demands for grants (2015-2016) of the ministry of
TRANSCRIPT
1
PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
RAJYA SABHA
DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE
ON SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS
Rajya Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi
April, 2015/ Vaisakha, 1937 (Saka)
Website : http://rajyasabha.nic.in
Email: [email protected]
TWO HUNDRED FIFTY FOURTH REPORT
DEMANDS FOR GRANTS (2015-2016)
OF THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT,
FORESTS & CLIMATE CHANGE
(DEMAND NO. 32)
(Presented to the Rajya Sabha on 27
th April, 2015)
(Laid on the Table of Lok Sabha on 27th
April, 2015)
(Presented to the Rajya Sabha on ______________, 2013)
(Laid on the Table of Lok Sabha on _____________, 2013)
2
PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
RAJYA SABHA
DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,
ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS
TWO HUNDRED FIFTY FOURTH REPORT
DEMANDS FOR GRANTS (2015-2016)
OF THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT,
FORESTS & CLIMATE CHANGE
(DEMAND NO. 32)
(Presented to the Rajya Sabha on 27th
April, 2015)
(Laid on the Table of Lok Sabha on 27th
April, 2015)
Rajya Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi
April, 2015/ Vaisakha, 1937 (Saka)
3
C O N T E N T S PAGES
1. COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE (i) – (ii)
2. PREFACE (iii)
3. ACRONYMS
4. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ●5. SUMMARY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS
●6. MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF THE COMMITTEE
●7. INDEX OF REPORTS
COMPOSITION OF THE DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,
ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS (2015-16)
---------- 1. Shri Ashwani Kumar –– Chairman
RAJYA SABHA
2. Shri Anil Madhav Dave
3. Shri Prem Chand Gupta
4. Shri C.P. Narayanan
5. Shri Paul Manoj Pandian
6. Dr. T. Subbarami Reddy
7. Shri Arvind Kumar Singh
8. Shri Bhupinder Singh
9. Shrimati Bimla Kashyap Sood
10. Shri Ronald Sapa Tlau
LOK SABHA
11. Shri Badruddin Ajmal
12. Shri Muzaffar Hussain Beig
13. Shrimati Bijoya Chakravarty
14. Shri Pankaj Chaudhary
15. Shri Prabhatsinh Pratapsinh Chauhan
16. Kum. Sushmita Dev
17. Shri Ninong Ering
18. Shri Laxman Giluwa
19. Dr. K. Gopal
20. Shri Daddan Mishra
21. Shri Shivaji Adhalrao Patil
22. Shri Nana Patole
23. Shri Nagendra Kumar Pradhan
24. Shri Harinarayan Rajbhar
25. Shrimati Sandhya Roy
26. Shri Kirti Vardhan Singh
27. Shri Nagendra Singh
28. Shrimati Renuka Sinha
● To be appended at printing stage
4
29. Shri Vikram Usendi
30. Shrimati Vasanthi M.
*31. Shri Chirag Paswan
____________________
SECRETARIAT Shri M.K. Khan, Joint Secretary
Shri Rohtas, Director
Shri V.S.P. Singh, Joint Director
Shri Rajiv Saxena, Assistant Director * Nominated w.e.f. 25th March, 2015.
Preface
I, the Chairman of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science
& Technology, Environment & Forests, having been authorised by the Committee to present the
Report on its behalf, present this Two Hundred Fifty-fourth Report of the Committee. This Report
deals with the detailed Demands for Grants (2015-2016) of the Ministry of Environment, Forests
and Climate Change (Demand No. 32).
2. In the meeting of the Committee held on the 30th March, 2015, the Secretary and other
Officers of the Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate Change gave an overview of the
various activities of the Ministry and the Members sought clarifications on various aspects of the
performance of the Ministry to enable it to scrutinise the Demands for Grants.
3. The Committee expresses its thanks to the Officers of the Ministry for replying to the
clarifications sought by the Members and placing before it the required material to enable the
Committee to scrutinise the Demands for Grants of the Ministry of Environment, Forests &
Climate Change.
4. The Committee considered and adopted the Report at its meeting held on the 23rd
April,
2015.
NEW DELHI;
April 23, 2015 ASHWANI KUMAR Chairman,
Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee
on Science & Technology, Environment & Forests.
ACRONYMS
AWBI : Animal Welfare Board of India;
BSI : Botanical Survey of India;
CEMP : Comprehensive Environmental Management Plan;
CEPI : Comprehensive Environmental Pollution Index;
CETP : Common Effluent Treatment Plants;
CFL : Compact Florescent Lamp;
CPCB : Central Pollution Control Board;
CSD : Commission on Sustainable Development;
CSIR : Council of Scientific and Industrial Research;
CSS : Centrally Sponsored Schemes;
CZA : Central Zoo Authority;
DST : Department of Science & Technology;
EFC : Expenditure Finance Commission;
EIA : Environment Impact Assessment;
5
EPR : Extended Producer Responsibility;
ESCAP : Economic and Social Council for Asia and Pacific;
FSI : Forest Survey of India;
GBPIHED : G.B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment & Development;
GDP : Gross Domestic Product;
GEF : Global Environment Facility;
GIM : Green India Mission;
ICAR : Indian Council of Agricultural Research;
ICFRE : Indian Council of Forestry Research & Education;
ICIMOD : International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development;
ICMR : Indian Council of Medical Research;
ICNIRP : International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection;
ICSSR : Indian Council of Social Science Research;
IGNFA : Indira Gandhi National Forestry Academy;
IIFM : Indian Institute of Forest Management;
IPIRTI : Indian Plywood Industries Research and Training Institute;
JFM : Joint Forest Management;
JNNURM : Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission;
MANREGA: Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme;
MLD : Million Liter Per day;
MSW : Municipal Solid Waste;
NAAQ : National Ambient Air Quality;
NAP : National Afforestation Programme;
NBA : National Biodiversity Authority;
NCEF : National Clean Energy Fund;
NCMP : National Coastal Management Plan;
NEERI : National Environmental Engineering Research Institute;
NGRBA : National Ganga River Basin Authority;
NIAW : National Institute of Animal Welfare;
NMNH : National Museum of Natural History;
NRCD : National River Conservation Directorate;
NRCP : National River Conservation Plan;
NTCA : National Tiger Conservation Authority;
NTFP : Non-Timber Forest Produce;
NWQMP : National Water Quality Monitoring Programme;
PCC : Pollution Control Committee;
PUFAs : Poly Unsaturated Fatty Acids;
SAARC : South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation;
SACEP : South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme;
SAFAR : System of Air Quality, Weather Forecasting and Research;
SFSRC : State Forest Service and Rangers College;
SPCB : State Pollution Control Board;
STP : Sewage Treatment Plant;
6
TPD : Tonnes Per Day;
UC : Utilisation Certificate;
UGC : University Grants Commission;
UNCED : United Nations Conference on Environment and Development;
UNEP : United Nations Environment Programme;
WCCB : Wildlife Crime Control Bureau;
WII : Wildlife Institute of India;
ZSI : Zoological Survey of India.
REPORT
Environment and Forests, it is commonly understood, are inexhaustible
natural endowments which have the capability to serve, support and sustain living
beings on the earth in eternity and in perpetuity notwithstanding the tendency to
over exploit our natural resources and the environment. Such a complacency in
understanding and insouciance in approach is sure to invite not only certain but
also imminent disaster. There is no gainsaying the fact that environment and
forests refresh, recharge, reinvigorate, rejuvenate and regenerate the environment
and that capability is not unlimited and infinite. Mother earth has enough to
support our needs but not enough to satisfy our greed. These words of our
founding fathers should guide our approach to dealing with environmental issues
inextricably connected with our inclusive and sustainable development agenda. 2. As per the Living Plant Report, 2014, the data collected in terms of
ecological footprint (which is suggestive of the pressure human activities put on
ecosystems) vis-à-vis bio-capacity (a measure of the capacity of systems to
produce useful biological materials and to absorb waste materials generated by
humans) the world is living in a situation of ecological overshoot, i.e., the
ecological footprint being larger than the bio-capacity. In 2010, the global
ecological footprint was 18.1 billion global hectares (gha) or 2.6 gha per capita
while the earth’s total bio-capacity was only 12 billion gha or 1.7 gha per capita.
Thus, we are running in a deficit of 6.1 billion global hectares (gha) or 0.9 gha per
capita. Moderate UN scenarios suggest that if current population and consumption
trends continue, by 2030s, we will need the equivalent of two earths to support us.
3. But this data may not necessarily hold good in respect of India because bio-
capacity is not spread evenly around the world. Despite the fact that the low
income countries have the smallest ecological footprint, they suffer the greatest
ecosystem losses. For India, environmental challenges are far more formidable, it
being home to 18 per cent of world’s population, 15 per cent of livestock
population and 7–8 per cent of all recorded species in only 2.3 per cent of the land
area and with 1.7 per cent of world’s forest.
4. The situation is indeed grave. According to various projections by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change extreme heat events are likely to be
longer and more intense in addition to changes in precipitation patterns. The
7
change in climate could affect the production of wheat, rice, and maize in the
tropical and temperate zones; have negative impact on health exacerbating health
problems that already exist especially in developing countries and adversely
impact productive activities like growing food and working outdoors.
5. Inklings of some of the projections have started manifesting in India in the
form of devastating natural calamities. Flash floods in Uttarakhand, back to back
floods in Kashmir, severe cyclonic storms like Phailin and Hudhud are some of the
recent instances. The cycle of monsoon has gone erratic affecting paddy
cultivation in large parts of the country. Natural flow of major rivers including the
Ganga, Yamuna, Sutlej, etc. shows a declining trend. Condition of lakes, rivers
and other water bodies continues to deteriorate day by day despite efforts made by
the Government. Worsening air quality in the country in general and Delhi in
particular has been making headlines earning ignominy at the national and
international levels so much so that some of the countries have reportedly reduced
the tenure of their diplomats in Delhi and many embassies have installed air
purifiers in their offices and residences of their diplomats.
6. We are at a stage when we need to seriously ponder over the imperatives of
sustainable development in the context of economic growth and intergenerational
equities. Environmental concerns cannot be construed as being at cross purposes
with development. Genuine environmental concerns can not be ignored. After all,
improving the quality of life of our people is at the heart of sustainable and
equitable development.
7. A study ‘Lower Pollution, Longer Lives’ published in the Economic and
Political Weekly on 21st February, 2015 has estimated that India can save upto 2
billion life years and about 3.2 years per person if 660 million people living in
areas exceeding the National Ambient Air Quality (NAAQ) for PM 2.5 pollution
can breathe air which meets air quality standards. This should be a clarion call to
proactively, effectively and purposively act in a time bound manner before it is too
late because environmental damage beyond a certain level becomes irreparable and
irreversible. It is most unfortunate that in a recent response filed in the High Court
of Delhi, Government has stated that there is no Action Plan so far to address the
critical challenges of air pollution in the Capital.
8. Not only metropolitan but even tier-II, smaller towns and cities are found to
be reeling under the severe impact of pollution on all environmental parameters.
We have the Wildlife (Protection) Act, since 1972; Water (Prevention and Control
of Pollution) Act since 1974; Forest (Conservation) Act since 1980; Air
(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act since 1981; a nodal administrative arm
of the Union Govt., namely, the Ministry of Environment & Forests (rechristened
in 2014 as Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change) since 1985; the
Environment (Protection) Act, since 1986; the Biodiversity Act since 2002; the
National Green Tribunal Act since 2010; Two National Policy Documents viz. the
National Forest Policy, 1988 and the Environment Policy, 2006. Vide Article
48(A) and 51(A)(g) of the Constitution since 1977.
8
9. The state is constitutionally mandated to protect and improve the
environment and safeguard our forests and wildlife. The constitution recognises
the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment
including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife. The principle of sustainable
development is incorporated as an integral component of the Right to Life under
Article 21 of the Constitution. Despite all these, the challenges of environmental
degradation remain unaddressed. No new initiative to purposively address the
issue has been brought before the Committee.
10. The fact that existing institutional machinery has failed to manage the
environment holistically, for various reasons is an inescapable reality. Some of
the failures have been addressed to in the report while examining the financial and
physical performance of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change
– the executive arm of the Govt. mandated to manage the environment & forests.
Before discussing specific issues the mandate of the Ministry needs to be stated
and understood.
11. Mandate of the Ministry
11.1 The broad mandates of the Ministry are as follows:-
Formation of national policies on management of environment, forest
and wildlife;
Implementation of provisions of related legislations on forest,
environment and wildlife, prevention and control of pollution of air
and water, etc.;
Climate Change matters;
Survey and exploration of natural resources particularly of forest,
flora, fauna, ecosystems, etc.;
Biodiversity conservation including that of lakes and wetlands.
Conservation, development, management and abatement of pollution
of rivers
Wildlife conservation, preservation, protection
Environmental Impact Assessment
Afforestation and eco-development
Prevention of cruelty to animals
Environmental research & development, education, training,
information and awareness.
12. The Ministry is also the nodal agency for the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP), South Asia Co-operative Environment Programme (SACEP),
International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) and the
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED). The
Ministry also coordinates with multilateral bodies such as the Commission on
Sustainable Development (CSD), Global Environment Facility (GEF) and regional
bodies such as Economic and Social Council for Asia and Pacific (ESCAP) and
9
South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) on matters
pertaining to environment.
12.1 The Ministry has the following main wings:
(i) Environment;
(ii) Climate Change;
(iii) National River conservation Directorate;
(iv) National afforestation and Eco-Development Board;
(v) Wildlife; and
(vi) Animal welfare.
13. Organizational Set Up
13.1 Ten Regional offices of the Ministry, located at Bengaluru, Bhopal,
Bhubaneswar, Chandigarh, Chennai, Dehradun, Lucknow, Nagpur, Ranchi, and
Shillong perform the functions of monitoring and evaluation of on-going forestry
development projects and schemes with specific emphasis on conservation of
forests and follow-up on implementation of conditions and safeguards laid down
by the Ministry for project activities where environmental clearance is given.
