MINUTES OF 37th EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (EAC) (THERMAL & COAL MINING) MEETING HELD ON 28th -29th NOVEMBER 2011 IN PARYAVARAN BHAWAN, CGO COMPLEX, LODI ROAD, NEW DELHI.

 

COAL MINING PROJECTS

The 37TH meeting of the reconstituted EAC (T &C) was held on 28th-29th November 2011 in 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 35th meeting of EAC (T&C) held on 17th-18th October 2011 was confirmed.

 

The agenda items were taken up as given below:

 

1.         Cluster-1 (Damoda Group of 3 Mines – Damoda (Albion Section) OCP, Damoda UGP and Damuda BJ Section OCP) Group of Mines (of 0.9 MTPA normative and 1.17 MTPA (peak) in a combined ML area of 575 ha) of M/s BCCL located in Jharia Coalfields, Block Chandrapur, dist. Dhanbad, Jharkhand (EC based on TOR granted on 03.07.2009)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the Damoda Group of mines (Cluster–1) consists of 3 mines of which 2 are operating mines - Damoda (Albion Section) OCP and Damoda UG mine and the third is a proposed  mine - Damuda BJ Section OCP. One mine - Ghutway is a closed mine and is not included in the application for EC. The mines falls under single lease hold area and are separated distinctly from other mines of Jharia Coalfields.  River Jamunia, which is a 4th Order river flows along the boundary of Cluster and joins River Damodar which flows near the eastern boundary of Cluster–I.  A seasonal nala - Podo Jore originates from the centre of the ML and joins River Jamunia. The entire infrastructure including project colony is shared by all the mines and fall within the lease area. The mines have common transport system. The proponent informed that backfilling of OB in Damoda OC and development of Damoda UG is on-going. OC mining is by Shovel-Dumper and underground mining is by Board and Pillar involving depillaring. Four seams by OC mining upto 105m depth would be undertaken.

 

The present land use of combined ML area of 575 ha of the cluster includes 77.25 ha of active mining area (abandoned, running, OB dump, coal dump, pit/CHP), 88.57 ha is settlements, 1 ha is water body, 204.67 ha is agricultural land, 4 ha is plantation, 9 ha is rail/road, 190.51 ha is wasteland/barren land. The entire 204.67 ha has not been acquired. It was stated that most of the 190 ha of barren land would be reclaimed and finally reduced to 40.64 ha. One water body of 20.84 ha would be left as a water body at the end of mining. No forestland is involved. Ground water level is in the range from 1.37m to 8.75 m during pre-monsoon and 0.37m to 4.79 m during post-monsoon in the core zone. Total water requirement is 1383 m3/day, of which 533m3/day is for mining operations and 850m3/day is for domestic use. A provision of Rs 5/T of coal has been made. R&R involves 51 PAFs, to be rehabilitated near Ghutway in 4.42 ha of area in Phase–I at the cost of Rs 3.5 crores. Funds allocated for EMP is Rs 2.50/T of coal in case of UG mine and Rs 5.50/T of coal in case of OC mine. The life of Damoda (Albion section OC) is 8 years, Damoda underground mine is 10 years, and the proposed Damoda (BJ –Section) OCP is 10 years. The project has been approved by BCCL Board. Consent to operate has also been obtained from JSPCB. Public Hearing was held on 11.05.201.

 

Cluster-I (Damoda Group of Mines)

S.N

Mines in Cluster-1

ML Area

(Ha)

Normative Prod. Capacity

(MTPA)

Peak Prod. capacity

(MTPA)

1.

Ghutway  OCP (closed for production)

575

-

-

2.

Damoda (Albion Section) OCP

0.20

0.26

3.

Damoda UG

0.10

0.13

4.

Damoda (BJ Section) OCP proposed

0.60

0.78

 

TOTAL

575

0.90

1.17

 

  Proposed Normative Coal Production of Cluster -I ( Damoda Group of Mines)

year

Damoda (Albion Section) OC

Damoda UG

Damoda (BJ Section) OCP proposed

Total

Peak Production

2012-13

0.20

0.10

0.20

0.50

0.65

2013-14

0.20

0.10

0.50

0.70(0.80)

0.91

2014-15

0.20

0.10

0.60

0.90

1.71

2015-16

0.20

0.10

0.60

0.90

1.71

2016-17

0.20

0.10

0.60

0.90

1.71

2017-till life of the mines

Production will be maintained within the proposed peak production level

 

SUMMARISED DATA   OF CLUSTER –I (Damoda Group of Mines)

 

S.N.

Particular

Damoda (Albion Section) OC

Damoda UG

Damoda

(BJ Section) OCP proposed

1.

Quarry area (ha)

66

-

51

2.

Ultimate depth (m)

85

240

105

3.

Mineable reserve(MT)

2.00

1.59

5.04

4.

Grade of coal

W-IV

W-II &W-IV

W-III

5.

Cost of production

(lakhs)

1060

5986

577.92

 

It was stated that the mined out area would be filled with flyash as proponent has already carried out leachability test through Central Institute of Mining and Fuel Research, Dhanbad, Jharkhand which carried out the study every 3 years. It was further informed that permission from DGMS for dumping flyash has been obtained. It was stated that no mining would be undertaken in fire affected areas. It was stated that care would be taken to ensure that such areas do not get entry of air (ventilation) which may start fresh fires. It was informed that opencast mining is proposed before start of underground mining.  At the end of the mining there would be no void and the entire mined out area re-vegetated. A minimum safety distance of 60m would be maintained between opencast and underground operations.

 

COMBINED LAND USE  OF CLUSTER –I (Damoda Group of Mines)

 

S.No

Type Land Use

Present Mining

Land Use

( ha)

Post- mining Land Use

(ha)

 

Abandoned quarry

 

77.25

 123.64 ha area would be backfilled and reclaimed

Mining

Running quarry

OB dump

Coal dump

Pit/CHP

Settlement

Service building/

88.7

78

Residential/Homestead land

 

 

Water body

Water body

1

20.80

Fallow land

Fallow land

204.67

204.67

Plantation

Plantation

4

98.25

Others(Rail & Road)

Others(Rail & Road)

9

9

Waste land/ Barren

Waste land/ Barren

190.51

40.64

 

Total

575

575

 

The proponent informed that eco-restoration of BCCL mine areas is to be implemented in two phases over a period of 10 years, of which, Phase–I is from 2011-16 and Phase-II from 2016-2021. It was stated that during Phase-I, development of a model restoration plantation is being done on a 10 ha OB dump site by FRI, Dehradun and thereafter 90 ha area of the area would be restored by BCCL in their 3 mining areas. During Phase-II (2016-2021), replication/expansion of proposed restoration models in the 126 ha area spread over 13 mines area of BCCL would be taken up. It was informed that the extent of fire in Jharia coalfields ahs been gradually reduced from the original 17 sq.km to 9 sq.km. and presently restricted to 3.99 sq.km. It was informed that after detailed studies, the best technology recommended by a World Bank study was to dig out the fire affected areas and dig out the coal. It was clarified that no UG/OC mining is being presently done in area where dump is on fire, and the seams in these areas are deep and will not be affected by the dump fires. Leachability study has been carried out on dumping of flyash in an abandoned area and no detrimental effects on water quality was found and no heavy metals were found in the flyash.

 

It was informed that the coal produced from Damoda OC mine is to be dispatched by rail through Damoda Railway siding located within the ML area. Some coal is also being sold through local sale which is dispatched by road. It was informed that the feeder breaker presently handles non-coking coal from the Albion OCP and cannot be used for coking coal from Damoda (BJ section) OCP. Loading is by pay loaders. 

 

The proponent apprised the Committee on the legal action initiated by the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board against 22 mines of BCCL. It was stated that there has been no change in the production or in the technology and the company is in the process of preparation of EIA-EMP Reports and for conduct of Public Hearing for the clusters of mines for which TOR has been issued by MOEF. It was informed that an ‘interim stay’ has been given by the Jharkhand High Court on the notices issued by the Jharkhand SPCB.

 

The Committee desired that details of each mine of cluster-1 in terms of lease area, calendar plan of production with plan for OB dumping and backfilling (for OC mines) and reclamation and final mine closure plan (as per MOEF tables) should be furnished. The Committee desired that mitigative measures should be taken to control the fire problem in the area. The Committee stated that the extent of fires in the UG seams and areas which are susceptible for new fires can be ascertained using Thermal Imaging and monitoring temperatures of coal seams (whether they are close to spontaneous ignition temperatures). The Committee desired that the proponent undertake an exercise whereby the layout of Jharia Coalfields should be superimposed with areas with a possibility of spontaneous ignition temp, through thermal imaging (NRSA) and areas with possibility of ingress of air and for checking for areas with a potential to become new areas with fire problems. The Committee desired that thermal imaging photographs of each cluster should be taken for taking appropriative preventive and mitigative measures under the Jharia Action Plan and details thereof furnished. The Committee desired that the results of the leachability test carried out by the proponent for dumping flyash in mined out areas should be provided to Committee. The Committee further desired that an undertaking be given that no mining would be undertaking where underground fires continue. The Committee observed that in many OB dump areas, fire start due to presence of coal/ shale with sufficient carbon content and sought specific details of preventive measures taken to prevent/check such fires.  The Committee desired that areas where opencast mining was carried out and completed should be reclaimed immediately thereafter. The Committee sought details of studies on flyash leachability and environmental impacts of dumping of flyash being done.

 

The Committee observed that there are small water bodies in Damoda (Albion Section) OC and desired that the embankment proposed along water body should be strengthened with stone pitching. The Committee noted that the cluster falls in a critically polluted area and the levels of SPM are high. The Committee desired that the air quality should be monitored for PM10, PM2.5 and also sought details of the locations of AAQ stations within the cluster along with wind rose. The Committee desired that project specific mitigative plan for pollution abatement from the mines of each cluster of BCCL prepared for Env. Action Plan for CPA Dhanbad should be furnished. The Committee desired that thick green belt needs to be developed along undisturbed areas, mine boundary and in mine reclamation as Jharia falls in critically polluted area. Issues raised in the Public Hearing should also be integrated with activities being taken up under CSR. The Committee noted that a provision of Rs 13.75 crores has been made under CSR fund for the year 2010-11, and desired that this should continue through the life of the mines. The Committee desired that a CSR Action Plan and its detail should be submitted. The Committee desired that 204.67 ha of fallow/abandoned land and 40.64 ha waste land/barren land should be rehabilitated/reclaimed as forest under CSR Plan. The Committee also desired that of the 190.51 ha existing as waste land not being acquired should be put to productive use under CSR and developed with fruit bearing and other useful species for the locals.  The Committee also desired that third party evaluation is required for proper implementation of CSR activity in the project area.

The Committee noted that the implementation of the Jharia Action Plan (JAP) is crucial for implementation of environmental management plan for the 103 mines of BCCL grouped in 17 clusters. The Committee stated that the views of the Divisional Commissioner heading the Monitoring Committee for JAP and of the DGMS could be obtained and submitted to the Hon’ble Court whether stopping the production/closing the mines would be detrimental in control of fires and from the safety point of view and in the implementation and completion of R&R as the environmental management plan for the clusters of mines are dovetailed to the implementation of the Jharia Action Plan. The Committee desired that the details of the number of clusters that fall under Phase–I and Phase–II of the Jharia action Plan should be provided and applications for EC for those clusters falling in Phase-I of the Jharia Action Plan should be made to Ministry on priority. 

The Committee decided to further consider the project after receipt of the issues sought by the Committee.        

 

 

2.         Madhuband Coal Washery (5 MTPA in an area of 23 ha) and Patherdih Coal Washery (5 MTPA and 6.5 MTPA peak in an area of 12 ha) of M/s BCCL, Dhanbad, Jharkhand (Further consideration of EC based on TOR)

 

Raw coal used in Madhuband Coal Washery has ash content of 42.8% and the clean coal with an yield of 2 MTPA of an ash content of 19.7% would be used in steel plants in Durgapur, Bhilai and Bokaro and 1 MTPA yield with an ash content of 40.7% which would be used in TPPs. Coal rejects of 2 MTPA with an ash content of more than 66.9% would be used in an FBC based TPP. Patherdih Coal 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.

 

The proposal was considered in the EAC meetings held in April and October 2011 wherein the details of a long-term MOU for use of coal rejects in an FBC based TPP were sought. The Committee also desired that details of activities proposed under CSR and budgetary provision thereof be furnished to Ministry.

