Procedure for Quality Control of Documents

1. Objective- To ensure a streamlined, accurate, and quality-controlled submission of documents to the Competent Authority, in accordance with the standards set by NABET, SEAC/EAC feedback, criteria as per Appendix III & IIIA of EIA Notification 2006 & its up to date Amendments and evolving environmental procedural guidelines.

2. Applicability to Project Teams- This SOP is applicable to all project teams of EIA Department. Each Team shall comprise of working Team (Estuary, Pool, Pond, Canal, Tributary, Cove and Ocean & Spring team representative), one C-suite officer and the project EIA Coordinator.

3. Applicability to Documents share for review- This SOP is applicable to all documents including applications for Terms of Reference (TOR), EC application, EDS/ADS responses, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports, TOR presentations, Public Hearing presentations, Environment Clearance (EC) presentations & Reconsideration presentations.

4. Key Roles and Responsibilities-

   • Working Team: Responsible for preparing the required documents, ensuring adherence to client and SEAC/EAC requirement, content clarity & grammatical accuracy under guidance of C-Suite officer/ EIA-Coordinator.

   • Chief-Suite Officer: Guide the working team technically in document preparation wherever necessary, validate the document’s completeness before it is forwarded to QCC and also grants final approval for submissions.

   • EIA Coordinator: Guide the working team technically in document preparation wherever necessary.

   • Quality Control Council (QCC): Conducts a technical review of submitted documents and integrates key insights from past experience ensuring that all deliverables meet client expectations, exceed EAC requirements, and uphold our internal quality benchmarks.

5. Flow Chart for Documents & Presentations review by QCC & Emergency Protocol- To strengthen the submission of Quality-Controlled documents to competent authorities and to ensure a more thorough internal review process in preparation for upcoming presentations, thereby enhancing the effectiveness and reception of our submissions before the EAC and other relevant bodies, the Quality Control Cell (QCC) review process has been structured into two distinct phases:

   • A:  Flow Chart for Report review by QCC & Emergency Protocol

   • B:  Flow Chart for Presentations review by QCC

5 B. Flow Chart for SOP for Presentation Review by QCC

Step 1

Step 2

• Review panel will comprise of Quality Control Council (QCC) team, the EIA coordinator for the project, the C-Suite officer for the project, Team Lead & respective team members and a field person along with one senior person from the Lab.
• Each review session will be scheduled for one hour to allow for comprehensive discussion and refinement of the presentation content.
• During Mock Review, team to also show KML of 10 km & 500 m radius marked with all environmentally sensitive features along with the List of environmentally sensitive features available on Parivesh Portal.
• To ensure all observations made during document reviews are accurately captured and shared further within one to two days for completion of the TF- QCC Response, a TA or another team member from the team must attend the review meetings to record the points discussed, get it reviewed by a senior team member and share with the QCC team. In case of unavailability, prior intimation must be given to the QCC team.

Step 3

7. Additional Guidelines

A. Regarding QCC Drive Usage:

• A QCC Drive has been created to maintain a centralised repository of all documents related to QCC and TFs. Team to share documents for review, only in PDF file format, so that a record of QCC observations can be maintained, and QCC will share observations either as a sticky note on the PDF file or can make a separate file in Word or handwritten document for it. QCC to ensure no observations to be given as comments in the editable file, & team is to ensure that no direct working file from the EIA-G Drive is shared.

• When filling out TFs for QCC, please save the completed files directly in this Shared QCC Drive.

• In the designated field within the QCC TF, please provide the link to the file saved within the QCC Drive.

B. Regarding Submission of TF12 for QC review:

• Please avoid submitting the TF multiple times for the same task. For example, if only the task differs but the project remains in the same stage (e.g., sharing the EIA Report first and later the Executive Summary), the latter can be sent as a trailing email under the same TF reference.

• However, if the stage of the project changes (e.g., from submission to presentation stage), a new TF form must be filled out to accurately reflect the updated status and activities

C. Regarding Marking scheme of the EIA Report as per NABET scheme, Tracking of the QCC observations incorporation, and continuous Learning

• Team to share the QCC Marking Scheme in PDF specific to EIAs, as prescribed under the NABET scheme. This document must be attached in the TF-12 (for QC Review). The PDF should have basic project details of the project & SOP number of QMSP filled in before submission. The QC team will then review and return the same document with filled marking and signature in the TF-13 (for QCC response).

• Teams must ensure that general suggestions or comments provided by QCC reviewers in one project are proactively incorporated into future submissions. If repeated mistakes are observed by QCC from the same team, the following three-level action plan will be followed:

  • Level 1: Explanation of repeated issues to the concerned team via video call.

  • Level 2: A formal alert email from QCC, advising corrective action

  • Level 3: Final warning issued, with the team required to provide justification.

• To support continuous improvement, and enhance the overall quality of future submissions,

  • Review meetings will be held with all Team Heads, the Operational Council Chairman, and Convener — fortnightly (2nd & 4th Saturday) for the initial months, and monthly (4th Saturday) thereafter. These sessions will address common review observations and clarify team-specific queries.

  • The internal EAC/SEAC meeting link should be shared with all teams within the EIA department, including the FAEs involved in the resp. projects for learning from feedback provided during EAC/SEAC.

9. Sector Specific Checklist to be followed by Working Team & QCC Team

(Both TOR Stage & EC Stage) - IN PROCESS

1. IND-1- Level-1- NA, Level-2- NB & SCJ

2. IND-2- Level-1- NA & Level-2- NB

3. IND-3 - Level-1- NA & Level-2- NB

4. Construction - Level-1- NA & Level-2- RB

5. Infrastructure - Level-1- NA & Level-2- AK & RB

6. Mining - Level-1- NA & Level-2- PB & SP

Note: Provision for peer review will be incorporated into the document review procedure once checklists are made available.