National Green Tribunal
M/S Gujarat Enviro Protection & ... vs M/S Power Grid Corporation Of India Ltd ... on 18 May, 2022
Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel
Item No. 05 (Court No. 1)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
(By Video Conferencing)
Original Application No. 40/2021
M/s Gujarat Enviro Protection &
Infrastructure Haryana (Pvt.) Ltd. Applicant
Versus
M/s Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. &Ors. Respondent(s)
Date of hearing: 18.05.2022
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, CHAIRPERSON
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR AGARWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
Applicant: Ms. Anandita Singh, Advocate
Respondent(s): Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG with Mr. Ashwarya Sinha, Advocate for
M/s Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.
Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, Advocate for CPCB
ORDER
1. Grievance in this application is against high transmission electric overhead line of R-1- M/s Power Grid Corporation of India Limited close to Treatment Storage Disposal Facility (TSDF) run by the applicant.
2. The matter was earlier considered vide order dated 08.10.2021 and a report from CPCB was sought, as follows:-
"4. We have heard learned Counsel for the applicant. He submits that the applicant is operating TSDF facility but the Power Grid Corporation of India has installed high tension lines in April, 2018 within 200 meters from the buffer zone from the boundary of TSDF required to be maintained under Rule 3(7) and Schedule I of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016. Radiation will be emitted by the 1 said process and thus the lines will affect the safety of TSDF and the workers operating it. Issue notice to respondent No. 1. Mr. Ashwarya Sinha, Advocate accepts notice and seeks time to file response. Let the same be done within one month. CPCB may constitute an Expert Committee to examine the issue whether high tension lines in proximity of the TSDF facility will be permissible and viable in view of relied upon guidelines and Rules or otherwise and file its report within three months by e-mail at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/ OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF."
3. In pursuance of above, CPCB has filed its report dated 25.04.2022 after holding meeting with the concerned. Its Expert Technical team undertook visit to the site and found that necessary distance was being maintained for the transmission line in question. The transmission line had no adverse impact on workers' health. The extracts from the report are:-
"
2. Action Taken by Central Pollution Control Board:
In order to identify the grievances of M/s GEPIL and response of M/s PGCIL on the same, CPCB alonwith officials from Haryana State Pollution Control Board conducted two meetings separately with the parties i.e. M/s GEPIL and M/s PGCIL on 10/12/2021 and 30/12/2021 respectively.
a. Meeting with M/s GEPIL: During the meeting on 10/12/2021, GEPIL has informed that (i) the said site was notified by Government of Haryana in 1997 for waste disposal; (ii) GEPIL has entered into agreement with Haryana Environmental Management Society (HEMS) on 30/08/2005 for development of TSDF; (iii) GEPIL has obtained possession of the site on 19/06/2006 and the facility was established on 29/06/2009.
Representatives of GEPIL raised their concerns w.r.t. (i) Safety of workers during operation & closure of landfill; (ii) Capacity reduction of Landfill due to height constraint & (iii) Violation of Buffer zone criteria as mentioned in the CPCB guidelines on Buffer Zone Around Waste Processing and Disposal Facilities, 2017.
It was also informed that Technology Information Forecasting and Assessment Council (TIFAC), Environmental Research Centre has been engaged to study the impact of the High Transmission electric overhead line on the Secure Landfill (SLF).
CPCB informed that the above Guidelines on Buffer Zone Around Waste Processing and Disposal Facilities, 2017 referred in the application are related to Solid Waste Management 2 Facilities and is not applicable for Common Hazardous Waste TSDF. There are separate Buffer zone requirements stipulated under the Guidelines on "Criteria on Hazardous Waste Landfill".
Further, GEPIL & Haryana SPCB were requested to provide documents on Environmental Clearance; Consent to Establish (CTE); initial Consent to Operate (CTO); design and layout approvals granted by HSPCB; Report of TIFAC, etc. However, only TIFAC report, authorizations, latest CTO, Agreement between M/s GEPIL & Haryana Environment Management Society and project report on TSDF facility were provided., Other documents related to impact & Risk assessment study, information related impact on health of workers and documents related to High Court order were sought.