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the company has signed an MOU dated 17.11.2011 between BCCL and Keerthi Industries Ltd., Hyderabad, copy of MOU dated 17.11.2011 between BCCL and Monnet Ispat, MOU dated 17.11.2011 between BCCL and Jindal Steel & Power Ltd for  use of rejects produced from proposed Patherdih NLW Coal Washery and Madhuband washery. It was clarified that the proposed Patherdih NLW Coal Washery (5MTPA) are located on non-coal bearing area. Proponent also presented preventive measures to be taken for prevention of dust eg. water sprinkling at the deliverance point, periodical checking of vehicles for source emission, cemented roads, stack emission monitoring for particulate matter, bag filter at suitable location, wind shelters/wind breaks, providing 3-tier green belt with native species. It was informed that the entire transportation of rejects would be by rail. In addition, the entire flyash generated from the FBC based TPP would be utilised by cement units in clinker production/ flyash brick unit. It was informed that an amount of Rs 2 cores/year would spent on project specific CSR. CSR activities would cover education, water supply, health care, social empowerment, infrastructure development i.e. road, water supply, electricity and a community centre. It was stated that a full time Monitoring Cell would be constituted.

 

The Committee after discussions recommended the two proposals for environmental clearance.

 

 

3.     North of Arkhapal-Srirampur Opencast Coalmine Project (30 MTPA in a Project area of 2250.2 ha) of M/s Strategic Energy Technology Systems Private Ltd. (SETSPL), located in Talcher Coalfields, dist. Angul, Orissa (TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that M/s Strategic Energy Technology Systems Private Limited is a 50:50 joint venture of TATA Sons & Tata Steel and Sasol Synfuels International (SSI), South Africa who have experience in coal gasification. The JV proposes to start a Coal to Liquid Fuel (CTL) project in India near Ranjagol at Gudiakateni in district Dhenkanal at a distance of 55 km away from mine site to which a rail link is proposed. It was informed that the Coal mine  Nationalisation Act 1973 was amended vide Notification dated June 2007 under section 3 of Act that allowed CTL and coal gasification as approved end use and coal mining by private companies. It was informed that North of Arkhapal -Srirampur Coal block was allocated to company by MOC on 27.2.2009. The conversion of high ash coal into oil product would be through Sasol’s CTL technology whereby coal gasification using Shell’s technology and coal liquefaction using Fischer Troph Reactor.  The total rated capacity of the projects is 30 MTPA and the total extractable reserves is 1 BT. The 30 MTPA of coal would produce an estimated 96,000 barrels per day (bpd) of diesel naptha and other by-products and LPG. Production of oil from CTL Plant is likely to begin in 2018 and the expected peak production of oil would be about 96,000 barrels of oil per day (bpd), of which 70% would be ultra clean diesel and the balance 30%, other liquid products such as naptha, kerosene and other by products such as sulphur, urea, ammonia, which can be used in the fertilizer industry.

 

It was informed that since the coal is high ash (F-G grade), some of the coal would require being washed to reduce the ash content to 40%, which increases the energy efficiency by 43%. Hence, a washery of about 8 MTPA capacity is planned to be set up at the CTL plant to maintain the coal quality requirement of CTL plant and the coal fines and coal rejects would be utilised in the linked 1800 (7 x 250) MW Thermal Power Plant captive to the CTL Plant, also to be established near the CTL Plant (at a distance of about 55 km from the coal mine). Of the 30 MTPA of coal, about 18 MTPA of low ash coal (< 40%) and the balance 12 MTPA is high ash coal (> 40% ash). Of the 18 MTPA of low ash coal, 14.6 MTPA would be sent to gasifier and 3.6 MTPA consisting of coal fines would be sent for steam and power generation.  Of the 12 MTPA of high ash coal, 9.6 MTPA would be sent to a coal washery proposed to be set up in the premises of the CTL/Power Plant and the balance 2.4 MTPA would be used directly for steam generation. The 9.6 MTPA of coal to be washed would yield 6.72 MTPA of clean coal to be used in gasifier and the balance 2.88 MTPA coal rejects to be used for power generation in FBC power plant to be established near CTL Plant. Thus, of the total 30 MTPA of raw coal, 21.12 MTPA would be used for gasification and the balance 8.88 MTPA would be used for steam and power generation. Capital cost of the coal mine project is Rs 5625 crores.

 

The total project area is 2253.20 ha of which 1820 ha is the ML area and 400 ha is area outside the ML required for infrastructure, OB dumping and 33.20 ha is for township. It was informed that of the total ML area of 1820 ha, coal bearing area is 1770 ha. Of the total project area, 598 ha is forestland of which 218 ha is Kandhala Reserve forest and Shiva Rampur Reserve Forest and 380 ha is revenue forest. The block is categorised as a ‘Go Area’.

 

It was informed that 54% of the mining area is privately owned and is used for agriculture for growing paddy in Kharif (summer season/rainy season), 25% of the land is utilised for crops such as moong, vegetables and other Rabi crop. Agriculture land is primarily double crop land. Coal is to be extracted by mechanised shovel-dumper system and the total estimated OB generation is 3120 Mm3 of which 450 Mm3 would be dumped externally of which 285 Mm3 of OB would be stored in an external OB dump near Sunakhani and Belpada village in an area of about 400 ha, which is non-forest and non-mineralised area, located outside the ML towards north in Ankagharia Sunakhani and Kishore Chandra Jangal villages. An estimated 152 PAFs in these villages would be displaced or affected for creation of the OB dump outside the mine lease. Life of the OC mine is 40 years. The total water requirement of the mine is 12,000 m3/d of which 8000 m3/d would be met form mine pit water and the balance 4000 m3/d would be obtained from River Brahmanai or Mahanadi which is about 60km distance form the mine. Surplus mine water of an estimated 25,000 m3/d would be discharged during the rainy season into Bangaru nalas after settling in ponds.

 

The project involves an R&R of 1183 PAFs (mostly SC and ST  tribals), of which 23 PAFs have already been displaced earlier by MCL from 22 villages adjacent to one another in a radius of 4-5km form 5 Gram Panchayats of Kandhala, Brajanathpur, Dharampur and Gurujanga of Talcher Block, Hariharpur. Capital cost of the project is Rs 5625 crores. The ML is drained by Bangaru nala, a tributary of River Brahmani flowing along the southern margin of block. Diversion of Bangaru nala along the boundary of the coal Block is proposed. River Brahamani river flows at a distance of 2 km in the north–east side of the block. There are a number of rain-fed steams within the block. It was stated that diversion NH-23 (old) and double lane road from Godibandha junction to Kaniha township of NTPC on northern part of the coal block would be diverted. There are no National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserves in the 10km buffer zone. It was stated that Bhulajhar and the Kanheijena forests within the study area at a distance approximately 4 km towards the Northeast side of the block is an elephant corridor with a good frequency of elephant movement reported in area. The dense forest is also a habitat for other wild life animals found in the area. It was informed that the neighbouring mines are Lingraj and Bhubaneshwari OCP. Proposal for Stage-I FC for diversion of 598.21 ha of forestland for OC mining has been submitted vide letter no.SETSPL/BBSR/070/11 dated 9.9.2011 to CCF, Bhubaneswar. The coal block is located in Angul area which is about 25 km away and Talcher town is located 5 km away which are Critically Polluted Areas as per MoEF circular dated 13.01.2010.  It was informed that the total ash volume to be generated by CTL plant is 320 Mm3 or 480 MT over mine life; 60% of this ash (288 MT) would be hard and coarse gasifier ash and the balance 40% would be flyash and boiler ash, which would be used for in pit dumping into the mine voids.

 

The Committee desired that the extent of coal usage for power generation should be reduced so that the most of the coal mined goes to CLT Plant; and coal rejects and coal fines could be used for power generation. The Committee noted that forest land is involved in the project, and the proponent should examine option of underground mining particularly in forest areas, as the ecological cost of destruction of the forests, huge displacement cost, diversion cost and social cost, usage of huge quantity of mine water, OB dumping out side area and associated social and environmental costs, etc are very high. The Committee desired that proponent examine of option of undertaking underground and opencast mining,

 

The Committee observed that the total OB generation would be 3,120Mm3. The Committee desired that all the OB generated should be rehandled and backfilled in the excavated mine void and  desired that the OB dumping programme be reworked including re-handling of OB from temporary external dumps, so that there are no external OB dumps at the final stage. The Committee desired that leachability study along with a detailed hydrogeology study of the area should be carried for deciding on filling mine void with flyash. The Committee observed that 11,000 tonnes of sand is required for construction of office etc. The Committee desired that the flyash bricks may be used for construction. The Committee observed that the coal mine project may deplete the ground water in the area and peizometers should be installed for monitoring ground water level in the area.  Water harvesting measures should be taken by proponent. The Committee observed that the coal mine project may deplete the ground water in the area and peizometers should be installed for monitoring ground water level in the area.  Water harvesting measures should be taken by proponent. The Committee desired that the proponent explore using mine water and rainwater harvesting instead of use of water from River Mahanadi.

 

The Committee desired that the agricultural crop whether single/double should be ascertained from the State revenue department. The Committee stated that the extent of survival of replanted uprooted trees is poor and desired that reclamation of the deforested areas should be done using a mix of native species representing the pre-mining ecosystem. The Committee desired that a study of elephant presence/habitat and its movement should be carried out for preparation of a WL Conservation Plan. The WL Cons. Plan should be also submitted to the PCCF (WL) for their comments and approval. The Committee noted that since Angul-Talcher has been identified as a Critically Polluted Area (Talcher is 7km distance from the mine), the Committee desired that the Environmental Action Plan prepared by OSPCB in consultation with CPCB of Angul-Talcher CEPI area may be studied by proponent and accordingly mitigative measures given in the Plan should be incorporated in the EIA-EMP Study to reduce the overall pollution load in the area. The Committee desired that the baseline data collected from July 2010 to July 2011 (which includes PM10 and PM 2.5) should be presented for seasons except monsoon) – post-monsoon/winter/summer. The AAQ stations should be representative of the meteorology and project area.

 

The Committee sought a detailed R&R Plan and a CSR Plan with detailed activities, implementation schedule, details of villages, budgetary provisions (capital and recurring). The Committee also desired that details of issues of tribals and their livelihood should be incorporated.

 

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

 

 

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

 

The proposal was last considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 20th-21st June 2011 and the clarifications/further information sought therein were further considered.

 

The proponent made presentation. It was informed that a temporary external OB dump would be created in the mineralised area within leasehold during the initial 7 years of operation; the maximum height of this OB dump would be 28m over an area of 175 ha. Simultaneous backfilling and re-handling of OB from the temporary external dump would commence from 3rd year onwards and from 8th year onward there would be no external dump. The height of internal dump of 180m would be gradually increased during 20th -25th year of OC operation to a maximum height of 120 m above surface and a total combined height of internal and external dump of 120 + 180 = 300m). It was stated that the entire mined out area of 1020.66 ha would be restored back to the pre-mining state or a better state through various reclamation measures. It was informed that slope stability study carried out by CIMFR has indicated that the internal dump height would be 120 m consisting of 6 benches of 20m each would not result in dump failures. The Study has recommended specific stability measures such as provision of garland drain, gabion toe wall, maintaining a minimum distance of 120 m between dump toe and bank of River Mand, retaining wall near toe of dump along haul road, grassing of dumps reinforced with geo-textile material in critical patches and reclamation with vegetation at the final stage. The proponent stated that all the aforesaid recommendations of the CIMFR study would be strictly followed. The proponent also stated that the study has also indicated that mine inundation by collapse of embankment on River Mand, will occur only if caving is done. However, a 500m solid barriers between OC and UG mining at the place where UG mining will start below OC mining would be left.

 

The proponent presented a detailed year-wise calendar plan for external OB dumping, internal dumping and re-handling in tabular form. It was informed that initially, a small amount of 16.20 Mm3 of OB would be used in the construction of embankment along River Mand (since the HFL of River Mand is 279.575 msl, whereras some portions of the coal block lie below the HFL), which would be about 12m in height, 30m wide and 3m above the HFL of River Mand and stone pitching along the slopes of the banks would also be done and the slopes stabilised by planting suitable grass and shrubs. It was stated that during 3rd to 25th year of OC operation an estimated 965 Mm3 of OB would be dumped internally raising the dump height to backfill the decoaled void of 180m and further increase to 120m above ground level. During this period, an estimated 36.82 Mm3 of OB would be re-handled from external OB dump to reduce the external OB dump from an area of 174.98 ha to 140 ha and height from 28m to ground level. From 26th year to 31st year of mine operation, ‘pruning’ of internal dump would begin for ensuring safety and stability, by rehandling of 349.02 Mm3 of OB into the internal dump area of 1020.66 ha reducing the dump height to a max. height of 12 m above ground level only from the original height of 120m. It was informed that there would be no void at the end of OC mining.

