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

 

SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 15TH MEETING OF EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL APPRAISAL OF MINING PROJECTS CONSTITUTED UNDER EIA NOTIFICATION, 2006.

The 15th meeting of the Expert Appraisal Committee for Environmental Impact Assessment of Mining Projects of the Ministry of Environment and Forests was held on May 25-27, 2011.  The list of participants is annexed. 

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

Item No. 1:

1.1     Confirmation of the minutes of the 14th Meeting.

The minutes of the 14th meeting were confirmed as circulated, however, the Committee observed that in respect of projects relating to mining of minor minerals from U.P. namely item nos. 2.38, 2.40, 2.41, 2.42, 2.43 and 2.45, the proposed study relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study), which was earlier stipulated in these projects may be steered by the State Government due to the sensitivities involved and the results obtained there from may be utilized by the State Government in fixing the quantity of mineral while granting the mining lease. 

Further, the study also suggested some changes regarding observations of turtle nesting sites.  Accordingly, the conditions earlier proposed in the last meeting will now be modified to read as under:

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mining lease. 

 

1.2     Circulation of Office Memorandums issued by MoEF:

          The three office memoranda namely; (i) Consideration of projects for grant of EC which involve forestland, dated 31st March, 2011, (ii) Procedure for consideration of proposal involving forests dated 26.4.2011 and (iii) Corporate Environment Responsibility dated 26.4.2011 were circulated to the members of the EAC and were briefly discussed so as to integrate the same while making recommendations on, as well as in formulating the TOR for various project proposals. 

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

 

2.1     Khondbond Iron and Manganese Ore Mine of M/s Tata Steel Ltd., village Khandbond, Tehsil Barbil, District Keonjhar, Orissa (Consultant: S.S. Environics (India) 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 5.4 million TPA (ROM) to 8.0 million TPA (ROM), manganese ore from 0.036 million TPA to 0.1 million TPA and a iron ore beneficiation plant of 8.0 million TPA throughput.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 25.6.2008.  Public hearing has been held on 29.10.2010.  The earlier environmental clearance was granted on 28.3.2005.  The mine lease area is 978.0 ha.  In addition, 41.472 ha has been earmarked for transportation corridor.  It includes 681.718 ha of reserved forests, 44.653 ha of Khesra forests and 110.386 ha of DLC land.  Forestry clearance has been obtained for 453.15 ha (317 ha fresh + 136.15 ha broken up prior to 1980).  The land requirement for the new beneficiation plant is 79.25 ha, which includes 33.25 ha for the tailing pond.  Mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Life of the mine is 14 years for iron ore and 5 years for manganese ore.  The ultimate working depth will be 567 m AMSL for iron ore and 515 m AMSL for manganese ore.  There will be six dumps (four for iron and two for manganese ore).  It is estimated that 2.4 million TPA of tailings will be generated.  The peak water requirement is 800 m3/hour, which will be obtained from Kundra nallah.  It was stated that no National Park / Sanctuary / Elephant Corridor are located within 10 km of the mine lease.  A map duly authenticated by DFO cum Wildlife Warden, Keonjhar has been submitted in this regard.  The compliance to the earlier EC conditions were also gone through by the Committee.  It was stated that waste dump 1 and 2 are in operation and will be sufficient up to 2013-14.  The non active areas have been stabilized by plantation.  It is also proposed to use part of the waste for land filling.  Dumps 2, 3 and 4 will be simultaneously active.  The authenticated list of flora and fauna was also provided.  The proponent have also prepared a site specific Wildlife Conservation Plan.  It was also reported that the company has an environment policy of its own with a well laid down organizational structure.  The issue relating to risk and hazards associated with manganese ore mining was also discussed.  It was stated by the proponent that emphasis is given for deduction of behavioral and neurological disturbances.   The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

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

(i)           The critical habitats, if any, within the impact zone should be individually identified and the conservation plan should effectively address the same. 

(ii)          During operation of the project, special emphasis shall be given to minimize risk and hazards due to manganese poisoning.

(iii)        The groundwater quality around the tailing pond shall be monitored regularly and time series data generated.  It shall be ensured that the groundwater quality is not affected adversely due to the project. 

(iv)        Corporate Environment Policy and hierarchical system for ensuring adherence to the policy and compliance with environmental regulation in accordance with the office memorandum dated 26.4.2011 issued by MoEF should be put in place.

 

2.2     Pakhar Bauxite Mine of M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd., District Lohardaga, Jharkhand (Consultant: Bhagavathi Anna Labs Ltd., Hyderabad)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of production of bauxite from 0.073 million TPA to 0.3 million TPA.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 14.9.2007.  Public hearing has been held on 10.10.2009.  Earlier, when this proposal was taken up for consideration by the EAC in its meeting held on March 17-19,2010, it was observed that the approved scheme of mining was in the name of M/s INDAL while the proposal was in the name of M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd.  The proponent was accordingly advised to get all the documents in the name of the lessee.  Accordingly, the proponent after getting the mining scheme approved in their name have submitted the proposal, which has been considered.  The mine lease area is 115.13 ha spread over two non contiguous blocks i.e. Block A and Block B (76.6 ha in Block A and 38.53 ha in Block B).  No forestland is involved.  The earlier clearance was granted on 11.9.1997.  Mine working will be opencast semi-mechanised involving drilling and blasting.  Ultimate working depth will be 25 m bgl.  The groundwater table varies between 120 – 150 m bgl.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  Life of the mine is 7 years.  Water requirement is 49 kld, which will be obtained from mine sump and groundwater.  It is estimated that 3.147 million m3 of waste will be generated.  The existing dump in an area of 1.9 ha will be utilized for dumping for next two years and thereafter it will be simultaneously backfilled.  The baseline AAQ data showed that the levels are within prescribed limits.  Authentic list of flora and fauna has also been provided.  The proponent has prepared a comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Plan with a capital cost of Rs 48.24 lakhs and annual recurring cost of Rs 10 lakhs.  Compliance to the earlier EC conditions was also briefly discussed and taken note of.  It was also stated by the proponent that they have a Corporate Environment Policy for ensuring compliance and its reporting with EC conditions.  The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

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

(i)           It shall be ensured that the fluoride level in the drinking water to be used by the workers in the project as well as to be provided to the public, if any, should meet the prescribed norms in this regard. 

(ii)          The critical habitat in the area including dens of python, fox and bear should be protected by adopting appropriate wildlife conservation measures. 

(iii)        Corporate Environment Policy and hierarchical system for ensuring adherence to the policy and compliance with environmental regulation in accordance with the office memorandum dated 26.4.2011 issued by MoEF should be put in place.   

