ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESMENT SCREENING REPORT FOR DRY COFFEE
SUBMITTED TO: GAMBELLA REGIONAL STATE ENVIROMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE PROTECTION BEREUA

 PROJECT OWNER: EBRAHIM YIMER

 PHONE: +251911005082
 10/30/2024

 PROJECT LOCATION: GAMBELLA REGIONAL STATE, MAJANG ZONE, GODERE WOREDA, METI
 CONSULTING FIRM; SAFE DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT AND TRAINING SERVICES PLC
 PHONE: +251913882511.

2024 G.C
METI-ETHIOPIA

20

2220

Introduction

1.1 Purpose of this Report

This Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Report sets out the proposed scope
of work and methods to be applied in the development of an Environmental Impact
Assessment Report (EIAR). It is to be used to support the EPA license review for the Dry
coffee hulling Industry (hereafter referred to as the facility) in Environmental scoping. It also
provides the proposed structure and contents of the EIAR.
 ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

Scoping is the process of determining what information should be included in the EIAR
and which methods should be used to collect and assess that information.

The main objectives of this report are:

• Identify environmental effects which may arise during the construction and operation of the
facility and which should therefore be addressed in more detail as part of the EIAR;

• Outline proposed assessment methodologies for completing the EIAR;

• Outline the likely contents of the EIAR; and

• Form a basis of common reference regarding the scope and methodology for the EIAR.

1.2 EIA Scoping Report Structure

The EIA Scoping Report structure is as follows:

Section 1: Provides an overview of the purpose and objectives of this EIA Scoping Report.

Section 2: Provides a description of the facility which is under consideration for this EIA
Scoping
Report.

Section 3: Provides an overview of the EIA process and the approach to the
development of the
EIAR.

Sections 4 – 13: These sections identify possible effects on the environment and
outline the proposed assessment methodology that will be adopted in assessing the effects.
The environmental aspects that will be considered in the EIAR are outlined below:

• Section 4: Population and Human Health;

• Section 5: Biodiversity;

• Section 6: Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology;

1
ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

• Section 7: Water and Hydrology;

• Section 8: Air Quality and Climate;

• Section 9: Noise and Vibration:

• Section 10: Landscape and Visual;

• Section 11: Traffic and Transport;

• Section 12: Waste Management; and

• Section 13: Archaeology, Cultural Heritage and Architectural Heritage.

ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

2
 ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

2. Project Description

2.1 Description of the Facility

Godere Woreda is situated in the southwest region of Ethiopia, specifically within the Gambella Region.
It is bordered by the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples' Region (SNNPR) to the south and
east, and by Mengesh Woreda to the west. The largest town in Godere is Meti.

Its geographic coordinates are approximately 7° 46' N latitude and 34° 36' E longitude. A coffee hulling
facility in Godere Woreda, Gambella Region, is a processing plant designed to remove the outer layer,
or hull, from coffee cherries. This process is essential to prepare the coffee beans for further processing
and export.

The facility typically includes:

 Receiving Area: Where freshly harvested coffee cherries are received and sorted.
 Hulling Machines: Mechanical devices that remove the outer hull from the beans.
 Drying Area: Where the hulled beans are dried to a specific moisture content.
 Cleaning and Sorting Equipment: To remove impurities and sort the beans by size and quality.
 Storage Facilities: To store the processed coffee beans until they are ready for export.

Such a facility would significantly improve the quality and value of coffee produced in the region,
benefiting local farmers and contributing to the economic development of the area.

Project Overview

The dry coffee hulling project in Godere Woreda, Gambella Region, aims to enhance the value of
locally produced coffee beans. By establishing a dedicated hulling facility, the project seeks to improve
the quality and marketability of the coffee, ultimately benefiting both farmers and the regional economy.

Project Objectives

 Value Addition: Increase the value of coffee production by removing the outer hull, enhancing the
quality and price of the beans.
 Income Generation: Provide a stable income source for local farmers and workers employed at the
hulling facility.
 Economic Development: Contribute to the overall economic development of the region by boosting
agricultural productivity and exports.
 Job Creation: Generate employment opportunities for local residents, particularly in rural areas.

Project Location

Godere Woreda is situated in the southwest region of Ethiopia, bordering South Sudan. The specific
location of the hulling facility within the woreda will be determined based on factors such as
accessibility, proximity to coffee-producing areas, and infrastructure availability.

Key Considerations
 ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

 Coffee Production: The region possesses suitable climatic conditions and altitude for coffee cultivation,
offering significant potential for increased production.
 Infrastructure: Adequate infrastructure, including roads and electricity, is essential for the efficient
operation of the hulling facility.
 Market Access: Access to domestic and international markets is crucial for the sale of the processed
coffee.
 Environmental Impact: The project should prioritize environmentally sustainable practices to
minimize negative impacts on the local ecosystem.

By addressing these key considerations and implementing the project effectively, the dry coffee hulling
facility in Godere Woreda can significantly contribute to the economic and social development of the
region.

Coffee Bean Varieties and Types

Coffee beans vary in their size, shape, color, and flavor depending on the region and conditions in which
they were grown. The range of unique flavors and aromas between regional varietals is as expansive as
the variety of wine available from different vineyards. It is well worth experimenting with different
varietals to discover a bean perfect for your palate.
Most regional varietals will fall into two main categories, Robusta or Arabica.

 Arabica: Arabica coffee is considered superior to Robusta because of its delicate flavor and low acidity.
This variety is grown at higher altitudes and can be more difficult and costly to grow. These labor-
intensive, low-yield plants produce a high-demand bean that sells for a higher price.
 Robusta: Robusta coffee tends to have a more acidic and harsh flavor than Arabica as well as higher
levels of caffeine. Robusta can be grown at lower altitudes, in hotter climates, and with less moisture.
Since Robusta has fewer growing restrictions and has a generally less desirable flavor, it is usually sold
for a lower price than Arabica beans. Most mass-market commercial beans are of the Robusta variety.

