MINUTES OF 27th EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (EAC) (THERMAL & COAL MINING) MEETING HELD ON 20th -21st June 2011 IN PARYAVARAN BHAWAN, CGO COMPLEX, NEW DELHI.

 

COAL MINING PROJECTS

The 27th meeting of the reconstituted EAC (T &C) was held on 20th -21st June 2011 to consider the projects of coal mining sector. The list of participants of EAC and the proponents are given at Annexure-1 and 2 respectively.

Confirmation of minutes

The minutes of the 25th meeting of EAC (T&C) held on 23rd -24th May 2011 was confirmed.

 

The agenda items were taken up as given below:

 

1.       Proposed Integrated Coal Washery (1.44 MTPA) & Ore Pelletisation (1.20 MTPA) and Ore Beneficiation Plant (1.44 MTPA) of M/s Shree Nakoda Ispat Global Ltd., dist. Raipur, Chhattisgarh (TOR)

 

Proponent did not come for the presentation and the proposal was not considered in the meeting. It was noted that the proponent did not appear for the third time and the Committee decided that the proposal should be placed again for consideration only after receiving an explanation from the proponent for absence.

 

 

2.       Moira Madhujore North & South Underground Coalmine Project (2 MTPA nominal and 2.34 MTPA peak over an ML area of 999 ha) of M/s Moira Madhujore Coal Ltd., located in Raniganj Coalfields, West Bengal (TOR)

 

The Committee noted that the proposal was under litigation and desired details.

 

The proponent informed that the proposal is for opening a new underground coalmine project in Raniganj Coalfields. The coal block had been allotted to the JV company by the MOC in 2009. It was informed that about 83% of the proposed coal mine projects falls under township and 700 ha under proposed Airport project. Of the total ML area, 12.13 ha is for surface rights of which 8.34 ha is Govt. land and 3.79 ha is agricultural land. It was informed that the State IAA has given an EC to the Township project. The land has been acquired by the WB Government and in view of the overlapping of areas of the coal block with the two other projects, the Govt. of WB has constituted a Committee to examine the issue. The proponent also filed a case which is pending in the Calcutta High Court. It was further informed that a Regional Plan is being formulated by the WBSIDC. In parallel, the MOC had allotted the Coal Block and a Mining Plan and the guidelines proposed by MOC for mining below the airport and township would be followed. Depth of underground mining would be 75m to 300m. The proponent requested for TOR which a decision is awaited.

 

The Chairman stated that this issue requires to be resolved first before consideration of TOR. Director, MOEF read out the MOEF Circular No.J-11013/41/2006-IA.II (I) dated 8th June 2011, Para (a), where cases involving common land where no project has been prescribed TORs/granted EC, if clarification is sought from State Govt about status of land involved in project and response is awaited, in the meantime the proposal will be delisted from the pending list. The project is under the ambience of above circular.

 

The Committee after discussions deferred consideration of the project until a decision is taken by the State Government in regard to land ownership. The Committee further desired that the matter be taken up by MOEF with the Chief Secretary to confirm the status of proposed land whether it has been allotted for mining purposes or for township.

 

 

3.      Proposed Pit-head Coal Washery (3.5 MTPA) in Tasra Coal Block of M/s Steel Authority of India Ltd. Located in Jharia Coialfields, Jharkhand (Further consideration of TOR)

 

The proposal is for establishing a new pit-head coal prime and medium coking coal washery of 3.5 MTPA capacity in 18 ha area within the premises of the captive Tasra Coalmine project. The proposal was considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 20th -21st December 2010. The proposed coal washery is to be located in a non-coal bearing area in the northern part of Tasra Coal block located in the eastern part of the Jharia coalfields. The coalmine project was accorded an EC on 13.10.2009, wherein a condition was stipulated for establishing a coal washery within the ML. The Committee in the meeting in December 2010, had noted that a Superphosphate and Gypsum Plant was in operation many years ago in the same site of the proposed coal washery. The Committee was of the view that the site could be contaminated with wastes of the unit and a detailed study requires to be carried out for ascertaining the suitability of the site for establishing the washery in terms of soil characteristics and analysis of wastes in the premises, the details of which should be presented before the Committee. The Committee had therefore sought a report on the site and had also desired that the proponent simultaneously consider other sites for the proposed washery.

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was stated that the land requirement of the project is 20 ha of which 18 ha is for the washery and 2 ha for the railway siding. The washery is to be a two-product washery using wet process technology in closed circuit system. Raw coal of upto 34.5 % ash content would be obtained from the captive Tasra Opencast Coalmine and clean coal (0.49 MTPA) of 18% ash content would be used by the company’s steel plant at Burnpur and Durgapur and power grade coal of 33.5% ash content (3.01 MTPA) would be utilised in the company’s linked TPP. Dispatch of both steel grade and power grade coal would be by rail from the proposed railway siding to be established near the washery. The estimated water requirement for the washery is 0.3 MGD. Life of the proposed washery is 25 years. It was informed that the drainage of the area is controlled by two Jores – Domahani and Cilatu which ultimately drain into River Damodar.

 

In view of the decisions of the EAC (T&C) in meeting held in Dec. 2010 for examining other sites, it was informed that an alternate site has been selected. It was informed that the new site comprises mainly of agricultural land and would require acquisition. A presentation was made on the soil characteristics of the site chosen earlier where a Super Phosphate Plant was in existence, which indicated that the soil is acidic with pH as low as 2.8 and with high electrical conductivity (presence of salts of Mg, Ca, etc). Levels of iron were also high in the groundwater samples near the site.

 

The Committee was of the view that the contaminated site of the Super Phosphate factory should be selected as site for the washery and the company undertake treatment of the contaminated site as a social cause. In this regard, the company may undertake pre-project treatment of the solid wastes lying in and around the old factory site before establishment of the coal washery and a conceptual Plan/Study for decontamination of the site should be provided. The Committee also was of the view that traces of radioactive substances such as uranium and radium could still be present and noted that details sought thereof were not presented. The Committee desired that the proponent contact the Bhaba Atomic Research Centre, Bombay for a detailed study of the area. Random samples of soil and water from surface water bodies, groundwater and solid wastes in the contamination site, should be studied for toxicity. The study should also include study on remediation measures that needs to be carried out. The Committee also desired that study should also include the cost of remediation and decommissioning of the old structures, etc, if any. The Committee also desired that the transportation of raw coal from the Tasra Coalmine should be by conveyor.

The Committee after discussions decided to further consider the project for TOR after receipt of the aforesaid details.

 

4.       Durgapur-II Tarimar Opencast (3 MTPA)-cum-Underground (1 MTPA) Coalmine Project (4 MTPA) and linked Coal Washery (4 MTPA) in an ML area of 1070 ha of M/s BALCO located in Tehsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh (EC based on TOR granted on 26.08.2008)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the proposal is for opening a new opencast-cum-underground coalmine project with a pit head coal washery. Coal Block was allotted by MOC on 06.11.2007 and Mining Plan was approved on 17.10.2008. The company is owned by Sterlite (51%) and GOI (49%). The total production capacity of the mine is 4 MTPA of which 3 MTPA is by opencast operations and 1 MTPA by underground mining and would have a pit head coal washery of 4 MTPA. It was stated that the entire coal produced from the mine would be used for the 1110 MW linked Thermal Power Plants (810 MW existing +300MW proposed) at Korba.  The total ML area is 1070 ha of which 365.056 ha is forestland, 420 ha is agricultural land, 44 ha is surface water bodies and 240.944 ha is others. There are no ecologically sensitive areas such as National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries located in the 10km buffer zone. However, the study area consisting of core zone and the buffer zone has a number of (9) Reserved Forests and (2) Protected Forests. Stage-I Forestry Clearance was obtained from MOEF vide letter No 8-37/2009-FC dated 21.01.2010 for diversion of 365.056 ha of forest land within ML area.  Presence of elephants in the area is seasonal. The entire ML area is for OC mining. Top seams would be mined by OC and the bottom seams (50-55% of the mineable reserves) by UG mining. Of the total ML area, 1020.66 ha is mine area, 16.20 ha is for embankment, safety zone for River Mand, 16.50 ha is for mine inclines, shaft for underground mining, washery, service buildings, roads, etc, and 16.64 ha is for green belt. River Mand flows alongside the lease boundary and a distance of 60m safety barrier (which has forest) between the mine and the river is proposed. An embankment of 3m higher than the HFL is also proposed. Coal transportation of coal from mine to the power plant would be by MGR and until its establishment, by road from Dharamjaigarh to Korba.

 

Mining is mechanised for opencast operations by conventional and blast free operations. Underground mining is also mechanised by Board & Pillar and using continuous miner. Mining depth is 16.5m to 250m bgl. Grade of coal is C to G. Total estimated OB generation is 967.28 Mm3 would be dumped in mineralised area raising the height of the temporary external OB dump to 120m and subsequently to be re-handled after 25 years. Backfilling would begin from the 3rd year, when 965.78m Mm3 of OB would be concurrently dumped internally. Further an amount of 36.82 Mm3 of OB would be re-handled from the temporary OB dump and backfilled until the 7th year. There would be no external OB dumped at the end of mine life,  when the backfilled area would be raised about 10m above ground level and no mine void would be left at the post mining stage. Life of the mine is 23 years (OC mine) and 75 years (UG mine). The total estimated environmental cost of the project is Rs 979 lakhs and the total recurring cost is Rs 482.76 lakhs. An estimated Rs 2800 lakhs is proposed for CSR for the next 5 years and Rs 1 crore is earmarked for developmental activities for the surrounding villages. R&R consists of 171 PAFs and 729 PAFs for Durgapur and Taraimar Coal Blocks respectively. The total cost for R&R Plan is Rs 190.735 crores.  Water table is in the range of 5-12m bgl during pre-monsoon and 2-6m bgl during post-monsoon. The total water requirement of the project is 864 m3/d of which 381 m3/d is for dust suppression, etc, 9m3/d is for workshop, 390 m3/d is for mining operations, 110 m3/d is for drinking/domestic use, 100m3/d is for green belt, 264 m3/d is for make-up water for the coal washery.

                                                                                                                                

The proponent presented details of the coal washery. It was informed that the coal washery of 4 MTPA capacity is based on a concept of zero-discharge. Technology to be used is Heavy media Cyclone (wet process). It was informed that coal rejects of 79-80% ash is proposed to be backfilled into the mine voids. Public Hearing was held on 31.01.2011.

