EIA guidelines 1994 and 2006 Notification of Government of India

EIA Notification, 1994

Introduction

• The 1994 EIA Notification marked the formal introduction of the Environmental Impact Assessment process in India. It was issued under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
• The notification aimed to ensure that all developmental projects undergo an environmental clearance process to assess their potential impacts.

Key Features

1. Scope: The notification listed various projects that required environmental clearance, including industries, mining, infrastructure projects, and thermal power plants.
2. Screening: Projects were categorized based on their potential environmental impacts. Those requiring an EIA had to submit an application to the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF).
3. Public Consultation: The 1994 guidelines emphasized public consultation, requiring project proponents to disclose information about the project to affected communities.
4. EIA Report: A detailed EIA report, including an Environmental Management Plan (EMP), was mandatory for obtaining clearance. The report had to outline the potential impacts and proposed mitigation measures.
5. Review and Clearance: The EIA reports were reviewed by expert committees, and clearances were granted based on their recommendations.

Limitations

• The 1994 notification faced criticism for its narrow scope, lack of transparency, and insufficient public participation. It also lacked clear timelines for the clearance process.

The Govindarajan Committee identified several constraints in the Environmental Clearance (EC) process under the 1994 EIA Notification. These included:

• A cumbersome procedure
• Excessive detail requirements in applications
• Delays in appraisal meetings
• Time-consuming processes that demanded undue effort
• Reopening of technical issues at various stages of appraisal
• Poor quality of EIA studies by consultants
• Delays caused by other concerned agencies

In contrast, the objectives of the proposed notification aimed to create a transparent, decentralized, and efficient regulatory framework that would:

• Integrate necessary environmental safeguards at the planning stage
• Engage stakeholders through public consultation
• Classify developmental projects based on their impact potential rather than investment criteria

Table highlighting the key amendments to the EIA Notification, 1994, as identified by the Govindarajan Committee:

Note: Despite multiple amendments, the EIA Notification of 1994 was criticized for its weaknesses, prompting the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) to propose significant modifications. A draft notification was published in September 2005, leading to the revised EIA Notification in 2006.

EIA Notification, 2006

Introduction:

• The EIA Notification of 2006 replaced the 1994 guidelines, addressing many of its limitations and introducing more comprehensive and transparent procedures.
• This notification was also issued under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

Key Features:

1. Categorization of Projects:

   • Projects were categorized into two main groups: Category A (requiring clearance from the central government) and Category B (requiring clearance from the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA)).
   • Category B projects were further divided into B1 (requiring detailed EIA) and B2 (not requiring detailed EIA).

2. Screening and Scoping:

   • A formal screening process determined whether a detailed EIA was necessary.
   • Scoping, the process of defining the scope of the EIA, was made mandatory, involving the identification of key environmental issues through public consultations and expert inputs.

3. Public Consultation:

   • The 2006 notification strengthened the role of public consultations, making them a crucial part of the EIA process. Public hearings were required for all Category A and Category B1 projects.

4. EIA Report and EMP:

   • A comprehensive EIA report, including an Environmental Management Plan (EMP), was mandatory. The EMP had to detail the mitigation measures for managing identified impacts.

5. Review and Decision-Making:

   • The review process involved expert appraisal committees (EACs) at the central and state levels. These committees evaluated the EIA reports and provided recommendations for approval or rejection.
   • Clear timelines were established for the review and clearance process, ensuring timely decision-making.

6. Post-Clearance Monitoring:

   • The 2006 notification introduced stringent post-clearance monitoring and compliance requirements. Project proponents had to submit regular compliance reports and were subject to periodic inspections.

7. Exemptions and Special Provisions:

   • Certain projects, such as those in critical sectors or requiring urgent clearances, were exempt from detailed EIA requirements under specific conditions.
   • Special provisions were made for projects in sensitive areas, requiring additional scrutiny.

Comparative Short Summary

Detailed comparison of the EIA Notification 2006 and EIA Notification 1994 (with amendments):

This comparison highlights the evolution of the EIA process from 1994 to 2006, showing increased decentralization, improved public participation, and clearer definitions of responsibilities and procedures.

