NABET Secretariat A S S E S S R S O EIA Consultant Unaccredited EIA Consultants Stay Order CPCB Empanelled Experts QCI MOM Review of Decision NABET Executives New Applicants NABET Advisor The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET
Preface Today Indian economy is depending on the 'green laws' of the country and during the last 5 years it was evident in terms of GDP growth. However, the biggest challenges are ahead in front of the nation is 'unemployment' and developmental projects are inevitable for the country but not at the cost of ecology and environment. Many industrialists and even the government felt that Indian green laws are monotonous, time consuming and doesn't support for nations development. Plenty of developmental projects create enormous jobs for the country and today these projects were kept dust ridden at Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India racks. Yet, another contributing factor for the same was induction of accreditation system of EIA consultant organisation by NABET. MoEF had utterly failed in implementing the provisions of EIA Notification, 2006 and in order to hide the discrepancies made by MoEF, NABET was inducted to control over poor environmental consultants. MoEF didn't worry about to improve its own mechanism of EAC and SEACs. However, MoEF through NABET targeted consultants to bring the quality of EIA. It was fun that NABET being existed in the country to develop the quality aspects in various sectors is directly involving in collection of bribe and blatantly the scheme made by NABET is 'illogical, unscientific and biased'. NABET sheltered retired officials of MoEF and Public Sector Undertakings for assessments who are not even carry out single EIA studies in their life time. Various environmental experts, scientific community and including MoEF officials didn't ready to accept the scheme and sent various comments to MoEF to rule out draft gazette notification published by MoEF to made the scheme mandatory in the month of July 2013. Therefore, it is urgency and need of the hour and responsibility of the new government to wholesomely reject the irrational scheme enacted by UPA government and this document entitled 'The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET' is an 'eye opener' to MOEF and new government. Indian Environmental Consultant organisations are expecting ' achhe din aane waale hain'.
Date: 29.05.2014
The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET
Table of Contents
1 Introduction 1 2 Statistics of Accreditation 6 2.1 State wise list of organizations applied for accreditation and no. of organizations accredited by NABET 6 2.2 Status of Accreditation in India 7 2.3 Status of Accreditation in Northern states 7 2.4 Status of Accreditation in North-Eastern states 7 2.5 Status of Accreditation in Eastern states 8 2.6 Status of Accreditation in Southern states 8 2.7 Status of Accreditation in Central states 8 2.8 Status of Accreditation in Western states 9 3 Why to Cancel NABET? 10 3.1 When there is a system for appraisal of EIA reports by EAC at MoEF, why we need another scheme? 10 3.2 Monopoly of NABET 11 3.3 Qualification and experience of Assessors and Committee Members 12 3.4 Creation of Unemployment 14 3.5 Fees prescribed are exorbitant 15 3.6 How two assessors of different background assess all 12 functional area experts? 16 3.7 Lack of transparency in assessment 16 3.8 Conflict of Interest and no need for NABET, under present composition of SEACs/ EACs & NABET committees 22 3.9 Latest judgment of NGT affirming that the O.M. has no legal sanctity 26 3.10 Helping each other attitude between subordinate officers / Directors and the Senior Bureaucrats at MoEF 27 3.11 Blatantly ignoring of Court Orders by NABET & MOEF 27 3.12 Incompetent operation of NABET/ QCI 28 3.13 Other irrational issues in NABET scheme 28 4 Constructive Suggestions 37 5 Conclusion 39 The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 1
Chapter 1. Introduction
In order to improve the quality of Environment Impact Assessment reports prepared under EIA, Notification, 2006 and its subsequent amendments, Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) introduced 'Scheme for Accreditation of EI A Consultant Organizations' through National Accreditation Board for Education & Training (NABET), Quality Council of India in December 2009 (Annexure - 1). The basis of the introduction of the scheme is not available with MOEF since MOEF has not conducted any study on faulty EIAs nor has any statistics to prove the assumption that EIAs are faulty. Several RTIs have been filed over the last years to obtain this information, but to no avail. Without understanding the factual positions on ground and competence of NABET, MoEF made the scheme compulsory in a short span of time and the result is evident today that the entire scheme is described as 'biased, unscientific, illegal and illogical'. Plenty of EIA consultant organizations have been rejected by giving false and unethical justifications in the last 3 years and NABET assessors and ineligible secretariat is directly involving in making the decisions for the country and created a havoc. Various environmental professional and young graduates are directly thrown out to street and huge amount of unemployment exists in the environmental sector and the youngsters find its difficulty to sustain in the sector. As a result, NABET and its assessors sheltered under the umbrella of MoEF for causing social injustice to the country which is legally unjustifiable. Various consultant organizations in the country questioned the said scheme and its aberration in various High Courts and obtained stay order for the entire scheme. Due to the immense pressure of assessors and NABET secretariat, MoEF published the draft gazette stating the scheme is mandatory by inviting public comments. However, most of the environmental experts in the country sent their apprehensions to MoEF stating the entire scheme was developed to create jobs for retired bureaucrats, MoEF officials, officials from PSUs, etc and the leadership for the entire scheme was set out by ex-secretary of MoEF. During his tenure at MoEF, he initiated the scheme, went on to retire from MOEF and join QCI as Chairman of the accreditation committee and is now the Chairman, QCI. The bureaucratic nexus between IAS officers makes it impossible for succeeding Secretaries of MOEF to break the stronghold of QCI on MOEF. Off course, in the name of the improving quality of EIA, certain white elephants were benefited directly at NABET secretariat and indirectly as assessors. The situation has deteriorated in such a way that, MoEF doesn't have any control on the NABET and it is evident from their minutes of meeting published in their website. At the outset it may be pointed out that the issuance of the draft notification permitting only those environment consultant organizations who are accredited by QCI or NABET for a particular sector or area is impermissible as the said issue of the excessive delegation of power by the MOEF to QCI/NABET is sub judice before various High Courts of the country. It is relevant to take note that The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 2
various High Courts have stayed the operation of the office memorandums and subsequent Scheme issued by QCI / NABET, therefore, the present act of MOEF in issuing the draft notification dated 19.07.2013 to incorporate the provision of ratifying the role of QCI / NABET while under challenge before various courts, amounts to interference in the administration of justice which is impermissible. It appears that MOEF vide the draft notification is endeavoring to cover its previous illegalities and irregularities committed in order to give legal sanctity to QCI / NABET, which at present is acting in contravention of the provisions of the Environment Protection Act 1986 (herein after referred to as the Act). It is pertinent to state that the action on part of MOEF in delegating its rulemaking power to QCI/NABET is excessive and in direct contravention of the provisions of the Act and all action taken by QCI/ NABET is a complete nullity and without jurisdiction, therefore, the issuance of the draft notification is nothing but an afterthought. The legislature has been provided with vide powers of delegation however it is subject to the limitation that it cannot delegate uncontrolled powers. The Honble Supreme Court has in a catena of judgments, laid down that the legislature may, after laying down the legislative policy, confer discretionary or administrative powers to work out details within the framework of the legislative policy. For the purpose of protecting and improving the quality of the environment and preventing controlling and abating environmental pollution, MOEF ought to have some basis to conclude that in absence of recognized consultant the quality of environment is suffering. Furthermore, it is also pertinent to mention Accreditation is not the guarantee that EIA report prepared by Accredited consultants will compulsorily be cleared by various Appraisal Committees, hence the purpose of accreditation is questionable. What is relevant to understand here, whether, over the past 4 years, since the illegal delegation of powers by MOEF to QCI/ NABET, has the quality of EIA Reports improved? The whole objective of EIA notification 2006 was to make the Environment Clearance procedure quicker and faster compare to earlier notification. The current status is all projects irrespective of size or sector or location or cost or environment impacts are getting delayed beyond any reasonable time. The objective itself is getting defeated. The proposed amendment will make the things worse and getting EC will become a task rather than creating a project. This will not be good for the country as well as for the health of already sick economy. With existing consultants- accredited or non- accredited projects are not getting approval in reasonable time period. After the proposed amendment, very few consultants will be in the field to prepare EIA and EMP ultimately resulting in paralyzing the EC system. Over a period of time, it will come to stand still. In view of this, it is not advisable to introduce a scheme which will result in only delay in environment clearance. The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 3
