Coastal clearance skipped in sand mining nods, NGT told

PANAJI
The Goa State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (Goa-SEIAA), a statutory body under the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, has informed the National Green Tribunal (NGT) that the Directorate of Mines and Geology failed to disclose that the areas identified for sand extraction fall within the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ), where such activity is prohibited without prior clearance.

In its submission before the NGT, SEIAA said that had the Mines Department clearly informed the authority that the proposed sand mining zones were located in CRZ/ICRZ areas, the authority would have insisted on mandatory prior clearance from the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) before even considering the Environmental Clearance (EC).

SEIAA further informed the tribunal that while granting EC to the Directorate of Mines and Geology for sand extraction over an area of 4.55 hectares, with an extraction capacity of 1,000 cubic metres per annum per permit by traditional manual methods, it had imposed specific condition that the EC expressly contingent upon obtaining clearance from GCZMA.

The NGT bench, after independently downloading Form-II from the Centre’s PARIVESH portal, observed that Serial No. 21 of the application form specifically requires disclosure on whether the project or activity is located in a CRZ or ICRZ area. The tribunal noted that this requirement exists to ensure that prior CRZ clearance is obtained from the competent authority before the EC process is taken up.

“SEIAA has admitted that the area in question falls in CRZ only. Therefore, this column certainly must have been filled by the project proponent indicating therein that the area where the EC was required fell in CRZ area,” the order stated.

During the hearing, counsel for SEIAA admitted that the area in question does fall under CRZ, which means the project proponent was required to disclose this fact while submitting Form-II. The tribunal noted that this column “certainly must have been filled” by the project proponent indicating the CRZ status of the area.

SEIAA maintained that the EC process had considered the National Institute of Oceanography (NIO) report, including the delineation of zones where sand extraction could be undertaken with minimal environmental impact. However, it reiterated that non-disclosure of the CRZ status by the Mines Department undermined the statutory clearance process.

NGT bench, while referring to the MoEF&CC’s Office Memorandum dated April 26, 2022, noted that in case of project located in CRZ areas, the applications have to be first moved before GCZMA for its recommendation and pursuant to that recommendation only, the SEIAA can be moved for consideration of grant of EC. “This procedure does not appear to have been followed in the case in hand,” the bench said.