Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental ......The Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited (KSW) is located 16 kilometres east of the town of Jinja in central Uganda. Currently,

Report to:

THE MADHVANI GROUP

Kakira Sugar Works CogenerationExpansion EnvironmentalAssessment

Document No. 0385240100-REP-VO001-02

Third Party DisclaimerThis document has been prepared in response to a specific request for service from the client to whom it is addressed.The content of this document is not intended for the use of, nor is it intended to be relied upon, by any person, firm, orcorporation, other than the client of Wardrop Engineering Inc. to whom it is addressed. Wardrop Engineering Inc. deniesany liability whatsoever to other parties, who may obtain access to this document for damages or injury suffered by suchthird parties arising from use of this document by them, vithout the express prior written authority of Wardrop EngineeringInc. and its client who has commissioned this document

Confidential

This document is for the confidential use of the addressee only. Any retention, reproduction, distribution or disclosure toparties other than the addressee is prohibited without the express written authorization of Wardrop Engineering Inc.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Report to:

THE MADHVANI GROUP

KAKIRA SUGAR WORKSCOGENERATION EXPANSIONENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

APRIL 2004

Prepared by Date

Knstina Farrner, M.Sc., P.Ag.

Reviewed by Date

Wayne Slack, P.Eng.

Authorized by Date

Peter Komelson, M.Sc.

VWWROP6725 Airport Road, 6th Floor, Mississauga, Ontario L4V 1V2Phone: 905-673-3788 Fax: 905-673-8007 E-mail: [email protected]

0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02

REV. ISSUE DATE PREPARED BY REVIEWED BY APPROVED BY DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONNO AND DATE AND DATE AND DATE

0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02

IARDROP

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The proposed co-generation expansion project at Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited(KSW) is an exciting project that is utilising a waste material to produce electricity forUganda. Even though the amount of bagasse combustion will be no different with orwith out the project, the benefits are the production of electricity and the reduction ofdiesel fuel currently used for loading and transporting the 113,000 tonnes of surplusbagasse'to the fields for disposal (buming).

Introduction

The Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited (KSW) is located 16 kilometres east of the townof Jinja in central Uganda. Currently, the enterprise is crushing sugar cane at the rate ofover 3000 tonnes of cane crushing per day (TCD) and employs over 6,000 workersthroughout its operations. KSW plans to expand this capacity by to a rate of 5000 TCD,a goal that will involve upgrading of the plant capacity. To achieve the expandedproduction target, expansion of the sugar factory with modifications to some processeswill be required. Engineering feasibility studies and plans have been prepared for thisproject. KSW prepared and submitted an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) forthe overall expansion program to the Govemment of Uganda National EnvironmentalManagement Agency (NEMA). Approval for the project was received in November1998.

Kakira currently employs a cogeneration facility utilizing the solid cane waste, known asbagasse, to generate electricity for the facility. Due to a need for additional electricitygeneration capacity in the grid network, KSW submitted a proposal to the Govemment ofUganda offering to expand its cogeneration facility beyond its own needs and supplyelectricity to the national grid network. KSW proposes to supply up to 7 MW of electricityto Uganda Electricity Transmission Company Limited (UETCL) for six hours per dayduring the peak period from 1800 hours to 2400 hours.

KSW has developed a phased expansion program for the expansion of the factory andthe cogeneration facilities. The current phase comprises a plan to expand production to4000 TCD and install a new cogeneration facility of 14-15 MW. The proposed projectincludes installation of additional boilers, turbo-generator, related piping, cabling,electrical equipment, instrumentation and control systems, and additional bagassehandling equipment. A new electrical sub-station at Kakira and a new 33 kV distributionline from Kakira to UEDCL's Jinja Industrial Sub-station at Mailombili will be constructedand allocation to UEDCL.

KSW has requested financial support of the cogeneration portion of the project throughthe Energy for Rural Transformation (ERT) program.

WARDROP

Environmental Assessment

Completion of an environmental assessment, in accordance with World Bank policy, is arequirement under the ERT. As such, this Environmental Assessment report focuses onthe KSW new cogeneration facility and the relevant aspects of the related investmentsincluding the electrical substation. An assessment of the new distmbution line will becompleted following determination of the route.

Information on the project was obtained from KSW, consultants, published literature,previous environmental reports, and literature and internet searches. Disciplinespecialists were contacted to help describe the project and the environment.

Potential Environmental Effects

Potential environmental effects of the proposed cogeneration project were identifiedusing scoping methods, interaction matrix techniques, and professional judgement.Mitigation measures were identified to eliminate, reduce and control environmentaleffects determined to be adverse. Follow-up was proposed to vepify the accuracy of theassessment and determine the effectiveness of mitigation measures. The significanceof the residual environmental effects remaining after mitigation were then evaluated.

Potential environmental effects of the proposed project were determined to be:

* Increased noise* Increased emissions* Increased dust* Reduced soil quality (spills and disposal)* Decreased groundwater quality (spills)* Decreased surface water quality (discharges)* Adverse effects on mammals and birds (waste disposal and storage)* Attraction of nuisance species (waste disposal)* Changes in employment opportunities* Reduced human health (noise, drinking water quality, air emissions)

Summary information on potential environmental effects is provided in Table ES-1,attached.

Environmental and Social Management Plan

A number of mitigation measures and follow-up requirement are identified in thisenvironmental assessment report. Some of the main measures include:

x Controlling the timing of noise generation to least disruptive periods, as practicable,and monitoring noise levels as required. Hearing protection will be provided toemployees working in high noise areas. Corrective actions will be taken on an as-required basis.

X To minimize air emissions from vehicle and equipment use, Kakira will ensure thatvehicles and equipment are inspected and maintained on a regular basis and that

ii

ARDROP

they will not be left idling when not in use. No ozone depleting substances will beused or generated from equipment during construction.

. The boilers will be equipped with a full wet scrubber to reduce the amount of ashreleased into the environment.

x Kakira will develop a spill prevention plan, prepare and implement chemical handlingand storage procedures and train employees about their use.

A Concrete berms will be constructed around areas where liquids are stored to containany spillage

X Spill kits will be maintained in all fuel and chemical storage areas for quick access ifneededWork will be monitored during construction to ensure there are no releases ofdeleterious substances.

x Refuelling and maintenance of equipment will be conducted in designated locationsonly.Workers handling chemicals will be provided training in chemical safety andadequate personal protective equipment.

x All water and dirt from transformers produced during maintenance activities will becollected and treated as hazardous waste.

. A waste disposal site will be properly sited and designed.x A spill prevention plan will be developed.x Spill containment supplies will be kept on-site in case of fuel leak.x Storage of fuels and other hazardous materials will be conducted in designated

locations only.x Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a wastewater treatment system including:

w Oil, grease and grit separationA primary settling and flow equalisation pondAn anaerobic pondAn aerobic pond

' Kakira will commit to reducing water use to minimize the wastewater generated.X Obtain permit from NEMA to operate waste disposal siteX Proper siting and formal design will allow for vermin breeding controlx Dispose of waste at a licensed off-site facilityX Create additional jobs in other locations within the factory for displaced workers

iD

VARDROP

Table ES-1

Environmental Effects Summary for the Proposed Kakira Sugar WorksCogeneration Expansion

Environmental Component Potential Project Effects Residual__________ _________ __________ E ffects

Adverse? Positive Can Be Mit gated? Signi icant?Yes No Yes No Inknowr Yes No

Air Quality, Climate, Meteorology '4 4 4

Topography and Bedrock 4

Soil Quality J '4 '4

Groundwater '4 4

Surface Water '4 ' '

Mammals and Birds ' '4 '4

Vegetation ' 4

Fish and Aquatic Invertebrates 4

Sensitive Habitats 4

Nuisance Species, vectors, '44dangerous

Commercially important species

Land/resource use 4 4 '

Planned Development Activities

Community Structure '4

Employment ' '

Dist. of Income, Goods, Services 4

Recreation 4

Health and Safety '4 ''

Cultural Properties '

A,

WROP

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Wardrop acknowledges, with appreciation, the contribution of the following individualsconsulted during the course of this assessment, particularly:

* Mr. Richard Orr, General Manager, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. Farhan Nakhooda, Projects Director, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. Kiran Kamat, Project Coordinator, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. Geoffrey Wabomba, Safety Health and Environment Superintendent, Kakira

Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. Francis Kirudde, Safety Supervisor, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. F.C.K Odongo, Administration Manger, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. Max Polzin, Works Manger, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. K.G.K. Raju, Agricultural Manager, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. V.G. Modi, Corporate Financial Controller, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. B.L. Lamba, Engineering Manager, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. Peter Ongula, Chemist, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited.* Mr. Robert Kwok, John H. Payne, Inc.

STUDY TEAM

The following key personnel were directly involved in the preparation of this report:

Mr. Peter Komelson, P.Eng. - Project ManagerMr. Wayne Slack, P.Eng. - Project DirectorMs. Kristina Farmer, M.Sc., P.Ag. - Lead AssessorDr. Patrick Mwesigye, Ph.D. - AssessorMs. Jennifer Van de Vooren, M.N.R.M. - AssessorMs. Sarah Wakelin, M.Sc. - AssessorMr. Ed Wolowich, M.Sc., P.Eng. -Advisor

This Wardrop report has been prepared for The Madhvani Group and its use is governedby the following Third Party Disclaimer.

v

ARDROP

DISCLAIMER

This document has been prepared in response to a specific request from the client towhom it is addressed. The contents of this document are not intended for use of, nor isit intended to be relied upon, by any person, firm, or corporation other than that client ofWardrop Engineering Inc. to whom it is addressed. Wardrop Engineering Inc. deniesany liability whatsoever to other parties who may obtain access to this document, or fordamages or injury suffered by such third parties arising from the use of this document bythem, without the express prior written authorization of Wardrop Engineering Inc. and itsclient who has commissioned this document.

LIMITATIONS

The scope of this report is limited to the matters expressly covered and is intendedsolely for the client to whom it is addressed. Wardrop makes no warranties, expressedor implied, including without limitation, as to the marketability of the site, or fitness for aparticular use. The assessment was conducted using standard engineering andscientific judgement, principles and practices, within a practical scope and budget. It ispartially based on the observations of the assessor during the time of the site visit, inconjunction with archival information obtained from a number of sources which isassumed to be correct. Except as provided, Wardrop has made no independentinvestigations to verify the accuracy or completeness of the information obtained fromsecondary sources or personal interviews. Generally, the findings, conclusions andrecommendations are based on a limited amount of data interpolated between samplingpoints and the actual conditions on the property may vary from that described above.Any findings regarding site conditions different from those described above upon whichthis report is based, will consequently change Wardrop's conclusions andrecommendations.

w

1ARDROP

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . I

1.1 BACKGROUND ............. 11.2 ASSESSMENT METHODS ........... 2

1.2.1 REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION ............................ 21.2.2 SCOPE ............................. 21.2.3 PROJECT COMPONENTS, PHASES AND ACTIVITIES ............ ................. 21.2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPONENTS ............................ 31.2.5 IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS .......... .................. 31.2.6 RESIDUAL EFFECTS ............................. 41.2.7 SIGNIFICANCE OF RESIDUAL EFFECTS ............................. 6

2.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK .................................... 7

2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ........................ 72.1.1 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY ...................................... 72.1.2 DIRECTORATE OF WATER DEVELOPMENT (DWD) .......................... 7...........72.1.3 UGANDA WILDLIFE AUTHORITY ...................................... 82.1.4 ELECTRICITY REGULATORY AUTHORITY ........... .......................... 82.1.5 WORLD BANK ...................................... 8

2.2 PROGRAMS, REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES ......................... 82.2.1 ENERGY FOR RURAL TRANSFORMATION (ERT) PROGRAM (2001) ........................ 82.2.2 THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT STATUTE (1995) ..................... ................. 92.2.3 THE PUBLIC HEALTHACT (1964) ..................................... 102.2.4 THE FACTORIES ACT (1964) ..................................... 112.2.5 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ..................................... 112.2.6 NEMA PROPOSED STANDARDS ..................................... 11

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT . . ........................... 12

3.1 LOCATION ........................................ 12

3.2 CURRENT OPERATIONS ....................................... 123.2.1 SUGAR CANE PROCESSING ....................................... 133.2.2 STEAM GENERATION ....................................... 19

3.3 PROPOSED EXPANSION ........................................ 233.3.1 FACTORY ....................................... 233.3.2 CO-GENERATION ....................................... 25

3.4 PROJECT ACTIVITIES - PRECONSTRUCTION, CONSTRUCTION, O&M .................................... 283.4.1 PRECONSTRUCTION PHASE ....................................... 283.4.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE ....................................... 293.4.3 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ....................................... 30

3.5 SCHEDULE ........................................ 30

3.6 STAFFING AND SUPPORT FACILITIES ....................................... 30

3.7 OFF-SITE INVESTMENTS ....................................... . 30

3.8 LIFE-SPAN AND EXPECTED FUTURE GROWTH ....................................... 30

4.0 BASELINE DATA ..................... 32

4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW ..................... 32

vii

VARDROP

4.1.1 SITE DESCRIPTION .................................. 324.1.2 LAND USE .................................. 32

4.2 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT .................................. 324.2.1 LOCATION / SETTING .................................. 324.2.2 DRAINAGE .................................. 32

4.3 BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT .................................. . 334.3.1 CLIMATE .................... 334.3.2 AIR QUALITY .................... 334.3.3 NOISE .................... 364.3.4 BEDROCK AND SURFICIAL GEOLOGY .................... 374.3.5 SOILS .................... 384.3.6 HYDROGEOLOGY .................... 384.3.7 HYDROLOGY .................... 38

4.4 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT .................................. ........................... 394.4.1 TERRESTRIAL HABITAT .................................. 394.4.2 TERRESTRIAL BIOTA .................................. 41

4.5 SOCIO-CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT ................................... 424.5.1 LANDAND RESOURCE USE .................................. 424.5.2 DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AREA .................................. 424.5.3 ECONOMIC CONDITION .................................. 424.5.4 INFRASTRUCTURE .................................. 42

5.0 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS .................................... 435.1 BIOPHYSICAL EFFECTS .......... 43

5.1.1 AIR QUALITY, CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY ........................ 435.1.2 SOIL QUALITY ........................ 685.1.3 GROUNDWATER ........................ 725.1.4 SURFACE WATER ........................ 735.1.5 MAMMALS AND BIRDS ........................ 765.1.6 VEGETATION ........................ 77

5.2 SOCIAL EFFECTS ........................ 775.2.1 POPULATION DEMOGRAPHICS ....................... 775.2.2 LAND / RESOURCE USE ....................... 785.2.3 EMPLOYMENT ....................... 785.2.4 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY ....................... 79

5.3 POSITIVE EFFECTS ........................ 82

6.0 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES . . . 836.1 STATUS QUO .. 836.2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION .836.3 CONCLUSION .. 84

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN . . .857.1 MITIGATION MEASURES .. 857.2 INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING AND TRAINING .. 857.3 MONITORING .. 92

8.0 TECHNICAL REFERENCES . . . 93

1ARDROP

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Terms of Reference for the Environmental AssessmentAppendix B Air EmissionsAppendix C Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Ltd. PermitsAppendix D List of Environmental and Social Assessment PreparersAppendix E Comments from World Bank and Corresponding ResponseAppendix F Minutes of Public Consultation Meeting

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Residual Effects Evaluation Criteria Used to Assess SignificanceTable 2 Factors Used to Assess High Significance of Residual EffectsTable 3 Non-Hazardous Solid Wastes Generated at KakiraTable 4 Air Emission Sources at KakiraTable 5 Boiler Emissions Source SummaryTable 6 Bi-monthly Noise Monitoring ResultsTable 7 Drinking Water Quality ResultsTable 8 Project Interaction MatrixTable 9 Environmental Effects SummaryTable 10 Residual Effects Assessment for SignificanceTable 11 a Noise Emission Levels from Various Construction Vehicles and EquipmentTable 11 b Values Used in Calculating Combined Noise LevelsTable 11 c Cumulative Noise Emissions for All Construction Vehicles and EquipmentTable 1ld Estimated Noise Emission from Expanded CogenerationTable 12a Estimated Project Fuel Consumption During ConstructionTable 12b Estimated Fossil Fuel Emissions During Construction ActivitiesTable 12c Anticipated Greenhouse Gas Production During ConstructionTable 13 Mitigation Action PlanTable 14 Environmental Monitoring Plan

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Location of Kakira Sugar Works EstateFigure 2 General Site Plan - Kakira Sugar WorksFigure 3 Generic Flow Diagram of Sugar ProcessingFigure 4 Detailed Flow Diagram of Sugar ProcessingFigure 5 Existing Power Generation LayoutFigure 6 Schematic Flow Diagram of the Cogeneration ProcessFigure 7 Proposed New Power Generation ArrangementFigure 8 Kakira Sugar Works Land Cover Map

ix

ARDROP

ABBREVIATIONS

ACGIH American Conference of Govemmental Industrial HygienistsASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-

conditioning EngineersAST Aboveground Storage TanksBMP(s) Best Management PracticesBOD Biochemical Oxygen DemandCOD Chemical Oxygen DemandDO Dissolved OxygenDWD Directorate of Water DevelopmentEC Electrical ConductivityEIA Environmental Impact AssessmentEF Emission FactorEHS Environment, Health and SafetyEMS Environmental Management SystemsERT Energy for Rural TransformationGoU Government of UgandaIAQ Indoor Air QualityKSW Kakira Sugar WorksMVA Megavolt AmpsMW Mega WattNEMA National Environmental Management Authority

(Government of Uganda)NES National Environment StatuteODS Ozone Depleting SubstancesOSHA Occupational Safety and Health AdministrationPCBs Polychlornated BiphenylsPPE Personal Protective EquipmentSHE Safety, Health and EnvironmentTCD Tons of Cane Crushing per DayTDS Total Dissolved SolidsTKN Total Kjeldahl NitrogenTOCs Total Organic CarbonsToR Terms of ReferenceTSS Total Suspended SolidsTWA Time Weighted AverageUST Underground Storage TanksUEDCL Uganda Electricity Distribution Company LimitedUETCL Uganda Electricity Transmission Company LimitedUSEPA United States Environmental Protection AgencyVOCs Volatile Organic CarbonsWDG Waste Disposal Ground

WIRDROP

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

The Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited (KSW) property covers over 9000 hectares ofland and is located 16 kilometres east of the town of Jinja in central Uganda. Currently,the enterprise is crushing sugar cane at the rate of over 3000 tonnes of cane crushingper day (TCD) and employs over 6,000 workers (including contract employees)throughout its operations. KSW plans to expand this capacity to a rate of 5000 TCD, agoal that will involve upgrading of the plant capacity.

Kakira currently employs a cogeneration facility utilizing the solid cane waste, known asbagasse, to generate electricity for the facility. Due to a need for additional electricitygeneration capacity in the grid network, KSW submitted a proposal to the Govemment ofUganda offering to expand its cogeneration facility beyond its own needs and supplyelectricity to the national grid network.

KSW originally proposed to provide the Ministry of Energy of the Govemment of Ugandawith 18 MW of electricity to the grid on a 24-hour per day basis. However, demandforecasts prepared by the Uganda Electricity Board / Uganda Electricity TransmissionCompany Limited (UETCL) indicated that this quantum of electricity would be greaterthan what could be sold. KSW therefore reduced its cogeneration project to supply up to7 MW of electricity to UETCL for six hours per day during the peak period from 1800hours to 2400 hours.

To achieve the expanded production target, expansion of the sugar factory withmodifications to some processes will be required. Engineering feasibility studies andplans have been prepared for this project. KSW prepared and submitted anEnvironmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the overall expansion program to theGovemment of Uganda National Environmental Management Agency (NEMA).Approval for the project was received in November 1998.

KSW has developed a phased expansion program for the expansion of the factory andthe cogeneration facilities. The current phase comprises a plan to expand production to4000 TCD and install a new cogeneration facility of 14-15 MW. The proposed projectincludes installation of additional boilers, turbo-generator, related piping, cabling,electrical equipment, instrumentation and control systems, and additional bagassehandling equipment. A new electrical sub-station at Kakira and a new 33 kV distributionline from Kakira to UEDCL's Jinja Industrial Sub-station at Mailombili will be constructedand allocation to UEDCL.

KSW has requested financial support of the cogeneration portion of the project throughthe Energy for Rural Transformation (ERT) program. Completion of an environmentalassessment, in accordance with World Bank policy, is a requirement under the ERT. Assuch, this Environmental Assessment report focuses,on the KSW new cogeneration

The Madhvani Group 1 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

m~~~~~~~~~~

MARDROP

facility and the relevant aspects of the related investments including the electricalsubstation. An assessment of the new distribution line will be completed followingdetermination of the route.

1.2 ASSESSMENT METHODS

Background information was acquired from a wide range of sources, including Ugandangovernment internet sites, consultant reports, documentation by public-interest groups,and publications of Ugandan legislation and policies.

1.2.1 REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION

The consultant team obtained and reviewed information on the proposed project, KSWproperty descriptions and use, and the surrounding environment. Information sourcesincluded KSW documents, photographs, NEMA data, engineering drawings, andgeological, hydrogeological and hydrological data. Information deficiencies wereidentified during this process. Information requests were presented to KSW.

1.2.2 SCOPE

The scope of the assessment includes a determination of the environmental effects to beaddressed and the effects to be considered in making decisions regarding the project.The scope of this environmental assessment was determined by the World Bank andwas described in the Terms of Reference for the Environmental Assessment of theproposed project, which is provided in Appendix A.

Appendix E provides comments received from the World Bank on the draft report andthe clients' and consultants' respective response to these comments. Appendix Fprovides the minutes of the Public Consultation Meeting held at the suggestion of theWorld Bank.

1.2.3 PROJECT COMPONENTS, PHASES AND ACTIVITIES

Project components were identified by the consultant team from an examinabon ofproject documentation and through consultations with the consultant engineers andrepresentatives from KSW. Three components were identified for the project:

1) Factory Expansion

2) Cogeneration Expansion

3) Substation Construction

An additional component, comprising the construction of the 33 KV distribution line, willbe assessed at a future date when the project is more developed. No construction on thetransmission line will occur until the environmental assessment, including a resettlementplan, if required, has been cleared and disclosed by the World Bank.

Two project phases were identified:

1. Construction


VRDROP

2. Operation and maintenance

Project activities for each of the above project components were identified by theconsultant team through an examination of project documentation and throughconsultations with the consultant engineers. A detailed project description, including thecomponents and activities, is presented in Section 3.

1.2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPONENTS

Environmental components were identified by the consultant team after examiningreference documents, conducting a site visit, discussing environmental conditions withKSW, and contacting relevant environmental authorities.

BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

Components of the biophysical environment described include:

A air quality

x noise

x bedrock and surficial geology

x soils

x hydrogeology

x hydrology

X terrestnal biota and habitat

A aquatic biota and habitat

SOCIO-ECONOMIc ENVIRONMENT

The description of the socio-economic environment includes information on the functionand structure of the socio-economic environment in the study area, demographics,infrastructure, and existing and planned land uses.

1.2.5 IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

Environmental effects were identified for the project using a combination of methodsincluding:

x Expert consultation

x A multidisciplinary team brainstorming process

x Interaction matrices

An environmental effect is any change that the project may cause in the environment.The World Bank defines environment as 'the natural and social conditions surroundingall.. .mankind, and including future generations". For the purpose of this environmentalassessment, the term "environmental effect' includes any change that the project maycause to the environment, including any effect of such change on:


VARDROP

x Biophysical conditions

k Health and socioeconomic conditions (resulting directly from environmental effects)

X Sustainable use of resources

x Current use of lands and resources for traditional purposes.

The multidisciplinary consultant team's professional judgement was used to complete aproject activity / environmental component interaction matrix. The team comprisedexperts in environmental science, biology, soil science, hydrogeology, andenvironmental engineering.

Potential interactions between project activities and environmental components wereindicated on an interaction matrix for the subject site. Interactions were denoted withopen and closed circles. Open circles were used to denote interactions that would notresult in a change from baseline conditions; consequently, these interactions were notdiscussed further. Closed circles were used to identify interactions that could lead to adirect adverse environmental effect and/or indirect social effect requiring mitigation.Negative or adverse direct environmental effects and indirect social effects arediscussed in Section 5.

1.2.6 RESIDUAL EFFECTS

Residual effects, or the effects remaining after the implementation of mitigation, wereevaluated using a number of criteria relating to both biophysical and socioeconomiccomponents. Criteria used include:

x Magnitude of effect

x Frequency of occurrence

X Duration

X ProbabilityAikelihood

x Reversibility

k Geographic extent

These criteria are briefly described below and in Table 1.

MAGNITUDE OF EFFECT

Magnitude is an estimation of the extent of change to the environment caused by theproject, based on predicted deviations from baseline conditions. For this project,magnitude was categorized as:

* Low (L) - a measurable change from background conditions but no lasting effect(s)on the environment.

* Medium (M) - a measurable change from background conditions with localizedand/or short-term effect(s) on the environment.


TABLE 1

Residual Effects Evaluation Criteria Used to Assess Significance

1Magnitude of Effect 2Frequency of Occurrence 3Duration 4Probability / Likelihood 5Reversibiflty 6Geographic Extent

Low (L): Low (L): Short-term/Low (L): Low (L): Likely/Low (L): Low (L):• measurable change from . Infrequent; occurs once a . Environmental effects are . <20% probability of . Effect is expected to * Effects occurs within

background year. expected to last < 1 month occurrence be reversible the project study area* no lasting effect on

environmental condition

Medium (M): Medium (M): Long-term/Medium (M): Medium (M): Unlikely/High (H): Medium (M):* measurable change from . Occurs intermittently . Environmental effects are . 20 - 70% probability of * Effect is not expected * Effect occurs within

background throughout a year. expected to last 1 month to occurrence to be reversible the local study area* localized and short-term 18 months

High (H): High (H): Far Future/High (H): High (H): Insufficient Data (n/a): High (H):* measurable change from . Frequent; occurs daily. . Environmental effects are . >70% probability of * Evaluation of effect is * Effect occurs beyond

background expected to last > 18 months occurrence not applicable due to the local study area* widespread and long-term insufficient data.

References: CEAA 1999.

Notes: 'Magnitude of Effect - measure of the degree of change in a measurement or analysis endpoint.2Frequency of Occurrence - how often the effect occurs within a given tme period.

3Duration - length of time over which an environmental effect spans.

4Probability - that the event is likely to occur anywhere in the study area.

IReversibility - indicator of the potential for natural recovery of the endpoint from the effect.6 Geographic Extent - area affected by the project.

WdRDROP

VARDROP

High (H) - a measurable change from background conditions with widespread andlong-term effect(s) on the environment.

FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE

Frequency relates to the number of times a project activity and/or an environmentaleffect will occur. An infrequent event, occurring once per year, was defined as havinglow (L) frequency. An event having a medium (M) frequency corresponds to an effectthat occurs intermittently throughout the year. The term high (H) frequency was appliedto any event occurring on a daily basis.

DURATION

Duration is the length of time that potential effects or activities could last. The durationof effect(s) may or may not be related to the durafion of a particular activity.Environmental effects and/or activities expected to last less than one month wereconsidered short-term, or of low (L) duration. Environmental effects and/or activitiesexpected to last between one to 18 months were considered medium-term, with medium(M) duration. Any effects or activities expected to last beyond 18 months wereconsidered a long-term, or of long (H) duration for the purposes of this assessment.

PROBABILITY! LIKELIHOOD

Probability is the chance or likelihood that an effect will occur in the environment.Probabilities were assigned as follows:

Low (L) <20% probability

x Medium (M) 20% to 70% probability

x High (H) >70% probability

The above values were selected based upon professional judgement.

REVERSIBILITY

An effect is considered reversible if, through natural or human processes, theenvironment returns to the original conditions present before exposure to the effect.Reversible effects were designated as (L). If the environment cannot recover naturally,the effect is considered irreversible and designated as (H).

GEOGRAPHIC EXTENT

Geographic extent describes the area over which the environment is subject to potentialeffects. Defining spatial boundaries establishes a frame of reference for identifying andevaluating environmental effects. Geographic areas examined for this project includethe Project Study Area and Local Study Area. The geographic extent over which theresidual effect may have an influence was classified as low (L) if the effect remainedwithin the Project Study Area, medium (M) if the effect influenced the Local Study Area,and high (H) if the effect influenced an area beyond the Local Study Area.


ARDROP

1.2.7 SIGNIFICANCE OF RESIDUAL EFFECTS

The residual environmental effects of each project component (construction, operation,and maintenance) were assigned an overall significance rating based on their predictedinfluence on the terrestrial, aquatic, atmospheric, and socioeconomic environments.

In assessing the significance of effects, the most important criterion was magnitude andthe application of other criteria was dependent on the rating for magnitude.

The following criteria were used to determine if the significance of the residual effectswas high:

Table 2

Factors Used to Assess High Significance of Residual Effects

If Magnitude of Effect Then the Requirements for the ResidualRatina is: Effect to be of High Significance are:

H One additional criterion rated 'H" and two othercriteria that are rated either 'H" or 'M"

M Two additional criteria rated "H" and two othercriteria that rated either 'H" or 'M"

L Four additional criteria rated "H"


VARDROP

2.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVEFRAMEWORK

The following sections provide a summary of the pertinent intemational, national,regional and local regulations and standards under which KSW must follow.

2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK

2.1.1 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

Following the enactment of the National Environment Statute (NES) 1995, the NationalEnvironment Management Authority (NEMA) was created and charged with theresponsibility to oversee, coordinate and supervise environmental management inUganda. NEMA's overall goal is to promote sound environmental management andprudent use of natural resources in Uganda.

Since its formation in 1995, NEMA has put a strong emphasis on developingenvironmental policies, laws and guidelines as evidenced by the large number ofenvironmental regulations that have been enacted over the last few years. Safeguardpolicy issues are addressed through these regulations, including environmental impactassessment (EIA) regulations. NEMA is responsible for EIA review and monitoring of theimplementation of environmental mitigation measures.

2.1.2 DIRECTORATE OF WATER DEVELOPMENT (DWD)

The right to investigate, control, protect and manage water in Uganda for any use, isvested in the Govemment and exercised by the Director of DWD in accordance with theprovisions in the Water Statute (1995). DWD is the Secretariat for the Water PolicyCommittee. The duties and roles of DWD include, among others, carrying out inventoryof water resources and preparation, update and revision of water action plans, revision,variation and cancellation of water and wastewater discharge permits. These permits areapproved in collaboration with major stakeholders such as NEMA.

Regulations under the Water Statute include:a The Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations, 1998a The Water Resources Regulations, 1998a The Sewerage Regulations, 1999a The Water Supply Regulations, 1999

The statute provides for the management of water in Uganda and is under the mandateof DWD in the Ministry of Water, Lands and Environment. Section 31, subsection (1) ofthe Water Statute deals with prohibition of pollution to water and stipulates that a personcommits an offence who, unless authorised under this Statute, causes or allows waste to

The Madhvani Group 7 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental/Assessment

WRDROP

come into contact with any water; waste to be discharged directly or indirectly into water;or water to be polluted.

Under section 107, the Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations (1998); the Water SupplyRegulations (1999) and the Sewerage Regulations (1999) have been put in place tooperationalise the Statute and are aimed at minimising pollution of public waters bydevelopers and other users. These regulations give procedures for obtaining waterabstraction and effluent discharge permits from DWD.

2.1.3 UGANDA WILDLIFE AUTHORITY

The Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) was established under the Uganda Wildlife Statute(1996). The main function of the UWA is to ensure sustainable management of wildlifein conservation areas by coordinating, monitoring and supervising wildlife managementissues; however, UWA can manage wildlife (wild plant and wild animals native toUganda) in both protected and unprotected areas.

2.1.4 ELECTRICITY REGULATORY AUTHORITY

Under the Electricity Act (1999), the Electricity Regulatory Authority is responsible forissuing license for the generation, transmission, distribution and/or sale of electricity.

2.1.5 WORLD BANK

Environmental Assessment is used in the World Bank to examine the potentialenvironmental risks and benefits associated with projects proposed for Bank financing.The Bank's environmental assessment policy and procedures are described in OP/BP(Operational Policy/Bank Procedures) 4.01. Environmental Assessment is one of the 10environmental and social Safeguard Policies of the World Bank. The Environmental andSocial Management Framework, which also includes a resettlement policy framework,will be referred to especially when resettlement issues are to be assessed duringconsultations for the transmission line. The World Bank's Policy on involuntaryresettlement will be triggered and the policy will be used as guidance to prepareresettlement/compensation plan as needed during the assessment of the transmissionline.

2.2 PROGRAMS, REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES

2.2.1 ENERGY FOR RURAL TRANSFORMATION (ERT) PROGRAM (2001)

This is a Govemment of Uganda program aimed to bring electricity to currently unservedrural areas. The goal is to facilitate economic transformation of the rural economy viaprovision of energy services. The project is focused on the private sector as the primaryservice provider. The World Bank provides funding assistance for implementation of theERT program.

All ERT projects must comply with the applicable environmental and social safeguardpolicies of the Government of Uganda and the World Bank, including Environmental

The Madhvani Group 8 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion EnvironmentalAssessment

ARDROP

Impact Assessment. NEMA is responsible for the review of the EIA and the monitoringof the implementation of environmental mitigation measures.

For ERT projects, the WB Environmental Assessment categories apply. Most ERTprojects are classified under Category B.

2.2.2 THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT STATUTE (1995)

Following the enactment of the National Environment Statute (NES) 1995, the NationalEnvironment Management Authority (NEMA) was created and charged with theresponsibility to oversee, coordinate and supervise environmental management inUganda.

The NES details environmental planning issues; environmental regulation;environmental management; control of pollution; environmental restoration orders andenvironmental easements; records, inspection and analysis; information, education andpublic awareness; and financial provisions. In addition, offences, judicial proceedings,intemational obligation and miscellaneous provisions are included. Regulations andguidelines have been or are in the process of being developed.

A Environmental Regulation (Part V) - including environmental impact assessment,auditing and monitoring.

( Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998 - a developer isresponsible for conducting an environmental assessment of any project that mayhave, will likely have, or will have an impact on the environment (NES 20(1) (3 a,b, c)). The objective of the assessment is to determine the possibleenvironmental impacts of a proposed project and measures to mitigate theireffects. Terms of reference, including study format and contents, methodology,public participation and any other relevant matters, are developed by theproponent in consultation with NEMA and any other agencies involved. NEMAand the lead agency review the assessment report. The public also has anopportunity to comment on the report. The Executive Director of NEMA makes adecision regarding the assessment based on the validity of the predictions made,public comments, an analysis of the economic and social impacts of the project,and any other important factors (Part VI Section 24(1). A post-assessment auditof the project must be completed within 36 months of the project.

Environmental Audit Guidelines (1999) - According to the National EnvironmentStatute 1995 (Section 23), NEMA shall, in conjunction with the lead agency, beresponsible for carrying out an environmental audit of the activities that are likelyto have significant effect on the environment. These guidelines outlinerequirements, procedures and methods for carrying out an environmental audit inUganda. Environmental Audit Regulations are in advanced stages ofpreparation.

A Establishment of environmental standards (Part VI) - Standards for air quality, waterquality, discharge of effluent into water, control of noise and soil quality. Thestandards for discharge of effluents into water or on land and minimum standards for

The Madhvani Group 9 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion EnvironmentalAssessment

VAROP

management of soil quality have already been developed. The National Environment(Standards for Discharge of Effluent into Water or on Land) Regulations (1999),Minimum Standards for Management of Soil Quality Regulations (2001) and TheNational Environment (Noise Standards and Control) Regulations, 2003 are in place.Environmental standards on air quality are still in draft form.