                            

2.3     Iron Ore Washing & Beneficiation Plant (15 MTPA) of M/s Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd., village Soyabali, Tehsil Barbil, District Keonjhar, Orissa (Consultant: S.S. Environics (I) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for setting up of a iron ore washing and beneficiation plant having a capacity of 15 million TPA throughput.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 15.2.2010.  Public hearing has been held on 3.9.2010.  The proposed beneficiation plant will be located within the existing mine lease having an area of 947.046 ha, out of which 943.926 ha is forestland.  The environmental clearance for mining was obtained on 19.10.2008.  Forestry clearance was granted on 21.6.2001 for an area of 865.2760 ha.  The land requirement for the beneficiation plant is estimated as 95.9 ha.  It includes 11.65 ha for beneficiation plant and 84.25 ha for tailing pond.  As per the proposal originally submitted and considered by the Committee, it was proposed to have 4 tailing ponds out of which 3 tailing ponds were within the mine lease area having a total area of 46.59 ha.  The balance area of 37.66 ha was outside the mine lease at a distance of 7.5 km from the plant site.  The said area of 37.66 ha involved 7.84 ha of forestland for which forestry clearance was not available.  The proponent had also not worked out the right of way (ROW) for transporting the tailings to the tailing ponds.  During, consideration of the proposal in the meeting, the proponent proposed to adopt filter press technology which will reduce the requirement of land for tailing pond.  It will also reduce the water requirement for the project.  Further, all the activities will be restricted to within the mine lease and the requirement of having a part of the tailing pond outside the mine lease would be eliminated.  Thus, the revised land requirement would be 29.3505 ha (proposed washing and beneficiation plant + existing washing plant) and 63.84 ha for tailing pond within the mine lease.  The tailings from the tailing thickener will pass through a filter press and the filter cake so generated will be stored at a site specifically earmarked for the purpose.  The total water requirement for circulation is estimated as 6846 m3/hour.  It is further estimated that 6236 m3/hour of water will be recovered and the net make up water requirement will be 610 m3/hour.  The water resource department have committed for supply of requisite quantity of water for the project.  The power requirement is estimated as 14 MVA from NESCO.  It is proposed to have 1.6 MW DG set to meet the power backup demand.  The baseline AAQ data showed the levels of PM10 and PM2.5 on relatively higher side.  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.

As the changes now proposed during the meeting due to adoption of filter press technology would entail modification / revision of project documents, it was decided that the proponent should in the first instance submit the revised documents to MoEF as well as circulate to all the members of EAC, which will be considered internally by the Committee during its next meeting to be held in June, 2011 for making its recommendation on the project. 

 

2.4     Bauxite Mining Project of M/s Yogita Allied & Calcine Products, village Gaga, Taluka Kalyanpur, District Jamnagar, Gujarat (Consultant: Creative Engineers and Consultants, Chennai)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for renewal of mine lease, which fall due on 15.1.2000 for production of 75,000 TPA (ROM) of bauxite.  It is a violation case as the mine continued to operate after it fell due for renewal.  It was also observed that the production from the mine had increased during 2006-07.  Mine is reported to be closed presently.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 8th June, 2009.  Public hearing has been held on 21.12.2010.  The mine lease area is 37.7675 ha.  No forestland is involved.  It has been considered as Category ‘A’ due to location of Gaga Sanctuary at a distance of 6 km and marine national park at 7 km from the mine lease.  Mine working will be opencast manual without involving drilling and blasting.  Ultimate working depth will be 5 m.  It is estimated that 75,000 m3 of OB and 65,000 m3 of inter burden will be generated during mine life.  Simultaneous backfilling is proposed.  There will be no external OB dump at the end of the mine life.  The groundwater table is reported to be at 20 m bgl.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  The water requirement is estimated as 14 kld, which will be obtained from bore well.  It was reported that there are 7 dwelling units in the western part of this mine which will not be disturbed.  The baseline AAQ data showed the levels within permissible limit.  The groundwater quality particularly in bore well (W3) showed high levels of TDS and nitrates.  At the end of the mine life an area of 2.88 ha will be covered under plantation.  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)           A map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden showing the location of National Park, Sanctuary, biosphere reserves, wildlife corridor, if any, within 10 km of the mine lease.  The exact distances may also be marked on the map.  Necessary clearance, if any, as may be applicable for such projects due to their location in proximity of the ecologically sensitive areas (National Park, Sanctuary) should also be obtained from the competent authority (Chief Wildlife Warden/Director, National Park/State Wildlife Department) and a copy furnished. 

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

 

2.5     Expansion of Bailadila Iron Ore Deposit No. 11-A of M/s National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (NMDC), Bachelli, Dantewada District, Chhattisgarh (Consultant: Vimta Labs Ltd., Hyderabad) 

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on March 23-25, 2011 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was clarified that the mine lease area is 233.509 ha, which is a forestland.  Forestry clearance has been obtained combinedly for an area of 874.924 ha for the Bailadila Iron Ore Project.  As per the break up given, area under mining will be 32.317 ha, area for waste dump will be 8.75 ha and area for haul road will be 6.20 ha.  The water requirement for the project is estimated as 150 kld.  The ROM iron ore from deposit 11-A will be processed along with deposit 10 iron ore in combined ore crushing, screening and loading plant.  The AAQ data showed PM10 levels at mine site on a higher side.  It was also stated that the proposed expansion is not likely to pose any additional threat to local flora and fauna.  About 10 lakh trees have been planted under afforestation programme at Bachelli Complex and NMDC is committed to plant at least 50,000 trees every year.  The other issues raised by the Committee were also clarified and discussed.   

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

(i)           Appropriate safeguard measures shall be taken for control of PM10 levels.  The levels shall be regularly monitored to ensure that these are within permissible limit.  The records of the monitored data shall be maintained and submitted as part of the six monthly monitoring report. 

(ii)          Corporate Environment Policy and hierarchical system for ensuring adherence to the policy and compliance with environmental regulation in accordance with the office memorandum dated 26.4.2011 issued by MoEF should be put in place. 

2.6     Expansion of Bailadila Iron Ore Deposit No. 10 along with Beneficiation Plant and Pellet Plant of M/s National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. (NMDC), Bachelli, Dantewada District, Chhattisgarh (Consultant: Vimta Labs Ltd., Hyderabad) 

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on March 23-25, 2011 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was categorically stated by the proponent that the beneficiation plant and pelletisation plant which earlier formed components of this project have since been dropped and therefore the proposal may be considered only for the mining component.  The beneficiation cum pellet plant has been dropped as the proponent did not have forestry clearance for the forestland outside the mine lease wherein the beneficiation cum pellet plant was proposed.  In view of the categorical submissions made by the proponent, the Committee considered the proposal further only for mining.  It was stated that the total land requirement for the project as per their revised profile will be 384.927 ha, which includes 309.340 ha of mine lease area and the balance 75.587 ha outside the mine lease.  The land outside the mine lease includes 25.687 ha of forestland and forestry clearance is reported to have been obtained.  The water requirement for the project will be 12,375 kld.  The slime generated from screening plant will be impounded in existing tailing pond no. 2.  The effluent generated from service centre will also be treated in existing ETP at hill top.  It was observed that the PM10 levels are on a higher side in the mine area.  Afforestation and greenbelt development are carried out with the help of State Forest Department.  The project proponent is committed to plant at least 50,000 trees annually.  It was also stated that there will be no significant adverse impact on flora and fauna due to the proposed expansion project.  The other issues raised by the Committee were also clarified and discussed.        