13.2 For attaining its objectives, the Ministry also provides financial support to
the following attached/subordinate/ autonomous organisations/ statutory bodies:
(i) Botanical Survey of India (BSI), Kolkata;
(ii) Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), Kolkata;
(iii) National Museum of Natural History (NMNH), New Delhi;
(iv) Indira Gandhi National Forestry Academy (IGNFA), Dehradun;
(v) State Forest Service and Rangers College, Dehradun;
(vi) Forest Survey of India (FSI), Dehradun;
(vii) Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), New Delhi;
(viii) G.B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Environment & Development
(GBPIHED), Almora;
(ix) Indian Council of Forestry Research & Education (ICFRE),
Dehradun;
(x) Indian Institute of Forest Management (IIFM), Bhopal;
(xi) Wildlife Institute of India (WII), Dehradun;
(xii) Central Zoo Authority (CZA), New Delhi;
(xiii) Indian Plywood Industries Research and Training Institute (IPIRTI),
Bengaluru;
(xiv) National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), New Delhi;
(xv) Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB), New Delhi;
(xvi) National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), Chennai;
(xvii) Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI), Chennai;
(xviii) National Institute of Animal Welfare (NLAW), Faridabad.
14. Rationalisation of Schemes in Twelfth Five Year Plan
14.1 The Ministry had rationalized 8 Schemes of Eleventh Plan to 5 in Twelfth
Plan by suitable merger, thereby reducing the number of thematic schemes from
22 to 18, comprising of 5 Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) and 13 Central
10
Sector Schemes. The Scheme on Climate Change was upgraded to a standalone
thematic scheme.
14.2 With effect from 2014-15 (Main Budget), the Plan Scheme of National
River Conservation Plan, comprising of three sub-schemes of National River
Conservation Directorate (NRCD), National River Conservation Programme
(NRCP) and National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA), has been
transferred to the Ministry of Water Resources. A new Scheme titled ‘National
Mission on Himalayan Studies’ with an outlay of Rs. 100.00 crore was introduced
in 2014-15. However, National River Conservation Directorate was restored as
per changes made in allocation of Business Rules, 1961. Accordingly, the total
number of Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) under the Ministry’s purview has
been reduced to 4, while enhancing the number of Central Sector Schemes to 14.
15. Twelfth Five Year Plan (2012-17) allocation vis-à-vis Annual Plan
Allocations 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15.
15.1 The approved outlay of the Ministry for the Eleventh Five Year Plan (2007-
12) was Rs. 10,000 Crore. The Ministry had proposed an outlay of Rs. 47,586
Crore for the Twelfth Five Year Plan (2012-17). However an outlay of Rs. 17, 874
Crore was approved. Although at current prices, the enhancement in the
Ministry’s Twelfth Plan outlay over the Eleventh Plan Outlay works out to 79 per
cent, considering the outlay proposed vis-à-vis approved, the gap of Rs. 29,712
crore is substantially wide and will adversely impact on the targets set by the
Ministry some of which though laudable, are prima-facie unrealistic. The
following extracts from the Planning Commission’s document – ‘Mid-Term
Appraisal of Eleventh Five Year Plan, is eloquent in this context:-
“The total central sector outlay for the Eleventh Plan is Rs. 10,96,860 Crore
(constant price) of which Rs. 8,841 Crore/ Rs. 10,000 Crore (constant and
current price respectively) is allocated for the environment, forest and
wildlife sectors. The current allocation for the environment and forest
sector is 0.70 per cent (0.91 per cent) of the total central sector outlay and
in the states it varies between 0.021 per cent and 1.78 per cent of the state
outlay for environment and 1.25 per cent for forestry and wildlife. An
allocation of at least 5 per cent of the annual, state, and central sector
outlay for the environment and forestry sectors separately needs to be
ensured, preferably by the Twelfth Five Year Plan.”
15.2 The Ministry should have been allocated about Rs. 3,575 crores every
year out of Rs. 17,874 crores sanctioned during Twelfth Five Year Plan. But
till the end of third year of the Plan only Rs. 6,903 crores against Rs.10,724.4
crores has been allocated, whereas actual utilization has been only Rs.5200
crores.
15.3 The Committee feels that the very purpose of long term planning in the
form of Five Year Plan is to formulate long gestation projects and for their
timely execution, for which inadequate allocation of funds should not be a
11
stumbling block. At the same time, the Ministry needs to ensure that the
funds are prudently and effectively utilized.
16. Allocation for the Year 2015-16
16.1 The Committee was informed that the Ministry of Environment, Forests and
Climate Change had projected a Plan outlay of Rs. 4440.20 crores for the year
2015-16, an increase of 117 per cent over the Budget Estimates of 2014-15.
However, an allocation of Rs. 1446.60 crores was approved by the Ministry of
Finance, excluding Rs. 64 and 46 crores to be sourced from the National Clean
Energy Fund for Green India Mission and National River Conservation
Directorate, respectively. It shows that an amount of Rs. 2993.60 crores has been
reduced in the projected Budgetary Demand of the Ministry. In percentage terms,
this reduction works out to 67.42 per cent. A chart showing sector-wise projected
demand vis-à-vis outlay approved is given below:-
Chart – I (In Crore)
Sl.
No.
Sector BE
Projected
2015-16
BE
Approved
2015-16
% of approved
BE to the BE
projected
1. Environment 1756.76 723.16 41.16
2. Forests & Wildlife 1983.15 558.94 28.18
3. National
Afforestation Eco-
Development Board
(incl. NAP)
594.49 118.00 19.85
4. NCRP (inc. NPCA) 75.00 35.00 46.67
5. Animal Welfare 30.80 11.50 37.34
Total (1-5) 4440.20 1446.60 32.58
16.2 It shows that although all the sectors have suffered, but the core sectors of
the Ministry viz. Environment, Forests & Wildlife and National Afforestation and
Eco Development Board are the worst sufferers in terms of reduction in the
projected demand of the Ministry. Sector-wise allocation for the Ministry
comprises of Rs. 758.16 crore on Environment and Ecology sector and Rs. 688.44
Crores for the Forestry & Wildlife sector.
16.3 The Committee enquired from the Ministry as to how does the budgetary
allocation made in 2014-15 & 2015-16 translate in percentage terms to the total
GDP of the country and to the total Central Plan outlay of the Government, the
Ministry's reply was that the Ministry’s Central Sector Plan allocation with respect
to the total GDP of the country in 2014-15 was 0.01 per cent and the figure for the
2015-16 was not available whereas in terms of the total Central Plan outlay of the
Government, the allocation works out to 0.24 per cent in 2014-15 and 0.17 per
cent in 2015-16 even though as referred to in para 16.10 hereafter, other Ministries
also have budgets allocated for environment related issues yet the amount
12
allocated to the administrative Ministry charged with the management of
environment are deafeningly eloquent.
16.4 This year, Plan outlay in net terms is less by Rs. 596.4 crore, as compared to
the year 2014-15. On a comparative analysis of the annual plan allocations made
to the Ministry, the Committee finds that there has been a constant reduction over
the last three years. A chart showing year-wise allocation and percentage increase
over the previous year is given below:-
Chart – II
(In Crore)
Year Non-
Plan
Plan Total Percentage
share of
Plan
allocation
Percentage increase
over previous year
Plan Total
2012-13 452.41 2430.00 2882.41 84.30 % 5.65% 5.12%
2013-14 454.70 2430.00 2884.70 84.24 % 0.00% 0.08%
2014-15 @* 467.50 2043.00* 2510.50 81.38 % -(15.92)% -(12.97)%
2015-16 491.00 1556.60@ 2047.60 76.02 % -(23.81)% -(18.44)% @* Green India Mission not part of the GBS, as the fund of Rs. 64 crore is sourced from “NCEF”.
National River Conservation Plan not part of the GBS, as the fund of Rs. 46.00 crore is sourced from
“NCEF”. *Scheme of National River Conservation Plan, National Ganga River Basin Authority
transferred to M/o. Water Resources.
16.5 Taking the year 2012-13 as the base year, there was a 5.65 percentage
increase in the Plan allocation as compared to the previous year. Thereafter, in the
year 2013-14, there was nil increase and in the year 2014-15, the Plan allocation
went in the minus i.e. -15.92 per cent while this year, it has widened further to -
23.8 per cent. This is clearly unacceptable considering the reality and gravity
of the environmental challenge and steps required to address the same. 16.6 Flagship/thematic scheme wise allocations for 2015-16, which account for
almost 72.86 per cent of the Plan outlay of the Ministry reflects that the Climate
Change Action Programme; Afforestation and Green India Mission and Project
Tiger have received priority. A chart showing the outlay on major
schemes/projects of the Ministry is given below:-
Chart – III
(In Crore) Name of Scheme 2014-15
BE
2014-15
RE
2015-16
BE
Increase
over 2014-
15 RE(%)
1. Central Pollution Control Board 57.92 40.00 50.00 3.21
2. Hazardous Substances Management
Scheme
25.00 6.00 25.00 1.61
3. Bio-diversity Conservation 50.00 24.00 24.00 1.54
4. National Plan for Conservation of
Aquatic Ecosystem
75.00 37.12 35.00 2.25
5. Environment Education and
Awareness
55.00 33.54 40.88 2.63
13
6. Climate Change Action Programme 25.00 10.00 175.01 11.24
7. Office Building (CCU) 33.12 31.37 1.50 0.10
8. National Coastal Management
Programme
160.80 160.80 100.00 6.42
9. National River Conservation Plan 0.00 84.00 46.00 2.96
10. ICFRE 143.66 127.26 110.00 7.07
11. IGNFA 32.00 34.30 20.00 1.28
12. Capacity Building For Forest
Management
32.00 21.00 44.00 2.83
13. Afforestation and Green India Mission 398.15 246.80 164.00 10.54
14. National Afforestation & Eco-
Development Board
34.74 26.85 18.00 1.16
15. Central Zoo Authority (incl. NZP) 38.00 35.00 14.50 0.93
16. Wild Life Management 8.00 5.70 5.32 0.34 17. Project Tiger 185.02 185.02 161.00 10.34 18. National Mission on Himalayan
Studies
100.00 0.00 100.00 6.42
Total (1-18) 1453.411 108.76 1134.21 72.86
16.7 The Committee also finds that the Plan allocation for Centrally Sponsored
Schemes in the current year has gone down by almost 50 per cent, the allocation
for the Central Schemes has also been curtailed in comparison to the BE
allocations of 2014-15. While for Centrally Sponsored Scheme, the BE allocation
in 2014-15 was Rs. 872.00 crores and for Central Schemes Rs. 1171.00 crores, the
current year allocation stands at Rs. 451.55 crores and Rs. 995.05 crores
respectively. A chart showing Scheme-wise BE/RE allocations made during the
year 2014-15 and BE 2015-16 is given below:-
Chart – IV (Rs. In crore)
S. No. Scheme BE
2014-15
RE
2014-15
Expenditure
(Upto date)
Utilization
of RE (%)
BE
2015-16
1 CSS 872.00 721.02 701.06 97.23% 451.55
2 CS 1171.00 828.98 781.36 94.26% 995.05
Total 2043.00 1550.00 1482.42 95.64% 1446.60 CSS: Centrally Sponsored Scheme; CS: Central Sector
16.8 On a comparative analysis of Sector-wise allocation, it is evident that the BE
allocation in 2014-15 for Environment & Ecology sector was Rs. 873.80 crore
which has come down to Rs. 758.16 crore in the current year. Similarly, the BE
allocation of Rs. 1169.20 crore for Forestry & Wildlife sector in 2014-15 has gone
down to Rs. 688.44 crore in the current year. It may be seen that while reduction
in the budgetary allocation this year in comparison to last year BE allocation for
Environment & Ecology sector comes to Rs. 115.64 crore, the reduction in the
Forestry & Wildlife sector amounts to Rs. 480.76 crore. If the current year
allocation is juxtaposed with the RE allocation of the last year, it is observed that
while outlay for Environment & Ecology sector has gone up by Rs. 122.19 crore,
the outlay for Forestry & Wildlife sector has gone down by Rs. 225.59 crore.
14
Thus, Forestry & Wildlife sector is the worst sufferer in terms of allocation.
Particularly, the programmes namely National Afforestation Programme,
Strengthening of Wildlife Divisions, Integrated Development of Wildlife Habitats
and Animal Welfare are the worst sufferers. A Sector-wise chart of allocation is
given below:-
Chart – V
Allocation for Environment & Ecology Sector (In Rs. Crore)
S.
No
Name of the Scheme BE
2014-15
RE
2014-15
Expenditure
(Upto-date)
Exp. as
% of RE
BE
2015-16
1. Environmental monitoring and
Governance (CS)
98.73 66.25 63.28 95.52 76.10
2. Pollution Abatement (CS) 45.35 20.40 18.16 89.02 43.10
3. R&D for Conservation &
Development (CS)
281.30 113.91 102.45 89.94 213.05
4. Conservation of Natural
Resources and Ecosystems
(CSS)
107.50 66.19 64.99 98.19 63.14
5. Environment Information,
Education & Awareness (CS)
107.50 75.95 72.45 95.39 79.23
6. Climate Change Action
Programme (CS)
25.00 10.00 3.15 31.50 175.01
7. International Co-operation(IC)
Activities (CS)
47.62 38.47 33.58 87.29 8.53
8. National Coastal Management
Programme (NCMP) (CS)
160.80 160.80 160.80 100.00 100.00
9. National River Conservation
Plan (NRCP) (CS)
- 84.00 74.13 88.25 46.00
Total Environment & Ecology 873.80 635.97 592.99 93.24 758.16
Chart – VI
Allocation for Forestry & Wildlife Sector (In Rs. Crore)
S.
No.
