FEBRUARY 2014 WEST BENGAL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DHAPA DUMPSITE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

DRAFT FINAL REPORT

in association with KADAM, Witteveen+Bos and Tauw

in association with KADAM, Witteveen+Bos and Tauw

ADDRESS COWI A/S Parallelvej 2 2800 Kongens Lyngby Denmark

TEL +45 56 40 00 00

FAX +45 56 40 99 99

WWW cowi.com FEBRUARY 2014 WEST BENGAL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DHAPA DUMPSITE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT DRAFT FINAL REPORT

PROJECT NO. A016205

DOCUMENT NO. 7B

VERSION 6

DATE OF ISSUE 17-06-2013, revision 30-6-2013, rev 17-07-2013, rev 21-9-2013, rev 09-12-2013, rev 10-02-2014

PREPARED NH, Anil Vishwakarma, Anand Kunte, Dr. Dushyant Mishra, Sudeshna Panchal, Dr. S. Kundu,

CHECKED Niels Erik Houe, Sangram Kadam

APPROVED Niels Erik Houe

5 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

CONTENTS

1 Summary 14 1.1 Introduction 14 1.1.1 Background 14 1.1.2 The Dhapa Dumping Area 14 1.2 Environmental Assessment 16 1.2.1 Objective of Environmental Assessment 16 1.2.2 Methodology for Environmental Assessment 16 1.2.3 Climate 17 1.2.4 Geology and Hydrogeology 17 1.2.5 Land Use Classification 18 1.2.6 Baseline Environmental Status 18 1.3 Remediation (Closure and Containment) Options 19 1.4 Environmental Impact Assessment 21 1.5 Social Assessment 23 1.5.1 Objective of Social Assessment 23 1.5.2 Methodology for Social Assessment 24 1.5.3 Baseline Social Scenario 24 1.5.4 Potential Social Impacts of the project 25 1.5.5 Community Development Needs 27 1.6 Conclusions 27

2 Introduction 29

3 Project Site Description 31 3.1 The Dhapa Municipal Dumpsite 31 3.1.1 About the Two Dumpsites 32

6 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

3.2 Location, Elevation, Approach and Connectivity 33 3.2.1 Location 33 3.2.2 Elevation 36 3.2.3 Approach 36 3.2.4 Connectivity 36 3.3 Site Description 37 3.4 Study Area 38

4 Environmental Assessment 39 4.1 Objective of Environmental Assessment 39 4.2 Methodology for Environmental Assessment 39 4.3 Climate 40 4.3.1 Temperature 40 4.3.2 Wind 41 4.3.3 Cloud Cover 42 4.3.4 Rainfall 43 4.3.5 Humidity 43 4.3.6 Recent Micro Meteorology 44 4.4 Geology and Hydrogeology 54 4.4.1 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology 54 4.4.2 Local Geology 55 4.4.3 Local Hydrogeology 57 4.4.4 Summary of Geological and Hydro Geological Information 61 4.5 Sampling and Analysis 64 4.6 Ground Water Investigations 66 4.6.1 Ground Water Boreholes drilling 66 4.6.2 Ground Water Quality 67 4.6.3 Extent of Ground Water Pollution 70 4.7 Surface Water Investigations 72 4.7.1 Surface Water Sampling 72 4.7.2 Surface Water Quality 72 4.7.3 Extent of Surface Water Pollution 73 4.8 Soil/Sediment Investigations 74 4.8.1 Top Soil/Sediment Sampling 74 4.8.2 Soil Quality 74 4.8.3 Sediment Quality 75 4.8.4 Extent of Sediment Contamination 75 4.9 Ambient Air Monitoring 75 4.9.1 Ambient Air Quality Station 75 4.9.2 Ambient Air Quality 76

7 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.9.3 Extent of Ambient Air Pollution 77 4.10 Landfill Gas Assessment 78 4.10.1 Landfill Gas Sampling 78 4.10.2 Landfill Gas Quality 80 4.10.3 Extent of Landfill Gas Pollution 81 4.10.4 Assessment of Landfill Gas 81 4.11 Noise Monitoring 82 4.11.1 Monitoring Methodology of Noise Level 82 4.11.2 Noise Level Results 82 4.11.3 Assessment of Noise Results 83 4.12 Flora and Fauna 83 4.12.1 Introduction 83 4.12.2 Terrestrial Flora and Fauna 85 4.12.3 Aquatic Flora and Fauna 88 4.12.4 Amphibians and Reptiles 93 4.12.5 Microbial Ecology 94 4.12.6 Synopsis 94 4.13 Land Use 97 4.13.1 Classification of Landuse and Land cover 97 4.13.2 Land use Classification Synopsis 97 4.13.3 Study Methodology Adopted 98 4.13.4 Class Wise Area Statistics 99 4.13.5 Final Land Use Map Preparation 100 4.14 Summarizing of the Environmental Profile of the project area 100

5 Environmental Risk Assessment 102 5.1 Conceptual Site Model 102 5.1.1 Source 103 5.2 Source-Pathway-Receptor Analysis 103 5.2.1 Source 103 5.2.2 Pathways 103 5.2.3 Receptors 104 5.3 Environmental Impacts due to the closed dumpsite 104 5.4 Extent of Environmental Impacts 105 5.4.1 Impact on Ground Water 105 5.4.2 Impacts on Surface water 106 5.4.3 Impacts on Soil 106 5.4.4 Impacts on Air 106 5.4.5 Impact on Flora and Fauna 107 5.5 Risk Assessment 107

8 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

5.5.1 Human risks 107 5.5.2 Other Human risk & hazards 111 5.5.3 Conclusions on human risks 112 5.5.4 Ecological risks 113 5.5.5 Environmental Risk Assessment using Groundwater Modelling 113

6 Social Assessment 115 6.1 Kolkata City 115 6.2 Dhapa Area 116 6.3 General Social Profile of Dhapa Area (Wards 57 & 58 of KMC) 117 6.4 Primary Socio-Economic Survey 118 6.4.1 Objective of Primary Survey 118 6.4.2 Methodology of primary survey 119 6.4.3 Sampling 119 6.4.4 The Survey 120 6.4.5 Limitations of the Study 122 6.5 Findings of the Primary Survey and PRA 122 6.5.1 History of Dhapa 122 6.5.2 Population 123 6.5.3 Family size 124 6.5.4 Family Type 124 6.5.5 Possession of govt. documents 125 6.5.6 Literacy 126 6.5.7 Ownership of Structures 126 6.5.8 Electricity 127 6.5.9 Income 127 6.5.10 Trees 128 6.6 Social Impact Assessment of Makaltala 128 6.6.1 Anticipated Social Impacts due to the Project that may require mitigation measures 128 6.6.2 Socio-economic Details for Makaltala: Potentially Impacted Village 129 6.6.3 Detailed Profile of Makaltala Village 130 6.6.4 Identified Impacts 138 6.7 Rehabilitation and Resettlement 146 6.8 Social Concerns not attributable to the Closed Dumpsite 147 6.9 Community Development Needs 147 6.10 Public Consultation 148

9 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.10.1 Introduction 148 6.1.1 Summary of public consultation 149 6.10.2 Stakeholders Consultation 150

7 Overview of the proposed Closure and Containment Options, their impacts and Mitigation measures 154 7.1.1 Introduction and Background 154 7.1.2 Approach of Selection of various options 156 7.1.3 Overview of Closure Options Selected 156 7.1.4 Construction Design Features Comparison of various options: 156 7.2 Option 1: Do Nothing 157 7.2.1 Description of Option 157 7.2.2 Environmental Impact of Option 1 157 7.3 Option 2: Simplified closure concept 158 7.3.1 Description of Option 158 7.3.2 Environmental Impact of Option 2 158 7.4 Option 3.1: Reduced infiltration and passive gas control 159 7.4.1 Description of Option 159 7.4.2 Environmental Impact of Option 3.1 159 7.5 Option 3.2: Reduced infiltration and gas treatment 160 7.5.1 Description of Option 160 7.5.2 Environmental Impact of Option 3.2 160 7.6 Option 4: Reduced Infiltration with leachate collection and treatment (and gas handling) 160 7.6.1 Description of Option 160 7.6.2 Environmental Impact of Option 4 161 7.7 Option 5: Impermeable cover, leachate collection and passive gas control 161 7.7.1 Description of Option 161 7.7.2 Environmental Impact of Option 5 162 7.8 Summary of the different options and selection of most suitable option 162

8 Policy, Legislative and Administrative Framework 170 8.1 Introduction 170 8.2 World Bank Group’s Environmental and Social Policies / Framework / Standards 170

10 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

8.2.1 World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies 171 8.2.2 Applicability of the World Bank Policies to the Dhapa Project: 174 8.2.3 Environmental Assessment Instruments Recognised by the World Bank 174 8.3 National Regulations 175 8.4 Overview of Applicable National Legislation 175 8.5 Comparison of Containment and Closure Options with applicable Environmental Legislations 181

9 Conclusions and Recommendations 191

References 193

Annexures 196

11 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

List of Annexures

Annexure 1: Long Term Climatological Tables (1961-1990) Kolkata, Alipore Station 198 Annexure 2: Sampling Locations Map for Environmental Baseline 201 Annexure 3: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Results near Closed Dumpsite 203 Annexure 4: Leachate (Groundwater) Monitoring Results near the Dumpsite 207 Annexure 5: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Results of Existing Tube wells in the Study Area 211 Annexure 6: Surface Water Quality Monitoring Results near the Dumpsite 216 Annexure 7: Soil Quality Monitoring Results near the Dumpsite 218 Annexure 8: Landuse Map of the Study Area (i.e. 2 kms around the Closed Dumpsite): 221 Annexure 9: Social Survey Questionnaire in Local Language (Bangla, followed by English) 223 Annexure 10: Regulatory Framework (Applicable National / Regional Legislation) 232 Annexure 11: KMC Act 250

12 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

ASL Above Sea Level BGL Below Ground Level CBIPMP Capacity Building for Industrial Pollution Management Project EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EKW East Kolkata Wetland KMC Kolkata Municipal Corporation LFG Landfill Gas LIBV Local Indicative Background Values msPAF multi substances Potential Affected Fraction SPM Suspended Particulate Matter SWID West Bengal State Water Investigation Directorate ToR Terms of Reference THV Thresh Hold Value WB World Bank WBPCB West Bengal Pollution Control Board PAH Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons THV Thresh Hold Value MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forest ESMP Environment and Social Management Plan ESA Environmental Site Assessment CDP Community Development Plan CSR Corporate Social Responsibility EP Environment Protection CPCB Central Pollution Control Board CGWA Central Ground Water Authority CGWB Central Ground Water Board EKWA East Kolkatta Wetland Authority EPA Environment Protection Agency INR Indian Rupees MSW Municipal Solid Waste IMD Indian Meteorological Department IS Indian Standards

13 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

BH Bore Hole DTH Direct To Hole PCB Pollution Control Board BDL Below Detectable Limit BOD Biological Oxygen Demand COD Chemical Oxygen Demand VOC Volatile Organic Compound WHO World Health Organization EKWMA East Kolkatta Wetland Management Authority NRSA National Remote Sensing Agency BPL Below Poverty Level

14 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

1 Summary

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 Background The Ministry of Environment & Forests, Govt. of India has undertaken a World Bank supported project titled “Capacity Building for Industrial Pollution Management” with the objective of developing a “National Programme for the Rehabilitation of Polluted sites”. As part of this initiative some polluted sites will be taken up for remediation in the country, of which one site is a recently closed dumpsite, of area 12.14 hectares, in the Dhapa Dumping Area of Kolkata. The state level implementation agency for the project is the West Bengal Pollution Control Board.

The environmental and social assessment of the site and the surrounding areas have been undertaken for ensuring that all environmental and social objectives of the project are fulfilled while designing and implementing the remediation plan for the Dhapa closed dumpsite.

1.1.2 The Dhapa Dumping Area Kolkata is the capital of the state of West Bengal located in the eastern part of India. It is one of the most highly populated cities in the country and with a population of 4.48 million (daytime population count rises to 8 million), the city generates about 3,500 to 3,700 tonnes of municipal solid waste (MSW) daily i.e. 1.3Million Tons annually. This waste is almost entirely disposed at the Dhapa Dumping Area with a very small portion going to another small municipal dump site in the city.

The Dhapa Dumping Area is owned and operated by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) and lies within Ward Nos. 57 and 58 of the KMC administrative boundaries, on the eastern part of Kolkata. Almost the entire area is part of a large protected wetland area called the East Kolkata

15 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Wetlands (listed as a Ramsar site in 2002). The entire raw sewage from the city flows through drainage channels into the wetlands and is eventually discharged into the river Vidyadhari.

Dhapa has been historically used for waste dumping for many decades. With the gradual development of the city towards the east, the garbage dumping has moved away further eastwards and the old dumping areas nearer to the main city are now used for farming (locally referred to as garbage farming). The current “dumping area” is spread over about 35 hectares. It consists of two unlined dumpsites, spaced ~ 500m apart – one closed dump of area ~ 12.14 ha and one active dump of area ~ 23 ha. The closed dump site (referred to as the ‘closed dumpsite’ or ‘the site’ or “project site”) commenced operations in 1987 and was closed in 2009. The active dumpsite (referred to as the “operational dumpsite” or ‘active dumpsite’) also commenced operations in 1987 and is expected to be operated for another two to three years.

In addition to the two dumpsites, the Dhapa Dumping Area includes an administrative office of the KMC, reception facilities for MSW, weighbridge, garage, a crematorium for unclaimed dead bodies, a privately operated compost plant and a private bone processing area.

Immediately to the north of the closed dumpsite is Makaltala Village. Another four villages namely Unchupota, Dhapa-Durgapur, Anantabadal and Khanaberia are located in the near vicinity of the dumping area. Although all these settlements are very much within the Kolkata Municipal Area, they are still referred to as “villages”.

16 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 1-1: Location of Dhapa Dumpsite

1.2 Environmental Assessment

1.2.1 Objective of Environmental Assessment Both the dumpsites in Dhapa are unlined and uncovered and have no environmental protection arrangements. Also, along with MSW, the dumpsites have also been used for industrial hazardous waste disposal till 2006 as there was no specialised hazardous waste disposal facility in the state till that time. It is only obvious that long term uncontrolled waste dumping in the area, without adequate pollution prevention and control measures, has had a substantial negative impact on the neighbouring environment. Even after dumping has ceased at the closed dumpsite, the site still poses significant hazard to the environment and neighbouring community as the closure has not been done in an environmentally sound manner. Hence, it was considered necessary to conduct the environmental assessment to understand the environmental risks, to decide on remediation needs and to plan for environmental monitoring during and after the remediation.

1.2.2 Methodology for Environmental Assessment Based on reconnaissance surveys including interactions with local people and other stakeholders and relevant literature study, the study area for the project was defined as 2 km around the centre of the closed dumpsite.

17 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

As only the remediation of the closed dumpsite is proposed to be undertaken; only the impacts due to the closed dumpsite have been assessed. The impacts due to operations at the active dumpsite (including vehicle movement), the composting facility, the crematorium and the bone processing area have not been assessed.

A Baseline Environmental Survey & Investigation Programme included a study of the local climate, lithology, hydrogeology and existing land use pattern followed by a detailed baseline environmental investigation programme involving drilling of boreholes, collection of groundwater (from existing tube wells and new bore holes), surface water, sediment and soil samples followed by analysis in the laboratory of M/s. SGS India in Kolkata which is recognised by the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India under the Environment (Protection) Act, 2006.

1.2.3 Climate Kolkata has a tropical climate. Summers are hot and humid with minimum temperatures near 30°C and maximum temperatures often exceeding 40 C during May and June. The annual mean maximum temperature recorded over a period of 30 years is observed to be 31.8°C and the annual mean minimum temperature is observed to be 22.1°C.The south-west monsoons lash the city between June to September and supplies the city with most of its annual rainfall of approximately 1728.5mm.The predominant wind direction during most of the year is from South to North.

1.2.4 Geology and Hydrogeology Based on lithologs generated through borehole drilling at the site, the geological formations found in the area are shown in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1: Geological Formation observed at the siteError! Reference source not found. Depth Lithology Aquifer / Aquitard 0-19m Dark grey coloured clay and silty clay Aquitard Yellowish, unconsolidated, loose very fine 19-27.5m Aquifer sand and silt with mica flakes

Yellowish to light grey coloured 27.5-32m Aquifer unconsolidated, loose very fine sand and silt

32-42m Grey cohesive sticky clay and silty clay Aquitard Yellowish to grey silty clay to clayey silt less 42-44m Aquitard cohesive 44-47m Light grey very fine silty sand Aquifer 47-60m Yellowish fine sand Aquifer

18 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

The ground water flow direction is from South West to North East towards the wetlands.

1.2.5 Land Use Classification A land use study was carried out over a 2 km radius around the closed dump site. The area statistics for Land use / Land cover in study area are presented in Table 1-2.

Table 1-2: Area Statistics for Land Use / Land Cover in the Study Area

S. Description Area (Sq. Km) Area (Ha) Percentage (%) No

1 Habitation 1.61 160.64 12.78

2 Industrial Area 0.12 11.79 0.94

3 Land without Scrub 0.44 43.85 3.49

4 Scrub 2.11 211.37 16.82

5 Water Body 5.55 554.77 44.15

6 Water Canals 0.29 28.88 2.30

7 Agricultural 2.45 245.34 19.52

Total area 12.57 1256.64 100.00

1.2.6 Baseline Environmental Status Based on the detailed Environmental Baseline Monitoring around the dump site, a conceptual site model was developed and the Environmental Impacts due to the closed dump site were evaluated. A summary highlighting the environmental impacts due to the closed dump site is shown in Table 1-3.

Table 1-3: Environmental Impacts due to closed dump site

Environmental Impacts Indices

Pollution expected due to release of odour and windblown dust but Ambient Air Quality monitoring results does not show adverse impacts on environment. Air Quality The methane and carbon dioxide concentrations in landfill gas are high, approximately 55% and 40% v/v, respectively. However landfill gas generation is low due to low content of organic matter in the waste

19 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Environmental Impacts Indices body.

Upper ground water below waste has moderate contamination due to Groundwater leachate percolation. Quality Deep aquifers are not contaminated and the water is acceptable for drinking purpose

Surface waters (lined dry weather untreated sewage canal / drainage channel) around the dump site are found to be contaminated with Surface Water organics and heavy metals due to migration of run-off and leachate Quality from dumpsite but the major cause of pollution is the untreated city sewage.

Top soil is found to be contaminated with heavy metals and organics Soil Quality due to surface run-off and leachate and also due to windblown dust/ litter

Sediments from the drainage channels around the dumpsite are found Sediment Quality to be contaminated with heavy metals like chromium, lead, cadmium, copper and zinc

There are no significant noise generating sources in the current Noise situation

Ecology and Surface run-off and leachate entering the wetland and agricultural Biodiversity fields

The baseline environmental status indicates that the environmental risks of leaving the closed dumpsite as it has significant environmental risks and it is essential to consider options for closing the dumpsite in an environmentally sound manner to contain the migration of pollutants into the neighbouring environment.

1.3 Remediation (Closure and Containment) Options Considering the need for the environmentally sound closure and containment of the closed Dhapa dumpsite, a total of six options of Containment and Closure are proposed as follows:

› Option 1: Do nothing - a baseline situation; as of now basis

› Option 2: Simplified closure concept- covering the dumpsite with unspecified material (sand, soil or clayey materials) followed by a vegetative layer on top and also a concrete surface run-off collection ditch around the dumpsite

20 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

› Option 3.1: Reduced infiltration and passive gas control - a top cover layer complying with the MSW Rules, 2000, landfill gas vents having bio-cover (with high humus content) and a concrete surface run-off collection ditch discharging to existing drainage canals

› Option 3.2: Reduced infiltration and gas treatment - Similar to option 3.1 but with active collection of landfill gas in wells followed by flaring

› Option 4: Reduced infiltration with leachate collection and treatment (and passive gas handling) - a top cover layer complying with the MSW Rules, 2000, concrete surface run-off collection and drainage system, active collection of landfill gas wells followed by flaring and a leachate collection and treatment system.

› Option 5: Impermeable cover and passive gas control – a top cover of impermeable liner (instead of low permeable clay barrier as specified in MSW Rules, 2000), a drainage layer over the liner followed by protective soil layer and a vegetative layer seeded with grass, concrete surface run-off collection and drainage system, active collection of landfill gas wells followed by passive gas ventilation and a leachate collection and treatment system

A comparison of the design features for various options is highlighted in Table 1-4.

Table 1-4: Design Features comparison of Various Options of Containment and Closure of project site S. Design features of Option Option Option Option Option Option No Containment and 1 2 3.1 3.2 4 5 Closure / Remediation 1 Permeable Cover √ 2 Semi Permeable Cover √ √ √ 3 Impermeable Cover √ 4 Surface Runoff and √ √ √ √ √ Control 5 Leachate Collection and √ √ ** treatment 6 Passive gas collection √ √ √ with methane oxidation

21 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S. Design features of Option Option Option Option Option Option No Containment and 1 2 3.1 3.2 4 5 Closure / Remediation 7 Active Gas Abstraction √ with flaring and /or utilization 8 Reshaping / Profiling of √ √ √ √ √ the dump site 9 Excavation, Sorting and √ √ √ √ √ Reuse of Part of Wastes1 Note: ** - Option 5 was selected with addition of Leachate treatment plant for treatment and disposal of leachates during the Operation and Maintenance Phase as per the discussions and decision taken in the TEP meeting.

1.4 Environmental Impact Assessment The environmental impacts of the various options considered for the remediation of the closed dumpsite have been identified and listed in Table 1-6.

Table 1-5: Impacts of Proposed Remediation measures of closed dumpsite Remediation Positive impacts Negative impacts Options

Option 1 NIL Continued pollution of surface water, groundwater, soil etc.,

Continued emission of landfill gas, dust, odour etc. Risk of landslides.

Option 2  Contamination of surface run-off and its Leachate generation will overflow to adjacent land with will be still be quite high and risk prevented. of leachate seeping out through waste body will  Waste/ dust transport by air will be continue to exist.

1 Reuse and segregation of waste was at the TEP meeting not accepted due to H&S reasons and will not be introduced in the project

22 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Remediation Positive impacts Negative impacts Options prevented Landfill gas emission will still be substantial  Leachate generation will reduce  Landfill gas emissions will be reduced due to partial methane oxidation in the top soil layer.  The aesthetics will improve

Option 3.1  Contamination of surface run-off and its Leachate generation will overflow to adjacent land with will be reduce but leachate will prevented. still be released into the environment  Waste/ dust transport by air will be prevented Landfill gas emission will continue  Leachate generation will reduce upto 50% and risk of leachate seepage through dumpsite slopes will be eliminated  Landfill gas emissions will be controlled and reduced through oxidation in the "windows".  The aesthetic will improve

Option 3.2  Contamination of surface run-off and its Leachate generation will overflow to adjacent land with will be reduce but leachate will prevented. still be released into the environment  Waste/ dust transport by air will be prevented Landfill gas emission will continue  Leachate generation will reduce upto 50% and risk of leachate seepage through dumpsite slopes will be eliminated

 Landfill gas emissions will be controlled and reduced through combustion in a flare.

 The aesthetics will improve

Option 4  Contamination of surface run-off and its Landfill gas emission will overflow to adjacent land with will be continue prevented.  Waste/ dust transport by air will be prevented

23 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Remediation Positive impacts Negative impacts Options  Leachate generation will reduce upto 50% and risk of leachate seepage through dumpsite slopes will be eliminated

 Landfill gas emissions will be reduced upto 50%. The collected gas will be oxidised.

 The aesthetics will improve

Option 5  Contamination of surface run-off and its NIL overflow to adjacent land with will be prevented.  Waste/ dust transport by air will be prevented  Risk of landslides will be eliminated  Leachate generation ceases after a few years. However a separate Leachate Treatment Facility will be installed for treatment and disposal of leachates.

 Landfill gas emissions will be reduced upto 50%. The collected gas will be oxidised.

 The aesthetic expression of the area will be improved

It is clear from the above table that the Option No 5 has the maximum environmental benefits but the proposed use of an impermeable liner over the dumpsite is beyond the regulatory requirement of having a low permeable clay liner only.

Option 5 is also the most expensive option.

Some negative environmental impacts are expected during the remediation activities like dust generation, pollution due to more traffic movement and labourers and risk of landslides/ rubbles. However these will only be temporary problems and the long term benefits far outweigh these impacts.

1.5 Social Assessment

1.5.1 Objective of Social Assessment The Social Assessment around the closed dumpsite was conducted to understand the existing social issues pertaining to the site. It was designed to

24 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

identify, anticipate and assess social impacts perceived for the proposed remediation of the dumpsite and to obtain the views of various stakeholders including the inhabitants of Makaltala village and identify possible remedial measures that may need to be incorporated in the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) for the project.

1.5.2 Methodology for Social Assessment The study area for the social assessment was chosen as 2 km radius from the centre of the closed dumpsite. Secondary data for the area being limited, Participatory Rapid Appraisal (PRA), extended Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and Depth Interviews (DI) were used for sampling of households in the four study villages - Unchupota, Khanaberia, Dhapa Durgapur and Anantabadal and a census of all households was done for Makaltala which is by the side of the closed dump. A total of 211 households were covered for socio-economic survey which included 76 households of Makaltala.

1.5.3 Baseline Social Scenario The land use pattern in the Dhapa Area indicates that majority of the area is covered by water bodies taking up 44.15% of the area followed by 19.52% agricultural land, scrubs take up 16.78% and habitations cover 12.78% of the area. A small percentage is taken up by industries, land without scrub and river area, amounting to 17.77%.

The KMC is responsible for providing the basic civic facilities and amenities like water, drainage, sanitation, garbage collection and anti- Malarial and health care programs to the residents of Wards 57 & 58, which includes the entire Dhapa Dumping Area.

As Makaltala is adjacent to the closed dumpsite, it is expected to be the most affected habitation in the area on account of the ensuing activities at the closed dumpsite. Hence, Makaltala was studied in greater detail than the other habitations.

The Makaltala village has a total population of 356 of whom 46% are males and 54% females showing a gender bias towards females in the population. Majority are nuclear families (75%) with 91% of the population being SCs. All HHs own their residential structures even though they do not have legal rights on the land on which it is situated. About 39 respondents claim to have some land. Three HHs possess van rickshaws, 80% HHs own bicycles which is a common form of transport while two own motorbikes.

Access is a major problem in the area as there is no form of public transport operating within the village or in the project area. Roads are bad and get worse during monsoons. The other infrastructure facilities of Makaltala village are irregular or at considerable distance rendering accessibility difficult.

25 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

A mixed pattern of livelihood is noted here. A large number of people are in fishing/ pisciculture, several are in govt. and private services, some are engaged in cultivation, some are agricultural and non-agricultural wage labour and a few are involved in rag picking. Subsequent to the closure of the dumpsite in 2009, there has been an increase in dependency on own farming and non-agricultural wage labour with significant increase in opportunity in govt. and private services. There has also been an increase in the variety of secondary livelihood options due to availability of opportunities outside the area.

There has been significant increase in monthly HH income post closure of the dumpsite which is coincidental. As of now there is no household below poverty line which is also corroborated through Governmental records that no household in Makaltala holds a BPL card. Primary data reveals that there are no HHs with income less than Rs.3,000/- per month, 8% (6) of HHs have income levels between Rs.3,001 to Rs.3,500/- per month indicating them to be potential BPL families. Presently 54% earn between Rs. 5,001 – 15,000/- per month. 3% earn more than Rs.25, 000/- per month.

Makaltala does not have dire poverty and does not suffer from food poverty. However, the community suffers from basic infrastructure poverty.

