Ministry of Environment & Forests                                                                               

(IA Division)

******

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 11TH MEETING OF EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL OF MINING PROJECTS CONSTITUTED UNDER EIA NOTIFICATION, 2006.

The 11th meeting of the Expert Appraisal Committee for Environmental Impact Assessment of Mining Projects of the Ministry of Environment and Forests was held on January 19 -21, 2011.  The list of participants is annexed. 

After welcoming the Committee Members, discussion on each of the agenda items was taken up ad-seriatim.

Item No. 1:

1.1           Confirmation of the minutes of the 10th Meeting.

The minutes of the 10th meeting were confirmed as circulated.

Item No. 2: Consideration of the Proposals listed in the Agenda:

2.1          Chrome Ore Beneficiation Plant of M/s JSL Ltd., village Kaliapani, District Jajpur, Orissa (Consultant: Geomin Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of production of chrome ore (ROM) from 0.1 million TPA to 0.215 million TPA and capacity of chrome ore beneficiation plant from 36,000 TPA to 60,000 TPA by installing an additional COB plant of 24,000 TPA capacity. TOR for this project were prescribed on 15.2.2010.  Public hearing was held on 31.8.2010. The earlier clearance for 0.1 million TPA was granted on 13.2.2001 in the name of M/s Jindal Strips Ltd, which was subsequently transferred in the name of M/s JSL Ltd vide letter dated 16.11.2002. The mine lease area is 89 ha, which includes 24.24 ha of forestland. Diversion of forestland for 22.8 ha has been obtained and the remaining 1.44 ha is the safety zone and will remain as forestland. The new COB plant will be located within the mine lease area adjacent to the earlier COB plant.  It has been reported that no ecologically sensitive area such as National Park / Sanctuary is located within 10 km of the mine lease. The water requirement is estimated as 685 kld, out of which 600 kld will be met from mine pit water and 85 kld from fresh water.  Mine water discharge is reported to be 1100 kld, which will be after proper treatment.  Mine working will be opencast semi mechanized involving drilling and blasting. The existing working levels in quarry 1 and 2 are 78 m AMSL and 210 m AMSL respectively which will go to 57 m AMSL and 122 m AMSL at the ultimate stage. The groundwater table is reported to be at 110 m AMSL.  Mine working has already intersected groundwater table.  Life of the mine is 5 years.  It has been estimated that 1,00,51,200 m3 of OB will be generated during the mine life.  The waste material will be stacked in an area of 25.9 ha. The accumulated tailing are reported to be 35,715 m3.  The tailings of COB plant 1 will be utilized in the COB plant 2.  The baseline AAQ data was shown to be within prescribed limits. The Committee, however, observed that in view of the large number of mines operating around the project area, the data need to be rechecked by collecting one month AAQ data afresh and the data so collected should be compared with the existing data.  The water quality with specific reference to chromium content should be got analyzed from NABL accredited lab.  The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that the there is no court case pending against the project.

Based on the presentation made and discussions held, the Committee sought information on the following:-

(i)                The details of the land acquired / to be acquired outside the mine lease area for any activity of the project should be furnished.  It should inter-alia include, extent of land, its ownership, its land use, the modus of acquisition, the purpose for which it will be utilized, distance from the mine lease, R&R involved, if any etc. It may also clearly be shown whether it has been reflected in the approved mine plan. The mine plan should take into account the total area of the land to be utilized in the project. 

(ii)              It may be clarified whether any forestry clearance is required for the forestland in the safety zone.  The confirmation in this regard from the competent authority should be provided. 

(iii)            The AAQ data for one month should collected afresh and the data so collected should be compared with the already collected data. 

(iv)            The water balance taking into account the total water requirement for the project, its source, recirculation and reuse of water, rainwater harvesting proposed, if any, should be provided. 

(v)              The approval from the competent authority regarding pumping of groundwater should be provided.

(vi)            Report of the detailed hydro-geological study reported to have been carried out should be provided. 

(vii)          In the details of the first order streams passing through the mine lease area which are likely to be affected due to the project and its impact on the hydrology of the area should be given. 

(viii)        Analysis of water quality with specific reference to chromium content should be carried out through an accredited lab and results furnished. 

(ix)            Quantity of waste to be generated and its management with specific reference to the number of dumps, their height, location and area should be given. 

(x)              Details of tailing pond in term of its location with respect to COB plant, area, adequacy for the life of the plant keeping in view the quantity of tailing to be generated along with its closure plan should be given. 

(xi)            Details of ETP along with analysis of treated effluents to be generated should be provided. 

(xii)          The detailed biological study as per TOR no. (xxviii) should be redone and details furnished. 

(xiii)        Action plan to address the issues raised during public hearing should be given. 

(xiv)        Occupational health impacts and their mitigation based on identification of hazards especially with regard to Hexavalent chromium (Cr+6) should be given. 

(xv)          Details of EMP cost and CSR should be given separately. 

It was decided that the proposal should be brought back before the Committee after the requisite information on the above mentioned points has been received till such time the file may be closed.

2.2          Laterite Mining Project of M/s K. Raghavacharyulu located at village Machanur, District Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh (EC)

          The consideration of the proposal was deferred at the request of the project proponent. 

2.3          Jajang Iron & Manganese Ore Mine of M/s Hargovind Pandya & Others, village Jajang & Bhalubeda, District Keonjhar, Orissa (Consultant: Envomin Consultant Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of production of iron ore to 0.36 million TPA (ROM) and manganese ore to 0.01 million TPA (ROM).  TOR for this project were prescribed on 23.10.2007.  Public hearing was held on 25.8.2010.  The mine lease area is 100.137 ha, which includes 63.217 ha of forestland.  It has been reported that the proponent has applied for diversion of 50.513 ha of forestland.  It is a violation case as the production from the mine has been increased after the EIA Notification, 1994 coming into force without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  The mine is reported to be closed presently.  Mine working will be opencast semi-mechanised.  Life of the mine is 10 years for iron ore and 113 years for manganese ore.  Ultimate working depth will be 460 m AMSL.  Groundwater table is reported at 455 m AMSL.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  Water requirement is 50 kld, which will be obtained from bore well and dug well.  It is estimated that 0.458 million m3 of waste will be generated during mine life.  No National Park / Wildlife Sanctuary / biosphere reserve / wildlife corridor / tiger / elephant reserve (existing as well as proposed) fall within 10 km of the mine lease.  It is estimated that 4,58,000 m3 of waste will be generated during the mine life.  Initially, it will be dumped in the form of an external OB dump with a height of about 30 m.  Backfilling is proposed, which will start in the year 2016 and the entire waste will be backfilled.  At the end of the mine life, there will be no external OB dump.  The ambient air quality data showed that the RSPM levels (PM10) are on a higher side within the core zone, which would necessitate additional effective safeguard measures to control the RSPM levels. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to following conditions and subject to Ministry taking action as per the procedure evolved dealing with such cases of violation:-

(i)                Necessary safeguard measures shall be taken for effective control of particulate levels (PM10) in the area.  The safeguard measures shall be implemented within first three months and their effectiveness shown with supporting data of actual air quality monitoring. 

(ii)              A safety zone of 50 m on both side of the river / nallah passing through the lease area as committed by the proponent during the meeting shall be left as no mining zone and no waste shall be dumped within this safety zone.

(iii)            Prior forestry clearance shall be obtained for the forestland involved in the project before restarting the mine.    

(iv)            Mine working will be restricted to above water table.  For working below water table, matter will be referred back to MoEF after carrying out detailed hydro-geological study and obtaining clearance from Central Groundwater Authority.  

2.4            Sandstone Mining Project of M/s Thekedar Shiv Charan Lal Gupta located at village Langra, Tehsil Mandrail, District Karauli, Rajasthan (EC)

The consideration of the proposal was deferred at the request of the project proponent

2.5     Balda Block Iron Ore Mine of M/s Serajuddin & Co., District Keonjhar, Orissa (Consultant: Envomin Consultant Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of iron ore from 1.482 million TPA to 4.5 million TPA (ROM).  TOR for this project were prescribed on 5.2.2009.  Public hearing was held on 18.10.2010.  The earlier clearance for 1.482 million TPA of iron ore was obtained on 21.8.2007.  It is a violation case as the proponent has enhanced production during 2008-09 without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  The mine lease area is 335.594 ha, which includes 258.133 ha of forestland.  Forestry clearance has been obtained for 24.446 ha of village forest while forestry clearance has been applied for 204.338 ha of DLC forest.  Mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Life of the mine is 10 years.  Ultimate working depth will be 610 m AMSL.  Groundwater table is at 517 m AMSL.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  Water requirement is estimated as 90 kld, which will be obtained from bore wells and dug wells.  No National Park / Sanctuary / Elephant Reserve is reported within 10 km of the mine lease.  The baseline AAQ data shows that the RSPM levels (PM10) on higher side within the core zone, which would require effective mitigation measures to be taken to control the same.  It is estimated that 62,29,200 m3 of waste will be generated during the mine life, which will initially be dumped in an area of 23.48 ha.  Backfilling is proposed from the year 2015 and the entire waste will be backfilled.  There will be no external OB dump at the end of the mine life.  Bethari nallah, a perennial nallah flows towards eastern boundary of the mine lease which will not be affected due to mining operation.  The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that the there is no court case pending against the project.

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to following conditions and subject to Ministry taking action as per the procedure evolved dealing with such cases of violation:-

(i)                Necessary safeguard measures shall be taken for effective control of particulate levels (PM10) in the area.  The safeguard measures shall be implemented within first three months and their effectiveness shown with supporting data on actual air quality monitoring. 

(ii)              A safety zone of 50 m on both side of the Bethari nallah on the eastern side of the mine lease shall be left as no mining zone and no waste shall be dumped within this safety zone.

(iii)            Prior forestry clearance shall be obtained for the forestland involved in the project before restarting the mine.   

(iv)            The enhanced production will be transported by using higher capacity trucks rather than increasing the number of trucks and the trucks to be used for minerals transportation should be covered with tarpaulin. 

2.6     Iron and Copper Ore and Associated Minerals Mine of M/s Jindal Saw Ltd located at village Lampiya, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan (Enkay Enviro Services, Jaipur)

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on October 20-22, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified that the maximum targeted production of 3.0 million TPA will be attained during 14th to 16th year after which the production will decline.  It is estimated that 54.394 million m3 of waste will be generated during the life of the mine.  About 17 million m3 of waste generated up to 11th year will be disposed into four external OB dumps in an area of 55 ha and thereafter the OB generated will be backfilled.  At the conceptual stage, an area of 90.47 ha will be made available for grazing and 133.03 ha will be for plantation.  The high levels of RSPM in the area were attributed to the natural dust levels associated with dust storm in the area.  The mitigation measures proposed inter-alia include; water sprinkling, transportation in covered trucks, wet drilling / drilling with dust extraction system, optimization of explosives for blasting, paving of road, water sprinkling on haul roads etc.  The water in the area is reported to be inherently having high levels of fluoride, particularly in village Banera.  It is proposed to install de-fluoridization plant at village Banera as part of CSR activities.  The other issues raised by the Committee were also clarified and discussed.   

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to following conditions:-

(i)                Continuous monitoring of the RSPM level near the crusher house shall be carried out and records maintained.  If any stage the levels are found to the exceeding the prescribed limits, the necessary mitigation measures shall be implemented. 

(ii)              Prior permission from the Competent Authority shall be obtained for use of groundwater for the project. 

(iii)            It shall be ensured that the adequate quantity of safe drinking water is provided to the villagers in the area where fluoride levels are found to be high.   

2.7          Mohra Limestone Mine of M/s Rungta Mines Ltd., Village Mohra, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Consultant: Min Mec Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi)

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on September 28-30, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified by the proponent that the proposed location of the dump has been shifted away from the nallah about 150 m.  Backfilling will start from 2nd year and the accumulated OB from the Ob dump will also be re-handled from 2nd year onwards.  The development of greenbelt covering of an area of 7.9 ha will be completed within first 5 years.  The radius of influence based on hydro-geological study is now reported to be 1225 m.  Water requirement is estimated as 90 kld for the mine and 1500 kld for cement plant.  It was stated that the mine seepage water as well as the harvested rainwater will be used in the project and the excess water will be given to the villagers for irrigation purpose and there will be no discharge into the drainage into natural channel.  The other issues raised were also clarified and discussed by the Committee.            

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to following conditions:-

(i)                The water requirement for the project (mines + cement plant) shall be met only from the mine sump water and the harvested rainwater.  As stated by the proponent, no additional water will be drawn from any other source. 

(ii)              The water for irrigation to the villagers shall be provided right from 1st year out of the excess mine sump water and there will be no discharge of mine sump water into the drainage channel. 

2.8     Iron Ore Beneficiation Plant of M/s Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., village Tantra, Raikela & Bandhal, Tehsil Koira, District Sundergarh, Orissa (Consultant: S.S. Environics (I) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with project report. 

The proposal is for setting up of a iron ore beneficiation plant having a capacity of 1.0 MTPA throughput using wet process.  The project will be located within the existing mine lease for which environment clearance was obtained in 2009.  Land requirement for the project is 9.395 ha, which include 4.335 ha for tailing disposal.  Water requirement will be 1577 m3/day.  The location of the iron ore beneficiation plant is within the existing mine area.  It was noted that the baseline AAQ data collection has already been started from December, 2010 to cover the winter season.  Forest clearance has been submitted at State Level with the mining proposal.   

