Minutes of the Environmental Public Hearing held in connection with the setting up of the New Petroleum Oil & Lubricants· (POL} Storage and Distribution Terminal of capacity 1,64,680 KL in Sy.No.120, Malkapur Village, Mandal, Yadadri Bhuavanagiri District, State by M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd on 26_09-2018 at 10.00 AM, Venue of the Public hearing: Near the proposed site area.

The following Public Hearing panel members were present:

SI. Name of the Panel Member No. 1. Smt. M. Vijaya Kumari, Representative of the Collector & District Revenue Officer & Additional District District Magistrate, Yadadri Magistrate, District. Bhuvanagiri District. 2. Sri B. Bhikshapathi, Representative of T.S. Pollution Environmental Engineer (FAC), Control Board. T.S. Pollution Control Board, Regional Office, Nalgonda.

The following Government officials were also present at the venue:

SI. Name & Designation No. 1. Sri Suraj Kumar, Revenue Divisional Officer, Choutuppal, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District. 2. Sri T. Ravindar, AES, TSPCB, Regional Office, Nalgonda. 3. Sri Ch. Veeresh, AEE, TSPCB, Regional Office, Nalgonda. 4. Kum . Md. Sajeena Begum, AEE, TSPCB, Regional Office, Nalgonda.

The following representatives of M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd were present:

S. No. Name & Designation 1. Sri K.V. Ramana Murthy, GM (Operations), M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 2. Sri Vibhash Kumar, CGM (Engineering), M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 3. Sri P.V. Suresh Kumar, GM (Engineering), M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 2. Sri M. Murali Krishna, M/s. S.V. Enviro Labs & Consultants, Environmental Consultant, Visakhapatnam.

At the outset, the Environmental Engineer (FAC), Regional Office, Nalgonda, TSPCB, invited the people gathered at the venue and public representatives and other officials to participate ir,Jhe environmental public hearing. He has also invited the District Revenue Officer, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District to occupy the dais and conduct the public hearing in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Environment Impact Assessment Notification (EIA), 2006 issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and_Climate Change, Government of . He informed that M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (IOCL), proposed to locate ·the Grass Root Petroleum Storage and Distribution Terminal in Sy.No. 120, Malkapur Village, Choutuppal Manda!, Yadadn Bhuavanagiri District. The capacity of the proposed Storage Terminal is 1,64,680 KL. While explaining the salient features of the EIA Notifi cation, 2006 S.O. (E) No.1533, dated 14-09-2006 and its subsequent amendments issued from time to time, he stated that the public hearing was a mandatory process for setting up of any industry or expansion of existing industry, which involves the storage of Petroleum Oil and Lubricants. He stated that the intimation of

Page 1 of 8 public hearing was published in 'Sakshi, Telugu Newspaper and in 'Hindu' English Newspaper on 25-08-2018. The Executive Summary on the project and other relevant information was displayed in the local body offices and the Collectorate to enable the people public to access the information. The present project is categorized as 'B' and the environmental public hearing is being held to elicit the views, opinion, suggestions and objections if any on the proposed project. He also informed that the entire proceedings would be video graphed and would be sent to the authorities for taking further action arid no final verdict on the proposal would be taken during public hearing. He then requested the District Revenue Officer, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District to conduct the proceedings of Public hearing.

The District Revenue Officer & Addi, District Magistrate, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District: while inviting the people gathered at the venue, stated that the entire proceedings of the environmental public hearing would be video graphed and would be sent with the views on the project expressed by the people gathered at the venue: She assured the people that opportunity would be given to all the people, who intended to speak on environmental aspects. All such speakers were requested to furnish their names on the slips supplied to them. She requested the people to express their views specifically point wise on the issues instead of elaborating the issues. She then invited the Company representative or their consultant to explain the salient features of environment management plan and mitigation measures proposed therein.

