National Green Tribunal
National Green Tribunal Southern Zone vs The Chief Secretary Government Of ... on 24 November, 2022
Author: Satyagopal Korlapati
Bench: Satyagopal Korlapati
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
Original Application No. 71 of 2021 (SZ)
(Through Video Conference)
IN THE MATTER OF
Trtibunal on its own motion Suo motu
Based on the newspaper item in the
New Indian Express dated 10.02.2021,
"Oil leak from titanium factory hits
Thiruvananthapuram coast, Public barred
From affected stretch".
News item in the Hindu dated 10.02.2021,
"Furnace oil from Titanium factory,
Spills in to tsea"
News Item in Mathrubumi, English Edition
Dated 10.02.2021, "Glass furnace pipe bursts
At Titanium factory in TVM, Oil leaked to sea"
With
1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Kerala,
Govt. Secretaiat,
Thiruvananthapuram- 695001.
2. The Principal Secretary to Govt. Of Kerala,
Department of Revenue and Disaster Management,
Room No. 201A 2nd Floor Annex I,
Govt. Secretariat,
Thiruvananthapuram- 695001
3. The Principal Secretary to Govt. Of Kerala,
Department of Environment,
Rom No. 406, 4th Floor Annex II,
Govt. Secretariat,
Thiruvananthapuram- 695001
4. The Principal Secretary to Govt. Of Kerala,
Health and Family Welfare Department,
Rom No. 603, 6th Floor Annex II,
Govt. Secretariat,
Thiruvananthapuram- 695001
5. The Chairman,
Kerala State Pollution Control Board,
Head Office, Pattom. P.O.
Thiruvananthapuram- 695004
6. Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority,
Rep. By its Chairman,
4th Floor, KSRTC Bus Terminal,
Thampanoor, Thiruvananthapuram- 695001.
7. Kerala State Disaster Management Authority,
Rep by its Member Secretary,
Observatory Hills, Vikas Bhavan P.O.,
Thiruvananthapuram- 695033.
1
8. The District Collector,
Thiruvananthapuram District,
2nd Floor Civil Sttion Building,
Civil Station Road, Thiruvananthapuram- 695043.
9. Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation,
Rep by its Corporation Secretary,
Vikas Bhavan P.O. Thiruvanathapuram,
Kerala- 695033.
10. Travancore Titanium Products Ltd,
Rep by its Managing Director,
Post Box No.1, Kochuveli,
Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala- 695021.
...Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s): Suo Motu.
For Respondent(s): Mr. G. Vignesh for Mr. E.K. Kumaresan for
R1 to R4, R7 and R8
Ms. Nivedita for Ms. Rema Smrithi for R5 and R6.
Ms. D. Kamachi for R9.
Mr. Thirunavukarasu for R8.
Mr. Vishnu for R10
Judgment Reserved on: 16th November, 2022.
Judgment Pronounced on: 24th November, 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER
JUDGMENT
Delivered by Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, Judicial Member
1. Oceanic oil spill is a major environmental problem as a result of exploration, ship wreckage etc. Nevertheless, there are several oil spills related to discharges and tanker operations. There are also unintentional or negligent releases of lubricants by industries and individual which also aggravate the environmental problem. In addition to that the bursting of the glass furnaces pipe like the one in the instant case also causes considerable environmental impact.
2. As there was a newspaper report published in Mathrubumi English Newspaper Edition dated 10.02.2021 under the caption "Glass furnace pipe bursts at Titanium factory in Thiruvananthapuram, oil leaked to sea"
This Tribunal had registered a suo motu case as the oil spill is harmful to many forms of aquatic life and it also reduces the level of oxygen. The newspaper report had mentioned that though steps have been taken to 2 block the leakage, it had spread on large scale into the sea which is likely to affect the marine ecology and cause pollution. On suo motu registering the case, this Tribunal had appointed a joint Committee to inspect the area in question and submit a factual as well as the action taken report including the imposition of environmental compensation and also the mitigative measures for restoring the damage caused to the marine ecology.