1.5.4 Potential Social Impacts of the project

Identified Anticipated Impacts Based on visual assessments, PRA and FGDs with the community and the detailed analysis of survey findings the following impacts have been identified. Positive impacts outweigh negative ones and people are happy that the area will have a better visual look with improved environment.

A. Positive Impacts  Surrounding and environment There will be fewer hazards so far as surroundings and environment is concerned. The landscape will improve, resulting in lowering of bad odour, mosquitoes, insects and other pollutions. It is expected that illnesses will also reduce.

 Less accidents Proper covering of the dumpsite will eliminate risks of landslides

 Better communication The approach road is envisaged to be improved as part of the project thereby improving the accessibility of the area

26 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

 Social upliftment The overall increase in aesthetics will mean an upliftment in the social status of the neighbouring Makaltala village that now live next to an unsightly dumpsite. Creation of a recreational space where nearby communities can gather and relax

 Livelihood options Temporary unskilled employment opportunities are expected to be generated for the local people (especially Makaltala) during the remediation work. Improved Health Conditions for Children

Decrease in spread of vector borne diseases / nuisance caused by mosquitoes / flies / vermin and dust

B. Anticipated Impacts

No negative social impacts of the proposed closure of the dumpsite have emerged. However, there are some short term negative impacts of the proposed activities during the execution stage.

A summary of anticipated impacts on Makaltala due to the project is presented in 1-1 as below:

Table 1-6 Anticipated Impact on Makaltala Inhabitants

Anticipated Impact due to closure and containment of the closed dumpsite

Physical Displacement None

Temporary Displacement None

Livelihood Displacement None

Affected Trees/Crops / trees None

Affected Common Structures None

Impact on Vulnerable HHs None

Anticipated Impact during the closure and containment

Disruption in mobility Short Term

Presence of outsiders in the area, setting up of labour Short Term camps if required

Dust, rubble and noise due to movement of vehicles Short Term

Requirement of space for parking of vehicles and Short Term equipment

Activities on slopes result in landslides affecting Short Term

27 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

houses located along the boundary of the dump

Loss of grazing ground for pigs and cattle Short Term

1.5.5 Community Development Needs Detailed discussions were conducted with the Makaltala community. All sections of people likely to be affected including the vulnerable and women participated in these consultations to discuss their views and aspirations about the project. Individual discussions during the survey, in-depth interviews with key informants and informal discussion were also held with key governmental personnel as part of the consultations.

The presently faced difficulties by the locals cannot be attributed to the project and its remediation plans. However, these may be addressed (as far as possible) as part of a Community Development Programme (CDP) by the KMC. The identified community needs that will be included under the CDP are, improvement of the road (from Makaltala to KMC office/weigh bridge) and replacement of the existing wooden bridge in the area as these are community’s prioritized needs.

The road from Bypass to the KMC office/weigh bridge is second in priority since it is in poor condition with pot holes at several places it requires requiring urgent repair works so that trucks, cycles and van rickshaws are able to ply easily. The other needs mentioned related to supply of safe drinking water, provision of hygienic sanitation facilities, implementation of health benefit schemes, establishment of educational facilities etc. which would be the responsibility of KMC.

1.6 Conclusions The environmental and social assessment has revealed that the environment around the Dhapa closed dumpsite is contaminated and the neighbouring community is affected due to risk of landslides, diseases and general poor aesthetics.

The proposed remediation will contain the pollutants in the closed dumpsite and prevent their migration. It will help in minimizing the environmental and health risks in the surrounding area, improve the aesthetics of the area. In addition to the local environmental benefits, the remediation will have global benefits with reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. It will improve the social life of the neighbouring inhabitants and will also translate into potential savings due to lower health care costs. Short term benefits will include generation of temporary employment for local people in the remediation works.

Other than the short term air and noise pollution expected during the remediation activities and the minor social problems like access restrictions

28 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

and presence of migrant labour / outsiders in the area, the remediation activities are not likely to have any major negative impacts.

The remediation of the closed dumpsite is not likely to have major negative impacts on livelihood of any household. On the contrary, it is expected to generate livelihood opportunities for some household members for which and where possible women will be given priority. In conclusion, the remediation is highly welcome by people in the area, specifically those in Makaltala.

Considering the several benefits of the scientific closure and containment of the closed Dhapa dumpsite, the remediation is essential and should be implemented as soon as possible.

29 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

2 Introduction

The Dhapa closed dumpsite has a 2 million m³ volume of waste dumped and which have been in operation during the period 1987 to 2009. The dumpsite is unlined and uncovered and without any environmental protection arrangements. The dumpsite has a negative impact on the environment, in particular surface waters and adjacent soil and less extent a social impact.

The containment and closure project includes installation of a top cover, leachate collection, landfill gas handling and profiling to improve its appearance as well as to stabilise slopes for avoidance of land sliding. Also an environmental and social management and monitoring program will be implemented.

This report has been prepared by COWI in association with KADAM, Witteveen+Bos and Tauw under the project for consulting services for Assessment of Contamination, Design of Remediation Plan, Bid Preparation and Supervision of Remedial Activities for the closed dumpsite within the Dhapa Municipal Dump Area in Kolkata, West Bengal.

This report is a separate document (Appendix B) to the Closed Dumpsite Containment and Closure Plans as specified in the contract with WBPCB under the agreed deliverables covered in Schedule 3 of the contract. It covers the existing environmental and social baseline, proposed containment and closure options, environmental and social impacts of the current situation as well as of those associated with the closure and containment options, followed by a legal screening of these options, to evaluate the options conformity with applicable legislation.

Subsequent to the finalisation of this report and the approval of a suitable Containment and Closure Plan option by the Technical Evaluation Panel formed by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) for this project, a final Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) will be made to mitigate the impacts of the closed dumpsite as well as those that may emanate from the remediation, construction activities and operation and maintenance of the selected option in the aftercare phase.

30 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

The present report is an Environmental and Social Assessment Report (ESA) covering the following:

› General – Introduction and Background, Baseline Environmental Assessment.

› Scope of ESIA:

 Assessment of Current Environmental Impacts on soil, ground water, surface water, air, flora and fauna due to the closed dump site.

 Assessment of Impacts of various options of containment and closure and their mitigation measures.

 Assessment of Current and Anticipated Potential Social Impacts due to the Dumpsite and Potential Community Development Plan Activities.

› Structure of the Report containing the following chapters:

 Summary

 Introduction

 Project Site Description

 Environmental Assessment

 Environmental Risk Assessment

 Social Assessment

 Overview of the proposed Closure and Containment Options, their impacts and Mitigation measures

 Policy, Legislative and Administrative Framework

 Conclusions

31 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

3 Project Site Description

3.1 The Dhapa Municipal Dumpsite

Kolkata is the capital of the state of West Bengal located in the eastern part of India. It is one of the most highly populated cities in the country and with a population of 4496694 souls2. The city generates about 3,500 to 3,700 tonnes of municipal solid waste (MSW) daily3 i.e. 1.3 Million Tons annually. This waste is almost entirely disposed at the Dhapa Dumping Area from the city limits.

The Dhapa Dumping Area is owned by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) and lies within Ward Nos. 57 and 58 of the KMC administrative boundaries, on the eastern part of Kolkata. Dhapa has been historically used for waste dumping for many decades. With the gradual development of the city towards the east, the garbage dumping has moved away further eastwards and the old dumping areas nearer to the main city are now used for farming (locally referred to as garbage farming). The current “dumping area” is spread over about 35 hectares. It consists of two unlined dumpsites, spaced ~ 500m apart – one closed dump of area ~ 12.14 ha and one active dump of area ~ 23 ha. The closed dump site (referred to as the ‘closed dumpsite’ or ‘the site’ or “project site”) commenced operations in 1987 and was closed in 2009. The active dumpsite (referred to as the ‘active dumpsite’) also commenced operations in 1987 and is expected to be operated for another two to three years.

2 As per Census Data 2011 of Kolkatta District, West Bengal 3 Source: Kolkatta Municipal Corporation data – average generation of solid waste received at Dhapa dumpsite.

32 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

In addition to the two dumpsites, the Dhapa Dumping Area includes an administrative office of the KMC, reception facilities for MSW, weighbridge, garage, a crematorium for unclaimed dead bodies, a privately operated compost plant and a private bone processing area.

Immediately to the north of the closed dumpsite is Makaltala Village. Another four villages namely Unchupota, Dhapa-Durgapur, Anantabadal and Khanaberia are located in the near vicinity of the dumping area.

The project site is described in more details in further sections of this chapter. The Dhapa Dumping Area is located within the East Kolkata Wetlands (EKW), a Ramsar Convention Wetland.

3.1.1 About the Two Dumpsites The two dumpsites within the Dhapa Dumping Area are non-contiguous, spaced ~ 0.5 km apart. The closed dumpsite, spread over an area of ~12.14 ha covering CS Dag No. 235/p, 237/p, 242/p, 243, 244, 245/p, 247/p and 606/P of Mouja Dhapa (refer , within Ward No. 57, commenced operations in 1987 and was shut down in 2009 (referred to as the ‘closed dumpsite’ or ‘the site’ or “project site”). The second and active dumpsite also commenced operations since 1987 and is still in operation (referred to as the ‘operational dumpsite’).

A definite date of termination of the active dump site is not known by the consultants however it is assumed that the operational dumpsite may last for around 3 – 4 years. Establishment of a new and controlled landfill dump is planned in the area.

Both the closed and the active dumpsite are by definition unlined and without any environmental protection or mediation facilities. The closed dump site bearing of area of 12.14 Ha is the project site.

In addition to the two dumpsites the area also includes the administration and reception facilities for the active dumpsite, a composting facility, access roads, a bone processing factory as well as neighbouring villagers and agricultural fields. The project site is described in more details in chapter 3.3.

This ESA report focuses on the closed dumpsite only.

33 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

3.2 Location, Elevation, Approach and Connectivity

3.2.1 Location Location maps for the closed dumpsite are presented as follows:

1. A map showing the general site location in West Bengal in Figure 3-1 2. A location map showing EKW within the Kolkata area in Figure 3-2 3. A location map of the site within the EKW: Figure 3-3 4. The co-ordinates of the closed dumpsite on a dumpsite boundary map: Figure 3-4 5. Cadastral map showing site location and extents: Figure 3-5

34 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3-1: Location Map showing the Site within the Kolkata Area, West Bengal

Figure 3-2: Location Map showing the EKW in the Kolkata Area

35 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3-3: Location of the site within the EKW

Figure 3-4: Co-ordinates along the boundary of the dumpsite

36 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 3-5: Cadastral Map showing site location and extents

3.2.2 Elevation The site lies within the Hooghly / Padma (Ganges) Delta at elevations ranging between 1.5 and 9 m ASL. Mean elevation at the base of the Dhapa closed dumpsite is ~5.0 m ASL. The top elevation of the closed dumpsite is 30.5 m ASL.

3.2.3 Approach The project site is within Kolkata City. To reach the Dhapa Dump Site:

› Reach Science City located in the eastern part of Kolkata. The Science City is located on the Eastern Metropolitan (EM) bypass road › Move towards north on the EM bypass road up to the Junction of Silver Spring and new upcoming J M Marriott (Holiday Inn, Kolkata) Hotels. From this junction the closed dumpsite is located around ~ 2 km opposite to the junction on eastern side on the Dhapa Road.

The site is well connected with the world, rest of India and West Bengal. Major connections are mentioned.

37 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Air Netaji Subhash Chandra Airport is ~ 11 kms (aerial distance) in NE direction.

Rail Howrah Railway station is ~ 9 kms (aerial distance) in NW direction from the site

Road The site is easily accessible through the EM bypass; which is well connected with all the major road and highways in the state.

3.3 Site Description

Only the dumpsite that was closed in 2009 is being considered for remediation under this project and is referred to as the “Project Site”. The dumpsite had been in operation for 22 years and is spread over an area of 12.14 ha within Ward No. 57 of KMC (CS Dag No. 235/p, 237/p, 242/p, 243, 244, 245/p, 247/p and 606/P). The area surrounding the project site is described below in further detail.

At entrance to the Dhapa Dumping Area is a MSW reception area with weighbridge, administrative building, garage etc. The closed dumpsite or the project area is just after the reception area towards the north. There is a compost plant, operated by M/s. Eastern Organic Fertilizer Ltd, located after the reception area beside the road leading to the closed dumpsite. The active dumpsite is beyond the compost plant towards the east at a distance of ~ 750m from the reception area.

There is a private bone processing area adjoining the closed dumpsite in the southwest direction spread over 3.3 ha. (land leased from KMC). The boundary between the closed dumpsite and the bone processing area is uncertain as municipal waste has either been disposed within the area or has slipped off from the closed dumpsite into the area. Besides bones, residues (shavings) from the leather industry are also processed in the bone processing area.

Immediately to the north of the closed dumpsite is Makaltala Village. A concrete boundary wall separates the village from the dumpsite. On the southern side of the dumpsite there is a surface water ditch. On the eastern side, there is a narrow unpaved road leading to Makaltala Village, a crematorium for unclaimed dead bodies and a large wastewater channel. In the northwest, there are patches of agricultural fields.

38 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

3.4 Study Area

For conducting a meaningful ESA as required for the project, it was important to arrive at a suitable definition of the study area. Based on reconnaissance surveys including interactions with local people and other stake holders and relevant literature study, the study area for the project was defined as 2 km around the centre of the closed dumpsite.

Only the closed dumpsite is the project area and therefore impacts due to operations at the active dumpsite (including vehicle movement), the composting facility, the crematorium and the bone processing area have not been assessed in this project..

39 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4 Environmental Assessment

4.1 Objective of Environmental Assessment

Both the dumpsites in Dhapa are unlined and uncovered and have no environmental protection arrangements. Also, along with MSW, the dumpsites have also been used for industrial hazardous waste disposal till 2006 as there was no specialised hazardous waste disposal facility in the state till that time. It is only obvious that long term uncontrolled waste dumping in the area, without adequate pollution prevention and control measures, has had a substantial negative impact on the neighbouring environment. Even after dumping has ceased at the closed dumpsite, the site still poses significant hazard to the environment and neighbouring community as the closure has not been done in an environmentally sound manner. Hence, it was considered necessary to conduct the environmental assessment to understand the environmental risks, to decide on remediation needs and to plan for environmental monitoring during and after the remediation.

4.2 Methodology for Environmental Assessment

Based on reconnaissance surveys including interactions with local people and other stake holders and relevant literature study, the study area for the project was defined as 2 km around the centre of the closed dumpsite.

As only the remediation of the closed dumpsite is proposed to be undertaken; only the impacts due to the closed dumpsite have been assessed. The impacts due to operations at the active dumpsite (including vehicle movement), the composting facility, the crematorium and the bone processing area have not been assessed.

The Baseline Environmental Assessment included a study of the local climate, lithology, hydrogeology and existing land use pattern followed by a detailed baseline environmental investigation programme involving drilling

40 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

of boreholes, collection of ground water (from existing tube wells and new bore holes), surface water, sediment and soil samples followed by analysis in the laboratory of M/s. SGS India in Kolkata which is recognised by the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Government of India under the Environment (Protection) Act, 2006.

4.3 Climate4

Kolkata has a tropical climate. Summers are hot and humid (with temperatures in the low 30's °C and during dry spells the maximum temperatures often exceed 40 °C (104 °F) during May and June) and winters tend to be moderately cold (with seasonal lows dipping to 9°C – 11 °C (48.2 °F – 51.8 °F) between December and January). Often during early summer, dusty squalls followed by spells of thunderstorm and heavy rains lash the city. These thunderstorms are convective in nature and locally known as Kal Baisakhi. Rains brought by the Bay of Bengal branch of South-West monsoon lash the city between June and September and supply the city with most of its annual rainfall.

4.3.1 Temperature5 Annual mean air temperature is as presented in Table 4-1. The annual mean maximum temperature recorded over a period of 30 years is observed to be 31.8° C and the annual mean minimum temperature is observed to be 22.1° C.

Summers are hot and humid with mean temperature ranging between 35.7– 33.8° C during March – Mid June. From October both day and night temperatures begin to decrease rapidly. January is generally the coldest month with mean daily minimum temperature of 13.8°C.

4 Source: Website http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/climate_of_Kolkata. 5 Source: Indian Meteorological Department (IMD), Long Term Climatological Tables, 1961- 1990, Kolkata (Alipore). This is the longest data set of meteorological readings published by the IMD and this data set is the most recent such compilation. The IMD Data is presented at Annexure 1.

41 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 4-1: Annual Mean Air Temperature Air Temperature Month Mean Daily Max. Temp Mean Daily Min. Temp deg C deg C

Jan 26.4 13.8

Feb 29.4 17

Mar 33.8 21.8

Apr 35.7 25

May 35.6 26.1

June 34 26.5

July 32.4 26.1

Aug 32.1 26

Sep 32.4 25.8

Oct 32.2 23.8

Nov 30.1 19.1

Dec 26.9 14.3

Annual Mean 31.8 22.1

4.3.2 Wind6 Long -term wind direction data is as presented in Table 4-2.

6 Source: Indian Meteorological Department (IMD), Long Term Climatological Tables, 1961- 1990, Kolkata (Alipore). The IMD Data is presented at Annexure 1.

42 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 4-2: Predominant Month Wise Wind Direction Predomina Second Third First Predominant nt Wind Predominant Wind Predominant Wind Direction Direction Direction Wind Direction

Mornin Mornin Evenin Mornin Evenin Month Evening g g g g g

January Calm Calm NW NW N N

February Calm Calm NW NW N S

March SW S Calm/S Calm NW SW

April S S SW SW SE SE

May S S SW SE SE SW

June S S SW/SE SE E SW

July S S SW SE SE SW

August S S SE SE E Calm

September S/SE S Calm SE E/SW Calm

October Calm Calm NW NW NE S

November Calm Calm NW NW N N

December Calm Calm NW NW N N

4.3.3 Cloud Cover7 The area remains cloudy between June – September, which is the active period of monsoon season. Generally, cloud cover ranges from 6 to 7 OKTAS during this monsoon season. In the summer season cloud cover is predominantly 0 OKTAS and on occasions goes upto 6 to 7 OKTAS.

7 Source: Indian Meteorological Department (IMD), Long Term Climatological Tables, 1961- 1990, Kolkata (Alipore). The IMD Data is presented at Annexure 1

43 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.3.4 Rainfall8 The south-west monsoons lash the city between June to September and supplies the city with most of its annual rainfall of approximately 1728.5 mm. The highest rainfall occurs in the month of July i.e. 375.70 mm. Monthly total rain fall data is presented in Table 4-3.

Table 4-3: Monthly Rainfall Data Month Rainfall (mm) No. of Rainy Days

January 15 0.8

February 24.4 1.7

March 32.9 2.2

April 57 3.5

May 120.7 6.7

June 291.2 12.7

July 375.7 17.2

August 348.4 17

September 291.4 13.4

October 137.7 6.6

November 22.2 1.1

December 11.9 0.4

Total 1728.5 83.3

4.3.5 Humidity9 Most humid conditions are found in the monsoons, followed by post- monsoons, winter and summer. Mornings are more humid than evenings and humidity ranges from 75-83% in monsoon to 47-71% during summer.

8 Source: Indian Meteorological Department (IMD), Long Term Climatological Tables, 1961- 1990, Kolkata (Alipore). The IMD Data is presented at Annexure 1. 9 Source: Indian Meteorological Department (IMD), Long Term Climatological Tables, 1961- 1990, Kolkata (Alipore). The IMD Data is presented at Annexure 1

44 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.3.6 Recent Micro Meteorology10 IMD data for recent micro meteorological information was collected. This has been tabulated into five tables namely:

› Monsoon 2012 (June 2012 – September 2012) › Post Monsoon 2012 (October 2012 – November 2012) › Winter 2012-13 (December 2012 – February 2013) › Summer 2013 (March 2013 – May 2013) › An Annual Table covering the entire database These are presented in tables as below:

Table 4-4: Monsoon 2012 – Mean Hourly Micro Meteorological Information Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours 0C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

1 00:00 28.0 85.3 2.2 7.8 180 S 5.9

2 01:00 27.9 85.5 2.1 7.6 180 S 6.1

3 02:00 27.8 86.6 2.4 8.7 180 S 6.2

4 03:00 27.6 86.9 1.9 6.8 180 S 6.2

5 04:00 27.4 87.4 1.9 6.8 180 S 6.3

6 05:00 27.3 88.3 1.7 6.2 180 S 6.3

7 06:00 27.7 86.6 2.0 7.3 180 S 6.2

8 07:00 28.5 83.5 2.8 10.0 180 S 6.1

9 08:00 29.5 78.7 3.2 11.6 202 SSW 6.0

10 09:00 30.8 75.0 3.1 11.3 180 S 5.6

11 10:00 31.7 71.3 3.4 12.3 180 S 5.4

12 11:00 32.4 68.5 3.7 13.2 157 SSE 5.2

10 Source: Website of IMD.

45 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours 0C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

13 12:00 32.8 66.5 3.8 13.5 180 S 5.2

14 13:00 33.0 66.1 3.7 13.4 180 S 5.1

15 14:00 33.1 65.3 3.8 13.7 157 SSE 4.9

16 15:00 32.9 66.0 3.7 13.4 180 S 5.0

17 16:00 32.3 68.4 3.8 13.5 180 S 5.0

18 17:00 31.2 71.3 3.5 12.7 180 S 5.1

19 18:00 30.3 73.9 3.4 12.2 180 S 5.0

20 19:00 29.5 76.7 3.3 11.8 180 S 5.0

21 20:00 29.0 79.1 3.2 11.6 180 S 5.3

22 21:00 28.6 81.1 3.1 11.0 180 S 5.4

23 22:00 28.4 82.0 2.6 9.4 180 S 5.5

24 23:00 28.2 82.8 2.5 9.2 180 S 5.6

The Wind rose for the above season is attached vide Figure 4-1

46 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-1: Wind Rose Monsoon 2012. Flow Vectors indicate Direction FROM which wind is blowing.

Table 4-5: Post Monsoon 2012 – Mean Hourly Micro Meteorological Information Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours 0C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

1 00:00 23.5 81.9 0.84 3.02 - CALM 1.6

2 01:00 23.3 82.6 0.97 3.49 - CALM 1.7

3 02:00 23.0 84.3 1.00 3.60 - CALM 1.8

4 03:00 22.8 85.1 0.96 3.45 - CALM 1.7

5 04:00 22.5 85.9 0.92 3.33 - CALM 2.0

6 05:00 22.3 87.0 1.0 3.5 - CALM 2.2

7 06:00 22.5 85.4 1.23 4.42 22 CALM/NNE 2.2

8 07:00 23.5 81.5 1.66 5.98 - CALM 1.9

9 08:00 25.2 75.2 2.41 8.67 22 CALM/NNE 1.4

47 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours 0C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

10 09:00 26.8 66.9 2.58 9.29 22 NNE 1.2

11 10:00 28.2 60.7 3.08 11.08 22 NNE 0.9

12 11:00 29.3 56.1 3.14 11.29 22 NNE 0.8

13 12:00 30.0 53.0 3.27 11.77 22 NNE 0.6

14 13:00 30.3 51.0 3.21 11.55 22 NNE 0.7

15 14:00 30.2 51.2 3.64 13.11 22 NNE 0.8

16 15:00 29.6 52.9 2.87 10.33 - CALM 0.8

17 16:00 28.7 57.1 2.32 8.37 - CALM 1.0

18 17:00 27.4 62.2 1.66 5.99 337 NNW 1.0

19 18:00 26.3 67.8 1.45 5.23 - CALM 1.1

20 19:00 25.6 71.5 1.26 4.54 - CALM 1.3

21 20:00 25.0 73.8 1.09 3.93 45 NE 1.2

22 21:00 24.4 76.6 1.01 3.64 45 NE 1.3

23 22:00 24.1 78.7 0.93 3.35 45 NE 1.5

24 23:00 24.1 78.7 0.93 3.35 45 NE 1.5

The Wind rose for the above season is attached vide Figure 4-2

48 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-2: Wind rose Post Monsoon 2012. Flow Vectors indicate Direction FROM which wind is blowing.

Table 4-6: Winter 2012 – 2013 – Mean Hourly Micro Meteorological Information Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours 0C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

1 00:00 16.5 82.0 0.5 1.8 45 NE 0.8

2 01:00 16.1 83.6 0.7 2.6 45 NE 0.8

3 02:00 15.7 85.4 0.7 2.5 45 NE 0.8

4 03:00 15.4 85.8 0.9 3.3 45 NE 0.8

5 04:00 15.2 86.6 0.9 3.4 45 NE 1.1

6 05:00 14.7 87.3 0.8 2.9 45 NE 1.1

7 06:00 14.7 87.6 0.9 3.1 45 NE 1.1

8 07:00 15.7 83.8 1.0 3.6 45 NE 1.0

49 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours 0C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

9 08:00 17.3 78.0 2.0 7.1 22 NNE 0.9

10 09:00 19.3 69.1 2.7 9.7 22 NNE 0.8

11 10:00 21.2 59.8 2.9 10.5 22 NNE 0.8

12 11:00 23.0 51.9 3.0 10.9 337 NNW 0.6

13 12:00 24.4 46.8 3.2 11.7 22 NNE 0.6

14 13:00 25.1 44.4 3.0 10.8 337 NNW 0.3

15 14:00 25.5 43.8 3.0 10.8 45 / 22 N/NNE 0.4

16 15:00 25.2 44.1 2.8 10.2 337 NNW 0.4

17 16:00 24.1 47.9 2.2 7.9 45 N 0.3

18 17:00 22.6 54.2 1.4 4.9 - CALM 0.4

19 18:00 21.3 61.0 0.8 3.0 - CALM 0.3

20 19:00 19.9 66.3 0.6 2.2 - CALM 0.5

21 20:00 18.9 70.9 0.5 1.7 - CALM 0.4

22 21:00 18.1 74.3 0.3 1.1 - CALM 0.4

23 22:00 17.6 77.2 0.5 1.6 - CALM 0.5

24 23:00 17.1 79.4 0.5 1.7 - CALM 0.6

The Wind rose for the above season is attached vide Figure 4-3.

50 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-3: Wind rose Winter 2012 – 2013. Flow Vectors indicate Direction FROM which wind is blowing.

Table 4-7: Summer 2013 – Mean Hourly Micro Meteorological Information Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours 0C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

1 00:00 26.7 77.8 2.73 9.81 180 S 0.8

2 01:00 26.4 79.1 2.54 9.13 180 S 0.8

3 02:00 26.2 80.0 2.58 9.29 180 S 1.0

4 03:00 26.1 80.6 2.38 8.58 180 S 0.9

5 04:00 25.8 81.5 2.24 8.08 180 S 0.9

6 05:00 25.5 82.7 2.08 7.48 180 S 0.9

7 06:00 25.9 82.2 2.19 7.88 202 SSW 0.8

8 07:00 26.9 78.5 2.74 9.85 225 SW 0.8

9 08:00 28.4 71.8 3.34 12.03 180 S 0.7

51 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours 0C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

10 09:00 30.0 66.0 3.86 13.91 180 S 0.6

11 10:00 31.4 59.7 3.74 13.48 180 S 0.5

12 11:00 32.8 53.6 3.96 14.26 180 S 0.3

13 12:00 33.8 50.5 3.82 13.75 225 SSW 0.3

14 13:00 34.5 48.3 4.16 14.96 180 / 202 S/SSW 0.4

15 14:00 34.8 46.5 4.15 14.94 180 S 0.5

16 15:00 34.5 47.6 4.22 15.20 180 S 0.5

17 16:00 33.6 50.1 4.29 15.45 202 SSW 0.6

18 17:00 32.4 53.4 4.00 14.39 180 S 0.7

19 18:00 30.7 59.2 3.90 14.04 180 / 202 S/SSW 0.8

20 19:00 29.3 63.1 3.90 14.05 202 SSW 0.9

21 20:00 28.3 67.0 3.86 13.90 202 SSW 0.9

22 21:00 27.6 70.7 3.83 13.79 202 SSW 0.9

23 22:00 27.3 72.5 3.41 12.27 202 SSW 1.0

24 23:00 27.0 73.7 3.22 11.59 180 S 0.8

The Wind rose for the above season is attached vide Figure 4-4.