Coffee Roasts
To prepare the green coffee bean for brewing, it must first be roasted. Coffee beans are roasted with dry
heat and with constant agitation to ensure even heating. The range of roasts varies from light golden
brown all the way to a dark, almost black appearance. Varying the roasting time has a significant effect
on the flavor, aroma, and color of the brewed coffee. Although there are several levels of roasting, they
can be grouped into three main categories: light, medium, and dark.

 Light: Light roasts provide the lightest, most delicate flavors and can often be more acidic. Because
there is less of a roasted flavor, the original flavor of the bean is allowed to shine through. High-quality
beans or varietals with very distinct flavors are often roasted light to allow the original flavor to remain
prominent. These beans will appear dry, as the bean has not been heated to the point where the oil is
extracted. Light roasts include: Cinnamon, American, Half-City, and New England Roasts.
 Medium: Medium-roasted beans will have a chocolate brown color, dry surface, and a full flavor. These
beans will have less acidity than lightly roasted beans and a slightly sweet, toasty flavor. Due to the
balanced flavor and acidity, this is the most popular roast within the major commercial coffee market.
Medium roasts are also known as Full City, Breakfast, or Regular Roast.
 Dark: Dark-roasted coffee is roasted until the sugars begin to caramelize and the oils begin to rise to the
surface of the bean. Depending on the darkness of the roast, the bean may have a slight sheen or an oily
appearance. The flavor of dark-roasted beans is strong, smoky, and sometimes spicy. The original flavor
of the bean is overpowered by the roasted flavor and therefore lower quality beans are often used for
 ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

darker roasts. Although these roasts have low acidity, they are often described as bitter. Roasts that fall
within the dark category include French, Viennese, Italian, and Espresso.
 Blends: To achieve unique flavor profiles, many roasters will create custom blends of beans with two or
more roasting levels. This provides a depth of flavor and complexity that cannot be achieved with a
single roast.

Caffeine and Decaffeination

Coffee is perhaps most prized for its caffeine content. The caffeine content in a cup of coffee varies
widely depending on the type of bean used and the brewing method. While most of the caffeine is
removed during the decaffeination process, trace amounts may still remain. The international standard
for decaffeination requires that 97% of the caffeine be removed from decaffeinated coffee while the
European Union’s standards require no less than 99.9% to be removed.
Most methods of decaffeination follow the same basic principle: the beans are soaked in water, which
allows the caffeine (and other chemicals responsible for flavor) to leach out of the beans. The extracted
liquid is then either passed through a filter or mixed with a solvent to remove only the caffeine and leave
the other beneficial compounds. The flavor-rich, caffeine deficient solution is then re-introduced to the
beans to allow the flavor to be reabsorbed.
The Swiss Water Method has gained popularity in recent years because it uses only water to remove
caffeine but the process is long and laborious. Other solvents used in the decaffeinating process include
carbon dioxide, ethyl acetate, or triglycerides. Each method has its own advantages and disadvantages
including cost, time, labor, and effect on the final flavor.
Research is being conducted to produce coffee plants that are deficient in the caffeine synthase gene and
therefore do not produce caffeine. This would eliminate the need for the decaffeination process and
would not only reduce costs but it would also keep the original flavor of the bean completely intact.

Storing Coffee
Proper storage of coffee has a great impact on the flavor of the brewed cup. Enemies to coffee’s flavor
include heat, oxygen, light, and moisture. Most commercial coffee today is sold in vacuum-sealed bags
with one-way valves to allow gasses to escape while keeping oxygen out. Once the seal on the bag is
broken, extra care must be taken to keep the beans fresh.
At home, coffee beans should be stored in an airtight container in a cool, dark, and dry place. Although
some people advocate keeping coffee beans in the refrigerator or freezer, this can present issues with
exposure to circulating air, excess humidity, and absorption of rogue flavors.
After roasting or once the seal is broken on a vacuum-sealed bag, it is best to use the beans within two
weeks. For this reason, buy only the quantity of coffee that will be used within two weeks to maintain
freshness and flavor. Purchasing roast-to-order coffee subscription boxes helps keep things fresh.

The processes at Dry coffee hulling industry are as follows;

The dry coffee hulling process involves several steps to transform raw coffee cherries into clean, dry
coffee beans. Here's a breakdown of the process:
 ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

1. Receiving and Sorting: Freshly harvested coffee cherries are received at the facility and sorted to
remove any foreign objects or underripe cherries.
2. Drying: The cherries are dried to reduce their moisture content to around 11-13%. This can be done
naturally by sun drying or mechanically using dryers. Drying is crucial to ensure proper hulling and
storage.
3. Hulling: The dried cherries are fed into a hulling machine, which removes the outer skin (husk) and the
parchment layer surrounding the beans.
4. Polishing: The hulled beans are polished to remove any remaining chaff or impurities.
5. Sorting and Grading: The beans are sorted by size and quality using screens and air tables. This
ensures consistency and maximizes the value of the coffee.
6. Storage: The sorted and graded coffee beans are stored in a cool, dry place until they are ready for
export or further processing.

By following these steps, a dry coffee hulling facility can significantly improve the quality and value of
coffee produced in the region.

2.2 Description of the Project

2.2.1EPA Review

The primary objective of the dry coffee hulling project is to enhance the quality and value of coffee
produced in Godere Woreda, Gambella Region, Ethiopia. By establishing a dedicated hulling facility,
the project aims to improve the economic livelihoods of local farmers and contribute to the overall
development of the region.

Project Components

1. Facility Construction: The construction of a modern coffee hulling facility equipped with state-of-the-
art machinery.
2. Equipment Procurement: The procurement of high-quality hulling machines, dryers, sorters, and other
necessary equipment.
3. Capacity Building: Training and capacity building for farmers, extension workers, and facility staff on
best practices in coffee cultivation, harvesting, and post-harvest processing.
4. Market Linkage: Establishing strong market linkages with both domestic and international buyers to
ensure the sale of high-quality coffee.
5. Quality Control: Implementing rigorous quality control measures to maintain consistent product
quality and meet international standards.

