National Environmental Management Laws Amendment Bill

1
National Environmental Management Laws Amendment
Bill

• BUSA submission to
• Parliamentary Portfolio Committee
• 21 August 2012

2
Scope of presentation

• Focus on amendments to NEMA
• Concern over increased stringency without
  motivation
• Additional EIA instruments in absence of
  implementation of amendments of 2009
• Challenges faced by regulated community not
  addressed
• Waste definition

3
Waste definition

• (iii) any portion of waste, once re-used,
  recycled and or recovered, ceases to be waste

4
Section 24 (2A)(a)

• The use of exemptions is well established and is
  implemented
• Section 24 contains a range of instruments which
  allow the Minister to manage and conserve the
  environment
• Motivation that this is not the case therefore
  not understood
• Request review need for this provision

5
Section 24 (2A) (b)

• Provision for new provision not to affect
  existing authorisations welcomed
• Lack of clarity that this status will be accorded
  to all authorisations issued by any competent
  authority not only in terms of section 24
• Request Clarify that not only section 24
  authorisations are covered

6
Section 24 (2A)(b)

• Comment period welcomed
• Request include provision for specific
  consultation with affected landowners in the case
  of prohibitions and restrictions in specific
  geographic areas

7
Amendment of 24 10(1)(a) (i)

• Extension of norms and standards beyond listed
  activities may have merit
• Current insertion in respect of listed activities
  in 2009 has still not been implemented
• Listed activities have been identified on the
  basis of risk of significant adverse impact
• No provision in Act for non listed activities to
  be controlled in this way

8
Amendment of 24 (10)(1)(a) (i)

• Motivation does not adequately explain need
• Request Committee to request
• progress report on implementation of current
  provisions before proceeding
• clarity on how non listed activities can be
  treated in this way

9
Amendment of 24 C 5(c)

• Provision for applicant to apply to Minister
  where MEC fails to take a decision within
  timeframes is welcomed
• Efficient and effective decision making is an
  objective of an effective state
• Implementation mechanisms should not increase
  cost to applicant
• Request Timeframes for Minister to respond in
  such circumstances should be prescribed

10
Amendment of 24 F

• Compliance with norms and standards being brought
  in line with other measures is supported
• Language not in line with the Act
• Reference only to developed standards not
  develop or adopt as in Act
• Circumstances for such standards to become
  mandatory not clear
• Request Text to be amended to include or
  adopted
• Clarify circumstances under which
  standards will be mandatory

11
Amendment of 24 G

• Amendment still does not deal with activities
  regulated by other specific environmental
  management acts
• Purpose of 24G is to remedy activities commenced
  without authorisation not completed
• No timeframes for decisions
• Request Extend amendment to other authorisations
• Prescribe time periods for decision
• Applicant should not be prosecuted where an
  application has been made, particularly when the
  application is successful

12
Amendment of 24M

• Always cases where exemption is justified
• Request retain provisions for exemption

13
Amendment of 24O

• Impossible to comply with instruments which are
  not known
• Request such instruments must be gazetted for
  comment and be gazetted before implementation

14
Amendment of s28

• Any organ of state may issue a directive without
  consultation with anyone else. This is currently
  not the case
• Not clear why the provision is required
• Request provision should be made for at least
  consultation with the Director General or
  provincial HoD as appropriate

15
Amendment of s28

• Directive in s 28(4) required when reasonable
  measures to address significant pollution are
  not taken.
• The failure to take the conditions of cessation
  and potential subsequent re-instatement into
  account, make this an extremely onerous measure
  which should only be taken as a last resort
• Not possible to cease activities and take
  measures as is required by the text

16
Amendment of s28

• Current subsection refers to reasonable
  measures proposed subsection (c) refers to
  measures
• Act refers to significant pollution
• Request review provisions to bring them in line
  with the Act

17
Amendment of 44

• Import and export control is recognised as being
  required in terms of multilateral environmental
  agreements
• Significant potential for duplication is
  introduced by this broad power
• No motivation is provided
• Request request motivation before inserting

18
Conclusions

• Recognise that Laws require ongoing updating and
  improvement
• Amendments m1818ust be well motivated and not
  increase regulatory burden without improved
  balanced outcomes
• Regulatory impact assessment