| File Note: |
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">Kindly peruse the note and recommendation given by RO. It is intimated that PP has not made a scientific alternative mode of disposal to handle the wastewater quantity @ 60 KLD as terminal STP is under capacity and is not adequate to handle the additional effluent load of such projects. The PP has not submitted a revised Environment Clearance/corrigendum regarding the change of the project . The PP has made the occupancy without the permission of the Board, PP has changed the STP technology from FAB to MBBR technology.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;"> If approved SCN for refusal CTO under the Water Act,1974 may be issued to PP with an opportunity to submit the reply within 7 days. EE.RO may also be requested to give his comments on the reply to be submitted by the PP and send the fresh recommendation.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraph" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.5in; background: white;"><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;">( Competency: Chairman Sir )</span></p> |
