Executive Summary

Draft EIA Report

Executive Summary

1. Introduction

Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) operates one of its largest oil refineries at Koyali (near Vadodara) in Gujarat, Western India. The refinery was commissioned in the year 1965 with a capacity of 3.0 MMTPA. Over the years, the capacity of the refinery has gradually been increased to 13.7 MMTPA with augmentation of old primary Atmospheric Units (AU-I, AU-II and AU-III) and addition of new primary units viz. Atmospheric Unit-IV in 1978 and AU-V in 1999 as well as augmentation of AU-IV in 2000.

Gujarat refinery IOCL owned a land of 434 Acres at survey no 771 to 795 at Dumad with Existing facilities of LPG marketing terminal commissioned during Nov 2002 and IOTL white oil terminal commissioned in the year 2012.

LPG marketing Terminal occupies land of approximately 62 Acres in 434 Acres at Dumad Village, Vadodara Savili Road, Dumad. It is about 3 Km from Dumad Approx ~8 Kms away from Gujarat Refinery (GR) of IOCL and situated between Vadodara-Savli Road. The operating processes carried out at the Terminal are receipt of LPG bulk, its storage in 6 mounded storage vessels having max storage capacity of 8300 MT, distribution of bulk LPG by loading Tank trucks and filled LPG cylinder after their filling at carousel machines. The quantity of LPG to be handled in existing facility is 0.50 MMTPA. The existing plant is under operation with GPCB consent obtained vide: AWH 68449, valid up to 18/11/2019 & PESO license obtained vide S/HO/GJ/03/498(S2126), Valid up to 31 March 2019.

IOTL Terminal occupies approximately 48 Acres of 434 Acres land. The existing terminal obtained EC in 2001 from MoEF vide: J-11011/8/2001-IA-II (I).The facility comprises of storage tanks for 5 No Gasoline Tanks, 4 No Diesel tanks, 3 No Kerosene Tank, 3 No Ethanol Tanks. The nearest railway station is Pilol 1.4 km towards NNE.The existing plant is under operation with GPCB consent obtained vide: AWH 65930, valid

1 Draft EIA Report up to 02/09/2019& PESO license obtained vide P/WC/GJ/15/2323(P-12298) (PESO) Valid Up to: - 31/12/2020.

2. Environmental Sensitive Areas

The existing complex is located at Dumad, Vadodara District, Gujarat State. The site is located ~20 Km from Vadodara city towards South-South-West. The site is located approximately≈ 14 Km towards East from Gujarat Refinery. Vishwamitri River is flowing adjacent to site boundary in East direction. Google image showing 15, 10, 5 and 1 Km radius from project boundary is shown in Figure 1.

The Environmentally Sensitive Areas within 15km from Project Boundary is provided in Table-1.

Table-1 Environmentally Sensitive Areas within 15km from Project Boundary

S. Areas Distance & Direction from project boundary No 1 Areas protected under international conventions, national or local legislation None within 15 km Radius for their ecological, landscape, cultural or other related value 2 Areas which are important or sensitive for ecological reasons – Wetlands, Watercourses or other water None within 15 Km radius bodies, coastal zone, biospheres, mountains, forests 3 Areas used by protected, important or sensitive species of flora or fauna for None within 15 Km radius breeding, nesting, foraging, resting, over wintering, migration 4 Inland, coastal, marine or None within 15 Km radius underground waters 5 State, National boundaries None within 15 Km radius

2 Draft EIA Report

6 Routes or facilities used by the public for access to None within 15 Km radius recreation or other tourist, pilgrim areas 7 Defence installations Nil 8 Densely populated or built-up Dumad area is surrounded by small villages like area (Nearest Town, City, Virod~0.8 km (ESE), ASOJ ~0.9 Km (NNW), District) Sisva ~1.4 Km (W), Ganpatpura ~1.1 km (SSW). However, most part of the Vadodara city, will fall within15 Km, which is having population more than 16 lakhs. 9 Areas occupied by sensitive S. Dista Directi man-made land uses No List of Sensitive Areas nce on (hospitals, schools, places of . (≈km) worship, community facilities) The Maharaj Sayaji 8.22 SSW 1 Rao University of Baroda 2 Madurai Kamraj University 10 SSW 3 GSFC University 6.42 WSW 4 Medical College of Baroda 10.28 SSW 5 Navrachana School Sama 6.89 SSW Sanskriti School of 4.85 SSE 6 Business MS Patel Institute of 8.43 SSW 7 Management 8 Cygnus world school 5.6 SSE 9 Bright day school 6.7 SSE American School of 9.6 SE 10 Baroda 11 Bright School 8.28 S 12 Ganga –Jamna Hospital 9.69 SW Bhailal-Amin General 8.9 SW 13 Hospital 14 SSG Hospital 10.14 S Metro-Hospital & Research 6.85 S 15 Institute 16 Satyam Hospital 5.95 SW 17 Tapovan Mandir 8.37 WSW 18 EME temple 7.52 SSW Shree Swaminarayan 8.64 S 19 Temple 20 Surya Narayan Temple 10.89 S 21 Kirti Mandir 9.89 SSW 10 Areas containing important, No

