101年度環境影響評估書件及審查結論執行情形監督專案工作計畫
| 中文摘要 | 本年度計畫主要針對環境影響評估審查通過之六個開發案，包括「核能一廠」、「核能四廠第一、二號機發電計畫」、「中部科學工業園區第三期發展區（后里基地-后里農場部分）開發計畫」、「南科液晶電視及產業支援工業區（樹谷園區）開發計畫變更案」、「六輕四期擴建計畫」與「台灣中油股份有限公司三輕更新擴產計畫」等六個案，協助環保署依「環境影響評估法」第18條規定主管機關監督環境影響說明書、評估書及審查結論之執行情形，每季辦理現地監督工作、會同環境監測作業及協助辦理監督委員會議，落實環境影響評估書件及審查結論的執行成效，有效強化環境影響評估制度效能及提高行政效率。 本專案計畫經執行檢討建議如下： (一)除例行性監督項目及該次監督重點項目之外，建議環保署考量由開發單位於「現地監督會議」說明前一季「環評監督委員會」委員意見之辦理情形。使環保署一方面能提早瞭解開發單位針對委員意見之辦理進度，俾利安排下一季環評監督委員會會議議程；另一方面輔導開發單位履行該案之環評承諾事項。 (二)建議環保署針對代檢驗業之採樣人員執行該公司採樣標準作業程序作一查核，確認其是否符合公告之檢測方法或是有因其他考量之因素與公告方法不同，進一步為未來標準檢測方法訂定之參考。 (三)建議環保署針對執行通過環境影響評估的重大開發案之檢測單位，進行不定期查核，以掌握代檢業者採樣作業之正確性及該採樣點之代表性。 (四)建議環保署於會同環境監測作業查核之同時，針對有爭議之監測項目，可擬派各區環境督察大隊或環境檢驗所進行平行監測（採樣）方式，後續將可比對開發單位之監測（採樣）步驟、採樣保存方式、數據等是否有所差異。 (五)建議環保署能於環評監督委員與環評審查委員會兩者之間建立相關機制，賦予環評監督委員會部分權限，針對開發案雖符合環評書件及審查結論內容但不合乎現況之情形提出相關建議，並納入監督事項；或是有定期之環境監測計畫檢討機制，使得環境監測計畫能具環境現況代表性。 (六)部分監督委員成員因出席率過低，有的甚至自上任後從未出席，造成佔缺情形產生，讓居民代表之監督委員以及與會列席民眾對監督委員會運作產生會議流於形式之觀感。建議環保署能針對本計畫六個案環評監督委員之出席率列為未來遴選新任委員之參考，以維持監督委員會議為多方參與及運用專業經驗評定開發案對環境之影響之功能。 (七)本計畫六個案為我國相關之重大開發案，鑒於非環評監督委員成員之關心相關議題人士申請旁聽列席並熱心參與會議之情形，建議環保署訂定環評監督委員會旁聽議事規則，以提供旁聽人員於能依據議事規則內容來進行意見表達，使得會議能順利進行並提升會議之討論效率。 (八)建議環評承諾事項申報表之申報單位在監測計畫執行過程中，能將近期之監測數據於表格D中呈現，以使相關案子之承辦人員能於第一時間瞭解該案近期之環境監測現況，而不需要另外調閱相關監測成果報告，以提升執行效率；另外，在表格G「歷次環境影響評估追蹤監督事項」中之申報情形，部分開發案僅列與會單位之意見及辦理情形，建議申報單位亦能將該會議之辦理日期一併填入，以利該開發案之相關承辦人掌握該開發案監督查核之頻率。 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 中文關鍵字 | 環境影響評估;監督委員會;環境監測 | ||
基本資訊
| 專案計畫編號 | EPA-101-Z102-02-201 | 經費年度 | 101 | 計畫經費 | 3880 千元 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 專案開始日期 | 2012/02/07 | 專案結束日期 | 2013/02/06 | 專案主持人 | 張長義教授 |
| 主辦單位 | 環境督察總隊 | 承辦人 | 石秉鑫 | 執行單位 | 財團法人環境資源研究發展基金會 |
成果下載
| 類型 | 檔名 | 檔案大小 | 說明 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 期末報告 | 101年度環境影響評估書件及審查結論執行情形監督專案工作計畫.pdf | 8MB |
The Supervision Project for Environmental Impact Assessment
| 英文摘要 | This annual project reviewed and supervised the approved environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports of six development projects, including the 1st nuclear power plant, the 4th nuclear power plant, the 3rd phase of Central Taiwan Science Park development project (Houli Science Park), the Tree Valley Park development modification project, the 6th Naphtha Cracker Project of Formosa Plastics Corporation, and the 3rd Naphtha Cracker Renovation and Expansion Project of CPC Corporation, Taiwan in the contract period. The contracted team assisted the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) to implement the “Environmental Impact Assessment Act” and to monitor the commitments concluded in environmental impact assessment reports during each development stage in the construction and operation period. In order to monitor the effectiveness of the environmental impact assessment and to examine EIA commitments, the project conducted quarterly on-site investigation and environmental monitoring. The surveillance committee meeting was held regularly every three months to review and enhance administrative performance. This project proposed the following five recommendations to the committee: 1. In addition to regular monitoring items and specific emphasized items, it was recommended that the EPA request the development company to report to the on-site monitoring conference the implementation of the EIA monitoring committee’s opinions in previous season. As a result, the EPA would be prepared to arrange the meeting agenda of the next EIA monitoring committee and to advise the development company to fulfill its commitments. 2. It was recommended that the EPA review the standard operation procedure of sampling implemented by the inspection surrogates to verify the conformation of the procedure to the official inspection method. The results of the reviews would be used for modifying the SOP in the future. 3. It was recommended that the EPA inspect the surrogate agencies with poor EIA examination records in order to assure the inspection surrogates’ adequate performance. 4. It was recommended the EPA dispatch the regional environmental inspection work force or the environmental analysis laboratory to conduct simultaneously monitoring sampling for disputed monitoring items. The sampling procedure, preservation method, and data could be compared to those of the development company for verification purpose. 5. It was recommended the competent authorities connect the EIA monitoring committee and the EIA review committee so the EIA monitoring committee had purview to make recommendations regarding EIA cases which conformed to the EIA requirements while considered unsuitable for the current situation and should be monitored closely. It was also recommended that a periodic review be needed for environmental monitoring programs in order to correspond to the current environmental situations. 6. The performance of the monitoring committee was compromised by the poor attencancy of certain members of the committee and criticized by representatives from local communities as being inconsequential. It was recommended the EPA use the attendancy as one of the criteria for selecting new members of the committee in order to maintain proper functioning of the committee as a multi-representative and professional EIA monitoring mechanism. 7. Since major development projects attracted attention from concerned stakeholders it was recommended that the auditing rules of procedure be stipulated for the EIA monitoring committee hearing so the stakeholders and concerned parties of the EIA cases could attend the hearings and state their opinions. 8. It was recommended the development company present the monitoring data in the table D during the monitoring project implementation period so the project personnel could understand the current monitoring status without further document research. It was also recommended that the meeting date be filled in the table G item of ‘previous EIA monitoring status’ in order to be informed of the frequency of inspection of certain cases. | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 英文關鍵字 | Environmental impact assessment;Environmental supervision committee;Environmental monitoring | ||