Benefits of the Project

 Increased Farmer Income: By improving the quality of their coffee, farmers can command higher
prices for their produce.
 Job Creation: The hulling facility will create employment opportunities for local residents, particularly
in rural areas.
 Economic Development: The project will contribute to the economic development of the region by
boosting agricultural productivity and exports.
 Improved Coffee Quality: The hulling facility will ensure that coffee beans are processed efficiently
and effectively, resulting in a higher-quality product.
 Environmental Sustainability: The project will promote sustainable coffee production practices, such
as proper waste management and efficient resource utilization.
 ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

By successfully implementing this project, Godere Woreda can position itself as a major coffee-
producing region in Ethiopia and contribute to the country's growing

3. Approach to the Environmental Impact Assessment

3.1 Introduction to the EIA Process

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for Coffee Hulling Facilities

An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a crucial step in the planning and development of a
coffee hulling facility. It involves a systematic process to identify, predict, and evaluate the potential
environmental impacts of the project. The EIA helps to ensure that the facility is designed and operated
in an environmentally responsible manner.

Key Environmental Impacts to Consider:

1. Water Pollution:
o Wastewater Discharge: The hulling process generates wastewater containing organic matter,
suspended solids, and chemicals. Improper disposal can pollute water bodies.
o Water Consumption: The facility's water usage for cleaning, processing, and cooling equipment can
impact local water resources, especially in water-scarce areas.

2. Air Pollution:
o Particulate Matter: Dust and particulate matter generated during the hulling, drying, and transportation
processes can contribute to air pollution.
o Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The energy consumption of the facility, particularly from fossil fuel-based
sources, can contribute to greenhouse gas emissions.

3. Land Use and Soil Degradation:

o Land Use Change: The construction of the facility and associated infrastructure can lead to land use
changes and habitat loss.
o Soil Erosion: Improper waste disposal and runoff from the facility can contribute to soil erosion and
degradation.

4. Noise Pollution:
o Equipment Noise: The operation of machinery and equipment can generate noise pollution, affecting
nearby communities.

Mitigation Measures:

To mitigate these potential impacts, the following measures can be implemented:

 Wastewater Treatment:
o Construct a wastewater treatment plant to treat wastewater before discharge.
o Implement biological or chemical treatment processes to reduce pollutants.
o Recycle treated wastewater for irrigation or other non-potable uses.
 Air Pollution Control:
 ENVIROMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACY ASSESMENT SCOPING REPORT

o Install dust collectors and filters to reduce particulate emissions.

o Use energy-efficient equipment and renewable energy sources to minimize greenhouse gas emissions.
 Land Use Management:
o Minimize land disturbance during construction and implement soil conservation measures.
o Proper waste disposal and solid waste management practices.
 Noise Control:
o Install noise barriers and silencers on equipment.
o Optimize equipment layout and operation schedules to reduce noise levels.

By conducting a thorough EIA and implementing effective mitigation measures, coffee hulling facilities
can minimize their environmental impact and contribute to sustainable development.

The EIA process can generally be summarised as follows:

• Screening – Is an EIA required

• Scoping – What issues should be considered within the EIAR?

• Baseline Data Collection – Establishing a robust baseline of the existing environment on and around
the facility. This stage includes a review of existing available information and undertaking any surveys
identified during the scoping phase;

• Impact Assessment – Assessment of the environmental impacts and establishing their

significance;

• Mitigation – Formulation of mitigation measures to ameliorate the potential impacts of the facility
which cannot be avoided practically through site design;

• Consultation – With Statutory Stakeholders, the public, and other bodies as required;

• Decision – The competent authority decides, taking into consideration the results of
consultations, if the facility can be authorised;

• Announcement – The public is informed of the decision; and

• Monitoring – Monitoring of the effectiveness of implemented mitigation measures.

 3.2 EIA Screening Assessment

Screening is the first stage of the EIA process, whereby a decision is made on whether or not
a mandatory EIA is required. A mandatory EIA is required for developments or projects that
are a classification specified by Annex 1 of the EIA Directive, as amended, or by Schedule 5
of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001, as amended.

Following correspondence and discussions with the EPA, they have advised that they
consider that the licence review requires the benefit of an EIAR with a view to demonstrating
that the facility will not present any significant environmental impacts in the future and the
EIAR is proceeding under that advice.

3.3 Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping

Following screening, ‘scoping’ is the process of determining the content and extent of matters
that should be covered in the environmental information contained within the EIAR. Scoping
requires the consideration of the nature and likely scale of the potential environmental impacts
likely to arise from a facility.

3.4 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Methodology

An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a systematic process to identify, predict, and evaluate the
potential environmental impacts of a proposed project. It is a crucial tool for decision-making, ensuring
that development projects are environmentally sustainable.

Key Steps in the EIA Process:

1. Screening:
o Purpose: To determine whether a proposed project requires a full EIA or a less detailed assessment.
o Process: Involves evaluating the project's potential impacts based on factors like size, location, and
environmental sensitivity.

2. Scoping:
o Purpose: To define the scope of the EIA, identifying the significant environmental impacts that need to
be assessed.
o Process: Involves consulting with stakeholders, including local communities, government agencies, and
experts, to determine the key issues to be addressed.

3. Baseline Environmental Assessment:

o Purpose: To establish a baseline understanding of the existing environmental conditions.
o Process: Involves collecting data on various environmental parameters, such as air quality, water
quality, noise levels, biodiversity, and socio-economic conditions.

4. Impact Assessment:
o Purpose: To predict and evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the project.
o Process: Involves using various techniques, such as modeling, expert judgment, and field surveys, to
assess the impacts on different environmental components.

5. Mitigation Measures:
 o Purpose: To identify and propose measures to reduce or eliminate negative impacts.
o Process: Involves developing strategies to minimize adverse effects on air, water, land, biodiversity, and
human health.

