DOCSLIB.ORG

North West Province

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
North West Province CHAPTER 9 – NORTH WEST PROVINCE Provincial Green Drop Score 50% Provincial Best Performer Tlokwe Local Municipality is the best performing municipality in North West Province: 97% Municipal Green Drop Score 100% improvement on 2009 Green Drop status 100% of plants in low risk position 92% Site Inspection Score 1 of one system Green Drop Certification status NORTH WEST Page 293 Introduction Wastewater services delivery is performed by ten (10) Water Services Authorities in North West Province via an infrastructure network comprising of 35 wastewater collector and treatment systems. A total flow of 144 Ml/day is received at the 35 treatment facilities, which has a collective hydraulic design capacity of 316 Ml/day (as ADWF). This means that 45.6% of the design capacity is taken up by the current operational flows, leaving a 54.4% to meet the future demand without creating new capacity. However, the findings of the Green Drop assessment suggest that a significant portion of surplus capacity might not be ‘readily available’, as result of inadequate maintenance and operational deficiencies at lower capacity municipalities. MICRO SMALL MEDIUM LARGE SIZE SIZE SIZE SIZE MACRO SIZE Total 10-25 <0.5 0.5-2 2-10 >25 Mℓ/day Undetermined Mℓ/day Mℓ/day Mℓ/day Mℓ/day Mℓ/day No of WWTPs 0 6 21 3 4 1 35 Total Design Capacity 0 6.9 99.6 50.3 159 1 315.8 (Ml/day) Total Daily Inflows 0 0.8 55.0 24.4 63.6 18 143.8 (Ml/day) *ADWF = Average Dry Weather Flow Provincial Green Drop Analysis Analysis of the Green Drop assessments and site inspection results indicate that performance vary from excellent to unsatisfactory. A total of 100% municipalities were assessed during the 2010/11 Green Drop Certification. NORTH WEST Page 294 GREEN DROP COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Performance Performance Category 2009 2010/11 trend Incentive-based indicators 8 10 Number of municipalities assessed (77.6%) (100%) ↑ Number of wastewater systems assessed 17 35 ↑ Average Green Drop score 33% 29% ↓ 5 6 Number of Green Drop scores ≥50% (29%) (17%) ↓ 12 29 Number of Green Drop scores <50% (71%) (83%) ↓ Number of Green Drop awards 0 1 ↑ Average Site Inspection Score N/A 45.3% N/A PROVINCIAL GREEN DROP SCORE N/A 50% N/A N/A = Not applied ↑ = improvement, ↓= digress, →= no change The 100% assessment coverage included a total of 35 wastewater systems for North West. This magnitude of coverage serves as affirmation of the increased awareness and renewed commitment by municipal management. Through the current Green Drop process, municipalities are renewing their operational baselines and reprioritise their plans with the primary objective of raising the current performance status in terms of municipal wastewater management. The incentive-based regulatory approach succeeds to act as a positive stimulus to facilitate improved performance and public accountability, whilst establishing essential systems and processes to sustain and measure gradual improvement. Analysis of the results indicate that the majority of systems (83%) lies in the lower scoring bracket of <50%, indicating that wastewater performance is not on standard in the Province. The average GDC score decreased from 33 to 29%, showing an overall digress on average performance. The regulatory opinion is that performance of the Province as a whole is unsatisfactory, as reflected by the average Municipal Green Drop Score of 50%. NORTH WEST Page 295 When comparing 2010/11 Green Drop results with 2009, the following trends are observed: 18 more systems were assessed in 2010 (35) compared to 2009 (17) 1 systems achieved Green Drop Certification, indicating that one systems is considered ‘excellent’ (>90%) × 82.4% of assessed systems performed ‘very poor to critical’ in 2009 compared to 83% in 2010/11, of which 59% systems were in ‘critical performance’ state in 2009 compared to 66% in 2010/11. Provincial Risk Analysis The Green Drop requirements are used to assess the entire value chain involved in the delivery of municipal wastewater services, whilst the risk analyses focus on the treatment function specifically. CUMULATIVE RISK COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Performance Performance Category 2009 2010/11 trend Risk-based indicators Highest CRR 28 25 ↓ Average CRR 16.5 16.3 ↓ Lowest CRR 6 9 ↑ Average Design Rating (A) 1.7 1.5 ↓ Average Capacity Exceedance Rating (B) 3.7 4.0 ↑ Average Effluent Failure Rating (C) 7.0 7.5 ↑ Average Technical Skills Rating (D) 3.3 2.9 ↓ AVERAGE % DEVIATION FROM maximum- 78.4 79.4 CRR ↑ N/A = Not applied ↑ = digress, ↓=improvement, →= no change NORTH WEST Page 296 From the above table, it can be observed that the Province still finds itself in ‘high risk’ space with 79.4% CRRmax. However, a positive risk reduction is observed on provincial averages, such as the highest CRR that decreased from 28 to 25↓, leading to a reduced Provincial average CRR of 16.3 (↓). Unfortunately, the counter profile is also true where the lowest CRR plants of 6 have moved into a higher CRR of 9 (↑). The CRR analysis further points out that good effort has be made to address the technical skills component in the Province. However, the risk factors dealing with plant capacity and effluent quality still require significant effort to ensure positive turnaround. The results indicate that (on average) the Province may be in the infancy of a positive turnaround of its risk profile, but that efforts need to be redoubled to gain momentum and ensure dedicated reduction in individual CRRs. Some plants are still sliding into higher risk positions and these have been placed under regulatory surveillance with the objective of ensuring improvement. As such, water resources and public health will suffer whilst the Province gears itself to close the gaps with urgency. These municipal treatment plants are clearly identified in this Chapter under “Regulatory Impression”. The following trend bar-chart paints a hopeful picture for wastewater treatment in North West. Although most plants still reside in high and critical risk position, a determined movement OUT OF critical risk position towards high risk space is noted. The trend is encouraging. Whilst the number of plants in medium risk position remains constant (5), the movement of 8 plants out of ‘low risk’ space is disheartening. One must be mindful that the 2009 and 2011 profile differ in terms of Merafong municipality that moved to Gauteng Province. Nevertheless, the early warnings are clear that some low risk plants are entering higher risk space and this trend need to be arrested. Experience has learnt that the cost and specialist resources are much higher to address critical risk scenario, compared to earlier interventions when detecting early warning signals of a plant moving into distress. An unusual strategy and turnaround plan would be required for Limpopo to recover from this atrocious state. 90 – 100% Critical risk WWTPs % Deviation = 70 - <90% High Risk WWTPs CRR/CRR(max) TREND 50-<70% Medium risk WWTPs <50% Low Risk WWTPs NORTH WEST Page 297 The following municipalities are in high- and critical risk positions in 2010/11 and placed under regulatory surveillance: 2011 Average Priority WSA Name WWTPs in high or critical risk space CRR/CRRmax % deviation 100% 1 Ventersdorp LM Ventersdorp 94% 2 Maquassi Hills LM Leeudoringstad, Wolmaranstad Delareyville, Lehurutshe-Welbedacht, Ottosdal, NgaraModiriMolema 91% 3 Sannieshof, Zeerust, Itsoseng, Mmabatho, Lichtenburg, DM Mafikeng, Atamelang, Coligny 83% 4 Kgetlengriver LM Koster, Swartruggens Dr. Ruth S Mompati 80% 5 Bloemhof, Schweizer-Reinecke, Vryburg, Christiana DM 78% 6 Madibeng LM Brits, Hartbeespoort, Letlhabile, Mothotlung Matlosana LM 78% 7 Klerksdorp, Orkney, Hartebeesfontein Rustenburg LM 65% 8 Boitekong, Lethabong Critical risk plants High risk plants Conclusion The Green Drop results for 2010-2011 indicated that municipal wastewater management in North West is not in a satisfactory state. The majority of wastewater systems reside in high risk state, compared to 2009. Furthermore, the average Green Drop score decreased from 33 to 29%. The Provincial Green Drop score of 50% indicate that decision making and resources to support turnaround plans, will be required to improve the situation. The positive message from the Green Drop results is that a definitive awareness momentum is building and all municipalities are on board with their performance portfolios. The 100% assessment coverage has resulted in a confirmed baseline, from where progress can now be monitored and regulatory surveillance can be effected. One Green Drop Certificate is awarded in North West: Tlokwe Local Municipality Performance Barometer The following log scale indicates the various positions that municipalities hold with respect to their individual Municipal Green Drop Scores: NORTH WEST Page 298 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NORTH WEST Page 299 Water Services Authority: Dr Ruth S Mompati