National Green Tribunal
News Item Published In Newspaper The ... vs Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board on 22 May, 2024
Author: Satyagopal Korlapati
Bench: Satyagopal Korlapati
Item No.1:-
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2024.
(Through Video Conference)
Original Application No.02 of 2024 (SZ)
Earlier O.A. No.205/2023 (PB)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Tribunal on its own motion SUO MOTU
based on the news item published in The
Times of India dt.07.03.2023 titled, "Oil
leaked in Tamil Nadu's Nagai spreading
along coast, say Experts"
And
1) Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board
Rep. by its Member Secretary
76, Mount Salai, Guindy,
Chennai - 600 032.
2) Tamil Nadu Coastal Zone Management Authority
Rep. by its Member Secretary
No.1, Jeenis Road, Panagal Building,
Ground Floor, Saidapet,
Chennai - 600 015.
3) Cauvery Basin Refinery,
Chennai Petroleum Corporation Limited
Rep. by its Managing Director
Panangudi Village,
Nagapattinam District - 611 002.
4) National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management
Rep. by its Director
Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC)
Anna University Campus,
Chennai - 600 025.
5) Indian Coast Guard Regional East
Rep. by its Commander Coast Guard,
Rajaji Salai, Near Napier Bridge,
Chennai - 600 009.
6) Department of Fisheries and Fishermen Welfare
3rd Floor, Integrated Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Building,
Nandanam, Chennai - 600 035.
...Respondent(s)
Page 1 of 13
For Applicant(s): Suo Motu by Court.
For Respondent(s): Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith for R1.
Dr. D. Shanmuganathan for R2 & R6.
Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Sr. Adv. a/w.
Mr. Chandan Sharma for R3.
Mr. Udhayakumar for R4.
Mr. Avinash Krishnan Ravi for R5.
Judgment Reserved on: 29th April, 2024.
CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
JUDGEMENT
Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member.
1. The above application was Suo Motu registered originally by the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal, New Delhi as O.A. No.205 of 2023 (PB) in the light of the newspaper report published in 'The Times of India' dated 07.03.2023 titled "Oil leaked in Tamil Nadu‟s Nagai spreading along coast, say Experts".
2. It was reported that the oil spill could spread for 2 Km seen along Nagapattinam Beach and Keechankuppam and further south. The leak was from 9 Km long 20 inches diameter pipeline from the Chennai Petroleum Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as „CPCL‟) Cauvery Basin Refinery (CBR) Crude storage tanks at Nagapattinam to Karaikal Port.
3. The Principal Bench had sought a response from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB), Tamil Nadu Coastal Zone Management Authority (TNCZMA), CPCL and also the National Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management (NCSCM) and Indian Coast Guard (ICG).
Page 2 of 134. The site investigation report was also filed by the CPCL dated 25.03.2023. As per the report, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) carried out a detailed mapping of environmental impact, including impact on vegetation, water and other coastal environment. The type of samples included seawater, sediment and fish. The sampling process was carried out as per the standard sampling guidelines and will be analyzed as per the Indian Standard methods. The collective samples have been preserved and transported to the NABL-accredited laboratory for analysis.
5. The report further stated that the sampling and site investigation findings would show that there is no visible contamination in and around the sampling site observed. The leakage had occurred due to the crack in the pipeline from the CPCL. The CPCL undertook cold repair of the crack with the help of the steel clamp and rubber. The majority of the spilt oil remained in the intertidal area. The ICG deployed ships and aircraft and did the continuous monitoring and assessment of the situation. It was observed that there was a „NIL‟ oil spill beyond the area of baseline of Nagur due to the timely intervention and monitoring, the leakage was contained without causing any damage to the flora and fauna.
6. The Principal Bench of this Tribunal, though noted the stand of the ICG and the CPCL that not much damage to the seawater due to the oil spillage, felt it appropriate to direct the investigation to ascertain whether any remedial measures are required. Therefore, constituted a Joint Committee comprising of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), TNPCB, District Magistrate - Nagapattinam, Indian National Center for Ocean Information Services (INCOIS) and NCSCM. The NCSCM was appointed as a nodal agency. The Joint Committee was also directed to undertake the safety audit and examine the pipeline in question to find out whether the crack was due to corrosion on account of non-maintenance.