Sri Vijaya Bhaskara Rao, Environmental Consultant, M/s. s.v. Enviro Labs and Consultants, Visakhapatnam: While welcoming the public, officials and journalists and media persons, he started with the project details. He informed that the information on the possible impacts and the remedial measures was prepared and copies were made available to the public in the local language. He stated that the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL), a Central Public Sector Undertaking attached to Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Govt. of India is proposing to construct New POL (MS, HSD, SKO, Ethanol, Bio-diesel, Trans-mix, ATF) Storage Tanks capacity 1,64,680 KL in Malkapur. It is the leading Indian corporate in the Fortune "Global 500' listing ranked at the 168th position in the year 2017. He stated that M/s. IOCL proposed to I .. establish new Petroleum products storage facility in Sy. No.120, Malkapur Village of Choutuppal Manda! in Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District on an area of 74.59 acres. The capacity of storage terminal was 1,64,680 KL comprised of 28 tanks to store MS, HSD, SKO, Ethanol, Bio-diesel. The new terminal would facilitate the easy distribution· of petroleum products in and around Hyderabad and Telangana and this terminal · would be helpful to redoce the problem of adulterated petrol~um products. He stated that the EiA report was prepared and aligned as per the generic structure of EIA, EMP Reports. He started his description of environment and identification of impacts. He stated that the Baseline .data was conducted in the study area during the January, 2018 to March, 2018. He started with impacts on land environment. The ·proposed petroleum products and storage facility would be in.stalled in an area of 74.59 acres of land. He started that minor quantities of solid and hazardous waste would be there due to the proposed project, which would be handled scienqfically. There would be no change in soil characteristics, land use pattern and landscape due to .constructlon of this terminal. He stated that s~il samples were collected from 5 locations in different direction within study area and characterized. He stated that existing ambient air quality data was collected from 8 sampling stations in study area .

Pag12 of 8 He stated that air pollutants were well within the limits specified under NAAQS for industrial, rural and residential areas. He stated that operation of POL terminal Involved only storage of products and would not lead to process specific emission of air pollutants into atmosphere and no air pollution was envisaged due to proposed storage tanks. He stated that noise monitoring was conducted at 8 locations as part of preparation of base line data and the results were below the standards stipulat~d by the CPCB. He stated that 8 Nos of ground water samples and 2 Nos of surface water samples were collected from different locations around POL Terminal, which were found to be within the limits stipulated-for surface water standards. The water requirement would be 25.0 KLD and the source of water would be underground bore wells. The estimated generation of waste water would be 17 KLD, which would be treated ~hrough Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) . Washing water would be diverted to oil water separator and clarified waste water would be reused for gardening. The domestic sewage would be diverted to septic tank followed by soak pit. There would be no adverse impact on Biological environment .as no risk was envisaged due to proposed storage terminal. He stated that no effluent would be discharged in to the water body and no impact on aquatic life was envisaged. He stated that there would be positive impact on socio-economic front. Provision of employment, socio-economic development, increase in employment due to large flow of financial and material resources through .increased business, trade commerce and service sector. The mig~ation of labour would be reduced. There would be increased economic activity. This would enable the availability of clean energy to the public. Construction and operation of Storage terminal would be taken up as per the· stringent safe guard measures stipulated by the Oil Safety Directorate and withqut any risk to the public.

The District Revenue Officer, Yadadri Bhuvanaglri District requested the public gathered at the venue of public hearing to offer their opinion, suggestions and views on the proposed Petroleum Storage and Distribution Terminal at Malkapur Village of Choutuppal Mandal in Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District.

1. Sri Md. Hanif, R/o. Malkapur: While welcoming the proposed terminal, he stated tha~ the surrounding lands -belonged to him and wanted paths to his lands.

2. Sri Ch. Sailu, District Congress Secretary, R/o. Choutuppal: While welcoming the proposed storage terminal, he stated that 74.59 acres of land in Sy.No. 120 was made available to the proposed storage unit and enquired whether there would be ~ny further requirement of land. He stated that the industry did not disclose the number of vacancies and number of employees to be provided employment. He urged the industry to establish one skill development center to impart training to the local youth in their existing units. He requested the industry to conduct health camps and provision of local employment. He wanted the industry to undertake plantation all along the highway and adoption of villages. He sought assistance to set up libraries. He hoped that the storage terminal would be free from air and water pollution and there would not be any polluti9n to underground water due to storage of 1, 64,680 KL of POL products. He requested that industry to offer incentives to the BC, SC and ST students. He concluded his speech with a request to clear the project.

