NABET - QCI ACCREDITATION - Paryavaran EIA Club - Paryavaran.com- Indian Environment Network

Prof Dr V N Sivasankara Pillai October 26, 2010 at 2:35am

Dear Sir,
Your observations on quality of data is very significant. We have no system for cross-verifying the data. The reliability depends on the integrity and professional attitude of data gathers. Many are magicians, who derive data from no where. PCB data available in the SoE reports and on the net show the basic error related to lower limit of quantification and significant figures. There is no qualification prescribed for personnel engaged in environmental monitoring operations. I have checked this on many occasions. Drivers have become sample collectors, no sampling device is used except the bucket, chain-of-custody is not even known to many, QA procedures are insisted on or known to many analysts, shelf life of chemicals and reagents are not known to many analysts, the list of negatives runs to pages! Our analysts follow APHA only for particular designation of interests to them. No body reads the background.
How can we remedy this situation?
1. Insist on the qualification of analysts for each operation and grade them based on knowledge and skills.
2. Conduct courses and accreditation exams for each operation - ethics, monitoring planning, sampling, preservation, calibration, procedures - calibration, analysis, data handling, reporting etc. (may be for a group of operations).
3. Introduce documentation requirements for every operation
4. Lay down reporting requirements (we find only data, and no reports!)

In short we have to introduce accreditation program for analysts at various levels based on theory, practice and professional apprenticeship.

Dr. Hemalkumar Naik October 25, 2010 at 11:14am

Dear Mr. M V RAGHAVACHARYULU
Please check two news i posted today regarding EIA and you will say " I will never refer Data of Reputed Govt. or Semi Govt. Organisation and even you will say i can do any thing with EC process as its matter of art of presentation not a techo-scientific task of EIA.

Dr. Hemalkumar Naik October 25, 2010 at 11:11am

Thanks for posting such matter. Well they -SPCB said they have not provided such to any one-CPCB. we can not say that SPCB is telling truth but as far as a legal action taken by CPCB & MoEF is concern such data must be provided to CPCB by inferior organisations may be like NEERI or NIO or SPCB or UTPCC. But the main question is of quality of data - primary data of monitoring of air & water. have you ever refered the findings of SPCB/UTPCC or other organisation? If not please get some published data and refer with the other Guidelines of CPCB for QA-QC or the scientific principle of data quality. You will be surprised. Even in case of air i have noticed that a area of cluster of industries using LDO/HSD/Fo as main fuel is showing lower SO2 Value than NOx value. Just do one monitoring and check what shall be the values? There are lot of issues as mentioned in this as well as other discussion byMr. Pillai. I am confident to prove 90% fradulancy in reported results of 99% organisation. Mr Pillai said a very good thing: "Fraudulent data generation is not a crime here, and the more thriving in business do extreme fraud."
Well lot of things to talk but we are in a country ruled or governed by Sleepy System so what can we do? we can do Just one thing -keep working with quality and ethically in our business without looking big profit. Of course we can not welcome loss in business so be in limit of profit with quality. Thanks

M V RAGHAVACHARYULU said:

Is the data collected from the government agencies is reliable? A million dollar question. Optimizing data collection requirement is something i too feel that reliability is maintained. sometimes i get a feeling that instead of collecting air quality data at same location for number of times (which is most offenly un-reliable) if few representative samples from more number of villages would be a better idea to understand the baseline of the area.

Its not commenting on government agencies or anyother but thinking what is right i am just putting this example ------ Recently a study has been carried out Comprehensive Environmental Pollution Index. it was said that the data was collected from state PCB's and PCB commented that no one approached them for any data and they have not given any data to anyone. The area is declared as Critically Polluted Area.

NABET - QCI ACCREDITATION

Ministry has made it mandatory that all the EIA consultants should get accredited by NABET - QCI will that improve the quality of EIA or not. if we…

RAGHAVA July 14, 2010 at 4:15am

Dear Sanjay,

Its good to see that someone is able to understand the real situation of consultancy jobs. But unfortunately consultancies are made victims by higher authorities and as well as project proponents. Its not that all the consultants are good or bad. But even after QCI Accreditation if someone comments it looks bad. Is the Environmental consultants job is to provide liaison work or to render an appropriate and legally correct environmental report?

Getting more emotional i think i stop here

Sanjay Mishra said:

Mr. Raghav,

I am delighted to know that you have started a debate on such an important issue. The thought of MoEF is quite correct in orde to check the mushrooming of EIA Consultants, before advent of EIA Notification, 2006. But involving QCI / NABET has not yielded desired results. Be it the process, pricing or policy problem; the theory failed. After a long span of 4 years; now, MoEF has certified a list of applicants. Here is a snag. Why allow an applicant only? When, the notification was not implemented for almost 4 years; why such a hurry today?

Further, just a certification would never ever change the quality of a report. It's important to make available some quality education / training courses for certification. There should be a proper understanding of buyers who pay consultants. Moreover, there has to be a policy to flush corruption involved in the process that bents down technical consultants to become liaison agents.

Thanks much,

Sanjay MISHRA

NABET - QCI ACCREDITATION

Ministry has made it mandatory that all the EIA consultants should get accredited by NABET - QCI will that improve the quality of EIA or not. if we…

Sanjaya Kumar Mishra July 12, 2010 at 1:39pm

Infact that's not at all a question. The most unreliable data is always generated from most of the PCBs/PCCs. Even we have evidences to prove that they have a vauum of technical know-hows, equipment and most importantly interests.