In regard to UG mining, it was stated that UG mining is to begin even as OC mining is in progress and the depillaring operation is planned to start after 12th year of UG mining.  The proponent clarified that as per DGMS recommendation and Subsidence Prediction modelling study carried out by CIMFR regional centre has recommended that all the panels demarcated in seam IV, III and II of Taraimar Block can be developed and depillared and top seam IV and III are contiguous and should be depillared simultaneously followed by seam-II. All 3 seams would be extracted by continuous miner by Bord & Pillar method. Life of the UG mine at 1 MTPA capacity is 75 years. The study recommends monitoring of groundwater movements (subsidence slope and strain) during depillaring of the proposed extraction panels. The study further recommends that in order to protect River Mand from surface subsidence, a safe distance of 60m should be left from the river bank as recommended for depillaring operations. The proponent has stated that they would strictly follow the recommendations of the CIMFR Study. The proponent also stated that although the Subsidence Prediction Study has indicated a maximum cumulative subsidence of 2839mm over the dump from depillaring and since no important surface features exist on the surface other than OB dump, the magnitude of subsidence is not significant.

DGMS, Dhanbad vide letter no. DGMS/SQ/2-011/78 dated 10.10.2011 has stated that due to likely lowering of the dump surface in the form of troughs, cracks which are expected to develop on surface and for spontaneous heating resulting in fire in the seam and an apprehension of in-rush of water from River Mand through the cracks and potholes, and therefore; caving method of depillaring is not advised and an alternate method other than caving should be adopted.

The comments of Shri B.P. Singh, Director of Mines Safety, Director General Mines Safety, Dhanbad and former member, EAC dated 27.11.2011 on the slope stability report and issues of safety of UG mining below OC workings/dump forwarded to the Ministry, were also considered by the Committee and was read out to the EAC, as Shri Singh had expressed his inability to be present for the meeting. The letter states that the 301m dump height is very high and proper slope and gradient of the OB dump should be maintained. Subsidence is reported to be 3,000-3,500 mm which could lead to accidents and blockage and there could be danger of mine inundation. A batter against River Mand has been suggested. The letter of Shri B.P. Singh further states that depillaring of seams IV, III, II by caving poses very high risks due to dangers of pit slope failure, dangers of parting failures leading to accidents, dangers of inundation due to subsidence and embankment failure of River Mand and dangers of fires in OB dumps migrating to UG workings. The letter states that UG working with caving is not a safe option and suggests that depillaring should be done by non-caving method such as use of continuous mining with active fill technology (CMAFT), or OB mixed with flyash. Further, depillaring operation scheduled after 12 years of underground mining should be carried out only with prior approval and directions of DGMS.

The proponent informed that a detailed Wildlife Conservation and Management Plan has been prepared and approved by PCCF/CWLW vide letter no. 2618 dated 16th November 2011. Under the WLCMP, 4 sites identified as “Elephant Use Area” namely near Bhahalapara (part of Sisriga RF in 25 ha, Khujibari near village Kudmura-25 ha, Kudmura village in the bank of river Mand-25 ha, near Sirtha village -108 ha for habitat improvement by creation of water source and salt licks, development of salt licks, implementation of soil conservation measures, addressing human–wildlife conflict issues, vigil and fire protection measures, creation of Conservation awareness, anti-depredation measures, etc. Conservation plan would be implemented for 25 years with budgetary provision of Rs 2.5 crores. It was informed that potential buyer for coal rejects, namely M/s ACB (India) Ltd., Raigarh/Korba and M/s RR Energy Ltd, Raigarh have been identified and an MOU entered with them for utilising the washery rejects of 2.7 lakh T/year and 1.8 lakh/year respectively. It was informed that the proponent has after studying various options of coal transportation zeroed in on the option of transportation of 11,000 TPD of coal by MGR to the linked plant for a distance of 71km, which would be established within 5 years, almost parallel to the State Highway involving the least forest cover and least disturbance to human habitation or villages. A detailed R&R Plan, CSR and Tribal Welfare Development Plan were submitted for a total cost of Rs 205 crores. Further, a provison of Rs 65 crores for Tribal Welfare Development Plan has been earmarked from the Rs 130 crores for CSR. A detailed CSR Plan ahs been prepared covering 15 villages of the area for the initial 5 years with a budgetary provision of Rs 28 crores.

 

The committee observed that the overall height of the internal dump is 300m. Further, as the mine is in high rainfall area, erosion is expected to be high during rainy season and collapse of the OB dumps due to run–off from rainfall is a distinct possibility. The Committee desired that the Slope Stability Modelling Study should be got carried for dump failure by taking into consideration parameters such as peak rainfall data (not for single day but for a cumulative number of high rainfall days, compaction for OB stabilisation, mix of soil material which increases dump stability and reduces dump slope failures, water erosion characteristics of the dump, etc. Based on modelling, the best option for stabilisation should be selected, checked with actual data/situation and appropriative course corrections taken thereon. The Committee noted that a 500m barrier is to be left between underground mine and opencast mine.

 

The Committee noted that UG mining is proposed underneath the OC mine/dump, even as OC mining is in progress. The Committee also noted that the Mining Plan is vague on the status of OC mine and the year of commencement of UG mining and merely states “after substantial progress of the OC mine, depillaring operation can be commenced”.  The details of comprehensive calendar plan of the OC-cum-UG mine has not been given in the approved Mining Plan of the MOC. The Committee also noted that depillaring operation is to begin 12 years after commencement of UG mining. The Committee was of the view that the only after due diligence of the safety issues of dumping to a max. height of 300m of dump height; UG mining below the OC mining should be undertaken. The Committee was also of the view that the aspect of depillaring with/without caving needs to be reviewed thoroughly at that stage. The Committee after discussions was of the view that the decision on the matter of undertaking UG mining below OC mine/internal dump and the process of depillaring 12 years thereafter with caving thereafter should be reviewed prior to start of UG mining and in case of serious safety issues, UG mining should not commence or could do so after a thorough risk assessment by DGMS and its prior approval. The Committee decided that no flyash should be used for backfilling of mine voids without proper study.

 

The Committee desired that the grassland should be developed as part of habitat restoration for elephants using the area as habitat. The Committee desired that the Wild life Conservation Plan should be raised from Rs 2.5 crores to Rs 5 crores for 25 years. The Committee recommended a time limit of 5 years for the establishment of MGR for coal transportation and that the MGR route should be aligned to cause minimal disturbance to movement of wild fauna. For the initial 5 years, the transportation could be by road to railway siding at Kharsia which is 60 km from mine and thereafter to Korba. The Committee desired that proponent should in consultation with PCCF (WL), Govt. of Chhattsgarh introduce alert/waning system such as whistle, horn, etc and train their drivers of MGRs for reducing train speeds to enable the wild animals including wild elephants to move away from the MGR tracks.

 

The Committee recommended provision of annuities of Rs 2500/month to vulnerable persons found in and around the project area. The Committee recommended that the relocation of 750 PAFs should be completed within a time frame in consultation with the District Administration. The Committee recommended that the proponent continue with the CSR Plan prepared for the 15 villages for the life of the project.

The Committee after discussions recommended the project for environmental clearance with the aforesaid conditions.

 

5.       Expansion of Mangrol Valia Opencast Lignite Mine Project (4.2 MTPA to 7.4 MTPA and expansion in ML area from 2080 ha to 3019 ha) of M/s Gujarat Industries Power Company Ltd., located in Tehsil Mangrol and Valia in districts Surat and Bharuch, Gujarat (Further consideration of TOR)

 

The proposal was earlier considered for TOR in the EAC meeting held on18TH -19TH April 2011, and the issues raised/clarifications sought by the Committee were further considered.

 

The proponent made presentation. It was informed that the annul requirement of 7.4 MTPA of lignite would be met from 3 working pits – Pit-1 (2.4 MTPA), Pit-2 (4.2 MTPA) and Pit-3 (0.8 MTPA which would be enhanced to 3.2 MTPA after exhaustion of Pit-1). It was informed that the proponent had examined three options to reduce the area for external dumping of OB with a view to minimising agricultural land for OB dumping:

 

Option-1           To keep all the OB on the mineralised area until mine void becomes sufficient to                          start backfilling.

Option-2           Keep all the OB in external OB dump until the mine voids are ready for backfilling.

Option-3           Keep part of the OB in the mineralised area and part in ext. Ob dump till mine voids are ready for backfilling and to re-handle the total OB at the end of mine life.

 

It was informed that Options 1 and 2 were found to be unfeasible, as in option-1, the OB if stored in the mineralised area, would block the mine from advancing and reaching the bottom seam and in option-2, the external OB dump area would be over 710 ha and requires to be reduced as per MoEF suggestion. Option-3 has therefore been selected as given below:

 

Total Area for External OB Dump and Mining area

 

S.N.

Particular

Area in  ha

Original Proposal

Revised Proposal (Option-3)

Reduction

In ML area

1

Mining Lease area (A)

2080

2060

20

2

Additional area for External Dump

980

309

671

3

Additional Mine area for extension of Mine from 110 depth to 150 m depth

650

650

0

 

Total area required for extension

3710

3019

691

 

 

DETAILS OF LAND REQUIREMENT AS PER OPTION-3

S.N.

Particulars

Agriculture land

(ha)

Waste land  (ha)

Total area

(ha)

1.

Original ML area

1971.29

108.71

2080

2.

Revised ML area(a)

1951.29

108.71

2060

3.

Additional area (b)

723.40

235.60

959

 

Total Project Area (a+b)

 

2674

 

344.31

 

3019

 

Proposed Land Use Pattern As Per Option-3

Land Use

ML Area

(ha) under Option-3

Additional area

 

(ha)

Total Project area (inclusive of additional area) in ha

Mining

1188.21

650

1838.21

Dumping

147.63

309

456.63

Top soil stacking

50

-

50

Lignite stacking

10

-

10

Infrastructure

2.80

 

2.80

Area of rationalisation

661.36

 

661.36

Total

2060

959

3019

 

It was informed that in Option-3, the rated capacity of the expansion would remain unchanged at 7.4 MTPA. Mining would be mechanised using diesel hydraulic shovels in combination with dumpers. Mining would start at 20m and the ultimate working depth would be 150m. Stripping ratio would be 6.02/T of lignite (including re-handling). The total estimated OB generation would be 1204.12 Mm3, of which 156.34 Mm3 of OB would be temporarily stored in an external dump of 50m height in 394 ha area and 36.44 Mm3 of OB would be temporarily stored in the mineralised area and re-handled. Thus, the total quantity of OB to be re-handled and backfilled would be 192.78 Mm3. The balance 947.02 Mm3 would be backfilled and 64.32 Mm3 of OB would be backfilled into the neighbouring Vastan Lignite Mine void. It was informed that the company would incur an additional cost of Rs 1200 crores for re-handling of OB. The total life of the mine is 35 years/38 years with backfilling and re-handling. The total water requirement is 770 m3/d. R&R involves 3 villages within the additional ML area. R&R does not involve homestead losers. The ML is drained by River Moti. There are existing road, railway line, electric power line and streams present in the Mangrol mine lease extended area. There are no National Parks, WL Sanctuaries, RF/PFs, etc in the study area. Coal transport & evacuation would be by dedicated road and then by conveyor from the mine stock yard to the linked power plant. The proponent also made a presentation on the status of compliance of environmental conditions stipulated in earlier EC dated 21.07.2003. The details of CSR activity were also presented.

 

The Committee after discussions agreed to Option-3. The Committee desired that the CSR funds of Rs 7.75 crores earmarked for 2010-2011, should also continue for life of mine for Rs 7.75 crores/annum.  The Committee observed that most of the conditions stipulated in the EC are being complied with.

 

The Committee after discussions recommended TOR at Annexure 4 along with specific conditions recommended by the Committee above read with general conditions given in Annexure 7.

 

 

6.         Durgapur II/Sariya Coal Block (2 MTPA) of M/s DB Power Limited, located in Mand-Raigarh Coalfields, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh (EC based on TOR granted on 23.10.2008)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that Durgapur II/Sariya Coal Mine Block was allotted to M/s DB Power Limited on 6.11.2007 by MOC for linked 2x600MW TPP at village Baradarah, dist. Raigarh as per MOU entered with Govt. of Chhattisgarh. The total land requirement is 540.75 ha of which 290.399 ha is forest land, 238.38 ha is agricultural land, 3.642 ha is waste land, 0.542 ha is surface water bodies, and 9.813 ha is others (which totals 542.776 ha) Mining Plan has been approved by MOC on 25.06.2009.