 

Based on the information furnished and presentation made, the Committee prescribed the following TORs for undertaking detailed EIA study:-

 

1)                 The alternate sites considered, the relative merits and demerits and the reasons for selecting the proposed site may be furnished. 

2)                 Details of the technology and process involved in the project may be furnished. 

3)                 The study area will comprise of 10 km zone around the project area and the data contained in the EIA such as waste generation etc should be for the life of the project. 

4)                 Size distribution of the iron ore with percentage weight shall also be done to assess the source of fugitive dust emission of the ore feed to the plant. 

5)                 Measures to manage the under size / over-size waste from the feed ore shall be provided. 

6)                 Details of the solid waste to be generated and its management.  Adequacy of the tailing pond for the life of the beneficiation plant should be provided with supporting data and documentation.  Design and capacity of tailing pond should be such as to guard against overflow from the tailing pond during heavy rainfall. The provision of lining, nature of lining with supporting permeability studies should also be provided. 

7)                 Land use of the study area delineating forest area, agricultural land, grazing land, wildlife sanctuary and national park, migratory routes of fauna, water bodies, human settlements and other ecological features may be provided.

8)                 The land requirement should be optimized and furnished. 

9)                 Land use plan of the project area should be prepared and provided. This should encompass pre-operational, operational and post operational phases. 

10)            Location of the proposed plant w.r.t. the source of raw material and mode of transportations of the ore from mines to the beneficiation plant, and outbound movement of the products should be provided.

11)            Proposed treatment of run off from the fines/waste dump should be provided. 

12)            Estimation of the fines going into the washings and its management should be given.

13)            Details of the equipment, settling pond etc. should be provided.  

14)            Detailed material balance to be provided.  

15)            Source of raw material and its transportation should be given.  Steps proposed to be taken to protect the ore from getting air borne to be given. 

16)            Management and disposal of tailings and closure plan of the tailing pond, if any, after the project is over, should be provided. 

17)            Biological as well as health impact of fines and other dust generated in the plant should be studied with reference to National and International Standards (WHO and ILO standards including CPCB norms).  The proposed mitigation measures with EMP should also be provided. 

18)            Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife corridors, Tiger/Elephant reserves (existing as well as proposed), if any, within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated. Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable to such projects due to proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas as mentioned above should be obtained from the State Wildlife Department/ Chief Wildlife Warden under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and copy furnished.

19)            A detailed biological study for the study area [core zone and buffer zone (10 km radius of the periphery of the mine lease)] shall be carried out. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation should be prepared in consultation with State Forest and Wildlife Department and details furnished. Necessary allocation of funds for implementing the same should be made as part of the project cost. 

20)            R&R plan / compensation details for the project affected people, if any, be provided. 

21)            Collection of one season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  Date wise collected baseline AAQ data should form part of EIA and EMP report. There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction. The mineralogical composition of PM10 should be given. 

22)            Air quality modeling should be carried out for prediction of impact of the project on the air quality of the area. It should also take into account the impact of mining project including movement of vehicles for transportation of mineral. The details of the model used and input parameters used for modeling should be provided.  The air quality contours may be shown on a location map clearly indicating the location of the site, location of sensitive receptors, if any and the habitation.  The wind roses showing pre-dominant wind direction may also be indicated on the map.

23)            The water requirement for the project, its availability and source to be furnished.  A detailed water balance should also be provided.  Fresh water requirement for the project should be indicated. 

24)            Necessary clearance from the Competent Authority for drawl of requisite quantity of water for the project should be provided. 

25)            Details of water conservation measures proposed to be adopted in the project should be furnished.

26)            Impact of the project on the water quality, both surface and groundwater, should be assessed and necessary safeguard measures, if any required, should be provided.

27)            Details of rainwater harvesting proposed, if any, in the project to be provided. 

28)            Quantity of solid waste generation, if any, should be estimated and details for its disposal and management should be provided.

29)            Impact on local transport infrastructure due to the project should be evaluated. Projected increase in truck traffic as a result of the project in the present road network (including those outside the project area) and whether it is capable of handling the increased load should be estimated.  Arrangement for improving the infrastructure, if contemplated including action to be taken by other agencies such as State Government, if any, should be covered.

30)            Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the workers may be indicated.

31)            Phase-wise plan of greenbelt development, plantation and compensatory afforestation may be given, clearly indicating the area to be covered under plantation and the species to be planted. The details of plantation already done should be given. 

32)            Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. Details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules should be incorporated in the EMP.

33)            Measures of socio economic influence to the local community proposed to be provided by project proponent.  As far as possible, quantitative dimension should be given. 

34)            Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts due to the project should be prepared and furnished. 

35)            Risk assessment and disaster management plan should inter-alia include breach of tailing pond, if any, pipeline failure and over flow from the tailing pond etc., if any, proposed in the project.

36)            Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided. 

37)            Details of litigation pending against the project, if any, with direction /order passed by any Court of Law against the project should be given.

38)            The cost of the project (capital cost and recurring cost) as well as the cost towards implementation of EMP should clearly be spelt out.  

 

Besides the above, the below mentioned general points should also be followed:-

a)     A note confirming compliance of the TOR, with cross referencing of the relevant sections / pages of the EIA report should be provided. 

b)    All documents may be properly referenced with index, page numbers and continuous page numbering. 

c)     Where data are presented in the report especially in tables, the period in which the data were collected and the sources should be indicated. 

d)    Where the documents provided are in a language other than English, an English translation should be provided.

e)     The Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of mining projects as prescribed by the Ministry shall also be filled and submitted.

f)      Approved mine plan along with copy of the approval letter for the proposed capacity should also be submitted. 

g)    While preparing the EIA report, the instructions for the proponents and instructions for the consultants issued by MoEF vide O.M. No. J-11013/41/2006-IA.II(I) dated 4th August, 2009, which are available on the website of this Ministry should also be followed. 

 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage, clearly showing the land features of the adjoining area. 

After preparing the draft EIA (as per the generic structure prescribed in Appendix-III of the EIA Notification, 2006) covering the above mentioned issues, the proponent will get the public hearing conducted and take further necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the EIA Notification, 2006. 

2.9          Collection of Minor Mineral (Sand, Stone & Bajri) from River Giri of M/s Allstone Mines & Minerals Pvt. Ltd., village Rampur Ghat, Tehsil Panota Sahib, District Sirmour, Himachal Pradesh (TOR)

The consideration of the proposal was deferred at the request of the project proponent. 

2.10          Collection of Minor Mineral (Sand, Stone & Bajri) from River Giri of M/s Inder Singh & Co., village Ghat, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, Himachal Pradesh (TOR)

          The consideration of the proposal was deferred at the request of the project proponent. 

2.11   Stone Mining Project (ML no. 22/92) of M/s Stone International Pvt. Ltd. located at village Chechat, Tehsil Ramganj Mandi, District Kota, Rajasthan (Consultant: Ramji Mine Envirotech, Jaipur) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report. 

The proposal is for renewal and enhancement of production of kota stone from 18,134 TPA to 0.125 million TPA. The mine lease area is 25 ha.  No forestland is involved.  It has been considered as a Category ‘A’ project because of its location at a distance of 6.4 km from the Dara Willdlife Sanctuary and Mukandra Hills National Park. It is a violation case because the proponent has increased production from the mine during the year 2007-10 i.e. after the EIA Notification, 2006 without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance. Mine working will be opencast semi mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Ultimate working depth will be 302 mRL.  Water table is reported to vary between 285 – 290 mRL.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  Backfilling is proposed which has already started.  The backfilled area will be reclaimed by plantation.  Water requirement is estimated as 25 kld, which will be obtained from nearby villages.     

 

Based on the information furnished and presentation made, the Committee prescribed the following TORs for undertaking detailed EIA study:-

 

1)                 Year-wise production prior to EIA Notification, 2006 coming into force and clearly stating the highest production achieved in any one year prior to 2006.  It may also be categorically informed whether there had been any increase in production after the EIA Notification, 2006 coming into force w.r.t. the highest production achieved prior to 2006. 

2)                 A copy of the document in support of the fact that the proponent is the rightful lessee of the mine should be given. 

3)                 All documents including approved mine plan, EIA and public hearing should be compatible with one another in terms of the mine lease area, production levels, waste generation and its management and mining technology and should be in the name of the lessee. 

4)                 The study area will comprise of 10 km zone around the mine lease from lease periphery and the data contained in the EIA such as waste generation etc should be for the life of the mine / lease period. 

5)                 Land use of the study area delineating forest area, agricultural land, grazing land, wildlife sanctuary and national park, migratory routes of fauna, water bodies, human settlements and other ecological features should be indicated.

6)                 Land use plan of the mine lease area should be prepared to encompass pre-operational, operational and post operational phases and submitted. 

7)                 A confirmation may be adduced, duly authenticated by the competent authority in the State Government to the effect whether the project falls in Aravalli and whether it is covered by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 8.4.2005 in the contempt petition (c) 412/2004 in writ petition 202 of 1995 in the matter of Godavarman vs Union of India.

8)                 Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed), if any, within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable to such projects due to proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas as mentioned above should be obtained from the State Wildlife Department/ Chief Wildlife Warden under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and copy furnished.

9)                 A detailed biological study for the study area [core zone and buffer zone (10 km radius of the periphery of the mine lease)] shall be carried out. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation should be prepared in consultation with State Forest and Wildlife Department and details furnished. Necessary allocation of funds for implementing the same should be made as part of the project cost. 

10)            R&R plan / compensation details for the project affected people should be furnished.  While preparing the R&R plan, the National Rehabilitation & Resettlement Policy should be kept in view.  In respect of SCs / STs and other weaker sections, need based sample survey, family-wise, should be undertaken to assess their requirement and action programmes prepared accordingly integrating the sectoral programme of line departments of the State Government. 

11)            One season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna shall be collected and the AAQ data so collected presented date-wise in the EIA and EMP report.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given. 

12)            Air quality modeling should be carried out for prediction of impact of the project on the air quality of the area. It should also take into account the impact of movement of vehicles for transportation of mineral. The details of the model used and input parameters used for modeling should be provided.  The air quality contours may be shown on a location map clearly indicating the location of the site, location of sensitive receptors, if any and the habitation.  The wind roses showing pre-dominant wind direction may also be indicated on the map.

13)            The water requirement for the project, its availability and source to be furnished.  A detailed water balance should also be provided.  Fresh water requirement for the project should be indicated. 

14)            Necessary clearance from the Competent Authority for drawl of requisite quantity of water for the project should be provided. 

15)            Details of water conservation measures proposed to be adopted in the project should be given.

16)            Impact of the project on the water quality both surface and groundwater should be assessed and necessary safeguard measures, if any required should be provided.

17)            Based on actual monitored data, it may clearly be shown whether working will intersect groundwater.  Necessary data and documentation in this regard may be provided.  In case the working will intersect groundwater table, a detailed hydro geological study should be undertaken and report furnished.  Necessary permission from Central Ground Water Authority for working below ground water and for pumping of ground water should also be obtained and copy furnished.

18)            Details of first order stream, if any passing through lease area and modification/ diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

19)            Details of rainwater harvesting proposed, if any, in the project should be provided. 

20)            Information on site elevation, working depth, groundwater table etc. should be provided both in AMSL and bgl.  A schematic diagram may also be provided for the same. 

21)            Quantity of solid waste generation to be estimated and details for its disposal and management should be provided.  The quality, volumes and methodology planned for removal and utilisation (preferably concurrently) of top soil should be indicated.  Details of backfilling proposed, if any, should also be given.  It may be clearly indicated that out of the total waste generated during the mine life, how much quantity would be backfilled and how much quantity would be disposed off in the form of external dump (number of dumps, their height, terraces etc. to be brought out).  

22)            The reclamation plan, post mine land use and progressive greenbelt development plan shall be prepared in tabular form (prescribed format) and submitted.  

23)            Impact on local transport infrastructure due to the project should be indicated. Projected increase in truck traffic as a result of the project in the present road network (including those outside the project area) should be worked out, indicating whether it is capable of handling the increased load.  Arrangement for improving the infrastructure, if contemplated (including action to be taken by other agencies such as State Government) should be covered.

24)            Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be included in the EIA report.

25)            Conceptual post mining land use and Reclamation and Rehabilitation of mined out area (with plans and with adequate number of sections) should be given in the EIA report.

26)            Phase-wise plan of greenbelt development, plantation and compensatory afforestation should be charted clearly indicating the area to be covered under plantation and the species to be planted. The details of plantation already done should be given. 

27)            Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. Details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules should be incorporated in the EMP.

28)            Measures of socio economic significance and influence to the local community proposed to be provided by project proponent should be indicated.  As far as possible, quantitative dimensions may be given with time frame for implementation. 

29)            Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts which, should inter-alia also include the impact due to change of land use, due to loss of agricultural land and grazing land, if any, occupational health impacts besides other impacts of the projects. 

30)            Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided. 

31)            Details of litigation pending against the project, if any, with direction /order passed by any Court of Law against the project should be given.

32)            The cost of the project (capital cost and recurring cost) as well as the cost towards implementation of EMP should clearly be spelt out.  

 

Besides the above, the below mentioned general points should also be followed:-

a)     A note confirming compliance of the TOR, with cross referencing of the relevant sections / pages of the EIA report should be provided. 

b)    All documents may be properly referenced with index, page numbers and continuous page numbering. 

c)     Where data are presented in the report especially in tables, the period in which the data were collected and the sources should be indicated. 

d)    Where the documents provided are in a language other than English, an English translation should be provided.

e)     The Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of mining projects as prescribed by the Ministry shall also be filled and submitted.

f)      Approved mine plan along with copy of the approval letter for the proposed capacity should also be submitted. 

g)    While preparing the EIA report, the instructions for the proponents and instructions for the consultants issued by MoEF vide O.M. No. J-11013/41/2006-IA.II(I) dated 4th August, 2009, which are available on the website of this Ministry should also be followed. 

