The ministry of environment and forests has stirred a hornet’s nest with its proposed changes to some of the environment protection rules that apply to development projects. While industry voices have welcomed the government’s decision to relax some of the norms, activists allege that if the changes to the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006, do go through, they would only end up in polluting the environment further.

The EIA Notification’s main aim is to achieve the objectives of the Environmental Protection Act, 1986. EIA sets the environmental ground rules for new development projects. But since it is a “subordinate legislation,” the government doesn’t need parliamentary approval to pass it and the ministry is free to amend its guidelines from time to time.

The EIA Notification was first enacted in 1994 and was amended several times before being replaced with a new Notification in 2006. Those who fail to comply with the EIA Notification guidelines are punishable under the Environment Protection Act and other laws.

“The latest proposal seems to have given a free run to the polluters,” says Manju Menon of Kalpvriksh, a non governmental organisation in Pune.

One of the proposed amendments states that in case of any expansion of existing projects, they are free to certify themselves as environmentally sound. “How can we expect those with commercial interests to issue a fair evaluation of the environmental impact of their projects,” asks Archana Prasad, associate professor, environmental history, at the Centre for Jawaharlal Nehru Studies, Jamia Millia University, New Delhi.

“It’s an absolute sham,” agrees Subhash Dutta, environment activist and lawyer. “The concept of environmental protection will be totally eliminated if the government finalises these rules.”

According to the EIA Notification of 2006, projects are divided into two categories, Category A and B. Category A projects need clearance by the ministry of environment. Category B projects need clearance from the state environment impact assessment authorities. The amendments exempt Category B projects from any assessment for a period of three years.

Again, as opposed to the EIA Notification of 2006 where construction projects of more than 20,000 sq. m had to get clearance, it is now proposed that the exemption be extended to 50,000 sq. m. Likewise, townships spreading over 100 hectares can come up without any clearance now. This was limited to 50 hectares previously.

The real estate industry has, of course, welcomed the government’s move to raise the environment assessment exemption limit to 100 hectares. Says Santosh Rungta, president, confederation of Real Estate Developers Association of India, “Even these restrictions are unnecessary as housing projects do not result in any serious pollution. Besides, any delay in environmental clearances leads to delays in projects and ultimately the consumers suffer.”

But environmentalists hold that the exemptions are tantamount to giving a carte blanche to industry. “By granting exemption from mandatory provisions of the law, the government is virtually handing licences to polluters,” says Leo F. Saldanha, coordinator of the Bangalore-based NGO, Environmental Support Group. Adds Prasad, “Under the new rules a human settlement can come up in an ecologically sensitive area without assessing the impact on the city's environs.”

Activists are also concerned that all mineral prospecting has been made exempt from the EIA notification. Moreover, it is proposed that coal mining projects with a lease area of up to 150 hectares will now be appraised as a Category B Project. The previous limit was 50 hectares. Since mining results in displacement and also ground level pollution, environmentalists allege that this change will have far reaching consequences.

The mining industry disagrees. “Mere exploration shouldn’t require environmental clearance. This was, in fact, scaring away many investors as it led to inordinate delays,” says R.K. Sharma, general secretary, Federation of Indian Mineral Industries.

Interestingly, the government has come in for some criticism from the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Environment and Forests. V. Maitreyan, head of the standing committee, points out that rather than strengthening the state environment impact assessment authorities, the proposed amendments virtually makes them irrelevant. “All the states should be on board as crucial decisions are there. Rather than decentralising, the draft notification just does the opposite,” he says.

The standing committee has, in fact, rejected the draft Notification and asked the government not to go ahead with the changes. “But the ministry bypassed the committee,” reveals Maitreyan.

In spite of protests by environmentalists — and reservations expressed by the parliamentary standing committee — the amendments are likely to be formalised soon. “We have received several comments on the proposed changes, and the ministry will consider all of these and take a final decision,” says an official of the environment ministry.

But activists are upset that the government did not even give them too many opportunities to react to the changes. “The government didn’t publicise the draft Notification properly. It just posted the draft on its website, thereby limiting the scope for people to respond,” says Saldanha.

However, the draft Notification has its plus points. For instance, it talks of “Post Environmental Clearance Monitoring” according to which it will now be mandatory to make public the environmental clearance granted for projects. New projects will have to advertise the clearances received in at least two local newspapers.

“The ministry of environment and forests and the state or Union territory environmental impact assessment authorities, as the case may be, shall also place the environmental clearance in the public domain. Further, copies of the environmental clearance shall be endorsed by the heads of local bodies, panchayats and municipal bodies in addition to the relevant offices of the government,” the new rule states.

Still, most experts feel that the draft Notification leaves a lot to be desired. “The language of the Notification is so vague that it is open to interpretation. People tend to read its provisions in their own way,” says Somnath Mukherjee, vice president, IL&FS Ecosmart, a leading environmental management services company.

Others say that the whole idea of a Notification is flawed and that it is high time the government goes for a clear and comprehensive law on environment impact assessment. “We need maximum transparency when it comes to laws on environment,” says Dutta.