MoEF’s Expert Appraisal Committee (Infra 2), after detailed deliberations on the proposal and submissions by the project proponent, recommended this at its meeting on March 5. According to the minutes of the meeting available in the public domain, the EAC was given to understand that though the proposals were not within its scope, the Ministry wanted it to consider this as a special case.
As the previous EC granted in 2011 was quashed by the courts, a certified compliance report may not be required and no work has been initiated at the site, the project proponents submitted.
The panel was informed that there was no scope for radioactivity and leaching of water and these have been explained to the courts. The project proponents clarified that studies showed there would be no impact of blasting on any habitation in the vicinity.
During the panel’s deliberations, an expert from the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) was present.
Two conditions
While granting EC, the committee stipulated specific conditions, of which two are key for the project to take off. One is the consent to establish and operate to be obtained from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB). In the past, INO project proponents had complained that the TNPCB had been sitting on the file for years without taking any action when Jayalalithaa was Chief Minister (2011-16). Also, the INO team has to obtain the necessary forest and National Board for Wild Life clearances as per law. The Mathikettan Shola National Park in Idukki district, Kerala, is situated within five km from the project site.When the project was considered by the Tamil Nadu State Expert Appraisal Committee in November 2017 (after Jayalalithaa’s death), it said that the proposed site forms part of the catchment area of various streams that contribute to the Vaigai watershed.
Therefore, Tamil Nadu was of the opinion that the proposal could not be appraised under category B of item 8(a) ‘Building and construction projects of the Schedule to the EIA notification 2006’, as it involved many technical features other than mere construction. The SEAC also said the project should be appropriately handled by the Centre. Incidentally, Deputy Chief Minister O. Panneerselvam represents the Bodi Assembly constituency.
Considering the national importance of the proposal, the MoEF decided to take the proposal at the Central level as a special case — a category 8(a) project — and granted environmental clearance with 17 conditions.
Mandates of the expert committee
The Expert Appraisal Committee Infra 2 of the Ministry of Environment and Forests deals with projects related to all ship breaking yard including ship breaking unit, airport, common hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities, ports and harbours, aerial ropeways, Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETP), common municipal solid waste management facility, building/construction projects, townships and area development projects.
NGO slams approval
Poovulagin Nanbargal, an NGO fighting against the implementation of the INO project in the area, has condemned the environmental clearance to the project.
In a statement, it said the committee had cleared it as a special case without considering the law, Tamil Nadu’s stand and local sentiments.
It said the Tamil Nadu government has always opposed the project.
Even last month, Deputy Chief Minister O. Panneerselvam had said that the project would not be allowed if it was found to be harmful.
The ruling party and opposition parties should oppose the project and the attitude of the Centre which was bent on implementing the project with scant regard for the State’s considerations and environmental laws, the NGO demanded.
No comments:
Post a Comment