Name of the Scheme BE
2014-15
RE
2014-15
Expenditure
(Upto-date)
Exp. as
% of RE
BE
2015-16
1. Grants in aid to Forests &
Wildlife institutions (CS)
184.37 66.91 159.07 95.30 145.80
2. Capacity building in
forestry sector (CS)
74.20 65.45 63.78 97.45 73.47
3. National Afforestation
Programme (National
Mission for a Green India)
(CSS)
466.40 300.92 294.25 97.78 149.50
4. Strengthening Forestry
Divisions (CS)
42.19 6.29 25.08 95.40 31.44
5. Strengthening of Wildlife
Divisions (CS)
46.00 40.70 39.66 97.44 19.82
15
6. Integrated Development
of Wild Life Habitats
(CSS)Project Tiger (CSS)
113.08 84.89 84.38 99.40 77.91
7. Project Tiger (CSS) 185.02 85.02 183.31 99.08 161.00
8. National Afforestation &
Eco-Development Board
(NAEB) (CS)
34.74 26.85 26.49 98.66 18.00
9. Animal Welfare (CS) 23.20 17.00 13.41 78.88 11.50
Total Forestry & Wildlife (In
Rs. Crore)
1169.20 914.03 889.43 97.31 688.44
16.9 The following broad reasons were attributed for lower allocation:
Overall Fiscal situation
XIV Finance Commission award to provide more funds to States-
hence their share in CSS will go up and Centre’s share will come
down
Funding pattern of CSS is likely to undergo a substantial change
Allocation reduced across many sectors
16.10 While making submissions on Demands for Grants of the Ministry,
Secretary requested the Committee to consider the fact that apart from the
budgetary outlay approved for the Ministry, pollution control measures get support
from other sources as well. Because of the increased devolution of funds to the
States as a result of the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission, these
States are expected to make higher contribution in the Centrally Sponsored
Schemes. For creation of public infrastructure to deal with the aspects of
pollution, resources are allocated through various Ministries of Govt. of India. For
creating urban municipal amenities, sewage treatment plants, etc. for instance,
funding is made by the Ministry of Urban Development. Similarly, for river
cleaning, Ministry of Water Resources, River Development and Ganga
Rejuvenation makes contribution and development of frontiers green technology is
supported by National Clean Energy Fund. Besides, private sector also contributes
funds for installation of online monitoring devices, effluent treatment plants,
modernization and upgradation of Effluent Treatment Plants to ensure zero liquid
discharge, convergence guidelines of Green India Mission with Mahatma Gandhi
National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MNREGS) have been issued in
March, 2015, whereby plantation activities could be undertaken through MNREGS
Scheme.
16.11 The Committee takes note of the views of and action proposed to be
taken, as elaborated by the Secretary but feels that the primary responsibility
for environmental protection must rest with the concerned Union Ministry
and it cannot avoid overall responsibility for an effective and coordinated
monitoring and protection of environment. The Committee, therefore,
recommends that close monitoring and corrective steps by the Ministry be
taken urgently and an Action Taken Report in this regard be presented.
Additional requisite funds if any, should be made available to the Ministry.
16
16.12 When the Committee enquired from the Ministry about the reasons for
decrease in the allocations made to the Ministry, it was told that budgetary
allocations to various sectors are determined by taking into account several factors
such as fiscal position, competing priorities of various sectors, etc. It is felt by the
Committee that considering the vital role and function being performed by
the Ministry, Government should give the requisite priority to the Ministry in
the matter of resource allocation.
16.13 The Ministry is engaged in arresting environmental degradation which
is considered to be a major contributing factor in loss of agricultural
productivity, because ecological degradation affects soil fertility (refer Paras 4
& 5 above); quantity and quality of water, air quality; forests; wildlife; and
fisheries, etc. The worst sufferers of forest degradation are the poor tribal
societies who live on natural resources. The loss of environmental resource
base often results in these groups being made destitute which leads to
alienation and exhaustion of large segment of our population. Further, urban
environmental degradation, including lack of adequate infrastructure for
waste treatment and sanitation, industrial and vehicular pollution impacts
adversely upon the health of the urban poor, which in turn affects the overall
quality of life and their capacity to optimize their potential. It is obvious that
worsening air and water quality will impact those who are living in poverty.
Indeed, the fallout of global warming and climate change will affect the
homeless and the poor more than anyone else. As the nodal Ministry for
environment protection and preservation, it should discharge its mandate
effectively. The Committee recommends that the Government shall consider
the critical role being discharged by the Ministry while making allocations
and accordingly make adequate and appropriate enhancement at the RE
stage. It is also advisable to put in place an Inter-Ministerial Mechanism to
resolve outstanding issues arising from different perspectives on critical
issues. The views of Environment Ministry on issues of environment must be
given due priority.
16.14 The Committee enquired from the Ministry as to which Programmes/
Schemes are likely to be affected by the reduced budgetary allocation and sought
Programme/Scheme wise details of the adverse impact that the reduced budgetary
outlay would have on them. The Ministry has listed thirteen following activities
which would bear the brunt of low allocations:
Prevention and control of pollution
Afforestation programme in inaccessible areas
Monitoring of forest cover & forest inventory
Resources Centres and rehabilitation activities of Central Zoo
Authority Affecting animal welfare
On going works relating to pollution abatement in rivers
17
Mapping, delineation & demarcation of Hazard lines/ Ecological
sensitive areas and capacity development in NCMP
Committed liabilities of on-going programmes
Recovery programme for critically endangered species
Project tiger-voluntary village relocation from Critical Tiger Habitat
(CBT) & Spl. Tiger Task force
Research projects and capacity building in the areas of wildlife crime
control
environmental education & awareness programme
Strengthening of Regional Offices of the Ministry
Commitments for key training programmes.
17. General Trend of Utilisation of Outlays
17.1 The Committee finds that the trend of utilisation of budgetary allocations
made to the Ministry in the first two years of the Twelfth Five Year Plan, i.e.,
2012-13 & 2013-14 has been quite unsatisfactory. For each year, the BE
allocation for the Ministry was Rs. 2430.00 crore which came down to Rs. 1800.00
crore and Rs. 1850.00 crore respectively at RE stage, thus, leaving Rs. 630.00 in
the first Annual Plan, i.e., 2012-13 and Rs. 580.00 crore in the 2nd
Annual Plan,
i.e., 2013-14 unutilized. Ministry’s contention that reduction in the Revised
Estimates was effected owing to reduction in the Revised Estimate of Plan budget
approved by the Ministry of Finance does not hold good because one of the prime
factors for reduction at the RE stage, as rightly admitted by the Secretary of the
Ministry, is low utilisation of funds in the first six months of the financial year.
But, this is only one aspect of the problem. The other aspect which is more serious
is the fact that even the RE allocations were not fully utilised by the Ministry in
any of the two years. As against the Revised Estimate of Rs. 1800.00 crore, the
actual expenditure in the year 2012-13 was Rs. 1636.18 crore whereas in the year
2013-14 as against the RE of Rs. 1850.00 crore, the actual expenditure was Rs.
1811.34 crore. In percentage terms, the utilisation percentage of RE, in these two
years accounted for 90.89 per cent and 97.89 per cent respectively.
17.2 The trend of utilisation more or less remains the same during the last year,
i.e., 2014-15 as well. The BE allocation of Rs. 2043 crore was reduced to Rs.
1550.00 crore at the RE stage meaning thereby a reduction of Rs. 493.00 crore.
The actual expenditure recorded as on 31.01.2015 has been stated to be Rs.
1206.87 crore. However, during its deliberations with the Committee on 30th
March, 2015, the figure of up-do-date expenditure was stated to be Rs. 1482.42
18
crore which in percentage terms works out to 95.64 per cent, as shown in the chart
below:
Chart – VII (In Rs. Crore)
S.
No.
Year BE RE Expenditure
(Upto-date)
Utilization
of RE (%)
1. 2012-13 2430.00 1800.00 1636.00 90.89%
2. 2013-14 2430.00 1850.00 1811.34 97.89%
3. 2014-15 2043.00# 1550.00 1482.42 95.64% #excluding Ganga Mission.
17.3 The Committee is of the considered opinion that enhancement of
financial allocations would indeed be meaningful if the Ministry ensures its
funds utilization for the specific purposes and priorities.
17.4 The Committee feels that the reasons given by the Ministry for
underutilization of funds are not convincing. The Committee while
expressing its concern over the underutilization of approved Outlays
recommends that the Ministry tighten its administrative setup to obviate
underutilization of funds because of administrative reasons such as late
approval, lack of adequate proposals, delays in receipt of proposals, late
submission of utilization certificates, revalidation of unspent balances, etc.
17.5 One of the reasons cited for low financial performance of the Ministry is the
Department of Expenditure instructions that if a grantee institution receiving multi
funding under various schemes of the Ministry, has even a single utilisation
certificate pending, no funds can be released to that grantee institution under any
other scheme. The Committee feels that these instructions should be relaxable
in suitable cases so as not to prevent effective utilization of funds for priority
projects. 18. Twelfth Five Year Plan Vision
18.1 The vision for the Ministry for the Twelfth Five Year Plan has been stated
as “Managing Environment, Forests, Wildlife and challenges due to Climate
Change for faster and equitable growth, where ecological security for
sustainability and inclusiveness is restored, equity in access to all environmental
goods and ecosystem services is assured through institutionalization of people’s
participation”; and “a future in which the nation takes pride in the quality of its
environment, forests, richness of its biodiversity, and efforts by the State and its
people to protect, expand and enrich it, for intra and inter-generational equity and
welfare of the local and global community”. Finding the ground reality and the
situation prevailing in the country in contrast to the stated vision, the Committee
enquired from the Ministry as to the extent to which it has been able to realize it.
In response, the Ministry came out with a vague and evasive reply by saying that
the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change through its various
programmes and Central Sector and Centrally Sponsored Schemes and through
19
various protective policies and regulations strives to achieve the goals outlined in
the Twelfth Five Year Plan for environment and forestry sector.
18.2 The Committee feels that though vision of the Ministry for the Twelfth
Plan period for managing environment, wildlife and challenges of climate
change is laudable, it is not backed up by a purposive and comprehensive
Action Plan and its efficient and effective implementation. Therefore, the
Committee recommends that an achievable Action Plan within realistic time
frame should be chalked out.
19. Monitorable Socio-Economic Targets & Goals
19.1 Twelfth Five Year Plan has identified 13 monitorable socio-economic
targets and 14 goals which would receive special attention of the Ministry, as
given below:-
TARGETS
Environment and Climate Change
(i) Assess and remediate 12 identified contaminated site (hazardous
chemicals and wastes) with potential for ground water contamination
by 2017.
(ii) Clean 80% of critically polluted stretches in rivers by 2017 and 100%
by 2020.
(iii) States to meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in
urban areas by 2017.
(iv) To reduce emission intensity of GDP in the line with the target of 20
to 25% reduction over 2005 levels by 2020.
Forests and Livelihood
(i) Greening 5 million ha. under Green India Mission including 1.5
million ha. of degraded lands, afforestation and eco-restoration of 0.9
million ha. of ecologically sensitive areas.
(ii) Technology-based monitoring of forest cover, biodiversity and
growing stock including change- monitoring on periodical basis
through dedicated satellite by 2017 and establishment of open web-
based National Forestry and Environmental Information system for
research and public accessibility by 2015.
(iii) Engagement of Village Green Guards/ Community Foresters for
every Joint Forest Management (JFM) village by 2016.
(iv) Establish forestry seek bank in forest circles and Model Nursery in
every district with information on public portal by 2014.
Wildlife, Ecotourism and Animal Welfare
(i) Twenty per cent of veterinary professionals will be trained in treating
wildlife.
(ii) Integrated Ecotourism District Plans covering 10% of all potential
Protected Areas by 2017.
20
(iii) Promoting participation of private sector, civil societies, NGOs and
philanthropists in animal welfare.
Ecosystem and Biodiversity
(i) Restore 0.1 million ha. of wetlands/ inland lakes/ water bodies by
2017.
(ii) Mapping and preparation of biodiversity management plans for
deserts, coastal areas, important coral zones, wetlands, mangroves and
so on to be completed by 2017.
GOALS
Environment
(i) Epidemiological studies to assess improvement in health status due to
better management of environment and ecology.
(ii) Promotion and adoption of cleaner technology, strengthening and
initiation of reforms in regulations, policy making and enforcement
institutions for environmental governance.
(iii) Move towards cumulative and strategic EIA.
(iv) Ensure ecological flows in all rivers by regulating abstractions so as
to allow conservation of riverine ecosystems through developing a
legal framework and management strategy for conservation of river
basins.
(v) Promotion of recycling and reuse of treated sewage in urban projects
such as sanitation, landscaping, central air conditioning and so on.
Forests and Livelihood
(i) Improve forest productivity, production and sustainable management
of biodiversity (equity in access to benefit sharing with local people).
(ii) Restoration and intensification of forest-rangelands/ grazing-land
management and establish community grazing land around forest
fringe villages.
(iii) Build capacity of Village Forest Committees/ Joint Forestry
Management Committees for management of forest resources
including ecotourism.
(iv) Revive seed orchards and silviculture plots for various forest types of
the country as well as for enlisted species under Minor Forest Produce
(MFP)/ Non-Timber Forest Produce (NTFP) including genetic
improvement of an establishment of clonal orchards.
Wildlife, Ecotourism and Animal Welfare
(i) Reducing and managing human-wildlife conflict.
(ii) Commercialization of permissible marine products rich in poly
unsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), vitamins and so on.
(iii) Promotion of ecotourism and participatory eco-development support
livelihood of local population.
21
Ecosystem and Biodiversity
(i) Develop national targets and indicators related to biodiversity and
support actions to strengthen implementation of Biological Diversity
Act, 2002 and ensure bio-safety for economic and social development
of local communities.
(ii) Assess coastal biodiversity resources, ensure sustainable
management, restoration of mangroves, coral reefs and wetlands and
support livelihood.
19.2 With regard to the 13 monitorable socioeconomic targets and 14 goals
identified for the Ministry for the Twelfth Five Year Plan, the Committee asked
the Ministry to highlight the salient achievements in general and with special
reference to (a) Assess and remediate 12 identified contaminated sites; (b) Clean
80 per cent of critically polluted stretches in rivers; (c) States to meet National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); (d) greening 5 million hectares under
Green India Mission including 1.5 mha of degraded lands; (e) establish forestry
seed bank in various circles and model nursery in every District by 2014; (f)
ensure ecological flows in all rivers by regulating abstractions through developing
a legal framework and management strategy for conservation of river basins.
