The Minutes of the 96th Meeting of the Expert Appraisal Committee for Building/Construction Projects/Township and Area Development Projects, Coastal Regulation Zone, Infrastructure Development and Miscellaneous projects held on 25th January, 2011 at Fazal Hall, Scope Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi.
2. Opening
Remarks of the Chairman.
The
Chairman welcomed the members to the 96th meeting of the EAC. Member
Secretary informed that in the last meeting of the EAC held on 18th
- 20th January, 2011, some of the proposals were deferred because of
the shortage of time. M/s Posco India Ltd. has also submitted a reply to the
observations raised during the 94th EAC meeting held on 30th
November, 2010 to 1st – 2nd December, 2010. A
presentation was made by them to Hon’ble MEF regarding the proposed project in
which Prof. Ramesh Ramchandran of the Institute of Ocean Management, Anna
University, Chennai briefed about the shoreline changes around the project
site. The above project is also to be considered in this meeting.
3. Reconsideration
of Old Projects
3.1
Review
of CRZ and Environmental clearance issued for the Captive Port: Deliberations
on the reports of the review committee constituted for integrated Steel Plant
of M/s Posco
India Pvt. Ltd. at
Jagatsinghpur District, Orissa. [F.No.10-9/2006-IA-III]
The
Environmental and CRZ Clearance for the construction of proposed captive port
at Jatadhar Muhan Creek, Near Paradeep, District Jagatsinghpur, Orissa by M/s
Posco India Pvt. Ltd. was issued on 15.05.2007. After getting complaints and
various representations against the project, the Ministry constituted a four
member committee under the Chairmanship of Ms. Meena Gupta. The committee was
asked to review the Environment, CRZ and other clearances given by MoEF and
State and local authorities in connection with POSCO project. The report was
submitted to the Ministry in two parts- one by Ms. Meena Gupta and the second
one by others each giving different findings and recommendations. The 3 members
of the Committee have recommended revocation of the Environmental and CRZ
Clearance issued to the project whereas the Chairperson of the Committee has
recommended continuation of the clearance with an advice to the Ministry to
request Expert Appraisal Committee’s to look into certain aspects of the
project.
2. In the light of deliberations of Ms.
Meena Gupta Committee related to the Port project, the EAC examined and
discussed the details in the EAC meetings held on 9th -10th
November, 2010 and 30th November, 2010 & 1st to 2nd
December, 2010. The Committee sought additional information including the
comprehensive EIA. In the later meeting, Senior officers from State Government
of Orissa, Orissa Coastal Zone Management Authority and State Pollution Control
Board also invited to the meeting for discussion. M/s Posco India Pvt. Ltd.
submitted the comprehensive EIA to all the committee members. The details
submitted and circulated were discussed during the meeting.
3. Prof. Ramesh Ramchandran of the Institute
for Ocean Management, Anna University, Chennai was invited to make a
presentation on the location of the project site in view of the studies
undertaken regarding the shoreline study of the stretch from Gopalpur to
Paradip which IOM had carried out along the coast of the proposed Captive Port
of M/s Posco India Pvt. Ltd. at Jagatsinghpur District, Orissa.
4. The Committee noted that:
(a). The
proposed site for M/s POSCO port is ~3.4km stretch along the creek (Jatadhar),
on the seaside of the channel, breakwaters and the mouth opening to the creek
has been located.
(b). The
following are the characteristics of the 3.4km of the coastline:-
Erosion Characteristics |
Distance (m) |
High erosion |
200 |
Medium erosion |
2000 |
Low erosion |
940 |
Stable coast |
340 |
Low accretion |
Nil |
Medium accretion |
Nil |
High accretion |
Nil |
Total |
3480 |
(c). With
regard to the change along the shore it is observed that the mouth of the creek
opens at different locations at different seasons of a year. During the study
period the mouth opening of the creek is at latitude of 20o12.6’N
and longitude 86o34.5’E, and latitude 20o12.1’N and
longitude 86o33.9’E. This mouth opening is proposed to be the
opening to the port through which the ships would enter the creek. M/s POSCO
port is located at the landward side of the creek.