6. Monitoring and Management Plan:

o Purpose: To establish a plan for monitoring the implementation of mitigation measures and the overall
environmental performance of the project.
o Process: Involves developing a system for regular monitoring, reporting, and corrective action.

7. Public Consultation:
o Purpose: To involve the public and other stakeholders in the decision-making process.
o Process: Involves organizing public hearings, workshops, and online consultations to gather feedback
and address concerns.

8. Decision Making:
o Purpose: To make informed decisions about the project based on the EIA findings.
o Process: Involves considering the potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and public
input to make a decision.

By following these steps, an EIA can help ensure that development projects are environmentally sound
and sustainable.

3.4. Baseline Data Collection for Coffee Hulling Facility EIA

Baseline data collection is a crucial step in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. It
involves gathering information about the existing environmental conditions in the project area before the
project commences. This data serves as a benchmark against which to measure future changes and
assess the project's environmental impacts.

Key Parameters for Baseline Data Collection in a Coffee Hulling Facility

1. Physical Environment:
o Topography: Elevation, slope, and landform characteristics.
o Geology and Soil: Soil type, erosion potential, and mineral composition.
o Hydrology: Surface water bodies, groundwater levels, and water quality parameters.
o Climate: Temperature, rainfall, humidity, and wind patterns.
o Noise Levels: Ambient noise levels in the area.

2. Biological Environment:
o Flora: Vegetation types, species diversity, and endangered or protected species.
o Fauna: Wildlife species, including mammals, birds, reptiles, and insects.
o Ecological Sensitivity: Identification of sensitive ecosystems, such as wetlands or forests.

3. Socio-economic Environment:
o Land Use: Current land use patterns, including agricultural, residential, and industrial areas.
o Population: Population density and demographic characteristics.
o Socio-economic Conditions: Income levels, employment opportunities, and infrastructure.
o Cultural and Heritage Sites: Identification of cultural and historical sites.
Data Collection Methods

 Literature Review: Collecting existing data from published reports, government records, and scientific
literature.
 Field Surveys: Conducting field visits to collect primary data, including:
o Visual Surveys: Observing the site and surrounding areas.
o Soil Sampling: Collecting soil samples for laboratory analysis.
o Water Sampling: Collecting water samples from surface water bodies and groundwater sources.
o Noise Measurements: Using sound level meters to measure noise levels.
o Biological Surveys: Conducting surveys of flora and fauna.
o Socio-economic Surveys: Conducting interviews and questionnaires with local communities.
 Remote Sensing: Using satellite imagery and aerial photography to analyze land use patterns,
vegetation cover, and water bodies.
 Geographic Information Systems (GIS): Using GIS to map and analyze spatial data.

Importance of Baseline Data

 Impact Assessment: Baseline data helps to identify potential impacts and predict future changes.
 Mitigation Measure Design: It informs the development of effective mitigation measures to minimize
adverse impacts.
 Monitoring and Evaluation: Baseline data provides a reference point for monitoring the project's
environmental performance and evaluating the effectiveness of mitigation measures.
 Decision Making: It supports informed decision-making by providing a clear understanding of the
project's potential environmental and social consequences.

By carefully collecting and analyzing baseline data, the EIA process can ensure that the coffee hulling
facility is developed and operated in an environmentally responsible manner.

3.4.2 Potential Impacts

Potential Environmental Impacts of Coffee Hulling

Coffee hulling, while essential for the coffee industry, can have potential negative impacts on
the environment if not managed properly. Here are some of the key environmental impacts:
1. Water Pollution
 Wastewater Discharge: The hulling process generates wastewater containing organic matter,
suspended solids, and chemicals. If not treated properly, this wastewater can pollute water
bodies.
 Water Consumption: The facility's water usage for cleaning, processing, and cooling
equipment can strain local water resources, especially in water-scarce areas.
2. Air Pollution
 Particulate Matter: Dust and particulate matter generated during the hulling, drying, and
transportation processes can contribute to air pollution, affecting air quality and human health.
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The energy consumption of the facility, particularly from fossil
fuel-based sources, can contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to climate
change.
3. Land Use and Soil Degradation
 Land Use Change: The construction of the facility and associated infrastructure can lead to
land use changes and habitat loss.
 Soil Erosion: Improper waste disposal and runoff from the facility can contribute to soil
erosion and degradation.
4. Noise Pollution
 Equipment Noise: The operation of machinery and equipment can generate noise pollution,
affecting nearby communities and wildlife.
5. Biodiversity Loss
 Habitat Destruction: The construction of the facility and associated infrastructure can lead to
habitat loss and fragmentation, affecting local biodiversity.
 Chemical Pollution: The use of pesticides and herbicides in coffee cultivation can pollute
water bodies and harm wildlife.
By understanding these potential impacts, it is crucial to implement effective mitigation
measures to minimize environmental damage and ensure sustainable coffee production.
.

3.4.3 Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measures for Environmental Impacts in Coffee

Hulling
To mitigate the potential environmental impacts of coffee hulling, a combination of technological,
operational, and management strategies can be implemented. Here are some key mitigation measures:

Water Pollution Mitigation

 Wastewater Treatment:
o Construct a wastewater treatment plant to treat wastewater before discharge.
o Implement biological or chemical treatment processes to reduce pollutants.
o Recycle treated wastewater for irrigation or other non-potable uses.
 Water Conservation:
o Implement water-efficient technologies, such as low-flow fixtures and drip irrigation.
o Recycle water used in cleaning processes.
o Monitor water usage and identify opportunities for reduction.

Air Pollution Mitigation

 Dust Control:
o Install dust collectors and filters on equipment to capture particulate matter.
o Use wet cleaning and suppression techniques to reduce dust generation.
o Maintain proper housekeeping practices to minimize dust accumulation.
 Energy Efficiency:
o Use energy-efficient equipment and technologies.
o Implement energy-saving measures, such as optimizing production schedules and reducing idle time.
o Explore the use of renewable energy sources, such as solar or biomass, to reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

Land Use and Soil Degradation Mitigation

 Land Use Planning:

o Develop a site-specific land use plan to minimize land disturbance and habitat loss.
o Implement erosion control measures, such as contour farming and terracing.
o Proper waste disposal and solid waste management practices.
 Soil Conservation:
o Implement soil conservation practices, such as cover cropping and mulching.
o Avoid over-fertilization and pesticide use.
o Monitor soil quality and take corrective action as needed.

