EIA notification amendment
The amended EIA notification dt 14/09/2006 is up:
http://envfor.nic.in/legis/eia/so1533.pdf
==========
Hindu report:
Centre notifies new environment norms
Special Correspondent
Building, construction sector get concessions
· Automobile, biomedical industry sectors to be
cleared at State level
· Projects to get environmental clearance depending
on built-up area
· Earlier clearance norms were time consuming, says
Ministry
· But new norms are criticised by environmental
groups, NGOs
http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/15/stories/2006091514660100.htm
==========
Campaign letter that was circulating last week:
CAMPAIGN FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE - INDIA
RPAD/FAX/EMAIL
Shri.A. Raja
UnionMinister for Environment and Forests
Governmentof India
ParyavaranBhavan
CGOComplex, Lodi Road
New Delhi
05 Sep. 2006
Reg.: Request toput on hold proposed amendment to the
EIANotification
DearShri. Raja,
Representativesof the Campaign for Environmental
Justice ? India met withyou on 9thAugust 2006 with
arequest that theproposed comprehensive amendment to
the Environment Impact AssessmentNotification must be
put on hold till such time extensive
consultationshavebeen held across the country with
State and Local Governments,environmentalgroups and
networks, mass movements, etc. The basis of this
demand was that the EIA Notification is
theonlyavailable means of information access and
participation in decisionmaking thatanticipates the
environmental and social impacts of large industrial
orinfrastructure projects, and highly polluting
facilities. While the present notification has
manyproblems, and needs to be reviewed, the process by
which the MinistryofEnvironment and Forests set about
amending this notification has hardlybeeninclusive.
Admittedly,during the 60 day commenting period
starting 15 September 2005 when thedraftproposed EIA
Notification was located on the Ministry?s website
(inEnglish),only select consultations have been held
with State Governmentrepresentativesand environmental
groups. The Parliament has not been consulted
eitherduringthe commenting period or at any time
thereafter. StateGovernments who have expressed
theirviews have not been consulted in the process of
finalisation of thedraft. The opinion of several
environmentalgroups,researchers, mass movements, etc.
has hardly been considered in theprocess ofre-drafting
the proposed amendment.
Admittedly,and shockingly, it has been confirmed in
response to Right toInformationapplications filed on
behalf of the Campaign for Environmental
Justice,thatthe Ministry has mainly consulted certain
industry associations in thefinalisation of the draft
notification.
Whenthese concerns were brought to the attention of
the ParliamentaryStandingCommittee on Science,
Technology, Environment and Forests, the Chairmanof
theCommittee, Shri. P. G. Narayanan, MP, thought it
fit to immediatelywrite tothe Prime Minister and
yourself (in his letter dated 1stSeptember 2006) that
hewas:
?shockedto learn that the Ministry has beenworking on
redrafting this critical notification for over a year
now. Unfortunately no consultation has been
soughtwith the Parliamentary Standing Committee.....
Iam deeply worried by the far reaching consequencesof
the proposed notification as it undermines the federal
character ofourpolity, given that the finalisation is
driven merely by the concerns ofIndustry Associations,
at the neglect of States. TheUnion of States has to
be consulted andtheir views sought before any major
changes are effected beforefinalising theproposed
revision of Environment Impact Assessment
Notification. Also we need to appreciate the
widespreadconcerns of peoples of India who havesought
ourintervention in ensuring this draft notification is
issued only aftermeaningful consultations?.
Shri.Sitaram Yechury, MP and Leader CPI (M) Group has
urged you in hisletter dated 31 August2006 to
?holdextensive consultations by organising
zonalworkshops involving the State Governments, Zilla
Parishads, Panchayats,massorganisations and NGOs? on
the proposed EIA Notification.
Shri.Yechury has further stressed that:
?thereshould also be a full discussion on this issue
in the Winter session oftheParliament. I hereby
request you to withhold the finalisation of
theEIANotification till such extensive discussions and
parliamentary debatetakeplace on the issue?.
Suchconsultations Shri. Yechury feels are important
as:
?thisnotification will have a big impact on the life
of local people livinginresource rich areas and it is
therefore essential that their concernsareadequately
addressed and their voices heard. For this it is also
important that the draft of the
Notificationisdiscussed and debated in the
Parliament.?
