MINUTES OF 35th EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (EAC) (THERMAL & COAL MINING) MEETING HELD ON 17th-18th OCTOBER 2011 IN PARYAVARAN BHAWAN, CGO COMPLEX, LODI ROAD, NEW DELHI.

 

COAL MINING PROJECTS

The 35TH meeting of the reconstituted EAC (T &C) was held on 17th-18th October 2011 in of Paryavaran Bhawan, C.G.O Complex, New Delhi 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 33rd meeting of EAC (T&C) held on 26th-27th September 2011 was confirmed subject to the following corrections:

 

(i)     Item No. 3: Para 3, line 2, after the words, “after blasting”, the words “in coal extraction” is     added.

 

(ii)    Item 7, Para 2: 2nd last line: Introduce the sentence: “The Committee desired that the             proponents should come up with Phase 2 planning of the project within 2 years”.

 

(iii)   Item 14: Last line: Introduce the following sentence: “In view of the fact that 60% increase     in the proposed capacity, the Committee desired that the proponents get examined adequacy     and stability of the existing system and structurals for the extra load. The Committee also       desired for mechanised conveyors/solo railway wagon loading system.

 

(iv)   Item No. 15, introduce the following line: “Both Parties, namely M/s WCL and M/s       MAHAGENCO should be involved in Joint sampling at both ends and should be included in the          FSA.”

 

The agenda items were taken up as given below:

 

1.   Patherdih NLW (Non-Linked Washery) Coking Coal Washery (Grade IV) (Nominal capacity 5 MTPA and 6.5 MTPA peak) of M/s Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., located in village Patherdih, Jharia Coalfields, dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand (EC based on TOR granted on 23.09.2010)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the proposed Patherdih Coal Washery of 5 MTPA capacity (normative) and 6.5 MTPA (peak) is to be located near cluster X group of mines in a non-coal bearing area in south-east Jharia Coalfields. River Damodar is at the distance of 3.5 km. The washery is to be operated on “Build–Operate & Maintain“ (BOM) concept. The land of 12 ha area consisting of mainly agricultural land is in the possession of BCCL. No forestland is involved. Of the total area of 12 ha, 3.056ha is for washery plant/workshop/building, 2.85 ha is for stockyard for storing clean coal, and rejects, 0.25ha is for ETP, 1.2 ha is for roads, 0.25 ha  is for truck parking, 0.434 ha  for others (stores, security post, canteen, toilets, laboratory, car shed, electric sub-station, miscellaneous), 3.96 ha is for green belt, The capacity of the coal washery is 16,000 TPD. It was informed that raw coal with an average ash content of 42% would be obtained from Rajapur OCP (61%). The washery would produce metallurgical clean coal (1.12 MTPA) of 18+ 0.5% ash content for use in steel plants at Durgapur, Bokaro and Rourkela and power grade coal (2.58 MTPA) of an ash content of 39.93% for use in thermal coal for power generation and coal rejects of 1.3 MTPA of > 60% ash content to be utilised in an FBC based Thermal Power Plant. Raw coal and washed coal to be obtained by rail from Patherdih Railway Station. The washery is based on the concept of zero-discharge and is a closed water recovery circuit process. Technology to be used is Heavy Media Cyclone (wet process comprising crushing, screening, washing and handling). Make-up water requirement is 1950 m3/d. It was explained that water would be recovered by use of Filter Press. The slurry generated in slurry fines would be recovered and the decanted water would be re-circulated. Source of water is adjoining Jealgora mine near the washery. It was informed that the standby water supply arrangement shall be made from Damodar River. No groundwater is to be used. It is proposed to construct a 4000T capacity bunker below ground. Facility for one or two-day storage capacity for both clean coal and coal rejects is proposed. The washed coal (Clean coal and power grade coal are proposed to be transported by conveyor belt to adjoining Railway siding and wagon loading of washed coal – metallurgical and power grade is proposed through fast loading system consisting of hopper & surface bunker. The entire quantity of coal rejects and middling from the washery would be sent to powerhouses in Durgapur and Bokaro for FBC based TPP using existing rail network. Mechanised dust sweepers are to be deployed. Employment is to be given to local persons. Life of the project is 18 years but it may be extended up to 25- 35 years. Rs 85 lakhs (capital cost) and Rs 35 lakhs (revenue) is proposed for EMP. Capital cost of the project is Rs 75.62 Crores. Public Hearing was held on 02.06.2011. No R&R is involved. It was informed that the company is in process of selecting user of rejects by bidding and MOUs would be entered with for use of coal rejects by M/s Monnet Ispat & Energy Ltd., M/s India Bulls Power Ltd, M/s Adhunik Group of Industries M/s Gupta coal fields & washery, M/s Abhijit Industries were the bidders for purchasing rejects and Expression of Interest submitted by these company to BCCL.

 

The Committee desired that all storage areas should be covered as sheds as coal dust is hazardous to the health of workforce working in washery/area. Preventive measures should be taken for suppression of dust. The Committee decided that all transfer and conveyor system, chutes should be closed. There should be no fugitive emissions of fine coal particles form the washery operations and from transfer points. The Committee desired that a 50m width green belt should be developed with 3-tier plantation using a mix of species. The Committee desired that the people displaced under JAP requiring R&R should be given priority for employment and local people should be given preference for both skilled and unskilled jobs. Training/skill development should form a part of the CSR for providing employment. The Committee also desired that provision of treated drinking water supply to the people of nearby villages be taken up under CSR. The Committee desired that details of a long-term MOU for use of coal rejects in an FBC based TPP should be furnished for further consideration. The Committee also desired that details of activities proposed under CSR and budgetary provision thereof be furnished to Ministry.

 

 

2.       Installation of Pyrite Treatment Plant in Surkha (North) Lignite Mine Project (3 MTPA) of M/s Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd., located in village Surkha, Tehsil Ghogha, District Bhavnagar, Gujarat- Further consideration of Modification of EC granted on dated 07.05.2007

 

The proponent made a presentation. The proposal was considered in the EAC meeting held on 24th -25th January 2011 and the details/clarifications sought were further considered. It was informed that Surkha North Lignite Mine project was granted EC on 07.05.2007 and lignite production in Surkha (North) lignite mine at 3 MTPA rated capacity started in December 2008. However, pyrite nodules began to show up as impurities in lignite seams as intermittent bands to the extent of 4% which is an estimated 80,000 TPA, which is about 9T/600T of lignite (400T of pyrite/day), which required separation. Since a Pyrite Plant was not included in the EIA-EMP Report of earlier project as pyrite nodules did not show up in the GR  the present proposal is for obtaining MOEF approval for installation if a Pyrite Removal Plant and choosing an appropriate technology for pyrite removal. It was also stated that the friable, low size Sulphur has no market. Physical separation using gravity separation has been found to be difficult. Water usage (froth floatation) involves high consumption of water. The proponent informed that other use of options such as magnetic separator, vibrating separator, density gradient, electrostatic precipitators were explored and presented before committee. The proponent has after considering many technologies zeroed in on use of X-Ray for pyrite removal. The proposed Ardee Sort module in place of RAMDARS module is to replace the radiation generation source from radioscopic Ce137 to a energy X-ray generator without affecting the efficiency of process. It was explained that this has also been tried in another mine in Orissa and found to be successful. The proponent informed that multi–energy X-Ray generator requires type approval from BARC and AERB and submitted their application to AERB, and inspection and testing has been completed on 12.10.2011. The recovered pyrite would be transported by conveyors to storage site and is proposed to be used as raw material for various chemical and sulphuric acid industries, etc. The process of identifying potential users is on. It was stated that an addendum EIA/EMP addressing of impact and Management for handling and transfer of pyrites and for its end use to ministry is also on. Proponent also submitted a detailed Risk Assessment for the storage, loading and transfer of pyrite to product end users.

 

The Committee was of the considered view that X-Ray technology presented appeared to be an inappropriate technology. The Committee observed that both X–rays and Y-rays radiation are hazardous. The Committee was of the view that the proposed Ardee Sort module Technology would not be suitable due to its adverse impact on the environment as whole. The Committee desired that proponent may contact Dr R.N. Patra, CMD, Indian Rare Earths Ltd., Mumbai for further consultation on the matter. The Committee stated that the use of pyrite (FeS2) by manufacturers of sulphuric acid, fertilizers requires to be examined. The Committee decided that advance treatment using radio active technology is not required for such small quantity of separation of pyrite from lignite. The Committee desired that physical process for separation of pyrite from lignite would be preferable and should be adopted. The Committee was of the view that technologies such as density separation, gravity separation, etc need to be explored in greater detail. The Committee noted that ESP which requires grinding incurring high capital costs and use of bag filters may also not be suitable as lignite with 40-50% moisture and sticky fines may choke the bag filters and lignite dust may be emitted in ambient air. The Committee also suggested that the proponent may consult Dr. N.P.H.Padmanabhan, Ore Dressing Group, Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration and Research, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Neyveli Lignite Corp., and other such proponents of beneficiation plants who have adopted similar technology for separation of pyrite from lignite may be consulted on the above issue. The Committee observed that GMDC has outsourced scouting of appropriate technology to its consultants which is not advisable.

 

The Committee decided to further reconsider the project for modification of EC condition after receipt of the aforesaid details

 

 

3.       Bithnok Lignite Mine Project (2.1 MTPA) of M/s Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. to be located at Bithnok, District Bikaner, Rajasthan (Further consideration of EC based on TOR 13.04.2007)

 

The proposal is for opening a new Bithnok Lignite Mine Project (2.1 MTPA) of M/s Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. to be located at Bithnok, District Bikaner, Rajasthan. The proposal was last considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 18th -19th July 2011 and the details/clarifications sought by the EAC were further considered.

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that there are no surface water bodies of significance found in the area. It was informed that the area consists of a few 1st and 2nd order ephemeral streams. The average rainfall is 280mm. There are a few ephemeral streams outside the core zone, creating a series of depressions/natural water bodies which are seasonal in nature. There are ‘baowl’ type of ponds for people outside the ML which have a natural clayey layer which does not permit percolation of rainwater to lower layers. A conceptual plan for protection of drainage found in the area has been prepared. An estimated total of 7442 m3/year of rain water would be collected. The Committee was informed that the surface drains and the rain water bodies in the mine area would be re-coursed to the nearest inland depressions found/created to collect maximum rain water during active mining. Further, surface tanks and check dams would also be constructed at suitable locations in the study area with a view to augmenting the water availability. Surplus mine discharge water would be used for recharging the area. Soil and water quality study would be carried out before and after the monsoon in and around evaporation ponds. Kanker and Bentonite would be used for pond lining to prevent leakage. As per a study carried out by RSMML, pond leakage was found to be limited to 6 inches. It was stated that continuous monitoring of pond leakage would be carried out by collecting samples around the ponds. The proponent assured that there would zero discharge from the desalination plant. It was stated that an MOU would be entered with the suitable buyer for the sodium salts produced from the brine sludge both from the evaporation ponds and from the RO unit at the time of implementation of project. It was stated that salt generation from dewatering leading to brine sludge would be only after 4 years. An MOU will be entered thereafter. It was informed that brackish water left in mine void at the post mining stage would have TDS levels of 15,000 mg/l. Of the total ML area of 2658 ha, quarry area is 1135 ha of which the final pit would be 600 ha area with a depth of 200m. It was stated that the matter has been reviewed and it has been decided to reduce the final mine void to 130m depth. It was informed that a provision of Rs 140 lakhs as capital costs and Rs 5/T of lignite as revenue costs would be earmarked for CSR, and an additional Rs 30 lakhs for water conservation measures.