 

Proposed Land use

S.N

Description

As per revised Mine Plan September 2011

Area  (ha) at the end of

5th year

8th year

Mine life

1.

a)Mining/Excavation

112.56

192.5

517.48

b)Settling pond at surface*

5.00

5.00

0.00

2.

Surface Dump

 

 

 

a) Surface Dump Within ML area

96.05

150.00

0.0

b)Top soil dump

2.00

2.00

0.00

3

Facilities

 

 

 

 

a)Office buildings, coal stockpile etc.

5.5

5.5

0.00

 

b) Road

5.00

5.00

2.00

 

c) Undisturbed

314.64

180.75

21.27

 

 

Total ML area (ha)

 

540.75

 

540.75

 

540.75

 

The rated capacity of coal production is 2 MTPA.  Mining would be mechanised using a combination of shovel-dumper and surface miner. Ultimate working depth is 180m which would be reduced to 40m at the post mining stage. Grade of coal is D to F. The ML is drained by River Mand and its tributaries. A few first streams traverse through the ML. The drainage of the Block is River Mand flowing at a distance of 3.5 km in the west and Sariya Nala flowing at 0.1 km in the south. It was clarified that no embankment is required as the RL of the mining is higher than the nala. However, first order streams within the ML area would be excavated.

 

An estimated 409.10 Mm3 of OB generated would be stored in an external OB dump of 100m in an area of 96.05 ha. Partial backfilling would begin during 6th year and concurrent backfilling of 412.43 Mm3 of OB during 8th to 35th year of mine life. An amount of 72.662 Mm3 of OB would re-handled to be backfilled in the decoaled void raising the backfilled area to 50m above ground level. At the post mining stage, 299.43 ha of the decoaled void of 540.75 ha would be reclaimed as a water body (241.32 ha) and the balance backilled and reclaimed with plantation. The depth of the final void of 180m to 55m.

 

The total water requirement is 741m3/day (406 m3/day-mining and 335m3/day for domestic use). It is proposed to use bore well water in the initial stage. The ground water level is in the range of 1m-13m bgl (pre-monsoon) and 0.1- 9.8 m bgl (post-monsoon). The project involves R&R of 128 PAF’s from the villages of Taraimar (48), Bayasi, ,Dharamjaigarh (16), Bayasi /Medarmar (64), Dharam colony included in Taraimar. The relocation site would be in Sagarpur(Potiya) within Dharmajaigarh Tehsil in Raigarh. The total cost of R&R would be Rs 770.01 lakhs.

 

There are no National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserves in the 10km buffer zone. The study area is rich in Sal forests and a number of endangered fauna including elephants are reported. Sherband RF is located at a distance of 0.08 km south and 3 protected forests are also found in the buffer zone. It was informed that proposal for diversion of 290.399 ha of forestland (Protected Forest + Revenue forest) is under process at the State Govt. It was informed that the Wild Life Conservation Plan has been prepared and submitted to the State Govt. The Plan includes measures such as fencing, fire protection, creation of water holes, salt lick, flower and fruits trees, creation of hide, habitat improvement, eco–development, cattle immunisation, eco-tourism, etc. Estimated cost of the WLCP is Rs 490 lakhs. 

 

It was stated that coal is proposed to be transported by 50-T trucks to linked thermal power plant of M/s D.B. Power near Kharsia at a distance of 85km. Coal is to be transported by road to Robertson’s Siding at a distance of 65km. It was informed that SECL is planning a new line for coal transportation for Raigarh coalfield and the same may be partly utilised for the transportation of coal for Sariya mine also. It was informed that a private railway siding would be established with 4-5 other coal companies whose blocks fall in the area for link upto Robertson’s Siding. The expected year of commissioning of common rail corridor is 2016, which would eliminate entire road transportation. A coal stock facility has also been provided for accommodating one week’s production. It was stated that a 2km stretch of Dharamjaigarh-Kharsia State Highway (No.22), along northern boundary is to be diverted along the NW boundary. Capital cost of the project is Rs 425 crores. The cost of EMP measures is Rs 421.34 lakhs or Rs 21.07/T of coal produced and Rs 299.41 lakhs/year (recurring) cost or Rs 14.97/T of coal. It was informed that Public hearing was held on 28.02.2011. CSR at Rs 5/T of coal with a provision of Rs 170 lakhs (capital) and Rs 100 lakhs (recurring) would be implemented. Life of mine is 35 years.

 

The Committee noted that the mining lease area has been reduced from the original ML area of 693.326 ha to 540.750 ha as there was widespread opposition against the project during the Public Hearing for acquisition of a town which forms a part of the lease and the details thereof were not presented to the Committee. In this regard, Chairman EAC read out news clipping of Times of India dated 02.03.2011 on the matter of serious objections from the public on the proposed acquisition of land for the coal mine project. The Committee also noted that during the Public Hearing, the people had insisted that no mining should be done in Dharmanjaigarh Nagar Panchayat as it is densely populated with well developed community facilities. The Committee also noted that a Writ Petition No. 3876 of 2011has been filed in the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur against the proposed mining in Dharmajaigarh Nagar Panchayat Area. The Committee sought the response of the proponent on the matter. The Committee sought details of the ML – original and revised, in terms of land use and mining operations.

 

The Committee desired that the height of the proposed OB dump of 100m over 150 ha should be reduced and the details of reworking OB management furnished. The Committee desired that the area of the final void of a depth of 40m in an area of 230 ha should be reduced by backfilling/rehandling of OB. The Committee desired that the map showing movement of elephant in the study area vis-à-vis elephant migratory corridor from Sarguja-Dharamjaigarh Forest Divisions should be provided on a map along with details of frequency of elephant movement in the area. Details of migratory corridor also provided. The Committee desired that the WL Conservation Plan should be prepared in consultation with the proponent of the neighbouring Durgapur-Taraimar so that free passageways between the adjoining forest areas and coal blocks can be created for free movement of animals even as mining operations commence. The Committee desired that a thick 3-tier plantation should be developed between the mine and habitation which should be at least 500m from the mine site and details thereof furnished including on a map. The Committee also desired that proponent should expedite the process of establishing railway siding ensuring that the minimum fragmentation forest and safety of elephants present in the area should be ensured. The Committee desired that the feasibility of coal transportation by conveyor-cum-rail mode requires being studied using common facilities/infrastructure such as Railway siding and railway track for neighbouring coal mine projects, which may come up in the area and details furnished and also shown on a  toposheet. The Committee desired that the rail corridor should not fragment forests. The Committee desired that the R&R Plan should include Plan for the 21 tribal PAFs and details furnished and issues of PESA (Panchyat Extension to Scheduled Areas) under Tribal Rights Act incorporated. CSR should include supply of drinking water to villagers.

 

In response to Committee’s observations, the proponent informed that the ML area had been reduced from 693.326 ha to 540.750 ha deleting areas with high population.  Further, the proponent informed that no excavation would be carried out within 45m of habitation in Dharmajaigarh Nagar Panchayat. The application for EC has been made with a revised ML area of 540.75 ha with changes in mine lease area mine lease area reduction in mineable reserves, quantum of overburden generation, life of mine, number of displacees and land loser, etc. The proponent informed that NOC has been obtained from the Gram Panchayts of two villages. In addition, the proponent took an undertaking with the District Magistrate that the religious places would not be disturbed.

 

The Committee decided to further consider the project after receipt of the details sought by the Committee in the earlier paras.

 

 

7.         Radhikapur East including (Utkal F) Coal Mine Block (5 MTPA) with Coal Washery (5 MTPA) of M/s Tata Sponge Iron Ltd. located in Chendipeda Tehsil, Angul District, Orissa (Further consideration of EC based on TOR granted on 16.11.2007)

 

The proposal was earlier considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 18-19 April 2011 and the response of the proponent to clarifications sought therein was further considered.

 

The proponent informed that the 3 JV partners namely, Tata Sponge, SPS Steel & Power, and Narbheram Power & Steel Pvt. Ltd who have been jointly allocated the block to share the coal produced on a pro rata basis, also would establish the pit head coal washery of 5 MTPA at the mine site.  EC has been obtained for the two of the linked FBC based Power projects and the third FBC based TPP is under consideration of the Ministry.  It was further informed that the proposal for diversion of 215.919 ha is pending with the State Government, details of which have been furnished to the Ministry.

 

The Committee after discussions recommended the proposal for environmental clearance subject to MOEF Circular dated 09.09.2011.

 

 

8.       Merta Road Lignite Mine (1 MTPA) of M/s NSL Nagapatnam Power and Infratech Pvt.Ltd. Dist. Nagaur, Rajasthan (TOR)

 

Proponent expressed inability to be present before the EAC for the presentation in the meeting.

 

 

9.     Urtan North Underground Coal Mine Project (0.6 MTPA in 475 ha) of M/s Urtan North Mining Company Ltd., Dist. Anuppur, M.P. (TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the proposal is for opening a new underground coalmine project of a total ML area of 475 ha consisting of  5.3816 ha Govt. land (gouchar (grazing) land), other Govt. land (nala, pond, etc) 25.997 ha, private agricultural land, habitation 25.997 ha. No forestland is involved. The nearest National Parks are Sanjay National Park and Bandhavgarh National park at the distance of 47 km in the North. There are 4 Reserve forests and 5 protected forests in the study area. The total lease area would be mined by underground mining and area for surface structures is 22.98 ha, which is under surface rights, which includes 4.2 ha for infrastructure facilities including CHP, main office ETP, main office pit office, incline 1&2 (0.50 ha), 0.50 is for settling pond, 1 ha is for coal stock yard, 1 ha is for essential quarter, 1.50 ha is for waste dump, 0.20 ha is for explosive magazine, 1.63 ha green belt around plant (total 10.54 ha). The ML also includes a coal washery of 8.77 ha. Mining is mechanised by Board & Pillar. Ultimate working depth is 454m and the topmost seam is at 282m. Water requirement is 550 m3/day (285 m3/day for mining from mine water, 265 m3/day is for domestic use from bore well. R&R involves only land oustees of Muhari, Baskhala, Thodha, Baskhali. Drainage of the block is by River Kewai at a distance of 2.7 km along the eastern side & Chauder nala flows at 0.2 km distance and 11 other nalas within 12.8 km area. Coal evacuation/transportation would be by 20-T coal tippers upto the nearest railway siding at Bijuri at a distance of 20km away for further transport by rail. Capital cost of the project is Rs 250 crores. Life of the mine is 46 years.

 

The pit head washery is proposed to be located within the lease hold for production of clean coal with 17% + 1% ash, middling with 52% ash & moisture which would be utilised for generation of power in TPP and coal rejects (0.09 MTPA) which would be also used in power generation.

 

The Committee after discussions recommended TOR for UG mine and washery as given in Annexures 3 and 5 read with general conditions given in Annexure 7.

 

 

10.      Wani Coal Washery (4 MTPA) at Khasra No. 19, 37 of M/s Gupta Coalfields & Washeries Ltd., in village Brahmani, Tehsil Wani, Dist. Yavatmal, Maharashtra – Further consideration of EC based on TOR granted on 17.12.2007

 

The project was earlier considered in EAC (T&C) Meeting held on 28th-29th March 2011 and Committee had sought certain clarifications, which were further considered.

 

The project was placed for reconsideration after the receipt of comments of Maharashtra SPCB, vide letter no. BO/JD (APC)/TB-1/B-5428 dated 01.10.2011 by MOEF. The EAC members decided that since a copy of the response from Maharshtra SPCB was not received by the project proponent, an opportunity should be given to them to study the report and the project would be taken up in the next EAC meeting.

 

 

11.        Mahavir Coal Washery (5 MTPA) of M/s Mahavir Coal Washeries Pvt. Ltd., located at village Bhengari, Tehsil Gharghora, Dist. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh (TOR)

 

The project was earlier considered on 29th-30th August 2011.

 

The proponent made the presentation. It was informed that Mahaveer Coal Washeries Pvt. Ltd (MCWPL) is a subsidiary of Mahaveer Group. The main business of the group has been Coal Trading. The present proposal is for establishing a new coal washery (commercial) of 5 MTPA capacity in a land area of 22.20 ha, which is mostly agricultural land. No forestland is involved. There are no ecologically sensitive areas found within 10km of the buffer zone. River Kurket flows at a distance of 3.6 km in the south-eastern side. There are 14 Forest blocks which include Protected Forest (5 PF), Reserve forest (9 RF) and Open Mixed forest block found within 10 km radius from the project boundary. The nearest village is about 7km from the washery.