District Municipality Municipal Green Drop Score: 21.9% Schweizer Vryburg Bloemhof Christiana Performance Area Reinecke (WSP: Naledi LM) (WSP:LekwaTeemane) (WSP:LekwaTeemane) Systems (WSP:Mamusa LM) Process Control, Maintenance & 50 15 8 3 Management skills Monitoring Programme 0 0 0 0 Credibility of Sample Analyses 10 0 0 70 Submission of Results 0 0 0 0 Wastewater Quality Compliance 5 20 0 0 Failure Response Management 0 25 25 0 Bylaws 40 40 40 30 Treatment & Collector Capacity 50 40 48 85 Asset Management 40 55 45 45 Bonus Scores 8.75 8.75 0 8.75 Penalties 0 0 0 0 Green Drop Score (2011) 21.3% (↑) 25.6% (↑) 16.8% (↑) 21.8% (↑) Green Drop Score (2009) 6% 2% 2% 2% Treatment Capacity (Ml/d) 6.5 9 5.6 3.5 Operational % i.t.o. Capacity 91% 73% 85% 80% Cumulative Risk Rating (CRR) 18 18 18 15 % i.t.o. Maximum Risk Rating 78.3 % (↓) 78.3% (→) 78.3% (↑) 83.3% (↓) NI - No information NA- Not assessed Regulatory Impression Dr Ruth S Mompati District Municipality is the responsible authority overseeing the operation of the wastewater systems by the WSPs (Naledi, Mamusa, LekwaTeemane, Greater Taung, Ratlou and Molopo municipalities).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ngaka Modiri Molema District
    2 PROFILE: NGAKA MODIRI MOLEMA DISTRICT PROFILE: NGAKA MODIRI MOLEMA DISTRICT 3 CONTENT 1. Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 4 2. Introduction: Brief Overview ........................................................................................... 7 2.1. Historical Perspective .............................................................................................. 7 2.3. Spatial Status .......................................................................................................... 9 3. Social Development Profile .......................................................................................... 10 3.1. Key Social Demographics ..................................................................................... 10 3.1.1. Population .......................................................................................................... 10 3.1.2. Gender, Age and Race ....................................................................................... 11 3.1.3. Households ........................................................................................................ 12 3.2. Health Profile ......................................................................................................... 12 3.3. COVID - 19............................................................................................................ 13 3.4. Poverty Dimensions .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Zeerust Sub District of Ramotshere Moiloa Magisterial District Main
    # # !C # ### # !C^# #!.C# # !C # # # # # # # # # ^!C# # # # # # # # ^ # # ^ # ## # !C # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # !C # !C # # # # # # ## # # # # !C# # # # #!C# # # ## ^ ## # !C # # # # # ^ # # # # # # #!C # # # !C # # #^ # # # # # # # # #!C # # # # # # # !C # # # # # # # # !C# ## # # # # # # !C# # !C # # # #^ # # # # # # # # # # # #!C# # # # # ## # # # # # # # ##!C # # ## # # # # # # # # # # !C### # # ## # ## # # # # # ## ## # ## !C## # # # # !C # # # #!C# # # # #^ # # # ## # # !C# # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # ## # # # # # # #!C # #!C #!C# # # # # # # ^# # # # # # # # # # ## # # ## # # !C# ^ ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # ### # ## # # !C # # #!C # # #!C # ## # !C## ## # # # # !C# # # ## # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # ## # # ### # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # #!C # # ## ## # # ## # ## # # ## ## # # #^!C # # # # # # ^ # # # # # # ## ## # # ## # # # # # !C # ## # # # #!C # ### # # # ##!C # # # # !C# #!C# ## # ## # # # !C # # ## # # ## # ## # ## ## # # ## !C# # # ## # ## # # ## #!C## # # # !C # !C# #!C # # ### # # # # # ## !C## !.### # ### # # # # ## !C # # # # # ## # #### # ## # # # # ## ## #^ # # # # # ^ # # !C# ## # # # # # # # !C## # ## # # # # # # # ## # # ##!C## ##!C# # !C# # # ## # !C### # # ^ # !C #### # # !C# ^#!C # # # !C # #!C ### ## ## #!C # ## # # # # # ## ## !C# ## # # # #!C # ## # ## ## # # # # # !C # # ^ # # ## ## ## # # # # !.!C## #!C## # ### # # # # # ## # # !C # # # # !C# # # # # # # # ## !C # # # # ## # # # # # # ## # # ## # # # ## # # ^ # # # # # # # ## !C ## # ^ # # # !C# # # # ^ # # ## #!C # # ^
    [Show full text]
  • Ramotshere Moiloa Local Municipality at a Glance
