Item no Confirmation of the minutes of 56 th meeting of State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority held on

Transcription

1 Proceedings of the 57 th meeting of State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority held on at AM in the Regional Office, Punjab Pollution Control Board, Phase-2, Opposite Bassi Cinema, SAS Nagar. The following were present: 1. Sh. A.S. Dogra, IFS (Retd), Chairman, SEIAA 2. Sh. F. Lal Kansal, Member, SEIAA 3. Dr. Babu Ram, Member Secretary, SEIAA At the outset, the Member Secretary (SEIAA) welcomed the members of the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) in 57 th Thereafter, agenda items were discussed in detail as under: meeting. Item no Confirmation of the minutes of 56 th meeting of State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority held on The proceedings of 56 th meeting of SEIAA held on were circulated to all concerned vide letter no dated 14/1/2014. No observation has been received from any of the members. As such, the SEIAA confirmed the said proceedings. Item no Follow up action on the decisions of the 54 th meeting of State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority held on It was seen by the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority. Item No : Regarding disposal of minor minerals encountered during construction of escape channel of Mukerian Hydel Project. The SEIAA observed as under: 1. The Additional Superintending Engineer, Mukerian Hydel Canal (O&M) Division, Punjab State Power Corporation, Talwara vide letter no dated has informed that: 1

2 o During the construction of Mukerian Hydel Channel Stage-I, Phase-I, an Escape Channel was constructed at RD 8880 m for Power House No.1, which was in cutting. Therefore, during excavation of the same, the material which was excavated, is lying dumped along the banks of the said escape channel in the shape of spillage. o Prior to construction of this escape channel, environmental clearance was obtained from the Deptt. of Science, Technology & Environment vide no. 3/5/78-HCT/Env dated for establishment of Mukerian Hydel Project. o There is a proposal to auction the said material through e-auction as per directions of the State Govt. 2. The PSPCL has requested the SEIAA to intimate as to whether the environmental clearance is required for disposal of the said material, if yes, the same may please be granted at the earliest possible. 3. The SEIAA has forwarded the request of PSPCL to SEAC to examine the same in depth and to send the recommendations in this regard at the earliest. 4. The PSPCL was requested by the SEAC vide letter no dated to attend its 75 th meeting on , which was attended by Sh. Ram Singh, SDO, PSPCL. The SEAC noted that already mined material is lying in the shape of spillage along the banks of escape channel of Mukerian Hydel Channel Stage-I for the last so many years as per application submitted by the PSPCL. But it is not clear as to whether lifting of such material is covered under the definition of mining of minor minerals or not. Sh. Ram Singh, SDO, PSPCL informed that the said material was excavated during the year and since then the same is lying in the shape of spillage. The SEAC further noted that the EIA notification was not in existence at that time. Therefore, it is a very peculiar case and the same is required to be referred to MoEF for getting clarification as to whether the environmental clearance under EIA notification dated is required for lifting of the said material or not since nothing has been mentioned in said EIA notification in this regard. After detailed deliberations, it was decided to recommend to SEIAA to take up the matter with the Ministry of Environment & Forests, New 2

3 Delhi for getting clarification as to whether the environmental clearance under EIA notification dated is required for lifting of the said material or not. The case was considered by the SEIAA in its 52 nd meeting held on and observed that there is a need to visit the site where the mined material is lying in the shape of spillage along the banks of escape for the last so many years. After detailed discussions, the SEIAA decided: (i) To constitute a Sub-Committee comprising of following members to visit the site where the mined material is lying in the shape of spillage along the banks of escape for the last so many years and the said Sub-Committee shall submit its report, within 15 days to the SEAC: Sh. Anil Sondhi, Member (SEAC) Sh. Malvinder Singh, Member (SEAC), Sh. D.S. Jaidka, Member (SEAC), Sh. R.K. Kakar, Prof. (Retd), Punjab University, as an Expert Member State Geolgist, Department of Industries & Commerce, Punjab, Chandigarh. Superintending Engineer, Irrigation Department, Punjab Superintending Engineer, PSPCL, Mukerian Hydel, Mukerian Senior Environmental Engineer, Punjab Pollution Control Board, Zonal Office, Jalandhar (Member Convener) (ii) To remand the case to SEAC with the request to review the matter as per the report to be submitted by the Sub-Committee and to give concrete recommendations. 5. As decided, the Sub-Committee was requested vide letter no dated to visit and submit its detailed report alongwith recommendations. 6. The Sub-Committee vide letter no dated has submitted its report, wherein, it has been mentioned that the site was visited on along the escape channel where the materials under consideration are lying. The Committee observed that the escape channel was in cutting and materials excavated during its construction are lying in the 3

