National Mineral Policy 2006 - Department of Mines

after the P1 or P2 stage. LAPLs, meant for those who would like to collect additional data byway of exploration before applying for a ML or who would like to undertake regional as wellas detailed exploration using expensive technologies, hence would normally be given notonly for greenfield areas (on technology considerations) but also for areas given up by GSIand/or RP holders even after work upto the E1 level.1.43 As regards PLs in RP held areas, in the current dispensation the exclusivity clauseensures that no application for a PL can be entertained where a RP is in operation. However,it is argued that such exclusivity militates against the basic concept of RP, which wasintroduced mainly to invite private sector initiative and investment into regional explorationand, thereby, supplement and add to the work done by GSI. If RPs are granted for areaswhere GSI or a government agency has already completed regional exploration and generatedadequate data warranting detailed exploration then a RP for that area would become counterproductivein that it would not only duplicate reconnaissance work where this has alreadybeen done but also hold up the detailed exploration work for the duration of the RP in the RPheldarea. Conversely, it is argued that the work of regional exploration done by GSI is toosketchy to enable an investor to take the decision to invest in detailed exploration and thetechnologies available for geological information collection are now so advanced that GSIdata is too inadequate at the end of a regional exploration exercise (even up to E2 level) towarrant a PL. While the concept of LAPL can resolve this issue to some extent it is alsosuggested that an applicant be allowed to apply for a LAPL or a PL directly in the nongreenfieldareas allotted to one or more RP holders under the ‘open sky’ policy. Nongreenfieldareas refers to those areas that are given up by GSI after P1 or P2 work and also toareas relinquished by other RP holders whose data is put into the public domain after thelock-in period. Since a PL applicant has to prove the existence of a mineral occurrence notonly in law but also to justify the investment in prospecting no investor will risk an RPactivity in an area which has already been adequately explored by GSI, just as no LAPL/PLapplicant will risk investment unless adequate regional exploration data is available. Itfollows that the protection afforded to the LAPL/PL holder would need to be veryconsiderable. This is dealt with later in the subsection dealing with security of tenure.1.44 In the light of the discussions above, the following changes in respect of explorationlicences are recommended:29