19.3 In reply to the query, the Ministry furnished a reply outlining the schemes,
funding pattern and other sundry details but not the concrete achievements in
categorical terms with regard to the socioeconomic target to assess and remediate
12 identified contaminated sites. The Ministry has given details of 3 programmes,
namely, Remediation of Contaminated Hazardous Waste Dump Sites under
National clean Energy Fund; Capacity Building for Industrial Pollution
Management Project and the National Programme for Rehabilitation of polluted
sites. Under the remediation of Contaminated Hazardous Waste Dump Sites, an
Inter-Ministerial group of Ministry of Finance had in its meeting held on 11th
August, 2011 approved the proposal for remediation for 12 hazardous
contaminated waste area at an initial project outlay of Rs. 805 crore. The current
status of the project is that Central Pollution Control Board had completed
technical review for entering into award of contract in respect of 8 contaminated
areas and the reconnaissance and preliminary assessment work completed on 30th
September, 2014. Preliminary investigation and development of conceptual site
mode and sample are under progress.
19.4 The scheme of Capacity Building of Industrial Pollution Management
Project is a World Bank aided project for 5 years commencing w.e.f. 13th
October,
2010. The project is supporting Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal in
implementation of pilot projects at 4 sites, 2 each in both the States. Out of the 4
pilot projects, the contract for remediation work was awarded in October, 2014, in
respect of closure and containment of MSW site, Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh. For
the rest of the 3, bidding was in process, meaning thereby that work started only on
one project, despite the fact that the duration of 5 year period is nearing
completion.
22
19.5 With reference to the target to clean 80 per cent polluted stretches and
rivers, the Ministry has inter-alia stated that proper treatment and disposal of
sewage generated in towns is the responsibility of the concerned State Govts./
local bodies so that the untreated sewage is not discharged into rivers and other
water bodies, thereby polluting them and that the Ministry has been supplementing
the efforts of the State Govts. in abatement of pollution in identified stretches of
various rivers under National River Conservation Plan. It is further stated that the
concerned State Pollution Control Boards are responsible to control and monitor
industrial pollution in order to ensure that untreated industrial effluents are not
discharged into the rivers. Finally, the Ministry contended that the monitorable
target of cleaning up of polluted rivers and stretches pertains to a number of
Ministries at the Central level, i.e., Ministries of Urban Development; Water
Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation; and Environment,
Forests and Climate Change in addition to State Governments and local bodies.
19.6 The Committee feels that the target to clean 80% critically polluted
stretches in rivers was assigned to the Ministry of Environment, Forests and
Climate Change but the Ministry could not deliver on the mandate.
Likewise, going by the present status of the 13 monitorable targets & goals
stated above, the progress is disappointing. It is obvious that the targets set
are entirely unrealistic going by the record thus far. No credible base has
been stated in support of the achievability of the targets within the specified
timeframe. The Ministry should review the status of these targets again and a
concrete Action Plan in this regard should be put in place at the earliest.
19.7 The reply given by the Ministry in the context of the goal to ensure
ecological flows in all the rivers by regulating abstractions through developing a
legal framework and management strategy for conservation of river basins is yet
another attempt on the part of the Ministry to shift its responsibility and place the
ball in the court of the Ministry of Water Resources, River Development and
Ganga Rejuvenation.
19.8 If the Ministry knew that the target did not fall within the ambit of the
Ministry, the Committee wonders why it accepted it as one of the goals for the
Twelfth Five Year Plan.
19.9 In view of the forgoing, the Committee finds that even after the lapse of
three years of the Twelfth Five Year Plan, the targets and goals proposed to
be achieved within in the plan period remain by and large unfulfilled. With
only two more years to go, the achievement of the targets/ goals appears to be
a far cry. The Committee takes a serious note of the fact that assigned
targets/goals have not been met and the timelines fixed are prima-facie
unrealistic. Sincere efforts ought to be made by the Ministry to vigorously
pursue these goals.
23
POLLUTION
20. Air
20.1 Pollution on all its parameters – air, water, noise, industrial waste, municipal
hazardous waste, e-waste, etc., over the last few years has gone beyond
permissible limits. What is worrisome and frightening is the fact that its intensity
and enormity continues to multiply with the passage of time, but the responsible
institutional machinery does not appear to be serious about doing anything to rein
in the monster of pollution. Worsening air quality of Delhi in particular and of the
entire country in general gets reflected through media reports from time to time.
As per a World Health Organisation report on air quality data base of 1600 cities
and 91 countries, as reported in the print media, Delhi has the most polluted air in
the world. The concentration of PM 2.5 fine respirable particles which is
considered most dangerous for health is highest in Delhi at 153 micrograms per
cubic meter as against the WHO standard of 10 micrograms per cubic meter. The
concentration of PM 10 (coarse particles) in Delhi is about 286 micrograms per
cubic meter, 14 times higher than the WHO annual mean standard of 20. An
analysis by Centre for Science and Environment shows that PM10 concentration in
Delhi’s air increased by about Seventy Five per cent from 2007 to 2011.
Vehicular emissions from diesel based engines in particular, are a major
contributor to air pollution in Delhi. Diesel is used as fuel by not just vehicles but
tractors, trucks, tubewells and generators. Significantly, WHO has characterized
Diesel as a Class-I Carcinogen. Other Indian cities with a very high level of PM10
include Gwalior, Raipur, Lucknow, Ghaziabad, etc. Yale University’s
Environmental Performance Index, 2014 had ranked India among the bottom five
in a list of 178 countries for various parameters including air pollution.
20.2 A 64 day study of air monitoring stations in the National Capital Region by
the Central Pollution Control Board found the average Benzene level which is
linked to certain kinds of lymphomas, a cancer that begins in the immune system,
to be 14 micrograms per cubic meter almost three times higher than the safe limit
of five in Delhi. According to a data analysis conducted by System of Air Quality,
Weather Forecasting and Research (SAFAR) under Ministry of Earth Sciences, air
quality in Delhi during winter was poor on 76 per cent of the winter days in 2014-
15, as compared to 67 per cent and 54 per cent in the preceding years.
20.3 When the Committee enquired about the total number of bad air days in
2014 and 2015 so far in Delhi, the Ministry presented the data percentage of good
air days for different pollutants in such a form that it is not possible to make out
exactly the number of bad air days, year-wise, separately and make a comparative
assessment. The Ministry replied that as per the data of CPCB, out of 100 days in
Delhi, good days of air quality are 84 per cent goods days for Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2), 83 per cent good days for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) and 5 per cent good days
for particulate matter having size less than 10 microns (PM10).
24
20.4 However, in its comments on a news-item according to which Delhi’s
average PM 2.5 level, as reported by CPCB was 153 micrograms per cubic metre
in 2013, the Ministry admitted that as per monitoring conducted at National
Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Programme Stations at Delhi during 2014, the
annual average value of PM 2.5 was 86 microgram per cubic meter, which is 2.2
times the standard value, i.e., 40 microgram per cubic meter, which is the annual
average. The Ministry, thus not only cleverly managed to dodge the query on PM
2.5 data for 2013 collected by CPCB but also in toning down its level to 86
microgram by giving figure for 2014 and not for 2013.
20.5 The Committee also sought comments of the Ministry on a news-item
according to which a joint study by Universities of Chicago, Yale and Harvard,
concluded that half of India’s population may be losing upto three years of lifespan
because of bad air. The Ministry stopped short of rejecting the finding by saying
that the figure quoted in the article “Lower Pollution Longer Life” published in
The Economics and Political Weekly are mere estimates and no field study has
been undertaken. The morbidity/ mortality is dependent upon several factors apart
from bad air. The same indifferent reply was received from the Ministry in
response to a question on a study published in 2014 by scientists from IIT, Roorki,
Humphrey School of Public Affairs, Institute of Minnesota and University of
Colorado which found a massive rise in mortality and morbidity associated with
high pollution levels in Delhi since 2000. According to it the total mortality has
gone up from 11,394 in 2000 to 18,229 in 2010; cardiovascular mortality from
3,912 to 6,374 and respiratory mortality from 1,697 to 2,701 during the above
period. According to Global Burden of Diseases, 2013, which tracks deaths and
illness from all causes every 10 year, polluted outdoor air caused 6,20,000
premature deaths in India in 2010 and this was a six fold jump from 1,00,000
deaths in 2000.
20.6 Since the Ministry shows reluctance in attaching more credibility to the
study reports on ill-effects of air pollution on health prepared by International
Institutes of repute, the Committee made a specific query to the Ministry as to
whether it has conducted any epidemiological study to assess the impacts of air
pollution on health in the country so that it need not necessarily depend on data
generated by other agencies and if so, what are the findings. The Ministry
submitted that three epidemiological studies sponsored by CPCB were conducted
by Chittaranjan National Cancer Institute, Kolkata during 2002 to 2005 and 2007
to 2012. These studies indicate that several pulmonary and systemic changes and
other health impairments are associated with cumulative exposure to high level of
particulate matter which increases the risk of various diseases including respiratory
and cardiovascular. However, results are indicative rather than conclusive because
health effects of air pollution are synergistic and additive which includes wide
range of variation which also depends on various factors of a person like food
habit, socio-economic status, medical history, immunity of the individual and
heredity, etc.
25
20.7 The Committee is of the opinion that as a Nation we cannot live in
denial. Air pollution at its highest is an undeniable reality in most of our
cities. The problem is real, widespread and indeed critical which finds
support in studies conducted by the Government's own arm, the Central
Pollution Control Board and other Govt. agencies such as the Ministry of
Earth Sciences, Delhi Pollution Control Committee in addition to
international studies. As per a news report of 180 cities monitored by the
CPCB in 2012, only two cities in Kerala meet the criteria of low air pollution.
20.8 The Committee finds it strange and ironical that the Ministry is neither
ready to rely on or accept epidemiological studies linking mortality with air
pollution conducted by reputed international institutes nor does it appear to
be inclined to accept the findings of the CPCB to arrive at a definite
conclusion. As recorded hereinabove, it is reported that in a recent affidavit
filed before the Delhi High Court, the Ministry has stated that as yet, there is
no finalized Action Plan to tackle the challenge of air pollution in Delhi. The
Committee recommends urgent remedial and purposive action within a
specified time frame to address the grave and critical challenge of
deteriorating ambient air quality which has serious consequences for the
health and well being of our citizens in derogation of their constitutional right
to a better quality of life, free from avoidable diseases as guaranteed under
Article 21 of the constitution. The Ministry should realize that it is
specifically mandated to subserve the most important constitutional
obligation, namely securing the citizens health and quality of life.
20.9 The Committee takes note of the recent launch of Air Quality Index, a
tool for effective dissemination of air quality information to people. It will,
however, be successful in the true sense of the term if the Ministry, based on
the air quality status, puts in place a short-term response plan with health
advisory and alarm systems for closing schools, factories and reducing the
number of cars on roads, so that even those not closely following the Air
Quality Index could be benefited from this service.
20.10 The Committee recommends that Government try to restrict the use of
personal vehicles through an efficient and cost effective public transport
system and also encourage clean vehicle technologies through fiscal incentives.
It also feels that the Ministry should advise civic agencies in Delhi and other
metropolitan cities to shift to vacuum cleaning and till that is in place to
clean/sweep roads during nights after sprinkling water so that dust settles
down by morning; safely dispose of dust so collected; strictly enforce ban on
burning of stubble leafs, garbage and other waste material like tyre;
polythene, plastic, etc.; ensure safe and scientific disposal of construction and
demolition waste; washing of tyres of vehicles coming out of construction
sites, keep loose soil, sand other construction material liable to create dust
under cover; to keep construction material away from foot-path. Besides a
26
toll free common helpline telephone number on national level may be
introduced for making complaints against those agencies/ individuals found
polluting the environment.
21. Noise Pollution
21.1 Noise pollution has emerged as one of the formidable challenges not only in
metropolitan but also in Tier-II and small cities. Noise pollution as we all know,
causes deleterious effects on human health and psychological well being of the
people. Noise not only causes irritation and annoyance but also constricts the
arteries. Health experts are of the opinion that noise in excess of 90 decibels can
lead to neurosis and nervous breakdown and can cause loss of hearing and
irreversible changes in nervous system. The World Health Organization has fixed
45 decibels as the safe noise level for a city. However, metropolitan cities in India
usually register on an average more than 90 decibels. During its study visit to
Mumbai, Visakhapatnam, Ludhiana and Amritsar, Members of the civil society
and NGOs voiced serious concerns over the rising levels of noise pollution caused
by vehicles, indiscriminate use of public address system, DG sets, burning of
crackers, construction activities, etc.
21.2 The Committee observes that the Noise Pollution (Regulation &
Control) Rules, 2000 which aims at maintaining the Ambient Air Quality
Standards in respect of noise, in the absence of a nodal and strict enforcement
and implementing machinery, is being blatantly violated all over the country.
The Committee feels that the Ministry should not seek solace in the fact that
by notifying standards and guidelines for noise pollution, it has done its duty.
The Committee recommends that the Ministry devise short and long-term
action plan to effectively meet the challenge of monitoring, regulating and
enforcing measures to check noise pollution.
22. Water
22.1 The condition of water quality in the country is also lamentable. The
CPCB in collaboration with the State Pollution Control Boards has been
monitoring the water quality of 445 rivers in India under the National Water
Quality Monitoring Programme. According to CPCB Report of 2010, 150
polluted river stretches in the country were identified based on Water Quality Data
for the years 2002 to 2008. However, as per the latest CPCB Report published in
February, 2015, the number of polluted river stretches has almost doubled to reach
the figure of 302 on 275 rivers, based on Water Quality Data for the year 2009 to
2011. As per information furnished by the Ministry, Maharashtra has the largest
number of polluted river stretches i.e. 49 followed by Assam with 28, Madhya
Pradesh with 21 and Gujarat 20. The total length of the polluted river stretches
comes to around 25,176 kilometers. The main sources of pollution in rivers are
sewage and industrial pollution, solid waste, open defecation, agricultural run off,
etc. The Committee has been given to understand that effluents discharged from
sugar industries in Ghonda District of U.P. as also similar discharges in other parts
of the country have rendered water bodies unfit for use by local residents. The
27
problem of pollution of rivers and sources of water is further compounded due to
non-availability of adequate fresh water for dilution and enhancing the assimilative
capacity of rivers.
