Government of India
Ministry of Environment & Forests
(FC Division)
Proceedings of the Forest Advisory Committee Meeting Convened on May 30th ? 31st, 2011
A.
PROPOSALS DEALT BY SHRI H.C. CHAUDHARY, AIGF
Total No. of Proposals: 15
Agenda No.1: Diversion of 121.854 ha. forest land in favour of Rail Vikas Nigam Limited for laying of New Obulavaripalli ? Venkatachalam reach
Broad Gauge Railways line from Km 22.4 to 36.5/43 to 43.5/ 47.8 & 80.7 to 84.5 in Reserved Forests of Nellore and Rajampet Divisions (File No. 835/2011-FC)
After careful examination of the proposal and interaction with representatives of the user agency, who made detailed presentation during the meeting, the FAC
noted as below:
(i)
Legal status of the Forest land proposed for diversion is Reserved Forest.
(ii)
The forest land proposed for diversion contains 16,858 trees. Stem density of the vegetation available in the forest land proposed for diversion is 138
trees per ha. The crown density of the vegetation available in the forest land proposed for diversion varies from 0.20 to 0.40.
(iii)
The forest land proposed for diversion does not form part of any protected area; however Penusula Narasimhaswamy sanctuary is situated at a
distance of about 6 km from this proposed line.
(iv)
The total length of the proposed line is 113.12 km. Of this, the length of the line passing through RF is 19.810 km. In Rajampet Forest Division the
line passes through forest area over a length of 5.375 km requiring an area of 32.605 ha. In Nellore Forest Division, the line passes through the forest area over a
length of 14.435 km requiring 89.249 ha. The 19.810 km line passing through the forest area includes two tunnels of total length of 7.425 km.
(v)
The line will reduce 93 km distance for transportation of freight to and from Krishnapatnam port to parts of Rayalaseema region of Andhra Pradesh
and Karnataka state. It will also provide railway connectivity to the areas between Obulavaripalli and Venkatachalam and shorter connectivity between Kadapa
and Nellore towns.
(vi)
The proposed line will exclusively be used as a dedicated freight corridor and thus will divert the pressure from the roads.
The FAC after detailed deliberation recommended diversion of the said forest land subject to the general conditions and the following specific condition:
(i)
After operationalization of the railways line, the State Government through the Chief Wildlife Warden will monitor its effect on the wildlife and will
suggest appropriate measures such as restriction on speed of trains plying on the line, and construction of protective fence etc. at identified vulnerable locations
to prevent injury and death to the wildlife.
Agenda No. 2: Study of floral and faunal parameters of the area located within and in vicinity of various coal mines of the Pench Kanhan Coal fields
( File 11-164/ 2010-FC)
After careful examination of the report prepared by the WII, Dehradun and interaction with representatives of the National Tiger Conservation Authority
(NTCA) and the Wildlife institute of India, Dehradun who made detailed presentation during the meeting the FAC noted as below:
(i)
As per the boundary of the viable wildlife corridor between Pench and Satpura tiger reserves identified by the WII, Dehradun out of the total 68 coal
blocks located in the Pench-Kanhan coal field, ten coal blocks bearing the number 58, 66, 60, 62,63,,68,59,55,,61,65,64 and 67 are located within the migratory
corridor between Pench and Satpura Tiger Reserves.
(ii)
The minimum width of the corridor identified by the WII, Dehradun is approx. 3 km.
(iii)
As desired by the FAC in its previous meeting convened on 16.12.2010, the NTCA has already assigned the work corridor to the WWF-India for
preparation of a detailed plan containing appropriate measures for rejuvenation and restocking of the said migratory corridor and the mitigative measures to
eliminate/minimize the adverse impacts of the transportation of the coal to be extracted from the Pench-Kanhan coalfield on the said migratory. The plan is
likely to be received by the Ministry within a period of 2 months.
The FAC after detailed deliberations recommended as below:
(i)
The boundary of the tiger and wildlife movement corridor as identified by the NTCA and WII may be accepted by the Ministry.
(ii)
No approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 or the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 may be accorded for undertaking mining in any of
the said ten coal blocks located within the above corridor at (i).
(iii)
In case mining is already being undertaken in any of the said ten coal blocks located within the migratory corridor, no approval under the Forest
(Conservation) Act, 1980 or the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for renewal of mining lease may be accorded. The mining in these mines shall be closed
after expiry of the current mining lease after reclamation of the mined over area. The operating mines may be analyzed and monitored for compliance of
conditions, having bearing with movement of wildlife.
(iv)
The proposals seeking approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 or the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for undertaking mining in any of
the 58 coal blocks of the Pench-Kanhan coal field located outside the migratory corridor may be processed by the Ministry on their merits and if are approved
their approval may be subject to the condition that the user agency shall contribute on proportionate basis the amount required for implementation of the plans to
be prepared by the NTCA for rejuvenation and restocking of the viable corridor and the mitigative measures to eliminate/minimize the adverse impacts of the
transportation of the coal to be extracted from the Pench-Kanhan coalfield on the viable corridor. It may be noted that this does not amount to recommendation
of in-principle (stage-I) clearance at this stage of the process.
(v)
For the purpose of apportioning the cost to be recovered from the user agency for rejuvenation and restocking of the migratory corridor and to
implement the mitigative measures to eliminate/minimize the adverse impacts of the transportation of the coal on the said migratory corridor, in case of open
cast mining the entire area of lease may be taken into account. In case of underground mining project, half of the area of the mining lease may be taken into
account to calculate the amount to be recovered from the user agency.
Agenda No. 3: Diversion of 80.507 ha of forest land for construction of 444 MW Vishnugarh-Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project in favour of Tehri
Hydro Development Corporation (THDC) for 30 years in district Chamoli, Uttarakhand ( File 8-65/2009-FC);
Agenda No.12: Diversion of 258.737 ha of forest land for Kotlibhel Hydro Electric Project (Stage-1A) (3 x 65 MW each) in favour of National Hydro
Power Corporation Limited proposed to be constructed on River Bhagirathi at Devprayag in Janpad Tehri Garhwal and Pauri Garhwal in
Uttarakhand (8-82/ 2007-FC);
Agenda No.13: Diversion of 496.793 ha. of forest land for 320 MW capacity Kotlibhel Hydro Electric Project (Stage-1B) in favour of National Hydro
Power Corporation Limited proposed to be constructed on River Alaknanda in Tehri and Pauri Garhwal districts of Uttarakhand (8-9/ 2008-FC);
Agenda No.14: Diversion of 658.282 ha of forest land for construction of 530 MW capacity Kotlibhel Hydro-electric Power Project (Stage-II) on
lease for 30 years in favour of NHPC, in the district of Pauri-Gharwal Uttarakhand. (File No. 8-66/ 2008-FC); and
Agenda No.15: Diversion of 60.513 ha of forest land in favour of GMR Energy Ltd. for construction of Alaknanda Hydro-electric Project in Chamoli
district of Uttarakhand (File No. 8-9/ 2010-FC)
The FAC examined the proposals in detail keeping in view the observations of the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and the Hon?ble Supreme Court. The
FAC also examined the reports of studies undertaken by (i) the Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, IIT, Roorkee to assess cumulative impact of hydropower
projects in Alaknanda and Bhagirathi basins up to Devprayag; and (ii) Wildlife Institute of India (WII), Dehradun to assess cumulative environmental impact
of various hydro electric projects in the said basins, particularly on the riverine eco system and land & aquatic biodiversity; and effectiveness of the mitigative
measures and compliance of the stipulated conditions on which various projects have earlier been cleared. FAC also interacted with representatives of the
Vishunugad Pipalkothi Hydro Power Project who made detailed presentation during the meeting. The FAC also considered its interaction with all other project
proponents in the past.
After detailed examination of the matter, the FAC noted as below:
1.
Government of Uttarakhand submitted proposal seeking prior approval of Central Govt. for diversion of forest land as detailed below, for construction of
following Hydroelectric Power Plants by the National Hydro Electric Power Corporation Limited (NHPC):
(i)
261.047 ha. forest land (including 2.310 ha. for underground works) for construction of Kotlibhel Stage-IA, HEP at 3.80 km upstream of the
confluence of river Bhagirathi and Alaknanda at Devprayag, on river Bhagirathi near village Muneth.