7. Thereafter, the Original Application was transferred to this Bench vide Order dated 21.08.2023 and the same was renumbered as O.A. No.02 of 2024 (SZ).
Page 3 of 138. The Joint Committee furnished its report dated 25.07.2023, wherein it is stated that 8.1 As per the mandate of the Joint Committee, there was a site visit, interaction with the stakeholders, to undertake a safety audit and examine the pipeline in question, assess the damage to the coastal and marine environment due to the impact, required remedial measures, recommendations of the remedial measures to be undertaken by the CPCL.
8.2 An interaction with the residents of the Pattinacherry Village reveals that the oil leak was noticed on 02.03.2023, a clamp was provided on 03.03.2023 and the leak was arrested on 04.03.2023, in the early morning. It was informed that the line was initially away from the coastal area and due to the sea advancement, the coastal water came to the pipeline and the line got exposed recently due to soil erosion. The fishermen went for fishing from 06.03.2023. The CPCL had agreed with the residents that the crude pipeline would be removed.
8.3 The pipeline was laid where for CPCL‟s Cauvery Basin Refinery (CBR) located at Nagapattinam, which was commissioned in the year 1993, for refining Narimanam Crude Oil from M/s. ONGC. In order to increase the capacity of the refinery, 20 Inch crude oil pipeline was laid in the year 2003 to source the other crudes by importing. However, the refinery operations were stopped on 01.04.2019 due to the limitations in meeting the product specifications corresponding to BS - VI. After the CBR refinery operations were stopped, the crude received from M/s. ONGC was collected in crude tanks located inside the refinery premises and they were transferred through the crude pipeline to cargo ships at Karaikal Port. The crude oil pipeline was used once in every 45 to 50 days for transferring crude oil from CPCL tanks in the refinery to the Karaikal Port. The last of such consignments was completed on 14.02.2023 and the pipeline had remained idle since February 2023.
Page 4 of 138.4 To arrest the oil spill, further leaks and the possibility of oil ingress into the coast, a temporary sand bund wall was created near the leaky spot of the pipeline.
8.5 Regarding the safety audit and examination of the pipeline, it was found that the remaining portion of the base pipeline was found intact with very little damage to the external coating of the pipeline. The CPCL explained that the damage to the coating material happened during the removal and shifting of the pipeline by the crane and sling. The thickness of the leaky portion of the pipeline is at permissible level of 6.1 mm and there was no corrosion or erosion observed in the pipeline. The cause of the leak reported may be due to the external impact.
8.6 It was explained by the CPCL officials that due to the gradual shifting of the intertidal zone and other developments like the construction of a breakwater at Karaikal Port and also due to the cyclones, the intertidal zone has come into contact with the pipeline. However, the exposure of the pipeline to seawater is a recent phenomenon and hence, corrosion and reduction in the thickness of the pipeline did not take place.
8.7 Studies undertaken by various agencies viz., INCOIS -
Hyderabad, Joint Studies by NCSCM - Chennai and National Centre for Coastal Research (NCCR) - Chennai, Studies by Coast Guard, ICGS Karaikkal, TNPCB, CPCL were also considered by the Joint Committee.
8.8 The INCOIS - Hyderabad released an advisory report on the oil spill on 06.03.2023. The gist of the report is furnished below:-
"INCOIS has generated an oil drift pattern for the period 20.00 hrs March 2, 2023 to 23.00 hrs on March 8, 2023. As per the report, at 23.00 hrs on March 6, 2023 -10.91 KM of coastline will be affected and on the next day, it can affect 11.40 KM. Further, on March 08, 2023 at 23.00 hrs, 12.00 KM of coastline will be affected. The quantity of oil considered in this simulation study was 100 MT as the exact quantity of oil spilled was not known to INCOIS. Hence a disclaimer was provided in the report prepared by Page 5 of 13 INCOIS after the simulation. The forecast quality was not confirmed due to uncertainty in the spill conditions."
