Group 2 ANU Environmental Audit Report

GROUP 2 EIA MEMBERS

NAME REGISTRATION NUMBER

AUGUSTINE MWENGA 21S01EIA005

JAPHET ABAE MOROA 21S01EIA012

GRACE WANGUI MWANGI 21S01EIA001

SYLVESTER SAMO OCHIENG

LILLIAN NTHOKI MUTHAMA 21S01EIA009

WYCLIFFE OMONDI OGUTU 21S01EIA019

IVY GATHII 21S01EIA008

ANDREW MURINGU NDUNGU

ESTA MLALE MWALOMA 21S01EIA003

ISAIAH GICHOHI 21S01EIA013

PETER KWINGA MUNYAO 21S0IEIA014

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 2: LEGAL FRAMEWORK
CHAPTER 3: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
CHAPTER 4: AUDIT FINDINGS

This section is broken down into the following areas: Kitchen, Dumping site, Classroom and
Administration Block.

4.1: Kitchen

ANU has two separate kitchens operated by different service providers and they are located
within different blocks apart from each other. They serve the entire campus population.
4.1.2. Audit areas
a. Environmental quality
i. Waste management
In the dining area, bins were placed at a strategic area. Waste segregation was not done at the
source of collection. At the holding area, the waste was packed in gunny sacks and seemed to
overstay before being evacuated for disposal. A lot of scavenger birds were seen all over, which
posed a health risk. A lot of flies were also evident in the holding area and strong odor which
were again a health risk to the institution and the surrounding community as well as an
environmental hazard.
ii. Affluent waste management
Both kitchens had an affluent drainage system as well as hand washing stations with soap and
running water. However, kitchen 2 had a dysfunctional and smelly manhole next to the main
entrance.
b. Health and safety
i. Public health issues (general cleanness/conditions)
Both kitchens were generally clean, organized, food served at a central place by the kitchen
workers. The covid 19 protocols were observed by all. The kitchen staff had the requisite attire,
they also underwent periodic health procedures as per the requirement of public health
regulations. Individual medical certifications/documents were not verified/produced during the
audit exercise. The quality of food served was observed to be meeting the expected standards.
ii. Drinking Water quality and sources
Both kitchens had clean drinking water dispensing points accessible to the visitors in the dining
room. The drinking water was treated within the university in a secured treatment plant.
iii. COVID-19
Covid 19 protocols were observed both by the kitchen workers and the students/visitors to the
dining halls. The arrangement of tables and shares were in line with the MOH protocols. All the
visitors were required to have their face masks and to observe social distancing. However,
common places in the dining room should be sanitized or cleaned frequently to avoid
contamination and obvious infections.
 iv. Safety issues
The handling and storage of LPG was in line with laid down safety procedures, i.e., in an open
secluded place and piped to the kitchen. No issue of concern was observed. The staff is trained in
fire prevention measures; however, the details were not available to the EA team.
The fire extinguishers were strategically placed, inspection details were also displayed. No fire
blankets were observed or seen in the kitchen.
v. Sanitation and hygiene
Both kitchens were served by several sanitation facilities or wash rooms, which were considered
to be adequate for the visitors/ students patronizing the dining facilities.
vi. Fire exit and assembly points
Fire exit and assembly points were well labeled and defined.

c. Social cultural aspects

i. Gender issues
No data was provided, however, the ratio of female employees to that of male was observed to
be average.
ii. PWDs
Facilities for PWDs were not observed in the 2 kitchen facilities
iii. HIV/AIDS
There was no indication of any HIV/AIDS related intervention in the facilities.
2. Documents available
a. Inspection reports for the facility
Inspection reports for the facility by public health authorities were not provided
b. Vaccination report
Vaccination reports or certificates for the kitchen staff were not availed to the team.
c. Contractual documents (e.g., with waste handlers)
No documents were availed to the team.

4.2: Classroom
ANU being a university, sampling of the classrooms was necessary. Four classrooms were
audited and an average result collected.
Audit results
a. Environmental Issues
Noise
The classrooms are located within the large complex. The noise levels are in the required limit
as per NEMA standards.
Solid Waste
The occupants of the classroom generate mostly solid waste in the form of papers. However,
there were no waste paper bins within the classroom.
Air Quality
There are enough ventilation spaces in windows, doors and ventilation spaces. The classrooms
has large widows which allows warm air to escape on the higher side while cool air comes in on
the lower side.
b. Safety Issues
 The primary source of lighting is natural light which is supplemented by electricity. All
the bulbs were fully functional although some sockets were open with naked wires which
could be a source of danger.
 Paint on some sections of the walls is peeling off due to moisture ingress through the
walls. This indicates a waterproofing problem around the wall.
 The classroom has doors opening to the inside which is not practical in times of
emergency. This can hamper movement of students during such cases.
 There are two entrances/exits which are sufficient as per the number of students. The
issue is that the entrances lack ramps to aid movement of people with disabilities.
Covid-19
Classroom seats are located approximately two meters from each other which are sufficient as
per the MOH regulations to reduce the spread of Covid-19.
4.3: Dumping site

4.4: Administration Block

CHAPTER 5: MITIGATION MEASURES
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS