How has the EIA Amendments in 2006 and 2020 affected the environment and communities?

Abstract

In this essay, we are going to be taking a look at the Environment Impact Assessment that was drafted in 2020. In order to provide ease of business, this proposal grants post-facto environment clearance which can have many negative implications. The notice for public hearings were also reduced from 30 to 20 days making it difficult for communities to voice their opinions. We are going to critically analyse the various implications of drafting an act like that and we will also compare it to the 2006 amendments to understand how the forest covers would change as a result of the new law.

Forests in India have been of vital importance because of its ecological, social and economic value that it provides not only at the local level but also at a national and global level through the extraction of natural resources which in turn generates a huge income for the government of India. During colonial rule, large patches of the forests of Western Ghats were taken down in order to provide timber for the railway projects, since then such ecologically degraded activities have been observed throughout the forests of the country despite gaining independence. Several projects including that of river valleys, nuclear power, exploration of oil and gas, ports, petroleum refineries, mining of major minerals, thermal power. highway roads etc have been carried out under the jurisdiction of the government and related authorities. As of today, conservation of biodiversity has been a major concern considering the climate change issue that the entire world is facing. In order to do that, India’s the then Prime Minister Ms Indira Gandhi delivered a keynote at a global level focusing on the Human Environment and raised some serious concerns on which global efforts were required, this included:

• Human health and settlements
• Territorial ecosystems
• Sustainable development
• Protection of natural resources
• Prevention of environmental disturbance
• Promotion of chemical safety
• Global Climatic changes
• Risk to ozone layer
• Depletion of Genetic resources
  

India had to look after these environmental issues but apart from that India faced and still faces two major problems of population growth and poverty which aggravates the ecological imbalance and needs immediate attention.

Now, the planning and implementation of commercial/industrial projects not only harms the geographical setting of the place but also affects the flora and fauna in addition to the local tribes who have considered these forests and river valleys as their natural habitat. Therefore, to safeguard the interests of both the citizens and the public and private parties who wish to conduct projects over biodiversity, the government introduced certain regulatory authorities and laws concerning environmental rights in India.

One such draft named Environment Impact Assessment Notification was published in 1994 under the Environment Protection Act 1986, by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEF&CC). The main objective of this notification was to support the sustainable industrialization process in the country after giving due consideration to the environmental and social impacts that it might have which means that the new proposals or projects could not be expanded further without receiving an environmental clearance from the government. It was also required for the formation of Impact Assessment Agency (IAA) and defined its roles and responsibilities to be played in the environmental clearance process. Since then many amendments have been removed and added in order to strengthen the process.

Several revisions to the EIA Notification, 2006, have been made from time to time for simplifying, decentralisation, and other purposes as per the directions of Courts and National Green Tribunal. Through the adoption of an online system, additional delegations, rationalisation, and standardisation of the process, the government hopes to make the process more transparent and efficient. The breach was described as projects that had begun construction activity, or had initiated expansion, modernization, or a change in product mix without obtaining Prior Environment Clearance.

Rather than focusing on maintaining environmental protection, the draft EIA Notification March 2020 (EIA Notification, 2020) violates the National Green Tribunal's judgments against post-facto approvals. The goal of this announcement is to legalize industry-related illegalities. The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change seeks to broaden the list of projects that do not require public participation before receiving environmental approval in the newest draft. According to the draft, public consultation is not required for projects such as irrigation modernization, all building construction, and area development projects, inland waterways, expansion or widening of national highways, all projects involving national defence and security or other strategic considerations as determined by the central government, all linear projects such as pipelines in border areas, and all off-shore projects located beyond the 12 nautical miles.

The proposal also reduces the time required for the public to submit replies during a public hearing for any application seeking environmental clearance from 30 days to 20 days. The public hearing process must also be completed in 40 days, as opposed to 45 days under the 2006 notification. The key reason for shortening the period is that new investments will find it easier to fulfil the EIA formalities. The problem is that if sufficient time is not given for individuals who would be affected by the project to prepare their thoughts, comments, and suggestions, such public hearings will be meaningless (as the high court stated in the Samarth Trust Case). This draft is better suited to investors than to the environment. This is evidenced by the fact that the deadline for producing a compliance report was extended throughout the project's duration. The previous notification required the project proponent to submit a report every six months demonstrating that they are carrying out their activities in accordance with the terms of the license issued. The new notification, on the other hand, simply needs the promoter to submit a report once a year. Because of the lengthy reporting period, many irreversible environmental, social, or health repercussions of the project may go undiscovered throughout this time.

Furthermore, the compliance system compels the promoters to file the documentation that will be used to analyse the environmental impact. This gives promoters a lot of leeway in terms of selecting the data and information they want to provide. If a proponent is involved in developmental action, he may argue that he has the option of either concealing or downplaying data concerning the activity's negative repercussions. In the Vedanta case of the Niyamgiri forest, legal provisions were broken and bent for the corporation's advantage, neglecting the Adivasi population's hardship. Situations like this could be avoided if the government conducted verification. If the government just relies on information provided by the project proponent, a problem will go unreported unless someone complains about it.

Various different critics such as environmental activists see the new draft of the EIA made by the union government as regressive in nature. The allegations state that this new draft is an attempt to make it easier to silence forest dwelling communities that rely on the forests for their lifestyle and livelihood.