4 shape of spoils along its bank. The spoils are in the land of village Namoli, Handwal and Ellaha, which was acquired by the then PSEB (now PSPCL) during the construction of Mukerian Hydel Channel Stage- 1 Project. The area of spoils of escape channel from RD 0 m to m is 7.67 hectares. The quantity of materials of spoils is about 2,44,000 cum. It has also been mentioned in the report that the sub- Committee contacted Sh. Som Ram, Sarpanch, Sh Jagdish Chand members of the Panchayat of Village Totey and Sh. Shamsher Singh of Vill. Khandwal to know about the materials lying dumped along the bank escape channel. They informed that the materials lying in the shape of spoils along the escape channel are the materials excavated during construction of escape channel. Executive Engineer PSPCL also informed the Sub-Committee that contractors in this area are regularly lifting the materials illegally from these spoils. The Sub-Committee further observed that substantial vegetation growth has come up during this long period of 34 years and the materials lying in the shape of spoils were excavated during the construction of escape channel of Mukerian Hydel Channel Stage- 1 Project. The Sub-Committee has attached the copy of layout plan of spoils; cross section of escape channel; area of spoils; details of quantity of material lying in the shape of spoils and videography for reference. The case was considered by the SEAC in its 83 rd meeting held on The SEAC perused the visit report submitted by Sub Committee. After discussions, the SEAC observed that there is a need for detailed re deliberation in the matter and to seek the opinion of experts from the fields of natural & environmental sciences. The SEAC decided to defer the case and place the same in the next meeting as and when scheduled and to invite the experts in the fields of natural & environmental sciences besides experts from the field of mining & drainage. 7. The PSPCL was requested by the SEAC vide letter no dated to attend its 85 th meeting on , which was attended by Sh. Lachhman Singh, SDO, PSPCL. 4

5 The Expert members from the various fields were requested by the SEAC to attend its 85 th meeting on , which was attended by the following: i) Dr. Adarsh Pal Vig, Prof. & Head Deptt. of Botanical & Environment Sciences, GNDU, Amritsar. ii) iii) iv) Prof. R. Jindal, Deptt. of Zoology & Former Head Deptt. of Environment Sciences, Punjab University, Chandigarh Dr. Suman Mor, Asstt. Professor, Deptt. of Environment Studies, Punjab University, Chandigarh Dr. M.S. Bhatti, Asstt. Professor, Deptt. of Botanical & Env. Science, GNDU, Amritsar. Sri Lachhman Singh, SDO,PSPL, informed the members and experts that the mined material was lying at the site since the past several years and was being lifted illegally by unknown persons, hence the PSPL now wanted to lift it so that it could be gainfully used. The experts perused the report and saw the video got prepared by the expert committee during the field visit. It was felt that this was already mined material but over the years wild growth had naturally taken place. Hence now it was difficult to differentiate between mined/excavated material and pre-existing topography. Under these circumstances, it would be appropriate to take EC and the case be considered under MoEF-GOI s OM dated under B2 category. After detailed deliberations, the SEAC decided to recommend to SEIAA that the project proponent may be asked to apply for obtaining environmental clearance under EIA notification dated for the proposed activity. The case was considered by the SEIAA in its 57 th meeting held on , wherein, after detailed delibrations the Authority accepted the recommendations of the SEAC and decided to ask the project proponent to apply for obtaining environmental clearance under EIA notification dated for the proposed activity. Item No : Application for obtaining Environmental Clearance under EIA notification dated for development of housing project namely 'SBP Housing Park' in the revenue estate of Village Mouja Rouni, Tehsil Derabassi, Distt. Mohali by M/s Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. The SEIAA observed as under: 1. M/s Singla Builders and Promoters Ltd. has applied for obtaining Environmental Clearance under EIA notification dated for the 5

6 construction of a Group Housing Project namely SBP Housing Park in the revenue estate of village Mouja Rouni, Tehsil Dera Bassi, Distt. S.A.S. Nagar. 2. The case was considered by the SEAC in its 64 th meeting on , wherein, after detailed deliberations, the Committee noted that the project proponent is required to submit certain information/data for appraisal of the project proposal. The SEAC decided to defer the case till the project proponent submits proper reply of the aforesaid observations. The decision of the SEAC was conveyed to the project proponent vide no dated Thereafter, in compliance to the Office Memorandum dated of the Ministry of Environment & Forests, the case was considered by the SEIAA in its 51 st meeting held and it was decided by the SEIAA to delist the case as the additional information desired has not been submitted even after 6 months of the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) meeting. The decision of the SEIAA was conveyed to the project proponent vide letter no dated Thereafter, M/s Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd., vide letter dated (received on ) has applied afresh for obtaining the Environmental Clearance under EIA notification dated for development of housing project namely 'SBP Housing Park' in the revenue estate of village Mouja Rouni, tehsil Derabassi, Distt. Mohali. The project is covered under category-b Clause 8 (a) of the Schedule appended to the said notification. However, MoEF vide Office Memorandum dated has made certain amendments in the procedured to be followed in the said cases (Construction or Township or Commercial Complexes or Housing Projects). As per amendment the said projects shall not require scoping and shall be appraised on the basis of Form-1 or Form-1A and the conceptual plan. The details of the project as given in Form-1 and 1A and other documents are as under: o The total land area of the project is acres in which 940 flats and 37 shops having the total built up area of 92,575 sq. m will be constructed. o The total cost of the project is 150 crore. o The total water requirement for the project will be 645 KLD, out of which 481 KLD will be met through ground water by installing tubewell/mc 6