Other regulations that have been developed under Section 108 of the NES include theNational Environment (Wetlands, River banks and Lake Shores Management)Regulations (2000), National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations (1999) andManagement of Ozone Depleting Substances and Products Regulations (2001).

x. Regulation 4 of the National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations(1999) describes the sorting and disposal of domestic waste and provides that thegenerator of domestic waste may, without a licence issued under these regulations,dispose of non-hazardous waste in an environmentally sound manner in accordancewith by-laws made by a competent local authority.

x The National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations (1999) also directlymentions the application of cleaner production as a means to minimise production ofwastes. Regulation 5 (1) states that: A person who owns or controls a facility orpremises which generate waste shall minimise the waste generated by adopting thefollowing cleaner production methods:

Improvement of production processes through:- Conserving raw materials and energy;- Eliminating the use of toxic raw materials;- Reducing toxic emissions and wastes

Monitoring the product cycle from beginning to end by:- Identifying and eliminating potential negative impacts of the product;- Enabling the recovery and reuse of the product where possible;- Reclamation and recycling;

Incorporating environmental concems in the design and disposal of a product.

The Executive Director of NEMA may give directions in writing to any person or class ofpersons to apply specifically stated methods of cleaner production. This is to achievethe goals of cleaner production stated in the directive.

2.2.3 THE PUBLIC HEALTH ACT (1964 )

Section 7 of the Act provides local authorities with administrative powers to take alllawful, necessary and reasonable practicable measures for preventing the occurrenceof, or for dealing with any outbreak or prevalence of, any infectious communicable orpreventable disease to safeguard and promote the public health and to exercise thepowers and perform the duties in respect of public health conferred or imposed by thisact or any other law.


.RDROP

Section 105 of the Public Health Act (1964) imposes a duty on the local authority to takemeasures to prevent any pollution dangerous to the health of any water supply that thepublic has a right to use for drinking or domestic purposes.

The Act details the siting of waste disposal facilities such as solid waste skips in relationto settlements and food points.

2.2.4 THE FACTORIES ACT (1964)

This act makes provisions for the health, safety and welfare of persons employed infactories and other places. Items included under this act include housekeeping,overcrowding, provisions for adequate ventilation and lighting, and general safety itemspertaining to work in confined spaces and fire safety. Workers must have sufficienttraining for their specific job and have supervision by a knowledgeable and experiencedperson. In addition, workers must have and be trained in the proper us of personalprotective equipment, as required.

2.2.5 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

Best management practices (BMPs) are generally accepted industry practices orstandards for environmental management and occupational health and safety. In theabsence of Ugandan legislation, BMPs provide quantitative or qualitative standardsagainst which to compare current performance. The standards used during thisassessment include:

x Cane Sugar Agricultural Operations, Occupational Safety and Health Guidelines,World Bank, 1984

x Cane Sugar: Mill and Refinery Operations, Occupational Safety and HealthGuidelines, World Bank, 1984

x Sugar Manufacturing, World Bank, 1993x Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality, Volume 1, Recommendations, World Health

Organization, 1984a Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook, Part IlIl, World Bank, 1998x National Ambient Air Quality Standards, US EPAx Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) - Indoor Air Quality

Guidelines.x American Conference of Govemmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) - Indoor Air

Quality Guidelines, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-ConditioningEngineers (ASHRAE) - Indoor Air Quality Guidelines.

2.2.6 NEMA PROPOSED STANDARDS

x Proposed Environmental Air Quality Standards and Guidelines for Uganda, 4th Draft,NEMA, February 2002

x Proposed National Environment (Noise Standards and Control) Regulations, 2001x Proposed Hazardous Chemicals Regulations (pending)x Oil Spillers Liability Regulations (pending)

The Madhvani Group 11 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

WARDROP

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSEDPROJECT

3.1 LOCATION

Kakira Sugar Works is located 16 km east of the town of Jinja and 100 km east ofKampala in central Uganda, with the shore of Lake Victoria at its southem edge (Figure1).

The enterprise was originally established in 1927 by the Madhvani family. At the time ofestablishment, the facility's crushing capacity was 150 tonnes of sugar cane per day. By1972, the enterprise was crushing approximately 3000 tonnes of sugar cane per day andproducing 85 000 tonnes of sugar per year. Between 1972 and 1985, the factory wasclosed and operations ceased due to the political turmoil in Uganda at that time. InMarch 1985, a new company, Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited, also owned by theMadhvani family, was incorporated and an expanded and modernized facility resumedoperation.

3.2 CURRENT OPERATIONS

A general site plan of the Kakira sugar factory is provided as Figure 2. Flow diagrams ofthe sugar manufacturing process are presented in Figures 3 (generic) and 4 (detailed).

Wastes generated by the process during the 2002 - 2003 season are listed in Table 3,below.

Table 3

Non-Hazardous Solid Wastes Generated at Kakira

Waste Description Disposal Method Quantity generated(annual basis)

Bagasse Used to fuel cogenerabon units producing 350 000 tonnes produced*steam and electricity (38.89% of cane crushed)

Excess is disposed by buming in open Approximately 113 000 tonnesfields. (150 loads x 3 MT = 450 MT/day)

of excess bagasse aretransported to the fields everyday.

Bagacillo Recycled to vacuum filters 5800 tonnes

Filter cake Applied as fertilizer to the cane fields 34 000 tonnes*

L ____________________ _____________________________________ (3.77% of cane crushed)

The Madhvani Group 12 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakra Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

VARDROP

Boiler ash Stockpiled. Some used for erosion control. 2700 tonnes*(0.3% of cane crushed)

Factory paper waste Transported using tipper lorry, bumt and 72 tonnes**covered with murram soil (twice a week).

Chemical packaging Transported using tractor-trailer to open 40,100 paper bagst

(paper and plastic bags) dumping at quarry site (twice a week). 39,000 plastic bags"*Molasses (by-product) Stored in aboveground tank and sold to 31 000 tonnes*

private customers. (3.46% of cane crushed)Metal scrap Recycled to foundry or steel mill. Foundry Not available

melts down the scrap to make machineparts.

Clarifier sludge Dumped on ground occasionally near Not availablecooling ponds when bagasse is in shortsupply. Clarifier cleaned every 2 weeks.

Slag Dumped on ground near foundry Minor amounts*Ref Kakira Final Manufacturing Report (1993-2000) and communicatons with F. Nakhooda. Estimate based

on 900 000 tonnes of cane crushed per year, or over 3000 tonnes cane crushed per day (TCD), and 250production days.

Estimated based on lT of waste, twice a week for 36 production weeks.Provided by Kakira in fax dated May 16th, 2002. Packaging quanuties based on quantty consumed.

The following is a brief descnption of the sugar manufacturing process.

3.2. 1 SUGAR CANE PROCESSING

GROWING AND HANDLING

Sugar cane, the raw material for the process, is cultivated and grown on extensive canefields on Kakira property. Harvesting is done by hand with machetes or by mechanicalcutters. At present, Kakira estates produces about 470 000 tonnes of cane per year,while outgrowers contribute 430 000 tonnes of cane per year, for a total of 900 000tonnes of cane per year, or over 3000 TCD. There are currently approximately 3,600outgrowers registered with Kakira, cultivating around 9000 hectares of sugar cane.Kakira has received approval from NEMA to proceed with an outgrowers developmentprogram to increase the number of outgrowers from 3,600 to 4,200, cultivating about 12000 hectares of soil.

The cane from the fields is transported by truck or tractor and trailer to the cane yardadjacent to the sugar-processing factory. The cane is weighed and unloaded from thevehicles by grab unloaders, manually offloading or dumping. Cane loaded onto theground is stacked and then transferred to the main cane carrier by a Cameco unloaderfor processing as required.

The raw sugar cane from the cane yard is conveyed to the milling station on the maincarrier. Before milling, the cane is first evened in the kicker, cut down to smaller piecesby a series of rotating cutting knives, and then chopped further in the fibrizer, whichshreds the cane and exposes the sugar containing cells. Kakira does not prewash theraw cane prior to juice extraction.


R:\CLIENTS A - Z\THE MADHVANI GROUP - 8524\03852401.00 - ENViRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT\CAD\KAKIRA\0385240100-0WG-VO002-0OA.0WG 03.07.29 15:05

* ~ ~ ~ 4 * .9 *, ,-, . ,^i . '

-1 - 4 ~% ;X; @ | > 't _ ; *, ........ f.

-4 .-.- ; -\ ' . ..... 4.- , ' 5 * ' w ;

' t . -PJ_ ^s >;; , \ ; t .' 4K;kO- '4 ,=;

lt I ~ ~ ~ ~ \ - 4i - v '^ ' f ' \ .1 .m

444 4 t ., r. f4 .- + . . ^s, { i9 -w s ,i ..................

i ww4 4 + \lw ..... J X F-' .... ;

w; .>KAKItRA - ~ -~- 1T t , L E ; ,' -J F -4

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l H'-L P ]I I T JHEF THI-J .;#_P TH HT' *'-E14C.[ P- FPC,E -T H '-LE- I , {.T 'a- -tw i

l -. , ',\r ' , X '.'V; l~~~~~~~~~x-~ -.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- ' 4t- r-h^*' B. , 4 4 ; .,

NO~~~\ ;b. DECITO DA THE MADHVAI GfiRO-UP/w

B~~~~~,. _ '* ,*'# .tY /# s <'s .~~~--. -4-..1,- ~i ,/

l AY.; VlC W JfRtA , 1 _ .1 -.1 4.

_ /

IDWG DESCRIPnON | FIGURE 1: L;OCATION OF

VAMMp| Engineering I nc.| KAKIRA SUGAR WORKS ESTATE

|DESIGNED eY; KF |DRAWN BY: VG |DWG, NO.

-CHECKED BY: IDATE: 03.06.23 | 0385240100-DWG-V0002-00

4-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

_ ~~~~~~~~~~-

R:\CLIENTS A- Z\THE MADHVANI GROUP- 8524\03852401.00 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT\CAD\KAKIRA\0385240100-DWG-V0003-OOA.DWG 03.07.29 15:03

(I2 . T H

._ t , ' . ' -q''''.'. ,

*,I- - .-M WLL BE PU S E A! .~C , )F THE: IN _-MATI N.:

RPE H F~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~ 2

IN WH.-IE tF I- AFT ITHER THAN FOR THE INTENFDED FIJPI ,,-F E ISAT THvE SOLE RS, H I HEl

DWG DESCRIPTION

FIGURE 2: GENERAL SITE PLANNO. DESCRIPTION DATE BYI

REVISIONS/ISSUE W-IRDROP I Engineering I nc. KAKIRA SUGAR WORKSTHE MADHVANI GROUP DESIGNED DY, KF I DRAWN DY~ VG O WG NO.

R:\CLIENTS A - Z\THE MADHVANI GROUP - 8524\03852401.00 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT\CAD\KAKIRA\0385240100-DWG-V0004-OOA.DWG 03.07.29 15:02

F~~~~~~~~~~~~

_ l. _ -_

._- ..

ji

r~ ~ ~ -' -

T,, I~Tu -,1NAIE, ,) T*i _-`,JI- HA BEE PRPA* L, %F,H OWE F, 3_,_ v_ R

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -. I .;v '.) <'- , ' I

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--. =--- -

'2 ---t'L -ow-

J T [ fmtg~~~~~~~~~ ~~~- *'2

l-IH A I P E LF

Tl.E IF 'I.lafl t 'LE Ati I-RT ,TEP T TliE IE Cg;H-B PR E AT E L, F;F THE O-

4 E 1 THI EI IE T A4 I , ., ,r .11S A,INITOIE H IFRAI: f I -,--**Zr.,4 l'vr .

NO. | IDESCRIPTION D [ ATE H BY FIGUEE|3 GENERIC DESRI

REVISIONS/ISSUE R p I Eng i nee ri n g Inc . DIAGRAM OF SUGAR PROCESSINGTHE MADHVANI GROUP DESIGNED BY KF |DRAWN BY: VG |DWG NO,

,. \CLILIIj- - -L\li it,: JflVm iI vrWuvP - OJ/t.\UJOJLtUI.UU - UIIVIMlUNIMVIE.1L MILmaic)MLIImI \%.,MU\\r\M\mr\uJOJLU IUU-U,vy-VUUI -ULD.UMT' UJ.U/.ZU IJ.U I

CANE

POWER FOR IN-HOUSE USE____ _-- - MILL .WAR......

BAGASSE l 9 JUICE

,L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____--_-PROCESS ..............P-.C_-HOUSE

:~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I i1- -- ~TURBO BIE

GENERATOR B IE .....................SET

HP STEAM I _ MOLASSES

LP STEAM

SUGARPOWER TO GRID

FOR SALE TO THIRD PARTIES

NOTE: ADAPTED FROM THE MADHVANI GROUP, 2002

OWC DESCRIPTION

FIGURE 4: SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM OFNO. DESCRIPTION DATE eyREVISIONS/ISSUE IW% R OP Engineering Inc. THE COGENERATION PROCESS

THE MADHVANI GROUP DESIGNED BY: KF |DRAWN BY: VG |DWG NO.CLIENT CHECKED BY: DATE: 03.05.02 | 0385240100-DWG-VOOO1-00

ADROP

MILLING

At the milling station, the cane passes through a series of rollers that crush the cane andextract the juice. Maceration or imbibition water (equal to 20-40% of the cane weightpassing through the mill) is added to the crushed cane prior to the final crushing mill toassist in extracting the cane juice. The juice flows through the machinery to a metaltrough below the floor and is pumped to a receiving tank. The bagasse (waste sugarcane material) is conveyed to the boiler furnaces for buming.

The objective is to optimize the milling operation via maximum cane preparation,maximum juice drainage, good mill setting and continuous even grinding rate.

CLARIFYING

From the receiving tank, batches of cane juice are pumped to the primary juice heaterwhere it is heated to about 65 to 70°C. The heated cane juice is then pumped to areaction tank where a lime solution is added to prevent sucrose inversion by increasingthe pH from 5.2 to 7.8. The lime solution is formed by adding powdered lime (calciumoxide) and water in the lime slaker.

From the reaction tank, the cane juices are heated in the secondary heaters to 100tol 050C and are then pumped to a clarifier where the solids are allowed to settle out.The clarifier mud is collected and transported to the filters, where bagacillo (fine bagasseparticles) are used as a filter medium to extract the remaining filtrate from the clarifiermud. The clarifier is cleaned out every two weeks. The remaining sludge is spread onthe ground adjacent to the water treatment plant. The filter cake (dried clarifier mud)from the filters is transported to the sugar cane fields for use as a soil amendment andthe filtrate is recycled back into the cane juice process. A total of 24 000 tonnes (3.77%of cane crushed) of filter cake is produced.

EVAPORA TING

The clear juice from the clarifier is pumped to multiple effect evaporators where it isconcentrated from about 85% water to 30-40% water. The concentrated juice is nowcalled syrup and is pumped to the sulphitor where sulphur dioxide (SO2) gas is bubbledthrough the syrup. The SO2 gas, created in the sulphur burner by igniting powderedsulphur, serves three purposes:

A it acts as a disinfectantx reduces the viscosity of the slurryx bleaches the syrup

Syrup from the evaporators is treated with sulphur dioxide (SO2) gas for bleachingpurposes. The SO2 is generated in a reaction vessel and bubbled through the syrup inthe "sulphitor" reaction tank, reducing the pH of the syrup from 6.8 to 5.5. Excesssulphur dioxide is discharged from a tank vent to the roof. Approximately 0.3 kg ofsulphur is consumed per tonne of crushed cane. On a 2500 metric tonnes of canecrushed per day (TCD) basis, approximately 750 kg of sulphur is used per day. Theexhausted gas discharged from the reaction vessel is estimated to have a maximum SO2gas concentration of 0.2% of the gas used (Kakira, 2000). Therefore, the SO2 gas


VARDROP

discharged from the sulphitor vessel will be a maximum of 1.5 kg/day. There is no

pollution control equipment on the sulphitor vessel.

CRYSTALLIZING

After bleaching, the syrup is taken to the vacuum pans for crystallization. Molasses is

then separated from the sugar in the centrifuges. The sugar is discharged to a conveyor

that takes it to a dryer where the sugar is dehumidified to give dry sugar, weighed in 50-

kg bags, and shipped out for sale or stocked.

The molasses is piped to a 3000 m3 outdoor aboveground storage tank adjacent to the

factory and is sold directly to private customers. The molasses is dispensed from the

tank to drums in the back of customers' trucks, via an overhead hose. Molasses,

though not hazardous to handle or to ingest, is a very viscous material and has a high

biological oxygen demand (BOD). If discharged to the environment in any significant

quantity, it may have considerable environmental impact on wildlife and aquatic life. The

molasses tank is of single-walled, stainless steel construction and was observed to be in

fair condition (Wardrop, 2002). There is no secondary containment. To keep the

molasses cool, and to prevent fermentation, water is continually sprayed on the exterior

of the tank. The water spray drains to a gutter that runs along side of the tank and

eventually discharges to the ground, reportedly somewhere in the bush.

3.2.2 STEAM GENERATION

BAGASSE-FIRED BOILERS

KSW bums bagasse to generate steam to drive factory turbo-generators, mill turbines

and turbo-pumps, and for use in sugar processing in the Boiling House. Bagasse quality

(moisture and ash content) is important for boiler efficiency. Bagasse moisture in the

range of 45-48% is desirable for efficient burning. It is necessary to have a continuous

flow of bagasse to the boiler fumaces; therefore, bagasse storage and reclaim systems

that can respond to accommodate variations in plant operations are essential.

A total of 350 000 tonnes of bagasse (38.89% of cane crushed) are produced on an

annual basis. Of this, approximately 237 000 tonnes are bumed in the boilers. The

remaining 113 000 tonnes (150 loads x 3 MT = 450 MT/day) of excess bagasse are

transported to the cane fields for disposal.

Operation

Bagasse is currently used to fuel four boilers (identified as Boiler Nos. 1 - 4) in the Kakira

factory (Figure 5). Bagasse is transferred from the mill tandems to the boilers on

bagasse carriers. The bagasse is gravity-fed through chutes to the boilers where it piles

onto a refractory hearth. Primary and overfire combustion air flows through ports in the

fumace walls; buming begins on the surface pile. Fuel oil or firewood is used for boiler

start-up, or as alternative emergency sources of energy.

Boilers No. 2 and 3, installed in 1954, are the oldest boilers at KSW. Boiler No.1

(Babcock & Wilson) was installed in 1969 and Boiler No. 4 was installed in 1971. The

boiler operating parameters and steam output (in tonnes per hour) are as follows:

The Madhvani Group 19 0385240100-REP-VO001-02

Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

WJADROP

Boiler No. 1: 30 T/hBoiler No. 2: 15 T/hBoiler No. 3: 15 T/hBoiler No. 4: 30 T/hTotal Current Steam Capacity 90 T/h

The steam requirement at the current operating level (3000 TCD) is 75 T/h, which issupplied by operating boilers 1 and 4 with extra steam from boilers 2 and/or 3, asrequired. The flue gas from the boilers is vented to the outdoors via three tall stacks.The boilers are not equipped with any pollution control equipment. Fumace ash ismanually removed from the boilers and trucked to a disposal area or used in the field asa soil amendment (John Payne, 1998).

Maintenance

All of the boilers have undergone various upgrades over the years. The boilers areinspected for safe operation every 12 to 14 months as per the Uganda Factory Act(1964).

COGENERA TION

A schematic flow diagram of the cogeneration process is provided again as Figure 6.

Boilers for cogeneration range from 20 bar to 80 bar pressure. The ratio of power tosteam generation increases with increasing pressure.

High-pressure steam is partly used to drive the Steam Turbine Drives in the sugar mill.The balance of the high-pressure steam is fed to the turbo-generators where the steamenergy is converted to electrical energy. This electricity is used to drive equipment in thefactory, foundry, workshop, offices and residential areas. The exhaust low-pressuresteam from the turbine is then used in the sugar manufacturing process.

KSW currently has two turbogenerators:

1. Franco Tossi 3 MW rated capacity, 2.7 MW achievable output2. Blohm and Voss 1.5 MW rated capacity, 1.2 MW achievable output

KSW also has five diesel generator sets with a combined capacity of 2500 KVA.Currently, KSW's intemal power generation is only used for intemal needs (sugar factoryand some ancillary units). KSW purchases electricity form UEDCL to provide electricityfor its infrastructure (housing, street lighting, sweets factory and irrigation).

The Madhvani Group 20 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessmnent


x1x

uw~~~~ ~~ ~~~ PM~~~~4 4 u

i-i

1D A .KM . f _

n __ . .2i __ LL &_ !~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~J,0 be mu At

D I N r li 9wnR3 Lf_

NO. -. SCRIPliON DA - _ X --- - *WTG DC O

REASIONS/ISSUE EY n Eng i n e ering I n c . POWER GENERATION LAYOUTTHE MADHVANI GROUP DESIGNED BY:. KF DRAWN BY. N DWG NO.

, at f t Z Z BRE I-H )F, ^)P,R.HTADWL EPRUDA -,UH SEOF TH IFi.PMAlfl h nu,'1 TI G,rAnlC fi

| ...... : r rIIIL M% l ,,rllilyVull uIv%UI - UJLi"J(JuJLtUIJJU U LIIVIINUI4MMI4IPiL M .c.)MIlI \ J \VNP \OJLJIUU - UY UtJUUUllU1r UJ.UI.LI IJ.UO

CANE

POWER FOR IN-HOUSE USE…_______________ _- - MILL .. WATER

BAGASSE JUICE

- - - - -- - - - - - - - - -4- - -PROCESS . . . . . . . .HOUSE

I ---. :

TURBO BOILER ..GENERATOR

SET i

HP STEAM | |. . . - . - MOLASSES

LP STEAM..... . .. . . _. I

SUGCARPOWER TO GRID

FOR SALE TO THIRD PARTIES

NOTE: ADAPTED FROM THE MADHVANI GROUP, 2002

DWG DESCRIPTION

FIGURE 6: SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAMNO. DESCRIPTION DATE BY

REVISIONS/ISSUE OP E n g i n e e r i n g I n c. OF THE COGENERATION PROCESSTHE MADHVANI GROUP DESIGNED BY: KF |DRAWN BY: VG |DWG NO.

CUENT CHECKED BY: |DATE: 03.05 .02 0385240100-DWG-VO001-00

VARDROP

3.3 PROPOSED EXPANSION

Once KSW increases cogeneration, they will provide electricity for their owninfrastructure that is estimated to be in the order of 1.5 MW. This includes electric powerfor pumping water for the factory and housing. The expanded sugar factory and newcogeneration plant will consume another 4.4 MW. During off-peak hours, the total futureKSW in-house power consumption, including irrigation, is estimated to be 8.6 MW.During peak hours, when there will be no irrigation, the estimated power requirementsare 12 to 13 MW total, with 6 to 7 MW exported to UETCL (KSW, 2002).

3.3.1 FACTORY

To facilitate an increase in production to 4000 TCD, a number of modifications andupgrades are required within the factory at each processing stage.

PROCESSING

x A new Cameco unloader will be used to unload cane directly onto the feeder table.This process will be located between the mill yard and the machine shop. Theoverhead crane will be extended and possibly elevated so that the crane candischarge cane onto the feeder table. A new cane feeder table (7 m x 12 m) will beinstalled to transfer cane to the main cane carrier. At night, the Cameco stacker willfeed stored cane directly to the main cane conveyor.

A A new shredder will be installed at the same location as the existing Unigrator. Theprepared cane will drop onto a belt conveyor that will transport the prepared cane tomill No. 1. A magnet will be mounted over the belt conveyor to remove any metalthat has passed through the shredder. This will protect the mill rolls from excessivetooth breakages.

MILLING

x The rake-type inter-carrier will allow maceration to be applied to its maximumefficiency. A chute can be mounted on mill No. 2 to improve mill throughput. Anincrease in extraction is expected.

x To increase milling capacity, strained and unstrained juice pumps, water imbibitionpumps and a strainer for secondary juice will be installed.

A A second milling tandem will be added in parallel with the existing milling train toaccommodate the planned increase in cane throughput. The second milling tandemwill be electrically or steam driven to improve the energy efficiency for thecogeneration project.

CLARIFYING

x Additional juice pumps for treated and clear juice, juice screens, rotary vacuum filter,vacuum pumps and milk of lime pumps will be installed to increase the capacity ofthe juice treatment and clarification.

The Madhvani Group 23 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion EnvironmentalAssessment

lWADROP

x The heating surfaces of the juice heaters as well as the clear juice heater will beincreased to increase the capacity.

x A new load cell type 250 tonne/hour juice weighing scale has been installed and wasoperated during the 2002/2003 crop season. This scale replaces the former150 tonne/hour scale, increasing the volume of juice weighed and improving thereliability for chemical control.

x A filtrate clarifier (designed locally) has been installed and was operated during the2002/2003 crop season. This will reduce the load on the existing tray clarifier. Anew trayless clarifier of SRI type has been installed and commissioned in January2003. This new clarifier will be used in lieu of the old tray type clarifier to improvejuice quality and to reduce sucrose losses through inversion. The new traylessclarifier will have a retention time of approximately 30 minutes compared to over 2hours for the old clarifier. The old clarifier will be left in place and be a standby unitfor emergency.

A rotary vacuum filter will be added to take care of the increase in mud loading fromthe increased grinding rate. The mud flow from the mud mixer to the filters will beautomatically controlled by monitoring the mud level in the filter mud trough.

EVAPORA TING

X The evaporator station will be converted from quadruple to quintuple effect, and willbe automated to ensure steam efficiencies are increased and steam economy isachieved.

CRYSTALLIZING

X A new 100 Vhr sulphur bumer was installed for the 2002/2003 crop season. Thisnew unit will improve the sulphitation process, thus resulting in a reduction in sulfurconsumption and S02 emissions.

x A syrup floatation clarifier was installed to reduce the turbidity of the syrup. Theremoval of suspended solids will reduce the syrup viscosity that in tum will improvethe pan boiling process.

x To increase plant capacity, low grade Vacuum Pan #8 has been installed andcommissioned during the 2002/2003 crop season. Pan Nos. 1 and 2 have also beenmodified to improve the heating surface volume ratio to improve pan boiling speed.

x The existing cooling water pond will be extended to accommodate the additionalwater to be processed as a result of the additional vacuum pans. An estimated 20%increase in water volume is expected, although this is all recirculated.

x Belt conveyors will be installed to allow for automation of the bagging and finalconveying operations. This will improve the accuracy and control of the system.

The Madhvani Group 24 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessrnent

ROP

3.3.2 CO-GENERATION

The proposed new power generation arrangement is provided as Figure 7.

A continuous flow of bagasse feed to the boilers must be established. To ensuremaximum boiler load and to off-set periods of factory stoppages due to mechanicalbreakdown and reduced cane supply, it is important to have a good bagasse storageand reclaim system. KSW therefore proposes to install additional bagasse handlingequipment including new belt type drives for bagasse carriers 1, 2 and 4. Bagasseconveyors for the new boiler facility and the new bagasse house will be belt type. Thedrag slat type recycled bagasse and feed conveyors to the existing boilers and existingbagasse reclaim house will be retained.

KSW proposes to construct a bagasse storage/reclaim house with a one-day storagecapacity. Any excess bagasse beyond the one-day storage quantum would betransferred to an outside storage yard (approximately 1000 T) and retrieved whenrequired.

With the expansion to 4000 TCD, the factory's steam requirement would increase to 95T/h. An additional 50 T/h steam is required for the cogeneration plant. The total steamrequirement is 145 T/h. To produce the additional steam generation capacity thefollowing activities are proposed:

x Refurbish Boilers 2 and 3 to increase steam generation from 15 T/h to 19 T/hl Install two low-pressure Breda boilers (50 T/h at 20 bar) currently available at Kakira.

Proposed steam capacity:

Boiler No. 1 30 T/hBoiler No. 2 19 T/hBoiler No. 3 19 T/hBoiler No. 4 30 T/hBreda Boiler No. 1 50 T/hBreda Boiler No. 2 50 T/hTotal Steam Capacity 198 T/h

KSW proposes to add a new 14-15 MW Extraction-condensing turbo-generator. Withthis type of turbine, only the quantity of steam required for the process is extracted at1 bar. The balance of the steam continues to flow through the turbine to generate moreelectric power. The exhaust steam is transferred to the condenser unit from the turbineand the condensed water obtained from this steam is recycled as boiler feed-water. Thisequipment would have a marginal extra capacity to produce additional power if greaterdemand occurs and adequate bagasse is available.



,,~~~~~ _

LI A~~~huL

1.., , . . - - . . . t~~~~~~~~~~~a-

,. w T0 o ¢.w

THE INFORkFATION I>! ITAI EED A1N1 THIS DRAWING HAS BEEII FREPARED S,ULEL, FOR THE IJWIIER FURU E ONl THIS PR I .CE I OP,RIGHTED AN IlT.IAATTHI FI-ED O;E ,F THIS NFOPMATI!ltI IS ABREA41H ,IF ,.P,RIE.HT AND WILL BE PLIRSUED A' .,H lI)SE OF THE INFORMATION 'N THIS DRAWINGIN WHOLE OP Ill PART OTHER THAN FOR THE INTENDED PURPOSE IS AT THE 'OLE Rll OF THE USER

DWG DESCRIPTION

FIGURE 7: PROPOSED NEWNO. DESCRIPITON IDATE IBy IPO EAD kC' ANTREOVISIO NS SSUE D ATE Engineering Inc. POWER GENERATION ARRANGEMENT

THE MADHVANI GROUP DESIGNED BY KF DRAWN BY VG IDWG NO

UARDROP

The new cogeneration plant will operate in two modes during the 305-day crushingseason (mid-June to mid-April):

x Off-peak Hours (18 hours per day)0 210 days, 8.6 MW required for infrastructure, factory, cogeneration plant and

irrigationw 95 days, 5.9 MW required for infrastructure, factory, and the cogeneration plant,

without irrigation

X Peak Hours (6 hours per day)Boiler steam output will be increased to generate 12 to 13 MW, 6 to 7 MW ofelectric power to be sold to UETCL.

During the off-season, stored excess bagasse will be used to generate 2.5 MW of powerfor intemal use only.

Installations of piping, cabling, electrical equipment, instrumentation and control systemsare necessary civil works. The entire operation of the factory as well as the turbine andcondenser system will be operated through an integrated Distributed Control Systemfrom a central control room.

The proposed cogeneration plant will consist of two Breda boilers in addition to the fourexisting boilers. The Breda boilers are equipped with a dry ash collection system. Theremaining fly ash will be scrubbed through a full wet scrubber. The fly ash will be sent toa clarifier where grit will be separated and mixed with the filter cake for disposal to thecane field. The water from the clarifier will be sent to a retention pond and theneventually overflow to the Kiko stream.

ELECTRICAL SUB-STATION AT KAKIRA

KSW will construct a new 10 MVA electrical substation at Kakira. The substation will beconstructed with one 10 MVA 33 kV transformer. The new substation will require afenced area of approximately 900 m2 (30 m x 30 m). The substation will be locatedadjacent to the foundry and, as a result, its construction and operations will not affectany vegetation, animal habitat or human settlements. The details of the electricalinstallations required will be determined after detailed design of the project, but will likelyinclude synchronization to the grid scheme, grounding and grid isolation. A smallconcrete building will be required to house the metering instruments. Typically this willbe locked and only be opened by the Utility company to obtain the monthly meterreading.

33Kv DISTRIBUTION LINE

KSW will install a new distribution line to connect the new Kakira sub-station to theUganda Electricity Distribution Company Limited (UEDCL) Jinja Industrial Substation atMailombili. This line comprises:

The Madhvani Group 27 0385240100-REP-VOOO1-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

IAR OP

x An overhead uninsulated All-Aluminum Alloy Conductor (AAAC) line from Kakira toWairaka / Bugembe. The total length of this line is approximately 10 km, and it isproposed to be constructed on land owned by KSW.

x An underground 3-core XLP insulated cable laid on the existing 10 m wide UEDCLRight of Way (ROW) from Wairaka to Mailombili. The total length of this portion ofthe distribution line is approximately 4 km.

Given the risk of theft of non-electrified cables, KSW will start constructing the proposedline only 3-6 months prior to commissioning of the new cogeneration plant that isscheduled for June 2005. It would hence be appropriate to carry out the New DistributionLine route shortly before the construction of the line to ensure that the most currentsituation on the ground is assessed.

An environmental assessment of the transmission line will be conducted at a later date.No construction on the transmission line will occur until the assessment, including aresettlement plan, if required, has been cleared and disclosed by the World Bank.

3.4 PROJECT ACTIVITIES - PRECONSTRUCTION, CONSTRUCTION, O&M

3.4.1 PRECONSTRUCTION PHASE

Activities that occur under the current factory operations include:

Sugar Processing Cogeneration* Transporting cane to factory * Conveying bagasse to boilers

* Transferring cane to cane carrier * Boiler start-up (fuel oil or wood)

* Preparing / shredding cane 0 Burning bagasse / generating steam

* Milling cane * Venting flue gas outdoors (stacks)

* Clarifying cane juice (heat, liming, filtering * Removing fumace ash (manually)mud) * Maintaining boilers

* Removing mud * Using high pressure steam to drive

* Evaporating juice Steam Turbine Drives in mill

* Sulphitating Syrup * Using high pressure steam to generate

* Crystallizing in vacuum pans power in turbo-generators

* Separating molasses * Using low pressure exhaust steam from

* Generating waste water turbine in sugar process

* Generating air emissions * Using diesel generators

* Generating wastewater

* Generating air emissions* Pumping water

Additional activities that will occur during the preconstruction phase of the project includethe following:


ARDROP

x Designx Construction documentationx Contract administration

PermitsTendering

x Surveying siteInventorying

3.4.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE

The construction phase comprises general activities, the factory expansion,cogeneration expansion, power line and substation. Activities for each of thesecomponents are listed below.

GENERAL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES

x Designing x Surveying sitex Inventorying x Mobilizing / demobilizingx Fencing x Removing hazardous materialsx Drilling / digging . Driving pilesx Excavating soil x Trenching/servicingx Backfilling soil x Pouring concretex Using heavy equipment and vehicles x Loading and unloading materialsx Separating building materials x Hauling building materialsx Stockpiling materials x Storing fuel and hazardous materialsx Removing equipment x Installing new equipmentx Finishing interior/exterior

FACTORY EXPANSION

x Installing equipment for sugar processing (pumps, conveyors, etc.)x Emitting gassesx Releasing effluentsx Disposing solid waste

COGENERA TION

x Construct new bagasse storage housex Refurbish existing boilersx Install Breda boilersx Installing extraction-condensing turbo-generatorx Installing wet scrubberx Emitting gassesx Disposing solid waste

SUBSTATION

x Installing piping and cablingx Installing electrical equipment, instrumentation and control systemsx Installing 10 MVA transformer

The Madhvani Gmup 29 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kak|ra Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

UARDROP

3.4.3 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

x Cleaning/maintaining buildings . Releasing effluentslx Emitting gasses x Buming bagasselx Operating turbogenerators x Operating mill turbinesx Operating turbo-pumps x Feeding bagasse to boilersl Storing bagasse x Reclaiming bagassel Extracting high pressure steam for power

generation

3.5 SCHEDULE

KSW proposes to complete and commission the project by June 2005. KSW estimatesthat 1.07 million tonnes of cane will be available in 2004-2005, which equates to enoughbagasse to generate at least 5 MW during peak hours. In 2005-2006, 1.12 milliontonnes of cane will be available, which will provide enough bagasse to generate at least6 MW during peak hours.

The final schedule will be determined upon completion of detailed project design.

3.6 STAFFING AND SUPPORT FACILITIES

The facility will require an additional 60 people for the operations. However, followingrestructuring and automation of some of the processes after the expansion of the sugarfactory, these staff will be relocated to the cogeneration facility from other factoryprocesses. Therefore, it is unlikely that the project will result in employing more people.

