| File Note: |
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">Kindly peruse the agenda note and recommendations given by EE,RO.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>it is intimated that while granint the previous CTO, valid upto 30/9/2022 that RO was requested to monitor the treatment installed by the industry as well as verify the documents submitted by the industry, check the compliance of the conditions of consent to operate granted under the Water Act, 1974.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Now, the industry has applied renewal of CTO granted under the Water Act, 1974 <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>and it has submitted performance report of the STP anlazed by the NABL and analysis report within limits. But R.O has not monitored the STP as already directed while granting CTO.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">R.O has reported that complaint has now been received in R.O regarding the illegal discharge of effluent ouside of the premises of the industry. As per verification by R.O, facts mentioned in the said complaint is genuine.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">If approved, SCN for refusal of renewal of CTO applied under the Water Act, 1974 alongwith an opportunity to submit reply within 7-days <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>and R.O may be requested to submit the comments on the reply to be submitted by the industry and send fresh recommendations. E.E, RO may also be requested to explain its position to why the industry was not monitored during the consented period earlier granted to it.</p> |