    RAMOTSHERE MOILOA LOCAL MUNICIPALITY Integrated Development Plan 2020/2021 Table of Contents Mayor’s Foreword i Mayor Cllr.P K Mothoagae ............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. Acting Municipal Manager’s Overview iv 1. CHAPTER 1: Executive Summary 1 1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Ramotshere Moiloa Local Municipality at a Glance ............................................................................ 1 1.3 The 2017-2022 IDP ............................................................................................................................. 2 1.4 The IDP Process ................................................................................................................................. 3 1.4.2 Phase 1 Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4.3 Phase 2: Strategies ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.4.4 Phase 3: Projects ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.4.5 Phase 4: Integration .................................................................................................................................... 5
    [Show full text]
  • North-West Province
    © Lonely Planet Publications 509 North-West Province From safaris to slots, the pursuit of pleasure is paramount in the North-West Province. And with the top three reasons to visit less than a six-hour drive from Johannesburg, this region is more than fun. It’s convenient. Gambling is the name of the game here, although not always in the traditional sense. Place your luck in a knowledgeable ranger’s hands at Madikwe Game Reserve and bet on how many lions he’ll spot on the sunrise wildlife drive. You have to stay to play at this exclusive reserve on the edge of the Kalahari, and the lodges here will be a splurge for many. But for that once-in-a-lifetime, romantic Out of Africa–style safari experience, South Africa’s fourth-largest reserve can’t be beat. If you’d rather spot the Big Five without professional help, do a self-drive safari in Pi- lanesberg National Park. The most accessible park in the country is cheaper than Madikwe, and still has 7000 animals packed into its extinct volcano confines. Plus it’s less than three hours’ drive from Jo’burg. When you’ve had your fill betting on finding rhino, switch to cards at the opulent Sun City casino complex down the road. The final component of the province’s big attraction trifecta is the southern hemisphere’s answer to Las Vegas: a shame- lessly gaudy, unabashedly kitsch and downright delicious place to pass an afternoon. Madikwe, Pilanesberg and Sun City may be the North-West Province’s heavyweight at- tractions, but there are more here than the province’s ‘Big Three’.
    [Show full text]
  • African Heritage Consultants Cc 2001/077745/23 Dr
    AFRICAN HERITAGE CONSULTANTS CC 2001/077745/23 DR. UDO S KÜSEL Tel: (012) 567 6046 Fax: 086 594 9721 P.O. Box 652 Magalieskruin Cell: 082 498 0673 E-mail: [email protected] 0150 A. PHASE I CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES IMPACT ASSESSMENT (a) PHASE I CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF PORTION 1 OF THE RHENOSTERSPRUIT FARM 908 JQ WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE MOSES KOTANE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY WITHIN THE BOJANALA DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY IN THE NORTH WEST PROVINCE. (b) REPORT COMPILED BY Dr. Udo S. Küsel; African Heritage Consultants CC P.O. Box 653, Magalieskruin, 0150 Tel: 012 567 6046; Fax: 086 594 9721; Cell: 082 498 0673 E-mail: [email protected] (c) DEVELOPER AND CONSULTANT INFORMATION Developer: Akha Maduna Property Developers (Pty) Ltd Contact Person: Mr. N. Kubeka Address: 103 Livingstone Street, Vryburg, 8601 Tel: 053 927 3569; Cell: 072 666 2166 E-mail: [email protected] Owner: Moses Kotane Local Municipality, Private Bag X 1011 Mogwase, 0314 Tel: 014 555 1300, Fax: 014 555 6368 Consultant: Lesekha Consulting Contact Person: Lesego Senna, Address: No. 25 Caroline Close, Rowlands Estate, Mafikeng, 2745 - Tel: 018 011 0002; Cell: 083 763 7854, E-mail: [email protected] Date of report: 27 August 2018 1 B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The site is typical Bushveld with mostly very dense vegetation. Towards the north and west a township has been developed – Mogwase and Mabele a Podi as well as the Mankwe Campus ORBIT TVET College. The site was investigated on foot and by vehicle. Especially towards the south the vegetation is very dense, this made the inspection of the site very difficult.