Subsequently, letter issued by Municipal Corporation Faridabad regarding land lease was also provided. The GEPIL failed to provide the relevant documents (i.e. initial CTE & CTO issued by HSPCB for TSDF, Environmental Impact Study, Site and Design layout approved by HSPCB and outcome of Hon'ble High Court of Haryana & Punjab orders in the matter of WP (C) No. 12312/2006) even after extension of timeline for submission of documents.
Based on the documents submitted, compliance of various regulatory provisions related to setting up and operation of common HW TSDF is summarised below:
i. Environmental Clearance: As per the prevailing regulations under Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification dated 14/09/2006, the common hazardous waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal facility are required to obtain the Environmental Clearance (EC) from the concerned agency.
The said requirement of EC was not applicable as per EIA Notification 1994, the same was added in 2006. In this regard, MoEF&CC vide its O.M dated 21/11/2006 had clarified that for projects which were not covered under EIA Notification 1994 and now require the same under EIA Notification 2006 have to follow the guidelines which states that "ii. Such Projects for which NOCs issued before 14th September, 2006 will not be required to take Environmental Clearance under the EIA Notification, 2006". A copy the said O.M is appended at Annexure-II.
In view of the above, M/s GEPIL was requested to provide copy of the Consent to Establish granted by HSPCB for establishment of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal facility. However, the documents could not be provided by GEPIL/HSPCB. M/s GEPIL has provided copy of first Authorization issued under the HWM Rules, 1989 on 08/08/2005.
3ii. Environmental Impact Assessment & Site notification:
M/s GEPIL obtained the possession of land in 2006. During the setting up of the TSDF, Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) (HWM) Rules, 1989 (as amended till 2003) were prevailing. As per the Rule 8 of the said HWM Rules, 1989 mandated conduction of EIA study & Public Hearing followed by site notification. Relevant portion of the said Rule provisions are reproduced below:
(4) "(3) The operator of a facility, occupier or any association of occupiers shall undertake an environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the selected site(s) and shall submit the EIA report to the State Pollution Control Board or Committee The State Pollution Control Board or Committee shall on being satisfied with the EIA report, cause a public notice for conducting a public hearing as per the procedure contained in the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 1994 published vide S.O. 60(E) dated the 27th January, 1994 as amended from time to time.
(5) The State Pollution Control Board or Committee shall forward to the State Government or Union territory Administration, as the case may be the project report including EIA report and details of public hearing along with its recommendations within a period of 30 days from the last date of public hearing.
(6) The State Government shall complete the assessment within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the documents mentioned in sub-rule (5) and convey the decision of its approval of site(s) or otherwise within 30 days thereafter to the concerned operator of the facility, occupier or any association of occupiers. (7) After approval of the site or sites, the State Government shall acquire the site(s) or inform the occupier or any operator of facility, or any association of occupiers to acquire the site(s) for setting up the facility for treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes.
The State Government shall simultaneously notify such sites(s). The State Government shall also compile and publish periodically an inventory of such hazardous wastes disposal sites and facilities;"
HSPCB vide its letter dated 08/08/2005 granted authorization to operate a facility for collection, reception, treatment, storage, transport and disposal of hazardous waste on the premises located in village Pali, Faridabad, Haryana. The said authorization also lay down aforesaid conditions along with special conditions to carryout Environmental Impact Analysis & Risk Assessment Study. A copy of Authorization granted by HSPCB on 08/08/2005 is appended at Annexure-III.4
Further, the issue of land allotment of 31 acers on which present TSDF has been developed was placed before Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the matter CWP No. 12312 of 2006. In the said matter, it was recorded that the said 31 acers (12 hectares) were part of 02 mining queries of 244 hectares. Hon'ble High Court in its orders dated 30/11/2007 also recorded that:
i. The site was notified by Environment Department, State of Haryana on May 27, 1997. In the said notification it has been written that "Whereas an environment impact study was undertaken for identifying a site as Waste Disposal Site for Faridabad Area", however, no such study report was placed before Hon'ble High Court.
ii. An environment assessment report related to selection of hazardous waste disposal sites in Faridabad was prepared by the National Productivity Council (Environment Division) in September, 1998.
iii. The prevailing rules required the Environmental Impact Study to precede the notification and not the other way around.
iv. No public notice was issued for public hearing, the assessment of the Government on the basis of the environment impact study and the details of public hearing was not done, approval of the Government was not taken for the setting up of TSDF, approval was only for a waste disposal site. Quite obviously the notification of 1997 was on the basis of the rules as originally drafted but not on the basis of the amended rules as they stand.