52 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-4: Wind rose Summer 2013. Flow Vectors indicate Direction FROM which wind is blowing.

Table 4-8: Annual – Mean Hourly Micro Meteorological Information Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours Deg C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

1 00:00 24.1 82.0 1.7 6.0 - CALM 2.6

2 01:00 23.9 82.9 1.7 6.1 - CALM 2.7

3 02:00 23.6 84.3 1.8 6.4 - CALM 2.8

4 03:00 23.4 84.8 1.6 5.8 - CALM 2.8

5 04:00 23.2 85.4 1.6 5.7 - CALM 2.9

6 05:00 22.9 86.4 1.5 5.2 - CALM 3.0

7 06:00 23.2 85.5 1.6 5.9 - CALM 2.9

8 07:00 24.1 82.0 2.1 7.7 - CALM 2.8

9 08:00 25.5 76.2 2.8 10.1 22 NNE 2.6

10 09:00 27.1 69.9 3.1 11.2 22 NNE 2.5

53 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Time Temperature Humidity Wind Speed Wind Direction Clouds S. OCTAS No. Hours Deg C (%) m/s Km/Hr Degree From of the Day

11 10:00 28.4 63.8 3.3 12.0 22 NNE 2.3

12 11:00 29.6 58.6 3.5 12.6 22 NNE 2.1

13 12:00 30.5 55.3 3.6 12.8 22 / 180 NNE / S 2.1

14 13:00 31.0 53.7 3.6 12.8 180 S 2.0

15 14:00 31.2 52.9 3.7 13.2 180 S 2.0

16 15:00 30.9 53.7 3.5 12.5 180 S 2.0

17 16:00 30.0 56.8 3.3 11.8 180 S 2.1

18 17:00 28.8 61.1 2.8 10.1 180 S 2.1

19 18:00 27.5 66.0 2.6 9.2 180 S 2.1

20 19:00 26.5 69.8 2.4 8.8 180 S 2.2

21 20:00 25.7 73.1 2.4 8.5 - CALM 2.3

22 21:00 25.1 76.0 2.2 8.0 - CALM 2.4

23 22:00 24.7 77.9 2.0 7.2 - CALM 2.5

24 23:00 24.4 79.3 1.9 6.8 - CALM 2.5

The Wind rose for the above season is attached vide Figure 4-5.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-5: Wind Rose: Annual. Flow Vectors indicate Direction FROM which wind is blowing. Looking to the above wind roses, the predominant wind direction as observed averagely during the entire year is from South to North and tends South Westerly to North Easterly directions.

4.4 Geology and Hydrogeology

4.4.1 Regional Geology and Hydrogeology Geologically and geo-morphologically Kolkata belongs to the lower deltaic plain of the Ganga-Padma river system. The area is containing multilayered deposits of unconsolidated sediments alternates between clay, silt, sand and gravel. In the entire area, fluvial processes have resulted in the formation of extensive Holocene-recent flood plains deposits mostly silt and clay. (Mukherjee et al 2007).

The topsoil in the area is clay and clay loam. This clay extends up to a depth of 10 to 25 m bgl in most of the area. Below this clay bed a fine sand bed is found which extends up to a depth of 30 to 35 m bgl. Below this level another clay, dark brown to greyish brown in colour occur up to a depth of 60 to 100 m bgl. From this depth another sand zone occurs which comprises

55 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

of fine, medium and coarse sand and extends up to a depth of 120 to 180 m bgl. Below this sand zone gravel bed occurs. Tertiary black and sticky clay occurs at the bottom of the sand and gravel zone. (Sengupta P.K. 2009).

Figure 4-6: District Resource Map of Kolkata Based on the District Resource Map of Kolkata published by Geological Survey of India, Dhapa site and surrounding geological formations consists of alternate layers of sand, silt, dark grey clays with geomorphic features like natural levee and flood plain basin zone.

4.4.2 Local Geology As a part of site investigations; a total of 9 boreholes drilled in and around the project site; 3 inside dumped material / waste body (BH 6, 7 and 8) and remaining (BH 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 9) near the periphery of the waste body.

DTH method was adopted for the 8 Nos of Borehole drillings. For the deep borehole (BH 9 upto: 60 m) the rotary drilling method was adopted.

56 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Based on the drilling activity of various boreholes within and around the closed dump site the following geological formations were extrapolated on an average.

Dumped material (filling material) encountered upto 2-4m bgl in all boreholes drilled at periphery of the waste body. Original clay mostly sticky, cohesive, loamy and light to dark grey coloured with minor amount of silt encountered below 3-4m depth with containing some highly decomposed organic matter mostly woods and roots of vegetation’s.

A deep borehole (BH 09) was further drilled later upto the primary aquifer. The geological formations encountered in the deep borehole are presented in Table 4-9.

Table 4-9: Geological Formations observed in the deep borehole 9 Depth Lithology Aquifer/Aquitard

0-19m Dark grey coloured clay and silty clay Aquitard

Yellowish, unconsolidated, loose very fine sand 19-27.5m Aquifer and silt with mica flakes

Yellowish to light grey coloured unconsolidated, 27.5-32m Aquifer loose very fine sand and silt

32-42m Gray cohesive sticky clay and silty clay Aquitard

Yellowish to grey silty clay to clayey silt less 42-44m Aquitard cohesive

44-47m Light grey very fine silty sand Aquifer

47-60m Yellowish fine sand Aquifer

In addition to this information on two borelogs of tube wells located at ITC Sonar Hotel (~3 km westward from dumpsite) and at Martinpara Village, (~4 km southwest from dumpsite) reveals that the primary aquifer is encountered at depths of ~ 44m bgl. Surprisingly, the 1st aquifer that encountered at depth of ~19m in BH 9 is absent in both tube wells. It may be possible that the 1st aquifer may only have a local extent and forming lens of fine sand within clay bed.

Thus in general at the site, the geological formations are expected to be as follows:

› Ground level › Fill (from reclamation of the area) – 2 to 4 m bgl › Sediments - Sandy clay loam, silty sand and very fine sand (Ganges Delta sediments) – 4 – 44 m bgl › Formations of sand and gravel (44 - ~180 m bgl (First Primary aquifer)

57 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

› 300 - 450 m bgl. basic clay bed

4.4.3 Local Hydrogeology Based on the drilling of the 8 boreholes in and around the project site and one deep borehole a borehole profile including geological description of the layers and hydro geological was prepared and presented as below:

58 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-7: Topographical Map of the closed dump site showing cross section lines for understanding local hydrogeology around the dump site.

59 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

60 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-8: Cross Section of Landfill Site showing the Local Geology and Hydrogeology

61 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

There are two aquifers present within 100 m depth of the soil profile. The 1st aquifer encounters at depth of 19 to 32m. It is a confined aquifer as it has aquitard (clay bed) at top as well as at bottom and may have only local extent. A second aquifer is also confined having thickness more than 100m. This is most exploited aquifer because most of the Kolkata city extracts water from this aquifer. The above cross section depicts both these aquifers.

4.4.4 Summary of Geological and Hydro Geological Information The information presentation in the previous section is summarized in form of Table 4-10 as below:

62 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 4-10: Litho logy for Dhapa / Kolkata Summary of Information collected Lithology Year and S. Name of Nature of Details of Depth (m, BGL) Remarks No. Source Information Aquifer / Source Description Aquitard From To

Geological 2007, Alternate layers of sand, Survey of Department silt, dark grey clays with India, directly under 1 Secondary - - geomorphic features like General Description District the natural levee and flood Resource Government plain basin zone Map, 2007 of India

Multi-layered deposits of unconsolidated sediments alternating between clay, silt and Mukherjee, gravel. Fluvial processes 2 Secondary 2007, - - General Description et al have resulted in the formation of Holocene / Recent flood plain deposits of mostly silt and clay

0 10/25 Clay and Clay Loam Aquitard Uppermost surface of Kolkata 10/25 30/35 Fine Sand Bed Aquifer is clay of thickness between 5-40 m BGL and at places Clay, dark brown to containing lenses of sand and Sengupta 30/35 60/100 Aquitard 3 Secondary 2009, greyish brown peat. East Kolkata PK, 2009 (Ultadanga, Park Circus, Fine, medium and Primary Santhoshpur, Garia and 60/100 120/180 coarse sands Aquifer Dhapa) are covered by Marshland deposit 120/180 Unconfirmed Sand Zone Gravel Bed Aquifer

63 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Lithology Year and S. Name of Nature of Details of Depth (m, BGL) Remarks No. Source Information Aquifer / Source Description Aquitard From To

Tertiary Black and Unconfirmed Sticky Clay, Tertiary, Aquitard Base

Dark grey coloured clay 0 19 Aquitard and silty clay

Yellowish, unconsolidated, loose, 19 27.5 Aquifer very fine sand and silt The Secondary unconfined with mica flakes Aquifer is 13 m thick whilst the Primary Aquifer Yellowish to light grey commences at 44 m and goes 27.5 32 unconsolidated, loose, Aquifer further than 60 m (reportedly Deep very fine sand and silt upto 100 m). In between there 4 Borehole by Primary 2012 are clayey soils which act as COWI et al Grey, cohesive, sticky barrier for avoiding 32 42 Aquitard clay and silty clay contamination spread to primary aquifers. The Yellowish to grey silty primary aquifer is tapped as a 42 44 clay to less cohesive Aquitard water source by residents of clayey silt Makaltala Village.

Light grey, very fine 44 47 Aquifer silty sand

47 60 Yellowish fine sand Aquifer

64 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.5 Sampling and Analysis

The sampling and analysis programme undertaken as part of the environmental assessment have been listed in Table 4-11.

Table 4-11: Sampling and Analysis Programme

S. Environmental Sampling & Analysis details No. Indices

Ambient Air Ambient Air Quality Monitoring around the closed 1 Quality (A 1 to dumpsite – 4 stations (24 hrs. period on continuous basis), A 4) based on parameters covered in MSW (M & H)Rules, 2000

Landfill Gas Monitoring programme – from 3 boreholes LFG drilled inside the closed dumpsite – monitored 2 Monitoring concentrations for parameters are Methane, Carbon (LFG 1 to LFG Dioxide, oxygen etc. 3)

Ground Water Quality Monitoring programme – from 6 boreholes (5 on the rim of the dumpsite and one deep Groundwater borehole) and other 9 existing tube wells in the study area 3 Quality (GW 1 in order to ascertain baseline ground water quality – to GW 9) parameters compared with IS 10500 - Drinking water Quality standards.

Ground Water Quality Monitoring programme – from Outside Tube outside 8 Tube wells was also carried out within and outside 4 wells Quality the study area in order to ascertain baseline ground water (TS 1 to TS 8) quality around the dumpsite – parameters compared with IS 10500 - Drinking water Quality standards.

Surface Water Quality Monitoring programme – 5 samples Surface Water were collected around the closed dumpsite from nearby 5 Quality SW 1 surface waters – parameters compared with General to SW 5) Standards for Discharge of Pollutants to Inland Surface Waters as per CPCB guidelines

Surface Water Surface Water Sediments Quality Monitoring programme – Sediment 3 samples were collected around the closed dumpsite from 6 Quality (S1, S3 nearby drainages – parameters compared with the Dutch and S5 Quality Standards for soil.

65 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S. Environmental Sampling & Analysis details No. Indices

Leachate Water Quality Monitoring programme – from 4 Leachate boreholes drilled within the closed dumpsite – parameters 7 Quality (L1 to compared with IS 10500 - Drinking water Quality standards L4) as well as Leachate Quality monitoring standards as per MSW Rules 2000

Soil Quality Monitoring programme – Soil samples Soil Quality 8 collected from boreholes drilled around the dumpsite – (SS1 to SS5) compared with the Dutch Quality Standards.

Noise (N1 to Ambient Noise Monitoring programme – 4 locations around 9 N4) the dumpsite to determine baseline noise levels

Note: BH locations are indicated as BH which are ground water quality monitoring locations GW in the map and are to be interpreted as GW = BH in text. The sampling location map depicting the various sampling locations around the closed dump site is presented in Figure 4-9 below:

Figure 4-9: Sampling Location Map – Landuse plan of Dhapa Closed Dump site

66 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-10: Sampling Location Map – Google Imagery – Dhapa Closed Dump site

Both the above maps are also reproduced at Annexure 2 at the end of this report.

4.6 Ground Water Investigations

4.6.1 Ground Water Boreholes drilling A total of 9 new boreholes (8 nos shallow and one deep) were drilled around the closed dumpsite for ground water investigations. Three boreholes were

67 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

located within the dumpsite and six boreholes were located in the border zone between the dumpsite and the surrounding areas. One borehole of depth 60 m was drilled in the vicinity of the dumpsite in order to tap the primary aquifer. The water from 6 existing tube wells in the neighbouring areas was also sampled. The borehole and tube well locations are as follows:-

› BH1 – shallow borehole outside the closed dumpsite in the south › BH2, BH3 and BH4 – shallow boreholes on the rim of the closed dumpsite › BH5, BH6, BH7 and BH8 - shallow boreholes drilled inside the closed dumpsite to sample leachate › BH9 – deep borehole outside the closed dumpsite › Tube well locations – 2 tube wells in neighbouring Makaltala village, one in Dhapa Durgapur village at a distance of 1 and half Km from the closed dumpsite towards the south, one at Martinpara at a distance of 4km from the closed dumpsite in the southwest direction, one in ITC Sonar hotel at a distance of 3 km from the site in the western direction and one near the bone processing area in the south west direction.

The Borehole and existing tube well locations (for ground water sampling) are shown on a Sampling Location Map placed at Annexure 2.

In order to assess the contamination levels; sampling of ground water was carried out in 3 sampling campaigns between May and September 2012 for the 9 newly drilled boreholes and also 6 existing tube wells in the neighbouring area;

› 1st. campaign in May – June 2012 (9 new boreholes) › 2nd campaign in July 2012(9 new boreholes + 6 existing deep tube wells) › 3rd campaign in September 2012 (9 new boreholes) Later ground water from 3 more existing tube wells in the villages of Unchupota, Khanaberia and Anantabadal were sampled..

4.6.2 Ground Water Quality Each of the ground water / leachate samples was tested for 143 parameters in the laboratory of SGS India in Kolkata. The laboratory is recognised by the Ministry of Environment & Forests, Govt. of India under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Results of analysis and their interpretations when compared with standards are presented in summarised form.

Summary tables are prepared for all the three sampling campaigns for the following:

Ground water quality around the closed dumpsite

68 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Leachate Quality within the dumpsite Ground water quality of existing bore wells within the study area in the vicinity of the dump site.

 Ground water quality around the closed dumpsite Ground water quality around the dump site in BH1, BH2, BH3, BH 4 and BH 9 were compared for all the three sampling campaigns with the Drinking Water Quality Standards as per IS 10500 and presented in Annexure 3.

Based on the analytical results following inferences can be drawn: › Chlorides in the samples (especially in BH2, BH 3 and BH 4) are over the permissible limit › Iron and Manganese content in nearly all the samples is above the permissible limit. › Mineral Oil in samples of BH 2, BH 3 and BH 4 are above the permissible limits indicating the contamination of leachate. › Phenolic compounds are above permissible limit especially in BH 2, BH 3 and BH 4. › Turbidity and Total dissolved solids in nearly all samples except BH 9 is above permissible limits › Heavy metals of Lead, mercury and nickel are found in concentrations exceeding permissible limit in some of the samples. › In general the results of analyses for Pesticides, Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) and Poly Chlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) are below the detection Limit (BDL) in all the samples. › In the four boreholes (BH1, 2, 3 and 4) the water samples in general have no or little smell (odourless or light pungent) which is in contrast to the boreholes (BH5, 6, 7 and 8) inside the dump site.

 Ground water quality in Deep borehole The deep boreholes comprising BH9 (60 m bgl) near the dumpsite represent the deep aquifer (primary aquifer). In this borehole, the following was observed:

› Iron concentration is 2.3 mg/l exceeding the Indian Standards. › Turbidity concentration is 9.99 mg/lit exceeding the Indian Standards. › With a few exceptions the results of the analyses do not exceed the maximum permissible levels of Indian Standard for drinking water. In general terms the deep ground water can be regarded as acceptable for drinking water purposes.

69 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

 Leachate Quality within and around the dumpsite BH5, BH6, BH7 and BH8 are the boreholes drilled inside the dump site which is shallow and tapping the leachate below the dump. The Leachate (Ground water) quality within the dump site in BH5, BH6, BH7, BH 8 were compared for all the three sampling campaigns with the Standards for Leachate as per MSW Rules 2000 (Inland Surface Waters) and also the Drinking Water Quality Standards as per IS 10500 and presented in Annexure 4. The leachate quality observed is presented as below in Table 4-12.

Table 4-12: Average Quality of Leachate Observed

Range of Values S. No Parameter observed based on test results (mg/lit)

1 COD 155 – 3762

2 BOD 29 - 1535

3 Total Dissolved Solids 3420 - 21520

4 Suspended Solids 24 - 2375

5 Chromium 0.03-1.17

6 Lead 0.02-0.25

Based on the analytical results following inferences can be drawn:

› The values of BOD, COD, chlorides, Total Dissolved Solids, Total Nitrogen and Total Suspended solids are high then discharge limits to inland surface waters. These are leachate generated from the dumpsite. › The colour of the samples is brown and the smell is pungent.

 Ground water quality in existing tube wells around the closed dumpsite Groundwater from 9 existing tube wells around the dumpsite was analysed. The analysis results were compared with the Drinking Water Quality Standards as per IS 10500 and presented in Annexure 5.

Based on the analytical results following inferences can be drawn:

› Iron and manganese concentration in Makaltala tube well is found to be 1.62 mg/lit and 0.38 mg/lit exceeding the permissible limits as per Drinking water Standards. › Iron concentration in Martinpara tube well is found to be 1.02 mg/lit exceeding permissible limits as per Indian Drinking water standards.

70 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

With a few exceptions the results of analysis of the water from all the tube wells do not exceed the maximum permissible levels of Indian Standard for drinking water and hence can be regarded as acceptable for drinking purposes.

4.6.3 Extent of Ground Water Pollution A ground water modelling study was undertaken based on 3D GMS modelling software. The subsurface pathways of contaminants are related to the geological structure of the sub surface, groundwater movement and infiltration of rainwater through the dumpsite to the groundwater zone. The rainwater infiltrates downwards through the dumpsite until it reaches the groundwater. On reaching the ground water, the rain water contaminated with leachate flows along with the ground water, predominantly in the horizontal direction.

The primary environmental assessment indicates very little groundwater pollution in BH 1 (located at the entry to the site near the KMC office in the Southern direction), medium pollution levels in the boreholes at the rim of the dumpsite (BH 2, BH 3, BH 4) and fairly high pollution level in the boreholes inside the dumpsite (BH 5, BH 6, BH 7 and BH 8). This indicates pollution within and near the dumpsite and little or no pollution at some distance from the dumpsite such as in borehole BH 1. The groundwater modelling results give indications of maximum extent of run off and leachate flow before entering the drainage channels or other surface water bodies.

71 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-11: Extension of groundwater pollution based on the modelled upper groundwater flow directions indicated by black arrows. It was revealed from the model that the pollution may extend upto maximum 300 m from the dumpsite to the west in the horizontal direction, but much less in the other directions, where the boundaries are the drainage channels close to the dumpsite.

The risk of groundwater pollution is however assessed to be negligible. This is mainly due to the presence of approximately 45 m of low permeable beds of clay, silt and silty sand above the primary aquifer which retains pollutants and prevents their flow. The results of the modelling revealed that it will take more than 380 years before the pollution can reach the primary aquifer. The average permeability for clay/silt layers is 1.4 x 10-8 m/s.

› The results of the chemical analysis of the water from the deep boreholes (existing tube wells in neighbouring villages) indicate that the pollution has not reached to deeper levels from where drinking water is sourced.

72 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.7 Surface Water Investigations

4.7.1 Surface Water Sampling A total of 5 surface water monitoring/sampling points were established in order to assess influence of dump on surface water bodies. Out of 5, 3 surface water points are used to collect surface sediments which are drained by rainwater or leachate in to the water bodies. The selection of the sampling points is based on topography and the observed flow directions. The sampling points were as under:

› SW1: Situated in the lined canal along the Dhapa road, incoming water › SW2: Situated in the lined canal along the access road to Makaltala, directly south of the dumpsite › SW3: Situated in the Storm Outlet Canal east of the Makaltala Bridge close to the outlet of the lined canal along the access road to the village, outgoing water › SW 4: Situated in the lined canal at north east of the dumpsite › SW 5: Situated at drains junction coming from dump and from bone factory, north west of the dumpsite. The surface water sampling locations along with their nomenclature are presented on a Sampling Location Map placed at Annexure 2.

4.7.2 Surface Water Quality In order to assess the pollution levels; sampling of surface water was carried out in 3 sampling campaigns at 5 locations:

› 1st. campaign in May – June 2012 (5 samples) › 2nd campaign in July 2012 (5 samples) › 3rd campaign in September 2012 (5 samples) During each sampling campaign, surface water samples were taken and sent for the chemical analysis. Surface water quality around the dump site in SW-1 to 5 were compared for all the three sampling campaigns with the General Standards for Discharge of pollutants to Inland Surface Waters as per CPCB and presented in Annexure 6.

Based on the analytical results following inferences can be drawn:

› The parameters of Ammonia, BOD and COD, Nitrates exceed the limits in samples of SW 2, SW 3 and SW 5.

73 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

› Mineral oil is observed at SW 5 location exceeding the limits. › Total Nitrogen and suspended solids are also exceeding limits at SW 2, SW 3, SW 4 and SW 5 › E-coli and Total Coliform count were found exceeding limits in nearly all the samples. The presence of the mentioned microorganisms in the surface waters might be partially due to the dumpsite but it is mainly due to the untreated sewage from Kolkata city and uncontrolled defecation by villagers and livestock. › The concentrations of lead, copper, nickel, chromium are found exceeding limits at various locations. › Traces of one or more volatile organic compounds have been found. These include benzene, toluene, chlorobenzene, 1, 2-dichloroethane, chloroform, dichloromethane and bromoform. It can be observed from the above that samples at locations SW2, SW3 and SW5 are more polluted compared to SW1 and SW4 because at these locations, leachate generated within the dump is directly mixed with the surface water. As SW5 is located at the junction of drains coming out from the dump and bone processing area therefore the pollution level in SW5 are higher in all campaigns. It is also observed that the concentration levels of pollutants are reduced during monsoon and post monsoon samples.

4.7.3 Extent of Surface Water Pollution The surface water at sampling point SW1 has relatively low levels of contaminants. All the other surface water around the dumpsite is contaminated. The leachate and rainwater runoff on the northwest side of the dumpsite flows into the agricultural fields. The leachate and run off on the other sides are flowing into the surrounding channels and canals, eventually in the direction of the Wetlands. It has been estimated that the leachate generation from the closed dumpsite only contributes to 0.07% of the total flow of wastewater into the wet lands and therefore the contribution of the closed dumpsite to the pollution of the wetlands is considered very limited11.

11 600 million litres of sewage/wastewater per day according to KEIP (www.keip.in) and estimated leachate generation from the closed dumpsite at 62,000 m³/year and surface water run-off at 93,000 m³/year or 0.07% of total water discharge to the wetlands.

74 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.8 Soil/Sediment Investigations

4.8.1 Top Soil/Sediment Sampling Sampling of top soil/sediments was taken as under:  Sediment soil Samples were collected at locations SW 1, SW 3 and SW 5 in 1st Campaign as follows: › SW1: situated in the lined canal along the Dhapa road, incoming water; › SW2: situated in the lined canal along the access road to Makaltala, directly south of the dumpsite; › SW3: situated in the Storm Outlet Canal east of the Makaltala Bridge close to the outlet of the lined canal along the access road to the village, outgoing water.  A mixed soil (segregated from waste) from top was also collected from bore holes drilled inside the dumpsite (BH 6, 7 and 8) in the 1st campaign.  Top soil samples were taken from boreholes drilled on site (BH 2 to 5 and BH 8) in 2nd Sampling campaign

4.8.2 Soil Quality Surface soil quality around the dump site for the above samples taken were compared with the Dutch Standards for Soil (Dutch Target and Intervention Values, 2000, version February 4th 2000) and presented in Annexure 7.

Surface Soil Samples Based on the analytical results following inferences can be drawn: › In all topsoil samples some metals are above the LIBV’s values (Pb, Cd, Cr, Cu, Sn and Zn). › In the topsoil samples of BH 2, situated within the perimeter of the bone processing factory, the concentration of chromium is exceeding the THV factor ~ 2.5 (max value of Cr is found to be 469.93 mg/kg). › In soil samples of BH 2, 3, 4 and 5 relatively high concentration of PAH are present. › In the topsoil of BH 3, situated north of the dumpsite, copper is present in a concentration almost equal to the THV. › The other compounds are found below the detection limits or are not exceeding the LIBV’s.

75 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Thus at and around dump site there is contamination present in top soil due to heavy metals and PAH content.

Sub soil samples Based on the analytical results following inferences can be drawn: › None of the analyzed deep sub soil samples (BH 1, BH 4, BH 5 and BH 8) has been affected by pollutants. Even the sample acquired from underneath the dumpsite, BH 8 at a depth of 31 meters below surface, is not contaminated.

4.8.3 Sediment Quality Based on the analytical results following inferences can be drawn: › The sediment at sampling point SW 1 is slightly polluted with cadmium. › The sediment of sampling point SW 3 is heavily contaminated with chromium above the THV (200.72 mg/kg dw). Also lead, cadmium, copper and zinc are present as contaminants above the LIBV. It is highly probable that the pollution with chromium is connected to the chromium contamination determined in the soil at the bone processing factory. Sampling point SW 3 is situated downstream in relation to this factory. › The sediment of sampling point SW 5 is polluted with chromium above the LIBV (37.19 mg/kg dw).

4.8.4 Extent of Sediment Contamination Based on the analysis results, it is concluded that the sediment at sample point SW1 is outside the area of impact of the closed dumpsite. This is consistent with the data for soil and ground water. The sediment at the outlet of the lined canal south of the dumpsite (SW3) is seriously contaminated with Chromium. The source of this contamination is most probably the Bone Processing Area. The result at sample point SW5 points out that the concentration is gradually decreasing with an increase in distance from the closed dumpsite. However, the sample from SW5 is slightly contaminated with Chromium which is probably due to the Bone Processing Area.

4.9 Ambient Air Monitoring

4.9.1 Ambient Air Quality Station Ambient air quality monitoring was carried out for twenty-four hours in the month of October 2012 (dates: 11-10-2012 to 12-10-2012). The ambient air

76 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

quality monitoring stations were set up at four different directions around the dumpsite.

 A-1 was set up behind the bone factory in the west, in order to capture the fumes coming from the factory as well as from the dumpsite. A-2 was set up in south south-west direction opposite of compost facility which manufactures organic fertilizers A-3 was set up in the Makaltala village in north east direction A-4 was set up in north-west along the dumpsite site.