 

The Committee desired that the proposal for storing OB in a 120m temporary external dump of 700 ha area until re-handling begins after along time period of 25 years is not practical and requires to be re-examined and presented to the Ministry. The Committee sought a detailed year-wise calendar plan for OB dumping (external, internal and re-handling) along with area and height of the dumps. The Committee observed that the embankment being provided along the riverside to be constructed by OB /solid waste should be strengthened with stone pitching. Slope stability should be done by planting suitable grass and shrubs. The Committee observed that the study area has a number of Reserved and Protected forests and the mining lease area is also in dense forest. The Committee noted that Dharmajaygarh forest is 50 km away which is an elephant corridor/habitat. The Committee further noted that although the DFO reported that there is no endangered flora and fauna in the area, the proponent has submitted a letter dated 1.10.2010 from Divisional Forest Officer, Dharmajaygarh Forest Division which stated that elephants seasonally visit the area near the water bodies present in study area. The Committee was of the view that in addition to elephants, other endangered fauna such as bear, leopard, etc are expected as the study area has a large number of forests. The Committee desired that the matter of submission of conflicting information by the DFO should be got clarified from the PCCF, Govt. of Chhattisgarh. The Committee was of the view that a Plan for wildlife conservation, including elephants reported seasonally visiting the area should be prepared and furnished to the Ministry. The WL Plan must include specific activities along with budgetary provisions for the life of the project. The Committee also desired that the detail of forests in core area and buffer area should be provided and reclamation and habitat restoration should be done from the species found in the original ecosystem. The Committee observed that Subsidence Prediction Modelling study has not been carried for UG mining as per TOR condition. Committee desired that the same should be done and details furnished. The Committee desired that comments of Shri B.P.Singh. Director of Mines Safety, Director-General Mines Safety, Dhanbad (DGMS) may be obtained. The Committee observed that at the time of TOR, it was proposed that rejects would be utilised in an FBC power plant but the EIA-EMP report has been prepared for backfilling the rejects with flyash in the mine void in alternate layers of coal rejects and mine waste. The Committee stated that flyash dumping cannot be permitted unless it is supported with feasibility study and trials which is not part of the EIA-EMP Report. Committee desired that justification is required for dumping rejects into void instead of sending to FBC power plant. Committee also directed PP that potential buyer of rejects to be worked out and selected. The Committee observed that one–season base line data along with metrological data for the same season has not been provided in the EIA-EMP Report. The Committee desired that - monitoring data for the months of March-May 2011 as per amended AAQ Notification be furnished. The Committee observed that the coal transportation to the linked TPP would be through Korba, which is a critically polluted area, and desired that coal despatch should be by rail or by MGR. The Committee sought details of distance to be covered by road transportation from mine to linked TPP (in km) and desired that transportation should be by rail/MGR and further desired that the rail/MGR should not pass through forested areas and preferably be alongside the existing SH or work out some other option like overhead conveyor, Ropeway etc. The Committee also desired that land use of passing MGR should be provided along with land use of existing road, State Highway. The Committee agreed that until the MGR/rail link is provided, the planned arrangement of transport of coal by road could be permitted. The Committee desired that a tentative Action Plan is required for R&R and CSR. The Committee noted that since 53% of the 729 PAFs are tribal, R&R Plan should include a component for Tribal Welfare Dev. Plan, which is not reflected in the R&R Plan. The Committee also desired that an option of 50% of the cash compensation to be paid over the life of the project should be examined. In addition, annuities for the vulnerable sections of the society (old, destitute, abandoned, etc) should be provided a minimum Rs 2500/month. The Committee desired that VDAC should be constituted for the implementation of CSR and details of villages along with details of activities and budgetary provisions (0.4% of the total project cost, i.e. Rs 130 crores) for life of the project should be furnished. CSR should include creation/maintenance of Health Centres, primary schools, etc

The Committee decided to further consider the project after receipt of the aforesaid details.

 

5.       Proposed Coal Washery (0.12 MTPA in 2.26982 ha area) of M/s North East Coal Washery located in village Kamarkutchi, dist. Kamrup, Assam (TOR)

 

The proposal is for establishing a Category B two-product Coal Washery of a production capacity of 0.12 MTPA in an area of 2.26982 ha in village Kamarkutchi, district Kamrup, Assam. The washery is based on a zero-discharge concept. Coal would be obtained from mine owners and mining would be by rat-hole mining with a production of about 10,000 T/month. Technology to be used is separation by gravity deploying Jigs/HM (wet process). The coal has a high sulphur content of 6% or so. Ash content of input coal is about 35-36% and that of clean coal would be less than 10% and utilised in coking coal plants in Dhanbad, Gwahati and partly sold to Bangladesh industries.  An estimated 85m3/d water is required of which 75 m3/d, 5m3/d for make-up water and 5m3/d for drinking. Source of water is groundwater. Drainage of the area is by River Digaru, which flows adjacent to the washery site. The boundary wall of the project area has been erected. It was clarified that no effluents from the washery would be let into the river flowing close to the washery. Coal rejects would be sent for use of brick kiln manufacturers. Coal transportation would be by trucks. Manpower requirement is 54 and would be drawn from the local population and to the extent possible for positions at higher levels. It was informed that all the coal fines from the washery operations would be collected and sold with the washed coal as the fines also have commercial value. The consent of the Gram Panchayat where the washery is being established, has been obtained and in view of this, the company requested for exemption from conduct of Public Hearing. Capital cost of the project is Rs 548.03 lakhs and cost of EMP is Rs 3.7 lakhs/annum. CSR would be for an estimated Rs 30 lakhs with a revenue expenditure of Rs 2 lakhs/year.

 

The Committee desired that since the washery is near the bank of river, settling tanks should be provided away from river. The Committee also desired that separate stormwater drain to drain rainwater and a garland drain for effluents from the washery premises need to be provided. The Committee also obtained the views of the representatives of the Assam State Pollution Control Board with regard to the location of the proposed project and its impact from environmental angle. The Committee desired that only local people should be engaged for the washery. The Committee in consensus agreed to exempt the project for conduct of Public Hearing. The Committee desired that the construction of the washery should meet the regulations of construction in seismic zone V.

 

Based on the presentation made and discussions held, the Committee prescribed the following TOR:

(i)         A brief description of the plant, the technology used, the source of coal, the mode of transport of incoming unwashed coal and the outgoing washed coal. Specific pollution control and mitigative measures for the entire process.

(ii)        The EIA-EMP report should cover the impacts and management plan for the project of the capacity for EC is sought and the impacts of specific activities on the environment of the region, and the environmental quality – air, water, land, biotic community, etc. through collection of data and information, generation of data on impacts for the rated capacity. If the washery is captive to a coal mine/TPP/Plant the cumulative impacts on the environment and usage of water should be brought out along with the EMP.

(iii)       A Study area map of the core zone and 10km area of the buffer showing major industries/mines and other polluting sources, which shall also indicate the migratory corridors of fauna, if any and the areas where endangered fauna and plants of medicinal and economic importance are found in the area. If there are any ecologically sensitive areas found within the 15km buffer zone, the shortest distance from the National Park/WL Sanctuary Tiger Reserve, etc should be shown and the comments of the Chief Wildlife Warden of the State Government should be furnished.

 (iv)      Collection of one-season (non-monsoon) primary base-line data on environmental quality – air (PM10, PM2.5, SOx and NOx), noise, water (surface and groundwater), soil. 

(v)        Detailed water balance should be provided. The break up of water requirement as per different activities in the mining operations vis-à-vis washery should be given separately. Source of water for use in mine, sanction of the competent authority in the State Govt. and examine if the unit can be zero discharge including recycling and reuse of the wastewater for other uses such as green belt, etc.

(vi)       Impact of choice of the selected use of technology and impact on air quality and waste generation (emissions and effluents). 

(vii)      Impacts of mineral transportation - the entire sequence of mineral production, transportation, handling, transfer and storage of mineral and waste, if any, and their impacts on air quality should be shown in a flow chart with the specific points where fugitive emissions can arise and the specific pollution control/mitigative measures proposed to be put in place.

(viii)      Details of various facilities to be provided for the personnel involved in mineral transportation in terms of parking, rest areas, canteen, and effluents/pollution load from these activities.  Examine whether existing roads are adequate to take care of the additional load of mineral [and rejects] transportation, their impacts. Details of workshop, if any, and treatment of workshop effluents.

(ix)       Impacts of CHP, if any on air and water quality. A flow chart of water use and whether the unit can be made a zero-discharge unit.

(x)        Details of green belt development.

(xi)       Including cost of EMP (capital and recurring) in the project cost.

(xii)       Status of any litigations/ court cases filed/pending on the project.

(xiii)      Submission of sample test analysis of:

i           Characteristics of coal to be washed- this includes grade of coal and other characteristics – ash, S and heavy metals including levels of Hg, As, Pb, Cr etc.

ii.          Characteristics and quantum of washed coal.

iii.         Characteristics and quantum of coal waste rejects.

(xiv)      Management/disposal/Use of coal waste rejects

(xv)      Copies of MOU/Agreement with linkages (for stand alone washery) for the capacity for which EC has been sought.

(xvi)      Submission of sample test analysis of:

Characteristics of coal to be washed- this includes grade of coal and other characteristics – ash, S.

 

The following general points should be noted:

(i)         All documents should be properly indexed, page numbered.

(ii)        Period/date of data collection should be clearly indicated.

(iii)       Authenticated English translation of all material provided in Regional languages.

(iv)              After the preparation of the draft EIA-EMP Report on the coal washery as per the aforesaid TOR, the proponent shall take necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance under the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006.

(v)                The details of the EIA-EMP Report should be summarised in the Mining Sector Questionnaire posted on the MOEF website with all sections duly filled in and furnished along with the EIA-EMP (Final) Report.

(vi)       The copy of the letter received from the Ministry on the TOR prescribed for the project should be attached as an annexure to the final EIA-EMP Report.

(vii)      The final EIA-EMP report submitted to the Ministry must incorporate the issues in TOR. The index of the final EIA-EMP report, must indicate the specific chapter and page no. of the EIA-EMP Report where the specific TOR prescribed by Ministry and the issue raised in the P.H. have been incorporated.

(viii)      The aforesaid TOR has a validity of two years only.

 

 

6.      Proposed Coal Washery (0.15 MTPA in an area of 0.4681 ha) of M/s Pride Coke Pvt. Ltd., located in village Amber, Taluka Sonapur, Dist. Kamrup, Assam (TOR)

 

The proponent informed that the proposal is for establishing a new two-product coal washery unit within the premises of its Coke Breeze & Low Ash Metallurgical Coke Plant as a part of modernization of its existing Coke plant.  No additional land area is required for the washery unit. The two-stage washery of a production capacity of 0.15 MTPA (category B) is to be established in an area of 0.4681 ha in village Amber, district Kamrup, Assam, at the interstate boundary of Assam and Meghalaya around 4 km within the premises of its existing Coke Plant of 0.9324 ha.  The total area for the coal washery would include area for storing coal fines, raw coal storage area and equipment, parking area, plantation and internal road. There are no RF/PF within 10km of the project. River Umtru flows at a distance of 3km from the washery. Of the 0.2 MTPA of raw coal with an ash content of 20-30%, 0.15 MTPA would be clean coal with 7% ash content and 0.05 MTPA of coal rejects with an ash content of 40% would be produced. Input coal would be obtained by trucks from privately owned mines produced by rat hole mining. Technology used in the washery would be separation by gravity deploying Jigs/HM. An estimated 75 TPD of rejects would be sold to FBC based TPP. An estimated 25 m3/d of water is required for the washery. Manpower requirement is 12. An amount of Rs 20 lakhs would be earmarked for CSR with a recurring expenditure of Rs 2 lakhs /year. The washed coal would be supplied to a large number of coke oven plant (metallurgical units) around 9 no, 4 cement plants, fire clay brick manufacturing units & 7 industries are located in proposed 10 km of area. Coal transportation would be by road. The washery would operate on a zero-discharge concept.

 

The Committee desired that since the washery is near the bank of river, settling tanks should be provided away from river. The Committee also desired that a separate stormwater drain to drain rainwater and garland drain for effluents from the washery premises need to be provided. The Committee desired that plantation should be developed along the boundary, vacant areas, at transfer and loading points, infrastructure and buildings. The Committee also obtained the views of the representatives of the Assam State Pollution Control Board in regard to the location of the proposed project and its impact from environmental angle. from privately owned mines produced by rat hole mining. The Committee desired that only local people should be engaged for the washery. The Committee agreed for exemption of conduct of Public Hearing. The Committee desired that the construction of the washery should meet the regulations of construction in seismic zone V.

 

Based on the presentation made and discussions held, the Committee prescribed the following TOR:

 

(i)         A brief description of the plant, the technology used, the source of coal, the mode of transport of incoming unwashed coal and the outgoing washed coal. Specific pollution control and mitigative measures for the entire process.

(ii)        The EIA-EMP report should cover the impacts and management plan for the project of the capacity for EC is sought and the impacts of specific activities on the environment of the region, and the environmental quality – air, water, land, biotic community, etc. through collection of data and information, generation of data on impacts for the rated capacity. If the washery is captive to a coal mine/TPP/Plant the cumulative impacts on the environment and usage of water should be brought out along with the EMP.

(iii)         A Study area map of the core zone and 10km area of the buffer showing major industries/mines and other polluting sources, which shall also indicate the migratory corridors of fauna, if any and the areas where endangered fauna and plants of medicinal and economic importance are found in the area. If there are any ecologically sensitive areas found within the 15km buffer zone, the shortest distance from the National Park/WL Sanctuary Tiger Reserve, etc should be shown and the comments of the Chief Wildlife Warden of the State Government should be furnished.