3. An action taken report was submitted by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Environment Department dated 05.04.2021. In the report, it is stated that there was a furnace oil spillage in Travancore Titanium Products Limited (TTPL) on 10.02.2021 due to an oil line breakage. Unfortunately, the discharge drain in the plant going to the sea shore was just below the line and the spilled oil was carried away to the sea shore causing a major environmental incident. The damage was detected within 10 minutes and pump was immediately stopped. However, an estimated quantity of 4750 litres of the oil was filled to the drain even though the drain was blocked immediately. Certain quantity of furnace oil was carried away to the sea shore. The Kerala State Pollution Control Board immediately rushed to the site communicating the same to the District Collector, Fire and Rescue Department, Indian Coast Guard, Vizhinjam and Indian Coast Guard, Kochi. On a preliminary enquiry it was found that the oil spread extended approximately for a stretch of 4.5 km upto Thumba. The Coast Guard authorities conducted an inspection and found that the leakage had affected only the shoreline and had not been carried to the deep sea. The samples of effluent and oily sand were collected from different points along the shore lines and also from the source of discharge. The factory premises was also inspected and found that the discharge into the drain leading to the sea was completely stopped and the industry was directed to carry out source level containment. The functioning of the factory was also stopped by the instruction given by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board. The District Disaster Management Authority found that the leakage has already spread to a large area, there was no threat of fire.
4. While so, the Government constituted a Committee consisting of Principal Secretary (II) to Industries Department, Managing Director, Malabar Cements Ltd., Managing Director, Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd to enquire into the leakage of furnace oil through drainage into the sea by order dated 12.02.2021. The said Committee submitted its report and 3 TTPL has been directed to comply with the recommendations in the report which are as follows:
Recommendations:
Replace the entire length of furnace oil pumping lines urgently. Periodic ultra sound testing for all the metallic pipe lines carrying critical liquids for thickness checking.
Sharp bends in the pumping circuit may be avoided. A new pumping line lay out has been needed in such a way that it should be keep away from drainage to avoid oil drain.
Pressure checking mechanism for all pumping lines are to be ensured and the operators have to ensure the monitoring throughout the pumping line. The valve at the distribution tank is to be replaced with pneumatically operated one and interlocked has to be provided with the furnace oil pump. The lines are to be fitted with proper pressure/flow switches and interlock has to be provided with the furnace oil pump.
Level indicators have to be fitted with all these tanks and interlock has to be provided with the furnace oil pump.
During pipe replacement, all pumping activities may be shifted to distribution tank area.
Surveillance cameras are to be placed in critical locations. A safety audit is to be conducted by an external, competent authority. Professionalism to be adopted by the operating staff was found lacking. Hence necessary administrative steps shall be taken to enhance their capabilities. The operating staff shall be held responsible for the incident that has taken place.
5. The Managing Director, TTPL informed that the Authorities from the Factories and Boilers have conducted inspection of the factory and they are all set to start the trial run and had ensured that all environmental norms are adhered to. The action taken report of the Government further stated that there was no immediate damage to the human life and health was caused due to the incident. The extent of damage to the environment including land, soil and marine environment is being assessed. The livelihood of the fishermen in the locality were affected for few days and the Chief Environmental Engineer, Regional office, Thiruvananthapuram also had requested the Department of Fisheries to assess and furnish a report on the extent of the marine wealth and fisheries families affected by the incident.
6. The Pollution Control Board, who is the 5th respondent, had filed a report dated 07.06.2021. Certain directions were issued to the unit by the Chairman, Pollution Control Board vide order dated 10.02.2021 which reads as follows:
1. Removal of oil contaminated beach sand from the entire contaminated beach length.
2. As the waves are transferring the leaked oil continuously to the sea shore, the removal of the contaminated sand till the last drop of oil is removed, should be ensured.
3. Absorbents like saw dust, rice husk etc shall be spread on the beach from the northern oil spread end, till the point where the spread has reached.
Sufficient labour, trucks and other equipments shall be employed to complete the work on a war footing.
