The environment clearance granted to Posco's mega steel
project in Orissa in January 2011 will remain suspended till the environment
ministry reviews it afresh, the National Green Tribunal held March 30. "The
environment clearance granted on January 31, 2011 to the project shall remain
suspended till such review and appraisal is done by the ministry," a bench
of tribunal comprising Justice C V Ramulu and Devendra Kumar Agarwal held.
The tribunal pointed out that memorandum of understanding
between the Orissa government and Posco states that the project is for
production of 12 million tonnes of steel per annum (MTPA) but the environment
impact assessment (EIA) report has been prepared only for 4 MTPA steel production
in the first phase.
It said the MoEF should take "policy decision"
that in projects of such magnitude the EIA should be done for the complete
project. "The EIA should assess it for the full capacity
right from the beginning," it said.
The tribunal directed the MoEF to review the clearance
afresh and attach "specific conditions" which Posco would have to
follow in a "defined timeline". It also directed the MoEF to set up a special committee
to "monitor the compliance to the environment clearance" thus
granted. The bench said appointment of Meena Gupta as chairman of the committee
to review the environmental clearance showed "departmental bias" as
she had only "supported" the environment clearance granted to Posco
earlier during her tenure as the Secretary, the MoEF. "The entire process
was vitiated in the eyes of law," the bench said in this regard.
The tribunal also said that the project proponent should
generate its own source of water instead of utilising the drinking water meant
for the Cuttack city in Orissa.b "In the country drinking water is scarce.
It would be better to ask the project proponent to generate its own source of
water. Avoiding utilising water meant for Cuttack city could be asked by the
ministry," it said.
The order came on a plea filed by environment activist
Prafulla Samantray seeking quashing of the environmental clearance granted to
Posco on the ground that it was "contrary to the provisions of the EIA
Notification 2006" and was "illegal and arbitrary".
Advocate Ritwick Dutta, appearing for the petitioner, had
said that impact on environment in case of steel production by the plant to its
full capacity would be much more. Prafulla, in his petition said, "It is
admitted that the project will not be viable if it is restricted to the steel
production of only 4 MTPA. In such circumstances, the EIA report should have
been for 12 MTPA (of steel production). The project proponent has opted to do
an EIA for 4 MTPA since the likely impact of 12 MTPA is bound to be much more and
very significant". Posco India Pvt Ltd was granted environmental clearance
for its two projects, steel-cum-captive power plant project and captive minor
port, in Jagatsinghpur district of Orissa in 2007. The MoEF after reviewing the
same, granted environmental clearance with additional conditions on January 31,
2011 which prompted the petitioner to move the tribunal.
The clearance was assailed contending that "the
whole approach of the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) was not to give an
unbiased opinion, but rather to justify the decision to grant environmental
clearance to both the projects."
The Environment Ministry, however, had told the tribunal
there was no infirmity in its decision to grant environmental clearance to
Posco. Posco had also maintained that it has not violated any law and is
working in compliance with the norms.
Source: The Pioneer