 

The Committee desired that natural ephemeral streams in core zone should be protected and preserved and the local inhabitants should be involved for storage of water. The Committee also desired that the “Badi” (ponds) should be created in project area. The Committee desired re-handling of OB at the last stage of mining so that the final mine void of 200m, which would be should be reduced to 130m depth, would be further reduced to 30m (i.e. backfilled to 170m depth). The 30m void being left as a water reservoir should be lined so that sweet water (rainwater) could be stored. The Committee also desired that the salt and brine sludge both generated from the evaporation ponds and from the RO unit should be sold and NLC should enter into an MOU with suitable buyers at the earliest. The Committee desired the original estimate for capital cost of Rs140 lakhs or @Rs 5/T of the net profits whichever is higher should be provided for CSR. The Committee desired that capital recurring cost for CSR should be Rs 70 lakhs and annual revenue expenditure of Rs 10 lakhs/year be provided for activities for the vulnerable section of society.

 

The Committee noted the plan to leave a void of 600ha of 200m depth in the post mining stage, as a water body of a depth of 130m leaving the top 70m of the void empty. The Committee further noted that the TDS levels of the water in the void would be very high in the range of 15,000mg/l and would be saline. The Committee desired that during the post-mining stage, the void should be backfilled completely and a void of 30m depth should be left in the decoaled area of 600 ha. The Committee also desired that the proponent should work out the option of backfilling the void of 600ha up to ground level so that no void would be left in post mining Stage. The Committee desired that the details of re-handling of OB, OB quantity to be backfilled, and calendar plan for backfilling should be provided. The Committee desired that the proponent should submit details of Final Closure Plan for further consideration.

 

 

4.  Lekhapani Opencast Coalmine Project (0.25 MTPA in an ML area of 235 ha) of North Eastern Coalfields of M/s Coal India Ltd., located in dist. Tinsukia, Assam? Further consideration of EC based on TOR)

 

The proposal is for opening a new Lekhapani Opencast Coalmine Project of 0.25 MTPA capacity in an ML area of 235 ha in North Eastern Coalfields of M/s Coal India Ltd. located in district Tinsukia, Assam. The proposal was earlier considered in the EAC (T&C) held on 22nd-23rd March 2010 and details/clarifications sought by the EAC were further considered.

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the entire mining area of 235 ha consists of forest land, of which 228.15 ha is Reserved Forest and 6.85 ha is Protected Forest but proposed as a Reserve Forest. The proposed project is located in south central part of Makum Coalfields in the Margherita Sub-Division of Tinsukia District, Assam. It was informed that forestry clearance for 235 ha is under process with the State Govt vide letter No. TPL.197/2002-03/193 dated 05.08.2011 of Deputy Commissioner, Tinsukia. It was informed that Dibru-Saikhowa National Park is about 65-70km from the ML. It was further stated by DFO, Digboi Division vide letter no 13/G-17/2417 dated 20.03.2010 that the Lekhapani project site is about 30km away from the Golai Elephant Corridor. The proponent informed that a team constituted by CCF, Assam comprising Conservator of Forests and Wildlife Tinsukia, Senior Wild Life Warden and DFO, Digboi division carried out site inspection on 08.07.2010 and submitted a report which states that the proposed site of diversion is part of Lekhapani RF under Digboi division and also falls in Dehing Patkai Elephant Reserve; however the proposal has been recommended on condition that CIL would deposit a Corpus Fund of Rs 2 Crores for Wild Life Conservation in Dehing-Patkai Elephant Reserve and Dibru-Saikhowa National Park. It was informed that CIL has undertaken to deposit Rs 2 crores vide its letter No. EMLR/2011/LKP OC/86 dated 30.06.2011 for WL Conservation Plan in Dehung-Patkai Elephant Reserve where the Makum Coalfields falls. It was stated that the preparation of the Wild Life Conservation Plan has been awarded to AARANYAK on 02.02.2011, which has suggested creation of a nursery for conserving bio-diversity of native species, water holes for wild life at strategic location, bird nest boxes in different locations, orchadium for orchids, butterfly garden or park, medicinal Plant garden to conserve gene pool, erection of check dams, measures to prevent and control soil erosion and sedimentation flow along rivers using embankments and erosion bridges, and also undertake regular monitoring of the  waters (surface and groundwater). The WL Conservation Plan also includes a back up plan for effectively dealing with straying of wild life animals, wild life rescue vehicle, constitution of crisis management team. It was stated that there are two neighbouring mines of NEC and a joint wild life monitoring team would be established under CSR.

 

It was informed that it is proposed to temporarily dump OB externally in Jhum land/Forest land for a period of 8 years. It was informed that the OB management plan provides for dumping of OB from Tikak Extn into Tikak OCP. Despite this, 45% of OB would be dumped in an external OB dump. At the end of mine life, the entire ML consisting of 235 ha forest area would be backfilled and there would be no external OB dump. Backfilling would begin in the 8th year and would continue till end of mining. No void would be left at the end of mining. It was informed that the entire coal transportation would be by rail from nearby railway siding. It was informed that a railway line goes upto Lekhapani and a proposal to extend the line upto Ledo has been made by converting the meter gauge line to broad gauge.

 

The Committee desired that the WL Plan ensures that the mine site be also used as a corridor/path for elephants/wild animals reported/straying into the area. The Committee also desired that a multi-disciplinary Environment Cell should be established experts in Ecology, Wildlife and Sociology. They should be involved in in-situ conservation. Activities under CSR could involve cultivation and processing of Monga silk, and local cottage/small industries should be encouraged for making products from indigenous materials available in the area. The Committee desired that the provision proposed for CSR amounting to Rs 276 lakhs should continue through the life of Lekhapani Opencast Coalmine Project and Tikak Extn. OCP. The Committee requested that the proponent pursue obtaining forestry clearance for the 235 ha forest land vide MOEF circular dated 9th September 2011.

 

The Committee after discussions recommended that a sub-committee consisting of Dr.C.R.Babu, Shri T.K.Dhar and Director, MOEF site would visit the two projects for recommending site specific environmental measures to be undertaken for the two projects for further consideration in the EAC.

 

 

 

5.      Tikak Extn. OCP (0.2 MTPA in ML area of 192 ha) of North-Eastern Coalfields of M/s Coal India Ltd., district Tinsukia, Assam (Further consideration of EC based on TOR granted on 23.05.2007)

 

The proposal was earlier considered in EAC meeting held on 26th-27th October 2010. The information sought by Committee has been presented. The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that of the entire Mining Area of 192 ha,72 ha is of forest land (Saleki Proposed Reserve Forest, Digboi division). The proposed project is located in north central part of Makum Coalfield in the Margherita Sub-Division of Tinsukia District, Assam. Ledo railway station is 3 km away from project site. Proponent informed that Forestry Clearance for 72 ha is under processing with State Govt as the same also reported by Deputy Commissioner, Tinsukia vide letter no TPL.197/2002-03/193 Dated 05.08.2011 and provided ‘NOC’ .The letter from DFO, Digboi Division vide letter no 13/G-17/2417 dated 20.03.2010 also reported that the Lekhapani proposed project site is 30 km away from Golai Elephant Corridor. The proponent also informed that team constituted by CCF, Assam comprising Conservator of Forests and Wildlife Tinsukia, Sr Wild Life Warden and DFO, Digboi division carried out site inspection on 08.07.2010 and submitted a report which states that the proposed site of diversion is part of Lekhapani RF under Digboi division and also falls in Dehing Patkai Elephant Reserve Proposal recommended on condition that CIL would deposit Corpus Fund of Rs 2 Crores for Wild Life Conservation in Dehing-Patkai Elephant Reserve and Dibru-Saikhowa National Park.CIL has undertaken to deposit Rs 2 crores vide its letter no.EMLR/2011/LKP OC/86 dated 30.06.2011. Preparation of Wild Life Conservation Plan has been awarded to AARANYAK on 02.02.2011which suggested nursery for conserving bio-diversity of native species, water holes for wild life at strategic location, Nest boxes for birds in different location, Orchadium for orchids, Butterfly garden or park, Medicinal Plant garden to preserve gene pool, erection of check dams, erosion and sedimentation control along rivers using embankment and erosion bridges, regular monitoring of water. Proponent proposed installing hoarding on wildlife conservation, back up plan for effective dealing with straying wild life animals, wild life rescue vehicle for nearest forest, constitution of crisis management team. Proponent informed that there are two neighbouring mines, joint wild life monitoring team under CSR.

 

The Committee after discussions recommended that a sub-committee consisting of Dr. C. R. Babu, Shri T. K. Dhar and Director, MOEF would site visit the two projects for recommending site specific environmental measures to be undertaken for the two projects for further consideration in the EAC.

 

 

6.  Thesgora Underground Coalmine Project of M/s Thesgora Coal Pvt. Ltd. dist. Chindwara, M.P. (further consideration of TOR)

 

The proposal was last considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 22nd -23rd March 2010, wherein the proposal was recommended TOR. However, TOR was not granted by MOEF, as a letter was received from the PCCF (WL), Govt. of M.P. stating that the Pench Coalfields form a part of the Pench-Satpura Tiger Corridor and as a result, all the proposals had been kept in abeyance until a formal report was received from National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA). After the receipt of the Final Report on the Tiger corridor from the Forest Wing of the MOEF in July 2011, the proposal was included in the agenda for consideration in the EAC meetings on July and August 2011, however, the proponent did not come for the meetings.

 

The proponent appeared before the Committee; however, the Committee decided to not consider the proposal as the copies of Form–I and pre-feasibility reports were not received by the EAC members. Director, MOEF also informed that the address given by the proponent also did not appear to be correct as no one could be contacted at the official address given. The Committee decided to defer consideration of the proposal.