 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area, (ii) geological maps and sections and (iii) sections of the mine pit and external dumps, if any, clearly showing the land features of the adjoining area. 

After preparing the draft EIA (as per the generic structure prescribed in Appendix-III of the EIA Notification, 2006) covering the above mentioned issues, the proponent will get the public hearing conducted and take further necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the EIA Notification, 2006. 

2.12   Hirri Dolomite Mining of Bhilai Steel Plant, Chhattisgarh M/s Steel Authority of India (Modification of EC condition, internal consideration) 

          The proposal relating to expansion of Hirri dolomite mine was earlier granted environmental clearance vide this Ministry’s letter no. J-11015/577/2007-IA.II(M) dated 5.2.2009 subject to various conditions inter-alia that the transportation of ore shall be done by covering the trucks with tarpaulin or other suitable mechanism so that no spillage of ore / dust take place. Transportation shall be done only during day time. The proponent had sought modification in the said condition to the extent that the prohibition of night shift transportation should be removed based on the reasons explained by the proponent. Accordingly, the matter was considered by the Committee.  Based on the discussions held, the Committee agreed to recommend for modification of the condition as requested by the project proponent. Accordingly, the condition may be modified to read as “the transportation of ore shall be done by covering the trucks with tarpaulin or other suitable mechanism so that no spillage of ore / dust take place”. 

2.13          Ajitaburu Manganese & Iron Ore Mines of M/s Devkabai Velji located at District Singhbhum, Jharkhand (EC)

 

The consideration of the proposal was deferred at the request of the proponent as the comments of SPCB were not available yet and the proposal is to be located in West Singhbhum District, an identified severely polluted area.

2.14          Limestone Mine of M/s Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd., Aminabad & Kairulabad in Taluka and District Ariyalur, Tamil Nadu (Consultant: Environmental System Consultants, Chennai)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  It was noted that the above mentioned proposal for enhancement of production of limestone from 0.3 million TPA to 1.4 million TPA was considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee for mining projects during its meeting held on February 25-26, 2010, wherein the Committee had recommended the proposal for environmental clearance.  The said proposal was granted exemption from conduct of public hearing by the EAC in terms of clause 7(ii) of the EIA Notification, 2006.  However, while processing the proposal for obtaining approval of the Competent Authority for grant of environmental clearance, it was decided not to accept the recommendations of the EAC without the expansion proposal having been subjected to public hearing.  Accordingly, the project proponent were requested to get public hearing done and finalize the EIA report, thereafter, taking into consideration issues raised during public hearing as prescribed in the EIA Notification, 2006.  Accordingly, the public hearing was conducted on 15.10.2010.  The proponent made a detailed presentation and the issues raised during public hearing were considered and discussed in the detail.  Although, the detailed presentation on the EIA report was made before the EAC in February, 2010 meeting, the presentation on the EIA was also made again covering the salient features of the project, its likely impacts and the proposed mitigation measures.   

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to the conditions already prescribed during the February, 2010 meeting and the following additional conditions:-

(i)                The roads through which mineral transportation is undertaken outside the mine lease area should be maintained through the nodal agency in the State Government by making financial contribution for the same. 

(ii)              The greenbelt plantation all around the mine lease should be completed within 5 years of grant of environmental clearance.

(iii)            The de-silted material from the river should not be left near the river to avoid it from going back into the river and should be properly disposed of at appropriate site. 

2.15          Jalahuri Iron and Manganese Mine of M/s Mala Roy & others, village Jalahuri, District Keonjhar, Orissa (Consultant: ERS(I) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of production of iron ore from 0.6 million TPA to 2.5 million TPA and production of 3,000 TPA of manganese ore along with crushing and screening plant.  It is a violation case as the proponent has increased production during the year 2007-08 and 2008-09 without obtaining the requisite prior environmental clearance.  The earlier environmental clearance for 0.6 million TPA was granted on 8.5.2008.  The mine lease area is 182.109 ha, which includes 177.569 ha of forestland.  Forestry clearance has been obtained for 111.580 ha.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 12.5.2009.  Public hearing was held on 14.7.2010.  No national park / sanctuary/ elephant corridor is reported within 10 km of the mine lease area.  A location map duly authenticated by DFO cum Wildlife Warden, Keonjhar has been submitted in this regard. Mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Ultimate working depth will be 588 m AMSL. The groundwater table is reported at 400 m AMSL. Mine working will not intersect groundwater table. The life of the mine is 12 years.  It is estimated that 3.977 million m3 of OB will be generated during the mine life.  Water requirement is 100 kld, which will be met from groundwater. Permission for drawl of groundwater has been obtained from CGWA.  The baseline AAQ data presented showed that the RSPM levels (PM10) were quite high and therefore, requisite mitigation measures need to be taken for control of RSPM.  It was also observed that the selection of AAQ monitoring station has not been done properly taking into account the pre-dominant downwind direction. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

Based on the presentation made and discussions held, the Committee sought information on the following:-

(i)                Compliance of the conditions stipulated in the environment and forestry clearance should be furnished. 

(ii)              The baseline AAQ data for at least one month should be collected afresh after properly selecting the AAQ monitoring stations based on the pre dominant downwind direction. 

(iii)            The mitigation measures for control of RSPM levels in the area should be implemented and details furnished. The effectiveness of these measures should be supported by actual field monitored data of ambient air quality for at least one month. 

(iv)            Free silica in the ambient air should also be monitored and results furnished. 

(v)              Flora and fauna data based on biological primary survey as per TOR no. (ix) should be furnished. 

(vi)            Post mine land use should be rechecked and furnished. 

(vii)          Information relating to occupational health aspect of the project taking into account the preventive approach based on identification of hazards and their mitigation should be provided. A detailed scheme to address these issues should also be prepared and furnished. 

It was decided that the proposal may be brought back before the Committee for its further consideration after the requisite information on the above mentioned points has been submitted.  Till such time, the file may be closed. 

2.16          Unchabali Iron Ore Beneficiation Plant of M/s Indrani Patnaik, village Unchaballi, District Keonjhar, Orissa (Consultant: Creative Engineers and Consultants, Chennai) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for setting up of a iron ore beneficiation plant with a capacity of 2.0 million TPA throughput.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 16.11.2009.  Public hearing was held on 5.10.2010.  The proposed plant will be located within the existing mine lease area for which environment clearance has already been obtained for a rated capacity of 4.0 million TPA.  Out of the total mine lease area of 106.1127 ha (including 103.432 ha of forestland), the land requirement for the beneficiation plant will be 2.35 ha.  It was stated by the proponent that so far forestry clearance has been obtained for 35.275 ha of forestland and for the remaining forestland excluding safety zone, the proposal for forestry clearance is under process.  The proposed beneficiation plant will be located within the forestland for which forestry clearance has already been obtained.  The life of the beneficiation plant is reported to be 10 years only based on the mineral available from this mine and accordingly proponent have sought for clearance only for 10 years.  The total water requirement has been estimated as 1025 kld, which will be obtained from groundwater.  Necessary permission from CGWA has been obtained in this regard.  The project is based on zero discharge.  The effluent generated will be recycled and reused and there will be no effluent discharge outside the plant area.  The cake generated from the filter press will be dumped initially for two years along with the overburden as inter mixed layers and thereafter it will be filled back into the mined out area.  The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.  

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to following condition:-

(i)                Necessary safeguard measures shall be taken for effective control of particulate levels (PM10) in the area. The safeguard measures shall be implemented within first three months and their effectiveness shown with supporting data of actual air quality monitoring.

2.17   S.V. Chetty Iron Ore Mine of M/s S.V. Srinivasulu, Village Jaisingpura, Sandur Taluk, Bellary, Karnataka (Consultant: Bhagvathi Anna Lab, Hyderabad) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report. 

The proposal is for enhancement of production of iron ore from 0.5 million TPA to 0.75 million TPA.  Earlier environmental clearance for 0.5 million TPA was obtained in 2007.  The mine lease area is 149.73 ha, which is a forestland.  Forestry clearance has been obtained for an area of 60 ha.  Mine working will be opencast mechanized.  No blasting is involved.  Life of the mine is 14 years.  Water requirement is 78 kld, which will be obtained from groundwater.  It is estimated that 6.57 million tonnes of waste will be generated.  Backfilling is proposed.  There are four first order streams passing through the mine lease area which ultimately discharge into Tungbhadra Reservoir at a distance of about 7 km.   

 

Based on the information furnished and presentation made, the Committee prescribed the following TORs for undertaking detailed EIA study:-

 

1)                 Status of compliance of the earlier EC conditions along with supporting documents and photographs should be submitted. 

2)                 Year-wise production details since 1994 onwards should be given clearly stating the highest production achieved in any one year prior to 1994.  It may also be categorically informed whether there had been any increase in production after the EIA Notification, 1994 coming into force w.r.t. the highest production achieved prior to 1994. 

3)                 A copy of the document in support of the fact that the proponent is the rightful lessee of the mine should be given. 

4)                 All documents including approved mine plan, EIA and public hearing should be compatible with one another in terms of the mine lease area, production levels, waste generation and its management and mining technology and should be in the name of the lessee. 

5)                 The study area will comprise of 10 km zone around the mine lease from lease periphery and the data contained in the EIA such as waste generation etc should be for the life of the mine / lease period. 

6)                 Land use of the study area delineating forest area, agricultural land, grazing land, wildlife sanctuary and national park, migratory routes of fauna, water bodies, human settlements and other ecological features should be indicated.

7)                 Land use plan of the mine lease area should be prepared to encompass pre-operational, operational and post operational phases and submitted. 

8)                 Status of forestry clearance for the broken up area and virgin forestland involved in the project including deposition of net present value (NPV) and compensatory afforestation (CA).  A copy of the proposal submitted for forestry clearance should also be furnished. 

9)                 Implementation status of recognition of forest rights under the Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, should be indicated.

10)            Impact of the project on the wildlife in the surrounding and any other protected area and accordingly detailed mitigative measures required should be worked out with cost implications and submitted. 

11)            The vegetation in the RF / PF area should be studied and details in this regard  given.    

12)            A study shall be got done to ascertain the impact of the mining project on wildlife of the area including on the elephant population and details furnished. 

13)            Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed), if any, within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden. Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable to such projects due to proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas as mentioned above should be obtained from the State Wildlife Department/ Chief Wildlife Warden under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and copy furnished.

14)            A detailed biological study for the study area [core zone and buffer zone (10 km radius of the periphery of the mine lease)] shall be carried out. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation should be prepared in consultation with State Forest and Wildlife Department and details furnished. Necessary allocation of funds for implementing the same should be made as part of the project cost. 

15)            Impact of change of land use should be given. 

16)            R&R plan / compensation details for the project affected people should be furnished.  While preparing the R&R plan, the National Rehabilitation & Resettlement Policy should be kept in view.  In respect of SCs / STs and other weaker sections, need based sample survey, family-wise, should be undertaken to assess their requirement and action programmes prepared accordingly integrating the sectoral programme of line departments of the State Government. 

17)            One season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna shall be collected and the AAQ data so collected presented date-wise in the EIA and EMP report.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given. 

18)            Air quality modeling should be carried out for prediction of impact of the project on the air quality of the area. It should also take into account the impact of movement of vehicles for transportation of mineral. The details of the model used and input parameters used for modeling should be provided.  The air quality contours may be shown on a location map clearly indicating the location of the site, location of sensitive receptors, if any and the habitation.  The wind roses showing pre-dominant wind direction may also be indicated on the map.

19)            The water requirement for the project, its availability and source to be furnished. A detailed water balance should also be provided.  Fresh water requirement for the project should be indicated. 

20)            Necessary clearance from the Competent Authority for drawl of requisite quantity of water for the project should be provided. 

21)            Details of water conservation measures proposed to be adopted in the project should be given.

22)            Impact of the project on the water quality both surface and groundwater should be assessed and necessary safeguard measures, if any required, should be provided.

23)            Based on actual monitored data, it may clearly be shown whether working will intersect groundwater.  Necessary data and documentation in this regard may be provided.  In case the working will intersect groundwater table, a detailed hydro geological study should be undertaken and report furnished.  Necessary permission from Central Ground Water Authority for working below ground water and for pumping of ground water should also be obtained and copy furnished.

24)            Details of first order stream, if any passing through lease area and modification/ diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out with specific reference to the total quantity of discharge into Tungbhadra Reservoir. 

25)            Details of rainwater harvesting proposed, if any, in the project should be provided. 

26)            Information on site elevation, working depth, groundwater table etc. should be provided both in AMSL and bgl.  A schematic diagram may also be provided for the same. 

27)            Quantity of solid waste generation to be estimated and details for its disposal and management should be provided. The quality, volumes and methodology planned for removal and utilisation (preferably concurrently) of top soil should be indicated.  Details of backfilling proposed, if any, should also be given.  It may be clearly indicated that out of the total waste generated during the mine life, how much quantity would be backfilled and how much quantity would be disposed off in the form of external dump (number of dumps, their height, terraces etc. to be brought out).  

28)            The reclamation plan, post mine land use and progressive greenbelt development plan shall be prepared in tabular form (prescribed format) and submitted.  