It is said that by bringing the accreditation scheme, quality of EIA and EMP report will improve. We agree that there has to be continual improvement in consultants reports, but we do not agree with the scheme by which it has been assumed that quality will improve. The Ministry should come out with quantitative data indicating the difference between EIA reports prepared by accredited and non accredited consultants. The accreditation scheme was introduced in the year 2009 and now you should have complete set of data regarding quality of EIA/EMP reports prepared by various organizations. In the absence of such data, it is unrealistic to bring the notification and make the accreditation compulsory. The scheme itself has no mechanism for self-improvement and NABET has passed the onus of training consultants to NGOs like CSE (representative of whom is also member of NABET committee), who themselves have never prepared an EIA report. The incompetency of CSE is evident from their comments available in their own website on EIAs which was awarded environmental clearance. The Ministry of Environment and Forests of Government of India issued an Office Memorandum dated 2nd December 2009 making it mandatory for all EIA Consultants to have the accreditation from NABET/QCI. As per the said memorandum an EIA / EMP Report prepared by non-accredited EIA Consultants will not be entertained after 30th June 2010. There were several Office Memorandums issued thereafter. All the OMs and the scheme of accreditation has been challenged before various high courts of the country being Gujarat, Karnataka, Delhi, Odisha, Rajasthan, Punjab & Haryana, West Bengal etc, vide Writ Petition No. SCA 10311 OF 2012, SCA 4979 of 2012, SCA 4974 of 2012, SCA 1782 of 2013, SCA 9679 of 2013, SCA 9680 of 2013 [Gujarat], SB Civil WP No. 3471 of 2013 [Rajasthan], WP 4651(W) of 2013, WP 13896 (W) of 2013 [Kolkata], WP (C) 12639/2012 [Orissa], CWP 10832 of 2012 (O&M) [Punjab & Haryana] and WP 1530-1531/2012 (GM-RES) [Bengaluru]. MOEF is well aware that the Honble High Courts across the country have not only issued notice but also granted stay in the said Writ Petition. It appears that the MOEF to nullify these orders, has issued the proposed draft notification. This seems to be vindictive in nature and biased mind for bringing the accreditation scheme. The right course should have been calling the Association of Environment Consultants as well as aggrieved parties who approached to high court and discuss the issue and at least try to understand the view points of the consultants. The Constitution of India has provided freedom to professionally qualified people to practice in the area of their expertise. People with qualification of M.B.B.S. are allowed to practice without any accreditation. Similarly citizens with law degree are doing practice in courts. The chartered accountants, company secretaries, architects, structural engineers and several other equally important professions have no such scheme of accreditation. The professions are managed by simple registration with respective professional bodies. It is difficult to understand why the MOEF is bent upon bringing such notification to take away the fundamental right of environment consultants. It would have been The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 4
well appreciated if MOEF could support in creating legal identity of Environment Consultants organization and in turn the association can provide registration of environment consultants or firms. The association can take care of professional ethics and improving quality of EIA/EMP reports. Without prejudice to our previous contentions, it is pointed out, in the absence of any checks and balances by MOEF against QCI, the entire scheme formulated by QCI/NABET is ill conceived with only target to earn money by NABET and its associated people- so called assessor and committee members. The assessor and committee members are all retired bureaucrats and/or academics. Hardly anybody is having real consultancy exposure- leave apart experience. It has now become a money making racket where the QCI/NABET deliberately does not carry out its due diligence at the relevant stages, leading to unfair rejections of the applications. It will not be wrong to say that QCI/NABET has turned out to be Environmental Mafia. The draft Gazette Notification by MoEF (S.O. 2204(E)) was published on 19.07.2013 and more than 10 months have passed and so far the final notification has not come. As learnt from MoEF, the validity of any draft Gazette Notification is for 6 months only and within which if the final notification is to be published or else the draft Gazette Notification become null and void. Therefore, in effect MoEF understood the gravity of the situation and dropped the idea of issuance of Gazette Notification. This is a welcome sign on the part of MoEF. Numerous applications have been rejected on frivolous grounds or after the final stage of office assessment on account of incomplete documents that ought to have been pointed out at earlier Stages I or II by QCI. This is done only after money in the form of fees is extracted from the consultant organizations. This practice is strongly opposed. The MOEF has formed various committees for different sectors and invited experts from a range of fields to evaluate EIA/EMP reports before granting Environment Clearance. In other words, it has out sourced the experienced man power for appraisal of reports. It is good and appreciable step. But in NABET scheme more emphasis is on in- house full time people rather than out sourcing to academically qualified and experienced people for different categories. This is vital and biggest issue of opposition of the scheme. The collusion and manipulation on account of the Scheme is writ at large in as much as it is incomprehensible as to how members of the SEAC / SEIAA / EACs are also members of Accreditation / Surveillance/ Assessment Committees of the QCI/NABET and furthermore, officials retiring from MOEF / CPCB are immediately joining QCI/ NABET in various capacities. Another instance of glaring contradiction is the difference in qualifications prescribed by the scheme for an EIA coordinator and statutory qualifications prescribed for being a member of the SEAC/ SEIAA:- The qualification prescribed for becoming EIA coordinator, the scheme requires Bachelors degree in engineering or masters degree in science with minimum seven years The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 5
experience whereas as regards the qualification and experience for becoming member of state level expert committee requirements for appraisal of EIA report- it is mentioned in EIA notification of 2006. The requirement is bachelors degree in engineering or masters degree in science with minimum four years experience. It means more experienced person with minimum seven years will get his/her EIA report appraised by less experienced person. It is for the MOEF to respond whether such stark contradiction can be permitted and whether the qualifications prescribed in the Scheme can override the qualifications statutorily prescribed by MOEF. An issue of sectarian expert is non-digestible. An environment expert can predict impacts based on specific environment issues involve in particular project. One cannot distinguish cement industry environment expert/ power industry environment expert/fertilizer industry environment expert and so on. There could be more exposure of specific sector for some individuals. But it does not mean that person cannot perform in other sectors. The environment consultant or firm could be expert in environment and related regulatory issues. The NABET requirement of exposure and EIA preparation of that sector is illogical. It is also worth mentioning that 2 assessors visit and conduct interview for all ECs and FAEs, which is impermissible. It is very hard to comprehend that how can 2 people are said to be experts on all sectors and functional areas for which a firm has applied. Any accreditation scheme in any sector is an optional scheme where one applies for accreditation in order to establish its quality for better market standing. Under the present Scheme, instead of enabling consultant organizations and potential clients, works more like a licensing scheme. The consultant who has not been granted license (accreditation) cannot work at all. It is difficult to understand the logic behind such scheme. Thus there are fundamental objections against the scheme. We welcome streamlining of environment consultancy services, but not in the manner prescribed by NABET/QCI. In this reference, it is worth mentioning scheme of recognition of environment auditor implemented by Gujarat Pollution Control Board at the behest of Hon. Gujarat High Court vide order dated 20/12/1996. The scheme is working nicely and with effective monitoring of GPCB, it has helped industries and statutory authorities for improvement of environment. We are not writing here to dilute the purpose of the scheme but we are here to show case how the scheme is unscientific and benefiting certain section of people in the country. The entire scheme was not formulated through grass root approach and is best example on how the top-down approach in the country fails to address the concerns of the common man. Evidences are crystal clear from last 5 years on how the scheme fall down in the country and at the end we are come out with a alternative solution to the problem of improving the quality of EIA reports prepared by the consultants. The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 6
Chapter 2. Statistics of Accreditation
2.1. State wise list of organizations applied for accreditation and no. of organizations accredited by NABET Table - 1 List of accredited organizations in the country Sl.No Name of the State No. of Applications filed No. of Accredited Organizations 1 Andra Pradesh 25 19 2 Arunachal Pradesh - - 3 Assam 3 2 4 Bihar 1 1 5 Chhattisgarh 4 1 6 Goa 2 1 7 Gujarat 34 20 8 Haryana 25 19 9 Himachal Pradesh 1 1 10 Jammu and Kashmir 3 1 11 Jharkhand 6 6 12 Karnataka 21 7 13 Kerala 3 3 14 Madya Pradesh 5 2 15 Maharashtra 48 27 16 Manipur - - 17 Meghalaya - - 18 Mizoram - - 19 Nagaland - - 20 Orissa 15 6 21 Punjab 3 - 22 Rajasthan 15 7 23 Sikkim - - 24 Tamil Nadu 30 10 25 Tripura - - 26 Uttaranchal 6 1 27 Uttar Pradesh 11 5 28 West Bengal 21 9 29 Delhi 49 20 30 Lakshadeep - - 31 Pondicherry - - 32 Andaman and Nicobar Islands - - 33 Chandigarh - - 34 Dadar and Nagar Haveli - - 35 Daman and Diu - - Source: NABET website, statistics as on 13.05.2014
The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 7
2.2. Status of Accreditation in India
2.3. Status of Accreditation in Northern states
2.4. Status of Accreditation in North-Eastern states
The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 8
2.5. Status of Accreditation in Eastern states
2.6. Status of Accreditation in Southern states
2.7. Status of Accreditation in Central states
The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 9
2.8. Status of Accreditation in Western states
It is prudent to mention here that the accreditations are misleading in their numbers. Of the total consultants in the accreditation list, only 28 organizations are completely accredited while the balance are provisionally accredited. The provisional accreditation is granted for a three months period during which the applicant organization has to fulfill the deficits identified in the audit, for grant of complete accreditation. It is important to note, that a provisionally accredited organisation remains in the provisionally accredited for not just more than three months but even years. Therefore, what is the sanctity of this system? In fact, it is a mockery. Furthermore, how can any organization operate with a the provisional accreditation sword hanging on their necks, never knowing when the arbitrariness of NABET can eliminate them from the accreditation system overnight. The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 10
Chapter 3. Why to cancel NABET?
