MINUTES OF
41st EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (EAC) (THERMAL & COAL MINING)
MEETING HELD ON 23rd-24th JANUARY 2012 IN PARYAVARAN BHAWAN, CGO COMPLEX, LODI ROAD,
NEW DELHI.
The 41st
meeting of the reconstituted
EAC (T &C) was held on 23rd-24th January 2012 in SCOPE Convention
Centre, SCOPE Complex,
The minutes of the 39th
meeting of EAC (T&C) held on 3rd-4th January 2012 and was confirmed.
The agenda items were
taken up as given below:
1. Khappa
and Extn. UGP (0.3 MTPA in an ML area of 649.46 ha) of M/s
Khappa Coal Company Pvt. Ltd., located in Tehsil Saoner, dist.
The proponent
made a presentation. It was informed that the coalmine has been allotted to JV
consisting of two companies – Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. and M/s Dalmia Cement
(Bharat) Ltd. on a 67%:33% sharing basis. It was informed that the coal would be used in the linked 1.5 MTPA Sponge
Iron Plant of M/s Sun flag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. and in the Cement Plant of
M/s Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. The proposal is for opening a new
underground coalmine – Khappa and Extension Underground Coalmine project of 0.3
MTPA production capacity in an ML area of 649.46 ha, of which 590 ha falls in Khappa Block and 59.38 ha fall in Khappa
extension block. Life of the mine is 76 years. Depth of the mine
is 60m-250m. A railway line passes through the ML. River Kolar passes through
the ML which is a major tributary of River Kanhan. A few
seasonal streams originate along the northern and eastern sector of the block
and flow southerly to meet River Kolar. Surface elevation
of the river is 284mRL and that of mine entry is 293mRL. Besides, mine entry is
at a distance of 250m from the river and hence mine inundation appears unlikely.
The block is highly faulted with 14 geological faults. Grade of coal is B-G.
Underground mining would be by Bord and Pillar method involving depillaring. The requirement of stowing would arise from 10th
year. It
was informed that only 22 MT of coal would be extracted, of which 16MT is from
development. No depillaring would be undertaken beneath river, habitation,
nalas, etc. It was informed that monitoring of ground movement
(subsidence, slope and strains) during depillaring of the proposed panels would
be carried out. Stowing operation using suitable and available material would
be practiced for conducting depillaring operation to control subsidence. It
was stated that after studying the mine working for an initial few years and
the mine gets stabilised, the capacity of mine may be increased for which
details would be submitted in a separate application for approval of MOEF.
It was informed that of the total ML area of 649.46 ha, 12.86 ha area
is covered by Zudipi forest land, 147.54 ha is non-forest land, 402 ha is
private tenancy land (Agricultural land) and 87.04 ha is Govt. land. Of the total ML area, Surface Rights for only
24.1 ha is required for surface and infrastructural facilities which includes 1
ha for surface dump, 0.3 for mine entry, 0.3 ha for settling pond, 2.5 ha for
facilities (building, magazine, coal stack, CHP, etc.), 1ha for road, 2 ha for
greenbelt around facilities and the balance 642.36 ha area is under Mining
Rights (undisturbed). The coal would be transported from
mine to CHP by conveyor and thereafter by road to Railway Siding. It was
informed that the distance of mine to railway siding is about 60km. It was
stated that impact of mine discharge on recharge of the aquifers could be
studied once the ultimate depth of 350m is reached. An estimated 240 m3/day is required for domestic
consumption of the colony/villages and would be drawn from Bore well and 32 m3/day
mine water is for mine operations. Water table is in the range of 3.25 to 14.8m
bgl. It was informed that a hydrogeological study was conducted which indicated
that there would be no effect on shallow aquifers; however, deep seated aquifer
below 60-300m would be affected. The peak mine seepage would be 13746m3/day. Public
Hearing was held on 08.07.2011.
The
Committee noted that the river is 50m from the mine and about 150m from mine
entry and desired that impacts of sub-soil seepage of the river into the mine
workings require to continuously monitored and measures for prevention of mine
inundation should be undertaken. The
Committee desired that the mine water should be collected in tanks and treated
for fluoride and hardness and supplied to the villages for irrigation and other
purposes. The
Committee also desired that the proponent undertake short-term, medium-term and
long-term plan for life of project for recharge of water in the watershed of
the study area where the mine would operate. The Committee desired that selective depillaring should be
carried out leaving areas beneath river, habitation, etc. The
Committee desired that the proponent examine the feasibility of long-term
transport of coal to their own captive plant or a railway siding closer to the
mine. The Committee also desired that mechanically covered trucks of 20-T or
more should be used for coal transportation. The Committee desired that
plantation should be developed within the 12 ha of area for which surface
rights are being obtained. The Committee desired that CH4 and CO
should be monitored and records maintained. The Committee desired that Third
Party evaluation should be carried out periodically on compliance of EC
conditions. The Committee desired that the capital costs for CSR be increased to
Rs 25 lakhs with an annual recurring cost of Rs 5/T of coal and further desired
that the proponent provide a dispensary and an ambulance in the study area as
desired during Public Hearing.
The
Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance with the
aforesaid conditions.
2. Devangudi Lignite Mine Project (2 MTPA
in an area of 1566 ha in a total ML area of 25,900 ha) of M/s Neyveli Lignite
Corp. Ltd., located in dist. Cuddalore, T.N. (TOR)
3. Expansion of Mine-1 A
(from 3 MTPA to 7 MTPA) of M/s Neyveli Lignite Corp. Ltd., located in dist.
Cuddalore, T.N. (TOR)
4. Restructuring of Mine-1 Lignite Mine
(reduction from 10.5 MTPA to 8 MTPA and expansion in ML area from 2762 ha to
3219 ha) of M/s Neyveli Lignite
Corp. Ltd., located in dist. Cuddalore, T.N. (TOR)
The
proponent made a presentation on Item 2. The proposal is for opening a new
Devangudi lignite mine of 1566 ha and of 2 MTPA production capacity. It was
informed that Devangudi lignite mine project forms a part of a mining lease of
25,900ha allotted to M/s Neyveli Lignite Corp. and is flanked by two mines-
Mine 1 and Mine 2. Two rivers – Vellar and Manimuktha flow at a distance of
100m. It was informed that sea is about 50km from the mines and the strata in
between comprises of Cuddlaore sandstone and forms an impervious barrier
preventing sea-water ingression. It was stated that monitoring of water quality
of the water table in the study area (upto depth of confined aquifers) has not
shown any salinity in groundwater. It was informed that of the 259 sq.km of ML,
mining is restricted to 73 sq.km of which 40 sq.km is quarry area. It was
informed that two external
The
Committee noted that the area is fertile agricultural land and with double
crops. It was also noted that the area is traversed by a number of rivers and
their tributaries and streams and tanks. The Committee after discussions sought
the following details:
(i) whether the mines of the total ML area of
259 sq.km form a part of the Cauvery delta, although the Consultants for Items
3 & 4 clarified that the mine does not form a part of the Cauvery delta. In
this regard, the Committee sought details of reports available on the Study of Cauvery
Basin and location of the mines on a landuse map including detailed drainage
map based on satellite imagery (1: 10,000).
(ii) Study report sought in earlier EC granted for
Mine-1 on impact of mining on
(iii) SC Judgement on change of land use of
double crop agricultural land for non-agricultural purposes.
The
Committee was also of the view that an independent view of eminent experts such
as Prof. M S Swaminathan or of a recognised agricultural University should be
obtained on the matter of large scale acquisition of good fertile agricultural
land for mining and its irreversible damage. The Committee was also of the view
that the view of expert such as Dr. Arijit Dey, former member EAC be obtained
on the matter of groundwater exploitation and impacts thereon. The Committee
also desired that waste management of all the mines within the ML area of 256
sq.km be examined on an integrated approach to minimise external
The
Committee decided that all the three proposals including Items 3 and 4 should
be further considered only after obtaining response on the aforesaid issues.
5. Thesgora Underground Coalmine Project of M/s Thesgora Coal Pvt. Ltd. dist. Chindwara,
M.P. (Further consideration of TOR)
The proposal was earlier considered in the
EAC meeting of 22nd -23rd March 2010, wherein it was
informed that the proposal is for production of coal of 1.5 MTPA by underground
mining to fulfil the demand of coal for existing steel
plant of Kamal Sponge Steel & Power Ltd. and Revathi Cement Pvt. Ltd.
Underground mining would be by Bord & Pillar method by caving. Life of mine
is 28 years. Of the total ML area of 500 ha, Govt. land is 226.38 ha, agriculture
land is 42.42 ha, forestland is 77.11 ha and Reserve forestland is 154.090 ha.
It was clarified that there are no tribals within the ML. Ultimate working
depth is 250m. It was informed that no nalas would be disturbed for mining. No
R&R involved except for land oustees who are to be surveyed. Life of the
project is 27 years.
The Committee desired that coal transportation should be by 30-T
trucks. The Committee desired that one season data (3 months) of AAQ
&water, noise is required as per new norms. Committee desired that the
annual revenue budget @Rs 5/tonne of coal produced and a capital budget of Rs
2.75 crores should be provided for CSR activities the details of which
(village-wise) should be furnished. The Committee however decided that TOR
could be granted only upon receiving confirmation on whether the aforesaid mine
falls in the Pench-Satpura Tiger Corridor.
Proponent made a
presentation. The proponent informed that the coalmine allotted is Thesgora B
Underground coalmine in village Tumri, dist. Chindwara. It was stated that the
proposed rated capacity of the mine is planned to be reduced from 1.5 MTPA to 1
MTPA. It was informed that the coalmine is situated about 35km from the
Pench-Satpura Tiger Reserve. The revised land use of the ML consists of 246 ha of
agricultural land, 2.5 ha of habitation, 8.5 ha is surface water body, 7.5 ha
is wasteland and 4.5 ha is roads. Of the total ML area, 30 ha is for Surface
Rights (19 ha for Incline and mine entry, 3.5 ha is for office and
infrastructure, and 2.5 ha is for approach roads). Coal transportation would be
by 30-T trucks form mine to proposed Railway Siding at Parasia.
The Committee desired that the proponent should examine the option of establishing
the railway siding nearer to the mine. The Committee desired that Subsidence Prediction
Study should be carried out in the area. The Committee desired that ventilation
fan arrangements of adequate capacity needs to be provided in the mine. The Committee
observed that some area of project falls under HFL (High Flood Line). The Committee
further observed that an embankment is proposed in the surface area, which
could hamper the movement of natural fauna found in the area. Further, the
embankment may obstruct the natural drainage and affect the natural ecology of
the region. The Committee desired that a study be undertaken on the impact of
the proposed embankment and its requirement. The Committee sought a copy of FC which
would be required at the time of EC. The Committee sought details of MOC
allocation for Thesgora B and a letter of proponent stating that the proposed
production is reduced from 1.5 MTPA to 1 MTPA for record of the MOEF. The
Committee recommended the proposal for TOR given in Annexure-5 read with
Annexure 7, subject to the furnishing of the aforesaid details and the
aforesaid specific TOR conditions.
6. Kalyan
Khani OCP (2 MTPA in an ML area of 945.21 ha) of M/s SCCL, located in dist.