3 Draft EIA Report

high quality or scarce resources, (groundwater resources, surface resources, forestry, agriculture, fisheries, tourism, minerals) 11 Areas already subjected to pollution or environmental damage (those where No existing legal environmental standards are exceeded) 12 Areas susceptible to natural hazard which could cause the project to present environmental problems, No (earthquakes, subsidence, landslides, erosion or extreme or adverse climatic conditions)

Figure-1 Google image showing 15, 10, 05 and 01 Km radius from project boundary

4 Draft EIA Report

3. Proposed Facilities

For KAHSPL & TTL project the following are proposed

a. Existing 18” dia Underground line in Koyali – Dumad ROW for HSD pipeline transfer (PLT) from JR & tanks at Dumad b. Existing 10” dia & 14” dia underground line in Koyali-Dumad ROW for MS and SKO PLT from JR and tanks at Dumad c. Proposed new 12” dia underground line in Koyali-Dumad ROW for ATF PLT from JR and tanks at Dumad d. Proposed new 12” dia underground line in Koyali-Dumad ROW for PCK PLT from JR and Tanks at Dumad e. Proposed new 12” dia underground line in Koyali-Dumad ROW for pumping of fresh water from JR to Dumad f. New 10” dia & 6” dia LMW & HMW underground line from JR to Dumad in existing Koyali-Dumad ROW g. Proposed Tanks with Capacities are given in Table- 2. Table- 2 Proposed Tanks with Capacities Total Capacity S. No Product Number of Tanks Capacity (KL) (KL) 1 HSD 30000 4 (2 in operation + 1 receiving + 1 M&I) 1,20,000 2 MS 25000 3 (1 in operation + 1 receiving + 1 M&I) 75,000 3 ATF 10000 3 ( 1 in operation + 1 receiving + 1 M&I) 30,000 4 PCK 10000 2 ( 1 in operation + 1 M&I) 20,000 5 SKO 5000 2 ( 1 in operation + 1 M&I) 10,000 6 LMW 5000 3 (1 in operation + 1 receiving + 1 M&I) 15000 7 HMW 5000 1 in operation/ Receiving 5000 Fresh/ 8 Fire 6000 3 (1 in operation + 1 M&I) 24000 Water Service 9 6000 1 in operation/ Receiving 6000 water

h. Provision of circulation pumps, compressors, Fire and safety systems and miscellaneous facilities at Dumad

5 Draft EIA Report

i. Cross Country Pipelines j. Pipeline terminal with Booster and mainline pumping station k. 6 Bay Tank Truck Loading Facilities for LMW and HMW and Utilities etc. l. Fire Station

Proposed Facilities for Acrylics/ Oxo Alcohol Project The Major facilities proposed are PRU Unit, SYN Gas Unit, Oxo Unit AA unit and BA Unit. The schematic diagram of the proposed project is shown below

Storage facilities The following storage facilities are envisaged during the proposed expansion is given in Table-3.

Table-3: Proposed Storage facilities for expansion project

S. Chemical Name Storage Type Storage Capacity No of No Period/ Tank (KL) Tanks 1 N Butanol Internal Floating Roof 3 Days 1025 1 2 I-Butanol Internal Floating Roof 7 Days 232 2 3 Acrylic Acid Cone Roof 6 Days 1583 1 4 Butyl Acrylate Cone Roof 7 Days 3617 2 5 Propylene Mounded Bullets 7 Days 1410 1 6 Naptha Internal Floating Roof 3 Days 468 2

The product evacuation from Dumad has been considered by road only.

