Structure of Environmental Impact Assessment Report

[RAGHAVA]

What's the Prime Objective of an EIA report

1. Is it to make public aware of the impacts of the project

2. To satisfy the local leaders & enhance business 

3. to obtain Environmental Clearance.

Almost all the three are interlinked in one way or the other.

The main issue is do we need to exactly address the project details, its impacts on environment and proposed management plan to mitigate or minimize if not manage the problem.

If its the above para then the report can be brief, present the salient features of projects and proposed mitigation measures. if Expert Committee members feel that is inadequate then they can suggest or impose necessary measures. so that many number of pages can be saved. 

Putting in simple way do we need to provide a crisp report addressing relevant issues or prepare a huge report beating round the bush without addressing the relevant issue. 

Unfortunately, the above line highlighted in red is been followed and accepted both by project proponent, public..........

 

why not this attitude change and Ministry give a directive that make a crisp report not wasting pages giving un-necessary things.

[Rakesh Shah]

Yes, the probable impacts should carry the most weight. The control measures in any case have been defined indirectly by the treated effluent/emissions requirements. The TOR should include a write-up on a similar industry already operating and duly signed/approved by the public hearing attendees of the earlier industry.

[GOPI KANTA GHOSH]

Yes...that is what is happening...we must create pressure...thanks for raising issue.

[meenakshi]

Yes I totally agree to you . we need to change style of making Eia.

[N PRADEEP KUMAR]

I concur with your Mr. Raghava. The reports must be made as concise as possible. While introducing riders to enforce conciseness is a way to regulate paper wastage and maintaining appropriate quality in report preparation, at the same time the reports can be prepared using self explanatory figures, diagrams, pictorials or flowcharts in a more extensive way rather than including huge paragraphs, for example as in Corporate Sustainable Development Reporting.

Also, some people are preparing huge reports intentionally so that the facts could be hidden and consequently the concerned expert will lose interest in the report. Consideration should also be given in changing this sort of attitude too.

[Vishal Duggal]

the e.i.a. should singularly concentrate on significant environmental aspects associated with the project under consideration. information on background environmental setting should concentrate only on environmental interactions during project life-cycle. this will remove superfluous elements (which may be upto 50%) from the study as well as report and will also reduce environmental cost of the study.

[Dr. V. K. Garg]

I agree with you, in addition to this other issues involved with it are that the data given in report is not reliable, and there are certain agents/consultants which can present the report to the Ministry which leads to corruption. So I will recommend that Universities / IITs/NITs should be recommended by MOEF for the study of environmetal analysis and impacts instead of private agencies.

[Janshi gajendiran]

Students and research groups can be given opportunities for EIA preparation . all eia run pages together beating about the bush. and jus few alternatives are discussed for name sake.

[Ratnakar Pandey]

Dear,

In my opinion for each & every things ministry can not give the directive to PP, it is self wisdom of PP or their environmental expert that he should instruct to EIA consultant for presenting the potential impact & their mitigation measures only in EIA report,Rest relevent minor impact & their mitigation measure shall be described in tabular form.

As much i know ministry never says that project proponent should come with irrelevant issue & voluminious report.......it is the EIA consultant who does this job..... finally majority of the proponent or their EIA expert who has not much knowledge about relevant & irrlevant issues,potential impacts & their mitigation measures.......accompany the consultant to present/prepare the voluminious report. 

[Dr. V. K. Garg]

BUT THE CONSULTANTS ARE APPROVED BY THE ministry.

[Ratnakar Pandey]

Not for putting irrevelant & unwanted information into & making the report voluminious... but to know the experience of associated experts......no need to answer the kind of approval MoEF have & what is going on in NABET accredation.

Dr. V. K. Garg said:

BUT THE CONSULTANTS ARE APPROVED BY THE ministry.

[Rakesh Shah]

Can a project be evaluated/studied during the general meeting period of 30-45 minutes? It is this component of the Clearance that should be really looked into. A project comes up forever-it has to be given due evaluation.

[Poonam Khatri]

I agree to Mr. Pandey's point that ministry doesn't ask to make the report voluminous..and my opinion is for PP who should hire an experienced and of course approved consultant. As, this will not only fullfil the clearance purpose but also the efficiency of project in terms of energy and material inputs. Dr. garg's point is appreciable that MOEF shoud put some quality institutes in this area..

Ratnakar Pandey said:

Dear,

In my opinion for each & every things ministry can not give the directive to PP, it is self wisdom of PP or their environmental expert that he should instruct to EIA consultant for presenting the potential impact & their mitigation measures only in EIA report,Rest relevent minor impact & their mitigation measure shall be described in tabular form.

As much i know ministry never says that project proponent should come with irrelevant issue & voluminious report.......it is the EIA consultant who does this job..... finally majority of the proponent or their EIA expert who has not much knowledge about relevant & irrlevant issues,potential impacts & their mitigation measures.......accompany the consultant to present/prepare the voluminious report.