22.2 According to the CPCB report 2009-10, the estimated sewage generation
from class-I & class-II towns in the country was around 38,255 Million Liter Per
day (MLD) while, the sewage treatment capacity was of 11,787 MLD or 30
percent of the total sewage generation. However, as per the recent study 2014-15
carried out by CPCB, the sewage generation from urban areas is estimated to have
reached 57,233 MLD against which 602 Sewage Treatment Plants having a total
treatment capacity of 21,478.69 MLD are available, which is around 37 per cent of
the total sewage generation. Thus, it may be seen that while the sewage generation
has increased by 18978 MLD within a span of 5 years, the treatment capacity has
increased by 9691.69 MLD during the corresponding period. The rapid pace of
urbanisation and increase in urban population has widened the gap between
sewage generation and treatment capacity and the situation will only worsen in
case remedial action is not taken immediately. Central Government should make
available to States adequate funds to install ETP, etc.
22.3 During its study visit to Kochi, the Committee witnessed the
deteriorating condition of Vembanad Lake. The Committee observed that the
entire lake was eutrophicated with sparse to dense infestation of water hyacinth
and other submergent weeds. The colour of the lake water was dark black and no
trace of aquatic life could be noticed. During its study visit to Ludhiana, the
Committee had a first-hand experience of the sorry state of affairs of Buddha
Nallah.
22.4 The condition of underground water is also a matter of great concern.
Arsenic content beyond permissible limit has been found in the underground water
in West Bengal and Bihar. Underground water of Punjab is found to be
contaminated which makes it unfit for drinking and is also found to contain
matters with carcinogenic content. 87 out of 142 potable water samples collected
from various parts of Amritsar city were found to contain Uranium elements than
the prescribed limit. Out of the 87, 19 samples have Uranium content more than
60 micro grams per liter, while 58 samples have Uranium content of 30 to 60
micro grams per liter. Some of the ground water sources in rural and urban areas
of Punjab are adversely affected from excess salinity, fluoride, arsenic, iron, micro
organisms and other single/multi contaminants in water. In a recent reply filed by
the State Government before the Punjab & Haryana High Court, the State has
admitted that samples of water collected from schools were found to be unfit for
consumption.
23. Water Purification Technology
23.1 The Committee was informed that Department of Atomic Energy (DAE)
can play an important role in capacity building of concerned agencies such as
SPCBs etc. in the field of advanced water treatment technologies and as
Technology advisor for selection of appropriate technology, vetting of system
28
design, utilization of indigenous low cost water technologies, testing &
commissioning, operation & maintenance, monitoring & trouble shooting and
water management including water harvesting as well as proper utilisation of water
based on end use.
23.2 The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Ministry should
facilitate the adoption of the technology developed by the Department of
Atomic Energy to effectively deal with the problem of contaminated
underground water in the country in general and Punjab in particular.
23.3 All efforts aimed at cleaning up of the rivers and water bodies are focused
mainly on techno mechanical measures like creation of facilities for interception
and diversion of raw sewage, construction of sewage systems, setting up of
Sewage Treatment Plants, Common Effluent Treatment Plants, electric/improved
wood crematoria, river front development, etc. According to information
furnished by the Ministry, the average cost of laying of sewerage network and
construction of Sewage Treatment Plants ranges from Rs. 3 to 5 crore per MLD
depending on site conditions, availability of existing sewerage network treatment
technology used and capacity of the sewerage treatment plant and the annual
operational and maintenance cost ranges from 5 to 10 per cent of the capital cost.
Thus, for laying of sewerage network and installation of STPs to bridge the gap of
creating treatment capacity for 36,875 MLD sewage, funds ranging from Rs.
1,10,000 to Rs. 1,80,000 crores would be required. The Ministry should
indicate the sources for resource mobilization of this magnitude and time
frame required to do so for bridging this gap. Alternative Action Plan should
also be considered. For instance, possibilities of Bio-digestible toilets,
reduction in capacity of flush pots of domestic toilets, etc. may be explored.
This would not only reduce the sewage load, but also save precious water.
Increasing ecological flow of waters in rivers so as to add to their assimilative
capacity would also go a long way in helping the Ministry improve their water
quality. Safeguarding the upper catchment area of rivers, especially the
spring fed rivers by bringing them under protected areas may also be
seriously considered by the Ministry. The Ministry may also tie up with the
scientific departments like, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research,
Department of Science & Technology, Department of Atomic Energy for
developing low cost and viable technologies for effective treatment of sewage.
The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Ministry should also work on
these low- cost and effective options, while continuing with the existing
measures.
23.4 The Committee feels that though installation/maintenance of STP may
not be directly under the jurisdiction of Ministry of Environment, Forests and
Climate Change, but determining sewage discharge norms/standards into
rivers for municipalities and State Govts. and strict implementation thereof
may go a long way in installing STPs and their proper maintenance.
Similarly, norms for solid and other municipal wastes for their segregation,
29
collection and disposal needs to be enforced. The Committee also feels that
instead of installing sewage treatment plants of bigger capacities emphasis
should be laid on installation of small capacity STPs. Government should also
encourage use of treated sewerage for agricultural and plantation purposes.
23.5 The Committee asked the Ministry in what manner it proposes to address
the situation and what are the chances of cleaning 302 polluted stretches on 275
rivers, especially in view of the fact that the required amount of the funds is not
likely to be provided to the Ministry. The Ministry responded by saying that
creation of STP capacity to bridge the gap between sewage generation and existing
treatment capacity thereby leading to cleaning all rivers and water bodies is a
mammoth task requiring the involvement and continuous efforts of all the
stakeholders viz. Central Government, State Govts., local bodies, implementing
agencies, NGOs, general public, users, etc. The Ministry further went on to add
that proper treatment and disposal of sewage generated in towns is basically the
responsibility of the concerned State Govts./local bodies. The Central Government
through the Ministries of Environment, Forests and Climate Change; Water
Resources, River Development, Ganga Rejuvenation; and Urban Development
have been supplementing the efforts of the State Governments in creation of
sewerage infrastructure and abatement of pollution in various rivers by providing
financial assistance through the Schemes of National River Conservation Plan,
National Ganga River Basin Authority/ Namami Gange and Jawaharlal Nehru
National Urban Renewal Mission. The States can also be requested to utilise part
of the funds that will flow to them through the 10 per cent additional fund
devaluation under the 14th Finance Commission for sewerage and sewage
treatment plants. Given the enormous amount of funds required for laying
sewerage and setting up of STPs and the Status of the working of sewerage plants,
the Committee feels that all stakeholders must ensure availability of maximum
funds for the purpose and their utilization in a coordinated and cooperative
endeavour in this critical national imperative. Cases of non-utilisation of total
installed capacity due to gaps in the sewerage system, malfunctioning of sewerage
pumping stations due to ageing, frequent breakdown of sewer and pipelines due to
corrosion, silting of sewer lines, etc., choking of the sewerage treatment plants,
non-operation of plants for want of electricity, etc. are a common phenomenon.
As per information furnished by the Ministry, 77 STPs with treatment capacity of
1119.79 MLD were non-operational. Some STPs and CETPs were also found to
be not complying with the prescribed standards. The Ministry should take
immediate steps to address the issue.
23.6 In such a scenario, the Committee feels that the Ministry needs to
actively coordinate efforts, by all stakeholders, at all levels to address the
defining environmental challenges of the 21st century.
30
24. National River Conservation Plan
24.1 Finding that no provision for National River Conservation Plan has been
made either under Central Plan or under the State /UT Plan in the year 2015-16,
the Committee asked the Ministry to explain the reasons. The Ministry replied that
an amount of only Rs. 1,500 crore has been provided to the Ministry in the Twelfth
Five Year Plan for river conservation. Out of Rs. 1,500 crore, only Rs. 388.38
crore could be made available to the Ministry in the first 3 years of the Plan period.
For the financial year 2015-16 against a projected requirement of Rs. 295 crore, a
provision of only Rs. 40 crore has been made available from National Clean
Energy Fund, which is not sufficient even for the ongoing sanctioned works under
National River Conservation Plan. Such an approach is self defeating indeed.
24.2 The Committee fails to understand the logic behind drastic cut in the
allocation to National River Conservation Plan despite the fact that more and
more rivers and water bodies are getting polluted. The Committee takes
serious note of the issue and feels that such a approach ought to be
disapproved. It, therefore, recommends that the Ministry of Finance provide
additional allocations under this scheme so that not only the ongoing
sanctioned works are implemented, but new projects of the Ministry could
also be taken up.
25. Solid Waste
25.1 In order to have an idea of the enormity of the problem of Municipal Solid
Waste (MSW), the Committee asked from the Ministry about its volume generated
in the country. The Ministry replied that 1,43,449 Tonnes Per Day (TPD) of MSW
is generated in the country. However, in its Annual Report, 2014-15, the Ministry
has stated that municipal areas in the country generate 1,33,760 metric tonnes per
day of municipal solid waste, out of which only 91,152 TPD is collected and only
around one fourth of it, i.e., 25,884 TDP is treated. In reply to the query as to
whether disposal of Municipal Solid Waste on landfill site is the only viable
solution or there is some scientific method of its disposal, the Ministry replied that
the Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000 has been
notified by the Ministry for management of solid waste. The rules provide for
compliance criterion and procedure for management of the waste and are at par
with the international practices.
25.2 During its interaction with Members of the Civil Society and the Non-
Governmental Organisations at Ludhiana and Amritsar, the Committee was
apprised that all sorts of wastes – bio-degradable, non-biodegradable, hazardous
wastes, carcasses and even biomedical wastes were getting dumped at landfill sites
posing serious health hazards to the local residents and also polluting underground
water in utter violation of Municipal Solid Wastes (Managing & Handling) Rules,
2000. Elaborating on the mechanism for enforcing these Rules, the Ministry
informed that the Secretary In-Charge, Department of Urban Development of the
State concerned or the Union Territory in metropolitan cities; District Magistrates
or Deputy Commissioners of the District within their jurisdiction have the overall
31
responsibility for enforcement of Rules; State Pollution Control Boards are
required to monitor the compliance of standards and the Central Pollution Control
Board is required to consolidate Annual Reports received from State Pollution
Control Boards and forward it to the Central Government.
25.3 The Committee finds that the mechanism for enforcement and
implementation of the Municipal Solid Wastes (Managing & Handling) Rules,
2000 appear to be ineffective on the ground. These Rules are being widely
and blatantly violated. Heaps of garbage emitting strong stench affecting
large surrounding areas have become symptomatic of cities, urban and semi-
urban areas.
25.4 Besides, e-waste, plastic waste and biomedical waste, etc. also pose
formidable challenges, which require decisive, proper and scientific system for
disposal before the situation becomes irreversible. The reality is that pollution and
environmental degradation continues to grow rather than abate.
26. E-Waste
26.1 E-waste is the most toxic of all waste material and serious health and
environment hazards are associated with it. It is increasing at an alarming rate and
as such its management and handling has become a major challenge for us. Based
on a survey carried out by Central Pollution Control Board, about 1,46,800 tonnes
of e-waste was generated in the country in the year 2005 and it was estimated that
the quantity of e-waste will increase to 8,00,000 tonnes by 2012. A yawning gap
exists between the e-waste generated in India and its capacity to deal with it.
Extended Producer’s Responsibility (EPR) is the main feature of E-Waste
(Management & Handling) Rules, 2011, notified by the Ministry, according to
which the producer is responsible for its product once the consumer discards them.
But so far, 123 producers in 11 States and 111 collection centres in 15 States have
been granted authorization. There are 126 registered e-waste recyclers/
dismantlers in 12 States. Failure to recycle e-waste is also leading to shortages of
rare earth minerals to make future generations of electronic equipment.
26.2 In view of e-waste management being a huge global problem (50 million
tonnes of e-waste was generated worldwide or 7 kg for every person on the
planet), there are numerous reports1 indicating that e-waste is being shipped to
developing counties in Asia, Africa and Latin America from developed countries
in the garb of import of “used goods” to pass on the hazards associated with e-
waste and to avoid costs associated with legitimate recycling. The Committee
recommends the creation of necessary legislative and enforcement mechanism
to prevent our country from becoming one of the dumping ground’s of e-
waste for developed nations.
26.3 The need for a review of the existing legal framework is self evident. A
necessary policy framework and the legal architecture together with an
effective implementation machinery needs to be put in place to meet the
1 Toxic ‘e-waste’ dumped in poor nations, says United Nations, The Observer, 14
th December, 2013.
32
challenge of e-waste management, which the Committee highly recommends.
This should be done in a time bound manner and in consultation with domain
experts and other stakeholders.
26.4 Given the reach of the electrical and electronic equipments in the
remote and far-flung areas of the country, the Committee finds that the
arrangements made for managing and handling of e-waste are quite
inadequate. The Committee, therefore, recommends that Government should
take all necessary steps to strengthen and expand the network of authorized
collection centres as well as registered recyclers and dismantlers in the
country in a big way, so as to ensure safe and scientific disposal of e-waste.
27. As per media reports, waste to energy incineration plants are toxic, costly,
inefficient and polluting owing to the low calorific value of waste. These plants
are also being opposed by local residents as they are stated to emit toxic gases like
dioxins and also particulate matters. Similarly, Compact Florescent Lamp (CFL)
bulbs were promoted in a big way as a part of energy saving measure. According
to a study conducted by Toxins Links – an environmental NGO, CFL has turned
out to be a potential health hazard. It has been estimated that 14.93 million CFLs
releasing approximately 74.65 Kg. of mercury were disposed off unsafely in Delhi
last year.
28. When the Committee sought the reaction of the Ministry to the study
conducted by Toxins Link, the Ministry informed that it has no such information.
