Ministry of Environment & Forests                                                                                        (IA Division)                                                                                                             ******

 

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 25TH MEETING OF EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL OF MINING PROJECTS CONSTITUTED UNDER EIA NOTIFICATION, 2006.

The 25th meeting of the Expert Appraisal Committee for Environmental Appraisal of Mining Projects of the Ministry of Environment and Forests was held on March 19-21, 2012.  The list of participants is annexed. 

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

Item No. 1:

1.1     Confirmation of the minutes of the 24th Meeting.

The minutes of the 24th meeting were confirmed as circulated.

 

2.1     Bhatin Mine of M/s Uranium Corporation of India Ltd., District East Singhbhum, Jharkhand (Consultant: Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research, Dhanbad)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for renewal of mine lease which fell due for renewal on October, 2007. TOR for this project were prescribed on 25.1.2008 combined for the Jaduguda and Bhatin mines wherein it was categorically stated that separate proposals should be submitted for the two mines as there are two separate mine plans. Accordingly, the proponent have submitted this proposal for the Bhatin mine only. Public hearing has been held on 26.5.2011. Mine lease area is 142.98 ha, which include 54.53 ha of forestland. Proponent have applied for forestry clearance, which is yet to be obtained. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. The rated capacity of the mine is 75,000 TPA (ROM). The ore from this mine will be processed at the Jaduguda mine located at a distance of about 4 km where the processing plant is located.  Mine working will be underground semi-mechanised by horizontal cut and fill method. Life of mine is 29 years. Water requirement for the project is estimated as 110 kld, which will be obtained from Gara river. It was observed from the baseline AAQ data that the RSPM levels in the Hartopa village and Bhatin village are on a higher side. It was also observed from the groundwater quality data presented that the lead and aluminum content in groundwater is higher than the prescribed limit. The proponent clarified that these higher values cannot be attributed to their activities. However, Committee observed that since the groundwater is reported to be used for drinking purpose in the area, the proponent may take proactive measures as part of their CSR activities to provide drinking water in the area, so as to avoid groundwater being used for drinking purposes. The stage of groundwater development in the area is reported to be 12.8%. It was also stated that no solid waste will be disposed on the surface. The hazardous waste (waste oil) is sold to authorized recyclers. It has been stated that at the end of the mine life an area of 5.87 ha will be covered under plantation including 0.75 ha of greenbelt. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting. These inter-alia included employment to local people, provision of drinking water, medical facilities and health effects such as reported disabled child birth etc. It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

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

(i)      Rigorous and regular ambient air quality monitoring shall be carried out and necessary safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the ambient air quality is within the permissible limits.

(ii)      As agreed to by the Proponent, safe drinking water will be provided to the people in the surrounding areas as part of their CSR activities. Awareness will also be created regarding the use of safe drinking water in the area.

2.2     Quartz Mine of M/s P. Abdul Rawoof Khan, Village Hattibelagal, Aluru Mandal, District Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh (Consultant: M/s Global Enviro Labs, Hyderabad)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal was earlier considered by the EAC during October, 2010, wherein the proponent were requested to revise the documents incorporating information / data for the lease period rather than 5 years only. Accordingly, based on the revised documents, proposal was considered further. The proposal is for opening of a new mine for production of 50,000 TPA of quartz. Mine lease area is 69.474 ha. No forestland is involved. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. Mine working will be opencast manual. Ultimate working depth will be 60 m bgl. Life of the mine is 300 years. It is reported that 6,50,000 tonnes of waste will be generated at the conceptual stage. The baseline AAQ data showed the levels within permissible limit. TOR for this project were prescribed on 26.9.2008. Public hearing has been held on 21.7.2009. It was observed that the Questionnaire has not been filled up properly. The EIA report has not been linked to the baseline data collected; rather the EIA/EMP report appeared too generic like in a text book. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.

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

(i)      The Questionnaire for environmental appraisal of projects should be filled in properly providing relevant information against the respective Questions. The data in the Questionnaire and EIA report should be mutually consistent. Specific mention in this regard may be made to Question no. 6 (ix), 9, 21, 34, 39 etc.

(ii)      The maps submitted should be duly signed and cross referenced with the text.

(iii)     Compliance of the court order should be shown. In this regard, the 10 ha area which is not part of the lease, should be shown on a map.

(iv)     Mineralogical composition of dust showing the percentage of free silica may be given.

(v)      Details of primary survey of flora and fauna should be given.

(vi)     Details of occupational health impacts and the proposed safeguard measures and the plan for their monitoring and mitigation should be given.

(vii)    Compliance of TORs should be given along with an undertaking that all the TORs have been complied with.

(viii)   Action plan to address the issues raised during public hearing should be given especially relating to the road in public property.

(ix)     Data furnished should cover the conceptual period, clearly demarcating the current lease period and the planned life of the mine to which progressive Closure Report relates in the approved Mine Plan.

(x)      EIA should utilize the baseline data collected and the EMP should address the same.

It was decided that the proponent will submit the response / information on the above-mentioned points by 5th April, 2012 and simultaneously circulate the same to the Members of the EAC and thereafter the proposal will be considered by the EAC during its meeting to be held in April, 2012.  

2.3     Moolvelas-Harvit-Kudgaon Bauxite Mine of M/s Bharatesh Construction Co. located at village Moolvelas-Harvit-Kudgaon, Taluka Shrivardhan, Raigad, Maharashtra

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of bauxite from 20472 TPA to 0.1 million TPA. TOR for this project were prescribed on 12.12.2007. Public hearing has been held on 21.11.2010. The earlier environment clearance was obtained on 18.4.2007. The mine lease area is 50.21 ha. No forestland is involved. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. Arabian sea is reported at a distance of 1.5 km. Kudki dam is at a distance of 0.6 km. Mine working will be opencast semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 40 m AMSL. Water requirement is estimated as 12 kld, which will be obtained from groundwater. It is estimated that 0.03 million m3 of waste will be generated during mine life. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting. It was observed that there is large scale resentment against the project.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

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

(i)        CRZ map on the prescribed scale, clearly demarcating the HTL, LTL, CRZ boundary and location of the mine w.r.t. CRZ duly authenticated by one of the authorized agencies may be submitted. The CRZ map should take into account the coast line as well as other tidal influenced water bodies including creeks, rivers etc., if any. The coastal features such as mudflats, mangroves etc. should also be shown.

(ii)      Details of the transportation of the mineral may be furnished. It may clearly be shown whether the road infrastructure is capable of taking the proposed incremental load. In case, any strengthening is required, details in this regard including action plan with time frame should be given.

(iii)     An undertaking regarding owning the data contained in the EIA report should be submitted.

(iv)     Compliance of the TORs should be given in a tabular form.

(v)      Action plan to address the issues raised during the public hearing should be given. The reasons for large scale resentment against the project should be highlighted and justification as to why the project should be considered by the Committee in spite of resentment expressed by the public during public hearing.

(vi)     Details of the proposed CSR activities with financial allocation should be given.

(vii)    Based on monitored data on groundwater table, it may clearly be shown whether mining will intersect groundwater table. The data regarding water table, depth of mining etc. should be given in mAMSL. In case the mining is likely to intersect groundwater table, possible ingress of salinity should be discussed in detail and report furnished.

(viii)  The earlier name of the project was Moolvelas-Harvit-Kudgaon Bauxite Mine while the name has now been changed to Harvit-Kudgaon Bauxite Mine. The reasons / implications in this regard should be given with supporting documents.

(ix)     Contour map as well as the land use map of the area should be given covering core zone and buffer zone.

(x)      Primary survey of flora and fauna in the study area should be given along with schedule of the fauna reported. In case of scheduled fauna, conservation plan should be given.

(xi)     It was observed that the issues relating to water table have not been discussed in the mine plan. It being a coastal area, the issues relating to water table, its inter-section during mining, pumping of groundwater if any, and its impact on the water regime should be discussed and report furnished.

(xii)    Compliance Report of the earlier EC conditions with supporting documents and photographs should be furnished.

(xiii)  The baseline AAQ data should be revalidated by collecting one month (non monsoon seasons) data afresh and the trends compared with the earlier data.

(xiv)  Details of occupational health impacts and the proposed mitigation plan in this regard should be furnished.

(xv)    Questionnaire for appraisal of mining project and Form-I shall be refilled correctly and furnished.

(xvi)  Details of R&R with compensation provided to the persons whose land was acquired/project affected persons shall be furnished.

(xvii) Toposheet /imagery with demarcation of study area, core zone and other features shall be furnished.

It was decided that the proposal may be brought back before the Committee for its further consideration after the requisite information as mentioned above has been submitted. In the meantime, the Project File may be kept closed.

