Policy Intervention Analysis : Environmental Impact Assessment [1 ed.] 9788179936160, 9788179934999

Citation preview

Ritu Paliwal $ Leena Srivastava Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is crucial for protecting the environment, especially in a country like India—with its dense and rapidly growing population, shrinking land mass, and an economy poised for rapid growth. In order to make EIA an interactive process, it is necessary that it is supported by a strong follow-up mechanism. A properly formulated follow-up process would not only encourage compliance but also increase awareness among the stakeholders. Policy Intervention Analysis: environmental impact assessment evaluates the adequacy of post project monitoring (PPM) process in India and its effective implementation with a focus on the industrial sector. The book investigates the reasons for poor compliance and gives corrective measures for corrective PPM. It identifies specific measures to improve environmental conditions and provides an action plan that will help strengthen the monitoring and enforcement mechanism based on specific regional concerns.

POLICY INTERVENTION ANALYSIS Environmental Impact Assessment Ritu Paliwal $ Leena Srivastava

The Energy and Resources Institute

The Energy and Resources Institute

Policy intervention AnAlysis

Policy intervention AnAlysis

Ritu Paliwal $ Leena Srivastava

The Energy and Resources Institute

© The Energy and Resources Institute, 2014

ISBN 978-81-7993-499-9

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. All export rights for this book vest exclusively with The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI). Unauthorized export is a violation of terms of sale and is subject to legal action. Suggested citation Paliwal, Ritu and Leena Srivastava. 2014. Policy Intervetion Analysis. New Delhi: TERI

Published by The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) TERI Press Darbari Seth Block IHC Complex, Lodhi Road New Delhi – 110 003 India

Printed in India

Tel. Fax

2468 2100 or 4150 4900 2468 2144 or 2468 2145 India +91 • Delhi (0) 11 Email [email protected] Website www.teriin.org

Preface

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedure was first introduced in the USA in the late 1960s. Since then it has been accepted as a fair means of assessing environmental impacts of a project or activity as well as planning mitigation measures to contain those impacts. Based on the results of an EIA, policymakers can decide whether or not to proceed with a project. They do not have to adhere to a preset environmental outcome; rather, they require to consider environmental values in their decisions and to defend those decisions after considering thorough environmental studies and public comments on the possible impacts. They can use EIA as a management tool to ensure the optimal use of natural resources for sustainable development. India adopted EIA in 1994, when an EIA notification was passed, which made environmental clearance mandatory for about 29 polluting activities. Several amendments were made to this notification, and later in 2006 a new notification was passed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) with the intention of making the Indian EIA process more efficient. The new notification was a great endeavour, but the entire focus remained on the process prior to project implementation, that is, the pre-decision stage. Least has been done to improve the implementation and follow-up activities so central to the success of an EIA process. Follow-up refers to monitoring and evaluation of a project or activity during its implementation stage. It makes EIA an interactive process where environmental compliance of an activity is evaluated to identify the deviation of the process from desired results and measures are suggested to achieve what was originally intended. In India, it is well known that weak enforcement and poor compliance have undermined the outcomes of most of the environmental laws and regulations, and a good follow-up is quite crucial for an effective EIA process. Within this context, it was considered extremely significant to evaluate the Indian follow-up process and hence the reason for writing this book.

vi

Preface

An outcome of several years of research, this book provides an insight into the institutional arrangement, roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders and the focus of terms of reference for the follow-up. It investigates the probable reasons for poor compliance whereby examining what is happening in reality. It gathers evidences from a case study and also observations made during site visit and discussion held with official of regulatory agencies involved in the process. While writing this book, the authors came across several wonderful people whom they feel indebted to for their help and guidance in one way or another. It is not possible to name everyone here, but the authors sincerely acknowledge all the staff and officials of The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), TERI University, DHI (India) Water and Environment Pvt. Ltd, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Regional Office of MoEF, Bhubaneswar, and West Bengal Pollution Control Board for their valued cooperation, comments, and helpful discussions. They also extend their thanks to representatives of various industrial units in Haldia for their cooperation. On a personal note, Dr Ritu Paliwal likes to extend special thanks to all her friends who have been a source of support and constant encouragement. She also acknowledges the most important people in her life—her parents, younger brother, and husband. They have been a source of strength, encouragement, and support for her. The authors are also grateful to almighty GOD for his blessings in the form of knowledge, wisdom and strength, and for enlightening them to be able to take the right path.

Contents

Preface List of Tables List of Figures Acronyms and Abbreviations

1. EIA Process in India and its Constraints 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

Introduction What is an EIA? EIA in India Significance of the Study Outline of the Book

2. Comparative Review of EIA 2.1 Introduction 2.2 EIA in India 2.3 Evaluation of the Indian EIA System

3. Haldia: A Case Study 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Haldia: An Industrial Estate

4. Concept of EIA Follow–up and Practice in India 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

EIA Follow-up Institutional Arrangement of Follow-up in India Appraisal of Follow-up Process in India Cost of Follow-up in Haldia

v ix xi xv

1 1 1 4 6 7

9 9 17 25

31 31 31

49 49 53 58 81

viii Contents 5. Environmental QualityAssessment 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5

Introduction Pollution Load from Various Units Air Quality Assessment—Dispersion Modelling Water Quality Assessment Effectiveness of the Monitoring Network

6. Enforcement Mechanisms 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4

Introduction Enforcement Mechanism in India Enforcement in Haldia Penalties Imposed Versus Cost of Compliance in Haldia

7. Questionnaire Analysis 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4

Introduction Structure of the Questionnaire Statistical Analysis of the Questionnaire Common Facts in the Analysis and Questionnaire

83 83 83 89 105 126

131 131 135 136 142

147 147 148 149 154

8. Conclusion and Policy Implications

157

8.1 Conclusion 8.2 Policy Implications to Make the Follow-up Effective Annexures A: Environmental Quality Standards B: Expert Questionnaire C: Industrial Questionnaire References Index About the Authors

157 160 165 167 175 183 201 209

List of Tables

2.1 2.2 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10

Comparison of EIA system in various countries SWOT analysis of the Indian EIA system with respect to the 1994 notification Sex ratio and literacy rate in Haldia Land use pattern of Haldia in 1989 and 2001 Seasons in Haldia Meteorological data for 2003, Haldia Common fauna of the region Health facilities working in the area Traffic count at mid-blocks List of industries in Haldia Water demand of various operating units in Haldia Ground water usage among units in Haldia Waste water discharge of various units Terminology related to follow-up Guiding principles to implement EIA follow-up Overview of the environmental regulations specified by the MoEF Content analysis of specified environmental conditions Details of source monitoring carried out by WBPCB Details of ambient air quality monitoring carried out by industries Details of source monitoring carried out by industries Compliance status of units with respect to the given TORs Frequency of monitoring in various units along with instances of non-compliance (2000–04) Categories of ventilation coefficient

26 29 33 34 34 35 39 39 42 44 47 47 48 50 53 56 57 61 61 62 64 66 67

x 4.11 4.12 4.13 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5

7.6

7.7 7.8

7.9

List of Tables

Air quality index for Haldia based on data at two stations 70 Instances of imposed bank guarantee 78 Annual cost of follow-up in Haldia in INR 82 Major air-polluting industrial units in Haldia 84 Fuel consumption of West Bengal—emission factors and sulphur content 85 Adopted emission factors for vehicles 86 Stability classification 96 Wind profile exponent based on stability classes 96 Model performance evaluation for selected stations 103 Details of the variables used in HD module calibration 118 Description of accounted point load discharges to river Hoogly and GBC 119 Details of the variables used in EL module calibration 120 Examples of a few recent and significant penalties in the USA 133 Significant court judgements on environmental protection 137 Significant court-imposed fines/penalties 138 Penalty provision as indicated in the Air and Water Act in India 143 Total environmental cost of non-compliance 145 What are the major contributions of EIA? 149 Will EIA 2006 notification bring substantial improvements in the process of PPM? 150 Where PPM guidelines need elaboration? 150 What are the most probable reasons of non-compliance on the part of industries? 151 Whether duplicity of efforts (that is, compliance checks by SPCB and RO) should be removed to utilize resources of regulatory authorities effectively? 153 For improved compliance and extensive source and ambient monitoring, which of the following arrangement is feasible and will also be a solution to limitation of regulatory agencies? 153 Which enforcement mechanism is more recommended to bind industrial units to regulations? 154 If capacity building initiatives have to be directed towards “legal powers”, which agency should have the legal power of enforcement for environmental regulations? 154 Opinion of industries to improve compliance and implementation 155

List of Figures

1.1 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10

Various stages in the EIA process EIA process in the USA EIA process in the Netherlands EIA process in the People’s Republic of China EIA process in Brazil EIA process in Mexico EIA process in India (added in 2006 notification) Overview of the study area—Haldia Population growth trend in HPA Annual wind rose of the Haldia region in 2003 General soil stratification and hydrogeology Road network in Haldia (road numbers are explained in Table 3.7) Indicative map of the location of industries around the Green Belt Canal (GBC) in Haldia A few industrial establishments discharging emissions from stacks Framework of PPM in India Location of air and water monitoring stations of WBPCB Hourly ventilation coefficients for winter and summer months Monthly concentrations of RSPM and SPM at two stations in Haldia Monthly concentrations of SO2 and NOx at two stations in Haldia Concentration of O&G at 10 locations in the GBC Concentration of TSS at 10 locations in the GBC Concentration of BOD at 10 locations in the GBC Concentration of COD at 10 locations in the GBC Instances of non-compliance in GBC regarding monthly monitoring in 2003

3 11 12 13 15 16 21 32 33 36 37 41 43 44 54 59 68 69 70 71 71 72 72 73

xii List of Figures 4.11 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22 5.23 5.24 5.25 5.26 5.27 5.28 5.29

Instances of non-compliance in GBC regarding monthly monitoring in 2004 Percentage contributions to SPM by various sources Percentage contributions of various industries to total industrial SPM Percentage contributions to SO2 by various sources Percentage contributions of various industries to total industrial SO2 Overview map showing Hoogly estuary and GBC (PST–SWAL; FBR–CFCL; PCU–MCPI) Percentage contributions of various industries to the total O&G load Percentage contributions of various industries to the total TSS load Percentage contributions of various industries to the total BOD load Percentage contributions of various industries to the total COD load Seasonal wind rose of Haldia Monthly stability profile of Haldia Observed and predicted monthly SPM concentration at WBIIDC Observed and predicted monthly SPM concentration at Supermarket Observed and predicted monthly SO2 concentration at WBIIDC Observed and predicted monthly SO2 concentration at Supermarket SPM isopleths for the pre-monsoon season SPM isopleths for the monsoon season SPM isopleths for the post-monsoon season SPM isopleths for the winter season SO2 isopleths for the pre-monsoon season SO2 isopleths for the monsoon season SO2 isopleths for the post-monsoon season SO2 isopleths for the winter season Bathymetry of Haldia Water levels at Diamond Harbour used as northern boundary Water levels at Sagar Roads used as southern boundary Model calibration: comparison between model-simulated and measured tidal elevation at Raichak Model calibration: comparison between model simulated and measured tidal elevation at Fraiser Model calibration: comparison between model-simulated results and measured BOD levels at various locations in GBC

74 87 88 88 89 90 90 91 91 92 98 99 99 100 100 101 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 116 117 118 120 121 122

List of Figures

5.30 5.31 5.32 5.33 5.34

5.35

5.36 5.37 6.1 8.1

xiii

Model validation: comparison between model-simulated results and measured tidal elevation at Kulpi (top) and Gangra (bottom) 123 Model result: predicted flow at Pataikhali 1 and Pataikhali 2 124 Model result: DO at three locations in GBC 125 Model result: BOD at three locations in GBC 126 BOD level in the river and part of GBC: high water and ebb condition in river; outflow from GBC(top); ebb condition in river; outward flow from GBC (middle); ebb condition in river and outward flow in GBC (bottom) 127 BOD level in the river and part of GBC: ebb condition in river and outflow in GBC (top); at low water, start of flood in river, inward flow in GBC (middle); flood condition in the river, inward flow in the GBC (bottom) 128 Model result: DO of river Hoogly near Pataikhali 1 and 2 129 Model result: BOD of river Hoogly near Pataikhali 1 and 2 129 Photographs taken near the Oil Jetty end of GBC 141 Suggestive framework for PPM in India 161

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ANOVA AOFL APP AQI BIS BOD CFCL COD CONAMA CONDEMA CONSEMA COR CPCB DEIS DG DHI DO DoE EAC EC EIA EIL EIR EIS EL

analysis of variance Alcamer Oils and Fats Ltd air pollution potential air quality index Bureau of Indian Standards biochemical oxygen demand Consolidated Fibres and Chemicals Ltd chemical oxygen demand National Council of the Environment, Brazil Municipal Council of the Environment, Brazil State Council of Environment, Brazil correlation coefficient Central Pollution Control Board draft environmental impact statement diesel generator Danish Hydraulic Institute dissolved oxygen Department of Environment Environmental Appraisal Committee Environmental Clearance environmental impact assessment Exide Industries Ltd Environmental Impact Report, China environmental impact statement EcoLab Module of MIKE

xvi

Acronyms and Abbreviations

EMP EPA EPB ESPL ETP FB FONSI GBC GLC HC HD HDA HMA HPA HPL HPL-Co HPCL HQ HT/LT IA IBAMA IMD INE INR IOA IOCL IOC-Pet ISCST 3 LEEGEPA LI LO LP

environmental management plan Environmental Protection Act, 1986, India Environmental Protection Bureaux, China Electro Steel Pvt. Ltd effluent treatment plant fractional bias finding of no significant impact Green Belt Canal Ground-level concentration hydrocarbon Hydrodynamic Module of MIKE Haldia Development Authority Haldia Municipality Area Haldia Planning Area Haldia Petrochemical Ltd HPL–Cogeneration Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd headquarters high tide/low tide impact assessment Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources India Meteorological Department National Ecology Institute, Mexico Indian Rupees index of agreement Indian Oil Corporation Ltd IOC-Petronas Ltd Industrial Source Complex Short Term 3 General Law of Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection, Mexico installation licence, Brazil licence of operation, Brazil advance licence, Brazil

Acronyms and Abbreviations

LPG MCPI MIKE MINARS MMA MOCPL MoEF MPGL NAAQM NCEPC NEAA NEPA NGO NH NMSE NOC NOI O&G OEMA PHED PIL PPM PROFEPA PSU RO ROD RSIL RTO SAPL SD SEAC SEDUE

xvii

liquefied petroleum gas MCCPTA Corp Pvt. Ltd numerical model used for water quality assessment Monitoring of Indian National Aquatic Resources System Ministry of the Environment, Water Resources and Legal Amazon, Brazil Marcus Oil and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd Ministry of Environment and Forests Madhya Pradesh Glychem Ltd National Ambient Air Quality Monitoring, India National Committee on Environmental Planning and Coordination, India National Environment Appellate Authority, India National Environmental Policy Act, USA non-governmental organization National Highway normalized mean square error no objection certificate Notification of Intent oil and grease State Agency for Environment, Brazil Public Health Engineering Department, India public interest litigation post-project monitoring Federal Environmental Protection Agency, Mexico practical salinity unit regional office of MoEF Record of Decision Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd regional transport office South Asian Petrochemical Ltd standard deviation state EAC, India Secretariat of Ecology and Urban Development, Mexico

xviii Acronyms and Abbreviations SEDESOL SEIAA SEMA SEMARNAP SEMARNAT SH SOD SPCB SPM SWAL SWOT TCL TOR TSS USA USEPA VKT VROM WASP WBIIDC WBPCB WHO

Secretariat of Social Development, Mexico State Environment Impact Assessment Authorities State Secretariat Secretariat of Environment, Natural Resources and Fisheries, Mexico Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources State Highway sediment oxygen demand State Pollution Control Board suspended particulate matter Shaw Wallace Agrochemicals Ltd strength, weakness, opportunity, and threat Tata Chemicals Ltd terms of reference total suspended solids United States of America United States Environmental Protection Agency vehicle kilometre travelled Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, The Netherlands water quality analysis simulation program West Bengal Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation West Bengal Pollution Control Board World Health Organisation

1

1.1

EIA Process in India and its Constraints

INTRODUCTION

Until quite recently, economic development throughout the world focused on improving the standard of living of the people and acquiring immediate economic gains, without considering environmental protection issues. The increasing pace of urbanization, industrialization, and infrastructure development has resulted in environmental pollution and degradation (Chopra, Kadekodi, and Mongia 1993). In general, every activity that accelerates economic growth has some bearing on the environment. However, these impacts are not immediate and are felt long after the development has taken place—they manifest themselves as pollution of air, water, and land, leading to loss of biodiversity and potential health hazards. Policymakers and administrative authorities realized that the situation was very delicate and finely balanced, since neither economic activities could be halted nor environmental pollution and degradation could be accepted. Hence, efforts were concentrated in evolving policy and planning initiatives for sustainable development aimed at a trade-off between development and socio-ecological losses (Donnelly, Clayton, and Hughes 1998; Rao 1997). This led to the advent of “environmental impact assessment” (EIA) as a tool to incorporate environmental management and sustainability in project development. EIA aims at improving decision-making and ensures that the development options under consideration are environmentally and socially sound and sustainable (Donnelly, Clayton, and Hughes 1998). It is a process, rather than an activity, that identifies, predicts, and evaluates the wide-ranging environmental impacts of a particular development or project.

1.2

WHAT IS AN EIA?

Environmental impact assessment was first introduced in the USA under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (Canter and Clark 1997). NEPA influenced federal decision-making by making the government account for the environmental

2

Policy Intervention Analysis

impacts of considered projects before committing any resource to it (Canter and Clark 1997; Ortolano and Shepherd 1995). The success of EIA under the NEPA encouraged other countries to adopt the EIA process. The Stockholm Conference (1972) and the Rio Conference (1992) advocated EIA as one of the policy instruments that could be used to curb pollution (Rao 1997). By 1996, more than 100 countries had EIA systems in place (Glasson and Salvador 2000). EIA has evolved as an important tool for integrating the objectives of environmental management with the requirements of economic growth (Rao 1997). An EIA process may essentially be divided into two stages: pre-decision and post-decision. Screening, scoping, impact prediction, and mitigation fall into the predecision stage, whereas follow-up relates to the activities carried out after a decision is made. Figure 1.1 shows a flow chart relating to the various activities of an EIA process, which are discussed briefly in the following paragraphs (Glasson, Therivel, and Chadwick 2005; Abaza, Bisset, and Sadler 2004; Donnelly, Clayton, and Hughes 1998; Lohani, Evans, Ludwig, et al. 1997; Canter 1996; Wansem and Smith 1995; Glasson, Therivel, and Chadwick 1994; Wathern 1988). Screening: Environmental impact assessment starts with screening that determines whether the project under scrutiny requires an EIA study or not. Legislative and official guidelines to screen a project are generally available, and they are based on the size, cost, location, type of process, and environmental damages envisaged. In many countries where EIA has several levels, that is, federal, state, municipal, and so on, jurisdiction over the project or determining who has the power to make decisions is also decided at this stage. Scoping: It is an essential stage in the whole EIA process. Scoping identifies the focus of the EIA study. Every activity has specific potential impacts, which need elaborate investigation. The exercise of scoping pinpoints aspects needing detailed examination and also the extent of the study. Study of alternatives: Assessment of different project alternatives is also a component of the EIA process. It includes a brief analysis of various sites, technology, raw materials, and impact-reduction measures available for a project in order to make the best and most environment-friendly choice.

Impact identification and prediction:

This involves collection of data on environmental, socio-economic, and climatic conditions of the region where a project is to be sited. Futuristic analysis is taken up to determine cause-effect relationships due to the upcoming activity. This step attempts to forecast the extent and magnitude of the impacts. Mathematical models for noise, air and water quality, along with time-series analyses are useful in this stage.

EIA Process in India and its Constraints

3

Figure 1.1 Various stages in the EIA process Source: http://www.iied.org/docs/spa/dir_impassess.pdf

Mitigation: On realizing the potential impacts of a project, measures are introduced to avoid, reduce, or compensate the negative impacts of the project. These actions are called mitigation measures. An environmental management plan (EMP) is also proposed, which details the work plan, time schedule, place, and cost of implementing the suggested mitigation measures. Public participation: It involves a two-way communication channel where concerned stakeholders are briefed about the upcoming project, and in return they are given a chance to make their concerns, suggestions, and preferences known, which can be incorporated in the project planning. These stakeholders may include citizens, public interest groups, experts, and governmental agencies. Reporting: It involves the presentation of the findings of the impact study in the form of a report called the environmental impact statement (EIS). This report is used

4

Policy Intervention Analysis

by decision-makers to study the details of the project site, impacts, and mitigation of the impacts for all practical purposes. Review and decision-making: Generally a committee undertakes the evaluation of a project based on the EIS and site visits if necessary. Different jurisdictions use different arrangements. However, most often the committee has experts on issues such as environment, ecology, industrial processes, and social aspects. While conferring an environmental clearance (EC) to a project, it is agreed that certain terms and conditions are to be complied with throughout the project life cycle. Follow-up: This refers to the post-decision activity carried out to review whether project implementation is executed according to the environmental standards and terms and conditions provided during approval. It also assesses overall environmental impacts due to the new activity.

1.3

EIA IN INDIA

In India, EIA was formally introduced in 1994 when the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) passed an EIA notification under the Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1986 (MoEF 1994 and 2003a). The 1994 notification covered about 32 different activities, including nuclear power plants, river valley projects, thermal power plants, several industries, mining, and infrastructure projects on the basis of their potential impacts on the environment. It mainly provided guidelines for screening, scoping, public hearing, and composition of decision-making committees. It is important to note here that although there is no mention of “follow-up”1 activity in the 1994 notification, this activity has been adopted as an essential activity and regional offices (ROs) of the MoEF are made responsible for its implementation. Several constraints were noticed in the systematic implementation of the 1994 notification, ranging from improper screening and scoping guidelines, inconsistent application of qualitative and quantitative tools for impact identification and prediction, and poor decision-making to ineffective monitoring and follow-up (MoEF 2003a; TERI 2002; Sinclair and Diduck 2000; World Bank 1999a). Of all the limitations, slack follow-up was identified as the major concern (MoEF 2003a; TERI 2002; Lohani, Evans, Ludwig, et al. 1997). The MoEF (2003a) also clearly identified “PPM as an area that was not given much emphasis during the framing of the EIA notification”. In September 2006, the MoEF passed a new EIA notification with the intention of making the Indian EIA process more efficient (MoEF 2006). The 2006 EIA notification focuses on elaboration of screening and scoping activities, enhanced public involvement, 1

Follow-up is a post-decision activity in the EIA process and is referred to as PPM (post-project monitoring) in India.

EIA Process in India and its Constraints

5

and decentralization of the process to introduce state-level EC committees. Most importantly, a follow-up process was introduced. While this notification is indeed a step in the right direction, the agenda is clearly to improve the environmental appraisal process prior to project implementation. Though follow-up has been introduced, there are still no formal guidelines on the procedural aspects, that is, approach, roles and responsibilities, monitoring requirements, and enforcement issues. Thus, the whole follow-up process is essentially the same as was practised earlier. In India, EIA is still largely linear and not an interactive process.2 Accordingly, in order to lead to desirable outcomes, it needs to be supported with a strong follow-up mechanism, which should identify the deviation of the process from intended actions and also suggest measures to achieve what was intended. The follow-up activity is a key to the success of the EIA process and has been highlighted in the work of many scholars (Jay, Jones, Slinn, et al. 2007; Ahammed and Nixon 2006; Paliwal 2006; Marshall, Arts, and Morrison-Saunders 2005; Abaza, Bisset, and Sadler 2004; Arts, Caldwell, and Morrison-Saunders 2001; MorrisonSaunders, Arts, Caldwell, et al. 2001a and b; Barker and Woods 1999; Wood and Linden 1999; Dipper et al. 1998; Glasson 1995; Ortolano and Shepherd 1995; Wood 1995; Biswas and Agarwala 1992; Buckley 1991). While granting clearance to an activity, certain stipulations such as emission limits, provision of pollution control equipment, and monitoring schedule are provided to the proponent. These stipulations work as “terms of references” for regulatory authorities to perform follow-up, which is aimed at carrying out the dual task of presenting the actual environmental impacts of the project and also verifying whether the environmental stipulations provided in the clearance are adequately implemented, that is, all the norms and standards are met and the environment is not adversely affected by the proposed activity. It can be observed that follow-up, if properly implemented, has many advantages. Besides ensuring implementation of stipulations as per the EC issued for the project, monitoring and evaluation during follow-up also ascertains enforcement of mitigation measures and helps in detecting the need of corrective measures in terms of project design or operational changes (World Bank 1999b). Continuous environmental 2

In policy process, linear and interactive models are widely discussed (Sutton 1999; Thomas and Grindle 1990). The linear model, which is commonly used, suggests that policy is a sequential process where on recognizing a problem, courses of actions to deal with the problem are identified, and after evaluating all the alternatives, the best one is selected based on which a policy is implemented successfully or unsuccessfully. Whereas, the interactive model argues that the policy process not as simple as the linear model makes it out to be, but that policy or reforms are altered in the process of implementation by the pressure and reaction of stakeholders who are involved in the process. These stakeholders may include administrative staff, managers, project proponents, local people, etc. because of which any policy may have multiple potential outcomes.

6

Policy Intervention Analysis

monitoring and evaluation compels industries to abide by the environmental regulations. Environmental monitoring also establishes a baseline data of the region and helps in understanding the cause-effect relationship between an activity and environmental change. It checks the accuracy of an EIA prediction, thereby increasing the knowledge base for better EIA of future projects (Lohani, Evans, Ludwig, et al. 1997). With so many advantages, it is now clear that follow-up is essential to ensure that the activity under consideration respects and safeguards the environment. Given the challenges of protecting the environment of a country like India with its dense and growing population, shrinking land mass, and with an economy poised for rapid growth, the role of EIA is very crucial. It can well be imagined that the role of a properly formulated follow-up process would not only encourage compliance but also increase awareness among stakeholders. Therefore, it is extremely essential to analyse the follow-up process, investigate the role of various agencies in the process, and detect failures and possible reasons for such inefficiencies in the system. This book is based on a case-study approach and examines the effectiveness of the Indian EIA follow-up process with a focus on the industrial estate of Haldia, situated in the state of West Bengal. It also suggests measures to streamline the process to obtain desired outcomes.

1.4

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This book presents a policy intervention analysis to check the effectiveness of the follow-up or post-project monitoring (PPM) in India. It intends to understand the policy, regulatory, and economic drivers of environmental compliance and suggests mechanisms for strengthening the same. The objectives of this book are as follows: • The new EIA notification has been implemented in India with a vision to improve the EIA process, which mainly focuses on activities prior to decision-making. However, it is known that in many countries, EIA policies fail in meeting their objectives due to poor implementation and follow-up practices. This book highlights the challenges that Indian regulators may face while implementing the changed or modified EIA process without strengthening the follow-up. • It intends to investigate the probable reasons for poor compliance and suggests corrective measures for effective PPM. • The results presented in this book would be helpful in identifying specific measures to improve the environmental conditions of the study area and may also provide an action plan for local authorities to strengthen their monitoring and enforcement mechanism based on specific regional concerns.

EIA Process in India and its Constraints

1.5

7

OUTLINE OF THE BOOK

The present work contains eight chapters. Chapter 1 provides an overview of the EIA process and follow-up mechanism in India. Chapter 2 discusses the EIA system in India as well as a few other countries. A comparative review is provided in this chapter. An account of the method used for evaluating the effectiveness of the Indian EIA follow-up process is given in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 discusses the institutional arrangement of PPM in India and also appraises the Indian PPM with respect to the identified elements of a standard follow-up. Issues relating to implementation of follow-up and the role of various agencies in the process are also presented. The chapter also discusses the probable reasons for the ineffective implementation of follow-up and the difficulties the units face while abiding by the regulations. Environmental quality assessment using air and water quality modelling is presented in Chapter 5. The way in which ongoing industrial activities affect the environment of the region has been described. The chapter also provides clues to develop an effective monitoring network. Weak enforcement was considered to be the main cause for the inefficiencies in PPM. Chapter 6 analyses the enforcement mechanism, that is, court proceedings as well as penalty instruments practised, to understand whether these mechanisms are appropriate to force units towards compliance. In order to understand the economics of the whole process, it also includes an estimate of the fines and penalties as well as cost of implementing environmental measures for industries. This includes the expenditure that regulatory authorities as well as proponents incur towards environmental management and monitoring measures. In any policy analysis, the major task is to ensure the representation of all stakeholders not only in defining a task but also while seeking possible solutions for it. Chapters 7 presents the analysis of the questionnaire survey carried out to gather responses of various stakeholders regarding the PPM process and measures to be adopted to improve PPM. The objective of this questionnaire was to examine the following questions in detail: (a) What is the status of PPM in India? (b) What are the perceived causes/reasons/barriers behind its ineffectiveness? (c) What are the approaches, policy measures, and strategies stakeholders suggest or feel appropriate to improve the process? This book concludes with Chapter 8, which includes suggestions to make PPM more comprehensive and accessible.

