Environmental Clearance Process
Expert Appraisal Committees and Accountability Gaps
The EIA Notification, 2006 (under EPA 1986) establishes a two-stage clearance process: (1) screening/scoping, and (2) appraisal by an Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC), followed by public consultation and final clearance by MoEFCC. The integrity of this system depends on the EAC's independence, the quality of the EIA report submitted by the project proponent, and meaningful public participation. For Great Nicobar, all three were alleged to be compromised.
- EIA reports are prepared by the project proponent (not by an independent agency) — creating an inherent conflict of interest.
- The EAC for the Great Nicobar project was alleged to have met for only one day to appraise a project of over 166 sq km.
- A High-Powered Committee (HPC) report commissioned to review the clearance has not been made public — raising transparency concerns under the RTI Act, 2005.
- Public hearings under EIA rules must be conducted in the affected area; for remote tribal areas, this norm is rarely satisfied in practice.
- The 2020 Draft EIA Notification attempted to dilute public hearing requirements and post-facto regularisation of violations — it was withdrawn after public opposition.
● Tracked since February 18, 2026 · last seen August 09, 2026 · updates as the daily brief publishes
See it in today’s brief.
Daily current affairs with every static concept explained in place.
Read the daily brief