National Mineral Policy 2006 - Department of Mines

3.41 Recognising the need to make the existing environment clearance procedure timebound and more transparent, the MOEF first brought out a draft notification on 15 September2005 proposing a number of changes in the 1994 notification and inviting comments fromstakeholders. The MOEF has further prepared a revised version of the draft notification of2005 after receiving responses as above and has circulated it in May 2006. It is expected thatthe MOEF will finally bring out a new notification to replace the existing notification of 1994based on the responses received on the September 2005 and May 2006 drafts.3.42 The new draft notification of May 2006 categorises mining projects into twocategories, viz. category A and category B. All mining projects with ML areas of more than50 hectares have been kept in category A. Mining operations on lease areas of more than 5hectares but less than 50 hectares are kept in category B. Mineral beneficiation activity ofmore than 0.1 million tonnes per annum has been included in category A. Mineralbeneficiation of less than 0.1 million tonnes per annum is kept in category B. All projects oractivities of category A, including expansion and modernisation of existing projects oractivities and changes in product mix, would require prior environmental clearance from theMOEF. Projects and activities of category B, including expansion, modernisation, or changein product mix, would require prior environment clearance from the State EnvironmentImpact Assessment Authority (SEIAA). Category B has further been divided into B1 and B2.Projects requiring an EIA report are categorised as B1. The MOEF expects to issue separateguidelines for the treatment of the sub-categories B1 and B2.3.43 The environmental clearance processes is proposed to comprise four stages. These areScreening (only for category B projects/activities), Scoping (for deciding TOR of EIAexercise) Public Consultation, and Appraisal. Time limits have been prescribed for eachstage.3.44 During detailed discussions, it transpired that the draft rules contained someimprovements as well as some stricter norms. After detailed discussions, the Committeemakes the following recommendations:• The time frame proposed in the draft notification of the MOEF of May 2006works out to 232 days, even after excluding the time required for preparation ofEMP and the final report. This proposed time frame is too long and is well beyond90