1. Implementation of the Air Quality Act (Act No. 39 of 2004)
Colloquium on Air Quality Management
Parliament of the Republic of South Africa
13 September 2016

2. Presentation Overview
Overview of Minimum Emission Standards (MES)
Compliance with Minimum Emission Standards (MES)
Review of Air Quality Management Plans & Challenges

3. Overview of Minimum Emission Standards (MES)
Vumile Senene
Acting Chief Director: Air Quality Management

4. History of Point Source Management in South Africa
Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, 1965
1. Point source focused
2. Ambient air quality not considered
3. Resulted in the creation of air pollution hotspots
4. Poorly crafted conditions
5. Limited monitoring of emissions
6. Most Registration Certificates had no reporting requirements
National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004
1. National Ambient Air Quality Standards established (24 December 2009)
2. Minimum Emission Standards established (31 March 2010)
3. Improved emission source management through AEL
4. Emission measurement & reporting requirements established for all sources

5. History of Point Source Management in South Africa
Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, 1965 Emission Limit
- PM: 200 mg/Sm3
Air Quality Act, 2004 Emission Limits
(10% O2, 273 K & kPa)
- PM: 100 mg/Nm3
- SO2: 3500 mg/Nm3
- NOX: 1100 mg/Nm3
Example: Power Generation

6. Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, 1965

7. APPA to AQA Transition 2010 - 2015 Existing Plants New Plants
- APPA conditions largely maintained
New Plants
- Required to comply with 2020 MES
- Required to comply with 2015 MES
2020 & Beyond

8. Development of Minimum Emission Standards
The minimum emission standards (MES) were developed through the SABS process.
Part of the process included transitional arrangements that would be needed to phase in the MES.
After much deliberation, it was concluded that existing plants would require time to come into compliance (2015 with existing plant standards and 2020 with new plant standards),
New plants would be required to comply with the new plant standards immediately (2010),
There was however a push by some industry players to extend the time required for existing plants to come into complies with MES due to size & complex nature of some facilities.
This was dismissed by the Department as it was a blanket approach even for facilities that could comply. Instead the additional time required would be assessed on case by case basis under the provisions of the postponement of compliance timeframes.

9. Compliance with Minimum Emission Standards
2010 – 2015
New plants complied with 2020 MES.
Some existing plants complied with existing plants standards while majority complied to the APPA Registration Certificate conditions.
There was however a drive during this time to convert APPA Registration Certificate into AQA Atmospheric Emission licences in preparation for the 2015 target.
2015 – 2020
New plants comply with 2020 MES.
Some existing plants comply with existing plants standards.
Some existing plants, aware of their inability to comply with the 2015 MES, applied for postponement.
Some existing facilities are currently in non-compliance and have not applied for postponement. These facilities are handled through compliance & enforcement action by respective authorities.

10. Challenges in Ensuring Compliance with MES
Due to the fact that air quality management is a concurrent function across all three spheres of government, the atmospheric emission licensing function is shared by National, Provincial, and Metropolitan and District Municipalities. Many of the Licensing Authorities (LAs) took over the function in 2010 after the promulgation of the MES.
While the National Department undertook capacity building for the new LAs, capacity has remained a challenges due to high staff turnover and shortage of personnel.
This lack of capacity in some municipalities has resulted in the late detection/identification of facilities operating illegally or in non- compliance to AEL conditions.

11. Measures to Address Challenges
There’s an ongoing capacity building programme aimed at assisting LAs with the necessary skills, with special focus on priority areas.
The Department has developed the South African Atmospheric Emission Licensing & Inventory Portal for issuing and managing AELs. The portal provides the following AEL management features:
Capturing and archiving all issued AEL
Notification of LAs on due dates for submission of emission report and all other reporting requirements
Reminders for planned inspections
Reminders on AEL renewals and reviews
These features are addressing critical deficiencies in document management systems of municipalities and provinces.

12. Key Achievements from the Implementation of MES
Benchmark has been set for all new facilities going forward. Any potential new entry in the market will know what emissions are expected and will design a plant accordingly,
Even though it was always going to be difficult to address historic issues, the MES have resulted in improved management of emissions from existing facilities through:
Clear monitoring & reporting requirements,
Improved enforceability of conditions and subsequent fines in cases of non-compliance, and
Transparency of applicable emission limits for respective facilities.

