1
This section covers environmental laws, regulations and guidelines, environmental standards including emission levels and species protection lists, environmental assessment reports, environmental screening and the screening procedures used in Nepal, scoping and the terms of reference, baseline establishment, executing the EIA process, alternatives and their comparison, the environmental management plan, environmental monitoring and environmental auditing.
2
Environmental Law, Standards and Principles • The hierarchy of instruments: an Act is passed by the legislature and provides the powers and duties;
3
Rules or Regulations are made under the Act and give the procedural detail; standards set enforceable numerical limits; and guidelines and manuals give non-binding advice on good practice.
4
Only Acts, Rules and notified standards are legally enforceable; guidelines are not — a distinction examined directly. • The guiding principles: the polluter pays principle (the cost of pollution is borne by the party causing it), the precautionary principle (scientific uncertainty is not a reason to postpone action against serious or irreversible harm), sustainable development (meeting present needs without compromising future generations), public participation and access to information, and intergenerational equity. • Kinds of standard: ambient standards describe the quality to be maintained in the surrounding air or water; emission or effluent standards limit what leaves a source; product standards limit the content of a product; and process standards prescribe the technology or method.
5
Ambient standards protect the receiving environment but are hard to attribute to a single source; emission standards are easy to monitor and enforce but take no account of the assimilative capacity of the receiving body. • Species protection lists schedule species as protected, endangered or of special concern, and their presence in a project area triggers additional assessment requirements and may prohibit certain activities outright.
6
Internationally, CITES controls trade in endangered species and the IUCN Red List provides the standard conservation-status classification. • In Nepal, the principal instruments are the Environment Protection Act, 2076 (2019) and the Environment Protection Rules, 2077 (2020), which replaced the Environment Protection Act, 2053 (1996) and its Rules of 2054.
7
Related instruments include the Solid Waste Management Act, 2068; the Water Resources Act, 2049; the Forest Act, 2076; and the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, 2029.
8
National ambient air quality standards, drinking water quality standards and generic and industry-specific effluent standards have been notified under this framework. • Legislation and standards are amended from time to time and schedules are revised, so the applicable requirement for any particular project must be verified against the current official publication.
9
The Assessment Tiers and Screening • Environmental assessment is the systematic process of predicting and evaluating the environmental consequences of a proposal before a decision is taken on it.
10
Its purpose is to inform the decision, not to prevent development, and it is anticipatory and preventive rather than reactive. • Screening is the first step, and it answers one question only: does this proposal require an environmental assessment, and if so at what level? It does not consider what the impacts are — that is scoping.
11
Confusing screening with scoping is the commonest error in this section. • Screening procedures are of three kinds: the list approach, in which schedules prescribe the level of assessment by project type and size, which is objective, quick and predictable but inflexible; the case-by-case approach, using expert judgement against criteria, which is flexible but slower and less consistent; and a hybrid of the two. • Nepal uses the list approach: the schedules to the Environment Protection Rules, 2077 prescribe which proposals require a Brief Environmental Study (BES), an Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) or a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), according to the type, size, location and sensitivity of the proposal.
12
A proposal located in or affecting an environmentally sensitive area — a national park, conservation area, wetland or the like — is generally elevated to a higher tier regardless of its size.
13
An IEE that reveals significant adverse impacts may be required to proceed to a full EIA. • Approval authority differs between the tiers, with the IEE approved at the sectoral ministry level and the EIA report requiring approval by the ministry responsible for environment.
14
The Rules also prescribe public notice, a public hearing and recommendation by the local body as part of the process.
15
Because these arrangements have changed with federal restructuring and are periodically amended, the current Rules must be consulted.
16
Scoping, Terms of Reference and Baseline • Scoping determines which issues, impacts and alternatives the assessment will examine, and how deeply.
17
Its purpose is to concentrate effort on the significant issues and exclude the trivial, so that the study is focused rather than encyclopaedic.