Based on the presentation made and discussion held, the Committee recommended the project only for mining component for enhancement of production of iron ore from 3.3 to 4.2 million TPA for environmental clearance subject to following condition:-

(i)           Appropriate safeguard measures shall be taken for control of PM10 levels.  The levels shall be regularly monitored to ensure that these are within permissible limit.  The records of the monitored data shall be maintained and submitted as part of the six monthly monitoring report. 

(ii)          Corporate Environment Policy and hierarchical system for ensuring adherence to the policy and compliance with environmental regulation in accordance with the office memorandum dated 26.4.2011 issued by MoEF should be put in place. 

 

2.7     Captive Limestone Mine for proposed Greenfield Cement Plant of M/s Orient Cement, village Itgi & Mogla, Chiiapur Taluk, District Gulbarga, Karnataka (Consultant: B.S. Envi-Tech Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad)

 

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

The proposal is for opening of a new mine for production of 3.0 million TPA of limestone to meet the requirement of their integrated cement plant which will be located adjacent to the mine lease.  It was stated that the proponent have submitted a separate application for TOR in respect of the cement plant with captive power plant to the industry sector.  The mine lease area is 602.054 ha.  No forestland is involved.  Mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Ultimate working depth will be 60 m.  Life of mine is 77 years.  Water requirement is 300 m3/day.  It was observed that Itgi village is surrounded by the mine lease all around it.  Further, it was also observed that the village will fall in the pre-dominant downwind direction of the cement plant.  It may, therefore, be necessary to examine the possibility of shifting the village to some other location.  Further, this limestone deposit being sedimentary deposit, use of surface miners should be examined.  

 

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

 

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

2)           The possibility of use of surface miners should be examined and details furnished along with justification in either situation. 

3)           The possibility of re-location of Itgi village should be examined and details furnished. 

4)           Integrated impacts of all the components including cement plant and captive power plant should be projected in the EIA report. 

5)           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. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

19)        The baseline data on health status of the villagers should be established and given in the EIA report. 

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

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

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.

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)        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. 

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. 

 

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. 

 

2.8     Collection of river bed sand mining from river Yamuna of M/s Maroon Engineers Consultants (P) Ltd., village Pachayara, District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi)

 

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 collection of 1,51,113 TPA of Sand from the bed of river Yamuna.  The mine lease area is 23.32 ha.  It is a violation case as the mine have been in operation after the EIA Notification, 2006 coming into force without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  The mine is reported to be closed presently.  The proposal has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of interstate boundary within 10 km of the mine lease.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised.  Ultimate working depth will be 3 mtr.  The mining will be restricted to above water level in dry portion only.  Mineral transportation will be by road.  No mining will be carried out during monsoon. 

 

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

 

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

2)           It may clearly be indicated whether the proposed project will have any impact on the Yamuna clearing project upstream of Wazirabad for storage capacity of fresh water. 

3)           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. 

4)           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. 

5)           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. 

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, mode of working, working shift, transportation of mineral etc.

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 should be provided, delineating forest area, agricultural land, grazing land, wildlife sanctuary and national park, migratory routes of fauna, water bodies, human settlements and other ecological features.

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

12)        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. 

13)        Detailed description of the vegetation in the RF / PF area should be given.   

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

15)        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.  A location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden should be provided in this regard. Necessary clearance from the Chief Wildlife Warden for operating the mine within 10 km of the National Park, if any, should also be obtained and furnished. 

16)        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 / amphibians especially fresh water turtles and other nesting sites, if any, in the riverine system shall be carried out.  Avian fauna should also be covered.  The biological value on either bank of the river should also be studied and given. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey, clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation and close monitoring 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. 

17)        Impact of the project on land use including change of river course, if any, should be brought out. 

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

19)        Collection of one season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  Date wise collected baseline AAQ data should form part of EIA and EMP report.  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. 

20)        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.

21)        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. 

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

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

24)        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.

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

26)        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.

27)        Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers.

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

29)        Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. 

30)        Occupational health impact of the project should be anticipated and preventive measures built in.  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 dimension should be given.

32)        Detailed environmental management plan to mitigate the environmental impacts should be prepared and furnished. 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. 

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 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. 

 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area and (ii) geological maps and sections.

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

 

2.9     Collection of river bed sand mining from the river Ganga of M/s Rajesh Bajpaee & Others, village Netuva, District Unnao, Uttar Pradesh (Consultant: Grass Root Research and Creation India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi)  

 

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 collection of 4,02,633 TPA of Sand from the bed of river Ganga near village Netuva.  The mine lease area is 162.35 ha.  It is a violation case as the mine have been in operation after the EIA Notification, 2006 coming into force without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  The mine is reported to be closed presently.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised.  Ultimate working depth will be 3 mtr.  The mining will be restricted to above water level in dry portion only.  Mineral transportation will be by road.  No mining will be carried out during monsoon. 

 

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

 

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

2)           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. 

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)           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. 

6)           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.  

7)           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, mode of working, working shift, transportation of mineral etc.

8)           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. 

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

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

11)        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. 

12)        Detailed description of the vegetation in the RF / PF area should be given.   

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

14)        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.  A location map duly authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden should be provided in this regard. Necessary clearance from the Chief Wildlife Warden for operating the mine within 10 km of the National Park, if any, should also be obtained and 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)] including the aquatic fauna / amphibians especially fresh water turtles and other nesting sites, if any, in the riverine system shall be carried out.  Avian fauna should also be covered.  The biological value on either bank of the river should also be studied and given. Details of flora and fauna, duly authenticated, separately for core and buffer zone should be furnished based on field survey, clearly indicating the Schedule of the fauna present. In case of any scheduled-I fauna found in the study area, the necessary plan for their conservation and close monitoring 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 of the project on land use including change of river course, if any, should be brought out. 

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

18)        Collection of one season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on ambient air quality (PM10, SO2 and NOx), water quality, noise level, soil and flora and fauna.  Site-specific meteorological data should also be collected.  The location of the monitoring stations should be justified.  Date wise collected baseline AAQ data should form part of EIA and EMP report.  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. 

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

23)        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.

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

25)        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.

26)        Details of the infrastructure facilities to be provided for the mine workers.

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

28)        Occupational health impact of project should be anticipated and preventive measures initiated.  Details in this regard should be provided. 

29)        Occupational health impact of the project should be anticipated and preventive measures built in.  Details of pre-placement medical examination and periodical medical examination schedules and medical facilities proposed to be provided should be incorporated in the EMP.

30)        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 dimension should be given.

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

32)        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. 

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

34)        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. 

 

The EIA report should also include (i) surface plan of the area indicating contours of main topographic features, drainage and mining area and (ii) geological maps and sections.

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. 

                                               

2.10   Iron Ore Screening and Washing Plant of M/s Eurasian Minerals & Enter -prises Pvt. Ltd., Hargarh Industrial Area, District Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh (TOR)

 

        In view of the letter dated 20.5.2011 received from the proponent stating that they would like to withdraw the said proposal, the Committee did not consider the proposal. 