3.7 OFF-SITE INVESTMENTS

No additional off-site investments will be required as a result of this project.

3.8 LIFE-SPAN AND EXPECTED FUTURE GROWTH

At present, KSW is not planning to export more than the 6 to 7 MW of power currentlyproposed. However, the system as proposed would accommodate an increase ingeneration of up to 9 to 10 MW without significant additional capital investment.

The Madhvani Group 30 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogenerabon Expanshn EnvironmnentalAssessrnent

| W E X _

Legend. District Boundary

--- County BoundarySub-County BoundaryParish BoundaryAll Weather Road, Bound Surface

-All Weather Road, Loose SurfaceDry Weather Road

-+-i-4Railway LineMotorable Tracks

- Main, Permanent RiverSmall, Permanent RiverContours

Broadleaved Tree Plantation or WoodlotConiferous Plantation

w Tropical High Forest (Fully Stocked)Tropical High Forest (Degraded / Encroached)Woodland

Bushland

Grassland

Wetland

Small-Scale (Non-Uniform) FarmlandUniform or Large-Scale Farmland The Madhvani GroupBuilt-Up Area K8Uonetess Map Description

Open Water ~~~~~~~~~~~Kakira Sugar Worksca) ~~~~Land Cover MapImpediments (e.g. Bare Rock, Barren Soil) asSt Figure 8

AUTHOR JiL |Pmwct#038524401- Map Number

ARDROP

4.0 BASELINE DATA

4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW

4.1. 1 SITE DESCRIPTION

The Kakira property covers about 22,500 acres (9000 hectares) of land, 19,000 acres ofwhich are used for sugar cane cultivation. The remainder of the property is occupied bymanufacturing operations, namely a sugar processing and packaging factory, a sweetsfactory and a soap and oil factory. Supporting infrastructure including administrativebuildings, an airstrip, living quarters, schools, hospital, stores and a 500 km roadnetwork, is also present.

4.1.2 LAND USE

Kakira Sugar Works neighbours with Polota Trading centre to the west, and with LakeVictoria to the south (Figure 8). To the north it is adjacent to Butamira Forest reserveand traversed by River Chico and to the east is Magamaga trading centre, Magamaga

- barracks and hill ranges. The terrain of the area is generally flat with undulating hilltopsthat are generally spread all over the entire plantation estate.

4.2 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

4.2.1 LOCATION / SETTING

Lake Victoria borders the property to the south, and agricultural land to the north, eastand west. The community of Polota, Mwiri Hill, and a swamp area known as Mutai forestswamp, are also located to the west.

The surface topography in the Kakira area comprises relatively flat terrain with hillyareas surrounding the property boundary. The estate is on a generally undulating plain.Slopes are between 2 to 12% with the steepest land on the midslopes. The generalsurface slopes from 1200 m in the south near Lake Victoria to 1150 m in the north.Small prominent hills with slopes up to 30% are interspersed on the plain. The relativerelief of the plain is 40 to 60 m.

4.2.2 DRAINAGE

The factory is located on a slope with the cane yard at the highest elevation and theprocess and boiler areas on the lowest end of the site. There are two principal drains atthe site. The first drain is a storm water and factory drain located on west side of thesugar store, the process house outflow joins this. The second drain services the caneyard area and powerhouse. The two systems combine into a single drain just below the


VARDROP

spray pond and join Mugala Stream, a natural water drainage system. Currently, allwastewater is discharged untreated into the Kiko River via the Mugala Stream.

4.3 BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

4.3.1 CLIMATE

The climate in the region is described as tropical. Altitude (1157 m) and Lake Victoramoderate temperatures, with an annual average maximum of 280C and a minimum of1 8°C. The Jinja District has two dry seasons (December to March and June to August)and two rainy seasons (March to May and September to December).

4.3.2 AIR QUALITY

As part of an atmospheric sampling program to determine temporal and spatial trends ofpesticides in air and precipitation in the Northem Lake Victoria watershed, a samplingsite was established at Kakira in November 1999. Results collected from November1999 to March 2000 reveal the presence of chlorinated compounds such as DDT and itsinsecticidally active isomers, Dieldrin, lindane (g-HCH), chlordane, and heptachlor.Preliminary analyses of the data indicate that the presence of these compounds arelikely due to regional depositions rather than local use. Analysis to determine thepresence of other compounds is underway.(http://Www.lvemp.org/L Publications/Uaanda/newsletter"/o2Oiun%202002.htm).

KSW does not use any insecticides for cane cultivation. Air emission sources andpollutants generated by Kakira operations are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4

Air Emission Sources at Kakira

Source PollutantsBagasse-fired boilers Particulate, C02, NO,Wood-fired boilers (start-up only) Particulate, CO, CO2, NO., SO., organicsBack-up diesel generators Diesel exhaust: Particulate, CO, C02, NO, SOX, organics,

metals (trace)Welding Metals (e.g. cadmium, cobalt, copper, chromium,

manganese, nickel, lead, zinc), particulate, NO,, COCane buming Particulate, NO, CO, C02

Bagasse buming Particulate, NO,, C02

Foundry furmaces (waste oil- Exhaust: Particulate, CO, C02, NO., SO., organicsfired/diesel)Sulphitor (tank vent) Sulphur dioxideSugar dryer ParticulateTippers and Lorries driving on Particulate (from road dust and uncovered loads ofunpaved roads bagasse or ash)Storage piles and outdoor conveyor Particulate (bagasse and ash)belts

The Madhvani Group 33 0385240100-REP-V0001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

WUADROP

BOILER EMISSION RATE ESTIMATES

The most significant pollutant emitted by bagasse-fired boilers is particulate matter,caused by the turbulent movement of combustion gases with respect to the burningbagasse and resultant ash.

Under normal operating conditions, the significant product of combustion of the bagasseis carbon dioxide (CO2), with lesser amounts of nitrogen oxides (NO,) and negligiblequantities of polycyclic organic matter. Emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) from the boilersare also considered negligible, owing to the characteristically low levels of sulfurassociated with bagasse.

Pollutant emission rates from the boilers under future operating conditions, where thebagasse feed rate will be increased by 100%, are summarized in Table 5. The emissionrates were calculated based on emission factors from the US EPA Publication AP-42,5th Edition, Volume 1 Chapter 1.8 Bagasse Combustion in Sugar Mills (US EPA, 1996)(Appendix B). The emission rates that have been calculated assume normal boileroperabon and a bagasse moisture content of approximately 50% by weight.

Table 5

Boiler Emissions Source Summary - Future Operation***

Emission Pollutant CAS No. Emission Emission FactorSource Rate (g/s)* Quality Rating"

Boiler No. 1 C0 2 124-38-9 6,933 ANO, 10102-44-0 5.3 CParticulates N/A 139 C

Boiler Nos. 2 & 3 C02 124-38-9 7,800 ANO, 10102-44-0 6 CParticulates N/A 156 C

Boiler No. 4 C02 124-38-9 6,933 ANO. 10102-44-0 5.3 CParticulates N/A 139 C

'See Appendix B for sample calculation of emission rates** Ref: US EPA AP-42 Table 1.8-1**Assumes the bagasse feed rate increases by 100%.

There are no Ugandan emission standards to which to compare the above estimatedrates.Note that the boilers use old technology and as such the existing combustion conditionsmay result in significant emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), unbumed organics (VOCs)and total organic compounds (TOCs). These have not been estimated becauseemission factors for these parameters are not available.

A screening level assessment of air emissions from the three bagasse boiler stacks wasconducted using the US EPA SCREEN3 model. The model input parameters, samplecalculations and dispersion modelling results are provided in Appendix B.

The MadhvaniGroup 34 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kalira Sugar Works Cogeneraton Expansion Envionmental Assessment

VARDROP

The SCREEN3 model results are given as ground level concentrations using a 1-houraveraging time. The 1-hour concentrations were converted to 8-hour and 24-houraveraging times by multiplying US EPA factors. The modelling results expressed interms of 1 hour, 8 hour and 24-hour averaging times are summarised in Appendix B.The 24-hour ground level pollutant concentrations are presented as a function ofdistance from the source in Appendix B.

Carbon Dioxide

The dispersion modelling results indicate that the 24-hour maximum concentrations ofcarbon dioxide, nitrous oxides and nitrogen dioxide, when the operations are increasedby 100%, are 130 000 ptg/M 3, 100 pg/M3 and 70 pg/M3 respectively. This would occur at183 m from the source.

Carbon dioxide emissions contribute to the global warming effect. Uganda has notcommitted to any intemational protocols for greenhouse gas reductions (e.g. Kyotoprotocol).

Nitrogen Oxides

The dispersion modelling results indicate that the 24-hour maximum concentrations ofnitrous oxides and nitrogen dioxide will be 100 p,g/M 3 and 70 pg/M3 respectively,occurring 183 m from the source, when facility operations are increased by 100%.

Nitrous oxides and nitrogen dioxides are precursors of acid rain, which affects forestsand vegetation. Our results indicate acceptable levels of these pollutants compared toUganda and international guidelines.

Other sources of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxides (including nitrogen dioxide), notincluded in the above, are: diesel generators, foundry fumaces, cane and bagassebuming in the fields, and wood firing of the boilers during start up.

Boiler Particulate Emissions

The dispersion modelling results indicate that the 24-hour maximum concentrations ofparticulates would be 2,600 1pg/M 3, occurring 183 m from the source.

Comparing the particulate results to the 24-hour ambient standard of 300 pg/M3

published in the Proposed Environmental Air Quality Standards for Uganda (February2002), we find that particulate concentrations may exceed this value for up to 10 kmfrom the stack base. As shown in Appendix B, these concentrations also exceed otherintemational standards (e.g. US NAAQS 100 pg/M 3; Equador 80 pLg/M 3).

Pollutant concentrations decrease as one moves away from the source. At the closestKakira property line (650 m from the source), 24-hour ground level concentrations ofparticulate are 870 pg/M 3. Thus Kakira employees and the public, or anyone who liveswithin a 10 km radius of the factory may experience health effects from particulates fromthe boilers. Please note that these concentrations are based on conservativeassumptions and literature values and represent a 'worst-case" scenario. The actual


ORDROP

concentrations may be much lower. As evidence to this, the Kakira hospital has notreceived any related health complaints in the past.

Those communities further away may not experience health effects. It is noted thatcommunities such as the one on top of Mwiri hill (157 m above the factory level), mayexperience concentrations almost double those at ground level, due to the impact of thehill on plume behaviour.

Although the SCREEN3 model incorporates many conservative assumptions, these areestimated results employing emission factors that assume normal boiler operation.These results do not account for operational upsets as may occur at Kakira given thatthe boilers use older technology.

There are a number of combustion sources that emit particulate matter at Kakira thathave not been estimated quantitatively. These include the diesel generators, foundryfumaces, and emissions during boiler start-up using wood. Their sources are consideredminor, in comparison to boiler emissions.

Fugitive Dust

There are a number of significant sources of fugitive dust emissions from Kakira. Theseinclude other fugitive sources such as trucks driving on unpaved roads, outdoorconveyors or chutes, or from holes in galvanized pipes that convey bagasse or bagacillo,and storage piles.

Sulphur Dioxide

Syrup from the evaporators is treated with sulphur dioxide (SO2 ) gas for bleachingpurposes. The S02 is generated in a reaction vessel and bubbled through the syrup inthe 'sulphitor" reaction tank, reducing the pH of the syrup from 6.8 to 5.5. Excesssulphur dioxide is discharged from a tank vent to the roof. Approximately 0.3 kg ofsulphur is consumed per tonne of crushed cane. On a 2500 TCD basis, approximately750 kg of sulphur is used per day. The exhausted gas discharged from the reactionvessel is estimated to have a maximum SO2 gas concentration of 0.2% of the gas used.Therefore the SO2 gas discharged from the sulphitor vessel will be a maximum of 1.5kg/day. There is no pollution control equipment on the sulphitor vessel.

Combustion sources such as diesel generators and wood fired boilers (start-up) will emitadditional amounts of sulphur dioxide.

4.3.3 NOISE

KSW has been monitoring noise levels within and around the sugar factory including theexisting cogeneration system. Results obtained from the monitoring exercise on abimonthly basis from December 2002 to February 2003 by the SHE division of KSW areindicated in Table 6. Except for a few locations like the electrical workshop, the officesand laboratories, the noise levels are higher than the World Bank noise standards forcane mills.

The Madhvani Group 36 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneralion Expansion Environmental Assessment

VARDROP

Table 6

Bi-monthly Noise Monitoring Results

Section Noise Levels (dBA) Current WorldUganda BankStandard Standard(dBA) for Cane

Mills

December January February2002 2003 2003

Lab/Offices 66 63 67 66 65 65 85 70

Mill 86 88 87 87 85 88 85 70

Evaporator 80 82 82 84 86 85 85 70

Clarification 83 80 81 83 83 84 85 70

Pan floor 83 81 81 82 83 82 85 70

Centrifugal 81 84 84 84 85 88 85 70

Bagging 76 79 77 77 75 73 85 70

Power house 77 77 78 78 76 77 85 70

control room I

Turbo generator 92 94 94 91 89 87 85 70

areaDiesel generator 98 98 98 100 83 80 85 70

roomBoiler area 86 89 91 89 90 91 85 70

Mechanical 77 82 78 80 80 77 85 70

workshopElectrical 66 70 69 72 70 70 85 70

workshop I_I

Foundry 70 85 87 84 89 84 85 70

Factory 63 60 80 82 62 62 75 70

compound (front)Factory 80 78 78 79 85 84 75 70

compound (rear) I I I

Notes: Vaues in Bold Italics exceed the World Bank standard.

The noise monitoring was targeted at areas that receive hissing noise from steam and

operations of the cogeneration area. It is expected that noise generated from the new

boilers of the proposed project will be lower and in general the project will result in less

noise levels from the cogeneration project.

4.3.4 BEDROCK AND SURFICIAL GEOLOGY

The Jinja District is underlain by Precambrian bedrock. Kakira falls within the Buganda-

Toro system which is characterized by partly granitized and metamorphosed formations

comprising Argillite and basal quartzite and amphibolies (NEMA, 1996).


VARDROP

4.3.5 SOILS

The regional stratigraphy of this part of Uganda generally comprises Nitisolic (Ferrisolic)soils comprising primarily porous, red clay. NEMA rates this type of soil as the mostfertile and productive soil in Uganda. Based on a borehole log obtained from DWD,these clay soils overly a sand unit that is underlain by a 27 m thick rubble zone(Wardrop, 2003). The bedrock, comprising Phyllite, is encountered at approximately 90m below grade.

x Valley bottoms - moderately drained and imperfectly drained soils dominated byheavy gleyed or mottled clays, developed on recent alluvial deposits

a Cultivated soils - mainly occurs on rhodic ferralsols

4.3.6 HYDROGEOLOGY

The Jinja area is considered to have low groundwater potential because of the fine-grained overburden and the resulting decrease in surface water infiltration. Theborehole log obtained from the Kakira area indicates water tables at a depth of 51 m(overburden) and 69 m (bedrock) below grade; however, given the clay soil conditions,perched shallow water tables are suspected.

4.3.7 HYDROLOGY

The southem extent of the Kakira property is approximately 500 m north of Fielding Bayof Lake Victoria. Chico (also referred to as Kiko), and Muwala (referred to as Mugala inKakira's Waste Discharge Permit Application) rivers both flow through the property(Figure 1). Water from Lake Victoria is used for irrigation purposes at Kakira.

CHICO RIVER TRIBUTARY (MUWALA STREAM)

The Muwala Stream is used as a source of drinking water. Sampling conducted as partof an environmental audit in 2002 indicates that this stream, except for thebacteriological quality, meets the drinking water standards. Relatively high values oftotal coliforms (1,700 no./100ml), faecal coliforms (573 no./100ml) and faecalstreptococci (2,060 no./ 00ml) imply faecal pollution of this stream. Based on the faecalcoliform and faecal streptococci ratio (0.28 < 0.4), the likely source of this pollution isanimal wastes and stormwater. In addition, during sampling, a man was observedbathing in the stream, while a woman was washing clothes in the streams' waters.Therefore microbiological contamination may also be caused from these activities. Thisis a cause for concern in view of the fact that most likely the communities residingadjacent to this stream use these waters for domestic purposes including drinking water.

The Madhvani Goup 38 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

ARDROP

Table 7

Drinking Water Quality Results

Mugala Drinking waterl Parameter Stream standards

Temperature (0C) 26.2 NSpH 6.86 6.5-8.5

EC 461 NSApparent colour (Ptco) 54 10True colour (Ptco) 23 10Turbidity (FAUs) 14 5DO (mg/l) 5.1 NSTSS (mg/1) 8 50TDS (mg/l) 324 < 1,000Nitrates (mg/I) 2.2 45Total coliforms 1700 50(no/1 Oml)Faecal coliforms 573 0(no/1 OOml)Faecal streptoccoci 2060 NS(no/1 OOml)

NS = no standardValues in Bold are in excess of the Uganda Standard Specification forDrinking (Potable) Water, February 1994

4.4 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT

4.4.1 TERRESTRIAL HABITAT

The Kakira estate falls into Albizzia chlorophora, semi-deciduous forest vegetation zone.However, the lands in the vicinity of the Kakira estate were cleared for agriculturalproduction almost a century ago leaving only small remnants of relatively naturalwoodlands with limited ecological function or value and virtually no linkages with otherbiological features.

During the August 2000 site visit, several Forest Reserves were inspected, includingButamira, Masiga, Namazingiri, and Namafuma. All have been essentially cleared yearsago, and now consist of plantations dominated by eucalyptus and/or pine. All ForestReserves examined in August have areas that are or have been inter-planted with foodcrops. While this practice serves a social good, it contributes nothing to the ecologicalvalue of the forest features.

AGRICUL TURE

The Jinja District has a high potential for agriculture due to favourable soils and weatherconditions. The main crops cultivated include maize, beans, groundnuts, coffee,

The Madhvani Group 39 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Envyionmental Assessment

VARDROP

bananas, sugar cane, sweet potatoes, vegetables and fruits (NEMA, 1996). Crops aregrown on both a subsistence and commercial level.

WOODLANDS

A small forested area is located within the Chico division of the Kakira property, whiledeveloped woodlands follow the main loose-surfaced all weather roads running northand west from the sugar factory.

Butamira Forest Reserve

The Butamira Forest Reserve is located in Buyengo sub-county, Jinja District, and it issituated immediately north of the main KSW estate. It is approximately 14 km2 in size.Prior to 1930, it was a natural forest owned by the Busoga Local Government. In 1930,it was gazetted as a Local Forest Reserve, and in 1949, it was leased by theGovemment to Muljibhai Madhvani & Company Limited (MMCL) for a period of 49 years.The terms of the lease required MMCL to clear the natural forest and to replant the landswith eucalyptus at a rate of 400 acres each year for the first 7 years. The eucalyptustrees were subsequently used as a source of fuel for the KSW sugar factory.

The conditions of the permit include, among other items, the preservation of uncultivatedstrips of land along the streams and rivers in the Reserve to protect against silting andprotection of hilltops against erosion and land degradation.

With the expulsion of the Asian community from Uganda in 1971/1972, along with otherproperties of the Madhvani Group, a widespread deforestation of the Butamira Areaoccured. In 1985, when the present management re-possessed the Kakira SugarComplex (now operated under the name of Kakria Sugar Works (1985) Ltd.), it also tookcharge of the Butamira Area for rehabilitation and development.

As of a August 2000 site visit by Wardrop, more than 700 ha of the Forest Reserve were"cleared" or "under stump", virtually all of which will be planted with cane before the endof 2003.

The NEMA has also reviewed KSW's development plans and has agreed that growing ofsugarcane will not have any negative impact of the local environment. Subsequently,Permit No. 00015 dated July 5, 2002, was issued to KSW for cane cultivation in theButamira Area. A copy of this permit is provided in Appendix C.

WETLANDS

There are virtually no wetlands within the nucleus KSW estate. If any existed beforeestablishment of the sugar-production facility, they have long since been displaced bycane field. As such, wetlands are not an issue on the main KSW lands.

The Madhvani Group 40 0385240100-REP-V0001-02l L Kaki Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Enwronnental Assessment

WARDROP

4.4.2 TERRESTRIAL BIOTA

BIRDS

A number of birds are known to occur within the Jinja district (NEMA, 1996). Theseinclude:

A White-necked Cormorantx African Darterx Black headed Heronx HamorkopA Hadada Ibisx African Hobbyx Bat Hawkx Eastem Grey plantain eaterx Brown Parrotx Pied Kingfisherx Woodland Kingfisherx Striped Kingfisherx Grey headed Kingfisherx Double-toothed Barbetx Little swift

Birds may potentially be affected by the cogeneration project due to potential increasesin noise generation and due to power line construction

FISH

The district's main water bodies, Lake Victoria and River Nile are habitat for a variety ofwildlife, of which fish is major. Lake Victoria supports high diversity of fish species. Thenon-cichlids alone numbered about 50. Of these about 10 are commercially important.These included Bagrus docmac (Semutundu), Claria gariepinus, Protopteriusgethiopicus (Mamba), Labeo victorianus (Ningu), Synodontis afrofischeri (Nkolongo),Barbus alrianalio (Kisinja), Mormyrus kannume (Nzere). These species are importantlocally.

Other species present in the water bodies of the district include:B. docmac, P. aethiopicus, C. gariepinus, Clarias liocephalus, S. agrofichari, M.kanumme, A. Iestesjacksonii (Nsoga), Garra johnstonii, Gnathonemus victoriae, G.Iongibarbis, Xeno clarias spp., L. victorianus, B. altinalis, S. intermedius, andAfromastace.

SMALL MAMMALS

A number of small mammals are known to occur in the Jinja district. These include fruitbats (Megachiroptera), insect eating bats (Microchiroptera), rodents, shrews, Civet cats,bats, ground squirrels (Xerus erythropus), and monkeys (Vervet and Colobus badius).

The Madhvani Group 41 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneraton Expansion Environmental Assessment

ARDROP

ENDANGERED AND PROTECTED SPECIES

There are no endangered species within the project area. Wetland and forested areasare considered as protected habitat in Uganda; however, these types of habitats do notfall within the project area.

4.5 SOCIO-CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT

The KSW facility, which directly occupies about 9000 hectares of land, now employsover 6,000 workers. In addition, there are about 3,600 "outgrowers", with individual landholdings ranging from about 2 hectares to several hundred hectares (average of 2.5hectares), which also supply cane under contract to the KSW mill. All outgrowers arelocated within a 25 km radius of the plant, which has a present sugar-cane crushingcapacity of about 3000 tonnes per day (TCD).

4.5.1 LAND AND RESOURCE USE

The land in the area is mainly used for cane cultivation.

4.5.2 DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AREA

The social organization of the area is based on the kinship system, patrilineal lineWomen in the area account for an important proportion of the labour force required.Majority of residents belong to the poor peasant category who own small land parcels(one or two acres).

4.5.3 ECONOMIC CONDITION

KSW has seen a steady growth of employment since 1985. Currently 6,500 people workwithin the estate, with 600 in the factory and the rest in agriculture and administration,including personnel, schools, hospitals, financing and security, etc. Infrastructureexpenditures include housing, roads, transport, electric supply, water treatment anddistribution, communication, hospital, education

Commercialization of the various crops is having a positive impact on residents (cash forcrops).

4.5.4 INFRASTRUCTURE

UTILITIES

Approximately 85% of the power at the Kakira property is supplied by the on-sitecogeneration operations. The Uganda ElectricityDistribution Company Ltd. (UEDCL)supplies the remaining 15%.

KSW has invested capital in infrastructure such as housing for employees, roads,transportation, electricity supply, water treatment, modem communications, and hospitaland schools.

The Madhvani Group 42 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion EnvironmentalAssessment

VARDROP

5.0 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL ANDSOCIAL IMPACTS

An interaction matrix identifying and assessing the interactions of project activities withenvironmental and socioeconomic components is presented in Table 8. Projectactivities with interactions on environmental components that could lead to potentialenvironment effects were denoted with a closed circle in the matrix.

5.1 BIOPHYSICAL EFFECTS

Descriptions and assessments of the identified potential environmental effects of theproposed project are provided in the following sections. Summaries of the results of theassessment are provided in Table 9. The results of the residual effects assessment aredetailed in Table 10.

5.1.1 AIR QUALITY, CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY

INCREASED NOISE GENERATION DUE TO CONSTRUCTION OF EXPANDED

COGENERATION FACILITY

Expansion activities are expected to occur over a ten-month period. These activities willincrease ambient noise levels, resulting in decreased air quality, or noise pollution.Ambient noise levels surrounding the Kakira site are within the 85-dB guideline value(based on noise monitoring values with the factory compound front and rear). Theclosest residential housing is located approximately 1000 m from the factory.

A number of types of equipment will be used on-site during expansion activities,including trucks, bulldozers, graders, front-end loaders, pneumatic drills, and dumptrucks. Noise levels may increase up to 130 dB due to the use of heavy equipment(NCLHH, 1999). Estimates of typical noise emissions from vehicles and equipmentexpected to be used during this project are provided in Table 1 la.

The World Health Organization has published methodology to estimate cumulative noiselevels as sound pressure (dBA) (WHO, 1995). Noise levels as sound pressure, dBA,differs from sound strength measured as decibels (dB), which is a measure of soundamplitude. dBA, takes into account the varying sensitivity of human hearing or sound atdifferent frequencies (Saflex Acoustical Guide, 2000). Sound pressure levels are notadditive; the mean square of the pressures are added and then reconverted to sound-pressure-level values. If there are any differences in the sound levels from two sources,the combined level will exceed the higher of the two levels, but always by less than 3dBA (Table 11 b).

The Madhvani Group 43 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02KakIa Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessrnent

Current operation

Table 8Environmental Component Interaction MatrixKakira Sugar Works -Bagasse Cogeneration Expansion

Project Components

Current Operation and Maintenance Activities

Sugarcanefactry * " * * I* I I* I * _ Cogeneration

ECE~

E s'~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~

0 ~~~ ~ ~ ~ a a e ~~~~~ ~~ Environmental Componeints E 8 e a

~~[o 5 0= a.' ~~~~1- Ea 0. E 8= >!~ ~ c A 050 f E ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 - o EE. 0

Biophysical Components

Clim6Uate&Mete_oloy _ _ ._.._

Topography .fo

B_edrockSoilt-Groundwater Surfaceiwalter--yegelation -natural - - -

Vegetation -agrcultural 0 --

Vegetation -rare or endangered species-mammalsBirdsFish_andkAquatic - lnvertebrates Sensitive Habitats (parks,peevs t. --

Commercially important species _0_

Nuisance species, vectors, dangerous____

Soclo-cuftural ComponentsPopulation Demographics 0 ] -- -- -

Land/resource use0 30Planned Development Activities- Community Structure,Employment0 ____

Distribution of Income. Goods, ServicesRecreationPublic Heal-th-&Sa-fty ~ 0CulturalProperties Tribal PeopleCustoms, Aspirations. Attitudes - -- …

Legend: Ql denotes interactions wvith no resulting change in baseline conditions * denotes potential adverse effecto denotes potential positive effects

Page 44

-_ _d T 1 PP- - _TT

* _ uolfqllu,Ioa, y __ ___ ___ +__ T olTl

* ~ ~ ~ - d AM

RM -4 -- --- - is 0. n* 0 r I-p. .. 6 0

* 7 -opo uqu"_o____X EX *(Ap,.1 ) M1O~ - N *flJ i

* *...t.q S~.~n9wo,a I . 6-9* P00 10 P01001) k.-i.i.:i9

* gjpo Os f5

q OWtA-0o

l~~~~~*110 *00 8401.0 ..,F(po.oo a.00..oS6 *Iitj1-!jX - t(.-d Oo..) sd ,.0.813

WR .-U (P-0000 d.

T..,A0~ p00100.., k 081 -

* 1 1 OPCI0P- 0 8 0-n 18,- I I I I I

I~ ~~~~~~~~ 1 F n"SPPusa en a I 00tIL E- -

| 11+1~~~~~~~~~~P0 0000400000 404.101000000801.00001 _ 0W00001l t - 1 1 0 1 1 1 1

* 001003 OflOlO = 00, I0rI.t = 0

#10 -4,%AO.A~8500010 F- F

** * wnX-h _00- 0 0A.

I 8A _ Boo:

| 0

P. 010d0

l 1 1 lt l= t~~~~A-8 a-M1 q*1+1 ~ ~ ~ -1 |- m O lo e= 1 1 ||||||- - = t

* *lulul BO1080pr0AQUnn -al | ] i . WCq t1+ __ 4 +p _~~~~~~~~+4

0001 00 ~ ~ F B"R.8C

*18' A

l *|+|+|^ IwL".X.qsusn _ q, 4 jj tt . 1 - 1 _ t t lo . a~H 1 IC, 1- r

I i - U O/ueo*q Ill , * ! ll IIi I I I I

l058i 000 0

00 * .A- 5 -

0-011 0.10,1 0 ~ 0> >0110.01- 10..B.1000 0-

IWDROP

Table 9

Environmental Effects Analysis SummaryKakira Sugar Works Proposed Cogeneration Expansion Project

Potential Effect Mitigation Measure Residual Effect Follow-up Significant?

Air Quality, Climate and Meteorology

Increased noise during construction and * Control the timing of noise to least Low Daily noise monitoring Nooperation of expanded cogeneration disruptive periods, as practicable. during construction.facility. * Monitor noise levels as required.

Implement further noise restrictions wherethe noise level exceeds ambient levels of85 dB by more than 20 dB.

* Minimize idling of vehicles and/orequipment.

* Maintain noise levels below 85 dBA orprovide hearing protection.

Increased emissions (SO2; NO,, CO, * Kakira will ensure that vehicles and Low Daily monitoring of NoCO2, and particulates) from combustion equipment are inspected and maintained. construction crew.of fossil fuels during construction. * Vehicles and equipment will not be left

idling when not in use.

* No ozone depleting substances will beused or generated from equipment duringconstruction.

Increased emissions (SO2, NO,, GO, * Equip boilers with dry-ash collection Moderate Air monitoring NoCO2, and particulates) during operation system and full wet scrubber to reduce theof expanded facility amount of ash released into the

environment.


UMRDROP

Table 9 (cont'd)



Increased dust generation during cane * Develop a bagasse handling management Low Ensure bagasse Noand bagasse handling, processing and plan to manage supply and demand and management system isstorage ensure bagasse quality. developed and

* Repair leakages in bagasse and bagacillo implementedchutes to reduce dust releases.

* Cover trucked materials during transport.* Provide Personal Protective Equipment

and training to personnel working directlywith dust-generating materials.

Soil Quality

Reduced soil quality as a result of * Develop a spill prevention plan. Low Develop and implement Nohazardous materials spills (fuels, oils, E Prepare and implement chemical handling nvironmentallubricants, other chemicals) andsPreare adiploemuentceialhnln Management Plan

and storage procedures ~~~encompassing chemical* Construct concrete bund around areas storage and handling

where liquids are stored to contain any procedures.spillage

* Maintain spill kits in all fuel and chemicalstorage areas

* Work will be monitored during constructionto ensure there are no releases ofdeleterious substances.

* Refuelling and maintenance of equipmentwill be conducted in designated locationsonly.

* Workers handling chemicals will beprovided training in chemical safety andadequate personal protective equipment.


'ARDROP

Table 9 (cont'd)



Reduced soil quality due to PCBs * Collect all water and dirt from transformers Low All new transformers will Noreleased. during transformer during maintenance activities and treat as continue to be PCB freemaintenance hazardous waste.

Reduced soil quality as a result of solid * Proper siting and design of a waste Low Nowaste disposal disposal site.

* Ensure no hazardous wastes are stored ordisposed of at waste disposal ground. .

Groundwater

Decreased groundwater quality as a * Develop spill prevention plan. Low * Kakira will conduct Noresult of hazardous materials spills * Prepare and implement chemical handling regular visual(fuel, oil, lubricant and other chemicals) and storage procedures and train inspections ofduring construction and operation employees on their use. hazardous m r

hazardous materials* Spill containment supplies will be kept on- storage areas,

site in case of fuel leak.* Construct concrete bund around areas including aboveground

where liquids are stored to contain any tanks.spillage

* Work will be monitored during constructionto ensure there are no releases ofdeleterious substances.

* Storage of fuels and other hazardousmaterials will be conducted in designatedlocations only

* Refuelling and maintenance of equipmentwill be conducted in designated locationsonly. .

The Madhvani Group 48 03852401 00-REP-VO001 -02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

VARDROP

Table 9 (cont'd)



Surface Water

Decreased surface water quality due to * Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a Low Kakira will develop and Noincreased wastewater discharges wastewater treatment system including implement an

* Oil, grease and grit separation environmental monitoring* A primary settling and flow program to monitor

equalisation pond surface water quality* An anaerobic pond leaving the wastewater* An anaerobic pond system.

* An aerobic pondOr* Constructed wetlands

* Reduce water use to minimize thewastewater generated.

Mammals and Birds

Decreased health of mammals due to a Obtain permit from NEMA to operate Low Nointeractions with improperly stored and waste disposal sitedisposed hazardous materials and * Proper siting and formal design will allowsewage for vermin breeding control

Nuisance Species, vectors, dangerous

Attraction of nuisance species, vectors * Obtain permit from NEMA to operate waste Low Kakira will work with Noand dangerous species at current on- disposal site NEMA to monitor wastesite waste disposal site (old quarry site) * Proper siting and formal design will allow disposal ground.

for vermin breeding control


WIRDROiP

Table 9 (cont'd)


Potential Effect Mitigation Measure Residual Effect Follow-up Significant?Land/resource use

Disposal of wastewater may negatively * Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a Low Kakira will develop and Noaffect land use due to decreased water wastewater treatment system including implement anquality a environmental monitoring* Oil, grease and grit separation program to monitor* A primary settling and flow equalisation surface water quality

pond leaving the wastewater* An anaerobic pond system.* An aerobic pondOr

* Constructed wetlands

Reduce water use to minimize thewastewater generated.

Employment

Decreased employment opportunities * Create additional jobs in other locations Low Noas a result of increased factory within the factory for displaced workersautomation

The Madhvani Group 50 03852401 00-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

VARDROP

Table 9 (cont'd)



Health and Safety

Decreased human health and safety as * Conduct personal monitoring of Low Conduct periodic noise Noa result of increased noise. employees in the areas of elevated noise monitoring, including

levels to determine the appropriate noise personal monitoring.rating of PPE. This should include thoseemployees who may pass through noisyareas on their way to their workstation.

* Provide appropriate PPE to staff workingin high-noise areas.

* Ensure that workers are trained on properuse of PPE.

* Construct and install silencers for steamdischarges.

Decreased human health due to * Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a Low Kakira will develop and Noimpacted drinking water wastewater treatment system including implement an

* Oil, grease and grit separation environmental monitoringprogram to monitor* A primary settling and flow surface water quality

equalisation pond leaving the wastewater• An anaerobic pond system.

* An aerobic pondOr

* Constructed wetlands

* Reduce water use to minimize thewastewater generated.

Reduced human health as a result of air * Equip boilers with dry-ash collectionemissions and dust system and full wet scrubber to reduce

the amount of ash released into theenvironment.


WRDROP

Table 9 (cont'd)



Health and Safety

* Develop a bagasse handlingmanagement plan to manage supply anddemand and ensure bagasse quality.

* Repair leakages in bagasse andbagacillo chutes to reduce dust releases.

* Cover trucked materials during transport.

* Provide Personal Protective Equipmentand training to personnel working directlywith dust-generating materials.


VARDROP

Table 10

Residual Effects Assessment for Significance

Kakira Sugar Works

Environmental Effect Evaluation CriteriaResidualEnvironmental Effect Magnitude Frequencyf | Duration Probability/ Geographic Significant?