(ii)
551.519 ha. forest land for construction of 320 MW capacity Kotlibhel Stage-1B HEP at 2.20 km upstream of the confluence of River Bhagirathi and
Alaknanda at Devprayag on Alaknanda River in Tehri and Pauri Garhwal districts of the Uttrakhand.
2.
The FAC after examination of the these proposals in its meeting convened on 29.04.2008 recommended diversion of the said forest land.
3.
In pursuance to the Hon?ble Supreme Court?s order dt. 27.04.2007, in IA No. 1413, 1414 etc. in WP (C) No. 202/1995, which inter-alia states that
??fresh cases may be cleared Project-wise by the FAC and thereafter such clearances shall be placed before this Court for approval?.?, the said proposals along
with said recommendation of the FAC were placed before the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) for its examination and appropriate recommendation to the
Hon?ble Supreme Court.
4.
On examination of the said proposals and FAC recommendations, the CEC recommended as follows:-
?the CEC of the view that it would be prudent that the reconstituted FAC reviews these projects after considering the findings of the studies regarding
(a) cumulative environmental impact of various hydro electric projects particularly on the riverine eco system and land and aquatic biodiversity; and
(b) effectiveness of the mitigative measures and compliance of the stipulated conditions on which various projects have earlier been cleared.?
5.
After examination of the above recommendations of the CEC, the Hon?ble Supreme Court vide order dated 30.02.2009 directed as below:
?CEC had made certain recommendations regarding diversion of 258.737 ha of forest land for Kotlibhel (State-1A) Hydro electric projects in favour of the
National Hydro Power Corporation Ltd and diversion of 496.793 ha of forest land for Kotlibhel (Stage (1-B) Hydro electric project in favour of the National
Hydro Power Corporation Ltd. The FAC will review these projects on the basis of recommendation made by CEC. The FAC will review its earlier order and
take a fresh decision and decision may be taken at the earliest at least within a period of five months.?
6.
In pursuance to the order dated 30.02.2009, the above proposals were placed before the newly constituted FAC in its meeting convened on 02.04.2009.
After careful consideration the FAC recommended that a Sub-committee under the chairmanship of Dr. Mahesh Rangarajan may be constituted to prepare a
detailed report on cumulative environmental impact of various hydro electric projects, particularly on the riverine eco system and land and aquatic biodiversity,
effectiveness of the mitigative measures and compliance of the stipulated conditions on which various projects have earlier been cleared.
7.
The sub-committee met on 06th June for the first time. On 30th June, 2009, all the project proponents of major hydroelectric projects on river Ganga
made their presentation on cumulative environmental impact of projects on river Ganga and study done so far, mitigative measures suggested therein and their
compliance.
8.
The sub-committee also conducted a field visit of Kotlibhel-Statge-1A, Kotlibhel-Stage-1B, Kotlibhel-Stage-II and Srinagar HEP on 29th October to
st
1 November, 2009. The Committee also interacted with NGO, local people and User Agency and considered their views and representations.
9.
After thorough study and site visits the sub-committee submitted its report containing following major recommendations:
(a) Minimum natural water flow (i.e. ecological water flow) should be maintained for continuity of aquatic ecosystem of river Ganga. This may be decided
by the National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA), constituted in February, 2009. However, till time it should be 16 cumecs or 20% of the lean season
flow whichever is higher.
(b)
Mahseer Conservation Reserve as proposed by State Wildlife Department should be established.
(c)
Aquatic Otter Conservation Area should be properly demarcated as suggested in the Environmental Management Plan and should have restricted access.
(d)
A corpus of 5% of the project costs of these three projects should be established for sustaining above mentioned activities.
(e) The corpus should be managed by a society registered under Society Act, with representative of the Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF),
representative of State Forest Department and State Wildlife Department, two independent experts and representative of NHPC. This will be constituted by the
State Government.
10.
The report of the sub-committee was placed before the FAC in its meeting convened on 11-12.12.2009.
11.
After though deliberations, the FAC in general, agreed with the report submitted by the sub-committee and observed that in view of preliminary
assessment done and the fact that several dozen more small, medium and large similar projects are on various stages of formulation, there is potential for
irreparable and irreversible damage to the entire river eco-system in the future. The Committee therefore, recommended that no further projects of this nature
can be considered by the FAC, without a comprehensive study of carrying capacity of River Ganga in the hilly terrain upto Haridwar.
12.
Apart from the Kotlibhel-IA and Kotlibhel-IB, the following three proposals seeking diversion of forest land under the Forest (Conservation) Act,
1980 for construction of Hydropower projects in Ganga River Basin were received by the Ministry:
(i)
Diversion of 658.282 ha of forest land for construction of 530 MW capacity Kotlibhel Hydro-electric Power Project (Stage-II) on lease for 30 years in
favour of NHPC, in the district of Pauri-Gharwal Uttarakhand.
(ii)
Diversion of 80.507 ha of forest land for construction of 444 MW Vishnugarh-Pipalkoti Hydro Electric Project in favour of Tehri Hydro Development
Corporation (THDC) for 30 years in district Chamoli, Uttarakhand.
(iii)
Diversion of 60.513 ha of forest land in favour of GMR Energy Ltd. for construction of Alaknanda Hydro-electric Project in Chamoli district of
Uttarakhand
13.
Accordingly, the NGRBA was requested to study and fix the minimum ecological water flow with terms of reference having issues like minimum
ecological water flow in Ganga vis-a-vis sustainable aquatic eco-system and bio-diversity therein, as per their mandate. The NGRBA was also requested that
the study should include suitable provision to assess the level of minimum water flow to have a sustainable aquatic eco-system and bio-diversity, impact of
these projects on terrestrial flora and fauna, etc.
14.
The Secretary, Forests & Forests convened a meeting on 25.06.2010 to discuss the matter. During the meeting it was observed that environmental and
forestry clearances for projects are to be processed in terms of statutory provisions. It was also observed that the NGRBA has not been envisaged as a separate
project clearance body.
15.
During the meeting it was also observed that in the Hon?ble Supreme Court?s order dated 30.02.2009 in the I. A. 1413, 1414 and 1426, main emphasis
is to reconsider the Kotlibhel (State-1A) and Kotlibhel (Stage- 1B) Hydro-Electric Power Projects in light of the findings of the studies regarding cumulative
environmental impact of various hydro electric projects on the riverine eco system, in general, and terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity, in particular, and
effectiveness of the mitigative measures and compliance of the stipulated conditions on which various projects have earlier been cleared.
16.
It was therefore, decided that the Forest Conservation Division in the Ministry would itself commission the study involving the Wildlife Institute of
India, Dehradun and other appropriate institutions having special knowledge and practical experience in the field of terrestrial, aquatic flora & fauna and biodiversity. These institutions could be IIT, Roorkee and Central Water Commission etc.
17.
The Forest Conservation Division in the MoEF therefore assigned the said study to the WII, Dehradun.
18.
Meanwhile, the National River Conservation Directorate (NRCD) in the Ministry assigned a study on Assessment of Cumulative Impact of
Hydropower Projects in Alaknanda and Bhagirathi basins up to Devprayag to the Alternate Hydro Energy Centre, IIT, Roorkee. Though the Kotlibhel
Hydroelectric Power Project(Within Stage- 2) is located outside the Bhagirathi and Alaknanda basis, to facilitate decision on the proposal seeking diversion of
forest land for its construction, both the IIT, Roorkee and the WII, Dehradun were requested to include the said project in the studies being undertaken by them.
19.
The IIT Roorkee submitted its report to the Ministry on 28th March 2011. Similarly, on 27.05,2010 the WII, Dehradun submitted a report containing
their recommendations./ observations pertaining to the said five projects for which proposals seeking prior approval of the Central Government under the Forest
(Conservation) Act, 1980, are presently pending before the Ministry.
20.
The range of environment flow as percentage of the mean annual flow for the said projects as recommended in the report submitted by the IIT, Roorkee
is as below:
Sl. No. Project
MAF
(cumecs)
Environment flow Environment flow
(% of MAF)
(cumecs)
1
Kotlibhel 1-A
266.35
10.00% to 15.09 % 26.63- 40.19
2
Kotlibhel-IB
Not Indicated Not Indicated
Not Indicated
3
Kotlibhel-II
Not Indicated Not Indicated
Not Indicated
4
Vishnugad Pipalkoti 205.30
7.62 % to 10.72 % 15.64 ? 22.00
5.