 (iv)        Collection of one-season (non-monsoon) primary base-line data on environmental quality – air (PM10, PM2.5, SOx and NOx), noise, water (surface and groundwater), soil. 

(iv)              Detailed water balance should be provided. The break up of water requirement as per different activities in the mining operations vis-à-vis washery should be given separately. Source of water for use in mine, sanction of the competent authority in the State Govt. and examine if the unit can be zero discharge including recycling and reuse of the wastewater for other uses such as green belt, etc.

(vi)       Impact of choice of the selected use of technology and impact on air quality and waste generation (emissions and effluents). 

(vii)      Impacts of mineral transportation - the entire sequence of mineral production, transportation, handling, transfer and storage of mineral and waste, if any, and their impacts on air quality should be shown in a flow chart with the specific points where fugitive emissions can arise and the specific pollution control/mitigative measures proposed to be put in place.

(viii)      Details of various facilities to be provided for the personnel involved in mineral transportation in terms of parking, rest areas, canteen, and effluents/pollution load from these activities.  Examine whether existing roads are adequate to take care of the additional load of mineral [and rejects] transportation, their impacts. Details of workshop, if any, and treatment of workshop effluents.

(ix)       Impacts of CHP, if any on air and water quality. A flow chart of water use and whether the unit can be made a zero-discharge unit.

(x)        Details of green belt development.

(xi)       Including cost of EMP (capital and recurring) in the project cost.

(xii)       Status of any litigations/ court cases filed/pending on the project.

(xiii)      Submission of sample test analysis of:

i.          Characteristics of coal to be washed- this includes grade of coal and other characteristics – ash, S and and heavy metals including levels of Hg, As, Pb, Cr etc.

ii.          Characteristics and quantum of washed coal.

iii.         Characteristics and quantum of coal waste rejects.

(xiv)      Management/disposal/Use of coal waste rejects

(xv)      Copies of MOU/Agreement with linkages (for stand alone washery) for the capacity for which EC has been sought.

(xvi)      Submission of sample test analysis of:

Characteristics of coal to be washed- this includes grade of coal and other characteristics – ash, S

 

The following general points should be noted:

 

(i)         All documents should be properly indexed, page numbered.

(ii)        Period/date of data collection should be clearly indicated.

(iii)       Authenticated English translation of all material provided in Regional languages.

(vi)              After the preparation of the draft EIA-EMP Report on the coal washery as per the aforesaid TOR, the proponent shall take necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance under the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006.

(vii)             The details of the EIA-EMP Report should be summarised in the Mining Sector Questionnaire posted on the MOEF website with all sections duly filled in and furnished along with the EIA-EMP (Final) Report.

(vi)       The copy of the letter received from the Ministry on the TOR prescribed for the project should be attached as an annexure to the final EIA-EMP Report.

(vii)      The final EIA-EMP report submitted to the Ministry must incorporate the issues in TOR. The index of the final EIA-EMP report, must indicate the specific chapter and page no. of the EIA-EMP Report where the specific TOR prescribed by Ministry and the issue raised in the P.H. have been incorporated.

(viii)      The aforesaid TOR has a validity of two years only.

 

 

7.      Expansion of Coal Beneficiation Plant (2 MTPA to 4 MTPA in an area of 6.32 ha) of M/s Global Coal & Mining Pvt. Ltd., located at vill.Tentulei, post South Balanda, Tehsil Talcher, dist. Angul, Orissa (EC based on TOR granted on 31.12.2008)

 

The proposal is for expansion in production from 2 MTPA to 4 MTPA in an area of 6.32 ha. A number of Reserve Forests (8) and Protected Forest (2) are found in the 10 Km study area. River Brahmani flows at a distance of 7.5 km in eastern direction. A number of industries and coal mine such as  NTPC-Kaniha Plant (9.5 km), MCL Mines (5 km), Fertilizer Corporation of India (FCI) (10 km) in south east, NALCO (3.0 km) are situated in the study area, which is part of the Angul-Talcher critically polluted area. Of the total plant area, 1.01 ha is for the Plant, 0.50 ha is for roads, 0.5 ha is for coal stockyards, 0.16 ha is parking area, 0.40 ha is for infrastructure, and 2.50 ha is for plantation/green belt, and 0.50 ha is for proposed expansion of the plant. The technology to be used is HM Cyclone. Sources of raw coal are the coalmines of MCL such as Jagannath, Ananta and Bhubaneshwari and the end user of the washed coal is Neyveli Lignite Corp. Ltd., APGENCO, etc.  Grade of raw coal is F-G with 42-45% ash content and clean coal would be with an ash content of 33.5 + 0.5 % and coal rejects of 58 + 3% ash content. Of the total 4 MTPA of raw coal, 2.94 MTPA would be clean coal and 1.06 MTPA would be coal rejects. Coal fines would be collected and blended with clean coal and sold to consumers to users such as brick manufacturers and Bhushan Steel & Power. Raw coal would be obtained by road using tipping trucks. The total water requirement is 630 m3/d of which 300 m3/d is for the existing unit of 2 MTPA and the balance 330 m3/d is for the proposed expansion unit of which 240 m3/d is for washing, 10 m3/d is for drinking, 70 m3/d is for green belt and dust suppression and 10 m3/d for evaporation losses. Source of water is MCL mine pit water for mine and green belt development and the water would be brought by pipelines for a distance of 5km to the washery for operations and water for drinking are met from bore-well. The total manpower of 175 persons includes 115 existing and 60 proposed for the expansion unit. Capital cost of the project is Rs 20.50 crores. Annual cost for EMP is Rs 1.59 crores. Annual budget for CSR is Rs 16 lakhs.  Clean coal to APGENCO would be by trucks/rail. The proponent informed that GCMPL is in process of developing its own railway siding using an old FCI railway line alignment. DPR has already been prepared and approved by East Cost Railway vide letter dated 02.03.2010 and the line would be soon ready for the expansion of the washery and thereafter clean coal and rejects will be transferred to the siding by belt conveyor so road transport for clean coal and rejects will be eliminated. It was informed that AAQ monitoring data is being regularly reported to OSPCB and a CTO was obtained on 28.04.2011.

 

The Committee desired that quantum of coal (raw, clean and rejects) should be provided as MTPA along with their ash content. The Committee desired that a plan of coal evacuation to end users by rail mode requires to be furnished. The Committee desired that the raw coal transportation should be either by rail or conveyor as the project is located in CPA of Angul-Talcher. The proponent should dovetailed transportation with MCL as MCL itself is required to establish a proposed railway line for transport of coal from MCL mines. The Committee desired that the various options available for transportation should be examined and presented. The Committee noted that the proponent had furnished old baseline data for the year December2008 - February 2009 and sought details of recent AAQ levels. The Committee desired that as the washery is in critically polluted area in Talcher, PP should generate fresh air data as per PM10 and PM2.5 and submit the same to the Ministry. The Committee desired that the proponent provide specific measures of reducing the pollution and other mitigative measures for reducing environmental impacts of operation of the washery in the midst of a CPA Angul-Talcher. The measures should be based on the Environmental Action Plan prepared by OSPCB recommended for the Angul-Talcher Region. The Committee desired that three-tier green belt should be developed along the washery boundary and along transfer and loading points and in the proposed railway siding to mitigate/check dust pollution and the entire coal dispatch from the group of mines should be dove-tailed with the Coal evacuation system prepared for the Angul-Talcher. The Committee sought a TOR-wise response to be made in the presentation. The Committee sought detailed Plan (village-wise and activity-wise) for CSR with details of budgetary provision for the activities for the life of the washery. Massive tree plantation is required in the proposed area.

 

The Committee decided to further consider the project for TOR after receipt of the aforesaid details.

 

 

8.      Chhinda OCP Expn. (0.18 MTPA to 0.65 MTPA in an ML area of 106.68 ha) of M/s Western Coalfields Ltd., located inTehsil Parasia, dist. Chindwara, M.P. (TOR)

 

The proposal is for expansion in production from 0.18 MTPA to 0.65 MTPA in the existing ML area of 106.68 ha. EC was obtained for 0.18 MTPA on 15.09.2005 Expansion in production would be by outsourcing and no additional land area is required. Of the total ML area, 103.876 ha is agricultural land, 2.804 ha waste land (Govt. land). No forestland is involved. The buffer zone contains a number of mixed and dense protected forests.  The ML does not fall in the proposed Pench-Satpura Tiger Corridor. The general slope of the ground is towards River Pench, which flow to the west and south periphery of ML area. HFL of river is 703m. Of the total ML area 106.68 ha, 52.20 ha is quarry area, 16.80 ha is for external OB dump (including embankment), 1.92ha is for infrastructure & CHP, 35.76 ha is for blasting zone. Mining methodology involves use of combination of shovel-dumper and surface miner. Total OB generation in the balance life of the project is 27.38 Mm3. Present height of external OB dump is 30m. Balance life of mine is 10 years. Ultimate depth of mine is 85m bgl. Capital cost of the project is Rs 17.79 crores. A provision of Rs 5/T of coal is earmarked for CSR. Water table is in the range of 13.1-13.8m bgl during pre-monsoon and 10.40-11.30m bgl during post-monsoon. There is no R&R involved. Coal transportation would be by trucks covered with tarpaulin.

 

The Committee desired that options for doing away with/minimising external OB dumping for the expansion project should be considered in the preparation of EIA-EMP Report.

         

Based on the application along with documents and presentation thereon and discussions held, the Committee prescribed the following TOR:

(i)                  An EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for 0.18 MTPA to 0.65 MTPA in an ML area of 106.68 ha based on the generic structure specified in Appendix III of the EIA Notification 2006.

(ii)                An EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for 0.18 MTPA to 0.65 MTPA in an ML area of 106.68 ha MTPA rated capacity cover the impacts and management plan for the project specific activities on the environment of the region, and the environmental quality – air, water, land, biotic community, etc. through collection of data and information, generation of data on impacts including prediction modelling for expansion from 0.18 MTPA to 0.65 MTPA of coal production based on approval of project/Mining Plan for the enhancement from 0.18 MTPA to 0.65 MTPA. Baseline data collection can be for any season except monsoon.

(iii)               A map specifying locations of the State, District and Project location.

(iv)              A Study area map of the core zone and 10km area of the buffer zone (1: 50,000 scale) clearly delineating the major topographical features such as the land use, surface drainage of rivers/streams/nalas/canals, locations of human habitations, major constructions including railways, roads, pipelines, major industries/mines and other polluting sources. In case of ecologically sensitive areas such as Biosphere Reserves/National Parks/WL Sanctuaries/ Elephant Reserves, forests (Reserved/Protected), migratory corridors of fauna, and areas where endangered fauna and plants of medicinal and economic importance found in the 15 km area of the buffer zone should be given.

(v)                Land use map (1: 50,000 scale) based on a recent satellite imagery of the study area may also be provided with explanatory note of the land use. Satellite imagery per se is not required.

(vi)              Map showing the core zone delineating the agricultural land (irrigated and unirrigated, uncultivable land (as defined in the revenue records), forest areas (as per records), along with other physical features such as water bodies, etc should be furnished.

(vii)             A contour map showing the area drainage of the core zone and 2-5 km of the buffer zone (where the water courses of the core zone ultimately join the major rivers/streams outside the lease/project area) should also be clearly indicated as a separate map.

 

(viii)           A detailed Site plan of the mine showing the various proposed break-up of the land for mining operations such as the quarry area, OB dumps, green belt, safety zone, buildings, infrastructure, CHP, ETP, Stockyard, township/colony (within and adjacent to the ML), undisturbed area and if any, in topography such as existing roads, drains/natural water bodies are to be left undisturbed along with any natural drainage adjoining the lease /project and modification of thereof in terms of construction of embankments/bunds, proposed diversion/rechannelling of the water courses, etc., approach roads, major haul roads, etc.

(ix)               In case of any proposed diversion of nallah/canal/river, the proposed route of diversion/modification of drainage and their realignment, construction of embankment etc. should also be shown on the map.

