Manipulative EIA reports and measures

[KANNA KUMAR SIRIPURAPU]

Dear All,

After going through some EIA reports prepared by the consultants which were submitted to the MoEF for the approval of the project, I found that they are highly manipulative and do not have any correlation with the ground realities!

One could go through the examples of POSCO, Vedanta, etc to name a few. These EIA reports are highly manipulative. I was wondering how good it would be if these experts could use their ingenuity in suggesting solutions or possible alternatives to the project rather than using their branis to by-pass and burry the facts.

Is this the time to initiate action against such consultants if the EIA reports submitted by them were found to be manipulative? Is there any progress in this way?

Kanna

[Ajay Kumar Gautam]

Dear All,
From the little experience and knowledge I have gained in these years, I would like to add my views after reading all the experts views and comments.
In my opinion, EIA reports are not manipulative. Impact Assessment is done by experts based on various assumptions and experiences. Except for some parts its also not quantative. Its qualitative. Different persons may have different opinions of same facts. (e.g. In a class, all pupils are taught the same syllabus and given the same questions, but the answer from each pupil differs, and based on the same one student scores full marks and one gets lower, depending on the understanding of the student of the subject). EIA report cannot fall in categ, say 2+2=4, its based on assumptions/justifications, how best one justifies the impact;
I agree that few cases have been reported of purposely/mistakingly hiding of some crucial facts/ground truth and same are facing the music.
I would like like to bring to the notice of all and repsected Dr. Pillai, that Govt.of India(MoEF) has already implemeted most the the things suggested by him.
QCI has been engaged to acredit the EIA consultants/professionals in turn (sector wise and work wise)
MoEF has prepared standard guidelines for preparing the EIA for each sector.
EIA is being prepared based on Guidelines given by the MoEF in its Terms of reference (TOR).
Professionals engaged for different activities is diclosed by the consultants.

Futher to Respected Mr. Saxena, who said that "In order to get realistic EIA, we may adopt the procedure followed in other developed countries where the EIA is being carried out by the Ministry themselves through empanelled authorized consultants. Till the project proponents are engaging consultants, we may not get right kind of EIA reports." Sir, EIA is now conducted by Authorize consultants only (Authorize for diff sectors by QCI). It is the same people that will do EIA, I don;t understand why we need a stick, being a serious consulttant if you understand your responsibility and understand the seriousness of the project/env even that stick is not required. Being a consultant if your are saying this wht if MoEF authorize you for the same work, you will deliver the right thing.

Regarding the Copy-Paste Technology, again i will say that Individual people is to be blamed neither the consultant nor the client, consultants gen engage people with lesser qualifications and trust them to deliver the results and doesn't have any check for quality. But now, that also being ckecked by QCI by its acreditation scheme.
We are now definitely getting Good EIA/EMP reports. India has worked a lot iun this regard, 3 cheers for India and MoEF.

Though, time and space is limited, Iwill end my discussion here, and hope i have conveyed my views appropriately.


Though, time and space is limited, Iwill end my discussion here, and hope i have conveyed my views appropriately.

[Anil Kumar Gupta]

Without further disclose, I have seen State PC Board officials sitting in the house of consutant, writing EIA reports for a upcoming industrial plant and then the report is submitted to the State PC Board itself for consideration and approval.

It was schocking scene for me, but facts are facts. This is happening. People are preparing comprehensive EIA with 4 season data with full report in 2-3 months time. More emphasis is on how to get clearance and manage the money flow to get the clearance rather than actual EIA.




Ajay Kumar Gautam said:

Dear All,
From the little experience and knowledge I have gained in these years, I would like to add my views after reading all the experts views and comments.
In my opinion, EIA reports are not manipulative. Impact Assessment is done by experts based on various assumptions and experiences. Except for some parts its also not quantative. Its qualitative. Different persons may have different opinions of same facts. (e.g. In a class, all pupils are taught the same syllabus and given the same questions, but the answer from each pupil differs, and based on the same one student scores full marks and one gets lower, depending on the understanding of the student of the subject). EIA report cannot fall in categ, say 2+2=4, its based on assumptions/justifications, how best one justifies the impact;
I agree that few cases have been reported of purposely/mistakingly hiding of some crucial facts/ground truth and same are facing the music.
I would like like to bring to the notice of all and repsected Dr. Pillai, that Govt.of India(MoEF) has already implemeted most the the things suggested by him.
QCI has been engaged to acredit the EIA consultants/professionals in turn (sector wise and work wise)
MoEF has prepared standard guidelines for preparing the EIA for each sector.
EIA is being prepared based on Guidelines given by the MoEF in its Terms of reference (TOR).
Professionals engaged for different activities is diclosed by the consultants.