4.9.2 Ambient Air Quality The monitoring results for various parameters analysed viz., ammonia, carbon monoxide, methane, sulphur dioxide and suspended particulate matter are presented in Table 4-13 as below:

Table 4-13: Ambient Air Quality Analysis

Standards A-4 A-1 A-2 as per A-3 (BH Parameter Unit (BH (Bone MSW rules (Makaltala) 3/SW 6) Factory) for 5) emissions

Ammonia µg/m3 <20.0 <20.0 <20.1 <20.0 400 (200) 12 (NH3)

Carbon 2 (1 hour) Monoxide mg/m3 <1.0 1.37 <1.0 2.17 1 (8 hour) (CO)

Methane Ppm 15.10 12.36 10.85 97.30 92013 (CH4)

14 Sulphur µg/m3 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 120 (80)

12 Required limits as per National Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Standards (NAAQMS). 13 920 ppmv is equivalent to 650 mg/m3 (650 mg/m3 is equivalent to approx. 2% of lower explosive limit).

77 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Standards A-4 A-1 A-2 as per A-3 (BH Parameter Unit (BH (Bone MSW rules (Makaltala) 3/SW 6) Factory) for 5) emissions Dioxide (SO2)

Suspended Particulate µg/m3 75.1 56.9 43.7 54.1 500 Matter (SPM)

Results of the sampling at four locations around the dumpsite showed 24-hour average levels of sulphur dioxide (SO2), suspended particulate matter (SPM), methane (CH4) and ammonia (NH3) well below the MSW 2000 acceptable levels for landfills. SO2 and NH3 were below measurement limits, far below the 24-hour NAAQMS for these two pollutants. Wind directions were variable during the sampling (from northwest, west and south).

Two of the air samples had carbon monoxide (CO) levels above the standard specified in MSW (M&H) Rules, 2000 (8-hour-average of 1 mg/m3). The elevated CO concentrations are due to the open chullah (oven) used in the Bone Factory rather than the dumpsite.

4.9.3 Extent of Ambient Air Pollution From the test results of ambient air quality monitoring it is concluded that the impact of the dumpsite on the ambient air quality in Dhapa area is negligible.

However human health risks due to emissions from the Bone Factory exist.

However associated human risks due to methane emissions, emissions associated with the Bone Factory and the dust emissions due to the vehicular movements to nearby locality cannot be eliminated.

14 Required limits as per National Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Standards (NAAQMS).

78 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.10 Landfill Gas Assessment

The closed dumpsite has no landfill gas control or gas management facilities. The dumpsite is closed since 2009 and hence emission of landfill gas is assumed to be low. Landfill gas odour is felt from time to time but not significantly and certainly less than what can be felt at active dumpsites with high content of organic waste.

4.10.1 Landfill Gas Sampling Monitoring of landfill gas was carried out in the three boreholes (BH 6, BH 7 and BH 8) during the period 28th September - 3rd October 2012. The results are presented in the table as below:

Table 4-14: Details of the Landfill Gas Sampling Programme

Item Description

Borehole no.: 6 28/9/2012

Water table below top of pipe 2.5 m

CH4: 0.1%

CO2: 0.0 % Gas composition over open borehole O2: 19.5% N: 80.4 %

Start pumping 11.15 hrs Pumping flow 2 l/min Pumping pressure -29.2 mbar

CH4: 0.0%

CO2: 18.6 % Composition at start O2: 0.0% N: 81.4 %

CH4: 0.0%

CO2: 18.6 % Stabilised composition O2: 0.0 % N: 81.4 %

Stop pumping 11.20 hrs

79 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Borehole no.: 7 28/9/2012 3/10/2012

Water table below top of pipe Not measured 7.22 m

CH4: ~10% CH4: 9 %

Gas composition over open borehole (The concentrations CO2: ~3 % CO2: 5 % fluctuate due to wind) O2: ~15% O2:15.5% N: 72 % N: 70.5 %

15.20 hrs Start pumping 11.50 hrs 2 l/min Pumping flow 2 l/min -3.3 - -3.6 Pumping pressure -6.3 mbar mbar

CH4: 58.4% CH4: 59.8%

CO2: 38.4 % CO2: 39.7 % Composition at start O2: 0.4% O2: 0.6% N: 2.8 % N: 0.0 %

CH4: 59.0% CH4: 60.6%

CO2: 38.7 % CO2: 39.9 % Stabilised composition O2: 0.3 % O2: 0.2 % N: 2.0 % N: 0.0 %

Stop pumping 11.55 hrs 15.40 hrs

Comments High content of CH4 and CO2 from start and more less no changes during 10-20 minutes of pumping. High content of methane and carbon dioxide above the open pipe indicates that landfill gas emit from the borehole. This, in conjunction with the concentrations measured in the wells shows that active production of landfill gas is taken place in the areas where the well is located. However relative high suction head (negative pressure) indicates a low permeability in the waste and low gas migration rates. (In dumpsites with a high LFG generation the pressure build up inside the waste body is high and a positive pressure will be observed)

Borehole no.: 8 28/9/2012 3/10/2012

Water table below top of pipe Not measured 10.68 m

Gas composition over open borehole (The CH4: ~5% CH4:~4% concentrations fluctuate due to wind) CO2: ~2.5 % CO2: ~3.5 %

80 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Borehole no.: 8 28/9/2012 3/10/2012

O2: ~15% O2: ~14% N: 77.5% N: 78.5%

Start pumping 12.30 hrs 16.15 hrs Pumping flow 2 l/min 2 l/min Pumping pressure -16 - -16.6 mbar -11.1 - -14 mbar

Composition at start CH4: 52.2% CH4: 56.9%

CO2: 36.9 % CO2: 39.1 %

O2:1.2% O2: 0.8% N: 9.7 % N: 9.7 %

Stabilised composition CH4: 54.2% CH4: 55.6%

CO2: 37.9 % CO2: 39.1 %

O2: 0.8 % O2: 0.8 % N: 7.1 % N: 7.1 %

Stop pumping 12.40 hrs 16.25 hrs

Comments: High content of CH4 and CO2 from start and more less no changes during 10 minutes of pumping. High content of methane and carbon dioxide above the open pipe indicates that landfill gas emit from the borehole. This, in conjunction with the concentrations measured in the wells shows that active production of landfill gas is taken place in the areas where the well is located. However relative high suction head (negative pressure) indicates a low permeability in the waste and low gas migration rates.

4.10.2 Landfill Gas Quality Based on landfill gas quality monitoring, following inferences can be drawn:

› The methane and carbon dioxide concentrations are high approximately 55% respectively 40% v/v. This indicates that the landfill is in a methanogenic phase › The gas contains slightly more CH4 than CO2. › The landfill temperature is higher than 40 Deg C and a low BOD/COD ratio (0.12 – 0.2) all indicates that the dumpsite is in its methanogenic phase. The landfill gas generation peaks in this phase which may last 10 - 30 years. Landfill gas generation will most properly last for another 10 - 15 years with a high CH4 and CO2 concentrations. › Despite the high CH4 and CO2 concentrations the total generation of LFG is assumed low for the following reasons :

81 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

› Low content of organic matter in waste samples (approx. 10%) › A relatively high suction head (5 -15 mbar) is required to establish a flow of 2 l/min

› Smells of landfill gas compounds (e.g. H2S) is not dominant at the site.

4.10.3 Extent of Landfill Gas Pollution The First Order Decay Model (FOD Model), IPCC Guideline 2006 (IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories), is used to estimate the total landfill gas generation at the closed Dhapa dumpsite. The input to the model is based on the observation from the site, analysed waste samples and the landfill gas monitoring carried out on site.

The maximum annual LFG generation at Dhapa dumpsite was in 2009 and estimated to ~5.1 million Nm3/year15. The generation is decreased to ~4.3 3 million Nm /year in 2013 (equivalent to 1.520 ton CH4/year or 32.000 CO2 equivalent).

4.10.4 Assessment of Landfill Gas In the Containment and Closure Option report (Appendix A to the Containment and Closure Plans report) in Section 8.2 landfill gas generation and possible handling and treatment options are described.

The annual amount of landfill gas generated at the dumpsite is assumed to be in order of 4.3 million m³ in 2013 or 2.1 million m³ of CH4 assuming an average content of 50% methane. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas with an impact 20-25 times higher than CO₂. The contribution to the global warming from Dhapa dumpsite is assumed approximately 32,000 tons CO₂ equivalents in 2012 or 250.000 tons CO₂ equivalents for the period 2013-2022. It is concluded that in comparison to other dumpsites of similar size, the generation of landfill gas of Dhapa is relatively low.

15 Source: KEIP report on Dhapa Landfill Gas Generation.

82 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.11 Noise Monitoring

4.11.1 Monitoring Methodology of Noise Level Methodology for monitoring of noise levels is given in Table 4-15.

Table 4-15: Monitoring Methodology of Noise Environme Sampli Sampli Sampli Sample collection Methodol ntal ng ng ng ogy Compo- locatio Parame Freque Sampli Detecti nent n ter ncy ng on equipm Limit ent

Ambient 4 Decibels – Once Noise 0.1 dB SL-4001 Noise levels locations during the Level (A) dB (A) study Meter Hourly reading for 24 hours at each location

4.11.2 Noise Level Results Noise readings were taken at four different locations within the study area at near-by locations of traffic movement and habitation area. The average noises levels are presented vide Table 4-16.

Table 4-16 : Noise Level Readings Average Noise Limits Noise levels levels Noise Category Station in dB (A) observed in Monitoring of Code dB (A) Location Area/Zone Day Night Day

Approach road to Dhapa dump site N 1 Residential 55 45 60.5 near the KMC office

N 2 Makaltala Village Residential 55 45 45.7

Fields nearby the N 3 approach road to Residential 55 45 56.9 Dhapa dumpsite

83 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Dhapa dump site N 4 Residential 55 45 68.4 road

Comparison of the ambient noise levels with the standards specified by CPCB reveals that the noise level at all locations is below the specified limit.

Table 4-17 : Standard of Ambient Noise Level as per CPCB Guidelines Limits in dB (A) Leq.

Area Category of Day Time Night Time Code Area/Zone From 6.00 am to 10.00 From 10.00 pm. to 6.00 pm am

A Industrial area 75 70

B Commercial area 65 55

C Residential area 55 45

D Silence Zone 50 40

4.11.3 Assessment of Noise Results From the results of noise monitoring, it can be inferred as follows:

› Noise levels during day time were observed to be slightly high compared to the limits due to movement of KMC vehicles for dumping of wastes to the operative landfill site. › Noise levels at Makaltala village are observed to be within the limits as per Residential area.

4.12 Flora and Fauna

4.12.1 Introduction As mentioned, the Dhapa dumpsite is situated within a Ramsar Wetland ‘The East Kolkata Wetland’. The Ramsar site spread across 12,500 ha. It comprises 254 sewage fed fisheries, small agricultural plots and solid waste farms (please refer Figure 4-12).

84 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-12: Dhapa dumpsite surrounded by agricultural fields (to the west) and fish ponds to the east and north.

Compilation of Information on Flora and Fauna

The sources of information used to collect information on flora and fauna, as well the key findings from these sources are provided in Table 4-23.

The coverage of information includes:

› Terrestrial Vegetation › Pollution of soil and vegetables with heavy metals › Vegetable production from fields adjacent to the Dhapa Dump Site › Terrestrial Birds › Terrestrial Mammals, Reptiles and Amphibians › Aquatic Birds › Microbial Ecology These are presented in subsequent sub-sections. A synopsis of the information collected is presented at the end of the Section.

85 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.12.2 Terrestrial Flora and Fauna

Terrestrial Vegetation Very little natural terrestrial vegetation is found at and around the dumpsite. A large area to the west of the dumpsite is used for cultivating vegetables. The vegetable fields are situated on previous garbage dumping plots. Vegetables grown on these plots may accumulate heavy metals taken up via the roots from garbage mixed soil, sewage used for watering the crops and soil exposed to leachate from the dumpsite.

A study by Ray, L. et al. 2010 showed that the vegetables content various heavy metals and were not suitable for human consumption according to WHO/ FAO recommendations (Refer Table 4-18).

Table 4-18: Mean concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead and chromium in washed samples of vegetables and in soil at the vegetable plots adjacent to Dhapa dumpsite

Lead* Cadmium* Copper* Chromium* Vegetables Samples (µg/g dry (µg/g dry (µg/g dry (µg/g dry weight) weight) weight) weight)

Brinjal (eggplant) 14 0.51 11.75 1.2

Indian spinach 16.6 0.37 16.13 1.1

Red Indian spinach 57.9 0.94 17.14 0.69

Cauliflower 3.9 0.11 6.11 2.45

Cabbage 5.1 0.07 0.45 0.21

Pumpkin leaves 21.6 1.12 10.85 3.38

Soil sample 11.6 0.72 7.9 -

Maximum allowable limits in vegetables for consumption 0.3 0.2 40 2.3 (recommended by WHO/FAO)

86 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Lead* Cadmium* Copper* Chromium* Vegetables Samples (µg/g dry (µg/g dry (µg/g dry (µg/g dry weight) weight) weight) weight)

Typically heavy metal concentration 10-70 0.07-1.1 6-60 5-121 in non-polluted soil

Note - * - Mean concentration of five samples of each species of vegetable and five soil samples (After Ray, L. et al. 2010); Figures in bold indicate exceeding of Maximum allowable limits in vegetables for consumption as recommended by WHO/FAO.

Terrestrial Birds The garbage on dumpsites attracts scavenging birds. The most common species of terrestrial birds on Dhapa dumpsite are the pariah kite (Milvus migrants) and Indian house crow (Corvus splendens). The pariah kite is the most common raptor in India, always living in and around human settlements. It is a very skilful flier, gliding through narrow alleys and wires and crisscrossing urban cityscapes looking for scraps.

The Indian house crow also is a potential danger to public health as it known to carry at least eight human enteric disease carrying bacteria including Salmonella, Plesiomonas and Escherichia coli. It is also a predator of smaller bird species and displaces other bird species through competition and aggression. It is also known to kill young domestic animals.

There are significantly lesser birds on the closed dumpsite compared to the active dumpsite, owing to lesser sources of food on the closed dumpsite. Birds that are found at or near the closed dumpsite are primarily attracted to the carcasses in the nearby bone processing facility.

87 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-13: The pariah kite (Milvus migrants) is common at Dhapa dumpsite

Terrestrial Mammals A total of 16 native species of mammals have been recorded in East Kolkata Wetland (Bandyopadhyaya et al 2004) none of which were observed at Dhapa dumpsite during the field survey. Only rats, pigs and cows feeding on the waste were observed.

Figure 4-14: Pigs feeding on garbage on Figure 4-15: Dhapa closed dumpsite the abandoned dumpsite, on which area being used for keeping cows garbage is still occasionally dumped Checklist of Mammalian Fauna (Kundu et al., 2008) is provided in Table 4-19.

Table 4-19: Checklist of Mammalian Fauna

S. Scientific Name Local Name Wildlife Status No.

1 Herpestes auropunctuatus Beji Schedule II

2 Herpestes edwardsii Neul Schedule II

3 Herpestes palustris Marsh Mongoose Schedule II

4 Felis chaus Khatas Schedule II

5 Canis aureus Seal Schedule II

Although none of the above was seen during the field survey, there are also most likely rats which are attracted to garbage and which may carry disease vectors from the waste.

Pigs and rats are commonly found in the closed dumpsite. Among rats Bandicota bengalensis which are commonly known locally as ‘Dhera Indur’ has been found vicinity of Makaltala area.

88 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Reptiles Bandyopadhyaya et al. 2004, reported the occurrence of 18 species of reptiles in East Kolkata wetlands, including:

› 13 snake species of which the Asiatic water snake (Xenochropes piscator), Buffstriped keelback (Amphiesma stolata) and Rainbow mud snake (Enhydris enhydris) are common › 2 species of monitor lizard › 3 species of common lizard

Table 4-20: Checklist of Reptiles (Kundu et al., 2008)

S. Scientific Name Local Name Wildlife Status No.

1 Naja naja naja Ghokro Schedule II

2 Naja kaonthia Keutiya Schedule II

3 Vipera ruselli Chandra bora Schedule II

4 Varanus flavescens Go Sap Schedule II

Najakaonthia which is locally called ‘Keutya’ is common in this site as per our discussions with locals. During COWI field visits it was observed once at the closed dumpsite.

4.12.3 Aquatic Flora and Fauna

Fish Farming The wetland houses the world’s largest ensemble of sewage fed fish ponds (called bheris) which receive and treat sewage from the City of Kolkata. Prawns (Macorbrachium rosenbergii) are also cultivated in the ponds.

Plankton Maiti et al 2011 found 78 phytoplankton species in fish ponds in East Kolkata Wetlands). The bulk of the species found are pollutant tolerant. Euglena sp. and Aphanocapsa sp. are the most common species. Numbers of individuals were very low. It was found that phytoplankton diversity is the highest in the post monsoon season and lowest in monsoon season, probably as a result of dilution of pond water during heavy rainfall.

89 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 4-16: Fish pond adjacent to Figure 4-17: Water hyacinth (Eichhorhia dumpsite crassipes) in fish pond adjacent to dumpsite

Figure 4-18: The catla fish (Catla catla) is Figure 4-19: Bullfrog (Rana tigrina) is a native species that are cultured in the fish encountered I East Kolkata wetland ponds in East Kolkata wetlands

Aquatic vegetation IWMED 2004 recorded 55 species of wetland vascular plants, 35 species of trees/shrubs and 14 species of climbers/lianas. In the core fish pond areas hardly any submerged vegetation was encountered. Earlier studies had shown rich salt water vegetation including mangroves and other brackish-water species in the past (Biswas 1927, Dasgupta 1973) but IWMED 2004 found some very sparse remnants of earlier salt water vegetation like Excoecaria agallocha, Achrostichum aureum and Acanthus ilicifolius.

Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) is very common in the wetland. It is an introduced species native to tropical and sub-tropical South America. Water hyacinth is a free-floating perennial aquatic plant with broad, thick, glossy, ovate leaves which float above the water surface. An erect stalk supports a single spike of 8-15 conspicuously attractive flowers, mostly lavender to pink

90 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

in colour with six petals. Water hyacinth is one of the fastest growing plants known doubling its population in two weeks. When not controlled, water hyacinth will cover lakes and ponds entirely; this dramatically impacts water flow, blocks sunlight from reaching native aquatic plants, and starves the water of oxygen, often killing fish. The fish farmers of Kolkata wetland control the water hyacinth, however they do no remove the plants entirely as they are beneficial for some fish species, which prefer to stay in areas with water hyacinth.

Fish Species and Species Diversity The composition of the fish fauna in East Kolkata Wetlands markedly reflects the use of the wetland for sewage based fish farming. A total of 37-45 species of fish have been recorded from EKW during different studies in the period 1989-2004 (De et al. 1989, IWMED 2004).

The biodiversity of the fish fauna in the wetland has decreased dramatically from some 80 species recorded in the late sixties to around 45 species today. This is a result of the farming practice. A recent study found that (refer Table 4-21):

› 42 % of the species encountered in EKW are farmed (29% native farmed species and 13% introduced farmed species) › 44 % of the species are native species that are not farmed › 7 % are introduced non-farmed species and › 7 % are invasive species An overview of the species in the different categories is presented in Table 4-21.

Table 4-21: Different Fish Special found in EKW Area

Native species farmed in EKW

Species traditionally farmed: Rohu (Labeo rohita), Catla (Catla catla ), Mrigal carp(Cirrhinus mrigala), Bata (Labeo bata), Kalbos (Labeo calbasu) Species recently introduced for farming on trial basis: Bhetki (Lates calcariferi), Parse (Liza parsia), Tangra (Mystus gulio and Mystus vittatus, Pabda (Ompok pabda), Pangus (Pangasius pangasius) and Baspata (Cynoglossus cynoglossus)

Introduced species farmed in EKW

Species: Silver carp (Hypothalmicthyes molitrix), Grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella), Bighead carp (Aristichthys nobilis), Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio), Tilapia

91 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

(Tilapia mossambica and Oreochromis nilotica)

Invasive species

Species: North African catfish: (Clarias gariepinus), Striped catfish (Pangasius sutchi) Remarks: An invasive species is a non-native species that adversely affect the habitats and bioregions they invade economically, environmentally, and/or ecologically.

Introduced non- farmed species

Species: Crocodile fish/ Vermiculated sailfin catfish (Pterygoplichthys disjunctivus) Crocodile fish /Snow pleco (Pterygoplichthys anisitsi), Crocodile fish/Orinoco sailfin catfish (Pterygoplichthys multiradiatus) Remarks: Native species of South America introduced accidentally in EKW. Of no interest as farm species

Native non- farmed species

Species : Titputi (Puntius ticto), Sarputi (Puntius sophore), Maurala (Amblopharyngodon mola), Belay (Glossogobius guris), Techokha (Aploecheilus panchax), Sol (Channa striata), Late (Channa punctatus), Chang (Channa gachua), Panol (Mastacembelus pancalus ), Ben (Mastacembelus. armatus), Kucho (Pisodonophis boro), Chanda (Chanda nama), Ranga chanda (Chanda ranga), Falui (Notopterus notopterus), Kholsa (Colisa fasciatus), Bacha (Eutropiichthys vacha), Singhi (Heteropneustes fossilis), Koi (Anabus testudineus)

Farmed Fish Species The most abundant species in terms of number and biomass are fish that are farmed such as the traditionally cultured native species rohu (Labeo rohita), catla (Catla catla), mrigel (Cirrhinus mrigala) and the introduced species silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix), common carp Cyprinus carpio), grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) and Tilapia (Tilapia mossambica and Oreochromis nilotica). Recently further seven native species have been introduced for farming on a trial basis. The introduced farmed species are native of Africa (the Tilapia species) Europe/Asia (Common carp) and East Asia (Silver carp, Grass carp and bighead Carp). In their native environments the farmed species are adapted to live in slow-flowing or standing waters, lakes, ponds, warm backwaters or flooded areas, which are characterised by relatively low oxygen concentration. Some of the species are very tolerant to low oxygen concentrations and high ammonia concentrations including the Tilapia species, the common carp and grass carp. Grass carp can tolerate oxygen concentrations as low as 0.5 mg/l. Farmers are increasingly more interested in stocking greater proportion of these very tolerant fishes to maximize the fish yield.

92 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

The majority of the farmed species feeds solely on phytoplankton, detritus or aquatic plants. However, some species also fed on other items such as zooplankton, insects and other aquatic invertebrates, snails, crustaceans or fish, but the vast majority of these species also include phytoplankton, detritus or aquatic plants in their diet.

The fact that these species are tolerant to low oxygen and primarily feed on plankton makes them especially suitable for cultivation in sewage fed ponds.

Invasive Fish Species Invasive species are non-indigenous species that adversely affect the habitats and bioregions they invade economically, environmentally and/or ecologically. Two species of invasive species encountered in East Kolkata Wetland North African catfish (Clarius gariepinus) and Striped catfish (Pangasius sutchi) pose great threat to the diversity of native fish.

The North African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) which is a native species of Africa has been cultured at some fish farms although it is a banned species in terms of fish farming, due to the fact that several countries have reported adverse ecological impact after introduction. The species is widely tolerant of extreme environmental conditions and may therefore, out compete other species. The presence of an accessory breathing organ enables this species to breath air when very active or under very dry conditions. Remains in the muddy substrates of ponds and occasionally gulp air through the mouth. It can leave the water at night using its strong pectoral fins and spines in search of land- based food or can move into the breeding areas through very shallow pathways. Feeds on insects, plankton, invertebrates and fish but also takes young birds, rotting flesh and plants.

Striped catfish (Pangasius sutchi) is a native species of South East Asia and is a banned species in East Kolkata Wetlands. Despite of this it has been cultured at some fish farms.

Introduced Non-Farmed Fish Species Three species of crocodile fish Pterygoplichthys disjunctivus, Pterygoplichthys anisitsi and Pterygoplichthys multiradiatus have been introduced accidentally. They are native species of South America and are of no interest as farm species. They are typically found in floodplain lakes, swamps and borrow pits, in poorly-oxygenated waters and must rely on air breathing for long periods of time. They have a specialized (enlarged) stomach which appears to function as accessory respiratory organs.

93 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.12.4 Amphibians and Reptiles Amphibians (frogs and toads) depend on water for reproduction. East Kolkata wetland offers suitable habitats for amphibians as they prefer impounded water for breeding, aquatic vegetation for development of tadpoles and vegetation on the banks for hiding and feeding (Kundu et al 2008). Four species of amphibians have been recorded: Bull frog (Rana tigrina), Green frog (Rana hexadactyla). Cricket frog (Rana limnocharis) and Common toad (Bufo melanostictus) (Bandyopadhyaya et al. 2004).

Of reptiles primarily attached to water fresh water tortoise (Melanochelys tricarinata) is reported to be present in the area (Bandyopadhyaya et al. 2004).

Table 4-22: Checklist of Amphibian Fauna (Kundu et al., 2008))

S. Scientific Name Common Name Wildlife Status No.

1 Rana tigrina Bull Frog Schedule IV

2 Rana hexadactyla Green Frog Schedule IV

3 Rana limnocharis Cricket Frog Schedule IV

No common frogs have been found in our study area.

Aquatic Birds The area around Dhapa dumpsite is almost devoid of water birds. In the past the entire Kolkata wetland was an important location for water birds, but today water birds are now mostly found in the relatively undisturbed and protected pockets of the wetland such as at Nalban behri/North Saltlake wetland and at Banabithan at the heart of Salt Lake City. (Bhattacharyya et al 2008)

Mammals Dependent on Water The near extinct Marsh Mongoose (Herpestes palustris Ghose) has been reported to have survived in a few locations in the Kolkata Wetlands (Mallick 2009), i.e. at the North Salt Lake Bhery areas and partially in Bhojerhat and Bhangar area situated some distance from Dhapa dumpsite. The Marsh Mongoose is endemic to West Bengal and is included in the schedule II of Indian Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. The species is "Endangered" following IUCN criteria. The population of Marsh mongoose has dwindled alarmingly due to the destruction of its habitats following reclamation of the Salt Lake City and Rajarhat expansion, as well as the conversion of large part of wetland area into aquaculture ponds mostly devoid of vegetation (Mallick 2009). Marsh mangoose borrows along the slopes of shallow water bodies covered with thick growth of aquatic and herbaceous vegetation. It feeds mainly on fish, and the common aquatic snail Pila globosa within the wetland but may also prey on

94 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

crustaceans mollusks, crabs, amphibians, small reptiles, birds, their eggs, insects and larvae.

4.12.5 Microbial Ecology The hot and humid climate all throughout the year favors this site to act as an incubator for diverse group of microbes [Klaus-Joerger, T et al., 2001]. Raychaudhuri, S. and A.R. Thakur, 2006 have done microbial resource mapping of this site and reveals the existence of microbes belonging to 12 main bacterial phyla. Presence of microbes like Actinobacteria sp. and Fermicutes sp. indicate the possible bioremediation mechanism operating there. They also isolated twenty bacterial strains which were found to grow in the presence of different concentrations of various heavy metals like aluminum (III), copper (II), nickel(II), cobalt(II), iron(II), chromium(III), lead(II), silver(I) and cadmium(II). Energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence and transmission electron microscopy reveals the accumulation of electron dense metals within the cells, thus confirming their metal accumulating ability.

4.12.6 Synopsis A synopsis of the discussion is presented in the Table 4-23.

95 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 4-23: Ecology and Bio-diversity at Dhapa / East Kolkata Wetlands (Different Sources)

S. Nature of Type of Name of Source, Publisher / Study Findings No. Information Information Year Publications

Levels of heavy metals in vegetable grown adjacent to the Electronic Journal of Dhapa dumpsite. Results indicated that the following Pollution of Environmental, heavy metals in vegetables were found to exceed WHO / soil and Agricultural and Food 1 Secondary Ray et al, 2010 FAO limits: lead, cadmium and chromium. Copper was vegetables with Chemistry ISSN found within limits. heavy metals 1579:4377; 9 (9); pp 1423-1432 The paper concluded that the main source of heavy metals is automobile exhaust.