Prof Dr V N Sivasankara Pillai said:

Data collection is a funny business in India. Fraudulent data generation is not a crime here, and the more thriving in business do extreme fraud.
Basic fact is that we are aping the west, without going into the details of capacity in monitoring technology and man power. Even our drinking water standards offer good example. There are very few labs where Q-assured measurements are done.
In chemeometrics we used to cite WQ data available at CPCB site for significant figures! Many analysts do not know the basic rules of data handling.
More interesting is Chain-of-Custody of samples and maintaining standard operating procedures for all monitoring/analytical operations.
It is high time that we start thinking about professionalism for analysts and monitoring personnel. Our professional associations seem to be more oriented to deriving lineages (political & Official), rather than true professionalism.

M V RAGHAVACHARYULU said:
Is the data collected from the government agencies is reliable? A million dollar question. Optimizing data collection requirement is something i too feel that reliability is maintained. sometimes i get a feeling that instead of collecting air quality data at same location for number of times (which is most offenly un-reliable) if few representative samples from more number of villages would be a better idea to understand the baseline of the area.

Its not commenting on government agencies or anyother but thinking what is right i am just putting this example ------ Recently a study has been carried out Comprehensive Environmental Pollution Index. it was said that the data was collected from state PCB's and PCB commented that no one approached them for any data and they have not given any data to anyone. The area is declared as Critically Polluted Area.

NABET - QCI ACCREDITATION

Ministry has made it mandatory that all the EIA consultants should get accredited by NABET - QCI will that improve the quality of EIA or not. if we…

Sanjaya Kumar Mishra July 12, 2010 at 1:37pm

Mr. Raghav,

I am delighted to know that you have started a debate on such an important issue. The thought of MoEF is quite correct in orde to check the mushrooming of EIA Consultants, before advent of EIA Notification, 2006. But involving QCI / NABET has not yielded desired results. Be it the process, pricing or policy problem; the theory failed. After a long span of 4 years; now, MoEF has certified a list of applicants. Here is a snag. Why allow an applicant only? When, the notification was not implemented for almost 4 years; why such a hurry today?

Further, just a certification would never ever change the quality of a report. It's important to make available some quality education / training courses for certification. There should be a proper understanding of buyers who pay consultants. Moreover, there has to be a policy to flush corruption involved in the process that bents down technical consultants to become liaison agents.

Thanks much,

Sanjay MISHRA

Prof Dr V N Sivasankara Pillai May 29, 2010 at 12:58am

Data collection is a funny business in India. Fraudulent data generation is not a crime here, and the more thriving in business do extreme fraud.
Basic fact is that we are aping the west, without going into the details of capacity in monitoring technology and man power. Even our drinking water standards offer good example. There are very few labs where Q-assured measurements are done.
In chemeometrics we used to cite WQ data available at CPCB site for significant figures! Many analysts do not know the basic rules of data handling.
More interesting is Chain-of-Custody of samples and maintaining standard operating procedures for all monitoring/analytical operations.
It is high time that we start thinking about professionalism for analysts and monitoring personnel. Our professional associations seem to be more oriented to deriving lineages (political & Official), rather than true professionalism.

M V RAGHAVACHARYULU said:

Is the data collected from the government agencies is reliable? A million dollar question. Optimizing data collection requirement is something i too feel that reliability is maintained. sometimes i get a feeling that instead of collecting air quality data at same location for number of times (which is most offenly un-reliable) if few representative samples from more number of villages would be a better idea to understand the baseline of the area.

Its not commenting on government agencies or anyother but thinking what is right i am just putting this example ------ Recently a study has been carried out Comprehensive Environmental Pollution Index. it was said that the data was collected from state PCB's and PCB commented that no one approached them for any data and they have not given any data to anyone. The area is declared as Critically Polluted Area.

RAGHAVA May 27, 2010 at 9:22am

Is the data collected from the government agencies is reliable? A million dollar question. Optimizing data collection requirement is something i too feel that reliability is maintained. sometimes i get a feeling that instead of collecting air quality data at same location for number of times (which is most offenly un-reliable) if few representative samples from more number of villages would be a better idea to understand the baseline of the area.

Its not commenting on government agencies or anyother but thinking what is right i am just putting this example ------ Recently a study has been carried out Comprehensive Environmental Pollution Index. it was said that the data was collected from state PCB's and PCB commented that no one approached them for any data and they have not given any data to anyone. The area is declared as Critically Polluted Area.

Prof Dr V N Sivasankara Pillai May 27, 2010 at 2:51am

Whether it is quality data or persons, we have to pay. Payment may be optimized thru many steps like free supply of data generated by government agencies, optimizing data collection requirements etc.

Prof Dr V N Sivasankara Pillai May 27, 2010 at 2:47am

Pl look at
http://www.epa.gov/fugitives/
to see how responsible agencies deal with bad personalities (including trainers and fraudulent data generators).
M V RAGHAVACHARYULU said:

Its a great idea that Environmental Professionals should be certified rather than consultancies. More over personal should be made responsible for the data collected and should collect the data with adequate proof.

But if we look out at ambient air quality monitoring. how many people are ready to keep the sampler and allow it to run for 24 hrs in a day for 2 days in a week, 4 weeks a month for 3 months. Even though the people are paid around Rs 150 - 200/day it is an obvious fact that the sampler will not run for more than 1 to 3 hours. In this context how a reliable data can be obtained.

Paryavaran EIA Club

Replies