Public Participation

Public participation in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a crucial component that ensures the inclusion of stakeholders' opinions, concerns, and insights into the decision-making process for proposed projects that may affect the environment. It is designed to improve the transparency, accountability, and quality of the EIA process.

Objectives of Public Participation

1. Inclusivity: Ensure that all relevant stakeholders, including local communities, NGOs, and other interested parties, have an opportunity to participate.
2. Transparency: Provide clear, accessible, and comprehensive information about the proposed project and its potential environmental impacts.
3. Improving Decision-making: Incorporate local knowledge and concerns into the EIA process to enhance the quality and credibility of environmental assessments.
4. Conflict Resolution: Address potential conflicts early in the project planning process to avoid future disputes.

Key Components of Public Participation

1. Notification:

   • Purpose: Inform the public about the proposed project, the EIA process, and opportunities for participation.
   • Methods: Announcements in newspapers, official websites, public notices, community meetings, and social media.
   • Content: Project description, potential environmental impacts, the schedule for public participation events, and how stakeholders can get involved.

2. Public Consultation:

   • Scoping Phase: Early engagement to identify key issues and concerns that should be addressed in the EIA.
   • Draft EIA Report Review: Public review of the draft EIA report to gather feedback on the findings and proposed mitigation measures.
   • Methods: Public meetings, workshops, focus group discussions, surveys, and written comments.

3. Public Hearing:

   • Objective: Provide a formal platform for stakeholders to express their views and concerns directly to the project proponents and regulatory authorities.
   • Process: Conducted by regulatory bodies like the State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs). Announced in advance, held at accessible locations, and ensuring that all views are recorded and considered.
   • Outcomes: Stakeholder feedback is documented and addressed in the final EIA report.

4. Incorporating Feedback:

   • Integration: Comments and concerns from the public are integrated into the final EIA report.
   • Revisions: The project proponents may need to revise the project plan, mitigation measures, or monitoring programs based on stakeholder input.
   • Response: Providing a formal response to the public on how their input has been considered and addressed.

5. Continuous Engagement:

   • Monitoring and Reporting: Public involvement continues post-approval through regular updates on project implementation, monitoring results, and any additional mitigation measures.
   • Grievance Mechanisms: Establishing channels for ongoing stakeholder feedback and complaint resolution throughout the project lifecycle.

Benefits of Public Participation

1. Enhanced Legitimacy: Builds trust and legitimacy for the project by showing that all voices are heard and considered.
2. Improved Environmental Outcomes: Local knowledge can identify potential impacts and solutions that may not be apparent to external experts.
3. Risk Management: Early identification and mitigation of social and environmental risks can prevent costly delays and conflicts.
4. Empowered Communities: Empowers local communities by involving them in decisions that affect their environment and livelihoods.

Challenges and Considerations

1. Access and Inclusivity: Ensuring that all segments of the population, including marginalized groups, have access to participation opportunities.
2. Communication Barriers: Overcoming language, literacy, and technological barriers to ensure effective communication and understanding.
3. Resource Limitations: Both for the organizing bodies and the participants, as public participation can be resource-intensive.
4. Managing Expectations: Clearly communicating the scope of public influence to avoid unrealistic expectations about the decision-making power of public input.

Legal and Regulatory Framework

Public participation in EIA is mandated by various national and international legal frameworks. For instance, in India:

• EIA Notification, 2006: Specifies the requirement for public consultation in the EIA process, particularly for Category A and Category B1 projects.
• Environmental Protection Act, 1986: Provides the overarching legal basis for EIA and public participation.
• International Guidelines: Various international guidelines and conventions, such as the Aarhus Convention, emphasize the importance of public participation in environmental matters.

General Time Frame for Public Participation in EIA

1. Notification Phase:

   • Duration: 1-2 weeks
   • Activities: Public notifications are issued through newspapers, websites, public notices, and other media to inform the public about the proposed project and the EIA process.

2. Scoping Phase:

   • Duration: 2-4 weeks
   • Activities: Early engagement with stakeholders to identify key issues and concerns. This may include public meetings, workshops, and written submissions.