Adilabad, A.P. (Revised TOR)
The proponent made a presentation. The proposal for opening a new
opencast coalmine project of 2 MTPA rated capacity in an ML area of 850 ha was
granted TOR on 20.03.2009, which involved R&R for 1758 PAFs. It was
informed that, after undertaking feasibility studies, a revised TOR application
has been submitted for a revised ML area of 945.21 ha for 2 MTPA (peak),
whereby the R&R has been reduced from 1758 PAFs to 350 PAFs, by relocating the temporary external
Of the total ML area of 945.21 ha, 546.21 ha is agricultural land, 46.46 ha is for plantation, 15.16 ha is
built-up area, 303.19ha is scrub/non-scrub land, 28.28 ha is surface water body
including river and 10.91 ha is road. Of the total ML area of 945.21 ha, 363.23
ha is quarry area, 248.74 ha is for OB dumps, 297.16 ha is for safety
barrier, drainage, 10.91 ha is for road diversion, 11.15 ha is for diversion of
nala, 14.02 ha is for buildings. Grade of coal is E. Mining would be opencast
by shovel-dumper combination. Ultimate depth would be 230m. Life of the mine is
19 years. Capital cost of the project Rs 183.66 crores. R&R involves
displacement of 350 PAFs from village Dubbagudem. Coal transportation would be from
railway siding. It was informed
that the one Zila Parishad (ZP) road connecting Kasipeta and Devapur villages to
the State Highway and passing through the proposed quarry area would be
diverted along the boundary the ML boundary for a total length of 3.64 km and re-connected
to existing road. Further, the road is also proposed to be widened and
strengthened for 1.34 km. A rivulet Suddalavagu passing over proposed quarry also
needs to be realinged for length of 1.56 kms. Another streamlet Devapurvagu
passing over the proposed ext. dump also requires realignment for length of 0.9
km.
It was informed that changes have been made to waste management by
reducing the max. OB dump height from 120m to 90m and by providing another ext.
OB dump and thus, increasing the OB dump area (external + internal) from 358.23
ha to 465.92 ha and the total ML area by 95.21 ha.
|
S.N |
Dump |
|
Max. height (m) |
Area (ha) |
Post-mining stage |
|
1. |
External dump -1 |
14.05 |
90 |
41.69 |
Remains as ext. dump |
|
2. |
External dump -2 |
56 |
90 |
114.73 |
Reahandled and backfileld into mine void |
|
3. |
External dump -3 |
42 |
90 |
92.32 |
-do- |
|
4. |
Internal dump-1 |
246.18 |
90 |
217.18 |
An area of 172.80 ah would be
raised 90m above g/l |
|
|
Total |
358.23 |
|
465.92 |
|
At the end of mining after 19 years, final void of an area of 190.43 ha
would be left of final depth reduced to 35m. It was informed that that the
entire quantity of OB in external
The Committee desired that the proponent examine at the time of EC (i)
sequential mining in the block so as to minimise
The Committee recommended a revised TOR with the aforesaid specific
conditions read with generic TOR at annexure-4 read with general conditions at
Annexure-7.
7. Kasipet
UG Mine Expansion (0.18 MTPA to 0.54 MTPA and ML area from 254 ha to 315.54 ha)
of M/s
Singareni Collieries Comp. Ltd., located in Mandal Kasipet, Dist.
Adilabad, A.P. (TOR)
The proponent made a presentation. It was informed
that the proposal is for expansion in ML area from 254 ha to 315.54 ha and for
increase in production capacity from 0.18 MTPA to 0.54 MTPA. Of the total ML
area of 315 ha, 233.80 ha is agricultural land (single crop), 39.39 ha is built
up area, 25.90 ha is existing mine, 16.45 ha is water body. No forestland is
involved. Of the total ML area, 273.19 ha is private land, 16.45 ha is
Government land and 25.90 ha is
The Committee observed that the area is backward and most of the
population belongs to ST/SC category. The Committee desired that the latest CSR
details should be furnished with EC. The Committee recommended a revised TOR with
the aforesaid specific conditions read with generic TOR at Annexure-5 read with
general conditions at Annexure-7.
8. Kasipet-2
Incline UGP (0.47 MTPA in an ML area of 206 ha) of M/s Singareni
Collieries Comp. Ltd., located in Mandal Kasipet, Dist.
Adilabad, A.P. (TOR)
The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the proposal is
for opening a new Kasipet-2 Underground Coalmine Project of 0.47 MTPA
production capacity in an ML area of 206 ha. The proposed project is north
extension property of the existing Kasipet-2 UGP. Of the total ML area of 206 ha, mining area is 198.80 ha, which consists
of 157.5 ha is agricultural land (single/double crop), 4.26 ha is wasteland,
2.08 ha is built-up area, 32.80 ha is water bodies. Of the total ML area, land proposed under Surface Rights is 29.79 ha (10.09 ha
for infrastructure, 0.85 ha is road, 3.16 ha is for sand stowing plant, 15.69
ha is for sand stockyard) and the balance area is undisturbed. A stream
Rallavagu passes through the ML. Kondengala tank also exist in the ML. Village
Dubbapalli is situated within the ML. Method of
mining is Bord & Pillar with Side Discharge Loaders and Universal Drill
machines. Mining involves
depillaring with hydraulic sand stowing. Hence, no R&R or
diversion of streams/rivulets passing through the ML is involved. Grade of coal
is D-E Coal evacuation is by road. Life of mine is 21 years. Estimated cost
of the project is Rs 60.18 crores.
The Committee desired that the feasibility of establishing a railway
siding nearer to the mine may be examined. The Committee recommended TOR with
this specific condition, read with generic TOR at Annexure-5 and General Conditions
at Anenxure-7.
9. Modification
of TOR granted on 27.06.2011 to Cluster
No. 8 of M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd (ECL), located in Raniganj Coalfields Ltd.,
W.B.
The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that in the earlier
presentation made before the EAC (T&C) held on 23rd -24th May 2011, the company had proposed
7 underground mines in Cluster 8 of a combined rated
capacity of 1.279 MTPA with a peak prodn. of 2.452 MTPA in a combined ML area
of 8281 ha. However, after a review of the situation in Raniganj
Coalfields, M/s ECL had re-examined the matter of extraction of coal from coal
pillars at shallow depth (which cannot be mined by underground mining) by
opencast mining in patches in one Mithapur UG mines of the cluster for a
limited period. It was stated that this would help reduce the extent of
unstable areas, curb illegal mining and further formation of unstable areas,
prevent fires, ensure safety of present UG workings and increase the output of
the underground mines of the cluster. The proponent informed that the impact of
this change in scenario of mining would be conversion of underground mines to
mixed type of mine although there would be no change in the number of mines and
combined area in the cluster. There would be small increase in peak production
for a limited period. Total land to be affected is less than 5% of cluster
area. The Committee was informed that in view of this, out of the total 7 UG
mines grouped in Cluster 8, one mine Mithapur West would be changed from UG to
mixed type OC+UG mine with normative production of 0.28 MTY and peak production
of 0.342 MTY for 2 years from mixed operation and thereafter it would be by
0.042 (peak) from under ground operation. The total leasehold area would remain
8281 ha with a combined production capacity
enhanced from 1.279 MTY to 1.53MTY normative and the peak capacity from 2.452 MTY to 2.75 MTY. By this proposed modification,
about 0.3% of the total land use of Cluster 8 would change to OC mining. It was
further informed that the quarried area of the OC patches would be backfilled
completely and covered with top soil, and eco-restoration carried out in the
excavated area.
|
MINES IN CLUSTER NO. 8 |
|||||
|
S.N |
Name of Mine |
Production capacity (MTPA) |
ML (ha) |
Life of Mine (years) |
|
|
Normative |
Peak |
|
|
||
|
1 |
Bhanora
UG Mine |
0.2 |
0.3 |
1330 |
>20 |
|
2 |
Girmint/KDI UG Mine |
0.04 |
0.65 |
1981 |
>50 |
|
3 |
Sirpur UG Mine |
0.014 |
0.024 |
2338 |
>20 |
|
4. |
Sirpur Seam Incline UG
Mine |
0.105 |
0.136 |
279 |
>25 |
|
5. |
Ningah UG Mine |
0.040 |
0.100 |
1072 |
>50 |
|
6. |
Mithapur |
0.28 |
0.342 |
527 |
>50 |
|
7. |
Satgram UG Mine |
0.85 |
1.200 |
754 |
>30 |
|
|
Total |
1.53 |
2.75 |
8281 |
- |
|
Changes proposed to Cluster-8 |
|||
|
Parameter |
Previous Appl. |
Proposed Appl. |
Remarks |
|
No of mines and their lease hold area |
7 UG Mines |
6 UG + 1 mixed (UG+OC )Mines |
1 mine changes from UG to Mixed type as OC patch to be operated |
|
Total area of cluster (ha) |
8281 ha |
8281 ha |
No Change |
|
No. of proposed new patches (OC) |
- |
1 |
Total quarry area =29.2 ha (0.3%) |
|
Peak Production |
2.45 MTPA (Excluding OC patches |
2.75 MTPA (including OC patches) |
Till OC patch gets exhausted. |
It is proposed to have OC mining in patches in 1 mine - Mithapur West
OC Patch, of the cluster for a limited period details are given below. As
a result, the maximum Production from the cluster would increase from 2.45 MTPA
to 2.75 MTPA till the patch gets exhausted. The details are given below.
|
Present Proposal to operate OC Patch/mine within
lease hold area of UG mines Cluster-8 |
||||||
|
Name of mine |
Area of Patch (in ha) |
Mineable reserves |
(Mm3) |
Normative Production capacity (MTPA) |
Peak Production capacity (MTPA) |
Life in years |
|
Mithapur West OC Patch |
29.2 |
0.47 |
5.9 |
0.25 |
0.3 |
2 |
The Committee desired
that the matter pertaining to R&R from unstable sites and reclamation of
old abandoned mines for future mining should be dovetailed with Raniganj Action Plan and details furnished during EC
presentation.
The Committee recommended modification of the TOR
granted as given above.
10. Modification
of TOR granted on 27.06.2011 to Cluster
No. 6 of M/s ECL, located in Raniganj Coalfields Ltd., W.B.
The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that in the earlier presentation
made before the EAC (T&C) held on 21st December 2010, It was informed that in the Cluster 6, the
company had proposed 9 underground mines of a
combined rated capacity of 1.013MTPA with a peak production of 1.750 MTPA in a
combined ML area of 4775 ha and TOR
was granted on 27.06.2011. However, after a review of the situation in
Raniganj Coalfields, M/s ECL had re-examined the matter of extraction of coal
from coal pillars at shallow depth (which cannot be mined by underground
mining) by opencast mining in patches in 4
UG mines of the cluster for a limited period. It was stated that
this would help reduce the extent of unstable areas, curb illegal mining and
further formation of unstable areas, prevent fires, ensure safety of present UG
workings and increase the output of the underground mines of the cluster. The
proponent informed that the impact of this change in scenario of mining would
be conversion of underground mines to mixed type of mine although there would
be no change in the number of mines and combined area in the cluster. There
would be small increase in peak production for a limited period. Total land to
be affected is less than 5% of cluster area. The Committee was informed that in
view of this, of the total 9 UG mines grouped in Cluster 6 are now proposed to
be mined in, 4 OC patches on Under ground mines namely Sodepur OC Patch
(10 Ha), Patmohana OC Patch(7.5 ha), Chinakuri III OC (7.2 ha),
Methani OC Patch(10.5 ha). The total
leasehold area would remain 4775 ha with a
combined production capacity enhanced from 1.013 MTY
to 1.453 MTPA normative and the peak capacity from 1.750 MTY to 2.25 MTPA. By this proposed
modification, about <1.0% of the total land use of Cluster 6 would change to
OC mining. It was further informed that the quarried area of the OC patches
would be backfilled completely and covered with top soil, and eco-restoration
carried out in the excavated area.