6 Draft EIA Report

Utilities

S. No Name of the Facility Demand 1. Pet Coke Power plant 17 MW 2. Boiler 200 TPH 3. Cooling water system (5 x 4200 KLPH, 4 working + 1 16320 KLPH standby) 16800 KLPH capacity 4. Nitrogen 900 NM3/Hr 800 KLPH 5. Raw water from IOCL Jack wells 400 KLPH 6. Fire water Storage 1700 KLPH 7. Flare 81000 NM3/Hr 8. ETP of 190 & 150 TPH capacity ~212 TPH 9. DG Set (Stand By) 1 x 1500 kVA

Piping Corridor The following streams are needed to be transferred through new pipelines in Existing koyali – Dumad ROW i. LPG ii. NAPTHA iii. Raw Water

4. Land Requirement

Proposed site layout is given in Figure 1. Land details are given in Table-4.

Table-4: Land details

Existing Land Proposed Total Site Name (Acres) (Acres) Acres LPG Terminal 62 -- 62 IOTL Terminal 48 -- 48 Proposed KAHSPL & TTL -- 79.8 79.8 Proposed Oxo/ Acrylics Project -- 65.5 65.5 Green Belt 33 111 144 Vacant Land 291 -256.3 34.7 Total Area Available at Dumad 434 434 Facility

7 Draft EIA Report

5. Water Requirement

Total water requirement of the existing facility is 24 KLD of which LPG terminal requires 19 KLD and IOTL white oil terminal requires 5 KLD.

The total additional water requirement for the proposed project is ~260 KLPH (say ~3 MGD) of which 2.7 MGD of raw water is required for operation of Oxo-Alcohol Project and 0.3 MGD of raw water for KAHSPL and TTL project.

Detailed breakup of Existing and proposed water balance is summarized in Table -5. Water Balance Diagram of Existing Terminals is given in Figure 2. Water balance diagram of the Proposed Facility is given in Figure 3. CPP Water Balance is given in Figure 4.

8 Draft EIA Report

Figure 1 Existing and ProposedSite Layout

9 Draft EIA Report

Table-5 Existing and Proposed Water Balance Diagram

Existing (KLD) Proposed (KLPH) Total (KLPH) ETP ETP ETP Fres Total Conden Treat Total Conde Treat Effluen Total Conden Treat S. Descriptio Fresh Effluent Fresh h Effluent Remarks Water sate ed Los Water nsate ed t Water sate ed No n Water Generat Water Loss Wate Generat Loss (a+b+ Used Water s (a+b+ Used Water Genera (a+b+ Used Water (a) ed (a) r ed c) (b) Used c) (b) Used ted c) (b) Used (a) (c) (c) (c) Raw Water 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 97.5 97.5 0 0 97.5 0 97.5 97.5 0 0 97.5 0 Treatment 2 Boiler 0 0 0 0 0 0 163 30.9 132.1 0 14.9 16 163 30.9 132.1 0 14.9 16 DM Plant 3 Regenerati 0 0 0 0 0 0 28.9 28.9 0 0 28.9 0 28.9 28.9 0 0 28.9 0 on 4 Domestic 13.5 13.5 0 0 12 1.5 15 15 0 0 13.5 1.5 15 15 0 0 13.5 1.5 Condensate 19. 5 Green Belt 19.5 0 0 19.5 0 110 0 30 80 0 110 110 0 30 80 0 110 from MEE is 5 used for GB Cylinder 6 Washing/ 6 6 0 0 3.5 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Testing ETP treated Cooling 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 430 335 - 95 50 380 430 335 - 95 50 380 water sent to tower cooling tower Fire water 8 4.5 4.5 0 0 0 4.5 15 15 0 0 0 15 15 15 0 0 0 15 Makeup 9 CPP 0 0 0 0 0 43 37.5 5.5 0 6.9 30.6 43 37.5 5.5 0 6.9 30.6 Ash Pond ETP treated 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.9 0 0 6.9 0 6.9 6.9 0 0 6.9 0 6.9 Quanching water used Total 43.5 24 0 19.5 15.5 26 902.4 559.8 167.6 175 211.7 553.1 902.4 559.8 167.6 175 211.7 553.1

Note: CETP = Combined Effluent Treatment Plant

Total Fresh water requirement after proposed expansion is ~560 KLPH

1 KL = 219.969 UK Gallon

So 219.969 * 560 KL/Hr* 24 Hrs/day / 10^6 = ~2.95 MGD (say 3 MGD)

10 Draft EIA Report

Figure 2 Water Balance Diagrams of Existing Terminals

11 Draft EIA Report

Figure 3 Water balance diagram of the Proposed Facility

12 Draft EIA Report

Figure 4 CPP Water Balance

13 Draft EIA Report

6. Wastewater Generation

Two Nos combined ETP (CETP) of 190 KLPH and 150 KLPH of ETPs is proposed. The amount of wastewater generated and to be treated is ~211.7 KLPH.