The Hon'ble High Court vide its aforesaid order quashed the Land notification of TSDF in violation of the Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 1989 and land lease deed of April 19, 2005 was also quashed. A copy of said order of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana is appended at Annexure-IV.
It is pertinent to mention that Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide its orders dated 31/03/2008 in the matter of SLP 5131 of 2008 put an interim stay on the aforesaid order of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana till further orders. The said order is appended as Annexure- V. The said matter is pending before Hon'ble Supreme Court.
iii. Design & setting up of disposal facility: As per Rule 8A of HWM Rules 1989 (as amended in 2000) "The occupier, any association or operator, shall before 5 setting up a disposal facility get the design and the layout of the facility approved by the State Pollution Control Board;"
The authorization issued to the unit in 2005 & 2006 also lays down the aforesaid condition. No document w.r.t aforesaid approval has been provided by GEPIL/HSPCB.
M/s GEPIL has provided a copy of the Project Report of Integrated Common Hazardous Waste Management Facility. The said project report outlines the capacity of the landfill (calculated with height till 06-08 meters) and plan for development of the same. The proposed landfill capacity under the said report is tabulated below:
Landfill Cell Location of Pit Volume Maximum Achievable Cell -1 Below Ground 2.5 Lakh m3 Above Ground 2.0 Lakh m3 Cell -2 Below Ground 4.10 Lakh m3 Above Ground 3.60 Lakh m3 Total 12.20 Lakh m3 In Phase-1 only cell 1A (part of Cell 1) having underground capacity of 1.0 lakh m3 was proposed to be developed. A copy of relevant portion of said Project Proposal report is appended at Annexure-VI. As per information submitted by the units about 123786 MT of Hazardous Waste has been disposed of in the Landfill till 31/03/2022.
iv. The estimated capacity of the landfill cells 1 & 2 were mentioned in the Project Report provided by GEPIL. However, approval of the proposed landfill cell from HSPCB has not been provided No development Buffer Zone: As per section 2(e) of CPCB guidelines "Criteria for Hazardous Waste Landfill" 2001, "A zone of 500 meters around a landfill boundary should be declared a no- development buffer zone after landfill location is finalised". The applicant has also referred to the violation of Buffer zone criteria, however, instead of above buffer zone criteria, M/ GEPIL has referred the buffer zone criteria applicable on the Solid Waste Management Facilities.
The said buffer zone in case of Common HW TSDF is required to be notified before development of the disposal facility as a preventive measure to safeguard the health of humans & environment from any possible impact from the TSDF. HSPCB and GEPIL (Haryana) have not provided any document related to notification of "No Development Buffer Zone" as per aforesaid CPCB guidelines.6
v. Authorization & Consent: As per the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 the said facility have to obtain Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate. The facility has provided copy of latest CTO issues by HSPCB and GEPIL has informed that in 2005 HSPCB used to issue combined CTE & CTO. However, copy of CTE & initial CTO has not been provided to CPCB.
Further, under the Hazardous & Other Wastes (Management & Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016 (earlier Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) 1989, as amended) the unit has to obtain Authorization for collection, treatment, storage, transportation and disposal of Hazardous waste. The unit has provided copy of 1st Authorization issued in 2005 as well as latest authorization issued by HSPCB on 07/08/2021 with validity upto 30/09/2026. A copy of latest authorization and CTO issued by HSPCB is appended at Annexure-VII.
b. Meeting with PGCIL: During the meeting, PGCIL submitted the procedures adopted for establishment of high-tension electricity transmission lines and submission made against the issues raised by GEPIL. The following major submissions were made by PGCIL:
i. PGCIL had issued a Public Notice in 02 Newspapers (i.e. Times of India & Punjab Kesari) 04/07/2015 for any objection/comments on the erection of the transmission lines which are in question under this matter at the proposal stage. However, no Comment/Objection was received by PGCIL. A copy of public notice issued is appended at Annexure-VIII.
ii. PGCIL has obtained NOC/permissions from Airport Authority of India; Competent Authority, Govt. of NCT of Delhi; Regional Offices of MoEF&CC. A copy of approvals is appended at Annexure-IX.
iii. PGCIL has obtained the permission for energization of the lines on 08/10/2018 from Central Electricity Authority (CEA). A copy of said CEA approval is appended at Annexure-X. iv. PGCIL has submitted that the transmission lines are designed and constructed in such a way that the total length of transmission lines is minimum, and exposure to residential and important installations is kept minimum safeguarding the public health.
v. As per CEA (Measures relating to Safety and Electricity Supply) a minimum ground clearance of 8.84 meters have to be maintained in case of 400 KV transmission lines.