29)            Impact on local transport infrastructure due to the project should be indicated. Projected increase in truck traffic as a result of the project in the present road network (including those outside the project area) should be worked out, indicating whether it is capable of handling the increased load.  Arrangement for improving the infrastructure, if contemplated (including action to be taken by other agencies such as State Government) should be covered.

30)            Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be included in the EIA report.

31)            Conceptual post mining land use and Reclamation and Rehabilitation of mined out area (with plans and with adequate number of sections) should be given in the EIA report.

32)            Phase-wise plan of greenbelt development, plantation and compensatory afforestation should be charted clearly indicating the area to be covered under plantation and the species to be planted. The details of plantation already done should be given. 

33)            Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. Details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules should be incorporated in the EMP.

34)            Measures of socio economic significance and influence to the local community proposed to be provided by project proponent should be indicated.  As far as possible, quantitative dimensions may be given with time frame for implementation. 

35)            Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts which, should inter-alia also include the impact due to change of land use, due to loss of agricultural land and grazing land, if any, occupational health impacts besides other impacts of the projects. 

36)            Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided. 

37)            Details of litigation pending against the project, if any, with direction /order passed by any Court of Law against the project should be given.

38)            The cost of the project (capital cost and recurring cost) as well as the cost towards implementation of EMP should clearly be spelt out.  

 

Besides the above, the below mentioned general points should also be followed:-

a)     A note confirming compliance of the TOR, with cross referencing of the relevant sections / pages of the EIA report should be provided. 

b)    All documents may be properly referenced with index, page numbers and continuous page numbering. 

c)     Where data are presented in the report especially in tables, the period in which the data were collected and the sources should be indicated. 

d)    Where the documents provided are in a language other than English, an English translation should be provided.

e)     The Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of mining projects as prescribed by the Ministry shall also be filled and submitted.

f)      Approved mine plan along with copy of the approval letter for the proposed capacity should also be submitted. 

g)    While preparing the EIA report, the instructions for the proponents and instructions for the consultants issued by MoEF vide O.M. No. J-11013/41/2006-IA.II(I) dated 4th August, 2009, which are available on the website of this Ministry should also be followed. 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area, (ii) geological maps and sections and (iii) sections of the mine pit and external dumps, if any, clearly showing the land features of the adjoining area. 

After preparing the draft EIA (as per the generic structure prescribed in Appendix-III of the EIA Notification, 2006) covering the above mentioned issues, the proponent will get the public hearing conducted and take further necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the EIA Notification, 2006. 

 

2.18          Sandstone Mining Project of M/s Roop Narain Pandey located at village Atewa, Kalyani, Tehsil Karauli, Rajasthan (EC)

 

          The consideration of the proposal was deferred at the request of the project proponent. 

 

2.19          Laupada Iron Ore Mining Project of M/s Laupada Iron Ore Mines, District Keonjhar, Orissa (Consultant: R.K. Consultants, Jodhpur)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for renewal of mine lease and enhancement of production of iron ore from 21,707 TPA to 1,20,000 TPA along with crushing and screening plant.  It is a violation case as the mine was closed since 1999 and restarted in 2008 without obtaining prior environmental clearance and in the year 2008-09 and 2009-10, the production from the mine has also increased.  The mine lease area is 141.336 ha, which includes 35.8648 ha of forestland. TOR for this project were prescribed on 5.2.2009.  Public hearing was held on 22.9.2010.  Mine working will be opencast semi mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Life of mine is 25 years.  Ultimate working depth will be 530 m AMSL. The groundwater table during post monsoon is 524.3 m AMSL.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table. The water requirement is 30 kld, which will be obtained from mine sump water and groundwater. The ambient air quality is shown to be within limit.  It is estimated that 0.133 m3 of waste will be generated during the mine life. Initially, it will be dumped in the form of external OB dump and subsequently it will be backfilled.  At the end of the mine life, there will be no external OB dump. Plantation will be raised in an area of 5 ha.  The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that the there is no court case pending against the project. 

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance.

 

2.20          Mining of rare minerals in CRZ area of M/s Indian Rare Earths Ltd. located at village Manavalakurichi, District Kanyakumari, Tamilnadu (Consultant:  Bhagavati Anna Labs Ltd., Hyderabad) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report. 

 

The proposal is for mining of rare minerals in CRZ area.  This proposal was referred to MoEF as a sequel to the court direction in the High Court of Madras.  During consideration of this proposal, Director (Environment), Govt. of Tamil Nadu & Member Secretary (SCZMA) was also present.  The history of the case was given by the State Govt. representative according to which, the proponent had applied for CRZ clearance for their existing and proposed expansion of mining activities in September, 2004 over an area of 1201 ha.  Although, the SCZMA had resolved to recommend the proposal to MoEF for mining in an area of 716.59 ha.  However, recommendations were not sent to MoEF pending submission of the copies of the proposal along with HTL maps as required by SCZMA. In the meantime, the EAC in its November, 2008 meeting had rejected the proposal pending approval of SCZMA and on the ground that the expansion of industrial activity is not permissible in CRZ area.  Since, then, the proponent had not pursued the matter. However, subsequent to the directions of Hon’ble High Court, the application has now been submitted. 

 

The Committee also took note of the letter from the Coastal Environment and Ecological Conservation Committee forwarding there with a copy of the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras dated 10.11.2010 vide which it has been directed that the writ petitioners be given an opportunity to be heard.

 

It was stated by the proponent that there are four mining leases along with mineral processing plant namely; (i) Mine lease in Manavalakurichi, Lakshmipuram and Colachel over an area of 141.2269 ha (under deemed extension), (ii) Mine lease in Manavalakurichi over an area of 7.06 ha (under deemed extension), (iii) Mine lease in Kizhmidalam and Midalam over an area of 29.7812 ha, which is not working presently and is reported under litigation and (iv) Mine lease in Manavalakurichi over an area of 14.84 ha, which is also reported to be not working and the lease deed has not been executed yet.  The Committee desired to know whether each mine lease has a separate mining plan or there is a unified mining plan. The proponent was not very clear on this issue.  It was, therefore, decided that in the eventuality, there is a unified mine plan for all the four mine leases, it could be considered as one proposal, however, if there are lease wise mine plans, the proposals would need to be submitted lease wise. In such a situation, depending on the size of the mine lease proposals qualifying in Category ‘A’ may be submitted to MoEF while category “B’ proposals may be submitted to SEIAA.  Further, the processing plant may be integrated with the lease in which it is to be located.

 

It was decided that the proposal will be considered further after the proponent submits the revised proposals taking into consideration the above issues.  Further, while considering the proposals, the representative of the Coastal Environment and Ecological Conservation Committee, the petitioner in the writ petition no. 5678 of 2007 will also be called for hearing in accordance with the direction of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. 

 

 

 

2.21          Marble (Minor Mineral) Mining Project (ML no. 56/02) of M/s Agarwal Marble Craft Pvt. Ltd located at village Barodiya, Tehsil Hindoli, District Kota, Rajasthan (Consultant: Ramji Mine Envirotech, Jaipur) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report. 

The proposal is for opening of a new mine for production of 0.1 million TPA of marble (minor mineral).  The mine lease area is 8 ha.  No forestland is involved.  It has been considered as a Category ‘A’ project because of its location at a distance of 300 m from the Jamva Ramgarh Sanctuary. The project proponent has furnished a copy of the letter no. F(2)Mines/Gr.2/2000.Pt dated 14.8.2008 from Department of Mines, Govt. of Rajasthan vide which the mining activity in the areas of mining leases falling outside the periphery of 100 m around the forests / Jamva Ramgarh Sanctuary boundary were allowed to be resumed.  Since, in the instant case the mine is located at a distance of 300 m of the Jamva Ramgarh Sanctuary, the proposal has been considered.  Mine working will be opencast semi mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Ultimate working depth will be 35 m from surface. Water table is reported to vary between 50 – 55 m bgl.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table. 2,95,182 m3 of waste will be generated during the mine life.  0.45 ha has been proposed as waste dump area. Water requirement is estimated as 23 kld, which will be obtained from nearby villages.    

 

Based on the information furnished and presentation made, the Committee prescribed the following TORs for undertaking detailed EIA study:-

 

1)                 A copy of the document in support of the fact that the proponent is the rightful lessee of the mine should be given. 

2)                 All documents including approved mine plan, EIA and public hearing should be compatible with one another in terms of the mine lease area, production levels, waste generation and its management and mining technology and should be in the name of the lessee. 

3)                 The study area will comprise of 10 km zone around the mine lease from lease periphery and the data contained in the EIA such as waste generation etc should be for the life of the mine / lease period. 

4)                 Land use of the study area delineating forest area, agricultural land, grazing land, wildlife sanctuary and national park, migratory routes of fauna, water bodies, human settlements and other ecological features should be indicated.

5)                 Land use plan of the mine lease area should be prepared to encompass pre-operational, operational and post operational phases and submitted. 

6)                 A confirmation may be adduced, duly authenticated by the competent authority in the State Government to the effect whether the project falls in Aravalli and whether it is covered by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 8.4.2005 in the contempt petition (c) 412/2004 in writ petition 202 of 1995 in the matter of Godavarman vs Union of India.

7)                 Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed), if any, within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable to such projects due to proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas as mentioned above should be obtained from the State Wildlife Department/ Chief Wildlife Warden under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and copy furnished.

8)                 A detailed biological study for the study area [core zone and buffer zone (10 km radius of the periphery of the mine lease)] shall be carried out. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation should be prepared in consultation with State Forest and Wildlife Department and details furnished. Necessary allocation of funds for implementing the same should be made as part of the project cost. 

9)                 R&R plan / compensation details for the project affected people should be furnished.  While preparing the R&R plan, the National Rehabilitation & Resettlement Policy should be kept in view.  In respect of SCs / STs and other weaker sections, need based sample survey, family-wise, should be undertaken to assess their requirement and action programmes prepared accordingly integrating the sectoral programme of line departments of the State Government. 

10)            One season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna shall be collected and the AAQ data so collected presented date-wise in the EIA and EMP report.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given. 

11)            Air quality modeling should be carried out for prediction of impact of the project on the air quality of the area. It should also take into account the impact of movement of vehicles for transportation of mineral. The details of the model used and input parameters used for modeling should be provided.  The air quality contours may be shown on a location map clearly indicating the location of the site, location of sensitive receptors, if any and the habitation.  The wind roses showing pre-dominant wind direction may also be indicated on the map.

12)            The water requirement for the project, its availability and source to be furnished.  A detailed water balance should also be provided.  Fresh water requirement for the project should be indicated. 

13)            Necessary clearance from the Competent Authority for drawl of requisite quantity of water for the project should be provided. 

14)            Details of water conservation measures proposed to be adopted in the project should be given.

15)            Impact of the project on the water quality both surface and groundwater should be assessed and necessary safeguard measures, if any required should be provided.

16)            Based on actual monitored data, it may clearly be shown whether working will intersect groundwater.  Necessary data and documentation in this regard may be provided.  In case the working will intersect groundwater table, a detailed hydro geological study should be undertaken and report furnished.  Necessary permission from Central Ground Water Authority for working below ground water and for pumping of ground water should also be obtained and copy furnished.

17)            Details of first order stream, if any passing through lease area and modification/ diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

18)            Details of rainwater harvesting proposed, if any, in the project should be provided. 

19)            Information on site elevation, working depth, groundwater table etc. should be provided both in AMSL and bgl.  A schematic diagram may also be provided for the same. 

20)            Quantity of solid waste generation to be estimated and details for its disposal and management should be provided.  The quality, volumes and methodology planned for removal and utilisation (preferably concurrently) of top soil should be indicated.  Details of backfilling proposed, if any, should also be given.  It may be clearly indicated that out of the total waste generated during the mine life, how much quantity would be backfilled and how much quantity would be disposed off in the form of external dump (number of dumps, their height, terraces etc. to be brought out).  The aspect of marble slurry management should also be discussed in detail.   

21)            The reclamation plan, post mine land use and progressive greenbelt development plan shall be prepared in tabular form (prescribed format) and submitted.  

22)            Impact on local transport infrastructure due to the project should be indicated. Projected increase in truck traffic as a result of the project in the present road network (including those outside the project area) should be worked out, indicating whether it is capable of handling the increased load.  Arrangement for improving the infrastructure, if contemplated (including action to be taken by other agencies such as State Government) should be covered.

23)            Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be included in the EIA report.

24)            Conceptual post mining land use and Reclamation and Rehabilitation of mined out area (with plans and with adequate number of sections) should be given in the EIA report.

25)            Phase-wise plan of greenbelt development, plantation and compensatory afforestation should be charted clearly indicating the area to be covered under plantation and the species to be planted. The details of plantation already done should be given. 

26)            Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. Details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules should be incorporated in the EMP.

27)            Measures of socio economic significance and influence to the local community proposed to be provided by project proponent should be indicated.  As far as possible, quantitative dimensions may be given with time frame for implementation. 

28)            Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts which, should inter-alia also include the impact due to change of land use, due to loss of agricultural land and grazing land, if any, occupational health impacts besides other impacts of the projects.  

29)            Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided. 

30)            Details of litigation pending against the project, if any, with direction /order passed by any Court of Law against the project should be given.

31)            The cost of the project (capital cost and recurring cost) as well as the cost towards implementation of EMP should clearly be spelt out.  