 

2.11   Ispat Dolomite Quarry, Baraduar Mining of M/s SAIL (Bhilai Steel Plant), village Chhittapandaria, Tehsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.

 

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 reopening of the Ispat Dolomite quarry, which is reported to have been worked during 1970 to 1983 and thereafter closed.  The mine fell due for renewal in December, 2010 and will be operated at a higher capacity of 2.0 million TPA of dolomite.  A screening and sizing plant will also be part of this project.  The mine lease area is 523.35 ha, which includes 432.69 ha of forestland.  Application has been made for obtaining forestry clearance.  A fort is located within 1 km within the mine lease.  It was also noted that the baseline AAQ data collection for the pre-monsoon period has already started.  The mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting. 

 

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

 

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

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

3)           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)           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. 

6)           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.  

7)           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. 

8)           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.

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

10)        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).

11)        A Certificate from the Competent Authority in the State Forest Department 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.

12)        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. 

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

14)        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. 

15)        The vegetation in the RF / PF area should be given.  Details in this regard should be given.    

16)        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. 

17)        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.

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

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

20)        NOC from the Archaeological Department for undertaking the project in view of the location of the fort at a distance of about 1 km should be furnished. 

21)        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. 

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

23)        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.

24)        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. 

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

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

27)        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.

28)        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.

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

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

31)        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. 

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

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

34)        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.

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

36)        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.

37)        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.

38)        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.

39)        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. 

40)        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. 

41)        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. 

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

43)        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. 

 

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   Japharkheda Red Ochre & China Clay Mining Project of M/s Shri Gopal Lal Agal, Village Japharkheda, District Chittorgarh, Rajasthan (Consultant: Udaipur Min-Tech Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for production of 25,000 TPA of red ochre and enhancement of china clay production from 16,709 TPA to 75,000 TPA and renewal of mine lease which fell due in 2000.  The mine is reported to be closed since 2004.  It is a violation case as production from the mine was increased after 1994 and it continues to operate after renewal fell due without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  TOR for this project was prescribed on 11.9.2009.  Public hearing has been held on 22.4.2010.  The mine lease area is 89.78 ha.  No forestland is involved.  Mine working will be opencast with shovel dumper combination.  No drilling and blasting is involved.  Ultimate working depth will be 18 m bgl (409 mRL).  The life of the mine is more than 100 years.  It was stated by the proponent that the mine does not fall in Aravali.  A letter dated 11.1.2010 from Mining Engineer, Chhitorgarh has been submitted in this regard.   No National park / Sanctuary is located within 10 km of the mine lease.  The baseline AAQ data showed the levels within permissible limits.  Water requirement is estimated as 9 kld, which will be obtained from tube well / dug well / rainwater.  The groundwater table is reported to vary between 348 mRL – 343 mRL.  Mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  It has been estimated that 2,19,000 m3 of waste will be generated during the lease period.  It will be disposed of in the form of two external OB dumps with a maximum height of 10 m.  As per the post mine land use, an area of 14.95 ha will be covered under plantation including plantation on dump and mined out benches.  The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

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

(i)             The provisions of Mines Act, as applicable shall be implemented. 

(ii)            Concentration of free silica in the ambient air shall be monitored regularly and records maintained as part of post project monitoring.  Necessary safeguard measures as may be required, based on monitored data of free silica, shall be taken. 

 

 

2.13   Ajitaburu Manganese & Iron Ore Mines of M/s Devkabai Velji located at District Singhbhum, Jharkhand (Consultant: Shiva Test House, Patna)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of production of manganese ore from 4,275 TPA to 59,500 TPA.  The earlier clearance was granted on 16.1.2009 for renewal of mine lease for production of 6,00,000 TPA of iron ore and 4,275 TPA of manganese ore.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 18.1.2010.  Public hearing has been held on 28.5.2010.  The mine lease area is 46.62 ha, which is a forestland.  Forestry clearance has been obtained for 31.476 ha. Mine working will be opencast semi-mechanised. Life of the mine is 18 years. The mine working will not intersect groundwater table.  The baseline AAQ data showed the levels within permissible limit.  The compliance of the earlier EC conditions was also reviewed.  As the project is to be located in West Singhbhum District, an identified severely polluted area, comments of Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board, which were received vide their letter dated 15.2.2011 and were duly considered by the Committee.  As per comments of SPCB, the average values of AAQ parameters were reported within prescribed limits, it was also stated that the water quality of river Karo has been found normal for outdoor bathing category – ‘B’.  It was also stated that solid waste kept in the mine lease area and garland drain will be constructed around the waste dumps.  It was, however, pointed out the unit has not provided bund on the toe of the existing waste dump area.  The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.

During consideration of the proposal, it was observed that the land for the waste dump is not available in the non mineralized area.  In view of the same, the proposal in its present form was found to be unviable. The Committee, therefore, deferred further consideration of the proposal till the project proponent examines the proposal afresh in the light of the observation made relating to availability of land for waste disposal.  The Committee, therefore, recommended for closure of the file. 

 

2.14   Expansion of Iron Ore Mine of M/s Kalinga Mining Corporation, village Joruri & Khandbandh, District Keonjhar, Orissa (Consultant: Creative Engineers & Consultants, Chennai)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for enhancement of iron ore production from 0.57 million TPA to 2.1 million TPA, setting up of a iron ore beneficiation plant with 120 TPH throughput and laying a railway siding for transportation of iron ore.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 15.2.2010.  Public hearing has been held on 17.2.2011.  The mine lease area is 73.228 ha, which includes 57.178 ha of forestland.  Forestry clearance for 47.214 ha has been obtained on 19.3.2008 and proposal for additional 6.679 ha is reported to be under process.  The earlier environmental clearance for production of 0.57 million TPA of iron ore was granted on 21.8.2007.  The status of compliance of the stipulated EC conditions was also presented before the Committee.  No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease.  A map duly authenticated by DFO cum Wildlife Warden, Keonjhar was submitted in this regard.  Mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Life of mine will be 8 years.  The beneficiation plant will be based on wet technology using filter press and would require 1.5 ha of land.  Water requirement for the beneficiation plant will be 375 kld.  Waste water will be recycled and reused.  No tailing dam is proposed in the project.  There will, however, be an emergency slime pit. The total water requirement for the project is 491 kld, which will be obtained from groundwater and necessary permission from CGWA has been obtained in this regard. The baseline AAQ data showed the levels of PM10 relatively on higher side. The authenticated list of flora and fauna was furnished.  The proponent have also prepared the site specific Wildlife Conservation Plan which has been approved by PCCF, Wildlife and will be implemented by DFO, Keonjhar.  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.

During consideration of the proposal, it was observed that the area required for the proposed railway siding falls in the forestland for which forestry clearance is yet to be obtained.  The proponent, however, stated that there is an existing railway siding outside the mine lease and till the forestry clearance for the land involved in the proposed railway siding is obtained, the existing railway siding outside the mine lease will be utilized. 