7vi. Various studies have been carried out in India and Globally, however, no study has directly linked the EMF with any ill effect on humans. Further, in order to ensure safety of general public from any possible ill effects Guidelines of International Commission on Non‐Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) are being followed in India which limits the Electric field upto 5KV/m and Magnetic Field at 200 µT for general public.
vii. GEPIL has approached PGCIL in 2018 when the construction was in advance stage and making any changes at that point of time was not possible.
viii. Shifting of any one tower will have cascading effect on the positions of multiple towers on either side.
ix. GEPIL has approached various Hon'ble Courts and Hon'ble Tribunal and the submission of the GEPIL w.r.t height of landfill has been inconsistent. Before Hon'ble NGT in the Original Application No. 40/2021, the unit has submitted that the final height of landfill will be 5 meters above ground level. However, in the I.A filled in the said matter, GEPIL has modified its submission informing that present height of landfill is 6.1 meters and will reach a height of 7.5 meters in future. A copy of relevant portion of submissions made by GEPIL before Hon'ble Tribunal is appended at Annexure-XI.
c. Joint visit of TSDF Site and Monitoring: The Expert Technical team headed by Shri. A. Sudhakar, Director (Scientist 'F'), CPCB conducted field inspection on 17/03/2022 and carried out measurements of the Ground clearance available along with Electric and Magnetic fields. Other technical members in the team included Ms. Deepti Kapil, Scientist 'D', CPCB; Shri. Sahil Patel, Scientist 'B', CPCB; Smt. Neeraj Bala, Scientist 'B', HSPCB and Shri. S.K Singh, DGM, PGCIL.
All the measurements were made in the presence of senior representatives of GEPIL headed by Shri. Ashwani Kumar, Unit Head-Operations and PGCIL headed by Sh. A.K Dixit, CGM, Shri. Adarsh Srivastava, Sr. GM and Smt. Arti Yadav, Chief Manager.
The points of measurements marked on Google map and measured values are tabulated below:
Table 1: Measurements below the Centre line Clearance Electric Field available (KV/m) Magnetic Field (µT) Points of from cable measurements (m) At 1 m At 1.8 m At 1 m At 1.8 m Right side Boundary Wall (P1) 15.284 0.19 0.47 1.5 1.6 On Ground Outside Landfill (P2) 16.418 0.03 0.03 1.27 1.4 8 On current base of Cell 1A (P3) 25.66 1.62 1.57 0.57 0.59 On current base of Cell 1A (P4) 26.502 2.02 1.9 0.46 0.49 On current base of Cell 1A (P5) 27.431 1.09 1.08 0.42 0.43 Table 2: Measurement at 23 meter from centre line:
Clearance Electric Field
available (KV/m) Magnetic Field (µT)
Points of from cable
measurements (m) At 1 m At 1.8 m At 1 m At 1.8 m
On Right side
Embankment of Cell
1A (E1) 14.285 0.5 0.5 0.68 0.75
On current base of
Cell 1A (R3) 25.96 0.45 0.42 0.35 0.36
On current base of
Cell 1A (R5) 27.999 1.09 1.08 0.38 0.38
On Left side
Embankment of Cell
1A (E2)* 19.952 0.26 0.24 0.32 0.32
*Measurement was taken at E2 due to presence of valley beyond that As per CEA (Measures relating to Safety and Electricity Supply), minimum ground clearance of 8.84 meters in case of 400 KV electricity transmission lines. A copy of relevant portion of said CEA regulations is appended at Annexure-XII.