Noise Pollution Mitigation

 Noise Control:
o Install noise barriers and silencers on equipment.
o Optimize equipment layout and operation schedules to reduce noise levels.
o Maintain equipment regularly to minimize noise generation.

Biodiversity Conservation

 Habitat Protection:
o Avoid clearing natural vegetation, especially in sensitive areas.
o Create buffer zones around the facility to protect wildlife habitats.
 Sustainable Agriculture Practices:
o Promote agroforestry and shade-grown coffee cultivation to maintain biodiversity.
o Minimize the use of pesticides and herbicides.

By implementing these mitigation measures, coffee hulling facilities can significantly reduce their
environmental impact and contribute to sustainable coffee production.

3.5 EIAR Structure and Content

The EIAR will be submitted to the EPA to support the licence review for the facility.

Broadly the following key sections will form the content of the EIAR document:
• Introduction
• The Environmental Impact Assessment Process
• Facility Description
• Consideration of Alternatives
• The following environmental topics will be addressed:
o Population and Human Health;
o Biodiversity;
o Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology;
o Water and Hydrology;
o Air Quality and Climate;
o Noise and Vibration:
o Landscape and Visual;
o Traffic and Transport;
7
 o Waste Management; and
o Archaeology, Cultural Heritage and Architectural Heritage
• Cumulative Impacts and Environmental Interactions

For each of the environmental aspects being assessed, the EIAR chapter will be structured broadly as
follows;

• Introduction to the topic area;

• Methodology;
• Baseline conditions;
• Predicted Impacts (construction and operational phases);
• Mitigation Measures;
• Residual Impacts;
• Difficulties Encountered in Compiling Information; and
• Cumulative Impacts and Impact Interrelations.

3.6 Appropriate Assessment for Coffee Hulling Projects

An Appropriate Assessment (AA) is a screening process used to determine whether a proposed

project is likely to have significant effects on Natura 2000 sites. In the context of a coffee hulling
facility, this assessment would focus on potential impacts on nearby protected areas or sites of
ecological importance.

Key Considerations for Appropriate Assessment in Coffee Hulling:

1. Natura 2000 Sites:

o Identification: Determine if the project site is located near or within a Natura 2000 site.
o Potential Impacts: Assess the potential impacts on the site's habitats and species, such as pollution,
noise, and disturbance.
o Mitigation Measures: Develop specific mitigation measures to minimize or avoid negative impacts.
2. Water Resources:
o Water Abstraction: Evaluate the potential impact of water abstraction on local water bodies and
ecosystems.
o Wastewater Discharge: Assess the potential impact of wastewater discharge on water quality and
aquatic life.
o Mitigation Measures: Implement water conservation measures, treat wastewater to minimize
pollution, and avoid excessive water abstraction.
3. Air Quality:
o Emissions: Assess the potential emissions of particulate matter, greenhouse gases, and other
pollutants from the hulling process and energy consumption.
o Mitigation Measures: Use energy-efficient equipment, implement air pollution control measures,
and reduce emissions from transportation.
4. Noise Pollution:
o Noise Levels: Assess the potential noise levels generated by the facility and their impact on nearby
habitats and human populations.
o Mitigation Measures: Implement noise reduction measures, such as noise barriers and silencers, and
optimize equipment operation.
5. Waste Management:
o Waste Generation: Identify the types and quantities of waste generated by the facility.
 o Waste Disposal: Develop a waste management plan to ensure proper disposal and minimize
environmental impact.
o Recycling and Reuse: Explore opportunities for recycling and reusing waste materials.

The Appropriate Assessment Process

1. Screening: Determine whether the project is likely to have significant effects on Natura 2000 sites.
2. Appraisal: If significant effects are identified, conduct a more detailed assessment to evaluate the
magnitude and significance of the impacts.
3. Mitigation Measures: Develop and implement appropriate mitigation measures to avoid, reduce, or
compensate for negative impacts.
4. Monitoring: Monitor the effectiveness of mitigation measures and the overall environmental
performance of the project.

By conducting a thorough Appropriate Assessment, coffee hulling projects can be designed and
implemented in a way that minimizes their environmental impact and contributes to sustainable
development.

3.7 Flood Risk Assessment for Coffee Hulling Facilities

A comprehensive flood risk assessment is essential for coffee hulling facilities, particularly those
situated in flood-prone areas. This assessment involves identifying potential flood hazards, evaluating
the vulnerability of the facility, and developing appropriate mitigation strategies.

To begin, historical flood data is analyzed to identify past flood events and their characteristics.
Hydrological and hydrodynamic modeling techniques are employed to assess the potential for future
flooding. The vulnerability of the facility is evaluated by considering its location, structural integrity,
and the vulnerability of equipment and machinery to flood damage.

Based on the hazard and vulnerability assessments, a risk matrix is developed to identify high-risk
areas within the facility. Mitigation measures, such as elevating buildings and equipment,
constructing flood barriers, and developing flood emergency plans, can be implemented to reduce the
impact of potential floods. Regular monitoring and updating of flood risk assessments and mitigation
plans are crucial to ensure the long-term resilience of coffee hulling facilities.

4. Population and Human Health

4.1 Potential Impacts

4.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

The main construction phase impacts would be associated with the potential
nuisance and disturbance caused by construction activities. This would potentially
include increases in noise and dust from the construction site and construction traffic on
the roads surrounding the facility, resulting in some potential disruption to local people or
groups. Such impacts may also result in impact to human health in the vicinity of the facility.
There may also be beneficial impacts to the local economy during construction with some
 increases in local economic activity, with construction staff using local businesses for items
such as food and fuel.