7 supply and remaining 164 KLD will be met through recycling of treated wastewater. o The total wastewater generation from the project will be 516 KLD, which will be treated in a STP to be installed within the project premises. The project proponent has proposed to use 164 KLD of treated wastewater for flushing purpose, 68 KLD will be used for irrigation of green area and remaining 284 KLD will be discharged to public sewer in summer season. In winter season, 164 KLD of treated wastewater will be used for flushing purpose, 34 KLD will be used for irrigation of green area and remaining 318 KLD will be discharged to public sewer. In rainy season, 164 KLD of treated wastewater will be used for flushing purpose and remaining 352 KLD will be discharged to public sewer. o The total quantity of solid waste generation will be 1930 kg/day shall be collected separately as biodegradable and non-biodegradable waste as per Municipal Solid Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, The biodegradable waste will be sent to approved site. The non-biodegradable and recyclable waste would be sold to recyclers. o The total load of electricity required for proposed project will be about 5000 KW, which will be supplied by PSPCL. The project proponent has made provision of D.G. sets as standby arrangement of electricity o The project proponent has proposed to provide rain water harvesting wells for ground water recharge. o The e-waste generated will be stored in an isolated room and will be sold to the manufacturers. o Used oil to be generated from the DG sets will be managed & handled as per the provisions of the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, The other details of the project have been given in the Form 1 & 1-A submitted by the promoter and the details of the proposed project are as under: 1. Properly filled Form 1 & 1A Yes 2. Proof of ownership of land Submitted. 3. CLU status The MC, Dera Bassi vide the letter no dated has informed to the 7

8 promoter company that the site of the project is located in residential zone as per Master Plan, but nothing has been mentioned regarding permission for CLU in the said letter. 4. Layout plan duly approved by the Competent Authority. 5. Topographical map of the area showing Contour Plan. 6. Status of construction, if any, alongwith photographs from all the four sides meter radius map of the area from periphery of project site clearly indicating the various industries (specifically red category industries) and structures lying in the area. 8. Site plan of the project showing the following i) Location of STP ; ii) Solid waste storage area. iii) Green belt iv) Parking space Submitted a copy of layout plan approved by MC, Dera Bassi. Submitted. Not submitted Not submitted. i) Marked ii) Marked iii) Marked iv) Marked. v) Marked. vi) Marked v) RWH and water recharge pits vi) Fire fighting equipment layout vii) First aid room viii) Location of Tubewells 9. Permission of Competent Authority for; vii) viii) Not Marked Marked a) Water and Sewerage connection b) Collection of Solid waste a) & b)the MC, Derabassi vide the letter no dated issued NOC to the project proponent to the effect that the treated wastewater of the proposed project can be discharged into sewer and the excess solid waste can be disposed off at dumping ground 8

9 c) Use of Ground Water 10. Water balance chart for summer, rainy and winter seasons indicating critical requirements. 11. Availability of adequate land for use of treated sewage and plantation. 12. Analysis reports of ambient air, ground water and noise levels from NABL/MoEF Accredited laboratories. 13. Quantification of energy saved and renewable energy devices used. 14. Drawing showing plumbing systems for use of fresh, treated and hot water of MC, Dera Bassi. c) Not submitted Submitted Not submitted Not submitted Submitted. Not submitted 15. Construction schedule (PERT/CPM Chart) Submitted. 16. Affidavits for ; a) Constitution of Environment Monitoring Cell b) Use of ready mix concrete or use of fly ash during construction. c) To provide Fire Fighting System d) To provide wind breaking curtains and water sprinkling system to minimize dust emissions during construction phase. e) To provide adequate safety measures for the construction workers during the construction phase. 17. Environmental Management Plan indicating the following: a) All mitigation measures for each item-wise activity to be undertaken during the construction, operation and the entire life cycle to minimize adverse environmental impacts as a result of the activities of the project. b) Compliance of various environmental regulations c) Steps to be taken in case of emergency such as accidents at the site including fire. d) For how long period the project proponent will be responsible for implementation of EMP and the name of the person(s) responsible 9 Submitted. (a) Submitted (b) Submitted (c) Submitted (d) Sh. Pardeep Singla, Director the promoter company, will be responsible for

10 for implementation of EMP. e) Capital & recurring cost for the EMP per year and the details of funds for the same. f) Name of the individual persons / organization, who will be responsible for implementation of EMP after the lapse of the period for which the project proponent is responsible. 18. Corporate Social Responsibility indicating various activities to be undertaken, provisions of funds for the same, the period for which the same is to be implemented and the person(s) responsible for the implementation of the same. 10 implementation of EMP. (e) Rs lacs will be incurred for implementation of EMP during construction phase and Rs. 20 lacs/annum will be incurred as recurring cost during construction phase. Rs. 100 lacs will be incurred for implementation of EMP during construction phase and Rs lacs/annum will be incurred as recurring cost during construction phase (f) The welfare association of residents or MC, who so ever takes over the project will be responsible for implementation of EMP. Rs lacs will be utilized for following activities under Corporate Social Responsibility: (i) The management will give preference in the job to nearby area people. (ii) Ponds will be cleaned of the nearby villages within 10 km of the area of the project. (iii) Blood donation camps and health checkup camps will be conducted in an area of 10 km radius from the project site. (iv) Books will be distributed in the area of 10 km radius from the project site. (v) Widening of reads will be done in the vicinity of the project.