3.1 When there is a system for appraisal of EIA reports by EAC at MoEF, why we need another scheme? As per EIA Notification, 2006 and its subsequent amendments, EAC at MoEF and SEAC and SEIAA at state level exists for review of EIA reports supported by various technical staff. However, when there is a crystal clear guidelines for choosing EAC/SEAC members in the notification and their duty is to review the reports prepared by the consultants and of necessary cross verify the authenticity by conducting site inspections. NABET during the surveillance assessment or during the re-accreditation of the accredited consultant organization, reviews the EIA reports submitted by the consultant organization to them (though it is not a mandate given by MoEF). The observations (shortcomings) of the EIA report by NABET are published in their website. You may please note that, by the time NABET reviews the EIA report, the project (for which EIA study was conducted by the consultant organization) might have been already accorded Environmental Clearance by MoEF (or the concerned SEIAA of the State) months ago and substantial investment has already been made in the project. A typical case giving NABET observations & its repercussions is quoted below:- Proceedings at MOEF Project EIA of Exploration, Testing of wells and Commercial Exploration of Mannargudi CBM Block, MG-CBM-2008/IV, in District Thiruvarur & Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu by M/s Great Eastern Energy Corporation Ltd. (GEECL) Consultant M/s Kadam Environmental Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara, Gujarat. Date of issuance of Environmental Clearance by MoEF 12/09/2012 Date of publishing of observations of the consultant organization by NABET 04/10/2013
NABET Observations on the said EIA report during the re-accreditation (NABET RA MOM dated 04.10.2014). a. In identification of impacts, significance aspects not discussed. b. Reliance on secondary sources are dominating; primary data collection is low. The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 11
c. For drilling rigs, major mitigation measures are at the time of construction phase and not during operation phase; legal issues are not adequately addressed. Implications (i) A NGO or an environmentalist can file a case at NGT/Supreme Court stating that the Environmental Clearance issued by MoEF / SEIAA did not look at the observations made by NABET, a body approved and constituted by MoEF for improving the quality of EIA. MoEF / SEIAA along with the project proponent can be dragged to the Court by the action of a body created by MoEF. (ii) Currently, the practice of extortion of money by the vested groups from the project proponent at different parts of the county for trivial matters are rampant. They will use the observations published by NABET as a tool for extortion of money from the project proponent since it is easily and readily available to them on a platter i.e. platter of NABETs website. (iii) Why Shri. B. Sen Gupta (Former Member Secretary, CPCB) is currently member of EAC, Industrial Committee, MoEF and Member of NABET Committee didn't look at the above observations while granting Environmental Clearance at MoEF for the said project and why is allowed to publish the above observations in NABET website? It is unclear. The same person plays some role at EAC and some other role at NABET. 3.2 Monopoly of NABET Still the unanswered mystery was - why MoEF choose NABET? Why can't other organizations in India for the accreditation purposes? The answers for the above questions are simple and below; 1. Former Secretary of MoEF currently with NABET made conspicuous lobby with MoEF officials on behalf of NABET to get control on environmental issues in the country and his vested interests are crystal clear that they need power even after the retirement and creating parallel MoEF in the name of NABET. 2. Look at the profile of NABET secretariat committee members and assessors. They have all enjoyed as members, chairman at EAC and other various committees at MoEF after the enactment of EIA Notification, 2006. And now there were no further opportunities at MoEF for any other committees and hence they sheltered under NABET for doing wrong things. 3. Hence, it is clear that, QCI and NABET employed retired officials of MoEF and made lobby with MoEF to obtain this scheme.
The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 12
3.3 Qualification and experience of Assessors and Committee Members The education qualification and experience matters for any assessment. As per the scheme, requires 12 functional area experts. However, NABET itself doesnt have qualified staff to assess all 12 functional area experts. Most of the staff at NABET are ISO 9001:2008 QMS assessors and very few are having practical essence of doing EIA studies. Whereas in the case of assessors, it was shocking that, they do not even conducted single EIA studies during their tenure become the assessors. Table - 2 Qualification and experience of NABET secretariat staff and assessors Sl.No Name Qualification Total years of experience (Years) 1. NABET Secretariat 1 Mr. Vipin Sahni B. Sc. MBA 24 2 Mr. A. K.Ghose B.Sc. Engg. M.Sc Engg. 40 3 Dr. Hari Prakash M.Sc. & Ph.D Agriculture M.Sc. Ecology & Env. PGDCBM 19 years 4 Mr. Abhay sharma BSc (H) Botany M.Sc. Env. Management 3 5 Ms. Jyoti Dadhiya BSc. Geography M.A Geography Masters in Env. Planning 1 6 Ms. Sakshi Bhargava B.Sc. Applied Life Sci (Env. Sci) 1 7 Ms. Preeti Pawaria B.Sc. General M.Sc. Environmental science 1 2. NABET Assessors 1 Dr. A.K.A. Rathi B.E. chemical 38 2 Dr. H.C. Sharatchandra M.Sc Agriculture D.Lit 37 3 Dr. H.K Parwana M.Sc Chemistry Ph.D Chem 27 4 Dr. L. Ramakrishnan M.Sc Analytical Chem. Ph.D Molecular Str PGD EE Ph.D Env. Management 34 5 Dr. U.C Mishra M.Sc Physics Ph.D Physics 53 years 7 Mr. Balaram Basu B.E Civil M.Tech PHE 36 8 Mr. K.B. Deb B.E Chemical M.Tech Chemical 40 9 Mr. N.K. Kuttiappan M.Sc Applied Chem. M.Tech Env Sci & Engg. 30 The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 13
10 Mr. Niranjan Bagchi B.E Metallurgical M.S(Engg), Metallurgical MS Env Toxicology 40 11 Mr.R.P.Sharma B.E Chem M.Tech Plant & Equipment 38 13 Mr. S. Bhowmik MSc Soil Microbiology Ph. D Soil Microbiology 28 14 Mr. T. Venugopal B.E civil M.Tech PHE 27 15 Mr. Tapan Chakravarty B.E Metallurgy Post Graduate Diploma in Environment and Ecology 42 16 Mr. V.S.S Bhaskara Murthy B.Tech Chemical M.Tech Petroleum Ref. Engg 34 17 Mr. Y.S.Murty B.E Civil M.Sc PHE M.S (Civil) 51 For example, Dr. H K Parwana, Former Chief Scientific Officer of Punjab PCB qualified as post graduate in Chemistry and did research work in chemistry become an assessor. She didn't even carry out single EIA in her life time and how can she know about EIA studies and assess all 12 functional area especially like Ecology and socio-economics. Another example, Dr. HC Sharathchandra, M.Sc and PhD in agriculture became the assessor on what grounds? He has immense teaching knowledge at agricultural universities and over night he become the chairman of the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board during Janata Dal government since he was cousin of Shri. HD Devegowda, Former Prime Minister of this country. After he become the Chairman of the PCB in 2008, he started turning pages with respect to EIA Notification, Water Act and Air Acts. If a candidate of such caliber becomes the assessor how can we expect justice from NABET for all the functional area experts. One more interesting examples was, RP Sharma, AK Gupta, Balram Basu, YS Murty, etc are graduated as Environmental Engineers and worked as Environmental Engineer in various public sector undertakings like NTPC, etc. During their tenure they have entrusted the work of obtaining clearances for their PSUs through separate consultants and claimed in front of NABET and consultant organizations that they have conducted various EIAs. Further, they don't even know what is the difference between A and B category projects become the assessors and rejected various experts in the country. It's sad !!!!!!!!!!!! For instance, for most of the organizations, the assessors have rejected / blindly accepted Ecology and Biodiversity and socio-economic studies / experts due to the lack understanding in the similar field. They don't even know what is the spelling of 'Asclepiadaceae' in taxonomy and they have The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 14