44. The contaminated sand shall be kept in the premises of the unit without causing any further contamination and the disposal of the same shall be in the presence of the Board officials and in accordance with direction of the Board. The drain inside the premises leading to the sea, still holding the leaked oil sludge shall be emptied, cleaned and the removed sludge shall be stored inside the industry premises without causing any further contamination.
5. The contaminated sludge, saw dust and sand collected shall be properly quantified; proof of which shall be submitted to the Board.
6. The proof of quantity of furnace oil leaked shall be submitted.
7. The oil collected in a pond in factory premises shall be transferred safely to leak proof tanks and contaminated soil shall be transferred along with soil sludge, and kept safely; the disposal shall be as per the direction of the Board.
8. There shall not be any discharge of effluent from the industry to the sea through authorised or any other outlet till the above works are completed. Prior permission from the Board shall be obtained before resuming production in the unit.
9. The industry shall install online effluent monitoring system in the open drain to the sea.
10. The industry shall provide leak detections facility for furnace oil line and for other hazardous materials.
7. The report further mentioned that the furnace oil contaminated sand and other waste materials have been completely removed from the drain discharge point. Therefore, the TTPL has requested them to permit them to operate the plant for production of 10 tonnes of TiO2 and 240 tonnes of H2SO4 per day. On 03.03.2021, permission was granted to TTPL to operate the plant on trial run basis for 05 days to produce 10 TPD of Titanium Dioxide and 240 TPD of Sulphuric Acid with strict observance of proper storage of sulphuric acid and without any effluent discharge outside the company through the outlet. With continuous monitoring the trial run was conducted from 16.03.2021 to 20.03.2021 and no effluent was discharged outside the company premises through the outlet during the said period. Therefore, the company was permitted to enhance the production of Titanium Dioxide on 31.05.2021.
8. In the meanwhile, the Joint Committee appointed by this Tribunal had inspected the site and filed a report. The Joint Committee inspected the unit premises including the furnace oil tanks, internal drains, outside drains reaching the sea shore. The internal drains were cleared of the oil spillages. The outside drain connected to the sea shore is passing through a coconut field and traversing below coastal road through culverts before reaching the sea shore. The total distance of the outside drain and the sea shore channel is approximately 150m. They were physically blocked by constructing a temporary wall just after the culvert before joining the sea shore. The Joint Committee had collected samples of the stream as well as water samples from the sea shore and also the soil samples for testing. In this report, the Pollution Control Board also had narrated the action taken by the unit and other local authorities after 5 the incident. There were shore cleanup activities and removal of oil contaminated sand was initiated as the spread extended upto 4.5 km stretch from the discharge channel. Soil from the seashore contaminated with the leaked oil to the tune of 22.27 MT has been recovered and sent to Treatment, Storage and Disposal facility (TSDF) located at Kochi for disposal through landfill. As per the analysis report of the soil, the oil content in the transported contaminated soil is 4.67% by weight, which indicates that approximately 01 tonne of oil has been removed. Further the furnace oil collected from the internal drains of the unit has been sent to the authorised used oil recycler. The Committee also observed that the unit has replaced the pipeline used for transportation of the furnace from the storage tank to the Boiler. A few of the recommendations made by the Committee constituted by the Government of Kerala were not yet fully implemented then and the company assured that they shall comply with all the conditions.
9. Regarding the compliance of regulations by the unit, the unit was functioning with valid consent and approval from various departments such as Kerala Pollution Control Board, Factories and Boilers, Local administration etc. The onsite emergency plan did not identify the situation of furnace oil leakage into the seashore and the emergency measures for the same have not been specified. Hence it was recommended that the onsite emergency plan to be revisited to incorporate such scenario of leakages of furnace oil or other chemicals into the seashore. The 10th respondent unit comes under the CRZ category II but the unit had not obtained the required clearance under the CRZ rules for the disposal of the effluent into the sea.