Further, as per current practices "Right of Way" (RoW) of 46 meters (23 meters on each side from centre of the transmission towers) have to be maintained in case of 400 KV electricity transmission lines.
d. Impact of High Tension Electricity Transmission lines on workers' health: During the site visit of TSDF, CPCB & HSPCB sought any study or documentary evidence with regard to possible health effects on workers, however, the same could not be provided by GEPIL. Further, it has been informed that currently 52 workers are working in TSDF (on Roll & Contractual basis), of which about 08 workers involved in Production/Maintenance have been working for more than 10 years, however, no employee has reported any health issues due to said transmission lines. CPCB has also examined the Environmental Health Criteria 238 prepared by World Health Organization (WHO) wherein it has been reported that available data do not indicate that Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) electric and/or magnetic fields affect the various human biological system (i.e. Cardiovascular, Immunology & Haematology, Reproductive, Neurodegenerative Neuroendocrine) in a way that would have an adverse impact on human health and the evidence is thus considered inadequate. Therefore, the contention of the 9 GEPIL related to possible health impacts on workers on TSDF do not hold any merit.
Fire/explosion hazard in landfill due to transmission lines: During the site visit, scientific evidence to support the claim of unit for possibility of fire/explosion hazard was sought, same was not provided. Further, it is pertinent to mention that as per CPCB guidelines combustible material shall not be disposed in TSDF, only stabilized waste has to be disposed of into Landfill. Therefore, if waste is being disposed of after stabilization as per due procedures, the same shall not catch fire/react from presence of electricity transmission lines.
3. Conclusion:
1. Regulatory provisions related to EIA Study, Site notification has not been complied with while establishing the Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility.
2. There are no documents submitted granting approval of design, capacity and height of the landfill.
3. There is no documentary evidence behind the contentions made w.r.t Impact on Health of Workers and possibility of fire hazard/explosion in the landfill due to electricity transmission lines.
4. GEPIL had not made objection against the construction of transmission lines on issuance of Public Notice by PGCIL in 2015.
5. The minimum Ground Clearance and Right of Way as per the Indian Electricity Rules and CEA (Measures relating to Safety and Electricity Supply) have to be provided.
a. Ground Clearance: The required clearance is 8.84 m.
and adequate height is available under all the transmission lines at present. As per field survey, a ground clearance of 25.66 m is available under the Central line and 25.96 meter is available under the western end of RoW. However, if the height of landfill Cell 1A is extended more on the Eastern side towards the transmission lines, the required clearance could be breached.
b. Safety: The electric field measured at the TSDF was in the range of 0.03 to 2.02 KV/m against the permitted limit of 5KV/m. Also, the magnetic field levels were observed in the range of 0.32 to 1.6 j.iT against the permitted limit of 200 T. Recommendations:
1. In order to ensure safe movement of vehicles and disposal of waste a clear distance of 30 meters (on either side from centre line connecting both transmission towers) have to be provided. The said distance takes care of the Right of Way 10 provision and also provided extra buffer to ensure safe operation of TSDF.
2. The maximum height of the landfill shall be developed at the western end, away from transmission lines which shall be reduced in graded manner in order to provide stability of the landfill and ensure safe operations.
3. HSPCB shall approve the layout and Cell design (existing as well as future) of landfill as per the above norms, HOWM Rules, 2016 amended thereof and CPCB guidelines so as to meet the requirements of the minimum ground clearance, RoW and also ensure safe operation of TSDF
4. The State Government shall notify the "No development buffer zone" around TSDF site and regularise all the provisions needed in the land allotment.
5. In order to ensure minimum clearance distance & safety provisions, HSPCB, GEPIL & PGCIL shall jointly conduct the measurement of the clearance available, electric & magnetic fields at every six months within & outside the premises of GEPIL. GEPIL shall provide its support to PGCIL for conducting the monitoring at the specified intervals."
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the report. It is shown that necessary distance has been maintained for the transmission lines. There is no objection to the report nor we find any reason not to accept the same. According to the report, it is the Applicant Facility which has to take necessary steps for compliance of environmental norms. Thus, no further order appears to be necessary except that the statutory regulators - CPCB and State PCB may take further appropriate action for compliance by the Applicant.
The Application is disposed of.
A copy of this order be forwarded to the CPCB and the State PCB by email for compliance.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, CP Sudhir Agarwal, JM 11 Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM May 18, 2022 Original Application No. 40/2021 AB 12