|
|
REVISED PROPOSALOF MINES IN CLUSTER -6 |
||||
|
|
Name of Mine |
Production capacity (MTPA) |
ML (ha) |
Life of Mine (yrs) |
|
|
|
|
Normative |
Peak |
|
|
|
1 |
Dhemomain
UG |
0.155 |
0.210 |
1623 |
>50 |
|
2 |
Sodepur
UG & OC Patch |
0.120 |
0.150 |
808 |
>10 |
|
3 |
Narsamuda
UG |
0.148 |
0.190 |
265 |
>10 |
|
4. |
Patmohana
UG & OC Patch |
0.120 |
0.120 |
544 |
>40 |
|
5 |
Chinakuri
I UG |
0.060 |
0.080 |
414 |
>50 |
|
6. |
Chinakuri
III UG & OC Patch |
0.150 |
0.200 |
216 |
>25 |
|
7. |
Bejdih
UG |
0.040 |
0.100 |
242 |
>20 |
|
8. |
Methani
UG & OC Patch |
0.100 |
0.200 |
348 |
>20 |
|
9. |
Sheetalpur UG |
0.120 |
0.500 |
315 |
>30 |
|
|
TOTAL |
1.453 |
2.25 |
4775 |
|
|
Changes proposed to Cluster-6 |
|||
|
Parameter |
Previous Appl. |
Proposed Appl. |
Remarks |
|
No of mines and their lease hold area |
9 UG Mines |
5 UG + 4 Mixed (UG+OC )Mines |
4 Mine changes from UG to Mixed type as OC patch to be operated |
|
Total area of cluster (ha) |
4775 ha |
4775 ha |
No Change |
|
No. of proposed new patches (OC) |
- |
4 |
Total quarry area =35.2 ha (<1 %) |
|
Peak Production |
1.75 MTY (Excluding OC patches |
2.25 MTY (including OC patches) |
Till OC patch gets exhausted. |
|
Present Proposal to operate OC Patch/mine within
lease hold area of UG mines OF Cluster-6 |
||||||
|
Name of mine |
Area of Patch (in ha) |
Mineable reserves (MT) |
(Mm3) |
Normative Production capacity (MTPA) |
Peak Production capacity (MTPA) |
Life in years |
|
Sodepur OC Patch |
10 |
0.24 |
2.2 |
0.12 |
0.15 |
2 |
|
Patmohana OC Patch |
7.5 |
0.1 |
1.2 |
0.10 |
0.10 |
1 |
|
Chinakuri III
OC Patch |
7.2 |
0.1 |
0.7 |
0.1 |
0.1 |
1 |
|
Methani
OC Patch |
10.5 |
0.16 |
3.6 |
0.12 |
0.15 |
1 1/2 |
The Committee desired
that the matter of R&R from unstable sites and reclamation of old abandoned
mines for future mining should be dovetailed
with Raniganj Action Plan and details furnished during EC presentation.
The Committee recommended modification in the TOR granted as given
above.
11. Modification
of TOR granted on 27.06.2011 to Cluster
No.7 of M/s ECL, located in Raniganj Coalfields Ltd., W.B.
The proponent made a
presentation. It was informed that in the earlier presentation
made before the EAC (T&C) held on 21st December 2010, It was informed that Cluster 7 consists
of 4 underground mines of a
combined rated capacity of 0.18 MTPA with a peak production of 0.240 MTPA in a
combined ML area of 2331 ha and TOR
granted on 27.06.2011. However, after a review of the situation in
Raniganj Coalfields, M/s ECL had re-examined the matter of extraction of coal
from coal pillars at shallow depth (which cannot be mined by underground
mining) by opencast mining in patches in one
UG mines of the cluster for a limited period. It was stated that
this would help reduce the extent of unstable areas, curb illegal mining and
further formation of unstable areas, prevent fires, ensure safety of present UG
workings and increase the output of the underground mines of the cluster. The
proponent informed that the impact of this change in scenario of mining would
be conversion of underground mines to mixed type of mine although there would
be no change in the number of mines and combined area in the cluster. There
would be small increase in peak production for a limited period. Total land to
be affected is less than 5% of cluster area. The Committee was informed that in
view of this, of the total 4 UG mines grouped in Cluster 7 are now proposed to
be mined in, one OC patches on Under ground mines namely Bhanora West OC
Patch (50 ha) and Bhanora West mine would be changed from UG to
mixed type OC+UG mine with normative production of 0.4MTY and peak production
of 0.5MTPA for 3 and half years from mixed operation and thereafter it would be
by 0.13 MTPA (peak) from under ground operation. The total leasehold area would
remain 2313 ha with a combined production capacity
enhanced from 0.180 MTPA to 0.58 MTPA normative and the peak capacity from 0.240MTPA to 0.74 MTPA. By this proposed modification, about
<2.0% of the total land use of Cluster 7 would change to OC mining. It was
further informed that the quarried area of the OC patches would be backfilled
completely and covered with top soil, and eco-restoration carried out in the
excavated area.
|
S.No |
MINES IN CLUSTER -7 |
||||
|
Name of Mine |
Production capacity (MTY) |
Leasehold Area (ha) |
Life of Mine (years) |
||
|
NORMATIVE |
PEAK |
||||
|
1 |
Barmondia
UG |
0.020 |
0.030 |
665 |
>10 |
|
2 |
Chakballavpur
(UG) |
0.030 |
0.040 |
233 |
>10 |
|
3 |
Manoharbahal
UG |
0.030 |
0.040 |
735 |
>10 |
|
4. |
Bhanora
West UG & OC Patch |
0.50 |
0.63 |
680 |
>20 |
|
|
|
0.58 |
0.74 |
2313 |
|
|
Changes proposed to Cluster-7 |
|||
|
Parameter |
Previous Appl. |
Proposed Appl. |
Remarks |
|
No of mines and their lease hold area |
4 UG Mines |
3 UG + 1 Mixed (UG+OC )Mines |
1 Mine
changes from UG to Mixed type as OC
patch to be operated |
|
Total area of cluster (ha) |
2313 ha |
2313 ha |
No Change |
|
No. of proposed new patches (OC) |
- |
1 |
Total quarry area = 50 ha
(<2 %) |
|
Peak Production |
0.24 MTY (Excluding OC patches) |
0.74 MTY (including OC patches) |
Till OC patch gets exhausted. |
|
Present Proposal to operate OC Patch/mine within
lease hold area of UG mines OF Cluster-7 |
||||||
|
Name of mine |
Area of Patch (in ha) |
Mineable reserves (MT) |
(Mm3) |
Normative Production capacity (MTPA) |
Peak Production capacity (MTPA) |
Life in years |
|
Bhanora
West OC Patch |
50 |
1.25 |
11.2 |
0.4 |
0.5 |
3 1/2 |
The Committee desired
that the matter of R&R from unstable sites and reclamation of old abandoned
mines for future mining should be dovetailed
with Raniganj Action Plan and details furnished during EC presentation.
The Committee recommended modification in the TOR
granted as given above.
12. Modification
of TOR granted to Cluster 5 (2 UG mines of a prod. capacity of 0.285 MTPA
normative and MTPA (peak) in a combined ML area of 2970 ha) of M/s ECL, located
in Raniganj Coalfields, dist. Burdwan,
The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that in the earlier presentation
made before the EAC (T&C) held on 26th-27th
October 2010, It was informed that
in the Cluster 5 company had proposed 2 underground mines of a combined rated
capacity of 0.18 MTPA with a peak production of 0.240 MTPA peak in a combined
ML area of 2970 ha and TOR granted
on 3.12.2010. However, after a review of the situation in Raniganj
Coalfields, M/s ECL had re-examined the matter of extraction of coal from coal
pillars at shallow depth (which cannot be mined by underground mining) by
opencast mining in patches in one UG
mines of the cluster for a limited period. It was stated that this would
help reduce the extent of unstable areas, curb illegal mining and further
formation of unstable areas, prevent fires, ensure safety of present UG
workings and increase the output of the underground mines of the cluster. The
proponent informed that the impact of this change in scenario of mining would
be conversion of underground mines to mixed type of mine although there would
be no change in the number of mines and combined area in the cluster. There
would be small increase in peak production for a limited period The Committee
was informed that in view of this, of the total 2 UG mines grouped in Cluster 5
are now proposed to be mined in, two OC patches on Under ground mines namely Parbelia
OC Patch (10ha) and Dubeswari OC patch (10.2 ha).Total area to be quarried in the
cluster by OC mining is about 20 ha. This is about 0.6% of the total area of
cluster. The total leasehold area would remain 2970 ha with a combined production capacity enhanced from 0.285 MTPA
to 0.485 MTPA normative and the peak capacity from 0.37 MTPA to 0.63
MTPA. However, the enhanced capacity would prevail for 2 years only, until
exhaustion of these patches. There would be no external
|
Changes proposed to Cluster-5 |
|||||
|
S.N |
Name of mine |
status |
Lease area(ha) |
Normative production (MTY) |
Peak production
Capacity |
|
1. |
Parbelia UG+OC patch |
working mine |
2730 |
0.25 |
0.32 |
|
2. |
Dubeswari UG+OC patch |
working mine |
240 |
0.235 |
0.31 |
|
Total |
2970.00 |
0.485 |
0.63 |
||
|
Changes proposed to Cluster-5 |
|||
|
Parameter |
Previous Appl. |
Proposed Appl. |
Remarks |
|
No of mines and their lease hold area |
2 UG Mines |
2 Mixed (UG+OC)Mines |
Mine
changes from UG to Mixed type as OC
patch to be operated |
|
Total area of cluster (ha) |
2970 ha |
2970 ha |
No Change |
|
No. of proposed new patches (OC) |
- |
2 |
Total quarry area = 20.2 ha |
|
Peak Production |
0.37 MTY (excluding OC patches) |
0.63 MTY (including OC patches) |
Till OC patch gets exhausted. |
|
Present Proposal to operate OC Patch/mine within
lease hold area of UG mines of Cluster-5 |
|||||
|
Name of mine |
Area of Patch (in ha) |
Mineable reserves (MT) |
(Mm3) |
Peak Production capacity (MTPA) |
Life in years |
|
Parbelia OC patch |
10 |
013 |
3.7 |
0.13 |
1 1/2 |
|
Dubeswari OC patch |
10.2 |
0.22 |
2.2 |
0.13 |
2 |
The Committee desired
that the matter of R&R from unstable sites and reclamation of old abandoned
mines for future mining should be dovetailed
with Raniganj Action Plan and details furnished during EC presentation.
The Committee recommended modification in the TOR
granted to Cluster No. 5 as given above.
13. Pyrite Removal Plant using Dry Process in
Surkha North Lignite Mine of M/s Gujarat Mineral Development Corp. Ltd.,
located in Tehsil Ghogha, dist. Bhavnagar, Gujarat (Further consideration)
The proposal
was last considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 17th -18th
October 2011. The clarifications sought were presented before the Committee. It
was informed that after examination of various technologies available for separation
of pyrite form lignite, the Aardee Technology was found to be the most suitable
with environmental advantages such as no slurry generation and as a result the
dry lignite produced from the separation is more suitable for use in the
TPP/boilers. The technology is also less capital intensive. The Committee was
informed that the AERB has approved the technology on 14.12.2011 after due
assessment of safety concerns. It was informed that as desired by the
Committee, the views of Dr R.N. Patra, CMD, Indian Rare Earths Ltd., Mumbai and
Dr. N.P.H. Padmanabhan, Ore Dressing Group, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, AMD Complex,
Begumpet, Hyderabad were obtained. It was informed that the levels of X-ray
radiation used for the separation process are well within the maximum
permissible limit of 20m R/hour (200, uSvs/hr) and 0.25 m R/hour (0.25,
uSvs/hr) as specified by AERB. The entire process of sorting would be done by
using X-rays in an automatic manner without any radiological harm to the
operator who remotely monitors the process. Further, Dr. A.K. Suri, Scientist
and Director, Material Group of BARC has also opined that DE-XRT sorting is
expected to be a good dry beneficiation technique for removal of pyrite content
of lignite. It was informed that Dr.