Alaknanda
7.62% to 18.80 %
41.33
3.14- 7.77
21.
As per the report submitted by the WII, Dehradun, the cumulative impact scores of these projects are as below:
Kotlibhel Kotlibhel
IA
IB
KotlibhelII
Vishnugad- Alaknanda
Pipalkoti
Badrinath
Biodiversity value
18
18
19
08
17
Impact Sources
08
08
13
14
11
Total Impacts
144
234
285
88
119
Conservation
Importance
1
1
2
1
3
144
234
570
88
357
Final Score
22.
Similarly, the major/ findings pertaining to these projects indicated in the report submitted by the WII, Dehradun are as below:
Kotlibhel-IA, Kotlibhel- IB and Kotlibhel-II Projects
(i)
The tract between Byasi and a few kilometers above Deoprayag, where Kotalibhel hydro-electrict projects (IA, IB and II) are proposed, supports a few
intact patches of dense riverine forests, scattered hill woodland and steep grassy slopes. Populations of an endangered Red Data Book (RDB) species i.e.,
Catamixis baccharoides (Asteracese) has been located in this area. In the event of this project coming up, this species would be affected negatively. In
addition, these riverine forests and grassy slopes serve as excellent habitats for species like goat antelope (Nemorrhaedus goral), barking deer (Muntiacus
muntjak), Kalij pheasant (Lophura leucomelanos) and also serve as migration pathways/corridors for a variety of altidinal migrants, especially the bird groups.
Therefore, even though the project areas of Kotlibhel IA, IB and II hydro-electric projects do not form a part of any existing or proposed Protected Area, they
do encompass substantial wildlife habitats for many mammal and bird species including RET species. Although these projects may not reduce the value of
RET mammal and bird species significantly, as these are widely distributed in the region. However, the fact that other biodiversity values such as diverse
habitat types including considerable proportion of riverine patches (that are unique), and habitat contiguity for altitudinal migrants will be compromised by
these projects particularly by Kotlibhel II and Kotlibhel IB.
(ii)
As indicated above the Kotlibhel IA, IB and II projects would negatively affect endangered floral species such as Catamixis baccharoides. Moreover,
these project sites harbor riverine forests and grassy slopes that are excellent habitats and migration pathways/corridors for a variety of wildlife species. On a
relative scale, Kotalibhel II and Kotlibhel IB will have significant threats to terrestrial biodiversity compared to Kotlibhel IA.
(iii)
As far as aquatic fauna is concerned, richest fish diversity with greater number of threatened species was recorded in the Zone of influence of Kotlibhel
II and Kotalibhel IB projects. The Ganges stretch between Devprayag and Rishikesh including Nayar River is the only available undisturbed Critical Habitat
for several threatened fishes, especially mahseer and snow-trout in the Garhwal Himalaya. The catchment between Rishikesh and Devprayag, including Nayar
River needs to be free of projects and should be declared as a ?Conservation Reserve? to ensure protection of fish fauna and the unique riverine forests which
exist in this region. Any hydro-electric projects in this region, such as the proposed Kotlibhel II project, will cause irreversible damage to the aquatic
biodiversity. Additionally, Kotlibhel IB projects will act as barriers for migratory species.
Vishnugad-Pipalkoti Hydropower Project
(i)
Vishnugad Pipalkoti project falls within 10 Km aerial distance from the boundary of the Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary (WS). Given the distance, it is
unlikely that this particular project will undermine the value of wildlife habitats/species of the PA, as the project site is at about 1,000m on river Alaknanda and
there are a few mountain ridges from the project site to the boundary of the Kedarnath WS. However, the hydro-electric project area has predominantly
secondary scrub and steep grassy slopes on either bank that are habitats for the endangered Cheer pheasant, which is Vulnerable species (IUCN RDB), listed in
the Schedule I of IWPA and is a evolutionary relict (meaning that it does not have any close relatives in the evolution scale). These vegetation categories have
long been subjected to intensive cutting and annual cool season burning. Presently, the distribution and population status of Cheer pheasant in this area is very
poor, largely due to habitat degradation and loss as a result of increasing anthropogenic pressure and development activities in the area. The major impact of the
hydro-electric project in this area would be the loss of fodder and fuel wood resources extracted by the local communities from the project area and inevitable
reduction and further degradation of valuable wildlife habitat for mammals and ground dwelling bird species.
(ii)
Fish diversity including threatened species was found to be comparatively less in the Pipalkoti region than in other proposed sites (e.g. Kotlibhel IA, IB
and II). However, this project would act as a barrier for migratory species. Suitable measures would have to be proposed to facilitate the upward migration of
fishes at-least during the monsoon. Other negative impacts on terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity are amenable to mitigation if appropriate measures are put in
place.
Alaknanda-Badrinath hydroecectric project
(i)
The Alaknanda-Badrinath hydro-electric project is located in the buffer zone of Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve (BR) which has two core zones the
Nanda Devi National Park (NP) and Valley of Flowers NP. Both the core zones are inscribed as UNESCO?s World Heritage Site (WHS). The conservation
status of the core zones and management success in Nanda Devi BR has been evaluated as excellent. However, concerns have been raised regarding the
development of many hydro-electric projects within the buffer zone of Nanda Devi (BR) encompass an area of over 5,500 Km2 and spans across three district
viz., Chamoli, Pithoragarh and Bageshwar. Of these, the buffer zone in Chamoli district encompass a wide range of altitude (1,300m to 6,500m) and diverse
wildlife habitats thereby providing connectivity between the two core zone for large carnivores such as the endangered snow leopard and Asiatic black bear.
The Alaknanda-Badrinath hydro-electric project also falls in the eastern most distribution limits of the endangered Himalayan brown bear.
(ii)
The snow leopard has been reported to occur in Badrinath-Mana and adjacent areas, Khiron valley, Valley of Flowers NP and its upper reaches in the
Alaknanda Valley. In Dhauliganga valley, it is reported from Nanda Devi NP and its adjacent areas, Ghamsali, Malari-Lapthal, and Girthiganga areas.
Anthropogenic pressures in the buffer zone are at low levels and largely confined to areas in and around the few villages and alpine rangelands thereby
providing connectivity between core zones by the movement of large carnivores such as the snow leopard-the apex predator of the high Himalayan ecosystem.
The need for large contiguous landscapes for conservation of the snow leopard has been emphasized under the Government of India?s initiative, the Project
Snow Leopard (PSL 2006).
(iii)
Similarly, the Himalayan brown bear is a large carnivore that occurs in low densities along a narrow strip (3,000 to 5,000m) in the western Himalayan
range in the State of Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand (Sathyakumar 2006). The eastern most distribution limit for this species is the
Chamoli district in Uttrakhand. Brown bears have been sighted west and east of the proposed hydro-electric project. To the west of the proposed hydroelectric project, brown bear has been recorded from Rudranath in Kedarnath WS, and Khiron Valley. To the east of the proposed hydro-electric project, the
brown bear has been recorded from Kaghbusandi, and in and around Valley of Flowers NP. The current levels of high pilgrim movement during summer
months, developmental activities such as building of roads and infrastructure in the area, the Vishnuprayag hydro-electric project have already led to heavy
disturbances in the stretch between Vishnuprayag and Badrinath. The proposed Alaknanda-Badrinath hydro-electric project and Khiron ganga hyro-electric
project falls in the same stretch and these additional developments may pose a serious threat to the existence and movement of species such as the snow leopard
and brown bear.
(iv)
This area supports seven out of 16 RDB plant species reported from Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve. These include: Cyananthus integer, Gentiana
crassuloides, Schizandra grandiflora, Allium Stracheyi, Acer caesium, Calanthe alpine and Oreorchis indica. Little below the project site, close to
Pandukeshar, there are a few individuals (<10) of a rare tree Michelia kisopa, which is confined mainly to this valley in Uttrakhand. Hence, the construction of
Alknanda-Badrinath hydro-electric project is likely to cause severe fragmentation and degradation of important wildlife habitats as well as habitat of above
mentioned RET species
(v)
Construction of Alaknanda-Badrinath hydro-electric project is likely to cause serve fragmentation and degradation of important wildlife bahitats as
well as habitat of RET floral species. Such as Michelia kisopa, Cyananthus integer, Gentiana crassuloides, Schizandra grandiflora, Allium stracheyi, Acer
cesium, Calanthe alpine and Oreorchis indica. It is important to restate that the Alaknanda-Badrinath hydro-electric project is located in the buffer zone of
Nanda Devi BR in the stretch between Vishnuprayag and Badrinath. Other significant consideration is that the current levels of disturbances due to pilgrim
movements during summer, road building, the existing Vishnuprayag hydro-electric project, and infrastructure developments in this stretch, have already
seriously threatened the Outstanding Universal Values (OUVs) of the Valley of Flowers NP, a World Heritage Site. This WHS is globally recognized for its
?exceptional beauty, floral biodiversity and aesthetic values?. In order to preserve these OUVs of the WHS, the Uttarakhand State had declared a buffer zone
which is also required to be conserved and sustainably used as the integrity of the WHS is very much dependent upon the integrity of the buffer zone also.
