SUGGESTIONS ON STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN EIA SYSTEM IN INDIA
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
SUGGESTIONS ON STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN EIA SYSTEM IN
INDIA
Objective of EIA: At REIAI, we believe that the EIA Notification is a very important piece
of legislation which, if properly used, can lead to the fine balance required to be struck
between environment and development, especially in a developing country like India which
needs development activities to lift large populations out of poverty but without damaging the
environment. The EIA process provides an opportunity to the country to assess the potential
impacts of the development activities and projects, and to design the required mitigation
measures and internalise the same within the project at planning stage itself to ensure that
adverse impacts are minimised and positive socio-economic and employment benefits of such
development activities/projects can be maximised. Our suggestions for transformation of the
process should be seen in this background.
Objective of EIA 2020: The draft EIA Notification 2020 comes 14 years after its currently
operational avatar came into operation, which itself came after 12 years of the first such
legislation. We may, therefore, safely assume that the draft 2020, once operational, will stay
at least for the next 10 – 15 years. We must, therefore, ensure that the legislation meets with
its objective – of promoting developmental activities at minimum or no damage to
environment.
The preamble to the draft Notification 2020 mentions, inter alia, the objectives of the draft as
below:
“”---Though the EIA Notification, 2006 has helped in realizing necessary environmental
safeguards by assessing environment impacts due to the proposed projects, that require
Prior Environment Clearance at the planning stage itself, the Central Government seeks to
make the process more transparent and expedient through implementation of online
system, further delegations, rationalization, standardization of the process, etc.; ---“
(emphasis ours)
Our understanding of the performance of the 2006 Notification is as noted below:
There have, so far, been 56 amendments to the 2006 Notification through Gazette
notifications while 230 Office Memoranda have been issued to clarify or significantly
amend the provisions of the original notification, and still counting!
There have been umpteen orders by various courts including NGT and Supreme Court
quashing many Environmental Clearances (ECs) granted by the regulatory authorities
due to poor quality of EIAs and questioning the decision-making process of the
appraisal committees
Courts have also been active in reversing many orders and amendments of the
Ministry in respect of the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006, especially those
relating to mining
There is a wide perception that the quality of the EIAs and appraisal thereof does not
do justice to the cause of protecting the environment which is the primary objective of
the Notification
Another widely held perception, surprisingly, is that the process of obtaining the ECs
is a burden on the industry. It takes years to obtain EC for the smallest of projects
without adding any value on the environmental protection front.
SEIAAs and SEACs are overburdened with number of projects; on the other hand,
Project Proponents and EIA Consultants are harried due to repeated hearings without
result!
The bottom line is that everyone involved in the process has only one objective: to get
or to give EC to the proposed project, not the intended objective as stated earlier!
Major features of EIA 2020: In this backdrop comes the draft EIA Notification 2020. So,
it’s necessary to examine what does the draft Notification proposes to do:
The draft does well in incorporating and integrating all the different amendments and
OMs issued in the last 14 years. One won’t now be required to hunt outside the
notification to find out applicable provisions. The moot question is: would the new
Notification avoid another cycle of issuance of amendments and OMs?
The draft does well in introducing definitions of terms used in the Notification which
is expected to be helpful in avoiding interpretational issues, though some of the
definitions would need to be improved before they serve the purpose.
The draft incorporates procedure for dealing with violations of the provisions of the
Notification. This is important and, in our view, well-intentioned since there is
currently no mechanism to deal with applications for EC by projects which have
indulged in violations, deliberately or otherwise. It remains to be seen, however,
whether these provisions are able to stand the test in courts.
The draft seeks to ease the burden on the industry by way of introducing:
o Relaxed requirements for modernisation with limited increase in production
o Increasing thresholds for many sectors
o Relaxed provisions for MSMEs
o Specific lists for exemptions from EC or from Public Hearing
o Introducing B2 category projects within the Schedule
o Re-introduction of District/Divisional Expert Appraisal Committees (for B2
cat projects) to be constituted by SEIAAs on recommendation of the State/UT
Govts
o Provision for a Technical Expert Committee and a Monitoring Committee
o Providing for a new concept ‘Environmental Permission’ and issue of EP on-
line based on ’acceptance’ of application by the concerned SEIAA
o Provisions for issue of instant ToRs, and reduced time limits for all stages in
the process
Pitfalls: While doing all the changes and integration, welcome as they are, the draft
notification suffers from the infirmity of being ‘more of the same’! So, there is no
acknowledgement of the fact (perception?) that the intended purpose of the legislation is lostand industry is only chasing ECs and regulatory authorities are also going through the
motions of granting the same.