3. Draft EIA Report Review:

   • Duration: 30-45 days
   • Activities: The draft EIA report is made available to the public for review and comments. Copies of the report are often placed in public libraries, on websites, or distributed to local communities.

4. Public Hearing:

   • Announcement: 30 days prior to the hearing
   • Duration: 1-2 days (actual hearing event)
   • Activities: Formal hearings are conducted by regulatory bodies where stakeholders can present their views and concerns directly. The announcement of the hearing must be made at least 30 days in advance to allow sufficient time for public preparation.

5. Incorporating Feedback and Finalizing EIA Report:

   • Duration: 2-4 weeks
   • Activities: Project proponents and regulatory authorities review the public feedback, incorporate relevant comments into the final EIA report, and respond to stakeholder inputs.

6. Decision Making:

   • Duration: Varies (typically 2-3 months)
   • Activities: Regulatory authorities consider the final EIA report, including public comments, and make a decision regarding project approval or rejection. The decision is then communicated to the public.

7. Post-Approval Monitoring and Engagement:

   • Duration: Continuous (project lifecycle)
   • Activities: Ongoing public engagement through updates on project implementation, monitoring results, and addressing any emerging concerns. Establishment of grievance mechanisms for continuous feedback.

Example: Time Period in India under EIA Notification, 2006

In India, the EIA Notification, 2006 outlines specific time frames for various stages of the public participation process:

1. Notification of Public Hearing: The public hearing notice must be published at least 30 days in advance in one major national daily and one regional vernacular daily.

2. Conduct of Public Hearing: The public hearing must be conducted within 45 days from the date of receipt of the draft EIA report.

3. Submission of Public Hearing Report: The report of the public hearing must be submitted to the regulatory authority within 8 days of the hearing.

4. Time Period for Public Comments on Draft EIA Report: The public has 30 days to review and submit comments on the draft EIA report from the date it is made public.

5. Final Decision Making: Typically, the regulatory authority aims to make a decision within 60-90 days after the submission of the final EIA report, incorporating public feedback.

Summary Table

Phase	Duration	Activities
Notification	1-2 weeks	Public notifications through various media channels
Scoping	2-4 weeks	Stakeholder engagement to identify key issues
Draft EIA Report Review	30-45 days	Public review and comments on the draft EIA report
Public Hearing Announcement	30 days prior	Announcement of public hearing date
Public Hearing	1-2 days	Formal hearing where stakeholders present views and concerns
Incorporating Feedback	2-4 weeks	Review and incorporation of public feedback into the final EIA report
Decision Making	2-3 months	Regulatory authority reviews the final EIA report and public comments, makes a decision
Post-Approval Monitoring and Engagement	Continuous	Ongoing updates, monitoring, and grievance redressal throughout the project lifecycle

The overall timeline for public participation in the EIA process typically spans several months, with specific stages designed to ensure comprehensive stakeholder engagement and integration of public concerns into the environmental decision-making process.

Review and decision making in EIA

The review and decision-making process in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a critical phase where the findings from the EIA report and public consultations are evaluated to make informed decisions regarding project approval. This process ensures that environmental, social, and economic impacts are thoroughly considered and mitigated before project implementation.

Steps in Review and Decision Making

1. Submission of the Final EIA Report:

   • The project proponent submits the final EIA report, including all public comments and responses, to the regulatory authority. This report should also include the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) outlining measures for mitigating identified impacts.

2. Initial Review by Regulatory Authority:

   • The regulatory authority conducts a preliminary review to ensure that the EIA report meets all necessary requirements and guidelines. This includes checking the completeness and accuracy of the information provided.

3. Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) Evaluation:

   • The EIA report is forwarded to an Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC), which consists of experts from various fields such as ecology, hydrology, environmental science, and social sciences. The EAC evaluates the technical and scientific aspects of the report.
   • The committee examines the adequacy of the impact assessment, the effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures, and the overall feasibility of the project from an environmental perspective.

4. Public Hearing Report Review:

   • The EAC reviews the public hearing report, which includes all stakeholder comments and concerns raised during the public consultation process. This ensures that community feedback is considered in the decision-making process.