Shri. RamjiLal Suman, MP and Memberof the same
Parliamentary Committee has also written to the PM
with anequallyforceful appeal (in his letter dated 01
September 2006) and statedthat:
?it is amatter of greatconcern that the Parliament,
Standing Committees, and the people of India have
notbeen taken intoconfidence in proposing this
notification which has seriousimplications on
ourenvironmental security. Thisindicates that
suggestions of certain industry associations are
beingincorporatedto promote their profits.?
Clearlytaking a stand against theMinistry?s move to
amend the EIA Notification in such manner, Shri.Suman
urgesthe PM:
?that any notification should be put on hold in
securingtheinterests of our federal democracy,
especially when such notificationscannotbe justified
at any cost?
Dr. S.Ramadoss, Founder Leader ofPattali Makkal Katchi
(PMK) has written to you in his letter date
2ndSeptember 2006 statingthat:
?(t)he EIANotificationwill have a bearing on the lives
and livelihoods of millions of alreadymarginalised
communities such as small and marginal farmers,
Dalits,adivasisand fisherfolk. It could aggravate
theproblem of ?development-induced? displacement and
lead to widespreadoutrageamong communities?.
On thisground he has alsoarticulated that
?(t)heEIA Notification has such far-ranging
implications that it shouldnot be a mere Notification.
I humblyrequest that the process of democracy not be
derailed, and seek yourintervention to ensure
widespread face-to-face consultations are heldwith
MPs,elected Local Government leaders, trade unions,
community groups andpublicinterest organisations?.
He hasfurther stressed the factthat MoEF has
?technicallyopened upconsultations only to the
industry after the 60-day consultation
periodandrecirculating amended notifications to them
after the comments istantamount toreissuing the
notification without providing for public
consultation?.
Your Cabinetcolleague, Shri. ManiShankar Iyer has also
forwarded the concerns of CEJI to you for
dueconsideration.
Sir, inlight of these consideredopinions of the
Parliamentary Standing Committee and
Parliamentarians,particularly their demand that the
proposed amendment to the EIANotificationshould not be
acted upon in these circumstances, it would have
beenappropriatefor the Secretary MoEF to respect their
wishes. Yet, he has gone on record to state that
?All consultations are over? (TimesofIndia,
01September 2006).
Ineffect this suggests that he intends to proceed with
the comprehensiveamendment to the EIA notification.
Asyou are aware, theDepartmentally Related
Parliamentary Standing Committees
?isapath-breaking endeavour of the Parliamentary
surveillance overadministration. With the emphasis of
theirfunctioning toconcentrate on long-term plans,
policies and the philosophies guidingtheworking of the
Executive, these Committees will be in a very
privilegedposition to provide necessary direction,
guidance and inputs for broadpolicyformulations and in
achievement of the long-term national perspectiveof
theExecutive?. (Source:
http://www.parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/intro/p21.htm)
Itis clear from thisthat it is the task of the
Executive wing of the governance system ofourcountry
to seek ?necessary direction, guidance and inputs for
broadpolicyformulations? in cognisance of the
Parliamentary Committee?s role of?surveillance over
administration?. Clearly, the manner in which the
Secretary, MoEF has proceededto issuethe draft
notification for consultation, and the skewed and
partialmannerof the consultations held in finalising
the notification, mainly withindustryassociations,
presents a scenario where the Executive division of
theMinistryhas not respected the ?privileged position?
of the ParliamentaryStandingCommittee.
Fromthis perspective,in serving the cause of
federalism, meaningful implementation of therule oflaw
and in fulfilling the objective of Section 3 of the
EnvironmentProtectionAct, it would be in the best
interest of all concerned and the countryas awhole, if
the proposed notification is kept in abeyance till
such timethedemands articulated by the Parliamentary
Standing Committee,Parliamentarians,and mass
movements, environmental networks, etc. are met with
fully andmeaningfully. This would also ensurethat
there is no violation of the Environment Protection
Act inamending theEIA Notification.
Keepingall these issuesin view, we hope you will take
action as requested and with duedispatch. Allthe
aforementioned letters are enclosed for your perusal
and records.