In reply to the question as to whether there is any infrastructure for safe disposal of
CFLs and the reasons why the Government has not yet developed any binding
regulation for their safe disposal, the Ministry instead of giving a pointed, specific
and straight-forward reply, cited CPCB communication to all the State
Governments and Union Territories to encourage establishment of recycling units,
so that the fused CFLs and Florescent Tube Lights are properly collected and the
Mercury recovered and recycled scientifically and safely. The Ministry also
informed that it has constituted a Task Force to evolve a policy on
“Environmentally sound management of Mercury in florescent lamps”. On being
further enquired as to whether there is any authorised CFL recycling unit in Delhi
and other cities in the country and what concrete measures Government proposes
to take to address the problem of unsafe disposal of CFLs, the Ministry responded
by saying that there is no authorised CFL recycling unit in Delhi or other city in
the country as on date due to economical non-viability. Even the Extended
Producer Responsibility (EPR) is not applicable to the producers of CFL.
29. The Committee is astonished to note that even though short-term
exposure to mercury affects nervous, digestive and immune system including
lungs and kidneys, no binding regulation and adequate infrastructure for safe
disposal of such a highly harmful pollutant has been developed. Moreover, if
this situation is prevailing in Delhi, the fate of other cities, towns and villages
of the country can be well imagined. A large number of companies are
manufacturing it without conforming to standards prescribed for maximum
33
mercury content with 5 mg per CFL for wattage upto and including 26 watts
because the standards are voluntary and not mandatory as confessed by the
Ministry. The Committee recommends that the Ministry of Environment,
Forests and Climate Change must take concrete and implementable steps to
ensure safe and scientific disposal of CFLs.
30. Environmental Performance and Efficiency of Coal Based Thermal
Power Plants
30.1 Coal-based thermal power plants are one of the most polluting ways of
producing power in the world. In India, about 70% of the power is provided by
coal. The high dependence on coal however comes at a significant cost to the
environment. Not only do coal-based thermal power plants result in large scale
emission of particulate matter (PM) and other pollutants such as SO2, NOx and
mercury they also produce 170 million odd tones of poorly managed fly ash and
consume tremendous quantities of water in the course of their operations.
30.2 An expert group2 forecast that despite the highly polluting nature of coal-
based thermal power generation, the world will continue to depend on coal to meet
a significant proportion of its energy needs at least in the medium term. In view of
this, it is imperative that the environmental performance and efficiency of existing
coal based plants be improved.
30.3 In the course of its study, the expert group has found the coal sector in India
to be polluting and resource-inefficient in general. A number of factors have been
attributed to this, major ones being lax and poorly enforced pollution norms that do
not cover many pollutants such as SO2, NOx and mercury and a flawed “merit
order dispatch” system that favours older and more inefficient coal plants over
more technologically advanced, efficient and relatively less polluting coal plants. It
is projected that the sector will produce 300 million tone of fly ash every year by
2021-22 contributing to air, water and land pollution as these toxic ashes are
dumped in poorly designed and maintained ash ponds. Furthermore, given the fact
that the coal sector in India consumes a large amount of water, it has the potential
to pose a tremendous burden on our country’s water resources given the fact that
India is already a high water-stressed nation whose water consumption is slated to
increase by more than 80% by 2021-22.
30.4 The expert group suggests that India must re-evaluate its current energy
policy which is centered on thermal power generation. An integrated energy policy
with renewables in the mix in addition to using more efficient base load coal-based
power plants are a way forward. Some of other recommendations offered by expert
groups include introducing tighter pollution norms and improving monitoring and
enforcement capacities in addition to focusing on better ash and water
management and incentivizing the use of the best available technology in coal-
based power plants.
2 Refer to the Preface of Centre for Science and Environment’s report titled “Heat on Power: Green Rating of Coal-
Based Thermal Power Plants” (2015)
34
31. Industrial Pollution vis-à-vis Monitoring and Enforcement Mechanism
31.1 With respect to industrial pollution vis-à-vis existing monitoring and
enforcement mechanism the Central Pollution Control Board in collaboration with
Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi had carried out Comprehensive
Environmental Assessment in 88 prominent industrial clusters of the country
during 2009-10 based on the Comprehensive Environmental Pollution Index
(CEPI). Out of these 88 industrial clusters, 43 with CEPI score of 70 and above
were identified as critically polluted areas. However, as per information furnished
by the Ministry, there are 78 polluted industrial areas, out of which, 33 are
critically polluted, 32 are severely polluted and 13 are polluted areas. In 2010,
moratorium was imposed on consideration of developmental projects in critically
polluted areas including projects in pipelines for environmental clearance.
Remedial action plans were prepared by concerned State Pollution Control Boards
to address the various environmental issues of the critically polluted areas. On the
basis of statements furnished by the concerned State Pollution Control Boards to
the effect that some groundwork has been initiated in accordance with the Actions
Plans, it was decided to lift the moratorium from 26 critically polluted areas.
Finally, moratorium on 10 critically polluted areas was lifted, while it was re-
imposed in 8 critically polluted areas, namely, Ghaziabad (U.P.), Indore (M.P.),
Jharsuguda. (Orissa), Ludhiana (Punjab), Panipat (Haryana), Patancheru- Bollaram
(A.P.), similarly, M.P. and U.P. and Wapi (Gujarat) in September, 2013. But just
after 9 months, i.e., on 10.06.2014, an order for keeping the order of reimposition
of moratorium in abeyance was issued by the Ministry despite the fact that going
by the steps taken, it appears that barring some paper work and some cosmetic
curative measures here and there, no substantial progress in improving the
environmental quality of critically polluted areas has been made. It is surprising to
note that moratorium on Corba in Chattisgarh with a CEPI score of 83.0 and
ranking 5th
in the list of 43 critically polluted areas was lifted on 17th September,
2013 by the Ministry on reassessment of CEPI score which was below 80 and/or
showing a decreasing trend. The Committee is flabbergasted to note that whereas
on a CEPI score of 70 and above, an area is declared as critically polluted,
moratorium on Corba was lifted on the basis that CEPI score was below 80.
31.2 These developments speak eloquently of utter adhocism in approach,
absolute lack of transparency and utter neglect towards environmental concerns of
the Ministry. The Committee feels that such a whimsical action on the part of the
Ministry will do more harm than good to the country in the long run as only
healthy workforce can give momentum to the economic development and any
compromise with the environmental concerns could have disastrous consequences.
31.3 The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Ministry should adopt
consistent, cohesive and transparent approach in dealing with the critically
polluted areas of the country and must ensure that the Action Plans prepared
for restoration of their environmental quality are strictly implemented within
35
a given timeframe and only then allow industrial activities and developmental
projects to take off in those areas. 32. The Committee finds that one of the main reasons for the alarming increase
in all types of pollution leading to environmental degradation lies in highly
inadequate monitoring and near absence of enforcement of environmental
rules/norms which can be gathered from the facts narrated in the succeeding paras.
33. At the lowest level, a provision has been made for self monitoring system
under which all the projects are required to undergo periodical monitoring on the
parameters stipulated for environment clearance and submit 6 monthly monitoring
reports twice in a year to the Ministry/State Environmental Impact Assessment
Authority and regional offices of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and
Climate Change. There are also regional offices of the Ministry of Environment,
Forests & Climate Change, State Pollution Control Boards, and also zonal offices
of Central Pollution Control Board. The final authority is Ministry of
Environment, Forests and Climate Change. As per the information furnished by
the Ministry, the number of projects under the jurisdiction of regional offices of
the Ministry for regular monitoring was 2820 in the year 2012-13; 2913 in the year
2013-14 and 2188 in the year 2014-15, against which 918, 1056, 676 projects were
monitored in the corresponding years respectively. Thus, almost only 1/3rd
of the
projects could be monitored by the regional offices of the Ministry per year.
Surprisingly, the number of projects under jurisdiction of regular monitoring for
compliance of norms shows a substantial decline in 2014-15 as compared to 2013-
14. A chart showing regional offices-wise number of projects under jurisdiction of
regular monitoring for compliance of norms and the number of projects monitored
is given below:-
Chart – XI
Year Lucknow Bhubaneswar Chandigarh Bhopal Shillong Bangalore
2012-
13
400 200 320 175 170 1555
213-14 400 210 360 175 170 1598
2014-
15
400 220 410 175 180 823
Chart – XII
Year Lucknow Bhubaneswar Chandigarh Bhopal Shillong Bangalore
2012-
13
495 01 204 12 77 129
213-14 488 13 143 41 178 193
2014-
15
301 40 46 62 147 80
34. The Committee fails to decipher the mystery behind the fact that under
Lucknow regional office, while the number of projects for regular monitoring in
the years 2012-13 and 2013-14 was 400 each, how come the number of projects
monitored went up to 495 and 488 respectively in those years. The Committee
36
enquired from the Ministry as to the reasons why the number of projects for
regular monitoring for compliance of norms under Bangalore regional office
declined almost by half from 1598 in 2013-14 to 823 in 2014-15 and the number
of projects actually monitored came down from 193 in 2013-14 to 80 in 2014-15.
The reasons given by the Ministry are in fact astonishing. It was informed that
monitoring of compliance of conditions stipulated in the Forest Clearance is
normally undertaken by officers in the rank of Conservator of Forest and Dy.
Conservator of Conservator of Forests. During the year 2014-15, two posts in the
rank of Conservator of Forests and Dy. Conservator of Forest in the Regional
Office (Southern Zone), Bangalore fell vacant due to repatriation of the
incumbents on completion of their deputation tenure. The numbers of projects
monitored by the Regional Office, Bangalore during the year 2014-15 was less
than the same monitored during the year 2013-14.
35. The reply to the query about frequency, if any, fixed for monitoring of the
projects, was in the negative and it was informed that detailed norms for
monitoring of projects of different nature during various stages of their
implementation have not been stipulated. The Committee also desired to know the
findings of monitoring reports during the last three years. The Ministry stated that
it observed certain non-compliance to conditions stipulated in the forests and
environment clearances. When the Committee enquired about the action initiated
against non-compliant projects together with final results of such action, the reply
received from the Ministry suggests that in the name of action, mere formalities
are completed. The Committee was informed that in case of environmental
clearance, violations of minor nature have been reported to the State Governments
and in case of violations of serious nature, the matter is reported to the Ministry to
issue Show Cause Notice to the project proponents.
36. Now let us assess as to how far the regional offices of the Ministry are
equipped to discharge their duties effectively and efficiently. The Supreme Court
in their judgment dated the 6th July, 2011 in the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of
1995 in the matter of TN Godavarman Thirumulpad has directed the Ministry to
increase the number of regional offices from 6 to 10. After more than 3 years, the
Government has established 4 new regional offices at Chennai, Nagpur, Dehradun
and Ranchi in 2014. The Committee finds that over the years, the functions of the
regional offices have increased almost three times in comparison to the activities
undertaken by them at the time of their opening. As against 10 activities in 1986
and 1988, the regional offices are undertaking 27 as of now. Some of them are
very crucial and vital for the abatement and control of pollution in the country,
which are as under:
(i) To undertake physical inspection of sites in cases of diversion of
forestland involving an area of more than 100 hectares and in other
cases as may be required;
37
(ii) To monitor the implementation of conditions and safeguards
stipulated by Central Government in the proposal approved under
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980;
(iii) To follow up implementation of conditions and safeguards laid down
for projects/ activities when environmental clearance is given;
(iv) To do surprise and random check/ verifications of environmental
clearance conditions of various projects by site visits;
(v) To follow up pollution control measures taken by industries, local
bodies, Government (State/ Centre);
(vi) To monitor and evaluate all ongoing forestry development projects
and scheme with specific emphasis on conservation of forests;
(vii) To collect and furnish information related to environmental impact
assessment of projects, Pollution control measures, methodology and
status, legal and enforcement measures, environmental protection for
special conservation areas like wetlands, mangroves and biosphere
reserves;
37. In reply to a query about the total staff strength of the 10 regional offices
and whether any addition to the staff strength of the regional offices has been made
in proportion to the increase in workload, the Ministry furnished the details of the
sanctioned strength and not the in-position strength and also stated that it has
created 145 additional posts for opening of 4 regional offices and strengthening of
the existing 6 regional offices. However, going by the figures of sanctioned vis-à-
vis in-position staff of the 4 newly opened regional offices, it appears quite
unlikely that the in-position staff strength of the regional offices is the same as the
sanctioned one. All the new 4 regional offices viz. Chennai, Dehradun, Nagpur
and Ranchi have a sanctioned strength of 30 each against which the in-position
number of staff is 9,4,3 and 2 respectively.
38. In order to have an idea as to whether the number of officials at the Centre
and the State level engaged in monitoring and enforcement of environmental rules/
norms all over the country is adequate, the Committee asked for State-wise details
in this regard from the Ministry, but the Ministry instead of being specific and
pointed, chose to give a vague and evasive reply. The question as to what needs to
be done and whether the Ministry has any roadmap to ensure that adequate number
of officials are in place for monitoring and enforcement also met the same fate
which is reproduced below:-
“The enforcement and compliance of environmental standards is being done
by SPCBs/PCCs. The staff is quite inadequate to take care of monitoring
and enforcement. It has also been informed by SPCBs/PCCs that there has
been an embargo for recruitment in states. As a result, there have been
vacancies against the sanctioned positions. The Ministry has no role in the
selection and appointment of officials of the SPCBs/PCCs”.
38
39. However, the lament of the Ministry over inadequacy of staff with State
Pollution Control Boards/ Pollution Control Committees does not go down well if
the staff strength of the CPCB which is under the administrative control of the
Ministry and is responsible inter-alia for carrying out inspections/ monitoring of
polluting industries, is taken into account. As per the information furnished by the
Ministry, as against the sanctioned post of 539 as on 23rd
march, 2015 in various
categories, 105 posts are vacant, out of which 31 posts are of Scientists and 29
posts of technical staff. The post of regular Chairman, CPCB has been lying
vacant purely due to procedural and administrative reasons since 29th February,
2012. The additional charge of Chairman, CPCB is being looked after by Special
Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change. The Committee
does not want to comment on the Ministry’s claim that the work of CPCB is being
effectively managed through such an arrangement, but it feels that the job of a
regular Chairman of CPCB is of highly technical and scientific nature which needs
to be looked after by someone specialized in the field. Of all the 3261 industries
falling under 17 category of highly polluting industries as on 31st December, 2014,
CPCB has carried out a total of 805 inspections during the last 4 years at an
average of 201.25 industries per year. It means that more than 3000 highly
polluting industries remain un-inspected which might be creating pollution to
whatever extent they liked with nobody to check. The number of industries
inspected shows a gradual decline in the last four years. While in 2011-12 and
2012-13, the number was 260 and 251 respectively, it has come down to 201 in
2013-14 and 93 in 2014-15 (January, 2015).