assessed and rejected various subject experts in the field since last 5 years. Don't you think it is a total nuisance, unscientific and illogical. 3.4 Creation of Unemployment The scheme only requires and approve only experienced professionals. Hence, all the environmental consultancy organizations didn't recruit fresh graduates in the environmental sector. Therefore the problem of unemployment is aggravating day by day. There is no scope in the system for a fresher to serve as an individual or free lancer. They have the option for an associate FAE (a concept which was added after much protests and is not reflected in the initial schemes) and are forced to qualify by working for minimum three years experience before they can have their own identity. Freshers are not being hired by EIA consultant organizations as they do not have any experience. No consultant wants to hire an associate FAE as they are not counted towards the accreditation process. Those who enter the EIA field are not paid salaries at par with their colleagues who went into research or into industry. This way, they will be forced out of the EIA stream. The intelligent students are getting better jobs and are joining at higher salaries where they have recognition and respect. If this continues, only the weaker or below average students will enter the EIA line and instead of having better quality reports, the quality of reports will decline. In a country, which is already suffering from slow growth, instead of encouraging the capable youngsters to participate in national building, such notifications from MOEF are obstructing their growth. All architects can register themselves with their association and start a practice. All CAs can register themselves with their governing institution and start practice. Hence, why has MOEF not started such a registration system, which will be welcome by students? There no provision is there for allowing long serving BSc and bachelor graduates to be brought in the mainstream. Now, at the age of 40+ years, are they supposed to go and obtain a Masters degree? There are large no. of very experience environmental consulting individuals (with businesses) who have not been given accreditation and neither will they be given accreditation until and unless they leave their current jobs and join an accredited firm. When there is severe dearth of qualified manpower that the same people who are in EAC/SEAC and in employment in various agencies are serving on NABET assessment committees, then how the actual working population are being denied the option of retaining original employment and providing services to other firms through MOUs with each other? Many consultancy firms are small and cannot afford to have such large number of compulsory experts as required by scheme. Some sectors such as construction, do not even require so many experts. There is no scope for collaboration between companies for resource sharing. The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 15
3.5 Fees prescribed are exorbitant QCI and NABET established with an objective of providing services to improve the quality of EIA studies and it is believed to be nonprofit organization. However, following statistics reveal that NABET with respect to EIA scheme made huge profits every year and it is running like any other corporate company in India. Hence, NABET is in profit of about 1,04,40,000/- since last 5 years. In the name of quality, a nonprofit organization is making huge profits. What is this? It is also prudent to bring to highlight that it has become a common practice for NABET to direct organization to re-apply on the basis of a one year old audit, which contained non- conformities (Ex- M/s Kalyani Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneshwar). Their intent is to generate more revenue through re-application & desk assessment fee. How does an organisation become qualified for accreditation after re-application within two months time, when it was not considered eligible to continue accreditation earlier ? These are tactics of NABET to harass and generate revenue. Sl.No Particulars Amount in Rs. 1. Amount prescribed by NABET for consultant Organizations a Up to 5 sectors or not exceeding 10 experts 30,000/- b 6-10 sectors or not exceeding 15 experts 40,000/- c 11-15 sectors or not exceeding 20-25 experts 50,000/- d >15 sectors or >25 experts 60,000/- e Hotel Accommodation, travelling and fees for assessors should be actual and borne by consultant organization - 2. Assumptions considered for calculation a Assuming 365 organizations applied for Initial Assessment i.e 365 x 40,000/- per organization 1,46,00,000/- b Assuming 167 organizations underwent Surveillance Assessment and further start with Re-accreditation i.e 167 x 40,000/- per organization x 3 years 2,00,40,000/- c Total net income collected by NABET sine last 5 years (A) 3,46,40,000/- d Salaries for NABET secretariat per month 4,00,000/- per month x 12 x 5 years 1,92,00,000/- e Other expenses 10,00,000/- per year x 5 years 50,00,000/- Total Expenses in last 5 years (B) 2,42,00,000/- Total income = Net income - net expenses (A- B) 1,04,40,000/- The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 16
3.6 How two assessors of different background assess all 12 functional area experts? Shockingly, as we discussed in the previous sections regarding the qualification of assessors, 2 assessors of different back ground will assess all 12 functional area experts. Most of the assessors do come prepared with the set of questions and checklist for assessing the experts. However, they are not interviewing the expert with the broader scope of subject area and knowledge. For instance, in one of the organization assessor asked to tell the family name of the particular plant / animal which doesn't belong to his geographical location for a EB expert. There are more than 15000 species of plants recorded in India and it is common sense that how can an expert remember all family names of the plants belongs to India. At the broader context he will be identified the plants with the help of local guides / manual, etc based on the geographical context and experience. Another instance for a young professional who is inducted first time under scheme was asked what does section 3 of subsection 2 says with respect to Water Act? Can you imagine the height of nuisance? If we ask the same question to a lawyer, can you imagine his status and as per the NABET assessors he must be knowing all sections of the acts, rules and guidelines enacted in India. Is it practically correct? 3.7 Lack of transparency in assessment The office assessment is entirely a biased system where an NABET advisor wish to help particular organization he will be attending that assessment. For plenty of organizations most of the NBAET committee members are known to them and they have hand in gloves with the consultants. NABET secretariat have already decided to close certain organizations and for those organizations, irrespective of proven experience they have rejected the accreditation. In fact, any consultant who dares to complain against them to MOEF gets targeted and NABET makes sure that the consultancy firm & their associates either does not get accreditation or gets demoted from category A to category B. Another example of this is M/s Min Mec Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi were not only were rejected on self-assumed grounds without seeking clarification but also barred from reapplication for one year, which even the High Court of Delhi has declared as illegal. NABET has gone out of its way to sabotage the credibility of Min Mec, who has been practicing in the field of Environmental Impact Assessment since 1986, since the advent of Environment (Protection) Act. The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 17
It is important to bring to attention here that organization which were not accredited earlier and approached High Courts for relief, when they go for accreditation, they not only get accreditation in multiple sectors but are also made to withdraw their case prior to grant of accreditation. The most recent of this kind of organization is M/s Vardan Environet, Gurgaon in addition to several other across the country. Another example is Pushpin Shah, Envisafe Environmental Consultants, Ahmedabad (sr. no. 61 of QCI directory linked with MoEF website). He got stay order against all office memoranda of MoEF, New Delhi related with NABET/QCI scheme along with other consultants in Gujarat on Jan. 24, 2013. He got QCI accreditation for 9 sectors in category 'B'. He asked the advocate to remove his name from the case. NABET has different set of rules for different applicants. In cases, where there are adverse comments from National Green Tribunal on the inferior quality of the report and how it has been detrimental to the project, NABET has taken no credible action against such organizations. There are so many instances of controversial reports by accredited consultants as follows, mostly in NGT, the list by no means complete : M/s VI MTA Labs, Hyderabad in multiple projects: Niyamgiri project, Vendanta Mines is found faulty by Green Court 2640 MW Thermal Power Plant at Sompeta of Nagarjuna Construction Company. EC cancelled on 15.06.2010 based faulty EIA. On 23.05.2012, NGT has clearly stated All the aforesaid errors and inadequacies could have been avoided by EIA consultant, but then it appears that there was a callous attitude which created unnecessary hurdles in appreciation of the report. Further, it appears that EIA report did not contain the findings of the special studies carried out by the various agencies at the time of Public Consultation. As the EIA Report is the key on which the EIA process revolves, it is important that EIA report prepared should be scientific and trustworthy and without any mistakes or ambiguity. MoEF may ensure that the quality of the EIA report remains fool proof and any consultants whose EIA reports are not found satisfactory, should be blacklisted. The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 18