Thankingyou,
Yourstruly,
LeoF. Saldanha
EnvironmentSupportGroup
for
Campaignfor EnvironmentalJustice ? India
KanchiKohli and Manju Menon (Kalpavriksh Pune/Delhi),
ManshiAsher (National Centre for Advocacy Studies,
Pune), Nityanand Jayaraman(Corporate Accountability
Desk, Chennai); Latha A. (Chalakudy
RiverProtectionCommittee, Thrissur); Samir Mehta
(Bombay Environment Action Group);LiyakathSyed
(Equations, Bangalore); Seerat Kacchap (BIRSA,
Jharkand);Deepankar Dutta(Samatha, Hyderabad); Bharat
Jairaj (Citizens Action Group, Chennai)andothers.
[Anetwork of voluntary organizations, movements,
project affectedcommunities,NGOs, research
organizations and individuals working to address
diverseenvironmental and social justice threats and
challenges in India]
Cc:
Shri.Mani Shankar Iyer,Union Minister for Panchayat
Raj and Youth Affairs
Shri.PrithvirajChauhan, Minister of State attached to
Prime Minister?s Office
Shri.P. G. Narayanan,MP, Chairman, Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Science, Technology,Environment
and Forests
Shri.Sitaram Yechury,MP, Leader, CPI (M), Rajya Sabha
Shri.Ramji Lal Suman,MP and Member, Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Science, Technology,Environment
and Forests
Dr.S. Ramadoss, FounderLeader, Pattali Makkal Katchi
Dr.Pradipto Ghosh, IAS,Secretary, Union Ministry of
Environment and Forests
Address for contact:
EnvironmentSupport Group ®
105,EastEnd B Main Road,Jayanagar9th Block East,
Bangalore560069.INDIA
Telefax:91-80-22441977/26531339
Fax:91-80-26534364
Email:[email protected] [email protected]:
www.esgindia.org
Kalpavriksh,
134, Tower10, Supreme Enclave, MayurVihar 1,
Delhi-110091,
Ph:22753714; Email: kanchi@xxxxxxxxxxx
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
The amended EIA notification dt 14/09/2006 is up:
http://envfor.nic.in/legis/eia/so1533.pdf
==========
Hindu report:
Centre notifies new environment norms
Special Correspondent
Building, construction sector get concessions
· Automobile, biomedical industry sectors to be
cleared at State level
· Projects to get environmental clearance depending
on built-up area
· Earlier clearance norms were time consuming, says
Ministry
· But new norms are criticised by environmental
groups, NGOs
http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/15/stories/2006091514660100.htm
==========
Campaign letter that was circulating last week:
CAMPAIGN FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE - INDIA
RPAD/FAX/EMAIL
Shri.A. Raja
UnionMinister for Environment and Forests
Governmentof India
ParyavaranBhavan
CGOComplex, Lodi Road
New Delhi
05 Sep. 2006
Reg.: Request toput on hold proposed amendment to the
EIANotification
DearShri. Raja,
Representativesof the Campaign for Environmental
Justice ? India met withyou on 9thAugust 2006 with
arequest that theproposed comprehensive amendment to
the Environment Impact AssessmentNotification must be
put on hold till such time extensive
consultationshavebeen held across the country with
State and Local Governments,environmentalgroups and
networks, mass movements, etc. The basis of this
demand was that the EIA Notification is
theonlyavailable means of information access and
participation in decisionmaking thatanticipates the
environmental and social impacts of large industrial
orinfrastructure projects, and highly polluting
facilities. While the present notification has
manyproblems, and needs to be reviewed, the process by
which the MinistryofEnvironment and Forests set about
amending this notification has hardlybeeninclusive.
Admittedly,during the 60 day commenting period
starting 15 September 2005 when thedraftproposed EIA
Notification was located on the Ministry?s website
(inEnglish),only select consultations have been held
with State Governmentrepresentativesand environmental
groups. The Parliament has not been consulted
eitherduringthe commenting period or at any time
thereafter. StateGovernments who have expressed
theirviews have not been consulted in the process of
finalisation of thedraft. The opinion of several
environmentalgroups,researchers, mass movements, etc.
has hardly been considered in theprocess ofre-drafting
the proposed amendment.