    [Show full text]
  • Delareyville Main Seat of Tswaing Magisterial District
    # # !C # # ### !C^ !.C# # # # !C # # # # # # # # # # ^!C # # # # # # # ^ # # ^ # # !C # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # !C# # !C # # # # # # # # # #!C # # # # # # #!C# # # # # # !C ^ # # # # # # # # # # # # ^ # # # # !C # !C # #^ # # # # # # ## # #!C # # # # # # ## !C# # # # # # # !C# ## # # # # !C # !C # # # ## # # # ^ # # # # # # # # #!C# # # # # ## ## # # # # # # # # # # ## #!C # # # # # # # # # # !C # # # ## # # ## # # # # # # !C # # # ## ## # ## # # # # !C # # # # ## # # !C# !C # #^ # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # #!C # ## # ##^ # !C #!C# # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # ## # # # !C# ## # # # # # ^ # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # ## # ## # # !C # # #!C # # # # # # # !C# # # # # !C # # # # !C## # # # # # # # # # ## # # # # # # ## ## ## # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # !C ## # # # # # # # # # ## # # #!C # # # # # # # # # ^ # # # # # # ^ # # # ## # # # # # # # # # ## #!C # # # # # # # #!C # !C # # # # !C # #!C # # # # # # # # ## # # !C # ### # ## # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # # !C # # # # # # ## # # # # # # !C # #### !C## # # # !C # # ## !C !C # # # # # # # # !.# # # # # # # ## # #!C# # # # # # # ## # # # # # # # # # # # ### # #^ # # # # # # # ## # # # # ^ # !C# ## # # # # # # !C## # # # # # # # ## # # # ## # !C ## # # # # # ## !C# # !C# ### # !C### # # ^ # # # !C ### # # # !C# ##!C # !C # # # ^ !C ## # # #!C ## # # # # # # # # # # ## !C## ## # # ## # ## # # # # # #!C # ## # # # # # # # ## # # !C # ^ # # ## # # # # # !.!C # # # # # # # !C # # !C# # ### # # # # # # # # # # ## !C # # # # ## !C
    [Show full text]
  • Rich Groundwater in the Eastern and Mogwase Regions of the Northern and North - West Provinces
    M DISTRIBUTION OF FLUORIDE - RICH GROUNDWATER IN THE EASTERN AND MOGWASE REGIONS OF THE NORTHERN AND NORTH - WEST PROVINCES LP McCaffrey • JP Willis WRC Report No 526/1/01 Disclaimer This report emanates from a project financed by the Water Research Commission (WRC) and is approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the WRC or the members of the project steering committee, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Vrywaring Hierdie verslag spruit voort uit 'n navorsingsprojek wat deur die Waternavorsingskommissie (WNK) gefinansier is en goedgekeur is vir publikasie. Goedkeuring beteken nie noodwendig dat die inhoud die siening en beleid van die WNK of die lede van die projek-loodskomitee weerspiee'J nie, of dat melding van handelsname of -ware deur die WNK vir gebruik goedgekeur of aanbeveel word nie. DISTRIBUTION OF FLUORIDE-RICH GROUND WATER IN THE EASTERN AND MOGWASE REGIONS OF THE NORTHERN AND NORTH-WEST PROVINCES by L p MCCAFFREY and j p WILLIS Department of Geological Sciences University of Cape Town Rondebosch 7700, South Africa Report to the Water Research Commission on the Project 'Distribution of fluoride-rich ground water in the eastern and Mogwase regions of the Northern and North-western Provinces: influence of bedrock and soils and constraints on utilisable drinking water supplies" Head of Department: Professor A P le Roex Project Leader: Professor J P Willis WRC Report No. 526/1/01 ISBN 186845
    [Show full text]
  • SIBU and the Crisis of Water Service Delivery in Sannieshof, North West Province
    SIBU and the crisis of water service delivery in Sannieshof, North West Province C GOUWS, I MOEKETSI, S MOTLOUNG, J TEMPELHOFF, G VAN GREUNING AND L VAN ZYL* Abstract In 2007 the residents of the town of Sannieshof in North West Province declared a dispute with the Tswaing Local Municipality on the grounds that the state of local service delivery left much to be desired. The ratepayers then formed the Sannieshof Inwoners Belastingbetalers Unie (SIBU) which literally took over the functions of local government of the town, functioning as a local government within a local government. This article provides a historical narrative of the conflict between SIBU and Tswaing Local Municipality, a dispute which was taken as far as the provincial High Court. Then follows an outline of conditions in