3 SCOPING 3.1 DEVELOPMENT OF SCOPING PROCESS Need for Scoping

Transcription

1 3 SCOPING 3.1 DEVELOPMENT OF SCOPING PROCESS Need for Scoping Environmental clearance procedure in India currently has no formal procedure for scoping of EIA studies except for certain guidelines prepared by MoEF in the form of an EIA manual and certain sector-specific guidelines. It is left to the project proponent and the consultant involved in preparation of Environmental Impact Assessment report. The guideline list out the important issues associated with various project sectors and the issues to be looked in to. The project proponent has also the option of taking advice from the officials of MoEF or even at state-level. However, such consultations for scoping do not have any legal mandate. Analysis of alternatives also lacks a formal procedure in the existing EC process. However, a two-stage clearance procedure for site-specific projects is in existence, which has some provision for analysis of alternatives. The procedures being followed at state level for environmental clearance, is mostly mandated as per the requirement of consents / authorisation under various Acts. These procedures being specific and based on application forms do not require any kind of scoping. Some states have also started appraising proposals for consents, using EIA studies. However, scoping procedure for such studies is also left to the project proponent and consultants. A significant feature that emerged from the of review of specific cases that applied to the MoEF for clearance was that generally projects take much longer than the scheduled 90 days for getting clearance. It was observed that in almost all cases, the initial review of EIA s led to the need for additional information requirements from the proponent s side. The additional information required ranged from minor clarifications on the project to in some cases specialised studies requiring data generation and thereby requiring considerable amount of time. Inevitably, this resulted in time delays in the getting of EC for the proponent. It also leads to National loss leading to economic blockage of project proposals. In this context it is felt that if the scope of an EIA was formulated in the beginning and a TOR is properly defined, it could result in considerable reduction in the time taken to process a case for EC. Moreover, the TOR for a project level EIA, which is delineated by the consultant in consultation with the proponent, is often based on generic sector guidelines or sector specific questionnaires developed by the MoEF. In the process, site-specific issues are often missed out in the EIA. This often leads to EIA report with superfluous information, little analysis of impacts and a standard set of mitigation measures. In absence of clear guidelines it is left to the EIA consultant to develop TOR and contents of the EIA. In certain cases even the project proponent leaves no room for the consultant to develop the scope for EIA and in most of the cases it seriously impacts the quality of EIA reports. There is also a lack of cleara guidelines for Risk Assessment and Social Impact Assessment. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT MOEF: DRAFT FRAMEWORK FOR EC 31

2 At the conceptual stages of the development of the EIA Notification, a lot of emphasis was put on a two stage EIA Process. One of the primary reason this was envisioned was to provide for the scope for looking into site, project and technology alternatives at an early stage of the project life cycle. However, in the final form, the first step of the two-stage process only involved the granting of site clearance for 5 category of site specific projects viz. mining, pit-head thermal power plants, hydro power and irrigation projects, Ports and harbours, prospecting and exploration of major minerals. In many cases, during the EIA appraisal process, it did come to light that a certain project was not compatible to be established from the environmental point of view, but because preliminary works had already begun, EC was granted based on certain strict clearance conditions. It has also happened that such projects had thereafter been dragged to courts by citizens groups and NGOs resulting in some cases the stoppage of the project after considerable expenditure from the proponents side. The presence of a choice of alternatives in the initial analysis could have presented such scenarios for consideration at later stages of the project. Absence of scoping is the most significant factor effecting efficiency of the entire Environmental Clearance Process. Absence of consideration of alternatives is again probably one of the most significant factors impacting the effectiveness of the Environmental Clearance Process using EIA system Purpose of Scoping It is proposed that scoping procedure in the EC process shall be introduced with the following important objectives: To ensure that the environmental information used for decision making provides a comprehensive picture of the important effects of the project, including issues of particular concern to affected groups. To focus resources on the important issues for decision-making and avoid wasted effort on issues of little relevance. Ensure that the environmental information provides a balanced view and is not burdened with irrelevant information. Stimulate early consultation between the project proponent and the regulatory authority about the project and its environmental impacts. Help effective planning, management and resourcing of the environmental studies. Identify alternatives to the proposed project and mitigating measures which ought to be considered by the developer. Identify other legislation or regulatory controls which may be relevant to the project and provide opportunities for the necessary assessment work for different control systems to be undertaken in parallel, therby avoiding duplication of effort and costs for all concerned. Reduce the risk of delays caused by requests for further information, risk of disagreement about impact assessment methods (baseline surveys, predictive methods and evaluation criteria) after submission of the EIA report for appraisal. 32