The first major issue is that post-facto clearance is allowed in the new draft of EIA. This would allow industries to construct without getting any environmental clearances. This would mean that industries such as the LG Polymer Plant in Visakhapatnam which has been running illegally for two decades can continue to operate legally because of the new draft. This plant had a styrene gas leak on May 7th because of the lack of safety assessment and clearances and the nearby regions were affected adversely because of the incident. The natural gas of Oil India Limited also caught fire in May because of not adhering to environmental norms. This plant was in operation for the past 15 years without any consent from the board.

Public participation has also been an important part of drafting such laws. In the case of the EIA, public participation has helped make the communities become aware of the new laws and what the consequences of those laws might be. It also gave them a platform to voice out any concerns, objections and support for the laws. This platform, however, has been taken away to a great extent in the new draft. Sectors like national defense and security no longer require public participation for construction. Moreover, widening of highways, irrigation projects and modernisation projects also do not require public participation anymore.

The public hearings that can take place have a shorter notice time which is intended to increase efficiency and expedite projects. This has greatly reduced public participation even further.

The 2006 amendments were recognised as progressive changes because it increased a lot of regulations on industries to benefit the environment and the communities that reside in it. One of the main policies was that pollution loads were to be reported by an official. Public participation was to be conducted in order to determine any violations that may have occurred. Public notices were to be given out if less than 50% of a project was completed within a given time period. There was a limited validity on the EC and in case of a mine lessee, a new lessee can continue only till upto 2 years. EC compliance reports were to be generated every six months which would give at least two reports per year for each project. There was also a process in place to recognise and deal with projects that failed to gain any coastal environmental clearance. Public consultation was a key element of the 2006 amendments and it included all projects that affected them in any way. Environmental clearance could not be transferred without a written “no objection” from a regulatory authority.

In 2020, a lot of these benefits were removed which will definitely negatively affect communities that rely on the forest. Now public participation is missing almost completely. THe increase in project ca[acity is also permitted without any public consultation. THe validity of environmental clearances have now been increased for all projects. Moreover, the compliance reports that were generated twice a year will now be generated only once a year making it more difficult to keep track of the ongoings of a project and whether they are in violation of any laws or not. Projects that have violated the laws by not obtaining a post-facto clearance and commencing work, will now be able to gain one which will clear them in perpetuity. This means that every illegal project has the opportunity to become legal now. The justification given by the union government for relaxing these laws is that it will help the economy get over the slump that it has ended up in because of the Covid-19 pandemic.

However, not everything is bad about the new draft, there are some new amendments that will actually help communities and the environment. There is now a requirement for a show-cause notice to consultants who do not comply with the terms of reference. Those parties that repeatedly violate this requirement will be delisted. There is also now a system that will help to monitor compliance of the environmental clearance and other permissions that are required.

It is absolutely essential to protect the forest covers of India which are getting depleted more and more every year. There are so many communities and ecosystems that rely on the forests for various aspects of their lives. It is important for the union government to recognise a need to balance infrastructure, economy-benefiting projects and forest rights, forest covers and legislate accordingly to reflect these values. The direction that the state is currently moving forward in is leaning more towards economic benefits which can be harmful in the long run. It is also harmful in the short run. A multitude of tragedies have already occurred in various parts of this nation because of a lack of regulations and carelessness. Those same occurrences can take place, if the EIA does not make regulations and clearances more thorough. Projects that have violated the EC laws should be held accountable in some form and giving them clearances in perpetuity is a form of pardon that can set a bad precedent for other projects that may follow. People’s opinion should be at the forefront of projects that affect them because forest dwelling communities are affected the most by these projects. In terms of the 2006 amendments, the new laws are a setback for these communities and for the environment as well. Whether economic benefits outweigh the environmental costs is something which only time will tell.

References

“Why Draft EIA 2020 Needs a Revaluation.” Down To Earth, www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/environment/why-draft-eia-2020-needs-a-revaluation-72148.

“Environment Ministry Eases Norms for Industry Expansion.” Hindustan Times, 30 Apr. 2021, www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/environment-ministry-eases-norms-for-industry-expansion-101619809093806.html.

“Throughout the Pandemic, Environmental Clearance Law Has Been under The Chopping Block.” The Wire, thewire.in/environment/throughout-the-pandemic-environmental-clearance-law-has-been-under-the-chopping-block.

Eia Notifications - Environmentclearance.nic.in. environmentclearance.nic.in/writereaddata/EIA%20Notifications.pdf.

Kohli, Manju Menon and Kanchi. “Eia Legitimised Environmental Destruction. Now, Govt 'Renovates' It for the Worst.” The Wire Science, 11 Aug. 2020, science.thewire.in/environment/eia-2020-environmental-degradation-draft/.

-, D. R. S., By, -, Sehgal, D. R., & here, P. enter your name. (2021, October 5). Ex post facto environment clearance - view of the Supreme Court. iPleaders. Retrieved December 17, 2021, from https://blog.ipleaders.in/ex-post-facto-environment-clearance-view-of-the-supreme-court/

Jolly, S., & Singh, S. (2021, July 8). Environmental impact assessment draft notification 2020, India: A Critique. Brill. Retrieved December 17, 2021, from https://brill.com/view/journals/cjel/5/1/article-p11_2.xml?ebody=pdf-46507

Banerjee, S. (2020, August 10). Draft EIA 2020: How it may impact north east. NIAS Repository. Retrieved December 17, 2021, from http://eprints.nias.res.in/2031/