Admittedly,and shockingly, it has been confirmed in
response to Right toInformationapplications filed on
behalf of the Campaign for Environmental
Justice,thatthe Ministry has mainly consulted certain
industry associations in thefinalisation of the draft
notification.
Whenthese concerns were brought to the attention of
the ParliamentaryStandingCommittee on Science,
Technology, Environment and Forests, the Chairmanof
theCommittee, Shri. P. G. Narayanan, MP, thought it
fit to immediatelywrite tothe Prime Minister and
yourself (in his letter dated 1stSeptember 2006) that
hewas:
?shockedto learn that the Ministry has beenworking on
redrafting this critical notification for over a year
now. Unfortunately no consultation has been
soughtwith the Parliamentary Standing Committee.....
Iam deeply worried by the far reaching consequencesof
the proposed notification as it undermines the federal
character ofourpolity, given that the finalisation is
driven merely by the concerns ofIndustry Associations,
at the neglect of States. TheUnion of States has to
be consulted andtheir views sought before any major
changes are effected beforefinalising theproposed
revision of Environment Impact Assessment
Notification. Also we need to appreciate the
widespreadconcerns of peoples of India who havesought
ourintervention in ensuring this draft notification is
issued only aftermeaningful consultations?.
Shri.Sitaram Yechury, MP and Leader CPI (M) Group has
urged you in hisletter dated 31 August2006 to
?holdextensive consultations by organising
zonalworkshops involving the State Governments, Zilla
Parishads, Panchayats,massorganisations and NGOs? on
the proposed EIA Notification.
Shri.Yechury has further stressed that:
?thereshould also be a full discussion on this issue
in the Winter session oftheParliament. I hereby
request you to withhold the finalisation of
theEIANotification till such extensive discussions and
parliamentary debatetakeplace on the issue?.
Suchconsultations Shri. Yechury feels are important
as:
?thisnotification will have a big impact on the life
of local people livinginresource rich areas and it is
therefore essential that their concernsareadequately
addressed and their voices heard. For this it is also
important that the draft of the
Notificationisdiscussed and debated in the
Parliament.?
Shri. RamjiLal Suman, MP and Memberof the same
Parliamentary Committee has also written to the PM
with anequallyforceful appeal (in his letter dated 01
September 2006) and statedthat:
?it is amatter of greatconcern that the Parliament,
Standing Committees, and the people of India have
notbeen taken intoconfidence in proposing this
notification which has seriousimplications on
ourenvironmental security. Thisindicates that
suggestions of certain industry associations are
beingincorporatedto promote their profits.?
Clearlytaking a stand against theMinistry?s move to
amend the EIA Notification in such manner, Shri.Suman
urgesthe PM:
?that any notification should be put on hold in
securingtheinterests of our federal democracy,
especially when such notificationscannotbe justified
at any cost?
Dr. S.Ramadoss, Founder Leader ofPattali Makkal Katchi
(PMK) has written to you in his letter date
2ndSeptember 2006 statingthat:
?(t)he EIANotificationwill have a bearing on the lives
and livelihoods of millions of alreadymarginalised
communities such as small and marginal farmers,
Dalits,adivasisand fisherfolk. It could aggravate
theproblem of ?development-induced? displacement and
lead to widespreadoutrageamong communities?.
On thisground he has alsoarticulated that
?(t)heEIA Notification has such far-ranging
implications that it shouldnot be a mere Notification.
I humblyrequest that the process of democracy not be
derailed, and seek yourintervention to ensure
widespread face-to-face consultations are heldwith
MPs,elected Local Government leaders, trade unions,
community groups andpublicinterest organisations?.
He hasfurther stressed the factthat MoEF has
?technicallyopened upconsultations only to the
industry after the 60-day consultation
periodandrecirculating amended notifications to them
after the comments istantamount toreissuing the
notification without providing for public
consultation?.
Your Cabinetcolleague, Shri. ManiShankar Iyer has also
forwarded the concerns of CEJI to you for
dueconsideration.