(d). Although
seasonal shifts in the Jatadhar Creek mouth was noticed in the past, since
2010, the creek opening has shifted more south and remains stable. Hence this
section of the creek mouth has not been considered for erosion/accretion
dynamics.
(e). A breakwater at the northern side of
1.07 km and south breakwater 1.6 km is proposed to be developed, latitude of 20o12.6’N
and longitude 86o34.5’E, and latitude 20o12.1’N and
longitude 86o33.9’E, respectively.
5. During the discussion, the Committee
suggested following additional conditions:
I
– Shoreline protection
(i)
No
construction shall be undertaken in the “high erosion” zone as indicated in the
map produced by the Institute for Ocean Management, Anna University. Port
limits as approved by the competent authority along with the coordinates shall
also be supplied to the MoEF.
(ii)
Shoreline
protection measures to counter erosion on the northern side of north breakwater
shall be undertaken using modern techniques. A well designed and matching sand
bypassing system shall be put be put in place.
(iii)
The shoreline shall be protected to
ensure that no further erosion occurs on the northern side of the Northern
Breakwater up to Paradip.
(iv)
The initial shoreline protection
shall be carried out through pumping of the good dredged material obtained from
capital dredging, to the north of northern breakwater.
(v)
A permanent pipeline of a suitable
diameter is to be laid below the channel (-23m and below) for sand by-pass
system.
(vi)
The good dredged material obtained
from maintenance dredging (at least about 3 million m3) shall be
used for nourishing the northern shoreline in addition to the sand bypassing
system.
(vii) The dredging
quantities indicated in the report must be updated in the light of dredging
carried out for IOCL in the creek after 2007 and consequential likely reduction
in the volume
(viii) Nourishment of the coast shall cover
not only the area which is likely to be affected due to construction of
breakwater (about 5.5km as per model report of DHI-Fig 2 and 3) but also shall
extend till the Paradip Port site.
(ix)
For the
sand bypassing system an amount of at least Rs.6.0 crores shall be earmarked
along with the sufficient budgetary provisions for maintenance including
man-power.
I. I Monitoring
of shoreline during construction and post construction
phases of the project
(i)
A
MOU shall be signed between NIO and Posco which shall include works relating to
monitoring of the shoreline, sand bypass system, beach nourishment and any
other activity that has an impact along the coast/coastal waters. National
Center for sustainable Coastal Management shall monitor the progress
periodically on behalf of the MoEF.
(ii)
Periodical
study on shore line changes shall be conducted, mitigation measures taken and
report submitted along with the six- monthly monitoring report.
(iii) Posco shall ensure
that no industrial activity shall be carried out within CRZ area other than
those permissible under the Notification.
II-
Site Selection Process
The selection of POSCO captive port site was mainly based
on operational reasons supported by technical feasibility. POSCO should have
examined all the identified sites based on the environmental parameters and
selection should have been based on technical/operational/economical and also
environmental justifications. The Multi Criteria Matrix (MCM) analysis
submitted by Posco depicts mostly the economic criteria and not the
environmental parameters. Further a uniform parameter description is desirable
for a better comparison of various site options on a common footing. The
potential of the existing facilities and those planned for accommodating bigger
vessels at Paradip port has not been explored.
(i)
Posco
shall submit a modified analysis giving main thrust on environmental issues
(marine environment in particular) besides other parameters such as transport
logistics, ease of operation etc and finally zeroing in on JMC for development
of a captive port.
(ii)
To avoid the adverse impact of
increased in ship movement (combined of existing and proposed ports), Posco
shall assess the cumulative impacts of ship movement on the marine environment
and shall submit to the Ministry a detailed EMP to address impacts of the
same.
(iii)
To avoid the adverse impact of combined
terrestrial activities (existing and proposed ports and industries), Posco
shall assess the impacts and submit a detailed EMP to address the adverse
impacts – if any, to the Ministry. The EMP so prepared should clearly list the
role, responsibilities and liabilities including the action plan specifying commitments,
role and responsibilities to avoid any adverse impact of terrestrial activities
on the marine environment. The developer shall commit to full responsibility
for liability and penalty (in case of any adverse impact) if any.