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

(i)           The work relating to railway siding will be taken up only after the forestry clearance for diversion of forestland involved in the proposed railway siding project has been obtained.  Till such time, the transportation of mineral will be carried out through the existing railway siding outside the mine lease. 

(ii)          Corporate Environment Policy and hierarchical system for ensuring adherence to the policy and compliance with environmental regulation in accordance with the office memorandum dated 26.4.2011 issued by MoEF should be put in place. 

 

2.15   Sambharnaka Quartz, Feldspar Mining Project of Shri Rajendra Kumar Chandaliya located in village Sambharnaka, Tehsil Deogarh, District Rajsamand, Rajasthan (EC) 

                  

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

 

 

2.16   Proposed Minor Mineral Project of M/s Department of Industries and Commerce, village Taggar Kalan, Hoshiarpur District, Punjab (TOR)

 

          The Mining Officer, Hoshiarpur, Govt. of Punjab vide letter dated 18.5.2011 informed that the mine lease area has been reduced from 54.49 ha to 30.54 ha and hence proposal falls in Category ‘B’.  In view of the same, the proposal would need to be considered by the SEIAA and accordingly the proposal was not considered by the EAC. 

 

 

 

2.17   Chedwai Limestone Mining Project of M/s Murli Industries Ltd. at village Chedwai, Tehsil Rajura, District Chandrapur, Maharashtra (Reconsideration Case) 

 

         As the entire mine lease area is forestland and the forestry clearance is yet to be obtained, the project proponent sought deferment of their proposal till the requisite forestry clearance has been obtained.  In view of the communication received from the proponent, the consideration of the proposal was deferred.  The Committee, therefore, recommended for closure of project file till then. 

 

2.18   Chhuinpali Quartite Mining Project of M/s Tata Refractories Ltd., located in village Chhuinpali, Tehsil Lakhanpur, District Jharsuguda, Orissa (Consultant: Kalyani Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar) 

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on December 22-24, 2010 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was reconfirmed by the proponent that no forestland is involved in the mine lease area. The Debrigarh Sanctuary is at a distance of 10.2 km from the southern boundary of the mine lease. A map duly authenticated by DFO cum Chief Wildlife Warden, Sambhalpur has been submitted in this regard.  The baseline AAQ data generated during January, 2011 was also furnished, which showed the AAQ levels within permissible limits.  The concentration of crystalline silica as respirable quartz was found to vary between 0.021 mg/m3 – 0.054 mg/m3 at different locations.  It was also stated that the backwater of Hirakud Reservoir is at a distance of 300 m during the highest flood level and no adverse impact is envisaged.  It was further stated that as per the comments of Hirakud Dam Authorities, protection measures are required to be undertaken by way of constructing garland drains, toe walls, masonry chutes, contour trenches and check dams to check the surface run of and sediments into the reservoir back waters.  The mitigation measures were presented in detail and discussed.  About 5.214 ha of mined out area will be planted.  Re-vegetation of benches will be carried out.  The mine voids will be filled with OB soil and sloped to natural contours and reseeded for plants.  At the end of the mine life an area of 6.768 ha will be converted into water body.        

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

(i)           Corporate Environment Policy and hierarchical system for ensuring adherence to the policy and compliance with environmental regulation in accordance with the office memorandum dated 26.4.2011 issued by MoEF should be put in place. 

 

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

 

The proposal was earlier considered by the Expert Appraisal Committee during its meeting held on April 25-27, 2011 wherein the Committee had sought additional information/clarifications on various related issues. Based on the additional information/clarifications submitted by the proponent, the proposal was considered further.  It was stated that an area of 7.403 ha will be excavated.  An area of 2.0 ha will be used for OB dump and greenbelt will be raised in an area of 1.0 ha.  The water will be obtained from authorized water supplier.  Information regarding floral species was furnished.  The ultimate working depth will be 564 m AMSL.  The water table is reported to be at 344 m AMSL.  The revised filled in Questionnaire was also furnished.  The other issues raised by the Committee were also discussed and clarified.     

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

 

2.20   Khapa Pardiwar Manganese Ore Mine of M/s Modern          Mineral Industry, village Khapa Pardiwar, Tehsil Sausar, District Chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh (Consultant: Pollution and Ecology Control Services, Nagpur) 

 

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 25,000 TPA of manganese ore.  The mine lease area is 7.088 ha.  It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of its location at a distance of 0.1 km from the inter-state boundary with Maharashtra. The proponent is reported to have submitted application for forestry clearance; however, supporting documents in this regard was not furnished. The site coordinates were also found to be at variance and the proponent was not able to provide correct information during the meeting.  In view of the above, the proponent was advised to recheck the coordinates and furnish the corrected information for consideration of the proposal during the next meeting to be held in June, 2011.  It was also desired that a copy of the proposal submitted for forestry clearance should also be furnished. The consideration of the proposal was therefore deferred. 

 

2.21   Manganese Ore Mine of M/s Modern Mineral Industry, village Madkasur, Tehsil Bichwa, District Chhindwara, Madhya Pradesh (Consultant: Pollution and Ecology Control Services, Nagpur)

 

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 25,000 TPA of manganese ore.  The mine lease area is 10.0 ha.  It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of its location at a distance of 2.0 km from the inter-state boundary with Maharashtra. The proponent is reported to have submitted application for forestry clearance; however, supporting documents in this regard was not furnished.  The site coordinates were also found to be at variance and the proponent was not able to provide correct information during the meeting.  In view of the above, the proponent was advised to recheck the coordinates and furnish the corrected information for consideration of the proposal during the next meeting to be held in June, 2011.  It was also desired that a copy of the proposal submitted for forestry clearance should also be furnished. The consideration of the proposal was therefore deferred. 

 

2.22   Iron Ore Beneficiation Plant of M/s Divyajyothi Steels Ltd., village Taranagar, Sandur Taluk, District Bellary, Karnataka (Consultant: Global Environment & Mining Services, Hospet)

 

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 setting up of a iron ore beneficiation plant with a throughput capacity of 0.6 million TPA along with pelletisation plant of 0.4 million TPA capacity.  The land requirement for the project is estimated as 50.6 acres.  No forestland is involved.  No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. The information relating to the site coordinates was found to be erroneous and the proponent was not able to provide correct information during the meeting. In view of the above, the proponent was advised to recheck the coordinates and furnish the corrected information for consideration of the proposal during the next meeting to be held in June, 2011.  The consideration of the proposal was therefore deferred. 

 

2.23   Manganese & Iron Ore Beneficiation Plant of M/s VSL Enterprises, Village Yeshwanthnagar, Sandur Taluk, District Bellary, Karnataka (Consultant: Global Environment & Mining Services, Hospet)

 

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 setting up of a manganese and iron ore beneficiation plant with a throughput capacity of 0.4 million TPA. The land requirement for the project is estimated as 7.3 acres. No forestland is involved. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. The information relating to the site coordinates was found to be erroneous and the proponent was not able to provide correct information during the meeting. In view of the above, the proponent was advised to recheck the coordinates and furnish the corrected information for consideration of the proposal during the next meeting to be held in June, 2011. The consideration of the proposal was therefore deferred. 