Numerous developmental activities and disturbances in the buffer zone are a serious threat to the maintenance of the OUVs of this WHS. Moreover, some of
these developments are of ?irreplaceable value? such as ?a flowing Alaknanda river?. Further, due to the current levels of developments and disturbances in the
region, only a very small stretch of undisturbed wilderness area is left as a corridor (between Vishnuprayag hydro-electric project and Badrinath) for use of
wildlife. Therefore, the impacts of the proposed Alaknanda-Badrinath hydro-electric projects should not be viewed in isolation and an assessment of all the
existing and proposed hydro-electric projects in this stretch of the river between Vishnuprayag and Badrinath would have to be looked in a cumulative manner.
Any further developmental activities in the form of proposed hydro-electric projects on the river Alaknanda, Khiron ganga and Laxman ganga (Pulna hydroelectric project) will seriously affect the OUVs of the WHS due to cumulative impacts.
(vi)
The proposed Badrinath and Khiron ganga hydro-electric projects will seriously hamper the movement of species such as the snow leopard and brown
bear in Nanda Devi BR as this is the only remaining stretch that is an important corridor for movement of these species. As the rare and endangered brown bear
has its eastern most distribution limits in this area, the proposed hydro-electric and other developmental activities will further lead to habitat loss and
degradation, and consequently shrinkage of the distribution range of this species.
23.
The report submitted by the WII, Dehradun finally recommended that of the five projects for which proposals seeking prior approval of the Central
Government under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for diversion of forest land required for their construction are presently pending before the Ministry of
Environment & Forests, three projects namely the Kothlibhel-II, Alaknanda-Badrinath and Kotlibhel IB support significant ecological/wildlife values that
include irreplaceable components. Any form of development in these areas will have irreversible and un-mitigable negative impacts on these values. With
regard to the other two projects (Kotlibhel IA and Vishnugad-Pipalkoti) the overall impacts on biodiversity values are relatively less. However, unless adequate
mitigative measures are put in place with assured compliance, damage to the biodiversity value in the region would be compromised.
The FAC took a considered view of the matter. The FAC recommends that prior approval of the Central Government in-accordance with the Section-2
of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for diversion of forest land required for construction of Kotlibhel-IB, Kotlibhel-II and Alaknanda Badrinath Hydropower
projects may not be accorded.
The FAC further recommended that keeping in view the report of the WII, Dehradun wherein it has been indicated that the overall impacts on
biodiversity values of the remaining two projects namely; the Kotlibhel IA and Vishnugad-Pipalkoti are relatively less, permission for diversion of 80.507 ha
and 258.737 ha. forest land required for construction of Vishnugad Pipalkoti and Kotlibhel-IA hydroelectric power projects respectively may be accorded
subject to the general conditions, standard conditions applicable to hydel and irrigation projects and the following specific conditions to prevent degradation in
biological value of their respective sites:
(i)
The user agency shall incorporate appropriate features in design of the dam to ensure that minimum discharge from the dam into the downstream
stretch of the river at any time is not less than the minim environment flow as recommended in the study undertaken by the IIT, Roorkee.
(ii)
The user agency in consultation with the WII, Dehradun shall undertake appropriate measures to mitigate/minimize the adverse impact of the
project on fish population in general and fish migration in particular. Such as installation may include installation and operation of fish passes, fish ladder, fish
lift, fish hatcheries etc.
(iii)
The recommendations of the WII on monitoring and protection of wildlife and habitats and the recommendations of the IIT, Roorkee regarding the
flows of rivers are to be implemented.
The FAC further recommended that keeping in the fact that a part of the forest land proposed for diversion for construction of the Vishunugad Pipalkoti
project is located within 10 km distance from the Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary, the diversion of the forest land required for construction of the said project will
be subject to the following additional conditions:
(i)
The EIA of the project shall be placed before the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife for its examination and appropriate
recommendation to mitigate adverse impact, if any, of the project on the Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary.
(ii)
The user agency and the State Government shall comply with the recommendation of the Standing committee of the NBWL and the user agency shall
provide funds required for execution of the mitigative measures, if any to be suggested by the Standing Committee of the NBWL.
Agenda No. 4: Diversion of 165.92 ha. of forest land in Chopdi, Rebbana and Tandur Reserved Forests of Bellampalli Division in favour of M/s.
Singareni Collieries Company Ltd. (SCCL) for their Abbapur pen cast Coal Mining Project in Adilabad district of Andhra Pradesh ( File 8-17/2011FC); and
Agenda No. 5: Diversion of 147.42 ha. of forest land in favour of the Singareni Colliery Company Limited (SCCL) for expansion of their
Ramagundam OCP-II in RG-III area located in Adrial RF of Karimnagar East Division in Karimnagar district of Andhra Pradesh [File 8-109/ 2005FC (Vol.)];
After careful examination of the proposals and interaction with representatives of the user agency, who made detailed presentation during the meeting, the FAC
observed that the SCCL has several mining leases. The Ministry receives several proposals to obtain prior approval of the Central Government under the Forest
(conservation) Act, 1980 for diversion of forest land in favour of SCCL for their coal mining projects.
The FAC after detailed deliberations recommended that to have a holistic view of the matter and to facilitate informed and objective decision on the proposal
seeking diversion of forest land in favour of the SSCL for their coal mining projects, the State Government of Andhra Pradesh may be requested to submit
following information pertaining to the SCCL:
(i)
Details viz. location, area, legal status (forest-Non-forest), estimated mineral reserves (separately in forest and non-forest area) and geo-referenced map
of the mining leases executed in favour of the SCCL;
(ii) Details viz. location, area, nature (underground/open cast), legal status (forest-Non-forest), mineral reserves, annual production capacity (as per EC),
date of start of operation, likely date of closure, status of reclamation of mined over area and geo-referenced map of the presently working mines;
(iii) Details viz. location, area, nature (underground/open cast), legal status (forest-Non-forest), date of start and closure of operation, status of reclamation of
mined over area and geo-referenced map of the mines which have already been closed;
(iv) Mining lease wise details viz. location, area, nature (underground/open cast), legal status (forest-Non-forest), date of start and closure of operation, and
geo-referenced map of the forest land diverted for mining (separately for open cast and underground mining) and ancillary purposes ; and
(v)
Mining lease wise details cost to raise compensatory afforestation and NPV etc. paid so far.
Agenda No. 6: Diversion of 10.05 ha. of forest land in Kondapuram & Kondaigudem Reserved Forests of Paloncha Division in favour of M/s.
Singareni Colliery Company Limited SCCL for development of infrastructure for their Kondapuram underground coal mine project located in
Khammam district of Andhra Pradesh [File 8-71/ 2009-FC (vol.)]
After careful examination of the proposal and interaction with representatives of the user agency, who made detailed presentation during the meeting, the FAC
noted as below:
(i)
Legal status of the Forest land proposed for diversion is Reserved Forest.
(ii)
The forest land proposed for diversion contains 3730 trees and 542 bamboo clumps. Stem density of the vegetation available in the forest land proposed
for diversion is 355 trees plus 51.60 bamboo clumps per ha. The crown density of the vegetation available in the forest land proposed for diversion is around
0.50.
(iii)
The forest land proposed for diversion does not form part of any protected area;
(iv)
The forest land proposed for diversion is required for creation of infrastructure of Kondapuram underground mining for which stage-I approval under the
Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 has already been accorded by the Ministry;
The FAC after detailed deliberation recommended diversion of the said forest land subject to the general conditions and the Standard conditions applicable to
the mining projects.