2

2.1

Comparative Review of EIA

INTRODUCTION

The process and scope of environmental impact assessment (EIA) is, in general, well understood by all. Yet, every jurisdiction has its own unique EIA system in place. The basic elements and the processes are the same, but the procedures, stakeholders, and time frame could vary according to the legal and administrative guidelines of different jurisdictions. To bring out the differences and similarities in its practice in different countries, a comparative review of the EIA process in India and five other countries—the United States of America (USA), the Netherlands, People’s Republic of China, Brazil, and Mexico—is provided in this chapter. This would help in understanding the process apart from determining how the current Indian EIA system can be improved. The USA and the Netherlands were chosen to represent developed nations, that is, nations possessing strong environmental management frameworks. China, Brazil, and Mexico were indicative of developing nations, where poverty, population, environmental problems, and the challenges of economic reforms were quite similar to those being faced by India.

2.1.1

EIA in the United States of America

Environmental impact assessment was adopted in the USA on 1 January 1970 under the federal legislation, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 1969 (Maza 2001; Canter 1996; Canter and Clark 1997; Wathern 1988). The Council of Environmental Quality has been central in strengthening the EIA system by promoting the procedures and guidelines in the USA. At the federal level, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is responsible for the management of the system, while developers and a

10 Policy Intervention Analysis lead federal agency associated with that development undertake EIAs (Wood 1995). EIA requirement applies to most federal actions, but not to state activities (unless the state has an EIA policy, like California) or to private projects except where federal permits are required. The proponent starts the process and applies to the lead agency by submitting a brief report about the project (Figure 2.1). The agency undertakes a preliminary environmental analysis to decide whether an environmental impact statement (EIS) is required or whether a “finding of no significant impact” (FONSI) is to be provided. The agency publishes a Notification of Intent (NOI) in the federal register, summarizing the reasons for the decision. If a detailed EIS is required, the scope of the EIS is provided to the proponent within 30 days after consulting experts and regional offices (ROs), on the basis of which a draft EIS (DEIS) is prepared. The DEIS is sent to the USEPA for critical review and also to obtain comments from the public and concerned agencies (Tzoumis and Finegold 2000; Wood 1995). Concerns and recommendations regarding impacts and mitigation measures provided by the public and agencies are collected within 45 days of submission of the DEIS. These are taken into consideration to prepare the final EIA report. The decision is made within 30 days of submission of the final EIA report. The Record of Decision (ROD) is published in the federal register along with the reason for the same. Post-decision monitoring in the USA is very discretionary in nature (Wood 1995). The federal regulations have provided scope for follow-up in Section 15.05.2 (c) of NEPA, which states that a “monitoring and enforcement program shall be adopted and summarized [in the ROD] where applicable for any mitigation” and Section 15.05.3 which states that agencies may provide for monitoring to assure that their decisions are carried out and should do so in important cases. Monitoring is not essential for all projects, unless it is mentioned in the ROD. In other cases, the lead agency has the right to ascertain that mitigation measures have been adopted and should make the records public.

2.1.2

EIA in the Netherlands

Provisions for EIA were introduced in the Environmental Protection (General) Act, which was enacted in 1987 (Wood 1995; Glasson, Therivel, and Chadwick 1994). Later these provisions were made mandatory by the Environmental Management Act, which came into being in 1994. The Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM 1994) is responsible for drafting and implementing EIA legislation, regulation, and guidelines. An independent expert committee, the Commission for EIA, advises a competent authority on terms of reference (TOR) for the EIS and reviews its quality after the EIS has been prepared. The competent

Comparative Review of EIA

11

Figure EIA process in the USA 2.1

authority is generally a municipal government, provincial government, or national ministry (Arts and Meijer 2004). Section 7 of the Environmental Management Act 1984 clearly describes the process of EIA in the Netherlands, and the various guidelines associated with it is presented in Figure 2.2. The proponent provides an NOI to receive approval for any developmental activity. The competent agency takes the opinion of the EIA Commission and the public, at large, on the proposal, in order to decide the scope of the EIS. The unique aspects of the EIA process in the Netherlands are its two-stage public consultation requirements and the integration of EIA at the plan and policy level, and assessment of the EIS report by a commission, independent of the government. The Environmental Management Act does not specify follow-up activity. However, the EIA Commission incorporates monitoring in its scoping guidelines to measure the impact. The Act states that the competent authority must monitor the consequence of the implementation action and the proponent must provide the competent authority with monitoring information (Wood 1995; VROM 1994). The competent authority is

12 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure EIA process in the Netherlands 2.2

also asked to provide a post-auditing report comparing real-time impacts with those predicted in the EIS. The Netherlands had adopted a practice prevailing in Canada, that is, screening requirement for follow-up (Arts and Meijer 2004). Guidelines were developed at the province level on how to follow-up and which projects are to be covered. This was felt necessary keeping in view the increasing number of projects requiring clearance and budgetary constraints to evaluate all of them. Only those projects that are assumed to have severe impacts were considered for detailed and comprehensive follow-up process, and the cost of follow-up was borne by the proponent. Focused follow-up has proved effective as it is done meticulously.

2.1.3

EIA in the People’s Republic of China

Environmental impact assessment was introduced under Article 6 of the Environmental Protection Law 1979 (Wang, Morgan, and Cashmore 2003; Chen, Warren, and Duan 1999; Lo, Tang, and Chan 1997; Glasson, Therivel, and Chadwick 1994). Administrative orders and regulations were issued in 1981 on how to carry out and implement the EIA

Comparative Review of EIA

13

process. The EIA ordinance was revised in 1986 to provide details on timing, funding, preparing, reviewing, decision-making, and roles of stakeholders (Mao and Hills 2002). Additional environmental protection legislations were introduced for water, noise, air, and solid waste in the meantime to support the process. Several efforts were made to improve the EIA process, and a final version of the EIA law was approved in October 2002 and came into effect in September 2003. The State Environmental Protection Administration is responsible for the implementation of the EIA system as well as review of national-level projects with investments greater than 200 million yuan.The Provincial and Municipal Environmental Protection Bureaux (EPBs) administers EIA at the regional level for projects requiring investment between 50 and 200 million yuan, and projects less than 50 million yuan are appraised by city EPBs. The proponent submits a brief proposal to the concerned authority, which decides on whether an EIA is required or not (Figure 2.3). Projects are defined as A, B, and C on the basis of potential impacts and site conditions. Projects classified as “A” are under obligation to take the services of accredited consultants and prepare a comprehensive environmental impact report

Figure EIA process in the People’s Republic of China 2.3

14 Policy Intervention Analysis (EIR), while projects categorized as “B” and “C” need to submit only an environmental impact form detailing project location, process, raw material, pollution load, associated environmental impacts, and pollution mitigation measures. This form may be filled by the proponent with the help of in-house experts. After review of the form, if required, the regulatory agency may direct the proponent to carry out a comprehensive EIA as well. The follow-up process is compulsory in China, and both EPBs and project developers are responsible for the construction as well as operation phase (Wang, Morgan, and Cashmore 2003). Developers carry out regular monitoring of air, water, solid waste, and noise, which are normally integrated with the internal environmental management process. Details such as the extent of monitoring, site, time, frequency of sampling, and quality control measures are generally listed in the EIR. The outcomes of monitoring during construction decide the provision of approval of operation. EPBs also check the compliance of the project with respect to technology, production process, products, environmental standards, and management strategies. They also undertake site inspections to ascertain compliance during the operation phase. However, the follow-up is still considered to be weak.

2.1.4

EIA in Brazil

Environmental impact assessment has been practised in Brazil since 1970 at the state level for projects requiring external funding (Brito and Moreira 2003). It was made mandatory in 1981 through the Brazilian National Environmental Policy (Brito and Moreira 2003; CEIA 2003). There are several levels of regulators in Brazil. At the federal level, the National Council of the Environment (CONAMA) establishes regulations and guidelines regarding EIA. The Ministry of the Environment, Water Resources and Legal Amazon (MMA) implements, coordinates, and integrates the policy (Kirchhoff 2006; CEIA 2003; Glasson and Salvador 2000). The Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) executes the regulations and reviews federal and other projects when more than one state is involved. At the state level, the State Council of Environment (CONSEMA), the State Secretariat (SEMA), and the State Agency for Environment (OEMA) have similar responsibilities as the CONAMA, MMA, and IBAMA, respectively. At the municipal level, the council (CONDEMA), secretariat, and department are operational and have a role in granting building licences before the commencement of any construction work. As shown in Figure 2.4, to initiate the process, the project proponent or developer applies for an advance licence (LP). The LP is provided on the basis of a project feasibility report. At this stage it is decided whether the project needs to take up a detailed EIA. In case an EIA is required, the OEMA analyses the EIA to provide the LP or reject the application. Thereafter, the project developer provides an impact

Comparative Review of EIA

15

Figure EIA process in Brazil 2.4

mitigation plan in order to apply for an installation licence (LI) to the OEMA. If the plan is found acceptable, LI is granted to start construction. The third stage of this process is to obtain approval to start operation. A licence of operation (LO) is issued after making sure that mitigation measures are in place according to the recommendations of the regulatory agency. There are provisions for EIA monitoring, but they have limited application (Glasson and Salvador 2000; Ebisemiju 1993).

2.1.5

EIA in Mexico

In Mexico, the Environmental Protection Law 1982 established the Secretariat of Ecology and Urban Development (SEDUE) and introduced the mandatory EIA system. In 1988, the General Law of Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection (LEEGEPA) established EIA as an important assessment tool (Palerm and Aceves 2004). In 1992, the SEDUE became the Secretariat of Social Development (SEDESOL). At the same time, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (PROFEPA) was created as an enforcement body for EIA.

16 Policy Intervention Analysis The Secretariat of Environment, Natural Resources and Fisheries (SEMARNAP) was created in December 1994 taking into account the economic, social, and environmental objectives. Later in 2000, under the Federal Public Administration Law, it was restructured into the Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources, SEMARNAT (SEMARNAT 2002). Under SEMARNAT, the National Ecology Institute (INE) was made responsible of establishing EIA policy, regulations, and procedures. Since then SEMARNAT, PROFEPA, and INE work closely on the EIA process. SEMARNAT is the authority that provides EIA approvals, whereas INE is a decentralized research body helping in shaping EIA policy, regulations, and procedures (INE 2006). PROFEPA is an autonomous entity under SEMARNAT, which is generally responsible for enforcing environmental laws, regulations, and environmental norms. The EIA process starts with the submission of an NOI and a report specifying the environmental impacts that may be caused by the considered work or activity to SEMARNAT (Spreij 2005; Palerm and Aceves 2004; Ortega-Rubio, Salinas-Zavala, Lluch-Cota, et al. 2001; SEMARNAT 2000; Bojorquez-Tapia and Gracia 1998), as shown in Figure 2.5.

Figure EIA process in Mexico 2.5

Comparative Review of EIA

17

Within 20 days, SEMARNAT analyses this report to decide whether EIS is required or not. The developer, according to the available guidelines, prepares EIS, on the basis of which the case is examined. SEMARNAT issues the ruling within 60 days. Afterwards, PROFEPA performs audits and inspections and observes compliance. Public hearing is not a regular feature in Mexico, but SEMARNAT may conduct public hearing, if an individual or party makes a written request.

2.2

EIA IN INDIA

In India, the first EIA was ordered during the early 1980s for the Silent River Valley Hydroelectric Project (MoEF 2003a; Valappil, Devoyst, and Hens 1994). Later, in 1985, realizing that the project would cause a big threat to the biodiversity and forest ecosystem of the area, it was abandoned and Silent Valley was declared as a national park. This case marked a new beginning in India, and since then EIAs were extended to other activities. Projects require EIA under the following cases: • If they needed an approval of the Public Investment Board/ Planning Commission/ Central Water Commission/Central Electricity Authority, and so on. • If they were referred to the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) by other ministries. • If they were proposed to be located in environmentally fragile or sensitive areas. • If they were under dispute. Later, EIA was introduced formally in 1994 when the MoEF passed an EIA notification under Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1986. Over the years, the system has undergone several amendments to improve the environmental clearance (EC) process and makes it an integral component of decision-making. The EIA process is now well-established, and ECs have already been provided to over 1500 development projects. It rests on the three pillars of statutory, administrative, and procedural frameworks.

2.2.1

Statutory Framework: 1994–2006

Environmental management issues came into focus in India when the National Committee on Environmental Planning and Coordination (NCEPC) was constituted in 1972, under the Department of Science and Technology, following the Stockholm Conference. The Planning Commission directed the NCEPC to undertake an EIA of the major development projects to weigh the pros and cons of these activities on the environment. Later, the Department of Environment (DoE) was established according to the recommendation of the NCEPC in 1980. This was finally converted into the full-fledged MoEF five years later (Rao 1997).

18 Policy Intervention Analysis The MoEF enacted EPA 1986 as an umbrella act covering various environmental aspects. Under this act, EIA notification was put forth, making EIA mandatory for 32 highly polluting activities, which included nuclear power plants, river valley projects, thermal power plants, industries, mining, and infrastructure projects (MoEF 1994 and 2004). The notification not only specified the type of activities, requiring EIA but also fixed a time schedule for the whole process. It also defined the role of the MoEF in the process. The public hearing procedure was introduced in 1997, outlining the process, that is, submission of report to the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB), specification for public hearing notice, composition of the hearing panel, and the time period for the completion of the public hearing process. A new chapter was added to the history of environmental regulations with the enactment of the EIA notification in September 2006 on the suggestions of Govindrajan Committee Report (MoEF 2006). The EIA process is now modified with a major focus on improving screening, scoping, public involvement, and decentralization of the process. The EC process is subjected to the stipulated standards in the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000 to provide the prescribed limit of the pollutants that a particular activity may release into the environment. The Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules 1989 and Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 are the other major acts that have a bearing on the EC practice. In addition, state governments may have stringent regulations based on local conditions, but these should be consistent with national laws, regulations, and standards.

2.2.2

Administrative Framework: 1994–2006

Earlier, the EC process was completely under the jurisdiction of the central government of India. At that time, all industrial activities listed in Schedule I of the EIA notification were required to take clearance from the environment ministry (MoEF 1994). Units that did not come under the purview of the MoEF were also asked to take up EIA by respective SPCBs, as deemed necessary. Many state boards appreciated the fact that the EIA process helped in understanding the impacts of a specific activity, and therefore more and more units were asked to prepare EIA reports even if the MoEF did not bind them to do so. Now with the complete enforcement of the new EIA notification (2006), EIA is decentralized and some of the projects can take EC from state authorities. The EC process is a two-tier system involving both central and state authorities. At the central level, the Impact Assessment (IA) division under MoEF, ROs, the National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA), and the Central Pollution

Comparative Review of EIA

19

Control Board (CPCB) are the four important institutions; whereas the State Environment Impact Assessment Authorities (SEIAA), SPCBs, and state DoE work at the provincial level.

2.2.2.1

Role of IA and SEIAA

The IA division of MoEF, in coordination with the relevant state and central authorities, is responsible for setting guidelines for the preparation of the EIA reports, questionnaires, and checklists for major sectors (MoEF 2003b). It prepares and issues various notifications and amendments pertaining to environmental laws. The IA has constituted six multi-disciplinary expert committees, each known as the Environmental Appraisal Committee (EAC) of the particular discipline, as specified in the EIA notification, to carry out reviews for mining, industries, thermal power plant, river valley and hydro-electricity projects, nuclear power plants, infrastructure, and miscellaneous activities. The appraisal process involves review of the EIA report and various documents submitted by the project proponent. The EAC may also seek clarification from the proponent and conduct site visits if necessary during the review procedure. Based on the documents submitted and clarification presented, the EAC either grants or rejects environment clearance to a developmental project. The IA division also responds to the litigations in the various courts regarding EC decisions, notifications, and amendments. With decentralization of the EC process, the SEIAA, comprising three members, including a chairman and a member secretary (to be nominated by the concerned state government or the union territory administration), performs the task of granting or rejecting clearance at the state level. State EAC (SEAC) comprises experts from various disciplines who examine the EIA report and provide their recommendation to the SEIAA.

2.2.2.2

Role of CPCB

The CPCB is an autonomous organization under the administrative control of MoEF. Initially, it was known as the Central Board for Prevention and Control of Pollution of Water, which came into being in 1974, with the enactment of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974. Later in 1981, the board was renamed and also assigned the powers and functions specified under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981. The CPCB primarily had powers explicit to the water and air acts, but now it is an umbrella organization with the legal strength of several acts that came afterwards. The CPCB has no direct role in the EC process, though it acts as a research organization, which collects, analyses, and disseminates information pertaining to pollution prevention and abatement; this benefits the MoEF, SPCBs,

20 Policy Intervention Analysis and several other stakeholders of the EC process. It is a common practice to designate technical staff and experts of the CPCB as members of the panels of EACs. The member-secretary of the CPCB or his/her representative is appointed to all sectorspecific committees (MoEF 2001a).

2.2.2.3

Role of ROs

The MOEF has set up six ROs with headquarters (HQs) at New Delhi. These centres have been set up especially for the monitoring and implementation of provisions under the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980, and environmental clearance process. Postproject monitoring (PPM) of the cleared projects in particular is a major responsibility of ROs.

2.2.2.4

Role of NEAA

Established in 1997, the NEAA is an autonomous body that hears any appeal against the decisions of the MoEF on approving or rejecting ECs (Rajaram and Das 2006). This authority may have three members, a chairperson, and a vice chairperson. However, this authority is non-functional and does not have regular members to take care of petitions.

2.2.2.5

Role of state DoE and SPCB

Environmental matters of any state ranging from the execution to the formulation of guidelines have been entrusted to the state DoE headed by a cabinet minister. The SPCBs work under DoEs to provide EC to projects at the state level (MoEF 1997). SPCBs issue a no objection certificate (NOC) to establish if the water and air pollution loads are acceptable for the area in which the project is to be located. This is to be submitted while applying for EC. The responsibility of conducting public hearings is also conferred on the SPCBs. The minutes of the meeting and major findings are to be furnished to IA/SEIAA within 30 days. The SPCBs are also involved in the EC process in the case of non-compliance of industries. The Ministry may direct SPCBs to look into the matter and take desired measures. With the enactment of the new 2006 notification, SPCBs have an expanded role in the process as SEIAA have most of its members from the concerned SPCB and DoE. Moreover, MoEF is exploring the possibility of conferring the responsibility of follow-up on SPCBs (personal communication with officials at SPCBs and MoEF).

2.2.3

Procedural Framework: 1994–2006

The whole process of EC involves many ministries and departments (Figure 2.6). It starts when the project proponent applies for an “NOC to Establish” to the respective SPCB or pollution control authorities in the case of union territories (that is, Delhi

Comparative Review of EIA

21

Pollution Control Committee in Delhi). Site clearance is also required for some activities such as mining, prospecting, and exploration of major minerals, pithead thermal power plants, multi-purpose river valley projects, and major ports and harbours. Consents from airport authority and state forest departments are also considered necessary if the proposed site is in the vicinity of an airport or involves any forest land. Once the project proponent receives all the approvals, an application along with a project feasibility report is submitted to MoEF/SEIAA for further approval. The EIA process in India involves three basic steps: (a) preparation of the EIA report, spanning scoping to documentation, (b) review and decision-making, and (c) post-project monitoring (Joseph 1998). Screening: It determines whether an EIA is required or not. According to the 1994 notification, EIA is necessary for 32 activities listed in Schedule I. The investment clause was formulated to streamline the screening process. It specified that new projects with an investment of more than INR 1000 million and modernization projects involving

Figure EIA process in India (added in 2006 notification) 2.6

22 Policy Intervention Analysis an investment of more than INR 500 million would require an EIA. This clause was not applicable to industries involving hazardous chemical processes; all such units were required to take an EIA. With the enactment of the 2006 notification, the EIA process has been decentralized. This notification provides a comprehensive list of projects and also classifies them into categories “A” and “B”, based on the type of processes, capacity, spatial extent of potential impacts on human health, and natural and man-made resources (MoEF 2006). All projects mentioned under category A compulsorily require an EC from MoEF, but for the projects under state jurisdiction, that is, category B, screening is a two-step process. To initiate the process, all proponents have to submit a duly filled Form 1 to the concerned authority, that is, MoEF or SEIAA. For the projects under the state, SEAC examines Form 1 and decides whether or not the project or activity requires an EIA. Projects that are supposed to take up comprehensive EIA are termed B1 (except building/construction projects/area development projects, and townships). The rest are termed B2, where detailed EIA is not required and clearance is, given on the basis of Form 1. Apart from the provided list of activities, any project planned in ecologically fragile areas or falling under coastal zone regulation requires an EIA (MoEF 2004; 2001a; 1992; 1991a and b; 1989a and b). Scoping: It identifies the concerns and issues to be addressed for a particular project. Till 2006, MoEF set guidelines and review checklists for relevant issues for different project types (MoEF 2001b). They also provided general questionnaires for all sectors. However, now scoping is an elaborate process. Proponents apply to relevant authorities by submitting Form 1. Based on the information provided, EAC and SEAC fix comprehensive TOR addressing all relevant environmental concerns to prepare an EIA for category A and B1 projects (MoEF 2006). Study of alternatives and public hearings are undertaken at this stage after the proponent informs the SPCB about the project and intentions to get clearance. Alternative scenarios must account for no project condition (business-as-usual scenario) along with project scenario employing best-suited technologies or processes (MoEF 2001b). Baseline analysis: Comparisons of project-induced environmental changes with those that are expected without the proposed project are assessed through baseline analysis. The quality of the baseline analysis establishes the viability of the appraisal of the impacts, and therefore of the EIA itself. Data are collected on both project engineering and environmental aspects. Project engineering deals with process technology, raw material, water and energy requirements, whereas data on air emissions, waste water, noise, solid waste, and hazardous/toxic waste are required for the environmental study.

Comparative Review of EIA

23

The project proponent may conduct monitoring for various required environmental quality parameters or the data available with the local monitoring stations of SPCBs and CPCB can be used. The Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) provides detailed guidelines on how to monitor and analyse baseline data. Impact prediction: Once the relevant environmental information is collected, consequences of the project are outlined. The prediction analysis should forecast the nature and significance of the expected impacts or explain why no significant impacts are anticipated. Several mathematical models are listed in the manual of MoEF to predict environmental and socio-ecological impacts (MoEF 2001b). Suggestions have also been made on the kind of conditions where they could be used. Impact mitigation measures: In an EIA, mitigation measures are proposed to avoid or reduce environmental and social impacts. An Environment Management Plan (EMP), a Risk Assessment Report and Disaster Management Plan (if hazardous substances are involved in the project), and a rehabilitation plan (if displacement of people is anticipated) are prepared to suggest remedial measures. EMP in particular should entail the following aspects (MoEF 2001b): • Pollution prevention • Waste minimization • End-of-pipe treatment • Mitigation measures • Protection of sensitive receptors In addition to the EMP, a work plan, a time schedule, locations, and cost of environmental monitoring must be supplied. Documentation: At the end of all the above-mentioned steps, a concise but comprehensive report is prepared. It summarizes the description of the project, regional settings, baseline conditions, impact prediction, and EMP. Project proponents hire consultants to carry out the EIA and prepare the report for them. In the 2006 notification, the generic structure of the EIA document has also been defined. Public consultation: The Indian system provides an opportunity to involve affected people and vulnerable groups to develop the TOR for EIA, thus incorporating their concerns into the decision-making process. The SPCB is required to publish notices for public hearing in two local newspapers, at least one of which should be in the vernacular language of the concerned region (MoEF 1994 and 2006). The date, time, and place of the hearing should be mentioned in the notice. EIA notification also makes provision for access to the executive summary of the project and EIA report at the offices of the District Collector, District Industry Centre, Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation/local body, SPCB, and state DoE (MoEF 1994). The

24 Policy Intervention Analysis composition of the public hearing panel was also specified by the law, which involved members of local authorities and representatives of the public nominated by the district collector. The process is further detailed in the 2006 notification and all the projects categorized as A and B1 are supposed to have public consultations.1 Now public hearings should be completed within 45 days of receipt of application from the project proponent, and proceedings of the hearing should be forwarded to the concerned authority within eight days of its completion. The public hearing process has been strengthened as people may provide their inputs in writing to the SPCB in case it is not possible for them to reach the public hearing. It is now necessary to prepare a videographic account of the whole process of hearing. Proponents are obligated to address all the views proposed during the public consultation. To increase public involvement and transparency of the process, the EIA report, EMP, EAC recommendation, EC conditions and even compliance reports provided by proponents will now be displayed on the websites of concerned regulatory authorities. Review and decision-making: This starts as soon as the proponent files an application accompanied by the documents, that is, EIA and EMP, project feasibility report, NOC, risk assessment and emergency preparedness plan, rehabilitation plan, details of public hearing, clearance from airport authority and state forest departments to IA or SEIAA (as per 2006 notification). The EAC or SEAC reviews the report with reference to the guidelines provided by MoEF in its manual (MoEF 2001b). It is free to conduct site visits if it is considered necessary. Based on the EIA review and other information, the IA or SEIAA either grants or rejects the environment clearance to the project. Earlier, the assessment had to be completed within a period of 90 days from the receipt of the requisite documents provided by the project authorities and completion of the public hearing, and the decision had to be conveyed to the proponent within 30 days thereafter. Now, on receiving the documents, authorities scrutinize them to check if everything has been properly submitted, and if any inadequacies are found, the same are communicated to the proponents within 30 days of receipt. Otherwise, all the documents are sent to the EAC or SEAC for their review and appraisal. A meeting of the EAC or SEAC is held to appraise the project—applicants are informed about it 15 days prior to the meeting. The decision made in the meeting is made public within 1

Modernization of irrigation projects, activities located within industrial estates or parks approved by the concerned authorities, expansion of roads and highways, all building /construction projects/area development projects and townships, all projects or activities concerning national defence and security do not require public hearing.

Comparative Review of EIA

25

five working days after the meeting. The whole process of review has to be completed within 60 days of the receipt of the application from the proponent. Post-project monitoring: PPM was not defined in the 1994 notification, but it was adopted as an administrative process and it was a responsibility of the regional offices of MoEF. Project authorities were required to submit monitoring reports to the RO every six months, detailing progress of implementation of the conditions given while granting EC to the projects. These offices were directed to follow-up on pollution control measures adopted by industries, and in this concern they were allowed to take up site visits. If any violation of the environmental stipulations was noticed, RO has to inform HQ to take necessary actions. Unlike the earlier notification, follow-up process has been introduced in this new notification. However, no formal guidelines on the procedural aspects, that is, approach, roles and responsibilities, monitoring requirements, and enforcement issues, are elaborated. Thus, the whole follow-up process will essentially be the same as practised earlier.

2.3

EVALUATION OF THE INDIAN EIA SYSTEM

Table 2.1 compares the Indian EIA system (before and after 2006) with the five countries discussed in Section 2.1 using the evaluation criteria proposed by Wood (1995). The evaluation criteria have been used in several studies (Riffat and Khan 2006; El-Fadl and El-Fadel 2004; David 2001; Glasson and Salvadora 2000; Wood and Linden 1999; Wood 1995). As can be seen, the EIA process in India has a basic structure similar to the other five countries, including screening, scoping, comprehensive study, mitigation report, review, public participation, decision, and follow-up measures. But the earlier EIA system in India was weak compared to countries such as the USA, the Netherlands, and China who had elaborate guidelines on aspects such as screening, scoping, and documentation. The Indian EIA process before 2006 had a limitation similar to those of Mexico and Brazil. The Indian system also lacked in effective follow-up, monitoring, and decision-making. A SWOT2 analysis was also taken up to delineate some of the peculiar features of the practice in India before the enactment of the 2006 notification. Table 2.2 briefly 2

A SWOT analysis is a technique commonly used to assist in identifying the strategic direction for an organization or practice. It yields useful information about the future viability of a considered system. The predictive capabilities of the technique come about from the consideration of the system’s strengths and weaknesses. The intention is to determine how the system will fare in the light of changes taking place around it. The strengths and weaknesses of a system are determined by internal elements, whereas external forces dictate opportunities and threats. Strengths can be defined as any available resource that can be used to improve its performance. Weaknesses are flaws/shortcomings of the system that may cause the loss of a competitive advantage, efficiency, or financial

26 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 2.1

Comparison of EIA system in various countries

Aspects

U

N

C

B

M

I1

I2

EIA is based on clear and legal provisions

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

EIA requirements clearly differentiated from other legal provisions

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Legal basis

Each step in the EIA process is enforceable through law

Y

Y

_

Y

Y

Y

Y

Time limits for the various steps in the EIA process are specified

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

EIA applicable to all public and private environmentally significant projects

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

All significant environmental impacts covered by the EIA

Y

Y

P

P

P

P

Y

Consideration of the impacts of various alternatives, including the no action alternative

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Published guidance on the treatment of the impacts of reasonable alternatives exists

Y

Y

N

N

Y

N

N

Clear specification of the type of action to be subject to EIA

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Clear criteria/thresholds exist (for example, size, location)

N

Y

Y

N

N

N

Y

Coverage of actions

Alternatives

Screening

Different types of EIA exist for different types of actions

Y

Y

Y

N

P

P

Screening decision made by publicly accountable body

Y

Y

Y

N

N

P

Y

Consultation and participation take place during screening

Y

N

P

_

N

N

Y

Right of appeal against screening decisions

Y

Y

N

Y

_

N

N

Proponent consults the environmental authority early in the EIA process

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

Y

Scoping is mandatory in each case

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

Y

Action-specific scoping guidelines exist

Y

Y

Y

N

N

P

Y

Scoping

Published guidelines on scoping procedures and methods exist

N

N

Y

_

N

P

P

Consultation and participation required in scoping

Y

Y

P

N

N

N

Y

Right of appeal against scoping decisions

N

Y

N

Y

_

N

N

EIA reports describe actions and environments affected, forecast impacts, indicate significance, and contain non-technical summary

Y

Y

Y

P

Y

P

Y

Guidelines on EIA report preparation exists

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

EIA methods or techniques to be employed are specified

N

N

Y

P

N

P

Y

Accreditation of EIA consultants exist

N

N

Y

N

N

N

P

Consultation and participation required in EIA report preparation

Y

Y

P

N

N

N

Y

EIA report preparation

Contd...