2.4   Dandguri-Khujare Bauxite Mine of M/s Bharatesh Construction Co. located at village Dandguri-Khujare Taluka Shrivardhan, Raigad, Maharashtra

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of bauxite from 18,000 TPA to 0.12 million TPA. TOR for this project were prescribed on 12.12.2007. Public hearing has been held on 21.11.2010. The earlier environment clearance was obtained on 18.4.2007. The mine lease area is 71.42 ha. No forestland is involved. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. Arabian sea is reported at a distance of 2.5 km. Mhasla creek at a distance of 5.1 km. Mine working will be opencast mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 110 m AMSL (10 m bgl from top of 120 m MSL). Water requirement is estimated as 15 kld, which will be obtained from groundwater. It is estimated that 0.38 million m3 of waste will be generated during mine life. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting. It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

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

(i)           The EIA report, mine plan / mine scheme should be made mutually consistent and the revised report(s) submitted clearly bringing out the changes made.

(ii)         Details of the land outside the mine lease area and the related R&R issues should also be discussed and details furnished.

(iii)        CRZ map on the prescribed scale, clearly demarcating the HTL, LTL, CRZ boundary and location of the mine w.r.t. CRZ duly authenticated by one of the authorized agencies may be submitted. The CRZ map should take into account the coast line as well as other tidal influenced water bodies including creeks, rivers etc., if any. The coastal features such as mudflats, mangroves etc. should also be shown.

(iv)        Details of the transportation of the mineral may be furnished. It may clearly be shown whether the road infrastructure is capable of taking the proposed incremental load. In case, any strengthening is required, details in this regard including action plan with time frame should be given.

(v)         An undertaking regarding owning the data contained in the EIA report should be submitted.

(vi)        Compliance of the TORs should be given in a tabular form.

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

(viii)     Details of the proposed CSR activities with financial allocation should be given.

(ix)        Based on monitored data on groundwater table, it may clearly be shown whether mining will intersect groundwater table. The data regarding water table, depth of mining etc. should be given in mAMSL. In case the mining is likely to intersect groundwater table, possible ingress of salinity should be discussed in detail and report furnished.

(x)         Contour map as well as the land use map of the area should be given covering core zone and buffer zone.

(xi)        Primary survey of flora and fauna in the study area should be given along with schedule of the fauna reported. In case of scheduled fauna, conservation plan should be given.

(xii)       It was observed that the issues relating to water table have not been discussed in the mine plan. It being a coastal area, the issues relating to water table, its inter-section during mining, pumping of groundwater if any, and its impact on the water regime should be discussed and report furnished.

(xiii)     Compliance Report of the earlier EC conditions with supporting documents and photographs should be furnished.

(xiv)     The baseline AAQ data should be revalidated by collecting one month (non monsoon seasons) data afresh and the trends compared with the earlier data.

(xv)       Details of occupational health impacts and the proposed mitigation plan in this regard should be furnished.

(xvi)     Questionnaire for appraisal of mining project and Form-I shall be refilled correctly and furnished.

(xvii)    Details of R&R with compensation provided to the persons whose land was acquired/project affected persons shall be furnished.

(xviii)   Toposheet /imagery with demarcation of study area, core zone and other features shall be furnished.

It was decided that the proposal may be brought back before the Committee for its further consideration after the requisite information as mentioned above has been submitted. In the meantime, the Project File may be kept closed.

2.5    Proposed Moulding Sand Mine of M/s Kedareswara Associates, village Naenahalli, Taluk Haveri, Karnataka (Consultant: M/s Global Enviro Labs, Hyderabad)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for opening of a new mine for production of 10,000 TPA of moulding sand from the bed of river Tungbhadra. TOR for this project were prescribed on 29.12.2008. Public hearing has been held on 9.4.2010. Mine lease area is 121.4 ha. No forestland is involved. It is a violation case as the mine has been in operation without obtaining requisite prior environment clearance. The mine is reported to be closed since 28.10.2010. Mine working will be opencast manual. Ultimate working depth will be 3 m. Mine working will not intersect groundwater table. Life of mine is 30 years. It was observed that the air quality monitoring stations have not been selected properly and the data so collected is not as per the prescribed protocol. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting. 

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

(i)           HFL level of river Tungbhadra vis-à-vis contour level of the site should be given. Based on the same, it may be shown whether the site is prone to flooding due to the river.

(ii)          One season baseline AAQ data should be collected by proper selection of monitoring stations covering the entire study area as per protocol including up wind and downwind directions. There should be at least one monitoring station in core zone and one in downwind direction within 500 m of the mine lease.

(iii)        Primary survey of flora and fauna in the study area shall be undertaken and details of the survey, clearly giving the list of scheduled fauna, if any in the area, should be furnished. In case of schedule-I fauna, conservation plan should be furnished.

(iv)        Details of the court case and its latest status should be furnished along with supporting documents including court order.

(v)          Copy of the mine lease document should be furnished.

(vi)        Year-wise production, clearly showing the highest production achieved prior to 1994 and whether there has been any increase in the production after the EIA Notification, 1994 coming into force, should be given.

(vii)       A copy of the approved mining scheme beyond 2012-13 should be furnished.

It was decided that the proposal may be brought back before the Committee for its further consideration after the requisite information as mentioned above has been submitted. In the meantime, the project file may be kept closed.

2.6     Laterite Iron Ore Mine of M/s V.K. Vhatkar, District Kolhapur, Maharashtra (Internal Consideration)

          The proposal was last considered by the Committee during its meeting held in March, 2011 wherein it was decided to refer the matter back to National Tiger Conservation Authority for their re-examination and giving their views taking into account the additional information submitted by the proponent. Accordingly, the matter was referred back to NTCA. The comments sent by NTCA vide their note dated 31.12.2011 stating that the said block falls in the Tiger corridor linking Shayadri Tiger Reserve (Chandoli National Park) and Radhnagari Wildlife Sanctuary. The connectivity is crucial for tiger movement in the northern Western Ghats area in the State of Maharashtra. The Committee took note of the above mentioned comments of NTCA and in view of the sensitivity of the area in terms of tiger movement, the Committee recommended for rejection of the proposal.

2.7    Collection of river bed sand / muram from river Sukhnai of Shri Virendra Rai, village Maukhas, Tehsil Mauranipur, District Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Noida) 

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

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease, which fell due in December, 2010 for extraction of 45,000 TPA of sand and muram. It was observed that the lease was granted for an area of 134.94 acres as single lease, however, the proponent have submitted a proposal by splitting the lease into smaller blocks. It was, therefore, desired that the proposal may be submitted as per the lease granted and not block-wise. It was decided that the proposal in its present form may be returned.

2.8    Luhargaon sand / muram from river Sukhnai of Shri Virendra Rai, village Luhargaon, Tehsil Mauranipur, District Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Noida) 

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

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease, which fell due in December, 2010 for extraction of 58,000 TPA of sand and muram. It was observed that the lease was granted for an area of 134.94 acres as a single lease. However, the proponent have now submitted a proposal by splitting the lease into smaller blocks. It was, therefore, desired that the proposal may be re-submitted as per the lease granted and not block-wise. It was decided that the proposal in its present form may be returned.

2.9    Deorisinghpura sand / muram from river Sukhnai of Shri Virendra Rai, village Deorisinghpura, Tehsil Mauranipur, District Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Noida) 

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

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease, which fell due in December, 2010 for extraction of 18,000 TPA of sand and muram. It was observed that the lease was granted for an area of 134.94 acres as single lease, however, the proponent have submitted a proposal by splitting the lease into smaller blocks. It was, therefore, desired that the proposal may be submitted as per the lease granted and not block-wise. It was decided that the proposal in its present form may be returned.

 

2.10  Murli Pahari Limestone Mine of M/s Kalyanpur Cements Ltd. located at Rohtas, Bihar (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Noida)  

The proposal was earlier considered by the Committee during its meeting held in November, 2010, wherein the proposal was kept in abeyance for want of clearance from Chief Wildlife Warden, Govt. of Bihar as also Standing Committee of NBWL due to location of the mine in proximity of the sanctuary within 1.5 km. Subsequently, the State Govt. of Bihar vide letter dated 24.1.2012 have informed that the proposal may be considered as per EIA Notification and the circulars issued by MoEF for prescribing TORs to this project. In view of the same, it was decided to place the proposal before the EAC for its consideration. Accordingly, the proposal was considered by the EAC.  

