Majority Report of the Committee Constituted to ... - Forest Rights Act

More documents

Recommendations

Info

withdrawal of 10 MGD water from the Jobra Barrage. The existing competing use of the water resources from the Jobra Barrage are drinking water for Cuttack and Bhubaneshwar cities, irrigation water for agriculture in four districts (Cuttack, Jagatsinghpur, Khurda and Kendrapada) and several industries, and these have not been taken into account. The public representatives who met the committee members expressed concern about the existing scarcity of water due to use by the already established industries. In fact, the Water Resources Department has allocated additional water from Hansua nalla for construction purposes which has not been disclosed in the EIA amounting to suppression of the information. The REIA has not addressed the widespread impact that will adversely affect a large population spread in a number of big towns as well as districts. 32. Recommendation- The Committee strongly feels that there have been many serious lapses and illegalities in the EIA process. The EIA for such a megaproject is rapid, based on one-season data without taking into account all the components of the project like the township project, water project, railroad and transport facilities etc. Moreover it is limited only to Phase I of the project. There are serious violations in the public hearing process where many communities have been left out. The imposition of additional conditions to the existing ECs will not at all remedy the lapses and illegalities. The Committee therefore strongly recommends that the Environmental Clearance given by the MoEF dated 15.5.2007 for minor port and 19.7.2007 for the steel plant should be immediately revoked. D. Compliance of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) 33. The Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) of Konark -Paradip stretch submitted by the Government of Orissa in 1995 to the MoEF includes the belt of Jatadharmohan creek. Because the area falls under estuary zone and is ecologically sensitive, barrier spits and channel bars occurring near the estuarine mouth has been categorized as CRZ-I. Only the areas studded with agriculture fields and settlements are to be categorized as CRZ-III near the Dhinkia village. The NIO report has not specifically indicated the extent of area/ length along the creek/shore line falling under CRZ I and CRZ III. 34. Further, the limits of the CRZ lines drawn on 1:5,000 scale maps by NIO at 500 m towards the northern portion of POSCO site and at 150 m on the creek side are not very clear. The limits and extent upto which these lines exists should have been well defined by the geo-coordinates in the maps as well as in the text. But it has not been mentioned in either of the documents. In the absence of such geo-
coordinates it would be impossible to draw lines on the ground. The main worry is who is going to verify these lines and distances from the HTL on the ground? No permanent marking has been done on the ground. Orissa state government was not associated in the CRZ survey of the POSCO site and NIO depended on the land use map and geo-coordinates provided by POSCO. 35. Except for port, any activity relating to steel plant, be it storage of raw material, cannot be allowed within the CRZ (500 m from HTL) as per CRZ Regulations. On the other hand NIO has recommended for establishing coal/ore and slag yard which are parts of steel plant in the CRZ I (i) & CRZ III areas facing open coast in northern side ( page 18 of the NIO-DCRZ Report). This amounts to violation of the CRZ regulations. 36. The State Coastal Management Zone Authority while discussing the port proposal of POSCO-India on 7 Aug 2006 found a mismatch between CRZ maps prepared by ORSAC and NIO. This was to be reconciled by the POSCO-India but no document for such reconciliation has been provided to the committee. 37. Dressing or altering of sand dunes, hills, natural features including landscape changes for beautification, recreational and other such purpose are prohibited , except as permitted under the notification. During the visit of the committee on 21 Sep 2010, the representative of the POSCO-India Mr. S.N. Singh informed the members that the existing mouth of the Jatadharmohan creek will be used as an approach channel for one lane for vessels and will be progressively widened to 500 m. The map provided by POSCO, however, shows that existing mouth will be filled and sandy barrier spit at about 500 m away towards south will be cut to make the approach channel. Such a cutting and filling of sand bars amounts to change of the natural course of the creek and are in contravention of the CRZ notification. In a clarification sought from the POSCO it was replied that the mouth of the Jatadharmohan creek originally existed at the proposed site in 1998 and in last 10 years the Jatadhar Mouth has shifted towards north and has acquired the present form. The site of the old mouth has been therefore chosen for making approach channel. The committee did not find such explanation convincing. Further, in the common clearance/approval dated 15.05.2007 given for CRZ and EIA for the port Condition B(vii) stipulates that the sand dunes and mangroves, if any, on the site should not be disturbed in any way. It is not clear