Agenda No. 7: Diversion of 269.1698 ha of forest land for Malangtoli Iron Mines of M/s Orissa Sponge Iron Limited (OSIL) in Keonjhar District of
Orissa ( File 8-13/2007-FC)
After careful examination of the proposal and interaction with representatives of the user agency, who made detailed presentation during the meeting, the FAC
noted as below:
(i)
The FAC after examination of the proposal and inspection report submitted by the Eastern Regional Office of the Ministry in its meeting convened on
17.10.2007 recommended diversion of the said forest land subject to the standard conditions and the following additional conditions:
(a)
Wildlife Management Plan to be revised by the State Government in consultation with Project Elephant, Ministry of Environment & Forests, and
(b)
Cost norms for compensatory afforestation with maintenance for a period of five years, may be revised by the State Government of Orissa to the costnorms as are being followed in the JBIC project being implemented in Orissa.
(ii)
In pursuance to the Hon?ble Supreme Court?s order dt. 27.04.2007, in IA No. 1413, 1414 etc. in WP (C) No. 202/1995, which inter-alia states that
??fresh cases may be cleared Project-wise by the FAC and thereafter such clearances shall be placed before this Court for approval?.?, the said proposals
along with said recommendation of the FAC were placed before the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) for its examination and appropriate
recommendation to the Hon?ble Supreme Court.
(iii)
The CEC after examination of the proposal observed that the recommendations made by the FAC may not be accepted. The proposal under the F.C.
Act may be considered for approval only if (a) the conditions stipulated by the Government of Orissa vide letter dated 27.9.2004 for the grant of the mining
lease have been fully complied with by the User Agency; (b) the mineral reserves available in the non forest area are first fully used; (c) it is established that
there is no possibility of sourcing the iron ore from the existing mines or from the new mines in non forest area; (d) the requirement of the forest land is kept to
the bare minimum possible linking it with the realistic requirement of iron ore by the User Agency; (e) the requisite environmental clearance for the mine,
expansion of the existing plant and also for the new plant are obtained; (f) no forest land is included in the mining lease for which approval under the F.C. Act
has not been sought i.e. no forest area should be allowed to be retained for future requirement; (g) the diversion of forest land is found to be in public interest;
(h) an affective Wildlife Management Plan is got prepared by the Wildlife Institute of India and agreed to be implemented at the Project Cost; and (i) it is linked
to the specific condition that failure of the User Agency to implement the expansion plan / establishment of new plant within the stipulated time will
automatically make the grant of mining lease liable for cancellation.?
(iv)
The Ministry in 2008 filed its detailed response to the above observation of the FAC. However, on the court?s directions a reconciliation meeting was
held between the CEC and MoEF. After the said reconciliation meeting the following submissions were made by the CEC in the Court:
?The recommendation of the FAC may not be accepted. Consequently the proposal for approval under the FC Act may be rejected?
(v)
The Hon?ble Supreme court on 20.02.2009 passed the following order:
?CEC had made certain recommendations regarding diversion of 269.1698 ha of forest land for Malangtoli Iron Mines of M/s Orissa Sponge Iron Ltd.
(OSIL) in Keonjhar District of Orissa. The Director General of Forests, MoEF to take appropriate decision after considering the Report given by CEC. The
recommendation was considered and now the MoEF has expressed his inability to accept the FAC report in all the above three projects. Union of India may
take appropriate decision and communicate the same to the parties.
(vi)
Keeping in view the said order of the Hon?ble Supreme Court, this Ministry vide its letter dated 16.06.2009 communicated its inability to accord
approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, for diversion of the said forest land.
(vii) The Government of Orissa vide their letter dated 16.09.2009 inter-alia informed the ministry that the applicant has broadly complied with all the points
indicated by the CEC and requested the Ministry to reconsider its decision to grant prior approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for diversion of the
said forest land.
The FAC after detailed deliberations recommended that the State Government may examine the veracity of the claim of the user agency on compliance of the
each of the issues raised by the CEC and submit its comments to this Ministry. On receipt the comments the same along with the proposal may again be placed
before the FAC for its examination and appropriate recommendations.
Agenda No. 8: Diversion of 258.867 ha of forest land in compartment No. 752 and 753 of Govindgarh Reserved Forest in favour of M/s Jai Prakash
Associates Limited district Satana, Madhya Pradesh for their Hinauti Extension limestone mining project in Satna district of Madhya Pradesh ( File
8-80/2008-FC)
Due to paucity of time the proposal could not be discussed in the meeting.
Agenda No. 9: Diversion of 80.00 ha. forest land in Chaural Range of Indore Division in Indore district in favour of Tensildar Dr. Ambedkar Nagar
Mahu, District Indore for construction of buildings and other infrastructure of Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indore (8-109/ 2010-FC)
After careful examination of the proposal and interaction with representatives of the user agency, who made detailed presentation during the meeting, the FAC
noted as below:
(i)
(ii)
Legal status of the forest land proposed for diversion is Reserved Forest;
The forest land proposed for diversion contains 7,164 trees. Average stem density in the forest land proposed for diversion is 89.55 trees/ha. ;
(iii)
Para 4.5 of the guidelines issued under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 provides that diversion of forest land for construction of buildings,
except for construction of schools, hospitals/dispensary, community halls, cooperatives, panchayats, tiny rural industrial sheds of Government etc. which are to
be put up for the benefit of people of that area, subject to a maximum of one hectare in each case, shall normally be not considered;
(iv)
The forest land proposed for diversion is located at approx. 25 km distance from the Indore Town.
The FAC consider it not prudent to divert forest land to set up higher educational institutes unless there are no other options. In this case, the State of Madhya
Pradesh has ample non-forest land which may be acquired as per normal procedures. The FAC also does not favour diversion of forest areas near urban and
semi urban centers which are of immense value, for such purposes. The FAC therefore, does not recommend diversion of forest land for construction of
buildings and other infrastructure of Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Indore.
Agenda No. 10: Re-diversion of 0.0795 ha. (0.08 ha.) of forest land in Kandlakoi RF of Hyderabad Division for laying of gas pipeline already diverted
forest area for construction of outer ring road at Kondlakoi, near Oxygen Park ? in favour of M/s. Bhagyanagar Gas Ltd., Hyderabad [8-66/ 2009-FC
(pt.)]
Due to paucity of time the proposal could not be discussed in the meeting.
Agenda No.11: Matter pertaining to suspension of the approval accorded under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for diversion of 110.87 ha.
forest land in Kothaguda Reserve Forest in Ranga Reddy District of Andhra Pradesh in favour of Andhra Pradesh Forest Development Corporation
(APFDC) Ltd. for execution of an Eco-Tourism Project (8-132/ 2003-FC)
The FAC examined the request of the State Government of Andhra Pradesh to consider the request of M/s Trac India Pvt. Limited who is executing a Night
Safari & Eco Park Project in an extent of 45.16 ha. within the 110.87 ha. forest land diverted in favour of Andhra Pradesh Forest Development Corporation
(APFDC) Ltd. for execution of an Eco-Tourism Project in Kothaguda Reserve Forest in Ranga Reddy District of Andhra Pradesh that each of the three
components of the said Eco-development works may be treated as separate one so that any omission at the issue that may arise at any time of the project, either
now or future, should not affect all the three.
The FAC after detailed deliberations recommended that keeping in view the fact that approval has been accorded by the Ministry in favour of the APFDC it
may not be advisable for the Ministry to deal directly and separately with the proponents of the each component of the said Eco-Tourism Development project.
However, to facilitate further appropriate action in the matter the State Government of Andhra Pradesh may examine separately the adherence by proponent of
the each of the three component of the said Eco-tourism project, to the (i) aims and objectives enunciated in the preamble of proposal submitted by the APFDC
to obtain prior approval of the Central Government under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for diversion of the said forest land; (ii) the own stated definition
of eco-tourism as ?not same as mass tourism and as something which leaves no impact but footprint? and (iii) the conditions stipulated in the Stage-I and StageII approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 accorded by the ministry for diversion of the forest land; and intimate the same to the Ministry for its
further necessary action in the matter.
B. PROPOSALS DEALT BY SHRI C.D. SINGH, IGF (FC) IN THE ABSENCE OF SHRI UMAKANT,
AIGF
Total No. of cases : 6
Sl.
No.