 

Besides the above, the below mentioned general points should also be followed:-

a)     A note confirming compliance of the TOR, with cross referencing of the relevant sections / pages of the EIA report should be provided. 

b)    All documents may be properly referenced with index, page numbers and continuous page numbering. 

c)     Where data are presented in the report especially in tables, the period in which the data were collected and the sources should be indicated. 

d)    Where the documents provided are in a language other than English, an English translation should be provided.

e)     The Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of mining projects as prescribed by the Ministry shall also be filled and submitted.

f)      Approved mine plan along with copy of the approval letter for the proposed capacity should also be submitted. 

g)    While preparing the EIA report, the instructions for the proponents and instructions for the consultants issued by MoEF vide O.M. No. J-11013/41/2006-IA.II(I) dated 4th August, 2009, which are available on the website of this Ministry should also be followed. 

 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area, (ii) geological maps and sections and (iii) sections of the mine pit and external dumps, if any, clearly showing the land features of the adjoining area. 

After preparing the draft EIA (as per the generic structure prescribed in Appendix-III of the EIA Notification, 2006) covering the above mentioned issues, the proponent will get the public hearing conducted and take further necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the EIA Notification, 2006. 

 

2.22          Baidyanathpur, Mangratoli & Kusumtoli Dolomite Mines of M/s Radha Raman Minerals, village Baidyanathpur, Mangratoli & Kusumtoli, District Sundergarh, Orissa (Consultant: Kalyani Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report. 

The proposal is for opening of a new mine for production of 1.2 million TPA of limestone.  The mine lease area is 64 ha.  No forestland is involved.  It is a violation case as the mine was operated during September to November, 2010 without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be opencast semi mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Ultimate working depth will be 210 mRL.  Life of the mine will be 13 years.  Backfilling is proposed.

 

Based on the information furnished and presentation made, the Committee prescribed the following TORs for undertaking detailed EIA study:-

 

1)                 Year-wise production details since 1994 onwards should be given clearly stating the highest production achieved in any one year prior to 1994.  It may also be categorically informed whether there had been any increase in production after the EIA Notification, 1994 coming into force w.r.t. the highest production achieved prior to 1994. 

2)                 A copy of the document in support of the fact that the proponent is the rightful lessee of the mine should be given. 

3)                 All documents including approved mine plan, EIA and public hearing should be compatible with one another in terms of the mine lease area, production levels, waste generation and its management and mining technology and should be in the name of the lessee. 

4)                 The study area will comprise of 10 km zone around the mine lease from lease periphery and the data contained in the EIA such as waste generation etc should be for the life of the mine / lease period. 

5)                 Land use of the study area delineating forest area, agricultural land, grazing land, wildlife sanctuary and national park, migratory routes of fauna, water bodies, human settlements and other ecological features should be indicated.

6)                 Land use plan of the mine lease area should be prepared to encompass pre-operational, operational and post operational phases and submitted. 

7)                 Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed), if any, within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable to such projects due to proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas as mentioned above should be obtained from the State Wildlife Department/ Chief Wildlife Warden under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and copy furnished.

8)                 A detailed biological study for the study area [core zone and buffer zone (10 km radius of the periphery of the mine lease)] shall be carried out. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation should be prepared in consultation with State Forest and Wildlife Department and details furnished. Necessary allocation of funds for implementing the same should be made as part of the project cost. 

9)                 Impact of change of land use should be given. 

10)            R&R plan / compensation details for the project affected people should be furnished.  While preparing the R&R plan, the National Rehabilitation & Resettlement Policy should be kept in view.  In respect of SCs / STs and other weaker sections, need based sample survey, family-wise, should be undertaken to assess their requirement and action programmes prepared accordingly integrating the sectoral programme of line departments of the State Government. 

11)            One season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna shall be collected and the AAQ data so collected presented date-wise in the EIA and EMP report.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given. 

12)            Air quality modeling should be carried out for prediction of impact of the project on the air quality of the area. It should also take into account the impact of movement of vehicles for transportation of mineral. The details of the model used and input parameters used for modeling should be provided.  The air quality contours may be shown on a location map clearly indicating the location of the site, location of sensitive receptors, if any and the habitation.  The wind roses showing pre-dominant wind direction may also be indicated on the map.

13)            The water requirement for the project, its availability and source to be furnished.  A detailed water balance should also be provided.  Fresh water requirement for the project should be indicated. 

14)            Necessary clearance from the Competent Authority for drawl of requisite quantity of water for the project should be provided. 

15)            Details of water conservation measures proposed to be adopted in the project should be given.

16)            Impact of the project on the water quality both surface and groundwater should be assessed and necessary safeguard measures, if any required should be provided.

17)            Based on actual monitored data, it may clearly be shown whether working will intersect groundwater.  Necessary data and documentation in this regard may be provided.  In case the working will intersect groundwater table, a detailed hydro geological study should be undertaken and report furnished.  Necessary permission from Central Ground Water Authority for working below ground water and for pumping of ground water should also be obtained and copy furnished.

18)            Details of first order stream, if any passing through lease area and modification/ diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

19)            Details of rainwater harvesting proposed, if any, in the project should be provided. 

20)            Information on site elevation, working depth, groundwater table etc. should be provided both in AMSL and bgl.  A schematic diagram may also be provided for the same. 

21)            Quantity of solid waste generation to be estimated and details for its disposal and management should be provided.  The quality, volumes and methodology planned for removal and utilisation (preferably concurrently) of top soil should be indicated.  Details of backfilling proposed, if any, should also be given.  It may be clearly indicated that out of the total waste generated during the mine life, how much quantity would be backfilled and how much quantity would be disposed off in the form of external dump (number of dumps, their height, terraces etc. to be brought out).  

22)            The reclamation plan, post mine land use and progressive greenbelt development plan shall be prepared in tabular form (prescribed format) and submitted.  

23)            Impact on local transport infrastructure due to the project should be indicated. Projected increase in truck traffic as a result of the project in the present road network (including those outside the project area) should be worked out, indicating whether it is capable of handling the increased load.  Arrangement for improving the infrastructure, if contemplated (including action to be taken by other agencies such as State Government) should be covered.

24)            Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be included in the EIA report.

25)            Conceptual post mining land use and Reclamation and Rehabilitation of mined out area (with plans and with adequate number of sections) should be given in the EIA report.

26)            Phase-wise plan of greenbelt development, plantation and compensatory afforestation should be charted clearly indicating the area to be covered under plantation and the species to be planted.

27)            Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. Details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules should be incorporated in the EMP.

28)            Measures of socio economic significance and influence to the local community proposed to be provided by project proponent should be indicated.  As far as possible, quantitative dimensions may be given with time frame for implementation. 

29)            Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts which, should inter-alia also include the impact due to change of land use, due to loss of agricultural land and grazing land, if any, occupational health impacts besides other impacts of the projects. 

30)            Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided. 

31)            Details of litigation pending against the project, if any, with direction /order passed by any Court of Law against the project should be given.

32)            The cost of the project (capital cost and recurring cost) as well as the cost towards implementation of EMP should clearly be spelt out.  

 

Besides the above, the below mentioned general points should also be followed:-

a)     A note confirming compliance of the TOR, with cross referencing of the relevant sections / pages of the EIA report should be provided. 

b)    All documents may be properly referenced with index, page numbers and continuous page numbering. 

c)     Where data are presented in the report especially in tables, the period in which the data were collected and the sources should be indicated. 

d)    Where the documents provided are in a language other than English, an English translation should be provided.

e)     The Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of mining projects as prescribed by the Ministry shall also be filled and submitted.

f)      Approved mine plan along with copy of the approval letter for the proposed capacity should also be submitted. 

g)    While preparing the EIA report, the instructions for the proponents and instructions for the consultants issued by MoEF vide O.M. No. J-11013/41/2006-IA.II(I) dated 4th August, 2009, which are available on the website of this Ministry should also be followed.

 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area, (ii) geological maps and sections and (iii) sections of the mine pit and external dumps, if any, clearly showing the land features of the adjoining area. 

After preparing the draft EIA (as per the generic structure prescribed in Appendix-III of the EIA Notification, 2006) covering the above mentioned issues, the proponent will get the public hearing conducted and take further necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the EIA Notification, 2006. 

 

2.23          Limestone (Minor Mineral) Mine of Smt. Sudha Parihar, Village Rundiya, Tehsil-Sojat & District Pali, Rajasthan (Consultant:  R.K. Consultants, Jodhpur) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report. 

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease which fall due in 1995 and enhancement of production of limestone (minor mineral) from 36,025 TPA to 1.0 million TPA and installation of a crusher.  Mine lease area is 917.52 ha.  It was noted that the mine is located at a distance of 48 km from Pali, the identified critically polluted area.  No forestland is involved.  Mine working will be opencast involving drilling and blasting.  Life of the mine is 96 years.  Water table is reported at 70 – 80 m bgl.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  It is estimated that 28 million m3 of waste will be generated during mine life, which will be ultimately backfilled.  Water requirement will be 15 kld, which will be obtained from mine sump water.  No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. 

 

Based on the information furnished and presentation made, the Committee prescribed the following TORs for undertaking detailed EIA study:-

 

1)                 Year-wise production prior to EIA Notification, 2006 coming into force and clearly stating the highest production achieved in any one year prior to 2006.  It may also be categorically informed whether there had been any increase in production after the EIA Notification, 2006 coming into force w.r.t. the highest production achieved prior to 2006. 

2)                 A copy of the document in support of the fact that the proponent is the rightful lessee of the mine should be given. 

3)                 All documents including approved mine plan, EIA and public hearing should be compatible with one another in terms of the mine lease area, production levels, waste generation and its management and mining technology and should be in the name of the lessee. 

4)                 The study area will comprise of 10 km zone around the mine lease from lease periphery and the data contained in the EIA such as waste generation etc should be for the life of the mine / lease period. 

5)                 Land use of the study area delineating forest area, agricultural land, grazing land, wildlife sanctuary and national park, migratory routes of fauna, water bodies, human settlements and other ecological features should be indicated.

6)                 Land use plan of the mine lease area should be prepared to encompass pre-operational, operational and post operational phases and submitted. 

7)                 A confirmation may be adduced, duly authenticated by the competent authority in the State Government to the effect whether the project falls in Aravalli and whether it is covered by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 8.4.2005 in the contempt petition (c) 412/2004 in writ petition 202 of 1995 in the matter of Godavarman vs Union of India.

8)                 Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed), if any, within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable to such projects due to proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas as mentioned above should be obtained from the State Wildlife Department/ Chief Wildlife Warden under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and copy furnished.

9)                 A detailed biological study for the study area [core zone and buffer zone (10 km radius of the periphery of the mine lease)] shall be carried out. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation should be prepared in consultation with State Forest and Wildlife Department and details furnished. Necessary allocation of funds for implementing the same should be made as part of the project cost. 

10)            Impact of change of land use should be given. 

11)            R&R plan / compensation details for the project affected people should be furnished.  While preparing the R&R plan, the National Rehabilitation & Resettlement Policy should be kept in view.  In respect of SCs / STs and other weaker sections, need based sample survey, family-wise, should be undertaken to assess their requirement and action programmes prepared accordingly integrating the sectoral programme of line departments of the State Government. 

12)            One season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna shall be collected and the AAQ data so collected presented date-wise in the EIA and EMP report.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given. 

13)            Air quality modeling should be carried out for prediction of impact of the project on the air quality of the area. It should also take into account the impact of movement of vehicles for transportation of mineral. The details of the model used and input parameters used for modeling should be provided.  The air quality contours may be shown on a location map clearly indicating the location of the site, location of sensitive receptors, if any and the habitation.  The wind roses showing pre-dominant wind direction may also be indicated on the map.

14)            The water requirement for the project, its availability and source to be furnished.  A detailed water balance should also be provided.  Fresh water requirement for the project should be indicated. 

15)            Necessary clearance from the Competent Authority for drawl of requisite quantity of water for the project should be provided. 

16)            Details of water conservation measures proposed to be adopted in the project should be given.

17)            Impact of the project on the water quality both surface and groundwater should be assessed and necessary safeguard measures, if any required should be provided.

18)            Based on actual monitored data, it may clearly be shown whether working will intersect groundwater.  Necessary data and documentation in this regard may be provided.  In case the working will intersect groundwater table, a detailed hydro geological study should be undertaken and report furnished.  Necessary permission from Central Ground Water Authority for working below ground water and for pumping of ground water should also be obtained and copy furnished.

19)            Details of first order stream, if any passing through lease area and modification/ diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

20)            Details of rainwater harvesting proposed, if any, in the project should be provided. 

21)            Information on site elevation, working depth, groundwater table etc. should be provided both in AMSL and bgl.  A schematic diagram may also be provided for the same. 

22)            Quantity of solid waste generation to be estimated and details for its disposal and management should be provided.  The quality, volumes and methodology planned for removal and utilisation (preferably concurrently) of top soil should be indicated.  Details of backfilling proposed, if any, should also be given.  It may be clearly indicated that out of the total waste generated during the mine life, how much quantity would be backfilled and how much quantity would be disposed off in the form of external dump (number of dumps, their height, terraces etc. to be brought out).  

23)            The reclamation plan, post mine land use and progressive greenbelt development plan shall be prepared in tabular form (prescribed format) and submitted.  

24)            Impact on local transport infrastructure due to the project should be indicated. Projected increase in truck traffic as a result of the project in the present road network (including those outside the project area) should be worked out, indicating whether it is capable of handling the increased load.  Arrangement for improving the infrastructure, if contemplated (including action to be taken by other agencies such as State Government) should be covered.

25)            Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be included in the EIA report.