3 One of the most important components of scoping is the consideration of alternatives. Alternatives are essentially, different ways in which the project proponent can feasibly meet the project s objectives, for exsample by carrying out a different type of action, choosing an alternative location or adopting a different technology or design for the project. At the more detailed level, alternatives merge into mitigating measures where specific changes are made to the project design or to methods of construction or operation to avoid, reduce or remedy environmental impacts. Alternatives and mitigation therefore cover a spectrum ranging from a high level to very detailed aspects of project design. As an example they might range from: Different strategies e.g. to manage demand or reduce losses rather than develop a new resource; Different sites or routes for all or part of the project; Different technologies and raw materials e.g. construction of a combined cycle gas turbine power plant rather than a coal fired power station; Altered layouts or designs e.g. locating noisy activities away from sensitive receptors or replacing one large stack for gaseous emissions with two smaller ones; Environmental measures incorporated into the project design e.g. construction of an ecoduct to ensure safe passage of wildlife across a motorway rather than establishment of compensatory habitat. The No Project alternative must also be considered as the baseline against which the environmental effects of the project should be considered. This may include changes from the present day situation as a result of other developments taking place in the vicinity and changes in environmental conditions International best practices of Scoping International Practices In the World Bank procedure, is done partly within the Bank and partly in consultation with between the Bank and the borrower. After consultation with the Regional Environmental Division, the project Task Manager indicates in the Initial Executive Summary the key environmental issues, the project category, the type of environmental work needed, and a preliminary EIA schedule. The Bank then discusses the scope of the EIA with the borrower and assists the borrower in preparing the TOR for the EIA. With regard to public consultation in the scoping stage, the Bank encourages borrowers to consult with affected groups and NGOs shortly after the EIA category has been assigned. The procedure also mentions that the TOR should provide for "adequate interagency coordination and consultation with affected groups and local NGOs. In the ADB procedure, the IEE play a crucial role in the delineation of the scope and the TOR for detailed EIA study. After a project has been screened and found to be having potentially significant impacts, an IEE is conducted with three primary objectives : 33

4 Identify the nature and severity of specific, significant environmental issues associated with the project; Identify easily implementable mitigative or offsetting measures for the significant environmental issues; Develop the TOR for the full scale EIA study should more detailed assessment be needed; Conducting an IEE thus ensures a focused TOR for a full scale EIA because it identifies the issues requiring resolution and provides background information on them. Scoping in country systems The US system has a well-defined scoping phase with scope for public consultation. Under the NEPA, after the screening is completed, the agency responsible for the project must publish a notice of intent in the Federal Register. This serves to notify the public that the agency intends to prepare an EIS and invites public participation. In this way the public is encouraged to participate in the scoping process and to provide critical inputs on issues including impacts, alternatives and mitigation possibilities. For complex projects, the US system employs a multi-step approach called tiering that allows for EIAs at various stages of the project to differ in terms of scope and detail. This results in the preparation of an initial EIS for a large scale proposal and subsequent EISs for specific components of the proposal. The EIS is prepared by the federal agency that has approval authority for the project. The Dutch Environmental Management Act illustrates a different approach to the scopng process wherein the Dutch EIA system has a formal scoping stage. The scoping stage begins after publication of the Identification Memorandum and starts with a round of public participation, consultation of the legal advisors and consultation of the independent Commission for EIA. It requires the competent authority to issue scoping guidelines to the proponent. In drafting these guidelines, the competent authority must allow the EIA Commission 9 weeks to make recommendations for the scoping guidelines. During this period, any other person who wishes to submit comments on the guidelines may do so. The competent authority then has 13 to 21 weeks from the date that the notice of intent to draft guidelines, which must then be circulated to the proponents for comments. Analysis of alternatives International Best Practices World Bank guidelines require a systematic comparison of the proposed investment design, site, technology, and operational alternatives. They are to be considered in terms of their potential environmental impacts, capital and recurrent costs, suitability of local conditions, and institutional, training and monitoring requirements. For each of the alternatives, the environmental costs and benefits are to be quantified to the extent possible, and economic values 34