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease which fell due in January, 2012. The mine lease area is 53.378 ha. No forestland is involved. The proposed capacity is 1.0 million TPA of limestone. It is a violation case as the production from the mine was enhanced after EIA Notification, 1994 coming into force without obtaining requisite prior environment clearance. Kaimur Wildlife Sanctuary is reported at a distance of 1.5 km. Rohtas Fort, an archeological monument is at a distance of 3.0 km. Mine working will be opencast mechanized. Life of mine is 20 years. Water requirement is 10 kld, which will be obtained from accumulated pit water and groundwater.

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

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

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

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

4)           All corner coordinates of the mine lease area superimposed on High Resolution Imagery/toposheet should be provided.

5)           Does the company have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by its Board of Directors? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA report. 

6)           Does the Environment Policy prescribe for standard operating process/ procedures to bring into focus any infringement / deviation / violation of the environmental or forest norms / conditions? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA. 

7)           What is the hierarchical system or Administrative order of the company to deal with the environmental issues and for ensuring compliance with the EC conditions.  Details of this system may be given. 

8)           Does the company have a 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?  This reporting mechanism should be detailed in the EIA report.  

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

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

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

12)        Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed), if any, within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden. Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable to such projects due to proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas as mentioned above, should be obtained from the State Wildlife Department/ Chief Wildlife Warden under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and copy furnished. As the mine is located at a distance of about 1.5 km from the Kaimur Sanctuary, necessary clearance from the Standing Committee of NBWL may also be obtained and copy furnished.

13)        Necessary clearance from Archeological Survey of India as may be applicable for locating the mine within 3.0 km from the Rohtas Fort may be obtained and copy furnished.

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

15)        Impact, if any, of change of land use should be given. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

24)        Details of any stream, seasonal or otherwise, passing through lease area and modification / diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

34)        Public health implication of the project and related activities for the population in the impact zone should be systematically evaluated and the proposed remedial measures should be detailed along with budgetary allocation. 

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

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

37)        Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided and also incorporated in the final EIA/EMP Report of the Project. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

h)   Changes, if any made in the basic scope and project parameters (as submitted in Form-I and the F.R for securing the TOR) should be brought to the attention of MoEF with reasons for such changes and permission should be sought, as the TOR may also have to be altered. Post Public Hearing changes in structure and content of the draft EIA/EMP (other than modifications arising out of the P.H. process) will entail conducting the PH again with the revised documentation.

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

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

 

2.11  Jobhipat Bauxite Mine of Shri O.P. Gupta, village Narma, Taluka Bishunpur, District Gumla, Jharkhand (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Noida) 

The proposal was considered by the Committee to determine the Terms of Reference (TOR) for undertaking detailed EIA study for the purpose of obtaining environmental clearance in accordance with the provisions of the EIA Notification, 2006.  For this purpose, the proponent had submitted information in the prescribed format (Form-1) along with pre-feasibility report.  The proposal is for renewal of mine lease, which fell due for renewal in 1994 for production of 4,58,295 TPA of bauxite. It is a violation case as the production from the mine was enhanced after EIA Notification, 1994 coming into force. The mine lease area is 129.445 ha, which include 60.89 ha of forestland. Out of the forestland, it is proposed to surrender 38.43 ha. The remaining 22.46 ha is proposed for forest diversion. The area for mine lease after surrender of part forestland will be 91.015 ha. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. Mine working opencast mechanized. Life of mine is 7 years. Water requirement is 20 kld, which will be obtained from groundwater.

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

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

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

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

4)           All corner coordinates of the mine lease area superimposed on High Resolution Imagery/toposheet should be provided.

5)           Does the company have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by its Board of Directors? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA report. 

6)           Does the Environment Policy prescribe for standard operating process/ procedures to bring into focus any infringement / deviation / violation of the environmental or forest norms / conditions? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA. 

7)           What is the hierarchical system or Administrative order of the company to deal with the environmental issues and for ensuring compliance with the EC conditions.  Details of this system may be given. 

8)           Does the company have a 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?  This reporting mechanism should be detailed in the EIA report.  

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

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

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

12)        Details of the land for OB dump outside the mine lease such as extent of land area, distance from mine lease, its land use, R&R issues, if any should be given. 

13)        High Resolution Satellite Imagery of the proposed area clearly showing the land use and other ecological features of the study area (core and buffer zone) should be furnished.

14)        A Certificate from the Competent Authority in the State Forest Department should be provided, confirming the involvement of forest land, if any in the project area, or otherwise, based on land use classification (revenue record) as also in terms of the definition of forest as pronounced in the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of T.N. Godavarman Vs. Union of India.  In the event of any claim by the project proponent regarding the status of forests, the site may be inspected by the State Forest Department along with the Regional Office of the Ministry to ascertain the status of forests, based on which the Certificate in this regard as mentioned above be issued. In all such cases, it would be desirable for representative of the State Forest Department to assist the Expert Appraisal Committees.

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

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

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

18)        The vegetation in the RF / PF area with necessary details should be given.    

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

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

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

22)        Impact, if any, of change of land use should be given. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

31)        Details of any stream, seasonal or otherwise, passing through lease area and modification / diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

41)        Public health implication of the project and related activities for the population in the impact zone should be systematically evaluated and the proposed remedial measures should be detailed along with budgetary allocation. 

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

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

44)        Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided and also incorporated in the final EIA/EMP Report of the Project. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

h)   Changes, if any made in the basic scope and project parameters (as submitted in Form-I and the F.R for securing the TOR) should be brought to the attention of MoEF with reasons for such changes and permission should be sought, as the TOR may also have to be altered. Post Public Hearing changes in structure and content of the draft EIA/EMP (other than modifications arising out of the P.H. process) will entail conducting the PH again with the revised documentation.

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

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

2.12  Reddipalayam Limestone Mine of M/s Madras Cements Ltd., village Reddipalayam and Nagamangalam, Taluk & District Ariyalur, Tamil Nadu (Consultant: Environmental Mine Plan and Resource Evaluation Solutions, Chennai)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for enhancement of production of limestone from 1.2 million TPA to 1.7 million TPA and production of 0.35 million TPA of interstitial marl. The earlier environment clearance for 1.2 million TPA was granted on 28.6.2007. The mine lease area is 63.6 ha. No forestland is involved. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. In addition, 31.372 ha of land outside the mine lease will be used for dumping of waste. Thus, the total project area is 94.972 ha. The mine is captive to cement plant at a distance of about 24 km. TOR for this project were prescribed on 13.1.2010. Public hearing has been held on 29.11.2011. Compliance to the earlier EC conditions were also presented and discussed during the meeting. Mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting. Life of mine is 10 years. Ultimate working depth will be 45 m bgl. It is estimated that 8.82 million m3 of OB and 1.14 million m3 of top soil will be generated. Backfilling is proposed, which will start from 2017. At the end of the mine life an area of 9.5 ha will be covered under greenbelt. A total area of 67.472 ha will be covered under plantation and an area of 27.50 ha will be converted into water body at conceptual stage. The baseline AAQ data presented showed that the levels are within prescribed limits. The groundwater table during post monsoon is reported to vary between 13 m – 16 m bgl. Mine working will intersect groundwater table. The stage of groundwater development is reported to be 59.78%. The water requirement is estimated as 96 kld, which will be met from bore wells. The proponent have obtained NOC from Central Ground Water Authority for drawl of 240 kld of water. Based on the blast vibration study it was concluded that the vibration recorded are less than the maximum allowable standards. The horizontal projection of flying rock fragments were observed to be within 25 m. The blasting may not have any damaging affect on the surrounding residential, if the blasting pattern given in the report is continued. In case the distance decreases below 185 m, the charge per delay may be decreased suitably. The report has suggested monitoring of ground vibrations. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting, which inter-alia include employment opportunity, depletion of groundwater due to mining, noise and vibration, laying of road for transportation and repair of damaged roads, backfilling of mined out area etc.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

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

(i)      Regular monitoring of vibration and its impact, if any, in the village will be carried out and if at any stage any damage is felt on the village buildings / structure, necessary corrective measures will be taken in this regard.

(ii)      Groundwater table shall be monitored regularly and it shall be ensured that there is no depletion of groundwater in the area. Necessary groundwater recharging structures shall be built.

(iii)     Exclusive road for transportation of limestone shall be laid as committed by the proponent. 

(iv)     The ambient air quality will be monitored regularly. There shall be at least one monitoring station in the habitation area. Necessary safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the air quality is within permissible limit.