 

 

7.       Mandla (North) Underground Coal Mining Project (1.5 MTPA) of M/s Jaiprakash Associates Ltd., Dist. Chindwara, M.P. (Further consideration of EC based on TOR granted on 18.03.2007 read with corrigendum dated 18.06.2008 and Modification of TOR dated 07.11.2008)

 

The proposal was considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 18th -19th July 2011 and the details/clarifications sought by the EAC were further considered.

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the feasibility of dumping OB from the tunnelling process of their mine (which is of 800m depth) into neighbouring mine void had been explored and the neighbouring Thesgora Opencast Mine of M/s WCL has been identified. However, permission of WCL needs to be obtained. It was stated that an amount of Rs 5/T of coal has been earmarked for revenue expenditure on CSR. It was also agreed to provide piped drinking water to the villagers under CSR. The proponent also agreed to contribute on proportionate basis, the amount required for Ecological-restoration Plan as estimated by the NTCA. It was also agreed that the colony will be located on non–forest land. The proponent agreed for establishing common facilities for bulk loading along with Mandla (S), Brahmpuri and Mandla (N) mines. It was informed that the Plan for Final Mine Closure would be implemented. It was informed that the proposal for stage–I forestry clearance is being considered in next FAC meeting for the 879 ha of forest land involved in the project.

 

The Committee desired that an MOU should be entered with M/s WCL for using the void of Thesgora OCP mine of M/s WCL for dumping of OB from Mandla (North). The Committee recommended the proposal for environmental clearance vide provisions of the MOEF Circular dated 09.09.2011.

8.  West Bokaro Opencast Expansion Coal Mine Project (7 MTPA to 9 MTPA in an ML area of 1740 ha) and Expansion of Washery from 2.9 MTPA to 4 MTPA of M/s Tata Steel Ltd., Dist. Ramgarh, Jharkhand (Further consideration of TOR)

 

The project was earlier considered in EAC meeting held on 29th-30th August 2011 and the clarifications sought by Committee were further considered.

 

The Proponent made the presentation. The details of mine development (existing) and proposed in the expansion project were presented on a top sheet/ land use map.

 

Forest land (906.83ha)

Notified Forest (596.9 ha)

GM (JJ) (309.93 ha)

Non-forestland (833.17 ha)

GM (526 ha)

Raiti (307.17 ha)

 

TOTAL

 

1740 ha

 

The mine is being presently operated in 3 blocks –SE, E, and AB in a combined area of 1411 ha. In addition, an area of 4.07 ha is also available for overland conveyor. NE block would be opened for the expansion project.

 

Name of Block

Quarry area (ha)

Land use of

Quarry Area

Infrastructure

(ha)

OB Dump

(ha)

NE

264

Forestland – 157.10

Non-forestland – 106.90

 

-

-

SE

300

Forestland – 249.90

Non-forestland – 50.1

 

5.82

-

E

231.27

Forestland  -222.24

Non-forestland -9.03

 

8.13

37

AB

615.73

Forestland – 218.94

Non-forestland – 396.79

 

10.73

82

TOTAL

1411

1411

 

24.68

 

Overland conveyor

(forestland)

-

-

4.07

 

 

TOTAL (ha)

 

1411

 

 

28.75

 

119

 

In addition, two external OB dumps of 37 ha for Block E and 82 ha for Block AB are located outside the ML and infrastructure of a combined area of 28.75 ha are also located outside the ML.

 

The proponent informed that the project also involves High Wall mining. It was stated that sequential mining and restoration would be undertaken in these quarries so that no external OB dump would be left and mine voids would be backfilled upto ground level. A temporary ext. OB dump of 60m would be created; however no external OB dumps would be left at end of mine life from operation of these 4 quarries. It was informed that Forestry clearance has been obtained for a total combined forestland of 633.31 ha. It was informed that Stage-II forestry clearance requires to be obtained for 4.07 ha after submitting the status under FRA 2006. The proposal for diversion of 222.24 ha of forest land is with MOEF, New Delhi. The details of compensatory afforestation sought by MOEF has been submitted to PCCF, Jharkhand. The proposal for diversion of 249.9 ha of forestland is with CCF, Central BBSR for site inspection. It was informed that diversion proposal for 154.72 ha of forestland is being submitted to DFO. It was informed that the area broken for 7 MTPA is 525ha, 119 ha for ext. OB dump and 45.62 ha for infrastructure. The area not broken (forestland and non forestland) is to be taken up for the 9 MTPA capacity expansion project of which 767.00ha and 4.07 ha of forest land shall be used.  The proponent submitted an R&R Action Plan for the balance 673 families.

 

The Committee desired that the proponent should carry out sequential mining and a mining plan prepared accordingly. The Committee also desired that Mine Closure Plan should also be submitted to MOC for approval. The Committee desired that the proponent work in the forestland for which permission had been given by Hon’ble High Court and approval by MOEF. The Committee desired that a calendar plan of production from all the quarries should be given along with programme of backfilling. The Committee noted that the details provided for the present project vis-à-vis  expansion project are not clear and sought details of the operational parameters, land use details, OB management, production, etc in a tabular form. The Committee suggested that experts in ecology/taxonomy be consulted for selecting native species found in the study area in reclamation and eco-restoration. The Committee sought details of Washery I and II, in terms of existing and proposed expansion and details of quantum of raw coal, clean coal, coal rejects in terms of quantity and ash content, details of technology, etc in tabular form. The Committee sought photographs of status and compliance of earlier EC

 

The Committee noted that details of land use of existing (7 MTPA) vis-à-vis expansion (9 MTPA) sought earlier should be furnished for record. The Committee after discussions recommended TOR with the aforesaid specific TOR conditions read with that given in Annexure- 3 and 4 and general conditions at Annexure-7.

 

 

9.       Expansion of Jamadoba Coal Washery (1 MTPA to 2 MTPA) of M/s Tata Steel Ltd., located in Jharia Coalfields, Dhanbad, Jharkhand  (TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. The proposal is for expansion of the existing Jamadoba Coking Coal Washery from 1 MTPA to 2 MTPA. It was informed that most of the 7ha area of the washery is agricultural land; no forestland is involved. The washery is at a distance of about 1km from River Damodar. Of the total 7ha area, 0.144 ha is for washery plant, 0.806 is for infrastructure CHP, storage area, dispatching, railway siding, conveying system, 0.25 ha for reservoir, 0.75 ha is for road, 1.90 ha is for pollution control, 3ha for ETP, tailing for slurry wastes, 0.08 ha is for green belt. The washery is a closed circuit washery and based on zero-discharge principle. The washery is wet process based on Dense Media Cyclone technology. Of the estimated 30270m3/month of water requirement, 30000 m3/month is for washery, 250 m3/month is for dust suppression and 20 m3/month is for green belt. Raw coal would be obtained from captive coalmines of Tata Steel and also from CIL mines in Jharia. Of the 2 MTPA raw coal of an average ash content of 30-32%, clean coalof 0.74 to 0.86 MTPA with an ash content of 17% would be produced which would be sent to their linked Steel Plant at Jamshedpur. The coal fines (tailings) of 0.24 to 0.36 MTPA with an ash content of 38-42% would be sold to end users and coal rejects of 0.16 to 0.24 MTPA with an ash content of 48-50% would be used in the company’s 10 MW Reject based TPP in Dhanbad. Flyash from the TPP is used in brick making. Raw coal would be transported through UG conveyors to an underground bunker and thereafter to a surface bunker to the washery and subsequently transported by rail to the steel plant. It was informed that the wet slurry is being stored in tailing ponds and about 30% of the slurry is being presently stored in 17 slurry ponds and the balance 70% of slurry is being re-circulated.

 

The Committee desired that use of new technologies such as Teetered Bed Separator which does not generate slurry and problems of slurry disposal should be explored instead of the conventional technologies currently in use. The Committee also desired that mitigative measures such as fog/mist sprinkling system at the crushing unit, and mobile sprinklers in public roads not owned by the company, and concreting/black topping of roads should be taken (including those not owned by the company under CSR) and mechanical sweeping of roads and development of 3-tier green belt should be included in the EMP to ensure that people are not exposed to coal dust. The washery operations should be mechanised to the extent possible to prevent fugitive dust emissions. Closed belt conveyors should be used for coal transportation. In addition, the sludge/slurry generated from the washery should not be released outside the washery. The Committee desired that the latest Photographs of existing project should be included in the EIA-EMP Report The Committee also desired that periodic check–up of workers employed in the washery area be undertaken. The Committee desired that the transportation roads should be black topped and mechanical sweepers used and mobile sprinklers should be provided. The Committee noted that the washery has a total of 17 settling tanks and desired that a reclamation plan for the 17 settling pond should be provided. The Committee desired that the proponent examine utilisation of slurry (coal fines after converting into cake) in an FBC plant.

 

The Committee after discussions recommended TOR with the inclusion of the aforesaid specific issues as specific conditions in the TOR read with generic TOR at Annexure 3 and general conditions at Annexure-7.

 

 

10.     Sijua Underground Coalmine Expansion Project of M/s Tata Steel Ltd (0.32 MTPA to 0.81 MTPA in an ML area of 278.1 ha) located in Jharia Coalfields, dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand (TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. The proposal is for expansion in production of coking coal from 0.32 MTPA to 0.81 MTPA in the existing Sijua Underground Coalmine in a total ML area of 278 ha. Of the total ML area  of 278.1ha, 4.45ha land is for office building, 22.23 ha is colony etc, 16.17 ha is settlements, 100.74 ha is under plantation and Park, 14.37 ha is for miscellaneous structures (tanks, drains, etc), 2.93 ha land is road, and the balance 78.59 ha is under agriculture. No forest land is involved. Underground mining is by Board & Pillar method with full depillaring with sand stowing. Ultimate working depth is 279m. The total water requirement is 800 gallons/month. No R&R is involved. River Damodar flows south of the ML. Transport of coal form the mine is by road to Bhelatand Coal Washery. It was informed that no change is planned in the expansion project on the present land use. It was stated that as the quality of coal is poor in coal seam IC and below with ash content of 33-35%, the colliery proposes to increase its production capacity to 0.61 MTPA of Run–of-Mine (ROM) coal by the year 2014-15 for making up the shortfall in yield of beneficiation coal of desired ash percentage required for Steel works. Production target for next 30 years would be achieved from development and depillaring panels of X, IXA, IX and VII seams. SDLs /LHDs would be utilised for loading the blasted coal on the chain/belt conveyor in underground. It was informed that the continuous miner may be introduced in the future if found suitable. It was stated that mine water collected in surface reservoir is used for sand stowing, dust suppression and domestic purposes. There would be no change in surface drainage. Suitable Pumping arrangement has been provided to enable mining through out the year.

 

The Committee desired that the proponent examine technological options such as replacing with continuous miners for maximum extraction of coal in an environment friendly manner and use of SDLs/LHDs only (instead of manual).