5 attached where feasible. The basis for the selection of the alternative proposed for the project must also be stated. Country level Best Practices Under US law, the responsible agency or agencies must explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives, and also explain why certain alternatives were eliminated from more detailed study. NEPA regulations state that the EIS should present the environmental impacts of the proposal and the alternatives in comparative form, providing decision makers and the public with clearly defined options from which to choose. In addition, to assessing the alternatives identified during the scoping process, NEPA regulations require the agency in every case to analyses the alternatives of not proceeding with the development at all the so called no action or no build alternative. In Netherlands, The competent authority requests the Commission for EIA to advise on guidelines (scoping). An expert-working group of the Commission formulates and publishes a scoping advice after visiting the location of the activity and after discussions with stakeholders. An important feature of this advisory role is that the Commission can suggest to investigate other alternatives than those indicated in the Identification Memorandum. The EIA systems of the developing countries studied does not seem to have any provision for analysis of alternatives. 3.2 FORMULATION OF MODIFIED EC PROCESS FOR SCOPING Scoping is an early stage in the EC process and is designed to ensure that the environmental studies provide all the relevant information on: The impacts of the project, in particular focussing on the most important impacts; The alternatives to the project; Any other matters to be included. The findings of scoping define the scope of the environmental information to be submitted to the regulatory authority and the terms of reference for the environmental studies to be undertaken to compile the information. It has been analysed and concluded by ERM that introduction of scoping in the proposed EC process would bring in substantial improvements in both efficiency and effectiveness of the process. Hence, it is proposed that scoping is carried out under a legal requirement rather than just provide guidelines to the project proponents and EIA consultants, to include it as a best practice Incorporation of Scoping stage in the EC process As evaluated the need & purpose of scoping and the changes proposed to the existing screening procedure, the scoping stage needs well defined procedural aspects. First of all, arrangements for provision of information required to carry out scoping needs to be made. Then, the methodology required for undertaking scoping exercise, appropriate authority that could lead the scoping and scoping outputs. 35

6 Information required for Scoping To allow someone to provide a Scoping Opinion, the project proponent will have to provide some information on the project. The types of information which is likely to be needed is similar to that which is needed for case-by-case screening procedure proposed, only that the information requirement for scoping is a bit more detailed and would in many cases require consultation between the regulatory authority, project proponent and public stakeholders. At the scoping stage, the kind of environmental information required will also in certain cases, require certain data collection and analysis, field studies and consultations. The aim is not to undertake the full EIA studies but to obtain sufficient information to allow a reasonable plan to be drawn up for those studies. The details of the information on project requested from the project proponent should reasonably be expected to have it at the stage in the development of the project that has been reached. Besides, the environmental information required for scoping, should also be based on the already available information with various government monitoring agencies, Zoning tools and the Data centres proposed under the EIC Component, by MoEF. The gaps and uncertainties in the information requested should be properly identified by the scoping authority and taken into account during the scoping exercise. The details of the information which can be requested will be set out in the EIA legislation in the form of an EA form. This shall invariably replace the application form under Schdule-II of the existing EIA Notification and shall also consider most of the information requirements required for the sectoral questionnaires, state-level consent applications. Scoping Procedure Scoping if led by the regulatory authority, requires that the project proponent provides information about the project and its location and then the regulatory authority consults with interested organisations, the project proponent to identify issues of concern resulting in issuance of a scoping opinion to the proponent. In case the project proponent leads scoping, he/she is required to prepare a draft scoping report and submit this to the regulatory authority for review and/or approval. During the process, the regulatory authority might consult with other stakeholders for their views on the proposed scope. This will result in a finalised scoping report. Considering the institutional framework for environmental regulation in India and the existing stage of awareness, development it is proposed that the regulatory authority takes the lead in carrying out scoping procedure. Accordingly, MoEF at central and SPCB s at state level should take the lead in carrying out scoping. When MoEF/SPCB s undertake scoping there are three key issues to be addressed. 1. Effects that the project could have on the environment. 2. Effects that are likely to significant and therefore need particular attention in the environmental studies. 3. Alternatives and mitigating measures ought to be considered in developing the proposals for the project. 36