18
Scoping involves the public, affected communities and relevant agencies, and identifies the spatial and temporal boundaries of the study. • Terms of Reference (ToR) are prepared on the basis of the scoping exercise and set out formally what the study must cover: the issues, the methods, the study area, the level of detail, the composition of the study team and the reporting format.
19
In Nepal the ToR must be approved by the competent authority before the EIA study begins — an important sequencing point. • Baseline establishment is the description of the existing environmental condition before the project, covering the physical environment (air, water, soil, noise, climate), the biological environment (flora, fauna, habitats, protected species) and the socio-economic and cultural environment (population, livelihoods, health, heritage). • Why the baseline matters: it is the reference against which every predicted impact is measured and against which later monitoring is compared — without it, no change can be attributed to the project.
20
It must cover a full annual cycle where seasonal variation is significant, and it should record the trend as well as the present state, since the environment may already be changing without the project.
21
Executing the EIA Process Stage Purpose Screening Decide whether an assessment is required and at what level Scoping Identify the significant issues, impacts and alternatives to be studied Terms of Reference Formalise the scope, methods and study requirements; obtain approval Baseline study Describe the existing environment against which change will be measured Impact prediction Forecast the nature, magnitude, extent, duration and probability of each impact Impact evaluation Judge the significance of each predicted impact against criteria and standards Mitigation Identify measures to avoid, minimise, rectify, reduce or compensate for impacts Reporting Prepare the EIA report with a non-technical executive summary Public consultation and review Public notice, hearing and expert review of the report Decision Approval, approval with conditions, or rejection Monitoring and auditing Verify actual impacts and the effectiveness of mitigation during implementation • Impact prediction and evaluation classify impacts as direct or indirect; short, medium or long term; reversible or irreversible; local, regional or global; adverse or beneficial; and cumulative.
22
Cumulative impacts — the combined effect of the project with other existing and proposed activities — are the most frequently neglected category and are examined for that reason.
23
Standard methods are checklists, matrices (the Leopold matrix being the classic), networks, overlays and GIS, and predictive modelling. • The mitigation hierarchy, which must be learnt in order: avoid → minimise → rectify or restore → reduce over time → compensate or offset.
24
Avoidance at the design stage is always preferable and cheapest; compensation is the last resort. • Alternatives must be examined and compared, including alternative sites, technologies, designs, scales, raw materials, timing and routes.
25
The 'no action' or 'without project' alternative must always be included, because it provides the benchmark against which every other option is judged — a point asked directly.
26
Alternatives are compared on environmental, technical, economic and social criteria, and the reasons for rejecting each should be recorded.
27
EMP, Monitoring and Auditing • The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) converts the study's recommendations into an implementable programme.
28
It specifies each mitigation measure, who is responsible, when it will be done, what it will cost, and how its performance will be verified, together with the monitoring programme, the institutional arrangements and training needs, the emergency response plan and the reporting requirements.
29
The EMP is the operative part of an EIA report — the part that is actually enforced as a condition of approval — and an EIA without a costed, assigned EMP is of little practical value. • Environmental monitoring is the systematic, repeated measurement of environmental parameters to verify predictions, check compliance and detect unforeseen effects.
30
Its types are baseline monitoring (before), compliance monitoring (against standards and conditions), impact or effects monitoring (of actual change) and receptor monitoring.
31
Monitoring must use the same parameters, methods and locations as the baseline, or the comparison is meaningless. • Environmental auditing is a systematic, documented and periodic evaluation of environmental performance against defined criteria.
32
Compliance auditing checks against legal requirements and permit conditions; management system auditing checks against ISO 14001 or the organisation's own system; and EIA (post-project) auditing compares the impacts that actually occurred with those that were predicted, in order to improve the accuracy of future assessments. • The distinction between monitoring and auditing is examined: monitoring is continuous or repeated measurement of the environment, while auditing is a periodic evaluation of performance and systems against criteria.
33
In Nepal the Environment Protection Act provides for environmental auditing of approved proposals by the ministry, and for monitoring by the proponent and the concerned body.