12.07.2015 Views

National Mineral Policy 2006 - Department of Mines

National Mineral Policy 2006 - Department of Mines

National Mineral Policy 2006 - Department of Mines

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

again and the State <strong>Mines</strong> <strong>Department</strong> should be authorised to grant or renew the MLto the individual lease holder subject to the fulfilment <strong>of</strong> the conditions stipulated inthe ‘in principle’ approval, such as transfer and mutation <strong>of</strong> non-forest land in favour<strong>of</strong> the Forest <strong>Department</strong>, payment for compensatory afforestation and NPV, and suchother stipulations as are normally put in by MOEF before conveying the formal(second stage) clearance. This would reduce the procedural steps in obtainingclearances. The state governments can report to the Central government on thecompliance <strong>of</strong> the conditions mentioned in the ‘in principle’ approval by the useragency. In other words, the Committee would recommend that the second stageclearance may be delegated to the state governments. Further, in the case <strong>of</strong> renewals<strong>of</strong> existing leases, if the MOEF has already given its approval under FCA, there is norationale for going through the whole process again when the lease becomes due forrenewal. Unless there are serious adverse effects on the forest and wildlife orenvironment in an area or there is violation <strong>of</strong> the conditions mentioned in the initialletter <strong>of</strong> approval, the approval <strong>of</strong> applications for renewal should be no more than aformality. [3.31]• When proposals for renewal <strong>of</strong> MLs are submitted for clearance under the FCA, 1980,the state governments <strong>of</strong>ten resort to arbitrary reductions in the lease area withoutassigning any reasons for the same. The industry has proposed that since factors suchas depth <strong>of</strong> mine and consistency <strong>of</strong> ore body decide the area required for mining aviable deposit, the area applied for mining should not be arbitrarily reduced whileaccording forest clearance or at the time <strong>of</strong> renewal <strong>of</strong> MLs. The Committeerecommends that ad hoc reductions in the area applied for renewal under forestclearance be done away with. [3.32]• Mining being a site-specific activity, diversion <strong>of</strong> forest land for mining should beconsidered for a longer period <strong>of</strong>, say, 50–100 years or till the exhaustion <strong>of</strong> the orebody. The Committee recommends that existing leases should be automaticallyrenewed till the ore in the deposit lasts provided that periodic monitoring reports <strong>of</strong>the Regional Officers <strong>of</strong> the MOEF during the lease period indicate compliance withthe conditions stipulated during grant <strong>of</strong> the diversion permission. If approval <strong>of</strong>206

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!