7 Many different techniques are available to help with scoping but it is proposed that checklists and matrices be used to provide a systematic way of thinking through the potential interactions between a project and its environment. Three checklists are proposed to be used to help in scoping: Scoping checklist Checklist of criteria for evaluating the significance of environmental effects. Checklist on Alternatives and Mitigation Measures. Scoping checklist will be in two parts. The first part will provide a detailed list of characteristics of projects, which could give rise to significant effects on the environment. The second part will provide a list of characteristics of project environment, which could be susceptible to significant adverse effects. The checklist of criteria for evaluating the significance of environmental effects will provide a list of factors to be considered in deciding whether or not an impact is likely to be significant. This checklist can also be used for undertaking a case-bycase screening, required as part of the proposed modifications to the EC process. Usage of these tools in doing preliminary analysis by the regulatory authority should be followed by presentation to the screening & scoping committee.. The screening & scoping committee will be similar to the existing project appraisal committees and will have to be separately constituted for each state and at the centre. The committee will also consist of the public stakeholders involved in the project implementation. The scoping exercise will result in a brief scoping report with necessarily the following aspects: 1. Types of environmental impacts to be investigated and reported in the environmental information. 2. Structure, content and length of the environmental impact assessment report. 3. Alternatives which should be considered. 4. Specify requirement of additional studies such as Risk Assessment, Social Impact Assessment, Ecological Impact Assessment. 5. Baseline surveys and investigations which should be carried out. 6. List of all the precursory/associated approvals that the regulatory authority will consider during environmental decision-making. The inclusion of the 6 th aspect mentioned above, will play a significant role in guiding the project proponent to plan properly the resources required to undergo various approvals. This plays a high significance especially in cases, where approvals relating aspects such as forest, coastal zone, wildlife are required. Besides, the above aspects, the scoping report can optionally contain information on the following aspects too: 1. Methods and criteria to be used for prediction and evaluation of effects. 2. Mitigation measures which should be considered. 3. Organisations / agencies to be consulted during the environmental studies. 37

8 Tools required for undertaking Scoping The significance & usage of scoping tools mentioned in the above sections have been described in details along with explanations as to how these tools will be helpful in carrying out scoping exercise, by the concerned environmental regulatory authority. Environmental effects can be characterised as interactions between some feature of the project and some feature of the surrounding environment. The Scoping Checklist-I is designed to help identify such interactions. The first part of this checklist will provide a list of possible project characteristics, which could give rise to environmental effects. The user (environmental regulatory authority) is prompted to first consider whether the project is expected to involve any of the activities or features listed in the checklist and to answer with one of the three responses in Column 2: Yes- if the activity is likely to occur. No if the activity is not expected to occur;? if it is uncertain whether the activity will occur or not. If the answer to any question is Yes, the user then considers which characteristics of the surrounding environment could be affected by that activity. The second part of the Scoping checklist-i is designed to help the user think through this stage. The results are entered in Column 3 of the first part of the Scoping Checklist-I creating a list of all the potential effects of the project. The environmental information provided to regulatory authorities must address all of these effects, but resources are usually limited and it is therefore important for decision-making on the particular project and are not burdened with irrelevant detail on insignificant issues. Identifying what is important at the scoping stage can, however be difficult as it requires decisions to be made about what is likely to be significant before detailed environmental studies have been undertaken. Hence, to help in evaluating the question of significance, a separate checklist has been drawn, called Scoping checklist-ii. For each potential environmental interaction identified in Column 3 of the Scoping Checklist-II, the user is invited to consider the factors listed in the Scoping checklist-ii to decide whether and how significant the effect is likely to be. The results should be entered in the final column of the Scoping Checklist-I and provide a list of significant issues which should be considered in detail in the environmental studies and reported in the EIA. The EIA should also identify the issues, which were identified as not significant and explain the reasons. Table No. 3.1 Scoping scheklist-i A (Activity) S.No. Questions to be considered in Scoping Yes/No? Which Characteristics of the Project Environment could be affected and how? Is the effect likely to be significant? Why? 1. Will construction, operation or decommissioning of the Project Involve actions which will cause physical changes in the locality (topography, land use, changes in waterbodies, etc.) 38

