The State Council: Abolishes the “Qualifications for Environmental Impact Assessment Agencies” and the “Environmental Protection Completion Acceptance” requirements.

　　One year ago, the State Council issued the “Decision on Amending the Regulations on Environmental Protection Management of Construction Projects,” revising the Regulations and removing the provisions governing the qualification requirements for environmental impact assessment agencies.
　　On August 31, 2018, one year later, Minister of Ecology and Environment Li Ganjie stated at the national video conference on deepening the “delegation, regulation, and service” reform and transforming government functions within the ecological and environmental system that two administrative approval items—“qualification for environmental impact assessment agencies” and “environmental protection completion acceptance”—had been reviewed and approved by the State Council Executive Meeting and would be implemented upon amendment of the relevant laws.
　　One year ago vs. one year later
　　The new Regulations, promulgated one year ago, introduced significant amendments primarily in the following areas:
　　The provision on “qualifications of EIA agencies” has been deleted, thereby abolishing the requirement for a qualification‑certificate review system.
　　The administrative licensing requirement for environmental protection acceptance upon project completion is abolished, and the responsibility for conducting the final acceptance is transferred from the environmental protection authorities to the project developer.
　　Add a provision on “circumstances for non-approval” to clarify the requirements for environmental impact assessment approval.
　　Clarify the legal status of environmental impact technical assessments;
　　Cancel the “requirements during the trial production period”;
　　The severity of penalties for violations and the accountability measures have been further strengthened.
　　One year later, with the implementation of the new Regulations, administrative approval procedures for intermediary services have been further standardized, and all 358 environmental impact assessment agencies within the national environmental protection system have completed their separation from government oversight. Two administrative approval items—“qualification of EIA agencies” and “environmental completion acceptance”—have been approved at a State Council Executive Meeting and will be implemented upon amendment of the relevant laws.
　　The authority to review and approve environmental impact assessments for 57 construction projects—including thermal power, oil and gas field development, steel, nonferrous metals, and shipbuilding—has been delegated. Additionally, 13 categories of projects have been downgraded from requiring the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report to merely preparing an Impact Statement or submitting a registration form. For projects with minimal environmental impacts that, under the law, only require submission of a registration form, the approval process has been replaced by a notification‑based filing system...
　　Why is the country determined?
　　Cancel the qualifications of environmental impact assessment agencies and others?
　　Project environmental impact assessments are designed to safeguard the ecological environment and prevent polluting enterprises from establishing themselves. Yet, as the first line of defense in environmental protection, these assessments have repeatedly been undermined by certain EIA agencies driven by profit.
　　In early 2015, the Central Third Inspection Group directly identified six major corruption issues within the environmental impact assessment (EIA) system. Following this, a sweeping “EIA storm” rapidly swept through the entire EIA market. The eight EIA agencies directly affiliated with the Ministry of Environmental Protection have already completed their separation from the environmental protection system, while 140 local environmental protection agencies have likewise severed ties and fully withdrawn from the EIA technical services market for construction projects—fulfilling Minister Chen Jining’s solemn commitment made at last year’s Two Sessions.
　　Whether it is revoking qualifications or narrowing the scope of assessments, the crackdown targets those environmental impact assessment agencies that have violated regulations, with the ultimate goal of ensuring that project EIAs fulfill their intended role. All these measures aim to further refine China’s EIA system, turning it into a robust safeguard for environmental protection.
　　The trend toward revoking qualifications is inevitable.
　　Where is the environmental impact assessment industry headed?
　　For enterprises:
　　The environmental impact assessment (EIA) sector stands on the cusp of a major transformation. With the weakening or elimination of corporate EIA qualifications, market dynamism will be fully unleashed, and the industry will undergo a thorough reshuffling. Companies that have relied on lending their qualifications to survive will face an existential crisis, while more capable firms are poised to capture a larger share of the market.
　　Following the removal of qualification requirements, all companies will be able to undertake projects, leading to fiercer market competition and a more pronounced survival-of-the-fittest dynamic, which will further squeeze EIA‑related profits. At the same time, this shift raises the bar for the overall capabilities of EIA agencies and places greater responsibilities on them.
　　After all, market fairness requires the removal of various institutional barriers, such as qualification requirements, to ensure that market participants can compete on an equal footing and that no restrictive or unreasonable entry thresholds are imposed.
　　At present, environmental impact assessment (EIA) qualification management is extremely stringent; however, in many cases, small, loosely organized entities and ad hoc teams can secure projects by borrowing qualifications. Under such circumstances, how can the quality of the resulting reports be assured?
　　Some enterprises survive by lending out their qualifications, yet they rarely engage in report preparation, leading to a steady erosion of their evaluation capabilities and a mismatch between their qualification levels and their actual competencies. In contrast, other firms have long been dedicated to environmental impact assessment, boasting both proven track records and robust technical expertise.

Source: Chemical Industry 707