Chennai’s garbage woes have taken a turn for the worse in light of multiple violations by the new contractors, Ramky Enviro Engineers, responsible for cleaning up the city. Ranging from lack of adherence to the basic terms of the contract it signed with the Corporation of Chennai (CoC) to worsening the city’s rich biodiversity, Ramky has exacerbated the problems it was chosen to remove.
The government of Tamil Nadu and the CoC are also to blame for not taking Ramky to task even though it has been three months since the contractors were brought on board to clean the areas of Kodambakkam (Zone XIII), Mylapore (Zone X) and Adyar (Zone V). Moreover, the state government’s lack of foresight in judging the value of the Pallikaranai marshlands that lies outside the city and commissioning it as a dump-yard has given rise to large concentrations of lead and manganese in the soil, causing severe poisoning of groundwater supply to the neighbourhood.
In fact, in its annual budget for the year 2012-2013, the Corporation of Chennai announced that Rs 70 crore would be spent on solid waste management in the city, with an additional Rs 5 crore going to be spent on the restoration of the marshlands. These are big numbers, considering the allocation for upgrading of electrical infrastructure in the city is Rs 45 crore, and of education, Rs 15 crore.
Mismanaging the marsh
Dr Indumathi Nambi, Assistant Professor in the Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering at IIT-Madras, profiled the soil sediments around the marshlands in a year-long study in 2010. She said, “The dump-yard is not even a landfill. Landfills have a proper basement three or four layers thick that prevent the sedimentation of heavy metals or surface runoffs into the drains.” She added that because of these shortcomings, the surrounding areas such as Mylai Balaji Nagar receive groundwater of very poor quality.
The fate of the marsh is linked closely with Ramky’s activities inside the city. Its contractors took charge after the Neel Metal Fanalca (NMF) fiasco that saw that contract being terminated four years before its expiry, leading to Ramky’s contract being more full-fledged, inclusive of many little considerations such as the presence of garbage bins on street corners, and valued more.
In the three years that NMF was in service, it was paid Rs 600-700 per tonne of waste post-segregation. However, Ramky is being paid Rs 1,469 per tonne of waste post-segregation. This is where the problems begin.
Negligence of duty
The contract stipulates that the commissionaires – in this case, Ramky Enviro Engineers – will be compensated only after the waste has been segregated at the source and then weighed at a designated weighment station. To supervise these activities, a Project Officer has been appointed by the CoC. However, that the waste has been segregated into recyclables, non-recyclables and non-recyclable non-biodegradables was brought under doubt after rag-pickers were spotted in and around the dump-yard at Pallikaranai.
Thirumurthy, a rag-picker off the Pallikaranai 100-feet road, said, “There are a lot of plastic items and metal items in the waste. There is no saying which part of the dump has what.” However, he said pickings become easier after corporation officials throw the plastic and metallic objects aside to burn the rest illegally.
Because waste is being dumped unsegregated, Ramky is being paid for a weight greater than what it should be. In comparison with NMF’s contractual rate, the compensation is likely to be almost twice as much.
This points to the Project Officer’s negligence of his duty. There are also other violations, minor in comparison, but important nonetheless because they concern the day-to-day operations of Ramky’s commissioners in the city.
For example, sweeping of the roads has to be carried out at least twice everyday according to the contract. However, residents of South Mada Street, Thiruvallur Nagar, Eldams Road and Sastri Nagar have been complaining that streets are being swept only once a day and that, too, with low efficiency. Other common complaints include lack of cleanliness around bins, irregular clearance of bins, and lack of service on the toll-free complaint line that Ramky is contractually obliged to set up.
Administration over the years
The Pallikaranai marshlands were brought under government agenda in 2002, when a study was conducted by the state to assess the land quality of the area. The then Collector, Abdul Salam, dismissed all land allotments on the marsh on the basis of them encroaching on environmentally sensitive areas. However, subsequently, the land was reallotted to the buyers after it was found that survey numbers attached to plots had been meddled with.