Figure 5 Typical ETP block diagram

7. Power & Fuel Requirement

The power requirement for the existing facility is met from JR. For proposed project the power requirement will be 17 MW to be sourced from proposed Captive power plant. Power and fuel requirement details are given in Table -6.

14 Draft EIA Report

Table-6: Power and Fuel Requirement

Capacity Details Existing Source Proposed Total (LPG+IOTL) Pet-coke based boiler. Petcoke will be supplied by JR. Natural Gas will be sourced from GAIL/GSPC. Adequate measures are taken to control Air Existing power Pollution through Power requirement 17 MW 17 MW installation of Electrostatic Requirement is met by Gujarat Precipitators to limit the Refinery solid particulate matter from petcoke based CPP will be limited to less than 50 mg/Nm3 and Fuel Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) as a part of CPP system 14.26 14.26 Fuel MTPH - MTPH Gujarat Refinery (Pet Coke) (Pet Coke)

40 LPH 40 LPH 40 LPH (IOTL) (IOTL) (IOTL) + + + Diesel Gujarat Refinery 750 LPM 750 LPM 750 LPM (LPG (LPG (LPG Terminal) Terminal) Terminal)

8. Manpower

The existing Terminals (IOTL & LPG) unit has a total of 72 permanent employees and 195 contract workers. Approximately ~1700 contract labors are required during construction phase based on various skills. Manpower details during construction and operation is given in Table -7 and Table-8.

Table-7: During Construction Phase

15 Draft EIA Report

S. No. Terminal Proposed 1 Acrylics/ Oxo Alcohol Terminal ~1000 2 KAhSPL & TTL ~700 Total ~1700

Table-8: During Operation Phase S. Existing Proposed Total Terminal No. Permanent Contract Security Permanent Contract 1 LPG 46 76 39 -- -- 161 2 IOTL 26 80 -- -- 106 3 Acrylics/ Oxo Alcohol 177 350 Terminal ------+ + 632 and 55 50 KAhSPL & TTL Grand Total 899

9. Solid Waste

During Construction Phase During construction phase ~3TPD of solid waste is envisaged. It will be the scope of the contractor to collect and dispose the solid waste generated during construction phase as per PCB norms.

During Operation Phase

During Operation phase Total of 407.25 Kg/day of solid waste is generated of which 162.9 kg/Day of organic waste will be composted and remaining Inorganic waste will be disposed through authorized vendors. Solid waste generation details for existing and proposed are given in Table-9. Hazardous waste generation details for existing and proposed are given in Table-10.

16 Draft EIA Report

Table-9: Solid waste generation details for existing and proposed. Existing (Kg/day) Proposed (Kg/day) S. Total List of Items No LPG Terminal & White Oxy Acrylics, KAHSPL (kg/Day) Oil Terminal & TTL 1 Organic 49.14 113.76 162.9 waste 2 Inorganic 73.71 170.64 244.35 waste Total 122.85 284.4 407.25 As per CPCB 0.45 kg/ capita/ day

10. Hazardous waste Management

Table-10: Hazardous waste generation details for existing and proposed.

S. Waste Propose Remarks Existing No Categor d List of y Oxo/ LPG White Items Acrylics, Termin Oil KAhSPL al Terminal & TTL Tank Sent to Authorized 1 Bottom 3.3 0.5 TPA 40 TPA 3 TPA Vendors. Sludge CHWIF Site Spend Oil Sent to Authorized 2 5.1 1.98 0.15 0.15 (KLPA) Vendors. Discarded 400 Collection storage and 0.5 3 Drums/ 33.3 Nos./Yea -- decontamination MTPM Container r within Facility Sent to Authorized Vendors. Paints and 0.14 4 21.1 -- -- (M/s. Recycling Coating T/Month Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (RSPL), Panoli