10. The environmental damage and compensation was also computed by the Joint Committee. The Committee made an assessment of the cost incurred for the immediate clean up and disposal of contaminated sand. As per the copy of statement provided by the unit representative, approximately Rs. 9.53 lakh has been spent by the unit for the shore clean up activities, including labour charges, disbursement of amount to local fishermen and hiring of vehicles etc. The local fishermen of the community were prohibited from going to the sea for two days following the oil spill which has resulted in economic loss to the fishermen whose livelihood was totally dependent on fishing and allied activities. Hence, the fishermen should also be adequately compensated for the loss of work for the days on which they were prohibited to enter the sea. The 6 10th respondent had agreed to compensate 902 fishermen at the rate of Rs. 200 per person based on the compensation amount fixed by the Government during the loss of livelihood on account of natural calamities. As the said amount was very meagre, the District Administration after discussion with the Deputy Director of Fisheries has enhanced the compensation to Rs. 700/- per person per day and directed the 10th respondent to consider the payment of said sum to the fishermen at the earliest. The Committee also had given the recommendations for avoiding such incidents and improvement of environment management which reads as follows:
5.0 Recommendations for avoiding such incidents and improvement of environment management:
Based on the observations made by the Committee, records verified and the analysis results of the sample collected during the visit, the Committee comes up with the following conclusions and recommendations;
A. With respect to the incident of oil leakage which happened due to negligence in assessing the pipeline for damages, as part of routine safety audits, the following steps needs to be implemented by the unit to avoid such incidents in future;
The periodic assessment of Pipe Integrity (including internal crack, corrosion and erosion) has to be made at least once in five years, so that the status of the pipeline shall be known and accordingly replacement period for the pipe shall be decided. The onsite emergency plan needs to be revisited to incorporate such scenarios of leakages of furnace oil or other chemicals into the seashore considering the proximity of the unit to the sea shore and existence of effluent drain.
The unit shall install automatic leak detection and cut-off systems to avoid such leakages and should implement the recommendations made by the Committee constituted by Govt. of Kerala, without further delay.
B. With respect to the overall improvement in environment management and assessment of long term impact of the oil leakage as well the historical practise of effluent discharge on the coast line including marine ecosystem, the unit shall take up a detailed long term study in consultation with reputed institutes in this field (Fisheries & Marine ecology) in line with the internationally accepted systematic methods for surveying an affected shoreline after an oil spill such as Shoreline Clean up and Assessment Technique (SCAT).
C. The analysis results indicate presence of traces of oil & Grease still in the sea shore sand samples and a detailed investigation and risk assessment study for remediation of sea shore shall be carried out to assess the impacts occurring from activities handling oil and grease, acid etc. and extent of damage (spatial) to environment, ecology and livelihoods estimated. Based on these estimates, emergency response procedures (ERP) shall be developed and costs assigned in the annual budget for monitoring the ERP. In this regard, the entire expenditure for the investigation, risk assessment study and remediation shall be borne by the unit.
D. Considering that the unit has installed systems such as MFRO which facilitates reuse of treated effluent, the practise of discharge of effluent to the sea shore shall be discontinued by the unit. KSPCB may consider amendment of the Consent conditions to this extent after ensuring that reject management systems are installed by the unit to achieve Zero Liquid Discharge status.
E. The unit shall comply with the CRZ notifications and obtain the necessary clearances from KCZMA as per the regulations.7
11. The Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority (KCZMA), who is the 6th respondent, had filed its report dated 19.02.2022. In the said report it is stated that the 10th respondent, TTPL, is situated within a radius of 500 m from the sea which falls under CRZ area and has not taken permission from KCZMA for the operation of the Phase-II project. A report was called from TTPL for not obtaining CRZ clearance from KCZMA on 27.07.2021. In its reply, the TTPL had stated they have obtained only Environmental Clearance for Phase-I of the project. For Phase-II, the company has deferred the project due to lack of funds and hence they did not seek the permission from KCZMA. The company clarified that there was no major expansion of the production activities since 1975. The 1st CRZ notification was issued on 19.02.1991. The TTPL had not submitted an application to KCZMA for CRZ clearance. The TTPL also assured that prior permission shall be taken from the KCZMA for all construction/alteration work in future. The KCZMA also directed the project proponent to submit the application for obtaining CRZ clearance on 07.02.2022 and the same was informed to the project proponent.