 

The Committee recommended TOR with the aforesaid specific conditions read with generic TOR at Annexure 5 and general conditions at Annexure-7.

 

 

11.     Modification of TOR granted to Cluster 1 (11 mines of a combined production of 1.172 MTPA with a peak capacity of 3.30 MTPA in a combined ML area of 3692 ha) of M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd., located in Raniganj Coalfields, dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand (TOR granted on 15.06.2011)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that in the earlier presentation made before the EAC (T&C) held on 19th April 2011, the company had proposed 11 mines in Cluster 1 consisting of 8 UG, 1 OC and 2 mixed (OC and UG) had been granted on 15.06.2011. However, after a review of the situation in Raniganj Coalfields, M/s ECL had re-examined the matter of extraction of coal from coal pillars at shallow depth (which cannot be mined by underground mining) by opencast mining in patches in 6 mines of the cluster for a limited period. It was stated that this would help reduce the extent of unstable areas, curb illegal mining and further formation of unstable areas, prevent fires, ensure safety of present UG workings and increase the output of the underground mines of the cluster. The proponent informed that the impact of this change in scenario of mining would be conversion of underground mines to mixed type of mine although there would be no change in the number of mines and combined area in the cluster. There would be small increase in peak production for a limited period. The Committee was informed that in view of this, the 11 mines grouped in Cluster 1 are now proposed to be mined in addition to the earlier 3 OC mines (Nirsha OC patch, Shampur OC patch, and Gopinathpur OC), 5 OC patches on UG mines - Chapapur-II OC Patch (14 ha), Khoodia UG & OC (18 ha), Lakhimata OC Patch (19 ha) and Kapasara (24 ha). The total leasehold area would remain 3692ha with a combined production capacity of 1.172 MTPA normative, however the peak capacity has been enhanced from 1.570 to 3.30 MTPA. By this proposed modification, about 5% of the total land use of Cluster 1 would change to OC mining. It was further informed that the quarried area of the OC patches would be backfilled completely and covered with top soil, and eco-restoration carried out in the excavated area.

 

            The details of the Cluster 1 mines are given below:

 MINES IN CLUSTER -1

 

 S.N

Name of Mine

Production capacity

(MTPA)

ML Area

(ha)

Life of Mine

 (years)

 

 

Normative

Peak

 

 

1

Hariajam UG

0.110

0.140

316

>25

2

Badjna UG

0.05

0.100

676

>25

3

Chapapur-II UG & OC*

1.01

1.06

480

>25

4.

Khoodia  UG & OC*

0.15

0.20

186

>25

5

Lakhimata UG& OC*

0.38

0.50

217

>25

6.

Shampur-B UG& OC *

0.24

0.30

368

>25

7

Mandman  UG

0.07

0.10

345

>25

8.

Nirsha OC patch

0.09

0.10

147

11

9.

Shampur-A UG & OC Patch

0.17

0.22

491

>25

10.

Gopinathpur UG & OC Patch

0.15

0.20

157

>25

11.

Kapasara UG & OC*

0.26

0.38

309

>25

 

 

Total

 

2.70

 

3.30

 

3692

 

 *         Mines changed from UG to mixed type due to proposed OC operation within the lease hold area.

 

 

Changes proposed to Cluster-1

 

Parameter

Previosus Appl.

Proposed Appl.

Remarks

No of mines and their lease hold area

11

11

No Change

Total area of cluster (ha)

3692

3692

No Change

No. of proposed new patches (OC)

-

-

5 additional OC area: Chapapur-II OC Patch, Khoodia OC Patch, Lakhimata OC Patch, Shampur OC patch and Kapasara OC patch

Peak Production

1.57 MTPA

3.30 MTPA

(including patches)

 

It is proposed to have OC mining in patches in 6 mines of the cluster for a limited period details are given below. As a result, the max. production from the cluster would increase from 1.57 MTPA to 3.30 MTPA for a limited period of 1-8 years.The details are given below.

 

 

Present Proposal to operate OC Patch/mine within lease hold area of UG mines

 

Name of mine

Area in ha

Mineable reserves

OB  to be

generated

(Mm3)

Normative Production capacity (MTPA)

Peak Production capacity

(MTPA)

Life in years

Chapapur-II OC Patch,

14.0

0.86

2.4

0.86

0.86

1

Khoodia OC Patch

18.0

0.125

3.4

0.01

0.10

1

Lakhimata OC Patch,

19.0

2.24

9.30

0.30

0.40

8

Shampur-B(Sangamahal  OC Patch)

33.0

0.4

2.2

0.15

0.20

3

Kapasara OC Patch

24.0

0.8

5.5

0.16

0.23

5

 

The Committee observed that the rationale for inclusion of 11 mines in one cluster requires to be clearly brought out. The Committee also desired that adequate number of monitoring stations are required for collection of one-season baseline data for the entire cluster of mines. The Committee desired that the upper seams should be mined out within 1-2 years and immediately reclaimed thereafter. The Committee also recommended Public Hearing on the EIA-EMP prepared for the entire cluster with the aforesaid modifications. The Committee desired that the upper seams should be mined out by opencast method within 1-2 years and reclaimed immediately thereafter.

 

The Committee recommended modification in the TOR granted as given above.

 

 

12.     Cluster 9 (15 mines of 6.25 MTPA with a peak prodn. of 8 MTPA in a combined ML area of 7145.4 ha) of M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd., located in Raniganj Coalfields, Dist. Burdwan, West Bengal (TOR granted on 19.05.2011)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the aforesaid cluster of 15 mines consisting of  only UG mines was granted TOR on 19.05.2011 with a normative production of 3 MTPA and a peak production of 4.5 MTPA. However, with a view to controlling illegal mining spread across Raniganj Coalfields which poses a threat to present UG workings, ECL has proposed to undertake extraction of coal in old workings in shallow depths and sites of illegal mining in 14 mines of the 15 mines in Cluster 9 by opencast method using shovel dumper combination, with a combined area of 378 ha (which is about 5% of the total combined ML area) for a total mineable reserves of 9.32 MT for a limited period of 1-5 years, which would reduce unstable areas, curb illegal mining and further formation of unstable areas, prevent fires, ensure safety of present UG working and increase output of the underground mines. This proposed change would result in a increase in normative production from 3 MTPA to 6.25 MTPA and peak production from 4 MTPA to 8 MTPA. It was informed that the quarried area would be backfilled completely and covered with top soil, eco-restoration would be done in excavated area. It was stated that the total combined ML area is 7145.4 ha which remains unchanged, however the production capacity has been enhanced from 3 MTPA to 6.25 normative and from 4 MTPA to 8 MTPA (peak) as given below:

 

 

 

 

STATUS

S.N.

MINES IN CLUSTER -9

 

Name of Mine

Production capacity (MTPA)

ML area (ha)

Life of Mine (years)

Normative

Peak

Working Mines

1

Ratibati UG

0.09

0.12

249

40

2

Chapuikhas UG&OC*

0.20

0.21

412

>50

3

Amritnagar UG1

1.14

1.14

279

>30

4.

Tirat UG

0.06

0.08

214.5

>10

5

Kuardih UG&OC*

0.35

0.47

615

>10

6.

Nimcha UG&OC*

0.71

0.80

890.2

>50

7

Ghusick UG

0.05

0.10

376

>50

8.

Kalipahari UG&OC*

0.66

0.82

299.5

>50

9.

Muslia UG&OC*

0.44

0.60

948

>50

10.

New Ghusick UG

0.04

0.05

224

>40

11.

Jemehari UG

0.03

0.04

118

>10

12.

JKNagar2UG&OC*

1.03

1.65

1237

>30

13.

Damra UG

0.04

0.06

249

>10

14.

Mahabir UG&OC*

0.87

1.33

241.2

>25

New project

15.

Narainkuri UG3

0.54

0.54

793

>25

TOTAL

6.25

8.0

7145.4

 

 

·         1&2 Mines having EC

·         3 New Projects

*         7 Mines have changed from UG to mixed type within the lease hold.

 

CHANGED PROPOSED TO  CLUSTER -9

Cluster Feature

Previous Application

Proposed revision

Remarks

No of mines and their lease hold area

15

15

No Change

Total area of cluster

7145 ha

7145 ha

No Change

No. of proposed new patches

nil

14

as table below

Peak Production

4.0 MTPA

8.0MTPA

(including patches)

Till Patches exhausted

 

Modified Proposal to operate OC Patch/mine within lease hold area of UG mines in

CLUSTER -9

 

 

Name of mine

Area

in ha

Mineable reserves

OB  to be

generated

(Mm3)

Normative Production capacity

(MTPA)

Peak Production capacity

(MTPA)

Life in years

1

Ratibati UG

No Opencast operation

0.09

0.12

 

2

Chapuikhas OC patch *

7

0.15

1.8

0.15

0.15

1

3

KuardiOC patch *

20

0.6

3.6

0.30

0.40

2

4

Damalia OC patch in Nimcha UG

5

0.40

1.7

0.40

0.40

1

5

Kalipahari OC patch-A

24

0.32

2.16

0.16

0.22

2

6

Kalipahari OC patch-B

20

0.30

2.00

0.15

0.20

2

7

Kalipahari OC patch-C

10

0.15

1.05

0.15

0.15

1

8

Kalipahari OC patch-D

10

0.15

1.05

0.15

0.15

1

9

Muslia OC patch

140

1.76

21.0

0.40

0.55

5

10

JKNagar OC patch

21

1.0

3.6

0.30

0.40

3

11

Pure Seasole OC Patch

8

0.12

0.90

0.12

0.12

1

12

Mallick Basti OCPatch

8

0.26

0.92

0.26

0.26

1

13

Mahabir OC patch 

26

1.50

6.0

0.20

0.40

4

14

Narainkuri OC Patch

60

1.51

6.8

0.40

0.55

4

15

Egara OC Patch

19

1.1

4.4

0.25

0.35

5

 

It was clarified that no underground mining within the statutory 60m area from River Damodar would be undertaken.

 

The Committee observed that the rationale for inclusion of 15 mines in one cluster requires to be clearly brought out. The Committee also desired that adequate number of monitoring stations be provided for collection of one-season baseline data for the entire cluster of mines. The Committee desired that the upper seams should be mined out within 1-2 year and immediately reclaimed thereafter. The Committee also recommended Public Hearing on the EIA-EMP prepared for the entire cluster with the aforesaid modifications. The Committee recommended modification of the TOR granted to Cluster 9 on the above basis.