Comparative Review of EIA

27

Table 2.1 Contd... Aspects Length of EIA report specified

U Y

N N

C N

B N

M N

I1 N

I2 P

EIA reports are publicly reviewed and the proponent responds to the points raised

Y

Y

P

P

P

P

Y

Review of the EIA report takes place

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Review criteria to determine EIA report’s adequacy exist

Y

N

_

N

N

N

P

Independent review body with appropriate expertise exists

Y

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

Findings of the EIA report review are published

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

N

Proponent can be asked for more information following review

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Draft and final EIA reports are prepared

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

Review of the EIA report

Published guidance on EIA review procedures and methods exists

Y

N

N

N

N

P

P

Consultation and participation required in EIA report review

Y

Y

P

P

Y

Y

Y

Consultation and participation required where further information is submitted

Y

Y

_

N

N

P

Y

Right of appeal against review decisions

Y

N

N

P

_

N

N

Findings of the EIA and the review are central to determine the decision on the action

Y

Y

N

P

P

Y

Y

Decisions are not made until the EIA report has been prepared and reviewed

Y

Y

P

Y

Y

Y

Y

Decisions made by a body other than the proponent

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Permission can be refused, conditions be imposed, or modifications be demanded at the decision stage

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Decision and its reasons are made public or published

Y

Y

_

N

P

P

Y

Published guidance on the factors to be considered in the decision exist

N

P

Y

P

N

P

P

Consultation and participation required in decision-making

Y

Y

P

Y

Y

P

Y

Right of appeal against decisions

Y

Y

N

_

N

Y

Y

Monitoring of the implementation of the action takes place

P

Y

Y

P

_

P

Y

Monitoring arrangements are specified in the EIA report

Y

P

Y

P

_

P

Y

Proponent may be required to take ameliorative action if monitoring demonstrates the need for it

Y

Y

Y

P

_

Y

Y

Results of monitoring are compared with the prediction in the EIA report

Y

Y

Y

_

_

N

N

Published guidance on monitoring and auditing action implementation and impacts exists

Y

N

_

_

_

N

P

Decision-making

Monitoring and auditing

Contd...

28 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 2.1 Contd... U

N

C

B

M

I1

I2

Monitoring and auditing results are published

Aspects

P

N

N

N

_

N

N

Public right of appeal if monitoring and auditing results are unsatisfactory

Y

Y

N

P

_

N

N

Copies of EIA documents made public at each stage of the EIA process

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

P

Copies of EIA documentations can be obtained/purchased at a reasonable price

Y

Y

_

_

_

N

P

Confidentiality/secrecy restrictions inhibit consultation and participation

_

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Consultation and participation methods appropriate to the stage of the EIA where they are employed

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

N

Funding of public participation provided

N

P

N

N

N

N

N

Adjoining authority/states/countries are consulted

P

Y

N

N

N

N

N

Published guidance on consultation and participation exists

N

N

N

N

N

P

Y

Results of consultation and participation are published

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

EIA system is monitored and amended, if necessary, to incorporate feedback from experience

Y

Y

_

N

N

N

N

Records of EIA reports for various types of action kept and made public

Y

Y

N

P

N

P

P

Records of financial costs of EIA kept and made public

N

N

P

N

N

N

N

Information on the time required for EIA collected and made public

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Consultation and participation

EIA system monitoring

Note: U – USA; N – The Netherlands; C – People’s Republic of China; B – Brazil; M – Mexico; I 1 – India w.r.t. 1994 notification; I 2 – India w.r.t. 2006 notification; Y – Yes; N – No; P – Partially

describes the features of the SWOT with respect to the 1994 notification. It shows that the strong legal framework was a positive and supportive feature of the Indian system, where the judiciary was proactive and had directed central and state authorities to take necessary measures to protect the environment and human health (CPCB 2002a; Biswas 1996). The strength of the Indian system was the existence of regulatory authorities to execute the law across the country. Due to several weaknesses ranging from inefficient screening and scoping to weak public participation and poor decisionmaking, the EIA process was perceived merely as a bureaucratic requirement limited to selection of a pollution control technology (MoEF 2003a; TERI 2002; Sinclair and Diduck 2000; Lohani, Evans, Ludwig, et al. 1997; Rao 1997; Valappil, Devuyst, resource. Sometimes it is recommended to identify opportunities and threats at the outset in order to hasten the identification of the systems’ strengths or weaknesses. Many of the threats are based on weaknesses.

Comparative Review of EIA Table 2.2

29

SWOT analysis of the Indian EIA system with respect to the 1994 notification

Strengths

Weaknesses

Well-defined legal structure

Screening and scoping processes are not well defined

Presence of well-knitted regulatory structure

Insufficient baseline data Inconsistent application of evaluation and predictive tools Improper monitoring and implementation Inadequate public participation Poor quality EIA reports and non-accountability of EIA professionals Lack of coordination among regulatory agencies and poorly defined decision-making process

Opportunities

Threats

Increasing public awareness

Poor governance and corruption

Growing consciousness through non-governmental organizations (NGOs)

Effect of economic reforms to pace up industrial growth

Self-regulation in the industrial sector

Lax regulations for small-scale industries

Integration of EIA with plans, policies, and programmes Source: Paliwal (2006)

and Hens 1994). However, with more education and awareness, people are becoming environment-conscious. The change in income levels, demand for personal comforts, and the socially responsible behaviour of industrial units have opened opportunities to improve the implementation of laws and policies. Excessive bureaucracy, corrupt pay-offs, enormous industrial growth to achieve economic gains, and small-scale industries enjoying lax standards were some of the perceived threats (CPCB 2002b; IPTEHR 1999; Kakonge 1998; UNDP 1997; CPCB 1994 and 1996; CSE 1996). When the 1994 stipulations and practices were compared with the 2006 notification, the strengths, opportunities, and threats were found to be still relevant because most of these aspects are independent of the EIA process and affect the process indirectly. But the 2006 notification is believed to take care of several weaknesses. In this decentralized system, screening is a two-tier process. The scoping processes is also more elaborate as the TOR for an EIA study has to be defined after consultation with EAC. Efforts are underway to develop a data bank to gather all information available on environmental parameters all over India, which will be provided to the stakeholders. These data banks are not fully functional at present, but it is proposed that most of the information will be made available on the Internet enabling open access, while some data sets will be made available on a payment basis. EIA professionals are also required to be accredited through the MoEF and will be held responsible for any wrong information provided during EIA studies or for hiding facts (QCI 2007). However, the new notification

30 Policy Intervention Analysis essentially focuses on pre-decision analysis—status quo prevails for post-decision activities in the case of follow-up, that is, monitoring and implementation aspects.

3

3.1

Haldia: A Case Study

INTRODUCTION

It is now understood that the environmental impact assessment (EIA) system in India has an appropriate structure, which is quite comparable to other countries. It has several inherent strengths and opportunities, and a marked improvement is envisaged in the process of screening, scoping, impact analysis, and public hearing with the enforcement of the new EIA policy of 2006. However, follow-up still needs a lot of improvement and, needless to say, implementation failures are enough to defeat the purpose of rigorous and comprehensive pre-decision activities. Keeping in mind the significance of the follow-up process that is central to the success of an EIA, the process needs to be studied in detail. This will be done with the help of an example. Let us take the case of Haldia, an industrial estate of West Bengal (Figure 3.1). Haldia presents a good mix of industrial units. There are eight big units in the area, which were subjected to EIA; out of which five (one refinery and four petrochemical plants) received environmental clearance (EC) from MoEF and three (a cogeneration plant, a fertilizer plant, and a battery-manufacturing unit) got clearances from the West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB).

3.2

HALDIA: AN INDUSTRIAL ESTATE

Haldia is one of the major industrial growth centres in the state of West Bengal. It is located in the district of East Medinipur, on the western bank of river Hoogly (alternatively spelled as Hoogli, Hooghly, or Hugli). It is situated 45 nautical miles south of Kolkata Port. The latitude and longitude of Haldia are 22º 02¢ N and 80º 06¢ E, respectively. It is an estuarine area where the sources of freshwater—rivers Hoogly, Roopnarayan, and Haldi—eventually drain into the Bay of Bengal.

32 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure Overview of the study area—Haldia 3.1

3.2.1

Demographic and Land Use Profile

Haldia was identified as a non-municipal urban area for the first time in the 1971 census. The town had 55 reclassified mouzas1 with a total population of 9968 and an area of 21.59 km2 in 1971. In 1980, the Haldia Development Authority (HDA) was constituted to take up planned development of the entire area and notified Haldia Planning Area (HPA). Later, Haldia municipality came into being in October 1983. Since then many mouzas have been added to the Haldia Municipal Area (HMA). The HPA has also been reclassified time and again to include other development blocks. Presently, the HPA is bounded by the rivers Hoogly and Haldi, and the Hijli tidal canal, covering an area of around 326.85 km2 (Figure 3.1). The HPA comprises five police stations, namely Sutahata, Durgachak, Bhabanipur, Haldia, and Mahisadal covering both urban and rural areas (TERI 2005). Out of all these police stations, Haldia, Bhabanipur, and Durgachak are completely urbanized; Mahisadal is entirely rural, whereas 75% of the total area of Sutahata has a rural background. HMA has

1

Mouza is a local term for villagers or panchayat.

Haldia: A Case Study

33

114 mouzas or 24 wards and covers an area of 109 km2. Nayachar island, Nandigram I & II, and the remaining parts of Mahisadal were included under HPA in 2001.

3.2.2

Population

The population of HPA has been showing an upward trend in the last few decades and particularly since 1981 (Census of India 2001) as shown in Figure 3.2. The total population of HPA has shown about 64% growth since 1981. The population of the urban centre (that is, HMA) is a major contribution to this escalating growth. HMA recorded almost 700% increase in population since 1981, whereas the rural population has increased by only 13%.

Figure Population growth trend in HPA 3.2

The male-to-female sex ratio in the region is higher for rural areas than for urban areas whereas, as expected, the literacy rate is higher in the urban centre (Table 3.1). Table 3.1

Sex ratio and literacy rate in Haldia Literacy rate

Region

Sex ratio

Total

Male

Female

Rural

950

80.55

88.77

71.88

Urban or HMA

899

82.09

89.96

73.24

HPA

931

81.12

89.22

72.37

34 Policy Intervention Analysis 3.2.3

Land Use

The land use pattern of the HPA is predominantly agricultural in nature. The HMA, in particular, has 34.3% of agriculture land out of a total of 10,900 Ha of land in 2001 (Table 3.2). The share of agricultural land, vacant land, and waterbodies put together has reduced from about 80% of the total land in 1989 to just about 39% in 2001. In lieu of this, residential and industrial land has shown a marked increase since 1989.

3.2.4

Climatic and Meteorological Conditions

The climate of Haldia is tropical. There are four well-marked seasons (Table 3.3). Summers are followed by the south-west monsoon from June to September. The maximum daily temperature was recorded in the month of May (36.6°C) and the minimum daily temperature was recorded as 9.3°C in the month of January. The mean daily rainfall was highest during the monsoon months as shown in Table 3.4. In 2003, July received the highest rainfall of all the months. Haldia also received heavy rainfall Table 3.2

Land use pattern of Haldia in 1989 and 2001

Category

1989

2001

Area (Ha)

Per cent of total

Area (Ha)

Per cent of total

Residential

157.59

2.2

2,299.97

22.00

Commercial

13.41

0.2

59.04

0.41

500.40

7.0

2,227.17

61.90

0.9

463.68

Industrial Public and semi-public Recreational

21.300 4.44

17.34

0.2

48.66

0.46

678.88

9.6

1,254.53

12.00

Agricultural

5,625.13

79.9

3,582.74

34.27

Vacant land

104.54

1.0

Waterbodies

414.56

3.96 445.56

0.16

10,900.00

100.00

Transport and communication

Area submerged under river Total

_ 7,054.70

100

Source: CES (2001)

Table 3.3

Seasons in Haldia

Season

Duration

Characteristic

Pre-monsoon/summer

March–May

Dry hot

Monsoon

June–September

Hot and humid

Post-monsoon

October–November

Humid

Winter

December–February

Dry cold

Source: Aftab (2005)

Haldia: A Case Study

35

Meteorological data for 2003, Haldia

Table 3.4 Month

Temperature (°C)

Rainfall (mm)

Relative humidity (%)

Wind (m/s)

71.8

3.3

speed*

Per cent calm*

Minimum

Maximum

January

13.20

24.7

February

19.40

28.7

4.2

75.0

3.5

56.70

March

22.50

30.6

58.3

73.0

4.8

13.31

April

26.60

33.7

32.7

75.4

5.1

0.00

May

27.40

34.4

109.7

76.0

5.0

0.00

June

26.70

33.1

280.5

80.0

4.7

0.00

July

26.40

32.3

388.3

84.8

4.0

0.00

August

26.70

32.1

328.5

83.6

4.0

0.13

September

26.70

32.7

137.6

80.5

3.5

0.14

October

25.19

31.8

372.4

81.9

3.2

0.18

November

19.57

31.2

32.9

69.7

2.9

0.69

December

15.70

26.1

50.0

72.7

2.9

0.94

0

3.90

Source: WBPCB (2003–2005); *IMD (2003)

in the first week of October and during this period, high daily rainfall of 92.6 mm and 75.5 mm were recorded. As expected, relative humidity was also noted highest during the monsoon months (June to September), with highest mean relative humidity in July. Annual wind rose based on hourly values of the region (Figure 3.3) suggested that the south-westerly wind was quite dominant in the region. It was evident that the south-west winds were predominant for a period of six months, that is, April to September. In the month of October, the wind direction was uniformly distributed in all directions. From November to March, the wind was mostly in the north-west and north directions. Average monthly wind velocity was found to be maximum in April followed by May and June. While calm conditions were recorded about 68% of the time during February, followed by March (13.3%) and January (3.9%), during the remaining period, calm conditions (that is, wind speed of less than 1.5 m/s) were not more than 1%.

3.2.5

Soil Characteristics

Soil near rivers is normally sandy clay, whereas in the areas away from rivers, it is either clay silt or sandy clay (HPL 2004; Aftab 2005). The colour of the soil varies between brown and black. The bulk density of soil varies from 1.4 to 1.8 mg/cc (Aftab 2005; TERI 2005). Porosity of soil varies between 37% and 47.6% and water holding

36 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure Annual wind rose of the Haldia region in 2003 3.3

capacity from 67% for sandy clay to 45% for clay silt. The pH of the soil is found to vary, pre-monsoon and post-monsoon, in the ranges of 6.5 to 8.0 and 6.2 to 8.2, respectively, with electrical conductivity in the range of 4.6 to 9.1 mhos/cm (TERI 2005; Aftab 2005). Soil of this region was found to contain the major elements in right quantity for vegetation growth. Levels of nitrogen are between 0.02% and 0.25%, phosphorus between 0.04% and 0.12%, and potassium in the range of 0.05% to 0.15% (HPL 2004). Other important minerals such as calcium, sodium, and magnesium are also found to be sufficient for plant growth. However, the content of potassium is insufficient according to plant requirements. The soil characteristic suggests that fertility of the soil in the area is reasonably good to support flora and crops in the region.

Haldia: A Case Study

3.2.6

37

Hydrogeology

The area is underlain by quaternary and tertiary sediments, consisting of clay, silt, sand of various grades and gravel (CGWB 2002). The lithological log of the area indicates that there is a rhythmic pattern of sedimentation with alternate deposits of clay, silt, and sand. A survey conducted by the Central Ground Water Board suggested that sediments 115 m below ground level (bgl) were generally argillaceous in nature with a few sand horizons occurring at different depths. From 120 m to 300 m bgl, sediments were arenaceous and have freshwater aquifers (Figure 3.4). Below 305 m, clayey material forms unconsolidated sediments (CGWB 2002; CGWB 1984). Saline or brackish water aquifers occur between 20 m and 120 m bgl. Freshwater aquifers are made up of several individual aquifers of variable thickness and are separated by distinct clay horizons. These aquifers are highly compressed and confined in nature. The coefficients of storage or storativity range between 1.4 × 10–3

Figure General soil stratification and hydrogeology 3.4

38 Policy Intervention Analysis and 3 ×10–4 (CGWB 2002). The coefficients of transmissibility and permeability vary in the range between 434 to 1930 m3/d/m and 13.7 to 44.7 m3/d/m2 respectively, which clearly indicate that aquifers are moderately conductive and poorly transmissive.

3.2.7

Flora and Fauna

The terrestrial vegetation in Haldia comprises almost 52 families of angiosperms, according to a survey carried out by the Centre for Study of Man and Environment, Kolkata. The area is surrounded by rivers and is also close to the ocean, and thus it has a large number of aquatic flora and faunal species. The flora comprises terrestrial plants with a capacity to withstand the periodic inundation effect of tides. The following are the major species of macrophytes characterizing the biodiversity of the region: Ipomoea fistula, Trewia nudiflora, Eupatorium odoratum, Lantana camara, Calotropis procera, Pandanus sp., Syzygium cumini, Jatropha gossypitolia, Croton bonplandianum, Chrozophora, Derris scandens, Clerodendron sp., Porteresia coarctata, Diplachne fusca, Suaeda maritima, Cyperus exaltatus, Avicennia marina, Acanthus ilicifolius, and so on (SAPL 1999; HLCL 1978). The common fauna includes freshwater fishes such as Amblypharyngodon mola (Mourala), Barbus sophora (Punti), Catla catla (Katla), Labeo rohita (Rui), and Cirrhinus mrigala (Mrigal) and brackish water species such as Seinena biauritus (Bhola), Liza parsia (Parse), Liza tade (Bhangan), Polynemus indicus (Lakhua) Eleutheronema tetradactylum (Gurjaheli), Stromateus cinereus (Pomfret), Penaeus monodon (Tiger prawn), and Tenualosa ilisha (Hilsa) (SAPL 1999; HLCL 1978). There are 56 types of microbiota, out of which 51 are phytoplankton species and 5 zooplanktons (SAPL 1999), showing dominance of phytoplankton in the region. Coscinodiscus sp. is the most abundant phytoplankton group followed by Nitzshia sp. and Navicula sp., whereas Copepoda sp. is dominant among zooplanktons. There is no wild life because of the complete absence of forest cover in the region, but some of the common land mammals and birds found in the region are listed in Table 3.5.

3.2.8

Education and Health Facilities

The existing education facilities at HPA are satisfactory. There are currently 38 schools up to secondary standard and 10 till higher secondary in addition to a number of primary schools (Aftab and Halder 2000). There are three colleges in the region with science, commerce, and arts streams. For technical education, there are several institutes such as the Haldia Institute of Technology, Indo-Australian Technology and Management, Central Institute of Plastic Engineering and Technology, a polytechnic institute, and a vocational training centre.

Haldia: A Case Study Table 3.5

39

Common fauna of the region

Common land mammals

Common birds

Scientific name

Common name

Scientific name

Common name

Viverricula indica

Small Indian civet

Corvus splendens

House crow

Vulpes bengalensis

Jackal

Dicrurus macrocercus

King crow

Herpestes edwardsi

Indian grey mongoose

Passer domesticus

House sparrow

Funambulus pennanti

Palm squirrel

Streptopelia chinensis

Spotted dove

Bandicota indica

Large bandicoot rat

Sirisoriasp

Indian king dove

Rattus rattus

House rat

Pycnonotus cafer

Red-vented bulbul

Mus booduga

Little Indian field mouse

Pycnonotus jocosus

Red-whiskered bulbul

Cynopterus sphinx

Short nosed fruit bat

Sturnus contra

Pied myna

Mus musculus

House mouse

Copsychus saularis

Magpie

Megalaima asiatica

Blue-throated barbet

Merops orientalis

Green bee-eater

Ceryle rudis

Pied kingfisher

Source: SAPL (1999)

Health services in Haldia need capacity augmentation, especially in rural HPA. There are two government hospitals for the general public, four hospitals, and a nursing home chiefly for the employees of industries such as IOCL, Calcutta Port Trust (CPT), EIL, and SWAL (Table 3.6). The rural population is dependent on primary health centre, which has limited facilities. Table 3.6

Health facilities working in the area

S. No.

Health facility

1

Subdivisional hospital

Number of beds 100

2

ESI Hospital

OPD

3

Coast Guard Hospital

6

4

IOCL Hospital

24

5

HFC Hospital

15

6

CPT Hospital

42

7

Dispensary

1

8

Primary Health Centre •

Haldia Municipal Area

4

•

Rural HPA

7

Source: CSE (2001); Aftab and Halder (2000)

40 Policy Intervention Analysis Six hospitals in the region seem sufficient, but in reality, the number of beds in all these facilities are too less to deal with the demand (CES 2001). A shortfall of 950 beds was realized within this region (TERI 2005). Government hospitals lack basic amenities and have a very poor infrastructure, including medical equipment. Industries present in the region are mostly petrochemical, thus special attention is required to up-to-date burn wards and intensive care units.

3.2.9

Water Supply System

The water supply system is under the Public Health Engineering Department (PHED) for HPA. To cater to the domestic and industrial water demand of HPA, raw water is drawn from river Hoogly at Geonkhali and treated in a plant with a capacity of 90.92 million litres per day (mld) to bring it to safe drinking standards. Water treatment is specially targeted for coliform and chloride content. Chloride content of this water varies between 250 mg/l and 500 mg/l. To bring down the chloride content to permissible levels, treated water is taken to Chaitanyapur where it is mixed with ground water extracted from 15 deep tube wells with a depth varying between 235 m and 308 m (Performance report, document no. 44, HDA 2003; CES 2001). The water after treatment and groundwater mixing is taken to Basudevpur pumping station from Chaitanyapur. Finally from this pumping station, water is supplied through a piped network with a capacity of 90.92 mld to various industrial units (82.96 mld). The rest goes for domestic use in the areas of Durgachak and Basudevpur.

3.2.10

Sewerage System

The sewerage system in HPA is poorly developed. No sewerage or drainage collection or treatment facility is available for household waste water produced in the rural and municipal areas of HPA. The sewage in HPA is discharged untreated or partially treated (through septic tanks) in the nearby natural drainage canals leading to rivers. For industrial waste, however, all industries have their own treatment plants suited to the type of effluent discharged. The treated effluent is discharged into the canals meeting river Hoogly. Sewage from industrial townships is also collected but treated using septic tanks before releasing.

3.2.11

Transport

Haldia is well connected to nearby places by road, rail, and ferry boats. National Highway (NH) 41 links Haldia to Kolaghat and meets NH 6 (the Mumbai–Calcutta road), making it quite accessible to the state capital, Kolkata. The major road networks in HPA include NH 41 (arterial) connecting Kolaghat to Dock; State Highway

Haldia: A Case Study

41

(SH) 4 (arterial)2 connecting Durgachak to Panskura, HPL link road (sub-arterial)3 connecting NH 41 and SH 4 across HPL, and collector4 road between Geonkhali and Terapakhya transecting Mahisadal and Kapasberia, collector road between Kukrahati and Balughata via Chaitanyapur and Brajalalchak, and internal roads connecting townships and industries (Figure 3.5). Out of the total road length, NH constitutes 11%, SH forms 17%, and rest comprises city streets (CES 2001). Traffic composition survey conducted at 15 mid-blocks suggests that the volume of slow-moving vehicles comprising cycles and rickshaws is very high and hovers between 50% and 80% at all locations except at NH 41 (Table 3.7). Fast-moving passenger vehicles (that is, two wheelers and cars/ taxis) are next in the list, followed by trucks (carrying goods) and buses. As expected,

Figure Road network in Haldia (road numbers are explained in Table 3.7) 3.5

2

Arterial: primary road for thorough traffic flow, connecting major land uses.

3

Sub-arterial: connects arterial roads, parking, loading/unloading restricted.

4

Collector: collecting/distributing traffic to and from local streets.

42 Policy Intervention Analysis Traffic count at mid-blocks

Table 3.7 Road number

Mid-block locations

Connecting place

Number of vehicles Bus

Car

Twowheeler

Goods truck

1

New Market

Super Market-Verona Bhawan

877

15,645

5,018

1,738

2

HFCL

Vidhyasagarmorh-Shaw Wallace

357

3

HPL

City Centre-Manjushree

95

1,117

739

685

3,537

1,573

967

4

Milon (NH 41)

City Centre-Brajlalchak

299

2,430

1,462

2,279

5

Brajlalchak-Chitanyapur

Brajlalchak-Chitanyapur

76

965

792

121

6

Brajlalchak-Balughata

Brajlalchak-Balughata

74

343

354

81

7

Sutahata (SH 4)

Chaitanyapur-Manjushree

469

3,518

1,978

226

8

Vivekanand Ashram

Chaitanyapur-Kukrahati

336

2,365

1,119

171

9

Shiv Mandir (SH 4)

Chaitanyapur-Mahisadal

260

646

453

109

10

Purbasivrampur

Mahisadal-Geonkhali

90

368

211

113

11

Bara Bhand

Kapasberia-Mahisadal

96

289

116

101

12

Babunia Market

Kapasberia-Terapakhaya

90

200

113

93

13

Oil Jetty

Oil Jetty-Vidyasagarmorh

29

493

178

409

14

CFCL

Shaw Wallace-Alichak

25

626

160

42

15

Marine Drive

Haldia Bhawan-Coast Guard

11

315

146

0

Source: CES (2001)

goods vehicles composition is quite low except in locations around industries, dock, and NH 41. On an average, 2279 trucks were observed on NH 41 each day. Within the city, on an average, 829 trucks/trailers enter the dock and 673 leave the dock daily (TERI 2005). Apart from this, a large number of trucks enter the Haldia to serve industries. A railway line connects Haldia to the South-Eastern Railway at Panksura. Two local trains run between Haldia and Panksura, and one between Howrah (Kolkata) and Haldia, daily. Waterways have also been developed to facilitate passenger movement in Haldia. Ferry boats run from Kukrahati to Riachak and Diamond Harbour. Ferry services also run within HPA to connect various places near rivers.

3.2.12

Industrial Development

Development of port facility under the administration of the Haldia Dock Complex was the most important factor for the evolution of the Haldia industrial region. The excellent geophysical location of Haldia, comprehensive port facilities, and establishment of various public sector companies such as IOCL and TCL paved the way for many large and small industries in and around Haldia, thereby enhancing the business prospects of the region to a considerable extent (Figure 3.6).

Haldia: A Case Study

43

Figure Indicative map of the location of industries around the Green Belt Canal (GBC) in Haldia 3.6

The presence of a large refinery, several petrochemical complexes, crude and petroleum products storage units, and downstream industries provides it a status of a hub of petroleum industry (Figure 3.7). Apart from these, the town has many other industrial units, including a pesticide plant, a coke manufacturing unit, and several small lead smelting units. A few edible oil making units had also come up in the recent past. There are several pipeline projects and storage tank farms in Haldia to support the activities of the refinery and petrochemical units. Haldia has a good industrial mix with a majority of petroleum and petrochemical units (Table 3.8). The development of Haldia is a typical example of induced growth as the magnitude of diversified industrial units is unrelated to the available local resources. No growth node exists in its vicinity, which may have a push and pull effect. The industrial town has attained a diversified mix of industries, but the expansion of the industrial sector has presented several challenges too. These challenges are posed in the form of requirements of sustained supply of water, electricity and raw material, and also air emissions, waste water, and solid waste.

44 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 3.7

Table 3.8

A few industrial establishments discharging emissions from stacks

List of industries in Haldia

Name of industry

Product/type

Remark

Refinery Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (IOCL)

LPG, naptha, kerosene, diesel

Petrochemical unit MCCPTA Corp Pvt. Ltd (MCPI)

Purified terepthalic acid

Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd (HPL)

High and linear low density polyethylene, ethylene, benzene

South Asian Petrochemicals Ltd (SAPL)

PET resin

Consolidated fibres and chemicals Ltd

Acrylic fibre

(CFCL) IOC Petronas Ltd (IOC- Pet)

LPG bottling plant

Intermittent discharge

Hindustan Lever Ltd (HLL)

Detergent

Zero effluent

Marcus Oil and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd

Refined polyethylene wax

Effluent

RDB Rasayans Ltd (RRL)

Wax from granules

Zero emission, negligible effluent

Rejoin Plastics Ltd (RPL)

Plastic moulding

(MOCPL) of 0.5 kl/d Battery manufacturing and associated units Exide Industries Ltd (EIL)

Automotive batteries

Industrial Associates (IA)

Small parts of lead alloy Contd...

Haldia: A Case Study

45

Table 3.8 Contd... Name of industry

Product/type

Remark

All these units work periodically as and when they get orders from EIL. Shiva Enterprise (SE)

Lead smelting

Krishi Supply Agency (KSA)

Lead smelting

Tushar and K Giri and Co. (TGC)

Lead smelting

Zenith Erector (ZE)

Lead smelting

Fertilizer TATA Chemicals Ltd (TCL)

PO4 fertilizer, H2SO4

Pesticide Shaw Wallace Agrochemicals Ltd

Ethion, isopropyl bromide

(SWAL) Power plant HPL–Cogeneration (HPL-Co)

Electricity generation

Effluent treated with HPL

Alcamer Oils and Fats Ltd (AOFL)

Edible oil, fatty acids

Emission details not available;

Madhya Pradesh Glychem Ltd (MPGL)

Vanaspati ghee, soya protein,

Effluent is treated and discharged

winterseed oil

by common facility of MPGL

Electro Steel Pvt. Ltd (ESPL)

Coke oven

Under stabilization phase

Petro Carbon and Chemicals Pvt Ltd (PCCL)

Calcinated petroleum coke

Details not available

Pioneer Minerals Pvt. Ltd (PMPL)

Coke (carbon powder)

Emission details not available; zero effluent

AVR Co.