4.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impacts

The facility employs approximately 180 people who work at the facility on a shift basis. In
retrofitting / expanding the scope of operations of this facility, impacts would largely be
associated with continued and increasing economic activity and security of employment at
the plant.

The potential of significant residual impacts (either adverse or beneficial) occurring in

relation to population and human health is generally considered low at this stage.

4.2 EIAR Scope

The assessment will comprise of a desk-based analysis of publicly available data, a site
visit and review of relevant policies and plans. The following aspects will be considered, and
information detailed, where relevant to the facility:

• Population;
• Economic Activity;
• Employment;
• Land Use and Development;
• Commuting Patterns; and
• Tourism, Recreation, and Access.

The significance of impacts on receptors such as primary public services and residential
buildings located in proximity to the facility will be assessed.

Human health will be considered as required by Directive 2015/52/EU. This will likely be
focused on identifying the environmental topics that have the potential to effect human
health and the assessment of those impacts elsewhere within the EIAR. These
environmental topics could include the likes of
noise and vibration, air quality and traffic.

9
 5. Biodiversity

5.1 Potential Impacts

5.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

Potential impacts for the construction phase of the facility, in the absence of mitigation
would be associated with the:

•loss of habitat due to the footprint of the facility and its construction;
• some potential disturbance of bird, bat or mammal species in close proximity to the
facility; and
• the potential spread of invasive species.

It is recognised that the pet food plant is being constructed within the boundary of an
already developed facility. The potential of encountering habitats or notable species of
ecological value is generally considered low.

5.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impacts

Potential adverse effects for the operational phase of the facility, in the absence of
mitigation have been identified as:

• lighting impacts – disturbance to nocturnal species, including badgers, bats, and birds;
• permanent loss of habitat within the footprint of the facility.

However, generally at this stage, no significant residual impacts on habitats or species are
anticipated as a result of the facility.

5.2 EIAR Scope

A field walkover will be undertaken alongside a desk study of available ecological

information and relevant plans and policies.

The impact assessment process will involve:

• Identifying any potential habitats or notable species of ecological value;

• Assessing potential direct, indirect and cumulative ecological impacts as a result of
the construction and operation of the facility;
• Identifying and characterising potential significant impacts;
• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate (reduce) significant impacts where required;
and
• Assessing the significance of any residual impacts after mitigation.
As noted in earlier sections, the EPA have screened out the need for Appropriate
Assessment – see appendix 1 and this suggests that they consider the potential impact on
the ecological environment to
be quite benign.
 6. Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology

6.1 Potential Impacts

6.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

Potential impacts associated with the construction phase of the facility may include:

• Loss of soil cover, soil erosion and compaction

• Removal and storage of spoil / overburden;
• Risk of encountering contaminated ground in unknown locations;
• Risk of contamination of existing soils and groundwater by the construction activities such as
accidental spills;

6.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impacts

Potential impacts associated with the operational phase of the facility may include:

• Changes in local surface run-off patterns resulting in local changes to recharge into the soils
and bedrock over the operational life of the facility;
• Potential for the permanent loss of localised soils; and
• Potential contamination of soils and groundwater through accidental spillages of fuels
or chemicals during operational and/or maintenance works.

The site’s WWTP currently discharges (under the EPA licence) to the local stream. It
is also connected to the Irish Water sewer system – but this is not in current use. As the
EPA are aware, Silver Hill have been working to develop alternative treated water disposal
routes. Drip irrigation has been proposed as a viable option. This would use land adjacent to
the site in up to 9 or 10 plots each with an area of 1.6ha area. The design flow rate would be
3l/m2/day.

Silver Hill have proposed a pilot project to the EPA and feedback is awaited.

Just before the EIAR process was commenced, Irish Water agreed that the local sewer
system can accommodate up to 230m3 of treated WWTP effluent per day in off peak hours
(see appendix 2). This disposal route will be considered in the EIAR.

6.2 EIAR Scope

A field walkover will be undertaken alongside a desk study of available information and
relevant policies and plans. The assessment will cover potential impacts on soils, geology and
hydrogeology and will describe the existing conditions and the likely potential impacts
associated with the construction and operation of the facility. The impact assessment process
will involve:

• Identifying and characterising the significance of potential impacts;

• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate significant impacts where required; and
• Assessing the significance of any residual impacts after mitigation.

The assessment to be carried out will include the following elements:

11
 • Identification of issues relevant to the facility;
• Review of current soil, bedrock and groundwater conditions in the vicinity of the facility;
• Review any potential sensitive receptors relevant to the facility, such as homes and
businesses which may use and abstract groundwater in the vicinity;
• Review potentially available site investigation data for works undertaken in the area of
the
facility;
• Assessment of potential impacts of construction and operational activities on soils, geology
and hydrogeology;
• Detailed description and impact assessment of drip irrigation system;
• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate (reduce) significant impacts where required;
and
• Assessing the significance of any residual impacts after mitigation.

A detailed site assessment review has been undertaken for the drip irrigation system –
conducted by Flynn and Shaw in 2016. A total of 15 trial holes were excavated throughout
the lands, each to a depth of 1.5m. This report will be used as the basis of impact
assessment for this chapter and no
further detailed (hydrogeological) modelling is considered required.

7. Water and Hydrology

7.1 Potential Impacts

7.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

During the construction phase there is the potential for impact on the hydrological
environment such as pollution of surface water features through surface water run-off and
also flood risk. Sources of pollution include sediment and on-site spillages, which if
uncontrolled may flow into local surface water drainage and outfall into the local
watercourses.

7.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impacts

During the operational phase there is the potential for pollution of surface water features through
surface water run-off. Sources of pollution associated with the facility would be from potential spills,
such as fuel / oil from vehicles on site or spillages from chemical drums. If such substances were
allowed to flow into surface water drainage, there is the potential for them to reach nearby surface water
bodies. Another potential impact could be flooding risk resulting from increased hardstanding
introduced by the facility.