The basic structure of EIA administration remains unchanged
Screening
Scoping
Preparation of EIA/EMP report, including
Public Consultations
Appraisal
Grant/refusal of EC
The various pitfalls in this process, as identified by us are listed below along with suggestions
on how to overcome those within the framework of the Notification. Our belief is that, with
the suggested structural changes, the EIA as a tool will become more potent in balancing the
apparently conflicting demands of environment and development while simultaneously
reducing the burden on the industry.Issue Explanation Suggestion Explanation
Quality of EIA 1. Too many 1. Reduce 1. Utilise to the extent feasible
reports; quality projects, number of regional and/or cumulative
of appraisal; especially at projects EIAs to grant ECs to
capacity and SEIAA/SEA requiring clusters [as per para 5.1(a)
institutional C level appraisal of NEP 2006]; distinction
independence of 2. Many 2. More between consents and ECs
regulatory members of competent 2. Transparent selection
authorities and Appraisal appraisal procedure; training; more
appraisal committees committees sectoral experts
committees don’t have
understandin
g of EIA or
the sector 3. SC order in Lafarge
3. Lack of 3. National EIA Judgement
institutional Authority and
learning, National
capacity, EACs as well
independenc as SEIAAs to
e have
4. Issue of EC permanent
letter secretariats,
unrelated to independent
EIA report of MoEFCC
5. Appraisal of and State
projects is Govt/SPCBs;
normally Independent
done without budget 4. Will ensure endorsement of
doing site all contents of EIA reports,
visits which 4. Approve the and compliance monitoring
is a crucial EIA report also based on the same
step in with 5. More realistic appraisal
understandin signatures of
g site- EAC/SEAC
specific on each page
features
5. Use
technology to
appraise the
site features
without
visiting:
satellite
pictures, live
streaming, etc
Time taken; Collection of fresh Suggest: default MoEFCC should develop/promote
reliability of baseline data for one option should be to a portal which can host all possible
baseline data season is the most prepare EIA reports data relevant to preparation of
(BLD) time consuming step based on secondary EIAs, duly geo-tagged to enablein the entire process data (except for very identifying sources of data relevant
of EIA preparation. large projects) from for a specific location based on
It’s an open secret government or other coordinates. The consultants and/or
that in a reliable sources. This PPs can download the data at a cost
predominant will have benefit in and prepare the EIA report quickly.
majority of cases, saving lot of time and Since everyone, including appraisal
the baseline data is would improve committees, have access to the
not credible. quality of EIA reports same data, appraisal would be
as well as of better.
appraisal.
Primary data to be necessary only
in case of and to the extent of non-
availability of secondary data
within 50 kms of the proposed site.
In case of expansion
projects: use of own Expansion: Will improve EMP and
monitored data compliance monitoring; will avoid
should be fresh BLD, reduce cost of EIA and
encouraged, duly reduce time frame, improve
calibrated with appraisal quality
secondary data
Mining sector 94 minerals, Separate EIA A small mine of, say, soapstone
has posed most distributed across Notification for (minor mineral) in Rajasthan vs in
problems different geo-socio- mining sector Uttarakhand(UK) can have entirely
regarding EIA environmental addressing all different environmental
framework; on scenarios; of sizes minerals, implications. Most such mines in
the other hand, varying from 0.1 to geographies, and geo UK (along steep hill slopes) can
mining sector has thousands of - socio-environmental lead to disasters like landslides.
its own set of hectares and variety factors. Also, in Cluster/cumulative assessment
elaborate of mining methods. India, multiple leases can look at all significant issues and
legislations are granted on single ensure appropriate mitigation
relating to, Sectoral regulators deposit having measures at a cluster level.
safety, welfare, for mining at central common geo-socio-
environment, (IBM) and State environmental issues.
scientific mining (DMG) levels to Combined assessment and approval
and mineral approve mining Combine process for mine plans and EIAs
conservation, plans which contain environmental can reap the benefits of mining
community EMP also assessment with the domain knowledge of sectoral
support, mine plan approval regulators and environmental
Sustainable process for more expertise of environmental
Development effective EC process regulators along with independent
Framework experts.
(SDF)
Construction Integrate with the Restrict the Individual standalone projects can
sector townplanning environmental continue to be governed by
process assessment process to individual EIA/EC process
Master Plans and
Zonal Plans forstipulating regional
conditions on
townplanning
departments or
development
agencies/authorities
Does EIA Different provisions Suggest: the Better appraisal if the social, socio-
Notification take in the draft 2020 Notification should economic and environmental
care of only indicate differing clearly state that it concerns are integrated.
environmental focus takes cognisance of Duplication of such assessments
issues and environmental as well and public consultations should be
concerns? as social and socio- removed from other legislations,
economic issues since eg, LARR Act, wherever applicable
these are closely
interwoven and is
also an internationally
accepted best practiceYou can also read
