Skip to main content

Environmental clearance: Seeking "additional information" will delay projects, Centre to expert committees

Counterview Desk
In a fresh concession to corporate sector developers across India, a new office memorandum, one the many in a series issues by the Union ministry of environment, forests and climate change, has told Indian and state environmental authorities not to seek any additional information before providing environmental clearance. The memorandum states, “it has been brought to its notice” that Expert Appraisal Committees (EACs, Central authorities, giving environmental clearance to bigger projects) and State Expert Appraisal Committees (SEACs, giving environmental nod to smaller projects) have been seeking “additional studies which do not form a part of terms of reference”, adding, the authorities should stop the practice.
Pointing out that this “delays the whole process and is against the spirit of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification (2006)”, the memorandum says, EACs and SEACs should address “all issues” at the primary Scoping Clearance stage itself, basing themselves on "information submitted by the project proponent". In fact, it insists, the meeting of project proponents with EACs should ensure that “no fresh issues are raised later”, and that additional information/ additional studies are asked for only in extreme, “inevitable” cases.
The title of the memorandum itself suggests what the Centre wants -- "Seeking additional studies by EACs/ SEACs during appraisal of project beyond the Terms of Reference (ToRs) prescribed under EIA Notification 2006."  Taking strong exception to the approach, two senior environmentalists of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), Parineeta Dandekar and Himanshu Thakkar, have said in a recent article that it as yet another “pro-industry and anti-environment” order, adding, “Drop by drop, such orders and circulars are making it impossible to rely on the original environmental acts and notifications.”
Suggesting that the new memorandum appears to have been “brought out due to pressure from project-related ministries and industrial lobby”, SANDRP has said, even now “EACs and SEACs were asking for additional studies in very rare cases”. In fact, “EACs, like the one on river valley and hydropower projects, have a clearance record of 100 per cent and rarely ask for additional studies.” Given this factor, they wonder, “So what was the need for this specific memorandum?”
Qualifying it as a “regressive step”, SANRDP says, “In reality, the very need for asking such additional studies or information is due to severely compromised information provided by the proponents themselves at the Scoping Clearance stage. Looking at the environmental clearance process, it seems hiding information, providing false information, misleading the EAC and even committing blatant violations has become the norm rather than an exception.”
It adds, “In very rare cases, when this is exposed before EAC, they have asked for additional studies -- instead of taking any strong action, for example rejecting the application or postponing decision till the studies are done, as per the law and prudent decision making norms.” In fact, the memorandum “effectively” states that EACs should “process applications based on any shoddy information they receive and should close their eyes even when critical issues surface later in the process”.
The environmentalists say, “Rather than passing such memorandums, the ministry needs to ensure that all the steps of EC process are complied with. That’s not the case today and that’s a more pressing problem than additional studies. It is this non-compliance that is damaging the spirit of EIA Notification 2006 about which the Ministry seems to be least concerned. There is no need for any additional memorandums to fix these issues, only real concern for spirit of EIA Notification and other related laws.“
According to them, “By ordering that no additional information should be sought after TOR stage, the ministry is deriding the importance of public hearing which take place as a part of the EIA study, after TORs are granted. By discouraging additional studies, it is suggesting that even public consultations are immaterial. No more studies, after TOR please!” They qualify it as “an insult of the public consultation process which should form the heart of appraisal and assessment process”.

Comments

TRENDING

Banned? Indian ports 'received' 38 US plastic waste containers reexported from Indonesia

By Rajiv Shah
An Indonesia-based international environmental watchdog group has dug out what it has called “a global pollution shell game”, stating how officials in Indonesia approved re-exports of “illegal” US waste shipments containing plastics mainly to India, as also to other Asian countries -- Thailand, South Korea and Vietnam -- instead of returning them to the US “as promised.”

Business interests? Hindu bankers 'helped' Company Raj to flourish, colonize India

By Rajiv Shah
A new book, ‘The Anarchy: The Relentless Rise of the East India Company’, authored by well-known Scott historian William Dalrymple, has said that a major reason for the success of the East India Company (EIC), which “colonized” the country between 1600 and 1857, was the support it got from Indian financiers or moneylenders, including Jagat Seth of Calcutta, Gokul Das of Benaras and other “Hindu bankers” of Patna and Allahabad.

Cops' 'inability' to deliver justice? Model Gujarat ranks 12th among 18 major states

By Rajiv Shah
A Tata Trusts study, released in Delhi on Thursday, has ranked “model” Gujarat 12th out of 18 major states it has analysed across India to “assess” the police's capacity to deliver justice. Several of the advanced states such as Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Punjab, Haryana, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana as well as some of the so-called Bimaru states such as Odisha, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh are found to have ranked better than Gujarat.

NHRC notice to Gujarat chief secretary following silicosis deaths in Rajkot

By Our Representative
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has asked the Gujarat chief secretary and the district magistrate, Rajkot, to respond to a complaint filed by health rights activist Jagdish Patel of the People's Training and Research Centre (PTRC), Vadodara, regarding the alleged death of Raju Prakash Parihar and two others reportedly because of silicosis, a fatal occupation disease, in Rajkot, one of Gujarat’s top cities.

People's pressure? GPCB mining cancellation 'notice' to top cement unit in Gujarat

By Sagar Rabari*
Environmental Clearance (EC) was given to Ultratech Cement Co Ltd for limestone mining in villages Talli and Bambhor of Talaja taluka in Bhavnagar district of Gujarat on January 5, 2017. EC was issued ignoring, overriding and undermining opposition from local farmers to mining activity in the area. The mining in these two villages covers an area of 193.3268 hectares (ha), while the entire project is spread over an area of 1,715.1311 ha.

Bullet train acquisition: Land holding worth Rs 1.5 crore, Gujarat govt 'offer' Rs 8 lakh

By RK Misra*
Foundation stones laid by Prime Minister Narendra Modi litter India’s cities, towns and villages, but there are few projects which he has pursued with such perseverance and tenacity as the Ahmedabad-Mumbai bullet train one. However, the overwhelming state power notwithstanding, the farmers, whose lands are being acquired for the Modi government’s dream project, have no plans to give up the fight.

Concern in UK over BJP supporters, Hindu charity 'interfering' in general elections

By Our Representative
Following apprehensions of “foreign interference” in Canadian elections, which took place last month, from several countries, including India, a similar a concern is now reported with regard to the next month’s United Kingdom general elections. The concern has particularly come from Labour Party candidates, who are citing campaign by “India-linked Hindu nationalist group” targeting Labour candidates.