OccFreqencyef Drto Likelihood Etn

Air Quality, Climate, Meteorology

Increased Noise - L H M H L L NoConstruction

Increased Noise - L H M H L L NoOperation

Increased emissions L H M H L L Nofrom combustion offossil fuels duringconstruction

Increased emissions M H H M L L Noduring operation ofexpanded facility

Increased dust L H L M L L Nogeneration during caneand bagasse handling,processing and storage


'ARDROP

Table 10


Kakira Sugar Works

Residual Environmental Effect Evaluation CriteriaResidual

Environmental Effect Magnitude Frequency of Duration Probability! Reversibility Geographic Significant?Magnitude Occurrence Likelihood Extent

Soil

Reduced soil quality as M L H L N/a N/a Noa result of hazardousmaterials spills

Reduced soil quality M L M L L L Nodue to PCBs releasedduring transformermaintenance

Reduced soil quality as M M H L N/a L Noa result of solid wastedisposal

Groundwater

Decreased H L H L N/a M jNogroundwater quality asa result of hazardousmaterials spills _

Surface Water

Decreased surface L M M L L H Nowater quality due toincreased wastewater


UARDROP

Table 10


Kakira Sugar Works

Environmental Effect Evaluation CriteriaResidual

Environmental Effect Magnitude Frequency of Duration Probability/ Reversibility Geographic Significant?agniue Occurrence urin Likelihood vi ,Extent

discharges _

Mammals and Birds

Decreased health due to L L L L L L Nointeractions withimproperly stored anddisposed hazardousmaterials and sewage

Nuisance Species

Attraction of nuisance L L L L L L Nospecies, vectors and ldangerous species to . Iwaste disposal site _

Population Demographics

Human population Cannot beI I ~~~~~~~assessed atdisplacement as a result present

of ROW placement presentLand and Resource Use

Disposal of waste water L T L L L L H Nomay negatively affect l lland use due to l l l l


WtRDROP

Table 10


Kakira Sugar Works

Environmental Effect Evaluation CriteriaResidual

Environmental Effect Magnitude Frequencyof Duration Probability/ Reversibility Geographic Significant?O~ccurrence jLikelihood Extent

decreased water quality

Employment

Decreased employment L L H L L L Nodue to increased factoryautomation

Public Safety and Health

Increased Noise M H M L L M No

Increased potential Cannot beeffects induced from assessed atelectromagnetic fields present

Reduced human health L H M M L L Noas a result of airemissions and dust

Decreased human L L L L L H Nohealth due to impacteddrinking water


|ARDROP

Table 11a

Noise Emission Levels from Various Construction Vehicles and Equipment

Equipment Number Estimated Noise Emission Levels (dBA)Vehicle* 5 80 per vehicleLoader** 2 104Bulldozer** 2 107Grader** 1 104Dump Truck** 5 92Jack Hammer** 1 130Pneumatic drill or heavy 1 120machine**Back hoe** 2 104

*Noise emission level reference distance is 15 metres**Noise emission levels taken at the operatorReference: NCLHH, 1999

Table lb

Values Used in Calculating Combined Noise Levels

Difference (dBA) Additive Noise ValueExcess of Stronger Add to the Add to the Stronger to get the

Stronger* Combined dBA level0 3.01 2.52 2.13 1.84 1.55 1.26 1.07 0.88 0.69 0.510 0.4*In order to combine sound pressure levels expressed in dBA, thestrongest emitter is used as the initial level. Each noise emitter iscompared to the strongest, and the difference in dBA levels between thetwo, determines the combined level.

Reference:World Health Organization, 1995

The Madhvani Group 57 03852401 00-REP-VO001 -02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion EnvironmentalAssessment

IARDROP

Table 11 c

Cumulative Noise Emissions for All Construction Vehicles and Equipment

Equipment Noise Difference Add to Cumulative NoiseEmission between Stronger to Emission (dBA)(dBA) Noise get Combined

Emitters LevelJack hammer 130Pneumatic drill, 120 10 0.4 130.4heavy machineBulldozers** 110 10.4 negligible 130.4Back hoes** 107 23.4 negligible 130.4Loaders** 107 23.4 negligible 130.4Grader 104 26.4 negligible 130.4Dump trucks* 99 31.4 negligible 130.4Vehicles* 87 43.4 negligible 130.4Ambient (heavy 85 45.4 negligible 130.4traffic area)*Assuming five vehicles or pieces of equipment operating at the same time**Assuming two pieces of equipment operating at the same time


IRDROP

Table 1Id

Estimated Noise Emission from Expanded Cogeneration

Section Noise Levels (dBA) Proposed UgandaStandard (dBA)

Current Average Estimated ChangesDec.2002 to Feb 2003

Turbo generator 91 941 85areaBoiler area 89 952 85Notes: Values in Bold exceed the guideline.1. Based on one turbogenerator at 91 dBA.2. Based on two boilers at 89 dBA each.3. Noise emissions will be reduced following installation of silencers for steam discharges and

increased instrumentation to control temperature and pressure to reduce noisy steamexhaust through safety alarm valves.


VRDROP

Potential Consequence

The estimated cumulative noise emission levels during construction activities mayincrease by as much as 45 dBA over ambient levels for heavy traffic areas (Table 11 c).This increase is considered a 'worst case" scenario because it assumes all equipmentwill be used at the same time. Construction activities are generally limited to within theKakira compound, where elevated noise levels due to factory operations, traffic, andbusiness operations are common. Because increased noise levels can impact humanhealth, mitigation is required.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease noise:

x Noise levels will be monitored during construction and further noise restrictions suchas limiting the number of equipment operating simultaneously, where the noise levelexceeds ambient levels of 70 dB by more than 20 dB.Equipment and vehicles will not be left idling for longer than 10 minutes at a time.

x Provide hearing protection to staff.x Isolation of noise sourcesx Clear waming signs indicating high level noise areas and emphasis of noise

protection equipment in those areas

Consequence of Residual Effect

Factory expansion is a short-term activity. Noise emissions will decrease byapproximately 10 dBA with mitigation, total noise increases are estimated to be about120 dBA at the source, or 35 dBA above ambient levels. Daily noise monitoring willallow corrective measures to be applied. The residual effect of noise disturbance duringdemolition will be of low consequence.

INCREASED NOISE GENERATION DUE TO OPERATION OF EXPANDED COGENERATIONFACILITY

The expanded cogeneration facility will be in operation indefinitely. Due to the additionof two boilers and one turbogenerators, as well as the associated infrastructure,additional noise will be produced, potentially resulting in decreased air quality, or noisepollution. Ambient noise levels surrounding the Kakira site are approximately 85 dB.The closest residential housing is located 1000 m from the factory.


Based on the addition of two boilers and one turbogenerator, the cumulative noiseemission levels during operation of the expanded cogeneration facility may increase byas much as 10 dBA over current levels in those areas of the factory (Tables 11 d). Thisincrease is considered a "worst case" scenario because it assumes that the newequipment will release the same amount of noise as all of the equipment in use duringthe 2002/2003 noise monitoring events. Increased noise as a result of infrastructurethan the generators and boilers has not been included in this assessment. Becauseincreased noise levels can impact human health, mitigation is required.

The Madhvani Group 60 0385240100-REP-VO001l02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneraton Expansion Environmental Assessment

WARDROP

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease noise:

x Noise levels will be monitored semi-monthly. Monitoring events will be conductedduring operation of the boilers and turbogenerator. Noise restrictions such aslimiting the number of equipment operating simultaneously, where the noise levelexceeds ambient levels of 70 dB by more than 20 dB, will be implemented, ifpossible.

x If off-site noise levels are greater than 70 dBA for extended periods of time, Kakirawill investigate the Installation of sound baniers such as trees or earth berms toreduce off-site noise levels.


Noise monitoring will allow corrective measures to be applied. The residual effect ofnoise disturbance during operation will be of low consequence.

DECREASED AIR QUALITY FROM FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS DURING CONSTRUCTION

Gaseous and particulate air emissions released from vehicles and equipment usedduring construction and operation will increase carbon dioxide (CO2), carbon monoxide(CO), methane (CH4), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen oxides (NO,),sulfur oxides (SO,), VOCs, and ground level ozone levels. Increased fossil fuelemissions may decrease local air quality.

Types of equipment with petroleum-fuelled engines that will likely be used duringconstruction include trucks, front-end loaders, dump trucks and light equipment. For thepurposes of this assessment, it is assumed that approximately two pieces of each typeof equipment and five vehicles will be used and the bulk of construction will takeapproximately 1.5 years.

Total estimated emissions for the proposed project were calculated using therelationship between fuel consumption and exhaust gas production. The estimated fuelconsumption during construction, as well as the estimated emissions during constructionfor various types of vehicles and machinery, is provided in Tables 12 a and b,respectively. The use of equipment during construction will increase emission valuesonly slightly from current levels; therefore, construction will not likely result in direct airquality problems or indirect effects on the health of valued environmental components orhuman health.

Substances that deplete ozone and contribute to global warming and acid rain can bemajor components of air emissions. Compounds related to global warming (CO2, CH4,and N20) and compounds related to acid rain (NOx and SOx) are anticipated. The totalestimated greenhouse gas emissions for the project are summarized in Tables 12 c.

The Madhvani Group 61 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogenerafion Expansion Environmental Assessment

IADROP

Table 12a

Estimated Project Fuel Consumption During Construction

Construction Estimated Fuel Type Estimated No. Total Fuel Total FuelEquipment Number Consumption Construction Consumption Consumption

(L/day) Days (L) (kg)Vehicles 5 Gasoline 150 550 82 500 56 925Loader 2 Diesel 300 550 165 000 113 850Dump Truck 2 Diesel 200 550 110 000 75 900Backhoe 1 Diesel 200 550 110 000 75 900Light All Gasoline 100 (total) 550 55 000 37 950EquipmentTotal 522 500 360 525Note: Construction Number of Days = (7 days per week) x (78 weeks) = 550 days. Based on worst case scenario using all

equipment every day of the estimated 1.5 year construction period.Assume the density of gasoline is 0.69 g/mL; Assume the density of 1-0 fuel (diesel) is 0.81 g/mL.Total annual fuel consumption in Uganda equals 127 million L annually (http://www.wri.orq/wri/ehiAeaddev.html)

References:RCO, 1999

ICC,1996

The Madhvani Group 62 0385240100-REP-V0001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration ExpansionEnvironmental Assessment

VARDROP

TABLE 12b

Estimated Fossil Fuel Emissions During Construction Activities

Equipment Type C02 CH4 N20 NO, co SO2

kg/year kg/year kg/year kg/year kg/year kg/year

Vehicles 143153 41.7 1.252 1252 16 692 31.7

Loader 138 971 9.48 1.137 1516 1895 30.4

Dump Truck 92 648 6.32 0.758 1011 1264 20.2

Backhoe 46 324 3.16 0.379 505 632 10.1

Light Equipment 35 629 10.4 0.312 312 4155 7.88

Total 366 725 71.1 3.83 4596 24 638 100.3

Global Warming Potential 1 21.00 310.000 Insignificant Insignificant N.A.

Total in CO2 Equivalents 366725 1493 1187 Insignificant Insignificant

Note: All values shown are expressed in kg/year.

All calculations were done in accordance with IPCC Guidelines (IPCC, 1996)

Annual emissions are based on 90 days of construction activity (year = 90 days)

N.A. = Not Applicable

Reference: Environment Canada, 1999


'ARDROP

Table 12c

Anticipated Greenhouse Gas Production During Construction

GreenhouseGas (kt CO2 Emissions (ktlyear)Equivalents)

Total Project World

Carbon Dioxide 0.367 23 900 000Methane 0.0015 7 560 000Nitrous Oxide 0.00119 17 050 000Total 0.370 485100 009Percent Project 100 1.14 x 107May GenerateReference:Environment Canada, 1999

The Madhvani Group 64 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration ExpansionEnvironmental Assessment

WARDROP


It is unlikely that air quality will be affected by fossil fuel emissions generated duringproject activities. Although carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, sulphuroxides, methane, VOCs, and ground ozone levels may be slightly affected locally duringtimes of construction using diesel or gas powered equipment, the changes in air qualitydue to project activities are expected to be minor.

Although the potential emissions produced during construction activities are low, there isa continual effort to decrease worldly emissions; therefore, mitigation is required in theproject study area.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to reduce emissions from vehicle andequipment use:

x Kakira will ensure that vehicles and equipment are inspected and maintained. Apoorly maintained engine and under-inflated tires can increase fuel consumption byup to 10% and 4 to 8%, respectively.

l Vehicles and equipment will not be left idling when not in use.x No ozone depleting substances will be used or generated from equipment during

construction.


Ensuring a high standard of inspection, maintenance, and operational practices is aneffective method of controlling excess emissions. This will reduce the magnitude andprobability of gaseous and particulate emissions from vehicle and equipment use to anacceptable level. The residual effect of decreased air quality due to fossil fuel emissionswas evaluated to be of low consequence in the project study area.

REDUCED AIR QUALITY INCREASED AIR EMISSIONS DURING OPERATION OFEXPANDED COGENERATION FACILITY

The air emission sources and pollutants generated by Kakira operations are summarizedin Table 4. The most significant pollutant emitted by bagasse-fired boilers is particulatematter, caused by the turbulent movement of combustion gases with respect to thebuming bagasse and resultant ash.

Under normal operating conditions, the significant product of combustion of the bagasseis carbon dioxide (CO2), with lesser amounts of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and negligiblequantities of polycyclic organic matter. Emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) from the boilersare also considered negligible, owing to the characteristically low levels of sulfurassociated with bagasse.

The Madhvani Group 65 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessmnent

ARDROP

Dispersion modelling results for future conditions (a 100% increase in the bagasse feedrate to the boilers) indicate the following maximum 24-hour concentrations could occur at183 m from the source:

X Carbon Dioxide - 130 000 _g/r3 - Carbon dioxide emissions contribute to the globalwarming effect. Uganda has not committed to any intemational protocols forgreenhouse gas reductions (e.g. Kyoto protocol).

x Nitrous Oxides and Nitrogen Dioxide - 100 pg/M3 and 70 11g/M 3, respectively- Nitrousoxides and nitrogen dioxides are precursors of acid rain, which affects forests andvegetation. Current concentrations fall within acceptable levels of these pollutantscompared to Uganda and intemational guidelines.

X Total Particulate Matter - 2600 pg/M3 - At the closest Kakira property line (650 mfrom the source), the 24-hour ground level concentration of particulates could reach870 j1g/M 3, and the concentration does not drop below the Uganda AQS Standard(300mg/m 3) for more than 10 km away from the stack. Thus Kakira employees andmembers of the public living within a radius of 10 km from the factory mayexperience health effects from particulate from the boilers. Communities furtheraway will most likely not experience health effects associated with particulateemissions. It should be noted that communities such as the one on top of Mwiri hill(157 m above the factory level), may experience concentrations almost double tothose at ground level, due to the impact of the hill on plume behaviour. However,Kakira Hospital has no recorded case or complaints of this effect.

Other emissions include:

X Fugitive Dust Emissions - There are a number of significant sources of fugitive dustemissions from Kakira. These include other fugitive sources such as trucks drivingon unpaved roads, outdoor conveyors or chutes, or from holes in galvanized pipesthat convey bagasse or bagacillo, and storage piles.

x Sulphur Dioxide - Syrup from the evaporators is treated with sulphur dioxide (SO2)gas for bleaching purposes. The SO2 is generated in a reaction vessel and bubbledthrough the syrup in the 'sulphitor" reaction tank, reducing the pH of the syrup from6.8 to 5.5. Excess sulphur dioxide is discharged from a tank vent to the roof.Approximately 0.3 kg of sulphur is consumed per tonne of crushed cane. On a 2500metric tonnes of cane crushed per day (TCD) basis, approximately 750 kg of sulphuris used per day. The exhausted gas discharged from the reaction vessel isestimated to have a maximum SO2 gas concentration of 0.2% of the gas used.Therefore the S0 2 gas discharged from the sulphitor vessel will be a maximum of 1.5kg/day. There is no pollution control equipment on the sulphitor vessel. Combustionsources such as diesel generators and wood fired boilers (start -up) will emitadditional amounts of sulphur dioxide. Kakira installed a new 100 tVhr sulphur bumerwhich includes a scrubber during the 2002/2003 crop season. This new unit willimprove the sulphitation process, thus resulting in a reduction in sulphurconsumption and overall SO2 emissions.

The Madhvani Group 66 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Worxs Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

ARDROP

Under the expanded operations, these concentrations can double, based on a doubling

of production and no additional emission controls. Air emissions assessment anddispersion modelling are provided in Appendix B. The maximum pollutantconcentrations are found at 183 m from the source.


With the expanded operations, air quality will be adversely affected as air emissions willapproximately double. Mitigation is required to reduce the potential impacts.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease emissions during operationof the expanded facility:

* The boilers will be equipped with a dry ash collection system and a full wet scrubberto reduce the amount of ash released into the environment. A properly chosen,sized and maintained wet scrubber should remove greater that 90% of theparticulate emissions from the bagasse boilers (US EPA, 1996). If this removal isapplied to the calculated air dispersion results provided in Appendix B, the maximum24-hour concentration of particulates that could escape into the surroundingenvironment would be 260 pLg/M 3. This is less than the maximum Uganda AQSStandard (300 pLg/rn3).

* Install a process control system to eliminate excess SO2.


Air emissions are one of the major environmental outputs at Kakira. Emissions arereleased throughout the sugar manufacturing process and will be released duringcogeneration activities. Following implementation of measures to control air emissions,the probability that air emissions will be in excess of guideline values will be reduced.Follow up monitoring may be required to determine actual concentrations ofcontaminants emitted from the expanded facility. As Kakira has committed to installingpollution control devices and has already changed the sulphitation process resulting in areduction in sulphur released to the atmosphere, the resultant residual effect afterimplementation of mitigation was evaluated to be of low significance.

REDUCED AIR QUALITY DUE TO DUST GENERATION DURING BAGASSE HANDLING,

STORAGE AND DISPOSAL

Disposal and storage of bagasse is an on-going challenge for Kakira. Excess bagasse,or bagasse that is too wet for buming, is stored in a covered storage area near theboilers. Currently, approximately 450 tons of bagasse is transported in uncovered trucksdaily to the sugar cane fields for buming. While not a hazardous material, bagassecreates nuisance dust and is thus damaging to the environment. Bagasse buming alsocreates nuisance conditions for surrounding communities. Stockpiles of damp bagassecreate ideal conditions for growth of toxic moulds that can be a health hazard foremployees.


1AMROP


With the installation of the new Breda boilers and expansion of the bagasse handlingarea, the excess bagasse problem will be reduced. However, management of thebagasse to ensure a steady supply to the boilers will be critical. Mitigation is required.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease dust generation dunngbagasse handling, storage and disposal:

A Kakira will develop a bagasse handling management plan to manage bagassesupply and demand to the boilers and to ensure bagasse quality is maintainedduring storage.

A Repair leakages in bagasse and bagacillo chutes to reduce dust releases.A Cover trucked materials during transport.A Provide Personal Protective Equipment and training to personnel working directly

with dust-generating materials.


Dust generation during cane and bagasse handling and storage cannot be avoidedcompletely; however, it can be minimized via the implementation of mitigation measures.Where unavoidable, Kakira will supply workers with appropriate personal protectiveequipment and will train them in its proper use. The residual effect after mitigation wasevaluated to be insignificant.

5.1.2 SOIL QUALITY

REDUCED SOIL QUALITY DUE TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SPILLS

A summary of non-hazardous solid wastes generated at Kakira, and disposal practices,is provided as Table 3. Kakira recycles or reuses a number of waste products.

Wastes that are considered hazardous in Uganda are defined as those that are listed inthe fifth schedule of the National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations (1999).Hazardous materials include substances, if released, may pose risks to the environmentor to the health and safety of people or wildlife. Hazardous materials used at Kakirainclude the following:

X Process Chemicals - kept in the main store where housekeeping and storageconditions are considered adequate (Wardrop, 2003). The floor is concrete,preventing surface contamination and most chemicals are kept on pallets, whichkeeps them dry.w Sulphur( Lime0 Caustic soda and washing sodaw Talocide (antibacterial spray applied in vicinity of milling equipment)w Phosphoric acidX Seperan/Flocculant


WARDROP

Sodium hydrosulphite

x Fuels - petroleum storage tanks - Surficial staining was observed in at least two tanklocations (standby diesel generator tanks, concrete pad at Chico divisionheadquarters) and discrepancies in dip records have historically been encountered.Kakira were not aware of any spills that have occurred. It is our understanding thatnone of the tanks are cathodically protected.

2. Other Materials - Other hazardous materials used at Kakira include various types oflubricating oils. Empty waste oil drums are primarily stored outside the main store.


A hazardous materials spill may occur from inadequate storage, fuelling activities, or asa result of a vehicle accident. Depending on the locabon of the spill, impacts to surfacewater, groundwater, and/or soil could result.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease the potential risk ofdecreased environmental quality due to spills of hazardous materials:

x Kakira will develop a spill prevention plan.

x Kakira will ensure that chemical containers are labelled and documentationregarding safe handling or first aid measures (i.e. MSDS) are accessible from eachstorage and use location.

x Kakira will make spill clean-up equipment readily available in chemical storageareas.

x Kakira will ensure that chemical containers are stored in a safe fashion to reduce thepotential for containers falling over and spilling.

x Storage of fuels and other hazardous materials will be conducted in designatedlocations only

x Work will be monitored during construction to ensure there are no releases ofdeleterious substances.

Refuelling and maintenance of equipment will be conducted in designated locationsonly

X Workers who handle the chemicals will be provided training in chemical safety andadequate personal protective equipment. Occupational exposure of workers duringhandling of toxic powdered chemicals such as caustic soda and sulphur, is aparticular concem. Emergency showers or eyewash stations in areas where somechemicals are handled will be considered.

The Madhvani Group 69 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakire Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

NRDROP


Following the implementation of mitigation measures, the nsk of accidental spills ofhazardous materials will be reduced. This potential effect will be of low significance.

REDUCED SOIL QUALITY DUE TO PCBs RELEASED DURING TRANSFORMERMAINTENANCE

There are thirty-three electrical transformers on the Kakira property. UEDCL owns ten ofthese and Kakira owns the rest. Kakira will be adding one additional transformer as aresult of the cogeneration project.

The transformers currently on the Kakira property were installed between 1959 to 2000.Private contractors complete major repairs on the transformers off-site; however, Kakiracompletes minor repairs on-site, including periodic filtering of the transformer oil toremove water and dirt. The facility has a portable piece of equipment for pumping the oilfrom the transformer, separating the oil and dirt and recycling the oil back to thetransformer. The typical practice is to discard small quantities of separated water ontothe ground.

PCBs are a class of chemicals, some of which are highly toxic and/or bioaccumulative.PCBs although not highly flammable, if ignited, will generate toxic fumes containingdioxins. PCB oils have excellent conductive properties and were therefore usedextensively in transformers and other electrical equipment. However, now that its toxicityis well known, the use of the oils has been phased out in many parts of the world.

It is unknown whether the transformer oil contains PCB's. However, NEMA suspectsthat many transformers in Uganda contain oil laced with PCB's, particularly oldtransformers. There are no facilities in Uganda to analyse for PCB's. Although it isassumed that the new transformer will be PCB-free, mitigation is required to limit theamount of PCBs potentially being released to the environment during maintenanceactivities of the existing units. For replacement of transformer oils, KSW will use PCB-free transformer oils.


The amount of PCBs currently released to the soil environment via discarded water islikely minimal as PCBs have a relatively low water solubility. However, due to thepotential toxic effects associated with PCBs, and because an additional transformer willbe installed, mitigation is recommended.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease the potential risk ofdecreased environmental quality due to the addition of PCBs to the soil:

A Kakira will collect all water and dirt from transformers during maintenance activitiesand treat as hazardous waste. These materials will be stored in an approvedlocation for future incineration in Europe. The estimated costs of analysis of PCBs,transport and incineration in Europe are indicated in the following table:


VARDROP

Estimated costs of handling Transformer PCBs at Kakira Sugar Works

Item Estimated costAnalysis of PCBs $150 per sampleTransport to Europe $1500 per tonneIncineration of PCBs $ 3000 per tonneMiscellaneous (permits, handling etc) $ 2000 per shipment


After implementation of mitigation measures, this potential effect is deemed to beinsignificant.

DECREASED SOIL QUALITY DUE TO ADDITION OF METALS TO SOILS THROUGHFILTER CAKE (MUD) AND FLY ASH SOIL AMENDMENTS

There is the potential for metals to be added to agricultural soils through the addition offilter cake and fly ash. A total of 24 000 tonnes (3.77% of cane crushed) of filter cake isproduced annually. During a previous environmental investigation, it was determinedthat the filter cake has an elevated level of copper (Wardrop 2003). It is understood thatelevated copper levels are naturally occurring and as such are not a result of the Kakiraactivities. Therefore, the fly ash and filter cake classify as non-hazardous waste.


The concentrations of metals within the filter cake and fly ash are within referencedguideline values for agricultural soils. Kakira does not add metals within their process,therefore all of the metals contained in the fly ash are expected to be naturally occurring,likely derived from the soil. Mitigation is not required.

REDUCED SOIL QUALITY AS A RESULT OF SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL

Kakira currently of solid waste at an old quarry site on their property. The quantities ofwaste disposed at this location are minimal currently; however, this is an unlicensed sitewith no formal design. The potential for environmental effects exists.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease the potential risk ofdecreased environmental quality due to solid waste disposal:

A Kakira will discontinue use of unlicensed waste disposal grounds. Only a site withproper siting, and a formal design (e.g. soil cover, leachate management, ventilation,vermin breeding control, etc.) will be used.

x Ensure that no hazardous wastes are stored or disposed of at waste disposalground.

The Madhvani Group 71 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneratbon Expansion Environmental Assessment

ARDROP


After implementation of mitigation measures, this potential for adverse effects will bereduced. The residual effect is deemed to be insignificant.

5.1.3 GROUNDWATER

DECREASED GROUNDWATER QUALITY AS A RESULT OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALSSPILLS

The Jinja area is considered to have low groundwater potential because of the fine-grained overburden and the resulting decrease in surface water infiltration. Water tables

in the Kakira area are found at a depth of 51 m (overburden) and 69 m (bedrock) belowgrade; however, given the clay soil conditions, perched shallow water tables aresuspected.


Groundwater in the Kakira area may be subject to impact as a result of spills ofhazardous materials, including fuels. The magnitude of effect will depend greatly on thetype of material released, the area in which the spill occurs, and whether a perchedshallow water table exists. Mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease the potential risk ofdecreased groundwater quality due to hazardous materials spills:

X Develop a spill prevention plan.k Prepare and implement chemical handling and storage procedures and train

employees on their use.- Kakira will conduct regular visual inspections of hazardous materials storage areas,

including aboveground tanks.k Kakira will ensure that chemical containers are labelled and documentation

regarding safe handling or first aid measures (i.e. MSDS) are accessible from eachstorage and use location.

x Kakira will make spill clean-up equipment readily available in chemical storage

areas.x Kakira will ensure that chemical containers are stored in a safe fashion in a

designated storage area to reduce the potential for containers falling over andspilling.

x Construct concrete berm around areas where liquids are stored to contain anyspillage

X Work will be monitored during construction to ensure there are no releases ofdeleterious substances.


Following the implementation of mitigation, the probability of impacts to groundwater willbe reduced. This effect was deemed insignificant.

The Madhvani Group 72 0385240100-REP-V0001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion EnvironmentalAssessment

ARDROP

5.1.4 SURFACE WATER

DECREASED SURFACE WATER QUALITY DUE TO INCREASED WASTEWATERDISCHARGES

There are currently three effluent streams discharged from the factory: mill effluent; filtereffluent; and centrifugal effluent. These streams combine and are later joined by minoreffluent streams from the canteen and the sweets factory and overflow from the sprayponds. The latter receives cooling and condenser waters from the vacuum pans andevaporators. The wastewater discharge then continues through the sugar plantationfields, is joined by the Muwala Stream, which finally discharges into the Chico Riverflowing north.

Kakira recently received its waste discharge permit from DWD. In its environmentalmonitoring programme, Kakira has been sampling individual effluent streams, as well ascombined wastewater streams, on a monthly basis and analysing for the followingparameters:

l PH x temperaturel 5-day Biological Oxygen Demand X Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)x total suspended solids (TSS) x turbidityk total dissolved solids (TDS) x total phosphorus, nitrate and nitrogen

flow

The results of a 2002 wastewater-sampling program of each individual effluent streamhave been compared to the conditions of Kakira's recently received waste dischargepermit and Uganda's Effluent Discharge Standards (Wardrop, 2002). In general, manyof the parameters exceeded the permit conditions at some point in time. Note that thiscomparison is probably most relevant for the combined factory effluent stream, before itpasses through the sugar plantations, because it constitutes the undiluted, combined'industrial waste" stream stipulated in the permit.

X Factory Effluents - These effluent streams refer to the wastewater streams from thesugar cane factory and include the mill, centrifugal and filter effluents beforecombining with other water/waste streams. Analytical results of wastewater samplescollected are presented in Wardrop 2002. The results show that the temperature, pH,Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), 5-day Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD5) ofsamples collected from all three streams exceed the permit conditions.

w Temperature of these streams were in the range of 49.1to 54.6 degrees Celsiuscompared to specified range of 20 to 3 5 degrees Celsius. The pH of the milleffluent and the centrifugal effluent were 9.4 and 10.5 respectively and exceededthe specified range of 6.0 to 8.0.

i BOD5 and COD of these streams, particularly the centrifugal stream with aBOD5 and COD of 1037 and 3038 mg/l respectively, also significantly exceededthe specified permit conditions of 335 and 1450 for BOD5 and COD respectively.

The Madhvani Gmup 73 0385240100-REP-VOOO1-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogenerabon Expansion Environmental Assessment

ARDROP

Filter and centrifugal effluents also have high Total Suspended Solids (TSS)concentrations (470 and 212 mg/l respectively), which exceed the permitcondition of (175 mg/I).

Effluent from the centrifuge station has high true colour {(357 platinum cobaltunits) Ptco)}, which is above the standard value of 100 Ptco, while that from thefilter and mill was 74 and 52 Ptco respectively.

The results also showed that Filter and Centrfugal effluents had TDSconcentrations of 1,324 and 2,156 mg/l respectively, which are above therecommended standard of 1000 mg/I. A review of the TDS results obtained byKakira shows that the TDS content of these effluents was on average = 200 mg/lfor most of the time and hence below the recommended guideline value. Thelatter was exceeded only once during the sampling period by the centrifugaleffluent with a value of 1,890 mg/I.

The nutrient content of these effluents (Total Phosphorus (Total-P) and nitrogen(measured as TKN)) falls within the effluent guideline values. Values for TotalPhosphorus of less than 1 mg Total-P/I (Guideline value is 10 mg/I) and TKN ofless than 1.5 mg/l were obtained with no TKN detected in the filter effluent.However, analysis of Total-P by Kakira (for the period between 25/07-7/09/2001)shows that the standard value was exceeded by the Mill station effluent (18 mg/I)and the filter station (11.7 mg/I). Observed levels of phosphorus at the filterstation may be attributed to addition of phosphoric acid in the clarifier stage, andpossibly from phosphate-based fertilizer residue on the cane.

The total sulphates of these effluents were very low (less than 2 mg/I) comparedto the guideline value of 500 mgA for effluent discharge.

Results for the oil and grease analysis of selected samples (mill, filter, centrifugaland factory effluent through the plantation) showed low levels (less than 1 mg/I)compared to the guideline value of 10mg/l. The filter effluent had the highestvalue of 0.780 mg/l while the centrifugal effluent had the lowest of 0.007 mg/I.The low oil and grease concentration in the effluents is likely attributed to goodmaintenance and housekeeping practices in the factory.

Combined Factory Effluent - Sampling locations were a few metres from the factorypremises, further as it flows through the plantation, just before joining the Muwalastream (tributary of the Chico River) and finally its combination with the Chico River.Results show that the combined effluent as it leaves the factory premises hastemperature, true colour, TSS, COD and BOD5 values which fall outside the effluentdischarge standards. However, this is further confirmed by the historical data (Table6). We noted the COD and BOD5 of this stream (1,382 and 214 mg/I respectively)do not exceed Kakira's permit conditions.

According to the Environment Superintendent of the factory, their efforts since2002 (the first year of operation under the permit) towards reducing the pollutionstrength of the final effluent have involved improvement in housekeeping as well


VARDROP

as reduction of the amount of wastewater discharged. Note that reduction inwastewater volumes may increase pollutant concentrations.

Samples collected and analysed further downstream generally showed reducedpollution levels, except for BOD5 (223 mgA compared to the initial value of 214mg/I) just before the effluent joins the Muwala stream.

Chico Composite - The Chico composite has lower values of BOD5 (126 mg/I) andCOD (232 mg/l) compared to the combined factory effluent before joining theMuwala stream. This is probably due to dilution by the Muwala stream resulting in anincreased flow rate.

Considering the likelihood of communities downstream using the rivers watersfor domestic purposes, the Chico composite quality was compared to theUganda Standard Specification for Drinking Water (February 1994). It was foundthat the water quality with respect to colour and turbidity does not meet thestandard. In addition, this stream has very low dissolved oxygen (DO) levels (<1mg/I) and may impact on the aquatic life (e.g., many types of fish cannot survivewhen levels of DO drop below 2-5 mg DO/I).

A metal scan analysis of this wastewater further shows that the iron levels (5.6mg/I) are above both the effluent discharge and drinking water standards (5 mg/Iand 0.3-3.5 mgA respectively). This may be attributed to the Muwala stream,which being a groundwater source (with a high TDS) probably has high levels ofthis metal. Furthermore, the manganese level of this wastewater (0.59 mg/I)does not fall within the drinking water standards range (0.1-0.5), although it iswithin the acceptable range for effluent discharge standards (1 mg/I). This againshows that presence of this metal in the Chico composite may be due to theMuwala stream. KSW does not use iron or manganese for its processes, so it islikely that the elevated iron and manganese in the wastewater are naturallyoccurring.

No lead, copper and nickel were detected in the wastewater stream. Low levelsof Al (0.01 mg/l), Zinc (0.23 mg/I), Chromium (0.03 mg/l) was found in thiscomposite stream and all were within the acceptable effluent discharge anddrinking water standards. Cadmium was found at a level of 0.01 mgA, whichthough compliant with the effluent discharge standards, is on the borderline fordrinking water standards (0.01 mg/I). This is a concem in view of the use of theriver by downstream communities for drinking purposes. The potential source ofthis metal in the Chico composite is either runoff from the estates fields orsediments in the natural river waters.

With factory expansion, the volume of wastewater generated will increase. Withincreased efforts to reduce water consumption, concentrations of each parameter willlikely also increase.

The Madhvani Group 75 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assesstnent

IRDROP


Water quality of the waters receiving effluent from the factory (Muwala Stream and ChicoRiver) could be adversely affected unless mitigation measures are implemented.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease the potential risk ofdecreased water quality due to effluent release:

x Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a wastewater treatment system. Apreliminary design has been completed. The proposed wastewater treatmentsystem consists of four components:

Oil, grease and grit separation, using separators installed at or close to thesources of the oil, grease or grit contaminants.A primary settling and flow equalisation pond with a 24 hydraulic retention time(HRT)An anaerobic pond with a 3 day HRT.An 'aerobic' pond with a 24 hour HRT.

It is expected that the discharge from the waste water treatment will be meet thedischarge standards given in the Sugar Manufacturing Guideline of the World Bank(PPAH, 1998). This means that strict monitoring of discharge from the treatment will benecessary in order to minimise the impacts of the discharge onto the quality of the waterquality of the streams that are used by local communities.

* Reduce water use to minimize the wastewater generated.


Following the implementation of mitigation, the quality of the wastewater leaving Kakirawill be within guidelines. The potential for effects on surface water quality will be greatlyreduced. The residual effect is deemed to be insignificant.