Padmanabhan, Ore
Dressing Group, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, AMD Complex, Begumpet,
The Committee after discussions agreed to the
choice of use of X-ray technology presented by the proponent for removal of
pyrite from lignite with the following conditions:
(i) No manual separation of the pyrite should
be permitted when X-ray technology is in use.
(ii) No wastes from the separation process or
wastes generated from the mine should be disposed/enter the marshy areas and
creeks or other surface water bodies.
(iii) The
radiation levels should be monitored for the level of radioactive exposure by
competent authorised/Certified persons who are well trained.
(iv) The proponent
may also find the applicability of the technology adopted in any other project elsewhere
in the world and report to MOEF.
(v) Manual
handling should be avoided at all circumstances.
(vi) The pyrite
waste should be stored in concreted structures and dispatched by mechanically
covered trucks to end users.
(vii) Periodic audit and inspections by BARC
experts so that there are no health hazards.
The Committee
recommended modification of the EC subject to the aforesaid conditions.
14. Expansion of Surkha North Lignite Mine (3
MTPA to 5 MTPA in existing ML area of 3672 ha) of M/s Gujarat Mineral
Development Corp. Ltd., located in Tehsil Ghogha, dist. Bhavnagar, Gujarat (TOR)
The proponent
made a presentation. It was informed that the proposal is for expansion from
Surkha Lignite Mine from 3 MTPA to 5 MTPA within the existing ML area of 3672
ha, of which 2941.6784 ha is private land, 730.3216 ha is Govt
land. No forestland is involved. The project had obtained EC on
07.05.2007 for 3 MTPA lignite production in an ML area of 3672 ha. It was
informed that HTL is about 1.3km from ML boundary and about 2.5km from mine
working area. It was stated that the entire geological strata between mine and
sea consists of Deccan Trap which is impervious to sweater intrusion. It was
stated that soil salinity is high and the levels of TDS in mine water is about
1600 mg/l. It was informed that stripping ratio is 1:9, however, external OB
dumping is not proposed and the entire OB from the expansion project would be
backfilled and an void of 171 ha area would be left at the post mining
stage. It was stated that an external
The
Committee after discussions decided that Public Hearing would require to be
conducted for the expansion project. The Committee desired that the number of
trips should be reduced and the transportation should be in trucks of higher
capacity. The Committee sought a one-season data based on the new NAAQM
Notification 2008 and an EIA-EMP on the incremental impacts of expansion in
production and also of transportation of lignite by road and rail modes. The
Committee desired that Third Party evaluation of the impact of CSR through a
survey. The Committee recommended the project for TOR with the aforesaid
specific conditions read with generic TOR and general conditions specified in
Annexure-7.
15. Expansion
in Churcha RO UG (1 MTPA to 2.10 MTPA and ML area from 2240.95 ha to 3590.147
ha) of M/s SECL located
in Tehsil Baikunthpur, dist.
The proponent made a presentation on the
clarifications sought by the EAC in its meeting held on 21st
December 2010. It was informed that the Third Party evaluation of groundwater monitoring
was undertaken by Central Groundwater Board, Central Region. It was stated that
the mine water of Churcha UGP was acidic and lime dozing is being done and
continuous monitoring of water quality in terms of pH, TDS would be undertaken
at all outlet discharge points. Mining would be undertaken to a depth of 400m.
Two continuous miners have been received and would be used and hence, drilling
and blasting would be avoided. Subsidence
Prediction Modelling has been carried out and no surface subsidence has been
observed. Subsidence Monitoring would be regularly carried out and appropriate
safety corrective measures taken. A number of measures to reduce SPM/RSPM
levels have been implemented which includes: mist spraying in CHP, transport of
wet coal, 3-tier plantation and transport of coal to CHP and to railway siding
by belt conveyor and thereafter by rail (100%) to Cement units.
The Committee after discussion recommended the
project for environmental clearance with a condition for loading of railway wagons
through CHP and no pay loader loading.
16. Jarangdih
Group of Mines (1.08 MTPA normative and 1.16 MTPA (peak) in an ML area of
493.51 ha) of M/s Central
Coalfields Ltd. (Further consideration of EC based on TOR)
The proposal was last considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held in
August 2011. The proponent made a presentation on the issues raised in the
Public Hearing held on 29.09.2011.
The Committee desired that the action taken on the issues raised in the
Public Hearing be furnished for record. The Committee after discussions
recommended the project for environmental clearance.
17. Ara-Sarubera Group of Mines (1.44 MTPA
normative and 1.66 MTPA peak in a
combined ML area of 1194.85 ha of M/s Central Coalfields Ltd., located in dist.Ramgarh, Jharkhand (EC
based on TOR granted on 01.07.2009)
The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the Ara-Sarubera
Group consists of 3 mines – Ara OCP, Chainpur OCP and Sarubera UGP, of which
Ara OCP and Sarubera UGP are pre-nationalisation mines and have been mined in
patches. The three mines have contiguous boundaries. All infrastructure
including colony are shared by the three mines and fall in Kuju Area.
|
S.N. |
Name
of Mine |
ML
area (ha) |
Nominal
Capacity (MTPA) |
Peak
Capacity (MTPA) |
|
1. |
Ara OCP |
508.21 |
0.76 |
0.87 |
|
2. |
Sarubera UGP |
449.39 |
0.18 |
0.21 |
|
3. |
Chainpur/Sarubera OCP |
237.25 |
0.50 |
0.58 |
|
|
TOTAL |
1194.85 |
1.44 |
1.66 |
It was informed that the company is proposed to shift to mechanised CHP
railway wagon loading in about 3 years time through implementation of a Master
Plan for Kuju Area. It was stated that it is proposed to undertake sequential
backfilling of the two quarries which would be raised to 20m above ground
level. The cluster has a total of 5 voids and 6 dumps and a Plan has been
formulated for their reclamation.
|
S.N. |
Particulars |
Ara
OCP |
Chainpur/Sarubera
OCP |
Sarubera
UGP |
|
1. |
Year of inception |
Pre- 1973 |
1987 |
Pre-1973 |
|
2. |
Max. working depth (m) |
156 |
105 |
100 |
|
3. |
Quarry area |
99.8 |
93 |
- |
|
4. |
Life of project (years) |
30 |
15 |
20 |
|
5. |
Mode of coal transport |
By rail from Chainpur Siding |
||
It was informed that three water
bodies of 100m, 85m and 75m would be left at the post mining stage. It was
clarified that the mine water in the area does not have TDS problems. It was
informed that an amount of Rs 43.61 lakhs has been earmarked for Kuju area. It
was informed that R&R for the project involved 333 households and 1500 PAPs
from Ara OCP involving 3 villages – Dumerbera, Ara and Baghlata. An R&R
site has been identified at Mourpa and R&R plan is to be implemented over a
time-frame of 5 years. The Committee desired that the proposed R&R Plan
should be furnished.
The Committee desired that the proponent examine options for reworking
the
The Committee after discussions decided to further consider the proposal
after receipt of the aforesaid details.
18. Piparwar
OCP (10 MTPA with a peak capacity of 11.5 MTPA) – clarification of M/s CCL vide
e-mail dated 12.01.2012 on Consideration in EAC meeting held on 28th-29th
Nov. 2011.
Director, MOEF informed that the proposal was
considered for introduction of a peak capacity in the existing Piparwar OCP of
10 MTPA in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 28th -29th
November 2011. The proposal obtained EC for 10 MTPA on 11.06.2007.
The Committee noted that introduction of a peak
capacity of 11.5 MTPA involves expansion in production from 10 MTPA to 11.5
MTPA. The Committee after discussions recommended the introduction of a peak
capacity of 11.5 MTPA in the EC granted to Piparwar OCP of 10 MTPA vide
provisions of the EIA Notification 2006.
19. Macherkunda
Underground Coalmine Project (0.30 MTPA in an ML area of 395 ha) of M/s
Bihar Sponge Iron Ltd., located in Hutar Coalfields, in dsit.
Latehar, Jharkhand (TOR)
The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the proposal is
for opening a new Macherkunda Underground Coalmine Project of 0.30 MTPA
capacity in an ML area of 395 ha in Hutar Coalfields, Jharkhand, to meet the partial coal requirement of its sponge
iron plant located in district Saraikela-Kharsawan, Jharkhand. Palamau Tiger Reserve is at a distance of 6km from
the ML, i.e. the Tiger Reserve falls within the buffer zone of the mine. Putuagarh RF and Barichatan RF are inside core
area and 3 more reserve forests and 3 protected forests are within 2-8 km area.
The entire ML area of 346.37 ha is forestland including 48.63 ha of PF. Application
for Stage-I FC has been made on 20.01.2012. An area of 14.26 ha is required under Surface Rights which includes 4.28ha for
mine entries, surface facilities at pit head and explosive agazine,1.46 ha
(1.26 ha outside block) is for approach road, and 8.52 ha is for colony
(outside block). Underground mining would be by Bord & Pillar method. Coal
is to be transported by road. Life of the mine is 25 years.
The Committee observed that the Palamau
National Tiger Reserve is at a distance of 6 km away from proposed site and the
approval of the Standing Committee on Wildlife and comments/approval of the
National Tiger Conservation Authority would be a pre-requisite for further
consideration of the proposal. The Committee also desired that a map certified
by PCCF (WL), Govt. of Jharkhand along with covering letter indicating the
shortest distance of the mine from the Palamu Tiger Reserve be furnished.
The Committee decided to further consider the project after receipt of
the aforesaid details.
20. Hirakhand
Bundia UGP (expn. from 0.54 MTPA to 0.95 MTPA) of M/s MCL located
in Ib Valley Coalfields, located in Ib Valley Coalfields, dist. Jharsuguda,
Orissa (Further
consideration of EC based on TOR)
The
proponent made a presentation on the clarifications sought by the EAC during
its last consideration of the proposal in the meeting held on 22.02.2011. The
proponent informed that it could not respond to issues earlier as there were other
projects of priority. It was informed that the upper seams of the mine of an
area of 119.036 ha of a total ML area of 422.35 ha are being operated as
Samleshwari OCP and the lower seams are being operated as Hirakhand Bundia UGP.
It was stated that the inter-seam parting between the OCP and the UGP is about
90m. It was informed that forestry clearance for 88.435 ha of forestland has
been applied for and is pending with State Govt. on the matter of
geo-referencing mapping. It was informed that CSR would be undertaken with a
provision of Rs 5/T of coal. Balance life of the mine is 26 years.
The
Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to MOEF
Circular dated 09.09.2011.
21. Orient-4 UGP (expn.
from 0.15 MTPA to 0.50 MTPA in ML area of 519.474 ha) of M/s
MCL located
in Ib Valley Coalfields, located in Ib Valley Coalfields, dist. Jharsuguda,
Orissa (Further
consideration of EC based on TOR)
The
proponent made a presentation on the clarifications sought by the EAC during
its last consideration of the proposal in the meeting held on 24.01.2011. It
was informed that moratorium based on CEPI Circular was lifted for Ib Valley on
05.07.2011. It was stated that of the total ML area of 519.474 ha, 391.43 ha is
for Mining Rights and 8 ha is for Surface Rights. The mine has 2 Incline air
intake ways and with a PV of a capacity of 3500 m3/min has been provided for
mine ventilation. It was informed forestry clearance for 397.439 ha of
forestland was pending with State Govt. It was informed that there is no
workshop as trucks used for transportation are outsourced. It was stated that
an ETP would be provided within 12 months.
The
Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to MOEF
Circular dated 09.09.2011.