8.9 Joint Study by the NCSCM - Chennai and NCCR -
Chennai: Experts from the above centres along with the Department of Environment and Climate Change, Government of Tamil Nadu and officials of the CPCL visited the oil spill site at Pattinacherry, Nagapattinam and the summary of the report is furnished below:-
"• The amount of crude oil spilled: The CPCL authorities informed that about 1000 liters of crude oil spilled over the area where the pipeline was damaged. It will be used to forecast and estimate the impact of crude oil on the marine ecosystem and its fate along and across the coast.
• Treatment and removal of oil slick: The spill was completely removed from the beach and the spread was controlled by applying the oil spill dispersant.
• Physical and Biological impacts: From intertidal observation along the study area it was observed that the diversity of intertidal organisms remained good and healthy. There is no oil sludge evidence/ marking on the groins and boulders along the intertidal rocky shore. The organisms of the intertidal area consist of burrowing crabs, gastropods, bivalves, and tubiculous polychaetes, etc. The observed Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) concentration was slightly higher than the concentrations recommended for designated best use for Class SW-1 (salt pans, shell fishing, mariculture, and ecologically sensitive zones) by the CPCB. However, the reported TPH concentrations are comparable to previous studies along the southeast coast of the Bay of Bengal."
8.10 Studies by Coast Guard, ICGS Karaikal: The Coast Guard, ICGS Karaikal had made an assessment till 0.8 Nautical Miles from the shoreline and reported no oil spillage along the coast until Nagapattinam. There was a minor leakage, which was spread in a 50 - 60 Meter intertidal area at the scene of the incident. Both ICGS C-436 and ICGS C- 435 reported „No oil spill‟ along the coast of Nagapattinam. On 05.03.2023, has reported that no spill and on 06.03.2023, no traces of oil were reported to be seen along the coast.
8.11 TNPCB collected surface water samples at three locations along the shore at Pattinacherry Village in and around the leakage point and sent them to M/s. Hubert Enviro Care Page 6 of 13 System Pvt. Ltd., a NABL-accredited laboratory. The water samples were collected very close to the leak point of the pipeline, higher concentration of Petroleum Hydrocarbon due to oil accumulation on the spot. Whereas, the Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) concentrations are within the permissible limits at 100 Meters away from the spot on both the North and South sampling points. The oil was removed by deploying a mobile vacuum sucker to avoid any possibility of oil ingress into the sea. Based on the results of the sweater samples collected, the TPH concentrations were well within the CPCB‟s permissible limits at all the sampling points. The CPCB permissible level for Class SW - 1 (for harbour waters) is 10 mg/L. The analysis report is also filed by the TNPCB.
8.12 The study by the CPCL was also directed to be furnished to the TNPCB. The CPCL had furnished the (a) Crude pipeline inspection report for the past one year; (b) Thickness measurement of the crude pipeline inspection report; (c) Central Mechanical Engineering Research Institute (CMERI) metallurgical analysis report of a 20 Inch crude pipeline failure of CBR; (d) Indian Oil Corporation Ltd- Research and Development (IOC-R&D) report on Bioremediation of sand;
(e) The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), New Delhi on Environment Impact Assessment study; and (f) Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT), Chennai, for oil spillage drift pattern study & oil spill quantity study.
8.13 Based on the above reports furnished by the CPCL, it was observed that there were no abnormalities found in the pipeline and the ultrasonic thickness ageing of the subject crude pipeline at various locations on both above the ground and underground portions of the pipeline was found to be good and the thickness of the pipeline was well within the limit and satisfactory.
8.14 The CPCL had entrusted the CMERI, which is the Institute for Mechanical Engineering, to carry out the metallurgical analysis of the crude pipeline to identify the root cause of the failure. The CMERI, in their Metallurgical Analysis Page 7 of 13 Report, had concluded that the pipeline failed due to the external object impact force. The report was also furnished and the findings of which are as follows:-
"1) The crack was initiated only on the outside diameter (OD) pipe wall surface of the pipeline.
2) The plastic collapse on the pipeline was due to the impact of external or foreign objects.
3) The plastic deformation-induced deformation texture bands within the metal matrix microstructure are evidenced by electron microscopy and optical microscopy.
4) The crack morphology on the failed pipeline was predominantly dominated by a brittle fracture due to sudden impact, while a mixed (brittle and ductile) mode of crack propagation was also evidenced."