III –
Marine Biological Activities - Sea
turtle and Horse shoe crabs
Additional documentary evidences to substantiate that i)
the proposed development will not impact the migration of Olive Ridley turtle
in the area and ii) that the present site has not witnessed any nesting so far.
(i)
Posco shall submit detailed Marine
Environment Conservation Plan to promote nesting of Olive Ridley Turtle as well
Mangrove Plantation. The implementation of conservation plan should start
before commencing of construction of port. The plan should clearly mention the
role and responsibilities in implementation and monitoring the conservation
plan along with dedicated funding provisions. The detailed compliance report
for the conservation plan shall be submitted every six months.
(ii)
Similarly,
in the case of horse shoe crabs, Posco shall submit the grain size analysis
carried out at the site of development and documentary evidences to show that
the animal would prefer a grain size of 0.18 to 0.20 mm only.
(iii)
Grain
size distribution analysis shall be carried out scientifically by calculating
the uniformity coefficient to confirm the sediment grain size that does not
support nesting for horse shoe crabs.
IV – Fishing Jetty
(i)
The
location and size of the fishing jetty intended to compensate the loss of fishing
activity arising out of development of the port at JMC shall be carried by
Posco in consultation with the local people to their satisfaction and
requirement. Separate clearance under Coastal Regulation Zone Notification,
2011 for the proposed fishing jetty shall be obtained.
(ii)
Posco shall made a detailed assessment
of the impacts on fishing communities and resultant economic losses covered in
R&R package – along with requirement of fishing jetty and identified beneficiaries, location
identified for of jetty (and alternative options considered).
V
– Sea water Intake and Outfall
It is noted that the sea water intake from proposed power
plant (at plant site) and outfall of the waste water from plant back into sea
has not been accounted for in the proposal. The discharge of cooling water is also required to meet the standards of
pH, temperature and free Chlorine, notified under the Environment (Protection)
Act, 1986. The proposal of intake and outfall shall require CRZ clearance which
will involve identification of the intake & discharge points and studies
including modeling for prediction of impacts on the marine ecology at the
locations. This will also need preparation and implementation of EMP for smooth
operation of the intake and discharge system. It is also noted that the layout
of the other facilities in the plant including the condensers may have
to be changed depending upon alignment
of the intake/discharge pipe lines.
(i)
Separate
CRZ clearance with details like temperature change, location/site for
discharge, conveyance (inlet/outlet), along with impact on marine environment –
flora and fauna shall be obtained.
(ii)
Also the
total plant capacity is 12 MTPA – water balance needs to be revised and
provided for the entire ultimate capacity and not just Phase I (i.e. 4 MTPA).
The details should also include how the ‘zero discharge’ water balance shall be
achieved during monsoon season with no/negligible demand for horticulture or
green areas.
VI
- Other Conditions
(i)
Representative
number of sediment samples from the sea bed as well as from the boreholes shall
be collected and analysed at least for the metals listed from A1 to A9 under
class ‘A’ of the Schedule-II of the Hazardous Waste (Management, Handling, and
Transboundary) Rules, 2008 (HW Rules 2008). The locations for collection of
representative samples to be selected keeping in mind the wide variation in the
concentration of lead, chromium and cadmium provided by the proponent. In case
the concentration either or all these
metals exceeds the limit of 50mg/kg specified in the HW Rules 2008 at any of
the sampling location in the dredging area, the dredged material will be
hazardous waste and not be used for any of the proposed activities. This shall
also mean that the proposed use of this material (17,962,000 cubic meters) for
reclamation for site preparation in the steel plant will have to be dropped.
Even in case of its being non-hazardous as per the HW Rules 2008, the material
is required to be tested for its leachabllity using the TCLP test, before
starting any dredging activities.