Storage: acid

Zero emission; intermittent effluent during cleaning operations.

United Storage Tank Terminals Ltd (USTTL)

Petroleum, storage

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd (BPCL)

Pipelines, storage

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL)

Pipelines, storage

Edible oil units store effluent in retention ponds

Ruchi Soya Industries Ltd (RSIL) Coke manufacturing

Pipelines and storage units

Contd...

46 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 3.8 Contd... Name of industry

Product/type

Indo-Burma Petroleum Corporation Ltd (IBPCL)

Pipelines, storage

Haldia–Baruani Pipeline (IOC-HBP)

Pipelines

Sanjana Cryogenic Storages Ltd (SCSL)

Storage: NH3 for HLCL

IFB Agro Industries Ltd (IAIL)

Storage: molasses, palm oil, H2SO4

Reliance Petroleum Ltd (RPL)

Storage

United Storage Tank Terminals Ltd (USTTL)

Storage

Novatech Bottling Plant (NBP)

LPG storage

Hi-tech Carbon (Hitech)

Storage: Feed stock

Remark

Miscellaneous Paraxiar India Pvt. Ltd (PIPL)

N2, O2

No emission, effluent to HPL

Note: Units that were not in operation in 2003: Swazal Organics (dye); Shamon Ispat (steel rolling); Hindustan Seal Ltd (steel and aluminium rolling); Black Bitumen (bitumen); Sai Surfactants Pvt. Ltd (surfactants).

Industrial water demand is quite high in the region and constitutes a major portion of the water supply (Table 3.9). As mentioned earlier, water demand of industries is met mostly by supply of PHED. There are many industries that utilize ground water (Table 3.10). IOCL and MCCL stand out clearly for their dependence on ground water. Two streams of waste water are produced in the units—domestic and industrial (Table 3.11). Domestic waste water is treated using soak pits and used within the units for gardening and other purposes. Industrial waste water is discharged after treatment to the nearby natural canals, which finally makes its entry to the Green Belt Canal (GBC). This is a man-made channel, dredged for fire-fighting purposes by the Haldia Dock Complex, but because of assimilation of waste from petroleum industries, it is no longer used. This canal has three ends, namely Oil Jetty end, Pataikhali 1, and Pataikhali 2. The Oil Jetty end is kept closed all the time and thus water exchange between GBC and Hoogly takes place at Pataikhali 1 and 2 only. Industrial units such as IOCL, SWAL, and CFCL discharge directly to GBC. Whereas, a natural canal called Mansathala Khal receives effluents from HPL, SAPL, EIL, IOC–Petronas, AOFL, and MPGL; and Atafola Khal drains TCL, before discharging to GBC. New treatment plants of MCCL and IOCL directly discharge into river Hoogly.

Haldia: A Case Study Table 3.9 S. No.

Water demand of various operating units in Haldia Industry

Present water demand (m3/d) Domestic

1

IOCL

2

HPL

Industrial/commercial

2,727.6

3

IOC–Petronas

4

EIL

5 6 7

HFCL

2,269

8

MCPI

250

9

TCL

10 11 12

CPT /HDC*

13

BPCL–tank farm

Total

18,184

20,911.6

363,639

36,369

800

800

650

759

PCCL

100

100

SWAL

6.8

6.8

16,366

16,616

900

900

CFCL

2,332

2,332

SAPL

200

200

5,000

3,901

8,901

6

20

26

109

2,269

14

HPCL–tank farm

50

50

15

Greenways Shipping

50

50

16

HIT

17

SIL

15

15

18

MPGIL

100

100

19

MOCL

250

250

20

Reliance Industries Ltd

5

5

21

AOFL

525

525

22

Sanjana Cryogenics

700

700

23

Truck Terminus

5

5

83

83

Source: TERI (2005)

Table 3.10

Ground water usage among units in Haldia Number of tube wells

Extraction (m3/d)

S. No.

Industry

1

IOCL–Haldia–Barauni pipeline

2

IOCL

16

11,469.6

3

EIL

2

548.8

4

SWAL

2

350.4

5

MCCL

5

2,999.9

2

120.0.0

6

IOC–Petronas

1

300.0.0

7

HFCL

1

94.9

8

PCCL

1

378.5

CFCL

2

766.5

9 Source:

CGWA, undated

47

48 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 3.11 S. No.

Waste water discharge of various units Industry

Discharge (m3/d) Domestic

Industrial

1

IOCL

4,680

3,288

2

TCL

2,400

480

3

HPL

480

6,586

4

EIL

—

421*

5

SWAL

45

112

6

MCCL

—

10,080*

7

IOC–Petronas

—

96

8

MPGL

5

154

9

SAPL

—

165*

10

CFCL

20

2,275

11

AOFL

7

89

*Mixed effluent flow rate Source: WBPCB, consent files

4

4.1

Concept of EIA Follow–up and Practice in India

EIA FOLLOW-UP

Pre-decision analysis in environmental impact assessment (EIA) deals with the forecast of a scenario that is non-existent at present and may only occur in the future under a set of assumptions and conditions. Such an analysis will always have uncertainties as the environment is a dynamic variable. Gaps in understanding between project planning and implementation lead to deviation between perceived outcomes and real environmental consequences. It is the real effects that are relevant, not the predicted impacts, which may only be observed with the help of follow-up activities. Follow-up provides a link between EIA decision-making and the operational phase of a project. It aims at ensuring that an action is being implemented in accordance with the measures specified while providing environmental clearance (EC). Thus, follow-up performs a dual task of identifying the actual environmental impacts of the project and checks if the mitigation measures are leading to desired outcomes.

4.1.1

Terminology of Follow-up

The concept of follow-up may be traced in the earlier works of Sadler (1988); Caldwell, Bartlett, Parker, et al. (1987); McCallum (1987); Tomlinson and Atkinson (1987a and b); and McCallum (1985) (cited from Arts, Caldwell, and Morrison-Saunders 2001 and Morrison-Saunders, Arts, Baker, et al. 2001b). Early literature on the subject preferred the term “audit” over “follow-up”, as used by Culhane (1987) and Tomlinson and Atkinson (1987a) to describe the work carried out to evaluate the predictive and forecast techniques used for preparing EIS in the USA. Later, McCallum (1987) used the term “follow-up” and linked that with various types of audits. There are several terms that have come into existence to define the activities taken up to provide feedback on the effectiveness of various activities of EIA as well as implementation of EIA conditions (Table 4.1). Most of these expressions are overlapping in nature, and “follow-up” later evolved as a canopy term used for all post-project implementation activities, such as monitoring, auditing, ex-post evaluation, post-decision analysis, and

50 Policy Intervention Analysis post-decision management (Morrison-Saunders and Arts, 2004; Arts, Caldwell, and Morrison-Saunders 2001). Table 4.1

Terminology related to follow-up

Surveillance Surveillance indicates the regular or periodic site inspections to check compliance and observe progress. Monitoring Monitoring refers to the collection of data through a series of repetitive measurements of environmental parameters. The main types of EIA monitoring activities are as follows: • •

Baseline monitoring: It is carried out during the pre-project period and may assist in determining changes that occur after implementation of a project. Impact/effect/area-wide monitoring: It assesses the general state of the environment during project construction and implementation to detect changes that may be attributed to the project. Compliance monitoring: It ensures that regulatory requirements and standards are being met and that implementation of mitigation actions is in accordance with the specifications agreed upon while obtaining the EC. •

Auditing Auditing is a term frequently used to describe a systematic process of examining, documenting, and verifying that EIA procedures and outcomes correspond to its objectives and recommendations. This process can be undertaken during and/ or after project construction and draws upon surveillance reports and monitoring data. The main types of audits related to post-decision activities are as follows: • •

Implementation audit: It essentially “polices” projects to ensure that recommended mitigation measures are in place and operated correctly. Performance audit: It is regarded as a management activity that examines the response of personnel concerned with the project operation to potential environmental problems and determines whether the actions required to deal with a major environmental incident are satisfactory. Project impact audits: It is designed to identify environmental changes that have occurred as a consequence of a development. Predictive techniques audit: It is to assess the accuracy and utility of predictive techniques by a comparison of actual consequences with the predicted environmental impacts of a project. EIA procedure audit: It includes any or all of the previously mentioned audits with the intention of improving procedures in general rather than individual EIAs. Compliance audit: It is undertaken to verify that the project complies with environmental standards and regulatory requirements.

• • • •

Evaluation Evaluation involves a policy-oriented review of the effectiveness and performance of the EIA process. It is concerned with the overall “balance sheet” of an EIA, looking at what it achieved, which aspects were influential, and how the process could be improved. Evaluations may be discussed under two subheads: • •

Ex-ante evaluation: It focuses on the preparation phase of the EIA activity, that is, problem analysis, defining project goals, study of alternatives, and so on. Ex-post evaluation: It indicates appraisal of a policy, plan, or decision once it is implemented to evaluate its usefulness. Post-decision analysis Post-project analysis is a generic term used for any activity looking into aspects of effectiveness and performance of a decision.

Source: Abaza, Bisset, and Sadler (2004); Arts and Nooteboom (1999) [cited in Arts, Caldwell, and Morrison-Saunders (2001)]; Au and Sanvicens (1996); McCallum (1987); Tomlinson and Atkinson (1987b)

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

51

4.1.2 Significance of Follow-up Sadler (1988) stated the significance of follow-up as “unless there is a minimum follow-up capability, EIA operates as a linear rather than an iterative process and lacks continuity. Even worse, the process risks becoming a pro-forma exercise rather than a meaningful exercise in environmental management.” As EIA is now considered an interactive process (as described in Chapter 1, footnote 2), the focus of EIA research has shifted towards follow-up activities and evaluation of EIA effectiveness. Follow-up can contribute a great deal towards improving the overall EIA process (Glasson, Therivel, and Chadwick 2005; Arts, Caldwell, and Morrison-Saunders 2001; Canter and Clark 1997; Glasson, Therivel, and Chadwick 1994) as • it presents the actual impacts, thereby establishing a cause-effect relationship between an activity and environmental change; • it helps in validating the prediction capabilities of tools and techniques used during the pre-decision stage; • it checks the compliance and implementation of environmental measures; • it detects the need for corrective measures; • it compels proponents to abide by regulations through continuous monitoring and evaluation under strict regulatory regimes; and • it engages all the stakeholders throughout the project life cycle, that is, proponent, regulators, and community. A good follow-up may prove to be a resource for future EIAs. Lessons learnt from the follow-up activity may provide valuable insights and feedbacks to other EIA stages such as scoping, impact prediction, mitigation, and decision-making. Thus, needless to say, EIA cannot have desirable outcomes unless and until it is supported by a strong follow-up mechanism, which should identify the deviation of the process from desired results and should also suggest measures to achieve what was originally intended.

4.1.3

Concept and Methodology of Follow-up

Environmental impact assessment follow-up may be conceptualized at three different levels (Morrison-Saunders and Arts 2004; Sadler 2004), discussed as follows: • Micro level: This refers to monitoring and evaluation at individual activity level. Micro-level follow-up is conducted on a project-by-project basis to understand whether project implementation and environment management are taken up properly. • Macro level: This relates to the investigations made to assess the effectiveness of the EIA process in totality of a specific jurisdiction. It aims to recognize whether the EIA system is working well and is leading to the desired results.

52 Policy Intervention Analysis •

Meta level: This goes a step further to understand whether EIA as a policy is worth adopting and whether it leads to better environment management and pollution control. The micro-level follow-up is targeted to check on implementation of environmental regulations at the project level. It helps in understanding the impact of an activity and also identifies what went wrong during planning, design, or implementation phases. Lessons are learnt from micro-level analyses and reasons of inefficiencies are sought out at policy level. The activity at macro level is relevant to regulators interested in improving EIA activity or reviewing EIA legislations. Meta analysis is linked closely to macro-level follow-up and tries to determine whether EIA works.

4.1.4

Elements and Principles of Follow-up

Recent literature defines EIA follow-up as “the monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of a project or plan (that has been subjected to EIA) for the management of, and communication about, the environmental performance of that project or plan” (Morrison-Saunders and Arts 2004). It essentially covers four basic elements, that is, monitoring, evaluation, management, and communication (Morrison-Saunders and Arts 2004; Arts, Caldwell, and Morrison-Saunders 2001). • Monitoring: It entails collection of environmental data to ascertain compliance with ambient as well as discharge standards. It is an essential component in the follow-up programme that assists other elements and is of three types (refer to Table 4.1). • Evaluation: It checks the monitoring records for their accuracy. It also involves the evaluation of the activity, its environmental effect, and the lessons that may be learnt to improve the situation. • Management: It signifies decision-making or taking appropriate actions after understanding the issues that emerge from monitoring and evaluation. • Communication: It informs the stakeholders, particularly the general public, about the results of monitoring, evaluation, and management. Over the years, a few general principles or guidelines have been developed for follow-up implementation (Marshall, Arts, and Morrison-Saunders 2005; MorrisonSaunders, Baker, and Arts 2003; Arts, Caldwell, and Morrison-Saunders 2001; Morrison-Saunders, Arts, Caldwell, et al. 2001a). A concise summary of these principles is presented in Table 4.2. These principles are generic in nature but provide muchneeded direction on the process. Further, follow-up should be planned at the time of conception of the project. Activities for which follow-up is essential should be identified as early as possible (Arts and Meijer 2004). Scoping of follow-up is also an important activity, which decides the terms of reference (TOR) of the follow-up activity to be carried out during the post-decision stage.

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India Table 4.2

53

Guiding principles to implement EIA follow-up

Why follow-up is needed?

• Follow-up is essential to determine EIA outcomes • Transparency and openness in the EIA process is important • EIA should include commitment to follow-up Who should be responsible for follow-up?

• Proponent must accept accountability to implement follow-up • Regulators should ensure that EIA is followed up • Community should be involved • All parties should cooperate What are the requirements of follow-up?

• It should be customized to the legislative, administrative, socio-economic, and cultural conditions of a jurisdiction • It should consider cumulative impacts and sustainability • It should be timely, adaptive, and action oriented • It should promote continuous learning from experience to improve future practice How should follow-up be done?

• It should clearly define the task, role, and responsibility of all stakeholders • It should be objective led and goal oriented • It should be specific to the purpose, design, location, and affected parties • It should have well-defined methodologies, criteria, approaches to monitoring, evaluation, management, and communication

• It should be sustained over the entire life of the activity • It should be provided with adequate resources Source: Marshall, Arts, and Morrison-Saunders (2005); Morrison-Saunders, Baker, and Arts (2003); Arts, Caldwell, and Morrison-Saunders (2001); Morrison-Saunders, Arts, Caldwell, et al. (2001a)

4.2

INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT OF FOLLOW-UP IN INDIA

The institutional arrangement for the PPM process can be studied to analyse the Indian system in the context of “who”, “how”, and “what” as suggested by Marshall, Arts, and Morrison-Saunders (2005). “Who” ascertains the involved stakeholders or actors in the process, “how” looks at the interdependency of all stakes and determines the sequence of activities in post-project monitoring (PPM). Lastly “what” discusses the various TORs of the projects. Let us consider the example of Haldia, whose background we studied in Chapter 3. There are several units in Haldia, but only eight big units in the industrial estate of Haldia were required to take EIA (refer to Table 3.8). Out of these, the IOCL

54 Policy Intervention Analysis refinery and four petrochemical units, that is, HPL, MCPI, IOC-Pet, and SAPL received clearance from MoEF, whereas HPL-Co plant, TCL, and EIL got clearance from West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB). There were several small units dealing with petroleum and petroleum products along with edible oil and small lead-smelting plants. These units were exempted from an EIA study by MoEF and the State Board because of their small size.

4.2.1

Mechanism of Follow-up—Who and How?

The MoEF and its regional office (RO) have a direct role to play in PPM (Paliwal 2006; Rajaram and Das 2006; MoEF 2003a) (Figure 4.1). The project proponent applies to MoEF or State Environment Impact Assessment Authorities (SEIAA) for EC by submitting an EIA report and an environment management plan (EMP) along with several other legal documents. In an EMP, the proponent details the mitigation, monitoring, and institutional measures that will be taken by them to eliminate, compensate, or reduce impacts to acceptable levels during the operation as well as implementation phase of an activity. EMP generally contains information about the pollution control equipment to be provided, details of the parameters to be sampled along with the frequency, laboratory set-up, specifications on the green belt, and composition of the environmental

Figure Framework of PPM in India 4.1

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

55

management cell. An expert committee reviews the submitted EIA report and EMP. On considering all possible impacts and appropriateness of EMP, this expert panel grants or rejects the EC to the project. On approving any project, the concerned regulatory authorities state a few conditions called EC conditions (MoEF, several years). These may only include the same conditions as proposed by the project proponent (mentioned in EMP) or may have some additional requirements that the regulatory agencies feel necessary. The project proponent has to abide by these conditions, and a compliance status report with respect to EC conditions has to be furnished to the respective RO every six months. RO officials also visit the industrial units every six months or every year to observe the compliance status in accordance with the stated EC stipulations. With each visit, a report mentioning status and discrepancy in compliance is provided to the MoEF in New Delhi (MoEF 2000–2004). Thus, the EC conditions provided by the MoEF act as TOR for all practical purposes to the PPM in India and RO carries out monitoring and evaluation functions in accordance with the provided EC stipulations for industries that receive clearance from MoEF. In addition to this, the state PCB (SPCB) is responsible for monitoring compliance of all projects under its jurisdiction. All projects are provided with an “NOC to establish” at the start in order to commence the development of the project. On receiving the environmental clearance, the project proponent takes up construction activities and the SPCB examines the fulfilment of the conditions provided in the NOC to establish. An “NOC to operate” is then provided to start the operation/process/ manufacturing. This “NOC to operate” acts as a TOR for SPCB officials who visit all the units at regular intervals in a year and carry out regular monitoring. With the enactment of the EIA notification of 2006, SEIAA will provide EC to projects at the state level, but RO will still bear the responsibility of carrying out PPM. In a personal communication, a senior official of WBPCB mentioned that a new model involving a joint team of RO, and more importantly SPCB, was being explored to strengthen the PPM process. It is also believed that PPM would be made more elaborate because most of the SEIAAs will have members of SPCB, and thus SPCB will be aware of all the stipulations provided to the units and compliance may be assessed with respect to these conditions during regular visits of Board officials.

4.2.2

Imposed Environmental Clearance Conditions—What?

This sub-section is aimed at understanding the “what” component of the EIA follow-up (Marshall, Arts, and Morrison-Saunders 2005). The MoEF provides two sets of conditions, that is, “specific” and “general”. The specific conditions offer guidelines on standards, pollution control devices, monitoring facilities for both sources and ambient

56 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 4.3

Overview of the environmental regulations specified by the MoEF

Specific conditions • Gaseous and particulate emission [suspended particulate matter (SPM), sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and hydrocarbons (HC)] from the various processing units should conform to the prescribed standards. • Ambient air quality monitoring stations should be set up in the downwind direction as well as where maximum ground level (that is, maximum impact zone) concentration of SPM, SO2, NOx is anticipated. • Fugitive emissions should be controlled and regularly monitored to record data. • The effluent emanating from different processes should be properly treated before discharging and should conform to the standards stipulated by the SPCB/prescribed under EPA (1986). • Adequate number of effluent quality monitoring stations should be set up in consultation with the SPCB according to prescribed parameters. • Project authorities must prepare a detailed scheme for solid and hazardous waste disposal. Hazardous waste should be handled according to the Hazardous (Management and Handling) Rules (1989) of EPA (1986). • Monitoring of noise levels should be carried out regularly. Necessary measures may be provided to keep noise levels below 85 db. • A green belt of adequate width and density should be provided around the plant. General conditions • No further expansion or modification in the plant should be carried out without prior approval from MoEF. • Project authorities must strictly adhere to the stipulations made by the SPCB and state government. • A separate environmental management cell should be constituted with suitably qualified people. • The project authority must set up laboratory facilities. • The funds expected for environmental protection measures should not be diverted for other purposes and year-wise expenditure should be reported to MoEF. • A compliance report should be provided to the regional office and SPCB. • Adequate measures should be taken to avoid any occupational diseases amongst the employees as a result of exposure to the various chemicals, gases, fumes, vapours, dust, and so on. • MoEF may revoke or suspend the clearance if implementation of any of the above conditions is not satisfactory. • MoEF reserves the right to stipulate additional conditions if found necessary. Source: MoEF, several years

environmental quality, and green belt, which are specific to each unit (Table 4.3). The general conditions are common to all the industries. In order to realize the focus of the conditions provided as TOR, a content analysis1 of the clearance received from MoEF (MoEF, several years) for the industries in Haldia can be studied. For this analysis, the EC conditions of each of those units are 1

Content analysis is a research method that uses a set of procedures to make valid inferences from text to assess the degree of attention or concern devoted to certain themes, categories, or issues (Neuman 1997; Weber 1990). This analysis was also referred in Ahammed and Nixon 2006; Glasson 1995.

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

57

categorized into seven different groups, that is, water, air, noise, solid waste, green belt, general, and others (Table 4.4). Conditions on air, water, and noise specify the number of monitoring stations, types of pollutants to be monitored, and frequency of sampling for each unit. Conditions on solid waste serve basically as a guide to have proper waste disposal measures and to adopt recycling and reuse options, whereas conditions covered under green belt specify portions of land to be used for plantation and enlist the variety of plants that should be planted around that unit. Most of the conditions provided to all the industries were “general” in nature and were directed to make them abide by various laws, submit compliance reports, and arrange for funds and composition of an environmental cell. Conditions on safety measures and risk were defined as “others”. The number of recommendations in each case showed that the general conditions covered 30% to 54% of the total content, except IOCL-FCCU for which this figure was about 71% of the total conditions. IOC-Pet, being a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) bottling plant, had many conditions on the safety measures to be adopted routinely as well as during hazardous circumstances, because of which most of them were placed under the “others” category. It was also noted that IOCL and HPL had taken EC more than once for their different projects costing more than INR 500 million—each time they were provided with additional conditions, which were more specific to the additional unit under consideration. West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB), on the other hand, had provided direct stipulations to the industries as NOC (WBPCB, several years). These conditions were specific to the pollution control devices to be placed, height of the stacks, number Table 4.4

Content analysis of specified environmental conditions

Project

Total condition

IOCL-Lube-oil

16

IOCL-DHDS IOCL-FCCU

General

Air related

Water related

Solid waste related

Noise related

Green belt related

Others

5

4

3

1

0

2

1

15

7

2

3

2

0

0

1

7

5

1

1

0

0

0

0

HPL

27

8

7

5

3

1

1

2

HPL-expansion

25

10

6

1

3

1

1

3

MCPI

21

9

3

4

3

0

1

1

SAPL

21

9

3

2

4

1

1

1

IOC-Pet

26

14

0

1

1

0

1

9

Source: MoEF, several years

58 Policy Intervention Analysis of diesel generator (DG) sets, discharge and emission standards, flow rate of effluents along with place of discharge, and measures for solid waste management and good housekeeping. The regulatory framework focuses more on complying with the standards in all respects, putting up proper pollution control devices, provisions of monitoring facilities for source and ambient environmental quality, and provision of green belt. Conditions provided by MoEF acted as umbrella guidelines. State stipulations were more specific but in agreement with MoEF stipulations.

4.3

APPRAISAL OF FOLLOW-UP PROCESS IN INDIA

It is common knowledge that any policy or process might be altered in the process of implementation by the pressure and reaction of involved stakeholders, that is, administrative staff, managers, project proponents, local people, and so on due to which that policy may have multiple potential outcomes adding to inefficiencies in the system. These constraints might exist at the level of defining the processes, relationships and interdependence among organizations, or operational arrangements. With this understanding, a “practice analysis” can be carried out to identify the constraints within the system that might undermine the implementation of PPM. The analysis will help to understand institutional barriers and problems. This section describes what is actually happening in reality, that is, a practice analysis (Ahammed and Nixon 2006) with respect to the four basic elements of followup—aptness of monitoring, evaluation, management, and communication (as discussed in Section 4.1.4). It is based on the observations made by officials of RO and WBPCB during 2000–2004 (MoEF 2000–2004; WBPCB 2000–2004a; WBPCB 2000–2004b) on the ground situation of PPM in India. It not only presents information on noncompliance but also provides an overview outlining the reasons perceived behind the shortfalls.

4.3.1

Monitoring Aspects

Monitoring refers to the process of ascertaining compliance with respect to the EC stipulations by RO. It also refers to the inspection and sampling done by WBPCB. In addition, industries were bound to furnish compliance reports to MoEF and monitoring results to WBPCB at specified intervals. As already mentioned, the officials from RO and WBPCB visit all the units at regular intervals. RO officials generally make visual observations, whereas WBPCB officials carry out regular monitoring, which clearly suggests that the most common methodologies adopted in India for follow-up are inspections/visits and environmental monitoring, as listed in Baker (2004).

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

4.3.1.1

59

Monitoring by RO

The RO inspects and notes observations with respect to the EC conditions each time an official visit to the units is organized. The frequency of these visits is once in a year. It may undertake monitoring if required, but for Haldia, none of the units were sampled during such visits. Status reports were prepared for each unit and submitted to the HQ of MoEF in New Delhi.

4.3.1.2

Monitoring by WBPCB

The WBPCB carried out impact as well as compliance monitoring for both air and water environment (Figure 4.2). Air quality was measured at three stations, namely Supermarket (Durgachak), WBIIDC Building, and Priyambada Housing. At the first two stations, sampling frequency was twice a week for respirable suspended particulate

Figure Location of air and water monitoring stations of WBPCB 4.2 (CP – Catch pit; HT/LT – High tide/Low tide)

60 Policy Intervention Analysis matter (RSPM), SPM, SO2, and NOx.2 The third station at Priyambada Housing was an automatic monitoring station and measured meteorological variables and pollutants such as CO, ozone, methane, and HC apart from RSPM, SPM, SO2, and NOx. Ambient water quality monitoring was also done at 10 different locations in the Green Belt Canal (GBC) every month for 16 parameters, including pH, total suspended solids (TSS), oil and grease (O&G), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), phenols (Ph), sulphide (S), hexavalent chromium (Cr6+), total chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), lead (Pb), zinc (Zn), iron (Fe), phosphate (PO4), cyanide (CN), and fluoride (F –). These parameters cover the contaminants expected from effluent of the units. Water quality of river Hoogly was also monitored for the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) initiative called Monitoring of Indian National Aquatic Resources at two places near Geonkhali (refer to Figure 3.2) and Durgachak for colour, odour, temperature, pH, conductivity, nitrate (NO3), nitrite (NO2), dissolved oxygen (DO), BOD, faecal coliforms, and total coliforms. Source monitoring was also carried out by WBPCB as detailed in Table 4.5. Air quality monitoring for most of the big units was done on a quarterly basis and SPM was sampled in all the units. IOCL was especially given an SO2 emission cap. Water quality was monitored mostly once a month at the inlet of ETP and discharge points of the industrial units except for HPL and IOC-Pet units. The parameters monitored were pH, TSS, COD, BOD, and O&G apart from some heavy metals. Of all the units, IOCL had maximum discharge points.

4.3.1.3

Monitoring by industries

All the units considered in the region were also expected to have provisions of selfmonitoring. All large units were supposed to provide air (that is, stack and ambient), water (effluent), and noise monitoring reports to the regulatory authorities. Services of private consultants were taken to complete this task. HPL, the largest petrochemical complex, monitored ambient air quality at 11 places (Table 4.6). Ambient water monitoring was not done by industries for canal and river. All stacks were monitored during industrial self-monitoring (Table 4.7). MoEF directed some of these units such as IOCL and HPL to set-up their own continuous stack monitoring facilities as well. 2

New National Ambient Air Quality Standards were notified in November 2009, but the data analysed in this book are prior to 2009 and hence old standards have been referred to observe compliance and limits.

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India Table 4.5 Industry

Details of source monitoring carried out by WBPCB Air monitoring

Water monitoring

Frequency

Parameter

Frequency

Parameter

IOCL

Quarterly

SPM, SO2

8

Monthly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G, Ph, S, CN, Pb

6

HPL

Quarterly

SPM

1

Bimonthly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G, Ph, S, CN, F–, Cr, Cr6+

1

MCPI

Quarterly

SPM

3

Monthly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G, Ph, CN, F–, Cr, Cr6+, Mn, Fe

2

SAPL

Quarterly

SPM

2

Monthly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G, Ph, S, CN, F–, Cr, Cr6+

2

IOC-Pet

Yearly

SPM

2

Yearly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G

3

TCL

Quarterly

SPM, SO2, F

11

Monthly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G, PO4, F–, Cr, Cr6+

1

EIL

Biannually

SPM, particulate Pb

5–7

Monthly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G, Pb

1

HPL-Co

Yearly

SPM, NOx for 1 stack

2

–

–

–

Table 4.6 Industry

Number of stacks

Number of locations

Details of ambient air quality monitoring carried out by industries Number of locations

Parameters

Frequency

IOCL

5

SPM, RPM, SO2, NOx, CO

Monthly

HPL

11

SPM, RPM, SO2, NOx, CO

Twice/week

MCPI

3

SPM, RPM, SO2, NOx, CO

Quarterly

SAPL

3

SPM, RPM

Biannually

IOC-Pet

2

SPM, RPM, SO2, NOx, CO

Yearly

TCL

3

SPM, RPM, SO2, NO2, NH3, F, Acid mist, SO3

Fortnightly

Exide

5

SPM, RPM, SO2, NO2,CO, Pb

Monthly

4.3.1.4

61

Inefficiencies observed in monitoring

Several discrepancies were observed in the monitoring activities carried out by regulatory agencies as well as industries. No monitoring was done for the years 2000 and 2002 by RO due to lack of manpower or other resources (interview with official of RO). MoEF asked HPL to set up a continuous stack monitoring station while granting clearance in 1992 and HPL did not fulfil this requirement. However, towards the end of 2007, the unit had agreed to set-up a continuous station after continuous persuasion from MoEF.