8.15 IOC R & D team had furnished the study on the requirement of the bioremediation and found as follows:-
"1) On the shore near the leak site as well as in the adjacent area, no traces of oil or tarball were observed. It is noteworthy that when crude oil comes in contact with sand, it forms tar balls due to the mixing of oil and sand with sea waves.
2) A few black spots were noticed on shore, which was probably due to material like coal dust which was not sticky like crude oil.
3) A representative composite sample of sand from the beach was collected from different depths and analyzed for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) content using the USEPA 9071B method. The TPH content of the composite sample was below the detection limit (less than 1 ppm)."
8.16 The above reveals that as the TPH content was below the detection limit, no remediation was recommended.
8.17 The TERI report on the environmental impact assessment study on seawater and sediment quality, aquatic biodiversity effect on the aquatic population was also furnished. TERI report concluded based on the overall marine water and sediment quality analysis that there is no evidence of environmental damage attributed to the oil leak and the findings were given as below:-
"1) The overall water quality analysis, sediment and biodiversity analysis of the study area from the crude oil leak point, revealed that there is no evidence of visible environmental damage.
2) The sampling and site investigation findings showed that there is no visible contamination in and around the sampling site."Page 8 of 13
8.18 IIT Chennai which studied the oil spillage drift pattern and oil spill quantity found that the oil spill trajectory patterns on a forecast basis using the GNOME model for the spill reported due to pipeline leakage at Nagore Beach to identify the quantum of leakage. The validation has been carried out using satellite image analysis. The IIT also studied oil spillage with Numerical modelling with 10MT with 1000 splots, 20 MT with 2000 splots, 40MT with 4000 splots, 60MT with 6000 splots, 80 MT with 8000 splots and 100MT with 10000 splots. IIT compared the spill pattern with an actual satellite image and concluded that roughly 10 MT (i.e. 10,000 Liters) would have leaked. The CPCL also clarified that they have deployed a mobile vacuum sucker and removed 3.4 MT (i.e. 4,000 Liters) and used oil dispersant to disperse 4.25 MT (i.e. 5,000 Liters). Hence, net spillage after vaporization is around 1.04 MT (i.e. 1,227 liters).
8.19 So, based on the reports of the various experts, the Joint Committee noted that no crude oil spill was observed, the visual observation of the shoreline was clean and no fish deaths were reported due to the incident.
8.20 Water samples collected close to the leakage point of the pipeline showed a higher concentration of TPH due to oil accumulation at the spot. The oil was removed by deploying a mobile vacuum sucker to avoid any possibility of oil ingress into the sea. The TPH concentrations were well within the CPCB‟s permissible limits in all the sampling points.
8.21 The report of the TERI, NCSCM, NCCR and TNPCB confirms that there was no feasible environmental damage in and around the oil spilt area. Also, the reports concluded that the TPH concentrations along the spillage site are within the permissible level. The portion of the pipeline adjacent to the clamped area was found intact and healthy and the visual inspection of the pipeline found that there was no internal or external corrosion. The CMERI analysis also concluded that the pipeline leakage was primarily due to external object Page 9 of 13 impact force and the crack was initiated only from the OD pipe wall surface of the pipeline.
8.22 Though no remedial measures as such were suggested for the subject crude pipeline, it was recommended that, "a) While laying the new crude line for the proposed gross root Refinery, the line needs to be laid at an adequate depth as per good engineering practices.
b) The Data Acquisition system (SCADA) and SOP has to be developed for monitoring the pipeline integrity. CPCL should ensure Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition system (SCADA) system for monitoring the pipeline integrity and leak.
c) Implementing a sound management system to develop and maintain the integrity of pipelines. The proposed crude lines shall have wall thickness higher than the actual requirement as per engineering requirements considering the above factors."
9. The TNCZMA (Respondent No.2), in its report dated 15.03.2024, had stated that about 1000 Litres of crude oil spilt over the area where the pipeline was damaged. The spill was completely removed from the beach by the CPCL authorities and the spread was controlled by applying the oil spill dispersant. From the intertidal observation along the study area, it was observed that the diversity of intertidal organisms remained good and healthy. There is no oil sludge evidence / marking on the groynes and boulders along the intertidal rocky shore. The organisms of the intertidal area consist of burrowing crabs, gastropods, bivalves, tubiculous polychaetes, etc.
