COMPLIANCES UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS IN INDIA

COMPLIANCES UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS IN INDIA

The Origin of Environmental Laws in India

Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to life and personal liberty as a fundamental right. The Supreme Court of India in 1978 breathed substantive life to this Article in the case of Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978). In the case Subhash Kumar vs. State of Bihar (1991), the Supreme Court of India declared that Article 21 “includes the right of enjoyment of pollution free water and air for full enjoyment of life”.

Since then right to live in a healthy environment has emerged as an inherent part of the Right to Life enshrined in Article 21.

The first PIL on environmental issues in the country before the Supreme Court of India was the case, Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra vs. State of UP (1988).

Common Mistakes committed by various Industries in India

The majority of the Factory Manager, EHS Manager, etc. — are unaware of all the nuances of environmental regulations or are unclear about their interpretation, attracting avoidable liabilities for their facility and organisation.

Failure to obtain valid Environmental Permits

Setting up an industry in India requires environmental permits among several other licenses, and some industrial facilities do not obtain the Environmental Clearance (EC), Consent to Establish (CTE), or Consent to Operate (CTO) permits that are required for operation. Other environmental permits including Hazardous Wastes Authorisation and Bio-medical Wastes Authorisation must also be obtained depending on operations conducted at the facility.

In other cases, industries that initially obtained these permits do not renew the same prior to the dates of expiration. Others do not obtain prior consent from the concerned State Pollution Control Board (SPCB)/ Pollution Control Committee (PCC) before making changes to installed equipment, processes, raw materials, or production (including changes to production capacity and product mix).

Omission of Details of Site Operations in Applications, Statutory Records & Returns:

 Another common observation is omission of details of site operations from applications for environmental permits as well as from statutory records and returns

Water Cess Returns	Form-1
Annual Environmental Statement	Form-V
Annual Hazardous Waste Returns	Form-4
Annual Report under Bio-medical Waste Rules, 1998	Form-II
Record of Hazardous Wastes	Form-3
Hazardous Waste Labels	Form-12
Hazardous Wastes Manifests	Form-13
Returns under Batteries Rules, 2001	Form-I
Records under E-Waste Rules, 2011	Form-2

Some common details often omitted from records and returns include:

• Details of water consumed for different applications are omitted in water cess returns;

• Emissions from stacks fire water pumps and vents of local exhaust systems are omitted in Consent applications and Form V;

• Cooling tower blow-down is omitted in Consent applications and Form V;

• Empty chemical containers and waste oil are omitted in application for Authorisation and in Form 3 and Form 4;

• Analysis results for soil and groundwater monitoring are omitted in Form 3;

• Hazardous waste categories are omitted in Form 12 and Form 13; and

• The date of generation of hazardous waste is omitted in Form 12.

Lack of Proper Waste Management:

One of the areas where compliance gaps are commonly observed across a spectrum of industries is in the area of waste management. The compliance gaps observed include:

• Inadequate segregation of wastes;

• Lack of documented records of waste characterisation and inventory;

• Lack of prescribed labels on containers of hazardous chemicals and hazardous wastes;

• Lack of appropriate storage areas (i.e., designated, segregated, weather-proof storage areas with secondary containment, impervious floors, and appropriate caution boards for hazardous chemicals, fuels, and hazardous wastes); and

• Lack of documented information regarding the waste vendors and final fate of disposed wastes

Lack of Spill Response Plans and Equipment:

A spill in a factory can cause significant loss to life and property, especially in factories using and storing hazardous chemicals. While maintaining  a spill response plan and associated equipment is not an explicitly stated regulatory requirement under present Indian laws, this is necessary to comply with the General Duty clauses contained under the

·        Factories Act, 1948;

·        the Manufacture, Storage & Import of Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989 as amended 2000 (hereinafter “MSIHC Rules, 1989”);

·      and the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules 2008 (hereinafter “Hazardous Wastes Rules, 2008”).

Due to the lack of explicit regulatory requirements, most factories are not aware of this, and spill response plans are often absent in Indian factories.

Effluent Discharge without Treatment:

Certain industries discharge effluents into the environment (such as through storm runoff; used fire water; cooling tower blow-down; floor and drum washings) without adequate prior treatment. By allowing the discharge of polluting matter into streams, drains, sewers, or on land, they potentially violate Section 7 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and Section 24 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. Should it be proved that the untreated effluent contains polluting matter in excess of prescribed standards, such industries could face stringent enforcement measures. Should such discharge be proven to be the cause of environmental degradation (on-site or off-site), liability to clean-up and restore the environment to its original state may be required.

Sum-Up

It is imperative for the industry to understand that what’s good for the environment is also beneficial to the business. Environmental protection and commercial success are not mutually exclusive; rather, they complement each other.

Courtesy: Mr. Pranav Sinha, AIEMA, PEA

Co-Authors: Mr.Ashutosh Senger, Ms.Shweta Arora,