17 Draft EIA Report

The net sludge production is 7.85 T/d (moisture content 70%) and net Salt production is 4.5 T/d (moisture content 10%). Sludge shall be largely composed of Calcium Carbonate and Magnesium Hydroxide and a small amount of settled Total Salt suspended solids and from ZLD 5 35.3 -- -- 4.05 MEE Copper Hydroxide. (TPD) The moisture content ranges between70% to 75%. Salts shall majorly consist of Sodium and Potassium Salts of Sulphates, Chlorides and Nitrates. The moisture content ranges between10% to 15%. Sent to Authorized Vendors. ETP Sent to Authorized 6 35.3 -- -- 0.8 Sludge Vendors. To be used in cement Gypsum 7 -- -- 130 manufacturing from CPP process Spent Disposal as per 8 1.6 -- -- 50 Catalyst GPCB/ CPCB norms Sent to authorized Oxidation 140 MT/ 5 9 1.6 -- -- vendors for Catalyst Yrs landfill/auction Sent to authorized CCU 4.8KL/ 3 10 1.6 -- -- vendors for Catalyst Yrs landfill/auction

11. Project cost

18 Draft EIA Report

The estimated cost for the proposed projects is given in Table-11.

Table-11: The estimated cost for the proposed projects. S. No. Proposed Project Project Cost (Crores) 1 Oxo/Acrylics project 4157 2 KAHSPL project 906 3 TTL Facilities 131 Total 5194

12. Baseline Study

Common Sampling Location Map (Nov-2017 to Jan 2018)

19 Draft EIA Report

I. Meteorological Environment

Meteorological scenario in and around the project site is an essential requirement during study period for proper interpretation of baseline air quality status. Meteorological data was collected during the study period; (November 2017 – January 2018).The wind rose for the period of Nov 2017 to Jan 2018 is given in Figure-6.

Figure-6: The wind rose for the period of Nov 2017 to Jan 2018.

II. Ambient Air Quality

The ambient air quality has been monitored at 8 locations for 12 parameters including 12 parameters as per NAAQS, 2009 within the study area. The baseline levels of PM10(48.2 - 92.4 µg/m³), PM2.5 (15.3 - 51.8µg/m³), SO2 (7.4-17.4 µg/m³), 3 NO2 (14.4- 44.9 µg/m³), CO (0.08—0.41 mg/m ), all the parameters are well within the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Industrial, Commercial and Residential areas at all monitoring locations during the study period from November 2107 to January 2018.

20 Draft EIA Report

III. Noise Environment

It is observed that the noise levels monitored at 8 locations. Day equivalent and night equivalent noise levels at all locations are within prescribed CPCB standards  In industrial areas day time noise levels was about 62.1 dB(A) to 65.2 dB(A) and 51.1 dB(A) to 52.8 dB(A) during night time, which is within prescribed limit by MoEF&CC (75 dB(A) Day time & 70 dB(A) Night time).  In residential areas day time noise levels varied from 56.1 dB(A) to 58.4 dB(A) and night time noise levels varied from 44.1 dB(A) to 49.1 dB(A) across the sampling stations. The field observations during the study period indicate that the ambient noise levels in Residential area are within prescribed the limit prescribed by MoEF&CC (55 dB(A) Day time & 45 dB(A) Night time)

IV. Water Environment

Surface water quality

The summary of surface water quality monitored at 8 locations is summarized below

 In the surface water the pH varies between 6.58-7.62  The Total Dissolved Solids range varies between 200 mg/l – 2481.58 mg/l for the surface water.  The chloride content in the surface water for study area is ranges between 12.7 mg/l – 526 mg/l.  The sulphate content of the surface water of the study area varies between 6.829 mg/l – 386 mg/l meeting the desirable limit of the IS 10500: 2012.  The Total hardness ranges is between 102 mg/l – 1785.04 mg/l.

Ground Water Quality

A summary of analytical results ground water quality monitored at 8 locations are presented below:

 The ground water results of the study area indicate that the average pH ranges are varied between 6.91-8.14

21 Draft EIA Report

 The Total Dissolved Solids ranges is varied between 714 mg/l – 5845 mg/l for the ground water and for few samples exceeded the permissible limits of IS 10500: 2012.  The desirable limit of the chloride content is 250mg/l and permissible limit is 1000 mg/l. The chloride content in the ground water for study area is ranges between 105 mg/l – 1516 mg/l. Some samples are exceeding the permissible limit.  The desirable limit of the sulphate content is 200mg/l and permissible limit is 400mg/l. the sulphate content of the ground water of the study area is varied between 38.7 mg/l – 1585 mg/l and some samples are not meeting the desirable limit of the IS 10500: 2012.  The Total hardness ranges is between 184.8 mg/l – 2908.6 mg/l. for ground water and for few samples exceeded the permissible limit of the IS 10500: 2012.