10. The Department of Fisheries was Suo Motu impleaded as 6th Respondent on 13.02.2024, as initially it was stated that the crude oil leakage had an impact on marine life.
11. The Department of Fisheries also filed a report dated 15.03.2024, wherein it is stated that the Peace Committee Meetings were conducted on 06.03.2023 and 16.03.2023 and the following decisions were taken:-
1) CPCL pipeline was to be permanently removed before 31.05.2023.
2) Before discharging the remaining crude oil in the pipeline by CPCL Company, approval is to be obtained from the District Administration, Fisheries and Page 10 of 13 Fishermen Welfare Department, Police Department and Fishermen Panchayats.
3) The Indian Oil Company officials were to inform the date of removal of the pipeline.
12. The report further states that the Tamil Nadu Dr. J. Jayalalithaa Fisheries University, Nagapattinam had collected finfish and shellfish samples from the sites of an oil spill at Nagapattinam coastal region on 12.03.2023 and submitted the sensory evaluation report on 16.03.2023, wherein it has been informed that there is no abnormal petroleum taint in the seafood samples viz., Finfish, Crustacean and Mollusks collected from the three different fish landing centre of Nagapattinam viz., Nagore, Samanthanpettai and Mahalakshmi Nagar.
13. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
14. The learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Rajeev Sharma, appearing for the CPCL pleaded that since all the reports of various expert institutions and also the Joint Committee report had given a clean chit that the oil leakage was only due to the external impact and had not caused any environmental impact, the present Original Application has to be closed.
15. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the TNPCB would state that as per the spill pattern, 10,000 Litres of oil had leaked, whereas only 9,000 Litres were removed or recovered. The CPCL has not accounted for 1,200 Litres which has either mixed with the seawater or sand. These kinds of incidents / accidents are prone to occur in future also. Merely because the reports of the various institutions have given a no- impact report, the CPCL cannot be absolved of its liability. Even though the leakage in the pipeline happened not because of the negligence or mistake of the CPCL, but only due to an external force, the CPCL is liable for their liability.
16. In this regard, if one observes the environmental law has seen a significant shift from fault-based to no-fault liability principles. This transition aims to address inherent challenges in holding polluters accountable for certain exceptions relating to Page 11 of 13 reasonable case, third party risks, and victim negligence. This shift is apparent through the statutes like, The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 which expressly embrace no-fault liability.
17. In the instant case, the application of no-fault liability necessitates evidence of resultant environmental harm whether the damage is man-made or natural, the hazards of it or known in crude oil transportation and such incidents underscore the justification for imposing no-fault liability.
18. Albeit, the reports indicate swift containment of the leak with minimal damage, the potential consequences for the marine eco-system and local fishing communities cannot be disregarded. This approach not only holds CPCL accountable for breaching its duty of care but also the compensation is proportionate to the harm inflicted.
19. Therefore, the applicability of no-fault liability in cases involving hazardous materials like crude oil serves a dual purpose, as it upholds the duty of care for entities in control of such materials even in the absence of proven negligence. Secondly, it ensures that compensation is commensurate with the actual damages occurred.
20. This theory is not new to the legal system, as several countries, including United States of America has the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 1980 commonly known as 'Superfund' to address the cleanup of hazardous waste sites and respond to environmental emergencies involving pollutants and contaminates.
21. Therefore, we hold that the CPCL is to be subjected to the principle of no-fault liability and impose a penalty for improvement of the environment and health of the people of the district.
Page 12 of 1322. In the result,
(i) The Original Application [O.A. No.02 of 2024 (SZ)] is disposed of.
(ii) The CPCL is liable for the incident, for which, we direct that an amount of Rs.5 Crores is to be paid within a period of 2 (Two) months.
(iii) The CPCL is directed to deposit the same with the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board.
(iv) The said amount collected should be utilized for improvement of the environment and health of the people of the district.
Sd/-
Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, JM Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, EM Internet - Yes/No All India NGT Reporter - Yes/No O.A. No.02/2024 (SZ), 22nd May, 2024. Mn.
Page 13 of 13