5.1.5 MAMMALS AND BIRDS

DECREASED HEALTH OF MAMMALS AND BIRDS AND INCREASED INTRODUCTION OFNUISANCE SPECIES AND VECTORS AS A RESULT OF WASTE DISPOSAL

Waste (including hazardous waste) and wastewater are currently disposed of untreatedwithin the Kakira Estate.

Hazardous wastes that are generated and stored (at least temporarily) on the propertyinclude waste oil drums, chemical containers and small quantities of hazardous solidwastes (e.g. sulphur ash) and biomedical wastes. Further, some hazardous wastes suchas sulphur ash are disposed of at the old quarry site, which is not appropriate

Kakira currently uses the old quarry for open dumping of waste. The quantities of wastedisposed at the quarry are minimal at this time. However, Kakira does not hold a permit

The Madhvani Group 76 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakra Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion EnvironmentalAssessment

VARDROP

to operate a disposal site, and the site does not have a formal design (e.g. soil cover,leachate management, ventilation, vermin breeding control) to meet the provisions ofNEMA or best management practices.


There is the potential for birds and animals to come into contact with improperly storedand/or disposed of wastes generated at Kakira. Some of these wastes may be harmfulto these organisms. Nuisance species and vectors may also inhabit improperlydesigned waste dumping areas. Mitigation is required.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease of health effects tomammals and birds and to decreased the potential for the introduction of nuisancespecies and vectors:

. The hazardous waste storage facility should be designed in accordance with bestmanagement practices.Best management practices for landfill design and operation are provided in theSolid and Hazardous Waste Management Plan (Wardrop, 2002).Kakira should arrange to obtain an appropriate permit from NEMA for the operationof waste disposal site. Proper siting and formal design of the waste disposal site(e.g. soil cover, leachate management, ventilation, vermin breeding control) shouldbe undertaken in coordination with NEMA to meet the provisions of the regulationand best management practices.Kakira can dispose of its waste at a licensed off-site facility when such a unit isestablished in the vicinity.


Following the implementation of mitigation measures, the residual effect on mammalsand birds is deemed to be insignificant.

5.1.6 VEGETATION

Any adverse impacts to vegetation will be as a result of the transmission line. As routinghas not been confirmed, these potential effects cannot be evaluated.

5.2 SOCIAL EFFECTS

5.2.1 POPULATION DEMOGRAPHICS

There is the potential for human population displacement as a result of the placement ofthe transmission line ROW. As routing has not been confirmed, these potential effectscannot be evaluated.


ARDROP

5.2.2 LAND / RESOURCE USE

DECREASED DRINKING WATER QUALITY AS A RESULT OF INCREASED WASTE WATERDISCHARGES


As a result of factory expansion, wastewater discharges will increase. Discharge ofuntreated effluent is currently a major concem for downstream communities on theChico River. As these communities likely use the water for domestic purposes includingdrinking water, the quality of the water will affect the use of this resource. Residents ofcommunities downstream of Kakira use the Water quality of the waters receiving effluentfrom the factory (Muwala Stream and Chico River) could be adversely affected unlessmitigation measures are implemented.

Mitigation


x Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a wastewater treatment system. Apreliminary design has been completed. The proposed wastewater treatmentsystem consists of four components:

w Oil, grease and grit separation, using separators installed at or close to thesources of the oil, grease or grit contaminants.

m A primary settling and flow equalisation pond with a 24 hydraulic retention time(HRT)

X An anaerobic pond with a 3 day HRT.) An "aerobic" pond with a 24 hour HRT.



Following the implementation of mitigation, the quality of the wastewater leaving Kakirawill be within guidelines. The potential for effects on surface water quality will be greatlyreduced. The residual effect is deemed to be insignificant.

LOSS OF LAND USE DUE TO TRANSMISSION LINE PLACEMENT

Depending on the route selected for the transmission line right-of-way, land use may beadversely affected. This is especially true if a new corridor is selected over an existingone. As routing has not been confirmed, these potential effects cannot be evaluated.

5.2.3 EMPLOYMENT

DECREASED EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES AS A RESULT OF FACTORY EXPANSION

Kakira's factory expansion plan includes automation of a number of steps. As a result,there is a potential for decreased employment at the factory.


WARDROP


In order to facilitate an increase in production to 4000 TCD, a number of modificationsand upgrades are required within the factory at each processing stage. Some of thesemodifications include increased reliance on mechanized equipment. Details areprovided in Section 3.3. As a result, some factory staff will be displaced.

Mitigation

Kakira is aware of employment concems as a result of the factory expansion. Kakira willendeavour to transfer and train displaced workers in other areas of the factory, includingthe cogeneration facility.


With the implementation of mitigation, it is anticipated that there will be no reduction inthe workforce at Kakira.

5.2.4 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY

INCREASED NOISE

The results from the noise sampling conducted at Kakira as part of the 2002 auditindicate that the workers assigned to many areas in the factory may be exposed toharmful noise levels. These areas include: cane preparation and crushing mill; the pans;the clarifiers; the sugar bagging house; the evaporators; the foundry; the centrifuges; themechanical shop; the power plant and near the boilers. Noise measurements indicatedthat workers in these areas might be exposed to noise levels above Uganda's proposednoise standard (85 dB (A)) over an 8-hour shift.


Based on the addition of two boilers and one turbogenerator, the cumulative noiseemission levels during operation of the expanded cogeneration facility may increase byas much as 10 dBA over current levels in those areas of the factory (Tables 11 c and d).This increase is considered a 'worst case" scenario because it assumes that the newequipment will release the same amount of noise as all of the equipment in use duringthe 2002/2003 noise monitoring events. Increased noise as a result of infrastructureother than the generators and boilers has not been included in this assessment.Because increased noise levels can impact human health, mitigation is required.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease the potential risk to humanhealth and safety as a result of increased noise generation:

x Conduct personal monitoring of employees in the areas of elevated noise levels todetermine the appropriate noise rating of PPE. This should include those employeeswho may pass through noisy areas on their way to their workstation.

The Madhvani Group 79 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakire Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion EnvwronmentalAssesstnien

WADROP

x Provide appropriate PPE to staff working in high-noise areas.x Ensure that workers are trained on proper use of PPE.A Construct and install silencers for steam discharges.


Following the implementation of mitigation, the impacts on human health and safety as aresult of increased noise is deemed to be insignificant.

INCREASED POTENTIAL EFFECTS INDUCED FROM ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS

Depending on the route selected for the transmission line right-of-way, people livingadjacent to the corridor could be adversely affected by electromagnetic fields (EMF). Asrouting has not been confirmed, these potential effects cannot be evaluated.

REDUCED HUMAN HEALTH AS A RESULT OF AIR EMISSIONS

As discussed in Section 5.1.1, there are a number of air emissions coming from Kakira.These air emissions will likely increase substantially after factory expansion andimplementation of cogeneration.


There is a potential for worker and public health effects from reduced air quality as aresult of emissions and dust. Risk to worker health is likely greater than public health,depending on the proximity to the activity. Air pollutants from vehicles and equipment,as well as dust from bagasse handling, may cause distress to workers that come incontact with it. Mitigation is required.

Mitigation

The following mitigation measures are proposed to decrease emissions and dust duringoperation of the expanded facility:* The boilers will be equipped with a dry ash collection system and a full wet scrubber

to reduce the amount of ash released into the environment. A properly chosen,sized and maintained wet scrubber should remove greater that 90% of theparticulate emissions from the bagasse boilers (US EPA, 1996). If this removal isapplied to the calculated air dispersion results provided in Appendix B, the maximum24-hour concentration of particulates that could escape into the surroundingenvironment would be 260 j.g/m3. This is less than the maximum Uganda AQSStandard (300 1Lg/m 3).

A Kakira will develop a bagasse handling management plan to manage bagassesupply and demand to the boilers and to ensure bagasse quality is maintainedduring storage.

A Repair leakages in bagasse and bagacillo chutes to reduce dust releases.A Cover trucked materials during transport.A Provide Personal Protective Equipment and training to personnel working directly

with dust-generating materials.

The Madhvani Group 80 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogenerabon Expansion Environmental Assessment

ARDROP


Air emissions are one of the major environmental outputs at Kakira. Emissions arereleased throughout the sugar manufacturing process and will be released duringcogeneration activities. Following implementation of measures to control air emissions,the probability that air emissions will be in excess of guideline values will likely bereduced. Follow up monitoring may be required to determine actual concentrations ofcontaminants emitted from the expanded facility. As Kakira has committed to installingpollution control devices and has already changed the sulphitation process resulting in areduction in S released to the atmosphere, the resultant residual effect afterimplementation of mitigation was evaluated to be of low significance.

DECREASED HUMAN HEALTH DUE TO IMPACTED DRINKING WATER


As a result of factory expansion, wastewater discharges will increase. Discharge ofuntreated effluent is currently a major concem for downstream communities on theChico River. As these communities likely use the water for domestic purposes includingdrinking water, the quality of the water will affect the use of this resource. Residents ofcommunities downstream of Kakira use this water source for domestic purposes.Human health could be affected if untreated effluent continues to be discharged into thewater system. Mitigation is required.

Mitigation


A Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a wastewater treatment system. Apreliminary design has been completed. The proposed wastewater treatmentsystem consists of four components:

Oil, grease and grit separation, using separators installed at or close to thesources of the oil, grease or grit contaminants.A primary settling and flow equalisation pond with a 24 hydraulic retention time(HRT)An anaerobic pond with a 3 day HRT.

co An 'aerobic" pond with a 24 hour HRT.



Following the implementation of mitigation, the quality of the wastewater leaving Kakirawill be within guidelines. The potential for effects on human health will be greatlyreduced. The residual effect is deemed to be insignificant.

The Madhvani Group 81 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessrnent

iRDROP

5.3 POSITIVE EFFECTS

Following the implementation of mitigation, the proposed project will lead to manypositive effects in both the biophysical and social environments. These include thefollowing:

X Improved Surface Water Quality - Following the construction and implementationof the wastewater treatment system, effluent quality leaving the factory will beimproved. As a result, the quality of the receiving streams will also likely improve.

x Reduced Unit Air Emissions - Kakira's project design includes various airemission controls designed to reduce the unit air emissions.

A Reduced Fossil Fuel Requirements for Steam Generation - Buming bagasse,which is a waste product of sugar processing, reduces the requirement for use offossil fuels to generate steam. This steam is then used for both factory operationsas well as for generating electricity. Emissions related to energy consumption forsteam generation will decrease.

Storage and Disposal of Excess Bagasse - Disposal and storage of bagasse is anon-going challenge for Kakira. Excess bagasse, or bagasse that is too wet forbuming, is stored in a covered storage area near the boilers. Approximately 450tons of bagasse is transported in uncovered trucks every day to the sugar canefields for buming. While not a hazardous material, bagasse creates nuisance dustand is thus damaging to the environment. Bagasse buming also creates nuisanceconditions for surrounding communities. Stockpiles of damp bagasse create idealconditions for growth of toxic moulds that can be a health hazard for employees.The expansion of the cogeneration facility will substantially eliminate the excessbagasse problem.

x Reduced Fossil Fuel Requirements for Transport of Bagasse - Currently,approximately 60 litres of fuels is used per day to transport bagasse from the factoryto the fields for disposal. The expansion of the cogeneration facility will eliminate thisstep in the process.

k Improved Air Quality - Buming of bagasse the cogeneration facility rather than inagricultural fields will lead to improved air quality as a result of decreased generationof carbon monoxide due to more efficient combustion and decreased nuisancesmoke.


WWRROP

6.0 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES

6.1 STATUS QUO

"Altematives to" the project are functionally different ways to meet the project need andachieve the projected purpose. The Status Quo altemative, or the alternative of notconstructing the project, is described below.

The Status Quo altemative comprises the current operations at KSW, as described inSection 3 of this report. KSW processes approximately 900,000 tonnes of cane peryear, crushing sugarcane at the rate of over 3000 tonnes of cane crushing per day(TCD).

KSW bums bagasse in four fuel boilers to generate steam to drive factory prime moverssuch as turbo-generators, mill turbines and turbo-pumps, and for use in sugarprocessing in the Boiling House. The total steam capacity of the plant in 90 T/h. Thesteam requirement at the current operating level (2500 TCD) is 75 T/h, which is suppliedby operating boilers 1 and 4 with extra steam from boilers 2 and/or 3, as required. Theflue gas from the boilers is vented to the outdoors via three tall stacks. The boilers arenot equipped with any pollution control equipment. Fumace ash is manually removedfrom the boilers and trucked to a disposal area or used in the field as a soil amendment.

High-pressure steam is partly used to drive the Steam Turbine Drives in the sugar mill.The balance of the high-pressure steam is fed to the turbo-generators where the steamenergy is converted to electrical energy. This electricity is used to drive equipment in thefactory, foundry, workshop, offices and residential areas. The exhaust low-pressuresteam from the turbine is then used in the sugar manufacturing process. Thecogeneration process is described in Figure X.

KSW also has five diesel generator sets with a combined capacity of 2,500 KVA.Currently, KSW's intemal power generation is only used for intemal needs (sugar factoryand some ancillary units). KSW purchases electricity form UEDCL to provide electricityfor its infrastructure (housing, street lighting, sweets factory and irrigation).

6.2 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION

The environmental interactions between the current operation and the environment areidentified in Table 8a. The following environmental parameters are affected by thecurrent operations at KSW:

x Air quality- Fugitive dust and petroleum hydrocarbon emissions are emitted duringvarious phases of the sugar process. Emissions from the boiler stacks, exhaust fromthe syrup suphitor and fugitive fly ash emissions from burning bagasse all have thepotential to impact air quality.

The Madhvani Group 83 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogenerabon Expansion EnvironmentalAssessment

ARDROP

x Surface Water Quality - Surface water is affected by the release of wastewater tothe River Kiko. Water is pumped from Lake Victoria.

x Vegetation - Vegetation is removed for the sugar process. Fumace ash is applied toagricultural soils as a soil amendment.

x Mammals and Birds - Noise generated during the sugar process may adverselyaffect mammals and birds in the area; however, it is likely that these organisms areaccustomed to these operations.

x Fish and Aquatic Invertebrates - Impacts to surface water quality can lead toeffects on aquatic organisms. Specifically, the addition of wastewater effluents tonatural water bodies and potential deposition of dust and other air emissions on thewater may adversely affect these organisms.

x Nuisance Species and Vectors - Nuisance species may be more prevalent as aresult of disposal of solid wastes, hazardous wastes and sewage.

The following social components are affected by the current operations at KSW:

x Land and Resource Use - The lands within the KSW Estate comprise mainly sugarcane acreages. There is increasing interest in cultivating sugar cane over othertraditional food and cash crops (Bhatt, 1998).

x Public Health and Safety- Public health concems are mainly associated with airquality.

6.3 CONCLUSION

If the KSW Cogeneration Expansion project is not implemented, none of the positiveeffects listed in Section 5.3 will be achieved. With the implementation of the proposedmitigation measures, the overall significance of this project will be low.

The Madhvani Group 84 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Woiks Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

ARDROP

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIALMANAGEMENT PLAN

An Environmental Management Plan (EMP) is defined as an instrument that details:

a the measures to be taken during the implementation and operation of a project toeliminate or offset adverse environmental impacts, or to reduce them to acceptablelevels

a the actions needed to implement these measures (World Bank, OP 4.01).

7.1 MITIGATION MEASURES

Mitigation is defined as the elimination, reduction and control of the adverse effects of aproject. Mitigation measures outlined in Section 5 of this report are summarized in Table13. Descriptions and technical details of the mitigation measures, responsibilities forimplementation, schedules, methods, and sources of funds are also detailed.

7.2 INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING AND TRAINING

KSW has been operating a cogeneration facility with relatively old equipment and little orno pollution control. They have introduced an environmental management system. Theproposed cogeneration project will include the establishment of modem equipment andthe employment of new/improved methods of environmental management to satisfy therequirements identified as mitigation measures in this report. As a result, institutionalstrengthening and training of human resources at KSW will be required in order to meetthis challenge.

The main objective of the Institutional Strengthening is to strengthen the institutionalcapacity within KSW to implement the mitigation measures in the report and to therebycontribute to social and environmental sustainable development. The proposedmechanism for institutional strengthening and training at KSW includes:

x Training of personnel to handle the equipment for cogeneration project by thecontractor who is to install the equipment.

a Closer co-ordination among existing activities and the cogeneration project at KSW.a Enhancement of environmental management capacity throughout the company.

The Madhvani Group 85 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogenerabon Expansion EnyironmnntalAssessment

WARDROP

Table 13

MITIGATION PLAN

Effect Mitigation Measure 1 Estimated Time Scale2

Cost (Ush)JAIR QUALITY, CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY

Increased noise during construction and * Control the timing of noise to least disruptive periods whenever Soperation of expanded cogeneration facility. practical.

* Monitor noise levels during construction. Implement further noise Srestrictions where the noise level exceeds ambient levels of 85 dB bymore than 20 dB

* Minimize idling of vehicles and/or equipment S* Maintain noise levels below 85 dBA or provide hearing protection S

Increased emissions (SO2, NOR,, CO, CO2, and * Kakira will ensure that vehicles and equipment are inspected and Mparticulates) from combustion of fossil fuels maintained.during construction

* Vehicles and equipment will not be left idling when not in use. S* No ozone depleting substances will be used or generated from Sequipment during construction

Increased emissions (S02, NO,, CO, CO2, and * Equip boilers with a dry ash collection system and full wet scrubber to 20 - 100 m Sparticulates) during operation of expanded reduce the amount of ash released into the environment.facility

Increased dust generation during cane and * Develop a bagasse handling management plan to manage supply and Mbagasse handling, processing and storage demand and ensure bagasse quality.* Repair leakages in bagasse and bagacillo chutes to reduce dust 5 - 20 m Mreleases.

* Cover trucked materials during transport. 5 m S* Provide Personal Protective Equipment and training to personnel 5 m Sworking directly with dust-generating materials.


MWRDROP

Table 13 (cont'd)

MITIGATION PLAN

Mitigation Measure Estimated Time Scale 2

Cost (Ush)l

SOILS

Reduced soil quality as a result of hazardous * Develop and implement a spill prevention plan including implement 20 m Mmaterials spills (fuels, oils, lubricants, other chemical handling and storage procedureschemicals) * Construct concrete bund around areas where liquids are stored to

contain any spillage

* Maintain spill kits in all fuel and chemical storage areas* Refuelling and maintenance of equipment will be conducted in

designated locations only

* Workers handling chemicals will be provided training in chemical safetyand adequate personal protective equipment.

* Work will be monitored during construction to ensure there are no 10 m Sreleases of deleterious substances.

Reduced soil quality due to PCBs released * Collect all water and dirt from transformers during maintenance activities 10 m Mduring transformer maintenance and treat as hazardous waste.

Reduced soil quality as a result of solid waste * Proper siting and design of a waste disposal site. 50 m Mdisposal

* Ensure no hazardous wastes are stored or disposed of at waste SL _______________________________________ disposal ground.


VARDROP

Table 13 (cont'd)

MITIGATION PLAN

Mitigation Measure Estimated Time Scale2

Cost (Ush)'GROUNDWATER

Decreased groundwater quality as a result of * Develop spill prevention plan. 20 m Mhazardous materials spills (fuel, oil, lubricantand other chemicals) during construction and * Prepare and implement chemical handling and storage procedures andoperation train employees on their use.

* Spill containment supplies will be kept on-site in case of fuel leak.* Construct concrete bund around areas where liquids are stored to

contain any spillage

* Work will be monitored during construction to ensure there are noreleases of deleterious substances.

* Storage of fuels and other hazardous materials will be conducted indesignated locations only

* Refuelling and maintenance of equipment will be conducted indesignated locations only.

SURFACE WATER

Decreased surface water quality due to * Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a wastewater treatment systemincreased wastewater discharges including 1000 m S* Oil, grease and grit separation* A primary settling and flow equalisation pond* An anaerobic pond* An aerobic pondOr* Constructed Wetlands



VARDROP

Table 13 (cont'd)

MITIGATION PLAN

Mitigation Measure X Estimated Time Scale2

Cost (Ush)'

MAMMALS AND BIRDS

Decreased health of mammals due to * Obtain permit from NEMA to operate waste disposal site 50 m Sinteractions with improperly stored anddisposed hazardous materials and sewage * Proper siting and formal design will allow for vermin breeding control

NUISANCE SPECIES, VECTORS, DANGEROUS

Attraction of nuisance species, vectors and . Obtain permit from NEMA to operate waste disposal site 50 m Sdangerous species at current on-site wastedisposal site (old quarry site).

* Proper siting and formal design will allow for vermin breeding controlLAND/RESOURCE USE

Disposal of wastewater may negatively affect * Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a wastewater treatment system Included above Sland use due to decreased water quality including

• Oil, grease and grit separation* A primary settling and flow equalisation pond• An anaerobic pond• An aerobic pondOra Constructed Wetlands


EMPLOYMENT

Decreased employment opportunities as a * Create additional jobs in other locations within the factory for displacedresult of increased factory automation workers l


UARDROP

Table 13 (cont'd)

MITIGATION PLAN

Mitigation Measure | Estimated Time Scale2

Cost (Ush)lHEALTH AND SAFETY

Decreased human health and safety as a result * Conduct personal monitoring of employees in the areas of elevated 5-10 m Sof increased noise. noise levels to determine the appropriate noise rating of PPE. Thisshould include those employees who may pass through noisy areas ontheir way to their workstation.

* Provide appropriate PPE to staff working in high-noise areas. s

* Ensure that workers are trained on proper use of PPE. s

* Construct and install silencers for steam discharges. S-M

Decreased human health due to impacted * Kakira's overall expansion plan includes a wastewater treatment Included abovedrinking water system including S* Oil, grease and grit separation• A primary settling and flow equalisation pond• An anaerobic pond• An aerobic pondOr* Constructed Wetlands


The Madhvani Group 90 03852401 00-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental Assessment

VARDROP

Table 13 (cont'd)MITIGATION PLAN

Mitigation Measure Estimated Time Scale 2

Cost (Ush)'Reduced human health as a result of air a Equip boilers with dry-ash collection system and full wet scrubber toemissions and dust reduce the amount of ash released into the environment.

S* Install a scrubber on the tank vent of the sulphitor to reduce Semissions.

* Develop a bagasse handling management plan to manage supply and 10 - 15 m Mdemand and ensure bagasse quality.* Repair leakages in bagasse and bagacillo chutes to reduce dust 5 - 20 m Mreleases.

* Cover trucked materials during transport. 5 m s

* Provide Personal Protective Equipment and training to personnel Sworking directly with dust-generating materials.Note: 'Estimated order of magnitude costs are in millions (m) of Ugandan Shillings

2Three implementation time scales have been recommended:S = short (during construction)M = medium (one to three years following construction)L = long (greater than 3 years following construction)


ARROP

7.3 MONITORING

An Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP) has been developed to verify the accuracy ofthe environmental assessment and to determine the effectiveness of measures taken tomitigate the adverse environmental effects of the project. Specifically, it will provideinformation on whether the predicted impacts of the project are within the specifiedlimits, and will provide early waming information of any unacceptable environmentalconditions. A more comprehensive EMP that will take into consideration the impacts ofthe transmission line will be made after public consultations and social assessment ofthe proposed line after a decision has been made by the developer and UEDCL.

Kakira currently has a routine inspection and monitoring program in place for certainaspects of their operations, including noise monitoring. Additional data has beencollected for effluent and surface water quality, as well as air quality. The EMP will buildupon the program already in place. Records will be kept by the Environmental Lead atKakira, or designate, and reported to NEMA and/or other authorities, as appropriate.

Table 14: Environmental Monitoring Plan

Location Parameter Frequency ofmonitoring

Boiler House Noise levels Routinely

Cogeneration Air quality Continuousplant Personal Protective

Equipment Continuous

Wastewater Effluent quality Monthlytreatment plant

Boiler House Working Continuousenvironment

Surface Water Water Quality Continuous

The Madhvani Group 92 0385240100-REP-VOOOI-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Envirnmental Assessm,ent

ARDROP

8.0 TECHNICAL REFERENCES

Bhatt, S.G. 1998. Environmental Impact Assessment of Kakira Sugar Works (1985)Limited on Existing Conditions and Future Expansion.

Intergovemmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 1996. Revised 1996 IPCCGuidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. hftp://www.ipocc-nggip.iaes.or.ip/public/gl/invsl.htm

Intemational Bank for Reconstruction and Development. 1991. EnvironmentalAssessment Sourcebook Volume I: Policies, Procedure, and Cross-Sectoral Issues.World Bank technical paper, ISSN 0253-7494, no. 139.

Intemational Bank for Reconstruction and Development. 1991. EnvironmentalAssessment Sourcebook Volume IlIl: Guidelines for an Environmental Assessment ofEnergy and Industry Projects. World Bank technical paper, ISSN 0253-7494, no. 139-140.

John H. Payne. 1998. Kakira Biomass Cogeneration Project No. 97-007B Final ReportVolumes 1, 2, 3. Prepared for Kakira Sugar Works by John H. Payne, Inc., Hawaii,U.S.A.

Kakira Sugar Works (1995) Ltd. (KSW). 2000. Kakira Final Manufacturing Report(1993-2000)

Kakira Sugar Works (1995) Ltd. (KSW). 2002. Expansion of the Kakira Sugar Complex.The Madhvani Group.

Multiplan Consulting Engineers. 2000. Factory Based Effluent Treatment WorksPreliminary Design Study Report (Final Draft). Prepared for Kakira Sugar Works (1985)Ltd. by Multiplan Consulting Engineers.

National Environment Management Authority (NEMA). 1996. Jinja District Profile.htti://www.nemaua.ora/disrictProfiles/JI NJA.pdf

Noise Centre for the League for the Hard of Hearing (NCLHH). 1999. Noise Levels inour Environment Fact Sheet. http://www.lhh.org/noise/decibel.htm

Saflex Acoustical Guide. 2000. Frequently Asked Questions about Acoustics.httD:/ANww.saflex.com/acoustic/faa.htm

US EPA. 1996. Bagasse Combustion in Sugar Mills. Publication AP-42, 5th Edition,Volume 1 Chapter 1.8.

The Madhvani Group 93 0385240100 REP-V000142Kakira Sugar Works Cogenerabon Expansion Environmental Assessment

ARDROP

Wardrop Engineering Inc. 2002. Environmental Audit Kakira Sugar Works (1985)Limited. Report to the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development ofUganda for the Privatisation and Utility Sector Reform Project.

World Health Organization (WHO). 1995. Community Noise.http://www.nonoise.ora/librarv/whonoise/whonoise.htm#31

World Bank Policies

* OP. 4.01 Environmental Assessment* OP. 4.09 Pest Management* OP. 4.04 Natural Habitat

World Banks Guidelines ( PPAH. 1998)* Environmental Audits in Industrial projects;* Guidelines for Sugar Manufacturing. General Environmental Guidelines;* Environment Management Systems and ISO 14000.

Relevant IFC Policies, Guideline and Guidance documents (www.ifc.org)* Policy Statement on Forced labor and harmful child labor;* Guidance document on HIV/Aids in the work place (IFC 2001);* General Health and Safety Guidelines (IFC guideline, 1998);* Guidelines for Plantations (IFC, 1998):* Guidelines for Pesticides Handling and Application (IFC, 1998);* Wastewater reuse (IFC guideline, 1998);* Hazardous Material management (IFC guideline, 2001);* Waste Management Facilities (IFC guideline, 1998);

Doing better business through effective public consultation and disclosure: a goodpractice manual (IFC 2000).

The Madhvani Group 94 0385240100-REP-VO001-02Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion EnvironmentalAssessnent

l

ARDROP

APPENDIX A

TERMS OF REFERENCE

TERMS OF REFERENCE (TOR) FOR ENVIRONMENTL ASSESSEMENTKAKIRA SUGAR WORKS BAGASSE COGENERATION EXPANSION

1. Introduction. Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Ltd. (KSW), formed in 1985, currently hasa crushing capacity of 2500 tones of cane per day (TCD). In 1995-96, KSW decidedto expand its sugar processing facilities to 5000 TCD based on the envisaged marketfor sugar in Uganda and the study on agriculture options for the South Busoga regionof Uganda. As a consequence of this basic expansion, KSW decided to expand itscogeneration capacity from the current 4.5MW. In general such cogenerationcapacity expansions would be sized to meet the additional requirements of theexpanded sugar crushing plant. However, this practice would result in considerableunderutilization of the bagasse, the excess of which would be bumed in the field. Inlight of the need for additional electricity generation capacity in the grid network,KSW submitted a proposal to the Government offering to expand its cogenerationfacility beyond its own needs, and supply electricity to the national grid network.

2. KSW already has prepared and received approval from the National EnvironmentalManagement Agency (NEMA) of Uganda for an EIA covering the overall sugarexpansion program to 5000 TCD including the expanded cogeneration facility for theestimated increased bagasse supply of 160,000 TB/y.

3. In subsequent discussion, the Government reduced its requirement of electricitysupply from KSW to peak hours only (1800-2400hours) and KSW decided toimplement a phased expansion programme for the expansion of its factory andcogeneration facilities.

4. In the current phase, KSW plans expansion it factory capacity to 4000 TCD andinstalling a new cogeneration facility of 14-15 MW. KSW's existing cogenerationfacilities would be retained in-situ and would be used if required when the newcogeneration facility is not operational. The new cogeneration facility would provideelectricity for KSW's own envisaged needs (which would be scheduled to be up tO 9MW off-peak and up to 6 MW during peak hours) and electricity for the national gridof up to 7 MW during peak hours only.

The current KSW cogeneration project is comprised of:(a) an additional boiler(b) a new 14-15 MW turbo-generator(c) related piping, cabling, electrical equipment, instrumentation and control

systems(d) additional bagasse handling equipment(e) the necessary civil works for all of the above,(f) a new electrical sub-station at Kakira(g) A new 33kV distribution from Kakira to the UEDCL Jinja Industrial

Substation at Mailombili, running parallel to the existing 33KV distribution

line from Kakira to Wairaka and installed above the existing 33KVdistribution line from Wairaka to Mailombili.

5. KSW anticipates accessing World Bank funds from the Energy for RuralTransformation (ERT) Project for the cogeneration facility expansion. Therefore, theproposed new EIA for KSW's new cogeneration facility must comply with theEnvironmental and Social Management framework developed for the ERT subprojectsuch as this one, the World Band must also review the EIA and issue a "no-objection" before funds are released under the ERT Project. For this reason and EIAfocusing on the cogeneration facility must be prepared.

6. Objectives. The objective of this assignment is to prepare an Environmental ImpactAssessment focusing on the KSW new cogeneration facility, including relevantaspects of related investments such as a new distribution line for evacuating power tothe main grid, if necessary.

7. Environmental Assessment Requirements. The EIA will be consistent with thefollowing regulations and guidelines which will govern the conduct of the assessmentand specify the content of its report.

* The World Bank's Operation Policy (OP) and Bank Procedure (BP) 4.01:"Environmental Assessment," The Pollution Abatement and ControlHandbook, and other pertinent policies and procedures;

* National laws and/or regulations on environmental reviews and impactassessments, including the Environmental and Social Management Frameworkprepared for the ERT Project;

* Regional, provincial or communal environmental assessment regulations;* Environmental assessment regulations of any other financing organizations

involved in the Kakira Cogeneration project.

8. Study Area. The study will focus on the cogeneration facility within the context ofthe sugar plant. Therefore, relevant major aspects of the factory operation will alsobe included in the analysis as they relate to the cogeneration facility. The study willalso include directly related investment such as transmission facilities, if any,required for power evacuation to the main grid.

9. Scope of Work.

9.1 Task 1. Description of the Proposed Project. Provide a brief description of therelevant parts pf the project, using drawings where necessary, and including thefollowing information: location (provide map); general layout; size, capacity, etc.;pre-construction activities; construction activities; schedule; staffing and support;facilities and services; operation and maintenance activities; required offsiteinvestments; life span, and expected future growth, if any.

9.2 Task 2. Description of the Environment. Assemble, evaluate and present baselinedata on the relevant environmental characteristics of the study area. Includeinformation on any changes anticipated before the project commences.

(a) Physical environment: topography; soil; climate and meteorology; ambient airquality; surface and ground - water hydrology; existing sources of airemissions; existing water pollution discharges; and receiving water quality.

(b) Biological environment: flora; fauna; rare or endangered species; sensitivehabits; including parks or preserves, significant natural sites, etc; species ofcommercial importance; and species with potential to become nuisances, vectorsor dangerous.

(c) Socio-cultural environment (include both present and projected whereappropriate): population; land use; planned development activities; communitystructures; employment; distribution of income, goods and services, recreation;public health; cultural properties; tribal people; and customs, aspirations andattitudes. Include a description of the history and current status of the relationsbetween KSW and the surrounding communities.

9.3. Task 3. Legislative and Regulatory Considerations. Describe the pertinentregulations and standards governing environmental quality, health and safety,protection of sensitive areas, protection of endangered species, sitting, land usecontrol, etc, at international, national, regional and local levels. This shouldinclude identification of World Bank safeguard issues that could potentially betriggered by the project.

9.4. Task 4. Determination of the Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project. Inthis analysis, distinguish between significant positive and negative impacts,direct and indirect impacts, and immediate and long-term impacts. Identifyimpacts which are unavoidable or irreversible. Wherever possible, describeimpacts quantitatively, in terms of environmental costs and benefits. Assigneconomic values when feasible. Characterize the extent and quality ofavailable data, explaining significant information deficiencies and anyuncertainties associated with predictions of impact. Include implications forlocal work force, if any. Identify potential stakeholders in the project as wellas social impacts of land acquisition (if any) associate with the project,including the transmission lines.

9.5. Task 5. Analysis of Alternatives to the Proposed Project. Analyze thealternative of not constructing the project, in order to demonstrateenvironmental conditions without it.

9.6. Task 6. Development of Environmental and Social Management Plan, withfocus on three generic areas. Mitigation measures, institutional strengtheningand training and monitoring. Descriptions of the latter two should be preparedin the context of the overall ERT Project, and in particular, the Environmentaland Social Management Framework prepared for that project.

Mitigation of environmental and social impact: Recommend feasible and costeffective measures to prevent or reduce significant negative impacts to acceptablelevels. Estimate the impacts and costs of those measures. Consider compensationto affect parties for impact which cannot be mitigated. The plan should includeproposed work programs, budget estimates, schedules, staffing and trainingrequirements, and other necessary support services to implement the mitigatingmeasures.

Institutional Strengthening and training: Identification of institutional needs toimplement environmental assessment recommendations and indicate how thesewill provide for.

Monitoring: Indicate how monitoring implementation of mitigation measures andthe impact of the project during construction and operation will be handled.Include in the plan an estimate of capital and operation costs and description ofother imputes (such as training and institutional strengthening) needed to carry itout.

9.7 Task 7. Assist in Public/NGO Participation. Identify affected groups and NGOswhich represent them, if any, and assist in obtaining their views. This willinclude keeping records of meetings and other activities, communications, andcomments.

10. Report. The environmental assessment report should be concise and limited tosignificant environmental issues. The main text should focus on findings,conclusions and recommended actions, supported by summaries of the datacollected and citations for any references used in interpreting those data. Detailedor interpreted data are not appropriate in the main text and should be presented inappendices or a separate volume. Unpublished documents used in the assessmentmay be readily available and should also be assembled in an appendix. Organizethe environmental assessment report according to the outline below.

Executive SummaryPolicy, Legal Administrative FrameworkDescription of the Proposed ProjectBaseline DataSignificant Environmental and Socio ImpactsAnalysis of AlternativesEnvironmental and Social Management PlanAppendices.List of Environmental and Social Assessment PreparersReferences Record of Interagency/Forun/ Consultation Meetings

11. Other Information. It is expected that much of the material required for thisassessment will be available from the previous EIA prepared for the full plant.