Page 1 and 2: Majority Report of the Committee Co
Page 3 and 4: governments were asked to provide c
Page 5 and 6: for claims after constitution of FR
Page 7 and 8: have worked with people, to help in
Page 9: 29. Concerns regarding the impact o
Page 13 and 14: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PREFACE CONTENTS
Page 15 and 16: as a whole (as opposed to for the i
Page 17 and 18: INTRODUCTION- Time Line of Events P
Page 19 and 20: government to hear all the applicat
Page 21 and 22: II. Recommendations of the Central
Page 23 and 24: V. Forest clearance given without c
Page 25 and 26: These Palli Sabha proceedings only
Page 27 and 28: ii) Investigation and ascertainment
Page 29 and 30: The Sairat income of the estate was
Page 31 and 32: V. Rights of `encroachers’ not se
Page 33 and 34: in the Schedule annexed hereto whic
Page 35 and 36: 9. Karonj Pongamia glabra 10. Sanar
Page 37: subdivision is supplied with betel
Page 40 and 41: 5. Aquaculture Ponds 0.79 0.20 6. A
Page 42 and 43: are interpreted as the remnants of
Page 44 and 45: VI. Impact of loss of coastal mangr
Page 46 and 47: to keep them at a middle income cla
Page 48 and 49: 25. Another source of income is fro
Page 50 and 51: vi) Status of ownership showed that
Page 52 and 53: v) All families in these villages (
Page 54 and 55: SECTION 3 Forest Rights and the For
Page 56 and 57: (4) He goes on to say that under su
Page 58 and 59: one must note that this is not limi
Page 60 and 61:
proviso to section 29(3) and theref
Page 62 and 63:
20. It must first be noted that whe
Page 64 and 65:
obtained by the resident tenants at
Page 66 and 67:
of Polanga lies within the project
Page 68 and 69:
esolutions in the registers but onl
Page 70 and 71:
53. In light of the above, the Comm
Page 72 and 73:
(4) District Welfare Officer (5) Th
Page 74 and 75:
68. It is not clear if the resoluti
Page 76 and 77:
anywhere in the State after June 20
Page 78 and 79:
- Both points have certified by the
Page 80 and 81:
3) Finally, the certification of co
Page 82 and 83:
98. The Committee finds that, even
Page 84 and 85:
112. The Orissa government's takeov
Page 86 and 87:
extent to which the Orissa R & R Po
Page 88 and 89:
(wherever applicable) in the Commit
Page 90 and 91:
18. Approximately 32 villages, most
Page 92 and 93:
Majority Report of the POSCO Enquir
Page 94 and 95:
the minor port. It is against this
Page 96 and 97:
12. The tests for evaluating adequa
Page 98 and 99:
Paradeep port area in a region desc
Page 100 and 101:
26. The proposed project is to set
Page 102 and 103:
33. The Schedule to the 2006 Notifi
Page 104 and 105:
August 2006 (Annexure E - 3 ) as pe
Page 106 and 107:
een annexed to the main text.” On
Page 108 and 109:
54.The committee members are of the
Page 110 and 111:
fragile coastal area which has repe
Page 112 and 113:
Board should stipulate appropriate
Page 114 and 115:
67. In the Letter No. WP-IWS-135/07
Page 116 and 117:
ii) Coastal Regulation Zone map ind
Page 118 and 119:
78. As far as the impact on the Pra
Page 120 and 121:
from the site. Since mangrove veget
Page 122 and 123:
potential hazardous units in this r
Page 124 and 125:
photographs and voucher would be pr
Page 126 and 127:
a) The project is highly significan
Page 128 and 129:
have not been followed through by t
Page 130 and 131:
dispensed with in the peculiar fact
Page 132 and 133:
conduct of public hearings is elabo
Page 134 and 135:
n Impact Identificatio n Mitigation
Page 136 and 137:
hazards and affect their livelihood
Page 138 and 139:
ecause of other industries in the a
Page 140 and 141:
2 Dredging would affect Atharbanki
Page 142 and 143:
6 Dredging of sand dumping it in th
Page 144 and 145:
were accepted or negatived. Failure
Page 146 and 147:
118. As per the Interim Operational
Page 148 and 149:
Para 14.0 Para 15.0 Par a 15. 0 Par
Page 150 and 151:
Director, Department of Disinvestme
Page 152 and 153:
Officials has committed any mistake
Page 154 and 155:
For these amongst other reasons, th
Page 156 and 157:
Introduction Section 6 Compliance o
Page 158 and 159:
Some activities are permissible wit
Page 160 and 161:
provided by POSCO-India Pvt Ltd and
Page 162 and 163:
5th December, 1989; except transfer
Page 164 and 165:
Location of slag yard in CRZ area p
Page 166 and 167:
that any of these issues were discu
Page 168 and 169:
In view of the above observations t
Page 170 and 171:
Conclusions and Recommendations Par
Page 172 and 173:
9. Though the MoEF is not the nodal
Page 174 and 175:
concerned authorities to such poten
Page 176 and 177:
As this report has demonstrated, wh
Page 178 and 179:
A. Preparation of EIA. 1. EIA shoul
Page 180 and 181:
e available to members of public el
Page 182 and 183:
REFERENCES / ANNEXURES Annexure No.
Page 184 and 185:
2010 Report. A-26 July 27 th , U.N.
Page 186 and 187:
FRA and compliance. C-7 July, 2004
Page 188 and 189:
Ghauj Jungle, Plot Nos. 1293 & 1294
Page 190 and 191:
Members in Bhubaneshwar E - 18 4.10
Page 192 and 193:
Annexure - H : CRZ serious concerns
Page 194:
Finance Minister, GoO. Note : The c
show all

Majority Report of the Committee Constituted to ... - Forest Rights Act

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?