 

2.24   Iron Ore Beneficiation with pelletisation Plant of M/s VSL Mining Company Pvt. Ltd., village Nandibandi, Hospet Taluk, District Bellary, Karnataka (Consultant: Global Environment & Mining Services, Hospet)

 

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 setting up of a iron ore beneficiation plant with a throughput capacity of 1.6 million TPA along with pelletisation plant of 1.2 million TPA capacity.  The land requirement for the project is estimated as 163 acres.  No forestland is involved.  No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. The information relating to the site coordinates was found to be erroneous and the proponent was not able to provide correct information during the meeting. In view of the above, the proponent was advised to recheck the coordinates and furnish the corrected information for consideration of the proposal during the next meeting to be held in June, 2011.  The consideration of the proposal was therefore deferred.

 

2.25   Expansion of Kallur Limestone Mine of M/s Chettinad Cement located at village Kullur, Taluk Chincholi, District Gulbarga, Karnataka (Consultant: Mineral Engineering Services, Bellary) 

         

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

 

The proposal is for enhancement of production from 4.0 million TPA to 10.0 million TPA for their cement plant as the proponent has also proposed to enhanced the capacity of their cement plant from 2.5 million TPA to 8.25 million TPA and captive power plant from 30 MW to 160 MW. The proposal for expansion of cement and power plant has been submitted separately by the Industry Committee and obtained TORs.  The mine lease area is 422.94 ha. No forestland is involved. The earlier environmental clearance was obtained on 18.6.2010 from Industry Sector. No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease. Mine working will be opencast mechanized involving drilling and blasting. The Committee desired that the use of surface miners should be examined and details furnished. Ultimate working depth will be 30 m. No waste will be generated. Groundwater is reported to vary between 10 – 40 m. Mine working will intersect ground -water table. 

 

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)           Integrated impacts taking into account all the components of this project as also other industries within the impact zone should be projected. 

6)           Examine the use of surface miners for the project. 

7)           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. 

8)           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. 

9)           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. 

10)        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.  

11)        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. 

12)        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.

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

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 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 of change of land use should be given. 

17)        Soil analysis should be carried out especially for presence of mercury, if any. 

18)        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. 

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

20)        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.

21)        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. 

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

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

24)        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.

25)        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.

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

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

28)        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. 

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

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

31)        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.

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

33)        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.

34)        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. 

35)        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.

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. 

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. 

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. 

 

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. 

 

2.26   Iron Ore & Quartz Mine of M/s U.B.R. Minerals, village Pothavaram, Bestavaripet (M), District Prakasham, Andhra Pradesh (EC)

 

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

 

2.27   Iron Ore Mining Project of M/s Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd., Donimalai Range, Sandur Taluka, Bellary District, Karnataka (EC)

 

          As the Stage-I forestry clearance for the forestland involved in the project is yet to be received, the proponent sought deferment for consideration of the proposal.  Accordingly, the proposal was not taken up for consideration.  The Committee, therefore, recommended for closure of project file till then. 

 

2.28   Iron Ore Beneficiation Plant of M/s Thakur Industries, Village Hirebaganal, Koppal Taluk & District, Karnataka (Consultant: Metamorphosissm, Bangalore)

 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same.  The proposal is for setting up of a iron ore beneficiation plant at village Hirebaganal, Karnataka with a throughput capacity of 0.6 million TPA.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 4.10.2010.  Public hearing has been held on 25.2.2011.  The low grade ore will be obtained locally. The land requirement for the project is 17.5 acres.  No forestland is involved. The water requirement is estimated as 600 kld, which will be obtained from bore wells. Out of the 600 kld, 530 kld will be recycled water and 70 kld will be fresh water.  Power requirement will be met from GESCOM.  The baseline AAQ data showed the levels within prescribed limits. The groundwater level varies from 10 – 20 m bgl.  It was also stated that water logging conditions do not prevail in the area and withdrawal of ground water will not have any adverse impact on groundwater aquifer.  Rainwater harvesting is proposed. The list of flora and fauna was also furnished.  It was stated that no rare, endangered and endemic species exists in the study area.  With regard to the slight change in the site coordinates as given in the EIA report vis-à-vis the presentation, it was clarified by the proponent that the coordinates given in the EIA report are of the village while in the presentation it is for the plant site.  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.  With regard to the public hearing the Committee took note of the observations of the Deputy Commissioner regarding the complaints against sponge iron industry on air pollution and directed the Regional Office to initiate stringent action against all erring sponge iron industries.  The Committee also took note of the response of the Regional Officer that all the sponge iron industries have provided ESP and bag filters to control the emissions, however, they are not meeting the prescribed standards and that the sponge iron industries have been asked to submit an action plan to comply with the revised environmental standards. 

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

(i)           Periodic monitoring of groundwater quality around the project site shall be undertaken and records maintained.  In case, any adverse impact is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken immediately. 

(ii)          The road will be paved and made pucca to control fugitive dust. 

 

2.29   Iron Ore Beneficiation Plant and Pellet Plant of M/s Shree Sai Shraddha Metallics Pvt. Ltd., Kotgarh, Noamundi, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand (TOR)

 

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

 

2.30   Bharat China Clay Mines (Block 2) along with washing and beneficiation plant, villge Raikaman, Lunti, P.S. Kumardungi, District Singhbhum West, Jharkhand (Consultant: GIS Enabled Environment & Neo-graphic Centre, Gaziabad) 

 

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 for enhancement of production of china clay from 0.009 million TPA to 0.026 million TPA along with washing plant.  The mine is due for renewal since 1988.  It is a Category ‘B’ project; however, as the SEIAA for Jharkhand has not been constituted, it has been considered in the Ministry.  The mine is reported to be closed since October, 2010.  It is a violation case as the mine has been working without any environment clearance even after it fell due for renewal and the production from the mine was increased after 1994.  The mine lease area is 31.68 ha.  No forestland is involved.  Mine working will be opencast manual.  Life of mine is 29 years.  It is estimated that 1,74,500 m3 of waste will be generated.  No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease.  Ultimate working depth will be 21 m.  Water requirement is estimated as 20 kld.  Discharge from the washing plant will be drained to the pond and recycled and the tailing generated will be used for backfilling.  The groundwater table is reported to be at 5 m bgl.  Mine working has already intersected the groundwater table. 

 

As the project is located in West Singhbhum District, an identified severely polluted area, the comments of SPCB were obtained.  The comments received vide their letter dated 18.5.2011 were duly considered.  It was stated by SPCB that the ambient air quality around the mine were found to be within prescribed limits. The effluents from the beneficiation plant is treated in series of settling ponds and recycled. No effluent is discharge in any natural course.  The mine water is kept in old quarry, the quality of mine water has been found in the prescribed limit.  The solid waste from the mine and tailings are used for mine reclamation.  