22. Lingraj
OCP Expansion (13 to 20 MTPA) of M/s MCL located in Talcher Coalfields, dist. Angul, Orissa
(Further consideration of TOR)
The
proponent made a presentation on the clarifications sought by the EAC during
its last consideration of the proposal in the meeting held on 29.03.2011. The
proponent informed that it could not respond to issues earlier as there were other
projects of priority. It was informed that a 42.5km 4-lane dedicated concrete
road corridor from Hingula OCP to Lingraj OCP for a total cost of Rs 290 crores
is scheduled to be completed by 2015. It was stated that another coal transport
corridor of 6km from Lingraj OCP to NH-23 is also proposed. In addition, an
IDCO Rail Corridor is also being planned by the State Govt. in consultation
with CMPDIL. The company also proposes to introduce mechanised rapid Silo
Loading in 3 years and transport coal to NTPC by MGR. It was informed that the
mine water is not acidic and a series of settling ponds of adequate capacity
for retention and settling have been provided before discharge of mine water.
It was stated that 70% of coal produced in existing project is without
blasting, which would be increased to 90% in the expansion project. It was
stated that the stripping ratio of Lingraj OCP is more than 2 and mine voids would
not be available for flyash dumping except at final stage of mine closure after
24 years. It is proposed to rehandle the
The
Committee desired that a calendar plan of production and OB generation including
rehandling should be furnished with various options of backfilling the mine
void at the final mine closure stage including option of dumping/receiving OB
from neighbouring mines to avoid external OB dumping. The Committee recommended TOR with the aforesaid condition read with
generic TOR given in Annexure-4 read with general conditions given in
Annexure-7.
23.
The proponent made a presentation on
clarifications sought by EAC (T&C) in meeting held on 23rd -24th
May 2011. It was informed that the mine does not fall in the Tadoba Andheri Tiger
Reserve (TATR) extended buffer zone. However, some portion of the buffer zone
of the project intercepts the buffer zone of TATR. According to letter dated 20.12.2011
of NTCA, the project is located at a distance of 9.8k, from the buffer zone of TATR.
|
S.N. |
Particulars |
Existing Project |
Expansion Project (Phase-I and II) |
|
1. |
Name |
|
|
|
2. |
Capacity (MTPA) |
2.30 |
3.00 |
|
3. |
Present Prodn. |
1.97 |
- |
|
4. |
Total ML area (ha) |
1354.64 |
1475.92 |
|
5. |
Land use Details |
Agr. land = 872.14 ha Govt. land = 157.93 ha Forestland =324.57ha, of which 257.77 ha has
been acquired. |
Agr. land = 260.09 ha Govt. land = 29.29 ha Balance forestland to be acquired – Nil in Ph.I
and 66.80 ha in Ph.II |
|
6. |
Forestry clearance |
Obtained for 257.77 ha in which the mine would
operate |
Phase-I obtained for 257.77 ha of forestland. Phase-II FC for balance 66.80 ha is under
process at State Govt. |
|
7. |
|
157 (already generated) 205.08 (balance life) |
|
|
8. |
Ultimate working Depth (m) |
110 |
190 |
|
9. |
R&R |
Nil |
3 villages – Sinhala, Navegaon, Masala Tukum |
|
10. |
Coal evacuation (TPD) |
6970 (Aerial ropeway) |
9090
(Aerial ropeway) |
|
11. |
Water Req. (m3/d) |
4350 (includes fire-fighting) |
2995 (deleting fire-fighting) |
|
12. |
Location (shortest dist.) from TATR
(ecologically sensitive area) (km) |
12.25 |
9.8 |
|
13. |
Approval of Standing Committee on Wildlife |
Not required |
Required for both Phase-I and Phase-II |
The extension project of a total ML area of
1475.92 ha consists of 1045.20 ah of agricultural land, 172.95 ha of Govt. land
and 257.77 ha of forestland in Phase-I. The additional ML area of 289.38ha in
Ph-I consists of 260.09 ha of agricultural land and 29.29 ha of Govt.
land. Of the total forestland of 324.57
ha in ML area of the existing project, 257.77 ha has been acquired. It is not
proposed to acquire the balance forestland of 66.80 ha under Ph.I and FC for
the balance area of 66.80 ha is proposed to be subsequently taken up in Ph.II
of the expansion project.
It was stated that the OB management has been
reworked according to which, an estimated 103.91 Mm3 of OB would be stored in
external
The Committee noted that the proposed expansion
project (phase-I and Phase-II) is at a distance of 9.8km from the TATR and may
require prior approval of the Standing Committee on Wildlife. The Committee recommended
EC for Phase-I which does not require FC, subject to prior approval of the
Standing committee on Wildlife. In case of Phase-II, the Committee also
recommended the proposal for EC subject to MOEF Circular dated 09.09.2011 and
subject to prior approval of the Standing Committee on Wildlife. The Committee
noted that Public Hearing has been conducted for both Ph-I and Ph-II of the
expansion project.
The EAC accepted the proponent’s request for EC for
expansion of production from 2.30 MTPA to 3 MTPA within the existing ML area
of 1354.64 ha, which falls at a distance 12.25 km from the TATR and does
not require approval of the Standing Committee on Wildlife. The Committee recommended
EC for expansion in production capacity from 2.3 MTPA to 3 MTPA within the ML
area of 1354.64 ha and sought a letter to this effect from the proponent for record of the
Ministry.
24. EC condition in EC granted on 14.07.2006 to
25. EC
condition in EC granted in May 2005 for Ukni Opencast Coalmine Project (1.1 MTPA to 2.2 MTPA over the
ML area of 940 ha) of M/s WCL and TOR granted on 28.10.2011 for further
expansion in prodn. from 2.20 MTPA to 3.50 MTPA and expn. in ML area from 940
ha to 1285.12 ha) of M/s Western Coalfields Ltd., located in dist. Yavatmal,
The proponent informed
that the EC letters for both the aforesaid projects had stipulated a condition
for provision of a retaining wall all along the external
It was informed that
peizometers have been installed for monitoring groundwater in the buffer zone
since Nov. 2010. One more peizometer has been installed near ML boundary where
monitoring ahs begun since Nov. 2011.
The Committee after deliberations
decided that the matter of construction of a retaining wall be referred to DGMS
for their comments for taking a decision on the matter.
The
meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.
* * *
Annexure-1
PARTICIPANTS IN 41st EXPERT APPRAISAL
COMMITTEE (THERMAL & COAL MINING) IN THE MEETING HELD ON 23rd-24th
JANUARY 2012 ON COAL SECTOR PROJECTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Shri
V.P. Raja … … … … Chairman
2. Prof.
C.R. Babu … … … … Vice-Chairman
3. Shri
T.K. Dhar … … …… … Member
4. Shri
J.L. Mehta … … … … Member
5. Prof. G.S.
Roonwal … … … … Member
6. Dr.
Shiv Attri (2nd day)… … … … Member
7. Dr. T.
Chandini … … … … Scientist
F MOEF
8. Dr.
Rubab Jaffer … … … … Scientist
B, MOEF
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Invitees:
1. Shri
R.K.Garg, Advisor, Coal India Ltd. attended the meeting on both days.
Annexure-2
PARTICIPANTS IN 41st EXPERT APPRAISAL
COMMITTEE (THERMAL & COAL MINING) IN THE MEETING HELD ON 23rd-24th
JANUARY 2012 ON COAL SECTOR PROJECTS
1. M/s
Khappa Coal Company Pvt. Ltd
1. Dr.
K C Narang, Tech. Adv., Dalmia Cements
2. Shri
P N Thakur, Head Project, KPCPL
3. Dr.
V N Choudhary, GM (Geology), Sunflag
4. Shri
R P Agarwal, MINMEC
5. Shri B D Sharma, MINMEC
6. Dr.Marisha
Sharma, MINMEC
2. M/s Neyveli Lignite Corp. Ltd
1. Shri
M Ragunathan, DGM, NLC
2. Shri R Solainathan, EE /Plnaning
3. Shri
C Shyam Sunder, VIMTA Labs
3
& 4 M/s NLC
1. Shri R Solainathan, EE /Plnaning
2. Shri
M Ragunathan, DGM, NLC
3. Shri B D Sharma, MINMEC
4. Dr.
Marisha Sharma, MINMEC
5. Ms.
Rashmi Gupta, MINMEC
5. M/s
Thesgora Coal Pvt. Ltd.
1. Shri
Arvind Pyani, VP, Thesogora
2. Shri V K Singh, Adv.
3. Shri C Palekar, Thesogora Coal
4. Shri D K Swain, Thesogora
6. M/s Singareni Collieries Comp. Ltd.
1. Shri B Ramesh Kumar, Dir (P&D)
2. Shri N Srinivasa Rao, DyGM (hydbd)
3. Shri P Sharth Kuamr, Addl. Mgr. (Env.)
4. Shri G V K Prasad, Geoprasad
5. Shri K Raghukumar, SE (Env.)
6. Dr.Durga Vara Prasad, SGP, SCCL
7. M/s
Eastern Coalfields Ltd.
1. Shri Raakesh Pandit, GM (Env.), ECL
2. Shri G Prasad, RD, CMPDI
3. Shri J M Biswal, GM (Env.)
4. Shri A Shekhar, Mgr. (Env.), CMPDI
8. M/s Gujarat Mineral Development Corp.
Ltd.
1. Shri
B P Pati, CGM
2. Shri
D U Vyas, GM
3. Shri
Vijay Jain, Dy GM (mining)
4. Dr.
Dinesh A Punchori, Mining (Env.), GMDC
5. Shri
Amrish Kuamr, AM (Env.), GMDC
6. Dr.Marisha
Sharma, Director, MINMEC
9. M/s
South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.
1. Shri M. Bhattacharya, GM (Env.)
2. Shri R N Biswas, RD, CMPDI, Bilaspur
3. Shri S C Shankar, SE (Env.)
10. M/s Central Coalfields
Ltd.
1. Shri P K Sinha, GM (Env.), CCL
2. Shri B K Sharma, Chief Manger (Env.),
CCL
3. Shri P Prasad, Chief Manger
(Hydrogeology), CMPDI
4. Shri J Chakrovorty, Sr. Manager, CMPDI
5. Shri Pushkar, Sr. Manager (env.), CMPD
11. M/s Bihar Sponge Iron Ltd.
1. Shri B D Garg, Director, BSIL
2. Shri B K Luthra, Ex. Director, BSIL
3. Shri A.K.Rana, GM (Mining), CMPDI
4. Shri K K Pandey, Manager, CMPDI
5. Shri Sunil Gor yd, BSIL
12. M/s
Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd
1. Shri A K Singh, Dir (P&P)
2. Shri S Roy Choudhary, GM Orient, MCL
3. Shri C Joydev, Sr. Mgr. (Env.), MCL
4. Shri B C Tripathi, GM (Env.), MCL
5. Shri R K Srivsatava, Lingraj OCP Area
6. Shri A K Samantray, Chief Manger
(Env.), CMPDI
7. Shri A Singh, RD, CMPDI
8. Shri K S Ganapathy, Chief Manager,
CMPDI
9. Shri S N Dash, Sr. Mgr., Mining, MCL
13. M/s Western Coalfields Ltd.
1. Shri A C Ray, GM (Env.)
2. Shri K Chakrovorty, GM (Mining), WCL
3. Shri K P Singh, Chief Manager, CMPDI
4. Dr.Debabrata Das, Sr. Off.
(Hydrogeology)
5. Shri S K Jagnaniya, CMPDI
------
ANNEXURE-3
GENERIC
TOR FOR COAL WASHERY
Based on the presentation made and discussions held, the Committee
prescribed the following TOR:
(i) A
brief description of the plant, the technology used, the source of coal, the
mode of transport of incoming unwashed coal and the outgoing washed coal.
Specific pollution control and mitigative measures for the entire process.
(ii) The
EIA-EMP report should cover the impacts and management plan for the project of
the capacity for EC is sought and the impacts of specific activities on the
environment of the region, and the environmental quality – air, water, land,
biotic community, etc. through collection of data and information, generation
of data on impacts for the rated capacity. If the washery is captive to a coal
mine/TPP/Plant the cumulative impacts on the environment and usage of water
should be brought out along with the EMP.