 

 

 

13.     Modification of TOR granted to Cluster 12 comprising of 19 mines of a combined prod. capacity of 27.16 MTPA with a peak production of 31.83 MTPA in a combined ML area of 13167 ha of M/s ECL, located in Raniganj Coalfields, in Tehsil Haripur Block, dist. Burdwan, West Bengal - TOR granted on 15.06.2011

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that TOR was considered in meeting held on 18th -19th April 2011 and TOR was granted on 15.06.2011 to Cluster 12 group of 17 mines. However, in view of the fact that old and illegal mining are spread across Raniganj Coalfields and pose threat to present UG workings and that coal pillars at shallow depth cannot be mined by underground mining, it has been proposed to undertake OC mining in selected areas/patches in 6 UG mines in the cluster, - Pandaveswar OC (170 ha), Madhaipur OC patch ( 64 ha), Samla OC Patch (146 ha), Kumardih B OC Patch (8 ha), Bankola OC Patch (7 ha), Kumardihi A OC patch (8 ha)- of a combined opencast mining of 403 ha varying from 1-5 years, which would reduce unstable areas, curb illegal mining and further formation of unstable areas, prevent fires, ensure safety of present UG working and increase the output of coal production in the underground mines. The proposal has also included inclusion of 2 new UG mines – (i) Madhiapur Extension/Rangamati B UGP and (ii) Manderboni Extension/Rangamati A UGP in the cluster increasing the number from 17 to 19. The total combined ML area has also been revised from 11,164 ha to 13,167 ha and a total combined production capacity of 31.83 MTPA with a peak production of 32.289 MTPA in a combined ML area of 13167 ha. Of the 19 mines, 9 mines have been granted EC. In addition, the revised proposal has also included establishment of a new Sonepur Bazasri Coal Washery (8 MTPA) in Sonepur Bazari OCP. Sonepur Bazari OCP has been granted EC.

 

S.no

MINES IN CLUSTER -12

 

 

Name of Mine

Production capacity

(MTPA)

ML Area

(ha)

Life of Mine

(years)

Normative

Peak

 

 

1

Pandaveswar UG& OC

1.34

1.68

483

>25

2

Dalurband OC &  UG

0.25

0.33

902

>25

3

Manderboni UG

0.13

0.17

467

>25

4.

South Samla UG& OC

1.08

1.41

558

>25

5

Madhaipur UG& OC

0.76

1.01

662

>25

6.

Nutandanga UG

0.10

0.12

543

>25

7

Kendra UG

0.06

0.10

459

>25

8.

Samla UG& OC

0.70

0.92

676

>25

9.

Sonepur Bazari OC & integrated Coal washery (8.0 MTY, 15 ha)

8.00

8.00

2405

>25

10.

Kumardihi B UG& OC

1.84

2.60

355

>25

11.

Nakrakonda UG

0.90

1.20

287

>25

12.

Jhanjra UG Expn proposed

3.50

3.50

1520

>25

13.

Tilaboni UG Expn proposed

1.86

2.14

869

>25

14.

Shyamsundrpur UG

0.50

0.90

533

>25

15.

Bankola UG& OC

0.60

0.83

830

>25

16.

Kottadih OC &  UG

3.00

4.00

770

>25

17.

Kumardihi A UG& OC

1.20

1.46

457

>25

18

Manderboni Extension /Rangamati A UGP

0.855

0.983

817

>25

19

Madaipur Extension /Rangamati A UGP

0,.48

0.48

494

>25

 

 

Total

 

27.16

31.83

 

 

13167

 

 

 

 

CHANGED PROPOSED TO  CLUSTER -12

 

 

Cluster Feature

 

Previous Application

 

Proposed revision

 

Remarks

No of mines and their lease hold area

17

(14UG+1OC+2Mixed-all new UG

19

(14 UG+1OC+2MIXED+2 New UG

2 new UG mines Manderboni Extension /Rangamati A UGP***and Madaipur Extension /Rangamati A UGP*** added

Total area of cluster

11164  ha

13167ha

Additional area (Jhanjra UG Expn proposed(259ha)Tilaboni(433 ha) Rangamati A UGP(817 ha) Rangamati B(494 HA)-all additional area

No. of proposed new patches

3

8

as table below

Peak Production

25.75MTPA

31.83 MTPA

(including patches)

Integrated CW at Sonepur Bazari OCP

 

Revised Land use in Cluster- 12 

Modified Proposal to operate OC Patches/mine within lease hold area of UG mines in Cluster -12

Name of mine

Area in ha

Mineable reserves

OB  to be

generated

(Mm3)

Normative Production capacity

Peak Production capacity

Life in years

Pandaveswar UG& OC

170

7.1

81.0

1.20

1.50

6

Purushotampur patch in South Samla UG

66

4.0

38.0

1.00

1.30

4

Samla UG

 

146

2.9

20.3

0.60

0.80

5

Nakrakonda OC

 

127

4.83

26.0

1.00

1.50

1

Kumardihi B OC Patch

8

0.4

1.6

0.10

0.14

4

Nakrakonda Extension OC Patch

27

0.54

5.5

0.54

0.54

1

Bankola OC Patch

 

7

0.4

1.25

0.20

0.26

2

Kumardihi AOC patch

8

0.6

2.0

0.20

0.26

3

 

It was also informed that a Coal washery of 8 MTPA capacity is proposed to be established in 15 ha area consisting mainly of agricultural land (no forestland is involved), within the leasehold of Sonepur Bazari OCP to produce washed coal with an ash content of 14.5+0.5% for coal dust injection in the Steel sector. The washery would be closed circuit washery based on the concept of zero discharge and based on wet process using Dense Media Cyclone. Raw coal (8 MTPA) would be obtained from Sonepur Bazari OCP with an average ash content of 24% which would yield clean coal of 5.10 MTPA with an ash content of 14.5 + and the balance 2.90 MTPA of coal rejects with an ash content 42.2 % would be used in a 10MW Reject-based TPP. Life of the project is 30 years.

 

The Committee observed that the rationale for inclusion of 19 mines in one cluster is not clear and is required to be clearly brought out in the EIA-EMP report for their inclusion for an integrated approach. The Committee also desired that adequate number of monitoring stations are required for collection of one-season baseline data for the entire cluster of mines. The Committee desired that the upper seams should be mined out within 1-2 year and immediately reclaimed thereafter. The Committee also recommended Public Hearing on the EIA-EMP prepared for the entire cluster with the aforesaid modifications.

 

The Committee recommended modification of the TOR granted to Cluster 12 on the above basis.

 

 

14.     Bina (Extn.) Opencast Project Coal Mine Project (expansion in production from 6 to 7.5 MTPA in an ML area of 1798 ha) of M/s Northern Coalfields Ltd. (NCL), located in district Sonebhadra, Uttar Pradesh (TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. Bina is located in Moher basin of Singrauli Coalfields and falls partly in Singrauli Dist, M.P. and partly in Sonebhadra, Dist. U.P. It was informed that the proposal is for expansion in production from 6 MTPA to 7.5 MTPA in 1798 ha. EC for 6 MTPA was obtained on 02.08.2006. The extension project involved 400 ha of additional unbroken area within the ML to be broken of which 379 ha is forestland. All the land has been acquired. Forestry clearance has been obtained and copies of FC have been furnished to the Ministry. The proposal does not involve requirement of additional land and there is no change in operational parameters and land use, drainage and other project parameters. The increase in production would be achieved by increasing the efficiency of HEMM and working days from 330 to 360 days. Of the total ML area of 1798, mining is being carried out in 1349 ha and the extension area is 449 ha. Of the total ML area of 1798 ha, 1257 ha is forestland (875 ha is in UP and 382 ha is in MP), 28 ha is Govt. land and 513 ha is tenancy land (496 ha is in UP and 17 ha is in MP). The main linkage is Anpara & Obra TPS.  Of the total ML area of 1798 ha, 814 ha is quarry area, 65 ha is for external dump. OB removal is by using dragline and shovel-dumper combination. It was stated that OB removal has been outsourced. Ultimate working depth is 250m. The OB dump would increase from 420m RL to 435m RL (300m dump). Final depth of water body would be 30m. Grade of coal is E. Mining Plan approved on 13.02.2010. Water is drawn from Govind Ballab Pant Sagar Reservoir and sanction of the U.P. State Govt. was obtained on 13.03.1979. Additional water requirement for the expansion project would be met form mine pit/recycled water. R&R of 38 PAFs has been completed. The project may be amalgamated in the future, with Kakri Opencast Coalmine Project. It was informed that a lagoon has been created for arresting the silt load from the project and only the clear water is channelled out of the ML. It was stated that Bina OCP has an integrated Coal Washery.

 

The Committee noted that the project falls in the Critically Polluted Area of Singrauli. The Committee observed that a large number of opencast mines are in operation in Singrauli and the run off from these mines are contributing to the siltation load of GB Sagar reservoir. The Committee observed that the lagoon would not be sufficient as mitigative measure to prevent/control run off of silt from mines. A detailed Area Drainage Study on the magnitude of the opencast operation of NCL mines and the cumulative impacts of mine operation on the siltation of GBS Reservoir requires to be studied through a specialised agency such as the Central Soil and Water Conservation Research Institute, Dehradun. The study should also consider the cumulative impacts of a large number of opencast mines of NCL on GBS Reservoir. The Committee sought details of the water quality of the lagoon. The Committee desired that an Integrated OB Management Plan needs to be drawn for the NCL mines. The Plan for the prevention and control of siltation in GBP Sagar and other water reservoirs should include measures such as (i) extensive plantation on existing OB dumps, (ii) providing Gabbion walls, (iii) engagement of some experts team to study the slope stability and prevent further percolation/siltation. A Study also needs to be conducted on the safety and stabilisation of OB dumps. The Committee desired that sequential backfilling involving groups of mines should be considered and stated that ecological restoration by using native species as required to blend the reclamation/eco-restoration of mined out areas with natural landscape and with the pre-mining ecosystem. The Committee desired that at the post-mining stage the water body left in the decoaled void should not exceed 30m in depth. The Committee desired an Environmental Cell/Panel of experts – Soil scientist, hydrologist, ecologist, sociologist be created. The Committee desired conduct of fresh Public Hearing vide provisions of EIA Notification 2006. The Committee sought complete details of compliance of earlier EC along with photographs.

 

The Committee recommended the project for TOR with the aforesaid specific conditions read with the generic TOR given in Annexure 4 and general conditions at Annexure-7.

 

 

15.     Talaipalli Coalmine (OC at 18 MTPA capacity and UG at 0.72 MTPA capacity of a total project area of 2349.35 ha) of M/s NTPC located in Tehsil Gharghoda, district Raigarh, Chhattisgrah (Further consideration of EC based on TOR granted on 29.11.2009)

 

The proposal was considered earlier in EAC (T&C) meeting held on 19.07.2010.The Committee sought clarification on the issues, which were further considered.