26)            Conceptual post mining land use and Reclamation and Rehabilitation of mined out area (with plans and with adequate number of sections) should be given in the EIA report.

27)            Phase-wise plan of greenbelt development, plantation and compensatory afforestation should be charted clearly indicating the area to be covered under plantation and the species to be planted. The details of plantation already done should be given. 

28)            Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. Details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules should be incorporated in the EMP.

29)            Measures of socio economic significance and influence to the local community proposed to be provided by project proponent should be indicated.  As far as possible, quantitative dimensions may be given with time frame for implementation. 

30)            Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts which, should inter-alia also include the impact due to change of land use, due to loss of agricultural land and grazing land, if any, occupational health impacts besides other impacts of the projects. 

31)            Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided. 

32)            Details of litigation pending against the project, if any, with direction /order passed by any Court of Law against the project should be given.

33)            The cost of the project (capital cost and recurring cost) as well as the cost towards implementation of EMP should clearly be spelt out.  

 

Besides the above, the below mentioned general points should also be followed:-

a)     A note confirming compliance of the TOR, with cross referencing of the relevant sections / pages of the EIA report should be provided. 

b)    All documents may be properly referenced with index, page numbers and continuous page numbering. 

c)     Where data are presented in the report especially in tables, the period in which the data were collected and the sources should be indicated. 

d)    Where the documents provided are in a language other than English, an English translation should be provided.

e)     The Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of mining projects as prescribed by the Ministry shall also be filled and submitted.

f)      Approved mine plan along with copy of the approval letter for the proposed capacity should also be submitted. 

g)    While preparing the EIA report, the instructions for the proponents and instructions for the consultants issued by MoEF vide O.M. No. J-11013/41/2006-IA.II(I) dated 4th August, 2009, which are available on the website of this Ministry should also be followed. 

 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area, (ii) geological maps and sections and (iii) sections of the mine pit and external dumps, if any, clearly showing the land features of the adjoining area. 

After preparing the draft EIA (as per the generic structure prescribed in Appendix-III of the EIA Notification, 2006) covering the above mentioned issues, the proponent will get the public hearing conducted and take further necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the EIA Notification, 2006. 

 

2.24          Limestone (minor mineral) Mine of M/s Sojat Lime Company, near village-Atbara, Tehsil-Sojat, District Pali, Rajasthan (Consultant:  R.K. Consultants, Jodhpur)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report. 

The proposal is for enhancement of production of limestone (minor mineral) from 95,571 TPA to 1.0 million TPA and installation of a crusher.  Mine lease area is 852.59 ha.  It was noted that the mine is located at a distance of 50 km from Pali, the identified critically polluted area.  No forestland is involved.  Mine working will be opencast involving drilling and blasting.  Life of the mine is 84 years.  Water table is reported at 70 – 80 m bgl.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  It is estimated that 28 million m3 of waste will be generated during mine life, which will be ultimately backfilled.  Water requirement will be 15 kld, which will be obtained from mine sump water.  No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. 

 

Based on the information furnished and presentation made, the Committee prescribed the following TORs for undertaking detailed EIA study:-

 

1)                 Year-wise production prior to EIA Notification, 2006 coming into force and clearly stating the highest production achieved in any one year prior to 2006.  It may also be categorically informed whether there had been any increase in production after the EIA Notification, 2006 coming into force w.r.t. the highest production achieved prior to 2006. 

2)                 A copy of the document in support of the fact that the proponent is the rightful lessee of the mine should be given. 

3)                 All documents including approved mine plan, EIA and public hearing should be compatible with one another in terms of the mine lease area, production levels, waste generation and its management and mining technology and should be in the name of the lessee. 

4)                 The study area will comprise of 10 km zone around the mine lease from lease periphery and the data contained in the EIA such as waste generation etc should be for the life of the mine / lease period. 

5)                 Land use of the study area delineating forest area, agricultural land, grazing land, wildlife sanctuary and national park, migratory routes of fauna, water bodies, human settlements and other ecological features should be indicated.

6)                 Land use plan of the mine lease area should be prepared to encompass pre-operational, operational and post operational phases and submitted. 

7)                 A confirmation may be adduced, duly authenticated by the competent authority in the State Government to the effect whether the project falls in Aravalli and whether it is covered by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 8.4.2005 in the contempt petition (c) 412/2004 in writ petition 202 of 1995 in the matter of Godavarman vs Union of India.

8)                 Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed), if any, within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable to such projects due to proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas as mentioned above should be obtained from the State Wildlife Department/ Chief Wildlife Warden under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and copy furnished.

9)                 A detailed biological study for the study area [core zone and buffer zone (10 km radius of the periphery of the mine lease)] shall be carried out. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation should be prepared in consultation with State Forest and Wildlife Department and details furnished. Necessary allocation of funds for implementing the same should be made as part of the project cost. 

10)            Impact of change of land use should be given. 

11)            R&R plan / compensation details for the project affected people should be furnished.  While preparing the R&R plan, the National Rehabilitation & Resettlement Policy should be kept in view.  In respect of SCs / STs and other weaker sections, need based sample survey, family-wise, should be undertaken to assess their requirement and action programmes prepared accordingly integrating the sectoral programme of line departments of the State Government. 

12)            One season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna shall be collected and the AAQ data so collected presented date-wise in the EIA and EMP report.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given. 

13)            Air quality modeling should be carried out for prediction of impact of the project on the air quality of the area. It should also take into account the impact of movement of vehicles for transportation of mineral. The details of the model used and input parameters used for modeling should be provided.  The air quality contours may be shown on a location map clearly indicating the location of the site, location of sensitive receptors, if any and the habitation.  The wind roses showing pre-dominant wind direction may also be indicated on the map.

14)            The water requirement for the project, its availability and source to be furnished.  A detailed water balance should also be provided.  Fresh water requirement for the project should be indicated. 

15)            Necessary clearance from the Competent Authority for drawl of requisite quantity of water for the project should be provided. 

16)            Details of water conservation measures proposed to be adopted in the project should be given.

17)            Impact of the project on the water quality both surface and groundwater should be assessed and necessary safeguard measures, if any required should be provided.

18)            Based on actual monitored data, it may clearly be shown whether working will intersect groundwater.  Necessary data and documentation in this regard may be provided.  In case the working will intersect groundwater table, a detailed hydro geological study should be undertaken and report furnished.  Necessary permission from Central Ground Water Authority for working below ground water and for pumping of ground water should also be obtained and copy furnished.

19)            Details of first order stream, if any passing through lease area and modification/ diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

20)            Details of rainwater harvesting proposed, if any, in the project should be provided. 

21)            Information on site elevation, working depth, groundwater table etc. should be provided both in AMSL and bgl.  A schematic diagram may also be provided for the same. 

22)            Quantity of solid waste generation to be estimated and details for its disposal and management should be provided.  The quality, volumes and methodology planned for removal and utilisation (preferably concurrently) of top soil should be indicated.  Details of backfilling proposed, if any, should also be given.  It may be clearly indicated that out of the total waste generated during the mine life, how much quantity would be backfilled and how much quantity would be disposed off in the form of external dump (number of dumps, their height, terraces etc. to be brought out).  

23)            The reclamation plan, post mine land use and progressive greenbelt development plan shall be prepared in tabular form (prescribed format) and submitted.  

24)            Impact on local transport infrastructure due to the project should be indicated. Projected increase in truck traffic as a result of the project in the present road network (including those outside the project area) should be worked out, indicating whether it is capable of handling the increased load.  Arrangement for improving the infrastructure, if contemplated (including action to be taken by other agencies such as State Government) should be covered.

25)            Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be included in the EIA report.

26)            Conceptual post mining land use and Reclamation and Rehabilitation of mined out area (with plans and with adequate number of sections) should be given in the EIA report.

27)            Phase-wise plan of greenbelt development, plantation and compensatory afforestation should be charted clearly indicating the area to be covered under plantation and the species to be planted. The details of plantation already done should be given. 

28)            Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. Details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules should be incorporated in the EMP.

29)            Measures of socio economic significance and influence to the local community proposed to be provided by project proponent should be indicated.  As far as possible, quantitative dimensions may be given with time frame for implementation. 

30)            Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts which, should inter-alia also include the impact due to change of land use, due to loss of agricultural land and grazing land, if any, occupational health impacts besides other impacts of the projects. 

31)            Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided. 

32)            Details of litigation pending against the project, if any, with direction /order passed by any Court of Law against the project should be given.

33)            The cost of the project (capital cost and recurring cost) as well as the cost towards implementation of EMP should clearly be spelt out.  

 

Besides the above, the below mentioned general points should also be followed:-

a)     A note confirming compliance of the TOR, with cross referencing of the relevant sections / pages of the EIA report should be provided. 

b)    All documents may be properly referenced with index, page numbers and continuous page numbering. 

c)     Where data are presented in the report especially in tables, the period in which the data were collected and the sources should be indicated. 

d)    Where the documents provided are in a language other than English, an English translation should be provided.

e)     The Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of mining projects as prescribed by the Ministry shall also be filled and submitted.

f)      Approved mine plan along with copy of the approval letter for the proposed capacity should also be submitted. 

g)    While preparing the EIA report, the instructions for the proponents and instructions for the consultants issued by MoEF vide O.M. No. J-11013/41/2006-IA.II(I) dated 4th August, 2009, which are available on the website of this Ministry should also be followed. 

 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area, (ii) geological maps and sections and (iii) sections of the mine pit and external dumps, if any, clearly showing the land features of the adjoining area. 

After preparing the draft EIA (as per the generic structure prescribed in Appendix-III of the EIA Notification, 2006) covering the above mentioned issues, the proponent will get the public hearing conducted and take further necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the EIA Notification, 2006. 

 

2.25 Yanakandla Limestone Mine of M/s Shri Jayajothi Cements Ltd. located at village Unakandla Tathapadu, Meerapuram, District Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh (Consultants: Environment, Mine Plan and Resource Evaluation Solutions, Chennai & Creative Engineers & Consultants, Chennai)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for opening of a new mine for production of 3.0 million TPA of limestone for use in their cement plant at a distance of about 3 km from the mine.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 13.1.2010.  Public hearing was held on 8.9.2010.  The mine lease area is 343.22 ha.  No forestland is involved.  No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease.  However, Yaganteshwaraswami Temple is located at a distance of 1.25 km from the mine lease.  The proponent have submitted a letter no. RC no. 44/2010 dated 6.12.2010 from Department of Archaeology and Museum, Anantpur, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh conveying their NOC for mining activities in the said mine as it is located beyond 400 m from the temple.  Mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Life of the mine is 20 years.  Mineral transportation will be by dumpers up to the crusher and thereafter by conveyor.  Water requirement is 75 kld, which will be obtained from G&SS / SRB Canal for which they have obtained permission from State Irrigation and CAD Department.  Ultimate working depth will be 268 mRL.  The groundwater table is reported to be at 25 m bgl during post monsoon in the core zone.  Mine working is likely to intersect groundwater table.  It was stated by the proponent that the OB generated will be dumped in the form of external OB dump during the first 10 years and thereafter it will be concurrently backfilled.  The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

The Committee also took note of the legal notices dated 25.8.2010 and 20.9.2010 received from Shri M. Lakshmi Reddy. The each of the issues raised therein and the response of the proponent in this regard was also considered by the Committee.  The Committee observed that the issue relating to the proximity to the temple does not hold ground since the proponent has obtained NOC from the State Department of Archaeological and Museums, Andhra Pradesh.  It was also stated by the proponent that the mine lease area is neither used for grazing nor there are any houses constructed on the hill block of the un-surveyed hill.  Further, the mining will be carried out as per the approved mine plan.  The proponent have already responded to the complainant on the issues raised in the complaint.  Taking note of the whole matter and based on the clarifications given by the proponent, the Committee observed that the issues raised by the complainant do not merit any consideration. 

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to following conditions:-

(i)                Necessary prior permission from the Central Ground Water Authority shall be obtained for working of the mine below water table based on detailed hydro-geological study so as to ensure that the water table is not adversely affected due to the project. 

(ii)              Although, temple is located at 1.25 km from the mine and that the State Department of Archaeology and Museums had granted their NOC, it shall, however, be ensured that there is no damage to the temple or any other built up structure including houses in the nearby area due to blasting.  The quantity of charge to be used for blasting shall be determined based on peak particle velocity. 

 

2.26 Bauxite Mine of M/s Vyaghreshwar Mineral Industrial Producer’s located at village Mahal-Mirya and Panchganu, District Raigad, Maharashtra (Consultant: Yogiraja Industrial Consultant, Pune) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for renewal of mine lease which became due in 1998 and enhancement of production of bauxite to 1,50,000 TPA.  The mine lease area is 79.981 ha.  Mine working will be opencast semi-mechanised.  No drilling and blasting is involved in the project.  Water requirement is 45 kld.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 12.1.2007.  Public hearing has been held on 10.10.2008.  It was noted that the data contained in the EIA has not been collected by the consultant who has prepared the EIA report. It has been stated in the EIA report that the EIA is prepared by the consultant on the basis of the data and information supplied by the client company.  It was also noted that the ambient air quality monitoring stations have neither been selected properly keeping in view the pre-dominant downwind direction nor proper geographical coverage has been given to the study area.  The report was also found to be deficient in terms of biological study. The quality of maps were also found to be bad and illegible.  Drainage map of the area was also not provided.  There was neither the toposheet nor the satellite imagery of the area. The EIA report was found to be deficient on many counts. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that the there is no court case pending against the project.