WRDROP

APPENDIX B

AIR EMISSIONS ASSESSMENTAND DISPERSION MODELLINGSUMMARY

Sample Emission Rate Calculations for C02 Emissions from Bagasse-Fired Boiler (BoileNo. 1)

Assumptions:Please note that the following calculations and SCREEN3 model were completed using all of theassumptions and documents referred to in Wardrop (2002; Appendix Il -BAir EmissionsAssessment and Dispersion Modelling). The only modification to this original document is that thebagasse feed rate to the four boilers was increased by 1 00%. In order to assess the worst casesituation, it was assumed for the purpose of this assessment that no other pollution controlsystems would be in place.

Emission Rate (g/s) = Bagasse Feed Rate (MT/s) x Emissions Factor (g/MT)

MT = Metric Tons (1 000 kg = 1 MT)

Convert Bagasse Feed Rate to MT/s:Factory Data: 32 MT/hBagasse Feed Rate: 32MT/h 3600 s/h

= 8.89E-03 MT/s

Convert Units of Emission Factors Obtained from USEPA AP-42 Table 1.8-1Emission Factor for C0 2 3 1560 lb of pollutant / Ton of wet, as fired bagasse

containing approximately 50%moisture

Multiply by0.5 to convert units to kg ofpollutant /MT ofwet, as fired bagasse. Multiply byl1000toconvert to g.

Emission Factor for CO2 = 1560 lb/ton x 0.5 (kg/lb) (ton/ MT) x 1000 (g/kg)= 780,000 g/MT

Calculate Emission Rate

Emission Rate =s8.89E-03 MT/s x 780,000 g/MTEmission Rate = 6,933 g/s

Table B.1. Emission Factors and Rates for Pollutants Vented from Bagasse Boilers

Source Pollutant Bagasse Feed Rate Emission Factor Emission Rate

Assumptions: ~ ~ Tnne/h

otonineWdrop ( lb/ton g/MT g/s

Boiler No. 1 (Si) CO2 32 1560 780,000 6,933bagasse feed1.2 600 5.3

systems________ Particulate 31.2 (1) 15,600 139Boiler No. 2 & 3 CO2 36 1560 780,000 7800Emission Rate (g/s) =1.2 600 6MT_____________ Particulate 31.2 (1) 15,600 156Boiler No. 4 (S3) CO2 32 1560 780,000 6,933

Bagasse Feed Rate: = 32MT/h1.2 600 5.3_____________ P Parxt i-cuIa teI 31.2 (1) 1 15,600 1 139Note (1) - USEPA emissions factor was multiplied by 2 to account for unwashed cane. This may in

fact be overstated and is therefore considered conservative.

Boiler Emission Summary (Screen 3 Dispersion Model Results)

Contaminant Emission Rate 1 Max Concentration (gg/m3) StandardsWgs)

1 -hr avg -8-h-v'g hravg Annual Avg 3 (gg/m3) Avg. time Reference

Carbon Dioxide 21,666 324,773 227,341 129,909 25,982 200 8 hr Uganda AQS 4Nitrous Oxides 17 255 178 102 20 125 24 hr Uganda AQSNitrogen Dioxide6 12 180 126 72 14 100 Annual NAAQS

100 Annual Equador300 24 hr Uganda AQS

Total Particulate5 434 6,506 4,554 2,602 520 80 24 hr EquadorI________________ I______________ _________________ __________________ 150 24 hr N A A Q S (PM -10)

Maximum Screen 3 Dispersion Factors (DF) for 1-hour average 14.99 lig/m3 at base case of 1 g/s.(I.e. 14.99 l_g/m 3/1 g/s x 21,666 g/s = 324,788 pg/m3)

Technical Notes:(1) Represents the sum total of emissions from all boilers stacks(2) Max Conc. = Emission rate (g/s) x Dispersion Factor(3) USEPA Multiplying factors to convert 1-hour averaging time concentration to other averaging periods:

Averaging Period Multiplying Factor8 hr 0.724 hr 0.4Annual 0.08Ref: Screening Procedures for estimating the Air Quality Impact of Stations Sources, revised EPA-454/R-92-019 p.4-16

(4) Proposed Environmental Air Quality Standards and Guidelines for Uganda Fourth Draft February 2002(5) Emission rate has been multiplied by and factor of 2 to account for the fact that KSW does not pre-wash cane(6) Nitrogen dioxides are assumed to be 70% of total nitrous oxides as per USEPA(7) NAAQS = US EPA National Ambient Air Quality Standard

Kakira Boilers - Estimated Carbon Dioxide Emitted During Operation

250000 _ _ _ __ _ _ . . ____ __ __ ____ _ __

.~ 200000 -- - -- _ _- - - - --- _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - -

*n 150000 -_ - _ _____ __ . .__ __ ___ _ ___ ___ _ _. __ _ _ __

°50000C

0* ~ 100000 - -_ _ - -- _ _ _ _ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ -- - - - ---- _ _ _

0

0C.) 0 0 -

Uganda AQS Standard - 2001ig/m3

0

Distance from Plant (m)

H-Current Operation 00FutureOper

07/02/0313:08:08

SCREEN3 MODEL RUN -VERSION DATED 96043 *'

Kakira Current Operation - C02

COMPLEX TERRAIN INPUTS:SOURCE TYPE = POINTEMISSION RATE (G/S) = 10833.0STACK HT (M) = 38.1000STACK DIAMETER (M) = 2.1000STACK VELOCITY (M/S) = 9.6143STACK GAS TEMP (K) = 408.0000AMBIENT AIR TEMP (K) = 293.0000RECEPTOR HEIGHT (M) = .0000URBAN/RURAL OPTION = RURAL

THE REGULATORY (DEFAULT) MIXING HEIGHT OPTION WAS SELECTED.THE REGULATORY (DEFAULT) ANEMOMETER HEIGHT OF 10.0 METERS WAS ENTERED.

BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M**4/S**3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M**4/S'*2.

FINAL STABLE PLUME HEIGHT (M) = 94.1DISTANCE TO FINAL RISE (M) = 151.3

'VALLEY 24-HR CALCS **SIMPLE TERRAIN 24-HR CALCS**TERR MAX 24-HR PLUME HT PLUME HTHT DIST CONC CONC ABOVE STK CONC ABOVE STK U10M USTK

(M) (M) (UG/M''3) (UG/M*-3) BASE (M) (UG/M'*3) HGT (M) SC (MIS)

157. 3200. .2043E+05 .2043E+05 94.1 .0000 .0 0 .0 .007/02/0313:08:08

SCREEN3 MODEL RUNVERSION DATED 96043

Kakira Current Operation -C02

SIMPLE TERRAIN INPUTS:SOURCE TYPE = POINTEMISSION RATE (G/S) = 10833.0STACK HEIGHT (M) = 38.1000STK INSIDE DIAM (M) = 2.1000STK EXIT VELOCITY (M/S)= 9.6143STK GAS EXIT TEMP (K) = 408.0000AMBIENT AIR TEMP (K) = 293.0000RECEPTOR HEIGHT (M) = .0000URBAN/RURAL OPTION = RURALBUILDING HEIGHT (M) = 25.0000MIN HORIZ BLDG DIM (M) = 145.2000MAX HORIZ BLDG DIM (M) = 226.6000


BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M*4/S**3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M*^4/S*'2.

FULL METEOROLOGY

SCREEN AUTOMATED DISTANCES

-TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES

DIST CONC U1OM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M*'3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

1 0 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 2.8 2.77 NO100 1.58E+05 6 4 8.3 10000 49.37 5.46 19.52 HS200 1.62E+05 6 4 8.3 10000 56.84 9.65 26.51 HS300 1.25E+05 6 4 8.3 10000 63.12 13.54 31.12 HS400 7.36E+04 6 4 8.3 10000 68.71 17.27 31.89 HS500 5.97E+04 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 36.69 35.69 HS600 5.47E+04 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 43.18 37.6 HS700 6.12E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 167.71 224.58 NO800 6.43E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 185.21 291.58 NO900 6.05E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 202.72 369.85 NO

1000 5.59E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 220.2 459.25 NO1100 5.18E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 237.6 559.71 NO1200 4.82E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 254.92 671.27 NO1300 4.52E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 272.14 793.94 NO1400 4.25E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 289.27 927.8 NO1500 4.02E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.3 1072.9 NO1600 3.81E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 323.23 1229.31 NO1700 3.67E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 257.14 207.85 NO1800 3.73E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 269.57 219.81 NO1900 3.75E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 281.95 231.9 NO2000 3.74E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 294.29 244.13 NO2100 3.70E+04 2 1 1.1 320 .283.79 306.59 256.47 NO2200 3.64E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 318.83 268.92 NO2300 3.56E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 331.04 281.46 NO2400 3.48E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 343.19 294.09 NO2500 3.39E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 355.3 306.81 NO2600 3.30E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 367.37 319.61 NO2700 3.21E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 379.39 332.48 NO2800 3.12E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 391.37 345.43 NO2900 3.04E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 403.3 358.43 NO3000 2.96E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 415.19 371.5 NO3500 2.81E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 159.96 57.53 HS4000 2.77E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 180.12 60.2 HS4500 2.71E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 200.04 62.75 HS5000 2.64E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 219.73 65.2 HS5500 2.57E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 239.22 67.57 HS6000 2.58E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 258.74 65.06 NO6500 2.59E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 277.84 67.43 NO7000 2.58E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 296.78 69.73 NO7500 2.56E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 315.57 71.95 NO8000 2.53E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 334.22 74.11 NO8500 2.50E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 352.73 76.2 NO9000 2.46E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 371.12 78.25 NO9500 2.41E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 389.39 80.24 NO

10000 2.36E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 407.54 82.18 NO15000 1-87E+04 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 388.8 59.77 HS

20000 1.63E+04 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 501.24 64.58 HS

MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCENTRATION AT OR BEYOND 1. M:183 1.62E+05 6 4 8.3 10000 55.75 9 25.4 HS

DWASH= MEANS NO CALC MADE (CONC = 0.0)DWASH=NO MEANS NO BUILDING DOWNWASH USEDDWASH=HS MEANS HUBER-SNYDER DOWNWASH USEDDWASH=SS MEANS SCHULMAN-SCIRE DOWNWASH USEDDWASH=NA MEANS DOWNWASH NOT APPLICABLE, X<3*LB

SCREEN DISCRETE DISTANCES

'''TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES***

DIST CONC U10M USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M^^3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) Z (M) DWASH

650 5.44E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 158.98 195.4 NO


^ SUMMARY OF TERRAIN HEIGHTS ENTERED FOR ^^ SIMPLE ELEVATED TERRAIN PROCEDURE *

TERRAIN DISTANCE RANGE (M)HT (M) MINIMUM MAXIMUM

0. 1. 20000.0. 650. --

REGULATORY (Default)PERFORMING CAVITY CALCULATIONS

WITH ORIGINAL SCREEN CAVITY MODEL(BRODE, 1988)

CAVITY CALCULATION - 1 CAVITY CALCULATION - 2CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000 CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000CRITWS @10M (M/S) = 99.99 CRITWS @10M (M/S) = 99.99CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99 DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00 CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 121.42 CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 103.63ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 145.20 ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 226.60

CAVITY CONC NOT CALCULATED FOR CRIT WS > 20.0 M/S. CONC SET = 0.0

END OF CAVITY CALCULATIONS

........... . ***............ .SUMMARY OF SCREEN MODEL RESULTS

CALCULATION MAX CONC DIST TO TERRAINPROCEDURE (UG/M*'3) MAX (M) HT (M)

SIMPLE TERRAIN .1624E+06 183. 0.

COMPLEX TERRAIN .2043E+05 3200. 157. (24-HR CONC)

REMEMBER TO INCLUDE BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS ''

07/02/0313:14:36


Kakira Future Operation - C02

COMPLEX TERRAIN INPUTS:SOURCE TYPE = POINTEMISSION RATE (G/S) 21666.0STACK HT (M) = 38.1000STACK DIAMETER (M) = 2.1000STACK VELOCITY (M/S) = 9.6143STACK GAS TEMP (K) = 408.0000AMBIENT AIR TEMP (K) = 293.0000RECEPTOR HEIGHT (M) = .0000URBAN/RURAL OPTION = RURAL


BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M''4/S''3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M''4/S*'2.


*VALLEY 24-HR CALCS' -SIMPLE TERRAIN 24-HR CALCS**TERR MAX 24-HR PLUME HT PLUME HTHT DIST CONC CONC ABOVE STK CONC ABOVE STK U10M USTK(M) (M) (UG/M*'3) (UG/M''3) BASE (M) (UG/M*'3) HGT (M) SC (M/S)

157. 3200. .4086E+05 .4086E+05 94.1 .0000 .0 0 .0 .007/02/0313:14:36

- SCREEN3 MODEL RUN- VERSION DATED 96043

Kakira Future Operation - C02



BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M**4/S**3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M*^4/S**2.

FULL METEOROLOGY

-SCREEN AUTOMATED DISTANCES-

TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES

DIST CONC U1OM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M*^3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) Z (M) DWASH

1 0 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 2.8 2.77 NO100 3.16E+05 6 4 8.3 10000 49.37 5.46 19.52 HS200 3.24E+05 6 4 8.3 10000 56.84 9.65 26.51 HS300 2.51E+05 6 4 8.3 10000 63.12 13.54 31.12 HS400 1.47E+05 6 4 8.3 10000 68.71 17.27 31.89 HS500 1.19E+05 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 36.69 35.69 HS600 1.09E+05 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 43.18 37.6 HS700 1.23E+05 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 167.71 224.58 NO800 1.29E+05 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 185.21 291.58 NO900 1.21E+05 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 202.72 369.85 NO

1000 1.12E+05 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 220.2 459.25 NO1100 1.04E+05 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 237.6 559.71 NO1200 9.65E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 254.92 671.27 NO1300 9.04E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 272.14 793.94 NO1400 8.50E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 289.27 927.8 NO1500 8.03E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.3 1072.9 NO1600 7.61E+04 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 323.23 1229.31 NO1700 7.33E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 257.14 207.85 NO1800 7.46E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 269.57 219.81 NO1900 7.50E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 281.95 231.9 NO2000 7.47E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 294.29 244.13 NO2100 7.39E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.59 256.47 NO2200 7.27E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 318.83 268.92 NO2300 7.12E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 331.04 281.46 NO2400 6.96E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 343.19 294.09 NO2500 6.78E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 355.3 306.81 NO2600 6.60E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 367.37 319.61 NO2700 6.42E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 379.39 332.48 NO2800 6.25E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 391.37 345.43 NO2900 6.08E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 403.3 358.43 NO3000 5.91E+04 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 415.19 371.5 NO3500 5.63E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 159.96 57.53 HS4000 5.54E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 180.12 60.2 HS4500 5.42E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 200.04 62.75 HS5000 5.28E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 219.73 65.2 HS5500 5.13E+04 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 239.22 67.57 HS6000 5.16E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 258.74 65.06 NO6500 5.18E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 277.84 67.43 NO7000 5.17E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 296.78 69.73 NO7500 5.13E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 315.57 71.95 NO.8000 5.07E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 334.22 74.11 NO8500 4.99E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 352.73 76.2 NO9000 4.91E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 371.12 78.25 NO9500 4.82E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 389.39 80.24 NO

10000 4.72E+04 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 407.54 82.18 NO15000 3.75E+04 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 388.8 59.77 HS

20000 3.26E+04 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 501.24 64.58 HS

MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCENTRATION AT OR BEYOND 1. M:183 3.25E+05 6 4 8.3 10000 55.75 9 25.4 HS



***TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES***

DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M**3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

650 1.09E+05 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 158.98 195.4 NO


^ SUMMARY OF TERRAIN HEIGHTS ENTERED FOR ^' SIMPLE ELEVATED TERRAIN PROCEDURE


0. 1. 20000.0. 650. --



CAVITY CALCULATION - I CAVITY CALCULATION - 2CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000 CONC (UG/M'*3) = .0000CRIT WS @10M (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @10M (M/S) = 99.99CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99 DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00 CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 121.42 CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 103.63ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 145.20 ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 226.60



SUMMARY OF SCREEN MODEL RESULTS

CALCULATION MAX CONC DIST TO TERRAINPROCEDURE (UGI/M*3) MAX (M) HT (M)

SIMPLE TERRAIN .3247E+06 183. 0.

COMPLEX TERRAIN .4086E+05 3200. 157. (24-HR CONC)

** REMEMBER TO INCLUDE BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS *

Kakira Boilers - Estimated Nitrous Oxides Emitted During Operation

140

Uganda AQS Standard - 125 Pg/m3

120 --- _ ____ _-___ .___ ________ ___ ___

._ 100 _ . . _-- . ---- _-___ __-- - -_ . . _ - _- __ _ _________ _ ._ _ ._ ___ _-

-ooJ

80 - \ ------- - - - --- --- ._. _0

C,

0x

6 0 - -~ ~~~ _-- - _-- - - - - - _--- .__ _

0Iz

20

0 -~~~~~~~

Distance from Plant (in)

- Current Oper-ati-on- Future Operationj

07/02/0313:22:50


Kakira Current Operation - Nitrous Oxides



BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M**4/S**3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M**4/S**2.


*VALLEY 24-HR CALCS* **SIMPLE TERRAIN 24-HR CALCS**TERR MAX 24-HR PLUME HT PLUME HTHT DIST CONC CONC ABOVE STK CONC ABOVE STK U10M USTK

(M) (M) (UG/M*-3) (UG/M**3) BASE (M) (UG/M'*3) HGT (M) SC (M/S)

157. 3200. 15.65 15.65 94.1 .0000 .0 0 .0 .007/02/0313:22:50





BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M--4/S-'3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M**4/S**2.

FULL METEOROLOGY



DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UGIM**3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

1 0 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 2.8 2.77 NO100 121.2 6 4 8.3 10000 49.37 5.46 19.52 HS200 124.2 6 4 8.3 10000 56.84 9.65 26.51 HS300 96 6 4 8.3 10000 63:12 13.54 31.12 HS400 56.42 6 4 8.3 10000 68.71 17.27 31.89 HS500 45.74 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 36.69 35.69 HS600 41.89 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 43.18 37.6 HS700 46.92 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 167.71 224.58 NO800 49.29 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 185.21 291.58 NO900 46.36 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 202.72 369.85 NO

1000 42.79 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 220.2 459.25 NO1100 39.66 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 237.6 559.71 NO1200 36.96 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 254.92 671.27 NO1300 34.62 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 272.14 793.94 NO1400 32.57 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 289.27 927.8 NO1500 30.76 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.3 1072.9 NO1600 29.15 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 323.23 1229.31 NO1700 28.09 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 257.14 207.85 NO1800 28.57 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 269.57 219.81 NO1900 28.73 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 281.95 231.9 NO2000 28.62 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 294.29 244.13 NO2100 28.31 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.59 256.47 NO2200 27.86 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 318.83 268.92 NO2300 27.29 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 331.04 281.46 NO2400 26.66 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 343.19 294.09 NO2500 25.99 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 355.3 306.81 NO2600 25.3 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 367.37 319.61 NO2700 24.61 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 379.39 332.48 NO2800 23.93 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 391.37 345.43 NO2900 23.27 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 403.3 358.43 NO3000 22.64 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 415.19 371.5 NO3500 21.55 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 159.96 57.53 HS4000 21.22 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 180.12 60.2 HS4500 20.77 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 200.04 62.75 HS5000 20.24 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 219.73 65.2 HS5500 19.67 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 239.22 67.57 HS6000 19.78 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 258.74 65.06 NO6500 19.86 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 277.84 67.43 NO7000 19.8 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 296.78 69.73 NO7500 19.65 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 315.57 71.95 NO8000 19.42 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 334.22 74.11 NO8500 19.13 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 352.73 76.2 NO9000 18.81 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 371.12 78.25 NO9500 18.46 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 389.39 80.24 NO

10000 18.09 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 407.54 82.18 NO15000 14.36 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 388.8 59.77 HS

20000 12.48 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 501.24 64.58 HS

MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCENTRATION AT OR BEYOND 1. M:183 124.4 6 4 8.3 10000 55.75 9 25.4 HS



^^^TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES***

DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M^^3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

650 41.68 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 158.98 195.4 NO

DWASH= MEANS NO CALC MADE (CONC = 0.0)DWASH=NO MEANS NO BUILDING DOWNWASH USEDDWASH=HS MEANS HUBER-SNYDER DOWNWASH USEDDWASH=SS MEANS SCHULMAN-SCIRE DOWNWASH USEDDWASH=NA MEANS DOWNWASH NOT APPLICABLE, X<3'LB

^ SUMMARY OF TERRAIN HEIGHTS ENTERED FOR ^' SIMPLE ELEVATED TERRAIN PROCEDURE *


0. 1. 20000.0. 650. -



CAVITY CALCULATION - 1 CAVITY CALCULATION - 2CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000 CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000CRITWS @10M (M/S) = 99.99 CRITWS @10M (M/S) = 99.99CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99 DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00 CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 121.42 CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 103.63ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 145.20 ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 226.60




CALCULATION MAX CONC DIST TO TERRAINPROCEDURE (UG/M''3) MAX (M) HT (M)

SIMPLE TERRAIN 124.4 183. 0.

COMPLEX TERRAIN 15.65 3200. 157. (24-HR CONC)

'' REMEMBER TO INCLUDE BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS **

07/02/031317:47

SCREEN3 MODEL RUN 1:4VERSION DATED 96043

Kakira Future Operation - Nitrous Oxides





'VALLEY 24-HR CALCS* -SIMPLE TERRAIN 24-HR CALCS**TERR MAX 24-HR PLUME HT PLUME HTHT DIST CONC CONC ABOVE STK CONC ABOVE STK U10M USTK

(M) (M) (UG/M*'3) (UG/M'*3) BASE (M) (UG/M**3) HGT(M) SC (M/S)

157. 3200. 32.06 32.06 94.1 .0000 .0 0 .0 .007/02/0313:17:47





BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M**4/S**3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M**4/S^*2.

FULL METEOROLOGY



DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M**3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) Z (M) DWASH

1 0 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 2.8 2.77 NO100 248.3 6 4 8.3 10000 49.37 5.46 19.52 HS200 254.4 6 4 8.3 10000 56.84 9.65 26.51 HS300 196.6 6 4 8.3 10000 63.12 13.54 31.12 HS400 115.6 6 4 8.3 10000 68.71 17.27 31.89 HS500 93.68 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 36.69 35.69 HS600 85.8 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 43.18 37.6 HS700 96.11 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 167.71 224.58 NO800 101 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 185.21 291.58 NO900 94.96 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 202.72 369.85 NO

1000 87.64 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 220.2 459.25 NO1100 81.23 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 237.6 559.71 NO1200 75.71 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 254.92 671.27 NO1300 70.92 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 272.14 793.94 NO1400 66.72 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 289.27 927.8 NO1500 63.01 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.3 1072.9 NO1600 59.71 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 323.23 1229.31 NO1700 57.53 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 257.14 207.85 NO1800 58.52 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 269.57 219.81 NO1900 58.84 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 281.95 231.9 NO2000 58.62 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 294.29 244.13 NO2100 57.99 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.59 256.47 NO2200 57.05 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 318.83 268.92 NO2300 55.9 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 331.04 281.46 NO2400 54.6 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 343.19 294.09 NO2500 53.23 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 355.3 306.81 NO2600 51.82 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 367.37 319.61 NO2700 50.41 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 379.39 332.48 NO2800 49.02 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 391.37 345.43 NO2900 47.67 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 403.3 358.43 NO3000 46.37 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 415.19 371.5 NO3500 44.13 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 159.96 57.53 HS4000 43.45 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 180.12 60.2 HS4500 42.53 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 200.04 62.75 HS5000 41.45 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 219.73 65.2 HS5500 40.28 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 239.22 67.57 HS6000 40.52 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 258.74 65.06 NO6500 40.67 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 277.84 67.43 NO7000 40.56 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 296.78 69.73 NO7500 40.24 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 315.57 71.95 NO8000 39.77 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 334.22 74.11 NO8500 39.19 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 352.73 76.2 NO9000 38.52 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 371.12 78.25 NO9500 37.8 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 389.39 80.24 NO

10000 37.05 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 407.54 82.18 NO15000 29.41 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 388.8 59.77 HS

20000 25.57 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 501.24 64.58 HS

MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCENTRATION ATOR BEYOND 1. M:183 254.8 6 4 8.3 10000 55.75 9 25.4 HS




DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M*'3) STAB (MIS) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

650 85.37 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 158.98 195.4 NO


' SUMMARY-OF TERRAIN HEIGHTS ENTERED FOR '* SIMPLE ELEVATED TERRAIN PROCEDURE *


0. 1. 20000.0. 650. -



CAVITY CALCULATION - 1 CAVITY CALCULATION - 2CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000 CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000CRITWS @1OM (M/S)= 99.99 CRITWS @1OM (M/S) = 99.99CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99 DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00 CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 121.42 CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 103.63ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 145.20 ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 226.60

CAVITY CONC NOT CALCULATED FOR CRIT WS > 20.0 M/S. CONG SET = 0.0


................... ........................ ***





'' REMEMBER TO INCLUDE BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS

Kakira Boilers - Estimated Nitrogen Dioxide Emitted During Operation

120

NAAQS and Eauador Standard - 1 OOLtq/m 3)

100 _

> 80 .

0)

-J

40

0

0

z20

0

(U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l(

Distance from Plant (m)

L40 _CurrentOperation Futu p __ _t eration

I 0

07/02/0313:29:52

SCREEN3 MODEL RUN 1:5VERSION DATED 96043

Kakira Current Operation - Nitrogen Dioxide

COMPLEX TERRAIN iNPUTS:SOURCE TYPE = POINTEMISSION RATE (G/S) = 5.80000STACK HT (M) = 38.1000STACK DIAMETER (M) = 2.1000STACK VELOCITY (M/S) = 9.6143STACK GAS TEMP (K) = 408.0000AMBIENT AIR TEMP (K) = 293.0000RECEPTOR HEIGHT (M) = .0000URBAN/RURAL OPTION = RURAL


BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M^-4/S^^3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M^^4/S*^2.


*VALLEY 24-HR CALCS^ -SIMPLE TERRAIN 24-HR CALCS**TERR MAX 24-HR PLUME HT PLUME HTHT DIST CONC CONC ABOVE STK CONC ABOVE STK U10M USTK

(M) (M) (UG/M^^3) (UG/M^^3) BASE (M) (UG/M^^3) HGT (M) SC (M/S)

157. 3200. 10.94 10.94 94.1 .0000 .0 0 .0 .007/02/0313:29:52


Kakira Current Operation - Nitrogen Dioxide



BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M^4/S**3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M^^4/S^^2.

FULL METEOROLOGY



DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M**3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

1 0 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 2.8 2.77 NO100 84.71 6 4 8.3 10000 49.37 5.46 19.52 HS200 86.81 6 4 8.3 10000 56.84 9.65 26.51 HS300 67.09 6 4 8.3 10000 63.12 13.54 31.12 HS400 39.43 6 4 8.3 10000 68.71 17.27 31.89 HS500 31.96 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 36.69 35.69 HS600 29.27 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 43.18 37.6 HS700 32.79 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 167.71 224.58 NO800 34.44 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 185.21 291.58 NO900 32.4 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 202.72 369.85 NO

1000 29.9 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 220.2 459.25 NO1100 27.71 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 237.6 559.71 NO1200 25.83 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 254.92 671.27 NO1300 24.19 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 272.14 793.94 NO1400 22.76 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 289.27 927.8 NO1500 21.5 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.3 1072.9 NO1600 20.37 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 323.23 1229.31 NO1700 19.63 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 257.14 207.85 NO1800 19.97 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 269.57 219.81 NO1900 20.08 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 281.95 231.9 NO2000 20 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 294.29 244.13 NO2100 19.79 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.59 256.47 NO2200 19.46 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 318.83 268.92 NO2300 19.07 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 331.04 281.46 NO2400 18.63 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 343.19 294.09 NO2500 18.16 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 355.3 306.81 NO2600 17.68 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 367.37 319.61 NO2700 17.2 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 379.39 332.48 NO2800 16.72 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 391.37 345.43 NO2900 16.26 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 403.3 358.43 NO3000 15.82 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 415.19 371.5 NO3500 15.06 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 159.96 57.53 HS4000 14.83 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 180.12 60.2 HS4500 14.51 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 200.04 62.75 HS5000 14.14 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 219.73 65.2 HS5500 13.74 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 239.22 67.57 HS6000 13.82 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 258.74 65.06 NO6500 13.88 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 277.84 67.43 NO7000 13.84 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 296.78 69.73 NO7500 13.73 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 315.57 71.95 NO8000 13.57 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 334.22 74.11 NO8500 13.37 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 352.73 76.2 NO9000 13.14 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 371.12 78.25 NO9500 12.9 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 389.39 80.24 NO

10000 12.64 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 407.54 82.18 NO15000 10.04 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 388.8 59.77 HS

20000 8.723 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 501.24 64.58 HS

MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCENTRATION AT OR BEYOND 1. M:183 86.93 6 4 8.3 10000 55.75 9 25.4 HS



-TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES***

DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M*^3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

650 29.13 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 158.98 195.4 NO


^ SUMMARY OF TERRAIN HEIGHTS ENTERED FOR• SIMPLE ELEVATED TERRAIN PROCEDURE *


0. 1. 20000.0. 650. -



CAVITY CALCULATION - 1 CAVITY CALCULATION - 2CONC (UG/M''3) = .0000 CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000CRIT WS @10M (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @10M (M/S) = 99.99CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99 DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00 CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 121.42 CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 103.63ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 145.20 ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 226.60




CALCULATION MAX CONC DIST TO TERRAIN

PROCEDURE (UG/M*^3) MAX (M) HT (M)



^^ REMEMBER TO INCLUDE BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS ^^

07/02/0313:33:49


Kakira Future Operation -Nitrogen Dioxide

COMPLEX TERRAIN INPUTS:SOURCE TYPE = POINTEMISSION RATE (G/S) = 12.0000STACK HT (M) = 38.1000STACK DIAMETER (M) = 2.1000STACK VELOCITY (MIS) = 9.6143STACK GAS TEMP (K) = 408.0000AMBIENT AIR TEMP (K) = 293.0000RECEPTOR HEIGHT (M) = .0000URBAN/RURAL OPTION = RURAL

THE REGULATORY (DEFAULT) MIXING HEIGHT OPTION WAS SELECTED.

THE REGULATORY (DEFAULT) ANEMOMETER HEIGHT OF 10.0 METERS WAS ENTERED.



*VALLEY 24-HR CALCS* -SIMPLE TERRAIN 24-HR CALCS**

TERR MA-X 24-HR PLUME HT PLUME HT

HT DIST CONC CONC ABOVE STK CONC ABOVE STK U10M USTK

(M) (M) (UG/M*'3) (UG/M**3) BASE (M) (UG/M**3) HGT(M) SC (M/S)

157. 3200. 22.63 22.63 94.1 .0000 .0 0 .0 .007/02/0313:33:49


Kakira Future Operation - Nitrogen Dioxide



BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M**4/S'*3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M**4/S**2.

FULL METEOROLOGY



DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M*'3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

1 0 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 2.8 2.77 NO

100 175.3 6 4 8.3 10000 49.37 5.46 19.52 HS200 179.6 6 4 8.3 10000 56.84 9.65 26.51 HS300 138.8 6 4 8.3 10000 63.12 13.54 31.12 HS400 81.57 6 4 8.3 10000 68.71 17.27 31.89 HS

500 66.13 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 36.69 35.69 HS600 60.56 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 43.18 37.6 HS

700 67.84 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 167.71 224.58 NO800 71.26 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 185.21 291.58 NO

900 67.03 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 202.72 369.85 NO1000 61.86 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 220.2 459.25 NO1100 57.34 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 237.6 559.71 NO1200 53.44 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 254.92 671.27 NO1300 50.06 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 272.14 793.94 NO

1400 47.09 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 289.27 927.8 NO1500 44.48 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.3 1072.9 NO1600 42.15 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 323.23 1229.31 NO1700 40.61 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 257.14 207.85 NO

1800 41.31 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 269.57 219.81 NO1900 41.53 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 281.95 231.9 NO2000 41.38 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 294.29 244.13 NO2100 40.94 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.59 256.47 NO2200 40.27 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 318.83 268.92 NO2300 39.46 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 331.04 281.46 NO

2400 38.54 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 343.19 294.09 NO2500 37.57 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 355.3 306.81 NO2600 36.58 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 367.37 319.61 NO2700 35.58 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 379.39 332.48 NO2800 34.6 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 391.37 345.43 NO2900 33.65 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 403.3 358.43 NO3000 32.73 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 415.19 371.5 NO3500 31.15 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 159.96 57.53 HS4000 30.67 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 180.12 60.2 HS4500 30.02 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 200.04 62.75 HS5000 29.26 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 219.73 65.2 HS5500 28.43 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 239.22 67.57 HS6000 28.6 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 258.74 65.06 NO6500 28.71 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 277.84 67.43 NO7000 28.63 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 296.78 69.73 NO7500 28.4 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 315.57 71.95 NO8000 28.07 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 334.22 74.11 NO8500 27.66 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 352.73 76.2 NO

9000 27.19 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 371.12 78.25 NO9500 26.68 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 389.39 80.24 NO

10000 26.15 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 407.54 82.18 NO15000 20.76 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 388.8 59.77 HS

20000 18.05 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 501.24 64.58 HS

MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCENTRATION AT OR BEYOND 1. M:

183 179.9 6 4 8.3 10000 55.75 9 25.4 HS

DWASH= MEANS NO CALC MADE (CONC = 0.0)

DWASH=NO MEANS NO BUILDING DOWNWASH USED

DWASH=HS MEANS HUBER-SNYDER DOWNWASH USED

DWASH=SS MEANS SCHULMAN-SCIRE DOWNWASH USED

DWASH=NA MEANS DOWNWASH NOT APPLICABLE, X<3*LB


-*TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES*^*

DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA

(M) (UG/M--3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

650 60.26 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 158.98 195.4 NO






* SUMMARY OF TERRAIN HEIGHTS ENTERED FOR ^

* SIMPLE ELEVATED TERRAIN PROCEDURE


0. 1. 20000.0. 650. --



CAVITY CALCULATION - 1 * CAVITY CALCULATION -2

CONC (UG/M*-3) = .0000 CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000

CRITWS @1OM (M/S)= 99.99 CRITWS @10M (M/S) = 99.99

CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99

DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99 DILUTION WS (M/S) = 99.99

CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00 CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00

CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 121.42 CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 103.63

ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 145.20 ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 226.60


END OF CAVITY CALCULATIONS......... ............ *.......

''' SUMMARY OF SCREEN MODEL RESULTS




*- REMEMBER TO INCLUDE BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS

Kakira Boilers - Estimated Particulates Emitted During Operation

3000 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

E 2500 - _

2000

C) 2000 - -_ _----- _- __ _ __ _ __

_ _ _ _ _ __ _

0C,

LI) 1500 _

.2-

i, 1000 A .L)

.2| --- - Uqanda AQS Standard - 300Ltq/M3

500 -_ _ --- - --

0

N 6o° (o° 6o o 1 o o o o O°z v t22OOE2 O°e° O°tz O z O

Distanceafrom Plantn(m)

-Current Operation --- Future Operation

07/02/0312:56:07


Kakira Current Operation - Particulates




BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M*'4/S*'3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M*4/S**2.


*VALLEY 24-HR CALCS* ''SIMPLE TERRAIN 24-HR CALCS-*

TERR MAX 24-HR PLUME HT PLUME HT


(M) (M) (UG/M''3) (UG/M*'3) BASE (M) (UG/M''3) HGT (M) SC (M/S)

157. 3200. 409.2 409.2 94.1 .0000 .0 0 .0 .007/02/0312:56:07


Kakira Present Operation - Particulates




BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M''4/S**3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M'4/S^'2.

