October 3, 2003, Vadodara
- Public Hearing Committee accepts contamination of groundwater by toxic chemicals in and around Effluent Channel Project (ECP) in Padra area of Vadodara District, Gujarat.
In a public hearing held on 1st October 2003, for expansion of M/s Banyan Chemicals Ltd. at Padra taluka, the chairperson of the public hearing panel, Mr. Bhagyesh Jha, District Collector, Vadodara District, left with no choice but to accept the severe contamination of ground water by illegal discharge of toxic chemicals by the unregulated chemical factories located around effluent channel project in the Padra region.
In his concluding remark after a three and half hour long public hearing, Mr. Bhagyesh Jha stated that Padra being the Food Basket of Vadodara district can not be subjected to further contamination of air, groundwater, soil and agriculture. He recommended to the Gujarat State Pollution Control Board to finalise long pending demand of Environmental Groups regarding a Regional EIA of the area; and made specific recommendation to analyse the groundwater in consultation with the community and voluntary organisation like Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti. He also requests the agriculture department to conduct the study the impact of pollution on agriculture. He further recommended the public health department to study the impact of pollution on human health.
Members of Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti and Farmer‚s Action Group while representing in front of the public hearing panel pointed out the following problems in the "Rapid Environmental Impact Assessment Report For Existing Bulk Drug Unit And Proposed Expansion", conducted for M/s Banyan Chemicals Ltd. Plot No. 31 Dabhasa, Dabhasa-Umariya Road, Taluka-Padra, Dist.-Vadodara, by en-Vision Enviro Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Surat:
(a) The proposed "expansion" of M/s Banyan Chemicals Ltd. is a misnomer since the company wants to expand almost 8 times its present production - from 3 porducts to 23 products. Therefore, it is almost setting up of a new industry rather than expansion of unit.
(b) The rapid EIA does not take a comprehensive look at the overall environmental situation of the area and the possible impact the expansion would have on the natural carrying capacity of the area. This is retreated by the fact that the EIA ignored some of the key studies on contamination of ground water, soil and crops in the area, which could have formed baseline data for any further industrial activity in the area. Like,
"Environment Impact Assessment Along The Effluent Channel From Baroda To Jambusar And At Its Confluence With Mahi Estuary At The Gulf Of Cambay With Special Reference To Heavy Metals" [September 1995]. By Dr. Avnesh H. Sharma of Division of Environmental Biology, Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, M. S. University of Baroda, Vadodara. This study clearly shows the high heavy metal contamination of vegetables and crops in the area.
"State Environmental Action Programme, Industrial Pollution", Phase I Report, July 2000 by Gujarat Ecology Commission‚s report regarding the Industrial Pollution, which clearly points out the high ground water contamination in the area.
"Industrialisation and Toxic Pollution in the Golden Corridor of Gujarat, Who Bears the Cost ?" February 1999, by Indian People‚s Tribunal.
Besides numerous reports by PSS, Farmers Action Groups and press clips that show red coloured ground water from the wells all along the Effluent Channel Pipeline.
(C) Members of PSS illustrated with recent photographs and data the environmental damage done to the ecology of the area. Scientific data showing presence of heavy metals like cadmium, mercury, copper in vegetables like brinjal, potato, drum stick, tomato where shown to the public hearing panel.
(D) While the company‚s EIA report mentions about colour in ground water, high TDS and presence of mercury and other metals in ground and surface water, without recognising it as an serious issue and conducting through scientific study of ground water, the company has conducted arbitrary sampling and based their findings on them.
(E) The EIA report uses data for land-use pattern from Census - 1991, which is highly problematic since the land use and cropping pattern in the last 12 years in the area has changed considerably. Without doing a scientific field based research on these two very important aspects, the rapid assessment is incomplete.
(F) The EIA report does not mention about presence of "Drum Sticks", a very important tree in the area, which forms one of the mainstays for livelihood for farmers in the area, each tree fetching up to Rs 1500. Therefore, not mentioning about this tree in the Rapid EIA is highly erroneous.
In reply, company left with no choice but to accept that the area may be highly polluted but you can not say that is only because of our company.
The PSS insisted for acceptance of the high-level pollution in the area because new amendment made by the Ministry of Environment and Forest on 4th August 2003 will be useful to the area. (Amendment : In Schedule 1 to the said notification, for the Note, the following Note shall be substituted, namely:-
"Note-Every project proposed to be located in
(a) a critically polluted area; or
(b) within a radius of fifteen kilometers of the boundary of
(i) reserved forests,
(ii) ecologically sensitive areas which include national parks, sanctuaries, biosphere reserves; and
(iii) any state,
shall require environmental clearance from the Central Government."
[No. Z-12013/4/89-IA-I]
Dr. V. Rajagopalan, Jt. Secy.
Note: The principal notification was published in the Gazette of India vide number S.O. 319(E) dated the 10th April, 1997.)
The PSS team also requested the Public Hearing Committed to visit the area to have idea about the contamination of groundwater, soil and agriculture. The PSS decided during the public hearing not to further press for it because at the end, the Chairperson of the committee accepted the ground reality of high-level pollution in area and even he was shock while looking at the photographs presented by the PSS regarding the groundwater contamination.
Members of PSS and FAG hope that the Gujarat Pollution Control Board, the Agriculture department, and the Health department take cognizance of the recommendations made by the Chairperson of the Pubic Hearing Committee, the District Collector. We also hope that the Collector will do the systematic follow up regarding the recommendation made by him.
Rohit Prajapati Madhumita Dutta
PARYAVARAN SURAKSHA SAMITI
Gujarat [India]
Phone No. 91-265-2412499
Email No:
rt_manav@sancharnet.in 
URL::