Log has written
FRIDAY, JULY 25, 2008 3:53 PM IST
New Delhi: On 29 December 2006, the Union environment ministry signed off on the environmental clearance for a bauxite mining project located in Ratnagiri, Maharashtra, to be operated by Ashapura Minechem Ltd, a listed Indian firm that is on the verge of starting the mine.
On the face of it, the clearance, given by the ministry on the recommendation of an internal expert appraisal committee on mining, consisting of 11 members, was fairly routine but vital to Ashapura moving ahead on the project.
But, it turns out that the critical environmental impact assessment, or EIA, the basis on which the expert group gave its approval, was based on data simply copied from a Russian bauxite mine report that had nothing to do with Ratnagiri’s vegetation or ecology.
Interviews with activists, officials in the environment ministry and companies, coupled with a review of documents obtained through the Right to Information Act (RTI) suggest that Ratnagiri may be one of many projects cleared by the ministry based on inaccurate environmental assessment reports.
Environmental activists maintain that several other projects have EIAs that are also faulty. Others say that an overburdened expert group and lack of standards for environment consultants who help write these reports is leading to some projects being approved without an accurate assessment of environmental and social costs.
“In the few years that we have started challenging faulty EIAs, we were clear that bulk of the EIA reports by even the most reputed organization are a ‘cut and paste’ job, based on secondary data... Most, if not all, got cleared by the ministry of environment and forests,” alleges Ritwick Dutta, an environmental lawyer and convenor of Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment, or Life, a New Delhi-based non-profit that obtained the Ratnagiri information through RTI.
If true, this would also mean that several ongoing projects could end up in legal jeopardy if environmentalists are able to prove their case.
While there is no independent means of verifying how many EIAs were faulty, in the Ratnagiri mining case, the ministry admits that approval was given without any independent assessment of the “facts” in the report.
Consider what the report said about the environment in Ratnagiri district: “The primary habitat near the site, for birds, is the spruce forests and the forests of mixed spruce and birch.”
Turns out, such tree species are found only in northern temperate regions, such as Alaska, Norway and Russia.
“There could be misjudgement on the part of the ministry in this case but the onus does not lie only on the ministry,” concedes a member of the expert group on mining that cleared the Ratnagiri project. He didn’t want to be named citing the need to follow the ministry’s protocol.
Find More Articles By:
 
Himanshu Said:


Excellent report and even better edit on Dec 28, 2008. Keep up the great work. One of the important follow ups can be seeing what happens to the conditions under which the environmental clearances are given and what happens to the environment management plans submitted with the clearances. And if there are consequences when the conditions are not adhered to and EMPs are not implemented, rather laws are violated with impunity. The Ministry of Environment and Forests is not just a rubber stamp, it seems to be an agent of environmental destruction, the way they have been performing. Another way to look at MEF's performance would be see how many of the projects that come to them are rejected. Very few, and that also mostly becasue of the limitations imposed due to the Supreme Court directives. In case of Allain Duhangan Hydropower project in Himachal Pradesh, this IFC (International Finance Corporation - the private sector arm of the World Bank) has an interesting approach: violate the law with impunity, pay fines when cought. It has paid fine to the tune of over Rs 7 crores in less than three years of its functioning. And it was amazing to see that the ministry rewarded the company with more forest land recently. The monitoring offices of the MEF do not have either any proper guidelines for monitoring the complaince of the law or conditions, nor do they seem to have any mandate. They do not do any surprise visits to the projects, in fact they pay visits using the facilities of the project promoters! And in case of National Hydroelectric Power Corporation, the ministry gives it clearances to projects like Chamera 3 and Parbati 3 even when the state government wrote to the MEF that these projects should not be given clearances. In case of Karcham Wangtoo Hydropower project, the ministry refuse to add the conditions recommended by the state govt. As they say, "log to ankhon me dhul jhonkte hain, ye to puri ki puri ankhen hi dhul main jhonkte hain."

Posted On 12/28/2007 3:48:36 PM