12. The 8th respondent, District Collector, also has filed his report stating that appropriate action would be taken to find out the complete solution in consultation with the public regarding the removal of the oil and sludge.
13. There was an additional report filed by the Joint Committee dated 18.07.2022. This report was filed as the Joint Committee had not arrived at the environmental compensation for the oil spillage from the 10 th respondent unit and the damage caused to the shore line. In that regard, it is stated as follows:
a. From the analysis results, it is felt that remediation for the oil and grease traces in the sea shore soil may not be necessary as the same has come to „below detectable levels‟ in the latest analysis. Further, as already reported, some amount of soil from the seashore, contaminated with the leaked oil (22.27 MT) was already recovered and sent to the TSDF for final disposal through landfill.
b. The action taken report provided by KSPCB (copy enclosed as Annexure 3) also indicates that the unit, M/s Travancore Titanium Products Ltd was closed down immediately after the incident and was given conditional permission for trial run at reduced capacity initially till the safety measures and shore clean-up activities were completed. Later on only, the unit was permitted to operate at full capacity.
c. With respect to the impact on aquatic life, the immediate effects of oil waste contamination may be mass mortality and contamination of fish and other food species. However, such impacts have not been reported and reports regarding the adverse effects on aquatic life are not available with the Fisheries Department, as confirmed by the representative from the District Administration.8
d. As already reported in the previous report, M/s Travancore Titanium Products Ltd has been instructed to compensate the fishermen on account of the loss of livelihood due to the incident. As per the latest status, out of 886 people identified, the compensation amount of Rs. 1400/- per person (at the rate of Rs. 700/- per day for two days‟ loss of lively hood) has already been distributed by the unit and disbursement of remaining amount, held up due to mismatch in bank account details, is under process. A copy of the communication from the unit to the district administration in this regard is enclosed as Annexure 4.
e. With respect to the environmental compensation, since the restoration cost may not be relevant at this point, as the Oil & Grease values are presently reported as „BDL‟, another approach based on the non-compliance of the unit can be considered, as it is evident from the analysis results that the Oil & Grease values in the nearby seashore soil became BDL only after significant time had passed and the same can be considered as the number of days of violation.
f. Environmental compensation (EC) can be assessed based on the CPCB guidelines using the following formula. The descriptors used in the formula and values considered for the descriptors are summarized in table:
EC (Rs.) = PI x N x R x S x LF Table: EC descriptors and values considered Components Description Value considered PI Pollution Index of industrial sector Red category (PI = 80) N* Number of days of violation took place 434 days (date of occurrence of oil leakage to latest monitoring conducted) R** Rupee factor (100-500) R factor considered as 100 S Scale of operation (Small/ Medium/ Large (S = 1.5) Large) LF Location factor Industrial area (LF = 1) N* - Number of days of violation - Incident took place on 10.02.2021 and the sea shore values were reported normal on 20.04.2022. Hence this time period of 434 days is considered.
R** -Rupee factor of 100 is considered as the incident was an accidental leakage The EC (Rs.) is worked out as = 80 x 434 x 100 x 1.5 x 1 = Rs.
52,08,000.00 The estimated EC for a violation period of 434 days shall be Rs.
52,08,000.00 g. The Hon‟ble Tribunal may also consider all other recommendations made by the Joint Committee for avoiding such incidents and improvement of environment management, as given in the previous report submitted earlier. h. KSPCB can conduct regular monitoring of the soil quality for some more time period and any abnormalities can be brought to the knowledge of CPCB also for any further actions, if required.