Sannieshof and the townships of Agisanang and Phelindaba. Attention is given to the perceptions of local residents on the prevalent conditions, specifically in respect of water supply and sanitation service delivery. In the third section there are some theoretical perspectives on political culture, socialisation and happiness. A debate is provided on how these phenomena manifest under existing conditions in Sannieshof, and more particularly, in its adjacent townships of Agisanang and Phelindaba. Keywords: Sannieshof Inwoners Belastingbetalers Unie (SIBU), North West Province, service delivery, water supply, sanitation, Tswaing Local Municipality. Disciplines: History, Political Science, Tourism Studies and Public Management and Administration, Industrial Psychology and Wellness Studies. Introduction In November 2007, irate ratepayers of the towns Sannieshof, Ottosdal and Delareyville in South Africa’s North West Province, declared a dispute with Tswaing Local Municipality, the local authority responsible for their municipal services.1 Using the Municipal Finance (Management) Act, 56 of 2003,2 the Municipal Structures Act, 117 of 1998,3 and the Municipal Systems Act, 32 * Research Niche Area for the Cultural Dynamics of Water (CuDyWat).
    [Show full text]
  • Lichtenburg 2
    LICHTENBURG 2 North West Province Social Impact Assessment (SIA) Scoping Report August 2018 Social Impact Assessment – Scoping Report August 2018 Lichtenburg 2 North West Province Prepared for: ABO Wind Lichtenburg 2 PV (Pty) Ltd Lichtenburg 2 North West Province August 2018 PROJECT DETAILS Title : Social Impact Assessment (SIA) Scoping Report for the Lichtenburg 2 PV Facility near Lichtenburg, in the North West Province Authors : Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd Sarah Watson Client : ABO Wind Lichtenburg 2 PV (Pty) Ltd Report Revision : Revision 1 Date : August 2018 When used as a reference this report should be cited as: Savannah Environmental (2018). Social Impact Assessment (SIA) Scoping Report for the Lichtenburg 2 PV Facility near Lichtenburg, in the North West Province. COPYRIGHT RESERVED This technical report has been produced for ABO Wind Lichtenburg 2 PV (Pty) Ltd. The intellectual property contained in this report remains vested in Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd. No part of the report may be reproduced in any manner without written permission from Savannah Environmental (Pty) Ltd or ABO Wind Lichtenburg 2 PV (Pty) Ltd. Project Details Page i Lichtenburg 2 North West Province August 2018 SPECIALIST DECLARATION OF INTEREST I, Sarah Watson, declare that – » I act as the independent specialist in this application. » I will perform the work relating to the application in an objective manner, even if this results in views and findings that are not favourable to the applicant. » I declare that there are no circumstances that may compromise my objectivity in performing such work. » I have expertise in conducting the specialist report relevant to this application, including knowledge of the Act, Regulations and any guidelines that have relevance to the proposed activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Basic Assessment Report Lehurutshe Landfill Site
    the DEDECT Department: Economic Development, Environment, Conservation and Tourism North West Provincial Government Republic of South Africa Agricentre Building Tel: (018) 389 5959/ 5156 Cnr. Dr. James Moroka & DIRECTORATE: ENVIRONMENTAL Fax: (018) 389 5006 Stadium Road [email protected] Private Bag X2039, QUALITY & PROTECTION Mmabatho, 2735 Basic Assessment Report for the Continued Operations of Lehurutshe Landfill site: Waste License Application NWP/WM/NM5/2013/27, Ramotshere-Moiloa Local Municipality (For official use only) File Reference Number: Application Number: Date Received: Basic assessment report in terms of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, 2010, promulgated in terms of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998), as amended. Kindly note that: 1. This basic assessment report is a standard report that may be required by a competent authority in terms of the EIA Regulations, 2010 and is meant to streamline applications. Please make sure that it is the report used by the particular competent authority for the activity that is being applied for. 2. The report must be typed within the spaces provided in the form. The size of the spaces provided is not necessarily indicative of the amount of information to be provided. The report is in the form of a table that can extend itself as each space is filled with typing. 