7.2 EIAR Scope

A field walkover will be undertaken alongside a desk study of available information and
relevant policies and plans. The assessment will describe the existing water environment and
any potential significant impacts associated with the construction and operation of the facility
on these aspects.
 The impact assessment process will involve:

• A review of drainage plans for surface and waste water at the facility and for the facility;
• Review of the receiving drainage system and existing surface water quality of the receiving
environment;
• Inspection of data that may be available relating to surface water quality, such as from
the EPA or Local Authority;
• Review of the relevant River Basin Management Plan;
• Identifying and characterising the significance of any potential impacts;
• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate (reduce) significant impacts (where they
occur);and
• Assessing the significance of any residual impacts after mitigation.

Whilst from a preliminary review, no significant impacts to/from flood risk are anticipated, a
Stage 1 flood risk assessment (FRA) will be carried out and appended to the EIAR. The
FRA will be carried out in accordance with the Office of Public Works (OPW) Guidelines for
Planning Authorities (GPA)
20: The Planning System and Flood Risk Management (OPW and Department of Environment,
Heritage and Local Government 2009).
 8. Air Quality and Climate

8.1 Potential Impacts

8.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

During the construction phase there is potential for an impact on air quality from
the following sources:

• Potential for construction dust emissions and nuisance dust from activities such
as excavation, soil movement, soil storage and backfilling. Dust tends to be
deposited within 500m of the generation site, and therefore sensitive receptors
which fall within this distance of construction activities would be more at risk; and
• Emissions from Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) and on-site construction
plant and equipment
which may give rise to emissions including; particulates (PM10 and PM2.5),
benzene, nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO).

In order to minimise dust emissions during construction, mitigation measures will

be included in the EIAR and be implemented during the construction phase of
the facility. The appointed contractor will be required to comply with these
measures.

8.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impacts

During the operational phase of the facility, air quality impacts may be
associated with emissions from the boilers and from the refrigeration systems.
Air emissions may generate quantities of air pollution such as NO2, CO,
benzene and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) and those associated
with refrigerant gases.

It is believed that the processing of offal onsite (in the pet food plant) will reduce
the risk of odours as the offal is currently collected on a need to basis.
Depending on the production rates this could be daily or every second day.
The process will use only fresh offal and there will be very little odour generated.
The process will work in tandem with the processing plant so this will ensure
fresh product will be readily available every two hours. No material will be
processed unless it is fresh.

An odour model will be generated and will assess the potential impact from the
development.
 8.2 EIAR Scope

The air quality assessment carried out on the facility will include the following
elements:

• Identification of air quality issues relevant to the components of the facility,

including boilers and refrigerants;
• Assess odour potential from the pet food plant;
• Review of background ambient air quality in the vicinity of the facility
(relevant air quality baseline data will be obtained from the EPA and publicly
available information);
• Assessment of potential construction related air quality impacts;
• Assessment of potential impacts of plant and equipment processes on air
quality;
• Assessment of potential impacts of traffic on ambient air quality;
• Identifying the significance of any potential impacts;
• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate (reduce) significant impacts
(where they occur);
and
• Assessing the significance of any residual impacts after mitigation.

The assessment will identify potential sensitive receptors relevant to the facility.
Sensitive receptors include locations where people spend significant periods
of time, such as domestic properties. Sensitive receptors within the vicinity of
the facility may include:

• Residential dwellings;
• Industrial or commercial uses sensitive to dust;
• Recreational areas and sports grounds;
• Schools and other educational establishments;
• Buildings of religious sensitivity;
• Designated ecological area of conservation (either Irish or European
designation);
• Hospitals and nursing homes; and
• Offices or Shops.
Given the nature of the expansion project, detailed dispersion modelling of the
boilers is not proposed to inform the impact assessment process – but an odour
model is proposed.

9. Noise and Vibration

9.1 Potential Impacts

9.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

The potential construction phase noise and vibration impacts will be associated
with the operation of machinery on the site. In addition, there may be some
percussive noise generated as a result of the need to break down the concrete
slabs existing on part of the site. The actual noise level produced by
construction work will vary depending on a number of factors including the type
of plant in use, plant location, duration of operation, hours of operation and
intervening topography.

Vibration impacts are predicted to be low given the nature of the work to be
undertaken.

9.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impacts

It is anticipated that operational phase noise and vibration impacts would be minimal
and would be associated with an expansion to the operation as opposed to new noise
sources.

9.2 EIAR Scope

The assessment will cover potential impacts from noise and vibration and will
describe the existing conditions and the likely potential impacts associated
with the construction and operation of the facility.

The impact assessment process will involve:

• Identifying the significance of any potential impacts;

• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate (reduce) significant impacts
(where they occur);
and
• Assessing the significance of any residual impacts after mitigation.
 The noise and vibration assessment carried out on the facility will include the
following elements:

• Identification of noise and vibration issues relevant to the facility;

• Review of background noise in the vicinity of the facility. A field walkover and
noise survey will be undertaken alongside a desk study any relevant baseline
information.;
• Assessment of potential noise and vibration impacts resulting from
construction activities;
• Assessment of potential impacts of operational phase plant processes on noise
and vibration in and around the applicable parts of the facility;
• Assessment of potential impacts of traffic on noise levels in and around the
facility.

Given the nature of the expansion project, detailed noise modelling is not
proposed to inform the impact assessment process.

The assessment will take account of any Noise Sensitive Locations (NSL’s)
relevant to the facility. Sensitive receptors will comprise places where it would
be reasonable to expect people to be exposed to local noise and vibrations. The
EPA NG4 definition of an NSL will be used in the assessment, as reproduced
below:

NSL – any dwelling house, hotel or hostel, health building, educational

establishment, place of worship or entertainment, or any other facility or other
facility or other area of high amenity which for its proper enjoyment requires the
absence of noise at nuisance levels:

Noise monitoring will be consistent with that gathered as part of the maintenance
of the current
EPA licence.