5. Site Visits (if necessary):

   • The EAC may conduct site visits to verify the information presented in the EIA report and assess the ground realities. Site visits help in understanding the local environmental conditions and potential impacts more comprehensively.

6. Technical Review Meetings:

   • The EAC holds technical review meetings with the project proponents, consultants, and other stakeholders to discuss the findings of the EIA report. These meetings allow for clarification of doubts and discussions on potential improvements to the project’s environmental management plan.

7. Compilation of EAC Recommendations:

   • Based on the thorough review, site visits, and technical meetings, the EAC compiles its recommendations. These recommendations may include conditions for project approval, additional mitigation measures, or suggestions for project redesign.

8. Decision Making by Regulatory Authority:

   • The regulatory authority, taking into account the EAC’s recommendations, makes the final decision regarding the project. The decision can be:
     • Approval: The project is approved with or without conditions. Conditions may include specific environmental safeguards, monitoring requirements, or additional studies.
     • Rejection: The project is rejected if the environmental impacts are deemed unacceptable or if the mitigation measures are insufficient.
     • Request for Additional Information: The regulatory authority may ask for more information or further studies before making a final decision.

9. Issuance of Environmental Clearance (EC):

   • If approved, an Environmental Clearance (EC) certificate is issued to the project proponent. This certificate outlines all the conditions that must be met during the project’s implementation.

10. Public Disclosure of Decision:

    • The decision, along with the rationale and conditions, is made public. This transparency helps maintain trust in the EIA process and ensures that stakeholders are informed about the outcomes.

11. Monitoring and Compliance:

    • Post-approval, the project is subject to regular monitoring to ensure compliance with the conditions outlined in the EC. The regulatory authority or a designated monitoring agency conducts periodic inspections and reviews compliance reports submitted by the project proponent.

Detailed Table: Review and Decision Making Process in EIA

The entire review and decision-making process typically spans several months, depending on the complexity of the project, the quality of the EIA report, and the thoroughness of stakeholder engagement. Effective review and decision-making ensure that projects proceed with minimal adverse environmental impacts and with adequate measures to protect and manage the environment.

Generalized approach to impact analysis Procedure for reviewing statement

The generalised approach to impact analysis in Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) involves a systematic process to identify, predict, evaluate, and mitigate the environmental impacts of proposed projects.

Generalised Approach to Impact Analysis

1. Project Screening

• Purpose: Determine whether a project requires an EIA and the level of assessment needed.
• Activities:
  • Initial assessment of project characteristics and potential impacts.
  • Categorization based on predefined criteria (e.g., project size, location).
• Outcome: Decision on the necessity and scope of the EIA.

2. Scoping

• Purpose: Identify the key environmental issues and impacts to be considered in the EIA.
• Activities:
  • Consultation with stakeholders, including the public, experts, and regulatory authorities.
  • Preparation of Terms of Reference (ToR) for the EIA study.
• Outcome: A detailed ToR outlining the scope and extent of the EIA.

3. Impact Identification

• Purpose: Identify all potential environmental impacts of the proposed project.
• Activities:
  • Use of checklists, matrices, and network diagrams to list potential impacts.
  • Identification of direct, indirect, cumulative, and synergistic impacts.
• Outcome: Comprehensive list of potential environmental impacts.

4. Impact Prediction

• Purpose: Predict the magnitude and significance of identified impacts.
• Activities:
  • Quantitative and qualitative assessment methods.
  • Use of models and simulations to predict changes in environmental parameters.
• Outcome: Detailed predictions of the extent, duration, and intensity of impacts.

5. Impact Evaluation

• Purpose: Evaluate the significance of predicted impacts.
• Activities:
  • Comparison of predicted impacts against baseline conditions and regulatory standards.
  • Consideration of the context, intensity, and likelihood of impacts.
• Outcome: Determination of which impacts are significant and require mitigation.

6. Mitigation Measures

• Purpose: Develop strategies to avoid, minimize, or compensate for significant impacts.
• Activities:
  • Identification of feasible mitigation options.
  • Integration of mitigation measures into project planning and design.
• Outcome: A set of proposed mitigation measures to reduce adverse impacts.

