VIJAYAWADA: The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has directed the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) to take action against Godavari Mega Aqua Food Park in AP as per the recommendations of the joint inspection report of the Central Pollution Control Board and APPCB.
As the aqua park management has sought time to file its objections, the case hearing was posted to November 4. AVVS Subrahmanyam had filed a petition with the NGT against Godavari Mega Aqua Food Park, citing pollution and adverse impact on the environment. The CPCB and APPCB which conducted the joint inspection of the aqua park located at Tundurru village in Bhimavaram mandal of West Godavari district, as directed by the NGT on August 28, submitted the report on September 19.
The joint inspection team suggested 16 remedial measures. During the inspection, as mentioned in the report, it was observed that Godavari Mega Aqua Food Park had failed to comply with certain conditions stated in the Consent For Operation (CFO). Most importantly it was observed that the unit had laid a 16 km pipeline from the unit to Yanamadurru drain to dispose of the treated effluents, though no such permission was given by the APPCB.
It was found that the company was not complying with the condition - The effluent generation shall not exceed 103 KLD (Kilo Litres Per Day) under any circumstances and if required the production shall be apportioned (reduced ) to limit the wastewater generation to 103 KLD. Instead, the effluent generation for the current production of about 14 TPD (Tonnes per Day) is about 190 KLD.
It was also found that there was no signboard at the entrance of the unit, which is against the condition that the industry should put up two signboards (6x4 feet each) at publicly visible places at the main gate indicating the products, effluent discharge and air emission standards, hazardous waste quantities and validity of DFO and exhibit the CFO order at a prominent place on the factory premises. The aqua park was also not complying with the condition for providing lined storage tanks for treated effluents before utilising them on land for irrigation. Instead, it had provided two unlined ponds with each of 2.5 acres and 3 metres deep, which has more than three months’ capacity.
Further, it had not complied with the conditions to maintain the records of daily production details and provide details of characteristics of effluents and emissions. It was partially complying with conditions to maintain the logbook for pollution control systems, inspection book for hazardous/non-hazardous solid waste generated and disposed of and development of green belt at a minimum of 33 per cent of the total project area. It had only partially complied with the condition that the industry shall dispose of solid waste (non-hazardous) and it was found that ETP sludge was in excess of the quantity specified.