J. Sri s. venkat Reddy, R/o. Choutuppal: While extending his full support ta the proposed POL Storage Terminal of M/s. IOCL, he requested the Public Sector Undertaking to provide

Page 3 of 8 employment to the local people unHke private sector _i ~dustr,ies who ignored the interests of the local people. He stated that the storage of POL products were almost equal to Lakh of LPG cylinders, he expected that highest safety standards would be followed to prevent fire, which would be uncontrollable in case of accident. He stresse~ _the need to maintain highest safety standards, keeping in view the safety of the people. He ~oped that there would give boost to industrial development in this area. He urged the_I?CL !~ provide employment to the people, who were mainly from weaker and scheduled casts, who lost.their land due to location of storage terminal. He requested for provision of employment to the local people. He requested that the fund allocated under CSR should be spent locally instead of elsewhere as was the practice earlier.

4. Sri Vijaya R~ddy, Environmental Activist, R/o. Nalgonda: He stated that the public hearing was conducted in accordance with the provisions of S. 0 . No.1533, EIA Notification, and its amendments of December, 2009 and April, 2011. He felt that the public hearing violated the provisions of above notifications and demanded the cancellation of public hearing. It was the responsibility of proponent to answer queries of each and every issue raised by the speaker. He stated that public hearings should not be conducted during rainy season and to be conducted only after December. He cited that the arrangements could not be made properly, even the panel members were taking shelter under umbrellas and opposed the public hearing in this condition. He stated that M/s. IOCL was one of the listed company under Fortune 500 and ranked 168 in the list. As per the industrial act amendment - 2013, CSR budget would be 5% in the case of industry with a capital investment of Rs.500 cores, which would be abut Rs. 27-30 cores to be spent on infrastructure and other development activities. He stated that as per the EIA amendment - 2009 it was the responsibility of the industry to create awareness among the people 10 days before the EPH and make them to participate in EPH but the industry failed in this issue. The industry failed to furnish any action plan in that direction, which could be considered as violation of existing norms. He urged the panel to cancel the present public hearing and re­ conduct the same after taking up extensive awareness campaign among the local people and record their opinion on the proposed storage terminal . He threatened to take legal course, in case the industry proceeded further by violating the provisions of Acts and Rule$. He found fault with the arrangements made for conducting public hearing and inability of the industry in providing Executive summaries and the way it was conducted by entrusting the responsibility to the contractor.

5. Sri P. Madhava Chary, R/o. Thangedapally: While welcoming the proposed storage terminal, he stated that this area -.yas a backward in all aspects. He urged employment to the local people and If possible to the women. He urged the industry to consider this as an adopted village and provide employment to educated · youth. He requeste~ to adopt highest safety standards as the industry was considered as one dealing with flammable materials.

6. Sri N. Ravi Kumar, Environmentalist, R/o. Nalgonda: He stated that the Telangana was formed on basic issues like funds, employment and water. The Government int~nded to develop pharma city exclusively to develop pharmaceutical industry and there would be no chance to locate any such industry in this place. Since this area was·mainly dry and was not served by any major river basin, there would be no possibility to develop agriculturally. With this background a

Page 4 of 8 concluded his speech with a recommendation to accord permission to the proposed storage

terminal by M/s. IOCL.

9, Sri P. Krishna, NGO, R/o. Choutuppal: He extended his full support to the proposed storage terminal and requested the authorities to aGCord necessary clearance. He stated that CSR funds should ·be spent locally for the develop~~nt of basic infrastructure in the surrounding villages. He urged the project proponent to provide· employment to the local youth.

10. Sri Latchi Reddy, Ex- Sarpanch, R/o. Malkapur: He stated that land was given to set up the storage terminal by the villagers. He stated that the villagers were informed through 'Dandora' about this public hearing. He felt that not even 20 members were from his village. He 1 stated that people from outside the village were more in number. He sought employment to the land loosers and complained that in most cases in other industries they were not provided employment. He sought priority in employment to the people who gave away their lands for locating the storage terminal.

11. Sri Ch. Srinivas, State Principal Secretary, Baindla Sankshema Sangham, R/o. Malkapur: While welcoming the proposed storage terminal by IOCL, he stated that lot of land was acquired by the Government earlier. He cited the instance of Textile Park, where in Government acquired 50 acres of land from the people to locate Textile units. Not a single unit came up so far and no employment. The land was lying fallow. The price of the land increased multifold now, he stated. He cited the assurance of the then District Collector, who promised jobs to the local youth. When enquired subsequently, the officers stated that there was no written assurance on providing employment. He stated that M/s. IOCL acquired nearly 100 acres. He urged them to give written assurance in respect of employment to the local people, whether it would be 35% or 50%, it should be covered through written assurance, so that they would plead before the officials to secure employment.

