Banner
Workflow

No dual eco-clearance for 39 categories of industry

Contact Counsellor

No dual eco-clearance for 39 categories of industry

  • Saying that it has complied with a “long standing demand by industry,” the Union Environment Ministry has exempted 39 categories of industries from the mandatory requirement of approaching State pollution control boards.

Highlights:

  • In a significant move to promote industrial ease of operation, the Union Environment Ministry has exempted 39 categories of industries, classified as ‘white category’ (least polluting), from requiring approvals from State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs). This change, aimed at reducing bureaucratic hurdles, formalizes existing practices and aligns with industry demands.

Key Highlights

Industries Affected:

  • Includes solar cell and module manufacturing, fly ash brick production, leather cutting and stitching, wind and hydel power units, and others.
  • These industries fall under the ‘white category’, which is the least polluting classification as per the 2016 Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) guidelines.

Impact of Exemptions:

  • Removal of the need for Consent to Establish (CTE) and Consent to Operate (CTO).
  • Industries holding Environmental Clearance (EC) are now exempt from obtaining CTE.
  • Aimed at reducing compliance duplication and accelerating industrial establishment.

Classification of Industries:

  • The CPCB categorizes industries into four groups based on pollution levels:
    • Red: Most polluting; under strict scrutiny.
    • Orange: Moderately polluting.
    • Green: Minimal pollution.
    • White: Least polluting; now exempt from many compliance requirements.

Rationale and Policy Shifts

Ease of Doing Business:

  • Addressing the “trust deficit” between industries and regulatory bodies, the amendments prioritize economic growth while maintaining environmental safeguards.
  • The changes were enabled through recent amendments to the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, which initially mandated SPCB approval for any potentially water-polluting industry.

Simplified Processes:

  • Focus on reducing imprisonment for minor violations and eliminating unnecessary overlaps in approvals.
  • Balances environmental oversight with business facilitation, particularly for industries with minimal environmental impact.

Central Oversight:

  • The Centre now holds greater authority to override SPCB decisions, ensuring uniformity in enforcement.

Historical Context: The Water Act of 1974

  • Objective: Prevent contamination of water resources by industrial effluents.
  • Outcomes: Established the CPCB and SPCBs to monitor water pollution.
  • Amendments (2024): Simplified compliance for industries while retaining safeguards for critical water bodies.

Challenges and Concerns

  • Environmental Risks:
    • Potential for misuse if industries exploit regulatory relaxations.
    • Ensuring robust monitoring mechanisms even for exempt industries.
  • State Autonomy:
    • Greater central control may reduce the autonomy of SPCBs, potentially causing regional governance challenges.
  • Way Forward
    • Balance Regulation with Growth: Policies must ensure environmental sustainability while fostering industrial ease.
    • Strengthen Monitoring: Use advanced technologies like GIS mapping and IoT for real-time pollution tracking.
    • Periodic Review: Regularly reassess the classification and compliance framework to align with evolving environmental challenges.

Prelims Takeaways

  • Central Pollution Control Board.
  • The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974

Categories