9^th November 2004

• Existing Regulations cannot process applications speedily
• They are not flexible
• They place a high administrative burden on officials and cause delays'
• They do not ensure provision of good quality information upfront
• Problems with activity list
• May cause delays in development

• Streamlining of process (reducing steps and interactions)
• Sufficient, adequate information prior to decision making
• Flexibility re entry point and need to know information
• Reduction of administrative burden
• Sound decision making with adequate information

PROCESS FOLLOWED

• Published for 60 day comment period on 25 June 2004
• Workshops held in each province during the comment period
• 140 submissions received by 24 August 2004
• National - provincial workshop held 5 -7 October
• Final draft compiled incorporating the various comments received

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS

• Process
• Terminology
• Environmental Managements Frameworks (EMF)
• Independent practitioners
• Financial matters
• Cooperative governance
• Structure
• Public participation
• Time frames
• Listed activities - thresholds, cumulative impacts

CHANGES EFFECTED

• Definitions added
• Use familiar terminology (screening, scoping)
• Pre-application consultation
• Financial security provision to be phased in
• Reconsidered report content
• Regulated report content merged with process
• Public participation clarified
• Timeframes binding
• Changes to listed activities - 5 schedules to 2 categories

PROPOSED APPROACH

• Screening report can be combined with. application form. Decision to grant authorisation can be taken on the basis of this
• Depending on nature of activity and location on list either screening or EIA specified
• Applicant may request flexibility from screening to EIA only
• Scoping and EIA combined into one process

EIA process

• Process investigates specific issues not addressed in screening report
• Specialist report and mitigation assessment report done and included into an Environmental Impact report with draft Environmental. Management Plan (EMP)
• Comment from interested and affected parties included
• Submit for review and for decision on authorisation

LISTED ACTIVITIES

• List divided into 2 categories
• Intention to limit investigation and ensure it takes place at appropriate level
• Generate an inclusive list that combines needs of all competent authorities
• Looks more, but sets thresholds that excludes many activities with small or limited impacts
• Identifies sensitive geographic areas linked to specified activities where process will be

required

THANK YOU