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was stated that the coalmine would meet 4000 MW of power production at 97.5 PLF. It was informed that Kurra nala is a seasonal nala originating from the northern side of the block and passes through the block and Joins River Kelo. It was informed that a detailed Area Drainage Study comprising run off characterization, flood frequency analysis, etc has been carried out. Based on the study, the diversion channel has been designed taking into consideration the realignment of the channel with the River to its original path. It was informed that the Channel Diversion Plan has been submitted to the Flood & Irrigation Dept., Govt. of Chhattisgarh. With regard to EAC’s suggestion for not taking up opencast mining in and near forest area towards River Kelo, it was informed that the study carried has indicated that exposure of coal seam left out would be prone to catching fire. Seam IV would yield about 18 MT from OC mining. Seam IV has 17% of the total reserves and mining it by UG method would yield only 30-40% of high grade coal. Further, the reduction in strike length would decrease the mine capacity and coal would be blocked due to greater/higher depth and delay the process of internal dumping. This would lead to a potential loss of about 65 MT of total reserves of Grade D & E, which would result in a loss of 800 MW of power generation from the linked Lara TPP. The OB requires storing in a temporary external dump and re-handling the same would increases the cost. In addition, not disturbing the forest area towards Kelo River also requires revision of Mining Plan which has been approved. With regard to EAC’s advice of reworking the OB dumping in 1400 ha of backfilled area, 60m above ground level, it was informed that there would be no permanent external dump outside the coal block. During the initial years, 264.52 Mm3 of OB would be temporarily accommodated in temporary external dumps in mineralised area within the mine lease, which would be re-handled in 446 ha of land, so land acquisition of 446 ha of land for ext. OB dump is not required. It was informed that 80 ha in an isolated patch during 1-4 years in ext. OB dump would be rehandled back into the mine void as internal dump. It was informed that the height of the internal OB dump would be about 60m above ground level. Of the total ML area of 2079.34 ha, 1848.38 ha would be simultaneously backfilled and reclaimed with plantation and the balance 230.90 ha would be left as a void. It was informed that the mining of Seam IV by UG mining was re-examined to reduce the total generation of OB. The proponent informed that the underground mining is risky in seam IV due to less partings and only 40-45% high grade coal would be extracted and hence OC mining is the preferred option. It was informed that a detailed hydrological study of the area has been carried out and the falls under “Safe Category” as far as ground water development is concerned. It was informed that confined aquifer is at the depth of 200m. It was stated that water harvesting measures and monitoring of ground water and surface waters would be carried out.  It was informed that a Conservation Plan for endangered wildlife of the area was drawn and submitted to the State Government. The Wild life conservation plan includes provision for the safe passage/corridor for the elephants, creation of underpass along elevated MGR, with passageway for free movement of herds of elephants, reducing speeds of train in elephant passages, development of plantation of fodder, habitat restoration. It was stated that Rs 5 Crores has been earmarked for wild life conservation. It was informed that the Plan for afforestation has been submitted to Chhattisgarh State Forest Department as part of the diversion proposal of 1532 acre land in Dharamanjaigarh and Raigarh at the cost of Rs 13.75 crores. It was informed that the linked Lara TPP is 60km and coal evacuation would be by MGR. However, the MGR would pass through the elephant migratory corridor. It is proposed to create underpass along MGR for the safe passage of elephants. Issues raised in Public Hearing and those raised by Jan Chtena on conduct of P.H. were presented.

 

The Committee desired that the approval of the Flood & Irrigation Dept, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh should be obtained for diversion channel. The Committee also desired that an embankment along the diverted channel should be stabilised with plantation using native species. The Committee desired that stone pitching should be done towards forest area. The Committee desired that thick plantation should be developed along the embankment. The Committee desired that the proponent rework the calendar plan for the first 10 years of mine operation for re-handling of OB so that the 405m depth of final water body in an area of 230 ha is reduced to 60m by backfilling into the final pit void. The Committee desired that a suitable scheme should be in consultation with State Govt for supply of drinking water to 8 surrounding villages be ensured whenever village wells go dry in the impact zone. In addition, peizometers should be installed for monitoring groundwater in the impact zone and TDS and TSS should also be monitored in addition to water levels. The Committee noted that the MGR route forms part of the elephant migratory corridor and would form a hindrance to the free movement of herds of elephants. The Committee desired that the proponent should explore putting up over-head multiple tubed conveyors on single/double gantries on single structures all across the route. The matter should be re-examined in consultation with the PCCF (WL) and WII. The Committee desired that an Env. Cell/Panel of experts consisting of WL expert, ecologist, sociologist and hydrology should be created. The Committee desired that eco-restoration should be undertaken using native species representing the pre-mining ecosystem. The Committee observed that District Tribal Welfare Plan is being prepared every year by the State Govt. which should be used to prepare and dovetail the activities for Tribal Dev. activities under CSR and R&R. The Committee desired that training/capacity development and skill development should form an integral part of CSR and R&R Action Plan. The Committee further desired that a colony for outsourced persons should also be provided. The Committee desired that the R&R Action Plan should provide for annuities to vulnerable persons of the society as per R&R Policy of Govt. of Chhattisgarh.

 

The Committee decided to further consider the aforesaid issues after receipt of the same by the proponent.

 

 

16.     Dulanga Opencast Coal Mining Project (7 MTPA in an Project area of 803.71 HA ) of M/s National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (NTPC), Ib valley coalfields, Dist. Sundergarh, Orissa (EC based on TOR granted on 17.01.2008)

 

Director, MOEF stated that the coal block was earlier categorised as a ‘No-Go’ Area and subsequently categorised as a ‘Go area’ vide MOEF letter dated 29.06.2011 based on which the project has been placed for consideration of EC.

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the Mining Plan was revised reducing the total ML area from 1030ha to 803 ha and 48MT of coal reserves have been left in the No-Go area. It was informed that MOEF vide letter no. FN 11-225/2011-FC dated 19.07.2011 has deleted the total forestland of 87 ha. The major parameters changed are given below:

 

S.N.

Parameter

Original Mining Plan

Revised Mining Plan

1.

Mine lease area

657

567.19

2.

Outside ML area

373.66

236.52

 

TOTAL

1030.66

803.71

1.

Mineable reserves (MT)

194.97

152

2.

OB generation (MT)

518

394

3.

Top Soil (MT)

3.75

3.65

4.

Production Capacity (MTPA)

7

7

5.

Mine Life (years)

31

26

 

 

Of the total project area of 803.71 ha, ML area is 567.19 ha consisting of quarry area and the balance 236.52 ha for external OB dump, infrastructure, safety zone, and township is outside the lease area. The revised ML includes one ext. OB dump along with facilities such as infrastructure, workshop, offices which are to be located near the OB dump site outside the ML, in view of the fact that NTPC has been asked by the State Govt. to look for alternate land around project for OB dumping as the approved dump location has been notified in favour of OPGC for the adjoining coal block.  Satparlia RF, Gir Pahar RF and Kalamegha RF are found adjoining the core zone. Forestland is 370 ha, Kathpalli RF is within core zone. Forest diversion proposal for 270 ha  has been submitted to DFO(Sundergarh) in January 2011. It was stated that the Sambalpur Elephant Reserve is at a distance of 25km and Debrigarh Sanctuary is at a distance of 33 km. Elephants are found/reported within study area. A Wildlife Conservation Plan for Rs 73 lakhs as capital costs and Rs 61 lakhs (annual) has been prepared and submitted PCCF (Wild life)/CWLW on 21.08.2010 and on 03.12.2010 and is with DFO since January 2011. Mining would be open cast mechanised by shovel and dumper combination and also by use of continuous surface miners for two seams. Grade of coal is mainly F-G. The total OB generation would be 394Mm3, of which 355.50 Mm3 would be backfilled in an area of 413.07 ha.  It was informed that OB dumping on mineralised area was not found to be feasible and a temporary external OB dump in an area of 106.62 ha and of 60m height for the initial period of 2.5 years is proposed for dumping 38.5 Mm3 of OB which would be reclaimed with plantation and after 2.5 to 3 years, concurrent backfilling would commence. An estimated 3.65 Mm3 of topsoil of would be stored in an area of 3.84 ha. Ultimate working depth is 255m. Of the total quarry area of 510.78 ha, an area of 351.23 ha would be backfilled and reclaimed with plantation and the balance 159.55 ha would be converted into a water body of 250m depth at the post mining stage. It was informed that it is planned to dump fly ash around the 24th year of mine operations. The approval of MOEF would be obtained at a later stage in this regard.  It was informed that the linked 3200 MW Darlipalli STPP is at a distance of about 10km away and coal transportation would be by rail (push-pull system). Railway track is to be laid for 10km. The total estimated water requirement is 1500 m3/d of which 997 m3/d is for mine operations (mine pit water) and 503 m3/d is for drinking (bore well water). It was informed that Garia Nala bisects the Block from the centre, Baidhara Nala and Nala B flow through the ML which join Basundhara Nala and finally Ib nala. It is proposed to divert all the 3 nalas -  Garia nala would be diverted from where it enters the block on north–west common boundary to all along north –east outside boundary of block. It would meet the main stream at the SE corner of the Block. Baidhara nala and Nala ‘B’ would be diverted all along the SW and NW boundary of the block inside the block boundary. The load of both would be discharged at commencement point of diversion of Garia nala. It was informed that an Embankment/Bund of 3m height is proposed for flood protection which is 3m above the HFL of the nala. In addition, sufficient barrier is to be left along the mine side to prevent inrush of water into the mine. It was stated that coal transportation would be by overhead conveyors below which the diverted channel of nala would flow. Nala flowing into the ML itself is a diversion from Manoharpur Block, in consultation with Flood & Irrigation Dept. Nala diversion is proposed during 3rd to 5th year of mine operations. Public Hearing was held on 02.07.2010. R&R Plan is for 417 PAPs and 309 homestead losers. CSR Plan has been prepared for life of the project. The total budgetary provision of Rs 15.92 crores (capital) and 7.34 crore/annum (recurring cost) is provided. Anticipated life of project is 24 years. Capital cost of the project is Rs 1356.61 crores.