9 S.No. Questions to be considered in Scoping 1.1 Permanent or temporary change in land use, landcover or topography including increase in intensity of land use? 1.2 Clearance of existing land, vegetation and buildings? 1.3 Creation of new land uses? 1.4 Pre-construction investigations eg borehouses, soil testing? 1.5 Construction works? 1.6 Demolition works? 1.7 Temporary sites used for construction works or housing of construction workers? 1.8 Above ground buildings, structures or earthworks including linear structures, cut and fill or excavations? 1.9 Underground works including mining or tunnelling? 1.10 Reclamation works? 1.11 Dredging? 1.12 Offshore structures? 1.13 Production and manufacturing processes? 1.14 Production and manufacturing processes? 1.15 Facilities for storage of goods or materials? 1.16 Facilities for treatment or disposal of solid waste or liquid effluents? 1.17 Facilities for long term housing of operational workers? 1.18 New road, rail or sea traffic during construction or operation? 1.19 New road, rail, air waterborne or other transport infrastructure including new or altered routes and stations, ports, airports etc? 1.20 Closure or diversion of existing transport routes or infrastructure leading to changes in traffic movements? 1.21 New or diverted transmission lines or pipelines? 1.22 Impoundment, damming, culverting, realignment or other changes to the hydrology of watercourses or aquifers? 1.23 Stream crossings? 1.24 Abstraction or transfers of water form ground or surface waters? 1.25 Changes in waterbodies or the land surface affecting drainage or run-off? 1.26 Transport of personnel or materials for construction, operation or decommissioning? Yes/No? Which Characteristics of the Project Environment could be affected and how? Is the effect likely to be significant? Why? 39

10 S.No. Questions to be considered in Scoping Yes/No? Which Characteristics of the Project Environment could be affected and how? Is the effect likely to be significant? Why? 1.27 Long term dismantling or decommissioning or restoration works? 1.28 Ongoing activity during decommissioning which could have an impact on the environment? 1.29 Influx of people to an area in either temporarily or permanently? 1.30 Introduction of alien species? 1.31 Loss of native species or genetic diversity? 1.32 Any other actions? 2. Will construction or operation of the Project use natural resources such as land, water, materials or energy, especially any resources which are non-renewable or in short supply? 2.1 Land especially undeveloped or agricultural land? 2.2 Water? 2.3 Minerals? 2.4 Aggregates? 2.5 Forests and timber? 2.6 Energy including electricity and fuels? 2.7 Any other resources? 3. Will the Project involve use, storage, transport, handling or production of substances or materials which could be harmful to human health or the environment or raise concerns about actual or perceived risks to human health? 3.1 Will the project involve use of substances or materials which are hazardous or toxic to human health or the environment (flora, fauna, water supplies)? 3.2 Will the project result in changes in occurrence of disease of affect disease vectors (eg insect or water borne diseases)? 3.3 Will the project affect the welfare of people eg by changing living conditions? 3.4 Are there especially vulnerable groups of people who could be affected by the project eg hospital patients, the elderly? 3.5 Any other causes? 4. Will the Project produce solid wastes during construction or operation or decommissioning? 4.1 Spoil, overburden or mine wastes? 4.2 Municipal waste (household and or commercial wastes)? 4.3 Hazardous or toxic wastes (including radioactive wastes)? 4.4 Other industrial process wastes? 4.5 Surplus product? 4.6 Sewage sludge or other sludges from effluent treatment? 4.7 Construction or demolition wastes? 4.8 Redundant machinery or equipment? 40