Futher to Respected Mr. Saxena, who said that "In order to get realistic EIA, we may adopt the procedure followed in other developed countries where the EIA is being carried out by the Ministry themselves through empanelled authorized consultants. Till the project proponents are engaging consultants, we may not get right kind of EIA reports." Sir, EIA is now conducted by Authorize consultants only (Authorize for diff sectors by QCI). It is the same people that will do EIA, I don;t understand why we need a stick, being a serious consulttant if you understand your responsibility and understand the seriousness of the project/env even that stick is not required. Being a consultant if your are saying this wht if MoEF authorize you for the same work, you will deliver the right thing.

Regarding the Copy-Paste Technology, again i will say that Individual people is to be blamed neither the consultant nor the client, consultants gen engage people with lesser qualifications and trust them to deliver the results and doesn't have any check for quality. But now, that also being ckecked by QCI by its acreditation scheme.
We are now definitely getting Good EIA/EMP reports. India has worked a lot iun this regard, 3 cheers for India and MoEF.

Though, time and space is limited, Iwill end my discussion here, and hope i have conveyed my views appropriately.


Though, time and space is limited, Iwill end my discussion here, and hope i have conveyed my views appropriately.

[Sireesha Patnaik]

Dear Kanna,

After going through the remarks and concensus on the Indian Scenario, I am sceptical about the sole motive of the Profession! I am doubtful of venturing back into this profession, unless there is a hope.

Best
Sireesha

[Anil Kumar Gupta]

Dear Sri Gautam,

I dont want to ruin any sentiments or business prospects of any agency or consultant, but just request that just for a moment we need to be honest to ourself in the mirror of conscience. Any range of consultant it is or any range of patronage of EIA doing instituion in the country or an international consultant engaged in doing EIA of indian project.........there is manipulation and story of befooling and befooled is involved. Reason is the EIA contact is given for managing clearnace and permits and not actually for really suggesting the environmental improvements. Environmental improvement or EMP is actually a kind of bye-product that is sometimes well taken by the enterpreneurs.

You check with the EIAs done by CSIR bodies viz. NEERI, Regional Labs of CSIR, NML, CLRI, ITRC, NBRI, ..... or TERI, EIL, PDIL, .....Envirotech, Remky, ......etc etc. any reports....the objective of EIA is to get manage the clearance. Public Hearing process is actually meant to fool the people and manage the publc consent by managing few NGOs and social leaders by pleasing them or befooling them. Its true that the reports contain good amount of good and useful data and interpretations, predictions etc. etc. but who actually looks into that if they are developed properly or not or how the interpretations have been made? actual is the management process starting from district administration, sub-regional officer of pollution control board then up and up.

I am really hurt with the lost image of environmetal decision making in this country. The same is with consents and authorization in many cases. These are the reasons environmental profession in this country is not a respectful one. Leave aside the environmental activist which has no much relation with enviornmental knowledge or science its simply activism with environmental colors and flavours.

Hope we develop and drive to realist the facts about EIA in India.

Regards

Anil K Gupta

[Dr. Sudhanshu Kumar]

Vinodh,

You should not make this general statement about the environmental professionals working outside India; I have worked in different countries but finally I am coming home next year.
Believe me, there are several opportunities in India for a professional to explore, why just EIA? EIA is a compliance requirement and what you expect from a devil’s lawyer?

Thanks
Sudhanshu



Vinodh Valluri said:

This is exactly the reason why environmental professionals [including me] are often turned away from working in India, and have to go find jobs elsewhere! Just imagine what could be achieved if people use their intelligence in doing something useful for society, than finding contorted ways to shoot the breeze around regulations! I'm sick of corrupt ignoramuses like them, and wonder if I will ever be able to work in India if situations continue to be so discouraging.. hopefully, things will get better while Minister Ramesh works for us..