Vegetable production Vegetables including brinjal, spinach, cauliflower, cabbage from fields 2 Primary COWI - and pumpkin are harvested daily from the fields adjacent to adjacent to the the Dhapa dumpsite Dhapa Dump Site

Crow, Pariah Kite are present at the active site in large Terrestrial quantities and fewer birds are visiting the closed dumpsite 3 Primary COWI - Birds Pariah kites and house crows have caused bird hits on aircraft

Institute of Wetland 16 native species of mammals Management and Terrestrial 18 species of reptiles in EKW including 13 snake species, Ecological Design, Mammals, Bandhyopadhyaya T, 2 species of monitor lizards and 3 species of common 4 Secondary Kolkata; Final Report on Reptiles and et al, 2004 lizards Preliminary Study on Bio- Amphibians diversity of sewage fed 4 species of amphibians were recorded fisheries 1 species of fresh water tortoise

96 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S. Nature of Type of Name of Source, Publisher / Study Findings No. Information Information Year Publications

16 mammalian species recorded in and around East Terrestrial Kundu, Pal, Saha, Proceedings of TAAL Kolkata Wetlands. Among these 8 Carnivore species, 2 Bat Mammals, 5 Secondary EKWMA / IESWM 2007: 12th World Lake species, 6 species squirrel, rats and mouse. As per Reptiles and 2008, Conference; pp 868-881 threatened rules, 9 are common, 1 is sporadic and rests 6 Amphibians are rare.

Terrestrial < 50 pigs feeding on Dhapa dumpsite were observed Mammals, 6 Primary COWI - Rodents (rats) present Reptiles and Amphibians Snake observed at least once

A critical study on the Totally 72 species of birds have been observed in and status of the East Kolkata Bhattacharya et al, around East Kolkata Wetlands in the past. Amongst these, 7 Aquatic Birds Secondary Wetlands with special 2008 35 species are resident, 19 species are migrant and 18 emphasis of water birds as species are not currently observed. bio-indicators

Microbial resource mapping of this site reveals the existence of microbes belonging to 12 main bacterial phyla. Presence of microbes like Actinobacteria sp. and Microbial genetic resource Microbial Raychaudhuri, S. and Fermicutes sp. indicate the possible bioremediation 8 Secondary mapping of Ecology A.R. Thakur, 2006 mechanisms operating in the site area. East Calcutta wetlands Microbes are also involved in decomposition and humus formation. It also revealed that the presence of Proteobacteria at EKW can accumulate the heavy metals.

97

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

4.13 Land Use

The Dhapa closed dump site lies within the East Kolkata Wetland (EKW), designated as a Ramsar Convention Site in November 2002.

4.13.1 Classification of Landuse and Land cover The National Remote Sensing Agency (NRSA), Government of India, conducted a land use survey using Remote Sensing Techniques in the year 1988-89 at the behest of the Planning Commission for classifying land by visual interpretation techniques and digital techniques. NRSA’s output resulted in a two-level system of classification, comprising primary land use/ land cover categories. Some of these primary categories required further delineation, leading to a second level of classification that resulted in further sub- categories. This system of classification has been the basis of the landuse/ land cover studies. Whilst these categories are generally found relevant for the Dhapa site with respect to describing land use and land cover classes, as per NRSA guidelines, are used in this project.

4.13.2 Land use Classification Synopsis A synopsis of the land use classification for the study area, for a total distance of 2 km radius from centre of closed dump site is summarized and presented in Table 4-24.

Table 4-24: Classification for Land Use Mapping S. No. Primary Classification Secondary Classification

Road

Railway

1. Built- Up Canal

Residential

Industrial

Crop Land/ Fallow Land 2. Agricultural Land Plantation

3. Waste Land Land without Scrub

Water Channels 4. Water Bodies Ponds/Tanks/Lakes

98 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S. No. Primary Classification Secondary Classification

River Bed

Scrubs 5. Vegetation Open Vegetation

4.13.3 Study Methodology Adopted The study area covers a distance equal to 2 km from the centre of the closed dumpsite. The study methodology involved the following steps:

Collection of Data This included downloading of 1.0 m resolution Google Earth satellite imagery.

Interpretation of Satellite Data The downloaded satellite imagery was interpreted considering the basic elements of interpretation such as size, shape, texture, pattern, location, association, shadow, aspect and resolution along with ground truth and ancillary information collected during the preliminary reconnaissance survey the interpretation was accomplished.

Ground Truth Study The aim of ground truth studies is to confirm whether the interpreted land uses are correct thus improving the quality of the output. It also allows interaction with local parties and stakeholders, thereby giving background information on the landuse.

Ground truth was carried out to check the discrepancy of the interpreted data. The survey consisted of traversing the study area, cross-checking of identified features with those represented on the map. Field notes were kept in the form of log sheets that recorded information pertaining to co- ordinates, photographs and identified land uses. Additional features identified or remarks made against existing interpretation were also recorded.

Field Survey The field survey was carried out around radial distance of 2 km from centre of the closed dumpsite. Following observations were made during the field visit surveys:

› Water bodies surrounding the closed landfill site are mainly used for pisciculture. These fish farms, locally known as bheries, are fed with raw sewage from the Kolkata Metropolitan Area through the main drainage canal adjacent to the closed dumpsite. Finally the waste water

99

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

is discharged to the river Vidyadhari. Water hyacinth is a common feature of all the bheries. › Horticulture is also popular. As many as 15 varieties of vegetables are grown in this area, which includes bottle gourd, bitter gourd and rich gourd, cauliflower, brinjal, reddish and several leafy vegetable, among all the crops, cauliflower was dominant .The local villagers sell above mentioned vegetables on road side. › GPS readings were taken during the surveys wherever it was felt that additional confirmation in interpretation of the data was required and also observations on land features were noted.

Table 4-25: GPS Reading within Study Area S. Location Latitude Longitude No.

1 Salt lake, Sector V, Fire Brigade, 22° 41’ 43.7” N 88° 27’ 57.8” E Back side of project site

2 Captain Bhery 22° 33’ 16.0” N 88° 24’ 40.0” E

3 Project site – Near bore hole 3 22° 32’ 45.0” N 88° 25’ 11.1” E

4 Makaltala Village 22° 32’ 43.1” N 88° 25’ 16.3” E

5 Near Tan Factory, Front side of 22° 32’ 38.2” N 88° 25’ 01.8” E project site

6 Near China town/Science City 22° 32’ 36.1” N 88° 24’ 59.6” E

7 Tangra/Topsia 22° 32’ 20.2” N 88° 23’ 10.7” E

8 Unchupota Village 22° 37’ 01.4” N 88° 25’ 54.9” E

9 Near Bantala Canal 22° 31’ 57.8” N 88° 25’ 51.9” E

10 Bamanghata 22° 31’ 36.6” N 88° 25’ 04.4” E

11 Bamanghata Canal Bank 22° 31’ 01.6” N 88° 28’ 33.5” E

12 Bantala Industrial Complex 22° 30’ 29.3” N 88° 30’ 37.7” E

13 Calcutta Leather Complex 22° 29’ 23.7” N 88° 30’ 38.0” E

14 Bantala Agriculture Land 22° 29’ 28.0” N 88° 30’ 37.9” E

4.13.4 Class Wise Area Statistics The area statistics of these classes are presented in Table 4-26.

100 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 4-26: Land Use / Land Cover Area Statistics S. Area in Description Area in Ha Percentage No. Sq. km

1 Habitation 1.61 160.64 12.78

2 Industrial Area 0.12 11.79 0.94

3 Land without Scrub 0.44 43.85 3.49

4 Scrub 2.11 211.37 16.82

5 Water Body 5.55 554.77 44.15

6 Water Channels 0.29 28.88 2.30

7 Agricultural 2.45 245.34 19.52

8 Total area 12.57 1256.64 100.00

4.13.5 Final Land Use Map Preparation The proportional presence of different land uses and land cover in terms of statistical percentages was derived for the study area. Appropriate legends were used to represent the various categories of land use and land cover, and were then written on the prepared land use and land cover map. The map is attached at Annexure 8.

4.14 Summarizing of the Environmental Profile of the project area The main conclusions on the environmental profile of the study / project area are:

› The closed Dhapa dumpsite has an impact on the levels of contamination in topsoil, upper groundwater, surface water and surface water sediments

› In all compartments (topsoil, upper groundwater, surface water and surface water sediments) testing values are exceeded

› The sub soil and groundwater from the primary aquifer are not affected by the dumpsite

› Flora and fauna are of little interest on the dumpsite and only agricultural crops downstream the dumpsite is directly affected by the dumpsite.

Thus it can be concluded that the Dhapa closed dump site poses a significant risk and impact on surroundings, humans, crops, surface and upper ground

101

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

water in the area due to spreading of contaminants in the immediate vicinity. Remediation of closed dump site; by having scientific closure, will minimize the risks of contaminant spreading in the area and over the years will eliminate further risk of pollution.

102 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

5 Environmental Risk Assessment

Based on the conducted tests and analysis / investigations carried out as a part of Environmental Assessment studies around the closed dump site, the level of contamination and the most important exposure routes / pathways has been quantified and evaluated. The overall environmental screening of the closed dump site can be depicted in form of a Concept Site Model (CSM) developed based on the baseline environmental assessment. The levels of contaminations based on the CSM are inputs for the risk assessment study as elaborated in this chapter.

5.1 Conceptual Site Model

The overall environmental impact of the closed dumpsite can be depicted in the form of a Conceptual Site Model (CSM) as shown in Figure 5-1. This CSM forms the basis for the Risk Assessment exercise for the closed dumpsite.

F D

B 1 C A C 2 3

5 4 E 6 4

103

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 5-1: Concept Site Model of Dhapa Dump Site 1. Waste body (dumpsite) A. Leachate generation within the 2. Concrete lined canal dumpsite 3. Wetlands (canal/lagoon) B. Leachate seeping out of slopes 4. Clay layers C. Surface water run-off 5. Upper (secondary) aquifer D. Emission of methane, VOC’s, dusts 6. Lower (primary) aquifer etc. E. Seeping of leachate to aquifer F. Precipitation

5.2 Source-Pathway-Receptor Analysis

5.2.1 Source The source of contamination is the waste dumped at the Dhapa closed dumpsite, more specifically the landfill gas and leachate generated from it. The waste type, age and volume determine the quality and quantity of the leachate and landfill gas. In this case the waste is fairly old as dumping had started in 1987 and ceased in 2009. Along with MSW, industrial hazardous wastes are known to have been dumped at the site. The total waste volume is very high with the landfill spreading over 12.14 ha and rises to a height of approximately 35 m from the base.

In addition to the landfill gas and leachate, windblown dust and litter are also considered as sources of contamination.

5.2.2 Pathways The following pathways for migration of contaminants have been identified:

Wind The main pathway for litter and dust dispersion is the wind. As long as the waste is kept uncovered, the dust and litter will continue to be blown off the dumpsite to the surroundings. In addition to the dust and litter, the wind also causes spreading of landfill gases from the dumpsite.

Rainwater Rainwater running through the dumpsite acts as a pathway for transport of leachate to the soil and groundwater. The rainwater flowing off the dumpsite along the slopes acts as a pathway for the uncovered waste to flow

104 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

into the nearby agricultural fields and surface water bodies including drainage canals.

Soil Soil acts as a pathway for transport of leachate to the groundwater and for uptake of contaminated surface run-off by plants.

Groundwater On reaching the groundwater, the leachate flows along with it and in this case the groundwater acts as the pathway. .

Surface water Contaminants like run-off from the dumpsite, leachate and windblown dust and litter that reach nearby surface water bodies like canals, rivers and streams are further transported by these surface waters and in this case the surface water acts as the pathway.

5.2.3 Receptors Receptors are air, surface water, ground water including drinking water sources, soil, flora, fauna and humans. In the case of the closed dumpsite, the most prominent group of receptors are the families living nearby in Makaltala. Of these families especially the children are at risk.

Related to the closed dumpsite the major contact routes are:

› Direct contact with contaminants (waste, soil, sediment, leachate and surface water); › Consumption of contaminated crops, animals and fish; › Inhalation of dust and gases coming from the dumpsite.

5.3 Environmental Impacts due to the closed dumpsite

Impacts due to the closed dump site are presented in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1: Environmental Impacts due to closed dump site

Environmental Impacts Indices

Pollution expected due to release of odour and windblown dust but Ambient Air Quality monitoring results do not show adverse Air Quality impacts on environment. The methane and carbon dioxide concentrations in landfill gas are

105

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Environmental Impacts Indices high, approximately 55% and 40% v/v, respectively. However landfill gas generation is low due to low content of organic matter in the waste body.

Upper ground water below waste has moderate contamination due to leachate percolation. Groundwater Quality Deep aquifers are not contaminated and the water is acceptable for drinking purpose

Surface waters (lined dry weather untreated sewage canal / drainage channel) around the dump site are found to be contaminated with Surface Water organics and heavy metals due to migration of run-off and leachate Quality from dumpsite but the major cause of pollution is the untreated city sewage.

Top soil is found to be contaminated with heavy metals and Soil Quality organics due to surface run-off and leachate and also due to windblown dust/ litter

Sediments from the drainage channels around the dumpsite are Sediment Quality found to be contaminated with heavy metals like chromium, lead, cadmium, copper and zinc

There are no significant noise generating sources in the current Noise situation

Ecology and Surface run-off and leachate entering the wetland and agricultural Biodiversity fields

5.4 Extent of Environmental Impacts

The environmental impact of the closed dumpsite on the various pathways and receptors have already been discussed in Chapter 4 but for the purpose of understanding and appreciating the Risk Assessment exercise, these have once again been reproduced here in brief.

5.4.1 Impact on Ground Water The Dhapa has a low permeability clay layer that confines the deeper primary aquifer and this aquifer has not been contaminated. However, the upper (shallow) groundwater has been affected by leachate seeping from the

106 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

dumpsite into the ground. This upper groundwater is located about 3 - 5 m below the ground surface.

According to the pre-monsoon contour maps of the piezometric surface the flow direction of the primary groundwater is towards Northeast. This means that the primary (deep) aquifer in the central Kolkata area west of the Dhapa dumpsite is not contaminated from the closed dumpsite.

5.4.2 Impacts on Surface water Surface run-off (a mix of rainwater flowing off the slopes of the closed dumpsite and the leachate seeping out from the side slopes) from the closed dumpsite is discharged either to the wetlands in the east and north east of the site via open channels, to the fields in the north-west of the site or to the bone processing area on the south west side.

This run-off is contaminated with inorganic (including heavy metals) and organic substances.

5.4.3 Impacts on Soil The top soils near the closed dumpsite have higher concentration of heavy metals compared to those in the background soil. The impact by spreading of pollutants by infiltration of leachate and contaminated groundwater into the sub soil (below the dumpsite) is very limited to non-existent. Chromium concentration, in particular, is observed in the soils nearby the Bone processing area.

5.4.4 Impacts on Air Based on the test results of ambient air quality, it is concluded that the impact of the closed dumpsite on the ambient air quality is negligible. There is no activity going on at the closed dumpsite and particulate matters only emerge from arid soil surface in dry season and spread by wind.

Total landfill gas generation in the closed dumpsite is low due to low organic content left in the wastes. Concentrations of CH4 and CO2 in the landfill gas are high to the tune of 55% and 40% v/v.

During the construction phase for remediation of the landfill SPM and RPM emission could be temporarily high; however appropriate measures and actions shall be included to reduce the impact and will be included as a part of Environmental Management Plan.

107

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

5.4.5 Impact on Flora and Fauna The impact of the closed dumpsite on the flora and fauna are mainly due to contaminated surface water and leachate discharged to the wetlands and agricultural fields via canals and uncontrolled streams.

The amount of contaminated surface water and leachate from the site entering into the wetland constitute only 0.07% of the sewage water entering into the wetlands16. Looking into the total flux of substances the impact of the Dhapa closed dumpsite on the local flora and fauna is only marginal.

5.5 Risk Assessment

5.5.1 Human risks To quantify the risk caused by the soil pollution in the Dhapa situation the quantitative risk model SANSCRIT version 2.1.2 has been used. This model is the Dutch Standard used for quantifying human and ecological risks and is obligatory in the environmental assessment of levels of contamination. The model is part of Risicotoolboxbodemby RIVM.

In this risk model the daily intake of contaminants by humans is calculated based on the soil concentration levels and the type of land use. The model quantifies the direct and indirect exposure routes and the daily human intake for each exposure route (Figure 5-2). This total intake is tested to human toxicological standard values.

16 600 million litres of sewage/wastewater per day according to KEIP (www.keip.in) and estimated leachate generation from the closed dumpsite at 62,000 m³/year and surface water run-off at 93,000 m³/year or 0.07% of total water discharge to the wetlands.

108 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 5-2: Exposure Routes calculated in the SANSCRIT Risk Model Although the model is developed to Dutch circumstances, some input parameters can be adjusted to local levels. These adjustments are described in Table 5-2.

The output of the model is a total intake of children and adults. This intake is tested to the Maximal Tolerable Risk level (MTR) based on a lifelong exposure. Intake and MTR are expressed in µg per kilogram bodyweight per day (µg/kg bw/day).

The MTR for non carcinogenic compounds is the same as the Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI). For carcinogenic compounds the MTR is based on an extra probability of tumour incidence of 1 to 10,000 based on a lifelong exposure.

The quantitative risk assessment has been conducted for 3 different types of land use relevant to the Dhapa situation:

› Residential area with garden › Kitchen garden › Agricultural use The adjusted input parameters and the justification for changing are given in Table 5-2. These input parameters are adjusted to the local circumstances.

109

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 5-2: Adjusted input parameters human risk assessment

Default Adjusted Parameter Unit Justification value value

The stay inside houses is Time spent 1.14 14 hrs estimated at maximum 10 outside adults hours.

The stay inside houses is Time spent 2.86 14 hrs estimated at maximum 10 outside children hours.

Contribution There are no crawlspaces crawlspace air to 0.1 0.01 (-) present. indoor air

Fraction All consumption from kitchen 0.1 1 (-) consumed crops garden or surrounding fields.

Because of poor hygienic Soil ingestion 100 200 mg/day conditions the default value is children doubled.

Because of poor hygienic Soil ingestion 50 100 mg/day conditions the default value is adults doubled.

As a representative soil concentration the geometric mean of compounds found above the Local Indicative Background Value (LIBV) in the topsoil is used. Given the type of contaminants (metals and PAH) and the relevant types of land use in the Dhapa situation, the topsoil concentrations are most relevant for calculating the actual human risk.

The most important results of the SANSCRIT calculations are summarized in Table 5-3.

Based on the calculations there is no human risk present due to the present levels of soil contamination. This is valid for all 3 types of land use. There is also no combination toxicity of PAH exceeding the threshold (∑(DIPAH /MTRPAH) <1). This leaving aside the other hazards that can be identified that causes risk (see section 6.1.4). It is noted that if the soil ingestion is higher than is estimated in this calculation, a human risk will occur, especially lead is a critical parameter. When the soil ingestion of children is raised to 400 mg/day and of adults to 300 mg/day the intake exceeds the MTR for lead. It is unclear what daily intake of soil is applicable to the situation of the villagers of Makaltala.

In Figure 5-3 the relative contribution of the pathways is depicted. This makes clear that for chromium, cadmium and benzo(a)pyrene the

110 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

consumption of crops is most relevant. For lead the intake is mainly due to ingestion of soil.

Table 5-3: Calculated daily intake (DI/MTR > 0.1)

Residential with garden Parameters Daily Intake (DI) MTR Unit DI/MTR

Cd 0.134 0.5 µg/kg bw/day 0.27

Cr 1.420 5 µg/kg bw/day 0.28

Pb 1.750 2.8 µg/kg bw/day 0.63

Benzo(a)pyrene 0.090 0.5 µg/kg bw/day 0.18

Chromium (Cr)

Consumption crops Ingestion soil Res t

Lead (Pb)

Consumption crops Ingestion soil Res t

111

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Benzo(a)pyreen

Consumption crops Ingestion soil Res t

Cadmium (Cd)

Consumption crops Ingestion soil Res t

Figure 5-3: Relative Contribution pathways to total human intake (residential situation with garden)

5.5.2 Other Human risk & hazards Based on the field work and survey, the following hazards beside soil contamination are identified in the Dhapa area.

› Groundwater: The time required by pollutants from the closed dumpsite to reach the primary (deep) aquifer has been calculated to be approximately 380 years and represents negligible human risk.

› Polluted surface water: The amount of contaminated surface water and leachate from Dhapa closed dumpsite entering into the wetland constitute only 0.07% of the sewage water entering into the wetlands. Looking into the total flux of substances, the human risk is concluded to be marginal.

› Inhalation of dust and gases: Wind causes spreading of dust, landfill gas and odour.

112 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

› In addition to the closed dumpsite, the adjacent bone processing area is also a source of environmental risk. Emissions from the oven, discharge of untreated effluents and surface run-off and careless storage and handling of chromium bearing leather shavings all contribute to the pollution in the area.

› A large quantity of asbestos material like broken roofing sheets were found on the closed dumpsite. Due to the spreading of dust by wind, asbestos fibres may get into the air.

› Medical waste: On the dumpsite medical waste has been observed at the surface. Before the authorised medical waste treatment facilities came into existence (2003), all medical waste from the city used to be dumped at Dhapa. The waste had been dumped long back and the current risk of infection is not expected to be high.

› Unstable slopes: There exists a risk of landslides and subsidence due to the unstable dumpsite slopes. Particularly the residents of Makaltala living very close to the northern side slope and the workers at the bone processing area are at risk.

› Fish farming and agriculture: Adjacent to the dumpsite, agricultural fields and fish ponds exist which face the risk of pollution from windblown dust, contaminated run off and leachate. There are thus chances of ingression of pollutants into the human food chain.

› Snakes: Snakes were observed at the dumpsite during field service and some of those might have been poisonous. Poisonous snakes pose a risk to entrants and villagers living and working adjacent to the dumpsite.

5.5.3 Conclusions on human risks Based on the conducted human risk assessment the following conclusions are drawn:

› There is no risk based on the levels of soil pollution. If the level of soil ingestion is higher than assumed, a risk, especially from lead, is present.

› There is human risk due to the presence of asbestos, medical waste and poisonous snakes at the dumpsite exposure to polluted surface water, sediment and dust and entering of pollutants into the human food chain

113

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

through livestock, crops and fish. However this risk has not been quantified.

5.5.4 Ecological risks An ecological risk assessment was conducted based on sampling of ground water, soil and sediments using appropriate modelling studies17.

The results reveal that the ecological systems are under pressure, affecting up to 57.7% of the organisms. The msPAF (multi substances Potential Affected Fraction) is highest at the bone processing area soil. The level of chromium is most responsible for the toxic effect. In the topsoil of BH 3, situated at the rim of the dumpsite, 33.7% of organisms are affected. The topsoil from the closed dumpsite itself and of BH 4 and BH5 is relatively not under stress with toxic pressure varying of 4.6% to 12.5%.

The sediment of SW 2 has a toxic pressure of 23.2%, induced by the level of chromium. The sediment at sampling points 1 and 3 has low eco-toxicity since the msPAF is as low as 0.

5.5.5 Environmental Risk Assessment using Groundwater Modelling Results from groundwater modelling indicate that towards west the contaminated water seeping out from the closed dumpsite will flow to a maximum distance of 300 m away from the dumpsite before entering surface water (Watershed is approximately 300 m west of the dumpsite. From hereof the water direction is either towards north or towards south and eventually intercepted by the open water canals). Towards north and east the distance to the wastewater channels or ponds is less than 100 m and to the south the distance to the drainage channel is maximum 200 m. These distances are also assessed to be the maximum extension of pollution of the upper groundwater. There is very little risk that the pollution will extend beyond these boundaries. This is supported by analyses of BH 1 located at some distance of the dumpsite that indicate no or very little groundwater pollution.

17 For soil and sediments msPAF and a SANSCRIT spreadsheet for toxic pressure is used. For groundwater comparison with drinking water standards is used.

114 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

The upper groundwater is not used for drinking water purposes in the area. All tube wells in the area used for drinking water abstracts water from the deeper primary aquifer. Consequently there is no risk for humans because they are not using the upper groundwater for drinking water.

Results of chemical analysis from the nine boreholes in the deep groundwater indicate that the primary aquifer is not polluted.

The risk of groundwater pollution is expected to be low mainly due to the presence of approximately 45 m of low permeable beds of clay and silt above the primary (deep) aquifer.

115

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

6 Social Assessment

6.1 Kolkata City Kolkata is a major metropolitan city in India and is the capital of the state of West Bengal. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation has an area of about 187 sq. km and a population of 4.48 million (2011 census) with a density of 24,783 per sq. km. It is estimated that there are 972,264 households (HHs) in the municipal area with the average household size being around 5.The day population inclusive of floating population is close to 8 million. The slum population is around 1.46 million (2001 census).

About three fifths of the total urban population of West Bengal state lives in Kolkata, due to available employment opportunities for skilled, semiskilled and unskilled workers in service, industrial and informal sectors in and around Kolkata. People from urban slums are involved in a range of occupations which are mostly concerned with providing services to the urban middle and upper classes; they work in small businesses and some work in the organized sector.

Briefly, average literacy rate of Kolkata city is 87.14% of which male and female literacy is 89.08 and 84.98 percents respectively. The sex ratio of Kolkata city is 899 per 1000 males. The child forms 6.69 % of total population of Kolkata City. Child sex ratio of girls is 930 per 1000 boys18.

18 http://www.census2011.co.in/census/city/215-kolkata.html

116 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.2 Dhapa Area The Dhapa area is located along the eastern fringe of Kolkata city within a protected wetland, namely the East Kolkata Wetlands, a Ramsar site. A land use map of 2 km radius from centre of the closed dump site was prepared for the study area (Annexure No. 8). Major area has been found to be covered by water bodies (44.15%) followed by 19.52% covered by agricultural land, scrubs taking up 16.78% and habitations cover taking up 12.78% land. Smaller percentage is taken up by industries, land without scrub and river area, amounting to 17.77% (Refer Table 4-26, Chapter 4).

Habitation Industrial Area 13% 1% Agricultural 20%

Riv er A rea 2% Land w ithout Scrub 3%

Scrub Water Body 17% 44%

Figure 6-1: Land use pattern Within the 2 km radius five habitations (still referred to as villages) have been identified and marked in the said land use map. The villages and their distances from the closed dumpsite are as follows:

Table 6-1: The entire Dhapa area, including the five villages, falls within ward 57 & 58 of Brough VII of the KMC (the corporation has a total of 141 wards and 15 boroughs).

S. No. Habitations Comments on selection 1. Makaltala Adjacent to the closed dumpsite 2. Unchupota Within ½ km of closed dumpsite 3. Khanaberia Within 1 km of closed dumpsite 4. Dhapa Durgapur Within 1 ½ km of closed dumpsite 5. Anantabadal Within 2 km of closed dumpsite

117

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.3 General Social Profile of Dhapa Area (Wards 57 & 58 of KMC) Ward 57 has a total area of 2735910.838 sq. mts. with a total population of 44914 persons while Ward 58 has a total area of 10810142.41 sq. mts and a population of 86618 persons19.

Both the wards have a high overall male dominance in the population with a low ratio of women – 810 & 776 per 1000 male respectively which is lower than that of Kolkata average of 899.

The literacy levels are also poorer when compared with that of Kolkata (Male 89.08% and Female 84.98%) at 69% & 60% for males in 57 and 58 Wards and at 60% & 49% for females in 57 and 58 Wards respectively. This data corroborates with the low availability of academic institutions in the vicinity of these Wards.