2.13  Limestone Mining Project of M/s Madras Cements Ltd., village Pudupalayam and Periyanagalur, Taluka Ariyalur, Tamil Nadu (Consultant: Environmental Mine Plan and Resource Evaluation Solutions, Chennai)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for enhancement of production of limestone from 0.5 million TPA to 1.5 million TPA. The earlier environment clearance for 0.5 million TPA was granted on 29.6.2007. The mine lease area is 26.075 ha. No forestland is involved. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. The mine is captive to cement plant at a distance of about 18 km. TOR for this project were prescribed on 27.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 29.11.2011. Compliance to the earlier EC conditions were also presented and discussed during the meeting. Mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting. Life of mine is 6 years. Ultimate working depth will be 45 m bgl. It is estimated that 4.22 million m3 of OB and 0.47 million m3 of top soil will be generated. Backfilling is proposed, which will start from 2017. At the end of the mine life an area of 3.67 ha will be covered under greenbelt. A total area of 12.43 ha will be covered under plantation and an area of 13.17 ha will be converted into water body at conceptual stage. The baseline AAQ data presented showed that the levels are within prescribed limits. The groundwater table during post monsoon is reported to vary between 13 m – 16 m bgl. Mine working will intersect groundwater table. The stage of groundwater development is reported to be 65.66%. The water requirement is estimated as 46 kld, which will be met from bore wells. The proponent have obtained NOC from Central Ground Water Authority for drawl of 120 kld of water. Based on the blast vibration study it was concluded that the vibration recorded are less than the maximum allowable standards. The horizontal projection of flying rock fragments were observed to be within 20 m. The blasting may not have any damaging affect on the surrounding residential, if the blasting pattern given in the report is continued. In case the distance decreases below 185 m, the charge per delay may be decreased suitably. The report has suggested monitoring of ground vibrations. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting, which inter-alia include employment opportunity, depletion of groundwater due to mining, noise and vibration,  repair of damage roads and overloading of trucks, backfilling of mined out area and monitoring of dust emission. It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

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

(i)      Regular monitoring of vibration and its impact, if any, in the village will be carried out and if at any stage any damage is felt on the village buildings / structure, necessary corrective measures will be taken in this regard.

(ii)      Groundwater table shall be monitored regularly and it shall be ensured that there is no depletion of groundwater in the area. Necessary groundwater recharging structures shall be built.

(iii)     Exclusive road for transportation of limestone shall be laid as committed by the proponent. 

(iv)     The ambient air quality will be monitored regularly. There shall be at least one monitoring station in the habitation area. Necessary safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the air quality is within permissible limit.

2.14  Rampura Limestone & Calcite Mine of M/s Oriental Talc Products Pvt. Ltd., Village Rampura, Tehsil Neemka Thana, District Sikar, Rajasthan (Consultant: Enkay Enviro Services, Jaipur)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for renewal of mine lease, which would fall due in February, 2013 and enhancement of production of limestone from 50,000 TPA to 1,15,000 TPA. Mine is reported to be closed since 1998. TOR for this project were prescribed on 3.4.2008. Public hearing has been held on 31.7.2009. The mine lease area is 41.13 ha. It has been considered as category ‘A’ because of its location at a distance of 4 km from the inter-state boundary of Rajasthan and Haryana. No forestland is involved. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. Mine working will be opencast semi-mechanised involving drilling and blasting. Life of mine is 11 years. Water requirement is 15 kld, which will be obtained from bore well. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting. It was observed that the baseline AAQ data given in the EIA report is for the month of October-November, 2010 (Post monsoon), while public hearing has been conducted in 2009. The Committee wanted to know regarding the data, which was placed before the public. The proponent clarified that the AAQ data given in the draft EIA report was revalidated by the present consultant which has been included in the EIA report. It was also observed that the PM10 levels are high within the mine lease. It was also observed that the water quality in the area is poor, particularly as regards TDS, Chloride, Fluoride etc.

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

(i)      A note on the court case relating to the project and its latest status.

(ii)      Papers relating to succession of mine ownership.

(iii)     A clarification from the State Government confirming the level at which the public hearing has been chaired.

(iv)     Year-wise production till the closure of the mine clearly showing the highest production achieved prior to the EIA Notification, 1994 coming into force.

(v)      Details of the AAQ data which was placed before the public in the draft EIA report should also be given and compared with the data now being given in the EIA report.

(vi)     In view of the observed high levels of PM10 in the mine lease area, particularly when the mining is reported to be closed, specific safeguard measures proposed to bring down the levels should be given along with their effectiveness in controlling the same. After implementing these measures, AAQ data should be collected afresh and submitted. AAQ monitoring network should be properly designed and monitoring carried out as per the protocol so as to give a fair representation of the entire study area.

(vii)    The Questionnaire should be properly filled up providing information against respective Questions.

(viii)   The information relating to waste etc. should be given till the lease period as well as the conceptual stage.

(ix)     Details of R&R of the land oustees should be given.

(x)      Compensation proposed for the grazing land to be used in the project in terms of the alternate arrangements made / to be made in this regard should be given.

(xi)     The area is over exploited in terms of the groundwater potential. Specific safeguard measures for ground water recharging and water conservation should be given.

(xii)    Details of flora and fauna separately for core and buffer zone duly authenticated should be given.

(xiii)   The occupational health aspect as given are only curative and not preventive. This aspect may be looked into and details furnished.

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

 

It was decided that the proposal may be brought back before the Committee for its further consideration after the requisite information has mentioned above has been submitted. In the meantime, the Project File may be kept closed.

2.15            Mining of Flag Stone of M/s Indira Patthar Shramik Sehkari Samiti, village Suwakheda, District Neemuch, Madhya Pradesh (Consultant: Enviro Techno Consult, Nagpur)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for renewal of mine lease, which falls due in 2013 for production of 11,700 TPA of flagstone, limestone (minor mineral). TOR for this project were prescribed on 5.2.2009. Public hearing has been held on 21.7.2011. Mine lease area is 117.532 ha. No forestland is involved. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. Mine working will be opencast involving drilling and blasting. Water requirement is estimated as 30 kld, which will be obtained from pit water and groundwater. It was observed that the baseline AAQ data has been collected during November – January, which is neither representative of post monsoon nor winter. As such, one season baseline AAQ data needs to be collected and presented. The baseline data on noise levels also require to be rechecked and reconfirmed. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. It was observed that the commitments made on the issues raised during public hearing were seen to be too vague.

Based on the presentation made and discussion held the Committed desired that the EIA report should be revised and redone by collecting one season baseline AAQ data afresh following the monitoring the protocol so as to give representative data of the study area. There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction. The public hearing issues also need to be addressed by a definite action plan along with corresponding financial allocation.

It was decided that the proposal may be brought back before the Committee for its further consideration after the revised EIA report as mentioned above has been submitted. In the meantime, the Project File may be kept closed.

2.16  Srikurmam Mineral Sands Mine of M/s Trimex Sands Pvt. Ltd., Village Vatsavalasa, Mandal Gara, District Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh

          The proposal was last considered by the EAC during its meeting held in September, 2011, wherein the prescribing of TOR was deferred till a site visit by a sub group of the Committee is undertaken to study the compliance of the present EC conditions. The sub group made the visit on 17th March, 2012 and based on the report of the sub-group, the proposal was further considered by the Committee. The Committee sought information on the following:

(i)      Map showing the location of dunes pre-mining and post mining.

(ii)      Details of additional land area required/proposed

(iii)     A note on mining clearly showing mining as per IBM approved mine plan Vs EC conditions.

(iv)     A note on MSP tailing disposal vis-à-vis approved mine plan.

(v)     Time series data of groundwater quality and water table.

(vi)     Latest status of court case.

(viii)   Details of faunal survey.

 

          Based on the discussion held, it was decided that the proposal may be considered further internally after the requisite information as mentioned above has been submitted by the proponent.

 

2.17  Aravali Gypsum & Minerals of M/s FCI Aravali Gypsum and Minerals India Ltd. located at village Padampura, Tehsil Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan (Consultant: R.K. Consultants, Jodhpur)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for enhancement of production of gypsum from 15,000 TPA to 50,000 TPA. Earlier EC for 15,000 TPA was obtained in 21.12.2005. TOR for this project were prescribed in 28.3.2011. Public hearing has been held on 21.10.2011. The mine lease area is 120 ha. No forestland is involved. Mine working will be opencast semi-mechanised. No blasting is involved. Ultimate working depth will be 1.4 m bgl. Water requirement is 5 kld, which will be obtained from PHED. Simultaneous backfilling will be done. It has been stated that the project area does not fall in Aravali and a letter dated 7.12.2011 from Assistant Mining Engineer, Sri Ganganagar has been submitted. The baseline AAQ data presented shows the levels within permissible limits. Compliance of earlier EC conditions was also presented and discussed during the meeting. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting, which inter-alia included leveling of land after mining. The social responsibilities being undertaken inter-alia included medical services, construction of community hall and plantation. It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

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

(i)      Post mining land must be restored to agriculture use to the extent possible and also the grazing land should be restored.