12. Sri Manohar Pantulu, R/o. Ramannapet: He stated that this area once hosted the fighters in liberation of area from the clutches of domination. He stated that this hill terrain became ideal one for fighters as the area was undulating and hilly, which provided shelter. He whole heartedly welcomed the IOCL, who opted this site to set up the storage terminal. He stated that only 20% of the people were educated and that too through papers and media and the area basically remained backward economically. He cited the instances of air, water and land pollution by several industries. He stated that he submitted reports and representations on pollution before the District Committees. He urged M/s. IOCL to implement wholeheartedly all pollution abatement measures as per norms and urged them to see that there would be no pollution of water in the tank. Being a old freedom fighter, he extended his full support to the proposed POL Terminal at Malkapur.

13, Sri S. Krishna Reddy, Fanner, Malkapur: He extended his support to the proposed terminal with a hope that there would be no problem to them . He stated that he owned agriculture land adjacent to the terminal. He wanted IOCL to provide detailed information on the proposed terminal would be beneficial or not. He supported the setting up of the terminal.

Page 6 of 8 maJor· Public· Sector· 011· firm came forward to estab1 1s- h th e·1 r storage terminal in this place to cater to the needs of fuel of Hyderabad city also. While welcoming the setting up of storage terminal he felt that this would be one of the biggest ever investment in this sector especially In .this area. This would pave way to improvement of basic infrastructure in thi_s region especially in this village. He suggested to the industry to raise the green belt in and around the village and cover up the hills in surrounding area. He stated that one cement industry in composite Nalgonda District imparted training to local youth to enable them to secure employment elsewhere.

7. Sri Sunanda Reddy, Environmental Activist, R/o. Nalgonda: While welcoming whole heartedly, he congratulated the IOCL for selecting this area to install storage terminal. He recommended for unconditional environmental clearance to this type of storage proje~. He stated that there was no chemical manufacturing, only storage of flammable products, which needed careful handling of storage and transport and disposal of material. He actually suggested that there should be no public hearing for this type of storage terminals and w~nted the MoEF&CC to exempt the storage terminals from the purview of public hearing._However , he stated that the storage terminal proposed on 74.59 acres of land and as per the norms, 33% of the area should be covered under greenbelt. As the population increased four folds after independence, he suggested keeping more area under greenbelt as part of ecological balance. He requested the industry to actively undertake CSR activities and implement them on large scale over 10 km radius. The storage terminal stores about 16 Crore liters of fuel and Rs.16 Crore at the rate of Rs.1/- would be more than enough to take up various development activities. He also suggested to take up Rain Harvesting Structures within the area, which could yield 20 Crore liters of rain water. If ever drop could be saved, it would be a boon to increase the underground water resources in this dry area . The industry needed hardly 1.5 Crore liters of water per year and the remaining could be utilized to boost the underground water thereby helping agricultur~ on large scale in surrounding areas. He urged the industry to take up skill development activity to provide gainful employment to the local people. He reiterated his recommendation for unconditional permission / clearance to the storage terminal.

8. Sri Y. Chenoa Keshava Reddy, Social Activist, R/o. Nalgonda: He stated that this is one of biggest companies and recommended for clearance. He gave following suggestions to the industry as part of environment protection and social responsibility. He wanted to provide employment to the local people as furnished in Executive Summary. He suggested that the industry would depend on underground water to meet their requirement and urged them to reduce their consumption in order to help the farmers with more water for cultivation purpose. He requested the industry to conduct medical camps. He requested the industry to undertake treatment of Sewage water and use for industrial purpose. He stated that the water became un­ potable in this area and requested the industry to supply treated water to villages surrounding the plant. He urged the industry to provide water treatment plants to overcome the problem of scarcity of water in the villages. The educated people in the villages were divided into skilled, semi-skilled and un-skilled categories depending on their qualifications for providing employment. He contended that there either public sector or private sector were providing direct employment. Only indirect employment was provided through contractor or outsource methods: He urged the IOCL to provide direct and permanent employment to the people and fill the vacancies. He

Pase s of a 14. Sri. J. Ravinder, Indian Environment and Social Forum President, R/o. Nalgonda: He stated that he was an environmental and social activist dealing with various environmental issues of composite Nalgonda District. He stated that the area of Malkapur was surrounded by hills covered with green vegetation. The famous Rachakonda Reserve Forest is adjacent to Malkapur. He requested the Industry to maintain the serenity of the area by adop~ing latest pollution abatement measures and to conduct useful programs to the local people under CSR activity.