Sir, inlight of these consideredopinions of the
Parliamentary Standing Committee and
Parliamentarians,particularly their demand that the
proposed amendment to the EIANotificationshould not be
acted upon in these circumstances, it would have
beenappropriatefor the Secretary MoEF to respect their
wishes. Yet, he has gone on record to state that
?All consultations are over? (TimesofIndia,
01September 2006).
Ineffect this suggests that he intends to proceed with
the comprehensiveamendment to the EIA notification.
Asyou are aware, theDepartmentally Related
Parliamentary Standing Committees
?isapath-breaking endeavour of the Parliamentary
surveillance overadministration. With the emphasis of
theirfunctioning toconcentrate on long-term plans,
policies and the philosophies guidingtheworking of the
Executive, these Committees will be in a very
privilegedposition to provide necessary direction,
guidance and inputs for broadpolicyformulations and in
achievement of the long-term national perspectiveof
theExecutive?. (Source:
http://www.parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/intro/p21.htm)
Itis clear from thisthat it is the task of the
Executive wing of the governance system ofourcountry
to seek ?necessary direction, guidance and inputs for
broadpolicyformulations? in cognisance of the
Parliamentary Committee?s role of?surveillance over
administration?. Clearly, the manner in which the
Secretary, MoEF has proceededto issuethe draft
notification for consultation, and the skewed and
partialmannerof the consultations held in finalising
the notification, mainly withindustryassociations,
presents a scenario where the Executive division of
theMinistryhas not respected the ?privileged position?
of the ParliamentaryStandingCommittee.
Fromthis perspective,in serving the cause of
federalism, meaningful implementation of therule oflaw
and in fulfilling the objective of Section 3 of the
EnvironmentProtectionAct, it would be in the best
interest of all concerned and the countryas awhole, if
the proposed notification is kept in abeyance till
such timethedemands articulated by the Parliamentary
Standing Committee,Parliamentarians,and mass
movements, environmental networks, etc. are met with
fully andmeaningfully. This would also ensurethat
there is no violation of the Environment Protection
Act inamending theEIA Notification.
Keepingall these issuesin view, we hope you will take
action as requested and with duedispatch. Allthe
aforementioned letters are enclosed for your perusal
and records.
Thankingyou,
Yourstruly,
LeoF. Saldanha
EnvironmentSupportGroup
for
Campaignfor EnvironmentalJustice ? India
KanchiKohli and Manju Menon (Kalpavriksh Pune/Delhi),
ManshiAsher (National Centre for Advocacy Studies,
Pune), Nityanand Jayaraman(Corporate Accountability
Desk, Chennai); Latha A. (Chalakudy
RiverProtectionCommittee, Thrissur); Samir Mehta
(Bombay Environment Action Group);LiyakathSyed
(Equations, Bangalore); Seerat Kacchap (BIRSA,
Jharkand);Deepankar Dutta(Samatha, Hyderabad); Bharat
Jairaj (Citizens Action Group, Chennai)andothers.
[Anetwork of voluntary organizations, movements,
project affectedcommunities,NGOs, research
organizations and individuals working to address
diverseenvironmental and social justice threats and
challenges in India]
Cc:
Shri.Mani Shankar Iyer,Union Minister for Panchayat
Raj and Youth Affairs
Shri.PrithvirajChauhan, Minister of State attached to
Prime Minister?s Office
Shri.P. G. Narayanan,MP, Chairman, Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Science, Technology,Environment
and Forests
Shri.Sitaram Yechury,MP, Leader, CPI (M), Rajya Sabha
Shri.Ramji Lal Suman,MP and Member, Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Science, Technology,Environment
and Forests
Dr.S. Ramadoss, FounderLeader, Pattali Makkal Katchi
Dr.Pradipto Ghosh, IAS,Secretary, Union Ministry of
Environment and Forests
Address for contact:
EnvironmentSupport Group ®
105,EastEnd B Main Road,Jayanagar9th Block East,
Bangalore560069.INDIA
Telefax:91-80-22441977/26531339
Fax:91-80-26534364
Email:[email protected] [email protected]:
www.esgindia.org
Kalpavriksh,
134, Tower10, Supreme Enclave, MayurVihar 1,
Delhi-110091,
Ph:22753714; Email: kanchi@xxxxxxxxxxx
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com