14. Since, the Central Pollution Control Board has taken the Rupee Factor as only 100, the Tribunal had sought for a clarification on the same. In the clarification report dated 14.11.2022, it stated that the incident has to be considered as an „onetime accident' which happened due to a mechanical failure in one of the overhead pipelines carrying furnace oil, which was coincidentally located above the open drain reaching to the sea shore. The oil leakage was also relatively less and some quantity of oil and oil contaminated sand from the sea shore and drains were already removed and sent for safe disposal as mentioned in their earlier report. The Indian Coast Guard and the District Administration also stated that 9 the oil spill was limited to shore line only and direct impact such as fish kill etc., was not reported. Already the compensation payable to the fishermen on account of loss of livelihood after the incident was assessed and the disbursement was under progress.
15. The report has further stated that so far as TTPL is concerned, it has to be inferred that due importance was not given to ensure the routine checks for the pipe integrity and strength of the pipeline carrying furnace oil which had resulted in the incident. Already the Joint Committee had recommended that the oil leakage that happened was only due to the negligence in assessing the pipeline for damages as part of the routine safety audits and recommended the following steps to be implemented by the unit to avoid any such incidents in future:
The periodic assessment of pipe integrity (including crack, corrosion and erosion) has to be made at least once in five years, so that the status of the pipelines shall be known and accordingly replacement period for the pipe shall be decided.
The onsite emergency plan needs to be revisited to incorporate such scenarios of leakages of furnaces oil or other chemicals into the seashore considering the proximity of the unit to the sea shroe and existence of effluent drain.
The unit shall install automatic leak detection and cut-off systems to avoid such leakages and should implement the recommendations made by the Committee constituted by Govt. of Kerala, without further delay.
16. In response to the same, the Learned Counsel appearing for the TTPL had filed a memo furnishing the profit and loss account from 31.03.2017 to 31.03.2021. The above profit and loss account of the 10 th respondent for the last five years appears to be running in loss.
17. The Joint Committee had earlier in its report dated 21.02.2022 had observed that normally the leakage of oil waste in shoreline or coast is expected due to interactions with sediments such as beach sand and gravel, rocks and boulders, vegetation, and terrestrial habitats. Oil spills, if reaching deep sea also present the potential for harm to deep sea and coastal fishing and fisheries. But in this case, the contamination is reported only to be on the shoreline. Regarding the hazards to the aquatic or marine life, normally, the oil spills will have toxic effects of exposure or ingestion, injuries such as smothering and deterioration of thermal insulation, and damage to their reproductive systems and behaviours. Long-term ecological effects that contaminate or destroy the 10 marine organic substrate and thereby interrupt the food chain are also harmful to the wildlife. In this case no such ecology effect is reported excepting the contamination on the shoreline. The other effect of such would be the recreational activities related to the facilities developed for fishing, boating, swimming, nature parks and preserves, beaches etc., which would be tourist attractions. No such impact also has been reported to have affected such activities in this case. Therefore, we are satisfied with the environmental compensation assessed by the Joint Committee. In view of the above discussion, the Original Application is disposed of as follows:
(i) The report of the Joint Committee and the Committee appointed by the Government of Kerala is recorded and accepted.
(ii) The 10th respondent, TTPL, is directed to strictly follow the recommendations made by the Joint Committee.
(iii) The 10th respondent is also directed to pay the environmental compensation assessed by the Joint Committee within a period of 03 months.
(iv) The 10th respondent is also directed to disburse the amount to the fishermen community at the earliest.
(v) The District Collector and the Kerala State Pollution control Board are directed to monitor the functioning of the unit periodically to avoid such incidents in future.
18. With the above observations and directions, the Original Application is disposed of.
...........................................................J.M. (Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana) .......................................E.M. (Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati) Internet - Yes/No All India NGT Reporter - Yes/No O.A. No.71/2021(SZ) 24th November, 2022. (AM) 11 Before the National Green Tribunal Southern Zone (Chennai) O.A. No. 71 of 2021 Suo Motu Vs. The Chief Secretary, Govt. of Kerala and Ors.
O.A. No. 71/2021(SZ) 24th November, 2022. (AM) 12