(ii)
Material
handling system and associated environmental issues in terms of fugitive
emission, dust control system (dry fogging system for dust control at port
areas particularly for iron ore, coal handling areas), conveyor system,
spillage and prevention, type of vessels, wharf side operations, material flow
system to the storage yard etc should be examined. Posco
shall submit detailed plan for handling fugitive dust emission – including
break up of large quantities – type of handling equipment for each category of
material along with quantities to be handled. The fugitive dust plan and
implementation shall be the responsibility of Posco.
(iii)
Posco shall submit details of dredged
material (detailed map indicating the location) proposed for reclamation at
Plant site in addition to reclamation plan for beach nourishment. ‘Non
–permissible/hazardous’ dredged material shall not used for reclamation. Fresh bathymetry survey shall be
carried out before dredging operations and the report submitted to the
Ministry.
(iv)
Mangrove
plantation/shelters belts shall be provided wherever possible and a plan with
budgetary provisions shall be submitted before the commencement of the port
facility.
(v)
Posco
shall submit final DPR including the estimation of number of berths during
various stages of development and consequential environmental issues, along
with implementation programme, for monitoring.
(vi)
R & R
shall be provided to the affected people as per the norms State
Government/Central Government.
(vii)
Posco
shall submit a comprehensive EIA report combining both the terrestrial
environment on the land ward side (steel plant) and the marine environment
on the seaward side (activities connected with captive port) so as to assess i)
the cumulative effect of both impacts on the development process in its
totality and ii) the appropriate mitigation measures required to be put in
place to preserve the environment without undue irretrievable damages.
(viii)
Oil Spill
Contingency Management Plan shall be prepared and facilities to deal with Oil
spill in and around the port area shall be provided in the port along with the
dedicated staff.
(ix)
A high level expert monitoring committee shall be
set up comprising of conservation experts and NGOs
representative to oversee – monitoring of shoreline (during
construction and post construction) including dredging, disposal of dredged
material and reclamation processes, Marine Environment Conservation
Plan. The composition shall be submitted to the Ministry for approval before
the commencement of the port operations.
With the
above additional conditions, the Committee recommended the proposal.
4. Consideration
of New projects - Cont.
4.1 Environmental
Clearance for construction of residential complex at TS.No. 2-9-408, Ward No.2,
Kacheri Kozhikode, Kerala by M/s. P. K. Sons [F.No.21-50/2010-IA.III]
Project proponent requested
for postponement.
4.2 Finalisation of ToR for construction
of Urban Estates at Mullanpur, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab by M/s. Divisional
Engineer, Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA)
[F.No.21-52/2010-IA.III]
As presented by the project proponent,
the proposal involves development of urban estate on
a plot area of (450 acres) 18,21,085.39 sq.m. The total water
requirement is 7425 KLD (domestic water 385 KLD). The capacity of STP proposed
is 2 MGD. Treated waste water to be used for flushing 2475 KLD, horticulture
495 KLD, washing 2200 KLD and bathing 1100 KLD. Total Municipal waste generated
is 24,750 Kg/day. The power requirement is about 20 MVA. The total parking proposed are for 376 Cars.
The total cost of the project is Rs. 765 Crores.
During discussions, the Committee
finalized the following ToR:
(i)
A site
plan showing the project site and its surroundings with physical features and
topographical details, such as land use, contours and drainage pattern, along
with photographs of the site from all four sides, should be included in the
background information.
(ii)
Examine
the quantity required for filling/excavation of site and identify the area from
where the earth will be borrowed/ disposed and whether any permission will be
needed.
(iii)
Examine
in detail the proposed site with reference to impact on infrastructure covering
water supply, storm water drainage, sewerage, power, etc., and the disposal of
treated/raw wastes from the complex on land/water body and into sewerage
system.
(iv)
Carry out
hydro-geological investigations and seek permission from Central Ground Water
Authority for withdrawal of ground water.
(v)
Examine
water quality also with reference to Persistent Organic Pollutants.