(iii) A
Study area map of the core zone and 10km area of the buffer showing major
industries/mines and other polluting sources, which shall also indicate the
migratory corridors of fauna, if any and the areas where endangered fauna and
plants of medicinal and economic importance are found in the area. If there are
any ecologically sensitive areas found within the 15km buffer zone, the
shortest distance from the National Park/WL Sanctuary Tiger Reserve, etc should
be shown and the comments of the Chief Wildlife Warden of the State Government
should be furnished.
(iv) Collection of one-season (non-monsoon)
primary base-line data on environmental quality – air (PM10, PM2.5,
SOx and NOx), noise, water (surface and groundwater), soil.
(iv)
Detailed
water balance should be provided. The break up of water requirement as per
different activities in the mining operations vis-à-vis washery should be given
separately. Source of water for use in mine, sanction of the competent
authority in the State Govt.. and examine if the unit can be zero discharge including
recycling and reuse of the wastewater for other uses such as green belt, etc.
(vi) Impact
of choice of the selected use of technology and impact on air quality and waste
generation (emissions and effluents).
(vii) Impacts
of mineral transportation - the entire sequence of mineral production,
transportation, handling, transfer and storage of mineral and waste, if any,
and their impacts on air quality should be shown in a flow chart with the
specific points where fugitive emissions can arise and the specific pollution
control/mitigative measures proposed to be put in place.
(viii) Details
of various facilities to be provided for the personnel involved in mineral
transportation in terms of parking, rest areas, canteen, and
effluents/pollution load from these activities.
Examine whether existing roads are adequate to take care of the
additional load of mineral [and rejects] transportation, their impacts. Details
of workshop, if any, and treatment of workshop effluents.
(ix) Impacts
of CHP, if any on air and water quality. A flow chart of water use and whether
the unit can be made a zero-discharge unit.
(x) Details
of green belt development.
(xi) Including
cost of EMP (capital and recurring) in the project cost.
(xiv) Public
Hearing details of the coal washery to include details of notices issued in the
newspaper, proceedings/minutes of public hearing, the points raised by the
general public and commitments made in a tabular form. If the Public Hearing is
in the regional language, an authenticated English Translation of the same
should be provided.
(xv)
Status of
any litigations/ court cases filed/pending on the project.
(xvi)
Submission
of sample test analysis of:
I Characteristics
of coal to be washed- this includes grade of coal and other characteristics –
ash, S and and heavy metals including levels of Hg, As, Pb, Cr etc.
II Characteristics
and quantum of washed coal.
III Characteristics
and quantum of coal waste rejects.
(xvii) Management/disposal/Use
of coal waste rejects
(xviii) Copies of MOU/Agreement
with linkages (for stand alone washery) for the capacity for which EC has been
sought.
(xxxvi)
Submission
of sample test analysis of:
Characteristics of coal to be washed- this includes
grade of coal and other characteristics – ash, S
(xxxviii) Corporate Environment Responsibility:
a) The
Company must have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by the Board of
Directors.
b) The
Environment Policy must prescribe for standard operating process/procedures to
bring into focus any infringements/deviation/violation of the environmental or
forest norms/conditions.
c) The hierarchical system or Administrative
Order of the company to deal with environmental issues and for ensuring
compliance with the environmental clearance conditions must be furnished.
d) To have
proper checks and balances, the company should have a well laid down system of
reporting of non-compliances/violations of environmental norms to the Board of
Directors of the company and/or shareholders or stakeholders at large.
____
ANNEXURE -4
GENERIC TOR
FOR AN OPENCAST COALMINE PROJECT
(i)
An
EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for …….. MTPA rated capacity in an
ML/project area of …… ha based on the generic structure specified in Appendix
III of the EIA Notification 2006.
(ii)
An
EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for ……. MTPA rated capacity cover the impacts and management plan for the
project specific activities on the environment of the region, and the
environmental quality – air, water, land, biotic community, etc. through
collection of data and information, generation of data on impacts including
prediction modelling for ………. MTPA of coal production based on approval
of project/Mining Plan for ………MTPA. Baseline data collection can be for any
season except monsoon.
(iii)
A map
specifying locations of the State, District and Project location.
(iv)
A Study area map of the core zone and 10km area of
the buffer zone (1: 50,000 scale) clearly delineating the major topographical
features such as the land use, surface drainage of rivers/streams/nalas/canals,
locations of human habitations, major constructions including railways, roads,
pipelines, major industries/mines and other polluting sources. In case of
ecologically sensitive areas such as Biosphere Reserves/National Parks/WL
Sanctuaries/ Elephant Reserves, forests (Reserved/Protected), migratory
corridors of fauna, and areas where endangered fauna and plants of medicinal
and economic importance found in the 15 km area of the buffer zone should be
given.
(v)
Land use
map (1: 50,000 scale) based on a recent satellite imagery of the study area may
also be provided with explanatory note of the land use. Satellite imagery per
se is not required.
(vi)
Map showing
the core zone delineating the agricultural land (irrigated and unirrigated,
uncultivable land (as defined in the revenue records), forest areas (as per
records), along with other physical features such as water bodies, etc should
be furnished.
(vii)
A contour
map showing the area drainage of the core zone and 2-5 km of the buffer zone
(where the water courses of the core zone ultimately join the major
rivers/streams outside the lease/project area) should also be clearly indicated
as a separate map.
(viii)
A detailed Site plan of the mine showing the
various proposed break-up of the land for mining operations such as the quarry
area, OB dumps, green belt, safety zone, buildings, infrastructure, CHP, ETP,
Stockyard, township/colony (within and adjacent to the ML), undisturbed area
and if any, in topography such as existing roads, drains/natural water bodies
are to be left undisturbed along with any natural drainage adjoining the lease
/project and modification of thereof in terms of construction of
embankments/bunds, proposed diversion/rechannelling of the water courses, etc.,
approach roads, major haul roads, etc.
(ix)
In case of
any proposed diversion of nallah/canal/river, the proposed route of
diversion/modification of drainage and their realignment, construction of
embankment etc. should also be shown on the map.
(x)
Similarly if the project involves diversion of any
road/railway line passing through the ML/project area, the proposed route of
diversion and its realignment should be shown.
(xi)
Break up of
lease/project area as per different land uses and their stage of acquisition.
LANDUSE DETAILS FOR OPENCAST PROJECT
|
S.N. |
LANDUSE |
Within ML Area (ha) |
Outside ML Area (ha) |
TOTAL |
|
1. |
Agricultural land |
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
Wasteland |
|
|
|
|
4. |
Grazing land |
|
|
|
|
5. |
Surface water bodies |
|
|
|
|
6. |
Settlements |
|
|
|
|
7. |
Others (specify) |
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
(xii)
Break-up of
lease/project area as per mining operations.
(xiii)
Impact of
changes in the land use due to the start of the projects if much of the land
being acquired is agricultural land/forestland/grazing land.
(xiv)
Collection
of one-season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on environmental quality -
air (PM10, PM2.5, SOx, NOx and
heavy metals such as Hg, Pb, Cr, As, etc), noise, water (surface and
groundwater), soil along with one-season met data coinciding with the same
season for AAQ collection period.
(xv)
Map of the
study area (1: 50, 000 scale) (core and buffer zone clearly delineating the
location of various stations superimposed with location of habitats, other
industries/mines, polluting sources. The number and location of the stations in
both core zone and buffer zone should be selected on the basis of size of
lease/project area, the proposed impacts in the downwind (air)/downstream
(surface water)/groundwater regime (based on flow). One station should be in
the upwind/upstream/non-impact/non-polluting area as a control station. The
monitoring should be as per CPCB guidelines and parameters for water testing
for both ground water and surface water as per ISI standards and CPCB
classification wherever applicable. Values should be provided based on
desirable limits.
(xvi)
Study on
the existing flora and fauna in the study area (10km) carried out by an
institution of relevant discipline and the list of flora and fauna duly
authenticated separately for the core and buffer zone and a statement clearly
specifying whether the study area forms a part of the migratory corridor of any
endangered fauna. If the study area has endangered flora and fauna, or if the
area is occasionally visited or used as a habitat by Schedule-I fauna, or if
the project falls within 15 km of an ecologically sensitive area, or used as a
migratory corridor then a comprehensive Conservation Plan should be prepared
and submitted with EIA-EMP Report and comments from the CWLW of the State Govt.
also obtained and furnished.
(xvii)
Details of
mineral reserves, geological status of the study are and the seams to be
worked, ultimate working depth and progressive stage-wise working scheme until
end of mine life should be reflected on the basis of the approved rated
capacity and calendar plans of production from the approved Mining Plan.
Geological maps and sections should be included. The progressive mine
development and Conceptual Final Mine Closure Plan should also be shown in
figures.
(xviii)
Details of
mining methods, technology, equipment to be used, etc., rationale for selection
of that technology and equipment proposed to be used vis-à-vis the potential
impacts.
(xix)
Impact of
mining on hydrology, modification of natural drainage, diversion and
channelling of the existing rivers/water courses flowing though the ML and
adjoining the lease/project and the impact on the existing users and impacts of
mining operations thereon.
(xx)
Detailed
water balance should be provided. The break up of water requirement for the
various mine operations should be given separately.
(xxi)
Source of
water for use in mine, sanction of the competent authority in the State Govt.
and impacts vis-à-vis the competing users.
(xxii)
Impact of
mining and water abstraction use in mine on the hydrogeology and groundwater
regime within the core zone and 10 km buffer zone including long–term modelling
studies on. Details of rainwater harvesting and measures for recharge of
groundwater should be reflected in case there us a declining trend of
groundwater availability and/or if the area falls within dark/grey zone.
(xxiii)
Impact of
blasting, noise and vibrations.
(xxiv)
Impacts of
mining on the AAQ, predictive modelling using the ISCST-3 (Revised) or latest
model.
(xxv)
Impacts of
mineral transportation – within and outside the lease/project along with
flow-chart indicating the specific areas generating fugitive emissions. Impacts
of transportation, handling, transfer of mineral and waste on air quality,
generation of effluents from workshop, management plan for maintenance of HEMM,
machinery, equipment. Details of various facilities to be provided in terms of
parking, rest areas, canteen, and effluents/pollution load from these
activities.
(xxvi)
Details of
waste generation – OB, topsoil – as per the approved calendar programme, and
their management shown in figures as well explanatory chapter with tables
giving progressive development and mine closure plan, green belt development,
backfilling programme and conceptual post mining land use.
(xxvii)
Progressive
Green belt and afforestation plan (both in text, figures as well as in tables
prepared by MOEF) and selection of species (local) for the
afforestation/plantation programme based on original survey/landuse.
Table 1: Stage-wise Landuse and Reclamation Area (ha)
|
S.N. |
Land use Category |
Present (1st Year) |
5th Year |
10th Year |
20th year |
24th Year (end of Mine life)* |
|
1. |
Backfilled Area (Reclaimed with plantation) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
Excavated Area (not reclaimed)/void |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
External Reclaimed with plantation) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
Reclaimed Top soil dump |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
Green Built Area |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. |
Undisturbed area (brought under plantation) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. |
Roads (avenue plantation) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8. |
Area around buildings and Infrastructure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
110* |
110* |
110* |
110* |
110* |
* As a representative example
Table 2: Stage-wise Cumulative
|
S.N. |
YEAR* |
Green Belt |
External Dump |
Backfilled Area |
Others (Undisturbed Area/etc) |
TOTAL |
|||||
|
|
|
Area (ha) |
No. of trees |
Area (ha) |
No. of Trees |
Area (ha) |
No. of Trees |
Area (ha) |
No. of Trees |
Area (ha) |
No. of Trees |
|
1. |
1st year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
3rd year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
5th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
10th yesr |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
15th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. |
20th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. |
25th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8. |
30th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9. |
34th year (end of mine life) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10. |
34-37th Year (Post-mining) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85 |
|
* As a representative example
(xxviii)
Conceptual
Final Mine Closure Plan, post mining land use and restoration of land/habitat
to pre- mining. A Plan for the ecological restoration of the area post mining
and for land use should be prepared with detailed cost provisions. Impact and
management of wastes and issues of rehandling (wherever applicable) and
backfilling and progressive mine closure and reclamation.