 

The Committee desired that proponent should submit the OB management Plan indicating a calendar plan of coal production, OB generation and its handling, dumping and backfilling programme and including the reworked calendar plan of last 10 years to reduce final pit void. The Committee observed that the extent of area reclaimed with plantation was not clear. The Committee observed that the proponent proposed to dump fly ash into the mine void. The Committee desired that a feasibility study should be carried for the presence of any heavy metals in the flyash before dumping as the heavy metal may leach into ground water and contaminate the same. The Committee desired that the proponent should re-examine diversion of 2nd and 3rd nala and realignment of nala. The Committee observed that the levels of fluoride are near threshold limit i.e. 0.1 to 0.77mg/l and desired continuous monitoring of ground water level in area. The Committee also desired that Peizometers should also be installed within 10 km of area for monitoring ground water quality. The Committee observed that the forest in the study area is Dry mixed Deciduous and Dry Peninsular Sal Forest type and wild fauna such as Sloth Bear (in addition to elephants), have been reported in the area. The Committee desired that as the railway track is in the area, the WL Plan should include use of sirens to alert the animals during rail movement. The Committee desired that proponent should submit a detailed R&R Action Plan for the PAPs. The Committee also desired a detailed activity–wise CSR Action Plan should be furnished. The Committee desired that Women’ education should be given priority under CSR.

 

The Committee decided to further reconsider the project for EC after receipt of the aforesaid details.

 

 

17.       New Patrapara Coal Block of M/s Bhushan Steel Ltd. (15 MTPA in an ML area of 971.8421ha and Project Area of 1179.5481 ha) to be located at Tehsil Chhendipada, Dist. Angul, Orissa (Modification of TOR granted on 17.01.2008)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the project was earlier under litigation and now the case stands vacated by the Hon’ble SC. It was informed that the Mining Plan originally for 8 MTPA has been revised to 15 MTPA. A new Form-1 appl. has been submitted. It was informed that the New Patrapara Coal Block consist of 3 quarries – Patrapara, Makarmada and Aumli is stated that the capacity increase from 8 MTPA to 12 MTPA is proposed by change of technology by combination of use of surface miner and Shovel-dumper combination with large sized benches and higher capacity shovel), and the capacity has been further enhanced from 12 MTPA to 15 MTPA and the life of the project is 25 years from the originally 44 years. It was informed that OB would be stored in mineralised area upto a height of 60, and rehandled to backfill the decoaled void and backfilling almost the entire excavated area upto ground level leaving a water body of 63.6 ha area with 40m depth at the end of mining.

 

The Committee desired an integrated project of all the three blocks. The Committee desired that the proponent should prepare an integrated OB management plan of all the three blocks involving sequential backfilling. The Committee desired that an area drainage plan of all the three blocks should be prepared as part of EIA-EMP. The Committee also sought details of existing (pre-mining) land use of the core zone and proposed changes in land use. The Committee also desired that a detailed R&R Action Plan be prepared and submitted.

 

The Committee recommended TOR with the aforesaid specific conditions and read with TOR given in the Annexure 4. The Committee recommended withdrawal of the earlier TOR granted on 17.01.2008.

 

 

18.     Sitarampur Underground Coalmine Project (1 MTPA in an ML area of 859 ha) of M/s West Bengal Mineral Development & Trading Corp. Ltd., Tehsil Asansol., dist. Bardhman, W.B. (TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the proposal is for opening a new underground coalmine project of 1 MTPA capacity in an ML area of 859 ha. It was informed that Sitarampur Coal Block was allotted to West Bengal Mineral Development and Trading Corporation Limited (WBMDTCL) by MOC on 27.12.2007. As per the MOC, Allotment Letter, WBMDTCL would supply coal from the block to meet part of the coal requirement of JSW Bengal Steel Ltd. For the proposed 10MTPA modern Steel Plant and 1620 MW power plant at Salboni, West Medinipur District. JSW Bengal Steel Ltd. is a JVC of JSW Steel Ltd and Govt. of West Bengal. It was informed that there are 7 Protected forests in 10 km area. Kulti block of WBMDTCL is the adjacent block. Mining Plan is under preparation. Seams are continuous with one another. Proposal to amalgamate the two mines into one in future. Of their total ML area, 832 ha is private land and 27 ha is Govt. Land. No facility is to be established in the present block. An area of 34.85 ha is under proposed for surface rights for establishing common facilities for Kulti and Sitarmapur UG projects in Kulti Coal Block. Grade of coal is medium coking coal W.G.II Steel grade. The project is by underground mining and mechanised with Long Wall method. Three shafts would be developed for a depth of 800m. The total estimated water requirement for both Kulti and Sitarampur is 1331 m3/day of which 1059 m3/day for industrial purposes, 272 m3/day is for domestic use. The source of water for drinking is bore well and mine water and surface water reservoir for mine operations. Life of the project is 40 years. Capital cost of the project is Rs 1440 crores (combined for Kulyi-Sitarampur). A small stream, Harilal Jore flows through the ML. and River Damodar flows at the distance of 4.6 km along the south side. NH-2 passes through the block. In addition, Howrah to Dhanbad railway line also passes through the block. Coal would be transported from pit head to railway siding by pipe conveyor (about 3 km). Blasting is required only for shaft sinking and drift drivage. No subsidence anticipated as the mine is very deep (800m-1200m). It was informed that they have awarded the job for fire study & control to CMPDI, although there is no fire problem.

 

The Committee desired that an integrated EIA-EMP for both Sitarampur and Kulti blocks should be prepared. The Committee desired that the proponent examine whether the measures outlined in Raniganj Action Plan could be integrated in the Mining Plan and in the EIA-EMP Report. The Committee also desired that monitoring CH4 and CO should be included. The proponent may also explore and examine the feasibility of using methane for energy generation. The Committee also desired that the impact of deep mining on the hydrogeology be studied. The Committee noted that high heat and humidity being a special case in Indian conditions, acre needs to be taken while planning ventilation for providing suitable working conditions and safety tot eh personnel and appliances.

The Committee recommended TOR with the aforesaid specific conditions read with the generic TOR given in Annexure 5 and general conditions at Annexure-7.

 

 

19.     Kulti Underground Coalmine Project (1 MTPA in an ML area of 776 ha) of M/s West Bengal Mineral Development & Trading Corp. Ltd., Tehsil Asansol., dist. Bardhman, W.B.(TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the proposal is for opening a new underground coalmine project of 1 MTPA capacity in an ML area of 776 ha. Of the total ML area of 776 ha, 733 ha is private land and 43 ha is Govt. Land. There are 2 Protected forest and one RF  within the 10 km buffer zone.  An area of 34.85 ha is proposed for surface rights for establishing common facilities for Kulti and Sitaramapur UG projects in Kulti Coal Block. Of the 34.85 ha under surface rights, 31.82 ha is agriculture land, 0.23ha is barren land and 2.80 ha is others. A total 741.15 ha area is under mining rights. The production capacity may be enhanced to 2 MTPA due to use of Longwall of higher capacity. Ultimate depth of mining is 350-1350m. No subsidence anticipated as the mine is very deep. The total estimated water requirement for both Kulti and Sitarampur is 1331 m3/day of which 1059 m3/day for industrial purposes, 272 m3/day is for domestic use. The combined manpower requirement for Kulit-Sitarampur is 800. Combined capital cost of the Kulit-Sitarampur projects is Rs 1440 crores. Coal would be transported from pit head to railway siding by pipe conveyor (about 3 km). Life of the project is 60 years.

 

The Committee desired that the proponent examine continuation of the practice of agriculture in all the 3 projects even when mining is on. The Committee sought a detailed CSR Plan for Kulti-Sitarampur and Ichhapur. The Committee desired that the entire coal transportation should be by rail mode only. The Committee desired an integrated EIA-EMP of both Sitarampur and Kulti blocks be prepared. The Committee desired that the proponent examine whether the measures outlined in Raniganj Action Plan could be integrated in the Mining Plan and in the EIA-EMP Report. The Committee also desired that monitoring CH4 and CO should be included. The proponent may also explore and examine the feasibility of using methane for energy generation. The Committee also desired that the impact of deep mining on the hydrogeology be studied. The Committee noted that high heat and humidity being a special case in Indian conditions, acre needs to be taken while planning ventilation for providing suitable working conditions and safety to the personnel and appliances.

 

 

The Committee recommended TOR with the aforesaid specific conditions read with the generic TOR given in Annexure 5 and general conditions at Annexure-7.

 

 

20.     Ichhapur Underground Coalmine Project (2 MTPA in an ML area of 1192 ha) of M/s West Bengal Mineral Development & Trading Corp. Ltd., Tehsil Asansol., dist. Bardhman, W.B.(TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the proposal is for opening a new underground coalmine project of 2 MTPA capacity in an ML area of 1192 ha. Of the total ML area, 803.49 ha is agricultural land, 33.62 ha is forestland, 60.50 ha is water bodies, and 80.16 ha is settlements and 214.43 ha is others (roads 7.57 ha, barren land 56.57ha, area under plantation 14.70 ha, infrastructure 7 ha, and industries 135.59 ha). It was informed that no forestland is involved and 33.62 ha area is under social forestry. Of the total ML area, 1157 ha is under Mining Rights and 34.40 ha is under surface rights. No subsidence anticipated as the mine is very deep. The project is by underground mining and mechanised with Long Wall method. The total estimated water requirement for both Kulti and Sitarampur is 1361 m3/day of which 1059 m3/day for industrial purposes, 272 m3/day is for domestic use. Life of the mine is 85 years. Capital cost of the project is Rs 1500 crores. Total manpower requirement is 750. It was stated that Suko Bandh flows at the distance of 0.9 km, Kumir nala at a distance of 2.8 km and Ajoy River is at the distance of 9.2 km along the north-eastern side. Coal would be transported from pit head to the railway siding by pipe conveyor (about 5 km).

 

The Committee desired that the proponent examine continuation of practice of agriculture in all 3 projects when mining is on. The Committee desired that the safety issues related to mine inundation should be studied as part of EIA-EMP Report. The Committee desired that the proponent examine whether the measures outlined in Raniganj Action Plan could be integrated in the Mining Plan and in the EIA-EMP Report. The Committee also desired that monitoring CH4 and CO should be included. The proponent may also explore and examine the feasibility of using methane for energy generation. The Committee also desired that the impact of deep mining on the hydrogeology be studied. The Committee desired than an integrated CSR Plan should be prepared for all the three coal projects. The Committee noted that high heat and humidity being a special case in Indian conditions, acre needs to be taken while planning ventilation for providing suitable working conditions and safety tot eh personnel and appliances.

 

 

The Committee recommended TOR with the aforesaid specific conditions read with the generic TOR given in Annexure 5 and general conditions at Annexure-7.

 

 

21.     Belpahar OC Expn. Project (4.5 MTPA to 6.0 MTPA over 1503.683 ha) of M/s Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., located in Ib valley coalfields, Dist. Angul, Orissa (Further Internal consideration of EC based on TOR granted on 11.07.2008)

 

The committee desired that the proponent should be present before committee in next EAC meeting for further consideration of the project.

 

 

22.     Basundhara OCP (2.4 MTPA to 8 MTPA and increase in lease area from 401 ha to 437.10 ha) of M/s MCL, Dist. Sundergarh, Orissa (Further Internal consideration of EC based on TOR granted on 11.07.2008)

      

The committee desired that the proponent should be present before committee in next EAC meeting for further consideration of the project.