Mrs Jayshree Vencatesan of Care Earth, an organisation that has been advocating the conservation of the marshlands, said, “Invisible groups have been trying to derail the government’s attempts to protect the marshland repeatedly. On the basis of wrong survey numbers, land was returned to those it was taken from and under these circumstances, the Centre for Wind Energy Technology came up.”
In 2003, the Save Pallikaranai Marsh Forum (SPMF) was constituted to protest against the dumping and burning of waste in the area. In the same year, the Perungudi sewage treatment plant (STP) became defunct in 1996, which was also targeted by the SPMF. In response, the Dr Vijayan Committee was set up by T R Baalu, then the minister for environment and forests. The committee, in turn, recommended the setting up of a 54 MLD (millions of litres per day) STP in place of the old one. For this purpose, the Corporation set aside Rs 300 crore.
Broken promises
Today, the plant, finally commissioned in 2006, is in a similar condition to its predecessor when it was decommissioned. The absence of a collection tank, provided to absorb loads exceeding the expected amount, has ensured that any excess waste flows directly into the marsh without being treated. This fate is not much different from that of a lot of the solid waste that enters the plant, which floats around untreated in the marsh.
During the renovation in 2006, Metrowater had reassured the residents that after upgrading, there would be no foul smell and that the treated sewage would be of a higher quality. There was also a promise made of Rs 83 lakh to upgrade the Taramani link road pumping station to improve the movement of wastes within the marshlands and prevent stagnation. To assist this, the CoC had also announced for the new plant to discharge effluents into the Buckingham canal.
None of these promises have been met. S Kumararaja of the Federation of Velachery Residents’ Welfare Associations, said, “Repeated representations have been made to upgrade the sewage pumping stations, but authorities are yet to take action. As the station often ceases functioning during monsoon, the sewer network gets affected.”
In 2005, S Malathi, then Chief Secretary of Tamil Nadu, brought 378 hectares of the marshland under the protection of the Forest Act of 1882. This effectively removed it from the jurisdiction of the CoC and placed it in the hands of the Forest Department, a central body, no longer letting the area be subject to indiscriminate pollution. Though this may seem like a cause to celebrate, Mrs Vencatesan says that “a careful perusal of the Department’s plans reveals that they plan to drain the marshlands and build a gated community for their officials.” (See inset)
Caught between centre and state politics
Between 2001 and 2006, conflicts between the Congress-dominated government at the Centre and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam-ruled (AIADMK) state prevented any quick action to be taken concerning the marshlands. In 2006, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) came to power at the state as well as the centre, and began to push for the setting up of an integrated waste management plant at the Pallikaranai marshlands and in Perungudi.
In 2009, the High Court Expert Committee Report, ordered by Judge A P Shah and headed by Ms Sheela Rani, that had looked into the DMK’s proposal was released. It pointed at the various illegal activities already being carried out on the marshlands and ways to tackle them. The most important conclusion of this report was that the “proposed municipal solid waste handling violates … the rules especially on source segregation, recycle, reuse and siting criteria.” This violation is with respect to the Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2000 framed under the Environment Protection Act.
However, these were only recommendations and were not enforced by authorities. Soon, clearance was received by the CoC from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) to set up an STP at the desired location after a controversial public hearing. It was at this time that a member of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), V Srinivasan, filed a petition with the National Environmental Appellate Authority (NEAA) in 2010, arguing that the plant was going to be situated within 10 km of a national park (at Guindy).
However, in 2011, the NEAA was dissolved and the National Green Tribunal (NGT) set up. The NGT opened up in Tamil Nadu on February 24, 2012, and turned down the DMK-led proposal to set up the integrated plant on the basis of its being within 6 km of the Guindy national park. Now, the proposal awaits clearance from the Centre, which they might not get because of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (1971).
There is one other violation of a Central legislation in terms of the National Wetland Law. Under the Draft Regulatory Framework for Wetlands Conservation, compiled by the Indira Gandhi Centre for Development Research and issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forests on May 24, 2010, solid waste dumping and discharge of untreated effluents on wetlands is prohibited. In extension to this, the Centre asked state governments to constitute a State Wetland Appraisal Committee to monitor the situation and shut down any illegal dumping on wetlands. Tamil Nadu is yet to set up such a committee.
No comments:
Post a Comment