11 S.No. Questions to be considered in Scoping Yes/No? Which Characteristics of the Project Environment could be affected and how? Is the effect likely to be significant? Why? 4.9 Contaminated soils or other materials? 4.10 Agricultural wastes? 4.11 Any other solid wastes? 5. Will the Project release pollutants or any hazardous, toxic or noxious substances to air? 5.1 Emissions from combustion of fossil fuels from stationary or mobile sources? 5.2 Emissions from production processes? 5.3 Emissions from materials handling including storage or transport? 5.4 Emissions from construction activities including plant and equipment? 5.5 Dust or odours from handling of materials including construction materials, sewage and waste? 5.6 Emissions from incineration of waste? 5.7 Emissions from burning of waste in open air (eg slash materials, construction debris)? 5.8 Emissions from any other sources? 6. Will the Project cause noise and vibration or release of light, heat energy or electromagnetic radiation? 6.1 From operation of equipment eg engines, ventilation plant, crushers? 6.2 From industrial or similar processes? 6.3 From construction or demolition? 6.4 From blasting or piling? 6.5 From construction or operational traffic? 6.6 From lighting or cooling systems? 6.7 From sources of electromagnetic radiation(consider effects on nearby sensitive equipment as well as people)? 6.8 From any other sources? 7. Will the Project lead to risks of contamination of land or water from releases of pollutants into the ground or into sewers, surface waters, groundwater, coastal waters or the sea? 7.1 From handling, storage, use or spillage of hazardous or toxic materials? 7.2 From discharge of sewage or other effluents (whether treated or untreated) to water or the land? 7.3 By deposition of pollutants emitted to air into the land or into water? 7.4 From any other sources? 7.5 Is there a risk of long term build up of pollutants in the environment from these sources? 8. Will there be any risk of accidents during construction or operation of the Project which could affect human health or the environment? 41

12 S.No. Questions to be considered in Scoping Yes/No? Which Characteristics of the Project Environment could be affected and how? Is the effect likely to be significant? Why? 8.1 From explosions, spillages, fires etc from storage, handling, use or production of hazardous or toxic substances? 8.2 From events beyond the limits of normal environmental protection eg failure of pollution control systems? 8.3 From any other causes? 8.4 Could the project be affected by natural disasters causing environmental damage (eg floods, earthquakes, landslip, etc)? 9. Will the Project result in social changes, for example, in demography, traditional lifestyles, employment? 9.1 Changes in population size, age, structure, social groups etc? 9.2 By resettlement of people or demolition of homes or communities or community facilities eg schools, hospitals, social facilities? 9.3 Through in-migration of new residents or creation of new communities? 9.4 By placing increased demands on local facilities or services eg housing. education, health? 9.5 By creating jobs during construction or operation or causing the loss of jobs with effects on unemployment and the economy? 9.6 Any other causes? Question Are there any other factors which should be considered such as consequential development which could lead to environmental effects or the potential for cumulative impacts with other existing or planned activities in the locality? 9.1 Will the project lead to pressure for consequential development which could have significant impact on the environment eg more housing, new roads, new supporting industries or utilities, etc.? 9.2 Will the project lead to development of supporting facilities, ancillary development or development stimulated by the project which could have impact on the environment eg: Supporting infrastructure (roads, power supply, waste or waste water treatment, etc.) housing development extractive industries supply industries other? 9.3 Will the project lead to after-use of the site which could have an impact on the environment? 42