Based on the information furnished and presentation made and taking into the comments / observations of State Pollution Control Board, 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)           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. 

5)           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. 

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 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. 

9)           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.

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

11)        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.

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

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

14)        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. 

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

16)        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.

17)        The water requirement for the project along with its break up for different activities including washing, its availability and source to be furnished.  A detailed water balance should also be provided along with quantity to be reused and re-circulated.  Fresh water requirement for the project should be indicated. 

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

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

20)        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.

21)        Detailed scheme for management of liquid effluents generated from the washing of china clay should be given in the EIA report. 

22)        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.

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

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

25)        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. 

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

27)        Details of management and disposal of tailings generated should be given. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

2.31   Underground Lawa Gold Ore Mining & Beneficiation Project of M/s Manmohan Mineral Industries Pvt. Ltd., village Lawa, Nimdih Block, Saraikela Kharsawan District, Jharkhand (Consultant: Bhagavathi Anna Labs Ltd., Hyderabad)

 

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

The proposal is for mining of gold ore with a capacity of 150 TPD and its beneficiation.  The deposits are reported to be worked earlier by British during pre independence period.  The mine lease area is 54.55 ha, which is a forestland.  The proponent have applied for forestry clearance.  Mine working will be underground using overhand stopping by cut and fill method, which will be initially worked using the existing old openings.  The gold bearing ore will be treated in a beneficiation plant with gravity separation method, floatation and carbon in pulp method (CIP) for recovering gold.  The beneficiation plant will be located near the mine site.  The water requirement is estimated as 80 kld, which will be obtained from sump water.  As the project it to be located in West Singhbhum District, an identified severely polluted area, comments of SPCB were sought which were received vide letter dated 26.5.2011 and duly taken on record and considered by the Committee.  It was reported that all parameters in ambient air around the project site and noise levels have been found within prescribed limit. 

 

Based on the information furnished and presentation made and taking into account the comments of SPCB, 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)        Alternate technology without using cyanide in the beneficiation process should be examined and details furnished.  The reasons for adopting the proposed technology should be given.  

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)     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).

13)     A Certificate from the Competent Authority in the State Forest Department 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.

14)     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. 

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

16)     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. 

17)     The vegetation in the RF / PF area should be given.  Details in this regard should be given.    

18)     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. 

19)     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.

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

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

22)     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. 

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

24)     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.

25)     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. 

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

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

28)     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.

29)     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.

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

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

32)     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. 

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

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

35)     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.

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

37)     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.

38)     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. 

39)     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. 

40)     The issues relating to cyanide poisoning should be addressed in the EIA report.  The necessary safeguard measures in this regard should also be detailed in the report.  These may be seen in the light of the international cyanide management code. 

41)     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. 

42)     Issues relating to mine safety based on subsidence study should be detailed.  The proposed safeguard measure in this regard should also be provided.    

43)     In view of the location of Chandil Reservoir, the issues relating to safety of mine and its inundation should be examined in depth and details furnished. 

44)     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. 

45)     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. 

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

47)     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. 

 

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. 

 

2.32  Patmunda Manganese Ore Mine of M/s Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd., village Patmunda, Kadamdihi, Podadihi, Barpatholi, Sanpatholi, District Sundergarh, Orissa (Consultant: ERS(I) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar)

 

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

The proposal is for enhancement of production of manganese ore from 1,83,375 TPA to 2,53,375 TPA along with jigging plant with capacity of 1x10 TPH and 3X15 TPH.  The earlier environment clearance was granted on 10th November, 2008.  The mine lease area is 807.316 ha, which includes 612.351 ha of forestland.  Stage-I forestry clearance has been obtained for 238.447 ha.  No National Park / Sanctuary is reported within 10 km of the mine lease.   Mine working will be opencast semi-mechanized involving drilling and blasting.  Life of the mine is 47 years.  Water requirement is 36 kld.

 

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

 

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

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

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

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

5)           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)        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).

13)        A Certificate from the Competent Authority in the State Forest Department 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.

14)        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. 

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

16)        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. 

17)        The vegetation in the RF / PF area should be given.  Details in this regard should be given.    

18)        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. 

19)        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.

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

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

22)        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. 

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

24)        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.

25)        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. 

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

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

28)        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.

29)        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.

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

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

32)        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. 

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

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

35)        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.

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

37)        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.

38)        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. 

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

40)        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. 

41)        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 including that due to manganese poisoning besides other impacts of the projects. 

42)        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. 

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

44)        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. 

 

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. 

 

2.33            River Bed Mining (10.52 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Mohd. Inam & Mahboob Aalam, village Chajjamal Ahatmaal, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 54,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Yamuna in Chajjamal Ahatmaal village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 19.11.2010.  The proponent informed the Committee that the earlier lease for this project expired on 22.5.2011 and further renewal of this lease has been approved by the State Government.  Accordingly, the proposal was considered for renewal of mine lease.  The mine lease area is 10.52 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P. and Haryana within 10 km.  Elephant reserve boundary is at a distance of 8.1 km. The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard. It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease. 

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

                              

2.34    River Bed Mining (8.06 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Mahmood Ali & Dilshad, village Rahna, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 1,26,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Yamuna in Rahna village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 10.11.2010. The mine lease area is 8.06 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P., Haryana and Uttarakhand within 10 km. Elephant reserve boundary is at a distance of 0.11 km. The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard.  It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease. 

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

 

2.35    River Bed Mining (36.38 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Mahmood Ali, Punit Jain & Mukesh Jain, village Aslampur Bartha, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 1,08,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Yamuna in Aslampur Bartha village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 10.11.2010.  The proponent informed the Committee that the earlier lease for this project expired on 22.5.2011 and further renewal of this lease has been approved by the State Government.  Accordingly, the proposal was considered for renewal of mine lease.  The mine lease area is 36.38 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P. and Haryana within 10 km.  No National Park / Sanctuary / Elephant Reserve are reported within 10 km of the mine lease. The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard.  It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.   

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease. 

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

 

2.36    River Bed Mining (10.32 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Mahmood Ali & Dilshad, village Rahna, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 1,08,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Yamuna in Rahna village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 11.11.2010.  The proponent informed the Committee that the earlier lease for this project expired on 22.5.2011 and further renewal of this lease has been approved by the State Government.  Accordingly, the proposal was considered for renewal of mine lease.  The mine lease area is 10.32 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P. and Haryana within 10 km.  Elephant Reserve boundary is reported at a distance of 0.545 km. The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard.  It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project.   

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease. 

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

 

2.37    River Bed Mining (10.32 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Vikas Agarwal & Wajid Ali, village Khushhalipur, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon)  

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 72,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Solani in Khushhalipur village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 12.11.2010. The mine lease area is 10.32 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P. and Uttarakhand within 10 km.  Elephant reserve boundary is at a distance of 1.14 km.  Rajaji National Park is at a distance of 5.0 km.  The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard.  It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease. 