62 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 4.7 Industry

Details of source monitoring carried out by industries Air monitoring

Water monitoring

Frequency

Parameter

IOCL

Monthly

PM, SO2, NOx, CO, HC

HPL

Monthly

SO2, NOx, CO, NMHC + PM in 2

MCPI

Monthly

SAPL

Number of stacks

Frequency

Parameter

Daily

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G, Ph, S

7

8

Daily (monthly)

pH, TSS, COD, BOD, O&G, Ph, S, CN, F–, Cr6+, Cr (Cl, Cu, Zn, Fe, PO4)

1

PM, SO2, NOx, CO, HC

3

Monthly

pH, COD, BOD, O&G, TSS, F–, Cr6+, Fe, Cr, Mn, CN, Ph

1

Quarterly

PM, SO2, NO2, CO, CO2

2

Daily

COD, BOD, TSS, pH

IOC-Pet

Yearly

PM, SO2, NOX, CO, CO2

11

Yearly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G

8

TCL

Fortnightly

SO2, acid mist in 2; PM, total F in 9

11

Weekly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G, PO4, F–, Cr, Cr6+

1

EIL

Biannually

PM, SO2, NOX, CO, Pb

20

Monthly

pH, TSS, BOD, COD, O&G, Pb, N

3

HPL-Co

Yearly

PM, SO2, NOx, CO

24

Number of locations

3 to 5

2

Sampling done by WBPCB also needed some redefining. It was observed that WBPCB did not regularly monitor all the stacks for which standards were defined and deemed necessary to conform to the compliance status. The frequency of sampling was also limited. Industries also carried out self-monitoring according to the directions of MoEF and WBPCB. However, the results of monitoring and analyses conducted by the units were contradictory to WBPCB monitoring results. Most of the industries reported 100% compliance rate as against the WBPCB records. In the case of MCPI, WBPCB monitoring showed repeated non-compliance between September 2002 and April 2003 for BOD and COD. However, self-monitoring results of the units showed non-compliance only for April 2003 and apparently the rest of the times all the standards were met. Later, the units accepted that the ETP was not achieving complete stabilization. Apart from this example, there were several communications exchanged between WBPCB and IOCL, SAPL, EIL, and so on, which showed that the monitoring conducted by the said units did not show non-compliance as against the samples taken by the Board. In addition, industries interfered in the monitoring and sampling process to conceal their faults. One such example was EIL. When the unit was inspected in February

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

63

2002, it stopped functioning of a few sources, as soon as monitoring was started, to show reduced load. An investigation team was formed to assist the High Court on a public interest litigation (PIL) against these units. The team submitted its observations on 1 November 2001 that the monitoring platforms of units such as TCL, EIL, and MCPI were inappropriate. It was strange to note that measuring and reporting waste water flow was nowhere mentioned till 2004, because of which determining the impact of load from units on surface water quality was very difficult. The focus of the monitoring programme was more on source compliance rather than the environmental impacts due to the ongoing activities. River quality monitoring was carried out only by WBPCB and was not very effective in correlating the impact of industrial load on the adjoining river water. The monitoring programme had a different objective and the signature pollutants from industries such as O&G and heavy metals were not measured. Moreover, primary physico-chemical parameters were emphasized rather than social and economic concerns. The rationale of setting up an industry-specific station is unclear. Huge effort was made towards monitoring of pollutant concentration by WBPCB and individual industries generating a quantum of data. However, these data were not comparable as there was no coordination in terms of time, space, and duration of sampling activities. Thus, all the efforts that went into data collection did not lead to any conclusive method of tracing non-compliance or checking environmental quality. Appropriateness of monitoring stations will be discussed further in Chapter 5.

4.3.2

Evaluation Aspects

Evaluation deals with the analysis of collected data through monitoring to ascertain compliance status as well as environmental quality. Monitoring results, as described in the above paragraphs, form the basis on which the function of evaluation is carried out. As we saw, in the case of Haldia, monitoring results conducted by industries and WBPCB were often contradictory. However, the monitoring performed by WBPCB was found more reliable in assessing non-compliance and was therefore used for evaluation proposes.

4.3.2.1

Evaluation of the compliance status

Table 4.8 provides an overview of the compliance status of the units in Haldia with respect to the EC conditions. The air pollution control equipment employed and the configuration of waste water treatment plant were also examined to assess adequacy of these measures. IOCL used scrubbers to control SO2 emissions, and HPL employed a cyclone dust collector to deal with SPM. MCPI employed an electrostatic precipitator for the incinerator plant, apart from vent gas scrubbers in other process units. EIL

64 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 4.8

Compliance status of units with respect to the given TORs

Specific condition

Inadequacies observed Clearance from MoEF

Clearance from WBPCB

IOCL

HPL

MCPI

SWAL

IOC-Pet

TCL

HPL-Co

EIL

Have proper air pollution control equipment and water treatment plant

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Managed solid waste properly

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

N

Took permission for expansion and modification

N

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Provided adequate green belt

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

N.A

N.A

N.A

Established environmental management cell

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Complied with standards

N

N

N

N

Y

N

Y

N

Note: Y – Yes, N – No, N.A – Not applicable Source: MoEF (2000–2004); WBPCB (2000–2004a and b).

stacks were attached to bag filters, and TCL used a combination of cyclone and wet scrubbers, cyclone and bag filters, or alkaline scrubbers to curb air pollution. SAPL and IOC-Pet did not use any air pollution control devices, as there was no such requirement for hot oil heaters, fire engines, and DG sets according to the directions of the regulatory units. Measures taken by these units were compared with the “best available treatment technology” suggested by CPCB in India (CPCB 1999 and 2003). It was found that the measures were in accordance with the guidelines issued to them by CPCB and WBPCB. All the units used “best available technologies” for end-ofpipe treatment. Similarly, water treatment plants were also found consistent with the environmental guidelines provided to various units. Solid waste disposal was a major issue in Haldia. Most of the units produced hazardous waste.3 The units either disposed their waste in pits prepared in their own premises or incinerated the waste. They also identified some recycle and reuse options according to feasibility and economic constraints. Despite some good efforts, there were some cases where industries did not give proper attention to this aspect. 3

Waste oil and oil emulsions, tarry wastes from refining and tar residues from distillation or pyrolytic treatment, sludge arising from treatment of waste waters containing heavy metals, toxic organics, oil emulsions, and spent chemical and incineration ash are categorized as hazardous under Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 1989.

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

65

Rupturing of impervious lining and overflowing of the sludge storage pit were observed repeatedly for IOCL. HPL was also served with a notice for improper management of sludge. Later on, this unit installed an incinerator. Sludge pits of EIL were found spilling all over. It is important to mention here that industry officials repeatedly stated the need for initiatives to develop recycling and reuse business to manage the waste produced from these units. In response, a common waste treatment facility was made functional in 2006 in Haldia to collect and treat waste from industrial units on a payment basis. Under the general conditions given to industries, it was explicitly mentioned that any modification and expansion should be reported to MoEF or WBPCB, as the case may be. However, there were instances where units (IOCL, MCPI), in the first place, did not inform the ministry before commencing the construction or expansion work. Later, they responded to such queries on the irregularities stating that the expansion or modification did not come under the purview of the process because either the investment was less than INR 500 million, or the total load to the environment was not increased. One of the several measures to check pollution was green belt development in and around the industrial unit, zone, or estate. Planting trees and shrubs around industries not only aids in air quality improvement of the region but also attenuates industrial noise, reuses treated waste water, utilizes the compost from microbial degradation of solid waste and sludge, and overall improvement of aesthetics of the area (Rao, Gavane, Ankam, et al. 2004). It may also serve as a cushion against accidental fires, explosions, and toxic releases (Khan and Abbasi 2000, 2001). Keeping all these advantages in view, most of the industries were directed to develop a green belt of appropriate width. All the units were found compliant on this aspect except a petrochemical plant, that is, SAPL. This plant had started its activity in 2003 even before identifying land for plantation. Otherwise, the units were found in compliance and regularly reported the status of plantation in terms of area planted, species of trees, and number of trees to the MoEF and WBPCB. Green belts around HPL and MCPI were particularly very healthy and tree canopy was also very well developed. WBPCB did not make development of green belt mandatory for TCL, HPL-Co, and EIL. As one of the specifications given by MoEF and WBPCB, units were required to set up an environmental management cell. It was observed that all units had an environmental cell headed by a senior person of the unit. These cells had the responsibility of implementing environmental management at the industrial end, that is, conducting monitoring, ensuring adequate working of pollution control equipment and applying for audits, NOC, environmental management systems, and so on. Occupational health and safety was also one of the shared responsibilities of this

66 Policy Intervention Analysis division in most cases. These cells also reported to MoEF and WBPCB about the measures taken up and funds spent towards environmental management. Compliance status with respect to environmental standards for all the units was evaluated on the basis of monitoring conducted by officials of WBPCB (WBPCB 2000– 2004b). The units had to comply with the standards each time they were monitored as per the environmental laws in India. A detailed analysis suggested that most of the units were often non-complying to the prescribed standards (Table 4.9). The instances of non-compliance for water were more frequent than air. The reason could be that frequent monitoring for water provided additional chances to trace violations. IOCL was found to be a defaulter for both air and water often. Noncompliance despite proper air pollution control equipment and suitable configuration of water treatment plants suggested inappropriate capacity or inadequate operations of the above-mentioned systems.

4.3.2.2

Evaluation of existing environmental quality

Apart from compliance or source monitoring, there is another aspect in evaluation— observation of the status of the environmental quality of the region. This section focuses on the air and water quality in Haldia on which most of the monitoring efforts of WBPCB were focused. Air quality status: For air quality assessment, two different approaches were used: (a) estimation of air pollution potential (APP) or ventilation coefficient to assess the dispersion and dilution capacity of the region, and (b) air quality classification using an index to study the air quality status of the region due to meteorological conditions and impact of ongoing activities.

Table 4.9 Frequency of monitoring in various units along with instances of non-compliance (2000–04) Industry

Air quality monitoring Frequency

Water quality monitoring Frequency

Non-compliance

IOCL

Quarterly

7

Monthly

20 (10 times in 2004 only)

HPL

Quarterly

0

Bi-monthly

Quarterly

2

Monthly

16

SWAL

Quarterly

1

Monthly

6

IOC-Pet*

Yearly

0

Yearly

TCL

Quarterly

13

Monthly

3#

EIL

Half yearly

4

Monthly

12

MCPI *#

Non-compliance

* Production started in 2002; # Part of data set was missing.

3

0

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

67

In terms of ventilation coefficient, the APP measures the inability of the atmosphere to disperse and dilute the pollutants that are emitted into it based on the values of specific meteorological parameters. Areas with high APP are generally termed stagnation areas, having stable stratification and a weak horizontal wind speed component. They are characterized by the following conditions (Gross 1970; Stackpole 1967): • During morning hours: mixing height of £500 m, with wind speed of £4 m/s. • During afternoon hours: ventilation coefficient of 12,000

Low-pollution potential that leads to high dilution

68 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure Hourly ventilation coefficients for winter and summer months 4.3

The cumulative air quality of Haldia is determined using the Oak Ridge AQI (Ott and Thons 1976, MoEF, undated; Reddy, Rama Rao, and Rao 2004). The formula is as follows:

[ {(

AQI= 39.02

) (

) (

SO2 NOx SPM _______ + ______ + _______ SPMstd SO2Std NOxStd

)}]

º(4.1)

where, SPM = SPM concentration at the monitoring location (µg/m3) SPMstd = Standard defined for SPM according to the monitoring location SO2 = SO2 concentration at the monitoring location (µg/m3) SO2std = Standard defined for SO2 according to the monitoring location NOx = NOx concentration at the monitoring location (µg/m3) NOxstd = Standard defined for NOx according to the monitoring location The air quality is considered to be excellent when AQI is less than 20, good if between 20 and 39, satisfactory if between 40 and 59, poor if between 60 and 79, bad if between 80 and 100, and dangerous when its value is above 100. The pollutant concentrations at two sites, namely Supermarket and WBIIDC, were observed; these sites were defined as commercial and industrial locations, respectively, according to HDA (Figures 4.4 and 4.5). It was clearly noted that pollutant concentration in

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

69

the region was well within the standards defined for residential and industrial areas (Annexure A). The ambient concentrations were used to calculate AQI for the two monitoring locations as shown in Table 4.11. The air quality was found to be superior at WBIIDC as compared to Supermarket. AQI clearly indicated that the area had better air quality in the summer months as compared to winter, which was quite expected considering the meteorological conditions.

Water quality status: The GBC assimilates effluent from almost all the units in Haldia, directly or through natural canals bringing the effluents of adjoining units. The monthly monitoring carried out by WBPCB at 10 locations in GBC for 16 parameters was used to trace whether industrial discharges affected the water quality of the GBC (Figure 4.2). The end of GBC towards IOCL was found to have high concentration of pollutants such as O&G, TSS, BOD, and COD (Figures 4.6 to 4.9). The annual average concentration for 2003 and 2004 of the mentioned pollutants followed a general trend—the levels were higher till Catch pit 5 and thereafter they were found to decrease except TSS.

Figure Monthly concentrations of RSPM and SPM at two stations in Haldia 4.4

70 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure Monthly concentrations of SO2 and NOx at two stations in Haldia 4.5

Table 4.11 Months

Air quality index for Haldia based on data at two stations Supermarket

WBIIDC

Value

Category

Value

Category

January

65.9

Poor

25.1

Good

February

57.6

Satisfactory

21.0

Good

March

54.6

Satisfactory

19.6

Excellent

April

34.0

Good

12.3

Excellent

May

34.2

Good

14.9

Excellent

June

32.8

Good

15.2

Excellent

July

27.2

Good

12.7

Excellent

August

25.5

Good

11.5

Excellent

September

24.3

Good

9.7

Excellent

October

40.3

Satisfactory

14.0

Excellent

November

55.4

Satisfactory

20.8

Good

December

76.4

Poor

25.4

Good

The IOCL was the only unit discharging effluents to the GBC at the Oil Jetty end and the effect of this effluent was quite pronounced on the system. After IOCL, both BOD and COD were found to decrease for the rest of the course of GBC.

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

71

Figure Concentration of O&G at 10 locations in the GBC 4.6

Figure Concentration of TSS at 10 locations in the GBC 4.7

The tidal flux caused by the natural channel, Pataikhali 2 joining the GBC at HT/ LT point, provides dilution around this location. However, at the point of joining of Mansathala Khal near Rail Bridge, BOD and COD increased marginally. TSS was

72 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure Concentration of BOD at 10 locations in the GBC 4.8

Figure Concentration of COD at 10 locations in the GBC 4.9

higher at Jetty end but dropped to about 55 near Catch pits 5 and 6. However, a rise in TSS concentration was observed from HT/LT point onwards till Pataikhali 1 to reach more than 200 mg/l on an average. This was attributed to the re-suspension of bottom sediments due to tidal action.

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

73

Unlike air quality standards, there were no water quality standards for the receiving water bodies other than the designated best use for coastal waters marine outfalls measures provided by CPCB (CPCB 1986). In the absence of any standards for most of the pollutants expected from the units in Haldia, effluent standards defined for the units were considered for the receiving water bodies as well (Annexure A). This is a fair assumption since concentration of the mentioned pollutants in the receiving waters was mainly due to anthropogenic activities (which means industrial here), and hence it should be either negligible or less than the allowable effluent standards for industries. Instances of breach were observed when the monthly concentrations in GBC were compared with the effluent standards. Figures 4.10 and 4.11 show instances of noncompliance for 2003 and 2004 at various locations for different parameters. It was observed that PO4 was exceptionally high between March and September throughout the canal in 2003. PO4 is an expected pollutant from fertilizer and pesticide units.

Figure 4.10 Instances of non-compliance in GBC regarding monthly monitoring in 2003

74 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 4.11 Instances of non-compliance in GBC regarding monthly monitoring in 2004

Hence, SWAL and TCL could be the prime source. In addition to this, CN was on the higher side at many locations in the GBC. CN is generally reported in petrochemical units and high concentration might be an impact of cumulative or individual discharges from HPL, SAPL, CFCL, and MCPI. Pollutants such as O&G, BOD, and TSS were found to be higher at all the catch pit locations around IOCL. This might be the result of waste water discharged from IOCL as several anomalies were observed in the treatment of effluents at IOCL during the same time. The unit had to set up a new ETP following the directions of WBPCB, and this became functional in the end of August 2003. The BOD, CN, and S concentrations were on the higher side in 2004 as well. The number of instances when pollutant concentration was found higher than effluent standards had reduced in 2004. TSS towards Pataikhali 1, as already mentioned, was high due to tidal flux and re-suspension. Unlike in 2003, high concentration of PO4 was not observed in 2004. It is interesting to note that TCL was provided PO4 limits in early 2004. It strengthens the assumption that PO4 in 2003 was contributed by TCL only. Despite all the above observations, the correlation between effluent discharge from adjoining industries and poor water quality of the GBC could not be established with the available data.

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

4.3.2.3

75

Inefficiencies observed during evaluation

While assessing the appropriateness of the evaluation process, several inadequacies were observed in the system. It was observed that industries manipulated the requirements and guidelines to their own benefit. It was also seen that implementation failures were not only because of the ill intentions of industrial units but also because of ineptness on the part of regulatory agencies. From MoEF records, it was noted that on several instances, industries avoided taking up measures required for environmental management even when they were explicitly mentioned in their EC conditions or NOCs. Even now, continuous stack monitoring stations, which was one of the conditions in EC, have not been set up by HPL, neither did IOCL take any measure to stop the flaring of hydrocarbons. Likewise, SAPL started production without identifying areas for plantation. The cases of MCPI and IOCL need special mention, where the units increased their production by increasing the number of working days and commissioning new units, respectively, without taking NOC from the Board. This was unacceptable since as any increment in production and new installation should be informed to the authorities even if it was less than INR 500 million or had no environmental impact. In each of these cases, a detailed investigation was required as total waste load was greater than before and the natural system assimilating these loads might have additional environmental impacts. The WBPCB inspection reports also mentioned instances of industrial negligence. One of the units, which had been a defaulter in the past, was caught discharging chemicals and effluent before completion of treatment (with high pollutant concentration) to cover up its non-compliance and achieve the standards at designated outlets to a land next to it. In November 2003, WBPCB noticed several non-conforming activities at EIL. The unit was found to bypass the waste water through several hidden outlets, one of the process stacks was working without operating the air pollution control equipment, and the height of some of the stacks was less than the specified limit of 30 m. This was registered as gross non-compliance and taken seriously by the Board. IOCL was discharging untreated waste water through a new outlet for which permission was not sought from the Board. Similarly, TCL plant was caught for violation of stack emission standards several times and the Board noted the unit as a frequent defaulter in September 2003. Sludge pits of EIL were also found spilling all over. Many compliance inadequacies were observed because of the ambiguous conditions provided in the EC to some units. These conditions were subject to interpretation biases, and thus units interpreted them as they wanted, for instance in the case of green belt development. In none of the clearance letters were conditions such as species of plants, density and area for plantation specified, were mentioned, which

76 Policy Intervention Analysis were left to the judgment of the units. It was noted that all units under MoEF were required to submit a compliance report to RO and WBPCB, but the time frame of this submission was not the same across the units. Sometimes, it was every six months to both the agencies, and at others, it was six months for RO and three months for WBPCB, which made it confusing. Moreover, WBPCB officials did not know what to do with the EC compliance reports, and hence industrial units were not very regular in submitting them (discussion with officials of WBPCB). However, the Board monitored compliance with respect to the NOC conditions and since NOC conditions were more or less similar to guidelines in the EC, the PPM automatically followed the required path. A preliminary assessment of the air and water environmental quality, mentioned in above sections, suggested that industries were found non-compliant many times and needed immediate action. Several instances of non-compliance were observed, but monitoring of ambient environment was not found to be appropriate to establish causeeffect relationship. It was not possible to correlate the instances of non-compliance with the impact on environmental quality because of insufficient data. Since identification and assessment of environmental impacts is an integral aspect of PPM, the state of environment in Haldia was assessed with the help of modelling tools. Details of this analysis are presented in Chapter 5.

4.3.3

Management and Enforcement Aspects

Once monitoring is accomplished and evaluation of compliance and environmental quality is done, measures are taken to re-establish compliance and improve environmental conditions. This step is called “management”.

4.3.3.1

Practice by MoEF

The MoEF has given very limited attention to management. The problem is lack of a mechanism to ensure efficient management and enforcement. ETP overflow and sludge-lining problem at IOCL were observed in 2001 along with LPG flaring—this was reported as non-compliance by RO. The unit responded by stating that the overflow and sludge problem had been fixed and that they would take corrective actions soon to stop the flaring. Thereafter, no investigation was made for a long time to check whether corrective measures were adopted as mentioned by the concerned unit. In the 2003 and 2004 inspections, it was found that no corrective actions had been taken. In a few cases, lack of guidance was evident on the part of the regulatory agencies. HPL had received EC in the early 1990s but started production almost nine years later. During this time, many changes were made in the process line and the latest available technologies were adopted. Thus many conditions imposed on them became redundant.

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

77

The conditions on HPL, which became obsolete, required immediate attention to smoothen the process but were not taken care of. The unit raised its concerns to MoEF that certain clauses were unnecessary (as revealed by the environmental official of HPL). MoEF consulted experts at CPCB only once in the case of hydrocarbon monitoring and modified the condition appropriately, but such initiatives were never heard of again. Lack of a mechanism to ensure compliance has helped defaulters conceal their flaws. It was also observed that RO always sought the Ministry’s directions to take any step, in the case of non-compliance. This not only increased the burden on the Ministry but also caused a lot of delay in taking up any corrective measure. There were several instances where industrial actions were found inconsistent with environmental regulations. However, till date the Ministry had not taken up any strict action against these units.

4.3.3.2

Practice by WBPCB

The general procedure to carry out the function of management by WBPCB involved issuance of show-cause notices to the industries whenever they were caught breaching the environmental guidelines. The units were required to provide reasons for the noncompliance in writing to the Board. On appraising the replies, the Board either issued a warning to comply or gave “direction of appearance” when the reasons were found unsatisfactory. It was noticed that marginal increase in concentrations beyond the allowable limits because of incidents taking place due to leaks, excessive rain in the case of water, and shutdown or maintenance for air were excused. In all other cases, units were given direction of appearance to consider the viewpoint of the industry. Here units were generally asked to comply in a time-bound manner and regular monitoring was ordered. In some cases where frequent non-compliance was observed, units were put on bank guarantee. In this process, defaulter units are asked to deposit a token amount with a bank, which is either refunded if the unit complies with the direction of the Board or forfeited if the action is not appropriate. There were cases of forfeiting bank guarantees when units were repeatedly found disrespecting the environmental management measures (Table 4.12). IOCL was found non-compliant most of the time and thus put on bank guarantee. Bank guarantee was also imposed on EIL on the basis of the Board’s observations in November 2003 and TCL after a hearing in September 2003, for violating SPM and F standards. Out of these, the only reported case of forfeiting bank guarantee was IOCL, where the Board not only forfeited the bank guarantee of INR 500,000 but also imposed an additional guarantee of INR 1,500,000. IOCL appealed to court in 2002 against the Board’s order and succeeded in getting a stay on the second guarantee. This order

78 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 4.12

Instances of imposed bank guarantee

Units

Action

Reasons

IOCL

Bank guarantee of INR 0.5 million imposed in August 2002, which was forfeited in November 2002.

The unit was found to discharge huge quantum of waste to a GBC and river Hoogly; a new outlet was constructed bypassing effluent without treatment.

TCL

Bank guarantee of INR. 0.5 million imposed in September 2003

The unit failed to comply with stack emission standards for PM and F.

EIL

Bank guarantee of INR 0.3 million imposed in November 2003

The unit did not comply with the standard.

Source: WBPCB (2006)

came in 2003, but the condition persists even now and the unit was time and again found non-compliant. A part from this, a PIL was filed by an NGO against the industrial unit of TCL on behalf of the villagers. In 2001, TCL was charged with emitting a high concentration of pollutants, which were supposed to have a damaging effect on paddy and mango plantation. The court provided its direction in 2002, where it was admitted that no direct correlation were found between the emissions of TCL and crop damage. It, anyway, formed an assessment committee to keep a close watch in the area and empowered it to take steps as and when deemed required. In some of these cases, the role of regulatory authorities should be appreciated— they kept on reminding industries about their responsibilities till the required measures were adopted. MCPI failed several times to achieve BOD and COD standards after its commissioning. The Board kept a close watch on its process, and in 2003, the units stabilized the effluent treatment process. Since then it was always found complying. HPL constructed an incineration plant after two years of starting production, when both MoEF and WBPCB forced it to take proper solid waste management measures. HPL agreed to install a continuous stack monitoring station. IOCL also commissioned a new treatment plant to take care of all its waste water in 2003.

4.3.3.3

Inadequacies observed during management

Management seems to be the weakest link in the whole process. There are provisions of monitoring through which irregularities were observed but nothing much was done. Paucity of resources was also a major concern. RO is a very important element of the management process since it helps in strengthening the execution, but due to resource shortage, it faces problems. It needs to be equipped with modern facilities such as faster modes of communications, pollutant-testing kits, sophisticated laboratories, and so on.

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

79

Decisions to impose a fine or forfeit bank guarantees on these units are not proportional to the instances and magnitude of non-compliance. A comparison between Table 4.9 and Table 4.12 makes it quite evident. It is quite clear that the two actions were not intimately tied. The Ministry also had never taken any legal action against any industry, as mentioned earlier. The judiciary was approached twice in Haldia, but no action was taken as it was not possible to prove offence. Judgments came about a year after the filing of the case. Environmental offence could not be proved due to inappropriate evidences brought about by the time lag between offence, reporting, inquiry, and re-examination. It called for a better legal capacity. Apart from manpower and legal aspects, capacity building is much needed for technical expertise. Such efforts might prove advantageous in the case of recurring problems, such as continuous flaring of LPG at IOCL, improper functioning of ETP at MCPI, heavy metal recovery from waste of EIL, and recycle and reuse of waste products. The WBPCB was equipped with facilities to carry out monitoring to trace noncompliance. However, it cannot be denied that the Board has its own limitations with regard to manpower, technical resources, and ever-increasing workload, because of which the frequency of monitoring was low and which, in turn, gave leverage to industries (discussion with officials of WBPCB).

4.3.4

Communication and Co-ordination Aspects

The process of follow-up provided a common thread of communication among RO, WBPCB, and industrial units in Haldia. Both federal and state authorities were made responsible for the execution and implementation of environmental regulations to provide a well-knit system at every end.

4.3.4.1

Interaction among regulatory agencies

The RO officials visited units at particular intervals and prepared a status report on compliance with respect to the conditions specified during clearance. Copies of the status reports were also filed with the MoEF headquarters in New Delhi. If any inefficiency or deviation from regulations on part of industries was observed, it was reported in the status report. All communications between RO and HQ were via post. In the case of non-compliance, MoEF asked units to furnish reasons for the noted failure. For instance, RO and MoEF wrote several times to IOCL and MCPI to send NOC for the expansion activities they had taken up—this was to confirm that WBPCB

80 Policy Intervention Analysis had reviewed the situation and had no objection. The RO noticed commissioning of a new unit at IOCL in November 2001 and wrote to MoEF in December 2001 to provide directions. MoEF sought a reply from the unit, and the unit replied to both RO and MoEF in January 2002 stating that the required measures were taken up. However, RO never received this letter, and later MoEF sent its copy to RO in March 2002 for their comments. RO replied to MoEF and through some miscommunication, MoEF failed to receive RO’s reply. MoEF remained ignorant about RO’s reply and again sent a letter to IOCL to report to RO in June 2002. The matter remained pending due to all the chaos, and finally RO mentioned to the Ministry in April 2003 that the status would be observed only in the next visit. The relevance of the case was lost, as the whole process took more than a year and a half. The WBPCB had better coordination between its regional office in Haldia and head office in Kolkata. Both the offices were well connected through Internet and phone. Industries also responded more readily to WBPCB in comparison to MoEF. Officials of IOCL quoted that WBPCB was more accessible than MoEF. It was easier to communicate with Board officials in the case of any difficulty, and they understood the situation better (personal communication with IOCL officials). The reason behind this is quite obvious when we consider the distance and the number of units to be monitored by the two authorities. The RO had to deal with a number of industrial units across the states in the eastern region, whereas the Haldia office of WBPCB was responsible for only some units in Haldia and the nearby areas. Moreover, the prime objective of the ROs of MoEF was to look at various aspects of the Forest (Conservation) Act 1970—this was the main reason they were constituted for each region under the supervision of the Chief Conservator of Forests. The mechanism of communicating non-compliance and decisions made by regulators to the local people was found to be completely absent. With the new notification, it is proposed that all the information about a unit, conditions of the Board, and monitoring and status reports must be placed on the website of the State Board.