13 S.No. Questions to be considered in Scoping 9.4 Will the project set a precedent for later developments? 9.5 Will the project have cumulative effects due to proximity to other existing or planned projects with similar effects? Yes/No? Which Characteristics of the Project Environment could be affected and how? Is the effect likely to be significant? Why? Table No. 3.2 Scoping Checklist-I B (Environmental Sensitivity) Question - Are there features of the local environment on or around the Project location which could be affected by the Project? Areas which are protected under international or national or local legislation for their ecological, landscape, cultural or other value, which could be affected by the project? Other areas which are important or sensitive for reasons of their ecology e.g. Wetlands, Watercourses or other waterbodies, the coastal zone, mountains, forests or woodlands Areas used by protected, important or sensitive species of fauna or flora e.g. for breeding, nesting, foraging, resting, overwintering, migration, which could be affected by the project? Inland, coastal, marine or underground waters? Areas or features of high landscape or scenic value? Routes or facilities used by the public for access to recreation or other facilities? Transport routes which are susceptible to congestion or which cause environmental problems? Areas or features of historic or cultural importance? Question - Is the Project in a location where it is likely to be highly visible to many people? Question - Is the Project located in a previously undeveloped area where there will be loss of greenfield land? Question - Are there existing land uses on or around the Project location which could be affected by the Project? For example: Homes, gardens, other private property, Industry, Commerce, Recreation, public open space, community facilities, agriculture, forestry, tourism, mining or quarrying Question - Are there any plans for future land uses on or around the location which could be affected by the Project? Question - Are there any areas on or around the location which are densely populated or built-up, which could be affected by the Project? Question - Are there any areas on or around the location which are occupied by sensitive land uses which could be affected by the Project? hospitals, schools, places of worship, 43

14 community facilities Question - Are there any areas on or around the location which contain important, high quality or scarce resources which could be affected by the Project? For example: groundwater resources, surface waters, forestry, agriculture, fisheries, tourism, minerals. Question - Are there any areas on or around the location of the Project which are already subject to pollution or environmental damage e.g. where existing legal environmental standards are exceeded, which could be affected by the project? Question - Is the Project location susceptible to earthquakes, subsidence, landslides, erosion, flooding or extreme or adverse climatic conditions e.g. temperature inversions, fogs, severe winds, which could cause the project to present environmental problems? Question - Is the Project likely to affect the physical condition of any environmental media? The atmospheric environment including microclimate and local and larger scale climatic conditions? Water - eg quantities, flows or levels of rivers, lakes, groundwater. Estuaries, coastal waters or the sea? Soils - eg quantities, depths, humidity, stability or erdodibility of soils? Geological and ground conditions? Question - Are releases from the Project likely to have effects on the quality of any environmental media? Local air quality? Global air quality including climate change and ozone depletion Water quality - rivers, lakes, groundwater. Estuaries, coastal waters or the sea? Nutrient status and eutrophication of waters? Acidification of soils or waters? Soils Noise? Temperature, light or electromagnetic radiation including electrical interference? Productivity of natural or agricultural systems? Question-is the Project likely to affect the availability or scarcity of any resources either locally or globally? Fossil fuels? Water? Minerals and aggregates? Timber? Other non-renewable resources? Infrastructure capacity in the locality - water, sewerage, power generation and transmission, telecommunications, waste disposal roads, rail? Question - Is the Project likely to affect human or community health or welfare? The quality or toxicity of air, water, foodstuffs and other products consumed by humans? Morbidity or mortality of individuals, communities or populations by exposure to pollution? Occurrence or distribution of disease vectors including insects? Vulnerability of individuals, communities or populations to disease? Individuals' sense of personal security? Community cohesion and identity? Cultural identity and associations? Minority rights? Housing conditions? Employment and quality of employment? Economic conditions? Social institutions? 44