 

*             *       *

 


Annexure-1

 

 

PARTICIPANTS IN 35th EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (THERMAL & COAL MINING) IN THE MEETING HELD ON 17th -18th OCTOBER 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. T. Chandini                                                        ..          Scientist F MOEF

 

7.       Dr. Rubab Jaffer                                                              Scientist B, MOEF

 

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

 

Special Invitees:

 

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


Annexure-2

 

PARTICIPANTS IN 35th EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (THERMAL & COAL MINING) IN THE MEETING HELD ON 17th -18th OCTOBER 2011 ON COAL SECTOR PROJECTS

 

1.         M/s Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.

            1.         Shri D.C.Jha, Dir. (Tech.). Oper.

            2.         Shri D.Kuamr, Chief General Manager, BCCL

            3.         Shri J.P.Lath, President, Monnet Ispat

            4.         Shri H.L.Sapru, Sr. Vice President, Monnet Ispat Ltd.

            5.         Shri V.K.Sinha, Reginal Director, CMPDI

            6.         Dr. EVR Raju, Sr. Manager, BCCL

            7.         Shri P P Gupta, General Manager, BCCL

            8.         Shri K S Rao, Dy. GM, Monnet

            9.         Dr. R K Sinha, C.M. (Env.), BCCL

 

2.         M/s Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.

            1.         Shri B.P.Pati, CGM, GMDC

            2.         Shri D V Vyas GM

            3.         Shri G.V.Ramana, Andei Hi-Tech P Ltd.

            4.         Shri A K Garg, GM (P), GMDC

            5.         Shri Arvind R, Asst. Manager (Env.)

            6.         Dr. Marisha Sharma, MINMEC Consultancy

            7.         Dr.D A Pandhri, Manager, GMDC (Env.)

 

3.         M/s Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd.

            1.         Shri M.Raghunathan, DGM, NLC

            2.         Shri E. Hanumatha Rao, DGM

            3.         Shri I Susai Arulraj, GM

            4.         Shri U.W Datey, Consultant

            5.         Shri Sukriti Tiwari, Consultant

 

4.         North Eastern Coalfields of M/s Coal India Ltd.

            1.         Dr.Debashish Sarkar, GM, NEC

            2.         Shri Malay Das, NEC

            3.         Shri Prabhu Prasad, CMPDI

            4.         Shri Ajay Kumar Pati, CMPDI

            5.         Shri Arabinda Kumar Roy, CMPDI

            6.         Shri Navin Kuamr Singh, CMPDI

            7.         Dr.Bibhuti P Lakhar, AARANYAK

 

5.         M/s Thesgora Coal Pvt. Ltd.

            1.         Shri Arvind Piyan, CEO

            2.         Shri Deepak Kumar, GM

            3.         Shri S.Kumar, Consultant

 

6.         M/s Jaiprakash Associates Ltd.

            1.         Shri M.S.Sandhu, Sr. GM

            2.         Shri S.N. Chawla, Sr. Eng.

            3.         Shri V S Bajaj

            4.         Shri M N Jha, Advisor

            5.         Dr. Marisha Sharma, MINMEC Consultant

 

7.         M/s Tata Steel Ltd.

            West Bokaro OCP

            1.         Shri Chanakya Chaudhary, CRE, Tata Steel

            2.         Shri Sanjay Rajona, GM, West Bokaro

            3.         Dr.Manoj Gupta

            4.         Shri Ajay Sahay, RE, Tata Steel

            5.         Shri S. Kumar, Consultant

            Jamadoba Coal Washery of Tata Steel

            1.         Shri Chanakya Chaudhary, CRE, Tata Steel

            2.         Shri Ajay Sahay, RE, Tata Steel

            3.         Shri C H Diwalker, GM

            4.         Shri Gopal Prasad, Mgr, Tata Steel

            5.         Dr. B.K.Tewary, Head EMG, CIMFR

            6.         Dr.M. Ahmad, Scientist, CIMFR

 

 

8.         M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd.

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

            2.         Shri G. Prasad, CMPDI

            3.         Shri Rakesh Pandit, GM (env.), ECL

            4.         Shri Anand Shekhar, CMPDI

 

9.         M/s Northern Coalfields Ltd. (NCL)

            1.         Shri N.Das, Director (Tech.)

            2.         Shri S.N. Sinha, CGM, Bina Project

            3.         Shri U.C. Dumka, Sr. Manager (Env.), NCL

 

10.        M/s National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (NTPC)

            Talaipalli OCP

            1.         Shri Sharad Anand, ED (Eng.)

            2.         Shri A.Upendra Rao, GM

            3.         Shri N.K.Srivastava

            4.         Shri A.B. Haldar, GM

            5.         Shri C.B.Poddar, DGM

            6.         Shri A.P.Malik

            7.         Dr. S.M. Kolay

            8.         Shri P Giri

            9.         Dr. Revti Raman, GM

            10.        Shri Amit More, Sr. Engr.

            11.        Shri Sankar Srivastava

            12.        Shri Rajesh Badoia, DGM
13.        Shri U.Sadanadam, Sr. Eng

            14.        Shri M.L.Naik, Consultant

            15.        Shri A.K.Dash, AGM

            16.        Shri S.K. Singh, Sr. Manager

 

            Dulanga OCP

            1.         Shri Sharad Anand, ED (Eng.)

            2.         Shri V C Dubey

            3.         Shri Swaran Singh, Consultant

            4.         Shri C.B.Poddhar, DGM

            5.         Dr. Marisha Sharma, Diretcor, MINMEC

            6.         Shri C.R.Barik, DGM

            7.         Shri A.Upendra Rao, GM

            8.         Shri N.K.Srivastava

            9.         Shri A.B. Haldar, GM

            10.        Shri Amit More, Sr. Engr.

            11.        Shri B D Sharma, MD, MINMEC

            12.        Ms. Mitali Mukhopadhyaya

            13.        Shri R K Baderia

 

 

11.        M/s Bhushan Steel Ltd.

            1.         Shri Kapil Dhagor, Sr GM (Mining)

            2.         Shri Sanjeev Kapoor

            3.         Shri Vir Krishen Kaul

            4.         Shri B D Sharma, MD, MINMEC

            5.         Dr. Marisha Sharma, Director, MINMEC

 

12.      M/s West Bengal Mineral Development & Trading Corp. Ltd.

            1.         Shri Goumb Poddi

            2.         Shri Arun Acharya

            3.         Shri S. Chakrovorty, Advisor < JSW, Bengal

            4.         Shri D Saha, AVP, Geology

            5.         Shri V K Srivastava, Advisor

            6.         Shri B D Sharma, MD, MINMEC

            7.         Dr. Marisha Sharma, Director, MINMEC

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

 


ANNEXURE-3

GENERIC TOR FOR COAL WASHERY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(x)        Details of green belt development.

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

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

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

(xvi)        Submission of sample test analysis of:

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

II     Characteristics and quantum of washed coal.

III    Characteristics and quantum of coal waste rejects.

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

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

(xxxvi)   Submission of sample test analysis of:

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

 

 

____


ANNEXURE -4

GENERIC TOR FOR AN OPENCAST COALMINE PROJECT

(i)             An EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for …….. MTPA rated capacity in an ML/project area of …… ha based on the generic structure specified in Appendix III of the EIA Notification 2006.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(xxiii)      Impact of blasting, noise and vibrations.                       

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

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

(xxvi)      Details of waste generation – OB, topsoil – as per the approved calendar programme, and their management shown in figures as well explanatory chapter with tables giving progressive development and mine closure plan, green belt development, backfilling programme and conceptual post mining land use. 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)     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.

(xxviii)    Conceptual Final Mine Closure Plan, post mining land use and restoration of land/habitat to pre- mining. A Plan for the ecological restoration of the area post mining and for land use should be prepared with detailed cost provisions. Impact and management of wastes and issues of rehandling (wherever applicable) and backfilling and progressive mine closure and reclamation.

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

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

(xxxi)      Risk Assessment and Disaster Preparedness and Management Plan.

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

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

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

(xxxv)    CSR Plan along with details of villages and specific budgetary provisions (capital and recurring) for specific activities over the life of the project.

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

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

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

(xxxxi) Submission of sample test analysis of:

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

(xxxxii) Copy of clearances/approvals – such as Forestry clearances, Mining Plan Approval,

            NOC from Flood and Irrigation Dept. (if req.), etc. wherever applicable.

___


ANNEXURE -5

GENERIC TOR FOR AN UNDERGROUND COALMINE PROJECT

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

(ii)            The EIA-EMP report should also cover the impacts and management plan for the project specific activities on the environment of the region, and the environmental quality – air, water, land, biotic community, etc. through collection of baseline data and information, generation of baseline data on impacts for ……. MTPA of coal production based on approval of project/Mining Plan.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(xxv)       CSR Plan along with details of villages and specific budgetary provisions (capital and recurring) for specific activities over the life of the project.

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

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

(xxxvii)  Submission of sample test analysis of:

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

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

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

 

___


ANNEXURE -6

GENERIC TOR FOR AN OPENCAST-CUM-UNDERGROUND COALMINE PROJECT

 

(i)             An EIA-EMP Report would be prepared for a combined rated capacity of…….. MTPA  for OC-cum-UG project which consists of ……. MTPA for OC and ………. MTPA for UG in an ML/project area of …… ha based on the generic structure specified in Appendix III of the EIA Notification 2006.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(xxiv)      Impact of blasting, noise and vibrations.                       

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

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

(xxvii)     Details of waste generation – OB, topsoil – as per the approved calendar programme, and their management shown in figures as well explanatory chapter with tables giving progressive development and mine closure plan, green belt development, backfilling programme and conceptual post mining land use. 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.

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

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

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

(xxxi)      Risk Assessment and Disaster Preparedness and Management Plan.

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

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

(xxxiv)   Conservation Plan for the endangered/endemic flora and fauna found in the study area and for safety of animals visiting/residing in the study area and also those using the study area as a migratory corridor.

(xxxv)    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.

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

(xxxvii)  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.

(xxxviii) CSR Plan along with details of villages and specific budgetary provisions (capital and recurring) for specific activities over the life of the project.

(xxxix) 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.

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

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

(xxxxii) 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.

(xxxxiii) Copy of clearances/approvals – such as Forestry clearances, Mining Plan Approval,

            NOC from Flood and Irrigation Dept. (if req.), etc.

 

____


 ANNEXURE-7

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS AND ADDITIONAL POINTS OF TOR

 

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.

(iv)        Grant of EC is also subject to Circulars issued under the EIA Notification 2006, which are available on the MOEF website: www.envfor.nic.in

______

 

Untitled Page