15. Sri S. Rami Reddy, R/o. Malkapur: He stated that he lost 10 acres of land for setting up of terminal by IOCL. He was left with only 2 acres of land, without any approach road. He urged the industry to provide road to the remaining land on which he was depending for survival.

16. Sri T. Krishnaiah, R/o. Chlnakondur: He thanked the IOCL for selecting ·Malkapur as the site for their proposed POL Storage Terminal. He sought priority in employment to the local people and people from local Manda!. He narrated his experience when they went for employment in other areas and stated that the priority was accorded to that local area. He sought priority in provision of employment without any prejudice to the local people only.

17. Sri S. Mahender Reddy, R/o. Malkapur: He stated that there were several educated people in his village and sought priority In employment. He stated that his land was lying adj acent to the storage terminal and in nearby area. He stated th.at M/s. IOCL promised to provide road to their green fields and farms at the time of acquisition of land for terminal and by believing the promise they extended their cooperation voluntarily for acquisition of the land. He hoped that they would keep up their promlse and provide land as well as -employment to the local people. He extended his full support to the proposed Storage Terminal by M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited.

The District Revenue Officer, Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District, requested the management of M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd to offer their clarifications on issues raised during course of proceedings of the hearing.

Sri M. Murali Krishna, Environment Consultant, M/s. Enviro Labs and Consultants, Visakhapatnam on behalf of the management gave categorical · replies on environmental aspects. He enumerated the issues raised by the individual speakers such as provision of road to the fields lying behind the terminal, apprentice training as part of skill development programme and CSR activity. He stated that CSR activities would be decided in consultation ·with the District Collector for the benefit of the local people. He stated that most of the speakers raised the issue of safety as flammable substances were stored in the terminal. He assured that'the directions and guidelines issued by the Oil Safety Directorate would be followed in totality and CCU directions and there would be no deviation in this regard. The tanks have Floating Roof and there would be no affect of vapour problems and also PV valve for each tank and there would be no possibility of any accident. He stated that there would be no air pollution from th~ storage terminal. Only there would be air emissions at the time of running DG sets that would happen only in the case of power failures only. He stated that adequate publicity was given through publishing the notification in Telugu and English Newspapers. Executive summaries were made

Page 7 of 8 - available at local offices mentioned in paper publications. Local Tom Tom and Dandora was resorted even one day before public hearing. He assured that 33% green belt would be maintained as per the nonns. There would be no leakages of any sort of effluent or sewage from the Terminal. Tapping of the ground water would be minimum and most met from Rain Water Harvesting. He stated that only 17 KL of water would be required for drinking and residential requirements. The sewage water after treatment would be utilized for raising green belt. He informed that Local development and road connectivity issues would be explained by the industry.

While thanking the people for their active participation in the public hearing despite adverse climatic conditions, Sri K.V. Ramana Murthy, General Manager (Operations), M/s. Indian OIi Corporation Limited stated that there would be no pollution from the Storage Terminal as it was not polluting activity. He made it clear that direct employment would be difficult being a storage terminal. However, he assured that there would be vast scope for indirect employment due to movement of trucks. He assured that CSR activity would be taken up in the villages as per the norms. The CSR activities include supply of Benches and furniture to the local schools and cited the example of Guntakal IOCL Terminal, where he implemented the CSR activity in good earnest. He assured that 30 feet wide bitumen topped road would be provided by the industry to connect the fields duly providing solar lighting through the lands procured / acquired by the industry. There would be tremendous scope for indirect employment due to movement of trucks and the requirements of truck operators. He informed that skill development was -not within his ambit, however h~ would take the matter to the notice of the management at higher level.

The District Revenue Officer, Yadadri Bhuvanaglri District concluded the public hearing stating that the views, opinion, suggestions and objections including written representations would be sent to the MoEF&CC without any editing.

The public hearing was concluded.

List of the public participated in the public hearing is appended.

~ ~V--9s~~ ~ -- Environmental Engineer (FAC), DistrictR J.enue Officer & T.s. Pollution Control Board Additional District Magistrate, Regional Office, Nalgonda. Yadadri Bhuvanagiri.