(vi)
Consider
soil characteristics and permeability for rainwater harvesting proposals, which
should be made with due safeguards for ground water quality. Maximise recycling
of water and utilisation of rainwater.
(vii)
Make
provision for guard pond and other provisions for safety against failure in the
operation of wastewater treatment facilities. Identify acceptable outfall for
treated effluent.
(viii)
Submit a
NOC from Defense establishment as the project site is adjoining above.
(ix)
Examine
the impact on rivers flowing on both sides of the site.
(x)
Noise
mitigation plan should be described. Also make provision of green belt as a
measure for mitigation of dust and noise and buffer between habitation and I.T.
Park.
(xi)
Examine
existing education and health facilities, police and other services and include
adequate provisions in the proposal.
(xii)
Study the
existing flora and fauna of the area and the impact of the project on them.
(xiii)
Landscape
plan, green belts and open spaces may be described.
(xiv)
Assess
soil erosion in view of the soil characteristics, topography and rainfall
pattern.
(xv)
Application
of renewable energy/alternate energy, such as solar and wind energy may be
described including solar water heating in the guidelines for entrepreneurs.
(xvi)
Consider
solid wastes, including e-waste in addition to other solid wastes and their
disposal.
(xvii)
Identification
of recyclable wastes and waste utilisation arrangements may be made.
(xviii)
Explore
possibility of generating biogas from biodegradable wastes.
(xix)
Arrangements
for hazardous waste management may be described as also the common facilities
for waste collection, treatment, recycling and disposal of all effluent,
emission and refuse including MSW, biomedical and hazardous wastes. Special attention should be made with
respect to bird menace.
(xx)
Provisions
made for safety in storage of materials, products and wastes may be described.
(xxi)
Disaster
management plan should be prepared.
(xxii)
Traffic
management plan including parking and loading/ unloading areas may be
described. Traffic survey should be carried out both on weekdays and weekend.
(xxiii)
Provide
service road for entry and exit to project site.
(xxiv)
Use of
local building materials should be described.
(xxv)
Consider
DG Flue Gas emissions to be treated in a scrubber.
(xxvi)
Provide
for conservation of resources, energy efficiency and use of renewable sources
of energy in the light of ECBC code.
(xxvii)
Application
of resettlement and rehabilitation policy may be described. Project affected
persons should be identified and rehabilitation and resettlement plan should be
prepared.
(xxviii)
Examine
separately the details for construction and operation phases both for
Environmental Management Plan and Environmental Monitoring Plan.
A detailed draft EIA/EMP report should
be prepared as per the above TOR and submitted to the Ministry in the
prescribed form as per EIA Notification dated 14th September 2006.
4.3 Finalisation
of ToR for the development of a Golf Course and residential project Imperial
Golf Estate at Village Mullapur & Talwandi, Block Sidwan Bet, Tehsil
Jargaon, District Ludhiana by M/s Spark Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.
[F.No.21-55/2010-IA.III]
As presented by the project proponent,
the proposal involves construction of an Imperial
Golf Estate on a plot area of 113.3073 ha. The total built-up area
of the project is 5,42,744 Sq.m. It is proposed to construct villas (Ground + 1
floor) overlooking the Golf Course. The total water requirement is 2092 KLD
(fresh water 1288 KLD + treated water 804 KLD). The capacity of STP proposed is
1.2 MLD. Treated waste water to be used for flushing 412 KLD, horticulture 270
KLD, Golf course irrigation 703 KLD. Total Municipal waste generated is 3487
T/day. The power requirement is about 12139 KW. The total parking proposed are for 1500 ECS.
During discussions, the Committee
finalized the following ToR:
(i)
A site
plan showing the project site and its surroundings with physical features and
topographical details, such as land use, contours and drainage pattern, along
with photographs of the site from all four sides, should be included in the
background information.
(ii)
Examine
the quantity required for filling/excavation of site and identify the area from
where the earth will be borrowed/ disposed and whether any permission will be
needed.
(iii)
Examine
in detail the proposed site with reference to impact on infrastructure covering
water supply, storm water drainage, sewerage, power, etc., and the disposal of
treated/raw wastes from the complex on land/water body and into sewerage
system.