Table 6-2: Population, gender and literacy data

Population Literacy

Ward HH Gender Male Female Total Male Female Total ratio Nos. % Nos. %

57 9236 45206 25100 20106 810 29382 17309 69 12073 60

58 16257 86487 48689 37798 776 47753 29376 60 18377 49

Source: KMC, 2001 Census data

About 1% (16212) in Ward 57 and 1.5% (30823) in Ward 58 are part of the working population of Kolkata. Overall working population from these 57 & 58 Wards are male (87% & 88%) with just 13% 12% female workers respectively.

The following table shows that out of 3454 cultivators in Kolkata, 1.7% & 2.2% are from Wards 57 & 58 respectively. Female cultivators in Ward 57 form a good part of this work category at 41% when compared with 24% in Ward 58. For agricultural wage labor Ward 58 has more female workers at

19 https://www.kmcgov.in/KMCPortal/jsp/KMCWard.jsp

118 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

19% than Ward 57 whereas for male workers Ward 57 has more at 89% than in Ward 58 which is at 81%.20.

Table 6-3: Work population in Kolkata and in the project Wards

Main Worker: Agri. Total Worker Main Worker: Cultivator Labour Area

Person Male Female Person Male Female Person Male Female

Kolkata 1717734 1451548 84% 266186 15% 5796 3454 60% 2342 40% 3737 2932 78% 805 22%

Ward 16212 (1%) 14069 87% 2143 13% 61 (1.7%) 36 59% 25 41% 257 (7%) 230 89% 27 11% No.57

Ward 30823 27013 88% 3810 12% 132 100 76% 32 24% 958 775 81% 183 19% No.58 (1.5%) (2.2%) (26%)

6.4 Primary Socio-Economic Survey

6.4.1 Objective of Primary Survey Secondary data search regarding Socio-Economic Status of the population of the Dhapa area (specially for the five habitations around the closed dumpsite) turned out to be futile as KMC was unable to provide documented evidence on the residents in the area even though majority households had ration cards and adults possessed voter cards. The KMC web site also did not have data on the villages; it only mentioned population data for Wards 57 and 58. Therefore, a primary Socio-Economic Survey was conducted for this area as part of the project. Social Impact Assessment (SIA) of Makaltala village was conducted which is closest to the closed dumpsite. All houses were covered socio economic survey.

20 https://www.kmcgov.in/KMCPortal/jsp/KMCWard.jsp; the available data does not provide any data on livestock rearing and rag picking as primary or secondary occupation.

119

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.4.2 Methodology of primary survey A study area of 2 km around the closed dumpsite was defined for conducting the survey. Step one: The information on the number of households in the five villages within the study area was gathered. The data obtained is a follows:

Table 6-4: Households in the Villages within 2 Km of Closed Dumpsite S. No. Habitations Total Households

1. Makaltala 76 2. Unchupota 115 3. Khanaberia 422 4. Dhapa Durgapur 281 5. Anantabadal 131 Total 1025 Step two: In the next stage, an executive decision was taken in consultation with WBPCB, KMC and World Bank to cover Makaltala households fully in census mode as the potentially affected community and to conduct sampled survey of the other four villages. 6.4.3 Sampling The Table 6.5 below provides the number of households covered in the SIA survey with justification on selection based on their distance from the project area. In Makaltala all households were surveyed while in others a minimum of 10% to a maximum of 28% households were surveyed. Overall, 21% of 1026 households in the area were surveyed purposively based on the availability of the respondent in the households.

Table 6-5: Households Covered in the SIA Survey S. Habit- Total Samples Comments on selection No. ations House Households -holds Selected 1. Makaltala 76 76 (100%) Census as it the potentially affected village 2. Unchupota 115 32 (28%) Within ½ km of closed dump 3. Khanaberia 422 46 (11%) Within 1 km of closed dump 4. Dhapa 281 41 (15%) Within 1 ½ km of closed Durgapur dump 5. Anantabadal 131 16 (12%) Within 2 km of closed dump

120 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S. Habit- Total Samples Comments on selection No. ations House Households -holds Selected Total 1025 211

6.4.4 The Survey The survey was conducted with the help of a local NGO (Development Action Society - DAS) selected by COWI-Kadam as he was familiar with the project area.

The Primary socio economic survey was conducted during the period 8th – 11th June, 2013. The PRA and stakeholder consultations were also conducted during the same period.

To undertake the survey volunteers from NGO, DAS (Development Action Society) were engaged by COWI - KADAM. These volunteers were then provided a training session by COWI- KADAM and the JPS Associates’ experts prior to being sent for the survey work.

The study consisted of various components of socio-economic profile such as demographic profile, health and economic status, educational status, drinking water supply, sanitation, means of transportation, religious and cultural attributes of the people, etc. within the study area of 2 km of the proposed project.

Field survey was conducted by using questionnaire translated into local dialect (Bangla language) as presented in Annexure. Stakeholder’s Consultation was conducted among the key policy makers and selected representative groups of communities.

121

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6-2 Photo documentation of field work for Social Assessment Studies

Public Consultation with Women Stakeholder Consultation with Chief Group at Makaltala Habitation Medical Officer

Pre-Testing of Questionnaire in Consultation Meeting with Ward Habitation Councillor

Figure 6-3: Study Area Photographs

Local Market at Khanaberia View of the Leachate flowing through Makaltala Habitation

122 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6-4 Photographs of Some Occupations: Fishmongers and Rag Pickers

Fish Vendor in the Study Area Female Rag Pickers on Active Dump Site, Unchupota

6.4.5 Limitations of the Study › Heavy reliance has been made on PRA information due to lack of village level government data.

› Since human memory is short and the survey expected a recall of livelihood, income, and expenditure scenario more than a year back, there is a high probability of past data being weak.

6.5 Findings of the Primary Survey and PRA

6.5.1 History of Dhapa The survey revealed anecdotal stories that Makaltala was possibly under the zamindari of Rani Rasmoni and later became the property of the caretakers of Rani’s estates and finally taken over by KMC.

People said, Rani Rashmoni was the actual owner of this land. Dwellers were paying land tax to the ‘chowkidwar’ or the watchman appointed by Rani Rashmoni many years ago. Some people perceived that Dr.Bidhan Ch. Roy, Chief Minister of West Bengal, handed the area over to ‘Calcutta Municipality’ for using it as the solid waste dumping site. Now it is under KMC and the dwellers are not paying any tax for the land. They do not have any land documents. They are residing here for last 3 or 4 generations. People in Unchupota were not able to recall much about the land history while the other three villages – Khanaberia, Dhapa-Durgapur and Anantabadal said that their area was part of Sunderbans.

123

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.5.2 Population The PRA revealed an overall gender ratio in favour of women with more percentage of women in Khanaberia and Anantabadal and equal in Unchupota. Dhapa Durgapur showed lowest ratio of women amongst the 5 study villages. However, survey revealed that Makaltala has a gender ratio in favour of women. Except Durgapur, all others have a better gender ratio than Kolkata which has 899 females per 1,000 males and better than the state ratio of 947 women per 1,000 men and even when compared with the national average of 940 women per 1,000 men [Table 6-6].

Table 6-6: Population in the Villages (Makaltala actual, others through PRA, in the absence of govt. data for 5 villages)

Gender Total Total population ratio S. No. No. of Villages number of HHs Males Females

1. Makaltala 76 46% 54% 1184

2. Unchupota 115 50% 50% 1000

3 Khanaberia 422 45% 55% 1222

4. Dhapa Durgapur 281 60% 40% 667

5. Anantabadal 131 45% 55% 1222

Total 1025

Source: Primary Survey, June 2013

Population composition Overall, SCs dominate the area with 92.5% of the responding households belonging to this caste. STs comprise 3.8% of the total responding households, belonging mainly to Dhapa Durgapur and in smaller numbers in Unchupota and Khanaberia. Makaltala did not record any ST household. This is followed by 2.4% GCs mainly in Makaltala and 0.9% OBCs again in Makaltala. The population is integrated into mainstream and all pursue similar type of occupations and way of life celebrating similar festivities like – Shitola puja, Loknath puja, Kalipuja puja, Saraswati puja.

124 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 6-7: Population composition

Name of Villages Nos. Surveyed

ST SC OBC GC

Total Total Total Total

Makaltala Not available 69 1 6

Unchupota 1 30 1 0

Khanaberia 2 44 0 0

Dhapa Durgapur 5 36 0 0

Anantabadal Not available 16 0 0

N= 211 8 195 2 6

Percentage 3.8 92.3 0.9 3.0

Not available= non existence of STs

6.5.3 Family size The overall family size is 4.7 per household. Highest number of family members is noted in Khanaberia with an average of 5 persons per household. Adults form 64% of the total surveyed population.

Table 6-8: Family Members

Name of Village Male Female Total Family size

Makaltala 163 193 356 4.7

Unchupota 80 76 156 4.8

Khanaberia 115 119 234 5.0

Dhapa Durgapur 98 95 193 4.7

Anantabadal 38 38 76 4.7

Total 496 523 1015 4.7 (av.)

6.5.4 Family Type The primary survey indicates high number of nuclear families in Unchupota and Khanaberia. Comparatively more joint families are found in Anantabadal, Durgapur & Makaltala. Extended families are not found at all, and this can be attributed mainly to lack of space for expanding residential structures.

125

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 6-9: Family Type

Name of No. of % No. of % No. of % Total Villages Joint Nuclear Extended families families families

Makaltala 19 25 57 75 0 0 76

Unchupota 5 16 27 84 0 0 32

Khanaberia 9 20 37 80 0 0 46

Dhapa 12 29 29 71 0 0 41 D Anantabadal 5 31 11 69 0 0 16

Total 50 24 161 75 0 0 211

6.5.5 Possession of govt. documents All responding families have some govt. document, either Ration Card (RC) or Voters’ Card (VC) thus proving that there is govt. recognition of their existence in the project area even though they do not possess any documents on land occupation.

Table 6-10: Govt. documents (multiple choices)

Compositi No. of HHs on of HHs Makalta Unchupo Khanaber Dhapa Anantabad la ta ia Durgap al ur

RC VC RC VC RC VC RC VC RC VC

Total 69 65 24 24 26 38 32 30 16 12

HHs 76 32 46 41 16

[RC: Ration Card, VC: Voters’ Card]

Even though PRA revealed a high gender ratio in favour of women (Table: 3.9) the number of women headed households in the five villages account for 15% proving that the project area is predominantly patriarchal with no female headed household in Makaltala.

126 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 6-11: Women Headed Households21

Village Total % Responding HHs

Makaltala 0 0

Unchupota 3 9

Khanaberia 6 15

Dhapa Durgapur 9 13

Anantabadal 2 13

Total 20 15

N= 211 (76 - Makaltala, 32 - Unchupota, 46 - Khanaberia, 41 - Dhapa Durgapur, 16 – Anantabadal)

6.5.6 Literacy There is a high level of illiteracy in the villages with the highest in Khanaberia at 77% followed by 62% in Dhapa Durgapur. (refer appendix)

6.5.7 Ownership of Structures The respondents are mainly owners of the structures that they live in except in Unchupota where 16% (5) are tenants. It can be therefore, surmised that majority residents in these villages own of the structures they reside in.

Table 6-12 Residential Structure Ownership Type

Name of Villages Owner % Tenant % Total

Makaltala 76 100 0 0 76

Unchupota 27 84 5 16 32

Khanaberia 46 100 0 0 46

Dhapa Durgapur 41 100 0 0 41

21 Women Headed Households –The households which have woman as the main earner, single woman, widow with minor children and below poverty

127

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Name of Villages Owner % Tenant % Total

Anantabadal 16 100 0 0 16

Total 206 5 211

6.5.8 Electricity Majority (89%) households interviewed have electricity connection in their house and thus have electricity meters installed by CESC. Unchupota has solar panels for street lighting. More than 90% of the respondents in Khanaberia and Dhapa Durgapur have electricity while in Anantabadal and Makaltala more than 80% are connected.

Table 6-13: Electricity Connection

Name of Villages Yes % No % No % Response

Makaltala 65 86 11 14 0 0

Unchupota 26 82 3 9 3 9

Khanaberia 44 96 1 2 1 2

Dhapa Durgapur 38 93 3 7 0 0

Anantabadal 14 87 2 13 0 0

Total, N = 211 187 89 20 9 4 2

6.5.9 Income Distinctly, none of the households in Makaltala are below poverty line even though there are borderline households. More such households are noted for Khanaberia and Dhapa Durgapur. The section 4 below, narrates the situation in Makaltala which is the focus village of this report. A large majority earn between Rs.3500/- and 15000/- p.m. with two each in Makaltala and Khanaberia earning more than Rs.25000/- pm. In Makaltala the members of the two families are in govt. service (KMC). In Khanaberia one family earns from fishery and sale of crops and vegetables while the other family earns from sale of crops and vegetables.

128 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 6-14: Income of Surveyed HHs

Income Range Makaltala Unchupota Khanaberia Dhapa Durgapur Anantabadal

Present Present Present Present Present

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

<= 3000 0 0 1 3 4 9 8 20 1 6

3001 to 3500 6 8 1 3 2 4 5 12 0 0

3501 to 5000 18 24 5 16 15 33 4 10 8 50

5001 to 10000 31 41 17 53 15 33 17 41 6 38

10001 to 15000 10 13 4 13 4 9 4 10 0 0

15001 to 20000 6 8 2 6 2 4 3 7 0 0

20001 to 25000 3 4 1 3 2 4 0 0 1 6

More than 25000 2 3 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0

No response 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 76 100 32 100 46 100 41 100 16 100

6.5.10 Trees All villages have both fruiting and non-fruiting trees with Makaltala having the most. Trees are found within homestead land and within village boundaries. The common fruiting trees are - Banana, Bel, Betel nut, Blackberry, Coconut, Custard apple, Dalim, Falsha, Guava, Jamrul, Kamranga, Kath Badam, Jackfruit, Khejur, Kul, Lebu, Mango, Nona, Papaya, ump Tree, Safeda, Drumsticks, Sajne, Tal, Tamarind.The non- fruiting trees found were – Banyan, Belful, Cotton, Debdaru, Kadam, Khiris, Krishnachura, Neem, Siris, Siuli, TagorFul. Produce from the trees be it fruits or wood are used for subsistence by the HHs to a large extent.

6.6 Social Impact Assessment of Makaltala

6.6.1 Anticipated Social Impacts due to the Project that may require mitigation measures Based on site visits and assessments it was understood that while there are 5 villages within the Project Influence Area (PIA) of 2 km radius of the closed dumpsite, only Makaltala which is situated closest to the closed dumpsite has the potential of getting directly impacted by the project activities. The

129

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

following table gives the summary of anticipated impacts on Makaltala due to the project.

Table 6-15: Anticipated Impact on Makaltala Inhabitants

Anticipated Impact due to closure and containment of the closed dumpsite

Physical Displacement None

Temporary Displacement None

Livelihood Displacement None

Affected Trees/Crops / trees None

Affected Common Structures None

Impact on Vulnerable HHs None

Anticipated Impact during the closure and containment

Disruption in mobility Short Term

Presence of outsiders in the area, setting up of labour Short Term camps if required

Dust, rubble and noise due to movement of vehicles Short Term

Requirement of space for parking of vehicles and Short Term equipment

Activities on slopes result in landslides affecting Short Term houses located along the boundary of the dump

Loss of grazing ground for pigs and cattle Short Term

6.6.2 Socio-economic Details for Makaltala: Potentially Impacted Village As has been mentioned under section 6.1, initial assessments revealed that of the five villages, Makaltala (located in ward 57) lies closest to the closed dumpsite and therefore has the potential to be directly impacted by the project. Hence, based on the anticipated impacts, Makaltala has been further studied in detail to assess the socio-economic status and level of impact if any on the inhabitants of Makaltala due to the project activities in order to be able to plan mitigation and rehabilitation measures.

130 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.6.3 Detailed Profile of Makaltala Village The table below indicates the social profile of the inhabitants of Makaltala (the universe has already been discussed in section 3.2 as part of analysis of all villages in the Project Influence Area). This is to assess and review the village status in the context of the project and identify if there are any project related impacts and affected persons and any severity that needs to be mitigated.

Makaltala has a total population of 356 of whom 46% are males and 54% females showing a gender bias towards females. The adult population is found to be 61%, 75% of the 76 HHs in Makaltala are nuclear families. 91% of the population belong to SC, 6% to GC and 2% are OBC HHs. The overall literacy rate is 64% with male’s being 77% and females 56%.

85% of HHs are connected to the power grid while15% do not have connection. However, during PRA it was stated that around 5 HHs have illegal connections by taking sub-connections from connected HHs against a mutually agreed monthly rent. 17% HHs have HH sanitation facilities while 42% have joint facilities (shared by a few HHs). 41% of the HHs are dependent on ‘open’ or ‘bush’ defecation.

Table 6-16: Profile of Makaltala Village

Makaltala

Total No. of HHs 76 (Joint – 25%, Nuclear – 75%)

Population Total – 356 Male – 163(46%) Adults – 217 Female – 193 (54%) Children – 139

No. of BPL HHs Nil

No. of Women Headed HHs NIl

Family Size 5

Sex Ratio 1184

Literacy Rate (excluding Overall – 64% (229) infants and children not going Male – 76% (124) to school yet) Female – 54% (105)

Social Group (76 HHs) SC – 91% (69); GC – 8% (6); OBC – 1% (1)

Electricity Connected - 86%; Not connected – 14%

Sanitation facilities HH – 17%: Joint – 42% & Open Defecation – 41%

Government Documents Ration Card – ,69% and Voters Card – 65%

131

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 4.3 indicates the gender wise age profile of Makaltala. Only 2% of the population are above 60 years of age and 13% are children. 62% are in the active age group of 18-60 years with 54% male and 56% female.

Table 6-17: Gender wise Age

Gender wise Age Profile of HHs

Age in Years Male % Female % Total %

<=6 19 12 29 15 48 13

7 to 17 33 20 46 24 89 22

18 to 30 55 34 62 32 117 33

31 to 60 55 34 50 26 105 29

Above 60 1 1 6 3 7 2

Total 163 100 193 100 356 100

All HHs own their residential structures even though they do not have legal rights on the land on which it is situated. About 39 respondents have some land, 25 respondents (64%) out of 39 grow vegetables for subsistence and also for sale. Out of these 25, 13 claim to be land owners while 12 cultivators have taken land on lease from others on payment of cash on monthly or yearly basis. Fifteen out of 25 who sell vegetables earn between Rs. 200/- to 13000/-

There are 3 (4%) of HHs who have van rickshaws which they use for transporting people and also carry vegetables from the village to the city on commercial basis. 59% have mobile phones and 55% have cable connections while 62% own televisions sets. 80% HHs own bicycles a common form of transport for people out of the village to the city.

132 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 6-18: Asset Holding

Asset No of HHs %

Own House 76 100

Have land 39 51

Land used for 25 cultivation i) Cultivation on own 13 land (claimed) ii) Cultivation on leased land for 12 cultivation

Cycle 61 80

TV 47 62

Mobile 45 59

Cable connection 42 55

Two wheelers 2 3

Refrigerator 3 4

Music system 1 1

Van rickshaw 3 4

Livestock: 13 HHs own 53 cows, 5 HHs own 23 pigs, 11 HHs have 39 goats and 12 families have 85 chicken/ducks. These numbers are not sacrosanct as animals and sold often and anecdotal evidence suggests that the numbers are reducing. Further, the Act of KMC22 does not allow animals and birds to be reared within municipal area without license. (Impact on livelihood has been discussed in the sections below)

22CMC (Amendment) Act, 1988, (WB Act XXI of 1988) w.e.f20/02/1989

133

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 6-19: Livestock Ownership

Livestock No. of HHs No. of Animals

Cows 13 53

Poultry 12 85

Goats 11 39

Pigs 5 23

State of Indebtedness: Inhabitants in Makaltala are mainly dependent on private money lenders for borrowing money during an emergency. The table below shows that people have the habit of repaying loans taken.

Table 6-20: Indebtedness Status

Range Private Money Govt Schemes Other Sources lender

No. of Repaid No. of Repaid No. of Repaid HH HH HH

<= 5000 4 3 7 7 (partial) (partial)

5001 - 10000 5 4 1 1 (partial)

10001 - 30000 4 3 1 (partial)

50001 – 1 1 100000 (partial)

Above 100000 1 1 (partial)

Access to basic Infrastructure: During PRA and FGD people stated that vehicular access is a major problem that they face. There is no form of public transport operating within the village. Roads are bad and get worse during monsoons. Observations and data analysis by consultants reveal that even though there is no food poverty in the area, the communities suffer from basic infrastructure needs poverty.

Lack of Anganwadi centre creates a problem for new born and pregnant mothers who need to travel a distance to access medical support.

134 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

While different sources of water are available, the overall quality of water is not good. They get their drinking water delivered 3-4 times a week by KMC tankers. However, for bathing, washing and cooking they use hand pump water. Sometimes when the tanker is unable to cater, they resort to hand pump water for drinking.

Table 6-21: Access to Infrastructure Facilities (Source PRA)

Health facilities

Government Hospital NRS / Chittaranjan - 15 k.m / 17 k.m

Primary Health Sub-centre 1 (Wednesday, 9- 12 a.m

Private Doctor 2: 2 k.m

Clinic organized by NGO / 1 (Once in a week / Tuesday clinic ) CBO

Education

Anganwadi Service Not available

Primary School 1 at a distance of 1.5 km

Secondary School 1 at a distance of 3 km

High School 1 at a distance of3 km

Non-formal Education centre 1 within the village (run by NGO)

Road

Kutcha Road -

Pacca Road -

Public Van Available after walking 1 km ( insufficient in number)

Public Bus / Auto Available after walking 3 km on EM Bypass

Water

Tube well ( Public ) 4 hand pumps available within the village. Quality of water is poor. They use it normally for washing and cooking and bathing also. 2% HH use this water for drinking purpose

Hand pumps ( Personal ) 20

Corporation water ( Tap ) No

Corporation water ( Supply 3 / 4 trips per week. They have to walk ½ k.m - Very Van ) Good (Use it only for drinking purpose . 4% HH use it

135

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Health facilities for cooking also )

Bathing / Washing Tube well/ pond within the village

Economic status: The dumpsite had reached its capacity and further dumping was stopped in 2009. However, the scientific closure and containment of the site would be taken up under the project is now being proposed. Therefore, the indicators of economic status were analysed taking their status prior and post closure to measure the level of impact on livelihood and economic status due to the closure of the dump.

Livelihood Profile: Pisciculture remains the most common primary source of livelihood for Makaltala HHs –before and after dumping was stopped. After dumping was stopped, there has been an increase in dependency on own farming and non-agricultural wage labour. There has been a significant increase in employment opportunities in govt. and private service sectors specifically for Makaltala residents being close to EM Bypass where several infrastructure projects are coming up. After dumping was stopped, employment has increased from 16% to 26%. This can also be attributed to the fact that people are now willing to travel out for livelihood. There has been an increase in the variety of secondary livelihood options in and around the area.

Table 6-22: Livelihood Status of 76 HHs

Income Source Primary Secondary

Before After Before After

No. % No. % No. % No, %

Agri on own land 9 12 10 13 1 1 6 8

Agri wage labour 8 11 4 5 0 0 0 0

Non agri wage labour 4 5 7 9 0 0 3 4

Business/Trade 5 7 6 8 0 0 2 3

Govt. Service 9 12 11 14 0 0 0 0

Pvt. Service 3 4 8 11 0 0 0 0

Fishing/pisciculture 19 25 18 24 2 3 1 1

Rag pickers 2 3 1 1 4 5 2 3

136 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Income Source Primary Secondary

Before After Before After

No. % No. % No. % No, %

Other 4 5 5 7 1 1 3 4

Driver 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

Cow rearing 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

Pig rearing 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0

NREGA 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0

No response 12 16 5 7 66 87 58 76

Total 76 100 76 100 76 100 76 100

A mixed pattern of livelihood is noted at present when all family members are considered. A large number are involved in fishing/Pisciculture, several in govt. and private services, cultivating (own) land, in agriculture and non- agriculture wage labour, and a few in rag picking. About 56% family members did not respond to this question.

Table 6-23 Present occupation of HH Members

Present Occupation No. %

Agri on own land 14 4

Agri wage labour 9 3

Non agri wage labour 13 4

Business/Trade 11 3

Govt. Service 16 4

Pvt. Service 13 4

Maid / domestic help 1 0

Fishing/pisciculture 22 6

Household duties 7 2

Student 16 4

Old 2 1

Unemployed 7 2

Rag pickers 6 2

137

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Present Occupation No. %

Other 15 4

Driver 1 0

Motor Van Driver 1 0

Self Employed 1 0

No response 201 56

Total 356 100

Source: Primary Survey, June 2013 Income Level of HHs: Analysis indicates that there has been significant increase in monthly HH income post closure of dump. Prior to closure 39% of the HHs had an income of less than Rs.3,000/- month indicating that they were BPL families. However, it must also be noted that as per the governmental records there are no BPL families amongst Makaltata HHs. Prior to closure, some HHs had the highest earning in the range of 15,001/- - 20,000/- month and 45% earned between Rs. 3,501/- – 10,000/- month.

Presently there are no HHs with income less than Rs.3, 000/- month. 8% (6) of HHs have income levels between Rs.3, 001/- to Rs.3, 500/- therefore any adverse effect on their livelihoods may result in them being categorised as potential BPL families. Presently 54% earn between Rs. 5,001/- – 15,000/- month with 3% earning more than Rs.25, 000/- month.

Table 6-24: HH Income Levels

Income Range Before After

No. % No. %

<= 3000 30 39 0 0

3001 to 3500 5 7 6 8

3501 to 5000 18 24 18 24

5001 to 10000 16 21 31 41

10001 to 15000 0 0 10 13

15001 to 20000 1 1 6 8

20001 to 25000 0 0 3 4

More than 25000 0 0 2 3

138 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Income Range Before After

No. % No. %

No response 6 8 0 0

Total 76 100 76 100

Source: Primary Survey, June 2013 Expenditure Levels: Analysis of monthly HH expenditure indicates that there has been an increase on the amount spent for different needs. This is expected considering the rate of inflation in the past few years. However, it must be noted that there is considerable increase in expenditure for commercial purposes. This indicates that people now have more money to invest even after spending towards basic amenities like food, health, education and travel. Increase in travel related expenditure is more as they “can now afford to send their children to school in van rickshaws.”

Table 6-25: Average Expenditure

Average Expenditure Type of Expenditure Before After Difference

Food 2586 3781 1195

Health 368 479 111

Addiction 452 625 173

Electricity charges 283 415 132

Education 607 685 78

Travel 310 572 262

Agriculture implement 381 278 -103

Payment of labour 2590 4242 1652

Implements for fishing 85 160 75

Fodder for livestock 940 1250 310

Inputs for commercial purpose 200 900 700

Other 452 588 136

6.6.4 Identified Impacts Based on visual assessments, PRA and FGDs with the community and the detailed analysis of survey, it was found that the closure of the dumpsite in

139

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

2009 has had the following positive and negative impacts on the inhabitants of Makaltala village.

Table 6-26: Positive Impacts due to Closure of dumpsite

Surroundings and Less hazards 1 Environment Decrease in odour and insects

Due to stopping of dumping, many people of Makaltala village migrated to other parts of the Increased livelihood city for employment. Several people opted for options resulting in 2 alternate livelihood sources in the city. It was increased income concluded that the closure of the dump has especially for males actually resulted in increased income levels due to various options being explored

Improved health Previously children used to playfully go and get 3 condition of children involved in rag picking but now that has stopped.

Table 6-27: Negative Impacts due to closure of dumpsite

1 Increase in cost of fodder Earlier the cattle and pigs, owned by the people of for animals Makaltala used to feed on the waste dumped at the project site but after closure of the site this source of cheap fodder is no longer available.