11 (vi) Environment awareness camps will be conducted in an area of radius 10 km from the project site. (vii) Parks of MC Derabassi will be maintained. (viii) Awareness on smoking risk programs within 5 km area of the project. The implementation of CSR will be the responsibility of Sh. Pardeep Singla, Director the promoter company. 19. NOC of the nearest Air Port issued by its Authority. 20. Traffic Circulation System and connectivity with a view to ensuring adequate parking, conflict free movements, Energy efficient Public Transport. 21. Disaster/Risk Assessment and Management Plan The NOC issued by Airports Authority of India vide the no dated submitted and as per this NOC the height of the building shall not exceed 100m above ground level. Not submitted Not submitted 2. The project proponent was requested by the SEAC vide letter no dated , to attend its 85 th meeting on and Sh. Deepak Gupta of M/s Jalvayu Consultants, Environmental Consultant of the promoter company. Sh. Deepak Gupta Environmental Consultant, informed the Committee that 40% of the construction has already been carried out at the site. The SEAC observed that the case is required to be dealt as per the procedure mentioned in the Office Memorandum dated of the Ministry of Environment & Forests as amended on since the promoter company has violated the provisions of EIA notification dated by starting construction of the project without obtaining environmental clearance under the said notification. 11

12 After detailed deliberations, the SEAC decided as under: (i) (ii) To forward the case to SEIAA with the recommendation to ask the project proponent to submit a formal resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the Company or to the Managing Committee / CEO of the Society, Trust, partnership / individually owned concern, within 60 days, mentioning that violations will not be repeated in future and in the meantime, the project may be delisted. In the eventuality of not having any response from the project proponent within the prescribed limit of 60 days, the project file may be closed. To recommend to SEIAA to send the case to the Govt. of Punjab, Department of Science, Technology & Environment: For initiating credible action against project proponent / responsible persons / promoter company under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 due to start of construction activities of the project without obtaining Environmental Clearance under EIA notification dated For issuance of directions under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 to restrain the promoter company from carrying out any further construction activity of the project till the environmental clearance under EIA notification dated is obtained. (iii) Further the project proponent shall submit the following information/data: Permission for CLU of the project site. 500 meter radius map of the area from periphery of project site clearly indicating all the features including various industries. Layout plan of the project showing the first aid room. Permission of CGWA for abstraction of groundwater. Details of land area for use of treated wastewater. Analysis reports of ambient air, ground water and noise 12

13 levels from NABL/MoEF Accredited laboratories. Drawing showing plumbing systems for use of fresh, treated and hot water. Traffic Circulation System and connectivity with a view to ensuring adequate parking, conflict free movements, Energy efficient Public Transport. Disaster/Risk Assessment and Management Plan 3. The case was considered by the SEIAA in its 57 th meeting held on , wherein, after detailed deliberations, the SEIAA decided as under: a) To send the case to the Govt. of Punjab, Department of Science, Technology & Environment: For initiating credible action against project proponent / responsible persons / promoter company under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 due to start of construction activities of the project without obtaining Environmental Clearance under EIA notification dated For issuance of directions under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 to restrain the promoter company from carrying out any further construction activity of the project till the environmental clearance under EIA notification dated is obtained. b) To ask the project proponent to submit a formal resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the Company or to the Managing Committee / CEO of the Society, Trust, partnership / individually owned concern, within 60 days, mentioning that violations will not be repeated in future and in the meantime, the project may be delisted. In the eventuality of not having any response from the project proponent within the prescribed limit of 60 days, the project file may be closed c) To inform the project proponent that the application for environmental clearance under EIA Notification dated will be considered only after the action is initiated by the Govt. of Punjab, Department of Science, Technology & Environment for violating the provisions of the 13

14 Item No : said notification due to start of construction work of the project without obtaining environmental clearance. The SEIAA observed as under: Application for obtaining Environmental Clearance under EIA notification dated for development of a residential project namely 'Falcon View' at Sector-66 A, Distt. Mohali by M/s Janta Land Promoters Limited. 1. M/s Janta Land Promoters Limited, vide letter dated (received on ) has applied for obtaining the Environmental Clearance under EIA notification dated for development of residential project namely namely 'Falcon View' at Sector-66 A, Distt. Mohali. The project is covered under category B-2 Clause 8 (a) of the Schedule appended to the said notification. The details of the project as given in Form 1 and 1A and other documents are as under: o The total land area of the project is 1,38,280 sqm in which 1602 flats having the total built up area of 4,93,407.3 sqm, will be constructed. o The total cost of the project is Rs.759 crore. o The total estimated designed population of the project will be 8010 persons. o The total water requirement for the project will be 1202 KLD, out of which 882 KLD will be met through groundwater by installing tubewell and the remaining will be met through recycling of treated wastewater. o The total wastewater generation from the project will be 962 KLD, which will be treated in a common STP of JLPL, of capacity 2800 KLD. The water balance submitted by the project proponent is not in order. o Green belt will be developed in an area of 36, sqm o The total quantity of solid waste generation will be 3204 kg/day shall be collected separately as biodegradable and non-biodegradable waste as per Municipal Solid Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, The biodegradable waste will be used for compost. The non-biodegradable and recyclable waste would be sold to recyclers. o The total load of electricity required for the project will be KW, which is to be provided by the PSPCL. The promoter company has provision to provide DG sets as standby arrangement of electricity. 14

