2020 · GS Paper 3 · Q7 · 10 marks

How does the draft Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2020 differ from the existing EIA Notification, 2006?

In short

The draft EIA Notification 2020 differs from the 2006 regime by fixing exempt project categories, shortening public hearing notice and allowing post-facto clearance with penalties. Hearing notice falls from 30 to 20 days and compliance reports from half-yearly to annual.

Model answer

Ghissu Editorial · Verified 4 Oct 2026

Introduction
EIA weighs a project's environmental costs before approval. The draft EIA Notification 2020, meant to replace the 2006 Notification, drew lakhs of comments and a Delhi High Court order to translate it into regional languages.
Changes in Screening and Clearance
•

Fixed Categories

The 2006 regime screened Category B projects case by case, while the draft fixes A, B1 and B2 and frees about 40 B2 types from EIA and public hearing.

•

Wider Exemptions

Strategic projects, linear projects within 100 km of the border and offshore projects beyond 12 nautical miles skip public hearing.

•

Expansion Relief

Expansion up to 25% needs no fresh clearance and up to 50% no public hearing, unlike the 2006 rule of appraising significant expansion.

•

Process Gains

New definitions of terms such as "protected area" and fixed appraisal timelines promise clearer, faster decisions.

Changes in Participation and Compliance
•

Voice of the Affected

Ten fewer days of notice hurts tribal and remote communities, who need time and translated reports to study a project.

•

Prevention to Cure

Post-facto regularisation turns EIA into a fee, which *Alembic Pharmaceuticals* (2020) called alien to environmental law.

•

Monitoring Blind Spots

Annual reports and barring citizens from reporting violations leave damage unseen for longer, while 50-year mining clearances freeze old baselines.

Conclusion
The draft trades scrutiny for speed, streamlining procedure but weakening participation, prevention and monitoring. Keeping the timelines while restoring public voice and rejecting post-facto approval would serve both growth and Article 21.

This model answer is indicative and the model can make mistakes; please verify key facts independently.

Hand-drawn diagram: EIA 2006 vs Draft 2020. EIA 2006 vs Draft 2020. Comparison of EIA 2006 and Draft EIA 2020
Diagram: EIA 2006 vs Draft 2020

Practise this question

  1. 1Get the answer sheet

    Sized for this question.

  2. 2Write your answer

    Timed, by hand.

  3. 3Get it marked

    Your score and what to fix.

Share this questionWhatsAppTelegramXLinkedIn

This chapter in the exam

Environmental Impact Assessment4 questions

Asked in 4 of 14 sittings since 2013

2013
–
2014
1
2015
–
2016
1
2017
–
2018
–
2019
–
2020
1
2021
–
2022
–
2023
–
2024
1
2025
–
2026
–

All 4 questions, sorted by sub-topic, with model answers and practice.

Question from the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) Examination 2020 paper. Answer written by Ghissu's engine and checked against our editorial standards. Found an error? Tell us and we correct it within 48 hours.

Ghissu

OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·
OUTWORK·
OUTTHINK·
MASTER THE SYSTEM·