2 Marginal increase in Due to stopping of dumping activities at the time taken to travel (only project site some rag pickers of Makaltala village for people continuing had to start going to the active dumpsite near with rag picking, refer Unchupota for rag picking. This resulted in higher Table 6.31) travelling time for them. However, this is neither significant part of their livelihood nor contributes much towards family income.

3 Loss of income for rag Women rag pickers of Makaltala village were pickers mostly affected due to loss of this income opportunity as they could not move to the active dumpsite which is at some distance from their village.

The positive and negative social impacts of the proposed scientific closure and containment of the closed Dumpsite were identified as follows:

Table 6-28: Positive Impacts of the scientific closure and containment of the closed Dumpsite

Positive Impacts of the scientific closure and containment of the closed Dumpsite

There will be no odour and windblown dust Surroundings and 1 Environment Contaminated surface water runoff and leachate from the dumpsite will no longer pollute the neighbouring

140 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Positive Impacts of the scientific closure and containment of the closed Dumpsite environment Proper covering of the dumpsite will eliminate 2 Less accidents risks of landslides, poisonous pests and insects.

The approach road is envisaged to be improved as part of the project thereby improving the accessibility of the area and indirectly paving the Better 3 way to better access to alternative opportunities for communication income sources, education, trainings and exposure to improved ways of lives.

The overall increase in aesthetics will mean an upliftment in the social status of the neighbouring Makaltala village who now live next to an unsightly dumpsite

4 Social upliftment Creation of a recreational space where nearby communities can gather and can relax in an environment free from contamination.

Scope for temporary income generating opportunities for local population through setting up of small Temporary Income enterprises like tea shops, eateries, etc. during 5 opportunities remediation works.

Health status is expected to improve due to decrease 6 Improved health in spread of vector borne diseases/nuisance caused by mosquitos/flies/vermin and dust..

No negative social impacts of the proposed closure and containment project have emerged through the primary survey, FGDs and consultations. However, there are expected to be some short term negative impacts of the proposed activities during the execution stage which are listed below:-

141

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 6-29: Impacts due to proposed closure and containment activities

Impacts due to proposed closure and containment Proposed activities Mitigation Measures

1 Impact on None Not applicable livelihood To be handled 2 Impact on People may find it difficult to mobility travel around the area due to through careful increased vehicular traffic and planning and equipment implementation of construction site 3 Presence of Workers and people working as management outsiders in the part of the team carrying out the measures by KMC in area remediation activities close association with the Contractor and 4 Dust, rubble and Will impact the living WBPCB and noise due to environment within the village Supervision movement of Consultant. vehicles 5 Requirement of May result in people having to space for stop cropping and growing parking of vegetables that they do on the land vehicles and temporarily equipment’s

6 Activities on May impact some HHs located Appropriate slopes result in right along the boundary of the preventive measures landslides dumpsite by the contractors as suggested by design consultants. Appropriate engineering practices will be diligently followed.

7 Loss of grazing Impact on HH income Ref: KMC Act ground for pigs and cattle

The identified positive impacts are welcome by the community. People are well informed and have appreciated these immensely. However, it is to be mentioned that the present infrastructural facilities are not adequate. The community feels the need of its development. The Makaltala community does not face any food poverty.

142 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Analysis of Level of Negative Impacts i. Impact on Rag-pickers The table below indicates that about 105 persons from 23 HHs who gave up rag picking (possibly post dump closure) have taken up various other forms of income generation which has resulted in substantial increase in income and have expressed happiness at remediation of the closed dump which would actually give them relief on several scores (see discussions on benefits).

Table 6-30: Shift in Income who gave up rag picking (after dump closure)

S. HH address No. of Members Total Family Total family B A 1 1 7 3800 5000 2 2 5 5000 8000 3 6,79 9 8200 12000 4 12 2 3000 6800 5 15 5 3500 12900 6 23 2 3600 3600 7 25 5 10000 11000 8 26 4 5100 9800 9 30 3 1000 5000 10 36 4 5200 6000 11 38 5 800 6500 12 44 9 2000 10400 13 52 5 2300 4600 14 53 4 3500 8500 15 54 6 2300 15100 16 58 3 3000 7000 17 61 6 5500 9300 18 62B 3 1800 3100 19 65 4 3000 4500 20 68 4 4700 8000 21 69 5 2650 8500 22 72 4 3250 4500 23 73 1 1500 2500 105

143

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

ii. Impact of Project on HHs still practicing Ragpicking Post Closure of Dump Analysis of income from different sources indicates that even though some HHs have one member practicing ragpicking as occasional activity; the HHs are overall, presently dependant on other sources of primary income. However, discussions reveal that those who still pursue ragpicking presently go to the Unchupota site (present active dumpsite) which will remain accessible. In fact, the income table shows, increase in family income at present and that there is no likelihood of their income levels being affected.

Table 6-31: Shift in Income Levels of HH Members who still practice Ragpicking

HH No. of Total Family Income Total Family Income address Members from all sources from all sources

After Before

1 One member 3800 5000

2 One member 5000 8000

6,79 One member 8200 12000

8 One member 6100 7000

15 One member 3500 12900

23 One member 3600 3600

25 One member 10000 11000

26 One member 5100 9800

36 One member 6000 5200

44 One member 2000 10400

50 One member 1500 4530

59 One member 0 15200

61 One member 5500 9300

62B One member 1800 3100

62C One member 4200 6400

65 One member 3000 4500

144 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

68 One member 4700 8000

69 One member 2650 8500

67 One member 2000 9000

71 One member 2500 5300

82 One member 3000 3150

iii. Impact on Vulnerable HHs As per the survey findings six HHs have an income range between Rs.3001/- to 3500/-.

However, it may be noted that all these HHs had much less level of income before closure and have shown an increase in income post closure of dump. It is expected that the remediation activities may actually present these HHs with an opportunity for added income generation through setting up of small enterprises like tea shops, eateries , etc. Efforts will have to be made during the construction phase of remediation activities to ensure that these families are given temporary income opportunities.

Table 6-32: Vulnerable families

HH No. of Pry Income Sec Income Income address Members

B A B A B A

34 5 3000 3500 - - 3000 3500

62B 3 1500 2000 - - 1800 3100

72 4 2500 3250 1000 - 3500 3250

73 3 2300 3500 - - 2300 3500

81 3 2000 3000 - - 2000 3200

82 3 1500 3150 1500 - 3000 3150

145

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

iv. Impact on Livelihood of HHs rearing Cows As per the survey 12 families own 51 cows. However, the numbers keep changing based on sale and purchase. None of the HHs stated that this was a source of substantial income. It may be noted that under KMC act keeping animals within the city limits is illegal and disallowed. HHs keeping such animals will need to get the approval and license from KMC23. (Please refer to Annexure 11 for KMC Act).

Table 6-33: HH Income from Cattle

Total Income Total Income HH address Cows Before from After from all all sources sources

Nos. Income

5 2 Not replied 3000 10800

12 6 Not replied 3000 6800

19 3 500 3000 23000

29 2 Not replied 10000 24000

31 3 Not replied 3500 8000

38 3 Not replied 800 6500

41,43 2 Not replied 5500 13500

59 2 Not replied 0 15200

64 15 Not replied24 1500

70 4 Not replied 3000 6000

73 6 Not replied 2300 3500

74 3 Not replied 5500 7950

23CMC (Amendment) Act, 1988, (WB Act XXI of 1988) w.e.f20/02/1989, Chapter XXXI: Animals and Birds, Powers and Functions of Municipal Authorities and the Officers of the Corporation 24It seems that this household grazes the cows here on behalf of a dairy owner

146 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

v. Impact on Livelihood of HHs rearing Pigs There are five HHs rearing pigs in this village. Analysis of income from pigs shows that income from pig farming is not substantial to be considered as a primary source of income. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the number of pigs in the families fluctuate depending on sale and purchase. Further with the KMC Act on Animals and Birds coming into force, lack of space and high cost of rearing, people are tending to get rid of the animals in the city. It can be safely stated that livelihood support activities carried out during the remediation and as CDP intervention will help offset this loss in income as this is not the primary source of income. (Refer to Annexure 11 for KMC Act).

Table 6-34: Income of HHs Rearing Pigs

HH address No. of Pigs Total Income from Total Income from all sources (Before) all sources (After)

No Income

19 3 - 4000 33000

53 2 1500 3500 8500

58 5 3000 3700 10000

61 1 500 5500 9300

69 3 2000 2650 8500

vi. Impact on HHs located along the boundary of Dumpsite during remediation activities. It is likely that the 17 households located along the side of the dump may be affected by the on-going remedial activities by way of landslides, falling rubble, dust and subsidence, sound and movement of vehicles, etc. more than others in the village. The design consultants would need to find technical solutions to protect them from these hazards in order to minimize or off set such impacts.

6.7 Rehabilitation and Resettlement No land acquisition or shifting of locals is required due to this project. Consequently, Rehabilitation and Resettlement / Land Acquisition are not required for the proposed project.

147

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

6.8 Social Concerns not attributable to the Closed Dumpsite Based on the socio-economic survey and stakeholder consultation the following social concerns that have been identified with respect to the general condition of the nearby residents:

› Lack of infrastructure development like roads, education, health and hygiene and communication etc.;

› Inadequacy of sanitation facilities and poor sanitation and personal hygiene practices;

› Lack of safe drinking water supply; and

› Odour and smoke coming from the crematorium and the bone factory near the closed dumpsite

6.9 Community Development Needs The difficulties faced by the locals (discussed in the previous Section) cannot be attributed to the existing closed dumpsite or the proposed closure and containment project. However, these may be as part of a Community Development Programme (CDP) by the appropriate government authorities or KMC. The CDP would include the improvement of the road (from Makaltala to KMC office/weighbridge) and the existing wooden bridge (See picture below) which is completely dilapidated; these are community’s prioritized needs. The road from Bypass to the KMC office/weigh bridge is next in priority; it is in poor condition with pot holes at several places requiring urgent repairs. This road could be widened so that trucks, cycles and van rickshaws are able to ply easily. These improvements would be necessary for the project implementation also.

148 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 6-5 Wooden bridge connecting Makaltala Village (Picture taken on 16th December 2013)

The supply of safe drinking water, provision of hygienic sanitation facilities, implementation of health benefit schemes, establishment of educational facilities etc. would form part of KMC’s governance related actions and are part of KMC’s plans.

6.10 Public Consultation

6.10.1 Introduction The public consultations and FGD’s envisaged informing the communities regarding the project and discussing the potential challenges, their mitigation and understanding information needs. Public consultations and focus group discussions were held at all five locations during the fieldwork. All sections of people likely to be affected including the vulnerable and women participated in these consultations to discuss their views and aspirations about the project. Individual discussions during the survey, in- depth interviews with key informants and informal discussion were also held with key governmental personnel as part of the consultations.

The main objectives of the discussion were to

 Ascertain the level of awareness about the project amongst the

149

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

stakeholders.  Understand people's perception of the social impact of the project.  Integrate people's suggestions for the improvement of the project.  Communities understanding of the project benefits  Willingness amongst community members to cooperate and participate in the project implementation  Suggestions & Recommendations. Public discussions were conducted at known important locations within the village with prior notice. On an average, 10-12 persons including women at 5 locations took part in the above process at each location. The minutes of meetings were documented and noted for incorporation and inclusion in the social management plan. Photo documentation of each meeting was also done.

Discussions were held specifically with Makaltala community on infrastructure development and livelihood related needs; challenges during remedial works; need for consultations and communications before, during and after implementation of plans; suggestions and comments on perceived concerns.

These meetings elicited views of the affected persons and other stakeholders on the before & after scenario of the dump closure, fear of subsidence & accidents, land use pattern, infrastructure needs, livelihoods and, gender issues. Views and needs expressed by participants were prioritised and incorporated in the project design as part of CDP activities and budgeted (see ESMP). Findings from discussions have also been provided in section 6.6.4 which discusses identified impacts.

The Team also had informal meetings with Principal Advisor-Kolkata Municipal Corporation (Municipal Solid Waste Management), Chief Municipal Health Officer, Executive Health Officer Borough VII, Health Officer Borough VII, Ward Counsellor, Local Leader, Local NGO and women.

6.1.1 Summary of public consultation All community members especially in Makaltala felt that the benefits of the project are immense and outweigh any adverse impact.

 Employment opportunity will increase for local people with the development work.

 Establishment of Dhapa as a green park / recreational area with the improvement of road would improvement aesthetics and quality of life in the area.

150 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

 Several persons mentioned that their relatives, who deterred visiting them due to filth and bad odour, would be happy to visit now.

 Visually, the area would look cleaner and better.

 Children will stop scavenging for goodies playfully and will thus be less susceptible to infections, injuries and fear of subsidence.

Some adverse impacts which were the concerns of a few persons were also discussed. These related to –

 Feeding of pigs

 Grazing of cows and pigs

Prioritisation of Community needs

 Replacement of the wooden bridge which almost completely dilapidated

 Up-gradation / repair and broadening of the access road from Makaltala wooden bridge till the KMC office / weigh bridge.

 Up-gradation / repair of the KMC road till the EM Bypass

These three being topmost in their priority, the other needs are -

 Improvement in supply of drinking water for the habitation

 Improvement in existing sanitary facilities to reduce open defecation

 Implementing solid waste management system so that the environment is kept clean after remediation

 Developing infrastructure and services related to health, education, transportation

6.10.2 Stakeholders Consultation A consultation with other stakeholders like KMC, local politicians and local NGOs was carried out as part of the Social Survey. The results of the discussions have been summarised and presented in Table 6-35.

151

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 6-35: Stakeholders Consultation Stakeholders Name of the Participants Designation Date Issues Discussed Description of discussions – key point

KMC Mr Arun Kumar Sarkar Principal Advisor- 8/6/13 Closed dump site  Makaltala has very few rag pickers. For Kolkata Municipal and livelihood. them, rag picking forms a very minor Corporation (Municipal part of livelihood and is occasional. Solid Waste However, in other villages rag picking Management) is important livelihood issue.  For women empowerment training for income generating activities may be provided. Training needs assessment to be conducted  Animal husbandry is a dying livelihood here and on the verge of extinction aided by the KMC’s Act on prohibition on animal husbandry without permission. KMC Dr Tapan Kumar Chief Municipal Health 8/6/13 Dhapa dump site  Several health related schemes (Regular Mukherjee Officer and their health Immunisation, pulse Polio, ANC etc.) issues are executed at regular intervals performing both clinical management of primary health.  All the major public health programs are implemented by KMC at the grass root level.  Some health awareness campaign are organised by a local NGO (DAS).

152 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Stakeholders Name of the Participants Designation Date Issues Discussed Description of discussions – key point

KMC Dr B. Mukhopadahyaya Executive Health Officer 8/6/13 Existing diseases  Conducting awareness campaigns and Borough VII in the implementation of health programmes surrounding through the local NGOs were suggested habitations of Dhapa Dump Site

KMC Dr Arif Health Officer Borough 8/6/13 Efforts made by  Various awareness campaigns on VII the department to AIDS/HIV as well as health and improve the hygiene were organised by the KMC. health and hygiene conditions

Community Mr Jiban Saha Ward Councillor 8/6/13 Provide basic  To provide regular drinking water and Representative infrastructure sufficient number of Sanitary Latrines facilities in the to the community habitations to improve their  To Construct pucca approach road for quality of life the better accessibility  To shift bone factory from their existing place

Assist  Convey grievances and local Political community in requirements to concerned officers and Dr Subhash Chakraborty Local Leader 8/6/13 Representative solving day to departments to provide redressal day problems

153

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Stakeholders Name of the Participants Designation Date Issues Discussed Description of discussions – key point

Availability of  Working on Adult education, formal basic education, income generating infrastructure programmes for women. facilities, women DAS Mrs. Sheela Sen Gupta Local NGO 10/6/13 and child  Supporting community for their development. infrastructure development (solar lighting)  Also conducting weekly health camps

154 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

7 Overview of the proposed Closure and Containment Options, their impacts and Mitigation measures

7.1.1 Introduction and Background Target for closure of Dhapa Dumpsites is to minimize or avoid future pollution from the dumpsite to the surrounding environment with a practicable and economically sound method also taken into account social issues and land use requirements.

The methodology used to find the recommendable option is by a stepwise procedure minimising number of realistic option. The process is described in detail in the Containment and Closure Plan report. Also the construction and O&M costs for each option are included in the Containment and Closure Plan report.

In Figure 7-1 the selection process for the final best option is shown.

155

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Figure 7-1: Decision tree for the selection of the recommended containment and closure option

Complete Sample analysis and Draft containment and assessment of site pollution levels closure plans Selection Realistisc of option preferred (5 + baseline) options Primary screening options (Matrix in appendix 1)

Predesigned of realistisc options

Evaluation and assessment of realistic options Selection Approval of recommended recommended option option Comparison of realistic options

No Yes

Final containment and closure plans

Detailed design of Approval of Recommended option recommended detail design option

No Yes

Complete detailed design

Tendering and implementation Tender documents and tender procedure

Implementation of Dhapa dumpsite remediation works

156 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

7.1.2 Approach of Selection of various options The following approach was adopted for selection of various options available looking to the local site conditions and environmental and social baseline assessment:

1. Review of elements of closure and containment such as:

› Top cover construction

› Surface water run-off and run-in control systems

› Groundwater protection systems

› Leachate handling, collection and treatment systems

› Landfill gas handling, collection and treatment systems

› Monitoring systems

2. Future Land Use as the dump site is located in the Wetlands.

3. Stability of Slopes and top cover construction suitable for future Landuse of the dumpsite.

4. Economical viability and acceptance to people

7.1.3 Overview of Closure Options Selected A total of six options of Containment and Closure of dump site are proposed as follows:

› Option 1: Do nothing › Option 2: Simplified closure concept › Option 3.1: Reduced infiltration and passive gas control › Option 3.2: Reduced infiltration and gas treatment › Option 4: Reduced infiltration with leachate collection and treatment (and passive gas handling) › Option 5: Impermeable cover and passive gas control

7.1.4 Construction Design Features Comparison of various options: A comparison table of all the constructional features of various options is highlighted in table below:

157

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 7-1: Design Features of the Six Options of Containment and Closure of Dumpsite

Constructional features S. of Containment and No Closure / Remediation Option 1 Option 2 Option 3.1 Option 3.2 Option 4 Option 5 Option

1 Permeable Cover √

2 Semi Permeable Cover √ √ √

3 Impermeable Cover √

4 Surface Runoff and Control √ √ √ √ √

5 Leachate Collection and its √ treatment

6 Passive gas collection with √ √ √ methane oxidation

7 Active Gas Abstraction with √ flaring and /or utilization

8 Reshaping / Profiling of the √ √ √ √ √ dump site

9 Excavation, Sorting and Reuse √ √ √ √ √ of Part of Wastes

Each of the above options have been technically discussed in terms of their adaptability in situations, their details, benefits and cost estimates etc in the Containment and Closure Plan Options Report separately submitted. In this chapter brief description of the various options in terms of their environmental impacts and mitigation measures are described in subsequent sections.

7.2 Option 1: Do Nothing

7.2.1 Description of Option This option is a baseline situation; as of now basis.

7.2.2 Environmental Impact of Option 1 The environmental impacts from the dumpsite will not change, and the impacts will be for many years ahead.

158 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

The organic and inorganic waste disposed at the dumpsite will however in time be degraded or washed out. The duration for stabilising of waste disposed as Dhapa dumpsite is unpredictable as the knowledge of waste composition is limited in particular for bio-medical waste and industrial waste. The general assumption for stabilising of uncontrolled dumpsite is minimum 50 years and most likely much longer but it depends on many factors e.g. waste composition, flow pattern in waste body (water will mainly flow in specific areas with fractures, voids etc.), retention of solid matters in some areas of the waste body etc.

Keeping the dumpsite as it is at the moment will result in risk factors such as:

› Continue pollution of surface water, groundwater, soil etc. › Continue emission of landfill gas, dust, odour etc. › Possible debilitation of slopes resulting in landslides.

7.3 Option 2: Simplified closure concept

7.3.1 Description of Option The simplified closure concept is simply covering the site with unspecified material (sand, soil or clayey materials) and shall only act as a physical protection layer of the waste body. E.g. the inert material in waste could be used by segregating the upper 2 m of the waste body and replacing the residues (waste) first and subsequently replace the fines (soil, sand etc.) on the top. To avoid surface erosion a vegetative layer are placed on top of the soil and seeded with grass.

Construction of a perimeter surface water ditch (concrete paved) with outlets to the surface recipients. A system of ditches on the remediated surface will also be required for erosion control.

7.3.2 Environmental Impact of Option 2 The main improvements compared with the "do nothing" options are:

› Surface water from the dumpsite will be controlled and separated from leachate. Overflow of adjacent land with contaminated surface water is prevented. › All wastes are covered. As no wastes are exposed transport of waste to surface waters and blocking outlets are avoided. › No waste exposure and risk of damage due to sharp ends, syringes etc. and infections are eliminated. › The surface water run-off is increasing and the leachate generation will be reduced but remains relatively high. High groundwater table inside the waste body can still be observed with a risk of leachate seepage through slopes.

159

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

› Continued pollution of the upper groundwater secondary aquifer. › Landfill gas emissions will be reduced as some methane oxidation will take place in the top soil layer. › The aesthetic expression of the area will be improved.

7.4 Option 3.1: Reduced infiltration and passive gas control

7.4.1 Description of Option The reduced infiltration system consists of a top cover layer complying with the MSW2000 rules.

Construction of a perimeter surface water ditch (concrete paved) with outlets to the surface recipients. A system of ditches on the remediated surface will also be required for erosion control. Construction of passive gas vents in surface. Gas venting areas will consist of "window" above the clay cover and filled with compost or other product with a high content of humus (Bio-cover system).

7.4.2 Environmental Impact of Option 3.1 The main improvements compared with the "Option 2" are:

› Surface water from the dumpsite will be controlled and separated from leachate. Overflow of adjacent land with contaminated surface water is prevented. › All wastes are covered. As no wastes are exposed transport of waste to surface waters and blocking outlets are avoided. › No waste exposure and risk of damage due to sharp ends, syringes etc. and infections are eliminated. › The surface water run-off is increasing and the leachate generation will be reduced up to 50%. The groundwater table inside the waste body will be low and risk of leachate seepage through slopes is eliminated. › Reduced infiltration of rainwater resulting in less leachate generation which will lower the water (leachate) level inside the waste body and the downwards gradient. › Landfill gas emissions will be controlled and reduced through oxidation in the "compost windows". › The aesthetic expression of the area will be improved.

160 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

7.5 Option 3.2: Reduced infiltration and gas treatment

7.5.1 Description of Option Similar to option 3.1 but passive oxidation in compost "windows" are replaced with active collection of landfill gas in wells and combusted in a flare.

7.5.2 Environmental Impact of Option 3.2 The main improvements compared with the "Option 3.1" are:

› Surface water from the dumpsite will be controlled and separated from leachate. Overflow of adjacent land with contaminated surface water is prevented. › All wastes are covered. As no wastes are exposed transport of waste to surface waters and blocking outlets are avoided. › No waste exposure and risk of damage due to sharp ends, syringes etc. and infections are eliminated. › The surface water run-off is increasing and the leachate generation will be reduced up to 50%. The groundwater table inside the waste body will be low and risk of leachate seepage through slopes is eliminated. › Reduced infiltration of rainwater resulting in less leachate generation which will lower the water (leachate) level inside the waste body and the downwards gradient. › Landfill gas emissions will be controlled and reduced through combustion in a flare. › The aesthetic expression of the area will be improved.

7.6 Option 4: Reduced Infiltration with leachate collection and treatment (and gas handling)

7.6.1 Description of Option The reduced infiltration system consists of a top cover layer complying with the MSW Rules, 2000.

Construction of a perimeter surface water ditch (concrete paved) with outlets to the surface recipients. A system of ditches on the remediated surface will also be required for erosion control.

Construction of active collection of landfill gas wells on surface and further combusted in a flare. The system will involve installation of a leachate collection system and treatment of leachate.

161

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

7.6.2 Environmental Impact of Option 4 The main improvements compared with the "Option 3.2" are:

› Surface water from the dumpsite will be controlled and separated from leachate. Overflow of adjacent land with leachate or contaminated surface water are excluded. › All wastes are covered. As no wastes are exposed transport of waste to surface waters and blocking outlets are avoided. › The surface water run-off from the area is increased and leachate generation reduced up to 50%. The groundwater table inside the waste body will be low and risk of leachate seepage through slopes are eliminated › Landfill gas emissions will be controlled and reduced through oxidation in the "windows". The oxidation potential in compost is approx. 100- 120 mg/m2 per day. The total area of compost windows should be approximately 3,500 m2. It is assumed that a total of 50% of the generated landfill gas can be collected and oxidised. The other 50% will emit to the atmosphere via fractures, cracks etc. in the surface. › Drainage of leachate from dumpsite perimeter will lower the water (leachate) level inside the dumpsite to the lowest possible and avoid leachate from flowing from the dumpsite towards the upper secondary aquifer. › Treatment of leachate is proposed thereby reducing the pollution levels of leachate. › The aesthetic expression of the area will be improved.

7.7 Option 5: Impermeable cover, leachate collection and passive gas control

7.7.1 Description of Option In this option the cover construction is not in accordance with the MSW Rules 2000, but with an impermeable sealing liner instead of a low permeable clay barrier. Above the sealing liner is installed a drainage layer, protection soil layer and a vegetative layer seeded with grass.

Construction of a perimeter surface water ditch (concrete paved) with outlets to the surface recipients. A system of ditches on the remediated surface will also be required for erosion control.

Leachate collection system is installed for collection of leachate during the construction phase and for the initial years after closure until the water (leachate) level inside the waste body has reached the same water as outside the closed and remediated dumpsite.

162 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Construction of passive gas vents in surface. Gas venting pipes through liner and exhaust of gas through a compost "window" for oxidation of methane and reduce odour problems.

7.7.2 Environmental Impact of Option 5 The main improvements compared with the "Option 4" are:

› Surface water from the dumpsite will be controlled and separated from leachate. Overflow of adjacent land with leachate or contaminated surface water are excluded. › All wastes are covered. As no wastes are exposed transport of waste to surface waters and blocking outlets are avoided. › The risk for landslides are reduced or eliminated. Slides in soils above the sealing liner are often seen but by keeping the slopes at 1:3, construction of platforms to limit the lengths of slopes and installation of intercepting surface water ditches on the slopes will reduce the risks. › The surface water run-off from the area is increased and leachate generation eliminated due to the impermeable liner. The risks of leachate seepage through slopes are eliminated too. › Avoidance of infiltration of rainwater resulting in no leachate generation which will lower the water (leachate) level inside the waste body to a level equal to or lower than in the surroundings will prevent future contamination of the upper secondary unconfined aquifer. Collection and treatment of leachate during construction and for the initial years after closure and remediation of the dumpsite One Leachate Treatment Plant will simultaneously be set up near the dumpsite where leachate coming out of the dumpsite will be treated before discharge. › Landfill gas emissions will be controlled and reduced through reduction in gas generation and by oxidation in the "windows". › The aesthetic expression of the area will be improved.