15 o The project proponent has proposed to provide rain water harvesting wells for ground water recharge. o The e-waste generated will be stored in an isolated room and will be sold to the manufacturers. o Used oil to be generated from the DG sets will be managed & handled as per the provisions of the Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Transboundary Movement) Rules, The other details of the project have been given in the Form 1 & 1-A submitted by the promoter and the details of the proposed project are as under: 1. Properly filled Form 1 & 1A Yes 2. Proof of ownership of land Submitted. 3. CLU status Permission for CLU for land area measuring acres has been issued vide letter no dated by the CTP, Punjab, which is in the name of M/s Janta Land Promoters Pvt. Ltd. 4. Layout plan duly approved by the Competent Authority. 5. Topographical map of the area showing Contour Plan. 6. Status of construction, if any, alongwith photographs from all the four sides. Submitted Submitted. Submitted, and it has been observed from the photographs that construction has been started at the project site. Further, the project proponent has submitted an undertaking to the effect that the construction activities of the project was started prior to the environmental clearance as the promoter company has the view that the project being an Industrial park does not require environmental clearance. This was not intentional violation of environment law and the violation of the Environment (Protection) Act will not be repeated meter radius map of the area from Submitted. 15

16 periphery of project site clearly indicating the various industries (specifically red category industries) and structures lying in the area. 8. Site plan of the project showing the following i) Location of STP ; ii) Solid waste storage area. iii) Green belt iv) Parking space v) RWH and water recharge pits vi) Fire fighting equipment layout vii) First aid room viii) Location of Tubewells 9. Permission of Competent Authority for; a) Water and Sewerage connection b) Collection of Solid waste 16 i) Common with Super mega project ii) Common with Super mega project iii) Marked iv) Marked v) Marked vi) Marked vii) Common with Super mega project viii) Common with Super mega project (i) The GMADA, S.A.S. Nagar, vide no dated has issued certificate to the promoter company, wherein, it has been mentioned that the GMADA will account for sewage load to be generated from the Sector 66-A, 82 and 83, Mohali, while designing the trunk services, to be laid by the GMADA. The connection with these trunk services will be allowed after these services are laid and commissioned as per the approved services plan. (ii) The MC, S.A.S. Nagar, vide no dated has issued certificate to the promoter company, wherein, it has been mentioned that the solid waste to be generated from the Sector 66-A, 82 and 83 can be disposed off by the firm at the

17 c) Use of Ground Water 10. Water balance chart for summer, rainy and winter seasons indicating critical requirements. 11. Availability of adequate land for use of treated sewage and plantation. dumping site deposition of requisite charges. (iii) The project proponent has submitted a copy of NOC issued by CGWA vide no. 637 dated for abstraction of groundwater to the tune of 2322 KLD. Submitted, but the same is not in order. Submitted 12. Analysis reports of ambient air, ground water and noise levels from NABL/MoEF Accredited laboratories. 13. Quantification of energy saved and renewable energy devices used. 14. Drawing showing plumbing systems for use of fresh, treated and hot water The ambient air monitoring has been got done from Eco Laboratories & Consultants Pvt. Ltd, and the analysis results indicate that the concentration of various pollutants such as PM 2.5, PM 10, SO 2, NO 2, NH 3, O 3, Pb, BaP, As, Ni, C 6 H 6 and CO have been measured. Also, ambient noise monitoring has been got done from the said firm and the analysis results indicate that the noise levels during day and night times, have been measured as 54.6 db(a) leq and 42.5 db(a) leq, respectively, against the prescribed standards of 55 and 45 db(a) leq. The analysis report of groundwater has also been submitted. Submitted. Submitted 15. Construction schedule (PERT/CPM Chart) Submitted. 16. Affidavits for ; a) Constitution of Environment Monitoring Cell Submitted. 17

18 b) Use of ready mix concrete or use of fly ash during construction. c) To provide Fire Fighting System d) To provide wind breaking curtains and water sprinkling system to minimize dust emissions during construction phase. e) To provide adequate safety measures for the construction workers during the construction phase. 17. Environmental Management Plan indicating the following: a) All mitigation measures for each item-wise activity to be undertaken during the construction, operation and the entire life cycle to minimize adverse environmental impacts as a result of the activities of the project. b) Compliance of various environmental regulations c) Steps to be taken in case of emergency such as accidents at the site including fire. d) For how long period the project proponent will be responsible for implementation of EMP and the name of the person(s) responsible for implementation of EMP. e) Capital & recurring cost for the EMP per year and the details of funds for the same. (a) Submitted (b) Submitted (c) Submitted (d) Sh. Hardeep Singh, Authorized Signatory of M/s JLPL, will be responsible for implementation of EMP. (e) Rs. 36 lacs will be incurred for implementation of EMP and Rs. 5 lacs/annum will be incurred as recurring cost. f) Name of the individual persons / organization, who will be responsible for implementation of EMP after the lapse of the period for which the project proponent is responsible. 18. Corporate Social Responsibility indicating various activities to be undertaken, provisions of funds for the same, the period for which the same is to be implemented and the person(s) 18 (f) The welfare association of residents along with the Environment Management Cell will be responsible for implementation of EMP. Rs. 7.5 crore will be utilized for following activities under Corporate Social Responsibility: (i) Providing school upto