(ii)      Greenbelt should be developed within three years towards the tributary of Indira Gandhi Canal.

(iii)     As part of the post project monitoring of AAQ, free silica should also be monitored.

2.18  Ranavav Limestone Mine of M/s Saurashtra Chemicals Ltd., District Porbandar, Gujarat (Consultant: Mantec Consultants Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi)

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on 25.2.2011, wherein the Committee had sought NOC from Chief Wildlife Warden, Gujarat because of the location of the mine at a distance of 4.3 km from the Barda Wildlife Sanctuary. The Committee took note of the letter dated 13.1.2012 from Chief Wildlife Warden, where in it has been stated that the lease area is not a forest area and is not a part of sanctuary or national park. The lease area is reported at a distance of 2.97 km from the Barda Wildlife Sanctuary. The Chief Wildlife Warden in the said letter have also stated that the project proponent shall obtain prior approval of Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife due to location of the mine within 10 km of the Sanctuary. It was also noted that it is a violation case as the mine has operated after it fell due for renewal in 2001.    

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance subject to their obtaining clearance from the Standing Committee of National Board for Wildlife as also stated in the letter of the Chief Wildlife Warden.

2.19  Mudh Ball Clay, Fire Clay, China Clay, Red & Yellow Ochre and Silica Sand Mine of M/s K.G. Mines & Minerals, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner, Rajasthan (TOR)

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

 

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease which fell due in August, 2011 and enhancement of production from 50,000 TPA to 1,00,000 TPA. It is a violation case as the mine has been operating after it fell due for renewal. The earlier EC was granted in February, 2008. The consideration of the proposal was deferred to the next meeting to be held in April, 2012 for want of compliance status of the earlier EC conditions, duly supported with data and photographs.

2.20  Gudha Ball Clay, Fire Clay, China Clay, Red & Yellow Ochre and Silica Sand Mine of M/s K.G. Mines & Minerals near village Gudha, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner, Rajasthan (TOR)

The consideration of the proposal was deferred to the next meeting to be held in April, 2012 for want of compliance status of the earlier EC conditions duly supported with data and photographs.

2.21  Iron Ore Beneficiation Plant of M/s Jindal Saw Ltd., village Dhedwas, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan (Consultant: Geomin Consulants Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

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

It was observed that the EC was granted to the said project in August, 2010. During exploration and further analysis the proponent observed that the ore body contains some iron sulphide which is harmful to pellets. Accordingly, the proponent have proposed to treat the concentrate by froth floatation to bring down the sulpher to less than or equal to 0.2%. Thus, the earlier project which was granted environment clearance is proposed to undergo change in scope by addition of another component in the beneficiation plant. Accordingly, the Committee considered the project under para 7(ii) of the EIA Notification, 2006 and the project was subjected to due diligence in terms of additional studies / information which the project proponent should submit for consideration of the project by the EAC in terms of the proposed change of scope. The committee desired information / studies on the following:

(i)      Information relating to handling of chemicals should be furnished.

(ii)      Acid drainage and the issues relating thereto should be discussed clearly bringing out their impact on different components of environment.

(iii)     Details relating to management and disposal of sludge should be furnished.

(iv)     Details relating to disposal / management of effluents should be furnished.

(v)      Detailed scheme for disposal of sulphur should be provided.

(vi)     Ingredients to be added at site, their quantity to be stored etc. should be examined in the light of applicability of HSM Rules and details furnished.

(vii)    Additional water requirement due to change in scope, water balance and availability of water should be provided.

(viii)   Soil permeability data and the requirement of lining for the tailing pond should be discussed in the light of leaching.

(ix)     Characteristics of effluents should be given.

(x)     Details of waste disposal should also be given.

(xi)              As regards the requirement of conducting public hearing afresh or otherwise, it was decided that a decision on the same will be taken after the requisite information on the above mentioned points has been submitted and examined by the Committee. 

It was decided that the proposal may be brought back before the Committee for its further consideration after the requisite information as mentioned above has been submitted. 

2.22  Kotri Fire Clay Mine of M/s Sampat Lal Daga near village Kotri, Tehsil Kolayat, District Bikaner, Rajasthan (TOR)

The consideration of the proposal was deferred to the next meeting to be held in April, 2012 for want of compliance status of the earlier EC conditions duly supported with data and photographs.

2.23  Renewal of Mining activities at Talawadi Bauxite Mine of M/s Orient Abrasives Ltd., village Mewasa, Taluka Kalyanpur, District Jamnagar, Gujarat

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

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease which fell due in 2001 for production of 6,600 TPA of bauxite. The mine lease area is 7.52 ha. It has been considered as category ‘A’ because of its location at a distance of 5.15 km from the marine national park. No forestland is involved. It is a violation case as the mine has operated after it fell due for renewal. Mine working will be opencast involving blasting. Mineral will be transported by road. Ultimate working depth will be 4.6 m bgl. Water table is reported to be at 12 m bgl. Water requirement is estimated as 3.15 kld, which will be obtained from tanker as well as from water stored in mine pit.

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

1)           Cumulative impact on the marine national park should be worked out and given.

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

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

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

5)           All corner coordinates of the mine lease area superimposed on High Resolution Imagery/toposheet should be provided.

6)           Does the company have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by its Board of Directors? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA report. 

7)           Does the Environment Policy prescribe for standard operating process/ procedures to bring into focus any infringement / deviation / violation of the environmental or forest norms / conditions? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA. 

8)           What is the hierarchical system or Administrative order of the company to deal with the environmental issues and for ensuring compliance with the EC conditions.  Details of this system may be given. 

9)           Does the company have a 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?  This reporting mechanism should be detailed in the EIA report.  

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

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

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

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

14)        Identification of CRZ area.  A CRZ map duly authenticated by one of the authorised agencies demarcating LTL, HTL, CRZ area, location of the mine lease w.r.t. CRZ, coastal features such as mangroves, if any.

15)        Contour map showing the contours from mine to marine national park should be clearly shown, so as to ensure that no effluents go to the marine national park.

16)        As the site is reported to fall in Seismic Zone IV, disaster management plan should be prepared and furnished.

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

18)        Impact, if any, of change of land use should be given. 

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

20)        One season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna shall be collected and the AAQ data so collected presented date-wise in the EIA and EMP report.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be such as to represent whole of the study area and justified keeping in view the pre-dominant downwind direction and location of sensitive receptors. There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction. 

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

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

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

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

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

26)        A detailed hydro-geological study showing the impact of the project on groundwater regime should be provided.  Impact on groundwater due to ingress of seawater, if any, may also be brought out.  In case the working will intersect groundwater table, a detailed hydro geological study should be undertaken and report furnished.  Necessary permission from Central Ground Water Authority for working below ground water and for pumping of ground water should also be obtained and copy furnished.

27)        Details of any stream, seasonal or otherwise, passing through lease area and modification / diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

37)        Public health implication of the project and related activities for the population in the impact zone should be systematically evaluated and the proposed remedial measures should be detailed along with budgetary allocation. 

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

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

40)        Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided and also incorporated in the final EIA/EMP Report of the Project. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

h)   Changes, if any made in the basic scope and project parameters (as submitted in Form-I and the F.R for securing the TOR) should be brought to the attention of MoEF with reasons for such changes and permission should be sought, as the TOR may also have to be altered. Post Public Hearing changes in structure and content of the draft EIA/EMP (other than modifications arising out of the P.H. process) will entail conducting the PH again with the revised documentation.

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

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

2.24  Expansion of Mining activities at Virpur-II Bauxite Mine of M/s Orient Abrasives Ltd., village Virpur, Taluka Kalyanpur, District Jamnagar, Gujarat

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

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease which fell due in 2000 and enhancement of production of bauxite from 4551 TPA to 77,400 TPA. The mine lease area is 13.48 ha. It has been considered as category ‘A’ because of its location at a distance of 1.705 km from the marine national park. No forestland is involved. It is a violation case as the mine has operated after it fell due for renewal. Mine working will be opencast involving blasting. Mineral will be transported by road. Ultimate working depth will be 5.5 m bgl. Water table is reported to be at 12 m bgl. Water requirement is estimated as 6.45 kld, which will be obtained from tanker as well as from water stored in mine pit.

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

1)           Cumulative impact on the marine national park should be worked out and given.

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

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

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

5)           All corner coordinates of the mine lease area superimposed on High Resolution Imagery/toposheet should be provided.

6)           Does the company have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by its Board of Directors? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA report. 