 

It was stated that the 5 MTPA of raw coal (of ash content of 45-50%) would yield 2.2 MTPA of clean coal (of ash content of 34 %), middling of 2.35 MTPA (of ash content of 58%) and 0.45 MTPA of coal rejects (of ash content of 86.5 %), which would be sent to miscellaneous industrial users. The washery would be two-product washery operated on a wet process using Heavy Media Cyclone (wet process comprising crushing, screening, washing and handling). The washery design has inbuilt flexibility to produce washed coal of quality <34% ash content suitable for the power generation, sponge iron and cement plants. The washery would be operated on zero-discharge. The users of coal rejects in an FBC based TPP are being identified. Of the total 22.2 ha area, 4.97769 ha is for washery plant, 2.26626 ha is stockyard for raw coal, 1.01173 ha is for clean coal, middling and rejects, 3.84455 ha is for others (internal road, maintenance shed, office, stores, etc), 7.32489 ha is for green belt, 2.76808 ha as vacant land.  It was confirmed that no construction has been started on the site.

 

It was informed that sources of raw coal would be Chhal and Baroud OCP of M/s SECL, which are located at a distance of 14km and about 15km respectively. The proposed mode of coal transportation of raw coal would be by a proposed railway line of TRN Energy from its site to SECL proposed line from Baroud and Chhal OCPs to Roberstson’s Siding. A rail link of the proponent from Coal washery upto TRN Energy Line is proposed. Until such time the railway line is constructed and made operational, coal transportation would be by road for Baroud: Gharghora-Chhal-Robertson/Bilaspur and for Chhal: Robertson/Bilaspur-Ambikapur. Robertson Siding is about 17km from the proposed site of the washery and it was stated that it is uneconomical to establish a rail link to Robertson Siding.

 

It was informed that the site considered for washery at Bhengari is located close and about 700 m from the existing coal transportation road through which SECL is already transporting the coal from Chhal and Baroud mines. The proponent further stated that the State revenue Department has surveyed the proposed project site. The site does not involve any R&R issue. Infrastructure facilities /logistic support available as the proposed washery site is adjacent to the existing 12MW Bio-mass based Power Plant of MECBL, a sister concern. Other suitable sites close to the mine, free from R&R issues, reasonably away from the forests and habitation, less vegetated and uncultivated are not available.

 

The proponent submitted that since the washery merely intercepts the existing route of transport of raw coal by road, no additional impacts is envisaged. The clean coal, middling and coal rejects would also be dispatched by the same route to the end users until the railway line is established. The proponent assured that a private dedicated railway siding would be setup for the proposed washery once location of railway siding for the above project from SECL rail net work is finalised and also assured that the transportation of washed coal, middlings, rejects would be by rail. The proponent requested the Committee to allow transportation of coal by road to 2x300MW TPP, which is being located near to the coal washery site at Bhengari, till such time rail link is established. It was informed that the company is in process of taking consent of SECL to link their railway siding which will be coming up in 4-5 years.

 

The Committee desired that at the time of Environment Clearance, the proponent should produce documents for SECL railway siding. The Committee recommended TOR as given in Annexure-3 read with specific conditions recommended by the Committee as given above read with general conditions given in Annexure 7.

 

 

13.        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 17th-18th October 2011 and the details/clarifications sought by the EAC were further considered.

 

The proponent made presentation. It was informed that the stripping ratio of 14.3 is high. As per the Mining Plan approved by the MOC, during the first 3 years, two external OB dumps of a height of 60m in areas of 626 ha and 328 ha would be created. Internal and external dumping would be carried out from the 5th year onwards and from the 15th year only concurrent backfilling until mining reached the ultimate depth of 205m. The total OB generated during the life of mine would be 1086.21Mm3 and 904.67 Mm3 of OB would be backfilled into the mine void. It was sated that of the total ML area of 2402 ha, the total quarry area is 1135 ha and the final mine void would be merely 52 ha of a depth of 205m and volume of 181.6 Mm3, which is merely 16.7% of the total excavation.

 

It was stated that a provision of Rs 6 akhs/ha of ML area (2402 ha) has been made for mine closure activity amounting to Rs 144.12 crores as per guidelines of MoC, GOI. The final mine closure prepared includes dozing, grading and stabilisation of the final void and slopes, for which sufficient fund provision is available in the Mine Closure Corpus fund.  It was stated that it is also proposed to fill the floor of the final void upto 5m thickness (volume 2.6Mm3) at an estimated cost of about Rs 13.3 crores from Mine Closure Fund. The void would be filled with water. The final void would be 2.5 km away from the nearest habitation village Bithnok, barbed fencing would be erected around the final void to prevent entry of human being and cattle. It was further informed that during the post-mining stage, water quality monitoring would be carried out for a period of 3 years and report submitted to SPCB and MOEF.

 

The estimated cost for complete filling of the Final Mine void would however be Rs 927.6 crores, which would affect the economic viability of the project. Thus, rehandling of OB is an expensive option as the cost of mining would be high because of OB transport and it was stated that no land is available for external OB dump along the dip side and there is forest land on the south and east of the final pit. It was informed that on the west of the pit, there are sand dunes and dumping on the north and north eastern in the mineralised area would require rehandling of OB, which will have a direct impact on the transfer price of lignite.

 

The Committee noted that the water in the final void filled would be brackish and to leave such water body at the post mining stage is an environmentally unsustainable option in a desert region. The Committee desired that the proponent rework the options of final mine closure and present to the Committee. The Committee requested the proponent to examine storing OB in mineralised area, which would reduce the cost of transportation and cost of acquiring land for external OB dumps in a non-mineralised area and also reduce rehandling costs. The Committee suggested that the dumps should be stabilised with grass species such as Sacchrum munja until the OB is rehandled should also be examined. The Committee desired that the option of storing in 3 small dumps, as the mine advances, within the mineralised area should be examined.

 

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

 

 

14.        Gare IV/1 Opencast Coalmine Project (Expn. of ML area from 705.556 ha to 978.654ha at 6 MTPA) and Expn. of Coal Washery from 2.4 MTPA to 3.2 MTPA) of M/s Jindal Steel & Power Ltd. located in dist. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh (Further consideration of EC based on TOR  24.04.2008)

 

The proposal was considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 18th -19th July 2011 wherein it was decided that a WL Conservation Plan for conservation of elephants reported/visiting the area should be prepared and presented before the Committee. In addition, the Committee also sought status of Stage-I clearance for the forestland vide MOEF Circular dated 31.03.2011.

 

Proponent made presentation of Conservation Plan for the Elephants reported in the area. It was informed that there are 11 villages in the buffer zone where the elephants   have been reported occasionally. These villages include Barkachar, Kenalibahal, Karmgarh, Chakabahal, Kushmel, Bhagora, Hamirpur, Navapara, Podigaon, Devagaon, and Tamnar. It was informed that, based on secondary data and 15 days of field survey, a group of 8-10 elephants enter from Dhanubarush RF to Bakachar RF and Samaruna RF in Chhattisgarh. The elephants move back and forth after 10-15 days and move along buffer boundary towards Chergura forests in Chhattisgarh but the elephants never visit Gare IV/I project area. A WL Conservation Plan has been prepared and consists of a specific Plan/ measures to ensure that the elephants do not deviate from their normal passage and habitat to venture into villages and destroy crops, property, etc. The WL Conservation Plan also includes fencing along the quarry, areas of inhabitation such as colony, infrastructure, offices, etc. The Plan includes habitat restoration of area, which are undisturbed or reclaimed after mining by a mix of species found in the original ecosystem. A copy of the Stage-I FC dated 02.02.2011 for 91.179 ha, has been provided to the Ministry and also circulated to the EAC members along with the WL Conservation Plan.

 

The Committee decided that the comments of Dr.V.B. Mathur, WII would be obtained on the issue of whether the area is an (un-notified) elephant corridor as stated by Shri Kanoje, Ex- CF, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh and/or on the reported presence of elephants in the study area (core zone and buffer zone) and on the WL Conservation Plan of the PP.

 

The Committee decided to further consider the project in the next EAC meeting after receipt of the aforesaid details.

 

 

15.        Piparwar OCP (10 MTPA (nominal) and 11.5 MTPA of M/s in an area of 1120.25 ha) of M/s Central Coalfields Ltd., located in Piparwar Area, Dist. Chatra, Jharkhand (TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. The proposal is for expansion of the existing OCP from 10 MTPA to 11.5 MTPA. Proponent informed that the Piparwar OCP (10 MTPA) is an existing project with prior Environmental Clearance dated 11.06.2007. The proponent presented the status of compliance of earlier EC. It was informed that a production of 9.9 MTPA has been reached. The application is for approval for a peak capacity of 11.5 MTPA (15% increase over the EC), as the mine can produce higher than the normative capacity in one or more years during 6-7 years balance life of mine without any change increase in lease hold area, change in technology. It was clarified that the production will never exceed 11.5 MTPA. The existing land use of the ML area of1120.25 ha, consists of 63 ha is agriculture & fallow land, 630 ha area is under forest/plantation, 52.25 ha is waste land, 30 ha is water body, 249 ha is mining and 96 ha is under settlements and infrastructure. It was informed that there would be no external dump. It was further informed that silo system and bulk loading instead of pay loader is being introduced. Coal transportation is by use of 22-T capacity (250) dumpers. Silo loading bulk loading facilities cum railway siding is under construction, which is to be commissioned by March 2013. Mine to washery is by conveyor system, in-pit crushing existing. The total area to be brought under afforestation is 976 ha. Balance area to be developed with native species. Balance life of project is 11 years.

 

The Committee sought a copy of FC for 186.50 ha of forestland – consisting of 101.87 ha, 43.30 ha and 13.11 ha. The Committee stated that the PP could apply for a higher capacity, if required at this stage, instead of violating by exceeding the capacity of 11.5 MTPA applied for at a later stage. The Committee sought the minutes of the Public Hearing held on 19.5.2006 for the 10 MTPA project and its compliance status. The Committee observed that air pollution in the area is high and that coal transportation by rail and mechanized silo and wagon loading should be introduced and establishment of a railway siding should be provided to reduce the dust pollution in the area as presently the transportation of coal is by road. The Committee desired that native plant species including fruits trees should be planted under the afforestation plan for reclamation.  The Committee desired that clean drinking water should be provided to villagers.  

The Committee recommended TOR as per Annexure 4 incorporating the specific conditions given by the EAC as above read with general conditions given in Annexure 7.

 

 

16.        Ashoka OCP Expn. (10 MTPA to 15 MTPA with a peak capacity of 20 MTPA and expansion in ML area from 1834.60 ha to 1916.63 ha) of M/s CCL, located in dist. Chatra, Jharkhand (Further consideration of TOR)

 

The proposal was considered in the EAC meeting held on 23rd -24th May 2011 and the details/clarifications sought were further considered.

 

The proponent made a presentation. The proposal is for expansion of the existing OCP from 10 MTPA to 15 MTPA (with a peak capacity of 20 MTPA) and expansion of ML area from 1834.60 ha to 1916.63 ha. It was informed that coal transportation from pit top to washery and CHP would be by dumpers and from washery to FBC based TPP located at a d distance of 600m would be by closed belt conveyors and transport of coal to railway Siding would be by closed conveyors for a length of 200m. Bulk loading would be by silo and wagon loading system. Thus, the entire coal transportation on surface is by closed conveyor system. The proponent informed that the transport of coal from mine to pit top by closed conveyor with in-pit crushing has been examined and not found feasible as most the quarry is intersected by faults of various throw with splitting of seams favours applicability of shovel and dumper method of mining. The leasehold would have a pit head washery for 10 MTPA. The additional 5MTPA coal of Ashok expansion OCP would be sent to the Piparwar Washery in the adjoining Piparwar OCP. The proponent informed that the application for EC for an Integrated Ashok washery-cum-FBC based TPP is under consideration of MOEF. It was stated that no OB would be transported by trucks outside the mine. The entire OB would be backfilled upto 30m above ground level in an area of 120 ha and no external OB dump is proposed in Ashoka OCP. Of this, 10-25m could be rehandled to bring the void to 85m depth void (by reducing by 55m). It was explained that for reduction of final pit depth from 140m to 20-30 m requires  re-handling of 150 Mm3 OB, which is time consuming and uneconomical.  It was stated that forestry clearance for 186 ha of forestland for existing project was obtained on 03.09.1999 and FC for the balance 548 ha is to be applied. It was informed that a detailed R&R Plan for 250 PAF’s would be prepared as part of EIA/EMP.

