Presentation by Dr. Yashpal Singh at WEBINAR on “DRAFT EIA NOTIFICATION 2020” Held on 31/05/2020

Presentation by Dr. Yashpal Singh, Chairman, The Wealthy Waste School India in the Brainstorming Session through WEBINAR on 31/05/2020 on the “DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (E.I.A.) NOTIFICATION 2020” published by MoEF&CC, New Delhi. Organized by the International Development Centre Foundation (IDC Foundation), Indian Association of Air Pollution Control (IAAPC)-(DC) and CPCB Alumni Association (CPCBAA).

The Presentation discusses the following issues :-
• Provisions for processing fee
• Procedure for interrelated and integrated projects.
• Need to specify the Secretarial for SEIAA, SEAC, UTEIAA, DEAC etc with budgets and funding.
• Functions of Member Secretary’s Need to be clearly specified
• Non Linear Border Projects.
• Procedures for change in Pollution Control Technology without any change in manufacturing processes.
• Application to be made on identification of site.
• Quorum for the meeting? Majority of present or majority of Members as in constitution.
• Need for clarity on ‘Built up area”. Areas open to Sky not to classify as built up area.
• The need for CER when C.S.R. and EMP already mandated (3.16)
• Rethink on the proposal to allow the Committees to modify the standard conditions
• Who will draw up the TOR. Authority or Committee (3.49, 3.56) Need for uniformity.
• Procedures for High Security projects.
• Extension of Tenures.
• Both the EAC and the SEAC/DLEAC should have Member Secretary’s with functions clearly defined.
• Technical committee to also have a role in coordination and compilation of sector wise Environmental Management and Pollution Control Options.
• Role of Technical Committee in individual Environmental Clearances to be established more clearly in the notification. Why do we provide a role for the Technical Committee in the individual clearances.
• Need to reconsider the proposal that New Projects shall only be referred to the Appraisal Committee for specific TOR if deemed necessary. Committee should decide whether Specific TOR is necessary or not. Referral should be compulsory.
• The provision that cases for amendment in TOR should be put up to the committee only if thought necessary needs a review. Referral to committee should be mandatory to avoid last moment observations from committee at appraisal.
• Reconsider requirements for monsoon base line data .
• Need for at least 1 day non monsoon check data in case of use of old base line data.
• Multi district-multiple Public hearings –Need to rethink.
• The completeness of application and legal status to be included in the initial scrutiny by the Authority before putting up to committee.
• Project proponents ‘may’ be invited rather than ‘shall’ be invited to the meetings for clarification at the discretion of the committee.
• The provision of exempting projects which do not pollute from an E.I.A. or E.M.P. needs to be reconsidered. E.C. is just not a pollution clearances. It involves land, water, ecology, socio economics, forestry, energy conservation etc. which may be important from the environmental point of view.
• Project proponents may not be invited to Authority meetings for clarification. Authority to seek clarification from committee. Need to add provision at
• Reconsider the requirement of preliminary notification under the LARR Act as proof of land. It takes almost 02 years to secure. What if the Committee rejects the site. Instead why not use the copy of notification regarding commencement of SIA and determination of public purpose/letter to collector notifying intent to purchase/letter from seller.
• Certificate of satisfactory compliance instead of compliance report every year
• Why Fee for non submission of Compliance Report {20(5)}. Fee is a consideration for services rendered.
• Compliance monitoring MoEF & CC RO or ZO CPCB may require specific provisions. May be RO MoEFF & CC or as delegated by him the ZO CPCB. Do not leave it open
• Amalgamating 02 or more environmental Clearances may create problems. Cumulative affects may need to be Assessed
• Need to consider cost of EMP as 1.5 times of ecological damage plus benefits derived. EMP is need based depending on EIA and Public Consultation. Need also to reconsider benefits accrued. Leave cost to best judgment of Committee.
• In cases where a project is being considered by the violation committee as sustainable and fit for E.C. it should not be a subject for a case under section 19.
• Immediately close down projects which are operating with consent but without E.C. Dealing consents as provisional for 06 months not proper
• Mining. One E.C. to be taken by district Administration. One Resource management, one E.M.P. , one EIA and one E.C. District Plan.
• Exempting all individual industries within Industrial areas only feasible if number, type and capacity of industries is specified in E.C.
• Cluster effect considerations need to be examined for exemption

Related Articles


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Stay Connected

- Advertisement -spot_img

Latest Articles