National Mineral Policy 2006 - Department of Mines
National Mineral Policy 2006 - Department of Mines National Mineral Policy 2006 - Department of Mines
per plan should be significantly higher than the prescribed penalties (as of 30June 2006).Mining Leases1.45 MLs cannot not be given unless there is ample evidence of an adequately prospectedore body, i.e. data describing in detail the entire ore body which is the end product of asuccessful PL operation. However, the current dispensation does not lay down thisrequirement clearly, except Section 5(2)(a) of the MMDR Act, which requires only proof ofmineral occurrence resulting from a RP (simple reconnaissance or regional explorationexercise). Of course, the requirement of a mining plan takes care of this issue to a certainextent but the Act needs to clearly lay down this requirement and the MCR should lay downin detail the nature of data to be provided in respect of each parameter. It may be mentionedthat this is one of the main reasons why a large number of leases have remained nonoperational.MLs that have been given on the basis of RP data instead of PL data cannot beoperated as prospecting (detailed exploration) is still to be completed. ML holders who aremostly in the small and medium enterprise (SME) sector have neither the knowledge nor thefunds required for detailed exploration and hence the MLs remain idle.1.46 MLs are granted in two kinds of areas, viz. areas prospected by a PL holder and areasprospected by State agencies with well-delineated, i.e. fully prospected, ore bodies ready formine development and mineral extraction. The issues concerning the former are dealt with inparagraphs 1.58 and 1.59 below, which deal with security of tenure. The issue of grantingMLs in respect of ore bodies fully prospected by public agencies at public expense has alsobeen discussed earlier in paragraph 1.32 above. It has been proposed in the interest oftransparency and for augmenting state revenues that the free distribution of such mineralresources may be done away with and that the ore bodies be disposed of through atender/auction process as a matter of policy. For the tender/auction process to be introduced,it will be necessary to amend the MMDR Act to grant the power to make disposals and alsoamend the rules to provide a transparent procedure for such disposals. At present, the disposalof such ore bodies is done along with other areas on a simple first-come-first-served basis[Section 11(2)] or where an area is notified in terms of Section 11(4) by inviting applicationsand selecting one among several applications on the broad parameters mentioned in Section32
11(3) of the MMDR Act. However, in all cases, the state governments, and in some caseseven the Centre, are authorised to bypass these provisions at their discretion.1.47 It is, therefore, recommended that:(i)(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)The MMDR Act be amended to exclude ore bodies fully prospected by publicagencies at public expense, as mentioned in paragraphs 1.32 and 1.46 above, fromthe purview of Section 11 of the MMDR Act;A fresh provision be introduced requiring the Central government, through theGSI (for GSI-prospected areas) and through IBM (for other than GSI-prospectedareas), to notify all areas that have been prospected (detailed exploration) by Stateagencies and are ready for mining within a time-bound framework;The state governments, through their Directorates in respect of non-Schedule Iminerals and in consultation with IBM in respect of Schedule I minerals, may becharged with the task of disposing of the ore bodies in such notified areas througha transparent tender/auction process. In the case of iron ore and bauxite, which arefully prospected, the disposal may be through the state governments with theassociation of IBM.Detailed rules and procedures for such disposal by tender/auction be laid down inthe MCDR.However, in the interest of overall development of the state, the state governmentmay waive the tender/auction procedures for ore bodies occurring within the stateand grant the lease to an applicant who is otherwise qualified in terms of criteria(a) to (c) of Section 11(3) of the Act but who is also willing to set up thedownstream industry within the territorial limits of the state. In case of more thanone applicant offering to set up such industry within the state, the stategovernment may grant the ML for such an ore body to the applicant which itadjudges to be the most deserving in terms of criteria (a) to (d) of Section 11(3) ofthe Act. In such cases, the full cost of exploration by the public agency should berecovered from the lessee.33
- Page 2 and 3: National Mineral PolicyReport of th
- Page 4 and 5: ContentsAcronyms...................