 

The Committee noted that FC for the 548 ha of additional forestland required for the expansion project is yet to be applied for. The Committee desired that the present OB dump towards River Damodar should be planted with grass and shrubs for its stability to prevent siltation and the sides should be gently sloped and stabilised by compaction and with plantation. The Committee desired that OB management should be reworked to reduce the final pit void depth.

 

The Committee recommended TOR as per Annexure 4 incorporating the specific conditions given by the EAC as above read with general conditions given in Annexure 7.

 

 

17.        Proposed Dhori Group of Mines ((0.846 MTPA normative and 1.282 MTPA peak) of M/s Central Coalfields Ltd. located in dist. Bokaro, Jharkhand – EC based on TOR granted on 09.02.2009.

 

The project earlier considered in EAC meeting held on 29th-30th August 2011 and the issues raised therein were further considered.

The proponent made the presentation. Proponent agreed that the water bodies (abandoned pits) should be used for Pisci-culture with assistance of Fisheries department/Birsa Agriculture University, Ranchi for the benefit of local communities. Proponent informed that they have got the Forestry clearance (Stage –II) from the ministry - (i) Dhori Khas UGP (172.20 ha) vide letter F.No. 8-79/2003/FC dated 17.7.2008; (ii) NS Dhori OC/Dhori OCP (69.183 ha) vide letter no.8-69/2004/FC dated 2.3.2009; (iii) Dhori OC/ S Dhori (143.050 ha) vide letter F.No. 8-122/90/ FC dated 1.7.1996 and (iv) NS Dhori UG (70.568)vide letter F. No. 8-74/2003/FC dated 17.07.2008 (Total forestland : 455.00 ha). The Proponent committed to take mititigative measures to reduce dust pollution during blasting and a plan to minimize dust generation along the major approach roads and haul roads by providing sprinklers, additional tree plantation and better maintenance of road. Proponent also proposed monitoring of particulates at blasting site as per DGMS regulations.

It was informed that the OB dumping has been re-examined and an estimated 26 Mm3 of OB from Amlo OCP which would have been stored as an external OB dump would be filled into the mine voids of Dhori OCP. In addition, OB planned to be stored in 20-30m (final bench) ext. OB in this project of would be re-handled so that the final height of the ext. OB dump in this project will not exceed 10m. It was agreed to provide 10 m wide green belt in vacant area and in and around Dhori OCP and develop a 3-tier avenue plantation on both side of main roads and approach roads which would be black topped. It was agreed that in adiiton, physical barrier would be provided, if required (after monitoring of AAQ levels), to further reduce source point/generation point dust pollution. The issues raised in Public Hearing were presented in a tabular form along with the commitment made/action taken. It was agreed that a net work of 6-peizometers for regular monitoring of ground water would be established. It was informed that the radius of influence of Dhoni is 283 m from the mine periphery while in NS Dhori UGP and Dhoni Khas is 126 m, which is not significant. It was informed that the Final Mine Closure Plan has been prepared and is under submission.

The Committee observed that FC for the balance forest land should be obtained. The Committee desired that the proponent may like to contact Jain Irrigation Systems Ltd, which has evolved technology with minimum use of water for development of plantation and use of water in the mining operations (water con. measures). The Committee desired that as the Dhori and Amlo are adjacent mines, the 70 ha backfilled area of Dhori should be brought down upto ground level by reworking the OB management and revising the Final Mine Closure accordingly.

The Committee recommended the project for environmental clearance.

 

18.        Krishnashila OCP expansion coal mining project (4 MTPA to 5 MTPA (Peak) in an area of 851.78 ha) of M/s Northern Coalfields Ltd., Dist. Sonebhadra, U.P. (TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that EC was obtained on 02.02.2005 for 4 MTPA, and the present proposal is for expansion to 5MTPA as production is reaching 4 MTPA. It was informed that there is no plan to increase beyond 5 MTPA, which is the highest achievable production. It was stated that there are 32 coal block in main Singrauli basin (does not include Moher basin) of which 16 blocks are yet to be allotted which would yield about 15,000 MW. NCL has applied for 11 of these new blocks. Expansion to 5 MTPA is due to favourable geo-mining condition and by increasing number of working days. There would be no increase of lease area, no change in technology, no change in product mix, no lease renewal. Future expansion, if any, would be done by amalgamation of Krishnashila OCP and Khadia OCP which would take into account issues such as OB dumping. Drainage of the mine is controlled by seasonal streams originating from hillocks within the block and draining towards south into the Govind Ballabh Pant Sagar. There are National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserves in the study area. Of the total forestland of 720.89ha, FC has been obtained on 06.07.2006 for 235.99 ha, on 30.06.1998 for 258 ha for Bina-II (original name of Krishnasila) and 65.5 ha diverted from Khadia Project and 161.40 ha diverted from Bina Project.

 

Of the total land requirement for the project of 851.78 ha, 720.89 ha is forest land, 120.60 ha is Government land and 10.29 ha is tenancy land. Quality of coal is D and E. Of the total ML area of 851.78ha, 469.80 ha is for quarry, 164.80 ha is for external dump,12 ha is for coal stock yard, 4 ha is for infrastructure, 15.75 ha is for road/railways, 25 ha green belt/afforested area, 2 ha is for ETP, 10 ha is for CHP, 8.43 ha is for water body and140 ha for others. The production capacity is to expand from 4 MTPA to 5 MTPA (peak). Mining would be mechanised method by hydraulic extractor /shovel and dumper combination. Ultimate working depth is 180m. It was clarified that ultimately, there would be no void. The total balance OB is 288.31Mm3 of which internal dumping is 81.65%. It was clarified that no OB dumping would be done in already reclaimed (with vegetation) dumpsites. Balance life of OC mine is 22 years (remaining life, which includes18 years at peak production of 5 MTPA). R&R consisting of 21 PAFs has been completed. Capital cost of project is Rs741.62 crores. EMP cost is Rs 23.01 crores (capital) and costs for reclamation is Rs 605.90 lakhs. CSR for 2011-12 is Rs 30.60 lakhs and should continue for life of the project. Coal handling and evacuation at present is through road transport to HINDALCO to Power Plant at Renusagar and railway to various power plants in India. It was stated that of the 5 MTPA, 3 MTPA are tubed conveyors (by Aug. 2012) and 2 MTPA by wagons (crushed coal from CHP) to HINDALCO (linkage) which is about 7km from the mine. Approval for enhancement of coal production to 7.5 MTPA for Bina Extn project ahs been obtained on 13.2.2010. Public hearing of 4 MTPA of Krishnashila project held on 06.03.2003.  It was informed that Krishnashila area is a water scarce area and rain water harvesting measures have been put up.

 

The Committee observed that the environmental clearance is obtained on 02.02.2005, prior to EIA Notification 2006, and therefore a fresh Public Hearing is required for expansion to 5 MTPA. The Committee desired that since the project falls in the ‘Critically Polluted Area’ of Singrauli, the mitigative measures to be taken to reduce the pollution in the area under the Singuali Env.Action Plan’ prepared by MPPCB and UPPCB should be incorporated as part of the EIA-EMP study. This should include details of how the expansion will not increase the AAQ levels which are already critical should be submitted as part of EIA-EMP. The Committee observed that the Krishnashila projects falls in the catchment area of Govind Ballabh Pant Sagar (GBPS) and large number of seasonal streams and primary and secondary channels are originate from the hillocks and drain towards the south into the GBPS. The Committee desired that a detailed “Hydro geological study” is required of the area as part of the EIA-EMP Report. The Committee desired that a Detailed Area Drainage Study on the cumulative impact of operation of such large capacity mines should be submitted as part of EIA-EMP. The Committee desired that no final void should be left at the post mining stage as OB from neighbouring mines should be brought and details of integrated OB management should be furnished in the EIA-EMP Report to ensure that no voids are left. The Committee desired that all the major mining and environmental parameters for the existing and proposed expansion project should be prepared/brought out in tabular form and presented in the EIA-EMP Report.

 

The Committee recommended TOR as per Annexure 4 incorporating the specific conditions given by the EAC as above read with general conditions given in Annexure 7.

 

 

19.        Proposal on Flyash Utilisation of 1200 MW TPP of M/s NALCO in an abandoned         coalmine void of Bharatpur (South) of M/s Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Talcher     Coalfields, Dist. Angul, Orissa

 

Both NALCO and M/s MCL made a joint presentation. It was informed that the proposal is for utilisation of flyash generated from 1200 MW TPP (12 x 100 MW) of M/s NALCO into abandoned coal mine void of Bharatpur (South) of M/s Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., Talcher Coalfields, Dist. Angul, Orissa. It was informed that the CPP NALCO provides uninterrupted power supply to its Aluminium smelter Plant. The TPP’s coal consumption is 17,970 MT/day, and the ash generation is 7188MT/day. The total area of the ash pond is 800 acres. Three pond systems have been used. Present height of the dyke is 107m. River Brahamani flows on the southern side and controls the drainage of the area of the mine where the ash is proposed to be filled. Bangaru jhor is a 5th order stream, which flows in the north western side of the block and drains into River Brahamani. Ground water level is in the range of 3.42m to 10.12m bgl (pre-monsoon) and 2.87m bgl to 4.67m bgl (post-monsoon).

 

The methodology proposed by NALCO for filling mine voids is by using HCSD method (ash to water ratio 60:40). It was informed that the technology was not available for transportation beyond 14 km and since the distance between CPP and mine is 23 km, the technology could not be adopted. NALCO has therefore adopted lean survey disposal (ash to water ratio 10:90). However, this technology can be adopted for short term and emergency measures only.

 

NALCO informed that the mine void assessment of Bharatpur mine has been done by CMPDI. The capacity of void would be 13.30 Mm3 which is planned to be partially  filled up with flyash. M/s TCE has been appointed as consultant for the project. Provisional approval has been obtained from MCL. The proposal of Rs 167.5 crores has been approved by NALCO, Board, Consent to Establish has been obtained from Orissa SPCB on 29.06.201. In addition, orders of Rs 65 crores has been placed for procurement of pipes, and work order have been placed for equipment procurement and execution.

 

It was informed that an earthen bund is to be provided in the centre of mine void and a number of RCC Hume pipe would remove the water from the mine which would be displaced by filling ash. As per OSPCB CTE conditions, measures are to be taken to prevent leakage, to provide garland drain to prevent inflow, green belt around mine pit, environment monitoring of air, surface, ground water and soil, weekly monitoring of  water quality of river/stream water in case of slurry pipe crossing them, soil cover of the mine after complete filling. Detailed reclamation plan would be implemented after proper investigation and approval, ground water monitoring around mine pit with construction of peizometers and of existing well. Regular monitoring reports on quality of re-cycled water from mine void require to be submitted. It was further informed that the quality of leachates has been established through TCLP(Toxicity characteristic leaching Procedure) and the study indicates that the metals from PFA does not show high concentration of metals (Pb,Cr,Cd,Zn,Ni,Cu) in the leachates. The study has concluded that flyash dumping would not affect the ground water quality in area.

 

The Committee observed that the soil data presented is vague and the sampling frequency is not sufficient. The Committee also expressed its concern that the soil is porous sandy soil, all the leachates leach into ground. The Committee also stated that complexes could be formed, when organic matter is present, and there is a possibility of bio-concentration and bioaccumulation of heavy metals in food chain. The Committee further noted that the pH of the mine water is 3.65 which is acidic and could leach the heavy metals from the flyash. The water abstracted from the ash filled mine void as proposed for cattle/human consumption should not be permitted. This requires a detailed study. The Committee desired that the following study should be carried out by NALCO before dumping flyash into mine voids: Total analysis of flyash including heavy metals, hydrogeology of mine, area drainage, analysis of clay for presence of heavy metals, permeability of area, aquifer parameters using tracer techniques for transmission of leachates, ground water scenario of the area, chemistry of the mine water and the groundwater aquifers, use of suitable lining material before dumping flyash and monitoring, safety and stability of in-pit slurry, issues of safe transportation of slurry, etc.

 

The representative of OSPCB, Dr. Akhila Kumar Swar, SEE reported that the 21 MT/year of flyash is generated in Orissa, of which 10 MT/year is being utilised, of which 5% is for brick making and the rest of flyash is being used for filling mine voids with dry filling with ash in an area of 70 acres. It was informed that guidelines have been prepared for the same. It was stated that since a large no of coal washeries are coming up in the area and a number of Thermal Power plants are operating as on date, the flyash generation and its disposal has become a major problem. OSPCB has issued closure notice to 200 Power Plants in the area. The representative, OSPCB was of the view that filling up of flyash in mine voids is a good option. The representative sought details of technological option by which flyash csould be filled up in mine voids and acidity of mine water reduced, spillage and leakages from pipes transferring the flyash to the mines controlled.