Based on the presentation made and discussions held, the Committee sought information as follows:-

(i)                Year wise production from the mine since 1994 i.e. the EIA Notification, 1994 coming into force till date, and the highest production achieved in any financial year prior to 1994 should be tabulated. 

(ii)              Filled in Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of mining project as prescribed by MoEF should be submitted.

(iii)            The source of data and its authenticity as contained in the EIA report should be given. It may clearly be indicated whether the laboratory, where data analysis was carried out, was an approved lab under EP Act or any other accreditation agency.   

(iv)            The drainage map of the area with special emphasis of the catchment of the Amba river and any other river in the area should be furnished. 

(v)              Land use of the study area separately for core and buffer zone should be indicated.  It may be categorically stated whether any forest land is involved in the project. 

(vi)            Ambient air quality monitoring should be carried out afresh at least for one month continuously after properly selecting the air quality stations covering the entire study area keeping in view the pre-dominant downwind direction and other sensitive receptors / habitation in the area. There should be at least one monitoring station in the core zone and one monitoring station in the pre dominant downwind direction within 500 m of the mine lease. 

(vii)          The source of water for the project should be indicated. Necessary permission from the Competent Authority for drawl of requisite quantity of water should be furnished. 

(viii)        A detailed biological study should be carried out and details furnished. 

(ix)            Information on site elevation, present working depth, ultimate working depth, groundwater table and its variation both in bgl and AMSL should be given. 

(x)              Details of waste generation and its management should be given. 

(xi)            Action plan to address the issues raised during the public hearing should be furnished.

(xii)          Details of greenbelt and plantation already carried out and to be carried out till conceptual stage should be given. 

(xiii)        Details of post mine land use in the prescribed format should be given. 

(xiv)        Cost of project and cost of EMP should be given. In addition, if any CSR activities are proposed, details about the same along with financial components should be given. 

It was decided that the proponent will submit the response / information on the above-mentioned points by 30th March, 2011 and simultaneously circulate the same to the Members of the EAC and thereafter the proposal will be considered by the EAC during its meeting to be held in April, 2011.

  

2.27 Putulipani Iron Ore Mine of M/s Gandhamardhan Sponge Industries (P) Ltd., District Keonjhar, Orissa (Consultant: Envomin Consultant Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of production of iron ore to 1.425 million TPA.  The earlier clearance for 0.36 million TPA was granted on 24.8.2007.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.10.2008.  Public hearing has been held on 24.5.2010.  It is a violation case as the proponent has increased production during 2007-08 and 2008-09 without obtaining the requisite environmental clearance.  The mine lease area is 100.1632 ha, which include 82.2009 ha of forestland.  Forestry clearance has been obtained for 66.2661 ha and the remaining 15.9348 ha will be safety zone.  Mine working will be opencast mechanized.  Life of mine is 9 years.  Ultimate working depth will be 620 m AMSL. Groundwater table is at 586 m AMSL. Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.Water requirement is 87 kld, which will be obtained from groundwater.  It is estimated that 23,91,360 m3 of waste will be generated during mine life. The baseline AAQ data showed the levels within permissible limits.  It was also noted that the site specific Wildlife Conservation Plan for the said mine has been approved by the Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) vide letter no. 10899 dated 15.12.2010 for a total financial outlay of Rs 94 lakhs. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance.

 

2.28 Sandstone Mine Project of M/s Thekedar Anand Lal Mahajan, village Gubrenda, Tehsil Karauli, District Karauli, Rajasthan (EC) 

 

          The consideration of the proposal was deferred as the project proponent did not attend the meeting. 

 

2.29          Malanjhand Copper Project of M/s Hindustan Copper Ltd., Village Malanjhand, Tehsil Baihar, District Madhya Pradesh (Consultant: Senes Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Noida) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with detailed project report. 

 

The proposal is for enhancement of ore production and milling capacity from 2.0 million TPA to 5.0 million TPA.  The proposal is for an underground mine, encompassing three contiguous leases, two of which together constituted the exhausting single open cast mine, at the bottom of which, the underground mine will be opened. The underground mine would spread out in to the third lease as it goes deeper. The Project would also have a larger Mineral Processing Plant of 5.0 million TPA capacity.

 

It was, however, noted by the Committee that under the 2006 Notification, separate  Applications would be required for each of the distinct individual mining leases, though the U.G. Mine and Beneficiation Plant are duly integrated and serve the three leases. Also, the proposal, as submitted, was rather ambiguous in its objective and intent. A succinct Prefeasibility Report was also required to be cast out of the documents submitted. This was explained during the meeting. In view of the above, it was decided that the proponent should submit the revised documents bringing clarity into the project proposal and thereafter, the proposal will be considered in the next meeting to be held in February, 2011.

 

2.30   Silica Sand Mining (ML no. 3/91) of M/s Bundi Silica Supply Company located at village Barodiya, Tehsil Hindoli, District Kota, Rajasthan (Consultant: Ramji Mine Envirotech, Jaipur) 

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report.

The proposal is for enhancement of production of silica sand from 0.1 million TPA to 0.3 million TPA.  The earlier environmental clearance was granted on 31.7.2006.  Mine lease area is 189.011 ha, spread over two blocks, however, as per the rider agreement the area has been limited to 59.511 ha.  Accordingly, the Committee has also considered the proposal taking the mine lease area as 59.511 ha.  Besides, mining there will also be a washing plant.  No forestland is involved within 59.511 ha.  Life of mine is 24 years.  Mine working will be opencast semi-mechanised involving drilling and blasting.  It has been stated that the mine lease area does not fall in Aravali.  Ultimate working depth will be 250 mRL.  Groundwater table is reported to vary between 220 – 230 mRL.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  The water requirement for the project is 40 kld. 

 

Based on the information furnished and presentation made, the Committee prescribed the following TORs for undertaking detailed EIA study:-

 

1)                 Status of compliance of the earlier EC conditions along with supporting documents and photographs should be submitted. 

2)                 Year-wise production details since 1994 onwards should be given clearly stating the highest production achieved in any one year prior to 1994.  It may also be categorically informed whether there had been any increase in production after the EIA Notification, 1994 coming into force w.r.t. the highest production achieved prior to 1994. 

3)                 A copy of the document in support of the fact that the proponent is the rightful lessee of the mine should be given. 

4)                 All documents including approved mine plan, EIA and public hearing should be compatible with one another in terms of the mine lease area, production levels, waste generation and its management and mining technology and should be in the name of the lessee. 

5)                 The study area will comprise of 10 km zone around the mine lease from lease periphery and the data contained in the EIA such as waste generation etc should be for the life of the mine / lease period. 

6)                 Land use of the study area delineating forest area, agricultural land, grazing land, wildlife sanctuary and national park, migratory routes of fauna, water bodies, human settlements and other ecological features should be indicated.

7)                 Land use plan of the mine lease area should be prepared to encompass pre-operational, operational and post operational phases and submitted. 

8)                 A confirmation may be adduced, duly authenticated by the competent authority in the State Government to the effect whether the project falls in Aravalli and whether it is covered by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 8.4.2005 in the contempt petition (c) 412/2004 in writ petition 202 of 1995 in the matter of Godavarman vs Union of India.

9)                 Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed), if any, within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable to such projects due to proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas as mentioned above should be obtained from the State Wildlife Department/ Chief Wildlife Warden under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and copy furnished.

10)            A detailed biological study for the study area [core zone and buffer zone (10 km radius of the periphery of the mine lease)] shall be carried out. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation should be prepared in consultation with State Forest and Wildlife Department and details furnished. Necessary allocation of funds for implementing the same should be made as part of the project cost. 

11)            Impact of change of land use should be given. 

12)            R&R plan / compensation details for the project affected people should be furnished.  While preparing the R&R plan, the National Rehabilitation & Resettlement Policy should be kept in view.  In respect of SCs / STs and other weaker sections, need based sample survey, family-wise, should be undertaken to assess their requirement and action programmes prepared accordingly integrating the sectoral programme of line departments of the State Government. 

13)            Analysis of sand for slime content should be carried out and results furnished. 

14)            One season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna shall be collected and the AAQ data so collected presented date-wise in the EIA and EMP report.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given. 

15)            Air quality modeling should be carried out for prediction of impact of the project on the air quality of the area. It should also take into account the impact of movement of vehicles for transportation of mineral. The details of the model used and input parameters used for modeling should be provided.  The air quality contours may be shown on a location map clearly indicating the location of the site, location of sensitive receptors, if any and the habitation.  The wind roses showing pre-dominant wind direction may also be indicated on the map.

16)            The water requirement for the project, its availability and source to be furnished.  A detailed water balance should also be provided.  Fresh water requirement for the project should be indicated. 

17)            Necessary clearance from the Competent Authority for drawl of requisite quantity of water for the project should be provided. 

18)            Details of water conservation measures proposed to be adopted in the project should be given.

19)            Impact of the project on the water quality both surface and groundwater should be assessed and necessary safeguard measures, if any required should be provided.

20)            Based on actual monitored data, it may clearly be shown whether working will intersect groundwater.  Necessary data and documentation in this regard may be provided.  In case the working will intersect groundwater table, a detailed hydro geological study should be undertaken and report furnished.  Necessary permission from Central Ground Water Authority for working below ground water and for pumping of ground water should also be obtained and copy furnished.

21)            Time series data of water table in the bore wells in the study area (separately for core and buffer zone) should be given. 

22)            Details of first order stream, if any passing through lease area and modification/ diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

23)            Details of rainwater harvesting proposed, if any, in the project should be provided. 

24)            Information on site elevation, working depth, groundwater table etc. should be provided both in AMSL and bgl.  A schematic diagram may also be provided for the same. 

25)            Quantity of solid waste generation to be estimated and details for its disposal and management should be provided.  The quality, volumes and methodology planned for removal and utilisation (preferably concurrently) of top soil should be indicated.  Details of backfilling proposed, if any, should also be given.  It may be clearly indicated that out of the total waste generated during the mine life, how much quantity would be backfilled and how much quantity would be disposed off in the form of external dump (number of dumps, their height, terraces etc. to be brought out).  

26)            The reclamation plan, post mine land use and progressive greenbelt development plan shall be prepared in tabular form (prescribed format) and submitted.  

27)            Impact on local transport infrastructure due to the project should be indicated. Projected increase in truck traffic as a result of the project in the present road network (including those outside the project area) should be worked out, indicating whether it is capable of handling the increased load.  Arrangement for improving the infrastructure, if contemplated (including action to be taken by other agencies such as State Government) should be covered.

28)            Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be included in the EIA report.

29)            Conceptual post mining land use and Reclamation and Rehabilitation of mined out area (with plans and with adequate number of sections) should be given in the EIA report.

30)            Phase-wise plan of greenbelt development, plantation and compensatory afforestation should be charted clearly indicating the area to be covered under plantation and the species to be planted. The details of plantation already done should be given. 

31)            Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. Details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules should be incorporated in the EMP.

32)            Measures of socio economic significance and influence to the local community proposed to be provided by project proponent should be indicated.  As far as possible, quantitative dimensions may be given with time frame for implementation. 

33)            Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts which, should inter-alia also include the impact due to change of land use, due to loss of agricultural land and grazing land, if any, occupational health impacts besides other impacts of the projects. 

34)            Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided. 

35)            Details of litigation pending against the project, if any, with direction /order passed by any Court of Law against the project should be given.

36)            The cost of the project (capital cost and recurring cost) as well as the cost towards implementation of EMP should clearly be spelt out.  

 

Besides the above, the below mentioned general points should also be followed:-

a)     A note confirming compliance of the TOR, with cross referencing of the relevant sections / pages of the EIA report should be provided. 

b)    All documents may be properly referenced with index, page numbers and continuous page numbering. 

c)     Where data are presented in the report especially in tables, the period in which the data were collected and the sources should be indicated. 

d)    Where the documents provided are in a language other than English, an English translation should be provided.

e)     The Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of mining projects as prescribed by the Ministry shall also be filled and submitted.

f)      Approved mine plan along with copy of the approval letter for the proposed capacity should also be submitted. 

g)    While preparing the EIA report, the instructions for the proponents and instructions for the consultants issued by MoEF vide O.M. No. J-11013/41/2006-IA.II(I) dated 4th August, 2009, which are available on the website of this Ministry should also be followed. 

 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area, (ii) geological maps and sections and (iii) sections of the mine pit and external dumps, if any, clearly showing the land features of the adjoining area. 

After preparing the draft EIA (as per the generic structure prescribed in Appendix-III of the EIA Notification, 2006) covering the above mentioned issues, the proponent will get the public hearing conducted and take further necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the EIA Notification, 2006. 

 

2.31   Mill Stone Mining Project of M/s Surendra Kumar Sharma, village Tali Hill, District Karauli, Rajasthan (Consultant: Ramji Mine Envirotech, Jaipur)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report. 

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease and enhancement of production of sand stone from 922.925 TPA to 80,000 TPA.  The mine lease area is 77.78 ha.  No forestland is involved.  It was observed that prima facie, the site is located in the catchment of Jagar Taal. In view of the likely adverse impacts of the proposed mining on the water recharging of the Jagar Taal, the Committee declined to prescribe the TORs and rejected the proposal. 

 

2.32       Collection of Minor Mineral from Nihal river of M/s Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation, Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi) 

 

        The proponent requested the Committee for deferment of the said proposal as they are yet to receive NOC from Chief Wildlife Warden.  The Committee agreed to the request of the project proponent. 