V. Soil Environment

Summary of analytical results of soil quality monitored at 8 locations are presented below:

 The pH of the soil samples ranged from 7.25-8.22. Indicating that the soils are almost neutral in nature.  Conductivity of the soil samples ranged from 100.5-245 μS/cm. As the EC value is less than 2000 μS/cm, the soil is found to be non-saline in nature  The water holding capacity of the soil samples varied from 15-42 (%).  Nitrogen content ranged from 42 kg/ha to 142 kg/ha  Phosphorous ranged from 15.7 kg/ha to 63.3 kg/ha  Potassium content ranges from 62.4 to 197 kg/ha

22 Draft EIA Report

VI. Biological Environment

Trees and shrubs play an essential role in maintaining an ecological equilibrium and improving the livelihood of people in the dry regions. Vegetation of a particular area depends upon the interaction of various natural biotic and abiotic factors including Temperature, Rain fall, Humidity, Soil type, plants, animals, micro-organisms of that particular area in which they grow live and influence one another. The study area is moderately rich in vegetation. The review of the study area indicated that 174 floral species have been identified within the vicinity of the project site (refer Table 3-20 of EIA report). The bio diversity richness map of the study area is given in Figure-7.

Figure-7: The bio diversity richness map of the study area

VII. Socio Economic Environment

Vadodara District is a district in the eastern part of the state of Gujarat in western India. The city of Vadodara (Baroda), in the western part of the district, is the administrative headquarters. Vadodara District covers an area of 7526 km². It had a population of 3,641,802 with population growth of 19.87% as of 2001 census. As of

23 Draft EIA Report

2011 it is the third most populous district of Gujarat (out of 33) with 4,165,626, after Ahmadabad (7,214,225) and Surat (6,081,322). The district is bounded by Panchmahal and Dahod districts to the North, Anand and Kheda districts to the West, Bharuch and Narmada districts to the South and Chhota Udaipur to the East.

A socio-economic study was undertaken in assessing aspects which are dealing with social and cultural conditions, and economic status in the study area. The study provides information such as demographic structure, population dynamics, infrastructure resources, and the status of human health and economic attributes like employment, per-capita income, agriculture, trade, and industrial development in the study area. The study of these characteristic helps in identification, prediction and evaluation of impacts on socio-economic and parameters of human interest due to proposed project developments. The parameters are:

 Demographic structure  Infrastructure Facility  Economic Status  Health status  Cultural attributes

Awareness and opinion of people about the project and Industries in the area.

VIII. Anticipated Environmental Impacts

a. Water Environment

The total raw water requirement is 560 TPH (considering the requirement of integrated project at Dumad). Raw water storage pond of total 10 days storage of water was considered for sizing the pond. Raw water treatment facilities include: chemical dosing system, multi grade filter, activated carbon filter and Reverse Osmosis plant.

Total 211.7 KLD of effluent of is anticipated and will be treated in dedicated proposed combined ETP’s of 190 KLPH and 150 KLPH. Treated water will be passed through RO and Permeate is used for Cooling tower and greenbelt.

24 Draft EIA Report

b. Air Environment

Adequate measures will be taken to control Air Pollution through installation of Electrostatic Precipitators and Fuel Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) as a part of CPP system. Following will be measured through installation of online analysers to measure SOx, NOx, CO, Hydrocarbons and Particulate Matter.Total Maximum GLCs from the proposed Stack Emissions are given in Table-12.

Table-12: Total Maximum GLCs from the proposed Stack Emissions

Max Base predicted Total NAAQ % Increment in Pollutan line Conc. Conc. at Conc. standar Concentration t (µg/m3) source (µg/m3) (µg/m3) d Levels

PM10 92.4 2.108 94.508 100 2.28 SO2 41.5 7.031 48.531 80 16.94 NOx 44.9 7.301 52.201 80 16.26

It was observed that the maximum incremental concentration observed due to 3 3 proposed expansion for PM, SO2 and NOx are 2.108 µg/m , 7.031 µg/m and 7.301 µg/m3. So it can be concluded that even after the expansion of the plant the impact envisaged is minimum. Vehicular modelling was also carried out but since the number of vehicles increased is marginal per day and no major impact envisaged on Air environment.