 

After discussions, the Committee suggested that NALCO and Advisor, Flyash Division, DST also consult BARC, National Geophysical Research Institute and Principal Advisor to PM on the matter for their valuable suggestions in scoping the study which is inter-ministerial in nature. Manuals brought out by WHO could also be consulted for scoping the study.  MS stated that a Committee was constituted in MOC to deliberate on the issues of use of mine voids as a feasible option for dumping flyash.

 

The Committee after discussion decided to further consider the matter after receipt of details discussed in the aforesaid paras.

 

 

20.        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 (EC based on TOR granted on 11.07.2008)

 

The proposal was further considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 20th -21st June 2011 on the issues/clarifications sought by the Committee.

 

The proponent made presentation. It was stated that flyash dumping would be allowed only after conducting feasibility studies and soil leachability test with prior approval of MoEF. It was stated that details of monitoring data is displayed on the company website www.mcl.gov.in. The proponent informed that the final void assessed for the 6 MTPA project would be up to 180 m level with 47.15Mm3 OB consisting of 19.01 M m3 of OB of the present project is and an additional OB of 28.14Mm3 arranged from Lakhimpur OCP. It was informed that M/s Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd has been contacted on R&R, which would be implemented as per R&R policy of Govt. of Orissa. It was informed that MCL is providing additional/enhanced benefit to the land losers i.e. Rs 10 Lakhs in lieu of employment, Rs 3 Lakhs in lieu of plot, Rs 2.32 lakhs for building and other assistance. An additional Rs 1 lakh would be provided to oustees for early vacation of land. It was informed that CIL is entering into a MoU with Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai for implementation of CSR policy. Issues of alternate livelihood concerns and income generating activities are being addressed under CSR and R&R. It was informed that MCL has constituted Rehabilitation and Peripheral Development Advisory committee (RPDAC) under the chairmanship of Revenue Divisional Commissioner for effective implementation of CSR. It was agreed to provide long term annuities to vulnerable people of the society. It was informed that status of CSR and R&R is already a part of the company annual report.    

 

The Committee after discussion recommended the project for EC with a condition that although dumping of flyash is part of the Environmental Action Plan for the Angul-Talcher Region, no dumping of flyash should be undertaken in the MCL mines without feasibility studies for flyash dumping and on soil leachability and prior approval of the MOEF. This is so not only for this coalmine but for all coalmines in Angul-Talcher Region.

 

 

21.        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 (EC based on TOR granted on 11.07.2008) 

 

The proposal was further considered in the EAC (T&C) meeting held on 20th -21st June 2011 on the issues/clarifications sought by the Committee.

 

The proponent made presentation. It was informed that the total balance coal and OB as on 1.4.2011 is 19.55 MT and 25Mm3. Calendar Plan of production and OB generation which would be backfilled for the balance three years of the mine.

 

Year of operation

Calendar Plan of Production and OB generation

Coal (MT)

OB (Mm3)

Year

Cumulative

Year

Cumulative

 

2011-2012

8.00

8.00

16.98

16.98

2012-2013

7.00

15.00

5.58

22.56

2013-2014

4.55

19.55

2.44

25.00

 

It was informed that the entire OB 25Mm3 would be backfilled. The backfilled area would be reclaimed and re-vegetated. The mine would be closed after the balance mineable coal reserve (19.55MT) is extracted by the year 2013-14. It was informed that during post–mining, the total area of 437.10 ha would consist of,  plantation (210.57 ha), water body (248.20 ha), public use (92.19 ha), undisturbed (86.14 ha). A total 67,42,521 saplings would be planted throughout the mine life. It was clarified that the reclaimed land is not suitable for agriculture due to poor fertility. The remaining void area in the quarry would be developed as water harvesting structure. It was stated that CIL is entering into an MoU with Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai for implementation of CSR policy. MCL would follow the same. CSR cell has already been established at MCL Headquarters headed by a senior officer, GM (CSR).

 

The Committee after discussions recommended the project for environmental clearance.

 

 

22.        Cluster No.11 (9.1(normative) 9.9 MTPA (peak) capacity in an area of 4218 ha) of M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd., located in Raniganj Coalfields, W.B. (TOR)

 

The proponent made a presentation. It was informed that the cluster 11 consisting of 11 UG mines of grade B-C (best quality non-coking coal), is located in the east-central part of Raniganj coalfields in the Burdwan district of state of West Bengal. The mine is 30km from North–East of Asansol Township. Drainage controlled by Singaran Nallah and its tributaries finally drains into Damodar River.

 

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 5 mines of the cluster for a limited period. 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.  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 area to be completely backfilled and would be handed over for eco-restoration by an expert. Mine closure Plan is being prepared. It was stated that that SDL and continuous miner would be used to increase production and surface miner has been introduced in Shankarpur OCP. UG Mining involves stowing. There are problems of fire or subsidence in this cluster. Grade of coal is B, C which are of good quality. There is no forest land involved in the project. OC patches/mines are planned in uninhabited areas, free from surface features. The details of revised working of cluster -11 are given below:

 

Re-organisation of the Mines of Cluster-11 for EIA/EMP

 

S.N

Name of mine

UG/OC

ML Area

(ha)

Production capacity

(MTPA)

 

Life of mines

 

 

 

 

normative

peak

 

1

Krishnanagar

UG

772

0.24

3.00

>25

2.

Haripur Groups of mines

UG &OC

853

1.99

 

2.27

 

>25

A

Haripur

UG

0.60

0.78

>25

B

Chora Block incline

UG

0.99

0.99

>25

C

Chora 7,9 & 10 pits

UG

D

Bonbahal OC patch(25 ha)*

OC

0.40

0.50

3

E

Shankarpur/CL Jambad OC* patch /Mine(52 ha)

OC

 

Exhausted & being backfilled

3

New Kenda Group of mines

UG &OC

742

3.71

 

3.89

 

>25

A

New Kenda

UG

0.11

0.14

>25

B

W. Kenda OC Patch(49 ha)

OC

 

0.60

0.75

2

C

New Kenda* OC Patch(240ha)

OC

3.00

3.90

8

4.

Bahula Group of mines

UG

676

0.42

0.55

>25

A

Lower Kenda

 

0.13

0.17

>25

B

Bahula

UG

0.24

0.31

>25

C

C.L. Jambad

UG

0.05

0.07

>25

5

Siduli UG

UG

335

0.30

0.30

>25

6.

Khandra

 

388

0.39

0.39

>25

7.

Shankarpur3Project

UG &OC

452

2.00

 

2.30

 

 

A

Shankarpur

UG

1.65

1.33

>25

B

Shankarpur OC Patch/mine (42 ha)*

OC

2.00

2.30

4

 

 

 

4218

9.10

 

9.90

 

 

It was informed that of Siduli OC Patch (40 ha), Khandra, and Shankarpur have obtained EC earlier.

 

OC MINES /Patches in Cluster -11

 

S.N

Name of Mine

Area

Mineable Reserves

Volume of OB to be generated (Mm3)

Peak capacity

Life in years

1.

W. Kenda OC Patch(49 ha)

49

1.18

7.65

0.75

2

2.

New Kenda OC Patch/mine

240

22

211

3.90

8

3.

Bonbahal OCPatch/mine

25

1.1

6.27

0.50

3

4.

Shankarpur//CL Jambad OC patch/mine

52

Exhausted & being Backfilled

5.

Shankarpur/CL Ocpatch/mine

42

7.85

34

2.30

4

 

 

Total

 

408

 

32.13

 

258.92

 

7.45

 

 

 

Last 5 years Production  from Cluster 11

 

Year

 

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-2010

2010-2011

Total (MT)

0.84

0.82

0.88

0.86

1.46

 

 

LAND USE OF CLUSTER- 11

 

S.No

Land Use

Area

(ha)

1

Cultivable

1412.57

2

Village/Basti

203.80

3

Tanks/Water bodies/water logged quarries

250.18

4

Danga/Wasteland

599.83

5

Road & Railways

99.77

6.

Plantation/Vegetation

170.40

7.

Vacant Govt. land

89.33

8

Built up area

133.17

9

Quarry

40

10

OB Dump

55

11

ECL land

1021.58

12

Colliery infrastructure

142.37

 

 

Total

 

4218 

 

           The Details of Rehabilitation in Cluster -11

S.N.

Parameter

Details

 

1.

Total Unstable Sites

10

2.

Total Affected Areas

29.85 ha

3.

Affected Population

8580

4.

Total  resettlement Cost

Rs 120 crores

5.

CSR

Rs 5/T of coal

6.

Environmental management

 Rs 7/T of coal

 

The Committee desired that the rationale for inclusion of 11 mines including those which have obtained EC should be clearly brought out in the EIA-EMP Report. The Committee desired that there would be no void at the end of mining. The Committee observed that a railway siding is located within the cluster which would be used for transportation of coal. The Committee desired that proponent should consult the Raniganj Action Plan as fire and subsidence are major problems in that area. The Committee desired that Public hearing should be conducted for all the mines in the cluster.

 

The Committee recommended TOR as per Annexure 6 incorporating the specific conditions given by the EAC as above read with general conditions given in Annexure 7.

 

 

23.        Report of Centre for Science and Environment regarding EC to Coal Mining.

 

A presentation was made by representative of the Centre of Science & Environment, New Delhi to the EAC (T&C) on its Report on the extent of ECs granted to Coal Mining Projects. CSE stated that Coal India has an existing capacity of about 500 MTPA and during the last five years alone, MoEF has granted EC doubling the coal production capacity in the country. CSE stated that the Ministry of Coal had agreed with the data compiled by CSE. CSE stated that similarly, the total ECs granted to Thermal Power Sector over the past 5 years or so has been exceedingly high and the impacts of implementation of these projects on ground and the cumulative impacts of grant of EC to coal mining projects on land, water, pollution, health and ecology and people needed to be assessed. This is particularly required for the projects granted environmental clearance in already critically polluted areas (CPA’s) of Singrauli, Korba, and in the districts of Raigarh and Hazaribagh. CSE also stated that the performance of coal sector on mine closure has been poor and at least 240 abandoned coal mines exist in the country, where no reclamation has taken place. In addition, monitoring of coal mines by State Pollution Control Boards and the Central Pollution Control Board shows that one third of operating coal mines in the country are violating environmental norms. The CSE was of the view that cumulative impact assessment studies are required and measures implemented taking into consideration the cumulative impact of upcoming projects. If proper action is not taken in these areas, they are likely to remain critically polluted. CSE suggested that MoEF should concentrate on the post-clearance monitoring of projects. Beside these, the moratorium should be extended where clearance exceeds target and capacity. The CSE recommended that MoEF should use the moratorium period to strengthen and improve regulatory procedure as per recommendation of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the recent Lafarge judgement. Public Hearing process should be strengthen, revision of EIA Notification 2006 to stipulate that it will clear projects after considering the cumulative impact. Monitoring procedure also requires to be strengthened.

Chairman, EAC stated that in a federal structure such as ours, land, water are State subjects. In many States, investment and growth are a priority and issues of governance are economy based. The Government has introduced a system of double checks that provides for industrialisation and growth to be taken up in a sustainable manner. The Chairman, EAC stated that the EAC (Thermal & Coal Mining) is a multi-disciplinary Committee consisting of experts of disciplines such as hydrology, ecology, wildlife, pollution and meteorology, sociologist, etc and other experts have been invited from time to time for their valuable suggestion in the process of appraisal of coal mining projects. It was stated that the adverse impacts of proposed projects on the environment and ecology are appraised in great detail before a project is recommended by the EAC for environmental clearance. The position in regard to CPAs has been that MOEF has imposed a moratorium on consideration of new cases (new as well as expansion) of coal mine projects located seven coal fields falling under CPA’s, until an Environmental Action Plan has been prepared by the respective State SPCBs. In regard to three coal fields (Angul-Talcher and Ib valley of M/s Mahanadi Coalfield Ltd. and Singrauli coalfields of NCL), it was stated that an Environmental action plan has been prepared and the moratorium imposed earlier has been lifted and projects from these areas are being considered. The project proponents of coalmine projects from these areas applying for EC, have been asked to furnish details of plan for mitigative measures to reduce the pollution load from new/expansion projects.

