dc16
- dEsPeraTe cRaNky -
Four new nuclear power plants proposed by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd have hit a green roadblock with the environment and forests ministry rejecting their intial applications for statutory environmental clearances.
The NPCIL has proposed four power plants, one each at Fatehabad in Haryana (2,800mw), Mandla in Madhya Pradesh (1,400mw), Srikakulam in Andhra Pradesh (6,000mw) and Bhavnagar in Gujarat (6,000mw). NPCIL intends to build these plants in three years once construction gets underway.
The statutory expert appraisal committee of the ministry has sent back the applications for all four projects pointing out that they lacked documentation on several counts. The applications were filed to secure what is referred to as "terms of reference" for conducting an environmental impact assessment study.
The committee noted that in each of the four cases even simple statutory forms had not been completed properly and information on land-use was missing.
This is the first stage of environmental clearance where the project developer submits preliminary information, which based on the information and type of project, provides a list of issues that the developer should address in the EIA report. The EIA report is then studied along with the report on the public hearing by the EIA to clear or reject proposals.
Committee sources said the documents sent for the clearance were so shoddily prepared that it was impossible to pass what should have been an easy first step towards clearances.
The committee official informed NPCI had been asked to resubmit their documents with all supportive paperwork to get requisite TORs for environment impact studies. Ministry officials pointed out as long as NPCI submitted the requisite documents, this would be just a temporary hold up as the real point of evaluation arises only after EIA and the Public hearing reports are submitted to the appraisal committee.
But that setting up nuclear power plants might be an uphill battle became evident with the NIMBY (not in my backyard syndrome) kicking in June when the NPCI officials went for some soil testing at Bhavnagar Gujarat. The villagers protested against the presence of the officials who had to beat a hasty retreat from the proposed site.
While resistance and controversy is bound to mar plants at the field level, and NPCI would be wary of it, the environment ministry's presentation to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science Technology, Environment and Forests on the Nuclear Liability Bill is bound to raise other issues of concern to the nuclear establishment.
The ministry, in its presentation before the committee, had pointed out that the bill must address the mutagenic and teratogenic effects of exposure to nuclear radiation. While the first is the direct impact on genetic structure, the other refers to the impacts on foetus before birth.
While suggesting that definitions of 'environmental damage' could be picked up from the existing Environment (Protection) Act, 1976, ministry officials also suggested there should be some provision for interim relief while liabilities get settled.
The NPCIL has proposed four power plants, one each at Fatehabad in Haryana (2,800mw), Mandla in Madhya Pradesh (1,400mw), Srikakulam in Andhra Pradesh (6,000mw) and Bhavnagar in Gujarat (6,000mw). NPCIL intends to build these plants in three years once construction gets underway.
The statutory expert appraisal committee of the ministry has sent back the applications for all four projects pointing out that they lacked documentation on several counts. The applications were filed to secure what is referred to as "terms of reference" for conducting an environmental impact assessment study.
The committee noted that in each of the four cases even simple statutory forms had not been completed properly and information on land-use was missing.
This is the first stage of environmental clearance where the project developer submits preliminary information, which based on the information and type of project, provides a list of issues that the developer should address in the EIA report. The EIA report is then studied along with the report on the public hearing by the EIA to clear or reject proposals.
Committee sources said the documents sent for the clearance were so shoddily prepared that it was impossible to pass what should have been an easy first step towards clearances.
The committee official informed NPCI had been asked to resubmit their documents with all supportive paperwork to get requisite TORs for environment impact studies. Ministry officials pointed out as long as NPCI submitted the requisite documents, this would be just a temporary hold up as the real point of evaluation arises only after EIA and the Public hearing reports are submitted to the appraisal committee.
But that setting up nuclear power plants might be an uphill battle became evident with the NIMBY (not in my backyard syndrome) kicking in June when the NPCI officials went for some soil testing at Bhavnagar Gujarat. The villagers protested against the presence of the officials who had to beat a hasty retreat from the proposed site.
While resistance and controversy is bound to mar plants at the field level, and NPCI would be wary of it, the environment ministry's presentation to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science Technology, Environment and Forests on the Nuclear Liability Bill is bound to raise other issues of concern to the nuclear establishment.
The ministry, in its presentation before the committee, had pointed out that the bill must address the mutagenic and teratogenic effects of exposure to nuclear radiation. While the first is the direct impact on genetic structure, the other refers to the impacts on foetus before birth.
While suggesting that definitions of 'environmental damage' could be picked up from the existing Environment (Protection) Act, 1976, ministry officials also suggested there should be some provision for interim relief while liabilities get settled.
