Two important Principles – Polluters Pay Principle and Precautionary Principle

POLLUTER PAYS PRINCIPLE

PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Section 3(1) and 2(v) of EPA, 1986 r/w Rules 5(3)(d) of the EP Rules, 1986 issued
Environmental Clearance Regulation, 2006.

It supersedes the earlier EIA Notification dated 27th January 1994.

Any new projects or activities or expansion or modernisation of existing projects or

activities based on the potential environmental impacts being undertaken in any part of
India, has to get Environmental Clearance.

Classification of Industries

Based on the production capacity – it is categorized into two. Category ‘A’ and Category ‘B’ of
the Schedule. (For example, in the case of mining of minerals – if the area is more than 50
hectares it falls under Category ‘A’ and if it is within 50 hectares, it falls under Category ‘B’ of
the Schedule to the notification.

Category ‘A’ Industries – EC from MoEF

o Central Government –30 in number – offshore and onshore oil and gas
exploration, mining, airports, river valley, soda ash industry, pesticides industry
and complex, chemical fertilizer, integrated paint industry, oil and gas
transportation pipeline, ship wrecking yards projects, asbestos and others.

Category ‘B’ Industries – EC from SEIAA

o SEIAA – common effluent treatment plants, common solid municipal waste

management, building and construction projects, township and area development
programmers, etc.
o CATEGORY B1- projects requiring EIA reports AND CATEGORY B2 - projects
not requiring EIA reports

Regulatory Authority for providing EC (For the purpose of granting EC, it authorises the CG
or the State or Union Territory Level Environmental Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) in
pursuance of Section 3(3) of EPA, 1986).

 Central Government – MoEF – Recommendations of an Expert Appraisal Committee

(EAC) consituted by the CG for the purpose of this notification.
  SEIAA – SEIAA shall base its decision on the recommendation of the State or UT Level
Expert Appraisal Committee (SEAC) as to be constituted for this notification.

FOUR STAGES OF ENVIRONMENTAL CLEARANCE – FOR NEW PROJECTS

1. SCREENING – it is only for Category B projects. SEIAA determines the project/activities

require environmental studies for the preparation of EIA depending upon the nature, location and
specificity of the project.

2. SCOPING – Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) in the case of Category ‘A’

projects/activities and State Level Appraisal Committee (SLAC) in the case of Category ‘B’
projects determine the detailed or comprehensive Terms of Reference (TOR) addressing all
relevant environmental concerns for the preparation of EIA report. TOR shall be based on the
information furnished in Application form. TOR should be conveyed to the Applicant within 60
days from the date of receipt of application.(Form 1). If TOR is not made within 60 days, the
informations that is submitted by the applicant shall be considered as TOR.

3. PUBLIC CONSULTATION – The concerns of the local communities should be ascertained.

Every project/activities falls under A and B-1 Category shall ascertain public consultation.
Examples – expansion of roads/highways, modernization of irrigation projects, projects or
activities concerning national defence or security and building or construction activities and
township.

Two Stages of Public Consultations

1. Public hearing at the site or close proximity of the project for ascertaining concerns of local
affected persons

2. obtaining response in writing from other concerned persons.

Who performs Public Hearing? – Concerned SPCB or Union Territory Pollution Control
Committee (UTPCC) in the specified manner and within 45 days from the request of the
applicant.

Procedure for conducting Public Hearing

1. notice should be given at least in one major national daily and one regional vernacular daily -
mentioning the date, time and exact venue for the conduct of public hearing. Notice should carry
the summary of the EIA of the project.

2. 30 days time duration is given to the general public for furnishing their responses to the notice

After receiving the public responses, the same shall be forwarded to the applicant to make
revisions to the EIA submitted or to make additions or alterations in EIA.
4. APPRAISAL – The detailed scrutiny by the EAC or SEAC of the application is known as
appraisal. EIA Report + Public Consultation responses – examined thoroughly in a transparent
manner. If any additional information is required, it may seek from the applicant.

Decision on Grant or Rejection of EC

After thorough examination of the application, it shall make “categorical recommendations” to

the regulatory authority either for grant of prior environmental clearance or for rejection of the
application with the reasons.

45 days from the date of receipt of EIA report

In the case of EIA is not mandatory, then 105 days from the date of receipt of application

If MoEF or SEIAA disagree with the recommendations submitted by SEAC or EAC – it should
be communicated to the respective organ within 45 days from the date of receipt of the
recommendations.

Validity of Environmental Clearance (para 9)

River Valley Projects – 10 years

Mining Projects – 30 years

Area development/township – 5 years

All other projects – 5 years

Post Environmental Clearance Monitoring

Half-yearly compliance reports has to be submitted in hard and soft copies to the regulatory
authority (1st June and 1st December of every year)

1. Deepak Kumar Vs State of Haryana, AIR 2012 SC 1386

After this notification, the mining of minor minerals also require EIA if area is more than 5
hectares. The Ministry of Mines, GoI has also issued “Environmental Aspects of Quarrying and
of Minor Minerals-Evolving of Model Guidelines” – 16th May 2011 – provide that the cost of
rehabilitation of flora and fauna destroyed while quarrying or mining operation shall be borne by
person holding the quarrying or mining lease.

Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd. Vs Ministry of Environment and Forest, (2013) 6 SCC 476

- Supreme Court held that there can be a stage wise grant of clearance to ensure
compliance with environmental safeguards
 - There can be rejection of final clearance due to non-compliance of the conditions
imposed in preliminary stage clearance.
- An opportunity must be provided for the compliance of the preconditions for grant of
final clearance
- While granting environmental clearance, the social, political, cultural and religious rights
of the tribal people, including the right to worship, must be taken into account and must
be safeguarded. (Gram Sabha was directed to examine the mining project and in case of
any violations/affecting the religious rights of the tribal people of the area)

Court stressed the importance of Environmental Clearance in the following cases

1. Noida Memorial Complex near Okhla Bird Sanctuary, re (2011) 1 SCC 744

2. Vedire Venkata Reddy Vs Union of India, AIR 2005 AP 155

3. Narmada Bachao Andolan Vs Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 3751

- Environmental clearance was given by the CG in 1987 for the construction and
alteration of dam
- Construction was taken up in 1987
- Writ was filed to challenge the said notification of 1994 has not complied with. EIA
is not obtained.
- SC held that the project commenced long back, it does not require EIA as required by
the notification where hundreds and crores of public money are spent.

4. M.C. Mehta Vs Union of India, AIR 2004 SC 4016

- SC made clear that though the notification of 1994 is not applicable to mining mineral
but having regard to degradation of the environment and risk involved to human health and
ecology, the EIA is must.

- in the present case, the mining activities in Delhi and Haryana region of ARavalli hills causing
environmental degradation was challenged. The SC appointed a monitoring committee to
reexamine the issue with certain directions.

5. Lafarge Umiam Mining (P) Ltd. Vs Union of India, AIR 2011 SC 2781, the SC made clear
that the project that was cleared by MoEF under the EIA Notification, 1994, need not get fresh
clearance under EIA Notification, 2006.

6. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India, - (2013) 4 SCC 575

- the Environmental Clearance issued in reference to EIA Notification, 1994 cannot be

quashed without any substantial ground. Public hearing is not made as mandatory in the said
notification. So, it cannot be a ground for rejection. Moreover The SC relied on the EIA report
submitted by the experts of CG and TNPCB – 1995. So, any illegality, irrationality or
procedural impropriety can be challenged against the industry.