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

 

2.38    River Bed Mining (9.31 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Amit Jain & Naseem, village Mayapur Rooppur, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon) 

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 1,08,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Badshahibagh Rao in Mayapur Roopur village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 19.11.2010. The mine lease area is 9.31 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P., Haryana and Uttarakhand within 10 km.  Elephant reserve boundary is at a distance of 0.963 km. The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard.  It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease. 

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

 

2.39    River Bed Mining (12.39 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Amit Jain & Naseem, village Madti Ahatmaal, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 72,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Yamuna in Madti Ahatmaal village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 11.11.2010. The mine lease area is 12.39 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P. and Haryana within 10 km.  Elephant reserve boundary is at a distance of 6.5 km. The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard.  It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease. 

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

 

2.40    River Bed Mining (18.75 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Vikas Agarwal & Wajid Ali, village Khushhalipur, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 72,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Solani in Khushhalipur village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 15.11.2010. The mine lease area is 18.75 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P. and Uttarakhand within 10 km.  Elephant reserve boundary is at a distance of 1.42 km.  Rajaji National Park is reported at a distance of 4.7 km.  The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard.  It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease. 

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

 

2.41    River Bed Mining (6.85 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Mohd. Inam & Mahboob Aalam, village Ganeshpur, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon)

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 45,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Lalo in Ganeshpur village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 12.11.2010.  The proponent informed the Committee that the earlier lease for this project expired on 22.5.2011 and further renewal of this lease has been approved by the State Government.  Accordingly, the proposal was considered for renewal of mine lease.  The mine lease area is 6.85 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P. and Uttarakhand within 10 km.  Elephant reserve boundary is at a distance of 0.427 km.  Rajaji National Park is reported at a distance of 2.0 km. The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard.  It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease.  

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

 

2.42    River Bed Mining (34.82 ha) of Sand, Bajri & Boulders (minor mineral) of M/s Mahmood Ali, Punit Jain & Mukesh Jain, village Rasoolpur, Tehsil Behat, District Saharanpur, U.P. (Consultant: J.M. Environet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon)  

The proposal was considered by the Committee and the proponent made a presentation on the same. The proposal is for environmental clearance for mining of 1,08,000 TPA of sand, bajri, boulders (minor mineral) put together from the bed of river Yamuna in Rasoolpur village, District Saharanpur, U.P.  TOR for this project were prescribed on 31.5.2010. Public hearing has been held on 20.11.2010.  The proponent informed the Committee that the earlier lease for this project expired on 22.5.2011 and further renewal of this lease has been approved by the State Government.  Accordingly, the proposal was considered for renewal of mine lease.  The mine lease area is 34.82 ha. No forestland is involved. It has been considered as Category ‘A’ because of the inter-state boundary of U.P. and Haryana within 10 km.  No National Park / Sanctuary / Elephant Reserve is reported within 10 km of the mine lease.  The proponent have submitted a map authenticated by Chief Wildlife Warden in this regard.  It is a violation case as the mine started functioning without obtaining requisite prior environmental clearance.  Mine working will be semi-mechanised. Ultimate working depth will be 2 m from river bed level.  Excavation will be done in half meter slice at a time with a maximum of 4 slices.  The river bed water level is reported to be 3 - 6 m below river bed level.  The baseline AAQ data showed the PM10 values in the crushing zone were on higher side.  It was also reported that no nesting of turtles was observed during their primary observation period although secondary data reports nesting of turtles in the region. The proponent have also submitted a letter from the Directorate of Geology and Mines, Govt. of U.P. dated 25.3.2011 stating that there is no provision for approval of mine plan for minor minerals other than in-situ rock deposit. The issues raised during public hearing were also considered and discussed during the meeting.  It was reported that there is no court case pending against the project. 

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

(i)           The proponent will observe every 15 days for nesting of any turtle in the area. Based on the observations so made, if turtle nesting is observed, necessary safeguard measures shall be taken in consultation with the State Wildlife Department.  For the purpose, awareness will be created amongst the mine workers about the nesting sites so that such sites, if any, are identified by the workers during operations of the mine for taking required safeguard measures. 

(ii)          A study shall be carried out through an expert agency like CWC relating to replenishment of the mineral (siltation study) so as to ensure that the quantity of mineral to be removed does not exceed the siltation to avoid over exploitation of mineral, which may adversely affect the dynamics of the river.  This study will be steered by the State Government, based on which the capacity of the mine will be decided by the concerned Department of the State Govt. while granting mine lease. 

(iii)        Effective safeguard measures shall be taken to ensure that the AAQ levels at various locations including crushing zone, are within permissible limit as prescribed by CPCB.  The standards prescribed for stone crushers shall be followed.

Next Meeting:

It was decided that the next meeting will be held on June 21-23, 2011. 

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

 

*********

 

 


Annexure

List of Participants

 

1.            Shri Mukunda Shenoy Nagar                           -         Chairman

2.       Dr. S. Subramaniyan                                      -         Vice Chairman

3.       Shri K.S. Anandan                                         -         Member

4.       Shri Vinay Mahajan                                        -         Member

5.       Prof. C.K. Varshney                                       -         Member

6.       Shri Sunil Peshin                                           -         Member

7.       Shri Mihir Moitra                                           -         Member                 

8.       Dr. B.K. Mishra                                              -         Member

9.       Shri T.K. Joshi                                               -         Member

10.     Shri Rajesh Srivastava                                    -         Member

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

12.     Dr. Satish C. Garkoti, Director

13.     Representative of M/s Tata Steel Ltd.

14.     Representative of M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd.

15.     Representative of M/s Sarda Mines Pvt. Ltd.

16.     Representative of M/s Yogita Allied & Calcine Products

17.     Representative of M/s National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.

18.     Representative of M/s Orient Cement

19.     Representative of M/s Maroon Engineers Consultants (P) Ltd.

20.     Representative of M/s Rajesh Bajpaee & Others

21.     Representative of M/s SAIL

22.     Representative of Shri Gopal Lal Agal

23.     Representative of M/s Devkabai Velji

24.     Representative of M/s Kalinga Mining Corporation

25.     Representative of M/s Tata Refractories Ltd.

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

27.     Representative of M/s Modern Mineral Industry

28.     Representative of M/s Divyajyothi Steels Ltd.

29.     Representative of M/s VSL Mining Company Pvt. Ltd.

30.     Representative of M/s Chettinad Cement

31.     Representative of M/s Kirloskar Ferrous Industries Ltd.

32.     Representative of M/s Thakur Industries

33.     Representative of M/s Bharat Minerals

34.     Representative of M/s Manmohan Mineral Industries Pvt. Ltd.

35.     Representative of M/s Orissa Manganese & Minerals Ltd.

36.     Representative of M/s Mohd. Inam & Mahboob Aalam

37.     Representative of M/s Mahmood Ali & Dilshad

38.     Representative of M/s Mahmood Ali, Punit Jain & Mukesh Jain

39.     Representative of M/s Vikas Agarwal & Wajid Ali

40.     Representative of M/s Amit Jain & Naseem

 

********

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Untitled Page