1. Diversion of 527.043 ha of forest land for coal mining from Hurra ?C? Mine Project located in
Rajmahal area of Godda Forest Division in favour of M/s Eastern Coalfield Limited (ECL) in
Godda district of Jharkhand. (File no. 8-6/2009-FC)
Decision of FAC
The Committee re-considered the proposal of
the Government of Jharkhand for diversion of
forest land for Hurra ?C? OCP project of M/s.
ECL and noted that the FAC on 26.02.2010
rejected the proposal as felling of large number
of trees (9,32,223), having girth from 10 cm up
ward, were involved and it was not advisable to
open up this forest area from forest
conservation point of view. However, on the
request of the State Government, the
Committee on 25.10.2010 reconsidered the
proposal and listened to the presentation made
by the Project proponent and the Nodal Officer
(FCA) of the State Government highlighting
that only Rajmahal mine is operating within
the radius of 10 km of project site and there
was a mistake in extrapolation of sampled data,
which showed 9,32,223 trees instead of 7,49,695
trees having girth more than 10 cm. The FAC,
thereafter, desired original toposheet clearly
showing the project area and the forest
boundary; the satellite imagery of the project
area with interpreted vegetation map on
suitable scale; photographs showing varying
densities of the different areas of the project;
up to date information of settlement of rights
under the FRA 2006; and the working sheet
abstract showing 10 cm girth class wise tree
population.
The Committee reconsidered the proposal and perused the detailed information submitted by
the State Government and noted that as per revised enumeration of trees, about 6,90,313 trees (i.e.
about 92%) fall in girth class 10-30 cm whereas only 58,952 trees falls in 30 cm & above girth class.
It was also noted that the mining will be done in two phases and only half of the total area will be
broken up in Ist 15 years of project life of 30 years.
After taking all relevant factors into account, the FAC recommended the proposed with
following special conditions in addition to standard conditions:
i. The project proponent will take up mining as per mining plan in two phases and will maintain the
forests in another half intact till the exhaustion of first mine.
ii. The project proponent will surrender equal extent of mined out area duly reclaimed at the time of
renewal or expansion of the project to the Forest Department.
2. Diversion of 30 Sq. Km. of forest land for AIZWAL district for Serlui ?B? Hydel Project,
Mizoram. (File no. 8-202/87-FC)
The Committee considered the proposal for Serlui ?B? Hydel Project and noted that MoEF had
earlier accorded in-principle approval for diversion of 30 sq. km. of forest land for Serlui ?B? Hydel
Project dated 26.3.1991 with certain conditions. However, due to one reason or the other, the State
Government failed to submit the compliance report within stipulated 5 years time. The compliance
report is submitted on 17.03.2011 with the request to grant stage-II clearance. As many parameters
have changed since the proposal was accorded approval, it was placed before the FAC. The FAC,
after discussing the proposal, desired that the State Government be requested to present the factual
position of the case and apply afresh for the Stage-I clearance.
3. Prospecting and exploration over an area of 3.5 sq km in Mauza Seregarha & Ganeshpur coal
block of North Karanpura coalfield in favour of M/s Seregarha Mines Limited in Latehar
Forest Division in Latehar district of Jharkhand. (File no. 8-20/2011-FC)
The Committee discussed the proposal for prospecting and exploration of coal in Seregarha &
Ganeshpur coal block of North Karanpura coalfield. The Committee also noted that the block is
allocated to M/s Arcelor Mittal India Limited and M/s GVK Power Limited. The coal block has an
area of 3.50 sq km, which contains 2.42 sq km of forest land and 108 sq km of Govt. non-forest land.
This block was regionally explored earlier by drilling 27 boreholes.
However, core drilling of 26 boreholes of 4? diameters will be required to establish exact
location of coal seams during which no felling of trees will be done. It was also noted that the area
does not form part of National Park, Wildlife Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserve, etc.
After discussing all aspects in detail, the Committee recommended the proposal of prospecting
with standard conditions.
4. Diversion of 139.00 ha of forest land for Jitpur Open Cast Coal Mining project in favour of M/s.
Jindal Steel & Power Limited in Godda Forest Division in Godda district of Jharkhand. (File no.
8-24/2010 - FC)
Deferred due to paucity of time.
5. Diversion of 79.56 ha of forest land for iron ore mining in East Bhanupratapur Forest Division
in favour of M/s Monnet Ispat & Energy Limited in Kanker district of Chhattisgarh. (File no.
8-81/2010-FC).
Deferred due to paucity of time.
6. Diversion of 158.64 ha of forest land for Dumri coal mining project in favour of M/s Nilachal
Iron & Power Limited in Hazaribagh West Forest Division in Hazaribagh district of
Jharkhand. (File no. 8-76/2010-FC)
Deferred due to paucity of time.
A.
PROPOSALS DEALT BY SHRI RAJESH SHARMA, AIGF
Total Number of Proposals: 09
Sl.
No.
Decision of FAC
1. Diversion of 78.45 ha of forest land for implementation of 96 MW Nafra Hydro Electric
Project in favour of M/s Sew Nafra Power Corporation Private Limited in Bomdila Forest
Division in West Kameng district of Arunachal Pradesh. (F. No.8-23/2011-FC)
The Committee reconsidered the proposal for diversion of 78.45 ha of forest land for 96 MW Nafra
Hydro Electric Project of Arunachal Pradesh on 5th-6th May, 2011, wherein the Committee requested
the IA Division of Ministry of Environment and Forests to give findings on ?cumulative
environmental impact of various hydro electric projects particularly on the riverine eco system and
land and aquatic biodiversity and also to provide a copy of the EIA/ EMP?.
The Committee considered the response of the IA division that a study for cumulative Impact
Assessment for Bichom Basin in Arunachal Pradesh has been conducted by WAPCOS on the behest
of 11 proposed projects on the River Bichom. The TORs for the study were approved by the EAC
and the cost of the study was shared on pro-rata basis by all the project proponents for the projects
coming up on the River Bichom. The WAPCOS submitted the final report to the Ministry.
The Committee also discussed the EIA report and noted that a minimum of 1.7 cumec of water has
to be released during the lean season.
There are many references to the presence of many wildlife species in the area, but there is no
detailed report is available on the existence of terrestrial and avian fauna in the project area. Given
the rich spectrum of biodiversity in general and of bird, mammal and plant species in the district, a
more in-depth assessment of the project site is essential.
The FAC examined the above and sought the following additional information:-
(a) The Chief Wildlife Warden of the State Government to give a report on wildlife presence and
habitat in the project area, with special emphasis on endangered species.
(b) WAPCOS, which has done the cumulative impact assessment for Bichom Basin in Arunachal
Pradesh on the behest of 11 proposed project, will make a formal presentation before the FAC.
2. Diversion of 75.304 ha of forest land for construction of 180 MW Bajoli- Holi Hydro Electric
Project in favour of GMR Bajoli Holi Hydro Power Pvt. Ltd in Bharmour Forest Division in
Chamba district of Himachal Pradesh. (F.No. 8-43/2011-FC)
The Committee considered the proposal for diversion of 75.304 ha of forest land for construction of
180 MW Bajoli- Holi Hydro Electric Project, envisaged as run of the river project on the Ravi River,
in the reach between Bajol to Holi villages in Chamba district, of Himachal Pradesh. It will divert
the river water from small storage reservoir with bed level at EL 1975m and full reservoir level at
2018.25 m . This will pass through a 15.56 km long tunnel on left bank of river Ravi and discharges
back to Surface Power House near Holi village. The total land required for the project is 85.779 ha
including 75.304 ha forest land & 09.588 ha private land. Out of 75.304 ha forest land, about 14.986
ha, is required for underground work and 60.318 ha, for surface rights. Out of 60.318 ha, 20.468 ha
is required for temporary use. The proposed area does not form part of any National Park,
Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserve, Tiger reserve, Elephant Corridor, etc., and the State Govt has
identified for raising compensatory afforestation on 151 ha of degraded forest land.
During its meeting on 5-6th of May 2011, the study to assess cumulative environmental impact of
various hydro electric projects particularly on the riverine eco system, land and aquatic biodiversity
may be done and sought information on following:
(a)
The State Government may be requested to assess cumulative impact of hydroelectric
projects on larger landscape in general and forest fragmentation and on wild life, both terrestrial and
acquatic species .
(b)
The State Government to verify the quantity of minimum discharge from the protected
stipulated therein the downstream.
