National Association for Clean Air Presentation to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on the Air Quality Bill 3 Feb 2004

What is NACA? Non-governmental organization promoting air quality, 34 year history, 6 local branches 450 members representing local authorities, research organizations, industry and private citizens Good depth of air quality related expertise Activities: Publishes a Journal and newsletter Provides bursaries for air pollution studies Produces information material for schools Local seminars and discussion forums Annual conference Members involved in drafting of local regulations, draft national ambient air quality standards

Purpose of the presentation Support for the principles of the Bill Point out some discrepancies Indicate areas for possible improvement Concern about implementation

Principles of the Bill supported Use of ambient air quality as point of departure Devolvement of control to local authorities Recognition of necessity for management planning including all sources, as well as a variety of control strategies Entrenched principle of public involvement in standard setting and licensing process

Some discrepancies noted In practice, priority areas (art 18,19) will probably be declared in number of areas (Durban South, Vaal area etc) which moves responsibility up to province and removes it from local authority. Provision for public involvement made but not carried through, e.g. Air quality management plans (art 18,19) and listing of activities (art21) only follow consultative process after preparation lack of provision for public communication & consultation during DEAT’s transitional phase project scheduled to be initiated this month. This projects aims at air quality and emission standard setting, Act implementation manual development (etc.). Provision is only made in the TOR for one stakeholder workshop.

Remaining concerns (Bill) Lack of provisions for management on air shed basis (similar to catchment management for water) – Bill allows, but does not enforce Air quality management process not clearly defined Transition period to Bill may be too short Important issues are left to regulations Lack of integration with EIA requirements

Implementation concerns (1) Implications of lack of capacity at local level Cost, time required for provision and training of staff Delays in Air Quality Management Plans and licensing process Possible cost of licensing process Can be alleviated by consolidating management at air shed level

Implementation concerns (2) Implications of delay in standard-setting process for ambient air quality Act cannot function without standards Proposed standards were based on internationally documented health thresholds and globallly accepted good practice Needs to proceed urgently Similar process required for emission standards – stakeholders should be consulted

Implementation concerns (3) DEAT proposed actions indicate that requirements for public participation is underestimated Highly complex process, large number of stakeholders DWAF policy/strategy development process provides excellent example of how stakeholders can be involved