7. Preparation of EIA Report

• Purpose: Document the findings of the EIA process.
• Activities:
  • Compilation of all relevant data, analyses, and proposed mitigation measures.
  • Preparation of an Environmental Management Plan (EMP).
• Outcome: Comprehensive EIA report ready for review by stakeholders and regulatory authorities.

Procedure for Reviewing an EIA Statement

1. Initial Review

• Purpose: Ensure the EIA report is complete and addresses all required elements.
• Activities:
  • Check for completeness and adherence to the ToR.
  • Preliminary assessment of the report's quality and thoroughness.
• Outcome: Confirmation that the EIA report is ready for detailed review.

2. Detailed Review

• Purpose: Critically evaluate the technical and scientific aspects of the EIA report.
• Activities:
  • Examination of baseline data and impact predictions.
  • Assessment of the methodologies used for impact identification and prediction.
  • Evaluation of the significance of predicted impacts and proposed mitigation measures.
• Outcome: Detailed feedback on the technical quality and adequacy of the EIA report.

3. Stakeholder Consultation

• Purpose: Gather input from stakeholders on the EIA findings and proposed mitigation measures.
• Activities:
  • Public hearings and meetings with affected communities.
  • Consultations with experts, NGOs, and other interested parties.
• Outcome: Incorporation of stakeholder concerns and suggestions into the EIA process.

4. Revision of EIA Report

• Purpose: Address comments and recommendations from the detailed review and stakeholder consultations.
• Activities:
  • Revision of the EIA report to improve clarity and address identified gaps.
  • Updating mitigation measures and the EMP as needed.
• Outcome: A revised EIA report that addresses all major concerns.

5. Final Review and Decision-Making

• Purpose: Make a final decision on the environmental acceptability of the proposed project.
• Activities:
  • Final assessment by the regulatory authority.
  • Consideration of all review comments, stakeholder inputs, and revisions.
• Outcome: Decision to grant or deny environmental clearance, along with conditions if approval is granted.

6. Public Disclosure

• Purpose: Ensure transparency and inform the public of the decision and its rationale.
• Activities:
  • Publication of the decision and EIA report.
  • Communication of conditions and monitoring requirements.
• Outcome: Public awareness and understanding of the project's environmental implications and regulatory conditions.

This structured approach ensures a thorough and transparent assessment of the environmental impacts of proposed projects, leading to informed decision-making and effective environmental management.

Guidelines for Environmental Audit

Environmental auditing is a systematic, documented, periodic, and objective process to assess an organization's environmental performance. The aim is to ensure compliance with environmental regulations, identify areas for improvement, and enhance overall environmental management practices.          

1. Planning and Preparation

• Objective Setting: Define the scope and objectives of the audit, including what aspects of the organization’s environmental performance will be examined.
• Team Formation: Assemble a team of qualified auditors with the necessary skills and knowledge.
• Audit Plan Development: Create a detailed audit plan outlining the schedule, methodology, and resources required.
• Pre-Audit Data Collection: Gather preliminary information about the organization’s operations, existing environmental policies, and past audit reports.

2. Defining the Audit Scope

• Scope Determination: Determine which areas and activities will be covered by the audit. This may include:
  • Compliance with environmental laws and regulations.
  • Performance against internal environmental standards.
  • Management systems and procedures.
  • Specific environmental impacts (e.g., waste management, emissions, resource usage).
• Criteria Establishment: Define the criteria against which performance will be measured, such as legal requirements, industry standards, and organizational policies.

3. Audit Execution

• Opening Meeting: Conduct an initial meeting with relevant stakeholders to explain the audit objectives, scope, and process.
• On-Site Activities: Perform on-site assessments including:
  • Interviews: Speak with staff and management to understand procedures and practices.
  • Document Review: Examine relevant documents such as permits, policies, records, and monitoring data.
  • Inspections: Visually inspect facilities, equipment, and operational practices.
  • Sampling and Testing: Collect samples and conduct tests if needed to verify compliance and performance.

4. Evaluation and Analysis

• Data Analysis: Evaluate the data collected during the audit to identify any non-compliances, inefficiencies, and areas for improvement.
• Risk Assessment: Assess the potential environmental risks associated with identified issues.
• Impact Evaluation: Evaluate the significance of the environmental impacts associated with the organization’s activities.