In response to the above, the State Government has submitted the following information:
(a)
The Ravi sub-basin of Indus basin is fully harnessed except for few projects in the upper
reaches of the river and as per the Indus water treaty 1970 agreed between India and Pakistan, Ravi
River is for full consumptive use of India. As such after completion of Thein Dam, which is the
downstream most storage scheme, no water is released downstream of Madhopur Barrage as such
practically a river stretch of about 80 km within the Indian territory and about 500 km downstream in
Pakistan territory is dry except during high floods. As such conducting cumulative impact studies in
this basin may not be that significant. However, EIA studies for Bajoli Holi have been conducted
through M/s. R S Envirlink Technologies, a reputed consultant recognized by MoEF which covers
detailed assessment of Impact of Bajoli Holi HEP .These details were put to expert appraisal
committee on the basis of which environmental clearance has been given to the project on January
23, 2011.
(b)
For verification of quantity of minimum discharge, the matter was referred to the
Directorate of Energy, Govt. of H.P. They have replied that no gauge and discharge site is
established on these streams, therefore, no long term discharge data is available. They have also
written that for verification of data of these rivulets, the method of proportional catchment area
method was adopted and it has been observed that the discharges method by the IPP is broad in
order. As per the Himachal State Policy, all the developers are required to release 15% of average of
lean 4 months discharge as downstream release continuously from the diversion structure. However,
MoEF while according environment clearance has stipulated that a 20% of average lean for 4 months
is required to be released downstream of the diversion structure. As such quantum of release
downstream is considered to be higher than minimum required.
(i)
After taking into account, the information given by the State Government, the Committee
recommended the proposal for approval subject to standard conditions and the following additional
conditions:
(a)
A cumulative study may be carried out by the State Government on behest of all project
proponents on Ravi River to assess the impact on landscape in general, and wildlife and ecological
aspects in specific before the final sanction is accorded. The FAC seeks special emphasis on the
issues of forest fragmentation and landscape level changes due to direct and indirect impact of the
project.
(b)
Detailed information on micro-hydel projects, exisitng and proposed inn the project basin
may be provided with maps.
(c)
For Compensatory Afforestation the area should not be the fragmented, it should be a
contiguous patch for effective monitoring and protection.
(d)
R&R policy submitted by the project proponent should be fully in consonance with the
National Draft R&R policy 2007.
3. Diversion of 365.10 ha of forest land in village Indaur, Tehsil Tijara for establishing a strategic
Defence project in favour of M/s DRDO, Ministry of Defence in Social Forestry Division in
Alwar district of Rajasthan. (F.No. 8-104/2010-FC)
The Committee considered the proposal for diversion of 365.10 ha of forest land for establishing a
strategic Defence project in Social Forestry Division in Alwar district of Rajasthan. Only 5% of
total proposed forest land for technical, administrative and security facility will be utilized by DRDO
and the remaining 95% area will be used as Buffer Zone. The total cost of the project is Rs.100.00
crores. There is no protected archaeological/heritage site/ defence establishment or any other
important monument is located in the area. There is no displacement of people involved in the
project. The area is highly degraded forest and only Fox, Jacal, Jungle Cats and Rabbits are found.
The project proponent would carry out additional plantation in the area to make the forest more
dense with a view to cover, conceal and camouflage the system and equipment deployed. This
project is of National importance and is meant for the security of our country. About 6,920 no. of
trees to be felled. Compensatory Afforestation has been proposed on double degraded forest land
over an area of 730.20 ha with the total financial outlay of Rs.3,87,73,620/-.
After discussing the proposal in detail, the FAC recommended the proposal with following specific
conditions along with other standard conditions:-
1.
Compensatory Afforestation was earlier proposed for 7 years maintenance. It should be
extended to a period for 10 years. This is considered essential given the arid conditions and the slow
rates of recruitment in such an ecological setting. Indigenous species of trees and shrubs are to be
chosen.
4.
Diversion of 370.00 ha of forest land near Rupnagar (Beawar) for establishing a strategic Defence project in favour of M/s DRDO, Ministry of Defence
in Pali Forest Division in Pali district of Rajasthan. (F.No. 8-105/2010-FC)
The Committee considered the proposal for diversion of 370.00 ha of forest land near Rupnagar
(Beawar) for establishing a strategic Defence project for National importance in favour of M/s
DRDO, Ministry of Defence in Pali Forest Division in Pali district of Rajasthan. Only 5% of total
proposed forest land for technical, administrative and security facility will be utilized by DRDO and
the remaining 95% area will be used as Buffer Zone.The total cost of the project is Rs.250.00 crores.
There is no protected archaeological/heritage site/ defence establishment or any other important
monument is located in the area. There is no displacement of people involved in the project. The area
is highly degraded forest and only Fox, Jacal, Jungle Cats and Rabbits are found. The project
proponent would carry out additional plantation in the area to make the forest more dense with a
view to cover, conceal and camouflage the system and equipment deployed.This project is of
National importance and is meant for the security of our country.
After discussing the proposal in detail, the FAC recommended the proposal with following specific
conditions along with other standard conditions:-
1.
Compensatory Afforestation was earlier proposed for 7 years maintenance. It should be
extended to a period for 10 years. This is considered essential given the arid conditions and the slow
rates of recruitment in such an ecological setting. Indigenous species of trees and shrubs are to be
chosen.
5. Diversion of 850.00 ha of forest land between Khoa and Jajor for establishing a strategic
Defence project in favour of M/s DRDO, Ministry of Defence in Social Forestry Division in
Alwar district of Rajasthan. (F.No. 8-106/2010-FC)
The Committee considered the proposal for diversion of 850.00 ha of forest land between Khoa and
Jajor for establishing a strategic Defence project for National importance in favour of M/s DRDO,
Ministry of Defence in Social Forestry Division in Alwar district of Rajasthan. Only 5% of total
proposed forest land for technical, administrative and security facility will be utilized by DRDO and
the remaining 95% area will be used as Buffer Zone.. The total cost of the project is Rs.350.00
crores. There is no protected archaeological/heritage site/ defence establishment or any other
important monument is located in the area. There is no displacement of people involved in the
project. The area is highly degraded forest and only Fox, Jacal, Jungle Cats and Rabbits are found.
The project proponent would carry out additional plantation in the area to make the forest more
dense with a view to cover, conceal and camouflage the system and equipment deployed. This
project is of National importance and is meant for the security of our country. About 484340 no. of
trees to be felled. Compensatory Afforestation has been proposed on double degraded forest land
over an area of 1700 ha with the total financial outlay of Rs.9,02,49,600/-.
After discussing the proposal in detail, the FAC recommended the proposal with following specific
conditions along with other standard conditions:-
1.
Compensatory Afforestation was earlier proposed for 7 years maintenance. It should be
extended to a period for 10 years. This is considered essential given the arid conditions and the slow
rates of recruitment in such an ecological setting. Indigenous species of trees and shrubs are to be
chosen.
2.
The State Forest Department will count at the time of compliance of stipulated conditions,
the number of trees to be felled in the project area in the following format:
Class (Diameter at breast height)
0 ? 30 cm
30 ? 60 cm
60-90 cm
>90 cm
No. of trees
3.
The State Forest Department, will also give the details of trees to be actually felled, during
the construction for various activities (5% of the area) specified in the project in consultation with
project proponent in the above format:
6. Diversion of 313.88 ha of forest land for construction of Tato-II Hydro Electric Project (700
MW) on Siyom river in favour of M/s Tato Hydro Power Pvt. Ltd. In West Siang district of
Arunachal Pradesh. (F.No. 8-82/2010-FC)
The Committee considered the proposal for construction of Tato-II Hydro Electric Project (700 MW)
on Siyom river in West Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh. The river Siyom originates in higher
Himalayas and flows generally in south-easterly direction. A series of large HEPs have been
identified for development on the Siyom river. Starting from upstream, these are the 500 MW
Hirong project, 700 MW Tato-II project, 1000 MW Naying project and 1000 MW Middle Siang
(Siyom) project. The proposed project is located downstream of confluence of river Siyom and river
Sichu at Tato. As enumerated by the State Forest Department about 1,20,890 no of trees above 60
cm girth (385/ha) have been enumerated in the proposed diversion area. About 37,000 trees fall
within 61-90 cm girth class and 64,678 trees fall in 91-120 cm girth class. Hollock (Terminalia
myriocarpa) and Siris (Albizia) are most prevalent species, others are Castonopsis, Toona, Magnolia,
Canarium, Phoeba, Altinzia, Kadam etc. Tree felling would not be required in all the areas like
surface area, over underground works like HRT, PH etc. (about 9.19 ha). Felling of about 38000
trees from 99.3 ha of submergence shall also not take place immediately. The Compensatory
Afforestation has been proposed over double degraded forest land, i.e., 628.00 ha in Aalo Forest
Division with a total financial outlay of Rs.7,59,17,500/-.
