1. 1 DEAT Responses To Comments Submitted On The National Environmental Management : Waste Bill Presentation to Portfolio Committee 03 March 2008

2. 2 OVERVIEW OF PRESENTATION 1.Introduction 2.Underlying approach to DEAT’s responses 3.Definitions 4.Nuclear and Mining Waste 5.What DEAT supports 6.What DEAT does not support 7.DEAT’s request in relation to IWMP’s 8.Conclusion

3. 3 1.INTRODUCTION  Input received from the public hearing was good, warranting some amendments.  Some comments were repeats from the last round of comments.  Some comments have already been provided for in the current version of the Bill

4. 4 2.UNDERLYING APPROACH TO DEAT RESPONSES  The Bill is Framework Legislation and therefore does not deal with detail that can be effectively dealt with in regulations e.g manner in which incentives for waste minimisation are applied, inclusion of e-waste & medical waste, appeal procedures etc.  National and International trends in environmental legislation have been embraced in the Bill e.g inclusion of general duty of care.  Environment is a concurrent competence therefore national legislation must not limit provinces’ powers to pass legislation.  Discourage over-regulation  All people must ensure that their activities do not adversely impact on environment.

5. 5 2.UNDERLYING APPROACH TO DEAT RESPONES  Bill provides for different types of regulatory approaches e.g  Licensing may be good for certain activities but declaration of priority waste might be better for certain waste streams.  Complement rather than duplicate existing legislation.  Incorporate successes of other legislation e.g appointment of independent persons to manage applications has been successfully adopted to implementation of EIA Regulations  Recognise that we cannot entirely eliminate waste.  Avoid overburdening any sphere of government e.g identification of investigation areas may be done by province or DEAT, not municipalities.  Incremental Implementation of Norms & Standards

6. 6 2.UNDERLYING APPROACH TO DEAT RESPONES  Provide for discretion to allow incremental or phased implementation of concepts or approaches that are new to SA law e.g contaminated land regime.  Existing Industry Waste Management plans (MOU’s) and Integrated Waste Management Plans must be aligned to the Bill.  Provide for variations in capacity to implement e.g provision of waste services by municipalities.

7. 7 3.1 DEFINITIONS TO BE AMENDED TERMPROPOSED AMENDMENT Best Practicable Environmental Option NEMA definition will be used Building and Demolition waste Exclude hazardous waste from the definition Inert wasteNew definition to ensure exclusion of substances like asbestos WasteNew definition to capture substances with no further use for the purpose of production New definition also ensures that when the Minister identifies any substance as waste, he does so by notice.

8. 8 3.2DEFINITIONS THAT REMAIN THE SAME TERMMOTIVATION disposalNot necessary to amend definition to include thermal destruction or incineration because these are covered under treatment requirements domestic wasteThe Bill makes provision for the separation of waste at source in section 9(3) and this will take care of e-waste & batteries. general wasteNot necessary to specify that general waste also has a long term hazard. The focus in the general waste definition is the fact that impact of general waste can be managed without isolation of the waste from the environment. hazardous wasteNot necessary to amend definition to take care of risks posed through or after disposal of hazardous waste because the Bill provides for specific disposal management measures storageThe time factor, which must distinguish between storage that requires compliance and storage that does not require compliance, is already provided for in Section 19 which deals with the list of waste management activities.

9. 9 3.3.ADDITIONAL TERMS REQUESTED TERMDEAT RESPONSE Litter; Product; Rehabilitation & Remediation; Raw material; Waste handling Not necessary to define these terms because dictionary definition suffices Salvaging; Medical waste; Landfill site Not necessary to define these terms because they have not been used in the Bill. IncinerationA proposed definition has been submitted

10. 10 3.4.SPECIFIC REQUEST FOR EXCLUSION REQUESTDEAT RESPONSE Metal Recyclers Association: Exclude scrap metal from ‘waste’ definition because inter alia scrap metal has economic value.  Constitutional Court has in the past stressed that economic value alone cannot be used to determine whether an activity should be subjected to environmental regulation.  Environmental impact of this waste stream is not addressed in the submission.  Not clear which provisions of Bill will result in alleged economic impact  Small scale operators will not be affected by Bill.  Exclusion will result in South Africa not complying with Basel Convention.

11. 11 4.RADIOACTIVE AND MINING WASTE ISSUEDEAT RESPONSE Exclusion of Radioactive Waste  Excluded in order to avoid duplication in legislation.  Radioactive waste is dealt with in the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA).  Requires very specific expertise that is currently located with DME. Exclusion of Mining Waste  Discussions have been held between DME & DEAT and a draft agreement has been proposed.

12. 12 5.WHAT DEAT SUPPORTS DEAT SUPPORTS  Inclusion of timeframes for waste reduction in the National Waste Management Strategy.  Inclusion of timeframes for waste reduction in IWMP’s.  Recognition of existing industry waste management plans IF they meet requirements of the Bill.  Polluter pays principle, which is already covered in the compliance and enforcement provisions in NEMA.

13. 13 6.WHAT DEAT DOES NOT SUPPORT DEAT DOES NOT SUPPORT  Mandatory differentiation in NWMS between geographical areas because it would force government to differentiate between provinces.  Obligatory consultation over non-substantive changes to legislation because this will result in unnecessary delays. Furthermore, the public can still exercise their right in terms of Promotion of Administrative Justice Act.  Reduction in timeframe for development of NWMS because there is substantial work and consultation to be done to update the existing strategy.  Leaving DWAF Minimum requirements as they are. These need to be updated to reflect the shift from to prevention, which is advocated by the waste hierarchy.

14. 14 6.WHAT DEAT DOES NOT SUPPORT DEAT DOES NOT SUPPORT  Establishment of a National Waste Management Commission because this would constitute duplication of NEAF and will put additional and unnecessary strain on government resources.  Technology-based approach to standards because this would be in conflict with SA’s obligations in terms of the World Trade Organisation. E.g banning of incineration is not supported.  Mandatory setting of norms and standards by provinces because National norms & standards could suffice for some provinces.  Inclusion of timeframes for provisioning of waste services by municipalities because timeframes will be different for each municipality and these can be addressed in each IWMP.  Complete exclusion of the banking industry to the ‘Contaminated Land’ provisions of the Bill. However the removal of the retrospective application of the provisions can be considered.

15. 15 7.DEAT’S REQUEST IN RELATION TO IWMP’S SECTION 11(4)  Section 11(4) currently requires municipalities to include Integrated Waste Management Plans in IDP’s contemplated by Municipal Systems Act  As a result the provincial MEC’s for environment do not have powers to approve the IWMP’s.  DEAT and Provinces agree that the environment MEC’s should have powers to approve IWMP’s.  DEAT proposes an amendment to the Bill to allow for submission of municipal IWMP’s to environment MEC for approval, then to MEC for Local Government as part of IDP.

16. 16 Thank You