FULL METEOROLOGY




(M) (UG/M^*3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

1 0 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 2.8 2.77 NO

100 3169 6 4 8.3 10000 49.37 5.46 19.52 HS

200 3248 6 4 8.3 10000 56.84 9.65 26.51 HS

300 2510 6 4 8.3 10000 63.12 13.54 31.12 HS

400 1475 6 4 8.3 10000 68.71 17.27 31.89 HS

500 1196 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 36.69 35.69 HS

600 1095 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 43.18 37.6 HS

700 1227 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 167.71 224.58 NO

800 1289 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 185.21 291.58 NO

900 1212 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 202.72 369.85 NO

1000 1119 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 220.2 459.25 NO

1100 1037 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 237.6 559.71 NO

1200 966.4 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 254.92 671.27 NO

1300 905.2 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 272.14 793.94 NO

1400 851.6 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 289.27 927.8 NO

1500 804.3 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.3 1072.9 NO

1600 762.1 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 323.23 1229.31 NO

1700 734.4 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 257.14 207.85 NO

1800 747 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 269.57 219.81 NO

1900 751.1 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 281.95 231.9 NO

2000 748.3 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 294.29 244.13 NO

2100 740.2 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.59 256.47 NO

2200 728.3 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 318.83 268.92 NO

2300 713.5 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 331.04 281.46 NO

2400 697 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 343.19 294.09 NO

2500 679.4 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 355.3 306.81 NO

2600 661.4 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 367.37 319.61 NO

2700 643.4 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 379.39 332.48 NO

2800 . 625.7 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 391.37 345.43 NO

2900 608.5 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 403.3 358.43 NO

3000 591.9 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 415.19 371.5 NO

3500 563.3 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 159.96 57.53 HS

4000 554.7 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 180.12 60.2 HS

4500 542.9 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 200.04 62.75 HS

5000 529.1 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 219.73 65.2 HS

5500 514.2 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 239.22 67.57 HS

6000 517.2 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 258.74 65.06 NO

6500 519.2 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 277.84 67.43 NO

7000 517.7 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 296.78 69.73 NO

7500 513.6 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 315.57 71.95 NO

8000 507.6 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 334.22 74.11 NO

8500 500.2 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 352.73 76.2 NO

9000 491.7 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 371.12 78.25 NO

9500 482.6 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 389.39 80.24 NO

10000 472.9 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 407.54 82.18 NO

15000 375.5 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 388.8 59.77 HS

20000 326.4 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 501.24 64.58 HS

MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCE TRATION AT OR BEYOND 1 M:

183 3253 6 4 8.3 10000 55.75 9 25.4 HS


......... ,. ,*...........SCREEN DISCRETE DISTANCES



(M) (UG/M**3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

650 1090 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 158.98 195.4 NO

DWASH= MEANS NO CALC MADE (CONC = 0.0)DWASH=NO MEANS NO BUILDING DOWNWASH USEDDWASH=HS MEANS HUBER-SNYDER DOWNWASH USEDDWASH=SS MEANS SCHULMAN-SCIRE DOWNWASH USEDDWASH=NA MEANS DOWNWASH NOT APPLICABLE, X<3tLB

' SUMMARY OF TERRAIN HEIGHTS ENTERED FOR' SIMPLE ELEVATED TERRAIN PROCEDURE


0. 1. 20000.0. 650. --

t REGULATORY (Default)PERFORMING CAVITY CALCULATIONS


CAVITY CALCULATION - 1 CAVITY CALCULATION - 2

CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000 CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000CRITWS @IOM (M/S) = 99.99 CRITWS @10M (M/S) = 99.99

CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99


CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00 CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 121.42 CAVITY LENGTH (M) = 103.63ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 145.20 ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 226.60



** SUMMARY OF SCREEN MODEL RESULTS

CALCULATION MAX CONC DIST TO TERRAIN

PROCEDURE (UG/M*^3) MAX (M) HT (M)

SIMPLE TERRAIN 3253. 183. 0.


REMEMBER TO INCLUDE BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS

07/02/0313:02:38


Kakira Future Operation - Particulates

COMPLEX TERRAIN INPUTS:SOURCE TYPE = POINTEMISSION RATE (G/S) = 434.000STACK HT (M) = 38.1000STACK DIAMETER (M) = 2.1000STACK VELOCITY (MIS) = 9.6143

STACK GAS TEMP (K) = 408.0000AMBIENT AIR TEMP (K) =293.0000RECEPTOR HEIGHT (M) = .0000

URBAN/RURAL OPTION = RURAL



BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M^^4/S*^3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M**4/S**2.

FINAL STABLE PLUME HEIGHT (M) = 94.1

DISTANCE TO FINAL RISE (M) = 151.3

*VALLEY 24-HR CALCS* -SIMPLE TERRAIN 24-HR CALCS*^

TERR MAX 24-HR PLUME HT PLUME HT


(M) (M) (UG/M*^3) (UG/M^^3) BASE (M) (UG/M*3) HGT (M) SC (MIS)

157. 3200. 818.4 818.4 94.1 .0000 .0 0 .0 .007/02/0313:02:38


Kakira Future Operation - Particulates

SIMPLE TERRAIN INPUTS:SOURCE TYPE = POINT

EMISSION RATE (G/S) = 434.000STACK HEIGHT (M) = 38.1000STK INSIDE DIAM (M) = 2.1000STK EXIT VELOCITY (M/S)= 9.6143STK GAS EXIT TEMP (K) = 408.0000AMBIENT AIR TEMP (K) = 293.0000RECEPTOR HEIGHT (M) = .0000

URBAN/RURAL OPTION = RURALBUILDING HEIGHT (M) = 25.0000MIN HORIZ BLDG DIM (M) = 145.2000MAX HORIZ BLDG DIM (M) = 226.6000



BUOY. FLUX = 29.298 M^^4/S*'3; MOM. FLUX = 73.185 M**4/S^*2.

FULL METEOROLOGY


-TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES

DIST CONC U1oM USTK MIX HT PLUME SIGMA SIGMA(M) (UG/M^^3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) z (M) DWASH

1 0 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 2.8 2.77 NO100 6339 6 4 8.3 10000 49.37 5.46 19.52 HS200 6496 6 4 8.3 10000 56.84 9.65 26.51 HS300 5020 6 4 8.3 10000 63.12 13.54 31.12 HS400 2950 6 4 8.3 10000 68.71 17.27 31.89 HS500 2392 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 36.69 35.69 HS600 2190 4 10 12.2 3200 57.18 43.18 37.6 HS700 2454 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 167.71 224.58 NO800 2577 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 185.21 291.58 NO900 2424 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 202.72 369.85 NO

1000 2237 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 220.2 459.25 NO1100 2074 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 237.6 559.71 NO1200 1933 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 254.92 671.27 NO1300 1810 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 272.14 793.94 NO1400 1703 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 289.27 927.8 NO1500 1609 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.3 1072.9 NO1600 1524 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 323.23 1229.31 NO1700 1469 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 257.14 207.85 NO1800 1494 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 269.57 219.81 NO1900 1502 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 281.95 231.9 NO2000 1497 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 294.29 244.13 NO2100 1480 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 306.59 256.47 NO2200 1457 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 318.83 268.92 NO2300 1427 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 331.04 281.46 NO2400 1394 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 343.19 294.09 NO2500 1359 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 355.3 306.81 NO2600 1323 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 367.37 319.61 NO2700 1287 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 379.39 332.48 NO2800 1251 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 391.37 345.43 NO2900 1217 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 403.3 358.43 NO3000 1184 2 1 1.1 320 283.79 415.19 371.5 NO3500 1127 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 159.96 57.53 HS4000 1109 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 180.12 60.2 HS4500 1086 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 200.04 62.75 HS5000 1058 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 219.73 65.2 HS5500 1028 5 1.5 2.4 10000 106.58 239.22 67.57 HS6000 1034 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 258.74 65.06 NO6500 1038 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 277.84 67.43 NO7000 1035 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 296.78 69.73 NO7500 1027 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 315.57 71.95 NO8000 1015 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 334.22 74.11 NO8500 1000 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 352.73 76.2 NO9000 983.5 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 371.12 78.25 NO9500 965.1 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 389.39 80.24 NO

10000 945.8 5 1 1.6 10000 116.49 407.54 82.18 NO15000 750.9 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 388.8 59.77 MS

20000 652.8 6 1 2.1 10000 97.6 501.24 64.58 HS

MAXIMUM 1-HR CONCENTRATION AT OR BEYOND 1. M:

183 6505 6 4 8.3 10000 55.75 9 25.4 HS







-*TERRAIN HEIGHT OF 0. M ABOVE STACK BASE USED FOR FOLLOWING DISTANCES***


(M) (UG/M**3) STAB (M/S) (M/S) (M) HT (M) Y (M) Z (M) DWASH

650 2179 1 1 1.1 320 283.79 158.98 195.4 NO





DWASH=NA MEANS DOWNWASH NOT APPLICABLE, X<3'LB

^ SUMMARY OF TERRAIN HEIGHTS ENTERED FOR '

• SIMPLE ELEVATED TERRAIN PROCEDURE *

TERRAIN DISTANCE RANGE (M)

HT (M) MINIMUM MAXIMUM

0. 1. 20000.0. 650. -



' CAVITY CALCULATION - 1 CAVITY CALCULATION - 2

CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000 CONC (UG/M**3) = .0000

CRIT WS @10M (M/S) = 99.99 CRIT WS @1 OM (M/S) = 99.99

CRIT WS @ HS (M/S)= 99.99 CRIT WS @ HS (M/S) = 99.99


CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00 CAVITY HT (M) = 25.00

CAVITYLENGTH (M) = 121.42 CAVITYLENGTH (M) = 103.63

ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 145.20 ALONGWIND DIM (M) = 226.60


END OF CAVITY CALCULATIONS................. .......................

.......................................


CALCULATION MAX CONC DiST TO TERRAINPROCEDURE (UG/M**3) MAX (M) HT (M)

SIMPLE TERRAIN 6505. 183. 0.

COMPLEX TERRAIN 818.4 3200. 157 (24-HR CONC)

*- REMEMBER TO INCLUDE BACKGROUND CONCENTRATIONS *-

ParticulatesDistance 1 Hour Average 8 Hour Average 24 Hour Average Annual Average 1 Hour Average

1 0 0 0 0 0

100 3169 2218.3 1267.6 253.52 1.58E+05200 3248 2273.6 1299.2 259.84 1.62E+05

300 2510 1757 1004 200.8 1.25E+05400 1475 1032.5 590 118 7.36E+04500 1196 837.2 478.4 95.68 5.97E+04600 1095 766.5 438 87.6 5.47E+04700 1227 858.9 490.8 98.16 6.12E+04800 1289 902.3 515.6 103.12 6.43E+04900 1212 848.4 484.8 96.96 6.05E+04

1000 1119 783.3 447.6 89.52 5.59E+041100 1037 725.9 414.8 82.96 5.18E+041200 966.4 676.48 386.56 77.312 4.82E+041300 905.2 633.64 362.08 72.416 4.52E+041400 851.6 596.12 340.64 68.128 4.25E+041500 804.3 563.01 321.72 64.344 4.02E+041600 762.1 533.47 304.84 60.968 3.81EE+041700 734.4 514.08 293.76 58.752 3.67E+041800 747 522.9 298.8 59.76 3.73E+041900 751.1 525.77 300.44 60.088 3.75E+042000 748.3 523.81 299.32 59.864 3.74E+042100 740.2 518.14 296.08 59.216 3.70E+042200 728.3 509.81 291.32 58.264 3.64E+042300 713.5 499.45 285.4 57.08 3.56E+042400 697 487.9 278.8 55.76 3.48E+042500 679.4 475.58 271.76 54.352 3.39E+042600 661.4 462.98 264.56 52.912 3.30E+042700 643.4 450.38 257.36 51.472 3.21 E+042800 625.7 437.99 250.28 50.056 3.12E+042900 608.5 425.95 243.4 48.68 3.04E+043000 591.9 414.33 236.76 47.352 2.96E+043500 563.3 394.31 225.32 45.064 2.81 E+044000 554.7 388.29 221.88 44.376 2.77E+044500 542.9 380.03 217.16 43.432 2.71E+045000 529.1 370.37 211.64 42.328 2.64E+045500 514.2 359.94 205.68 41.136 2.57E+046000 517.2 362.04 206.88 41.376 2.58E+046500 519.2 363.44 207.68 41.536 2.59E+047000 517.7 362.39 207.08 41.416 2.58E+047500 513.6 359.52 205.44 41.088 2.56E+048000 507.6 355.32 203.04 40.608 2.53E+048500 500.2 350.14 200.08 40.016 2.50E+049000 491.7 344.19 196.68 39.336 2.46E+049500 482.6 337.82 193.04 38.608 2.41E+04

10000 472.9 331.03 189.16 37.832 2.36E+0415000 375.5 262.85 150.2 30.04 1.87E+0420000 326.4 228.48 130.56 26.112 1.63E+04

C02 Nitrous Oxides8 Hour Average 24 Hour Average Annual Average 1 Hour Average 8 Hour Average 24 Hour Average

0 0 0 0 0 0110740 63280 12656 121.2 84.84 48.48113470 64840 12968 124.2 86.94 49.6887710 50120 10024 96 67.2 38.451548 29456 5891.2 56.42 39.494 22.56841790 23880 4776 45.74 32.018 18.29638269 21868 4373.6 41.89 29.323 16.75642868 24496 4899.2 46.92 32.844 18.76845031 25732 5146.4 49.29 34.503 19.71642357 24204 4840.8 46.36 32.452 18.54439095 22340 4468 42.79 29.953 17.11636232 20704 4140.8 39.66 27.762 15.86433768 19296 3859.2 36.96 25.872 14.78431633 18076 3615.2 34.62 24.234 13.84829757 17004 3400.8 32.57 22.799 13.02828105 16060 3212 30.76 21.532 12.30426635 15220 3044 29.15 20.405 11.6625662 14664 2932.8 28.09 19.663 11.23626103 14916 2983.2 28.57 19.999 11.42826250 15000 3000 28.73 20.111 11.49226152 14944 2988.8 28.62 20.034 11.44825865 14780 2956 28.31 19.817 11.32425452 14544 2908.8 27.86 19.502 11.14424934 14248 2849.6 27.29 19.103 10.91624353 13916 2783.2 26.66 18.662 10.66423744 13568 2713.6 25.99 18.193 10.39623114 13208 2641.6 25.3 17.71 10.1222484 12848 2569.6 24.61 17.227 9.84421868 12496 2499.2 23.93 16.751 9.57221266 12152 2430.4 23.27 16.289 9.30820685 11820 2364 22.64 15.848 9.05619684 11248 2249.6 21.55 15.085 8.6219383 11076 2215.2 21.22 14.854 8.48818970 10840 2168 20.77 14.539 8.30818494 10568 2113.6 20.24 14.168 8.09617969 10268 2053.6 19.67 13.769 7.86818074 10328 2065.6 19.78 13.846 7.91218144 10368 2073.6 19.86 13.902 7.94418088 10336 2067.2 19.8 13.86 7.9217948 10256 2051.2 19.65 13.755 7.8617738 10136 2027.2 19.42 13.594 7.76817479 9988 1997.6 19.13 13.391 7.65217185 9820 1964 18.81 13.167 7.52416863 9636 1927.2 18.46 12.922 7.38416527 9444 1888.8 18.09 12.663 7.23613118 7496 1499.2 14.36 10.052 5.74411403 6516 1303.2 12.48 8.736 4.992

Nitrogen Dioxide 24hour

Annual Average 1 Hour Average 8 Hour Average 24 Hour Average Annual Average Particulate

0 0 0 0 0 300

9.696 84.71 59.297 33.884 6.7768 300

9.936 86.81 60.767 34.724 6.9448 300

7.68 67.09 46.963 26.836 5.3672 300

4.5136 39.43 27.601 15.772 3.1544 300

3.6592 31.96 22.372 12.784 2.5568 300

3.3512 29.27 20.489 11.708 2.3416 300

3.7536 32.79 22.953 13.116 2.6232 300

3.9432 34.44 24.108 13.776 2.7552 300

3.7088 32.4 22.68 12.96 2.592 300

3.4232 29.9 20.93 11.96 2.392 300

3.1728 27.71 19.397 11.084 2.2168 300

2.9568 25.83 18.081 10.332 2.0664 300

2.7696 24.19 16.933 9.676 1.9352 300

2.6056 22.76 15.932 9.104 1.8208 300

2.4608 21.5 15.05 8.6 1.72 300

2.332 20.37 14.259 8.148 1.6296 300

2.2472 19.63 13.741 7.852 1.5704 300

2.2856 19.97 13.979 7.988 1.5976 300

2.2984 20.08 14.056 8.032 1.6064 300

2.2896 20 14 8 1.6 300

2.2648 19.79 13.853 7.916 1.5832 300

2.2288 19.46 13.622 7.784 1.5568 300

2.1832 19.07 13.349 7.628 1.5256 300

2.1328 18.63 13.041 7.452 1.4904 300

2.0792 18.16 12.712 7.264 1.4528 300

2.024 17.68 12.376 7.072 1.4144 300

1.9688 17.2 12.04 6.88 1.376 300

1.9144 16.72 11.704 6.688 1.3376 300

1.8616 16.26 11.382 6.504 1.3008 300

1.8112 15.82 11.074 6.328 1.2656 300

1.724 15.06 10.542 6.024 1.2048 300

1.6976 14.83 10.381 5.932 1.1864 300

1.6616 14.51 10.157 5.804 1.1608 300

1.6192 14.14 9.898 5.656 1.1312 300

1.5736 13.74 9.618 5.496 1.0992 300

1.5824 13.82 9.674 5.528 1.1056 300

1.5888 13.88 9.716 5.552 1.1104 300

1.584 13.84 9.688 5.536 1.1072 300

1.572 13.73 9.611 5.492 1.0984 300

1.5536 13.57 9.499 5.428 1.0856 300

1.5304 13.37 9.359 5.348 1.0696 300

1.5048 13.14 9.198 5.256 1.0512 300

1.4768 12.9 9.03 5.16 1.032 300

1.4472 12.64 8.848 5.056 1.0112 300

1.1488 10.04 7.028 4.016 0.8032 300

0.9984 8.723 6.1061 3.4892 0.69784 300

8hour 24hour annualC02 Stds. NOX Stds. N02 Stds.

200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100200 125 100

ParticulatesDistance 1 Hour Average 8 Hour Average 24 Hour Average Annual Average 1 Hour Average

1 0 0 0 0 0100 6339 4437.3 2535.6 507.12 3.16E+05200 6496 4547.2 2598.4 515.68 3.24E+05300 5020 3514 2008 401.6 2.51 E+05400 2950 2065 1180 236 1.47E+05500 2392 1674.4 956.8 191.36 1.19E+05600 2190 1533 876 175.2 1.09E+05700 2454 1717.8 981.6 196.32 1.23E+05800 2577 1803.9 1030.8 206.16 1.29E+05900 2424 1696.8 969.6 193.92 1.21E+05

1000 2237 1565.9 894.8 178.96 1.12E+051100 2074 1451.8 829.6 165.92 1.04E+051200 1933 1353.1 773.2 154.64 9.65E+041300 1810 1267 724 144.8 9.04E+041400 1703 1192.1 681.2 136.24 8.50E+041500 1609 1126.3 643.6 128.72 8.03E+041600 1524 1066.8 609.6 121.92 7.61E+041700 1469 1028.3 587.6 117.52 7.33E+041800 1494 1045.8 597.6 119.52 7.46E+041900 1502 1051.4 600.8 120.16 7.50E+042000 1497 1047.9 598.8 119.76 7.47E+042100 1480 1036 592 118.4 7.39E+042200 1457 1019.9 582.8 116.56 7.27E+042300 1427 998.9 570.8 114.16 7.12E+042400 1394 975.8 557.6 111.52 6.96E+042500 1359 951.3 543.6 108.72 6.78E+042600 1323 926.1 529.2 105.84 6.60E+042700 1287 900.9 514.8 102.96 6.42E+042800 1251 875.7 500.4 100.08 6.25E+042900 1217 851.9 486.8 97.36 6.08E+043000 1184 828.8 473.6 94.72 5.91E+043500 1127 788.9 450.8 90.16 5.63E+044000 1109 776.3 443.6 88.72 5.54E+044500 1086 760.2 434.4 86.88 5.42E+045000 1058 740.6 423.2 84.64 5.28E+045500 1028 719.6 411.2 82.24 5.13E+046000 1034 723.8 413.6 82.72 5.16E+046500 1038 726.6 415.2 83.04 5.18E+047000 1035 724.5 414 82.8 5.17E+047500 1027 718.9 410.8 82.16 5.13E+048000 1015 710.5 406 81.2 5.07E+048500 1000 700 400 80 4.99E+049000 983.5 688.45 393.4 78.68 4.91 E+049500 965.1 675.57 386.04 77.208 4.82E+04

10000 945.8 662.06 378.32 75.664 4.72E+0415000 750.9 525.63 300.36 60.072 3.75E+0420000 652.8 456.96 261.12 52.224 3.26E+04

C02 Nitrous Oxides8 Hour Average 24 Hour Average Annual Average 1 Hour Average 8 Hour Average 24 Hour Average

0 0 0 0 0 0221480 126560 25312 248.3 173.81 99.32227010 129720 25944 254.4 178.08 101.76175420 100240 20048 196.6 137.62 78.64103110 58920 11784 115.6 80.92 46.2483580 47760 9552 93.68 65.576 37.47276510 43720 8744 85.8 60.06 34.3285750 49000 9800 96.11 67.277 38.44490090 51480 10296 101 70.7 40.484700 48400 9680 94.96 66.472 37.98478190 44680 8936 87.64 61.348 35.05672450 41400 8280 81.23 56.861 32.49267543 38596 7719.2 75.71 52.997 30.28463266 36152 7230.4 70.92 49.644 28.36859521 34012 6802.4 66.72 46.704 26.68856210 32120 6424 63.01 44.107 25.20453270 30440 6088 59.71 41.797 23.88451324 29328 5865.6 57.53 40.271 23.01252206 29832 5966.4 58.52 40.964 23.40852493 29996 5999.2 58.84 41.188 23.53652297 29884 5976.8 58.62 41.034 23.44851737 29564 5912.8 57.99 40.593 23.19650897 29084 5816.8 57.05 39.935 22.8249868 28496 5699.2 55.9 39.13 22.3648713 27836 5567.2 54.6 38.22 21.8447488 27136 5427.2 53.23 37.261 21.29246228 26416 5283.2 51.82 36.274 20.72844968 25696 5139.2 50.41 35.287 20.16443729 24988 4997.6 49.02 34.314 19.60842525 24300 4860 47.67 33.369 19.06841370 23640 4728 46.37 32.459 18.54839375 22500 4500 44.13 30.891 17.65238766 22152 4430.4 43.45 30.415 17.3837940 21680 4336 42.53 29.771 17.01236981 21132 4226.4 41.45 29.015 16.5835938 20536 4107.2 40.28 28.196 16.11236148 20656 4131.2 40.52 28.364 16.20836288 20736 4147.2 40.67 28.469 16.26836183 20676 4135.2 40.56 28.392 16.22435896 20512 4102.4 40.24 28.168 16.09635476 20272 4054.4 39.77 27.839 15.90834958 19976 3995.2 39.19 27.433 15.67634370 19640 3928 38.52 26.964 15.40833726 19272 3854.4 37.8 26.46 15.1233047 18884 3776.8 37.05 25.935 14.8226243 14996 2999.2 29.41 20.587 11.76422813 13036 2607.2 25.57 17.899 10.228

Nitrogen DioxideAnnual Average 1 Hour Average 8 Hour Average 24 Hour Average Annual Average

0 0 .0 0 019.864 175.3 122.71 70.12 14.02420.352 179.6 125.72 71.84 14.36815.728 138.8 97.16 55.52 11.1049.248 81.57 57.099 32.628 6.5256

7.4944 66.13 46.291 26.452 5.29046.864 60.56 42.392 24.224 4.8448

7.6888 67.84 47.488 27.136 5.42728.08 71.26 49.882 28.504 5.7008

7.5968 67.03 46.921 26.812 5.36247.0112 61.86 43.302 24.744 4.94886.4984 57.34 40.138 22.936 4.58726.0568 53.44 37.408 21.376 4.27525.6736 50.06 35.042 20.024 4.00485.3376 47.09 32.963 18.836 3.76725.0408 44.48 31.136 17.792 3.55844.7768 42.15 29.505 16.86 3.3724.6024 40.61 28.427 16.244 3.24884.6816 41.31 28.917 16.524 3.30484.7072 41.53 29.071 16.612 3.32244.6896 41.38 28.966 16.552 3.31044.6392 40.94 28.658 16.376 3.27524.564 40.27 28.189 16.108 3.22164.472 39.46 27.622 15.784 3.15684.368 38.54 26.978 15.416 3.0832

4.2584 37.57 26.299 15.028 3.00564.1456 36.58 25.606 14.632 2.92644.0328 35.58 24.906 14.232 2.84643.9216 34.6 24.22 13.84 2.7683.8136 33.65 23.555 13.46 2.6923.7096 32.73 22.911 13.092 2.61843.5304 31.15 21.805 12.46 2.4923.476 30.67 21.469 12.268 2.4536

3.4024 30.02 21.014 12.008 2.40163.316 29.26 20.482 11.704 2.3408

3.2224 28.43 19.901 11.372 2.27443.2416 28.6 20.02 11.44 2.2883.2536 28.71 20.097 11.484 2.29683.2448 28.63 20.041 11.452 2.29043.2192 28.4 19.88 11.36 2.2723.1816 28.07 19.649 11.228 2.24563.1352 27.66 19.362 11.064 2.21283.0816 27.19 19.033 10.876 2.1752

3.024 26.68 18.676 10.672 2.13442.964 26.15 18.305 10.46 2.092

2.3528 20.76 14.532 8.304 1.66082.0456 18.05 12.635 7.22 1.444

24hour 8hour 24hour annualParticulate Stds. C02 Stds. NOX Stds. N02 Stds.

300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100300 200 125 100

ARDROP

APPENDIX C

KAKIRA SUGAR WORKS (1985)LTD. PERMITS

FORM B

ORIGINAL Permit No. NEMA/RBILSNWT/049

REPUBUC OF UGANDA

Fee paid: UShs. 100,000/= (REGULATION 12 & 23)

THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT STATUTE, 1995 Statute No. 4 of 1995.

The National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores Management) Regulations, 2000.

* PERMIT TO CARRY OUT A REGULATED ACTIVITY IN A WETLAND/RIVER BANK/LAKE SHORE

Name KAKIRA SUGAR WORKS (1985) LIMITED

Address P.O. BOX 121, JINJA

You are hereby granted a permit to cany out the activity (s) in a vA?wiver/bank as applied for.

Locationoofhthe enriverbank nl*iFS* CHICO STREAM FOR SUGAR CANE GROWsING

(BUTEMBE,KAKIRA-KABYAZA,KARONGO, CHICO DIVISIONS)

JINJA DISTRICT

(District, county, sub-county, villageAJtere necess mention more than one)

The permit is granted valid from 2ND rB&A*n 0 04 to 2ND JANUARY 20 06 2 years).

The permit is subject to the following conditions attached

(Please attach on separate sheet where necessary) _

Date 30TH DECEMBER,2003_i i

A5A'Vseal and Sigiature of The Executive Director

National Environment Management Authority

*Delete whichever is not applicable-ORIGINAL: Developer; DUPLICATE: Lead Agency; TRIPLICATE: The Authority.

- CONDITIONS FOR ISSUING A PERMIT

For

Sugar Cane growing along the banks of River Chicoand other streams

issued toKakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited

located inJinja, Butembe, Kakira-Kabyaza, Karongo and

Chico divisions - Jinja District

In addition to implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Project Brief, the developer

shall ensure that:

(i). No other authorised activities other than for which the Permit has been issued (Sugar

Cane Growing) are carried out within the regulated zones of the rivers;

(ii). A 5m (five meters) no encroachment zone is maintained along River Chico and other

streams in the whole sugar plantation and planted with grass to ensure that the sediment

from the fields are trapped;

(iii). Any use of surface or ground water along the river must be in accordance with the Water

Resources Regulations 1998, which requires among others obtaining a permit in case of

using a motorised pump or abstraction of water of over 400m3 /day;

(iv). The riverbank shall not be fenced off near the facility so as to allow continued public

access and use of the riverbank such as getting access to the river whenever the need

arises;

(v). In accordance with Section 23(4) of the National Environment Statute 1995, any additional

undesirable environmental impacts that may arise during the construction and operation of

the facility, but not contemplated during the issuing of this permit are mitigated;

(vi). Undertake monitoring and report to this Authority and/or the Directorate of Water

Development any incidents of pollution of the river and also undertake immediate remedial

action where this pollution is caused by activities of your company.

Page 1 of 2

Signuwdin 7Cmpafa on Tuesda, 09 fDecember 2003

|~~~~~~~~~~I SeafandfS41ture of/The Executive Director

National Environment management Authority

C.C. The Chief Administrative OfficerJINJA DistrictJINJA

The District Environment OfficerJINJA DistrictJINJA

Page 2 of 2

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

WASTE WATER DISCHARGE PERMIT(The Water Statute, No. 9 of 1995, the Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations, 1995 and the Water Resources Regulations,

In exercise of the powers conferred upon the Director by sections 5, 18 and 29 of the Water Statute,1995; and in accordance with regulation 7 of the Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations, 1998, this

isto grant a Waste Water Discharge Pernit

Number: JJAlOO098/3 WDMD W2001To Kakira Sugar Weks- (1985) Limited

P. 0. Box 121, Jinja

to discharge waste in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit.The permit is granted in the terms and conditions set here in the Annex, which is part of this

permit,and under all other terms and conditions set in the Water Statute, 1995, the Water (Waste

Discharge)Regulations, 1998 and the Water Resources Regulations, 1998..

This permit is granted for a period not exceeding 3 year(s), which come into force onMonday, November 19, 2001 until Friday, November 19, 2004.

Issuance Date: Monday, November 19, 2001

p.o. angireDI TOR OF WATE DEVELOPMENT

Wednesday, December 19,2001 Page I of 4

WASTE DISCHFARGE PERMIT - STANDARD CONDITIONSWater Statute, 1995:

Section 20a 3 not cause or allow any water to be polluted;

Section 20b prevernt damage to the source from which water is taken, or to which water is discharged aster use;

Section 20c take precautions to ensure that no activities on the land where water is used results in the accumulation of any substanceSwhich may reder water less fit for the purpose for which it maay be reasnably used;Section 22(1) Iwhere in the opinion of the Director the water available in the area is, or is likely to become, insufficient in quantity orIquality for the needs of dte persons using or seeking to use it from that source, the Diretor meay, by notice in witing to the[holder of a water pemit fo r that area, suspend or vary the water pernit.Section 22(2) [The Director iay impose conditions to any permit varied, suspended or granted under subsection (I) including requiring[compenstion to a holder of a water permit by another holder of a water permiit.Section 29(9) [The Director nay, at any time, amend the terms of; suspend the operation oCs or cancel a waste discharge permit it in his[opinion, it is necessary to protc the environmet or to prevent the pollution ofaany water.Section 26 (1) Subject to section 33, where the Director isof the opinion tat in order to make water available fora public purpose it istnecessary to cancel or vary a water permit, the Direcr nmay canel or vary the water permit.1(2) The Minister may, by notice in the Gazstte, declare any pur'pose to be a public purpose for purpose of this section.Section 37 An authorised person miay enter land for purposes of -(a) inspeting works or use of water or

(b) taking samplesbr making tests, to find out whether:-(i) water is being wasted, misused or polluted;(ii) the termis of any water permit, waste dischag pernmit or any other permtit ganted under this Part of the Statute arebeing complied with;

S(iii) an offence is being committed against this Part of the Statute, or the Statute is otherwise being complied with.Regulation 31(q) A person commnits an offence who, unless authorsed under this Part of th Statute, causes or allows-(a) waste to come into contact with any water,

(b) waste to be discharged dieciy or indiretly into water,(c) water to be polluted.

Regulation 31(2) The provisions of subsection (,) shall apply to permits granted and works constructed before the commencement of thisIStatute.

Regulation 321(4) A pern or public authority contravening the provisions of subsection (1)d trough which damiage is caused, shall be liableto pay the cost of reedying the damiage caused and reinstating the environrmnt, as far as is possible, to the condition thatwould have existe if the danmge was not caused.

Water (Waste DischAn Regulations, 199r:Regulation 10 (1) A person who becomes the owner or occupier of any premises in respect of which a waste discharge permit exists shallcontinue to discharge waste from the premises in accordance with the conditions and terms spelt out in that wastedischarge permit for a period of three months from the date on which that person becomes the owner or occupier of theprernises.

(2) Alter the expiry of the period referred to in sub-regulation (1) of this regulation the Director shall, upon receipt of theapplication of the persn referned to in sub-regulation (1), made in Form C set out in the Sixth Schedule, grant that persona waste discharge permit on conditions which are not more onerous to the applicant than the conditions attached to theprevious waste discharge permit relating to those premises and if the Director is satisfied that the purposes for which thepremises are to be used and the nature of any waste will not change in any material respect.Offence Penalties Various sections of the Water Statute, 1995 and Regulations -Offence and Penalties.

Wednesday, December 19,2001 Page 2 of 4

ANNEXSPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT

Name: KAKIRA SUGAR WORKS (1985) LtdPermit Number: JJA100098/3WDMDW 2001

1. Location of point of waste discharge:

Basin Lake Victoria/ Lake KyogaCatchment Lake Victoria/ Lake Kyoga

District Jinja

County Kakira

2. Description of Discharge

(i) Numbers of existing Discharge: I(ii) Type of discharge: Industrial waste(i i i) Nature of discharge: ...(iv) Means of discharge: Channel(v) Water body to which waste is discharged Lake Kyoga(vi) Maximum instantaneous rate of discharge should not exceed I. 12m 3/sec.(vi i) Volume discharged shall not exceed 1610 m3/day in a period of 24 hours

3. Discharge Compositiona) The discharge shall:(i) not exceed a temperature of 20 -350C(ii) contain no visible signs of oil or grease in excess of 10mg/Ib) For the following determinants, in any series of samples of the final effluent taken over a twelve monthperiod, shall not be:(i) in excess of 335mg/I of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) measured after Sdays at 20degrees Centigrade (refer to special permit conditions)(ii) in excess of 175milligrams of suspended solids (measured after drying for Ihour at 105degrees Centigrade);(iii) in excess of 300NTU of turbidity(iv) a pH value of less than 6.0Or greater than 8.0(v) in excess of 1450mg/l of COD (refer to special permit conditions).(vi) in excess of 500mg/I of Sulphates(vii) in excess of 10mg/I of Total Phosphorus as P.(viii) in excess of 10mg/1 of Total Nitrogen as N(ix) in excess of l .Omg/l of sulphide

Wednesday, December 19,2001 Page 3 of 4

ANNEXSPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT

Name: KAKIRA SUGAR WORKS (1985) LtdPermit Number: JJA100098/3WDMDW 2001

4. In addition to the conditions specified in the Statute and any other law in force, this permit is subject to thefollowing terms and conditions:a) This permit shall not be taken as providing a statutory defense against a charge of pollution in respect of anypoisonous, noxious or polluting constituents not specified in the permit.b) Except with the agreement of the person making the discharge under this permit, no notice shall be servedrevoking the permit or modifying the conditions before Friday, November 19, 2004c) You shall provide and maintain facilities, which enable the Director's representatives to take flowmeasurements of the final waste effluent, which is discharged to the outlet. The discharger shall identify thefacility with a clearly visible sign, distinguishing it from any other and provide a visible notch, mark ordevice indicating the level equivalent to the maximum instantaneous permitted flow.

d) You shall provide and maintain facilities, which shall enable the Director's representatives to take discrete orcomposite samples of final waste effluent, which is discharged at the outlet. The discharger shall identifythe facility with a clearly visible sign distinguishing it from any other.

e) You shall provide to the Director's satisfaction a drawing showing the precise location of the facilitiesprovided in accordance with conditions c) and d) above not later than one month prior to the date of.enforcement of this permit.

f) Facilities shall be provided for the safe and convenient access to enable the Director's representatives at anytime to take samples, cany out flow measurements and inspection to ensure that the conditions of thispermit are complied with.