(x)                Similarly if the project involves diversion of any road/railway line passing through the ML/project area, the proposed route of diversion and its realignment should be shown.

(xi)               Break up of lease/project area as per different land uses and their stage of acquisition.

(xii)             Break-up of lease/project area as per mining operations.

(xiii)            Impact of changes in the land use due to the start of the projects if much of the land being acquired is agricultural land/forestland/grazing land.

(xiv)           Collection of one-season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on environmental quality - air (PM10, PM2.5, SOx , NOx and heavy metals such as Hg, Pb, Cr, As, etc), noise, water (surface and groundwater), soil along with one-season met data coinciding with the same season for AAQ collection period.

(xv)             Map of the study area (1: 50, 000 scale) (core and buffer zone clearly delineating the location of various stations superimposed with location of habitats, other industries/mines, polluting sources. The number and location of the stations in both core zone and buffer zone should be selected on the basis of size of lease/project area, the proposed impacts in the downwind (air)/downstream (surface water)/groundwater regime (based on flow). One station should be in the upwind/upstream/non-impact/non-polluting area as a control station. The monitoring should be as per CPCB guidelines and parameters for water testing for both ground water and surface water as per ISI  standards and CPCB classification wherever applicable.

(xvi)           Study on the existing flora and fauna in the study area (10km) carried out by an institution of relevant discipline and the list of flora and fauna duly authenticated separately for the core and buffer zone and a statement clearly specifying whether the study area forms a part of the migratory corridor of any endangered fauna. If the study area has endangered flora and fauna, or if the area is occasionally visited or used as a habitat by Schedule-I fauna, or if the project falls within 15 km of an ecologically sensitive area, or used as a migratory corridor then a comprehensive Conservation Plan should be prepared and submitted with EIA-EMP Report and comments from the CWLW of the State Govt. also obtained and furnished.

(xvii)          Details of mineral reserves, geological status of the study are and the seams to be worked, ultimate working depth and progressive stage-wise working scheme until end of mine life should be reflected on the basis of the approved rated capacity and calendar plans of production from the approved Mining Plan. Geological maps and sections should be included. The progressive mine development and Conceptual Final Mine Closure Plan should also be shown in figures.

(xviii)        Details of mining methods, technology, equipment to be used, etc., rationale for selection of that technology and equipment proposed to be used vis-à-vis the potential impacts.

(xix)            Impact of mining on hydrology, modification of natural drainage, diversion and channelling of the existing rivers/water courses flowing though the ML and adjoining the lease/project and the impact on the existing users and impacts of mining operations thereon.

(xx)             Detailed water balance should be provided. The break up of water requirement for the various mine operations should be given separately.

(xxi)            Source of water for use in mine, sanction of the competent authority in the State Govt. and impacts vis-à-vis the competing users.

(xxii)          Impact of mining and water abstraction use in mine on the hydrogeology and groundwater regime within the core zone and 10 km buffer zone including long–term modelling studies on. Details of rainwater harvesting and measures for recharge of groundwater should be reflected in case there us a declining trend of groundwater availability and/or if the area falls within dark/grey zone.

(xxiii)         Impact of blasting, noise and vibrations.                   

(xxiv)        Impacts of mining on the AAQ, predictive modelling using the ISCST-3 (Revised) or latest model.

(xxv)          Impacts of mineral transportation – within and outside the lease/project along with flow-chart indicating the specific areas generating fugitive emissions. Impacts of transportation, handling, transfer of mineral and waste on air quality, generation of effluents from workshop, management plan for maintenance of HEMM, machinery, equipment. Details of various facilities to be provided in terms of parking, rest areas, canteen, and effluents/pollution load from these activities.

(xxvi)        The Committee desired that options for doing away with/minimising external OB dumping for the expansion project should be considered in the preparation of EIA-EMP Report. Details of waste generation – OB, topsoil – as per the approved calendar programme, and their management shown in figures as well explanatory chapter with tables giving progressive development and mine closure plan, green belt development, backfilling programme and conceptual post mining land use. OB dump heights and terracing should be based on slope stability studies with a max of 28o angle as the ultimate slope. Sections of dumps (ultimate) (both longitudinal and cross section) with relation to the adjacent area should be shown.

(xxvii)       Impact and management of wastes and issues of rehandling and backfilling and progressive mine closure and reclamation.

(xxviii)     Flow chart of water balance. Treatment of effluents from workshop, township, domestic wastewater, mine water discharge, etc. Details of STP in colony and ETP in mine. Recycling of water to the max. possible extent.

(xxix)         Occupational health issues. Baseline data on the health of the population in the impact zone and measures for occupational health and safety of the personnel and manpower for the mine.

(xxx)          Disaster Management Plan.

(xxxi)         Integrating in the Env. Management Plan with measures for minimising use of natural resources - water, land, energy, etc.

(xxxii)       Progressive Green belt and afforestation plan (both in text, figures as well as in tables prepared by MOEF) and selection of species (local) for the afforestation/plantation programme based on original survey/landuse.

(xxxiii)      Conceptual Final Mine Closure Plan, post mining land use and restoration of land/habitat to pre- mining. A Plan for the ecological restoration of the area post mining and for land use should be prepared with detailed cost provisions.

(xxxiv)     Including cost of EMP (capital and recurring) in the project cost and for progressive and final mine closure plan.

(xxxv)       Public Hearing should cover the details of notices issued in the newspaper, proceedings/minutes of public hearing, the points raised by the general public and commitments made by the proponent should be presented in a tabular form. If the Public Hearing is in the regional language, an authenticated English Translation of the same should be provided.

(xxxvi)     In built mechanism of self-monitoring of compliance of environmental regulations.

(xxxvii)    Status of any litigations/ court cases filed/pending on the project.

(xxxviii)  Submission of sample test analysis of:

(xxxix)   Characteristics of coal - this includes grade of coal and other characteristics – ash, S and heavy metals including levels of Hg, As, Pb, Cr etc.

(xxxx)    Copy of clearances/approvals – such as Forestry clearances, Mining Plan Approval, NOC from Flood and Irrigation Dept. (if req.), etc. wherever applicable.

 

The following general points should be noted:

(i)         All documents should be properly indexed, page numbered.

(ii)        Period/date of data collection should be clearly indicated.

(iii)       Authenticated English translation of all material provided in Regional languages.

(iv)       After the preparation of the draft EIA-EMP Report as per the aforesaid TOR, the proponent shall get the Public Hearing conducted as prescribed in the EIA Notification 2006 and take necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance under the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006.

(v)                The letter/application for EC should quote the MOEF file No. and also attach a copy of the letter prescribing the TOR.

(vi)              The copy of the letter received from the Ministry on the TOR prescribed for the project should be attached as an annexure to the final EIA-EMP Report.

(vii)      The final EIA-EMP report submitted to the Ministry must incorporate the issues in TOR and that raised in Public Hearing. The index of the final EIA-EMP report, must indicate the specific chapter and page no. of the EIA-EMP Report where the specific TOR prescribed by Ministry and the issue raised in the P.H. have been incorporated. Mining Questionnaire (posted on MOEF website) with all sections duly filled in shall also be submitted at the time of applying for EC.

(viii)      The aforesaid TOR has a validity of two years only.

 

The following additional points are also to be noted:

(i)                  Grant of TOR does not necessarily mean grant of EC.

(ii)                Grant of TOR/EC to the present project does not necessarily mean grant of TOR/EC to the captive/linked project.

(iii)               Grant of TOR/EC to the present project does not necessarily mean grant of approvals in other regulations such as the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 or the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

 

 

9.       Murpar UG Coalmine Expn. Project (0.09 MTPA (normative) 0.28 MTPA (peak) and expn. in ML area from 325.00 ha to 759.28 ha) of M/s WCL, located in Tehsil Chimur, dist. Chandrapur, Maharashtra (TOR)

 

The proposal is for expansion in ML area from 325.00 ha to 759.28 ha with a production capacity of 0.09 MTPA (normative) with a peak production of 0.28 MTPA with an expansion in ML area from 325 ha to 759.28 ha. EC was obtained for 0.28 MTPA on 15.11.2002. Of the total ML area of 759.28 ha, 680.78 ha is forest land, 6.50 ha is Govt. land, 57.0 ha is tenancy land. In addition, an area of 15 ha has been acquired under surface rights for township outside the ML for the existing and expansion project. The entire ML is under Mining Rights and 15 ha is under Surface Rights, which includes 0.50 ha of forest land and 14.50 ha of agricultural land. Forestry clearance has been obtained for entire forestland 680.78 ha involved for the UG mine vide FC letter no 8-35/2000 dated 01.06.2011 for both all Rights as well as for Mining Rights. Mining methodology is Board & Pillar method. The project does not involve R&R. Water table is in the range of 4.60-12m bgl (pre-monsoon) and 1.10-4.88m bgl during post-monsoon. An estimated 600m3/d of water is required for the project. The nearest siding is Umrer Railway Siding, which is situated at a distance of 72 km from the mine. Partial coal dispatch of 272 TPD is by road using 54 trucks/day. Main linkage is MAHAGENCO. Mining Plan has been approved for 0.28 MTPA peak production, which has been reached, hence it is a violation case. Controlled blasting will be practised below forestland.

 

Based on the application along with documents and presentation thereon and discussions held, the Committee prescribed the following TOR:

(i)                  An EIA-EMP Report should be prepared for 0.09 MTPA (normative) 0.28 MTPA (peak) and expansion in ML area from 325.00 ha to 759.28 ha addressing the impacts of the underground coalmine project including the aspects of mineral transportation and issues of impacts on hydrogeology, plan for conservation of flora/fauna and afforestation/ plantation programme based on the generic structure specified in Appendix III of the EIA Notification 2006.Baseline data collection can be for any season except monsoon.

(ii)                The EIA-EMP report should also cover the impacts and management plan for the project specific activities on the environment of the region, and the environmental quality – air, water, land, biotic community, etc. through collection of baseline data and information, generation of baseline data on impacts for 0.09 MTPA (normative) 0.28 MTPA (peak) and expn. in ML area from 325.00 ha to 759.28 ha of coal production based on approval of project/Mining Plan.

(iii)               A Study area map of the core zone and 10km area of the buffer zone (15 km of the buffer zone in case of ecologically sensitive areas) delineating the major topographical features such as the land use, drainage, locations of habitats, major construction including railways, roads, pipelines, major industries/mines and other polluting sources, which shall also indicate the migratory corridors of fauna, if any and the areas where endangered fauna and plants of medicinal and economic importance are found in the area.

(iv)              Map showing the core zone along with 3-5 km of the buffer zone) delineating the agricultural land (irrigated and unirrigated, uncultivable land (as defined in the revenue records), forest areas (as per records) and grazing land and wasteland and water bodies.

(v)                Contour map at 3m interval along with Site plan of the mine (lease/project area with about 3-5 km of the buffer zone) showing the various surface structures such as buildings, infrastructure, CHP, ETP, Stockyard, township/colony (within/adjacent to the ML), green belt and undisturbed area and if any existing roads, drains/natural water bodies are to be left undisturbed along with details of natural drainage adjoining the lease/project and modification of thereof in terms of construction of embankments/bunds, proposed diversion/rechannelling of the water courses, etc., highways, passing through the lease/project area.

(vi)              Original land use (agricultural land/forestland/grazing land/wasteland/water bodies) of the area. Impacts of project, if any on the landuse, in particular, agricultural land/forestland/grazing land/water bodies falling within the lease/project and acquired for mining operations. Extent of area under surface rights and under mining rights.

(vii)             Study on the existing flora and fauna in the study area carried out by an institution of relevant discipline and the list of flora and fauna duly authenticated separately for the core and buffer zone and a statement clearly specifying whether the study area forms a part of the migratory corridor of any endangered fauna. The flora and fauna details should be furnished separately for the core zone and buffer zone. The report and the list should be authenticated by the concerned institution carrying out the study and the names of the species scientific and common names) along with the classification under the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 should be furnished.