After hearing the presentation made by the project proponents, the Committee deliberated on various
issues and desired that a Government Study to assess cumulative impact of hydroelectric projects on
riverine, ecosystem, may be done on the following:-
(i)
Wildlife experts/ institutes may be asked to study the status of wildlife in the project area
with special emphasis on endangered and rare endemic species of faunaand flora.
(ii)
The study should reveal the possible impacts and also suggest the mitigating measures. It
should examine risks of forest fragmentaion and landscape level changes due to the direct and
indirect impact of the proposed project.
(iii)
State Government may also be requested to give the details of various projects including
existing and proposed micro-hydel projects and thus provide overall plan for river Siyom and river
Sichu.
(iv)
The biodiversity plan of project proponent urgently need critical analysis and substantial
redrafting. It appears arbitrary and should instead be based on Biodiversity Conservation efforts on
scientific principles.
7. Diversion of 775.00 ha (originally proposed 901.00 ha) of forest land for construction of
Renuka Dam project in favour of M/s. Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited in
Renuka, Paonta, Nahan, Rajgarh & WL-Shimla Forest Divisions in Sirmour district of
Himachal Pradesh. (F.No. 8-41/2009-FC)
The Committee reconsidered the proposal for diversion of 775.00 ha of forest land for construction
of Renuka Dam project in Himachal Pradesh and noted that the project was considered in the FAC
meeting on 17.06.2010, but the recommendation of the Committee was not accepted by the
Government on the ground that the proposal involved high density forest and require felling of large
number of trees.
However, the State Government has requested the MoEF to reconsider the project on the ground
that:
(i)
Total number of trees in the original proposal was 77,000 in addition to 95,860 saplings,
which now after the FRL-4 (762 m) enumeration, has come down to 60,355 and 70,401 respectively.
(ii)
There is a reduction of 18.33% in case of mature trees (i.e. class III and above) and reduction
of 22.01% in case of poles with a combined reduction of 21.16%. Similarly, saplings (below class V)
have also been reduced by 26.55%. Thus there is reduction of an overall 24.35% when trees and
saplings are taken together. The position is summarized in the following table.
Sl. No. Category/class of trees Trees involved in
Trees falling
total forestland
in the area
sought for diversion below FRL-4
m
1. Mature trees (Class-III
8,363
6,826
& above i.e. dia 30 cm
& above)
2. Poles (class-v & vi i.e.
68,637
53,482
dia 10 to 30 cm)
Sub-total (trees + Poles)
77,000
60,308
Reduction % reduction
(in no.)
1,537
18.38%
15,155
22.08%
16,692
21.68%
(iii) Trees falling in the area from riverbed level to FRL-4 m are required to be removed and the
rest will not be removed.
The FAC, after examining the information given by the State Government, desired the following
additional information:-
(a)
State Government should give complete and adequate evidenc of compliance with the
provisions of the FRA 2006 for land proposed for diversion.
(b)
State Government needs to furnish a comprehensive status report on enumeration of trees in
the entire project area. This should include the Shamalat lands and private forest lands.
8. Diversion of 330.70 ha of forest land in Nawada Forest Division for construction of KodermaTilaiya new Broad Gauge Railway line (49.515 km) in favour of East Central Railway,
Koderma in Bihar. (F.No. 8-55/2007-FC)
The Committee reconsidered the proposal for construction of Koderma-Tilaiya new Broad Gauge
Railway line (49.515 km) in Bihar and noted that the construction of Bihar portion of KodermaTilaiya railway line was discussed in the FAC meetings held on 20th September, 2007, 7th January,
2010 and 17.06.2010. The Committee in 2007 desired that the opinion of the CWLW of Bihar be
obtained as the rail line was passing through dense forest, where movement of elephants has been
reported. In January 2010, the report of the Chief Wildlife Warden, Bihar about the wildlife
population and their distribution in the landscape was discussed and it was recommended that
Government of Bihar may organize a professional study by qualified wildlife expert to study the
impact of this project on the wildlife, in the context of the importance highlighted by the Chief
Wildlife Warden and the clear concern expressed by the PCCF about the additional stress in the ecosystem. The team however could not make a visit to the site. The Railways authorities explained the
alternatives in detail with toposheet maps and highlighted that due to serious gradient constraints on
hilly terrain, no other alternative is technically feasible. The Committee also noted the content of the
CWLW?s report highlighting that about 25.26 km of new BG railway line passes through the forest
area (20 km through dense forest and 2.13 km through 5 tunnels), though covering 16 villages
enroute with 4 stations, will primarily transport coal from Shivpur coal mine area to Barh STPS
reducing the present distance between Koderama-Tilaiya via Gaya from 110 km to 64.5 km.
However, the recommendations of the FAC dated 17.06.2010 could not be accepted on the grounds
that the crown density of the forest area involved is 0.5 and about 63,711 trees of diameter above 30
cms and 1,86,150 saplings would be felled for laying the Railway line.?
The Railways has requested the MoEF to reconsider the proposal as it was essentially required to
supply coal to Barh STPP from North Karnpura Coalfields. The Committee recommended the
proposal and reiterated its recommendation with following special conditions:-
(i)
The user agency will assist State Government in protection and conservation of wildlife
found in the areas in consultation with CWLW of the State and with qualified scientific personnel.
(ii)
Before the final approval, a revised site inspection will be done by a team consisting of
wildlife experts, which will carry out section by section inspection and submit a report on impact of
this project on wildlife along with associated mitigative measures which will be implemented by the
user agency/ Railways, including the possibility of providing tunnels to minimize the above ground
disturbances.
(iii)
There is a need to control speed as per terrain and presence of wildlife and their behaviour.
There should be regular meeting between the railways and forest officials on speed of trains in this
sector as substantial forest land is involved.
(iv)
The construction of Jamundaha and Bara Halt stations be avoided to reduce the adverse
impact of proposed railj line on the dense forest area. As a result no station will be constructed in 24
km long dense forest area. Possibility may be explored to shift Belatand station over to already
available land at Gajhandi with the Railways. Also avoid construction of Jharahi station on
Jharkhand portion.
(v)
No station should be constructed between Jharahi/Dilwa and Bara/ Khairondh in future.
9. Diversion of 61.4083 ha of forest land being diverted/ transferred in favour of M/s JSW Energy
Ltd. For the construction of 240 MW Kuther Hydroelectric Project within the jurisdiction of
Bharmour Forest Division, Distt. Chamba, H.P. (F.No. 8-47/2011-FC)
The Committee considered the proposal for construction of 240 MW Kuther Hydro Electric Project,
envisaged as run of the river project on Ravi, in sub-Tehsil Holi of Chamba District in Himachal
Pradesh. It will divert the river water from a Barrage having a small storage reservoir through a
14.602 km long tunnel on left bank of river Ravi. The total land required for the project is 69.1178
ha including 61.4083 ha forest land and 7.7095 ha private land. Out of 61.4083 ha forest land, 19.94
ha is required for underground works. The proposed area does not form part of any National Park,
Sanctuary, Biosphere Reserve, Tiger reserve, Elephant Corridor, etc., and the State Govt. has issued
a certificate of the availability of degraded forest land in Himachal Pradesh in Dist. Chamba for
raising compensatory afforestation on 123 ha of land.
After detailed discussion and hearing the argument of the project proponent, the Committee
recommended the proposal for approval subject to standard conditions and the following additional
conditions:
(a)
A cumulative study may be carried out by the State Government on behest of all project
proponents on Ravi River to assess the impact on landscape in general, and wildlife and ecological
aspects in specific before the final sanction is accorded.
(b)
basin.
Detailed information regarding prposed and existing micro-hydel projcts on the project
(c)
For Compensatory Afforestation the area should not be the fragmented, it should be a
contiguous patch of few hectares for effective administrative control and protection.
(d)
R&R policy submitted by the project proponent should be inconsonance with the Draft
National R&R policy 2007.
*****