4.3.4.2

Inadequacies observed during coordination

Regional office was not a self-sufficient unit and always looked up to MoEF for its direction on issues. The whole process of sending information and receiving took place via post. It was noted that the Internet facility was not utilized properly to make interactions faster. On several instances, there was a lack of coordination between WBPCB and the concerned RO. Though they were dealing with the same set of industries, they performed their duties in isolation. As mentioned earlier, RO and MoEF wrote several

Concept of EIA Follow-up and Practice in India

81

times to project proponents to send NOC in the case of expansion activities of IOCL and MCPI. WBPCB was not consulted directly though it was the issuing and renewing authority for NOCs. In any case, WBPCB should have been the first authority to notice any expansion or inconsistency in achieving the pollution standards as it carried out inspection and monitoring of these units at regular intervals. The fact could have been used to the advantage of these agencies to avoid misunderstanding and delays in taking preventive measures. If an integrated system had been in place, wastage of time could have been avoided. Lack of coordination between regulatory agencies also poses a hindrance in effective implementation of environmental regulations. Better coordination might have pressurized the industries from both ends to take prompt actions in complying with regulations. The roles and responsibilities of the regulatory agencies in the case of PPM were not well understood as WBPCB had no clue what to do with the EC compliance reports that industries submitted to the Board (personal communication, WBPCB official).

4.4

COST OF FOLLOW-UP IN HALDIA

Complete analysis of the PPM (as was done in the case of Haldia) highlights the inconsistencies in the system. It also helps in assessing the loopholes in the system. It is also necessary to estimate the cost of follow-up. Let us again take the case of industries in Haldia. Money invested in follow-up measures was taken as an indication to understand the sum of resources dedicated towards PPM through RO and WBPCB. It was necessary to utilize and redistribute these resources more efficiently while strengthening the follow-up process. Cost of follow-up included the cost at the regulator’s end as well as at the industry’s end. Both central and state regulatory agencies were involved in the system, but it was the RO who mainly undertook annual visits and reporting of compliance status to the head office of the MoEF, whereas SPCB conducted monitoring (refer to Table 4.8). Thus, most of the administrative cost of follow-up was borne by the State Board. Data were also collected to find the cost of self-monitoring at the industrial end and administrative and monitoring cost at the WBPCB end. These figures provide an idea of the major cost of follow-up in the region. It might be an underestimation of the total cost since the expenditure involved in the administrative process at industries and MoEF was not considered due to lack of details. Table 4.13 provides the annual cost of follow-up considering frequency and parameters monitored by the industrial units as well as WBPCB. The cost of monitoring was taken from published documents available at the WBPCB according to which industries were charged.

82 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 4.13

Annual cost of follow-up in Haldia in INR

Institution involved

Annual expenditure

Industrial Ambient air monitoring

1,814,300

Stack monitoring

2,658,100

Effluent discharge monitoring

2,721,200

Ambient water monitoring Total

_ 793,600

WBPCB Ambient air monitoring

1,664,320

Stack monitoring

449,700

Effluent discharge monitoring

288,300

Ambient water monitoring

252,000

Administrative cost (includes salaries, laboratory consumables, house rent, and contingency) Total Total follow-up cost

639,817 3,294,137 10,487,737

Administrative cost of WBPCB office in Haldia was also collected, and after detailed discussions with the officials, it was assumed that 50% of the total expenditure towards salaries, laboratory, and consumables was utilized towards follow-up of industrial units. The rest was believed to be invested in other functions such as environmental management programmes at community levels and follow-up of units in areas other than Haldia. The total cost of follow-up in Haldia was calculated as INR 10.5 million. Industries bore about INR 9.7 million of the total expenditure as stack and effluent discharge monitoring conducted by WBPCB was also recovered from associated units. WBPCB’s Haldia office spent about INR 2.5 million annually, out of which INR 1.2 million was consumed towards operation and maintenance of the automatic monitoring station at Priyambada Housing.

5

5.1

Environmental Quality Assessment

INTRODUCTION

The units in Haldia did not conform to several environmental stipulations and also breached environmental standards for both water and air. However, as discussed in Chapter 4, a correlation between non-compliance and its impacts on the environment could not be found. Thus, it was felt important to assess the environmental quality of the area and the impacts of industrial loads. Environmental quality assessment for water and air was carried out for the following reasons: • To realize the share of industrial activities in the region to the total pollutant load (non-coverage issue). • To realize the impact of non-compliance on the environment (cause-effect relationship). • To have a synoptic view of pollutant spread in the region. This was not possible through the monitoring or preliminary assessment presented in Chapter 4. • To observe the effectiveness of the monitoring network/programme in order to suggest corrective measures. This chapter presents emission inventories from various sources that were used as the input for the numerical modelling studies regarding water and air quality. Later, the results of the modelling were utilized to observe the usefulness of the monitoring programme.

5.2

POLLUTION LOAD FROM VARIOUS UNITS

Inventories were made for both air and water in order to realize the share of various sources to the total load in the region. An inventory is a computed list of various sources of pollution in a given area for a specified time period. Preparation of the emission inventory involved efforts to identify, list, and estimate the emission from various sources.

84

Policy Intervention Analysis

5.2.1

Inventory for Air Pollution Sources

In Haldia, diverse activities contribute to air emissions as it is a port town and an industrial estate. Numerous vehicles ply in and out of Haldia daily to serve the port and industries. Domestic activities contribute a lot to air pollution, as the major fuels in households are coal, kerosene, firewood, and so on. Industries also have their share with more than 60 major stacks emitting pollutants in the area. Emission inventories for SPM and SO2 were prepared considering industrial, mobile, and domestic sources characterized as point and area sources. NOx was not considered, as it was not a requirement to monitor it in the type of industries present in Haldia.

5.2.1.1

Air emission from industries

Haldia has emerged as a major industrial growth centre in West Bengal. It is a hub of petroleum units along with several other units, including fertilizer, pesticide, fibremaking, edible oil, and several small lead smelting plants. Table 5.1 presents data on emissions compiled from stack emission monitoring reports, applications for consent to operate, subsequent consent orders by West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB), and information from individual industries. Table 5.1

Major air-polluting industrial units in Haldia

Industry

Load (Tonne/Annum) SOx

SPM

IOCL

6,519.73

607.27

TCL

166.96

411.26

MCPI

_

80.22

HPL

57.16

0.10

HPL-Co

30.72

5.30

EIL

_

2.44

SWAL

_

10.37

CFCL SAPL

_

70.10

588.82

125.37

HLL

9.98

14.09

MPGL

0.82

0.91

MOCPL

33.21

_

RSIL

1.30

6.57

ESPL

48.18

176.45

Environmental Quality Assessment

5.2.1.2

85

Air emission from domestic activities

The contribution of domestic sources or area sources to air pollution is chiefly due to the fuel used for cooking and lighting purposes. The region of Haldia Municipal Area (HMA) was divided into grids of 1.5 × 1.5 km and the population in each grid was determined using Census of India 2001 data. The load due to burning of fuel was estimated using the following approach (Government of Orissa 2006; TERI 2005; World Bank 1997). Pollution load = Per capita fuel consumption × Population × Emission factorº(5.1) Data on per capita fuel consumption for Haldia Planning Area (HPA) or Medinipur district were not available. In the absence of these details, the consumption pattern of fuel in West Bengal in the form of fuel and light per person per month was used as proxy (Table 5.2). Fuel consumption was quite primitive in nature in West Bengal and the level of consumption was also very low. The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended emission factors that were used to calculate domestic emissions (TERI 2005; World Bank 1997). Table 5.2

Fuel consumption of West Bengal—emission factors and sulphur content

Fuel type

Urban consumption (person/month)

Emission factor TSP (kg/T)

SOx (kg/T)

Coke (kg)

1.75

Firewood and chips (kg)

2.96

13.70

0.5

–

_

13.70

0.5

–

Kerosene (l)

1.50

3.00

17S

0.2%

Coal (kg)

1.92

10.00

19S

0.6%

LPG (kg)

1.31

0.42

0.02S

0.02%

Dung cake (kg)

10.00

Sulphur content 19S

0.6%

Source: Reddy and Venkataraman (2002); MSPI (2001); WHO (1982)

5.2.1.3

Air emission from vehicles

Total emission (calculations were made for PM as well as SOx from vehicles) was calculated using number of vehicles plying on the roads, modal split, and average distance travelled or vehicle kilometre travelled (VKT) as given in Equations (5.2) and (5.3) (Government of Orissa 2006; TERI 2005). Pollution loadPM = Number of vehicles × Emission factor × Deterioration factor × VKT º(5.2) Pollution loadSO = Number of vehicles × Fuel used per km × Sulphur content in 2 fuel × VKT º(5.3)

Policy Intervention Analysis

86

The details provided in CES (2001) for the number of vehicles in each mode (passenger cars, trucks, buses, two wheelers) are utilized within HPA to account for vehicular load (refer to Table 3.7). Emission factors and deterioration factors used in SPM calculations were those of CPCB (CPCB 2000), based on the assumed average age of these vehicles (Table 5.3). The average age of the vehicles was assumed based on the discussion with regional transport officials and Haldia Development Authority (HDA) officials. Most of the vehicles in Haldia were diesel driven. Table 5.3

Adopted emission factors for vehicles

Vehicle type

Details for SPM Average age

Details for SOx Emission factor (gm/km)

Deterioration factor

l/km*

Sulphur content**

Two-wheelers, 2 stroke

5 to 7

0.10

1.300

_

_

Passenger car diesel

10

0.84

1.280

0.1

0.025

Bus

10

3.00

1.355

0.3

0.025

Trucks

10

1.5.0

1.595

0.3

0.025

Source: CPCB (2000); *World Bank (1997);**DRTH (2006)

The general condition of roads in Haldia was very bad and there was a lot of dust re-suspension because of plying vehicles. The dust re-suspension was accounted in SPM calculations using the following formula (USEPA 2006b):

[ ( )

sL E = k ___ 2

0.65

( ) ]–C

W × ___ 3

1.5

º(5.4)

where, E = Particulate emission factor (units same as k) k = Particle size multiplier for particle size range and units of interest (g/VKT) sL = Road surface silt loading (g/m2) W = Average weight (tonnes) of vehicle travelling on the road C = Emission factor for a 1980’s vehicle fleet exhaust, brake wear, and tire wear (g/VKT) The adopted values for k, sL, and C were 24 g/ VKT, 0.5 g/m2, and 0.1317 g/VKT, respectively (USEPA 2006b). The average weight of each category of vehicles (that is, bus, car, and two wheelers) was calculated using average occupancy of vehicles and

Environmental Quality Assessment

87

number of vehicles (CES 2001). The average weight of trucks was taken as 12 tonnes based on the log entries of the industries and port trust.

5.2.1.4

Distribution of pollution load among sources

The total load from all the sources was calculated using Equations (5.1), (5.2), (5.3), and (5.4). It was about 7443 and 3181 tonnes/annum for SO2 and SPM, respectively. For SPM, industrial sources and dust re-suspension contributed about 43% and 45%, respectively, as against 6% each by vehicle and domestic sources (Figure 5.1). Among industries, IOCL was the largest source followed by TCL (Figure 5.2). Nearly all SO2 was contributed by industrial sources (Figure 5.3). IOCL was the major contributor of SO2 with a share of 88% of the total. WBPCB fixed a cap on the total sulphur emissions from this refinery to about 1475 kg of SO2/h. Yet, the total SO2 emission from major processes of IOCL was only around 744.26 kg/ h, which was well within the limits. SAPL was the second highest SO2 load contributor (Figure 5.4). Contribution of the eight large units (for which EIA was taken up and those considered in Chapter 4) towards total industrial load of PM and SO2 was about 92% and 99%, respectively. The total load produced by the units involved in manufacturing batteries, pesticides, detergents, and edible oil products was very insignificant as compared to the contribution of refinery and petrochemical units in Haldia.

5.2.2

Inventory for Water Pollution Sources

In the rural and municipal areas of HPA, no sewerage or drainage collection or treatment facility was available for household waste water produced. Open defecation practices were prevalent. Effluent generated from the industrial townships was treated

Figure Percentage contributions to SPM by various sources 5.1

88

Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure Percentage contributions of various industries to total industrial SPM 5.2 Note:

Rest 1% is contributed by HPL-Co, EIL, and RSIL.

Figure Percentage contributions to SO2 by various sources 5.3

using septic tanks and soak pits. Hence, with the available details it was not possible to account for domestic sources. An inventory was prepared for water, considering all the units discharging to the Green Belt Canal (GBC) directly or indirectly, using four parameters: chemical oxygen demand (COD), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended soilds (TSS), and oil and grease (O&G). There were three industrial units discharging directly into

Environmental Quality Assessment

89

Figure Percentage contributions of various industries to total industrial SO2 5.4

the GBC, that is, IOCL, SWAL, CFCL, whereas Mansathala khal and Atafola khal accumulated waste from several industries before discharging to GBC (Figure 5.5). MCPI and the new effluent treatment plant (ETP) of IOCL discharged directly into the river near the closed Oil Jetty end and upstream of Pataikhali 1, respectively. The total effluent loads to the GBC were 12, 168, 139, and 1097 kg/d for O&G, TSS, BOD, and COD, respectively (Figures 5.6 to 5.9). IOCL was the leading contributor for all pollutants reaching GBC with a share of more than 30% of the total load. HPL mostly followed IOCL in the list except for BOD load where MCPI was found to be the second largest source. As noticed in the case of air, the share of the eight big units in the waste water load was very high compared to the other smaller units in the region.

5.3

AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT—DISPERSION MODELLING

The air quality modelling was carried out once the inventory for air pollutant sources was done. Air dispersion modelling is a technique where a set of mathematical equations relates the release of air pollutants from emission sources to the corresponding concentration of pollutants in the ambient air. The modelling results were used to determine the impact of emissions on the ambient air quality of Haldia and also to assess the assimilative capacity of the region. The choice of air model depends on its ability to handle multiple sources (point, area, and line), the characteristic of the land on which the model is to be used (rural and flat terrain), the data required and available, and applications reported.

90

Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure Overview map showing Hoogly estuary and GBC (PST – SWAL; FBR – CFCL; PCU – MCPI) 5.5

Figure Percentage contributions of various industries to the total O&G load 5.6

Environmental Quality Assessment

91

Figure Percentage contributions of various industries to the total TSS load 5.7

Figure Percentage contributions of various industries to the total BOD load 5.8

Out of the several preferred and recommended models for Haldia, the atmospheric dispersion modelling system (ADMS), point area line sources algorithm with deposition and sedimentation (PAL-DS), AERMIC’s model (AERMOD), and industrial source complex short term 3 (ISCST 3) were studied, considering the above criteria (USEPA 2005).

92

Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure Percentage contributions of various industries to the total COD load 5.9

Point area line was not chosen since industrial source complex (ISC) and AERMOD were reported to be better substitutes in the case of point and area sources, whereas CALINE had similar algorithms and could be used in place of point area line (PAL) for line sources (Jungers, Kear, Eisinger, et al. 2006). ADMS was another obvious choice but could not be applied because it was a proprietary model, which needed a licence for any application (Hanna, Egan, Purdum, et al. 2001; Carruthers, Dyster, and McHugh 1998; CERC 1998; Carruthers, Edmunds, Ellis, et al. 1995). AERMOD has several improved algorithms and was the latest among all the chosen models (USEPA 2004; Sax and Isakov 2003; USEPA 2003; Hanna, Egan, Purdum, et al. 2001; AERMIC 1998). However, it required lower and upper layer meteorological data; such an extensive data set was not available for Haldia and, thus, AERMOD was excluded from the preferred choice. The ISCST model was finally chosen due to the extensive literature available on its applicability for different settings not only in India but also worldwide (Goyal and Rao 2007; Kansal 2007; Chen, Liv, and Chen 2006; Aftab 2005; Al-Rashidi, Nassehi, and Wakeman 2005; Bhanarkar, Goyal, Sivacoumar, et al. 2005; Rama Krishna, Reddy, Reddy, et al. 2005; TERI 2005; Rama Krishna, Reddy, Reddy, et al. 2004; Manju, Balakrishnan, and Mani 2002; Dubey 2001; Sivacoumar, Bhanarkar, Goyal, et al. 2001; CPCB 1998). ISCST was also recommended by MoEF in its guidelines (MOEF 2001b).

Environmental Quality Assessment

5.3.1

93

About ISCST 3

Industrial source complex short term 3 is the latest in the series of ISC models and is developed by USEPA. The basis of ISCST is the straight-line, steady-state Gaussian plume equation, which is used with some modifications to model point source emissions from stacks, isolated vents, multiple vents, storage piles, and conveyor belts (USEPA 1995). The model has flexibility to use either polar or Cartesian coordinates. It simulates point, area, and volume sources, considers both dry and wet deposition, and adjusts for terrain conditions and building downwash effect for all pollutants such as RSPM, SPM, SO2, and NOx. The steady-state Gaussian plume equation for hourly concentration at a downwind distance x (m) and crosswind distance y (m), used in the model, is given in Equation (5.5) (USEPA 1995; Boubel, Fox, Turner, et al. 1994; Turner 1994).

[ ]

QkVD Y2 C = ________ exp – ____ 2pmsYsz 2s2Y

º(5.5)

where, C

= Concentration of pollutant (µg/m3)

Q k

= Pollutant emission rate (mass per unit time) = Scaling coefficient to convert the calculated concentration to the desired unit (default value of 1 × 106 for Q in g/s)

V

= Vertical term

m

= Mean wind speed at stack or release height (m/s)

D = Decay term sy, sz = Standard deviation of lateral and vertical concentration distribution (m) For area and open pit emissions, the following modified Gaussian equation is used:

(

[ ] )

QAkVD Y2 dY dx C = ________ sz exp – ____ 2pmsxsz 2s2Y

º(5.6)

where, QA = Area source emission rate (g/m2/s) sx = Standard deviation of horizontal concentration distribution (m) (i) The vertical term accounts for the vertical distribution of the Gaussian plume. It includes the effects of source and receptor elevation, plume rise, limited mixing in

94

Policy Intervention Analysis

the vertical direction, gravitational settling, and dry deposition of the particulates. It also takes into consideration the effects of the restriction on vertical plume growth at the top of the mixing layer. If the effective stack height exceeds the mixing height, the plume is assumed to penetrate the elevated inversion and the ground-level concentration is set equal to zero.

[ (

)] [ ( )] [ ( )] [ ( )] [ ( )] [ ( )]

zr – he V = exp – 0.5 ______ sz

•

+

S

i=1

{

2

zx – he + exp – 0.5 ______ sz

H1 exp – 0.5 ___ sz

2

H3 + exp – 0.5 ___ sz

H2 + exp – 0.5 ___ sz

2

2

2

H4 + exp – 0.5 ___ sz

2

}

º(5.7)

where, he = hs + Dh H1 = Zr – (2izi – he) H2 = Zr + (2izi – he) H3 = Zr – (2izi – he) H4 = Zx + (2izi – he) Zr = Receptor height above ground, that is, flag pole (m) Zi = Mixing height (m) he = Effective stack height (m) hx = Physical stack height (m) Dh = Plume rise (m) (ii) Plume rise by default uses Brigg’s formula. Pasquill–Gifford curves are applied to determine the horizontal and vertical dispersion parameters considering buoyancyinduced dispersion in ISCST. The Brigg’s plume rise equation for buoyancydominated plumes is as follows: 2 gv s ds (Ts – Ta) _____________ F= 4Ts

where, F = Buoyancy flux (m4/s3) g = Acceleration due to gravity (m/s)

º(5.8)

Environmental Quality Assessment

vs = ds = Ts = Ta =

95

Stack gas exit velocity (m/s) Top inside stack diameter (m) Stack gas temperature (k) Ambient temperature (k)

If F < 55, 21.425F3/4 DH = ___________ m If F > 55, 38.71F3/5 DH = _________ m (iii) Mean observed wind speed is corrected to the mean wind speed at stack height (m) using the following power equation: p

( )

hs m = mref ___ zref

º(5.9)

where, mref = Observed mean wind speed (m/s) hs = Physical stack height (m) zref = Referenced height of measured mean wind speed (m) p = Wind profile exponent The above-mentioned wind profile exponents are calculated after defining the stability class based on the characteristic of the wind in the region (Tables 5.4 and 5.5). (iv) The decay term is a simple method of accounting for the pollutant removal by physical or chemical processes. x __ exp – y m ; D= 1;

(

)

for

y>0

for

y=0

where y

= Decay coefficient (s–1) =

x

= Downwind distance (m)

T1/2 = Half-life of pollutant (s)

0.693 ______ T1/2

º(5.10)

96

Policy Intervention Analysis

Table 5.4

Stability classification

Surface wind speed Day at 10 m (m/s) Incoming solar radiation (Langley/h)

Night Cloud cover

Strong >50

Moderate 25–50

Slight 12.5–25

Mostly overcast (4 oktas)

6

C

D

D

D

D

Note: A – most unstable; B – moderately unstable; C – slightly unstable; D – neutral; E – slightly stable; F – most stable. Source: Pasquill (1961)

Table 5.5

Wind profile exponent based on stability classes

Stability class

Rural exponent

Urban exponent

A

0.07

0.15

B

0.07

0.15

C

0.10

0.20

D

0.15

0.25

E

0.35

0.30

F

0.55

0.30

Source: Turner (1994)

5.3.2

Model Set-up

As mentioned above, ISCST 3 was used to predict the spatial distribution of pollutants (SPM and SO2) from various sources in HMA. The model required details about the source emission rates and prevailing meteorological conditions as main inputs. The data gathered for the emission inventory (refer to Section 5.2.1) can be used as input in the modelling exercise to describe the source contribution. The region can be divided into equal grids of 1.5 km × 1.5 km and a uniform distribution of emission in each grid assumed, to calculate emissions from the area. For line sources, a 1.5 km × 1.5 km grid can be taken for regions with very dense road network (that is, IOCL township, near dock complex, and so on); otherwise, the actual length and width of the road can be considered and a series of small rectangular grids formed to quantify road emissions. Meteorological conditions in Haldia were provided as hourly meteorological data, including wind direction, wind speed, ambient air temperature, mixing height, and stability class (A–F). Two sets of meteorological data were collected for a year—from

Environmental Quality Assessment

97

1 January 2003 to 31 December 2003. Hourly data on wind speed, wind direction, temperature, and solar insulation were collected from an automated meteorologicalcum-pollutant monitoring station at Priyambada Housing (WBPCB 2003–2005), whereas data collected from IMD had details on rainfall along with three-hourly values for cloud cover (IMD 2003). The climate of Haldia is tropical. Climatologically, there are four well-marked seasons in Haldia, that is, pre-monsoon—March to May, monsoon—June to September, post-monsoon—October and November, winter—December to February. Wind speed and wind direction in the form of wind roses are presented in Figure 5.10. Pre-monsoon months showed highest wind speed up to 7.5 m/s and the predominant wind direction was south-westerly. Wind speed decreased as winter conditions approached. Atmospheric stability was determined using the solar insolation method based on parameters such as wind speed, solar insulation, and cloud cover (Table 5.4). To determine the day time stability, solar insolation was used along with wind speed, whereas for night hours, cloud cover and wind speed were considered. Figure 5.11 presents the calculated stability. It was quite evident that from November to March, both stable and unstable conditions occurred equally. Unstable atmospheric conditions were observed for most of the day while stable conditions prevailed during nights. Neutral conditions were predominant from April to October because of the presence of cloud cover over the region.

5.3.3

Model Calibration

Model verification refers to checks that are carried out on model performance at the local level. This basically involves the comparison of predicted versus measured concentrations. In Haldia, the model-predicted pollutant concentrations were compared with observed concentrations for the period of one year (April 2003–March 2004) at two stations (WBIIDC and Supermarket) for SPM and SO2. For SPM, dust re-suspension, vehicle exhaust, and domestic and industrial emissions were accounted. Figures 5.12 and 5.13 show that predicted and observed values of SPM were in good agreement. In the monsoon months, the predicted concentrations did not follow the trend of lower concentration because the dust-settling effect of rain was not considered in the model. However, the concentration in the monsoon period was lower than that in the winter season because of high wind velocities during the monsoon season. Similarly, the predicted and measured SO2 concentrations were compared as shown in Figures 5.14 and 5.15. At both the stations, the model yielded outputs that were satisfactory except for the monsoon season. The graphs provide a good visual comparison of model-predicted and observed values. However, there are model performance criteria to establish statistical comparison.

98

Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 5.10 Seasonal wind rose of Haldia

Mean and standard deviation (SD) need to be calculated for both observed and predicted values. Later, the model’s performance has to be evaluated in terms of bias, correlation coefficient (COR), and statistical errors, namely fractional bias (FB), normalized mean square error (NMSE), and index of agreement (IOA). These criteria are widely reported (Al-Rashidi, Nassehi, and Wakeman 2005; Rama Krishna, Reddy,

Environmental Quality Assessment

Figure 5.11 Monthly stability profile of Haldia

Figure 5.12 Observed and predicted monthly SPM concentration at WBIIDC

99

100 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 5.13 Observed and predicted monthly SPM concentration at Supermarket

Figure 5.14 Observed and predicted monthly SO2 concentration at WBIIDC

Environmental Quality Assessment

101

Figure 5.15 Observed and predicted monthly SO2 concentration at Supermarket

Reddy, et al. 2004; Goyal and Rama Krishna 2002; Sivacoumar, Bhanarkar, Goyal, et al. 2001; Boubel, Fox, Turner, et al. 1994). These parameters are defined as follows (Equations 5.11 to 5.15): º(5.11)

Bias = OB – PR

Bias represents absolute difference between predicted (PR) and observed (OB) mean.

[

___

___

OB – PR___ ___ FB = _____________ 0.5(OB + PR)

]

º(5.12)

FB indicates how well the model produces average values around the average values of the observed variable. The ideal value of this measure is zero, but it can range from – 2 to 2. Negative values of FB indicate a model over-prediction, and positive values indicate a model under-prediction. An FB value of 1.99 indicates an underprediction of 200 times by the model; 1.00 corresponds to model under-prediction of 20 times, and for a value of 0.67 within a factor 2.

102 Policy Intervention Analysis

1 NMSE = __ N

[

N

____

____

(OBi – PRi)2 i ______________ ___ ___ (OB × PR)

S

]

º(5.13)

The values of NMSE should be close to zero for a good model performance. The NMSE provides the strength of deviations from mean.

COR =

[

___

N

S

___

(OBi – OB) (PRi – PR) i_______________________ (SDOB · SDPR)

]

º(5.14)

Correlation (often measured as a correlation coefficient) indicates the strength and direction of a linear relationship between two random variables. Values between 0 and 1 indicate poor to perfect correlation between the two variables.

IOA = 1 –

[

N

(PRi – OBi)2 i ________________________________

S

N

___

S ( | PRi – OB | i

2

___

2

+ | OBi – OB |

)

]

º(5.15)

Index of agreement takes values between 0 and 1, suggesting poor to perfect agreement between predicted and observed values. In Haldia, all these statistical parameters were calculated for both PM and SO2 (Table 5.6). The correlation between model-predicted and measured monthly average was good for SPM and reasonably well for SO2. At all stations, FB was less than ± 0.67—hence within a factor of 2. Positive values suggested that the model was under predicting the concentrations. NMSE values at both the stations were less than 0.3 for SPM and 0.1 for SO2, which were considered agreeable for air quality analysis. The values of IOA revealed that the model’s performance for both the parameters was good with an accuracy of more than 67% and 76% for SPM and SO2, respectively. The overall trends and statistical analyses suggested that the model’s performance was good.

5.3.4

Model Results and Discussion

Considering the seasonal effect for the two pollutants, monthly ground-level concentrations (GLCs) were predicted for SPM and SO2 for all the four seasons. The concentration isopleths were produced from the model-predicted concentrations resulting from all the three sources, that is, industrial, domestic, and vehicular.

Environmental Quality Assessment Table 5.6

103

Model performance evaluation for selected stations

Parameter/location

Statistical parameters Mean

SD

Bias

COR

Observed

99.69

55.00

32.92

0.83

Predicted

66.78

34.73

Observed

146.26

87.46

5.46

Predicted

140.80

47.62

Observed

5.88

1.18

Predicted

5.95

2.51

Observed

7.62

1.56

Predicted

6.55

1.90

FB

NMSE

IOA

0.40

0.31

0.76

0.80

0.04

0.15

0.81

–0.07

0.66

–0.01

0.10

0.69

1.07

0.56

0.15

0.07

0.67

SPM WBIIDC station

Supermarket station

SO2 WBIIDC station

Supermarket station

The contours were plotted in a 5 km radius keeping one of the IOCL’s stacks as reference point. Due to a wind speed of 5–7 m/s during pre-monsoon and monsoon months, the GLC occurred very close to the IOCL stacks in the downwind direction (Figures 5.16 and 5.17). The maximum monthly GLCs for SPM were 679 mg/m3 and 759 mg/m3 for the pre-monsoon and monsoon period, respectively, which were observed in the southwest direction due to intermittent north and north-east winds during those seasons. Though the general pattern on concentrations was the same in those two seasons, higher concentrations and more dispersed contours were observed perhaps due to relatively weaker south-east and south-south-east winds. During post-monsoon, winds were well distributed in all directions with a predominance of west-north-west, north-west, and north-north-west within a range of 3–4 m/s (refer to Figure 5.10). As a result, SPM concentration was also higher due to lesser dispersion offered. The maximum concentration, of more than 900 µg/m3, occurred in the south direction over river Hoogly (Figure 5.18). Concentrations in the winter season were highest with a value of about 1050 µg/m3 in a predominantly downwind direction (Figure 5.19). Due to prevalent meteorological conditions, high concentrations of SPM were observed over river Hoogly. The contours revealed that pollutants from various sources were generally transported in the south, south-south-east, and south-east directions

104 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 5.16 SPM isopleths for the pre-monsoon season

of Haldia. Because of this, recorded concentrations at the monitoring locations within Haldia were well below the stipulated National Ambient Air Quality Monitoring (NAAQM) standard of 500 µg/m3 (Annexure A). The isopleths of SO2 showed almost the same trend. Pre-monsoon season was marked with concentrations as high as 35 µg/m3 about 2000 m downstream of IOCL in the south-west direction as shown in Figure 5.20. Concentrations near TCL were also predicted to be as high as 32 mg/m3 on the north-east side of the plant. The monsoon season also presented the same distribution pattern of pollutants in the area (Figure 5.21). Concentrations were found to increase till 2000 m downstream of IOCL in the south-west direction, achieving maxima of 30 mg/m3, and thereafter it reduced as distance increased. During the post-monsoon season, the pollutants were found to be more dispersed (Figure 5.22). Concentration contours for winter were

Environmental Quality Assessment

105

Figure 5.17 SPM isopleths for the monsoon season

found to be skewed towards the south-south-east and south-east direction. Maximum concentration occurred at about 1000 m south of IOCL (Figure 5.23). The concentration of SO2 due to the cumulative impact of all the sources remained well within the desired levels of 120 mg/m3.