7)           Does the Environment Policy prescribe for standard operating process/ procedures to bring into focus any infringement / deviation / violation of the environmental or forest norms / conditions? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA. 

8)           What is the hierarchical system or Administrative order of the company to deal with the environmental issues and for ensuring compliance with the EC conditions.  Details of this system may be given. 

9)           Does the company have a 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?  This reporting mechanism should be detailed in the EIA report.  

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

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

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

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

14)        Identification of CRZ area.  A CRZ map duly authenticated by one of the authorised agencies demarcating LTL, HTL, CRZ area, location of the mine lease w.r.t. CRZ, coastal features such as mangroves, if any.

15)        Contour map showing the contours from mine to marine national park should be clearly shown, so as to ensure that no effluents go to the marine national park.

16)        As the site is reported to fall in Seismic Zone IV, disaster management plan should be prepared and furnished.

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

18)        Impact, if any, of change of land use should be given. 

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

20)        One season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna shall be collected and the AAQ data so collected presented date-wise in the EIA and EMP report.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be such as to represent whole of the study area and justified keeping in view the pre-dominant downwind direction and location of sensitive receptors. There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction. 

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

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

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

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

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

26)        A detailed hydro-geological study showing the impact of the project on groundwater regime should be provided.  Impact on groundwater due to ingress of seawater, if any, may also be brought out.  In case the working will intersect groundwater table, a detailed hydro geological study should be undertaken and report furnished.  Necessary permission from Central Ground Water Authority for working below ground water and for pumping of ground water should also be obtained and copy furnished.

27)        Details of any stream, seasonal or otherwise, passing through lease area and modification / diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

37)        Public health implication of the project and related activities for the population in the impact zone should be systematically evaluated and the proposed remedial measures should be detailed along with budgetary allocation. 

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

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

40)        Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided and also incorporated in the final EIA/EMP Report of the Project. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

h)   Changes, if any made in the basic scope and project parameters (as submitted in Form-I and the F.R for securing the TOR) should be brought to the attention of MoEF with reasons for such changes and permission should be sought, as the TOR may also have to be altered. Post Public Hearing changes in structure and content of the draft EIA/EMP (other than modifications arising out of the P.H. process) will entail conducting the PH again with the revised documentation.

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

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

2.25  Karampada Iron Ore Mine of M/s Shah Bros., Village Chaibasa, West Singhbhum, Jharkhand (Consultant: Vision Tech Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for enhancement of production of iron ore from 0.1 million TPA to 0.93 million TPA (ROM). The earlier environment clearance was granted on 23.1.2007 for 0.1 million TPA. The mine lease area is 233.99 ha, which is forestland. It has been stated that there was a proposal to surrender 43.769 ha of forestland. In addition, an area of 6.13 ha outside the mine lease is also proposed for waste disposal. The forest authority is reported to have taken possession of this land. The mining lease for the reduced area is not yet renewed and therefore the mining scheme has been prepared for the total mine lease area. TOR for this project were prescribed on 22.6.2010. Public hearing has been held on 29.6.2011. It was stated that the forest clearance for the broken up area of 24.856 ha has been accorded on 3.1.2005. The proponent has submitted forest diversion proposal for an additional area of 71.565 ha. As the project is located in West Singhbhum, an identified severely polluted area, comments of Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board were also obtained which have been received vide letter dated 20.3.2012 and have been considered by the EAC. As per the report of SPCB, ambient air quality levels are within permissible limits. It has further been stated that as the mining will be above water table, there is no chance of water pollution. Mine working will be opencast mechanized. The ultimate working depth will be 99 m bgl. Life of mine is 30 years. It is estimated that 9,55,203 m3 of waste will be generated during mine life. It was observed that the public hearing has been held only for 0.8 million TPA. The proponent clarified that the 0.8 million tonne is the actual production whereas ROM will be 0.93 million TPA. Compliance of earlier EC conditions were also presented and discussed, however, the requisite supporting data /photographs were not available. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting, which inter-alia included development of village road, water availability, dust going into the agriculture field, school facilities etc. It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

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

(i)      Confirmation from the Competent Authority in the State Govt. regarding the level / rank of the Officer who chaired the public hearing proceedings.

(ii)      Compliance of earlier EC conditions with supporting data / photographs.

(iii)     The baseline AAQ data to be redone by proper selection of the AAQ monitoring station following the monitoring protocol such that the data is representative of the entire study area. Simultaneous data should be collected at all the monitoring stations. There should be at least one monitoring station within 500 m from the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction.

(iv)     The EIA report which was placed before the public and the one now finalized and submitted should be compared for the data contained in the two reports. The comparison should be given along with copies of both the reports.

(v)      It is observed that the public hearing has been held for 0.8 million TPA while the proposal is for 0.9 million TPA. The matter may be clarified along with requisite supporting documents.

(vi)     Soil quality data to be rechecked and resubmitted.

(vii)    Details of flora and fauna in the study area separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished duly authenticated.

(viii)   CSR activities in the area need to be taken up based on the Need based family oriented survey. Details in this regard should be furnished.

(ix)     Details of R&R in respect of the area outside the mine lease to be used in the project should be given.

(x)      An undertaking regarding ownership of data and compliance of prescribed TORs should be submitted.

(xi)     Details of the action taken / initiated by the State Govt., if any, against the project for the violation made should be submitted.

It was decided that the proposal may be brought back before the Committee for its further consideration after the requisite information has mentioned above has been submitted.

 

2.26  Jain China Clay Mine-Bhonda along with Beneficiation Plant of M/s The Jain China Clay Mines Pvt. Ltd., village Bhonda, Kumardungi, Chaibasa, Jharkhand (Consultant: ERS(I) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for renewal of mine lease, which would fall due in December, 2012 and enhancement of production of china clay to 8,000 TPA along with washing plant having a capacity of 10,000 TPA. TOR for this project were prescribed on 12th May, 2009.  Public hearing has been held on 17.1.2011. It was observed that the EIA report has been prepared based on only one month AAQ data. Further, data on biological component for core zone has also not been given in the EIA report. The Committee, therefore, desired that the proponent should redo the EIA and based on the revised EIA so prepared, the public hearing should be conducted afresh. The proposal for EC may be submitted thereafter. The proposal in its present form may be rejected and file closed.

2.27            Jain China Clay Mines-Ho-Bhonda along with Beneficiation Plant of M/s The Jain China Clay Mines Pvt. Ltd., village Kumardungi, Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand (Consultant: ERS(I) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for renewal of mine lease, which fell due for renewal in January, 1996 and enhancement of production of china clay to 4,500 TPA along with washing plant having a capacity of 10,000 TPA. TOR for this project were prescribed on 12th May, 2009. Public hearing has been held on 17.1.2011. It was observed that the EIA report has been prepared based on only one month AAQ data. Further, data on biological component for core zone has also not been given in the EIA report. The Committee, therefore, desired that the proponent should redo the EIA and based on the revised EIA so prepared, the public hearing should be conducted afresh. The proposal for EC may be submitted thereafter. The proposal in its present form may be rejected and file closed.

 

2.28            Diamond China Clay Mines of M/s The Singhbhum Mineral Co., Village Karanjiya, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand (EC)

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

2.29  Surjabasa Limestone Mine of M/s Narsinh Harji, village Surjabasa, P.O. Chaibasa, District Singhbhum (West), Jharkhand (Consultant: Shiva Test House, Patna)

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

The proposal is for renewal of mine lease which fell due in February, 2009 and enhancement of production of limestone from 30,000 TPA to 60,000 TPA. The mine is reported to be closed since December, 2011. The mine lease area is 16.7 ha. It was stated during the meeting that the mine lease area includes 8.26 ha of forestland. It has been considered in MoEF as the SEIAA for Jharkhand is not in place. It was noted that the proponent has not yet applied for diversion of forestland. In view of the same, the proponent was requested to first apply for forestry clearance and submit copy of their application to this Ministry as well and thereafter the proposal will be taken up for consideration. The consideration of the proposal was therefore deferred.

2.30  Pillidhar Bauxite Mine of M/s Shri Nataraj Ceramic & Chemical Industries Ltd. located at Taluk-Kalyanpur, District Jamnagar (Gujarat) (EC)

         The consideration of the proposal was deferred at the request of the project proponent. The Committee also recommended for closure of the file and delisting from pending list as the project proponent has sought deferment several times. It will now be taken up only after receipt of written request from the proponent for listing of their proposal.