c. Noise Environment

All equipment in the plant produce 40 to 55 dB(A) after control measures and equipment are designed/operated to have a noise level not exceeding 85 to 90 dB(A) as per the requirement of Occupational Health and Safety Administration Standard (OHSAS). In addition, since most of the noise generating equipment would be in closed structures, the noise transmitted outside would be still lower and for any other case of higher noise sufficient safety ear plugs and ear muffs will be provided to the employees.

d. Land Use

The proposed expansion is within the existing IOCl Dumad complex and the proposed activity doesn’t change the land use classification of the site.

25 Draft EIA Report

IX. Environmental Monitoring Program A monitoring schedule with respect to AAQ, Water, Wastewater quality, Noise Quality as per CPCB/MoEF&CC/GPCB shall be maintained.

X. Pollution Control Measures

Fugitive air emissions from captive power plant will be controlled by ESP & FGD will be provided to meet the norms as required by CPCB. Adequate stack height will be provided.

Municipal solid waste will be composted within the facility.

Hazardous waste will be stored and disposed off to authorized vendors for landfill. Fly ash will be disposed off to cement manufacturing processes.

The Industrial effluent generated will be treated in inhouse ETP. The sewage from domestic use will be treated in ETP and treated water will be recycled back into the system.

The proposed wastewater treatment system will be a Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD). Hence, there will be no discharge to land environment.

XI. Greenbelt Development

Project site is an existing unit with shrubs and small trees. There will be clearance of land envisaged for proposed projects. Existing Green belt is over a stretch of 33 Acres with approx 25000-30000 trees and adequate measures will be taken to maintain the greenbelt of 111 Acres for the proposed expansion. The lists of species suggested for green belt is given in Table-13. Green belt development scheme is given in Table-14.

26 Draft EIA Report

Table-13: List of Suggested Species for green belt

S. Sensitiv Heig Canopy Trees Common Regene Growth N e/ ht size species name ration Rate o Tolerant (m) (m2) Abutilon Through Quick 1. Kanghi Tolerant 5 NA Indicum seeds growing Acacia Australian By Quick 2. Auriculiformi Tolerant 16 8548.22 wattle seeds growing s Acacia By Quick 3. Khair Tolerant 3 108.42 Catechu seeds growing Acacia Silver By Quick 4. Tolerant 15 NA Dealbata wattle seeds growing Acacia By Quick 5. Farnesiana Babul Tolerant 5 NA seeds growing Wild Actinodaphn By 6. e Pisa Tolerant 13 - - seeds Angustifolia Adina By Slow 148490. 7. Haldu Tolerant 20 Cordifolia seeds growing 1 By Aegle seeds, Slow 26547.1 8. Boel Tolerant 12 Marmelos root growing 9 cuttings By Aesculus seeds, Quick 9. Bankhar Sensitive 20 Indica Hook root growing suckers By Albizia seeds, Quick 10. Tugli lalai Tolerant 10 -- Amara root growing suckers Anona By Fast 11. Raamaphal Tolerant 10 2017.44 Reticulate seeds growing Anthocephal By Quick 12. Kadamba Tolerant 20 52233.5 us Chinensis seeds growing Quick Azadiracta By growth 300445. 13. Neem tree Tolerant 20 Indica seeds after 1st 3 season

27 Draft EIA Report

Balanites By Quick 14. Ingoriyo Tolerant 9 Roxburghii seeds growing Bambusa By Quick 15. Wans Tolerant 20 -- Arundinocia cuttings growing Barringtonia Samudraph By Quick 16. Tolerant 9-12 -- Acutangula ol seeds growing Bauhinia By Quick 17. Asundro Tolerant 5 136.9 Racemosa seeds growing Bauhinia By Quick 18. Kavindara Tolerant 5 1769.52 Varigata seeds growing

Source: Guidelines for Developing Greenbelts- PROBES/75/1999-2000

Table-14: Green belt development scheme

S. Description Scheme of plantation N 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Total o Year year year Year Year Area to Develop 1 9.105 9.105 9.105 9.105 9.105 45.525 (Ha) Plantion of Seeds/ 2 13650 13650 13650 13650 13650 68250 Saplings Expenditure 3 18 18 18 18 18 90 (Lakhs)

Note: 1500 Trees per Hectare