10. Landscape and Visual

10.1 Potential Impacts

10.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

 Potential construction phase impacts relevant to the Landscape and Visual
Assessment may include;

• Visual impacts from the movement of traffic and machinery to and from
the facility and associated ancillary construction requirements i.e. water
drainage, power and lighting etc to and from the facility;
• Landscape and visual impacts arising from the movement of construction
materials;

10.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impacts

Potential operational phase impacts relevant to the Landscape and Visual

Assessment may include:

• Landscape and visual impacts arising from the presence of new permanent
structures at the facility.

The facility is being developed solely within the boundary of an existing

well established and developed site. At this stage, no significant residual
impacts on the landscape and visual environment are anticipated.

10.2 EIAR Scope

The assessment will include a field walkover undertaken alongside a

desk study of available information and relevant policies and plans. The impact
assessment process will involve:

• Describing the existing environment (both landscape and visual) taking into
account the landscape character assessment published by Monaghan County
Council in the County Development Plan 2019-2025;
• Identifying potential landscape and visual issues relevant to the facility;
• Assigning landscape and visual receptor sensitivity;
• Identifying the significance of any potential impacts;
• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate (reduce) significant impacts
(where they occur);
• Assessing the significance of any residual landscape effects and visual
effects after mitigation.

Given the nature of the expansion project within the confines of the
existing facility, detailed photomontages are not proposed to be developed, to
inform the impact assessment process.
 11. Traffic and Transport

11.1 Potential Impacts

11.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

Potential impacts during the construction phase may include:

• An increase in noise and potentially dust generated from construction related

traffic may cause some level of disruption;
• An increase in road traffic levels due to construction related activities supplying
and accessing the site using the existing road network.

11.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impacts

Potential impacts during the operational phase may include:

• Increase in traffic levels due to traffic accessing/ egressing the facility.

11.2 EIAR Scope

The assessment will address potential impacts on traffic and transport and will
describe the existing conditions and the likely potential impacts associated
with the construction and operation of the facility. The impact assessment
process will involve:

• Evaluating the facility in relation to all road users including general traffic,
HGV’s, cyclists and
pedestrians;
• Reviewing the future road and public transports proposals in the area
surrounding the facility;
• Parking and loading availability at the facility during the construction and
operational phases;
• Identifying and characterising the significance of any potential impacts;
• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate (reduce) any significant
impacts (where they occur); and
• Assessing the significance of any residual impacts after mitigation.
 A Traffic and Transport Assessment (TTA) will be undertaken as per TII TTA
guidelines (2014).

12. Waste Management

12.1 Potential Impacts

12.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

Potential impacts during the construction phase may include:

• Production of additional waste material, arising from excavation works

• Excavation of possible contaminated lands, which would require disposal off
site at a suitably licensed facility;
• Surplus materials and waste may occur where material supply exceeds
material demand.

12.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impact

Wastes generated during the operational phase of the facility are likely to include
general waste and wastes produced as a result of the expansion to the
production process. The waste streams are typically Category 1 and 3 (offal)
animal by-products, fat, WWTP sludge, blood, municipal wastes and organic
fertiliser (duck slurry)

The pet food process will have a solid material, a liquid fat and effluent.
The effluent volume generated will be in the region of 150 m3 per week or less
than 1 m3 per hour to the wastewater treatment plant. The products will be sold
converting a waste material into a product.

12.2 EIAR Scope

The assessment will cover the potential impacts of waste generation, describe
the existing conditions and the likely potential impacts associated with the
construction and operation of the facility. The impact assessment process will
involve:

• Review of current and future waste plans and/or requirements relevant to

the facility i.e. national and regional waste management policies and objectives;
• Describing the waste streams arising from the construction and operational
phase of the facility;
• Review of excavated materials expected to be generated during the
construction phase;
 • Identifying and characterising the significance of any potential impacts;
• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate (reduce) any significant
impacts (where they occur); and
• Assessing the significance of any residual impacts after mitigation.

13. Archaeology,Architectural and Cultural Heritage

13.1 Potential Impacts

13.1.1 Potential Construction Phase Impacts

No significant impacts are currently anticipated upon the cultural heritage
resource as a result of the facility. The pet food plant is being developed within
the existing facility boundary in an area that has been previously constructed on
and developed. Nothing of archaeological or architectural note has been
identified to date on site and it is expected that there is low potential for
other subsurface unrecorded archaeology to be present. The closest designated
heritage asset is approximately 300m north west of the facility. It is described
as a Ringfort (ref: MO001-044) in the town land of Knockakirwin.

13.1.2 Potential Operational Phase Impacts

Similar to the construction phase, no significant impacts are currently envisaged as a result of the
operational phase of the facility. It is considered unlikely that there would be direct or indirect impacts on
cultural heritage given that the development is occurring within the existing site boundary and also
accounting for the distance to the closest designated heritage asset.

13.2 EIAR Scope

It is proposed that an assessment of cultural heritage will be carried out in and

will be tailored accordingly based on professional judgement and local
circumstances.

The assessment will cover potential for impacts on archaeology, architectural

and cultural heritage, and will describe the existing conditions and any likely
potential impacts associated with the construction and operation of the facility
(where relevant). The impact assessment process will involve:

• Undertaking a search of the Record of Monuments and Places (RMPs),

Site and
Monuments Record (SMR), and National Inventory of Architectural Heritage
(NIAH)
• Review of aerial photographic and cartographic sources available online;
• Review of the Excavation Bulletin;
• Identifying and characterising the significance of any potential impacts;
• Incorporating measures to avoid and mitigate (reduce) these any
significant impacts
(where they occur); and
• Assessing the significance of any residual impacts after mitigation.
14. Consultation

The scoping report will be reviewed and approved by the EPA. The Agency will comment on
areas that they suggest require more or less attention than detailed above. The aim would be
that when the EIAR is submitted to the EPA as part of the licence review process this will
facilitate an efficient review (with minimal amount of further information requests)