2.31  Rabda Graphite Mine and Beneficiation Plant of Shri Hemant Kumar Poddar, village Rabda, District Palamau, Jharkhand (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Noida)

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

The proposal is for opening of a new mine for production of 49,181 TPA of graphite  along with a beneficiation plant of 3,780 TPA. It was noted that the mine lease is in the name of Shri Hemant Kumar Poddar while the beneficiation plant is in the name of M/s Tirupati Carbons and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., a separate entity. The Committee, therefore, desired that the proponent should submit two separate proposals in the name of the respective proponents and thereafter both the proposals will be taken up for consideration during the next meeting of EAC to be held in April, 2012.

2.32  Balda Block Iron Ore Mines of M/s Serajuddin & Co., village Balda, Bada Kalimati & Nayagarh, Tehsil Barbil, District Keonjhar, Orissa (TOR) (Consultant: )

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

2.33  China Clay Mining Project of M/s J.K. White Cements Works, village Kantharia, Tehsil & District Chitorgarh, Rajasthan (Consultant: Ramji Mine Envirotech, Jaipur)

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

The proposal was last considered by the EAC in its meeting held in February, 2012, however, prescribing of TORs was deferred for want of information regarding status of compliance of the earlier EC conditions. Based on the compliance details now furnished the proposal was considered further. The proposal is for enhancement of production of china clay from 15,000 TPA to 1,50,000 TPA and installation of crusher of 65 TPH capacity. The earlier environment clearance for 15,000 TPA capacity was granted in April, 2003. It was stated that the proponent had earlier obtained TORs in March, 2009 without any crusher. Now since crusher has also been incorporated and the TORs are almost 3 years old, the proponent have sought prescribing of TORs afresh. The Committee, therefore, decided to consider the present application in supersession of the TORs prescribed earlier. The compliance of earlier EC conditions was also presented and discussed in detail. It was observed that the compliance needs further improvement and by the time the proponent come for EC, they must improve the compliance status.

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

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

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

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

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

5)           All corner coordinates of the mine lease area superimposed on High Resolution Imagery/toposheet should be provided.

6)           Does the company have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by its Board of Directors? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA report. 

7)           Does the Environment Policy prescribe for standard operating process/ procedures to bring into focus any infringement / deviation / violation of the environmental or forest norms / conditions? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA. 

8)           What is the hierarchical system or Administrative order of the company to deal with the environmental issues and for ensuring compliance with the EC conditions.  Details of this system may be given. 

9)           Does the company have a 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?  This reporting mechanism should be detailed in the EIA report.  

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

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

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

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

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

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

16)        Impact, if any, of change of land use should be given. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

25)        Details of any stream, seasonal or otherwise, passing through lease area and modification / diversion proposed, if any and the impact of the same on the hydrology should be brought out. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

35)        Public health implication of the project and related activities for the population in the impact zone should be systematically evaluated and the proposed remedial measures should be detailed along with budgetary allocation. 

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

37)        Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts which, should inter-alia also include the impact due to change of land use, due to loss of agricultural land and grazing land, if any, occupational health impacts besides other impacts of the projects. Specific safeguard measures for control of particulate level especially fugitive emissions in the crusher zone should be discussed in detail.

38)        Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided and also incorporated in the final EIA/EMP Report of the Project. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

h)   Changes, if any made in the basic scope and project parameters (as submitted in Form-I and the F.R for securing the TOR) should be brought to the attention of MoEF with reasons for such changes and permission should be sought, as the TOR may also have to be altered. Post Public Hearing changes in structure and content of the draft EIA/EMP (other than modifications arising out of the P.H. process) will entail conducting the PH again with the revised documentation.

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

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

2.34  Minor Mineral Project of M/s Department of Industries and Commerce, village Togar, Tehsil Ludhiana East, District Ludhiana, Punjab  (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Noida)

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

The Committee observed that the applications for prescribing TORs have been submitted by the Department of Industries, Govt. of Punjab. Considering the overall sovereign role of ensuring environmental protection and regulation, it would be desirable that the State by itself does not play the role of a proponent or miner, but assigns it to a State owned or contractually bound entity other than itself.

The proposal is for extraction of 5,83,000 TPA of Sand (minor mineral) from the bed of river Sutluj, village Togar, District Ludhiana. The mine lease area is 54.6 ha. Mining will be opencast semi-mechanised along the centre of the river bed keeping both shores unaffected.  Depth of mining will be 3 m. 

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

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

2)           Cumulative impacts of all other projects within the impact zone should also be given. While working out the cumulative impact, transportation route should also be taken into account and the impact on crops in the agricultural fields enroute, if any, should also be given.

3)           Does the company have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by its Board of Directors? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA report. 

4)           Does the Environment Policy prescribe for standard operating process/procedures to bring into focus any infringement / deviation / violation of the environmental or forest norms / conditions? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA.

5)           All corner coordinates of the mine lease area superimposed on High Resolution Imagery/toposheet should be provided.

6)           What is the hierarchical system or Administrative order of the company to deal with the environmental issues and for ensuring compliance with the EC conditions.  Details of this system may be given. 

7)           Does the company have a 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?  This reporting mechanism should be detailed in the EIA report.  

8)           The terms and conditions imposed, if any, by the Competent Authority in the State Government while granting mining lease / permit / contract should be built into the mine plan (eco friendly mine plan) as well as the EIA report.  It may inter-alia include; area of working (length and breadth of the river stretch), mode of working, working shift, transportation of mineral, restriction, if any imposed for working etc. 

9)           Involvement of forestland, if any, in the project and status of forestry clearance should be given. 

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

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

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

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

14)        The vegetation in the RF / PF in the study area, if any, should be indicated.  

15)        A study shall be got done to ascertain the impact of the mining project on wildlife of the area including aquatic life. 

16)        Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed) within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden. Necessary clearance from the Chief Wildlife Warden for operating the mine within 10 km of the National Park/Sanctuary, if any, should also be obtained and furnished. 

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

18)        Impact of the project on land use including change of river course, if any should be given. 

19)        Impact on topography, drainage, agricultural fields, cattle fields, wildlife, water logging leading to water borne diseases, if any.  It may also be shown whether it will lead to change of watercourse of the river.  Modelling exercise should also be carried out through an expert agency to show the change in river flow dynamics, if any.

20)        Collection of one season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna, site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be such as to represent whole of the study area and justified keeping in view the pre-dominant downwind direction and location of sensitive receptors. Date wise collected baseline AAQ data should form part of EIA and EMP report.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given.  There should be at least one AAQ monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

28)        Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be furnished.

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

30)        Occupational health impacts of the project activity should be anticipated and reported and proposed preventive measures indicated. These alongwith details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules and medical facilities proposed to be provided should be incorporated in the EMP.

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

32)        Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts. Specific safeguard measures to control PM10 as well as pollution due to transportation should be given.

33)        Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided and also incorporated in the final EIA/EMP Report of the Project. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

h)   Changes, if any made in the basic scope and project parameters (as submitted in Form-I and the F.R for securing the TOR) should be brought to the attention of MoEF with reasons for such changes and permission should be sought, as the TOR may also have to be altered. Post Public Hearing changes in structure and content of the draft EIA/EMP (other than modifications arising out of the P.H. process) will entail conducting the PH again with the revised documentation.

The EIA report should also include surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area.

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

2.35  Minor Mineral Project of M/s Department of Industries and Commerce, village Jamalpur Leli, Tehsil Ludhiana East, District Ludhiana, Punjab (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Noida)

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

The Committee observed that the applications for prescribing TORs have been submitted by the Department of Industries, Govt. of Punjab. Considering the overall sovereign role of ensuring environmental protection and regulation, it would be desirable that the State by itself does not play the role of a proponent or miner, but assigns it to a State owned or contractually bound entity other than itself.

The proposal is for extraction of 8,65,000 TPA of Sand (minor mineral) from the bed of river Sutluj, village Jamalpur Leli, District Ludhiana. The mine lease area is 80.2 ha. Mining will be opencast semi-mechanised along the centre of the river bed keeping both shores unaffected. Depth of mining will be 3 m. 

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

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

2)           Cumulative impacts of all other projects within the impact zone should also be given. While working out the cumulative impact, transportation route should also be taken into account and the impact on crops in the agricultural fields enroute, if any, should also be given.

3)           Does the company have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by its Board of Directors? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA report. 

4)           Does the Environment Policy prescribe for standard operating process/procedures to bring into focus any infringement / deviation / violation of the environmental or forest norms / conditions? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA. 

5)           All corner coordinates of the mine lease area superimposed on High Resolution Imagery/toposheet should be provided.

6)           What is the hierarchical system or Administrative order of the company to deal with the environmental issues and for ensuring compliance with the EC conditions.  Details of this system may be given. 

7)           Does the company have a 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?  This reporting mechanism should be detailed in the EIA report.  