 

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

 

*              *        *

 


Annexure-1

 

 

PARTICIPANTS IN 37th EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (THERMAL & COAL MINING) IN THE MEETING HELD ON 28th -29th NOVEMBER 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. Shiv Attri (first-day)                                                    Member

 

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

 

8.       Dr. Rubab Jaffer                                                             Scientist B, MOEF

 

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

 

Special Invitees:

 

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


Annexure-2

 

PARTICIPANTS IN 37th EXPERT APPRAISAL COMMITTEE (THERMAL & COAL MINING) IN THE MEETING HELD ON 28th -29th NOVEMBER 2011 ON COAL SECTOR PROJECTS

 

 

1.         M/s Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.

            1.         Shri D.C.Jha, Director (Tech.)

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

            3.         Dr.EVR Raju, GM (Env.)

            4.         Shri Amit Ray, Env. Mgr., CMPDI

            5.         Shri V.K.Sinha, CMPDI

            6.         Shri S.Panja, Sr.Mgr., Hydrogeology, CMPDI

            7.         Shri K.Sutradhar

            8.         Shri J Roy

 

            For Patherdih and Madhuband Coal Washery of M/s BCCL

            In addition:

            1.         Shri JP Lath, Monnet Ispat

            2.         Shri HL Sapru, Monnet Ispat

            3.         Shri KS Rao, Monnet

           

2.         M/s Strategic Energy Technology Systems Private Ltd.

            1.         Shri Chankya Chaoudahry, CRE, tata Steel

            2.         Shri Suran Pilaly

            3.         Shri Piyush Srivastava

            4.         Shri Sushil Handa, ERM India Pvt. Ltd.

            5.         Shri C. Saxena, AGM, SETPL

            6.         Shri Jagdish thakkar, GM (Env.), Tata Consultancy

            7.         Shri D.B.S.Raina, GM, Tata Steel                      

 

3.         M/s BALCO

            1.         Shri B.K.Bhatia, AVP, Mines, BALCO

            2.         Shri Gunjan Gupta, CEO & WTD, BALCO

            3.         Shri Nishant Kr., BALCO

            4.         Shri Amit Singh, BALCO

            5.         Shri Rajesh Mishra, BALCO

            6.         Shri Y.P. Bajaj, Comsultant, BALCO

            7.         Dr. John Louis P, Scientsist & CIMFR

            8.         Shri V. Sawhney, Mining Consultant

            9.         Shri T.K. Mishra, ABRAD, Kolkatta

            10.        Dr.JC Jhanwar, CIMFR

            11./       Shri P.Giri, Creative Engineers & Consultants

 

4.         M/s Gujarat Industries Power Company Ltd.

            1.         Shri Ajay Gupta, Chief Manager, GIPCL

            2.         Shri H.J.Shukla, Manager, GIPCL

            3.         Shri NR Parmer, DGM (CSR), GIPCL

            4.         Shri N.K.Purohit, AGM, Mining, GIPCL

            5.         Shri RC Mohan

            6.         Shri D Mishra

            7.         Shri Ravi Joshi

 

5.         M/s DB Power Limited

            1.         Shri Deep Kamra, Sr. VP, DB Power

            2.         Shri Sanjay Ganjoo, Head, CSR, DB Power

            3.         Shri Amit Agarwal, DB Power

            4.         Shri RK Gupta, DB Power

            5.         Shri RK Jain, DB Power

            6.         Shri A.R.Rai, GM (Min.)

            7.         Shri BD Sharma, MD, MINMEC

            8.         Dr.JP Gupta, MINMEC

            9.         Shri NK Singh, Consultant

            10.        Shri MM Ojha, Mining Advisor

            11.        Shri ML Naik, Consultant

            12.        Shri RP Agarwal

            13.        Shri Ravi Sharma

            14.        Shri Pankaj Bhardawaj

 

6.         M/s Tata Sponge Iron Ltd.

            1.         Shri Ujjawal Chatterjee, Tata Sponge

            2.         Shri Chankya Chaoudhay, Tata Steel

 

7.         M/s Urtan North Mining Company Ltd.

            1.         Shri Manoj Rai Tahmar, Mnaager –BD

            2.         Shri Bachha Prasad, DGM, Mines

            3.         Shri BD Sharma, MD, MINMEC

            4.         Shri NC Bagchi, Sr. GM (Mining), Urtan North Mining

            5.         Shri DN Abrol, Director

            6.         Shri V Ravi Kuamr, JSPL

 

8.         M/s Gupta Coalfields & Washeries Ltd.

            1.         Shri Deo Sharma, project Director

            2.         Shri Ashok Mundhara, Sr.V.President

            3.         Shri Shantanu Puranik, Consultant

            4.         Shri Rajesh Shivlal Shrivastava, Consultant

 

9.         M/s Mahavir Coal Washeries Pvt. Ltd.

            1.         Shri Navin Kuamr, Manager

            2.         Shri YP Ohari, Vice-President

            3.         Shri Vishal Jain, Director

            4.         DS Rajput, Vice-president

            5.         Shri Janrdhan, Vimta Labs

            6.         Shri Vishal Kuamr Jain

            7.         Shri M.Javala

 

10.        M/s Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd.

            1.         Shri Chandrashekaran

            2.         Shri Sukriti Tiwari, Consultant

            3.         Shri Alagan

 

11.        M/s Jindal Steel & Power Ltd.

            1.         Dr.R.Kumar, JSPL

            2.         Shri Shaslal Janwal, JSPL

            3.         Dr.J.K.Soni, JSPL

            4.         Shri SR Chary

            5.         Shri DN Abrol, ED, JSPL

            6.         Shri Anand Goyal, Jt. MD, JSPL

            7.         Dr. I U Rao, JSPL

            8.         Prof. Joshua, WDD

 

12.        M/s Central Coalfields Ltd.

            1.         Shri T K Nag, Director (Tech.), (Oper.)

            2.         Shri PK Sinha, GM (E&F)

            3.         Shri BK Sharma, Chief Manager, CCL

            4.         Shri S.Panja, Sr.Mgr, Hydrogeology

            5.         Shri PK Sinha, CMPDI

 

13.        M/s Northern Coalfields Ltd.

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

            2.         Shri PK Chopra, Reg. Director, CMPDI

            3.         Shri VK Pandey, Manager

            4.         Shri S Panja, Hydrogeology, CMPDI

            5.         Shri RN Mishra, General Manager, KSL

            6.         Shri UC Dumka, Sr.Manager (Env.), NCL

            7.         Shri Rakesh Kumar, Sr.Manager (Mines), Krishnasila Project, NCL

            8.         Shri SK Singh, Officer Survey, Block-B, NCL

 

14.        M/s Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd.

            1.         Shri BC Tripathi, GM, Env. MCL

            2.         Shri C Jaydev, Sr. Manager (Env.)

            3.         Shri AK Samantaray, Sr. Mnager (Env.), CMPDI

            4.         Shri KS Ganapathy, Chief Engr., CMPDI

            5.         Shri AK Chakroborty, GM (Mines), CMPDI

 

15.        NALCO Flyash Dumping Issue

            1.         Shri BB Das, DGM (E&S)

            2.         Shri S Mukherjee, Chief Manaager

            3.         Shri BC Tripathi, GM, Env. MCL

            4.         Shri KS Sreedhara, ED (Prodn.), NALCO

            5.         Shri Jiban Mahapatra, AGM, NALCO

            6.         Shri KS Ganapathy, Chief Mnagaer, CMPDI

            7.         Shri Navin Kumar Singh, Sr. Manager

 

            Special Invitees

            1.         Shri Akhila Kumar Swar, SEE, Orissa State Pollution Control Board

            2.         Dr.Vimal Kumar,Sc G & Head, Flyash Unit, Min. of S&T

            3.         Shri J S Kamyotra, MS, CPCB

 

16.        M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd.

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

            2.         Shri Rakesh Pandit, GM (Env.), ECL

            3.         Shri Anand Shekhar, Manager (Env.)

            4.         Shri N Srivastava, CM (G), CIL

            5.         Shri S Ramdev, SOM, CMPDI

 

17.        Centre for Science and Environment

            1.         Dr.Sunita Narain, Director, CSE

            2.         Shri Chandra Bhushan, CSE

            3.         Shri Sugandh, CSE

            4.         Dr.Ruchi Pant, Prog. Analysts, UNDP

 

 

 

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


 

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.

LANDUSE DETAILS FOR OPENCAST PROJECT

S.N.

LANDUSE

Within ML Area (ha)

Outside ML Area (ha)

TOTAL

1.

Agricultural land

 

 

 

2.

Forest land

 

 

 

3.

Wasteland

 

 

 

4.

Grazing land

 

 

 

5.

Surface water bodies

 

 

 

6.

Settlements

 

 

 

7.

Others (specify)

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

 

 

 

 

(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.

 

Table 1: Stage-wise Landuse and Reclamation Area (ha)

S.N.

Land use Category

Present

(1st Year)

5th Year

10th Year

20th year

24th Year (end of Mine life)*

1.

Backfilled Area (Reclaimed with plantation)

 

 

 

 

 

2.

Excavated Area (not reclaimed)/void

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.

External OB dump

Reclaimed with plantation)

 

 

 

 

 

4.

Reclaimed Top soil dump

 

 

 

 

 

5.

Green Built Area

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.

Undisturbed area (brought under plantation)

 

 

 

 

 

7.

Roads (avenue plantation)

 

 

 

 

 

8.

Area around buildings and Infrastructure

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

110*

110*

110*

110*

110*

* As a representative example

 

 

Table 2: Stage-wise Cumulative Plantation

S.N.

YEAR*

Green Belt

External Dump

Backfilled Area

Others

(Undisturbed

Area/etc)

TOTAL

 

 

Area

(ha)

No. of trees

Area

(ha)

No. of Trees

Area

(ha)

No. of Trees

Area

(ha)

No. of

 Trees

Area

(ha)

No. of

 Trees

1.

1st year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.

3rd year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.

5th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.

10th yesr

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.

15th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.

20th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7.

25th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.

30th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.

34th year (end of mine life)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.

34-37th Year (Post-mining)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

85

 

* As a representative example

 

 

(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.

 

Table 3: Post-Mining Landuse Pattern of ML/Project Area (ha)

S.N.

Land use during Mining

Land Use (ha)

1.

External OB Dump

Plantation

Water Body

Public Use

Undisturbed

TOTAL

2.

Top soil Dump

 

 

 

 

 

3.

Excavation

 

 

 

 

 

4.

Roads

 

 

 

 

 

4.

Built up area

 

 

 

 

 

5.

Green Belt

 

 

 

 

 

6.

Undisturbed Area

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

85

 

 

 

110

 

(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.

 

(A) FORESTRY CLEARANCE

 

TOTAL ML/PROJECT  

AREA (ha)

TOTAL FORESTLAND (ha)

Date of FC

Extent of forestland

Balance area for which FC is yet to be obtained

Status of appl. for diversion of

forestland

 

 

If more than one, provide details of each FC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(B)        MINING PLAN/PROJECT APPROVAL


Date of Approval of Mining Plan/Project Approval:

            Copy of Letter of Approval of Mining Plan/Project Approval

 

___


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.

 

S.N.

 ML/Project

Land use

Area under Surface Rights (ha)

Area Under Mining Rights (ha)

Area under Both (ha)

1.

Agricultural land

 

 

 

2.

Forest Land

 

 

 

3.

Grazing Land

 

 

 

4.

Settlements

 

 

 

5.

Others (specify)

 

 

 

 

Area Under Surface Rights

S.N.

Details

Area (ha)

1.

Buildings

 

2.

Infrastructure

 

3.

Roads

 

4.

Others (specify)

 

 

TOTAL

 

 

 

(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.

 

Table 1 Stage-wise Cumulative Plantation

S.N.

YEAR*

Green Belt

External Dump

Backfilled Area

Others

(Undisturbed

Area/etc)

TOTAL

 

 

Area

(ha)

No. of trees

Area

(ha)

No. of Trees

Area

(ha)

No. of Trees

Area

(ha)

No. of

 Trees

Area

(ha)

No. of

 Trees

1.

1st year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.

3rd year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.

5th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.

10th yesr

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.

15th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.

20th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7.

25th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.

30th year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.

34th year (end of mine life)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.

34-37th Year (Post-mining)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

85*

2,12,500

*As a representative example

 

(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.

(A) FORESTRY CLEARANCE

 

TOTAL ML/PROJECT  

AREA (ha)

TOTAL FORESTLAND (ha)

Date of FC

Extent of forestland

Balance area for which FC is yet to be obtained

Status of appl. for diversion of

forestland

 

 

If more than one, provide details of each FC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(B)        MINING PLAN /PROJECT APPROVAL


Date of Approval of Mining Plan/Project Approval:

            Copy of Letter of Approval of Mining Plan/Project Approval

___


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.

 

LANDUSE DETAILS FOR OPENCAST PROJECT