Table 3: Post-Mining Landuse Pattern of ML/Project Area (ha)
|
S.N. |
Land use during Mining |
Land Use (ha) |
||||
|
1. |
External |
|
Water Body |
Public Use |
Undisturbed |
TOTAL |
|
2. |
Top soil Dump |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
Excavation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
Roads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
Built up area |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
Green Belt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. |
Undisturbed Area |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
85 |
|
|
|
110 |
(xxix)
Flow chart
of water balance. Treatment of effluents from workshop, township, domestic
wastewater, mine water discharge, etc. Details of STP in colony and ETP in
mine. Recycling of water to the max. possible extent.
(xxx)
Occupational
health issues. Baseline data on the health of the population in the impact zone
and measures for occupational health and safety of the personnel and manpower
for the mine.
(xxxi)
Risk
Assessment and Disaster Preparedness and Management Plan.
(xxxii)
Integrating
in the Env. Management Plan with measures for minimising use of natural
resources - water, land, energy, etc.
(xxxiii)
Including
cost of EMP (capital and recurring) in the project cost and for progressive and
final mine closure plan.
(xxxiv)
Details of
R&R. Detailed project specific
R&R Plan with data on the existing socio-economic status of the population
(including tribals, SC/ST, BPL families) found in the study area and broad plan
for resettlement of the displaced population, site for the resettlement colony,
alternate livelihood concerns/employment for the displaced people, civic and
housing amenities being offered, etc and costs along with the schedule of the
implementation of the R&R Plan.
(xxxv)
CSR Plan
along with details of villages and specific budgetary provisions (capital and
recurring) for specific activities over the life of the project.
(xxxvi)
Public
Hearing should cover the details of notices issued in the newspaper,
proceedings/minutes of public hearing, the points raised by the general public
and commitments made by the proponent should be presented in a tabular form. If
the Public Hearing is in the regional language, an authenticated English
Translation of the same should be provided.
(xxxvii)
In built
mechanism of self-monitoring of compliance of environmental regulations.
(xxxx) Status of any litigations/
court cases filed/pending on the project.
(xxxxi) Submission of sample test analysis of:
Characteristics of coal - this includes grade of
coal and other characteristics – ash, S and heavy metals including levels of Hg,
As, Pb, Cr etc.
(xxxxii) Copy of clearances/approvals – such as Forestry clearances,
Mining Plan Approval,
NOC from Flood and
Irrigation Dept. (if req.), etc. wherever applicable.
(A) FORESTRY CLEARANCE
|
TOTAL ML/PROJECT
AREA (ha) |
TOTAL FORESTLAND (ha) |
Date of FC |
Extent of forestland |
Balance area for which FC is yet to be obtained |
Status of appl. for diversion of forestland |
|
|
|
If more than one, provide details of each FC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(B) MINING
PLAN/PROJECT APPROVAL
Date of Approval of Mining Plan/Project Approval:
Copy
of Letter of Approval of Mining Plan/Project Approval
(xxxviii) Corporate Environment Responsibility:
a) The
Company must have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by the Board of
Directors.
b) The
Environment Policy must prescribe for standard operating process/procedures to
bring into focus any infringements/deviation/violation of the environmental or
forest norms/conditions.
c) The hierarchical system or Administrative
Order of the company to deal with environmental issues and for ensuring
compliance with the environmental clearance conditions must be furnished.
d) To have
proper checks and balances, the company should have a well laid down system of
reporting of non-compliances/violations of environmental norms to the Board of
Directors of the company and/or shareholders or stakeholders at large.
___
ANNEXURE -5
GENERIC TOR
FOR AN UNDERGROUND COALMINE PROJECT
(i)
An
EIA-EMP Report should be prepared for a peak capacity of ………….. MTPA over an area of ………….. ha
addressing the impacts of the underground coalmine project including the
aspects of mineral transportation and issues of impacts on hydrogeology, plan
for conservation of flora/fauna and afforestation/plantation programme based on
the generic structure specified in Appendix III of the EIA Notification 2006.. Baseline data collection can be for any season
except monsoon.
(ii)
The EIA-EMP
report should also cover the impacts and management plan for the project
specific activities on the environment of the region, and the environmental
quality – air, water, land, biotic community, etc. through collection of
baseline data and information, generation of baseline data on impacts for ……. MTPA of coal
production based on approval of project/Mining Plan.
(iii)
A Study
area map of the core zone and 10km area of the buffer zone (15 km of the buffer
zone in case of ecologically sensitive areas) delineating the major
topographical features such as the land use, drainage, locations of habitats,
major construction including railways, roads, pipelines, major industries/mines
and other polluting sources, which shall also indicate the migratory corridors
of fauna, if any and the areas where endangered fauna and plants of medicinal
and economic importance are found in the area.
(iv)
Map showing
the core zone along with 3-5 km of the buffer zone) delineating the
agricultural land (irrigated and unirrigated, uncultivable land (as defined in
the revenue records), forest areas (as per records) and grazing land and
wasteland and water bodies.
(v)
Contour map
at 3m interval along with Site plan of the mine (lease/project area with about
3-5 km of the buffer zone) showing the various surface structures such as
buildings, infrastructure, CHP, ETP, Stockyard, township/colony
(within/adjacent to the ML), green belt and undisturbed area and if any
existing roads, drains/natural water bodies are to be left undisturbed along
with details of natural drainage adjoining the lease/project and modification
of thereof in terms of construction of embankments/bunds, proposed
diversion/rechannelling of the water courses, etc., highways, passing through
the lease/project area.
(vi)
Original
land use (agricultural land/forestland/grazing land/wasteland/water bodies) of
the area. Impacts of project, if any on the landuse, in particular,
agricultural land/forestland/grazing land/water bodies falling within the
lease/project and acquired for mining operations. Extent of area under surface
rights and under mining rights.
|
S.N. |
ML/Project Land use |
Area under Surface Rights (ha) |
Area Under Mining Rights (ha) |
Area under Both (ha) |
|
1. |
Agricultural land |
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
Grazing Land |
|
|
|
|
4. |
Settlements |
|
|
|
|
5. |
Others (specify) |
|
|
|
Area Under Surface
Rights
|
S.N. |
Details |
Area (ha) |
|
1. |
Buildings |
|
|
2. |
Infrastructure |
|
|
3. |
Roads |
|
|
4. |
Others (specify) |
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
(vii)
Study on
the existing flora and fauna in the study area carried out by an institution of
relevant discipline and the list of flora and fauna duly authenticated
separately for the core and buffer zone and a statement clearly specifying
whether the study area forms a part of the migratory corridor of any endangered
fauna. The flora and fauna details should be furnished separately for the core
zone and buffer zone. The report and the list should be authenticated by the concerned
institution carrying out the study and the names of the species scientific and
common names) along with the classification under the Wild Life Protection Act,
1972 should be furnished.
(viii)
Details of
mineral reserves, geological status of the study area and the seams to be
worked, ultimate working depth and progressive stage-wise working plan/scheme
until end of mine life should be reflected on the basis of the approved rated
capacity and calendar plans of production from the approved Mining Plan. Geological
maps should also be included.
(ix)
Impact of
mining on hydrology, modification of natural drainage, diversion and
channelling of the existing rivers/water courses flowing though the ML and
adjoining the lease/project and the impact on the existing users and impacts of
mining operations thereon.
(x)
Collection
of one-season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on environmental quality –
air (PM10, PM2.5, SOx, NOx and
heavy metals such as Hg, Pb, Cr, AS, etc), noise, water (surface and
groundwater), soil along with one-season met data.
(xi)
Map of the
study area (core and buffer zone) clearly delineating the location of various
monitoring stations (air/water/soil and noise – each shown separately)
superimposed with location of habitats, wind roses, other industries/mines,
polluting sources. The number and location of the stations should be selected
on the basis of the proposed impacts in the downwind/downstream/groundwater
regime. One station should be in the upwind/upstream/non-impact non-polluting
area as a control station. Wind roses to determine air pollutant dispersion and
impacts thereof shall be determined. Monitoring should be as per CPCB
guidelines and standards for air, water, noise notified under Environment
Protection Rules. Parameters for water testing for both ground and surface
water should be as per ISI standards and CPCB classification of surface water
wherever applicable.
(xii)
Impact of
mining and water abstraction and mine water discharge in mine on the
hydrogeology and groundwater regime within the core zone and 10km buffer zone
including long–term modelling studies on the impact of mining on the
groundwater regime. Details of rainwater harvesting and measures for recharge
of groundwater should be reflected wherever the areas are declared dark/grey
from groundwater development.
(xiii)
Study on
subsidence, measures for mitigation/prevention of subsidence, modelling
subsidence prediction and its use during mine operation, safety issues.
(xiv)
Detailed
water balance should be provided. The break up of water requirement as per
different activities in the mining operations, including use of water for sand
stowing should be given separately. Source of water for use in mine, sanction
of the competent authority in the State Govt. and impacts vis-à-vis the
competing users should be provided.
(xv)
Impact of
choice of mining method, technology, selected use of machinery - and impact on
air quality, mineral transportation, coal handling & storage/stockyard,
etc, Impact of blasting, noise and vibrations.
(xvi)
Impacts of
mineral transportation – within and outside the lease/project. The entire
sequence of mineral production, transportation, handling, transfer and storage
of mineral and waste, and their impacts on air quality should be shown in a
flow chart with the specific points where fugitive emissions can arise and the
specific pollution control/mitigative measures proposed to be put in place.
Examine the adequacy of roads existing in the area and if new roads are
proposed, the impact of their construction and use particularly if forestland
is used.
(xvii)
Details of
various facilities to be provided in terms of parking, rest areas, canteen, and
effluents/pollution load from these activities.
Examine whether existing roads are adequate to take care of the
additional load of mineral and their impacts.
(xviii)
Examine the
number and efficiency of mobile/static water sprinkling system along the main
mineral transportation road within the mine, approach roads to the
mine/stockyard/siding, and also the frequency of their use in impacting air
quality.
(xix)
Impacts of
CHP, if any on air and water quality. A flow chart of water use and whether the
unit can be made a zero-discharge unit.
(xx)
Conceptual
Final Mine Closure Plan along with the fund requirement for the detailed
activities proposed there under. Impacts
of change in land use for mining operations and whether the land can be
restored for agricultural use post mining.
Table 1 Stage-wise
Cumulative
|
S.N. |
YEAR* |
Green Belt |
External Dump |
Backfilled Area |
Others (Undisturbed Area/etc) |
TOTAL |
|||||
|
|
|
Area (ha) |
No. of trees |
Area (ha) |
No. of Trees |
Area (ha) |
No. of Trees |
Area (ha) |
No. of Trees |
Area (ha) |
No. of Trees |
|
1. |
1st year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
3rd year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
5th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
10th yesr |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
15th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. |
20th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. |
25th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8. |
30th year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9. |
34th year (end of mine life) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10. |
34-37th Year (Post-mining) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85* |
2,12,500 |
*As a representative
example
(xxi)
Occupational
health issues. Baseline data on the health of the population in the impact zone
and measures for occupational health and safety of the personnel and manpower
for the mine should be furnished.