(viii)           Details of mineral reserves, geological status of the study area and the seams to be worked, ultimate working depth and progressive stage-wise working plan/scheme until end of mine life should be reflected on the basis of the approved rated capacity and calendar plans of production from the approved Mining Plan. Geological maps should also be included.

(ix)               Impact of mining on hydrology, modification of natural drainage, diversion and channelling of the existing rivers/water courses flowing though the ML and adjoining the lease/project and the impact on the existing users and impacts of mining operations thereon.

(x)                Collection of one-season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on environmental quality – air (PM10, PM2.5, SOx, NOx and heavy metals such as Hg, Pb, Cr, AS, etc), noise, water (surface and groundwater), soil along with one-season met data.. 

(xi)               Map of the study area (core and buffer zone) clearly delineating the location of various monitoring stations (air/water/soil and noise – each shown separately) superimposed with location of habitats, wind roses, other industries/mines, polluting sources. The number and location of the stations should be selected on the basis of the proposed impacts in the downwind/downstream/groundwater regime. One station should be in the upwind/upstream/non-impact non-polluting area as a control station. Wind roses to determine air pollutant dispersion and impacts thereof shall be determined. Monitoring should be as per CPCB guidelines and standards for air, water, noise notified under Environment Protection Rules. Parameters for water testing for both ground and surface water should be as per ISI standards and CPCB classification of surface water wherever applicable.

(xii)             Impact of mining and water abstraction and mine water discharge in mine on the hydrogeology and groundwater regime within the core zone and 10km buffer zone including long–term modelling studies on the impact of mining on the groundwater regime. Details of rainwater harvesting and measures for recharge of groundwater should be reflected wherever the areas is declared dark/grey from groundwater development.

(xiii)            Study on subsidence, measures for mitigation/prevention of subsidence, modelling subsidence prediction and its use during mine operation, safety issues.

(xiv)           Detailed water balance should be provided. The break up of water requirement as per different activities in the mining operations, including use of water for sand stowing should be given separately. Source of water for use in mine, sanction of the competent authority in the State Govt. and impacts vis-à-vis the competing users should be provided.

(xv)             Impact of choice of mining method, technology, selected use of machinery - and impact on air quality, mineral transportation, coal handling & storage/stockyard, etc, Impact of blasting, noise and vibrations.

(xvi)           Impacts of mineral transportation – within and outside the lease/project. The entire sequence of mineral production, transportation, handling, transfer and storage of mineral and waste, and their impacts on air quality should be shown in a flow chart with the specific points where fugitive emissions can arise and the specific pollution control/mitigative measures proposed to be put in place. Examine the adequacy of roads existing in the area and if new roads are proposed, the impact of their construction and use particularly if forestland is used.

(xvii)          Details of various facilities to be provided in terms of parking, rest areas, canteen, and effluents/pollution load from these activities.  Examine whether existing roads are adequate to take care of the additional load of mineral and their impacts.

(xviii)        Examine the number and efficiency of mobile/static water sprinkling system along the main mineral transportation road within the mine, approach roads to the mine/stockyard/siding, and also the frequency of their use in impacting air quality.

(xix)            Impacts of CHP, if any on air and water quality. A flow chart of water use and whether the unit can be made a zero-discharge unit.

(xx)             Conceptual Final Mine Closure Plan along with the fund requirement for the detailed activities proposed there under.  Impacts of change in land use for mining operations and whether the land can be restored for agricultural use post mining.

(xxi)            Occupational health issues. Baseline data on the health of the population in the impact zone and measures for occupational health and safety of the personnel and manpower for the mine should be furnished.

(xxii)          Details of cost of EMP (capital and recurring) in the project cost and for final mine closure plan. The specific costs (capital and recurring) of each pollution control/mitigative measures proposed in the project until end of mine life and a statement that this is included in the project cost.

(xxiii)         Integrating in the Env. Management Plan with measures for minimising use of natural resources – water, land, energy, raw materials/mineral, etc.

(xxiv)        Public Hearing should cover the details as specified in the EIA Notification 2006, and include notices issued in the newspaper, proceedings/minutes of public hearing, the points raised by the general public and commitments by the proponent made should be presented in a tabular form. If the Public Hearing is in the regional language, an authenticated English Translation of the same should be provided.

(xxv)          Status of any litigations/ court cases filed/pending on the project.

(xxvi)    Submission of sample test analysis of:

(xxvii)   Characteristics of coal - this includes grade of coal and other characteristics – ash, S

            and heavy metals including levels of Hg, As, Pb, Cr etc.

(xxviii)  Copy of clearances/approvals – such as Forestry clearances, Mining Plan Approval, NOC from Flood and Irrigation Dept. (if req.), etc.

 

The following general points should be noted:

(i)         All documents should be properly indexed, page numbered.

(ii)        Period/date of data collection should be clearly indicated.

(iii)       Authenticated English translation of all material in Regional languages provided/enclosed with the application.

(iv)              After the preparation of the draft EIA-EMP Report as per the aforesaid TOR, the proponent shall get the Public Hearing conducted as prescribed in the EIA Notification 2006 and take necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance under the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006.

(v)                The final EIA-EMP report submitted to the Ministry must incorporate the issues in TOR and that raised in Public Hearing. The index of the final EIA-EMP report, must indicate the specific chapter and page no. of the EIA-EMP Report where the specific TOR prescribed by Ministry and the issue raised in the P.H. have been incorporated.

(vi)       The letter/application for EC should quote the MOEF file No. and also attach a copy of the letter prescribing the TOR.

(vii)      The copy of the letter received from the Ministry on the TOR prescribed for the

project should be attached as an annexure to the final EIA-EMP Report.

(viii)      Mining Questionnaire (posted on MOEF website) with all sections duly filled in shall also be submitted at the time of applying for EC.

(ix)       The aforesaid TOR has a validity of two years only.

 

The following additional points are also to be noted:

(i)                  Grant of TOR does not necessarily mean grant of EC.

(ii)                Grant of TOR/EC to the present project does not necessarily mean grant of TOR/EC to the captive/linked project.

(iii)               Grant of TOR/EC to the present project does not necessarily mean grant of approvals in other regulations such as the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 or the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

 

 

10.    Tubed Opencast Coalmine Project (6 MTPA peak over 460 ha) of M/s Tubed Coal Mines Ltd., dist. Latehar, Jharkhand (Further Internal consideration of EC based on TOR granted on 30.04.2009)

 

The details and specific commitments made on the information/clarification sought by the EAC in the May 2011 meeting were discussed and the EAC noted the following details furnished by the proponent:  

 

i.        Details of constitution of the JV company.

ii.       Details of break-up of schemes and activities for skill development and vocational training for employment generation and establishment of SHGs and cooperatives especially for women.  A budgetary provision of Rs 2.58 cores for first initial 5 years, which would be continued over the life of the project.

iii.      A budgetary provision of Rs 97.5 lakhs has been provided for Tribal Development Plan along with details of activities thereunder. The proponent has further committed to facilitate marketing of the forest produce under the Plan.

iv.      The proponent has committed that at the post mining stage, land would be restored as agriculture land and provided irrigation facilities from the mine void water for the same.

v.       The impact of implementation of R&R and CSR would be monitored by a survey once every 3 years or so. Independent third party evaluations of CSR and R&R implementation would also be carried out by sociologists/experts. Institution such as Xavier College would be involved to carry out the evaluation. The status of implementation of R&R and CSR would be uploaded on the company website.

vi.      Silo loading will be provided.

vii.     Comments of Chief Wildlife Warden, Jharkhand has been provided.

viii.     Forest land diversion would be completed within 5 years.

 

The Committee noted the details furnished and presented by the proponent on the aforesaid issues and stated that they would not require further consideration. However, the matter of forestry (Stage-I) clearance is still awaited and the EAC decided that the proposal would be further considered thereon.

 

 

11.     Wani Coal Washery (0.6 MTPA to 2 MTPA) of M/s Indo-Unique Flame Ltd., located in Plots No.33, 34, 35, 36, MIDC Industrial Area, dist. Yavatmal, Maharashtra (Further Internal consideration of EC based on TOR)

 

The project was considered in the EAC meeting held in May 2011. The details and specific commitments made on the information/clarification sought by the EAC in the May 2011 are given below:

 

·                A total of 8 mechanical sweepers would be provided.

·                Coal storage yard has been provided with 3 sprinklers for dust suppression.

·                In addition, 20 Rain jet will be provided for dust suppression. Additional rain jets will also be provided, if required.

·                In addition, 3-tier avenue plantation would be developed along vacant areas, near washery, storage yards, loading points and transfer points and along internal roads and main approach roads. About 3,000 plants have been already planted.

·                It was stated that since the unit is zero discharge washery, treated washery effluent will be used  for green belt development.

·             Settling ponds will be constructed.

·             Details of socio-economic activities to be undertaken have been furnished.

 

 The Committee after discussions on the aforesaid details furnished, recommended the project for EC.

               

 

12.    Talabira-I Coalmine Project (1.5 MTPA to 3 MTPA ) of M/s HINDALCO, located in village Khinda, Tehsil Rengali, dist. Sambalpur, Orissa (Further Internal consideration of EC based on TOR)

 

The project was considered in the EAC meeting held in April 2011. The details and specific commitments made on the information/clarification sought by the EAC in April 2011 meeting were discussed. The Committee desired that coal transportation by road over the balance life of project of 7 years could be reduced and the proponent could consider transportation by rail using Railway siding to be ready by 2013.

 

The Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance.

13.   Belpahar OCP (4.5 MTPA to 6 MTPA) of M/s Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., located in Ib Valley Coalfields, dist. Jharsuguda, Orissa (Further consideration of EC based on TOR)

 

The proposal was further considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 21st-22nd February 2011 on the issues/clarifications sought by the Committee. The proponent clarified that the project would work within the 6 MTPA production for which EC has been sought. Detailed exploration has been undertaken in the dip side beyond present lease area and for further expansion, it is proposed to go for integrated project of Lakhanpur OC expn. project and Belpahar OC Expn. The final mine void at the end of the project would be 60.05 ha area with a depth of 90m which will exist until the expansion project is taken up. The proponent informed that with regard to R&R involving Chharla and Darlipali villages, a total of 186 PAF’S of village Chharla are to be resettled of which 70 PAF’s have already been resettled. The balance 116 PAF’s are reluctant to shift and demanding employment of which 41 cases are under consideration under R&R policy of Govt. of Orissa. Of the 231 PAFs of village Darlipali, 55 PAFs have already been resettled and the balance 176PAF’s are reluctant to shift and demanding employment beyond R&R policy of Govt. of Orissa. It was informed that a monitoring–cum-co-ordination committee which includes State level officer and representatives of the MCL has been constituted. An amount of Rs 1930 lakhs has been proposed for the next 5 years and thereafter Rs 534 lakhs would be spent for the period of 2015-16 and beyond in consultation with the villagers. In addition, Rs 545 lakhs budgetary provision has been made for peripheral development activities to be taken within Belpahar municipality.

 

The Committee decided that even if dumping of flyash is part of the Environmental Action Plan for the Angul-Talcher Region, no dumping of flyash should be undertaken in the MCL mines without feasibility studies for flyash dumping and on soil leachability and prior approval of the MOEF. This is so not only for this coalmine but for all coalmines in Angul-Talcher Region. The Committee desired that fortnightly data should be displayed on company website as Talcher is critically polluted area under CEPI. The Committee desired that the depth of final mine void for the present project should be reduced to 30-35m. The Committee desired that MCL may like to contact M/s Singrani Collieries Company Ltd for addressing issues of R&R.

 

The Committee was of the view that in view of the magnitude of R&R and CSR issues involved in MCL projects, the company must engage sociologists and other professionals in not only the implementation of R&R but also CSR. Training, capacity building for alternate livelihood etc should also be addressed under R&R and CSR. The company must implement CSR through VDIC involving the representatives of the local villages, local administration such as the DC and the project representatives. The Committee desired that long term annuities should be provided to vulnerable people such as abandoned, old, stray person. A Status Report of R&R should be brought out every year in the Annual Report of the company along with other performance parameters including impacts of measures taken on the key socio-economic parameters and quality of life parameters. In addition, the Committee desired that Third party evaluation should be carried out on the impact of CSR activities through suitable institutions.