Chettinad Power for its 1200 MW TPP- environmental clearance granted was challenged before the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in the Appeal No. 12 of 2011. The Honble National Green Tribunal in its judgment dated 30.05.2012 had directed the Ministry to appraise the project based on updated EIA report both on terrestrial and marine ecology and also based on objections / suggestions received (if any) on the aforesaid updated reports. The Honble Tribunal had also suspended the environmental clearance until the appraisal mentioned above is carried out and the Ministry takes a decision. M/s WAPCOS Limited, which is a provisionally accredited consultant as per the latest list, is allowed to carry out EIAs for river valley and hydroelectric projects. Two of the most controversial EIAs that this consultant has prepared relate to the Teesta III hydroelectric project in Sikkim and the Athirapilly project in the state of Kerala, wherein EIA was also proved to be inadequate by the High Court of Kerala. Further, the organisation has submitted an another EIA report at Karnataka for Sonthi Lift Irrigation Scheme for Public Hearing, wherein they have not collected the baseline data for 3 seasons and within 15 days report have been prepared and submitted to KSPCB for public hearing. In between the report, various other project areas were also evident. M/s Agricultural Finance Corporation Ltd (AFCL), which is also on the provisional list. AFCL had prepared the EIA for the Tipaimukh Hydro-Electric Project in Manipur. When the EIA was being considered by the MoEF's Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) in 2006-2007, the latter had detected several discrepancies M/s M. N. Dastur & Company (P) Ltd., Kolkata involved in the controversial POSCO project in Odisha M/s EMTRC Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Currently involved in Jindals Super Thermal Power Station at Tamnar, Chhattisgarh challenged in NGT The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 19
M/s Scania Steel & Power Ltd. - on 9.02.2012 the NGT has set aside the EC and commented It appears that the EIA Consultant has taken it in a very casual way and Steps should also be taken for black listing Consultants found to have reported cooked data or wrong data and for producing sub-standard EIA/EMP report. M/s Global Enviro Labs involved in Vedanta Aluminum Limited's Lanjigarh alumina refinery. M/s Bhagvati Ana Labs Limited involved in the Pirna Iron Ore Mine of Sesa Goa whose EC was cancelled in September 2011 for suppressing information and faulty environment impact assessment. They received accreditation in June 2010 and surveillance committee discussed case in June 2012 and their accreditation is continued till date. There is no evidence of even investigation on the matter by QCI or BALs reapplication Tiroda Iron Ore Mine at Tiroda village, Sawantwadi Taluk, Sindhudurg District of Maharashtra State of M/s Gogte Minerals. NGT on 12.09.2011 has ruled EIA report which was prepared at the behest of project proponent, does not disclose proper and sufficient facts and information. ........ Though the Public Hearing was conducted mostly in accordance with the procedure, the various objections raised in the Public Hearing, as reflected in the Public Hearing minutes placed on record were not properly evaluated and addressed in the EIA report. M/s B S Envi-Tech (P) Ltd, Hyderabad involved in Bhavanapadu Thermal Power Plant of East Coast Energy Pvt. Ltd, in Srikakulam District of Andhra Pradesh Dheeru powergens Katghora power plant EC rejected on misleading information about location in critically polluted area M/s Envirotech East Pvt. Ltd. M/s South Asian Petrochem, an EIA was made for PET resin manufacturing plant at Haldia, an area under moratorium, a fact which would not have escaped The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 20
the EIA consultant and yet no action has been initiated against them. The EC was cancelled after issuance Proposed organic synthetic plant in Bishnupur for M/s GTZ (India) Pvt. Ltd., a sector for which the consultant does not have accreditation Detox Corporation Pvt. Ltd. involved 300 MW thermal power plant project of the OPG Power Gujarat Limited in the ecologically and socially fragile inter-tidal area of Kutch coast in Gujarat. M/s SGS I ndia Pvt. Ltd. - 1000 MW Coal Based Thermal Power Plant at Naraj Marthapur, Cuttack, Orissa of The Tata Power Company Ltd. (NGT application 79/2012) M/s ABC Environ Solutions renamed as ABC Techno Labs Pvt Ltd. - EC cancelled vide NGT order dated 24.02.2011 for 1400 TPD Integrated Municiapl Solid Waste Processing plant, Pallikarani village, Tamilnadu due to suppression of information by consultant and project proponent Unistar Environment & Research Labs Pvt. Ltd. Involved in a Specialty Alumina Chemical manufacturing unit at village Reladi in Taluka Bhuj, District Kutch. NGT noted Consultants should gather some primary material with respect to the socio- economic data in the Project area and do carry out some preliminary survey to understand the basic needs of the people in the Project area so that appropriate environmental management plan is formulated. In the instant case, nothing of this sort appears to have been conducted. Thereafter NGT directed The Project Proponent shall engage environmental consultant based on ToR approved by SEIAA for conducting primary socio-economic survey in the area of influence wherein special attention shall be paid to cover details of progressive farmers and their cultivation practices. L & T Ramboll Consulting Engineers Limited. - Directions from NGT/ NEAA to revise and improve EIA to IL&FS Tamilnadu Power. The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 21
NEERI for the proposed 3X660 MW expansion of coal based thermal power unit at Koradi Thermal Power Project in Nagpur district of Maharashtra. On 20.09.2011 deficiencies were pointed out by NGT It is brought to your attention that in the ongoing NGT case of Cement plant in Bhavnagar of M/s Nirma, after the High Court of Gujarat has decided in favour of the Cement plant, their EIA consultant M/s Min Mec Consultancy Pvt. Ltd. had been denied accreditation and banned for one year from reapplication (against the law of the land), yet in none of the other equally or more serious offences (some repeat) by the above mentioned consultants any credible action is evident by MOEF/ QCI/ NABET. Apparently, there exists a nexus between favorite consultants and QCI/ NABET. Preference to organisation of relatives of assessor and accreditation/ surveillance committee members. An example is the case of M/s Kadam Environmental Consultants, Gujarat, which has got accreditation in an unusually large number of sectors- 23. Another classic case is Envirotech East Pvt. Ltd. which is belongs to the relative of Dr. B Sengupta and has accreditation in sectors. So much so that in the case of violations by them explained earlier have been apparently ignored. During a meeting between the Environmental Consultants Association representatives and Mr Rajagopalan, Secretary, MOEF, it was understood from the Secretary that MOEF was also interested in limiting the number of practicing consultants. It appears that Secretary, MOEF is in nexus with NABET, perhaps with his own agenda post-retirement. Most of the accredited consultants do not have facility of accredited laboratory and the consultants having MOEF/ NABL accredited labs are not accredited. Some companies which were not even 6 months old at time of accreditation have been accredited while companies preparing EIAs since last 20 years were not granted accreditation. There has to be something fundamentally irrational in the accreditation system for this kind of occurrences The National Institutes like NEERI are not fully accredited. Very important institutes like National Institute of Oceanography, NIOT, CRRI, BNHS, Colleges with infrastructure & departments, GMRICS, SWRE, have been denied accreditation by The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 22
NABET. If the specialized institutes are not accredited to specialized studies, ex- marine EIAs by Consultancy wing of NIO, Mumbai then who will do? No consultant is accredited in the field of Nuclear power. Still nuclear plant reports are being prepared, public hearing is being held and clearances are happening. In the interest of the nation, the accreditation requirement is being by-passed. The same benefit should be extended to all sectors. GDP is at all time low, industrialization is required and accreditation process is slowing it down. 3.8 Conflict of Interest and no need for NABET, under present composition of SEACs/ EACs & NABET committees NABET has appointed following members who were employee of MOEF or members of Expert Appraisal Committee of Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India as their committee members thereby providing monitory benefits to them. 1. Sh. Pradipto Ghosh, IAS (former Secretary, MoEF) Regarding the bureaucrats, it is always said, when they are in service they dont do anything for the Country and for the Society. After retirement, they started repenting and stated correcting the system for no use of anybody and for the reasons best known to them. Typical example is the case of a retired bureaucrat, Shri Pradipto Ghosh, IAS, who is the so called chairman of the Accreditation Committee since the inception of the scheme. As all of you are aware that he was the Secretary, Ministry of Environment & Forests, during the period when Mr. A. Raja was the Minister for Environment & Forests. It was an open sale of Environmental Clearance happened during his time. It is in everybodys memory that so many NGOs and magazines like Down to Earth came out with articles Environmental Clearance for Sale. All these illegal activities in the name of environment happened under the nose of Shri Pradipto Ghosh, IAS at Paryavaran Bhawan. But no action or movement from anyone including Mr. Pradipto Ghosh, IAS, the then Secretary of MoEF. Now he stated repenting about the old days. As a matter of fact, it is observed from the published minutes of the Accreditation/ Surveillance / re-accreditation meetings, the presence of Mr. Pradipto Ghosh in the meetings at NABET are almost nil. The details are given below :- The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 23