19 responsible for the implementation of the same. middle class (ii) Creche for children of labour. (iii) Dispensary for welfare of villagers at the space offered by the villagers. Sh. Hardeep Singh, Authorized Signatory of M/s JLPL, will be responsible for implementation of CSR. 19. NOC of the nearest Air Port issued by its Authority. 20. Traffic Circulation System and connectivity with a view to ensuring adequate parking, conflict free movements, Energy efficient Public Transport. 21. Disaster/Risk Assessment and Management Plan The NOC issued by Airports Authority of India vide the no dated submitted and as per this NOC the height of the building shall not exceed 80m above ground level. Submitted Submitted 2. The project proponent was requested by the SEAC vide letter no dated , to attend its 85 th meeting on and following were present in the said meeting on behalf of the project proponent: (i) (ii) Sh. Hardeep Singh, Deputy Chief Engineer of the promoter company. Ms. Simranjit Kaur of M/s Eco Labs, Mohali, Environmental Consultant of the promoter company. Sh. Hardeep Singh, Deputy Chief Engineer of the promoter company informed the Committee that the construction work has just been started at site. The SEAC observed that the case is required to be dealt as per the procedure mentioned in the Office Memorandum dated of the Ministry of Environment & Forests as amended on since the promoter company has violated the provisions of EIA notification dated by starting construction of the project without obtaining environmental clearance under the said notification. 19

20 After detailed deliberations, the SEAC decided as under: (ii) (ii) To forward the case to SEIAA with the recommendation to ask the project proponent to submit a formal resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the Company or to the Managing Committee / CEO of the Society, Trust, partnership / individually owned concern, within 60 days, mentioning that violations will not be repeated in future and in the meantime, the project may be delisted. In the eventuality of not having any response from the project proponent within the prescribed limit of 60 days, the project file may be closed. To recommend to SEIAA to send the case to the Govt. of Punjab, Department of Science, Technology & Environment: For initiating credible action against project proponent / responsible persons / promoter company under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 due to start of construction activities of the project without obtaining Environmental Clearance under EIA notification dated For issuance of directions under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 to restrain the promoter company from carrying out any further construction activity of the project till the environmental clearance under EIA notification dated is obtained. chart. Further, the project proponent would submit revised water balance 3. The case was considered by the SEIAA in its 57 th meeting held on , wherein, after detailed deliberations, the SEIAA decided as under: a) To send the case to the Govt. of Punjab, Department of Science, Technology & Environment: For initiating credible action against project proponent / responsible persons / promoter company under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 due to start of construction activities of the project without obtaining Environmental Clearance under EIA notification dated

21 For issuance of directions under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 to restrain the promoter company from carrying out any further construction activity of the project till the environmental clearance under EIA notification dated is obtained. b) To ask the project proponent to submit a formal resolution passed by the Board of Directors of the Company or to the Managing Committee / CEO of the Society, Trust, partnership / individually owned concern, within 60 days, mentioning that violations will not be repeated in future and in the meantime, the project may be delisted. In the eventuality of not having any response from the project proponent within the prescribed limit of 60 days, the project file may be closed c) To inform the project proponent that the application for environmental clearance under EIA Notification dated will be considered only after the action is initiated by the Govt. of Punjab, Department of Science, Technology & Environment for violating the provisions of the said notification due to start of construction work of the project without obtaining environmental clearance Item No : Application for obtaining environmental clearance under EIA notification dated for mining of minor minerals (sand) in the revenue estate of Village Bare Ke, Tehsil Ferozepur, District Ferozepur of General Manager cum Mining Officer, District Industries Centre, Malwa Road, Ferozepur. The SEIAA observed as under: 1. The General Manager- Cum-Mining Officer, District Industries Centre, Malwa Road, Ferozepur, vide letter no dated (received in this office on ), has applied for obtaining environmental clearance under EIA notification dated for river bed mining of minor minerals(sand) in the revenue estate of Village Bare Ke, Tehsil Ferozepur, District Ferozepur. The project is covered under category 1 (a) of the Schedule appended to the said notification. 21