 

The Committee desired for specific commitments from the proponent on the aforesaid issues which would be further internally considered.

 

 

14.    Basundhara (West) OCP Expn. (2.4 MTPA to 8 MTPA) of Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., located in Ib Valley Coalfields, dist. Jharsuguda, Orissa (Further consideration of EC based on TOR)

 

The proposal was further considered on the issues/clarifications sought by the EAC in the meeting held on 21st -22nd February 2011. The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that a total of 19.55MT of coal and 25 Mm3 of OB would be generated over the balance three years. In regard to CSR, it was informed that a total Rs 2100.34 lakhs was spent on CSR activities  during the last three years, an amount of Rs 8.50 lakhs was spent on education, Rs 4.66 lakhs on health, Rs 23.01 for drinking water supply, Rs 2042.94 lakhs for roads, Rs 21.23 for other project development works. It was informed that an amount of Rs 16.86 crores has been earmarked for CSR for the balance life of mine for 3 years.

 

The Committee sought a Calendar Plan of production and OB generation which would be backfilled for the balance three years of the mine. The details of the final mine void/ mine closure should also be provided, which would be internally considered by the EAC. The Committee desired that Social Audit and Third Party evaluation should be got carried out for the projects through some good institution. The Committee also desired that a small CSR unit should be established at MCL and expertise of university in the area may be utilised.

 

The Committee desired for specific commitments from the proponent on the aforesaid issues which would be further internally considered.

 

 

15.     Samleshwari OCP Expn. (5 MTPA to 11 MTPA and expansion in ML area from 878.619 ha to 978.119 ha) of Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., located in Ib Valley Coalfields, dist. Jharsuguda, Orissa (Further consideration of EC based on TOR)

 

The project was considered in EAC held on 21-22 February 2011. The details/clarifications sought by the EAC were presented for further consideration. The proponent presented the calendar plan of production of 11 MT, 6.578 MT and 4.485 MT for the balance three years and an estimated 117.478 Mm3 of OB would be generated which would be entirely backfilled. It was informed that an application has been submitted for diversion of 21.866 ha of forestland for expansion of the project. It was informed that since the forest occurs in patches, it is difficult to delete the forest areas from the project. On the matter of status of R&R, it was informed that two villages involving 416 PAFs would be affected due to expansion of the project of which 184 PAFs require to be resettled and the balance 232 PAFs are land losers. Of these, 48 PAFs have been resettled (opted for cash compensation) and 136 PAFs are yet to be resettled and an R&R Action Plan has been prepared for their resettlement in Madhuband Nagar. The balance 232 families have been paid compensation. It was informed that a quarry area of 311 ha has been backfilled, and the balance area of 137.272 ha of quarry area would be concurrently backfilled. It was informed that Hirakund reservoir is located at a distance of 3.5 km away from the mine and mine is advancing towards the west and away from the reservoir towards the east and therefore mine seepage and flooding is not expected. It was informed that the diversion of Pandren Jore has been planned as per a study carried out on the feasibility of its diversion due to presence of reserves below and there would be no further realignment of the nala for the expansion project due to the presence of TATA Refractories Limited Colony. It was stated that stone pitching would be done on the slope of the embankment of the diversion canal along the river side. It was informed that since Samleshwari Expn. Project ahs a balance life of 3 years only, bulk loading may not be economical. However, the company would examine establishment of bulk loading during amalgamation of Lakhawar and Samleshwari OCP after completion of Samleshwari project. It was informed that “Heavy Duty truck “mounted sweeping machine (Mechanical sweeper) for sweeping the main transportation road has already been introduced. It was informed that in regard to condition for evaluation of health impact health of Samleshwari OC employees along with local inhabitants, ICMR has expressed its inability to undertake such a study.

 

The Committee sought a specific letter on the matter of presence of forestland supported by topo sheet maps to the MOEF for taking a decision on the matter. The Committee noted that as per decision were taken between two ministries in the meeting held on 28.02.2008 between MOC-MOEF at the Secretary level, participated by Chairman, Coal India Ltd. and the CMDs of all the Coal India subsidiaries regarding EC based on highest achievable production capacity would be prepared for taking into consideration the geo-mining and techno-economic issues. However, the EAC noted that the proponent, namely MCL has not prepared the EIA-EMP based on highest achievable production capacity for the existing project which has reached 11 MTPA within the existing ML area, despite an agreement between the MOC-MOEF in 2008 attended to by Chairman, Coal India Ltd. and CMDs of all the Coal India subsidiaries that all proposals prepared would be based on highest achievable production capacity and the project is operating in violation of the EIA Notification 2006. The Committee desired  that the company may contact a local Health Institute/hospitals for the periodic evaluation of the health of the workers.

 

The Committee after discussions decided that the proponent may undertake further action on the issues as per details furnished above. However, the proposal may be further considered on the basis of forestry clearance for the forestland in the expansion project.

 

 

 

16.     Gose OCP (2 MTPA with a peak capacity of 2.3 MTPA in an ML area of 442.52 ha) of M/s Central Coalfields Ltd., located in West Bokaro Coalfields, dist. Hazaribagh, Jharkhand (TOR)

 

The proposal is for opening a new opencast coalmine project of 2 MTPA (normative) with a peak production of 2.3 MTPA in an ML area of 442.52 ha. Gose block is located in South-Eastern part of the West Bokaro coal field adjacent to Kedla OCP. Of the total ML area, 101.50 ha is forestland and an additional 11.62 ha of forestland as safety zone, 251.14 ha is agricultural land and 78.26 ha is tenancy land. There are no ecologically sensitive areas such as National Parks, WL Sanctuaries, etc. The drainage of the block is controlled by River Bokaro and Jharna nala which flows across the ML north to South joins the river in the south. Jharna Nala requires to be diverted. Of the total ML area, 147.21 ha is for two quarries- I (48.55 ha) and II (108.66ha), 154.64 ha is for external OB dump, 15 ha is for infrastructure, 3,95 ha is for retaining wall and drain, 111.72 ha for safety zone. Of the total 2 MTPA, 0.65 MTPA will be mined from Quarry-I and 1.35 MTPA from Quarry-II. Opencast mining would be mechanised using shovel-dumper and Surface miner. OB dumping would be carried out 100m from the River. It was clarified that alternate area is not available for OB dumping, and an external dump is required even with staggering of mining in the two quarries - Quarry –I will be mined first at 0.65 MTPA and Quarry –II will be started at 1.35 MTPA, i.e. after 4th years of Quarry –I operation. It was informed that OB will be placed on dump-A with 5.64 Mm3 OB externally from 1st to 2nd year of mining operation. From 3rd to 12th year, 69.53 Mm3 OB would be stored in external Dump-B and from 13th to 20th year, 43.35 Mm3 OB would be dumped in the void of Quarry –I as Dump-C. Height of OB dump-A would be 40m with 21 ha area, dump ‘B’ height would be 90m with an area 85 ha and of, Dump ‘C’ would be 30m.

 

The Committee desired that the sequencing of mining in the two quarries should be such that the 90m OB dump is avoided or its height reduced. The Committee desired that various options to reduce external – both number of external dumps and dump height and area including the option of not brining in OB from Kedla OCP should be examined and presented again to the Committee. The Committee desired that an integrated coal evacuation system is required as neighbouring group of mines can be integrated by providing closed conveyor system upto washery/railway siding and a railway line should be established for transportation of washed coal. The Committee desired that a one season data for AAQ-Met (for the same season) should be generated as per the new NAQQM Notification and Met stations established using the wind rose and predominant wind direction.

 

The Committee decided to further consider the project for TOR after receipt of the aforesaid details.

 

 

17.    Simlong Opencast Expansion Project (2 MTPA normative and peak prodn. of 2.30 MTPA in an ML area 327.74 ha) of M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd., located in dist. Sahebganj, Jharkhand (TOR)

 

The proposal is for undertaking opencast mining in the mine taken over from pre-nationalisation of a production capacity of 2 MTPA (normative) with a peak production of 2.30 MTPA in an ML area of 327.74 ha. Of the total ML area, 84.57 ha is forest land, 39.96 ha is Govt. land and 155.97ha is tenancy land. Of the total ML area of 337.74 ha, 270ha for Quarry (including 81.19 ha forest land), 34.67 ha for External OB dump (including 3.38 ha forest land),  32.37 ha for mine infrastructure and rehabilitation site. All infrastructural facilities like power, railway siding, coal handling plant, roads, culverts and communications are to be created. About 84.37 ha forestland consisting mainly of scrub is to be diverted. Mining would mechanised by shovel-dumper and surface miner. Ultimate depth is 196m bgl. Quality of coal is power grade. It was informed that as the mine is surrounded by forestland at the periphery form 3 sides, and since the Forest Dept. has denied permission to store OB on forestland, the mine has been divided into two blocks and OB would be temporarily stored in mineralised area and re-handled. Quarry II will be open after backfilling of quarry –I and OB of quarry pit would be kept in Chuperbita area. Pit –I OB will be back filled in eastern side in Bara Ghaghri side and after extraction of coal, refilled. OB of pit II  would be kept in backfilled area of Pit –I reclaimed area and after completion OB will be backfilled in pit -II and there will be no void at the end of mining. Of the total OB generation of 137.80 Mm3, 66.70 Mm3 is from east part of the quarry and 71.10 Mm3 from the west part of the mine. Life of the mine is 26 years. Cost of CSR would be Rs 5/T of coal. R&R consists of 230 PAFs from 4 villages – Jhapani, Chhota, Ghaghri, Bara Ghaghri and Simlong. Cost of R&R Plan is Rs 674.50 lakhs. Cost of pollution control measures would be Rs 998 lakhs. Drainage of block is controlled by River Gumani – a perennial river flowing along the western boundary of the block. Damro nala flows along the south–western boundary of the block. Transport of coal is proposed from railway siding near Kumarour, adjacent to the existing MGR track connecting Rajmahal and Farakka STPS which is 46 Km away. NTPC, which is linkage to the mine, has planned to provide a dedicated rail infrastructure within 10 km of the project. Until it is established, coal transport would be by road during the initial three years. It is proposed to divert the Godda-Sahebganj road which passes thorugh the north–western part of block.

 

The Committee desired that coal evacuation should be dovetailed with NTPC’s proposed MGR   project. The Committee also desired that copy of application for Stage–I FC be provided.

 

Based on the application along with documents and presentation thereon and discussions held, the Committee prescribed the following TOR:

(i)                  An EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for 2 MTPA normative and peak prodn. of 2.30 MTPA in an ML area 327.74 ha based on the generic structure specified in Appendix III of the EIA Notification 2006.

(ii)                An EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for 2 MTPA normative and peak prodn. of 2.30 MTPA in an ML area 327.74 ha and cover the impacts and management plan for the project specific activities on the environment of the region, and the environmental quality – air, water, land, biotic community, etc. through collection of data and information, generation of data on impacts including prediction modelling for 2 MTPA normative and peak prodn. of 2.30 MTPA in an ML area 327.74 ha of coal production based on approval of project/Mining Plan for 2 MTPA normative and peak prodn. of 2.30 MTPA in an ML area 327.74 ha MTPA. Baseline data collection can be for any season except monsoon.

(iii)               A map specifying locations of the State, District and Project location.

(iv)              A Study area map of the core zone and 10km area of the buffer zone (1: 50,000 scale) clearly delineating the major topographical features such as the land use, surface drainage of rivers/streams/nalas/canals, locations of human habitations, major constructions including railways, roads, pipelines, major industries/mines and other polluting sources. In case of ecologically sensitive areas such as Biosphere Reserves/National Parks/WL Sanctuaries/ Elephant Reserves, forests (Reserved/Protected), migratory corridors of fauna, and areas where endangered fauna and plants of medicinal and economic importance found in the 15 km area of the buffer zone should be given.

(v)                Land use map (1: 50,000 scale) based on a recent satellite imagery of the study area may also be provided with explanatory note of the land use. Satellite imagery per se is not required.