RE-ACCREDITATION COMMITTEE MEETING Total meeting held as on 11-04-2014 = 18 Sr. No. Name of the Member Status 1 Dr. Prodi pto Ghosh, IAS, Ex-Secret ary, MoEF In all meeti ngs Absent
SURVEILLANCE ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Total meeting held as on 23-08-2013 = 63 Sr. No. Name of the Member Status 1 Dr. Prodi pto Ghosh In 57 meetings Absent In 6 meeting Present INITIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Total meeting held as on 27-03-2012 = 74 Sr. No. Name of the Member Status 1 Dr. Prodi pto Ghosh In 51 Absent In 23 Present Dr. Pradipto Ghosh, Ex-Secretary, MoEF, who is instrumental in initiating the scheme is not at all seen in the decision making process for more than one year. It was told that he has resigned from the accreditation committee of NABET due to the high corrupt practices prevailing in NABET. However, NABET is using his name for the reasons best known to them. Or else, his name may be kept in the pay role of NABET as a sleeping chairman and taking the monthly allowance from NABET for using his name and his blessings. It is a doubtful case of his continuity in NABET. This matter needs a detailed investigation. 2. Sh. Paritosh C. Tyagi former chai rman, C.P.C.B. (for 5 years) and 3. Dr. B. Sen Gupta former Member Secretary, C.P.C.B. (for 10 years) The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 24
Shri Paritosh C. Tyagi and Dr. B. Sen Gupta are members of the accreditation committee from the inception of the accreditation scheme. The great achievements of these two senior officers are noticeable. The condition of river Yamuna is known to all. Honbel Supreme Court in year 2004 declared it as a sewer and not as river. The geographical location of river Yamuna in Delhi territory is, it is flowing within 1 km. from the office of C.P.C.B. (Parivesh Bhawan) Both the above mentioned officers served the Country and river Yamuna in such a way so as to ensure that river Yamuna remain as a sewer. It is also a well known fact that Delhi is declared as the most polluted city in the world in terms of air quality by UN. Such a dubious distinction could be achieved by a rigorous and meticulous hard work of both the above officers with the support of officials from MoEF. Far reaching powers were available to all the three above mentioned senior officers under Environment Protection Act, 1986 and in the far end of their life they are doing service to the nation by introducing the accreditation scheme of EIA consultant so as to achieve the lost environmental glory of our country and which is a myth. 4. Bharat Bhushan former Director MoEF and currently member of SEAC-2, Maharashtra is and Member of Accreditation committee NABET after retirement. 5. Dr. Asha Rajvanshi currently Member EAC, Mining, MoEF is also Member of Accreditation committee of NABET 6. Prof B .B . Dhar former member EAC, Mining, MoEF is also Member of Accreditation committee of NABET 7. Dr. S . Devotta current Chairman SEAC-1, Maharashtra is also Member of Accreditation committee of NABET 8. Dr. C. K. Varshney current Member EAC, Nuclear, MOEF, former member, EAC Mining (upto 2012), MOEF; former member, EAC Thermal (upto 2009), MoEF is also Member of Accreditation committee of NABET 9. Shri Chandra Bhushan Director, CSE, NGO funded by MoEF also Member of Accreditation committee of NABET. It is essential to identify his date of joining since it The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 25
is prudent to highlight that the Down To Earth magazine published by his organisation had highlighted the adverse points of the NABET scheme. Is his inclusion by NABET a step to pacify CSE and restrict adverse publicity? CSE is conducting training programs for EIA/EMP is which the same experts who are in NABET are teaching. CSE itself has never been known to have prepared a single EIA/EMP report. His organisation is well aware of defaulting consultants as evidenced from the CSE website which analyses such faulty EIAs, yet there is no evidence of credible action by the committee of which he is a member. RE-ACCREDITATION COMMITTEE MEETING Total meeting held as on 11-04-2014 = 18 Sr. No. Name of the Member Status 1 Shri. Chandra Bhushan, Deput y Di rect or General, Centre for Sci ence & Envi ronment In all meeti ngs Absent SURVEILLANCE ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Total meeting held as on 23-08-2013 = 63 Sr. No. Name of the Member Status 1 Shri. Chandra Bhushan In 59 meetings Absent In 4 meetings Present INITIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MEETING Total meeting held as on 27-03-2012 = 74 Sr. No. Name of the Member Status 1 Shri. Chandra Bhushan In 52 Absent In 22 Present Sh. Chandra Bhushan, Deputy Director General, Centre for Science & Environment who is not seen in the decision making process for more than one year. However, NABET is using the name of a person from a reputed NGO for the reasons best known to them. Or else his name may be kept in the pay role as a sleeping member and The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 26
taking the monthly allowance from NABET for using his name and his blessings. This matter needs a detailed investigation. 10. K. P. Nyati current Member, Madhya Pradesh SEAC; former member Thermal EAC, MOEF is also Member of Accreditation committee of NABET There are two Technical Members who are/were Directors of Environmental consultancy organization. Again, it is not clear why they are there and who nominated them. On what basis were they chose? They are as under 1. Dr. C. R. Wate : Director, National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, Nagpur (NABET/QCI accredited EIA consultant organization) is also Technical Committee Member of NABET 2. P. K. Taneja : former Director of JM Envirotech Gurgaon and now his wife is Director of the consultancy organization (NABET/QCI accredited EIA consultant organization). Furthermore, NABET has not disclosed the list of its assessors on its website. Perhaps it is to avoid identification of misdeeds by the same. However, by virtue of our network we have come to know that Dr. A. K. A. Rathi is an assessor. He is also known to be conducting EIA training programs (Anchor Institute for Infrastructure Sector, Faculty of Planning and Public Policy, CEPT University) as well as relative of EIA coordinator in M/s Kadam Environmental Consultants, Gujarat, which has got accreditation in an unusually large number of sectors- 23. Mr. A. K. A. Rathi was earlier with government of Gujarat and as a government representative he was director in all CETP (Common Effluent Treatment Plant) projects of Gujarat. Lot of malpractices were done by most of the CETP projects of Gujarat and today very few CETPs (hardly 2 or 3) meet the discharge norms. 3.9 Latest judgment of NGT dt. 28-03-2014 affirming that the O.M. has no legal sanctity In the latest Judgment dt. 28-03-2014 by the Principal Bench of National Green Tribunal (NGT), New Delhi has ruled that Office Memorandum (O.M.) is an administrative order and cannot frustrate the Legislative Act. I n fact, it falls beyond the scope of administrative powers. The judgment is from the Principal Bench of NGT Delhi and The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 27
have all over India application. Therefore, apart from the Stay Orders from different Honble High Courts in the Country, the NGT Order extends the enforceability of Stay throughout the Country nullifying the effect of O.M. of MoEF. 3.10 Helping each other attitude between subordinate officers / Directors and the Senior Bureaucrats at MoEF As you all are aware that NABET is the post retirement rehabilitation center for the subordinate officers / Directors of MoEF and State Level Pollution Control Boards. During their services at MoEF, they support the accreditation scheme so as to favor NABET and ensure their berth after retirement. This aspect of nurturing the NABET scheme by Directors of MoEF is well known to the senior bureaucrats. In order to get bigger deals and assignments at the level of senior bureaucrats, they use the services of directors for issuing necessary O.M.s and desired notings in the files and make them as a scape goat. The directors will blindly obey the verbal instructions of senior bureaucrats for any matter in return of the favor the senior bureaucrats show to them in sustaining the NABET scheme. In other words, the senior bureaucrats give loly pops to directors and get big things done through them. A kind of reciprocal helping arrangement. 3.11 Blatantly ignoring of Court Orders by NABET & MOEF The High Court of Delhi vide its judgment dated 07.11.2013 in matter of WP(C) 3141, 7034, 103, 2765 & 3648 of 2013states It is further directed that an application submitted by an individual seeking empanelment even in his personal name, shall not be rejected on the ground that the applicant is an individual. NABET has neither challenge the directions of the court nor started the individual accreditation system. Having brought the matter to the High Courts attention by the petitioner, the High Court redirected compliance within 6 weeks which again NABET has not complied nor intends to comply. It is a serious contempt of the Court. It is also brought to attention that High Court of Rajasthan has stayed the accreditation scheme vide its order . Yet the scheme continues to operate in violation of the order. It is important to note that in the NGT order dated 28.03.2014 in application no. 343 & 279 of 2013 has stated that Office Memorandum is an administrative order and The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 28