3. Where applicable tick the boxes that are applicable in the report. 4. An incomplete report may be returned to the applicant for revision. 5. The use of ―not applicable‖ in the report must be done with circumspection because if it is used in respect of material information that is required by the competent authority for assessing the application, it may result in the rejection of the application as provided for in the regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Appendix I: Public Participation
    APPENDIX I - Public Participation 1. Appendix I1: Advertisements and Notices 2. Appendix I2: Notification to I&APs 3. Appendix I3: Comments and Response Report 4. Appendix I4: Notification to Authorities 5. Appendix I5: I&AP Register 6. Appendix I6: Meeting Minutes APPENDIX I1: Advertisements and Notices 1. Advertisement 2. Proof of placement 3. Site notices 4. Proof of placement Site notices on the corner of Lange and Kort streets (25°34'18.09"S, 26° 5'16.72"E). Site notices on the corner of Buiten and Kort streets (25°34'14.44"S, 26° 5'34.97"E). APPENDIX I2: Notification to I&APs 1. Background Information Document (BID) 2. Letter of notification – I&APs 3. Mailchimp proof of delivery 4. Postal proof of delivery APPENDIX I3: Comments and Response Report All comments received following the availability of the Draft BAR will be compiled in a Comments and Responses Report which will be included in the Final BA Report for submission to READ for review and a decision on Environmental Authorisation. The following issues and/or comments have been received to date. Correspondence date Stakeholder / I&AP Affiliation Comments Response and medium Dear Aidan, Your company is currently conducting a Basic Impact Assessment for the establishment of a proposed extension Dear Ms Du Plooy of two middle income residential areas on portin 5 of Farm Hazia. Please could you forward me the BID or BAR for Thank you for your email, you have been this application and register me as a Interested & Affected added to the Interested and Affected party? Parties list and will be notified when the draft Basic Assessment Report is Thanking you in anticipation of a favourable response.
    [Show full text]
  • MAHLANGU MAFIKA : Applicant And
    CA 137/2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (BOPHUTHATSWANA PROVINCIAL DIVISION) In the matter between:- MAHLANGU MAFIKA : Applicant and THE STATE : Respondent APPLICATION MAFIKENG HENDRICKS AJ DATE OF HEARING :22 September 2003 DATE OF JUDGMENT :25 September 2003 COUNSEL FOR APPLICANT :Adv. E.M. Mmolawa COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT :Adv. M.M. Sono HENDRICKS AJ: This is an appeal against the refusal of bail by the Magistrate in the Regional Court, Mmabatho. The Appellant, who was accused no. 7 - in the court a quo , applied unsuccessfully to be released on bail pending his trial. The initial bail application was heard on the 05th March 2003 and new evidence was led on 10th April 2003, but it was only on the 12th September 2003 (5 months later) that this appeal appeared for the first time before this court. It is indeed regrettable that such a long delay occurred in this matter seeing that bail appeals are urgent and it should be attended to as soon as it is practically possible to do so. The appellant was together with his co-accused arrested at a farm near Ramatlabama, near the border with neighbouring Botswana. It appears from the uncontested evidence that the Appellant happened to be in a Nissan Bakkie together with one of his co-accused, accused no. 4, in the court a quo . Apparently Accused No. 4 was asked by the Appellant to bring building materials from Pretoria to Itsoseng where the Appellant was attending to a building project at the Itsoseng Magistrate Court. According to the Appellant, Accused No.
    [Show full text]