15 Table 3.3 Scoping Checklist II (Significance of impacts) Questions to be Considered 1. Will there be a large change in environmental conditions? 2. Will new features be out-of-scale with the existing environment? 3. Will the effect be unusual in the area or particularly complex? 4. Will the effect extend over a large area? 5. Will there be any potential for transfrontier impact? 6. Will many people be affected? 7. Will many receptors of other types (fauna and flora, businesses, facilities) be affected? 8. Will valuable or scarce features or resources be affected? 9. Is there a risk that environmental standards will be breached? 10. Is there a risk that protected sites, areas, features will be affected? 11. Is there a high probability of the effect occurring? 12. Will the effect continue for a long time? 13. Will the effect be permanent rather than temporary? 14. Will the impact be continuous rather than intermittent? 15. If it is intermittent will it be frequent rather than rare? 16. Will the impact be irreversible? 17. Will it be difficult to avoid, or reduce or repair or compensate for the effect? When using the Scoping Checklist-I it is important to remember that secondary and higher order effects can occur as a result of a primary interaction between a project activity and the project environment. So for example, a change in siterun-off can effect the hydrology of a watercourse; this can subsequently affect water quality and the ecology of the watercourse; and this can then affect fishing and other uses of that water. Where a primary effect is identified the user should always think about whether secondary or further effects on other aspects of the environment could arise as a result. Users should also remember that effects can occur not only permanently and over the long term but also temporarily, for example just during construction, commissioning or decommissioning or just during certain phases of project operation, or that may occur intermittently, for example during certain periods of activity or times of year or as a result of abnormal events affecting the project. (Accidents, earthquakes, floods etc.). Requirements to undertake Cumulative impacts can also be decided during this stage. As repeatedly being stressed, on of the important aims of scoping is to identify alternatives and mitigation measures, which it may be appropriate for the project proponent to consider in finalising the project proposals. A checklist called Scoping checklist-iii has been designed to provide examples of the types of alternatives and measures which may be available and which could reduce the environmental impact of the project. 45

16 Table 3.4Checklist-III for alternatives. Types of Alternatives and Mitigating Measures to be Considered Locations or routes Processes or technologies Pollution controls Measures to manage demand for goods or services Measures to conserve or reduce wastage of resources Different approaches to meeting demand Working methods Site plans and layouts Design of structures Types and sources of materials Product specifications Timetable for construction, operation and decommissioning including any phasing of the project Start and finish dates Size of the site or facility Level of production Responsibilities for implementation Waste disposal arrangements including recycling, recovery, reuse and final disposal Access arrangements and routes for traffic to and from the site Ancillary facilities Management methods and systems Environmental management responsibilities and procedures Employment and staff training Monitoring and contingency plans Decommissioning arrangements, site restoration and after-use Do Nothing or Do Minimum 3.3 PHASE-WISE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN For the proposed modifications, a phase-wise implementation plan has been prepared. Although international best practices have been evaluated for evaluating the existing EC process, ERM has ensured that the revisions suggested are simple, practical and capable of being implemented under Indian conditions; Phase-I: Improvements that could be readily taken up within the framework of the existing EC regulations and which could be implemented without any delay of time. (1 year) Phase-II: Improvements that would require modifications to the existing regulations and for which some preparatory work and training would be required as part of the capacity building exercise. (2 years) Phase-III: Improvements that would involve major operating changes. (3 years) 46

17 Table No. 3.5 Phasewise Implementation of Scoping in proposed EC Process Phase-I Phase-II Phase-III Sector-specific manuals prepared as part of the component-b should include guidelines for conducting EIA studies, which can temporarily and partly substitute the requirements of scoping. Release of amended legislations - EIA Notification. (a) intorduction of scoping stage at MoEF. (b) Formation of scoping committees at MoEF Traning and capacity building for undertaking formal scoping in MoEF MoEF should introduce informal scoping process for Category-A projects and publicizes it widely. Benefits of this process should also be publicised and proponents made to understand the benefits inherent in such a process. (no delays due to info clarification asked at the later stage). Release of National EIA Guidance manual (Component-B) to introduce scoping procedure & guidelines for carrying out scoping. Traning and capacity building for undertaking formal scoping at state-level. Informal scoping process for Category-B1 projects should be introduced at state-level and publicizes it widely. Benefits of this process should also be publicised and proponents made to understand the benefits inherent in such a process. (no delays due to info clarification asked at the later stage). (a) intorduction of scoping stage at state-level. (b) Formation of scoping committees at state-level Decision support system should be developed to aid the scoping committees in carrying out scoping Scoping procedures can be fine-tuned with practicalities faced during implementation.. Zoning tool based studies should be carried out for applicability in scoping. The amendment to legislations would be carried out and identification of the stakeholders to be trained should be done. This would be followed by release of legislation with a delayed period of around 6 months for implementation. During this 6 month period, the stakeholders would be trained for capacity building. Implementation of Zoning tools-eic based studies for carrying out scoping at state and central leveles. ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 47 MOEF: DRAFT FRAMEWORK FOR EC