40. The Committee also finds that the number of highly polluting industries
inspected has also declined over the years. As against the 32 cement, 16
fertilizers, 12 pesticides, 23 pulp and papers, 33 sugar, 8 tanneries, 37 thermal
power plants, inspected in the year 2011-12, the number has gone down to 7, 2, 1,
7, 16, 4 & 4 respectively in 2014-15. The very fact that CPCB issued 51 directions
to respective State Pollution Control Boards/Pollution Control Committees suggest
that they are not performing the duties they were created for.
41. The Committee feels that lax monitoring, flaccid enforcement arising
out of inadequate manpower, institutional failure, overlapping jurisdiction
added by total absence of accountability, are the main drivers of
environmental degradation.
42. The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Ministry must come
out with a time bound technology backed action plan to monitor the
compliance of environmental norms and ensure accountability of not only
industries but of municipalities and other stakeholders.
43. Utilisation of Outlay by Central Pollution Control Board
43.1 In the year 2014-15, CPCB was allotted BE Plan outlay of Rs. 57.92 crore,
which was reduced to Rs. 40.00 crores at the RE stage. However by 31st
December, 2014, an amount of Rs. 26.53 crore was utilised, leaving almost Rs.
13.47 crore unutilized, which gets reflected in the physical performance of CPCB.
39
As against the target of setting up of 700 Air Quality Monitoring stations, as of
now only 244 stations have been set up. The target of setting up of 35 new noise
monitoring stations are in progress/process since the year 2013-14. The
Committee feels that such under-utilisation of allocated resources and short-
fall in physical targets is a matter of concern and concrete steps need to be
taken urgently for achievement of physical and financial targets by CPCB.
44. Fund for Environmental Protection and Monitoring
44.1 The Committee asked from the Ministry about the reasons for total
allocation (both Plan and Non-Plan) of Rs. 760.11 crore for Environmental
Protection and Monitoring, this year being less as compared to the last year BE of
Rs. 830.04 crore and the Actuals of Rs. 879.42 crore in 2013-14 and whether this
year Plan allocation was sufficient. The Ministry replied that, in fact, it had
projected higher BE and RE allocations for the year 2014-15, however, due to
overall allocation made to the Ministry which has gone down, the allocations for
environmental governance, protection and monitoring has been affected. The
Ministry further asserted that higher amount was desired to achieve environmental
protection, governance and monitoring.
44.2 The Committee feels that in view of the rapid environmental
degradation and growing environmental challenges, the need for
strengthening environmental protection and monitoring has increased and we
cannot afford to be lax on this front. The Committee, therefore, recommends
that the Ministry of Finance should suitably enhance allocation under this
Head at the RE stage.
45. Forestry
45.1 The National Forest Policy 1988, envisaged the national goal of having
minimum of 33 per cent of the total land area of the country under forests or tree
cover. 24.01 per cent of forest and tree cover, though way behind the national
goal, looks to be fairly good. But such a sense of satisfaction arises out of the
terminologies of Forest and Forest Cover which includes even open forests with
tree canopy density of 10 per cent and more, but less than 40 per cent; moderately
dense forest with tree canopy density of 40 per cent or more but less than 70 per
cent. The breakup of the forest and tree cover as per India State of Forest Report,
2013 shows that the total forest and tree cover of 24.01 comprises of 2.54 per cent
very dense forest, 9.70 per cent moderate dense forest, 8.99 per cent open forest
and 2.78 per cent tree cover. The percent of very dense forest continues to be at
2.54 per cent ever since the year 2007. Thus, the forest cover in true sense of the
term as per the 2013 report constitutes only 12.2 per cent of the total geographical
area of the country.
45.2 National Afforestation Programme was launched in 2002-03 to improve
forests and livelihood of the people living in and around forest area for which an
outlay of Rs. 2500.00 crore was approved for the Twelfth Five Year Plan, out of
which an amount of Rs. 663.45 crore approximately 1/4th of the total approved
outlay was spent during the last 3 years. This year the allocation has been reduced
40
from Rs. 243.80 crore at the BE level in 2014-15 to Rs. 100.00 crore. In all
likelihood, the entire outlay earmarked for National Afforestation Programme for
the Twelfth Five Year Plan is not going to be fully utilised. The Ministry has
informed that the funding pattern of the National Afforestation Programme is
likely to undergo a change with the Centre and State share of 50:50 from 2015-16
onwards instead of existing 100 per cent central share. This change in funding
pattern would definitely affect the progress of the Programme, as the States, owing
to their own priorities may not like to contribute to this Programme as expected by
the Ministry.
45.3 Similarly, Green India Mission, which aims at increasing the Forest and tree
cover by 5 MHA, as well as, increasing the quality of the existing forest cover in
another 5 MHA was launched in 2011-12 with an approved outlay of Rs. 2000.00
crore under the Twelfth Five Year Plan. The actual expenditure incurred during
the last 3 years was a mere Rs. 12.66 crore. The total estimated expenditure under
this Mission is Rs. 13,000 crore for the Twelfth Plan period and one year spill over
into the Thirteenth Five Year Plan 2017-18 consisting of 2000.00 crore outlay
under the Twelfth Plan, Rs. 400 crore from the XIII Finance Commission grants
towards States’ share and convergence with Compensatory Afforestation Fund
Management and Planning Authority for Rs. 6000.00 crore, Mahatma Gandhi
National Rural Employee Guarantee Scheme for Rs. 4000 crore and with National
Afforestation Programme for Rs. 6000 crore. Against the backdrop of previous
trend of expenditure incurred, the Committee can only hope that such a huge
amount is fully utilised during the remaining three years, i.e., 2 years of the
Twelfth Five Year Plan and one year spill over into the Thirteenth Plan. Such a
huge budgetary provisions and their tardy utilisation stands in stark contrast to the
candid confession by the Secretary of the Ministry that 40 per cent of the forest is
still degraded which is a matter of worry. One of the major fallouts of degraded
forests results in straying of wild animals outside their habitats and going into the
human habitation leading to man-animal conflict. Besides making people their
prey they also damage the crops of farmers.
45.4 The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Ministry should
seriously focus its attention on increasing the forest area besides improving
the quality of degraded forests by making full utilization of funds made
available under Green India Mission. Besides planting local species, the
Ministry should also plant fruit bearing trees. Another area on which the
Ministry must act is to check the large-scale illegal felling of trees by
smugglers. For doing this effectively, the Ministry should ensure involvement
of villagers/Gram Panchayats by giving them incentives as a percentage of
fine imposed on those felling trees illegally. In order to increase the green
cover, the Ministry must persuade the industrialists to undertake plantation
in the surplus land available with them in the campus of their industries/
factories.
41
46. Fund for Green India Mission
46.1 The Committee finds that out of the total BE allocation of R. 80.00 crore for
2014-15, only Rs. 3.00 crores could be utilised and still this year outlay for this
scheme has been kept at Rs. 64.00 crore. When the Committee enquired from the
Ministry about the reasons for gross under utilisation of funds last year and the
steps taken to ensure that this year's allocation would be fully utilised, the
Ministry replied that Govt. of India approved the National Mission for Green India
(GIM) as a centrally sponsored scheme in February, 2014-15. The implementation
guideline for the Mission were finalised in November, 2014. The National
Governing Council and the National Executive Council have been constituted in
the month of March, 2015. Since the first meeting of the National Executive
Council is yet to take place, it would not be possible to utilise Rs. 3.00 crore for
the current year spending of the approved outlay. The Ministry stated that 13 State
Govts. had so far submitted their perspective plans which will be placed before the
National Executive Council for approval and hence no difficulty was foreseen in
utilizing the approved outlay for the year 2015-16.
46.2 The Committee expresses its serious concern over the unduly long
gestation period for such an important and critical scheme like Green India
Mission which aims at undertaking forestry in a big way. Even after four
years, it is yet to make any headway. This is a matter of serious concern. The
Committee, therefore, recommends that the Ministry should ensure that this
Mission takes off this year and is completed within the stipulated period.
47. CAMPA Fund
47.1 The Committee has been informed that an amount to the tune of around Rs.
38,000 crore is lying in Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and
Planning Authority (CAMPA). As per the directions of Supreme Court, the
Ministry is supposed to release funds only to the extent of ten per cent of the
principal amount of about Rs. 23,800 and that also from the interest accrued. This
year although the Ministry was authorized to release about Rs. 2,400 crore it could
release only Rs. 1,100 crore as Action Plans were not received from all the States.
48. Encroachment on Forest Area
48.1 Encroachment on forest area all over the country, including in the State of
Maharashtra emerged as one of the prominent issues before the Committee. The
Committee takes note of the fact that protection and management of forest is
primarily the responsibility of the concerned State Government, Union Territories
and Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change supplements the
efforts of the States in protection and management of forests through the Centrally
Sponsored Scheme of Intensification of Forest Management. The Committee,
however, feels that encroachment of forest area is a serious issue and the
Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change should in
consultation and cooperation with State Governments devise a mechanism to
effectively address this issue.
42
49. Mangroves
49.1 During its study visit to Mumbai, the Committee was informed that in the
early 1990s over 37 sq. kilometers of mangroves existed in Mumbai largely in
Thane Creek, Mahim, Versova, Gorai, Ghodbander, Bandra, Malabar Hills and
Colaba. Around 20 out of the 35, species of true mangroves found in India have
been identified along the Maharashtra coast and 15 species of these are found in
Mumbai. But in the past decade or so, Mumbai has lost around 40 per cent of its
mangroves largely because of reclamation of coastal areas for the purpose of
housing, slums, sewage treatment, garbage dump, etc. Hon’ble Mumbai High
Court has ordered freeze on destruction of mangrove forests in Maharashtra and
has banned construction within 50 meters of mangrove forests.
49.2 The Committee feels that the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests
and Climate Change should not remain a mute spectator to the decreasing
mangroves cover in Mumbai and, therefore, recommends that it should take
all necessary measures to protect the mangrove areas from further
encroachment.
50. Forest Conservation and Afforestation/ Tribal Rights
50.1 The National Environment Policy (NEP) 2006, provides the concept of
“entities of incomparable value” i.e. entities, natural or man-made, whose
conservation would override ordinary cost-benefit considerations.
50.2 Hence, the Committee is of the opinion that while clearing proposals for
economic activity in forest areas inhabited by tribals such as in the case of
Niyamgiri, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change should
attach weight to the concept of “entities of incomparable value” incorporated
in the NEP 2006.
51. Wildlife Conservation
51.1 A leading environmental expert3 has pointed out that since 1972 about 600
wildlife Protected Areas (PAs) have been notified, however in the process large
number of forest dwellers have been displaced from their traditional lands in
addition to precipitating significant man-animal conflict and increased poaching.
51.2 According to the expert4, a major exercise to identify ecologically rational
boundaries of PAs, while ensuring availability of wildlife corridors between them
needs to be undertaken. It is considered that such an exercise would also help to
identify locations of man-animal conflict and mitigate such conflict by provision
of safe corridors for movement of wildlife.
52. Training Programme
52.1 The Committee finds that the Indira Gandhi National Forest Academy
imparts training inter-alia to other stakeholders such as Members of Parliament,
Members of higher judiciaries, etc. Besides, the Ministry has a separate scheme
called Training of Other Stakeholders under which NGOs, social activists, press
3 Dr. Prodipto Ghosh (Distinguished Fellow at the Energy Research Institute), “Harmonizing Concerns of
Environment and Development” 24 April, 2015. 4 Ibid.
43
and media people, etc. are sensitized toward conservation of natural resources.
There is yet another scheme of the Ministry, namely, Environment, Education,
Awareness and Training.
52.2 The Committee feels that there is need to sensitize school children by
introducing environment protection as a subject of study in their curriculum.
52.3 The Committee also finds that the Ministry is running more numbers of
training programmes for other stakeholders with as paltry an allocation as Rs.
0.20 crore. When the Committee enquired as to whether running more number of
schemes with paltry allocation has been found to be useful in a huge country like
ours or it would be prudent to integrate these schemes with identical mandate and
run them effectively by cutting down establishment related expenditure. The
Ministry did not give any direct response.
52.4 The Committee feels that at a time when people are losing respect and
sensitivity for environment and the enormity of environmental challenges
have acquired alarming proportions, it would be appropriate that the
Ministry runs training and awareness programme in an effective manner.
The Ministry, therefore, should think in terms of consolidating the
programmes with identical nature and bring out a consolidated programme
to serve the desired purpose in a better way.
53. Sand Mining
53.1 The issue of large-scale illegal sand mining emerged prominently during the
discussion with the Ministry while considering the Demands for Grants. The
Committee underlined the fact that unregulated and unsustainable sand mining is
rendering the rivers dry because sand groundwater recharge and also helps balance
the ecology in the riparian area of the river. The Ministry responded by saying that
on the 27th
march, 2015, a workshop of Secretaries of Environment and Secretaries
of Mines of all the States to evolve model guidelines for sustainable and scientific
sand mining was organized. The Ministry also informed that the Supreme Court in
2012 has made environmental clearance mandatory for all types and of all sizes of
leases whereas earlier, it was not mandatory for leases below the size of 5 hectare.
The Ministry proposes to file a modification application in the Supreme Court
seeking exemption for leases less than 5 hectare.
53.2 The Committee is of the view that the issue of illegal mining is a matter
of serious concern because it is rampant across the country. The Committee,
therefore, recommends that the Ministry should assess the quantum and
forms of illegal sand mining so that the enormity of the problem can be
assessed and remedial measures suggested. Thereafter, the action plan to
curb it may be evolved.