[Anil Kumar Saxena]

Dear All,

All is not so bad, as has been visualized. The systems are being put in place and we have one of the most stringent regulations. However, as I have mentioned earlier that implementation is lax which need to be tighten which has been reflected by some of the steps being taken by the Ministry of Environment & Forests.

The system can further be improved by conducting EIA by the Ministry itself. In this direction, the proactive approach of the CPCB to preparing Zonal Atlas in variious parts of the country was the right direction. However, it has gone to the cold storage and no one is following these zonal atlas prepared by deploying lot of manpower and funds. These atlas clearly gives the areas which are not suitable for industrialization. One should use these atlases for conducting EIA and select the site rather than pre-identified sites.

The future is very bright and all is not lost. Have a patience and we will excel.

Thanks,

Dr. A. K. Saxena



Dr. Sudhanshu Kumar said:

Vinodh,

You should not make this general statement about the environmental professionals working outside India; I have worked in different countries but finally I am coming home next year.
Believe me, there are several opportunities in India for a professional to explore, why just EIA? EIA is a compliance requirement and what you expect from a devil’s lawyer?

Thanks
Sudhanshu



Vinodh Valluri said:

This is exactly the reason why environmental professionals [including me] are often turned away from working in India, and have to go find jobs elsewhere! Just imagine what could be achieved if people use their intelligence in doing something useful for society, than finding contorted ways to shoot the breeze around regulations! I'm sick of corrupt ignoramuses like them, and wonder if I will ever be able to work in India if situations continue to be so discouraging.. hopefully, things will get better while Minister Ramesh works for us..

[Prof Dr V N Sivasankara Pillai]

Dear Friends,
Pl note that NEAMA draft is published st he MoEF website. This gives us an opportunity to air our concerns with authorities and give inputs for effective framing of NEAMA guidelines. If NEAMA incorporates operational guidelines for generating eia data with quality assurance, and is equipped with powers to prosecute frauds, the quality of EIA and EMP can be improved, and that way adverse impact exerted by on the environment can be curtailed.
I invite the inputs to this effect from all my friends in the Paravran-EIA Club.
Sincerely
V N Sivasankara Pillai

[JEYARAM.S]

 

Dear Dr KSM Rao

 

It is interesting to look at your views / comments on EIA Reports. To keep up the reports away from any

manipulation, we may think of any fool proof system /idea. One of it cam to my mind is as below:

" The final copy of Approved Report MAY NEED TO BE REGISTERED THRO A BODY Say (sub registrar of land records or suitable authority) just like any other PROPERTY DOCUMENT REGISTRATION. We may think of moving this concept @ ministry level to make it as a G.O /practice that all approved EIA reports by SEIA/MoEF may be registered at a desingted registry IN BOTH HARD /SOFT form ( scanned pages).

Days may not be far off even to create a separate REGISTRY FOR EIA reports in our country. Indirectly EIA becomes backbone of Industrial /economical /social development of a nation.... such an important document. Hence, we scientists/engrs / experts / consultants in this field may think on this further to protect the very purpose of professional practice in all the ways ensuring that WHAT IS GIVEN IN REPORT IS PRACTISED IN spirit & writing /practiceses..... Hope you may like to discuss further on this being one of the EIA expert in India..

My special regards to you as i worked with you in your team in 1994-95..........

Regards

Jeyaram

 

 

 

 

Dr. K.S.M.Rao said:

While conceding that EIA reports have been manipulative hitherto, with the rejection of reports of power plant for Nagarjuna, rejection of report of Vedanta at Langigarh and raising doubts about the POSCO reports, it is but clear that manupulated reports do not stand the test of time.

It has been a belief that once a report is submitted, and an environmental clearance the job of the report is over, no longer so. EIA reports are now to be considered as long term asset (if good) and long term liability if it has been manipulated by consultants/ proponent.

if this fact is realised, I am sure good quality reports will emerge since no one would want to hold a report which has the potential to be reopened and questioned in the long run. This could have implications on the business of the consultant as well as on the reputation of the developers.