cannot frustrate the legislative act. The MoEF, therefore, has dearly cost the livelihood of competent and sincere workers of this country to fulfill the vested interests of one retired bureaucrat. 3.12 Incompetent operation of NABET/ QCI NABET claims to be developing a system for the betterment of the country but in that process, it is crossing boundaries and trampling over the constitutional rights of people There is no Quality Management System such as ISO 9001 being followed by NABET. As a consequence they not just make mistakes but blunders. Due to one such blunder on not following procedure, M/s Environmental Research and Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. had to drag NABET to High Court of Odisha and were granted a favorable decision against NABET Where is the copy of the quality manual and quality assurance procedures of NABET? Till date they have not responded to a very crucial RTI which will reveal all their incompetency's Numerous applications have been rejected on frivolous grounds or after the final stage of office assessment on account of incomplete documents that ought to have been pointed out at earlier Stages I or II by QCI. This is done only after money in the form of fees is extracted from the consultant organizations. This practice is strongly opposed. Till 05.10.2013, their rejected list of consultant as well as accredited list of consultant, both showed the name of M/s Kalyani Laboratories. It is now that they have removed the name from rejected list Such an organisation which itself is inferior in the quality of their working should absolutely not be allowed any authority over other organizations 3.13 Other irrational issues in NABET scheme (a) The EIA Notification has given a Schedule of Industries on the basis of which EC requirement and categorization into A and B is there. The accreditation scheme by NABET has made their own Sectors, most of which are not in consonance with the The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 29
Notification, creating unnecessary confusion. Furthermore, an environmental consultant is specialized in environment and can take the aid of the industry specific technical expert, thus, should be accredited for all items/ industries/ sectors. (b) Consultant categorization into Category A & B- all consultants should be equally accredited. The categorization by EIA Notification is on the basis of production capacity, which does not diminish or increase the impact if the project is small or large. The knowledge requirement for both small and large project will be same. A category B project, falling within 10 km of the general conditions, becomes Category A and suddenly, due to that, a previously competent consultant is no more competent to prepare that report. By demarcating the consultants into Category A and B, is the NABET aiming at providing inferior quality reports to the SEACs? The EIA quality has to be same for both EAC, MOEF and SEACs of state so there should not be any A or B (c) Construction sector not requires to be treated in same manner since neither same number of experts are required for a construction project under B2 category nor an EIA firm is required. For years, project planners and architects have been defending the construction sector projects with the assistance of a free lance environmental consultant and MOEF/ NABL accredited laboratory. Thus, item 8(a) and 8(b), both require to be exempted from the necessity of an EIA consultant. A detailed note on the ridiculousness of the scheme is given in Annexure 2. (d) Corruption - Technical Advisor of NABET is the connecting link between assessors, committee members and consultant organizations to collect the bribe. He sits at NABET secretariat and choose assessors based on the bribe. Further, he himself attend many office assessments and selected various organizations with no infrastructure. Further, One of the assessor Dr. Sharat Chandra, Assessor had asked for a bribe during assessment from to one of the Consultancy Organization for providing accreditation.
The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 30
Kindly find below certain recent examples of similar kind; (e) As per NABET RA MoM dated 28/03/2014 for one of the organization, a person becomes 'A' category EIA coordinator for 5 sectors and 'A' category functional area expert for 3 areas. Can you believe this? (f) As per NABET SA MoM dated 02/04/2014 for one of the organization, a person have been approved as A category FAE for AP, WP and AQ and the same person is also approved as A category FAE for 'Socio-economics'. What does this mean? As per the information, technical advisor of NABET was attended for office assessment. Without bring it to the knowledge of other consultants regarding educational qualification, NABET approved the above expert for irrational functional areas. This is the best example where NABET is directly involving in collection of bribe. (g) As per the recent NABET MOMs, many EIA coordinators have been demoted even if they have not carried out any projects? How does the knowledge of an expert come down year to year? (h) For most of the organizations, assessors targeted the experts personally if they cross question. The scheme requires that for any organisation to get accreditation in a sector, say, Building & large construction projects including shopping malls, multiplexes, commercial complexes, housing estates, hospitals, institutions, the organization has to have an EIA coordinator (EC) from that sector and 12 types of function area experts (FAEs) as follows: 1. Land Use 2. Air Pollution Monitoring, prevention & control 3. Meteorology, Air Quality Modelling & Prediction 4. Water Pollution Monitoring, Prevention & control 5. Ecology & Biodiversity 6. Noise & Vibration 7. Socio-economic aspects 8. Hydrology, Ground Water & Water conservation The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 31
9. Geology 10. Soil Conservation 11. Risk & Hazards Management 12. Solid & Hazardous Waste Management (including municipal solid wastes) Out of the above full time employees (i.e. in house experts) need to be following; 1. Air Pollution Monitoring, prevention & control 2. Water Pollution Monitoring, Prevention & control 3. Solid & Hazardous Waste Management (including municipal solid wastes) 4. Ecology & Biodiversity 5. Socio-economic aspects FAE 4 & 5 above has the liberty that the expert can be empanelled but supported by an in-house Associate FAE. Beyond this, it is stated in the Explanatory notes dated 19.10.2012 that However, availability of the following 8 functional areas will be absolutely essential, based on the result of SA or assessment of fresh application, as applicable, for consideration of expansion/modification in scope of accreditation, which leaves massive scope for ambiguity. If 8 are essential then why twelve have been listed? Does it mean that organisations with 8 FAEs are as competent as those with 12? Looking at a Building & large construction project, such as a Mall, which come up is urban areas which everyone is familiar with, based on basic common sense alone, one can realize that unlike an industrial project, the Mall does not have any major impact on air pollution which would require any major measures for prevention and control. Thus, for an organization which is applying for accreditation in Building & Large construction, there is no requirement for a full time FAE in Air Pollution Monitoring, prevention & control. Furthermore, upto 22.08.2013, only those building construction projects with built up area more than 1,50,000 sq.m. required preparation of an EIA report. Such projects were far less in number than the ones within the 20,000-1,50,000 sq.m. bracket, whos environmental clearance was awarded on the appraisal of Form-1, Form 1A and Conceptual Plan. The input into Form1, 1A & Conceptual plan is provided mostly by the Architect and planners of the project and any environmental monitoring or measurements can be got done by any accredited laboratory. The assistance of a free lance The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 32
environmental consultant familiar with the environmental clearance process, for expertise on finer points is more than sufficient. Thus, there is actually no need for an environmental consultant to hire or empanel all 12 experts for such projects, when EIAs dont have to be prepared for the same. The MOEF, by virtue of its OM and the scheme by virtue of its structure, gives no liberty to Building & large construction projects in permitting applications or presentations to EAC/ SEACs by the project proponent or the architects/ planners or to freelance Environmental consultants. For such projects, earlier there was no need to hire EIA consulting organizations but now, whether needed or not, they have to be hired. This will be clearer by the following table 3 :
The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 33