(iv)
Carry out
hydro-geological investigations and seek permission from Central Ground Water
Authority for withdrawal of ground water.
(v)
Examine
water quality also with reference to Persistent Organic Pollutants.
(vi)
Submit
details about reduction of water consumption and also with site specific limit
to application of water (in terms of m³/day/ha)
(vii)
Consider
soil characteristics and permeability for rainwater harvesting proposals, which
should be made with due safeguards for ground water quality. Maximise recycling
of water and utilisation of rainwater.
(viii)
Submit
details about pesticide management so that the water bodies and groundwater are
not affected.
(ix)
Make
provision for guard pond and other provisions for safety against failure in the
operation of wastewater treatment facilities.
Identify acceptable outfall for treated effluent.
(x)
Noise
mitigation plan should be described. Also make provision of green belt as a
measure for mitigation of dust and noise and buffer between habitation and I.T.
Park.
(xi)
Examine
existing education and health facilities, police and other services and include
adequate provisions in the proposal.
(xii)
Study the
existing flora and fauna of the area and the impact of the project on them.
(xiii)
Landscape
plan, green belts and open spaces may be described.
(xiv)
Assess
soil erosion in view of the soil characteristics, topography and rainfall
pattern.
(xv)
Application
of renewable energy/alternate energy, such as solar and wind energy may be
described including solar water heating in the guidelines for entrepreneurs.
(xvi)
Consider
solid wastes, including e-waste in addition to other solid wastes and their
disposal.
(xvii)
Identification
of recyclable wastes and waste utilisation arrangements may be made.
(xviii)
Explore
possibility of generating biogas from biodegradable wastes.
(xix)
Arrangements
for hazardous waste management may be described as also the common facilities
for waste collection, treatment, recycling and disposal of all effluent,
emission and refuse including MSW, biomedical and hazardous wastes. Special
attention should be made with respect to bird menace.
(xx)
Provisions
made for safety in storage of materials, products and wastes may be described.
(xxi)
Disaster
management plan should be prepared.
(xxii)
Traffic
management plan including parking and loading/unloading areas may be described.
Traffic survey should be carried out both on weekdays and weekend.
(xxiii)
Provide
service road for entry and exit to project site.
(xxiv)
Use of
local building materials should be described.
(xxv)
Consider
DG Flue Gas emissions to be treated in a scrubber.
(xxvi)
Provide
for conservation of resources, energy efficiency and use of renewable sources
of energy in the light of ECBC code.
(xxvii)
Application
of resettlement and rehabilitation policy may be described. Project affected
persons should be identified and rehabilitation and resettlement plan should be
prepared.
(xxviii)
Examine
separately the details for construction and operation phases both for
Environmental Management Plan and Environmental Monitoring Plan.
A detailed draft EIA/EMP report should
be prepared as per the above TOR and submitted to the Ministry in the
prescribed form as per EIA Notification dated 14th September 2006.
96th Meeting of the Expert
Appraisal Committee for Infrastructure Development, Coastal Regulation Zone and
Miscellaneous projects held on 25th January, 2011 at Fazal Hall,
Scope Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi.
List of Participants/ Expert
Committee
1.
Shri Naresh Dayal, IAS(Rtd)
Chairman
2.
Dr. M.L.Sharma, IFS(Retd) Vice Chairman
3. Shri
Kathirvel Dharmalingam Member
4.
Dr. H.S.Ramesh Member
5.
Dr. Y.Basavaraju Member
6. Dr. Suresh Kumar Rohilla Member
7. Dr.
R.S.Mahawar (Rep. of CPCB) Member
8.
Shri Bharat Bhushan Member Secretary
Supporting Staff
9.
Shri E. Thirunavukkarasu Dy.
Director, MoEF
Project Authorities:
Representatives from M/s. Posco India Pvt. Ltd.
Representatives from M/s. Divisional
Engineer, (GMADA)
Representatives from M/s. Spark
Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.