22 The details of the project are as under: 1. About 17,600 Ton/year of mining of minor minerals(sand) will be carried out in an area of Hectare in the revenue estate of Village Bare Ke, Tehsil Ferozepur, District Ferozepur in H.B. no. 66, Khasra no.: 56M//17/2, 18/1, 18/2, 30M//21, 22, 49M//1, 50M//5, 29M//25/2. 2. A letter no. 511 dated issued by Department of Forest & Wildlife, Ferozepur to the effect that village Akku Maste Ki, Bandala, Bare Ki, Chak Khanna, Changali Kadim, Kamal Wala, Mandot Utarh, Saddu Shah Wala do not fall under forest area. 3. Proposed 'Terms of Reference' have been submitted. 4. As per point 1(vi) of the pre-feasibility report no Reserve Forests are present within 10km radius of the study area. 5. The project proponent has submitted the following documents alongwith Form I: Pre- feasibility report Surface plan has been submitted and duly signed by General Managercum-Mining Officer. Environmental Management Plan. Submitted a combined map showing the various sand mining leases falling in Ferozepur District. Submitted Topographical Map Submitted photographs of the project site. 2. The project proponent was requested by the SEAC vide letter No dated , to attend its 85 th meeting on The following were present on behalf of the project proponent: (i) Sh. Manjeet Singh, SIPO, O/O General Manager-cum-Mining Officer, District Industries Centre, Ferozepur 22

23 (ii) Sh. M.V. Raghavacharyulu of M/s Bhagavathi Ana Labs Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad, Environmental Consultant of the project proponent The Environmental Consultant of the project proponent submitted the project proposal before the SEAC as under: i) About 17,600 Ton/year of mining of minor minerals(sand) will be carried out in an area of hectare in the revenue estate of Village Bare Ke, Tehsil Ferozepur, District Ferozepur in H.B. no. 66, Khasra no.: 56M//17/2, 18/1, 18/2, 30M//21, 22, 49M//1, 50M//5, 29M//25/2. ii) The Department of Forest & Wildlife, Ferozepur has issued letter no. 511 dated by to the effect that village Akku Maste Ki, Bandala, Bare Ki, Chak Khanna, Changali Kadim, Kamal Wala, Mandot Utarh, Saddu Shah Wala do not fall under forest area. iii) No instream mining will be carried out at the proposed site and sand mining will be done out side the river bed only. iv) Presently, no mining site is existing/in operation and no environmental clearance has been obtained by any project proponent for mining of minor minerals (sand) in District Ferozepur. v) Inter-site distance amongst all the mining sites falling under the jurisdiction of District Ferozepur and are under consideration in the present agenda, is more than 1 km. All these mining sites have been marked on a single map of the area showing inter-site distances. The SEAC categorized the project as category B-1 of the EIA Notification dated , thus, the project proponent is required to be issued 'Terms of Reference' (TOR) for preparation of detailed draft Rapid EIA report. The Committee decided to finalize "Terms of Reference" and to convey the same to the project proponent for preparation of rapid EIA study report. However, later on towards the end of the meeting it came to the notice of SEAC that the Govt. of Inida, Ministry of Environment & Forests, New Delhi vide Office Memorandum No. J /12/2013-IA-II(I) dated has laid down the following stipulations in respect of river sand mining projects: "(iii) No river sand mining project, with mine lease area less than 5 ha, may be considered for granting EC. The river sand mining projects with mining lease area > 5 ha but < 25 ha will be categorized as 'B2'. In addition to the requirement of documents, as brought out above under 23

24 sub-para (ii) above for appraisal, such projects will be considered subject to the following stipulations: (a) The mining activity shall be done manually. (b) The depth of mining shall be restricted to 3 m/water level, whichever is less. (c) For carrying out mining in proximity to any bridge and/or embankment, appropriate safety zone shall be worked out on case to case basis to the satisfaction of SEAC/SEIAA, taking into account the structural parameters, locational aspects, flow rate, etc. and no mining shall be carried out in the safety zone so worked out. (d) No instream mining shall be allowed. (e) The mining plan approved by the authorized agency of the State Government shall inter-alia include study to show that the annual replenishment of sand in the mining lease area is sufficient to sustain the mining operations at levels prescribed in the mining plan and that the transport infrastructure is adequate to transport the mines with taurpoline to minimize dust/sand particle emissions. (f) EC will be valid for mine lease period subject to a ceiling of 5 years. Provided, in case the mining lease area is likely to result in a cluster situation i.e. if the periphery of one lease area is less than 1 km from the periphery of another lease area and total lease area equals or exceeds 25 ha, the activity shall become category 'B1' project under the EIA notification, In such a case, mining operations in any of the mine lease areas in the cluster will be allowed only if the environmental clearance has been obtained in respect of cluster." The SEAC meticulously perused the application and noted that the project proponent has applied for sand mining in an area less than 5 hectares and as per OM dated of MoEF, no river sand mining project, with mine lease area less than 5 hectares may be considered for granting EC. Therefore, the SEAC decided to recommend to SEIAA to return the application to the project proponent. 3. The case was considered by the SEIAA in its 57 th meeting held on , wherein, the SEIAA deliberated upon the OM dated 24/12/2013 issued by MoEF and observed that no river sand mining project, with mine lease area less than 5 hectares may be considered for granting EC. The SEIAA observed that in the present case application has been made for mining of minor 24