Sl. No. Functional Area Pre-requisite of the scheme Relevance to a Building & large construction project Remark 1 Land Use Essential - In- house or empanelled Construction can take place only on designated land use as per Master Plan, already prepared by development authorities. In case, the land use in 10 km radius (study area) has to be studied, there are specialized remote sensing agencies who interpret the satellite image and provide land use through computer softwares at reasonable cost Not required as out sourcing is economical. 2 Air Pollution Monitoring, prevention & control Essential - In- house In a project like a Mall, the air pollution can be from a diesel generator set (DG set) for back up power. The norms on DG sets are already prescribed by CPCB and there are no additional pollution control measures except specifying the minimum height of its stack (chimney) through Notifications. All environmental consultants are aware of these notifications. Separate in- house expert not required 3 Meteorology, Air Quality Modelling & Prediction Essential - In- house or empanelled Meteorology is measured by a laboratory Air Quality Modelling & Prediction is carried out by a software and there are agencies available who can conduct this at a reasonable cost Not required as out sourcing is economical. 4 Water Pollution Monitoring, Prevention & control Essential - In- house The Buildings & construction projects have water consumption, waste water generation, treatment, recycling & reuse and thus expertise is essential Required 5 Ecology & Biodiversity Essential - In- house or empanelled supported by in-house Associate FAE Buildings & construction projects have landscape consultants who in turn have horticulturists on board. They chose the species of trees to be planted, where, at which density and when. Thus, there is no need to have full time in-house expert for this There are complete lists of proposed plants available from Central Pollution Control Board for greenbelts and available Not required as input available from landscape consultant The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 34
Sl. No. Functional Area Pre-requisite of the scheme Relevance to a Building & large construction project Remark in public domain 6 Noise & Vibration The noise and vibrations will be from DG sets for which standard control measures like enclosures & vibrations dampners are available Not required 7 Socio-economic aspects Essential - In- house or empanelled supported by in-house Associate FAE The Buildings & construction projects are coming in cities and towns where there is no interference of the project proponent in the socio-economics of the area. The assessment of impact on socio-economics of the area due to the project also will hold no meaning in such projects. Reason being, if a Mall is coming up in Saket, the employees can be from anywhere in Delhi- as far as Jahangirpuri or even outside Delhi i.e. from NCR. The same holds true for visitors, which again can be from around the area of the mall, from further corners or Delhi & NCR or even outside Delhi. Not needed as the impact assessment itself will be purely theoretical 8 Hydrology, Ground Water & Water conservation This is an important aspect as the Buildings & construction projects may be drawing ground water and water table may be declining. Permission for ground water withdrawal is to be obtained after due study from Central Ground Water Authority (CGWA) for which a Hydrogeological Consultant can be hired Water conservation is essential and so is rain water harvesting. The water conservation measures are available to the architect in the form of what type of taps and flushing systems to be used while an expert in rain water harvesting will design the rain water harvesting system Required, although can be outsourced. Not even put as essential by NABET 9 Geology Not applicable Not required 10 Soil Conservation Whatever little soil is excavated is reused for landscaping Not required The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 35
Sl. No. Functional Area Pre-requisite of the scheme Relevance to a Building & large construction project Remark and the landscape consultant oversees this 11 Risk & Hazards Management Essential - In- house or empanelled Emergency management plans are essential for approval of the building plans from the Fire Department. These are prepared by the consultant assisting in obtaining Fire clearance Not required 12 Solid & Hazardous Waste Management (including municipal solid wastes) Essential - In- house This is a major aspect and requires calculation of estimated waste likely to be generated, the segregation, treatment and disposal Since in most cities, the system of treatment and disposal is already in place by the municipality or development authority, there is little scope for value addition beyond the plot boundary with respect to this aspect Required The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 36
Furthermore, the Number of such projects that can be carried out by an organization has been restricted to 15 nos. per EIA Coordinator. Such consultations fetch an organization approximately Rs. 2 lakh per project, on an average. Thus, an organization with EC accredited for Building & large construction projects can have an income of Rs. 30 lakhs, in which it is not possible to sustain 12 FAEs, as required by the scheme. The in-house FAEs are charging around Rs. 6 lakhs/ annum and five such experts are compulsory. In addition, there has to be associate FAEs (juniors) and other support staff. Money has to be spent on environmental monitoring by hiring a laboratory and site visits, etc. Logically, the consultant organization should increase the rates to cover costs but that means more than doubling of the cost to client in an already over competitive market, which has gotten destabilized due to the pre-requisites of the scheme. In an economy which is already showing negative industrial growth, such additional costs and red-tapism is hampering the growth and a loss to the nation.
The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 37
4. Constructive Suggestions
1. There should not be a system of compulsory accreditation at all. Instead, as in the case of CAs, CS, lawyers, architects, there should be a system of each environmental professional to be registered with MOEF. Thus, every capable individual can exercise their right to practice. Furthermore, from the data bank, the competent experts can collectively get together and prepare a report, without having to join an organization for the purpose of accreditation. 2. There is no need for accreditation scheme as all reports and consultants are being appraised by SEACs/ SEIAAs and EACs across the country and their quality can be tested and reported to the MOEF by them 3. If at all, accreditation is considered as pre-requisite by MOEF, then it should follow the same protocol as across the world. All over the world, standard quality management, environment management and safety systems are implemented for laboratories, industries and service providers which follow the ISO or the National Standards adapted by each country. Any agency desirous of such accreditations such as ISO 9001, 14001, OHSAS, 17025 etc does so voluntarily and has the option of various accreditation agencies to chose from. Such accreditations give advantages to the company in various forms. Similarly, MOEF should come up with a voluntary scheme and not grant sou-moto accreditation power to an inexperienced and profit-making agency like QCI/ NABET. In absence of any control by MOEF over QCI/ NABET and absence of option of any other accreditation agency, this is creating a monopoly and against business ethics. 4. The Ministry should prepare proper guidelines, rules and regulations, framework for the process of accreditation of Environmental Consultants. 5. The accreditation scheme should be made in discussion with experts from different institutions like universities, Technical Institutes, NGOs, Industries, Environmental Consultants etc. 6. The accreditation scheme should be finalized by the Ministry which will be reviewed after a minimum period of 3 years. 7. Creation of appellate authority chaired by Retired High Court Judge and supported by Technical Experts to submit appeal by aggrieved consultants. 8. Appointment of non bureaucratic public representatives in the accreditation scheme. 9. Ex MOEF/SPCBs/CPCB/ Dept. of Environment Officials/ EAC/SEAC Members will not be part of accreditation process. 10. The notification should cover the criteria for accreditation of accreditation agencies/ bodies specifying tenure, age, qualification and experience. The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 38
11. The notification should be finalized only after multiple accreditation agencies are available 12. The time taken by the accreditation body/ agency for application processing should not be more than 1 month. 13. Transparency and answerability by the assessors/ accreditation committee/ surveillance committee has to be there 14. No interference by the committee in recruitment done by organizations unless the person concerned does not have the requisite qualifications or experience 15. The MOEF should constitute a body for accreditation in line with how it is done under the section 12 of EPA for laboratories 16. There should be no fees, which only can ensure no corruption 17. There should not be any restriction on the number of sectors or number of EIAs, which is direct violation of the fundamental right 18. All the consultants shall be given minimum three years Time getting accreditation after issuances of final notification.
The Red Book - Undocumented story of EIA Consultant organizations accreditation by NABET Page | 39
5. Conclusion
Ayn Rand said When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing when you see money flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors when you see that men get richer by graft and pull than by work, and your laws dont protect you against them, but protect them against you when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice you may know that your society is doomed. MOEF should not facilitate in this doom.