13. Compliance with Minimum Emission Standards
Ms Minky Chauke
Director – Compliance EIP

14. BACKGROUND
On site compliance monitoring inspections by EMIs (DEA, Provincial Environmental Departments and Municipalities)
Facilities required to conduct emissions monitoring continuously and/or periodically and submit emissions monitoring reports to the Licensing Authorities (District Municipalities and Provinces) for review.

15. Total of 16 not in full compliance to MES
COMPLIANCE STATUS
Onsite inspections conducted at 21 Facilities jointly EMIs from 3 spheres since April 2015
Total of 16 not in full compliance to MES
5 of the 16 are Eskom Power Stations
5 of the 16 HCRW facilities
Old technologies and poor quality of coal cited as reason for non-compliance

16. FACILITIES EXCEEDING MES
2015/16 FY
Facility
Date
Findings (Exceedances)
Evraz Highveld Steel
02-03 June 2015
PM, SO2
PPC Dwaalboom
1 September 2015 PM
Eskom Tutuka Power Station
17-18 November 2015
PM, SO2, NOX
Natref
14 December 2015
Monitoring not conducted as required
Eskom Kendal Power Station
AEL Mining

17. FACILITIES EXCEEDING MES
2016/17 FY
Facility
Date
Findings (Exceedances)
Sasol Sasolburg
19 April 2016
CO, SO2, NOX, TOC
AMSA Vanderbijlpark
6-7 June 2016 PM
DMS Powders
30 August 2016
Eskom Lethabo Power Station
19-20 July 2016
PM, SO2
Eskom Majuba Power Station
5-6 September 2016
Data presented not demonstrating compliance
Eskom Medupi Power Station
7-8 February 2017

18. FACILITIES EXCEEDING MES
2016/17 FY HCRW INCINERATORS
Facility
Date
Findings (Exceedances)
Averda Klerksdorp
15 Nov 2016
HCl, CO, HF
Biomed
NO, NOX, Heavy Metals , Dioxins and furans
ClinX
Monitoring not conducted
EnviroServ Eastern Cape (Roodepoort)
PM, HCl, SO2, CO, Dioxins and Furans
Optimum
17 Nov 2016
Monitoring no conducted as required

19. Review of Air Quality Management Plans & Challenges
Ms Elizabeth Masekoameng
Director – Atmospheric Policy, Regulation and Planning

20. Priority Area AQMP Review
The HPA AQMP mid-term review was completed in 2017
The VTAPA AQMP mid-term review was completed in 2013
The full revision of the AQMP has commenced

21. Priority Area AQMP Review
Data issues found during AQMP reviews
The emissions data and ambient air quality data that was available during the development of the initial AQMPs was not sufficient to enable adequate problem characterisation.
All these issues have been addressed and currently:
Improved emissions inventories are available in NAEIS system and other sources.
This will enable better problem characterization during the review of the AQMP

22. Priority Area AQMP Review
Air quality issues found during AQMP reviews
Since the development of the initial AQMPs, government has developed the necessary tools for AQM ( legislation and systems).
There has been some increase in the level of resources allocated (ambient monitoring stations).
Since the development of the AQMPs, the levels of air pollution have been fluctuating. But generally there is some improvement. Though not to the desired levels.
This issue will be addressed by:
Reviewing the AQMP to include more targeted, more focused interventions
Ensuring that the AQMP is informed by thorough understanding of source contributions (as shown in the next slide

23. Priority Area AQMP Review
AQMP review process
Baseline assessment
Emissions inventories
Ambient AQ data
Inputs:
Results of the source apportionment study
Results of the VTAPA health study
Gap analysis
- Identify gaps in data
Intervention description
- measures to reduce emissions from various sources

24. AQMP input 1: Source Apportionment in the VTAPA
The Department has recognized the need to have a better understanding of the contribution of the different sources to the ambient air. To this end, the Department, in collaboration with its stakeholders, is currently undertaking a Source Apportionment Study in the VTAPA. The study will shed light on the contribution of sources such as industrial activities, domestic fuel burning, mining and vehicular emissions to the ambient air.
It must, however, be clarified that the study will not be able to pinpoint individual contributors but will give us an idea of the various contributors towards air pollution in the area.
Information obtained from this study will then assist the Department in developing targeted interventions, thereby ensuring that all stakeholders use resources efficiently & effectively.

25. AQMP input 2: Source Apportionment in the VTAPA
The VTAPA health study enabled the Department to identify vulnerable areas: through vulnerability assessments done.
These are areas where high pollution levels coincide with the large number of vulnerable population groups (elderly and children).
The results of this study will be factored into the development of the AQMP. i.e. priority will be given to those areas in terms of implementation of interventions.