(vi)              Map showing the core zone delineating the agricultural land (irrigated and unirrigated, uncultivable land (as defined in the revenue records), forest areas (as per records), along with other physical features such as water bodies, etc should be furnished.

(vii)             A contour map showing the area drainage of the core zone and 2-5 km of the buffer zone (where the water courses of the core zone ultimately join the major rivers/streams outside the lease/project area) should also be clearly indicated as a separate map.

 

(viii)           A detailed Site plan of the mine showing the various proposed break-up of the land for mining operations such as the quarry area, OB dumps, green belt, safety zone, buildings, infrastructure, CHP, ETP, Stockyard, township/colony (within and adjacent to the ML), undisturbed area and if any, in topography such as existing roads, drains/natural water bodies are to be left undisturbed along with any natural drainage adjoining the lease /project and modification of thereof in terms of construction of embankments/bunds, proposed diversion/rechannelling of the water courses, etc., approach roads, major haul roads, etc.

(ix)               In case of any proposed diversion of nallah/canal/river, the proposed route of diversion/modification of drainage and their realignment, construction of embankment etc. should also be shown on the map.

(x)                Similarly if the project involves diversion of any road/railway line passing through the ML/project area, the proposed route of diversion and its realignment should be shown.

(xi)               Break up of lease/project area as per different land uses and their stage of acquisition.

(xii)             Break-up of lease/project area as per mining operations.

(xiii)            Impact of changes in the land use due to the start of the projects if much of the land being acquired is agricultural land/forestland/grazing land.

(xiv)           Collection of one-season (non-monsoon) primary baseline data on environmental quality - air (PM10, PM2.5, SOx , NOx and heavy metals such as Hg, Pb, Cr, As, etc), noise, water (surface and groundwater), soil along with one-season met data coinciding with the same season for AAQ collection period.

(xv)             Map of the study area (1: 50, 000 scale) (core and buffer zone clearly delineating the location of various stations superimposed with location of habitats, other industries/mines, polluting sources. The number and location of the stations in both core zone and buffer zone should be selected on the basis of size of lease/project area, the proposed impacts in the downwind (air)/downstream (surface water)/groundwater regime (based on flow). One station should be in the upwind/upstream/non-impact/non-polluting area as a control station. The monitoring should be as per CPCB guidelines and parameters for water testing for both ground water and surface water as per ISI  standards and CPCB classification wherever applicable.

(xvi)           Study on the existing flora and fauna in the study area (10km) carried out by an institution of relevant discipline and the list of flora and fauna duly authenticated separately for the core and buffer zone and a statement clearly specifying whether the study area forms a part of the migratory corridor of any endangered fauna. If the study area has endangered flora and fauna, or if the area is occasionally visited or used as a habitat by Schedule-I fauna, or if the project falls within 15 km of an ecologically sensitive area, or used as a migratory corridor then a comprehensive Conservation Plan should be prepared and submitted with EIA-EMP Report and comments from the CWLW of the State Govt. also obtained and furnished.

(xvii)          Details of mineral reserves, geological status of the study are and the seams to be worked, ultimate working depth and progressive stage-wise working scheme until end of mine life should be reflected on the basis of the approved rated capacity and calendar plans of production from the approved Mining Plan. Geological maps and sections should be included. The progressive mine development and Conceptual Final Mine Closure Plan should also be shown in figures.

(xviii)        Details of mining methods, technology, equipment to be used, etc., rationale for selection of that technology and equipment proposed to be used vis-à-vis the potential impacts.

(xix)            Impact of mining on hydrology, modification of natural drainage, diversion and channelling of the existing rivers/water courses flowing though the ML and adjoining the lease/project and the impact on the existing users and impacts of mining operations thereon.

(xx)             Detailed water balance should be provided. The break up of water requirement for the various mine operations should be given separately.

(xxi)            Source of water for use in mine, sanction of the competent authority in the State Govt. and impacts vis-à-vis the competing users.

(xxii)          Impact of mining and water abstraction use in mine on the hydrogeology and groundwater regime within the core zone and 10 km buffer zone including long–term modelling studies on. Details of rainwater harvesting and measures for recharge of groundwater should be reflected in case there us a declining trend of groundwater availability and/or if the area falls within dark/grey zone.

(xxiii)         Impact of blasting, noise and vibrations.                   

(xxiv)        Impacts of mining on the AAQ, predictive modelling using the ISCST-3 (Revised) or latest model.

(xxv)          Impacts of mineral transportation – within and outside the lease/project along with flow-chart indicating the specific areas generating fugitive emissions. Impacts of transportation, handling, transfer of mineral and waste on air quality, generation of effluents from workshop, management plan for maintenance of HEMM, machinery, equipment. Details of various facilities to be provided in terms of parking, rest areas, canteen, and effluents/pollution load from these activities.

(xxvi)        Details of waste generation – OB, topsoil – as per the approved calendar programme, and their management shown in figures as well explanatory chapter with tables giving progressive development and mine closure plan, green belt development, backfilling programme and conceptual post mining land use. OB dump heights and terracing should based on slope stability studies with a max of 28o angle as the ultimate slope. Sections of dumps (ultimate) (both longitudinal and cross section) with relation to the adjacent area should be shown.

(xxvii)       Impact and management of wastes and issues of rehandling and backfilling and progressive mine closure and reclamation.

(xxviii)     Flow chart of water balance. Treatment of effluents from workshop, township, domestic wastewater, mine water discharge, etc. Details of STP in colony and ETP in mine. Recycling of water to the max. possible extent.

(xxix)         Occupational health issues. Baseline data on the health of the population in the impact zone and measures for occupational health and safety of the personnel and manpower for the mine.

(xxx)          Disaster Management Plan.

(xxxi)         Integrating in the Env. Management Plan with measures for minimising use of natural resources - water, land, energy, etc.

(xxxii)       Progressive Green belt and afforestation plan (both in text, figures as well as in tables prepared by MOEF) and selection of species (local) for the afforestation/plantation programme based on original survey/landuse.

(xxxiii)      Conceptual Final Mine Closure Plan, post mining land use and restoration of land/habitat to pre- mining. A Plan for the ecological restoration of the area post mining and for land use should be prepared with detailed cost provisions.

(xxxiv)     Including cost of EMP (capital and recurring) in the project cost and for progressive and final mine closure plan.

(xxxv)       Details of R&R.  Detailed project specific R&R Plan with data on the existing socio-economic status of the population (including tribals, SC/ST, BPL families)  found in the study area and broad plan for resettlement of the displaced population, site for the resettlement colony, alternate livelihood concerns/employment for the displaced people, civic and housing amenities being offered, etc and costs along with the schedule of the implementation of the R&R Plan.

(xxxvi)     Public Hearing should cover the details of notices issued in the newspaper, proceedings/minutes of public hearing, the points raised by the general public and commitments made by the proponent should be presented in a tabular form. If the Public Hearing is in the regional language, an authenticated English Translation of the same should be provided.

(xxxvii)  In built mechanism of self-monitoring of compliance of environmental regulations.

(xxxviii) Status of any litigations/ court cases filed/pending on the project.

(xxxix)  Submission of sample test analysis of:

Characteristics of coal - this includes grade of coal and other characteristics – ash, S and heavy metals including levels of Hg, As, Pb, Cr etc.

(xxxx) Copy of clearances/approvals – such as Forestry clearances, Mining Plan Approval, NOC from Flood and Irrigation Dept. (if req.), etc. wherever applicable.

 

The following general points should be noted:

(i)         All documents should be properly indexed, page numbered.

(ii)        Period/date of data collection should be clearly indicated.

(iii)       Authenticated English translation of all material provided in Regional languages.

(iv)       After the preparation of the draft EIA-EMP Report as per the aforesaid TOR, the proponent shall get the Public Hearing conducted as prescribed in the EIA Notification 2006 and take necessary action for obtaining environmental clearance under the provisions of the EIA Notification 2006.

(v)        The letter/application for EC should quote the MOEF file No. and also attach a copy of the letter prescribing the TOR.

(vi)       The copy of the letter received from the Ministry on the TOR prescribed for the project should be attached as an annexure to the final EIA-EMP Report.

(vii)      The final EIA-EMP report submitted to the Ministry must incorporate the issues in TOR and that raised in Public Hearing. The index of the final EIA-EMP report, must indicate the specific chapter and page no. of the EIA-EMP Report where the specific TOR prescribed by Ministry and the issue raised in the P.H. have been incorporated. Mining Questionnaire (posted on MOEF website) with all sections duly filled in shall also be submitted at the time of applying for EC.

(viii)      The aforesaid TOR has a validity of two years only.

 

The following additional points are also to be noted:

(i)                  Grant of TOR does not necessarily mean grant of EC.

(ii)                Grant of TOR/EC to the present project does not necessarily mean grant of TOR/EC to the captive/linked project.

(iii)               Grant of TOR/EC to the present project does not necessarily mean grant of approvals in other regulations such as the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 or the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

 

 

18.    Marki-Zari-Jamani-Adkoli Opencast Coalmine Project (1.0 MTPA in an ML area of 459.68 ha) of M/s Maharashtra State Mining Corp. Ltd., Adkoli, Paunar and Ganeshpur Khurd Village, Tehsil Jamani, Dist. Yavatmal, Maharashtra (TOR)

 

The proponent began a presentation. It was informed that MSMCL has entered into a joint venture with M/s Sunil HI Tech to develop and mine coal from Marki-Zari-Jamani-Adkoli Block.

 

The Committee desired that proponent furnish a copy of MOU between MSMCL with M/s Sunil HI Tech. The Committee also desired that a copy of accreditation of Sun-Hi Tech company along with all details of directors, their CV’S and MOA among all the partners of company. The Company further desired for details of MOU with M/s Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. for sharing of the coal vis-a-vis MOC Allocation letter of Coal block to M/s MSMCL. The Committee desired that PP should provide all the details in chronological order in the form of case book covering the following:

 

·                 Allocation of block to M/s Maharashtra State Mining Corp. Ltd.

·                 Decision of Board of MSMCL

·                 MOC Allocation letter and terms thereunder.

·                 Competitive bidding rules

·                 Copies of papers underlying the decision of allocation of block.

·         Process followed by MSMCL for choosing JVC and details of decisions by which M/s Sunil HI     

          Tech  has been selected.

·                 Status of registration of JVC.

·                 Copy of Memorandum of Association of JV should be registered under company Act.

·                 Agreement between M/s Maharashtra State Mining Corp. Ltd and M/s Sunil HI Tech

·                 Share holding agreement under the Companies Act between M/s Sunil HI Tech and M/s

          Jaiprakash Associates.

 

The Committee also noted that the maps furnished by the Consultant were not satisfactory as the land use details have not been provided despite the Instructions circulated to the proponent to this effect. The Committee after discussion decided to further consider the project after furnishing of the aforesaid details.

 

19.     Establishment of 5 MTPA Coal Washery of M/s Monnet Ispat & Energy Ltd., located at village Malibrahamani, Tehsil Chendipeda, Dist. Angul, Orissa (EC based on TOR granted on 23.03.2011)

 

The proponent explained that the proposal is to establish a new pit head coal washery  of 5 MTPA capacity in an area of 11.77 ha adjoining the linked 2x525 MW TPP in compliance of EC condition given for the TPP for use of washed coal of 34% ash content only in the TPP. The washery is being established through a Indo-Japan Collaboration with technical support from New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organisation (NEDO), Japan  for use of  Vari-Jig Auto Rejects Control System. The process to be used is a clean technology and would help in higher yield of clean coal (3% more) than conventional Batac Jig process technology. The Project will be implemented under “Green Aid Plan” formally promoted by the Ministry of Economy and Trade and Industry (METI) of Japan and the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Coal, GOI to support the efforts of India in addressing its energy and environmental related issues. It was informed that 5 MTPA of raw coal with an ash of about 44.6% which would yield 3.57 MTPA of clean coal with an ash content of 34 %  and the balance 1.43 MTPA of coal rejects would have a high ash content of 71% which would be utilised in the company’s FBC based TPP. The washery would receive raw coal of 5 MTPA from its two captive coal mines namely Utkal B2 and from Mandakini Coal Block. It was informed that the linked TPP and the two captive coal mines have obtained environmental clearance from the Ministry.