54. Effect of Pollution on Taj
54.1 Taking note of the study conducted by two scientists from IIT, Kanpur
which appeared in the Journal “Environmental Science & Technology of American
Chemical Society”, according to which discoloration of Taj Mahal was taking
place due to particulate carbon and dust deposition generated from combustion of
44
fossil fuel and biomass, the Committee considered this issue in its meeting held
on 10th January, 2015 and also made a study visit to Agra. The Committee noticed
that despite efforts claimed to have been made by the Ministry of Environment,
Forests and Climate Change, Taj Trapezium Zone Authority, UP Pollution Control
Board and Archeological Survey of India, pollution continues to affect the world
heritage site. Despite Supreme Court orders of 1996, Programmes/Schemes have
not been fully implemented in the spirit of the court’s order. Government should
apprise the Hon’ble Supreme Court of the implementation of its orders and also
obtain clarifications if necessary. The fact remains that pollution has increased,
taking a toll on the Taj – a symbol of national pride and heritage. This sorry state
of affairs clearly indicates that the concerned authorities have failed in discharge of
their given duties. A multi-pronged strategy is needed to address the challenge
of preserving the pristine beauty of the Taj for which the Committee has
made some suggestions. The Archeological Survey of India should submit an
Action Plan at the earliest and take immediate steps to protect the Taj. A
long-term strategy for developing and environmentally preserving the river
Yamuna catchment area around the Taj as also ensuring the mitigation of
vehicular pollution in and around Agra ought to be vigorously implemented.
Afforestation in and greenery of the Taj surroundings should begin forthwith.
54.2 The Committee observes that for environmental management in heritage,
pilgrimage and tourists centres including Taj Protection Mission, no outlay has
been earmarked. However, a token amount of Rs. 1 lakh at the BE level was
allocated under the Plan head in the year 2014-15, out of which not even a penny
was utilised. This year again a token amount of Rs. 1 lakh has been allocated
under the Plan Head. On being enquired about the allocation of token amount
which was not going to serve any meaningful purpose, the Ministry informed that
no Central Plan was made or utilised under Taj Protection Mission during the last
2 years. At present, only a token provision of Rs. 1 lakh is available under the Taj
Trapezium Zone Scheme. Explaining the reasons for non-utilisation of funds, the
Ministry further stated that a Comprehensive Environmental Management Plan
(CEMP) for Taj Trapezium Zone was received from National Environmental
Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) in January, 2012. The Secretary, Agra
Development Authority wrote to the Secretary Deptt. of Environment , Govt. of
Uttar Pradesh on 7th February, 2012 forwarding CEMP and a list of 22 new
projects for concurrence and onward transmission to the Govt. of India for
consideration in the Twelfth Five Year Plan. However, despite several reminders
and persuasion, no proposal has yet been forwarded by the Govt. of U.P.
54.3 The Committee hopes that the UP Govt. forwards the Comprehensive
Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for Taj Trapezium Zone prepared
by National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) and 22
new projects to the Govt. of India for concurrence and recommends that the
Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change should pursue the
issue of protection of Taj Mahal from pollution with the State Government.
45
55. Electromagnetic Radiation
55.1 E-radiation from cell towers is yet another issue on which despite the fact
that it has become a matter of great concern because of its reported impact on
health of human beings, animals, birds and honeybees, the Ministry continues to
maintain its indifference. In the absence of any creditable information from the
Govt., people feel agitated and worried. Deptt. of Telecommunication in its
deposition before the Committee had informed that norms for exposure limit for
radio frequency field has been reduced to 1/10th of the existing limits prescribed by
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and
that there was a difference of opinion on the impact of radiation from cell towers
on health of citizens. However, there is a need to effectively monitor the effect of
radiation from cell towers etc. and the number of inspectors available for the
purpose needs to be significantly enhanced by the concerned administrative
Ministry.
55.2 Secretary, Department of Science & Technology (DST) informed the
Committee that based on the report of a Committee comprising of Ministry of
Science & Technology; Environment & Forests; Deptt. of Telecommunication, etc.
set up in 2012, research proposals specific to the country had been called and 79
proposals had been short-listed. DST has funded 20 projects. The outcome of
these projects will be compiled as soon as they are received. A time bound Action
Programme needs to be finalized. The outcome of the aforesaid projects cannot be
awaited forever.
55.3 The Committee recommends that the Ministry should evolve a
mechanism to create awareness on the subject among the people. This issue
has to be addressed comprehensively and public hearings with stakeholders
should be the basis for further action in the matter. The judgments of various
courts on this issue need to be implemented forthwith. 56. Climate Change
56.1 The International Negotiations on the climate change must ensure that
India plays its rightful role at global forums for facilitating a progressive
international movement to address the challenges of climate change. The UN
Climate Conference in Paris later this year will hopefully represent a
purposive advance in this direction in terms of addressing the critical issues of
availability of finance and technology transfer to developing countries.
56.2 The implementation of the accepted principle of Common But
Differentiated Responsibility (CBDR) poses a challenge which needs to be
resolved consistent with the need for high and sustainable economic growth in
the developing world.
56.3 Quite clearly the need to close the gap in transport, city, agriculture and
forest based emissions pose a serious challenge. For a legally binding
international treaty to be in force by 2020, we need to forge a just consensus
on pre-2020 actions.
46
57. Flash Floods in Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand
57.1 Erratic and unpredictable climatic behaviour with discernible and
debilitating impact on human life and livelihood had started playing havoc in terms
of loss of life and property at regular intervals. The effect of ecological
degradation caused by unplanned development and urbanization and also reckless
encroachment on the wetlands leading to shrinking of water bodies, wetlands,
drainage channels etc. seems to have caused recent Flash floods in Kashmir and
before that in Uttarakhand. These floods are a grim reminder that climate change
is now hitting India hard.
57.2 The Committee, therefore, feels that it is now more incumbent than
even before on the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change to
find the solution to the problems devising out of climate change to obviate its
devastating effects on human beings and their property.
58. Climate Change Action Programme
58.1 The Climate Change Action Programme was in principle approved by the
Planning Commission in 2011 to create and strengthen scientific and analytical
capacity for assessment of climate change in the country, bringing in place
institutional framework for scientific policy initiative and implementation of
climate change related actions in the context of sustainable development.
However, it was finally approved by the Cabinet in January, 2013 for
implementation in the Twelfth Five Year Plan as a Central Scheme and Rs. 300
crore was earmarked for the purpose. During 2013-14, however if the financial
performance is taken as a yardstick to measure the progress of the programme, the
result is quite distressing. During 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 an outlay of Rs.
22.35 crore, 32.35 crore, & 25.00 crore respectively was approved, however,
actual expenditure incurred was mere Rs. 4.45 crore, Rs. 4.09 crore and Rs. 2.19
crore in the corresponding years respectively. For the year 2013-14 and 2014-15,
the reasons for underutilisation of funds is the same, i.e., time taken in Expenditure
Finance Commission (EFC) approval process.
58.2 The Committee recognises the fact that Government alone cannot be held
responsible for maintaining healthy environment. A spirit of partnership with the
active involvement of people needs to be devised by the Government throughout
the spectrum of environmental management in the country. Though, the State
must galvanize its efforts but every individual at a personal level also needs to chip
in for maintaining and enhancing the quality of the environment. The Government
needs to handle the issue of environmental management in a two-fold manner –
with scientific-technical aspect on the one side and through popular campaign for
awareness. To ensure people’s active involvement in the projects or schemes run
by the Government, a continuous campaign to make them aware of the importance,
relevance and necessity of such projects is certainly essential.
58.3 The Committee, therefore, recommends that to make its environment
protection schemes/ projects successful, Government must make sincere
47
efforts to make people conscious of the fact that the degradation of
environment has put a question mark on the very survival of humankind.
59. High Level Committee Report
59.1 The Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change constituted a
high level Committee under the chairmanship of Shri TSR Subramanian to review
various Acts administered by it on 29th
August, 2014 to submit its report within
three months. The Committee submitted its report to Government in November,
2014. There have been adverse comments on the recommendations in the report
from various quarters. The Committee decided to hear experts on the issue. In its
meeting held on 9th January, 2015, the Standing Committee heard the views of
experts/ representatives of NGOs on the various recommendations of the
Subramanian Committee Report and its likely impact on Environment, Forests and
Wildlife. Almost all the experts/NGOs who appeared before the Committee
expressed serious reservations qua the recommendations. Representatives of the
Ministry were also present in the meeting. The Committee feels that there is no
cogent reason for hurrying through with the Report without comprehensive and
meaningful consultations with all stakeholders.
59.2 An expert group5 in their submission to the Parliamentary Standing
Committee have commented on how the HLC report has largely become a
document about project approvals and clearances instead of dealing with the
nuances of environmental governance reforms.
59.3 The following objections, inter-alia, have been raised with reference to
certain recommendations of this Report:
(i) The HLC report proposes a new law, the Environmental Laws
Management Act, without stating expressly as to what will be the
status of the other existing environmental laws – i.e. will they be
integrated or will they remain.
(ii) The recommendations of the HLC report fail to provide much teeth
or tools to the regulatory agencies to safeguard the environment.
(iii) The HLC report has not holistically addressed the issue of rooting out
arbitrariness from the process of enforcement. Establishing a Standard
Operating Procedure for inspection, monitoring and enforcement for
existing laws and regulations can go a long way in weeding out ad-
hoc actions that often dominate the process.
(iv) The recommendations of the HLC report do not touch upon the
challenge posed by the lack of institutional capacity on the part of
regulatory and enforcement institutions to monitor the enforcement of
existing laws. Devising mid-term and long term institution building
plans in addition to inculcating greater transparency and financial
self-sufficiency could be a way forward in this regard.
5 Refer to Centre for Science and Environment’s report titled “Response to the report of the High Level Committee
to review various Acts administered by the MoEF&CC” (2015)
48
(v) Engaging the public, creating awareness and promoting involvement
are essential in strengthening and securing the environment. The HLC
report is silent on ways to ensure greater public participation in this
respect
59.4 The expert group expressed the following in its response to the HLC’s
report:
“…observations and the recommendations of the Committee as they stand
should be taken up as the beginning of a dialogue on reforming
environmental governance, which need to be further perfected by including
many of the concerns that have been left out in the report. A hurried
piecemeal approach for reforming environmental problems, will actually
mean tinkering with the status quo without any effective improvement in
environmental conditions and achieving the objective of long term
environmental protection.”
59.5 The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Ministry should not
proceed with the implementation of the recommendations made by the
Subramanian Committee without a further indepth review and after taking
into account the views expressed by various stakeholders which now form
part of the Standing Committee’s deliberations. Indeed, further views can
also be solicited on the subject.
CONCLUSION
60. The Committee has endeavoured to consider the challenge of
environment protection and prevention of damage to our ecology in a holistic
perspective. The challenge is indeed grave and needs to be addressed as a
matter of highest national priority as if tomorrow was today. The agenda for
action cannot be hostage to compulsions of partisan politics or to lack of
political will. Nor can the bureaucratic red tape and ‘passing the buck’
attitude be an excuse for inaction. While pursuing our national goal of high
economic growth as a means of poverty alleviation we will need to reiterate in
our actions the primacy of environmental concerns.
61. Climate Change resulting from ecological imbalance, a rapacious and
unsustainable exploitation of our national resources and flawed priorities
have had demonstrable adverse effects on the quality of life of the vast mass of
our people living on the margins, particularly the farming community in
rural areas and the urban poor.
62. The adverse impact of climate change on our agricultural productivity
and the management challenge of water resources has added to the woes of
millions of Indians, accentuating the misery that goes with poverty and
absence of economic stability. The challenge to health and longevity for
millions of Indians on account of air pollution and lack of potable water,
sanitation and housing facilities in many parts of the country has deprived the
49
affected people of their fundamental and constitutional right to life with
dignity.
63. We need to unequivocally accept the demonstrated co-relation between
sustainable development and living standards of the people. We need to
formulate and implement policies that can integrate the imperatives of
economic growth with environmental responsibility.
64. We cannot rest till we have 13 of the world’s 20 worst polluted cities
and the highest levels of air pollution which is the fifth largest killer of our
citizens. It is reported that the health cost of PM10 accounts for 3% of our
GDP. Also, 76 of our 150 major rivers are polluted with (BOD) 10-30 mg/1.
We cannot claim to have moved forward in addressing environmental
concerns as long as 500 million litres of industrial discharge from 764 units
flows into the Ganga every day. We need to urgently correct the situation
where 8-% of water supplied to households is returned as waste water and
where 808 million people depend on traditional bio mass; such as firewood
and dung cake for cooking6. We need to preserve our cultural heritage from
the vagaries of climate change and must find immediate and enduring
solutions for preserving our iconic heritage monuments such as the Taj by
addressing the issues involved. A monumental task indeed!
65. The Committee therefore recommends that in devising a time bound
Action Plan to address the situation comprehensively, the widest possible
consultations with all stakeholders be ensured so that based on a broad
national consensus thus arrived at, useful and effective steps are taken across
the board to ensure that all our citizens are able to live in a better
environment and in harmony with nature – which throughout the ages has
been the Indian way of life.
66. The Committee takes note of the fact that the Ministry of Environment,
Forests and Climate Change has a central mandate of protecting our
environment which is our common heritage. Flawed regulatory regime, poor
management of resources, inadequate use of technology, disincentives to
environmental conservation, absence of a credible, effective and accountable
enforcement machinery leading ultimately to lack of enforcement of
environmental norms and laws, are challenges that are required to be
addressed without any delay. The Committee is not satisfied with overall
performance of the concerned agencies of the Government as regards the
management and protection of our environment.
67. Considering the mandate and enormity of the environmental
challenges, the Committee feels that the outlay approved for the year 2015-16
falls far short of what is indeed needed. While the Committee recommends to
the Ministry of Finance to provide adequate resources to enable the Ministry
to discharge its given mandate purposively, at the same time it recommends to
6 Figures are taken from various reports.
50
the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change to streamline and
strengthen its institutional machinery and rise to the occasion to meet critical
environmental challenges.