5.4

WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT

A water quality assessment was also done in Haldia to analyse the impact of industrial effluents on the GBC and river Hoogly. The selection of a water quality model was mainly based on its suitability to account for the flow fluctuations and complex bathymetry of the estuarine areas in Haldia, accessibility and provision of technical support to carry out the analysis.

106 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 5.18 SPM isopleths for the post-monsoon season

The water quality analysis simulation program (WASP) and MIKE were found to be the most widely used models for estuarine areas (Babu, Das, and Vethamony 2006; DHI 2005a; Siegle, Huntley, and Davidson 2002; Himesh, Rao, and Mahajan 2000; Warren and Bach 1992; Ambrose, Tim, Wool, et al. 1988; Wool, Ambrose, Martin, et al. undated). Both these models have the capability to simulate dynamic flow and water quality. They are specialized models and thus require technical assistance for their successful execution. In Haldia, MIKE was preferred over WASP as the technical support to carry out the work could be obtained from the Danish Hydraulic Institute (DHI), India. Moreover, MIKE had already been applied for the hydrodynamic study of Haldia (BPPL 2005; NIOT 2004).

5.4.1

MIKE 21 FM

MIKE 21 FM is a two-dimensional or area model based on the flexible mesh approach and developed and maintained by DHI–Water, Environment and Health, Denmark. It

Environmental Quality Assessment

107

Figure 5.19 SPM isopleths for the winter season

is a well-known model available worldwide and used for simulating water environments such as oceans, coasts, and estuaries. Suited for environments where stratification (that is, vertical) of the system can be neglected, it is based on the finite volume method where each element is of triangular shape and is especially useful where the usual fixed grid systems are unable to adjust to domains with arbitrary geometries. The advantage of using this model is that it can represent islands and complex bathymetry more precisely, resolution can be placed in an optimal manner at desired locations, the problem of staircasing near land boundaries can be avoided, and grids with dynamically changing resolution are possible. The MIKE 21 FM model has five modules to aid in modelling studies for a wide range of objectives. The hydrodynamic (HD) module is the basic computational component of the entire MIKE 21 FM system. Other modules follow the HD and are used for various purposes as their names suggest, that is, transport for advection and dispersion studies, eco lab (EL) for ecological parameters, mud transport, and sand

108 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 5.20 SO2 isopleths for the pre-monsoon season

transport for sedimentation studies. In Haldia, HD module was set up, followed by the EL module.

5.4.1.1

Hydrodynamic module

The HD module simulates water, level variations, flows and distribution of salt and temperature subjected to a variety of forcing and boundary conditions in lakes, estuaries, and coastal regions. It is based on the numerical solution of two-dimensional shallow water equations— the depth integrated incompressible Reynolds averaged Navier–Stokes equations (Tartar 2006; DHI 2005a; Temam 2001). It is also based on the continuity (Equation 5.16) and momentum equations, following the principle of conservation of mass and momentum in both x and y directions (Equations 5.17 and 5.18).

Environmental Quality Assessment

109

Figure 5.21 SO2 isopleths for the monsoon season

Mass equation: continuity ∂x ∂p ∂q ___ + ___ + ___ = 0 ∂t ∂x ∂y

º(5.16)

The momentum equation has nine components representing effects of (a) time deviation, (b) convective momentum, (c) cross momentum, (d) gravity, (e) bed resistance, (f) eddy viscosity, (g) Coriolis, (h) wind resistance/friction effect, and (i) density/barometric pressure gradient. Momentum equation: x direction _______

(

∂(hrxy) ∂(hrxx) ______ gp ∂x p2 pq ∂p ÷p2 + q2 – ___ ∂ __ ∂ ___ 1 ______ ___ ___ ___ __________ + __ + + + gh + x h rv ∂t ∂y h ∂x ∂x ∂y c2h2

( )

( )

( )

)

∂(pa) h _____ – Wq – fWx + ___ rv ∂x = 0 ... (5.17)

110 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 5.22 SO2 isopleths for the post-monsoon season

Momentum equation: y direction _______

(

)

∂(hryy) ∂(hrxy) gq p2 + q2 ___ ∂x q pq ∂p ___ ÷ ∂ ___ ∂ __ 1 ______ ___ ___ ___ __________ + + gh + – + + ______ – Wp rw ∂t ∂y h ∂x h ∂y ∂y ∂x c2h2

( ) ( ) ( ) 2

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

∂(pa) h _____ – fWy + ___ rv ∂xy = 0 (h)

(i)

…(5.18)

Environmental Quality Assessment

111

Figure 5.23 SO2 isopleths for the winter season

where, x, y = x = t = p, q = h g C t W f

= = = = = =

Spatial coordinates (m) Surface elevation or water levels above datum (m) Time (s) Momentum or flux densities in the x and y directions, respectively (m3/s/m) Water depth (m) Acceleration due to gravity (m/s2) Chezy resistance (m1/2/s) Shear stress (kg/m/s2) or Pa Coriolis parameter, latitude dependent (s–1) Wind friction factor (dimensionless)

112 Policy Intervention Analysis Vx, Vy = Wind speed component in the x and y directions (m/s) rw = Density of water (kg/m2) ra = Atmospheric pressure (kg/m/s2 or Pa) The spatial discretization of equations is performed using a cell-centred finite volume method and the domain is discretized by subdividing the continuum into non-overlapping elements/cells. An approximate Riemann solver is used for convective fluxes, which makes it possible to handle discontinuous solutions. An explicit scheme is used for time integration. MIKE 21 HD makes use of the alternating directional implicit technique to integrate the equations for mass and momentum conservation in the space–time domain.

5.4.1.2

ECO lab module

Eco lab is a numerical tool for ecological modelling. It is a generic tool for customizing an aquatic ecosystem model to describe water quality, eutrophication, heavy metals interactions, and ecology (DHI 2004). The module is mostly used for water quality modelling as a part of environmental impact assessment of different human activities. It may also be applied in aquaculture to optimize the production of fish, sea grasses and mussels, and forecast water quality (DHI 2007 and 2005b; Edelvang, Kaas, Erichsen, et al. 2005). Users can choose predefined mathematical description of ecosystems or develop their own model concepts. The module can describe dissolved substances, particulate matter of dead or living material, living biological organisms, and several other components. In the case of Haldia, an EL template was prepared with the view of observing the pollutant spread in the GBC and river Hoogly for dissolved oxygen (DO) and BOD. Equations were formulated for various processes (Chapra 1997; Jorgensen 1994; Thomann and Mueller 1987). For BOD, only the process of decay was considered and defined as shown in Equation (5.19).

(

d(BOD) DO2 ________ = kd3 BOD QT3 – 20 ______________ dt DO2 + (HSDO)2

)

where, kd3 = BOD decay constant at 20°C (d–) BOD = BOD of the system (mg/l) Q3 = Arrhenius temperature coefficient for BOD decay (dimensionless) T = Water temperature (°C) DO = DO of the system (mg/l) HSDO = Half-saturation coefficient for oxygen (mg/l)

º(5.19)

Environmental Quality Assessment

113

On the other hand, for DO (Equation 5.20), processes such as re-aeration, photosynthesis, BOD decay, respiration, and sediment oxygen demand (SOD) were considered. All the equations used to define these processes are as follows.

[

d(DO) dDO _____ = ______ dt dt

]

Reaeration

[

d(DO) – ______ dt

[

d(DO) – ______ dt

]

[

d(DO) – ______ dt

BOD Decay

d(DO) ] + [ ______ dt ] SOD

]

Photosynthesis

º(5.20) Respiration

[

d(DO) (i) Re-aeration: ______ dt

]

Reaeration

= Ka QT4 – 20 (Cs – DO)

where, 0.728 u0.5 – 0.317 u + 0.0372 u2 Ka = 5.233 u h–1.67 + _____________________________ h

(

)

Cs = 14.65 – 0.0841 S + T [0.00256 S – 0.41022 + T (0.007991 –0.0000374 S – 0.000077774 T)] d(BOD) (ii) BOD decay: same as ________ dt

[

d(DO) (iii) SOD: ______ dt

DO Q ] = ( ___________ HS + DO ) SOD

DO

[

T – 20 , 5

if DO > 2: else = 0

]

d(DO) = r Gmax QT1 – 20 F1 a (iv) Photosynthesis ______ Photosynthesis dt 2.718 suninp F1 = ___________ (e– a1 – e– a0) Ke h

(

)

t suninp = COS (2 * p) ___ a , if dayswitch = 2: else = 0 24

( /)

dayswitch = sunup + sundown t = hour – (12 + fi) a = 2 rd 1.8 Ke = ___ SD

114 Policy Intervention Analysis

() ()

Ia a1 = __ ( e–Ke h ) Is Ia a0 = __ Is

[

d(DO) (v) Respiration: ______ dt

]

Respiration

= r Kra QT2 – 20 a

For all these equations, Ka = Re-aeration constant at 20°C (d– 1) Q4 = Arrhenius temperature coefficient for re-aeration (dimensionless) Cs = Saturation constant of DO, w.r.t. salinity and temperature S = Water salinity (PSU) T = Water temperature (°C) DO = DO of the system (mg/l) u = Velocity (m/s) h = Water depth (m) HSDO = Half-saturation coefficient of oxygen (mg/l) Q5 = Arrhenius temperature coefficient for SOD decay (dimensionless) r = Oxygen generated per unit mass of plant biomass produced (gO2/mg-chlorophyll a) Gmax = Maximum plant growth in optimal light and excess nutrients (d–1) Qt = Arrhenius temperature coefficient for photosynthesis (dimensionless) F1 = Attenuation of growth due to light over depth and one day (dimensionless) a = Concentration of plant biomass or chlorophyll a (mg-chlorophyll a/m3) suninp = Photoperiod or light availability (dimensionless) Ke = Light extinction coefficient (m–1) a1 = Light attenuation due to particles (dimensionless) a0 = Light attenuation due to non-optimality of available light(dimensionless) dayswitch = Time for which photosynthesis will occur (dimensionless) sunup = 1, if hour > sunrise (year, month, day, latitude, fi); else = 0 sundown = 1, if hour < sundown (year, month, day, latitude, fi); else = 0 t = Solar irradiance factor for diurnal variations (h)

Environmental Quality Assessment

fi rd SD Ia Is Kra Q2

5.4.2

= = = = = = =

115

Correction factor for noon = 1 h Relative day length (year, month, day, latitude) Secchi depth (m) Average daylight intensity (ly/d) Light intensity for optimal plant growth (ly/d) Respiration rate of plants (d–1) Arrhenius temperature coefficient for respiration (dimensionless)

Hoogly Estuary and GBC

The Hoogly estuary is a complex system with dynamic flow, depth, and velocity conditions. Rivers Hoogly, Roopnarayan, and Haldi bring freshwater to the estuary, which eventually drains into the Bay of Bengal. The estuary is shallow and its average depth is 6 m. Because of shallow depths and intense tidal mixing, the Hoogly estuary is well-mixed and vertically homogeneous throughout the year except for a short period during the south-west monsoon season (June–September) during which the estuary is partially stratified due to freshwater discharge (Sadhuram, Sharma, Ramana Murthy, et al. 2005). Average freshwater discharge is reported to be 3000 m3/s during the southwest monsoon season, that is, June–September, and 1000 m3/s during the dry season, that is, November–May (Sadhuram, Sharma, Ramana Murthy, et al. 2005). The mixed layer depth of this estuary was determined as 6 m (De, Ghosh, Jana, et al. 1991; Gole and Vaidyaraman 1966). The tidal effect is noticeable in river Hoogly up to nearly 200 km upstream from Sagar Island, the mouth of the estuary. The salinity intrusion, however, is only confined to 70 km from the mouth, even during the dry season. This estuary accumulates waste from industrial units in Haldia through GBC as already explained in Section 5.2.2. This canal is 7 km long and about 30 m wide and has two ends namely, Oil Jetty and Pataikhali 1 (refer to Figure 5.5). A natural channel called Pataikhali 2 also joins the GBC at HT/LT connection point. It has a width of about 15 m. The Oil Jetty end is kept closed all the time, thus water exchange between GBC and river Hoogly takes place at Pataikhali 1 and 2 only. The depth of the canal varies from 2 m at the Oil Jetty end to 0.6 m at Pataikhali 1.

5.4.3

Model Set-up

The numerical modelling carried out in Haldia aimed at analysing the pollutant spread and included a MIKE 21 HD and EL module. MIKE 21 was applied to assess the pollution profile of the area in terms of DO and BOD for 15 days in November 2005, that is, 1 November to 15 November, to represent the post-monsoon period over a lunar month consisting of both the spring and the neap tide. The model results are

116 Policy Intervention Analysis dependent upon a sound model set-up and reliable input information, which are documented in the next section.

5.4.3.1

HD module set-up

The inputs to this module are bathymetry, water-level conditions along the boundaries of the model, temperature, salinity, wind speed, and direction. Model domain and bathymetry: Bathymetry reflects the geometry of the region. The prepared bathymetry had grid size varying between 30 m and 3000 m. To take advantage of the capabilities of the FM model, the mesh or grids inside GBC and its adjacent area in the estuary were kept finer, whereas grids in the lower stretch of the estuary had coarser resolution. The model bathymetry was prepared based on the depth information extracted from a software product named C-MAP1 and the data collected from a survey done for Kulpi port project by DHI, India in 2005 (BPPL 2005). Bathymetry was reduced to chart datum, that is, a datum set approximately equal to the lowest astronomical tide (Figure 5.24). As already explained earlier, the depth of GBC varies between 1.5 m and 0.6 m from Oil Jetty to Pataikhali end. The river in front of Haldia is divided into two

Figure 5.24 Bathymetry of Haldia

1

C-MAP is a compilation of digitized hydrographic charts. This product is provided by Jepessen Marine, Norwaydetails available at .

Environmental Quality Assessment

117

channels by an island called Nayachar. The depth of the channel of the river adjacent to the GBC varies between 0.5 m and 2 m, whereas the average depth of the channels on the other side of the island is about 3 m. Wind profile: Meteorological data were collected from an automatic monitoring station operated by WBPCB in Haldia (WBPCB 2003–2005). The data suggested that winds were north and north-westerly for about 80% of the time with an average speed of 3 m/s. Water levels: The water levels or tide data were also extracted from the C-MAP for two stations, that is, Diamond Harbour and Sagar Roads, to represent the uppermost (north) and lowermost (south) boundary conditions, respectively. The water levels at Diamond Harbour varied between 0.9 m and 6.2 m with an average of 3.3 m (Figure 5.25), whereas water levels recorded at Sagar Roads had an average of 3.0 m and ranged between 0.9 m and 5.3 m (Figure 5.26). Other parameters: Apart from the above-mentioned inputs, the model also required a few other parameters for HD set-up. The values used for these input variables are shown in Table 5.7. Heat exchange was also accounted for in the model. The model used Dalton’s, Angstrom’s, and Lambert–Beer’s laws to formulate the heat exchange for the system using meteorological variables such as temperature, relative humidity, and cloud cover (WBPCB 2003–2005).

Figure 5.25 Water levels at Diamond Harbour used as northern boundary

118 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 5.26 Water levels at Sagar Roads used as southern boundary

Table 5.7

Details of the variables used in HD module calibration

Parameter

Value used

Manning’s number (that is, 1/Manning’s coefficient)

32 m1/3/s (default)

Smagorinsky coefficient—Eddy viscosity formulation

0.28 (default)

Temperature

27°C#

Salinity (northern to southern boundary)

0–18.3 PSU*

Source: #WBPCB (2005); *NIOT (2004)

5.4.3.2

Eco lab module set-up

The data regarding seven sources that were discharging into GBC and river Hoogly (Table 5.8) along with river Haldi, which joins Hoogly downstream of Haldia, were considered. The pollutant concentration data were collected for industrial sources and river (WBPCB 2000–2004b; WBPCB 2003 unpublished; Sadhuram, Sharma, Ramana Murthy, et al. 2005; CPCB 2001) to be used as input to the model. DO levels were assumed to be 6 mg/l at both upper and lower boundaries, whereas BOD concentrations were kept at 2 mg/l and 1 mg/l at northern and southern boundaries, respectively. DO content of all the sources was considered to be zero as these waste streams were directly coming from the industrial outlets, except river Haldi where its value was taken as 6 mg/l (CPCB 2001). The salinity and temperature of all the sources and river Haldi were kept at zero PSU and 27°C, respectively.

Environmental Quality Assessment

119

Description of accounted point load discharges to river Hoogly and GBC

Table 5.8

Place of discharge/sources

Discharge (m3/d)

BOD (mg/l)

To river Hoogly River* Haldi

10.3 (m3/s)

1.3

IOCL- ETP

3,984

9.4

MCPI

1,080

33.2

3,000

4.3

157

33.9

To GBC IOCL-Catch pit 6 SWAL Mansathala khal

7,832

3.9

Atafola khal

2,880

1.3

CFCL

2,295

3.8

Source: *CPCB (2001); WBPCB (2000–2004b)

The EL module was calibrated using values of coefficients (Table 5.9) and load from various sources. The average daylight intensity was calculated based on the solar radiation data collected from the automatic monitoring station at Priyambada Housing (WBPCB 2003–2005).

5.4.4

Model Calibration

The objective of model calibration is to test how well the model is able to represent the real conditions of the region for which it is applied. The comparison of the deviation between model-predicted and measured values of a particularly important variable is frequently assessed to calibrate a model. Errors in simulations are estimated as the difference between model-predicted or forecast values and measured or observed data (Equation 5.21). Error = Measured value – Predicted value

5.4.4.1

º(5.21)

HD module

To calibrate the HD module, water or tide level was selected as one of the important parameters. The model results were compared with the measured water levels at Raichak and Fraiser for 6 and 15 days, respectively. The measured and predicted tidal levels were found in agreement (Figures 5.27 and 5.28). Amplitude differences between measured and predicted tidal levels at both the stations were not more than 0.4 m. The tidal phase was also found to be well synchronized at both the locations, when measured and simulated results were compared.

120 Policy Intervention Analysis Table 5.9

Details of the variables used in EL module calibration

Constant/coefficient

Value used

BOD degradation constant at 20°C, kd3

0.35/d

Arrhenius temperature coefficient for BOD decay, Q3

1.02

Half-saturation coefficient of oxygen, HSDO

2 mg/l

Arrhenius temperature coefficient for re-aeration, Q4

1.02

Arrhenius temperature coefficient for SOD decay, Q5

1

O2 generated per unit mass of plant biomass, r

0.2 g O2/mg-chla

Maximum plant growth for optimal conditions, Gmax

2/d

Arrhenius temperature coefficient for photosynthesis, Q1

1.066

Average daylight intensity, Ia Light intensity for optimal plant growth, Is

3,489 ly/d 300 ly/d

Respiration rate of the plants, Kra

0.15/d

Arrhenius temperature coefficient for respiration, Q2

1.08

Concentration of plant biomass or chlorophyll a, a

0.3 mg/m3*

Secchi depth

0.4 m

Source: *Chauhan, Nagur, Mohan, et al. (2001); Chapra (1997); Thomann and Mueller (1987)

Figure Model calibration: comparison between model-simulated and measured tidal elevation 5.27 at Raichak

5.4.4.2

Eco lab module

To calibrate the EL module, six stations were considered. It was noted that the differences between the mean of the measured and the model-predicted values of

Environmental Quality Assessment

121

.

Figure Model calibration: comparison between model simulated and measured tidal elevation 5.28 at Fraiser

BOD were insignificant and showed a good fit at four locations, that is, near Oil Jetty end, between catch pits 5 and 6, near HT/LT connection point, and in front of CFCL (Figure 5.29). The highest error among these four sites was –0.8 mg/l at catch pits 5 and 6. The errors or residuals calculated at the other two sites, that is, catch pits 1 and 2 and near Pataikhali 1 were 8.4 mg/l and 3.2 mg/l, respectively. The vehicle loading and unloading terminal of the refinery was located near catch pits 1 and 2, and it is quite possible that there might have been some unaccounted spillage while handling the petroleum products and cleaning of vehicles, which increased the BOD load of GBC at this point. At Pataikhali 1, this difference could be due to the re-suspension of settled material caused by the back and forth movement of the tidal flow at this point. Dissolved oxygen calibration was carried out using the limited data available in literature (Sadhuram, Sharma, Ramana Murthy, et al. 2005; TERI 2005; CPCB 2001) in order to make sure that the DO signatures were captured correctly in the simulations. The recorded observations of DO for the Hoogly estuary were found to vary between 5 mg/l and 6.5 mg/l for the post-monsoon season. However, these observations did not provide any information on the tidal stages and exact location of measurements. For the same reach, model simulations indicated DO values between 4.5 mg/l and 6 mg/l. These model results were compared qualitatively with the available DO observations and were found reasonable. DO was not a very critical parameter

122 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure Model calibration: comparison between model-simulated results and measured BOD levels 5.29 at various locations in GBC

in the estuary because the tidal fluctuations and dimension of the system helped in sufficiently assimilating DO.

5.4.5

Model Validation

The HD module was validated for another set of data collected in January 2003 for two different stations, namely Kulpi and Gangra (Figure 5.5). Figure 5.30 shows a very good fit between water levels of the simulation and the measured data at both the stations. Therefore, the model was deemed suitable for making predictions for the Hoogly and the GBC. The BOD and DO data were not available for validation purposes. However, it is believed that a suitably calibrated and validated HD module would also ensure acceptable and accurate results for ecological parameters as the spread and concentration of pollutants in this system were mostly governed by hydrodynamic flows.

5.4.6 Model Results and Discussion In this section, we detail the results of the assessment of the water quality of the GBC and river Hoogly under the impact of various industrial loads.

5.4.6.1

HD module

Under the effect of tidal movement in the estuary, water flushes in and out of GBC from two points, namely Pataikhali 1 and 2. The maximum observed flow inside the

Environmental Quality Assessment

123

Figure Model validation: comparison between model-simulated results and measured tidal 5.30 elevation at Kulpi (top) and Gangra (bottom)

GBC was about 1.2 m3/s/m and 3 m3/s/m at Pataikhali 1 and 2, respectively (Figure 5.31). Inward movement of water in GBC caused dilution of pollutants discharged from industrial outlets. The rate of backward flow of water from GBC to Hoogly was observed as 0.4 m3/s/m and 1.6 m3/s/m at Pataikhali 1 and 2, respectively. Pataikhali 2 was a narrow channel (that is, 15 m in width), thus the mean velocities of water moving in and out (0.7 m/s and 0.4 m/s) were found to be higher than at Pataikhali 1 (0.2 m/s and 0.4 m/s). The impact of the flushing action was observed to be significant till catch pit 5. Water mixing beyond catch pit 5 was not very good because of the

124 Policy Intervention Analysis

Figure 5.31 Model result: predicted flow at Pataikhali 1 and Pataikhali 2 Note: Negative flux values indicate mass movement out of Hoogly or inside GBC.

higher depth of the canal. The flow variations during spring and neap tide are clearly revealed in Figure 5.31. The water movement in and out of GBC was dependent on the water-level difference between the two systems. Water flushes out of GBC soon after high tide in Hoogly, marking receding water level in the river. Whereas, backward flow was observed into the GBC as soon as water levels increased after low water conditions in the river. High and low water conditions marked the reversal of flow outside and inside the GBC, respectively.

5.4.6.2

Eco lab module

Biochemical oxygen demand and DO profiles over 15 days were extracted at the closed end of Oil Jetty, connection point of HT/LT (middle point), and near Pataikhali 1 and 2 in river Hoogly to assess the pollution profile of the area. The water quality was compared with respect to the allowable DO and BOD levels designated for Class SW-IV waters (that is Harbour) at coastal water marine outfalls (CPCB 1998), which suggest a desired DO level of 3.0 mg/l or 40% saturation value (whichever is higher) and a BOD value of 5 mg/l for 3 days at 27°C (Annexure A). In GBC, the DO values near the Oil Jetty end were quite low with a mean value of 0.2 mg/l (Figure 5.32). At HT/LT connection point, the DO was found to vary between 2 mg/l and 5 mg/l. DO profiles of Pataikhali 1 and 2 were in close agreement with a mean DO of about 4 mg/l. The DO levels in the river conformed to the desired

Environmental Quality Assessment

125

Figure 5.32 Model result: DO at three locations in GBC

SW-IV standards for most of the times, except a few occasions during neap tidal conditions. The BOD levels near Oil Jetty were mostly above 19 mg/l, exceeding the standards by almost 400%. This end behaved as a stagnant pond because of negligible tidal mixing and higher depth, which is evident from both DO and BOD profiles. The BOD at HT/LT connection varied between 2 mg/l and 6 mg/l, but the location did not conform to standard values as BOD was found to exceed 5 mg/l, a number of times. The model-predicted BOD in the river near Pataikhali 1 and 2 ( Divan, S and A. Rosencranz. 2001. Environmental Law and Policy in India: Cases, Material and Statutes, 2nd edition. New Delhi: Oxford University Press Donnelly, A., B. D. Clayton, and R. Hughes. 1998. A Directory of Impact Assessment Guidelines, 2nd edition, pp. 7–14. London: International Institute for Environment and Development DRTH (Department of Road Transport and Highways). 2006. Vehicle Emission Norms. New Delhi: Department of Road Transport and Highways, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, Government of India. Details available at Dubey, S. K. 2001. Assimilative capacity of ambient air of Satna with respect to respiratory particulate matter. M.Tech Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, India Ebisemiju, F. S. 1993. Environmental impact assessment: making it work in developing countries. Journal of Environmental Management 38: 247–273 Edelvang, K., H. Kaas, A. C. Erichsen, D. Alvarez-Berastegui, K. Bundgaard, and P. V. Jørgensen. 2005. Numerical modelling of phytoplankton biomass in coastal waters. Journal of Marine Systems 57: 13–29 El-Fadl, K. and M. El-Fadel. 2004. Comparative assessment of EIA systems in MENA countries: challenges and prospects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 24 (6): 553–593 Glasson, J. 1995. Life after the decision: the importance of monitoring in EIA. Built Environment 20(4): 309–320 Glasson, J. and N. N. B. Salvador. 2000. EIA in Brazil: a procedure-practice gap. A comparative study with reference to the EU and especially UK. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 20: 191–225 Glasson, J., R. Therivel, and A. Chadwick. 1994. Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment: Principle and Procedures, Process, Practice and Prospects. London: UCL Press Glasson, J., R. Therivel, and A. Chadwick. 2005. An Introduction to Environmental Impact Assessment, 3rd edition. London: Routledge

References

189

Gole, C. V. and P. P. Vaidyaraman. 1966. Salinity distribution and effect of fresh water flows in the River Hooghly. Proceedings of the 10th Congress of Coastal Engineering, Tokyo, 2, 1412–1434 Government of Orissa. 2006. Environmental Management Plan for Bhubaneshwar. Bhubaneshwar, Orissa: Department of Forest and Environment. Details available at Goyal, S. K. and C. V. C. Rao. 2007. Air assimilative capacity-based environment friendly sitting of new industries—a case study of Kochi region. Journal of Environmental Management 84 (4): 473–483 Goyal, P. and T. V. B. P. S. Rama Krishna. 2002. Dispersion of pollutants in convective low wind: a case study of Delhi. Atmospheric Environment 36: 2071–2079 Gross, E. 1970. The National Air Pollution Potential Forecast Program, ESSA Technical Memorandum WBTM NMC; 47. Washington, DC: National Meteorological Center, Weather Bureau, Environmental Science Services Administration, United State Department of Commerce Hanna, S. R., B. A. Egan, J. Purdum, and J. Waglet. 2001. Evaluation of the ADMS, AERMOD, and ISC3 dispersion models with the OPTEX, Duke Forest, Kincaid, Indianapolis and Lovett field datasets. International Journal of Environment and Pollution 16: 301–314 Himesh, S., C. V. C. Rao, and A. U. Mahajan. 2000. Calibration and validation of water quality model (Case 2 Estuary): Technical Report CM 0002. Bangalore, India: CSIR Centre for Mathematical Modelling and Computer Simulation Bangalore, India HLCL (Hind Lever Chemicals Ltd). 1978. Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment. Haldia, West Bengal: Hind Lever Chemicals Ltd (now TATA Chemicals Ltd) HPL (Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd). 2004. Comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment for Petrochemical Complex (520 KTA Ethylene). Haldia, West Bengal: Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd IMD (India Meteorological Department). 2003. Meteorological Data—Wind Direction, Wind Speed, Temperature, Relative Humidity, Rainfall and Cloud Cover. Kolkata: India Meteorological Department INE (Instituto Nacional de Ecología). 2006. Mission and Aim of The National Institute of Ecology. Mexico: National Institute of Ecology (Instituto Nacional de Ecología). Details available at INECE (International Conference on Environmental Compliance and Enforcement). 1998. Citizen enforcement: tools for effective participation, capacity building support document for environmental compliance and enforcement programs. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Environmental Compliance and Enforcement,