8)           The terms and conditions imposed, if any, by the Competent Authority in the State Government while granting mining lease / permit / contract should be built into the mine plan (eco friendly mine plan) as well as the EIA report.  It may inter-alia include; area of working (length and breadth of the river stretch), mode of working, working shift, transportation of mineral, restriction, if any imposed for working etc. 

9)           Involvement of forestland, if any, in the project and status of forestry clearance should be given. 

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

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

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

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

14)        The vegetation in the RF / PF in the study area, if any, should be indicated.  

15)        A study shall be got done to ascertain the impact of the mining project on wildlife of the area including aquatic life. 

16)        Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed) within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden. Necessary clearance from the Chief Wildlife Warden for operating the mine within 10 km of the National Park/Sanctuary, if any, should also be obtained and furnished. 

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

18)        Impact of the project on land use including change of river course, if any should be given. 

19)        Impact on topography, drainage, agricultural fields, cattle fields, wildlife, water logging leading to water borne diseases, if any.  It may also be shown whether it will lead to change of watercourse of the river.  Modelling exercise should also be carried out through an expert agency to show the change in river flow dynamics, if any.

20)        Collection of one season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna, site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be such as to represent whole of the study area and justified keeping in view the pre-dominant downwind direction and location of sensitive receptors. Date wise collected baseline AAQ data should form part of EIA and EMP report.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given.  There should be at least one AAQ monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

28)        Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be furnished.

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

30)        Occupational health impacts of the project activity should be anticipated and reported and proposed preventive measures indicated. These alongwith details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules and medical facilities proposed to be provided should be incorporated in the EMP.

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

32)        Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts. Specific safeguard measures to control PM10 as well as pollution due to transportation should be given.

33)        Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided and also incorporated in the final EIA/EMP Report of the Project. 

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

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

h)   Changes, if any made in the basic scope and project parameters (as submitted in Form-I and the F.R for securing the TOR) should be brought to the attention of MoEF with reasons for such changes and permission should be sought, as the TOR may also have to be altered. Post Public Hearing changes in structure and content of the draft EIA/EMP (other than modifications arising out of the P.H. process) will entail conducting the PH again with the revised documentation.

The EIA report should also include surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area.

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

2.36  Minor Mineral Project of M/s Department of Industries and Commerce, village Raur, Tehsil Ludhiana East, District Ludhiana, Punjab (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Noida)

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

The Committee observed that the applications for prescribing TORs have been submitted by the Department of Industries, Govt. of Punjab. Considering the overall sovereign role of ensuring environmental protection and regulation, it would be desirable that the State by itself does not play the role of a proponent or miner, but assigns it to a State owned or contractually bound entity other than itself.

The proposal is for extraction of 6,91,000 TPA of Sand (minor mineral) from the bed of river Sutluj, village Raur, District Ludhiana. The mine lease area is 64.8 ha. Mining will be opencast semi-mechanised along the centre of the river bed keeping both shores unaffected. Depth of mining will be 3 m. 

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

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

2)           Cumulative impacts of all other projects within the impact zone should also be given. While working out the cumulative impact, transportation route should also be taken into account and the impact on crops in the agricultural fields enroute, if any, should also be given.

3)           Does the company have a well laid down Environment Policy approved by its Board of Directors? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA report. 

4)           Does the Environment Policy prescribe for standard operating process/procedures to bring into focus any infringement / deviation / violation of the environmental or forest norms / conditions? If so, it may be detailed in the EIA. 

5)           All corner coordinates of the mine lease area superimposed on High Resolution Imagery/toposheet should be provided.

6)           What is the hierarchical system or Administrative order of the company to deal with the environmental issues and for ensuring compliance with the EC conditions. Details of this system may be given. 

7)           Does the company have a 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? This reporting mechanism should be detailed in the EIA report.  

8)           The terms and conditions imposed, if any, by the Competent Authority in the State Government while granting mining lease / permit / contract should be built into the mine plan (eco friendly mine plan) as well as the EIA report.  It may inter-alia include; area of working (length and breadth of the river stretch), mode of working, working shift, transportation of mineral, restriction, if any imposed for working etc. 

9)           Involvement of forestland, if any, in the project and status of forestry clearance should be given. 

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

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

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

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

14)        The vegetation in the RF / PF in the study area, if any, should be indicated.  

15)        A study shall be got done to ascertain the impact of the mining project on wildlife of the area including aquatic life. 

16)        Location of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Biosphere Reserves, Wildlife Corridors, Tiger/Elephant Reserves (existing as well as proposed) within 10 km of the mine lease should be clearly indicated supported by a location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden. Necessary clearance from the Chief Wildlife Warden for operating the mine within 10 km of the National Park/Sanctuary, if any, should also be obtained and furnished. 

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

18)        Impact of the project on land use including change of river course, if any should be given. 

19)        Impact on topography, drainage, agricultural fields, cattle fields, wildlife, water logging leading to water borne diseases, if any.  It may also be shown whether it will lead to change of watercourse of the river.  Modelling exercise should also be carried out through an expert agency to show the change in river flow dynamics, if any.

20)        Collection of one season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna, site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be such as to represent whole of the study area and justified keeping in view the pre-dominant downwind direction and location of sensitive receptors. Date wise collected baseline AAQ data should form part of EIA and EMP report.  The mineralogical composition of PM10 particularly for free silica should be given.  There should be at least one AAQ monitoring station within 500 m of the mine lease in the pre-dominant downwind direction. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

28)        Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers should be furnished.

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

30)        Occupational health impacts of the project activity should be anticipated and reported and proposed preventive measures indicated. These alongwith details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules and medical facilities proposed to be provided should be incorporated in the EMP.

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

32)        Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts. Specific safeguard measures to control PM10 as well as pollution due to transportation should be given.

33)        Public hearing points raised and commitment of the project proponent on the same along with time bound action plan to implement the same should be provided and also incorporated in the final EIA/EMP Report of the Project. 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

h)   Changes, if any made in the basic scope and project parameters (as submitted in Form-I and the F.R for securing the TOR) should be brought to the attention of MoEF with reasons for such changes and permission should be sought, as the TOR may also have to be altered. Post Public Hearing changes in structure and content of the draft EIA/EMP (other than modifications arising out of the P.H. process) will entail conducting the PH again with the revised documentation.

The EIA report should also include surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area.

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

Any other item: 

Preparation of Guidelines for Categorisation of Projects into B1 and B2

          As per the decision taken in the Ministry to prepare sector-wise guidelines to categorize category ‘B’ projects into B1 and B2, the matter was briefly discussed during the meeting. It was decided to continue discussion on the subject and work out a draft in the next meeting.

Next Meeting:

It was decided that the next meeting will be held on April 16-18, 2012. 

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

 

*********


Annexure

List of Participants

1.            Shri M.S. Nagar                                             -         Chairman

2.            Dr. S. Subramaniyam                                    -         Vice Chairman

3.       Prof. C.K. Varshney                                       -         Member

4.       Shri K.S. Anandan                                         -         Member

5.       Shri Ranjan Sahai                                          -         Member

6.       Shri Mihir Moitra                                           -         Member       

7.       Dr. L. Ajay Kumar                                          -         Member

8.       Dr. S.K. Peshin                                              -         Member

9.       Shri Vinay Mahajan                                        -         Member

10.     Shri Rajesh Srivastava                                    -         Member

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

12.     Representative of M/s Uranium Corporation of India Ltd

13.     Representative of M/s P. Abdul Rawoof Khan

14.     Representative of M/s Bharatesh Construction Co.

15.     Representative of M/s Kedareswara Associates

16.     Representative of Shri Virendra Rai

17.     Representative of M/s Kalyanpur Cements Ltd.

18.     Representative of Shri O.P. Gupta

19.     Representative of M/s Madras Cements Ltd.

20.     Representative of M/s Oriental Talc Products Pvt. Ltd.

21.     Representative of M/s Indira Patthar Shramik Sehkari Samiti

22.     Representative of M/s Trimex Sands Pvt. Ltd.

23.     Representative of M/s FCI Aravali Gypsum and Minerals India Ltd.

24.     Representative of M/s Saurashtra Chemicals Ltd.

25.     Representative of M/s K.G. Mines & Minerals

26.     Representative of M/s Jindal Saw Ltd.

27.     Representative of M/s Orient Abrasives Ltd.

28.     Representative of M/s Shah Bros.

29.     Representative of M/s The Jain China Clay Mines Pvt. Ltd.

30.     Representative of M/s Narsinh Harji

31.     Representative of M/s Shri Hemant Kumar Poddar

32.     Representative of M/s J.K. White Cements Works

33.     Representative of M/s Department of Industries and Commerce

********

 

 

 

Untitled Page