 

2.33       Collection of Minor Mineral from Sharda river of M/s Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation, Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi)

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on November 24-26, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified that no National Park / Sanctuary falls within 10 km of the mine lease.  An authenticated map along with NOC from PCCF (Wildlife) has been submitted in this regard.  The list of flora and fauna was also submitted.  It was stated that the forest working plan, being implemented by State Forest Department include protection of wildlife and this would be duly taken care of while picking up of reta, bajri and sand.  It was stated that the mining in Uttarakhand has been carried out since British time; and since 2003 to 2008, all the mining activity in the forest area has been carried out by Uttaranchal Van Vikas Nigam.  No significant adverse impact is anticipated on river course.  The quantity of mineral to be removed has been fixed based on replenishment rate.  The issues raised during public hearing as also raised by the Committee were also clarified.  It was also stated by the proponent that although the lease has been granted to them in perpetuity, however, since the forestry clearance is for a period of 10 years, the environmental clearance may also be granted for a maximum period of 10 years, to make it co-terminus with the forestry clearance.  

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance for a period of 10 years or till the forestry clearance whichever is earlier, subject to following condition:

(i)                Wherever deployment of labour attracts the Mines Act, the provision thereof shall be strictly followed. 

 

2.34       Collection of Minor Mineral from Kirora Nallah river of M/s Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation, Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi) 

 

        The proponent requested the Committee for deferment of the said proposal as they are yet to receive NOC from Chief Wildlife Warden.  The Committee agreed to the request of the project proponent. 

 

2.35       Collection of Minor Mineral from Kosi river of M/s Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation, Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi) 

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on November 24-26, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified that Corbet National Park is located within the buffer zone of the mine lease. An authenticated map along with NOC from PCCF (Wildlife) has been submitted in this regard.  The list of flora and fauna was also submitted.  It was stated that the forest working plan, being implemented by State Forest Department include protection of wildlife and this would be duly taken care of while picking up of reta, bajri and sand.    It was stated that the mining in Uttarakhand has been carried out since British time; and since 2003 to 2008, all the mining activity in the forest area has been carried out by Uttaranchal Van Vikas Nigam.  No significant adverse impact is anticipated on river course. The quantity of mineral to be removed has been fixed based on replenishment rate. The issues raised during public hearing as also raised by the Committee were also clarified. It was also stated by the proponent that although the lease has been granted to them in perpetuity, however, since the forestry clearance is for a period of 10 years, the environmental clearance may also be granted for a maximum period of 10 years to make it co-terminus with the forestry clearance.  

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance for a period of 10 years or till the forestry clearance whichever is earlier subject to following condition:

(i)                Wherever deployment of labour attracts the Mines Act, the provision thereof shall be strictly followed. 

 

2.36       Collection of Minor Mineral from Kailash Nandhor river of M/s Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation, Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi)

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on November 24-26, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified that no National Park / Sanctuary falls within 10 km of the mine lease.  An authenticated map along with NOC from PCCF (Wildlife) has been submitted in this regard.  It was noted that the Chief Wildlife Warden in his remarks on the authenticated map have stated that mining may not be allowed north of Chorgallia.  The list of flora and fauna was also submitted.  It was stated that the forest working plan, being implemented by State Forest Department include protection of wildlife and this would be duly taken care of while picking up of reta, bajri and sand.  It was stated that the mining in Uttarakhand has been carried out since British time and since 2003 to 2008 all the mining activity in the forest area has been carried out by Uttaranchal Van Vikas Nigam.  No significant adverse impact is anticipated on river course.  The quantity of mineral to be removed has been fixed based on replenishment rate.  The issues raised during public hearing as also raised by the Committee were also clarified.  It was also stated by the proponent that although the lease has been granted to them in perpetuity, however, since the forestry clearance is for a period of 10 years, the environmental clearance may also be granted for a maximum period of 10 years to make it co-terminus with the forestry clearance.  

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance for a period of 10 years or till the forestry clearance whichever is earlier subject to following condition:

(i)                Wherever deployment of labour attracts the Mines Act, the provision thereof shall be strictly followed. 

(ii)              No mining will be carried out north of Chorgallia in accordance with the recommendations of PCCF (Wildlife). 

 

2.37       Collection of Minor Mineral from Upper Nandhor river of M/s Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation, Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi)

 

        The proponent requested the Committee for deferment of the said proposal as they are yet to receive NOC from Chief Wildlife Warden.  The Committee agreed to the request of the project proponent.

 

2.38       Collection of Minor Mineral from Dabka river of M/s          Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation, Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi)  

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on November 24-26, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified that no National Park / Sanctuary falls within 10 km of the mine lease, however, Jim Corbett National Park is reported at 10.7 km.  An authenticated map along with NOC from PCCF (Wildlife) has been submitted in this regard.  The list of flora and fauna was also submitted. It was stated that the forest working plan, being implemented by State Forest Department include protection of wildlife and this would be duly taken care of while picking up of reta, bajri and sand.  It was stated that the mining in Uttarakhand has been carried out since British time and since 2003 to 2008 all the mining activity in the forest area has been carried out by Uttaranchal Van Vikas Nigam.  No significant adverse impact is anticipated on river course.  The quantity of mineral to be removed has been fixed based on replenishment rate.  The issues raised during public hearing as also raised by the Committee were also clarified.  It was also stated by the proponent that although the lease has been granted to them in perpetuity, however, since the forestry clearance is for a period of 10 years, the environmental clearance may also be granted for a maximum period of 10 years to make it co-terminus with the forestry clearance.  

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance for a period of 10 years or till the forestry clearance whichever is earlier subject to following condition:

(i)                Wherever deployment of labour attracts the Mines Act, the provision thereof shall be strictly followed. 

 

 

2.39       Collection of Minor Mineral from Gola river of M/s Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation, Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi) 

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on November 24-26, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified that no National Park / Sanctuary falls within 10 km of the mine lease.  An authenticated map along with NOC from PCCF (Wildlife) has been submitted in this regard.  The list of flora and fauna was also submitted.  It was stated that the forest working plan, being implemented by State Forest Department include protection of wildlife and this would be duly taken care of while picking up of reta, bajri and sand.  It was stated that the mining in Uttarakhand has been carried out since British time and since 2003 to 2008 all the mining activity in the forest area has been carried out by Uttaranchal Van Vikas Nigam.  No significant adverse impact is anticipated on river course.  The quantity of mineral to be removed has been fixed based on replenishment rate.  The issues raised during public hearing as also raised by the Committee were also clarified.  It was also stated by the proponent that although the lease has been granted to them in perpetuity, however, since the forestry clearance is for a period of 10 years, the environmental clearance may also be granted for a maximum period of 10 years to make it co-terminus with the forestry clearance.  

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance for a period of 10 years or till the forestry clearance whichever is earlier subject to following condition:

(i)                Wherever deployment of labour attracts the Mines Act, the provision thereof shall be strictly followed. 

 

2.40       Collection of minor mineral from Jakhan-1 River of M/s Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation,          Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi)

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on December 22-24, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified that no National Park / Sanctuary falls within 10 km of the mine lease.  It was, however, stated that Rajaji National Park is located at 12.3 km from mine lease.  An authenticated map along with NOC from PCCF (Wildlife) has been submitted in this regard.  The list of flora and fauna was also submitted.  It was stated that the forest working plan, being implemented by State Forest Department include protection of wildlife and this would be duly taken care of while picking up of reta, bajri and sand.  It was stated that the mining in Uttarakhand has been carried out since British time and since 2003 to 2008 all the mining activity in the forest area has been carried out by Uttaranchal Van Vikas Nigam.  No significant adverse impact is anticipated on river course.  The quantity of mineral to be removed has been fixed based on replenishment rate.  The issues raised during public hearing as also raised by the Committee were also clarified.  It was also stated by the proponent that although the lease has been granted to them in perpetuity, however, since the forestry clearance is for a period of 10 years, the environmental clearance may also be granted for a maximum period of 10 years to make it co-terminus with the forestry clearance.  

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance for a period of 10 years or till the forestry clearance whichever is earlier subject to following condition:

(i)                Wherever deployment of labour attracts the Mines Act, the provision thereof shall be strictly followed. 

 

2.41       Collection of minor mineral from Jakhan-2 River of M/s Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation, Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi)

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on December 22-24, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified that Rajaji National Park is located at a distance of 7.42 km from the mine lease.  An authenticated map along with NOC from PCCF (Wildlife) has been submitted in this regard.  The list of flora and fauna was also submitted.  It was stated that the forest working plan, being implemented by State Forest Department include protection of wildlife and this would be duly taken care of while picking up of reta, bajri and sand.  It was stated that the mining in Uttarakhand has been carried out since British time and since 2003 to 2008 all the mining activity in the forest area has been carried out by Uttaranchal Van Vikas Nigam.  No significant adverse impact is anticipated on river course.  The quantity of mineral to be removed has been fixed based on replenishment rate.  The issues raised during public hearing as also raised by the Committee were also clarified.  It was also stated by the proponent that although the lease has been granted to them in perpetuity, however, since the forestry clearance is for a period of 10 years, the environmental clearance may also be granted for a maximum period of 10 years to make it co-terminus with the forestry clearance.  

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance for a period of 10 years or till the forestry clearance whichever is earlier subject to following condition:

(i)                Wherever deployment of labour attracts the Mines Act, the provision thereof shall be strictly followed. 

 

 

 

2.42       Collection of minor mineral from Song-3 River of M/s Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation,          Uttarakhand (Consultant: Grass Roots Research and Creation India (P) Ltd., New Delhi)

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on December 22-24, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was stated that Rajaji National Park is at a distance of 1.0 km towards south west from the mine lease.  An authenticated map along with NOC from PCCF (Wildlife) has been submitted in this regard.  However, from the map it appears that the boundary of the Rajaji National Park is just abutting the mine lease boundary.  The Committee also took note of the comments of PCCF (Wildlife) on the authenticated map wherein it has been stated that only the upper portion of the lot can be allowed for mining.  Accordingly, the Committee was of the view that the mining should be restricted to only upper half of the mine lease on the northern side such that there is at least one km distance between the mine lease and the closest boundary of the Rajaji National Park.  The list of flora and fauna was also submitted.  It was stated that the forest working plan, being implemented by State Forest Department include protection of wildlife and this would be duly taken care of while picking up of reta, bajri and sand.  It was stated that the mining in Uttarakhand has been carried out since British time and since 2003 to 2008 all the mining activity in the forest area has been carried out by Uttaranchal Van Vikas Nigam.  No significant adverse impact is anticipated on river course.  The quantity of mineral to be removed has been fixed based on replenishment rate.  The issues raised during public hearing as also raised by the Committee were also clarified.  It was also stated by the proponent that although the lease has been granted to them in perpetuity, however, since the forestry clearance is for a period of 10 years, the environmental clearance may also be granted for a maximum period of 10 years to make it co-terminus with the forestry clearance.  

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance for a period of 10 years or till the forestry clearance whichever is earlier subject to following condition:

(i)                Wherever deployment of labour attracts the Mines Act, the provision thereof shall be strictly followed. 

(ii)              The mine working shall be restricted to only the upper portion of the mine lease on the northern side in such a manner that there is at least 1.0 km distance between the closest boundary of the Rajaji National Park and the working area of the mine lease. 

Next Meeting:

It was decided that the next meeting will be held on February 23 -25, 2011. 

               The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.

*********


Annexure

List of Participants

 

1.                 Shri Mukunda Shenoy Nagar      -     Chairman

2.       Dr. S. Subramaniyan      -     Member

3.       Shri K.S. Anandan     -     Member

4.       Shri Ranjan Sahai     -     Member

5.       Dr. Tushar Kant Joshi      -     Member

6.     Prof. C.K. Varshney     -     Member

7.       Shri Vinay Mahajan     -     Member

8.       Shri Mihir Moitra     -     Member  

9.       Shri Sunil Peshin     -     Member

10.     Shri T.S. Srinivasamurthy, Director (Env),     -     Invitee                          Govt. of Tamilnadu     (For Indian Rare Earth Project)

11.     Dr. S.K. Aggarwal, Director     -     Member Secretary

12.     Dr. Satish C. Garkoti, Director

13.     Shri Om Prakash, Dy. Director

14.      Representative of M/s JSL Ltd.

15.      Representative of M/s Hargovind Pandya & Others

16.      Representative of M/s Serajuddin & Co.

17.      Representative of M/s Jindal Saw Ltd

18.      Representative of M/s Rungta Mines Ltd.

19.      Representative of M/s Jindal Steel & Power Ltd.

20.      Representative of M/s Stone International Pvt. Ltd.

21.      Representative of M/s Steel Authority of India

22.      Representative of M/s Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd.

23.      Representative of M/s Mala Roy & others

24.      Representative of M/s Indrani Patnaik

25.      Representative of M/s S.V. Srinivasulu  

26.     Representative of M/s Laupada Iron Ore Mines

27.      Representative of M/s Indian Rare Earths Ltd.

28.      Representative of M/s Agarwal Marble Craft Pvt. Ltd

29.      Representative of M/s Radha Raman Minerals

30.      Representative of Smt. Sudha Parihar

31.      Representative of M/s Sojat Lime Company

32.      Representative of M/s Shri Jayajothi Cements Ltd.

33.      Representative of M/s Vyaghreshwar Mineral Industrial Producer’s

34.      Representative of M/s Gandhamardhan Sponge Industries (P) Ltd.

35.      Representative of M/s Hindustan Copper Ltd.

36. Representative of M/s Surendra Kumar Sharma

37. Representative of M/s Uttaranchal Forest Development Corporation

********

 

 

 

 

Untitled Page