- Page 6 and 7: Annexure 5: Using the GRI Guideline
- Page 8 and 9: GDP gross domestic productGIS Geogr
- Page 10 and 11: UNFCUSVATWCUUnited Nations Framewor
- Page 12 and 13: Introduction1. The Government of In
- Page 14 and 15: issues relate to fund raising by pr
- Page 16 and 17: termination of MLs, lowering of cei
- Page 18 and 19: • In the case of large mining ope
- Page 20 and 21: investment. The work done by GSI co
- Page 22 and 23: mainly for minerals of base metals
- Page 24 and 25: 1.21 This situation has changed dra
- Page 26 and 27: absent. A study by the United Natio
- Page 28 and 29: example, a mining major may outsour
- Page 30 and 31: would otherwise remain unexploited
- Page 32 and 33: the policy environment must continu
- Page 34 and 35: ‘A thrust is to be given to explo
- Page 36 and 37: In reviewing the MMDR Act, it is ne
- Page 38 and 39: permissible activities in order to
- Page 40 and 41: (i)(ii)(iii)(iv)The current two-tie
- Page 44 and 45: Duration of Concessions1.48 In the
- Page 46 and 47: 10,000 sq. km in a state. This has
- Page 48 and 49: (ii)(iii)(iv)The maximum total area
- Page 50 and 51: e obviated if the lease deed is exh
- Page 52 and 53: elinquishment of areas by the lesse
- Page 54 and 55: to give priority to the prior appli
- Page 56 and 57: (v)(vi)(vii)Rules should be prescri
- Page 58 and 59: esponsible for all rights, liabilit
- Page 60 and 61: ut also the revenue generated from
- Page 62 and 63: government at the Secretariat. A le
- Page 64 and 65: Secretary. If the Directorate is in
- Page 66 and 67: (i) All applications for mineral co
- Page 68 and 69: application. A similar website shou
- Page 70 and 71: concerned State Government (or othe
- Page 72 and 73: Further, Rule 7D of the MCR specifi
- Page 74 and 75: mission mode through, inter alia, t
- Page 76 and 77: Chapter 3Forest Conservation and En
- Page 78 and 79: conservation. There are trade-offs
- Page 80 and 81: ICMM AND SDF3.8 The ICMM membership
- Page 82 and 83: higher level. The basic approach is
- Page 84 and 85: (i) To minimize displacement and to
- Page 86 and 87: affected PAPs in the mining operati
- Page 88 and 89: that a well-regulated and responsib
- Page 90 and 91: (iii)Notwithstanding the above, sur
11(3) <strong>of</strong> the MMDR Act. However, in all cases, the state governments, and in some caseseven the Centre, are authorised to bypass these provisions at their discretion.1.47 It is, therefore, recommended that:(i)(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)The MMDR Act be amended to exclude ore bodies fully prospected by publicagencies at public expense, as mentioned in paragraphs 1.32 and 1.46 above, fromthe purview <strong>of</strong> Section 11 <strong>of</strong> the MMDR Act;A fresh provision be introduced requiring the Central government, through theGSI (for GSI-prospected areas) and through IBM (for other than GSI-prospectedareas), to notify all areas that have been prospected (detailed exploration) by Stateagencies and are ready for mining within a time-bound framework;The state governments, through their Directorates in respect <strong>of</strong> non-Schedule Iminerals and in consultation with IBM in respect <strong>of</strong> Schedule I minerals, may becharged with the task <strong>of</strong> disposing <strong>of</strong> the ore bodies in such notified areas througha transparent tender/auction process. In the case <strong>of</strong> iron ore and bauxite, which arefully prospected, the disposal may be through the state governments with theassociation <strong>of</strong> IBM.Detailed rules and procedures for such disposal by tender/auction be laid down inthe MCDR.However, in the interest <strong>of</strong> overall development <strong>of</strong> the state, the state governmentmay waive the tender/auction procedures for ore bodies occurring within the stateand grant the lease to an applicant who is otherwise qualified in terms <strong>of</strong> criteria(a) to (c) <strong>of</strong> Section 11(3) <strong>of</strong> the Act but who is also willing to set up thedownstream industry within the territorial limits <strong>of</strong> the state. In case <strong>of</strong> more thanone applicant <strong>of</strong>fering to set up such industry within the state, the stategovernment may grant the ML for such an ore body to the applicant which itadjudges to be the most deserving in terms <strong>of</strong> criteria (a) to (d) <strong>of</strong> Section 11(3) <strong>of</strong>the Act. In such cases, the full cost <strong>of</strong> exploration by the public agency should berecovered from the lessee.33
Change language