[ by Kavita Krishnan ]The Supreme Court lifted cleared the way for construction of a greenfield airport at Mopa in Goa subject to certain conditions suggested by the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC). The Court directed the EAC to revisit its recommendations for the grant of the Environmental Clearance (EC) including the conditions and to impose additional conditions to adequately protect...
The Supreme Court lifted cleared the way for construction of a greenfield airport at Mopa in Goa subject to certain conditions suggested by the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC). The Court directed the EAC to revisit its recommendations for the grant of the Environmental Clearance (EC) including the conditions and to impose additional conditions to adequately protect the concerns governing the terrestrial eco-systems, besides formulating conditions pertaining to air, water, noise, land, biological and socio-economic environment.
The judgment comes after a year when the Supreme Court had suspended all construction activities for the greenfield project, ordering status quo in the case.
The Union of India in the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) moved the proceedings, seeking a direction that the Minutes of the 40th meeting of the EAC dated 23 April 2019 be taken on the record so that the embargo imposed by the Supreme Court on the Environmental Clearance for a greenfield airport at Mopa Goa can be lifted.
The EAC tabulated the details of forest areas which fell within a radial distance of 15 kilometers of the proposed airport and within the territories of the States of Goa and Maharashtra. The concerns highlighted were in relation to the need to preserve the biodiversity of the Western Ghats. A High Level Working Group (HLWG) on the Western Ghats chaired by Dr. K Kasturirangan constituted under the auspices of the MoEFCC sought to preserve the biodiversity of the Western Ghats.
On the existence of Ecologically Sensitive Areas (ESAs), the EAC noted that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report had only indicated that Pernem taluka, where the project is to come up, has not been earmarked as an ESA in the Kasturirangan Committee report. The EAC also deliberated on the likely impact of the construction and operation of an airport on the flora, fauna and hydrological systems in the ESAs as well as in regard to climatic variations.
The EAC mentioned in its minutes that all the ESAs are far away from the project and therefore the impact on air and noise environment is expected to be minimal. It also mentioned in its minutes that, “With regards to climatic variations, the EAC felt that additional initiatives such as Green Infrastructure Development program, adoption of low emission intensive technologies, renewable energy program, and Airport Carbon Accreditation need to be adopted to reduce the impact on Green House Gas (GHG) emissions and thereby climate change.”
Summing up its analysis, the EAC also held that as against 54,176 trees, which have been felled on the project site based on earlier approvals given by competent authority, the project proponent is proposing to plant 5,50,000 trees (50,000 trees at the project site, 2,50,000 trees in the nearby villages supervised by the Biodiversity Board and 2,50,000 trees under the supervision of DGCA.
Accordingly, the EAC recommended the grant of an EC to the project with additional environmental safeguards and conditions.
GMR Goa International Airport Limited committed to fulfill the objective of making the proposed greenfield airport at Mopa Goa, a zero carbon airport operation. The purpose of a zero carbon airport operation is to eliminate anthropogenic carbon emissions reaching the atmosphere completely or to the minimum extent possible from airport activities performed during its operation.
The Court observed, “The Court highlighted numerous concerns including the preservation of forests, the existence of ESAs with their attendant features and the impact of the proposed project on natural water channels. The Court also noted the abject failure of the project proponent to provide complete information on the existence of reserved forests. In the proceedings that followed the judgment of this Court, the project proponent sought to remedy its failure by taking into account additional information on significant aspects of the environment. In the process leading to the grant of the EC as well as the lifting of its suspension by this Court, numerous mitigatory conditions have been imposed on the project proponent. We deem it appropriate to ensure oversight of the project by a specialized body to ensure compliance with the directions cumulatively issued by this Court.”
The Apex Court directed the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) to be appointed to oversee compliance with the directions issued by the Court.
Justices Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Hemant Gupta presided over the case.