(xxii)
Details of
cost of EMP (capital and recurring) in the project cost and for final mine
closure plan. The specific costs (capital and recurring) of each pollution
control/mitigative measures proposed in the project until end of mine life and
a statement that this is included in the project cost.
(xxiii)
Integrating
in the Env. Management Plan with measures for minimising use of natural
resources – water, land, energy, raw materials/mineral, etc.
(xxiv)
R&R:
Detailed project specific R&R Plan with data on the existing socio-economic
status (including tribals, SC/ST) of the population in the study area and broad
plan for resettlement of the displaced population, site for the resettlement
colony, alternate livelihood concerns/employment for the displaced people,
civic and housing amenities being offered, etc and costs along with the
schedule of the implementation of the R&R Plan.
(xxv)
CSR Plan
along with details of villages and specific budgetary provisions (capital and
recurring) for specific activities over the life of the project.
(xxvi)
Public
Hearing should cover the details as specified in the EIA Notification 2006, and
include notices issued in the newspaper, proceedings/minutes of public hearing,
the points raised by the general public and commitments by the proponent made
should be presented in a tabular form. If the Public Hearing is in the regional
language, an authenticated English Translation of the same should be provided.
(xxvii)
Status of
any litigations/ court cases filed/pending in any Court/Tribunal on the project
should be furnished.
(xxxvii)
Submission
of sample test analysis of:
(xxxvii) Characteristics of coal - this includes
grade of coal and other characteristics – ash, S
and
heavy metals including levels of Hg, As, Pb, Cr etc.
(xxxviii) Copy of clearances/approvals – such as
Forestry clearances, Mining Plan Approval, NOC from Flood and Irrigation Dept.
(if req.), etc.
(A) FORESTRY CLEARANCE
|
TOTAL ML/PROJECT
AREA (ha) |
TOTAL FORESTLAND (ha) |
Date of FC |
Extent of forestland |
Balance area for which FC is yet to be obtained |
Status of appl. for diversion of forestland |
|
|
|
If more than one, provide details of each FC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(B) MINING
PLAN /PROJECT APPROVAL
Date of Approval of Mining Plan/Project Approval:
Copy
of Letter of Approval of Mining Plan/Project Approval
(xxxviii) Corporate Environment Responsibility:
a) The
Company must have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by the Board of
Directors.
b) The
Environment Policy must prescribe for standard operating process/procedures to
bring into focus any infringements/deviation/violation of the environmental or
forest norms/conditions.
c) The hierarchical system or Administrative
Order of the company to deal with environmental issues and for ensuring
compliance with the environmental clearance conditions must be furnished.
d) To have
proper checks and balances, the company should have a well laid down system of
reporting of non-compliances/violations of environmental norms to the Board of
Directors of the company and/or shareholders or stakeholders at large.
___
ANNEXURE-6
GENERIC TOR
FOR AN OPENCAST-CUM-UNDERGROUND COALMINE PROJECT
(i)
An
EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for a combined rated capacity of…….. MTPA
for OC-cum-UG project which consists of ……. MTPA for OC and ………. MTPA
for UG in an ML/project area of …… ha based on the generic structure specified
in Appendix III of the EIA Notification 2006.
(ii)
An
EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for ……. MTPA rated capacity cover the impacts and management plan for the
project specific activities on the environment of the region, and the
environmental quality – air, water, land, biotic community, etc. through
collection of data and information, generation of data on impacts including
prediction modelling for ………. MTPA of coal
production based on approval of project/Mining Plan for …….. MTPA. Baseline
data collection can be for any season except monsoon.
(iii)
A map
specifying locations of the State, District and Project location.
(iv)
A Study area map of the core zone and 10km area of
the buffer zone (1: 50,000 scale) clearly delineating the major topographical
features such as the land use, surface drainage of rivers/streams/nalas/canals,
locations of human habitations, major constructions including railways, roads,
pipelines, major industries/mines and other polluting sources. In case of
ecologically sensitive areas such as Biosphere Reserves/National Parks/WL
Sanctuaries/ Elephant Reserves, forests (Reserved/Protected), migratory
corridors of fauna, and areas where endangered fauna and plants of medicinal
and economic importance found in the 15 km area of the buffer zone should be
given.
(v)
Land use
map (1: 50,000 scale) based on a recent satellite imagery of the study area may
also be provided with explanatory note of the land use. Satellite imagery per
se is not required.
(vi)
Map showing
the core zone delineating the agricultural land (irrigated and unirrigated,
uncultivable land (as defined in the revenue records), forest areas (as per
records), along with other physical features such as water bodies, etc should
be furnished.
(vii)
A contour
map showing the area drainage of the core zone and 2-5 km of the buffer zone
(where the water courses of the core zone ultimately join the major
rivers/streams outside the lease/project area) should also be clearly indicated
as a separate map.
(viii)
A detailed Site plan of the mine showing the
various proposed break-up of the land for mining operations such as the quarry
area, OB dumps, green belt, safety zone, buildings, infrastructure, CHP, ETP,
Stockyard, township/colony (within and adjacent to the ML), undisturbed area
and if any, in topography such as existing roads, drains/natural water bodies
are to be left undisturbed along with any natural drainage adjoining the lease
/project and modification of thereof in terms of construction of
embankments/bunds, proposed diversion/rechannelling of the water courses, etc.,
approach roads, major haul roads, etc.
(ix)
In case of
any proposed diversion of nallah/canal/river, the proposed route of
diversion/modification of drainage and their realignment, construction of
embankment etc. should also be shown on the map.
(x)
Similarly if the project involves diversion of any
road/railway line passing through the ML/project area, the proposed route of
diversion and its realignment should be shown.
(xi)
Break up of
lease/project area as per different land uses and their stage of acquisition.
LANDUSE DETAILS FOR
OPENCAST PROJECT
|
S.N. |
LANDUSE |
Within ML Area (ha) |
Outside ML Area (ha) |
TOTAL (ha) |
|
1. |
Agricultural land |
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
Wasteland |
|
|
|
|
4. |
Grazing land |
|
|
|
|
5. |
Surface water bodies |
|
|
|
|
6. |
Settlements |
|
|
|
|
7. |
Others (specify) |
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
LANDUSE DETAILS FOR
UNDERGROUND PROJECT
|
S.N. |
ML/Project Land use |
Area under Surface Rights (ha) |
Area Under Mining Rights (ha) |
Area under Both (ha) |
|
1. |
Agricultural land |
|
|
|
|
2. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
Grazing Land |
|
|
|
|
4. |
Wasteland |
|
|
|
|
5. |
Water Bodies |
|
|
|
|
6. |
Settlements |
|
|
|
|
7. |
Others (specify) |
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
Area Under Surface
Rights
|
S.N. |
Details |
Area (ha) |
|
1. |
Buildings |
|
|
2. |
Infrastructure |
|
|
3. |
Roads |
|
|
4. |
Others (specify) |
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
(xii)
Break-up of
lease/project area as per mining operations.
(xiii)
Impact of
changes in the land use due to the start of the projects if much of the land being
acquired is agricultural land/forestland/grazing land.
(xiv)
Collection
of one-season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on environmental quality -
air (PM10, PM2.5, SOx , NOx and
heavy metals such as Hg, Pb, Cr, As, etc), noise, water (surface and groundwater),
soil along with one-season met data.
(xv)
Map of the
study area (1: 50, 000 scale) (core and buffer zone clearly delineating the
location of various stations superimposed with location of habitats, other
industries/mines, polluting sources. The number and location of the stations in
both core zone and buffer zone should be selected on the basis of size of
lease/project area, the proposed impacts in the downwind (air)/downstream
(surface water)/groundwater regime (based on flow). One station should be in
the upwind/upstream/non-impact/non-polluting area as a control station. The
monitoring should be as per CPCB guidelines and parameters for water testing
for both ground water and surface water as per ISI standards and CPCB
classification wherever applicable. Values should be presented in comparison to
desirable limits.
(xvi)
Study on
the existing flora and fauna in the study area (10km) carried out by an
institution of relevant discipline and the list of flora and fauna duly
authenticated separately for the core and buffer zone and a statement clearly
specifying whether the study area forms a part of the migratory corridor of any
endangered fauna. If the study area has endangered flora and fauna, or if the
project falls within 15 km of an ecologically sensitive area, then a
comprehensive Conservation Plan should be prepared and furnished along with
comments from the CWLW of the State Govt.
(xvii)
Details of
mineral reserves, geological status of the study are and the seams to be
worked, ultimate working depth and progressive stage-wise working scheme until
end of mine life should be reflected on the basis of the approved rated
capacity and calendar plans of production from the approved Mining Plan.
Geological maps and sections should be included. The progressive mine development
and final mine closure plan should also be shown in figures.
(xviii)
Details of
mining methods, technology, equipment to be used, etc., rationale for selection
of that technology and equipment proposed to be used vis-à-vis the potential
impacts.
(xix)
Study on subsidence,
measures for mitigation/prevention of subsidence, modelling subsidence
prediction and its use during mine operation, safety issues.
(xx)
Impact of
mining on hydrology, modification of natural drainage, diversion and
channelling of the existing rivers/water courses flowing though the ML and
adjoining the lease/project and the impact on the existing users and impacts of
mining operations thereon.
(xxi)
Detailed
water balance should be provided. The break up of water requirement for the
various mine operations should be given separately.
(xxii)
Source of
water for use in mine, sanction of the competent authority in the State Govt.
and impacts vis-à-vis the competing users.
(xxiii)
Impact of
mining and water abstraction use in mine on the hydrogeology and groundwater
regime within the core zone and 10 km buffer zone including long–term modelling
studies on. Details of rainwater harvesting and measures for recharge of
groundwater should be reflected in case there us a declining trend of
groundwater availability and/or if the area falls within dark/grey zone.
(xxiv)
Impact of
blasting, noise and vibrations.
(xxv)
Impacts of
mining on the AAQ, predictive modelling using the ISCST-3 (Revised) or latest
model.
(xxvi)
Impacts of
mineral transportation – within and outside the lease/project along with
flow-chart indicating the specific areas generating fugitive emissions. Impacts
of transportation, handling, transfer of mineral and waste on air quality,
generation of effluents from workshop, management plan for maintenance of HEMM,
machinery, equipment. Details of various facilities to be provided in terms of
parking, rest areas, canteen, and effluents/pollution load from these
activities.
(xxvii)
Details of
waste generation – OB, topsoil – as per the approved calendar programme, and
their management shown in figures as well explanatory chapter with tables
giving progressive development and mine closure plan, green belt development,
backfilling programme and conceptual post mining land use.
(xxviii)
Impact and
management of wastes and issues of rehandling and backfilling and progressive mine
closure and reclamation.
(xxix)
Flow chart
of water balance. Treatment of effluents from workshop, township, domestic
wastewater, mine water discharge, etc. Details of STP in colony and ETP in
mine. Recycling of water to the max. possible extent.
(xxx)
Occupational
health issues. Baseline data on the health of the population in the impact zone
and measures for occupational health and safety of the personnel and manpower
for the mine.
(xxxi)
Risk
Assessment and Disaster Preparedness and Management Plan.
(xxxii)
Integrating
in the Env. Management Plan with measures for minimising use of natural
resources - water, land, energy, etc.
(xxxiii)
Progressive
Green belt and afforestation plan (both in text, figures as well as in tables
prepared by MOEF given below) and selection of species (local) for the
afforestation/plantation programme based on original survey/landuse.
Table 1: Stage-wise
Landuse and Reclamation Area (ha)
|
S.N. |
Land use Category |
Present (1st Year) |
5th Year |
10th Year |
20th year |
24th Year (end of Mine life)* |
|
1. |
Backfilled Area (Reclaimed with plantation) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
Excavated Area (not reclaimed)/void |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. |
External Reclaimed with plantation) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. |
Reclaimed Top soil dump |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
Green Built Area |
|
|
|
|