25 minerals (sand) in an area less than 5 hectares. After detailed deliberations, the SEIAA decided that the application submitted by the project proponent for obtaining environmental clearance may be returned in light of stipulations laid in OM dated 24/12/2013 for such type of projects. Item No : Application for obtaining environmental clearance under EIA notification dated for mining of minor minerals (sand) in the revenue estate of Village Chabba, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur of General Manager cum Mining Officer, District Industries Centre, Malwa Road, Ferozepur. The SEIAA observed as under: The General Manager- Cum-Mining Officer, District Industries Centre, Malwa Road, Ferozepur, vide letter no dated (received in this office on ), has applied for obtaining environmental clearance under EIA notification dated for river bed mining of minor minerals(sand) in the revenue estate of Village Chabba, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur. The project is covered under category 1 (a) of the Schedule appended to the said notification. The details of the project are as under: 1. About 9,800 Ton/year of mining of minor minerals (Sand) will be carried out in an area of Hectares in the revenue estate of Village Chabba, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur in H.B. no. 28, Khasra no.:10m//22, 10/1, 10/2, 11/1, 11/2. 2. A letter no. 511 dated issued by Department of Forest & Wildlife, Ferozepur to the effect that Village Akku Maste Ki, Bandala, Bare Ki, Chak Khanna, Changali Kadim, Kamal Wala, Mandot Utarh, Saddu Shah Wala do not fall under forest area. 3. Proposed 'Terms of Reference' have been submitted. 4. As per point 1(vi) of the pre-feasibility report no Reserve Forests are present within 10km radius of the study area. 5. The project proponent has submitted the following documents alongwith Form I: Pre- feasibility report 25

26 Surface plan has been submitted and duly signed by General Managercum-Mining Officer. Environmental Management Plan. Submitted a combined map showing the various sand mining leases falling in Ferozepur District. Submitted Topographical Map Submitted photographs of the project site. 2. The project proponent was requested by the SEAC vide letter No dated , to attend its 85 th meeting on The following were present on behalf of the project proponent: (i) (ii) Sh. Manjeet Singh, SIPO, O/O General Manager-cum-Mining Officer, District Industries Centre, Ferozepur Sh. M.V. Raghavacharyulu of M/s Bhagavathi Ana Labs Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad, Environmental Consultant of the project proponent The Environmental Consultant of the project proponent submitted the project proposal before the SEAC as under: i) About 9,800 Ton/year of mining of minor minerals (Sand) will be carried out in an area of Hectares in the revenue estate of Village Chabba, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur in H.B. no. 28, Khasra no.:10m//22, 10/1, 10/2, 11/1, 11/2. ii) The Department of Forest & Wildlife, Ferozepur has issued letter no. 511 iii) iv) dated by to the effect that village Akku Maste Ki, Bandala, Bare Ki, Chak Khanna, Changali Kadim, Kamal Wala, Mandot Utarh, Saddu Shah Wala do not fall under forest area. No instream mining will be carried out at the proposed site and sand mining will be done out side the river bed only. Presently, no mining site is existing/in operation and no environmental clearance has been obtained by any project proponent for mining of minor minerals (sand) in District Ferozepur. v) Inter-site distance amongst all the mining sites falling under the jurisdiction of District Ferozepur and are under consideration in the present agenda, is more 26

27 than 1 km. All these mining sites have been marked on a single map of the area showing inter-site distances. The SEAC categorized the project as category B-1 of the EIA Notification dated , thus, the project proponent is required to be issued 'Terms of Reference' (TOR) for preparation of detailed draft Rapid EIA report. The Committee decided to finalize "Terms of Reference" and to convey the same to the project proponent for preparation of rapid EIA study report. However, lateron towards the end of the meeting it came to the notice of SEAC that the Govt. of Inida, Ministry of Environment & Forests, New Delhi vide Office Memorandum No. J /12/2013-IA-II(I) dated has laid down the following stipulations in respect of river sand mining projects: "(iii) No river sand mining project, with mine lease area less than 5 ha, may be considered for granting EC. The river sand mining projects with mining lease area > 5 ha but < 25 ha will be categorized as 'B2'. In addition to the requirement of documents, as brought out above under sub-para (ii) above for appraisal, such projects will be considered subject to the following stipulations: (a) The mining activity shall be done manually. (b) The depth of mining shall be restricted to 3 m/water level, whichever is less. (c) For carrying out mining in proximity to any bridge and/or embankment, appropriate safety zone shall be worked out on case to case basis to the satisfaction of SEAC/SEIAA, taking into account the structural parameters, locational aspects, flow rate, etc. and no mining shall be carried out in the safety zone so worked out. (d) No instream mining shall be allowed. (e) The mining plan approved by the authorized agency of the State Government shall inter-alia include study to show that the annual replenishment of sand in the mining lease area is sufficient to sustain the mining operations at levels prescribed in the mining plan and that the transport infrastructure is adequate to transport the mines with taurpoline to minimize dust/sand particle emissions. (f) EC will be valid for mine lease period subject to a ceiling of 5 years. Provided, in case the mining lease area is likely to result in a cluster situation i.e. if the periphery of one lease area is less than 1 km from the periphery of another lease area and total lease area equals or exceeds 25 27