 

The total water requirement of the washery is an estimated 2400 m3/d which would be entirely met form the Utkal B2 and Mandakini Coalmines and transported by pipelines. There would no wastewater generated from the process and the plant would operate on zero-discharge, i.e., no water would be discharged outside the washery premises and water would be recycled back to the Plant operations or used in green belt development. The clean technology with Japanese collaboration to be used in this washery also envisages no slurry ponds unlike conventional wet process washeries and hence there is no pollution or waste generated from overflow of coal fines from slurry ponds.

 

It was stated that the washery would receive raw coal from two coal mines, namely Utkal B2 located at a distance of 4.4 km and from Mandakini Coal Block located at a distance of 22 km. The transportation of raw coal from Utkal B2 Coalmine to the washery would be by conveyors and by road from Mandakini Coalmine. It was stated that it is proposed to lay a closed conveyor from Mandakini within a period of 3 years. It was informed that the entire washed coal would be transported to the linked TPP by closed conveyors. Coal rejects would be sent to the company’s FBC based TPP in Raigarh by rail. The initial transportation upto railway siding, covering a distance of 12 km, would be by road. The proponent stated the levels of air quality parameters including PM10 and PM2.5 were within prescribed limits in the study area. However, as the washery is located in Chendipeda Tehsil which forms a part of the Critically Polluted Area of Angul-Talcher Region, it was stated that all mitigative measures at the washery and the linked TPP would be taken to keep the levels of air quality parameters well within limits.

 

The Committee noted that the project is a unique one under Indo-Japanese collaboration mode. It was noted that the washery’s boundary is common with that of the linked TPP and transport of clean coal to the TPP is by closed conveyors. The Committee desired that in addition to participation in the Regional Environmental Action Plan prepared and being implemented by the Orissa State Govt/ SPCB for Angul-Talcher, the company should also develop a 3-tier plantation using native species within the washery premises and along the approach roads and along transfer points, loading points, etc. The main approach roads should be black topped and all internal roads black topped or concreted. In addition, mist-type sprinkling arrangements should also be provided. The company should deploy mechanical sweepers along the main approach roads and all internal roads. The washery should operate on zero-discharge. No effluents from the washery shall be let into any of the surface water bodies such as nallahs/streams/drains. The Washery should be provided with a garland drain to carry/recycle the effluents generated from the washery operations and separate storm water drain. The Committee noted that in view that the washery is a pit-head washery to the linked TPP which has already obtained an EC and the two coalmines from where the raw coal is being obtained have also obtained an EC, and the washery is being established on a new pilot scale clean technology for reducing coal rejects and improving efficiency yielding a higher production of clean coal and a better efficiency of use of make-up water, the Committee after deliberations decided that the Public Hearing could be waived off, but CSR @Rs 5/T of coal should be spent annually on CSR activities.

 

The Committee after discussions recommended the project for environmental clearance.

 

 

Any Other Issue with the Permission of the Chair:

 

19.     Letter dated 08.06.2011 of M/s Radhikapur (West) Coal Mining Private Ltd. in regard to TOR granted dated 30.05.2011 with a condition No.  (xvii) Study on subsidence, measures for mitigation/prevention of subsidence, modelling subsidence prediction and its use during mine operation, safety issues.

 

The above cited project was considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 18th-19th April 2011 and TOR was granted on 30.05.2011. Director, MOEF informed that a letter no RWCMPL/3C/11-12/54 dated 8.6.2011 requesting for deletion of TOR Condition No. xvii for undertaking Subsidence Prediction Modelling, since underground coal mining would be taken up below pit floor of opencast mining. The proponent sought the deletion on the condition that there is a 60m wide area between the opencast and underground mining consisting of shale and sandstone. The underground mining would be taken up 60m below opencast mining. In view of that, the proponent has stated that there is no risk to the underground mining to the overlying opencast operations.

 

The Committee was of the view that OC mining over the underground mining would loosen up the earth and may therefore result in greater water permeability and less stability than a virgin area. The Committee in view of this, desired that Modelling Subsidence Prediction study should be carried out by the proponent as per the TOR condition No. xvii. .

 

                                                                                                   

20.     Letter dated 13.04.2011 of M/s SCCL regarding the matter of creation of mine voids of 30m depth at the post mining stage

 

A letter no.CMD/PD/H/439 dated 13.4.2011 has been received from M/s Singareni collieries Company Ltd. (SCCL) regarding restriction of final mine void to 35/45 m depth in the EC letters to 13 of their opencast coalmine projects. The proponent has requested that they should also be allowed to be involved in the study recommended by the EAC (T&C) vide minutes of the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 22nd -23rd November 2010 wherein it was decided that a Multi-disciplinary study funded by MOEF be carried out by expert from various institution on “Environment issues concerning creation of water bodies in decoaled void of coal mines at the post mining stage as part of Final Mine Closures”.

 

The Committee agreed for participation of SCCL in the aforesaid Study. The Committee also decided that the Study being multi-disciplinary in nature with disciplines such as ecology, environmental chemistry, mining engineering, and environmental biology and economics, would require the involvement of several institutions within the country having the relevant expertise. Alternately, an institution from international bidding may require to be identified and selectd. The Committee requested Prof. C.R.Babu to provide inputs in this regard which could be taken further by the MOEF.

 

 

 

21.     Director, MOEF circulated the MOEF Circular dated 08.06.2011 regarding “Applications received for prescribing TORs/grant of EC involving land claimed to be owned by different project proponents – procedure to be followed” and Circular dated 26.04.2011 regarding “Corporate Environmental Responsibility”, which are also available on the MOEF website www.envfor.nic.in/project clearances/environmental clearances, to the members of EAC (T&C) during the meeting for information.

 

 

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

*        *        *


Annexure-1

 

 

PARTICIPANTS IN 27th EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (THERMAL & COAL MINING) IN THE MEETING HELD ON 20th -21st June 2011 ON COAL SECTOR PROJECTS

 

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.       Shri V.P. Raja                                                                               Chairman

 

2.       Prof. C.R. Babu                                                                             Vice-Chairman

 

3.       Shri T.K. Dhar                                    ……                                        Member

 

4.       Shri J.L. Mehta                                                                             Member

 

5.       Prof. G.S. Roonwal                                                                        Member

 

6.       Dr. D.S. Attri, Scientist, IMD                                                             Member

 

7.       Dr. T. Chandini                                            ..                                  Scientist F MOEF

 

8.       Dr. Rubab Jaffer                                                                       Scientist B, MOEF

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Special Invitees:

 

1.       Shri R.K.Garg,  Advisor, Coal India Ltd. attended the meeting on both days.

 

2.       Shri Chandan Bhadury, Sr.Env. Engr.,                                 }          

R.O.Guwahati, Assam Pollution Control Board.                     }           Attended the meeting

3.       Shri Debashish Dey, Asst. Engr.,                                        }           on Items 5 and 6

Assam State Pollution Control Board, H.O. Guwahati – 21.    }


Annexure-2

 

PARTICIPANTS IN 27th MEETING OF EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (THERMAL & COAL MINING) HELD ON 20th -21st JUNE 2011 ON COAL MINING PROJECTS

 

 

1.       M/s Shree Nakoda Ispat Global Ltd.

          None appeared for the presentation.

 

2.       M/s Moira Madhujore Coal Ltd.

          1.      Shri Saket Agrawal, Director

          2.      Shri Subhash Agrawal

          3.      Shri B.S.Sinha

          4.      Shri J.Moitra

 

3.       M/s BALCO

          1.      Shri Gunjan Gupta, CEO

          2.      Shri B.K.Bhatia, GM (Mines Development)

          3.      Shri V.K.Sahai, Mining Consultant

          4.      Shri V.K.Bajaj, ACMM Consultant

          5.      Dr.Meeta Khilnani, Director, HCPL, Jodhpur

          6.      Shri R.K.Kher, Head, CSR

          7.      Shri P. Gir-cretu, Consultant

 

4.       M/s Steel Authority of India Ltd.

          1.      Shri P.C.Tibrewal, ED (Collieries), SAIL

          2.      Shri Ram Gopal, GM

          3.      Shri K.L. Srinivasa Rao, GM (Collieries)

          4.      Shri Arvind Kumar, DGM (CRMG), SAIL, Delhi

 

5.       M/s North East Coal Washery

          1.      Shri B.U.Uithe

          2.      Shri T. Drauti

          3.      Partner Shri Naresh Combi

 

6.       M/s Pride Coke Pvt. Ltd.

          1.      Shri Jagdesh TV

          2.      Shri Hemant Hanalthe

          3.      Shri Neeraj Sule

          4.      Shri Deepak Jai

 

7.       M/s Global Coal & Mining Pvt. Ltd.

          1.      Shri V.K.Sehgal, MD

          2.      Shri Randhi Singh, Sr. GM

          3.      Shri B.P.Chaudhary, Env.

          4.      Shri R.Bhambrey

          5.      Shri R. In

 

8.       M/s Western Coalfields Ltd.

          1.      Shri K.Chakravorty, GM (mines)

          2.      Shri A.C.Ray, GM (Env.)

 

9.       M/s Tubed Coal Mines Ltd.

          1.      Shri V.K.Kochhr, Tata Power

          2.      Shri P.Samanta, GM, TCML

          3.      Shri Shouvik Majumdar, GM, HIL

          4.      Shri Amit Jain, Tata Power

          5.      Shri PRS Mani, GM, HINDALCO

          6.      Shri Vinod K Verma, DGM, HINDALCO

          7.      Shri Abhishek Kumar, Asst. Mgr, HINDALCO

 

10.     M/s HINDALCO

          1.      Shri Shouvik Majumdar, GM, HIL

          2.      Shri PRS Mani, GM, HINDALCO

          3.      Shri Vinod K Verma, DGM, HINDALCO

          4.      Shri Om Prakash, HINDALCO

          5.      Shri N.K.Singh, Consultant

          6.      Shri Rajesh Kanungo, Consultant

 

11.     M/s Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd.

          1.      Shri A.K.Singh, Dir (Tech.)

          2.      Shri B.C.Tripathi, GM (Env.)

          3.      Shri B.N.Shukla, GM

          4.      Shri S.Chandra, GM (Ib Valley)

          5.      Shri R.P.Gupta, GM (Lakhanpur Area)

          6.      Shri A.K.Chakraborty, GM, CMPDI, Bhubaneshwar

          7.      Shri A.K.Samantaray, Sr.Mgr. (Env.)

          8.      Shri K.S.Ganapati, Chief Manager

          9.      Shri S.Jayadev

 

12.     M/s Central Coalfields Ltd.

          1.      Shri Sumit Ghosh, CGM (E&F)

          2.      Shri B.K.Sharma, Chief Manager (Env.)

          3.      Shri Dileep Rai, CMPDI

          4.      Shri V.K.rai, CMPDI

          5.      Shri U.S.Singh, Sr. Mgr.

 

13.     M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd.

          1.      Shri N.Kumar, Dir (Tech.)

          2.      Shri Rakesh Pandit

          3.      Shri B.N.Basu, CMPDI

          4.      Shri Anand Shekhar, CMPDI

 

14.     M/s Maharashtra State Mining Corp. Ltd.

          1.      Shri P.Y.Tembhase, GM (Oper.)

          2.      Shri M.N.Jha, Sunil Hi-Tech Eng.

          3.      Shri V.S.Bajaj

          4.      Shri A.D.Jaorkal

          5.      Shri S.K.Roy

          6.      Shri Anirban Paul

          7.     Shri M.S.Sandhu

          8.     Shri S.N.Chauela

          9.     Shri D.G.Garway, ANACON Lab, Consultant

 

15.     M/s Monnet Ispat & Energy Ltd.

          1.      Shri J.P.Lath

          2.      Shri K.S.Rao

          3.      Dr.A.M.Siddique, NEDO

          4.      Shri Rajesh Rana

 

____

 

Untitled Page