The Discharger shall pay an annual charge of UShs: 1,000,000 Date to be paid 19/11/02g) You shall put in place wastewater treatment facility within the first 2 years of operation under permit.h) You shall put in place flow measuring devices and take samples of (a) upstream of the discharge point; and;(b) effluent discharge on a monthly basis for chemical analysis at own cost. The parameters to be measuredduring monitoring shall include:

(a) pH (g) Turbidity(b) Electrical Conductivity (h) Faecal Coliforms(c) Total Suspended Solids (1050 C) (i) BOD(d) Dissolved Oxygen (j) COD(e) Temperature (k) Total Nitrogen(f) Total Phosphorus

i) You shall improve on the quality of the final wastewater within the first year of operation under permit. Asa minimum the final TSS, COD and BOD, be reduced by 50% within the 3 years of operation under permitj) You shall ensure that the effluent at all times must not exceed the levels of heavy metals and otherprescribed substances.

k) You shall under take monitoring of the volume of wastewater discharge on a monthly basis.

Wednesday, December 19, 2001 Page 4 of 4

FORM Cl

THF REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

SURFACE WATER ABSTRACTION PERMIT(wh 111car Stalute, No.9aT.V 1.9.95s and tew ateLor Resurces RZealicm, 1 998)

In exercise of the powersm conferred upon the Director by sections 5 and 18 of the Water

Statute, 1995; and in accordance with regulations 3, 7 and 10 of the Water Resources

Regulations, 1998, this is to grant a Surface Water Permit

Number: JJAM00176/4SWMT?W 2000

To: Kaki-Lra Sugar Works (1985) Limited

P. O Box 121 JINJA

to abstract surface water in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit.

The permit is granted in the terrns and conditions set here on the reverse side of this form and

in the Annex, which is part of this permit, and under all other terms and conditions set in the

Water Statute, 1995 and the Water Resources Regulations, 1998.

This permit is granted for a period not exceeding 5 year(s), which come into force on

Tuesday, March 28, 200Q until Monday, March 28, 2005.

Issuance Date: Tuesd, y, March 28, 2000

angire

DIRETOR OF WA ER DEVELOPMENT

Tuesday, Mardi 28, 2000 Page 1 of 3

SURFACE WATER PERMIT - STANDARD CONDMTIONSWater Statute, 1995:

1. Section 20 (a) not cause or allow any water to be polluted;

2. Section 20 (b) prevent damage to the source from which water is taken, or to which water is discharged after use;3. Section20 (c) take precautions to ensure that no activities on the land where water is used results in the accumulation of any substancewhich mnay render water less fit for the purpose for which it may be reasonably used;4. Section 22 (1) Wherein the opinion ofthe Director the water available in the area is, or is likely to become, insufficient in quantity orquslityfortheneeds ofthepersons usimgor seeiingto use it fromthat source, the Director may, bynotice in wntingtothe

hsolder of a water permit f or that ares, suspend or vary the water permiL.5. Section 22 (2) The Director may impose conditions to any permit varied, suspended or granted under subsection (1) including requiring[compensation to a holder of a water permit by another holder of a water pernitI6. Section 25 The Director may cancel a water pennit where in his opinion the holder of a water permit has-

(a) failed to comply with any express or implied condition to which the water permit is subject;(b) taken or used more water than he is eatitled to take in any period;(c) taken or used water for a purpose other than that for which he is entitled;(d) failed to comply with any provision of this Statute;(e) not made full beneficial use ofthe permit wihin the two preceding years.

7. Section 26 I() Subjectto section 33, where the Director is ofthe opinion that in order to make water available for a public purpose it isecessary to cancel or vary a water permit, the Director may cancel or vary the water permit.(2) The Minister may, by notice in the Gazette, declare any purpose to be a public purpose for purpose ofthis section.

8. Section 37 An authorised person nay enter land for purposes ofk-(a) inspecting works or use of wate-, or(b) taking samnples or numing tests, to find out whether:-(i) water is being wasted,nisused or polluted;(ii) the terms of any water permit, waste discharge permit or any other permit granted under this Part ofthe Statute arebeing complied with;(iii) an offence is being committed against this Part ofthe Statute, orthe Statute is otherwise being conplied with.

9. Section 18 (7) IA grant of an application under this section does not imply any represantation or guarantee by the Director, authorisedperson or public authority that water will be available at the place.

10. Regulation 31 (1) A person commits an offence who, unless authorised under this Part ofthe Statute, causes or allows-(a) waste to cone into contact with any water,(b) waste to be discharged directly or indirecly into water,(c) water to be polluted.

11. Regulation 31 (2) The provisions of subsection (1) shall applyto permits granted and works constructed beforethe commencement ofthis Statute.

12. Regulation 31 (4) Aperson orpublic authority contraveningthe provisions of subsection (I)through which damage is caused, shall beliableto paythe cost of rcnedyingthe damage caused and reinstatingthe environment, as far as is possible, to thecondition that would have existed if the damage was not caused.

Water Resources Regulations, 1998:

13. Regulation 7 (3) Aperson who becomes the owner or occupier of any premises in resped ofwhich a water pernit exists shall continueto abstrac water in accordance with the conditions and terms spelt out in that water permi for a period of three monthsfrom the date on which that person becomes the owner or occupier of the prnnises.

14.Regulation 8 (1) A holder of a water permit granted under regulation 3 or 10 may before the expiry of his permit, apply to theDirector for the renewal ofthe permiL(2) An application referred to in sub-regulation (I) ofthis regulation shall,

(a) be made in a form and manner determiined by the Director,(b) contain such inforantion as the Director may specify,(c) be accomnpanied by the fee specified in the Second Schedule to these regulations.

(3) The Director shall, in considering an application refcrred to under this regulation, take into account the factorsspecified in regulation 6 ofthese regulations.(4) Where the Director renews a permit he/she nay renew such penit on such conditions, subject to these regulations,as he or she may determine.

15. Penalties FVarious sections ofthe Water Statute, 1995 and Regulations -Offence and Penalties.

Tuesday, March 28, 2000 Page 2 of 3

ANNEXSPECIAL TERMS AND CONDMIONS FOR THE ABSTRACTION OF SURFACE WATERName : Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited

Permit Number JJA100176/4SWMDW 20001. Specifications:

Source of Water Uptake Lake Specific Source: Lake Vidoria at Kakira

District fmjja

County Butembe

SubCounty Kakira

Village/Parish

2. National grid reference of point of water uptake: Latitude: 531275 Longitude: 0530003. Purpose of Water Use Multiple Uses -

34. Maximum Amount of water to be taken (m /day) 9,022

5. Frequency of any withdrawal or diversion of water Daily

6. Maximum Rate of abstraction (m3/s)

7. In addition to the conditions specified in the Statute and any other law in force, this permit is subject to thefollowing terms and conditions:

a) Methods Authorised for the water abstraction:Motorized Pumping

b) The Protection of the environment and other userWater cmtaining cheiicals used for irrigation should be carefully monitored for quality.

c) The installation and use of Measuring Devices or Pumps:

d) Name and Location of Land where water is used or will be used:Kakira Sugar Works Estate

e) Regulation 7(2)b the permit shall be granted subjec to such oinditions as are relevant to the specified particular types of usesdtemined by the Committee-,

f) Regulation 7(2)n paymait for the water used;

g) Regulation 7(2)o 'he protedion ofthe environment;

h) Regulation 7(2)p e conservation policy ofthe Goverment;

i) Regulation 7(2)q lbe efficint use ofwater resources;

j) Regulation 7(2)r the manner in which the applicant is to compensate any person whose existing authorised use of water may beadversely affeeded by the allocation or use of water under permit;

The Water User shall pay an annual charge of UShs: 100,000 Date to be paid 28/03/01

k) Any Other specific Condition for this permit:

Tuesday, March 28,2000 Page 3 of 3

Not TransferableORIGINAL

THE FORESTS ACT FORM E

PERMIT -I .('

DaIe: .......... .. ) .. .... ... ....... S. station ........ .....42 ... '..

Subject to the conditions of the Forests Act and any Rules made thereunder and to the terms and

conditions stated herein; 0 L

V,,V f2-4 W - C'c-() ThIV- -7A

.................................................................. .................................................................................... ................ ......... .

is herebv authorised to . ...... .................. .

4 " - C~ - 0/ ~1 ,..... ....!............L..in the . , ........I... . ...... Eorest Reserve.

This permit expires on. 4 J . .l .g ......... g O

........ .. >.................. / ITsuing Officer

.... p....... i ..... Designation.

CONDITIONS

I. The permit holder shall take all precautions to prevent unnecessary damage to other forest produce

arising out of the operations under this permit and shall be responsible for the acts of their servants,

employees or agents.

2. The permit holder and their servants and employees shall at all times assist forest officers in the

prevention and extinction of fires in or threatening the area the subject of this permit, and in the

prevention and detection of forest offences.

3. In the event of a breach of the Forests Act or any Rules thereunder or any term or condition of this

permit, this permit may be cancelled without prejudice to any proceedings which may be taken in

respect of the said breach.

4. 'Fle permit holder shall, on the expiry of this permit, surrender it to the issuing officer.

5. The permit holder ilay,1:atny time terminate this permit by giving the issuing officer not less than....X days notice thereof.

6. The Permit holder shall abide by other additional conditions that may be attached in special

circumstances.

ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS

7- The Permit Holder shall be responsible for planting a Forest Plantations

equivalent in Area to Butamira Forest Reserve in South Busoga Forest

Reserve within Mayuge District of Busoga Region and maintain it for one year

before handing over to Forest Department. The above planting shall be

completed as per agreed planting programme within a period of 8-10 years

from the date of issue of this permit.

8. The Permit Holder shall ensure that uncultivated strips of land along the

streams and rivers in the Reserve are preserved as protection measure

against their silting.

9. The Permit Holder shall ensure the protection of the Hilltops and their steep

sides are protected against erosion and land degradation while establishing

the'said sugar plantations.

1 0.The Permit Holder shall put in place a monitoring programme to monitor

chemical residues (herbicides and fertilizers) in the environment used in the

growing of sugar cane.

l CS'mS l

WARDROP

APPENDIX D

LIST OF ENVIRONMENTALAND SOCIAL ASSESSMENTPREPARERS

I~~~~~~~~~----

VARDROP

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENTPREPARERS

The following personnel were involved in the preparation of this environmentalassessment report:

x Mr. Peter Komelson, P.Eng. - Project Managerx Mr. Wayne Slack, P.Eng. - Project Directorx Ms. Krstina Farmer, M.Sc., P.Ag. - Lead Assessorx Dr. Patrick Mwesigye, Ph.D. - Assessor*x Ms. Jennifer Van de Vooren, M.N.R.M. - Assessor* Ms. Sarah Wakelin, M.Sc. - Assessor* Mr. Ed Wolowich, M.Sc., P.Eng. - Advisor

ARDROP

APPENDIX E

COMMENTS FROM WORLDBANK ANDCORRESPONDINGRESPONSE

VAtDROP

Appendix E: Comments from World Bank and Consultant Response

Comments from the Social Reviewer:

I have reviewed the Environmental Assessment for 'Kakira Sugar WorksCogeneration Expansion", which is a component of the Energy for RuralTransformation Program in Uganda (not the Private Utility Sector Reform as isindicated on a sticker on the report). The Kakira component will expand itscogeneration facility and thereby supply electricity (7 MW) to the national grid network.Physical installations which will potentially have an impact on people and propertyinclude a new electrical sub-station at Kakira and a new 33 kV distribution line (16 km)from Kakira to Jinja.

The land required for the Kakira sub-station is approximately 30 meters x 30 metersand is located next to the foundry and I understand, on KSW company grounds.Unless people are squatting on this area, it will not be an issue.

An environmental assessment (EA) has not yet been carried out for the distributionline, however it will be carried out once the exact route has been determined and aresettlement action plan (RAP) will be prepared. It is recommended that the RAP beprepared at the same time as the EA, in order to save time.

I find that the EA is close to being adequate as it is, just a few sections that need tobetter address the issues and which will require some more work, see below:

If the crushing of sugar cane will increase from 3000 tonnes per day to 5000 tonnesper day, this must mean that the area of sugar cane plantations will need to almostdouble. Which is the land that will be used for expansion of the plantations? Is itowned by KSW already, is anyone using it, how will it be otherwise acquired?

The increase in cane supply will be achieved as follows:

* The major increase in cane supply will be from horizontal expansion ofsmall outarowers. New farmers have been encouraged by the profitableand successful experience of the existing 3,600 out-grower farmers whoare registered with and supply cane to the company. Out-grower canesupply to KSW has already increased from 385,000 TC/y in 2001-02 to439,0000 TC/y in 2002-03 with a target of 506,000 TC/y in 2003-04 withfurther increases of about 200,000 TC/y in the following 2 years.

* Additional 90,000 - 100,000 TC/y (to reach about 600,000 TC/y) throughvertical expansion of improved agricultural practices on the Companyowned Nucleus Estate. Including re-introduction of spray irrigation onapprox. 2,800 hectares. The land is already owned and used by KSW

* No land acquisition is envisaged.

A minor issue is in "Administrative Framework", where it would be appropriate tomention the Environmental and Social Management Framework, which also includes aresettlement policy framework. Under the same heading, paragraph 2.1.5, it would beappropriate to mention that the World Bank's policy on Involuntary resettlement (4.12)

1ARDROP

will be triggered and the policy used as guidance to prepareresettlement/compensation plan as needed.

No resettlement activity is envisaged, but appropriate reference is made in thereport.

Not related to safeguards but to social development aspects in general, is the fact thatsocial issues and social impact are not thoroughly discussed (in chapters 4.5 and 5.2)and those sections could be developed better.

For example, what will the almost doubling of cane crushing and expansionmean for the workforce of about 6,000? Will it remain the same? How is the workforceorganized on the estate and how have the employees participated in the developmentof the expansion idea? What are the social and economic circumstances of theirexistence? For one thing, will the energy surplus to the national grid benefit them?

Since the major expansion in cane supply is to come from out-grower farmers,the company's employment is not expected to increase significantly

Increased Nucleus Estate intensity of agricultural operations has already requiredan increase of about 500 farm workers and this is likely to be the steady statesituation.

The KSW work-force is represented by The National Union of Plantation andAgricultural Workers (NUPA W), whose chairman is Kutosi Esau, and GeneralSecretary is Hon Pajobo Joram Bruno. The Union is affiliated to the NationalOrganisation of Trades Unions, Uganda.

The increased energy supply to the national grid during peak hours will providerelief to the national short fall and will result in reduced load shedding for thecountry as a whole.

If Kakira did not plan to self-generate the additional electric power that will berequired for the factory expansion this would have imposed a further demandburden on the national grid.

The Company's own infrastructure (including housing, schools, hospital, etc.) willbe provided self generated power instead of the present supply from the nationalgrid - providing the employees reliable electricity supply with out load shedding.

Will the expansion involve modemisation in terms of equipment and will that affect thenumber of people employed?

Whilst modern technology will be used for the new Cogeneration Plant, this willbe an augmentation to KSW's facilities and no retrenchment of factor workers isenvisaged.

2

NIRDROP

A public consultation meeting of local leaders was held on 5 March 2004 atKakira and these issues were discussed in detail. The minutes of the meeting areattached in Appendix F of the report.

How will retrenchment be addressed? Agreed, this is not an social assessmentbut one will need to know more about the 6,000 people who work on the estateand who will be affected in one way or another.

There might not be extensive retrenchment since the increase in crushingcapacity will more than compensate the introduction of new technology. Theeconomies of scale of production (about 150, 000 tons per year in 4-5 years) willresult in less production costs and the company will be more competitive againstthe cheap imported sugar.

Ideally, Kakira works very closely with its outgrowers. This means that thecompany will be able to monitor the relocation of employees from the company towork with the outgrowers. The employees likely to be most affected will be thedrivers of the company who have been ferrying away the excess bagasse to thefields for burning.

Comments from the Environmental Reviewer:

I read the EA report and have the following comments:

1. Page 8. The World Bank Safeguard Policies need to be identified andexplained how these safeguard policies will be addressed. The EnvironmentalAssessment Safeguard Policy applies. The World Bank Pest ManagementSafeguard Policy might apply as well. In case the pest management policy applies apest management plan needs to be prepared for the increase in sugar cane

production by outgrowers, which would likely result in increased pesticide production,to be used by the factory for sugar manufacturing. It is not clear if pesticides are usedby outgrowers (needs to be discussed with the TTL). KSW itself does not usepesticides for sugar cane cultivation. The outgrower project should also not result indestruction of natural forest (clearance of natural forest for agricultural production, thiswould trigger the World Bank's Natural Habitat Safeguard Policy).

Kakira's out-growers do not generally use pesticides as there are no pests thataffect sugar cane plantations in the South Busoga area.

Expansion of out-grower cane areas is not expected to result in any destruction ofnatural forests. Kakira encourages farmers to only utilise two thirds of their landfor sugarcane; the balance one third is suggested to be used for food crops,grazing and forestry. It is expected that the area planted to trees will actuallyincrease as farmers plan to utilise timber for other economic activity on asustainable basis.

Kakira's Out-growers Department visit each out-grower farmer prior to registrationand ensures that farmers comply with national environmental regulations and

3

VARDROP

also leave adequate land for cultivation of subsistence / food crops etc.

The company has instituted a clearly defined policy on outgrowers. Kakira hasacquired a Global Position System (GPS) to map out boundaries of sugar caneestates owned by outgrowers. The coordinates are to be used to derine the actualsize of the fields and the actual boundaries with fragile and sensitive ecosystems(the company does not deal with any outgrowers who are growing sugar insensitive ecosystems). If the out-grower is to increase the acreage of the fields,the company will have to be informed and it approves the proposed changes.These will again be entered in the database with the outline map drawn. It willtherefore not be possible to change the size of the fields without consent fromKakira.

2. Page 11. The consultants should use also the following guidelines:Sugar Manufacturing, Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook (PPAH), 1998,which specifies the air emission, liquid effluent and ambient noise standards andmonitoring requirements for sugar manufacturing, (the EA states the date ofthis report is 2001, should be corrected); General Environmental Guidelines,PPAH, 1998; IFC Occupational Health and Safety Guidelines (on website:

www.ifc.org); Monitoring, PPAH, 1998. The PPAH can be found on the IFC website:www.ifc.ora and on the World Bank website; www.worldbank.ora. The project shouldalso comply with the applicable Ugandan pollution control standards; whicheverstandardis more stringent (Ugandan or World Bank standard).

This has been effected in the report.

The emission rates of g/s should also be converted in the units of the World Bankguidelines, e.g. mg/Nm3 (table B1, table 5, etc.).

There are no direct conversion factors to convert g/s to mg/Nm3. In order for usto present our findings in mg/Nm3 we would require re-modelling of freshlycollected data from the field. Our main intention of using an emission rate of g/swas to emphasize the load of the emissions coming out of the stack. It shouldalso be noted that the correct and reasonable usage of the guidelines is forcomparison of "already dispersed"maximum ground level concentrations, whichis the air people are actually exposed to.

2. Figure 4 and Figure 6 are the same.

Fixed in the final report

3. Page 29. The World Bank noise standard for cane mills is not 90 dBA,but 70 dBA in industrial areas and 55 dBA in day time in residential/educationalareas, being reduced during night time to 45 dBA (22:00-07:00). See PPAHpage 403. The noise standards for the project need to be adapted to the WorldBank guideline which is more stringent than the Ugandan noise standard.Construction noise levels will be higher, but need to be mitigated. Operational noiselevels need to comply with the 70 dBA, which means that mitigation measures, such

4

IWIDROP

as isolation of noise sources might be required.

This has been changed in the report.

4. The 24-hour maximum ambient guideline for nitrogen oxides of 150micrograms/m3 as mentioned in the General Environmental Guidelines of the PPAHneeds to be respected.

Noted

5. Total Particular Matter emissions are high. The General EnvironmentalGuidelines of the World Bank (PPAH, 1998 page 437) mention standards for ambientparticulate matter: Annual arithmetic mean of 50 microgram/m3; and Maximum 24hour average of 70 microgram/m3. These standards need to be complied with.

Noted

6. Page 39. almost at the bottom of the page: ..... The maximum pollutantconcentrations are found at 183 m from the source. It would be useful to mentionwhich concentration of S02 is found at this distance.

We state in section 5.1.1 that "emissions of sulfur dioxide from the boilers arealso considered negligible, owing to the characteristically low levels of sulfurassociated with bagasse." Therefore dispersion of the gas up the stack willrender it extremely negligible at 183 m.

7. Page 43. Transformer oils should be tested if they are PCB oils. If they are PCBoils, they should be shipped to Europe for incineration. In Africa at present there is notsuch an incineration facility and indefinite storage is not an option. The project shouldinclude a budget for the transport and incineration of the PCBs.

The costs have been included in the report.

8. Page 48. It should be stated which are the expected wastewater dischargeconcentrations at the outlet of the wastewater plant. The effluent needs to complywith effluent standards mentioned in the Sugar Manufacturing guideline of the WorldBank (PPAH, 1998). Strict adherence will be required since communities downstreamuse the river as a drinking water source.

Appropriate changes have been made in the report

9. Page 59. states that a comprehensive environmental monitoring plan willbe developed. The World Bank requires that this environmental monitoring plan ispart of the present EA.

The plan has been included in the report.

5

VARDROP

APPENDIX F

MINUTES OF PUBLICCONSULTATION MEETING

Minutes of the Public Consultative Environment ImpactAssessment (ELA) meeting held with the staff and community ofKakira Sugar Works Ltd

A meeting was held on Friday, 8th March 2004 at Kakira Sugar WorksLtd (KSW) as part of the requirements for the EIA report. The meetingwas chaired by the General Manager of KSW who introduced theconsultants from Wardrop. The consultants explained that since theproject was funded by the World Bank, an EIA and a publicconsultative meeting was required and thus the reason for the abovemeeting. The other members were asked to introduce themselves. Themembers comprised of heads of departments, factory staff, DistrictEnvironmental Officer Jinja and Local Council representatives of thesurrounding villages as shown below:1. Mr C.R.B. Orr General Manager2. Dr Mwesigye Patrick Wardrop Consultant3. Ms Barbara Batumbya Wardrop Consultant4. Mr Dickson Lufafa District Environmental Officer Jinja5. Mr G. Wabomba Safety, Health & Environmental Supt6. Mr Ganesan. S Electrical Engineer Manager7. Mrs Asiimwe J T/ Welfare Officer8. Mr Otieno Michael Educ. Officer/ LCII Chairman Kakira9. Buzu Noah LCI Chairman s/Qrts10. Mr Okot Franco A.G.C/MAN LCI Mabati Village11. Maboni Jerome Chairman Kliz Village12. Vudriga Akulino Chairman PPG Village13. Sabwe Jonathan Rep Chairman III14. Ariki Joseph Chairman LC II Karongo Parish15. Kalibusi Salim Deputy Electrical Engineer16. Ofutra Mohammed Ali Branulia Secretary17. Florence Akalya Area Women co-ord Kakira18. Ongula Peter Lab Superintendent19. Mutanje A Rashidi Process Supt KSW20. Ssali Iddi Chairman LC II Mawoito21. Mujongola Nathan Chairman LCI Bungalow22. Opale Daniel C/person LCI Maji Mazrui Village23. Amule Amosi C/person LCI Terego Village

The Kakira electrical engineer then gave a brief background of thecogeneration project. He explained that power from the steamgenerated from the bagasse would be sold to Uganda ElectricityDistribution Company Ltd (UEDCL). He also said that this was thecheapest form of biomass generation of power. He said that presentlythe-bagasse is left to rot in the field and decompose and then mixedback into the soil. However, sometimes the bagasse is burnt releasingcarbondioxide into the air and thus adding to the green house gases. Inthis way the energy is being wasted and yet it can be harnessed andused for the benefit of Uganda. So the project will produce electricitynot only for use on the estate but also for the country at large.

- - - - - - -

The chairman then handed over the meeting to Dr Mwesigye, one ofthe consultants to get the views of the people on the project. Heemphasized that law requires an EIA to be conducted for a new projectfollowed by a public consultative meeting with the stakeholders. Hebriefly talked about voluntary and involuntary resettlement andemphasized that the objective of the meeting was to get the views of thepeople concerning the project. Their views were in form of questions,which were as follows;1. Will the project make the electricity bills lower?2. Will the houses, which don't have, power presently benefit?3. Will the people really benefit since the project is funded by theWorld Bank?4. Will the nearest people to Kakira have access to electricity and atcheaper cost?5. Will it be possible to change from Uganda Electricty Distributionto the Kakira electricity and what are the possible costs?6. In Uganda, how many of such projects exist, or is this the first?7. Give details of voluntary and involuntary settlement and will therebe compensation for both types of resettlement?8. What is the advantage to the government on implementation of theproject?9. Is the project bringing free electricity to the people?10. What is the biggest advantage concerning the people of Kakira?11. How much electricity is being generated in the country at themoment, what are the future plans concerning electricityproduction and what is the current percentage use of electricity bythe people of Uganda?12. Is it safe for Kakira to produce electricity given the fact that itbeing produced from steam generated by the baggasse?13. Will the project utilize all the baggasse or will there still be excessbaggasse?14. How will the continuous steam production be taken care of sincethe machines will have to shut down once in a while formaintenance?Reactions to the questions* Only 5% of 24 million have access to electricity, so the project is apositive one. Only 1% of this electricity is in the rural areas andgovernment's target is to increase from 1% to 10% in the ruralareas. Kakira will therefore help to meet part of this target. SoKakira has already obtained an Independent Power Producinglicense according to the law and a Power Purchasing Agreement hasbeen made between UEDCL and Kakira, all that is lacking is themoney from the World Bank for implementation of the project.* Other factories like Kasese Cobalt are also producing electricity butits not enough.

* It was made clear that Kakira will not set up its own distributionstation but will sell directly to UEDCL.* About having free electricity, the general manager said that apolicy decision would have to be made concerning the possibility offree electricity but it is not a guarantee. However there are plans to

connect all the camps which do not presently have electricity andsome of the electricity will also be used for irrigation.* Involuntary and voluntary resettlement will be discussed at a laterstage at the transmission line phase. However, he briefly said thatfor those within the camps, there would be internal resettlements.But for those outside the camps the resettlement will be according tothe RAP which will be put in place and communicated to theconcerned parties at a similar meeting.* It is safe for Kakira to produce the electricity since steam will berestricted to the inside of the factory and none will come out. Thereare safety valves to release the high pressure built up by the steam.Besides Kakira is presently producing electricity for its ownconsumption so they are experienced. Internally in-house protectionsafety will be taken care of especially sound for which ear-plugswill be provided.

* The Safety, Health and Environment Superintendent of Kakira alsosaid that the project will reduce excess baggasse which is presentlya nuisance to the people's health. Fly ash arrestors will be installedand will prevent ash from getting to people's clothes and houses andconsequently reduce complaints from neighbours.* The general manager said that KSW is considering to importsugarcane varieties with less fibre and more sugar. This will help inreducing the baggasse. Small projects of producing charcoal frombaggasse are also being considered such that even the excessbaggasse that has not been used in producing electricity will beutilized.* To take care of the continuous steam production, two mills whichwill operate side by side. When one is shut down for maintenance,then the other one will be working. Storage of the baggasse will bealso be taken care of to ensure constant supply of electricity 365days a year.* Kakira will sell the electricity to UEDCL therefore some profit willbe obtained. However part of the proceeds will be used to servicethe loan from the World Bank.* The DEO of Jinja had a chance to talk to the forum about the needfor EIA and what it is about.* The general manager said that Kakira is committed to protectingthe environment and as such there are quarterly Environmentalmeetings to which the DEO of Jinja is also invited to discussenvironmental issues pertinent to Kakira.Benefits of the project

* Uganda as a country will benefit by having more power.* Employment opportunities for the people who will be involved inthe project.* Out growers will benefit since there will be more demand forsugarcane by Kakira Sugar Works Ltd. It is projected that demandfrom the out growers will double in the next 4-5 years. As a result amonitoring programme for the out growers is being put in placesuch that before the farmers expand their field, management will be

consulted to make sure that the sensitive environment like wetlandis not interfered with.

* For the workers benefit, management is planning an expansion ofthe factory consequently increasing the number of workers so as tolower the cost of production. This will reduce the threat of thecheaper sugar dumped into the country. Therefore the workers maynot have direct benefits of profit but will have more job security.

* Camps in Kakira which do not presently have electricity will accesselectricity as a result of this project.

The people's view on negative impacts of the project.* Vandalism of the electric wires* Jobs lost particularly the baggasse drivers* Resettlement of the people.Reactions to the above views* The people will be sensitized and a task force will also be put inplace to take care of any vandalism. Under ground cables may alsobe considered as a means of minimizing the vandalism of cables,however underground cables have peculiar disadvantages as well.* In the case of drivers who have been driving the baggasse trucks,

none of them will lose a job directly as a result of the project. Thisis because turnover of the drivers is high and some have reachedretirement age, while others will be taken to do other jobs.

* A Resettlement Action Plan will be drawn up and disclosed to theparties concerned. Compensation of the affected parties will then beeffected according to the prevailing district compensation rates.* The General Manger also went ahead to explain that he had achance of speaking to the president and floated the idea of using

sugar molasses to get ethanol. This ethanol would mixed with fuel.This would save on the fuel budget and would decrease on the'nguli' distillers who use sugar molasses to make alcohol anddispose the dregs into the stream making water unsafe for thepeople. The president was keen on the project.

The General manager thanked the participants and closed the meeting.

1 Nt%[ AcY CVD-t - C, P

0~~~~ LT. A-itm L ~o, N.,,, olzw -E- i I-e hqF o ll-k> .Lct f

11 VL1bQI, X-LN52 Q0kt\ 9Pf -UIT

-t~~p uz--f2z 2Rr vt " s ' 4

t3~~~~~~~~~~- -1 v-s l+8l CL1*

1~6) 4 L /K$r3: C/142,,7 E . > Lc, S G V i

19 O 'a u6 n Cj vtf S LC_

C lF ep L.c 1- -

2i3 A

BY MARK KIRUMIRA 74-year-old corporation embarked on the project i . ,following recommendations in 1986 by ''K ,Rakira Sugzar Works' (KSW) application SOFIRECO, an indcpcildent rescarch group from ifor generating and selling powcr is being France.K rcviewcd anid the outcome will bc out in KSW, whicih currently produces 4MW of iMay, Frank Sebboxva, the executive director of power, is sclf-sufficient in terms of power. '...4i the Electricity Regulatory Authiority (ERA), has Initially, it had promised to generate 30MW of ~~,said. whiich 18MW would be connected to the grid on . .,_

Sebbowa, whlo was speaking at a conisultative a 24 hiou r basis. However, the Ministry of Energy 1 workshop to hcar the public's views on the and Minleral Development requested KSW to go ,company's project proposal and application for down to 7MW of power for six hours a day in thepower gencrationi, said that it would be in the peak period of 1800hrs to 2400 because theinterest of the ERA to approve the project. The UETCL would only neced 7MW for the peak .half-day workshop was hlcid on April 20th at period from 1800 to 240OhrssSunset Hotcl, Jinja. According to thle Energy Pu hase Agreenient"The ERA can rejcct, order variations or (EPA) of 31st July2003 b n KSW, UETCLaccept the project but Iost probably we siall (Uganda Elcctricity Transmission Company)not reject it bccause it might takc us too back,' and UEDCL (Uganda Electricity Distributionsaid Scbbowa. Company), it was agreed that Kakira wouldHe said the project was good because it generate and sell power to the UETCL at a atewould increase electricity supply, especially in of US cents 4.9 per unit for 10 years.Busoga. Also, the surplus sold by Kakira at Some members of the public, however, voiced l-.. a

|peak timc wouild help alleviate load shedding, their concern that KSW might charge high tariffs.

W

which stems from limiited power supply, addedd iut arhan said that people should know that RO l lSebbowa. generating power from renewable sources is

Hawaii (originated co-generation), ;&"Uniless we take on people like KSW then load more expensive and costs around 5 US cents Jinja municipality's deputy Ethiopia, South Africa, Thailand e

shedding is here to stay," he said. globally, mayor, Bagoole Kirimwitta, and Indonesia. Now Tanzania and :.'

Only 5% of the total population (24 million KSW has submitted its Environmental Impact commended the Madhvani Kenya are looking at it.people) in Uganda have electricity in their Statement (EIS) to the National Environment business empire for what he called At the close of the public hearing,homes, said ERA chairman Ben Dramadri. In Management Authority (NEMA). The good social responsibility and Sebbowa called upon people torural areas, only 2% of the population use Environmental Impact Review was completed in welcomed the project. look at electricity in a commercialelectricity. Construction of a new power dam February 2004, and is now awaiting approval. Co-generation is done in perspective so as to steer theon Bujagali falls, whiich would augment power Saidi Balaba of the UEDCL said that given the countries such as India, Mauzitius country to economic development. supply, has been bogged down by the growth of 8% in electricity consumption levels, (where 80% of power is derivedstupcndous cost of the project. President KSW's project was welcome and it would help from sugarcane and bagasse), See reIidstreso.apaoges2and6Museveni commissioned the project in 2002. meet the increasing demand among UEDCL'sWhile presenting the KSW's proposal, the customers. Fle added that more 80MW would beproject director, Nakhood Farhan, said that the produced by Kira Dam by 2005/06. To PAGE 24 LADY BEHIND DEAL: Energy and Mlneral Devolopment minister Syda Bbumba

l EW|UN

Locals

ipowr~~~~~~i raes I O ueeASUBAXER MUKOSEBy Ricks KayIzzl -

RESIDENTS of Jinjahave asked districtauthorities to subsidise ,. . ...the price atgwichKaki-ra Sugar Works (KS W)

.-Ltd will be selling elec-tricity.

During a public hear-ing - at Sunset Hotelrecently, the residentssaid leaving KSW to sell K.electricity would lead toexploitation.The hearing was

organised by the Elec-tricity RegulatoryAuthority (ERA) tohear residents' views ......on KSW's application tosell electricity to thenational grid.

"We have not beenconsulted on thecharges and that maylead to exploitation bythe power generators,"said Simon Mukyawe. a THIS IS IT: ERA's chairman Ben Dramadri, lawyer Johnson Kwesigabo and Ssebbowaresident.

Dr. Frank Ssebbowa, KSW would produce and would be sold at $4.9 bagasse, which is used inthe ERA chief executive sell power to Uganda cents (sh95) to UETCL. the production of elec-officer, said a power pur- Electricity Distribution He said the company tricity.chase agreement had Company Ltd (UEDCL) had invested $14mn into '"With increasedbeen signed between which would sell it to the project. bagasse, we wish toKakira and the Uganda consumers. It also planned to increase electricity gener-Electricity Trransmis- Farhan Nakhooda, the expand the production ation to between 14 andsion Company Ltd Madhvarni Group power capacity to 4000 tonnes of l5mega watts in a co-gen-(UTETCL). project manager, said cane per day to ensure a eration arrangement," heHe said under the deal, each electricity unit high generation of said.

Documents

Kakira Sugar Works Cogeneration Expansion Environmental ......The Kakira Sugar Works (1985) Limited (KSW) is located 16 kilometres east of the town of Jinja in central Uganda. Currently,