190 References Monterey, International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement. Details available at IPTEHR (Indian People’s Tribunal on Environment and Human Rights). 1999. Who bears the cost: industrialization and toxic pollution in the ‘golden corridor’ of Gujarat. Details available at Jay, S., C. Jones, P. Slinn, and C. Wood. 2007. Environmental impact assessment: retrospect and prospect. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 27: 287–300 Jorgensen, S. E. 1994. Fundamentals of Ecological Modeling, 2nd Edition. Developments in Environmental Modelling—19. Amsterdam: Elsevier Joseph, K. 1998. Monograph on Environmental Impact Assessment in India. Chennai: Environmental Information System, Centre for Environmental Studies, Anna University Jungers, B., T. Kear, D. Eisinger, and D. Niemeier. 2006. A survey of air quality dispersion models for project level conformity analysis. UC Davis-Caltrans Air Quality Project, Task Order no. 44., Department of Civil and Environment Engineering, University of California. Details available at Kakonge, K. O. 1998. EIA and good governance: issues and lessons from Africa. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 18: 289–305 Kansal, A. 2007. Valuation of health benefits of World Bank guidelines for air emissions in thermal power plant, PhD Thesis.. New Delhi: Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, India Khan, F. I. and S. A. Abbasi. 2000. Attenuation of gaseous pollutant by greenbelts. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 64: 457–475 Khan, F. I. and S. A. Abbasi. 2001. Effective design of greenbelts using mathematical models. Journal of Hazardous Material B81: 33–65 Kirchhoff, D. 2006. Capacity building for EIA in Brazil: preliminary considerations and problems to be overcome. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 8 (1): 1–18 Leelakrishnan, P. 2002. Environmental Law in India. New Delhi: Butterworths India Lo, C. W., S. Tang, and S. Chan. 1997. The political economy of EIA in Guangzhou. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 17: 371–382 Lohani, B., J. W. Evans, H. Ludwig, R. R. Evritt, R. A. Carpenter, and S. L. Tu. 1997. Environmental Impact Assessment for Developing Countries in Asia, Volume I: Overview. Manila: Asian Development Bank

References

191

Manju, N., N. Balakrishnan, and N. Mani. 2002. Assimilative capacity and pollutant dispersion studies for the industrial zone of Manali. Atmospheric Environment 36: 3461–3471 Mao, W. and P. Hills. 2002. Impacts of the economic–political reform on environmental impact assessment implementation in China. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 20: 101–111 Marshall, R., J. Arts, and A. Morrison-Saunders. 2005. International Principles for best practice EIA follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 23(3): 175–181 Maza, C. L. 2001. NEPA’s influence in developing countries: the Chilean case. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 21: 169–179 McCallum, D. R. 1985. Planned follow-up, a basis for acting on EIAs. Paper Presented at Annual Conference, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 27–28 June McCallum, D. R. 1987. Follow-up to environmental impact assessment: learning from Canadian Government experience. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 8 (3): 199–215 MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 1989a. The Environment (Protection) Act Notification—Regarding Doon Valley (Uttar Pradesh), S.O.102 (E). New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 1989b. The Environment (Protection) Act Notification—Regarding Murud Janjira (Maharashtra), S.O.20 (E). New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 1991a. The Environment (Protection) Act Notification—Regarding Dhanu Taluka (Maharashtra), S.O. 416 (E). New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 1991b. The Environment (Protection) Act Notification—Coastal Zone Regulations, S.O. 114 (E). New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 1992. The Environment (Protection) Act Notification—Regarding Aravalli Ranges, S.O. 319 (E). New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 1994. The Environment Impact Assessment Notification, S.O.60 (E). New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 1997. The Environment (Protection) Act Notification—Regarding Thermal Power Plant (Delegation of Power), S.O.319 (E). New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India

192 References MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 2000–2004. Descriptive Reports on Status of Compliance to Conditions of Environmental Clearance for Various Units. Bhubaneswar: Regional Office, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 2001a. The Environment (Protection) Act Notification—Regarding Mahabaleshwar Panchgani (Maharastra), S.O. 52 (E). New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 2001b. Environmental Impact Assessment: a Manual. New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Details available at MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 2003a. Draft Report on Formulation of Revised Environmental Clearance Process—Phased Implementation: Environment Management Capacity Building Project—EIA Component. New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Details available at

MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 2003b. Brochure on Items of Work Handled in Various Divisions and Sections of Ministry. New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Details available at MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). 2004. The Environment (Protection) Act Notification—Regarding New Towns and Industrial Estates, S.O. 801 (E). New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Details available at

MoEF. 2006. The Environment Impact Assessment Notification, S.O. 1533. New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Details available at

MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). Several Years. Environmental Clearance Conditions for Various Units. New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forests). Undated. Carrying Capacity Study of Teesta Basin in Sikkim, Air Environment, Volume-V. New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Prepared by Centre for Atmospheric Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Morrison-Saunders, A. and J. Arts (eds). 2004. Assessing Impact—Handbook of EIA And SEA Follow-Up. London: Earth Scan Morrison-Saunders, A., J. Arts, P. Caldwell, and J. Baker. 2001a. EIA follow-up: outcomes and improvement discussion paper. Presented at IAIA ‘01 Impact Assessment in the Urban Context Conference, Cartagena, Colombia, 27 May–2 June

References

193

Morrison-Saunders, A., J. Arts, J. Baker, and P. Caldwell. 2001b. Role and stakes in environmental impact assessment follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 19 (4): 289—296 Morrison-Saunders, A., J. Baker, and J. Arts. 2003. Lessons from practice: towards successful follow-up. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 21: 43–56 MSPI (Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation). 2001. Consumption of some important commodities in India 1999–2000. National Sample Survey 55th Round. New Delhi: Department of Statistics, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India Nair, A. and K. C. Sahu. 1999. When wealth is not health: analysis. Down to Earth, January 31, 32–50 Neuman, W. L. 1997. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, 3rd edition, pp. 272–279. Boston: Allyn and Bacon NIOT (National Institute of Ocean Technology). 2004. Further Study (Phase II) for Formulation and Design of Alternate River Regulatory Measure Schemes. Chennai: National Institute of Ocean Technology NYSDEC (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation). 1990. Civil Penalty Policy: The Commissioner Policy, Environmental Enforcement. New York: Compliance Assurance Bureau, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Details available at Ortega-Rubio, A., C. A. Salinas-Zavala, D. Lluch-Cota, and E. Troyo-Diéguez. 2001. A new method to determine the level of the environmental impact assessment studies in Mexico. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 21: 73–81 Ortolano, L. and A. Shepherd. 1995. Environmental impact assessment: challenges and opportunities. Impact Assessment 13: 3–30 Ott, W. R and G. C. Thons. 1976. Oak ridge air quality index: air pollution indices. A compendium and assessment of indices used in the United States and Canada Ann Arbor Science pp. 43–46. Palerm, J. and C. Aceves. 2004. Environmental impact assessment in Mexico: an analysis from a ‘consolidating democracy’. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 22 (2): 99–108 Paliwal, R. 2006. EIA practice in India and its evaluation using SWOT analysis. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 26: 492–510 Pasquill, F. 1961. The estimation of dispersion of windborne material. Meteorological Magazine 90 (1063): 33–49

194 References QCI (Quality Council of India). 2007. Criteria for Registration of EIA Consultant Organizations. New Delhi: Quality Council of India. Details available at Rajaram, T. and A. Das. 2006. Need for participatory and sustainable principles in India’s EIA system: lessons from the Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 24 (2): 115–126 Rama Krishna, T. V. B. P. S., M. K. Reddy, R. C. Reddy, and R. N. Singh. 2004. Assimilative capacity and dispersion of pollutants due to industrial sources in Visakhapatnam bowl area. Atmospheric Environment 28: 6775–6787 Rama Krishna, T. V. B. P. S., M. K. Reddy, R. C. Reddy, and R. N. Singh. 2005. Impact of an industrial complex on the ambient air quality: case study using a dispersion model. Atmospheric Environment 39 (29): 5395–5407 Rao, C. V. C. 1997. Environmental impact assessment state-of-art. Tech Monitor 14 (3): 40–49 Rao, P. S., A. G. Gavane, S. S. Ankam, M. F. Ansari, V. I. Pandit, and P. Nema. 2004. Performance evaluation of a green belt in a petroleum refinery: a case study. Ecological Engineering 23: 77–84 Reddy, M. S. and C. Venkataraman. 2002. Inventory of aerosol and sulphur dioxide emissions from India: I—Fossil fuel combustion. Atmospheric Environment 36: 677–697 Reddy, M. K., K. G. Rama Rao, and R. Rao. 2004. Air quality status of Visakhapatnam (India)—indices basis. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 95 (1–3): 1–12 Riffat, R. and D. Khan. 2006. A review and evaluation of environmental impact assessment process in Pakistan. Journal of Applied Sciences in Environmental Sanitation 1: 17–29 Sadler, B. 1988. The evaluation of assessment: post-EIS research and process development. In Environmental Impact Assessment: Theory and Practice, edited by P. Wathern, pp. 129–142. London: Onwin-Hyman Sadler, B. 2004. On evaluating the success of EIA and SEA. In Assessing ImpactHandbook of EIA and SEA Follow-up, A. Morrison-Saunders and J. Arts, pp. 248–286. London: Earth Scan Sadhuram, Y., V. V. Sharma, T. V. Ramana Murthy, and B. P. Rao. 2005. Seasonal variability of physico-chemical characteristics of the Haldia channel of the Hoogly estuary, India. Journal of Earth System Science 114 (1): 37–49 SAPL (South Asian Petrochemicals Ltd). 1999. Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment. Haldia, West Bengal: South Asian Petrochemicals Ltd

References

195

Sax, T. and V. Isakov. 2003. A case study for assessing uncertainty in local-scale regulatory air quality modeling applications. Atmospheric Environment 37: 3481– 3489 SEMARNAT. 2000. General Law of Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection (Reglamento de la Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y la Protección al Ambiente). Mexico: Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales). Details available at SEMARNAT. 2002. Environmental Policy Background. Mexico: Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales). Details available at Siegle, E, D. A. Huntley, and M. A. Davidson. 2002. Modelling water surface topography at a complex inlet system—Teignmouth, UK. Journal of Coastal Research 36: 675–685 Sinclair, A. J. and A. P. Diduck. 2000. Public involvement in environmental impact assessment: a case study of hydro development in Kullu district, Himachal Pradesh, India. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 18 (1): 63–75 Sivacoumar, R., A. D. Bhanarkar, S. K. Goyal, S. K. Gadkari, and A. L. Aggarwal. 2001. Air pollution modeling for an industrial complex and model performance evaluation. Environmental Pollution 111: 471–477 Spreij, M. 2005. National Aquaculture Legislation Overview—Mexico. Rome: Inland Water Resources and Aquaculture Service (FIRI), Food and Agriculture Organisation. Details available at Stackpole, J. D. 1967. The air pollution potential forecast program Suitland, Maryland. Technical Memorandum No. 43. Washington, DC: National Meteorological Center, Weather Bureau, Environmental Science Services Administration, United State Department of Commerce Storey, K. and B. Noble. 2005. Socio-economic effects monitoring: towards improvements informed by bio-physical effects monitoring. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 23: 210–214 Sutton, R. 1999. The policy process: an overview. Working Paper 118. London: Overseas Development Institute Tartar, L. 2006. An Introduction to Navier–Stokes Equation and Oceanography, Volume 1. Berlin: Springer

196 References Temam, R. 2001. Navier—Stokes Equations—Theory and Numerical Analysis. American Mathematical Society: Chelsea Publishing S TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute). 1998. Looking Back to Think Ahead: Green India 2047, pp. 189–253. New Delhi: The Energy and Resources Institute TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute). 2002. TA Cluster for Environmental Management at the State Level (Component A: Promotion and Assessment of Environmentally Sound Projects), India (Volume I), TA No. 3423-IND. New Delhi: The Energy and Resources Institute, Submitted to Asian Development Bank TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute). 2005. Preparation of area-wide environmental quality management plan for Haldia. Project Report No. 2004EE23. New Delhi: The Energy and Resources Institute Thomann, R. V. and J. A. Mueller. 1987. Principles of Surface Water Quality Modelling and Control. New York: Harper and Row Thomas, J. W. and M. S. Grindle. 1990. After the decision: implementing policy reforms in developing countries. World Development 18 (8): 1163–1181 Tomlinson, P. and S. F. Atkinson. 1987a. Environmental audits: a literature review. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 8: 239–261 Tomlinson, P. and S. F. Atkinson. 1987b. Environmental audits: proposed terminology. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 8: 187–198 Turner, D. B. 1994. Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimation: An Introduction to Dispersion Modeling, 2nd edition. Boca Raton: Lewis Publication Tzoumis, K. and L. Finegold. 2000. Looking at the quality of draft environmental impact statements over time in the United States: Having ratings improved? Environmental Impact Assessment Review 20: 557–578 UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 1997. Corruption and good governance. Discussion Paper 3. New York: Management Development and Governance Division, Bureau for Policy and Programme Support, United Nations Development Programme. Details available at Upadhyay, S. and V. Upadhyay. 2002. Handbook on Environmental Law: Environmental Protection, Land and Energy Laws, Volume 3, pp. 44, 45, 64–77. New Delhi: Butterworth India USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1995. User’s Guide for the Industrial Source Complex (ISC3) Dispersion, Models (Volumes I, II and III). Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: United States Environmental Protection Agency USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2003. AERMOD: Latest Features and Evaluation Results, EPA-454/R-03-003. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: United States Environmental Protection Agency

References

197

USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2004. User’s Guide for the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model AERMOD. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: United States Environmental Protection Agency USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2005. Guideline on Air Quality Models (revised), CFR 51, Appendix W. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina: United States Environmental Protection Agency. Details available at

USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2006a. Compliance and Enforcement: Civil, Cleanup, and Criminal Enforcement Programs. Washington, DC: United States Environmental Protection Agency. Details available at USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2006b. AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I, Chapter 13: Miscellaneous Sources. Washington, DC: United States Environmental Protection Agency. Details available at Valappil, M., D. Devuyst, and L. Hens. 1994. Evaluation of the environmental impact assessment procedure in India. Impact Assessment 12: 75–88 VROM. 1994. Environmental Management Act. The Netherlands: Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM). Details available at Wang, Y., R. K. Morgan, and M. Cashmore. 2003. Environmental impact assessment of projects in the People’s Republic of China: new law, old problems. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 23: 543–579 Wansem, M. V. and D. B. Smith. 1995. Strengthening EIA Capacity in Asia: Environmental Impact Assessment in the Philippines, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka. Washington, DC: World Resource Institute Warren, I. R. and H. K. Bach. 1992. MIKE21: A modelling system for estuaries, coastal waters and seas. Environmental Software 7: 229–240 Wathern, P. 1988. An introductory guide to EIA. In Environmental Impact Assessment: Theory and Practice, edited by P. Wathern, pp. 1–28. London: Onwin-Hyman WBPCB (West Bengal Pollution Control Board). 2000–2004a. Inspections Reports on Status of Compliance for Various Units. Haldia: Regional Office, West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Government of West Bengal WBPCB (West Bengal Pollution Control Board). 2000–2004b. Monitoring Reports on Environmental Conditions for Various Units. Haldia: Regional Office, West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Government of West Bengal

198 References WBPCB (West Bengal Pollution Control Board). 2003. Unpublished. River water quality monitoring records for Roopnarayan and Hooghly. Carried out under Monitoring of Indian National Aquatic Resources (MINARS) initiatives of Central Pollution Control Board. Haldia: Regional Office, West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Government of West Bengal WBPCB (West Bengal Pollution Control Board). 2003–2005. Meteorological Data—Wind Direction, Wind Speed, Temperature, Relative Humidity and Solar Radiance. Haldia: West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Government of West Bengal WBPCB (West Bengal Pollution Control Board). 2006. Environmental News: Regulatory Actions against Various Units. Kolkata: West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Government of West Bengal. Details available at WBPCB (West Bengal Pollution Control Board). Several Years. No Objection Certificates to Establish/Operate. Kolkata: West Bengal Pollution Control Board, Government of West Bengal Weber, R. P. 1990. Basic Content Analysis, 2nd edition. London: Sage University Weigend, T. 1994. The System of Administrative and Penal Sanctions in the Member States of the European Communities—Report for the Federal Republic of Germany. Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, European Commission WHO (World Health Organization). 1982. Rapid assessment of sources of air, water and land pollution. Offset Publication No. 62. Geneva: World Health Organization Wood, C. and C. Linden. 1999. An evaluation of the Hong Kong environmental impact assessment system. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 17 (1): 21–31 Wood, C. M., B. Dipper, and C. Jones. 2000. Auditing the assessments of the environmental impacts of planning projects. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 43 (1): 23–47 Wood, C. 1995. Environmental Impact Assessment: A Comparative Review. Harlow: Longman Wood, M. and R. Macrory. 2003. Environmental Civil Penalties: A More Proportionate Response to Regulatory Breach. London: Centre for Law and the Environment, Faculty of Laws, University College London. Details available at Wool, T. A., R. B. Ambrose, J. L. Martin, and E. A. Comer. Undated. Water Quality Analysis Simulation Program (WASP), Version 6.0, DRAFT: User’s Manual. Atlanta, GA: United State Environmental Protection Agency—Region 4

References

199

World Bank. 1997. Urban air quality management strategy in Asia: Greater Mumbai report (URBAIR). Technical Paper No. 381, edited by J. J. Shah and T. Nagpal. Washington, DC: World Bank World Bank. 1999a. India—Review of the Effectiveness of EA in World Bank Assisted Projects (1990–97). Washington, DC: Environment Sector Management Unit, South Asia Region, World Bank. Details available at World Bank. 1999b. Environmental management plans. World Bank Update No. 25. Washington, DC: World Bank. Details available at

Index

A Air (Prevention and Control Pollution) Act 1981 135 air pollution potential 66 air quality assessment 92 monitoring network 127–128 status 66 atmospheric dispersion modelling system (ADMS) 92 B Bathymetry of Haldia 115 biodiversity 1 Brazilian National Environmental Policy 14 Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) 23 C Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) 19, 60 air quality monitoring 60, 61 Chief Conservator of Forests 80 Council of Environmental Quality 9 D Department of Environment and Heritage 122 Diamond Harbour 115

E eco-lab 116, 122 economic development 1 economic gains 1 economic growth 1 environmental impact assessment (EIA ) 1, 2, 9, 31 alternatives study of 2 impact identification 2 impact prediction 2 review 4 auditing 50 committees 3 communication 52 cost 2 decision making 1, 4 environmental damages 2 environmental impacts 5 implementation 5 stipulation 5 environmental management 1 evaluation 50, 52 follow-up 4 appraisal 58 concept 51 methodology 51

202 Index principles 52, 53 significance 51 guidelines 2 Haldia 31 climate 97 follow-up costs 81, 82 SWOT analysis 28 analysis 28–29 impacts 11 practice 9 process 2, 3, 9 impact prediction 2 in Brazil 9, 15 Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (CONSEMA) 14, Brazilian National Environmental Policy 14 licenses 14, 15 Ministry of the Environment National Council of Environment (CONAM) 14 State Agency for Environment 14 State Secretariat 14 Water Resources and Legal Amazon 14 in India 4, 17 activities 49 administrative framework 18 Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, 19 analysis 22 Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) 19 decision making 24 Department of Environment (DoE) 17, 20 Department of Science and Technology (DST) 17

documentation 23 environment clearance (EC) 49 Environment Management Plan 23 Environmental Appraisal Committee (EAC) 19 evaluation 25 follow-up 49, 50 Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 Govindarajan Committee Report 18 impact assessment 18 impact mitigation 23 impact prediction 23 National Committee on Environmental Planning and Coordination (NCEPC) 17 National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA) 18 Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000 18 notification, 21, 22 policy implementation 49 polluting activities 18 procedural framework 21 process in India 21 project engineering 23, 25 public consultation 23 review 24 Risk Assessment Report and Disaster Management Plan 23 role of 19 scoping 22 screening 22 State Pollution Control Board 18, 20 statutory framework 17 statutory framework 17 The Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules 1989 18

Index Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974 18 in Mexico 9, 15 Environment and Natural Resources 16, National Ecology Institute 16 Environmental Protection Law 1982 15 Federal and Natural Ecology 16 Federal Environmental Protection Agency 15 General Law of Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection 15 Natural Resources and Fisheries 16 Secretariat of Ecology and Urban Development (SEDUE) 15 Secretary of Social Development 15 in the Netherlands 5, 10, 12 Environment Management Act 10 Environment Protection (General) Act 10 environmental impact statement 10, process in 12 Ministry of Housing Spatial Planning and the Environment 10 Terms of Reference (TOR) 10 in People’s Republic of China 9, 13 environmental impact report (EIR) 13, 14 environmental protection 13 Environmental Protection Law 12 for air 13 for noise 13 for water 13 improvement of process 13 internal environment management process 14

203

process in 13 Provincial and Municipal Environmental Protection Bureaux (EPBs) 13, 15 State Environmental Protection Administration 13 in USA 9, 11, 19 environmental impact statement 10 finding of no signification impact (FONSI) 10 Notification of Intent (NOI) 10 legislative 2 levels, federal 2, state 2, municipal 2 location 2 management 52 Ministry of Environmental and Forests (MoEF) 4, mitigation 2, 3 monitoring 50, 52, 58 post-decision 2 post-decision analysis 50 post-project monitoring 53 practice 18 practice 9, pre-decision 2 process in 16, public participation 3 reporting 3, activities 2 scoping 2 scoping 2 screening 2 size 2 success of 2 surveillance 50 system in various countries, comparison of 26–28 TORs 53

204 Index under NEPA 2 emission BOD 91, COD 92 limits 5 O&G 90 SO2, 88, 89 SPM 87, 88 TSS 91 enforcement mechanism 131 Air (Prevention and Control Pollution) Act 1981 135 in Haldia 136 in India, 135 National Environment Tribunal Act 1995 135 post-project monitoring 131, 132 Public Liability Insurance Act 1991 135 Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 135 environment 1 appraisal 5 role 5 responsibilities 5 enforcement 5 monitoring 5, assessment air 7 water 7, clearance 4 clearance conditions 55 conditions 57 impact report (EIR) 13, 14 impact statement (EIS) 3, 10, 11, 12 impacts 1, 5 Management Act 1984 10, 11 management cell 65

pollution 1 degradation 1, Protection (General) Act 10 protection 1 court judgements 137–138 IOCL case 138 penalties imposed 142, 143, 145 proceedings observation 140 TCL case 139 quality assessment 83 Environmental Protection Act (EPA) 1986 4 activities 4 constraints 4 decision making 4 emission limits 5 environmental impacts 5 impacts 4, screening 4 implementation 4 implementation 5 industries 4 infrastructure projects 4 interactive process 5 mining 4 modification (of 1994) 4 nuclear power plants 4 quantitative 4 regional offices 4 river valley projects 4 scoping 4 stipulation 5 success 5 thermal power plants 4 tools, qualitative 4 Environmental Protection Law 1982 12, 15 regulations by MoEF 56

Index evaluation, aspects 63, 66, inefficiencies 75, F Forest (Conservation) Act 1970 80 G Green Belt Canal (GBC) 46, 90 air quality monitoring 60, 61, 113 biochemical oxygen demand 89 BOD 120, 125, 126, 141 chemical oxygen demand 89 discharges 117 dissolved oxygen 123, 124 effluent treatment plant 89 total suspended solids 89 ground-level concentrations 102 H Haldia 31, 32 climate 7, 34, 35, 66, 97 educational institutes 38 environmental clearance 31 environmental impact assessment 31 fauna 38, 39 flora 38 Green Belt Canal (GBC) 46, 71, 72, 73, 74, 89 ground water usage 47 Haldia Development Authority (HDA) 32 Haldia Municipal Area (HMA) 32, 97 health facilities 38, 39 hydrogeology 36, 37 industrial development 42, 43, 44–45 industrial estate 31 land use 33, 34 population 33 population growth 33

205

pre-water quality status 69, 70, 71 rivers, Hoogly, Roopnarayan, Haldi 31, seasons 34 sewage system 40 soil 36, 37 soil characteristics 35 traffic 42 transport 40, 41 waste water discharge 48 water demand 47 water supply system 40 West Bengal Pollution Control Board 31 wind 98 health hazards 1 I index of agreement (IOA) 101 industrial negligence 75 industrial source complex short term 3 (ISCST) 93 industrialization 1 infrastructure development 1 L liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) bottling plant 57 M management and enforcement aspects 76 communication aspects 79 inadequacies 78 interaction among 79 MoEF 76 regulatory agencies WBPCB 77 Ministry of Environmental and Forests (MoEF) 4 action plan 6

206 Index cause-effect 6 environment 6 notification 4 protection 6 Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment 10 monitoring network effectiveness 124 monitoring, of Indian National Aquatic Resources 60 air quality 61 inefficiencies 61 sources 62 N National Ecology Institute (NIE) 16 National Environment Tribunal Act 1995 135 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 1969 1 decision making 1 environmental impacts 2 National Environmental Protection Act 1969 (NEPA) 9 normalised mean square error (NMSE) 101, 102 nuclear power plants 4, impact on environment 4 P policymakers 1 pollution control 5 curbing 2 load 83 air 1, 84 air emission from industries 84 air emission from domestic activities 85

air emission from vehicles 85, 85 fuel emission 85 land 1 post-project monitoring (PPM ) 4, 7, 147 framework 54 follow-up 6 Provincial and Municipal Environmental Protection Bureaux (EPBs) 13 Public Liability Insurance Act 1991 135 R Rio Conference (1992) 2 river valley projects 4 impact on environment 4 S Silent River Valley Hydroelectric Project 17 State Environmental Protection Administration 13 supermarket 99 suspended particulate matter 103, 104, 105 pre monsoon 105, post monsoon 105 sustainability 1 project development 1 sustainable development 1 T Terms of Reference (TOR) 10 64 The Stockholm Conference (1972) 2 thermal power plants 4 impact on environment 4 tidal elevation Raichak 118, at Frasier U United States Environmental Protection Agency (USPEA) 9, 93, 132, 133 civil administrative enforcement 132 civil judicial enforcement 132

Index clean-up enforcement 132 criminal enforcement 132 environmental laws 132 federal contracts 132 penalties 133–135 urbanization 1 V ventilation coefficient 67, 68 W Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 135

207

water quality assessment 108 monitoring network 128–129 status 69 West Bengal Industrial Development Council 99 West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPSB) 31, 75 monitoring 59, 61, 62 wind profile 99

About the Authors

Ritu Paliwal is Senior Environmental Consultant in AECOM. She has a Masters in environmental management and a PhD in environmental policy from TERI University. Dr Paliwal has a rich experience of several years in research institutions, consultancy, and industry in multitude of disciplines. Having extensively worked on various administrative, statutory, and procedural aspects of environmental regulations, Dr Paliwal has developed good understanding on institutional strengthening and capacity building needs in India. In addition, environmental modelling (air and water) and industrial pollution control are other key areas of interest to her. She has a number of publications in peer-reviewed journals. Leena Srivastava is currently the Vice Chancellor of the TERI University in addition to being the Hony. Executive Director (Operations) at TERI, New Delhi. She has a Masters in Economics from the University of Hyderabad and a PhD in Energy Economics from the Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore. Dr Srivastava is on the editorial boards of various international journals dealing with energy and environment issues, and has a number of publications to her credit. In 2008, the Prime Minister of the Republic of France awarded Dr Srivastava with the Knight of the Order of Academic Palms (Chevalier dans l’Ordre des Palmes Academiques). She has also received a Certificate of Recognition from Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh, and the IPCC for her contribution to the work of IPCC. She is the first recipient of Richard von Weizsacker Fellowship of the Robert Bosch Stiftung 2012.

Ritu Paliwal $ Leena Srivastava Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is crucial for protecting the environment, especially in a country like India—with its dense and rapidly growing population, shrinking land mass, and an economy poised for rapid growth. In order to make EIA an interactive process, it is necessary that it is supported by a strong follow-up mechanism. A properly formulated follow-up process would not only encourage compliance but also increase awareness among the stakeholders. Policy Intervention Analysis: environmental impact assessment evaluates the adequacy of post project monitoring (PPM) process in India and its effective implementation with a focus on the industrial sector. The book investigates the reasons for poor compliance and gives corrective measures for corrective PPM. It identifies specific measures to improve environmental conditions and provides an action plan that will help strengthen the monitoring and enforcement mechanism based on specific regional concerns.

POLICY INTERVENTION ANALYSIS Environmental Impact Assessment Ritu Paliwal $ Leena Srivastava

The Energy and Resources Institute

The Energy and Resources Institute