5. Reporting

• Draft Report Preparation: Prepare a draft audit report detailing the findings, including:
  • Summary of audit scope and objectives.
  • Description of methodologies used.
  • Detailed findings for each area audited.
  • Non-compliance issues and areas for improvement.
  • Recommendations for corrective actions and improvements.
• Stakeholder Review: Share the draft report with relevant stakeholders for review and feedback.
• Final Report: Incorporate feedback and finalize the audit report. Ensure it is clear, concise, and actionable.

6. Corrective Actions and Follow-Up

• Action Plan Development: Work with the organization to develop a detailed action plan addressing the audit findings and recommendations.
• Implementation: Assist or monitor the implementation of corrective actions and improvements.
• Follow-Up Audit: Schedule follow-up audits to verify the effectiveness of implemented actions and ensure continuous improvement.

7. Continuous Improvement

• Feedback Loop: Use audit findings to continually improve the organization’s environmental management system.
• Training and Awareness: Conduct training sessions to educate staff on audit findings and recommended practices.
• Performance Monitoring: Regularly monitor environmental performance and make adjustments as necessary.

Detailed Steps in the Environmental Audit Process

A. Preparation Phase

1. Define the Purpose and Scope:
   • Determine the specific objectives of the audit (e.g., compliance, performance improvement).
   • Outline the scope, including specific locations, processes, and activities to be audited.
2. Select the Audit Team:
   • Choose auditors with relevant expertise and knowledge.
   • Ensure team members are impartial and independent.
3. Develop the Audit Plan:
   • Create a schedule and allocate resources.
   • Identify key documents and records needed for review.
4. Collect Preliminary Information:
   • Review past audit reports, environmental policies, and regulatory requirements.
   • Gather initial data on the organization’s environmental aspects and impacts.

B. Execution Phase

1. Conduct Opening Meeting:
   • Introduce the audit team and explain the audit process.
   • Discuss the audit plan and objectives with key stakeholders.
2. Perform On-Site Assessments:
   • Conduct interviews with staff to gather information on procedures and practices.
   • Review documents such as permits, environmental management plans, and monitoring records.
   • Inspect facilities and equipment to check for compliance and operational effectiveness.
3. Collect and Analyze Data:
   • Gather data through observations, measurements, and sampling.
   • Analyze the data to identify any deviations from regulatory requirements and standards.

C. Reporting Phase

1. Prepare the Draft Report:
   • Document findings in a clear and organized manner.
   • Highlight non-compliance issues, risks, and areas needing improvement.
   • Provide actionable recommendations for corrective measures.
2. Review with Stakeholders:
   • Share the draft report with management and other relevant parties.
   • Gather feedback and address any concerns or additional information.
3. Finalize the Report:
   • Incorporate feedback and finalize the audit report.
   • Ensure it is comprehensive, objective, and easy to understand.

D. Post-Audit Phase

1. Develop Action Plan:
   • Collaborate with the organization to create a plan for addressing audit findings.
   • Prioritize actions based on the severity and risk of identified issues.
2. Implement Corrective Actions:
   • Support the organization in implementing recommended actions.
   • Provide guidance and resources as needed to ensure effective implementation.
3. Follow-Up and Monitoring:
   • Schedule follow-up audits to verify that corrective actions have been taken.
   • Continuously monitor environmental performance and make adjustments as necessary.

E. Continuous Improvement

1. Training and Awareness:
   • Educate staff on audit findings and the importance of compliance and best practices.
   • Promote a culture of continuous improvement and environmental stewardship.
2. Regular Reviews:
   • Periodically review and update environmental policies and procedures.
   • Ensure ongoing compliance with regulatory requirements and standards.
3. Feedback and Adaptation:
   • Use audit results to inform future audits and improvements.
   • Adapt environmental management strategies based on audit findings and evolving regulations.

Environmental audits are crucial for maintaining compliance with environmental regulations and improving overall environmental performance. By following a structured approach that includes planning, execution, reporting, and continuous improvement, organizations can identify and address environmental risks, enhance their sustainability practices, and demonstrate their commitment to environmental stewardship.