National Board for Wildlife: the Standing Committee that decides a wildlife clearance.

The National Board for Wildlife is the apex advisory body constituted under section 5A of the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972, chaired by the Prime Minister. In practice project proposals are considered by its Standing Committee, chaired by the Union Environment Minister, which recommends grant or refusal of wildlife clearance and the conditions attached to it.

The State Board for Wildlife examines a proposal at the State level and makes a recommendation; the Standing Committee of the National Board takes the decision. A proposal ordinarily reaches the Standing Committee only with the State Board's recommendation on record, so the two are sequential stages of one route rather than alternatives.

Not automatically. Where an eco-sensitive zone has been notified, the notification's extent and its activity schedule govern. The 10 km distance operates as the referral screen where no zone is notified. Establishing which applies is the purpose of an eco-sensitive zone assessment, and it should precede any assumption either way.

No. Wildlife clearance arises under the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 in relation to protected areas and their buffers; forest clearance arises under the Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam 1980 for diversion of forest land; Environment Clearance arises under the EIA Notification 2006. A project near a sanctuary on forest land can need all three.

Where a proposal affects a tiger reserve, its core or buffer area, or an identified corridor, the National Tiger Conservation Authority's view is engaged in addition to the ordinary wildlife clearance process, and the statutory protection of core areas is stricter. Proposals in such areas should be scoped on that basis from the outset.

Yes, and it routinely does: conservation plan implementation, crossing structures, restrictions on construction methods and timing, funding commitments and monitoring arrangements. Those conditions become obligations of the project, enforceable in the same way as the clearance itself.

Work in a protected area or in breach of an eco-sensitive zone notification exposes the proponent to action under the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 and the Environment (Protection) Act 1986, including stop-work directions and prosecution, and to proceedings before the National Green Tribunal. Regularisation after the fact is uncertain and slow.

The user agency, ordinarily with the State wildlife administration, presents the proposal, and the consultant prepares and supports the technical case. The Committee's questions are directed at the proponent, so someone who can speak to the engineering and the commitments should be present, not only the technical author.