7.8 Summary of the different options and selection of most suitable option A summary comparison of various technical options; their mitigation measures for containment and closure of Dhapa closed dumpsite is presented in table as below:

163

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 7-2: Technical Mitigation Measures for Closure and Containment Options S Indices Option 1: Do Option 2: Option 3.1: Option 3.2: Option 4: Reduced Option 5: Reduced No nothing Simplified Reduced Reduced Infiltration with infiltration and gas Closure Infiltration and infiltration and leachate collection treatment Concept passive gas gas treatment and treatment (and control gas handling)

1 Surface Water Existing baseline Surface Water will Surface Water will be Surface Water will be Surface Water will be Surface Water will be situation as of be controlled and controlled and controlled and controlled and separated controlled and separated now basis separated from separated from separated from from leachate avoiding from leachate avoiding leachate avoiding leachate avoiding leachate avoiding contamination. Overflow contamination.

contamination. contamination. contamination. to adjacent land with Overflow to adjacent Overflow to Overflow to adjacent Overflow to adjacent surface water is land with surface water adjacent land with land with surface land with surface prevented.. is prevented. surface water is water is prevented. water is prevented. prevented.

2 Waste Wastes are covered. Wastes are covered. Wastes are covered. Wastes are covered. No Wastes are covered. No No transport of No transport of No transport of transport of wastes / dust transport of wastes / wastes / dust / litter wastes / dust / litter wastes / dust / litter / litter to surroundings dust / litter to to surroundings to surroundings to surroundings surroundings

3 Leachate Leachate Leachate generation Leachate generation Leachate generation will The surface water run- Management generation will will reduce up to will reduce up to reduce up to 50%. The off from the area is reduce but remains 50%. The 50%. The groundwater table inside increased and leachate relatively high groundwater table groundwater table the waste body will be generation is eliminated inside the waste body inside the waste body low and risk of leachate due to the impermeable will be low and risk will be low and risk seepage through slopes liner. The risks of of leachate seepage of leachate seepage is eliminated. Treatment leachate seepage through slopes are through slopes are of Leachates is proposed through slopes are

164 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S Indices Option 1: Do Option 2: Option 3.1: Option 3.2: Option 4: Reduced Option 5: Reduced No nothing Simplified Reduced Reduced Infiltration with infiltration and gas Closure Infiltration and infiltration and leachate collection treatment Concept passive gas gas treatment and treatment (and control gas handling) eliminated eliminated thereby reducing the eliminated. Residual pollution levels of Leachates generated leachates. will be treated and disposal off safely

4 Ground Water High water Reduced infiltration Reduced infiltration Reduced infiltration of Avoidance of (leachate) level of rainwater resulting of rainwater resulting rainwater resulting in infiltration of rainwater inside the waste in less leachate in less leachate less leachate generation resulting in no leachate boundary with a generation which will generation which will which will lower the generation which will risk of seepage of lower the water lower the water water (leachate) level lower the water leachate through (leachate) level (leachate) level inside the waste body (leachate) level inside slopes inside the waste body inside the waste body and the downwards and the downwards and the downwards gradient gradient gradient

5 Pollution to Continued pollution Continued pollution Continued pollution No Continued pollution No continued pollution Secondary ground to secondary of the upper of the upper of the upper ground of the upper water unconfined ground water groundwater groundwater water because of groundwater secondary aquifer unconfined aquifer secondary aquifer secondary aquifer treatment of leachates aquifer

6 Landfill Gas Landfill gas Landfill gas Landfill gas Landfill gas emissions Landfill gas emissions Management emissions will be emissions will be emissions will be will be controlled and will be controlled and reduced as some controlled and controlled and reduced through reduced through methane oxidation reduced through reduced through reduction in gas reduction in gas will take place in oxidation in the generation and by generation and by

165

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S Indices Option 1: Do Option 2: Option 3.1: Option 3.2: Option 4: Reduced Option 5: Reduced No nothing Simplified Reduced Reduced Infiltration with infiltration and gas Closure Infiltration and infiltration and leachate collection treatment Concept passive gas gas treatment and treatment (and control gas handling) the top soil layer "windows". combustion in a flare oxidation in the oxidation in the "windows". "windows"

7 Aesthetics The aesthetic The aesthetic The aesthetic The aesthetic expression The aesthetic expression of the expression of the area expression of the area of the area will be expression of the area will be will be improved will be improved improved improved area will be improved

166 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

The Consultant’s opinion is for implementing Option 4 / Option 5 which is found to most compliant as per technical requirements and also in accordance with the Indian Legislative requirements. Partial non- compliance (applicable for all options) will essentially be the continued, perhaps limited, presence of certain harmful wastes (hazardous / bio- medical / e-waste) which will not be extracted from the dump site.

An elaborated summary of the Environment and Social Legislation compared with Option 4 and 5 is presented in Table 7-3.

Table 7-3: Comparison of Option 4 & 5 for Containment and Closure of Dhapa Landfill with Relevant Environmental and Social Legislation S. Applicability Considered Options for Containment and Closure No. of various Acts, Rules Option 4: Reduced Option 5: Impermeable and infiltration with cover and passive gas control Regulations leachate collection and treatment (and gas handling)

1 The Compliance with EP Act Compliance with EP Act Environment (Collection and treatment of Protection Act leachate will be a permanent and Rules, 1986 installation and will be operated during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Remediation project), (air emissions will be controlled and treated by means of oxidation in compost filter)

2 The Water Compliance with Water Compliance with Water Act (Prevention and Act Control) of Pollution, Act, 1974 and Rules 1975

3 The Water Applicable as ground Applicable as ground water (Prevention and water extraction is extraction is envisaged for Control) of envisaged for watering of watering of the cover layer. Pollution Cess the cover layer Act, 1977 and Rules 1978

4 West Bengal Applicable since ground Applicable since ground water is Ground Water water is being abstracted. being abstracted. However, no Act 2005 However, no special special permission is required permission is required since the area lies in safe zone and since the area lies in safe since abstraction will be less than zone and since abstraction 2000 m3/day. will be less than 2000 m3/day.

167

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S. Applicability Considered Options for Containment and Closure No. of various Acts, Rules Option 4: Reduced Option 5: Impermeable and infiltration with cover and passive gas control Regulations leachate collection and treatment (and gas handling)

5 The Municipal Full Compliance with In Compliance to MSW Rules, top Solid Wastes MSW Rules as leachate cover will be provided and (Management treatment as well as gas leachate management by and Handling) flaring is envisaged Installation of Leachate Treatment Rules, 2000 Facility is provided.

6 The Hazardous Partial compliance with Partial compliance with the Wastes the Hazardous Wastes Hazardous Wastes Rules since the (Management, Rules since the landfill landfill will be partially excavated Handling and will be partially excavated for re-profiling, and during that Trans boundary) for re-profiling, and process, identified hazardous Rules 2008 during that process, wastes (e.g. asbestos waste) will identified hazardous be segregated and disposed as per wastes (e.g. asbestos the Authorisation secured under waste) will be segregated the Rules from the WBPCB. and disposed as per the Authorisation secured under the Rules from the WBPCB.

7 The Bio- Partial compliance with Partial compliance with the Medical Wastes the Hazardous Wastes Hazardous Wastes Rules since the (Management Rules since the landfill landfill will be partially excavated and Handling) will be partially excavated for re-profiling, and during that Rules, 1998 for re-profiling, and process, identified bio-medical during that process, wastes (e.g. with infectious identified bio-medical properties) will be segregated and wastes (e.g. with disposed as per the Authorisation infectious properties) will secured under the Rules from the be segregated and WBPCB. disposed as per the Authorisation secured under the Rules from the WBPCB.

168 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S. Applicability Considered Options for Containment and Closure No. of various Acts, Rules Option 4: Reduced Option 5: Impermeable and infiltration with cover and passive gas control Regulations leachate collection and treatment (and gas handling)

8 Air (Prevention Active gas treatment in Active gas treatment in the form of and Control) of the form of hot oxidation in a compost filter will Pollution Act flaring/oxidation I be used to mitigate methane 1981 and Rules compost filter will be emissions. This will result in 1982 used to mitigate methane emission of pollutants, namely emissions. This will result SO2, NOx and Particulates in emission of pollutants, amongst others, as by-products of namely SO2, NOx and the methane combustion process. Particulates amongst However, since these are expected others, as by-products of to be within specified norms the methane combustion (under the National Ambient Air process. However, since Quality Standards), they will be these are expected to be compliant with the Air Act. within specified norms (under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards), they will be compliant with the Air Act.

9 Noise Pollution Moderate increase in Moderate increase in noise levels (Regulation and noise levels during during construction phase and Control) Rules construction phase and minor during the after-closure 2000 minor during the after- period. Compliance with the Rules closure period. will be maintained. Compliance with the Rules will be maintained.

10 The Wetlands Dhapa lies within a Dhapa lies within a protected (Conservation protected wetland, namely wetland, namely the East Kolkata and the East Kolkata Wetlands, a Ramsar Convention Management) Wetlands, a Ramsar site. In this plan since the landfill Rules, 2010 Convention site. In this will be covered with an plan since the landfill will impermeable layer which will be covered with a semi- further reduce leachate generation permeable layer which as compared to the Option 4 will further reduce leading to elimination of leachate, leachate generation as due to drying, after few years. compared to the Option 2. Application already submitted to Further, leachate will be the East Kolkata Wetland treated in this option, Authority for getting necessary leading to prevention of approval / permission / clearance pollution to ground water; for the Remediation / Closure and surface water and soil, Containment of the Dump site hence NOT pose a threat along with leachate treatment to the wetlands. facility.

169

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

S. Applicability Considered Options for Containment and Closure No. of various Acts, Rules Option 4: Reduced Option 5: Impermeable and infiltration with cover and passive gas control Regulations leachate collection and treatment (and gas handling)

11 East Kolkata Dhapa lies within a Dhapa lies within a protected Wetlands protected wetland, namely wetland, namely the East Kolkata (Conservation the East Kolkata Wetlands, a Ramsar Convention and Wetlands, a Ramsar site. In this plan since the landfill Management) Convention site. In this will be covered with an Act, 2006 plan since the landfill will impermeable layer which will be covered with a semi- further reduce leachate generation permeable layer which as compared to the Option 4 will further reduce leading to elimination of leachate, leachate generation as due to drying, after few years. compared to the Option 2. Application already submitted to Further, leachate will be the East Kolkata Wetland treated in this option, Authority for getting necessary leading to prevention of approval / permission / clearance pollution to ground water; for the Remediation / Closure and surface water and soil, Containment of the Dump site hence NOT pose a threat along with leachate treatment to the wetlands. facility.

12 The Contract Applicable Applicable Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970

13 The Companies Applicable Applicable Bill, 2012

14 Labour Laws Applicable Applicable (ESI Act 1948 etc.)

15 National Applicable Applicable Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy, 2007

Based on the comparison of the above two options, Option 5 was selected as most suitable option along with Leachate Treatment Facility

170 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

8 Policy, Legislative and Administrative Framework

8.1 Introduction

This section presents relevant international and national regulation regarding the environmental and social assessment of projects. In this Section special focus is given to the regulations of:

› The World Bank Group (WBG), which includes The World Bank (WB), i.e. the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA). These have been discussed since the World Bank Group is funding part of the project.

› National legislation, i.e. from India, has also been covered as relevant to the project.

› The Project Operation manual for Capacity Building for Industrial Pollution Management Projects (under which this project falls) also implies to the adherence to the Environmental and Social Management Framework laid down as per Safe Guard Policies of World Bank Group.

8.2 World Bank Group’s Environmental and Social Policies / Framework / Standards

The World Bank Group’s Environmental and Social Policies and Actions are dictated by:

› World Bank’s Environmental and Social (‘Safeguard’) Policies in place since 1998 as last revised.

These are further discussed.

171

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

8.2.1 World Bank Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies The operations of the World Bank are guided by a comprehensive set of policies and procedures, dealing with the Bank's core development objectives and goals, the instruments for pursuing them, and specific requirements for Bank financed operations. These are set out in the Bank's Operational Manual. The core of this guidance lies in the Operational Policies (OPs) which are short, focused statements that follow from the Bank's Articles of Agreement, its general conditions, and from policies specifically approved by the Board. Bank Procedures (BPs) provide guidance for Bank Officials in implementing the Ops25.

Within the overall set of Operational Policies, Bank management has identified ten key policies26 that are critical to ensuring that potentially adverse environmental and social consequences are identified, minimized, and mitigated. These ten policies are collectively known as the Safeguard Policies, and receive particular attention during the project preparation and approval process. These environmental and social safeguard policies are a cornerstone of the Bank’s support to sustainable poverty reduction. The objective of these policies is to prevent and mitigate undue harm to people and their environment in the development process. These policies provide guidelines for bank and borrower staffs in the identification, preparation, and implementation of programs and projects. The effectiveness and development impact of projects and programs supported by the Bank has substantially increased as a result of attention to these policies. Safeguard policies have often provided a platform for the participation of stakeholders in project design, and have been an important instrument for building ownership among local populations.

The policies are summarised in Table 8-1.

25 (OPs) are short, focused statements that follow from the Bank's Articles of Agreement, the general conditions, and policies approved by the Board. OPs establish the parameters for the conduct of operations; they also describe the circumstances under which exceptions to policy are admissible and spell out who authorizes exceptions. Bank Procedures (BPs) explain how Bank staff carry out the policies set out in the OPs. They spell out the procedures and documentation required to ensure Bankwide consistency and quality. Operational Memoranda (OP Memos) are interim instructions intended to elaborate on material in OPs/BPs or ODs. Once the instructions in OP Memos are incorporated into revisions of the pertinent OPs/BPs, the OP Memos are retired. 26 ‘Safeguard Policies’ at www.worldbank.org

172 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 8-1: World Bank’s Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies

Policy Description

World Bank policy on environmental assessment (EA) states that all projects proposed for World Bank financing require an EA to ensure that they are environmentally and socially sound and sustainable. EA is a process whose breadth, depth and type of assessment varies according to the type of project. Various instruments are used to perform the EA OP/BP 4.01 on Environmental depending on the complexity of the project and are assessment covered in para 8.2.2. EA applies one or more of these instruments or elements of them, as appropriate. When the project is likely to have sectoral or regional impacts, sectoral or regional EA is required. Categories are: ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, and ‘FI’. OP 4.01 also sets forth the minimum requirements for public consultation and public disclosure for projects.

This policy affirms the World Bank’s commitment to promote and support natural habitat conservation and improved land use, and the protection, maintenance, OP/BP 4.04 on natural habitats and rehabilitation of natural habitats and their functions in its project financing. The World Bank does not support projects that involve significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats.

The World Bank supports the use of biological or environmental control methods rather than the use of OP 4.09 on pest management pesticides where there is a need for pest management. Where pesticides are required, this policy sets forth the criteria for their use.

OP/BP 4.10, Indigenous Peoples, underscores the need for Borrowers and Bank staff to identify indigenous peoples, consult with them, ensure that they participate OP/BP 4.10 on indigenous in, and benefit from Bank-funded operations in a peoples culturally appropriate way - and that adverse impacts on them are avoided, or where not feasible, minimized or mitigated.

Cultural resources are important as sources of valuable historical and scientific information, as assets for economic and social development, and as integral parts of a people's cultural identity and practices. The loss of OP/BP 4.11 on physical cultural such resources is irreversible, but fortunately, it is often resources avoidable. The objective of OP/BP 4.11 on Physical Cultural Resources is to avoid, or mitigate, adverse impacts on cultural resources from development projects that the World Bank finances.

This policy is applied wherever land, housing or other resources are taken involuntarily from people. It sets out the objectives to be met and procedures to be OP/BP 4.12 on involuntary followed for carrying out baseline studies, impact resettlement analyses, and mitigation plans when affected people must move or lose part or all of their livelihoods. An annex to OP 4.12 presents the outline for a Resettlement Plan, the key document to be prepared by

173

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Policy Description the project sponsor. Note: OP/BP 4.12 is not triggered as R&R and Land Acquisition is not applicable for this project

World Bank involvement in the forestry sector aims to reduce deforestation, enhance the environmental contribution of forested areas, promote afforestation, OP/BP 4.36 on forests reduce poverty, and encourage economic development. The World Bank does not finance commercial logging operations or the purchase of logging equipment for use in primary tropical moist forests.

This policy sets forth the World Bank’s requirements for projects where dams are to be constructed. The owner of a dam has full responsibility for the safety of the dam. The World Bank requires that dams be designed and constructed by experienced and competent professionals. For large dams (over 15 OP/BP 4.37 on dam safety meters high) and dams between 10 and 15 meters that present special design complexities, World Bank requires reviews by a panel of independent experts, preparation of detailed plans, and periodic safety inspections. The policy covers mine tailings dams and dams containing other material such as ash from power plants, as well as water storage dams.

Projects on International Waterways may affect the relations between the World Bank and its borrowers, and between riparian states. Therefore, the Bank attaches great importance to the riparians making appropriate agreements or arrangements for the entire waterway, or parts thereof, and stands ready to assist in OP/BP 7.50 regarding projects this regard. In the absence of such agreements or on international waterways arrangements, the Bank requires, as a general rule, that the prospective borrower notifies the other riparians of the project. The Policy lays down detailed procedures for the notification requirement, including the role of the Bank in affecting the notification, period of reply and the procedures in case there is an objection by one of the riparians to the project.

Operational Policy (OP)/Bank Procedure (BP) 7.60: Projects in Disputed Areas may affect the relations between the Bank and its borrowers, and between the claimants to the disputed area. Therefore, the Bank will only finance projects in disputed areas when either OP/BP 7.60 regarding projects in there is no objection from the other claimant to the disputed areas disputed area, or when the special circumstances of the case support Bank financing, notwithstanding the objection. The policy details those special circumstances. In such cases, the project documents should include a statement emphasizing that by supporting the project, the Bank does not intend to make any judgment on the legal or other status of the

174 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Policy Description territories concerned or to prejudice the final determination of the parties' claims.

8.2.2 Applicability of the World Bank Policies to the Dhapa Project:  OP 4.01 – Environmental Assessment. The Project is classified as Category A. An Environmental and Social Assessment (ESA) to identify this Project’s potential environmental and social impacts has to be completed in accordance with the Bank’s environmental policies applicable to Category A projects. The ESA report also reviews India’s policy and regulatory framework regarding management of hazardous and municipal solid waste and related environmental issues, evaluates the positive and negative impacts and strategic environmental priorities. The Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) comprises: (i) an Impact Matrix during Site Remediation of project activities, direct and indirect impacts and their positive and negative effects; (ii) a plan that details, for each site being remediated, the specific environmental and social impacts and related mitigation measures for these site-specific impacts–including a Resettlement/Rehabilitation Action Plan (RAP) to fully address any resettlement needs and the considerable issues regarding restoration of income.

 OP 4.04 – Natural Habitats. The policy on natural habitats may be triggered specifically with regard to the closure and rehabilitation of Dhapa old municipal waste dump site, which is in the vicinity of the East Kolkata wetlands. The remediation measures at Dhapa are designed to mitigate impacts of toxic run-offs from the site, which pose risks to the community and area ecology. The closure and reclaiming of the site is expected to result in decreased levels of pollution in the water and soil and thus will have significant positive impacts. Any temporary impacts as a result of the remediation works will be mitigated following the recommendations of the ESMP.

 OP 4.12 – Involuntary Resettlement. The physical activities envisaged under the project are unlikely to have significantly adverse social safeguard impacts. No land acquisition is expected under the project; however, the project has triggered the policy on involuntary resettlement due to the likelihood that income streams will be interrupted by project activities and will need to be restored.

8.2.3 Environmental Assessment Instruments Recognised by the World Bank Depending on the project, a range of instruments can be used to satisfy the Bank's EA requirement:

175

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

› Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) › Regional or Sectoral EA, › Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) › Environmental Audit, Hazard or Risk assessment, › Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and › Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). EA applies one or more of these instruments, or elements of them, as appropriate. When the project is likely to have sectoral or regional impacts, sectoral or regional EA is required.

8.3 National Regulations

As discussed, the project involves closure and containment of the dumpsite, for which six possible options have been discussed. Considering that one amongst these would require being implemented, it is necessary to have an understanding of the likely legislative framework that could impact these options. This chapter addresses this need by covering:

› An overview of applicable regulation, including the co-relation of each regulation with applicable closure and containment options › Detailed explanation with respect to each legislation covering its scope, relevance, compliance requirements and regulatory oversight › Summing up of the discussion by comparing the extent of compliance offered by each closure and containment option vis-a-vis each regulation

8.4 Overview of Applicable National Legislation

A gist of applicable legislation is provided in Table 8-2. These regulations are to be strictly adhered to during the phase of Implementation of the Closure and Containment / Remediation activities for the closed dumpsite. The Contractor will be responsible for strictly adhering / catering to the applicable legislations governing the closure / remediation of the dumpsite and also take permissions / approvals from any concerned authorities as the case may be.

It is to be noted that the EIA Notification, 2006 does not require securing of formal Environmental Clearance for projects involving landfill closure (as it is a Category B2 project), as already mentioned earlier.

176 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Table 8-2: Legislative Overview Applicability / Rationale / S. Permit Compliance Competent Regulation Purpose Relevant Containment and No. Required? Documentation Authority Closure Option

An umbrella Act based on Form V under the EP Rules for which many regulations The basic legislation which all options where authorization Environment Protection are based; the Rules governs much other regulation and consents as part of post- 1 Act, 1986; Environment No WBPCB specify discharge norms that is relevant to the Site. closure operations would be Protection Rules, 1986 and specifications for Relevant for each option. required. (Options 3.1, 3.2, 4 various discharges and 5).

The main regulation Proof of compliance with Municipal Solid Wastes governing management of Closure of landfills requires Yes – for discharge limits for leachate, air 2 (Management and Municipal Solid Wastes in compliance with the MSW leachate WBPCB emissions and compost quality Handling) Rules, 2000 India, including closure of Rules. Relevant for each option. treatment (if required). landfills / dumpsites.

Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, Point source air emissions are Permit compliance, in particular To regulate emissions to 3 1981; Air (Prevention and likely to be part of Closure and No point source air emission WBPCB the atmosphere Control of Pollution) Containment Option 3.2 and 5. results. Rules, 1982

Some noise level enhancement is likely as part of the Closure and Noise Pollution To control background Containment Options and Source and background noise 4 (Regulation and Control) noise levels in the No WBPCB Operation / Maintenance levels. Rules, 2000 environment. Schedule. Will be relevant for Options 2 to 5.

Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, To regulate wastewater Leachate treatment plants are Clause wise permit compliance, 5 1974; Water (Prevention discharges into different proposed as per Containment and Yes especially quality of wastewater WBPCB and Control of Pollution) receiving streams Closure Options 3.2, 4 and 5. being discharged into outlet Rules, 1975

177

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Applicability / Rationale / S. Permit Compliance Competent Regulation Purpose Relevant Containment and No. Required? Documentation Authority Closure Option

To gather cess for the State Water (Prevention and Pollution Control Boards Control of Pollution) Cess as one of the means for For all options where water is Monthly water cess returns and Act, 1977; Water 6 their functioning; to consumed (Option 2 to 5) as part No annual water cess returns as per WBPCB (Prevention and Control of encourage control on of the end use. Form 1. Pollution) Cess Rules, consumption of water 1978 as amended in 2003 resources.

To control abstraction (drawl) of groundwater in Applicable in case water Status of the site at the time of notified areas and regulate requirements post-closure are The West Bengal Ground abstraction of groundwater by 7 groundwater abstraction in addressed by abstraction of Yes SWID Water Act 2005 drilling of a well to be checked areas considered over- groundwater through drilling of with the SWID. exploited, critical and an abstraction well. semi-critical

The Hazardous Wastes Management of Hazardous Applicable for all options Clause wise compliance with 8 (Management, Handling Wastes (Some hazardous whereby hazardous waste Yes the Hazardous Waste WBPCB and Tran boundary) Rules, waste are expected authorisation is required (Options Authorisation including suitable

178 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Applicability / Rationale / S. Permit Compliance Competent Regulation Purpose Relevant Containment and No. Required? Documentation Authority Closure Option 2008 as amended till date disposed at the closed 4 and 5) manifest records of hazardous dumpsite) waste management.

Management of Bio- Likely, based on wastes Compliance with permit norms The Bio-Medical Wastes medical Wastes (It identified during the landfill re- including manifest / disposal (Management and 9 is known that bio-medical profiling process. See footnote. Yes records indicating safe disposal WBPCB Handling) Rules, 1998, as waste are disposed at the Applicable for Options 3.1, 3.2, 4 to an authorised disposal amended in 200327 dumpsite) and 5. facility.

Discharges into wetlands require to be regulated under these To maintain the ecological Correspondence with the Rules. Options 2, 3.1, 3.2, 4 and Central The Wetlands character of identified Central Wetlands Regulatory 5 all discharge treated effluent Wetlands 10 (Conservation and wetlands, including Yes Authority and compliance with into the water body lying within Regulatory Management) Rules, 2010 Ramsar Convention any requirements stipulated by the wetlands through a drainage Authority Wetlands the Authority channel.

11 The East Kolkata To demarcate the East The closure / remediation project Clearance Application already submitted East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation Kolkata Wetlands’ of the closed dumpsite in the area required from to the East Kolkata Wetland Wetlands

27 Both the Bio-Medical Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules as well as the E-waste (Management and Handling) Rules would require consideration when the site is re- laid to achieve the required shape and slope (Options 3.1, 3.2, 4 and 5). During the process of profiling of wastes excavation will be carried out. Looking at the past history of waste dumping, it is possible that some bio-medical and some e-waste may be generated and would necessarily require suitable disposal as per applicable norms.

179

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Applicability / Rationale / S. Permit Compliance Competent Regulation Purpose Relevant Containment and No. Required? Documentation Authority Closure Option and Management) Act, boundaries, prevent of Dhapa East Kolkata Authority for getting necessary Management 2006 unauthorised use or Wetlands clearance for the Remediation / Authority development of the Closure and Containment of the (EKWA) Wetlands, prevent and Dump site along with leachate restrict mining and treatment facility. quarrying within the Wetlands, reduce pollution in the Wetlands, to prepare action plans conforming to the Ramsar Convention and others.

Labour would require to be hired The Contract Labour To regulate employment of during the time of construction / Compliance with the permit Labour 13 (Regulation and Abolition) Yes contract labour. operation and maintenance (labour license) Commissioner Act 1970 (Options 2, 3.1, 3.2, 4 and 5)

In case inter-state labour would To regulate hiring and require to be hired during the The Inter State Migrant Proof of compliance with the Labour 14 working conditions of time of construction / operation Yes Workmen Act, 1979 regulation Commissioner inter-state workmen. and maintenance (Options 2, 3.1, 3.2, 4 and 5)

Labour Laws (ESI Act, To ensure equity / fairness Labour would require to be hired 1948, EPF Act, 1952, and welfare whilst hiring during the time of construction / Proof of compliance with the Labour 15 Workmen’s Compensation of employees during the Yes operation and maintenance regulation Commissioner Act, 1936, Bonus Act, construction / operation (Options 2, 3.1, 3.2, 4 and 5) 1965) phase

180 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

181

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

8.5 Comparison of Containment and Closure Options with applicable Environmental Legislations

A summary comparison of various identified options for containment and closure of Dhapa closed dumpsite with relevant environment and social rules and regulation / legislation is presented in Table 8-3.

The Consultant’s opinion is for implementing Option 4 or Option 5 which is found to most compliant with relevant legislation as compared to other options. The partial non-compliance (applicable for all options) will essentially be the continued, perhaps limited, presence of certain harmful wastes (hazardous / bio-medical / e-waste) which cannot be extracted completely from the dump site.

182 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 8-3: Comparison of Identified Options for Containment and Closure of Dhapa Landfill with Relevant Environment al and Social Legislation OPTIONS Applica- bility of Option 3.1: Option 4: Reduced S. various Option 3.2: Option 5: Option 2: Reduced infiltration with No. Acts, Rules Option 1: Do Reduced Impermeable cover Simplified infiltration and leachate collection and nothing infiltration and and passive gas closure concept passive gas and treatment (and Regulations gas treatment control control gas handling)

Compliance with EP Act Compliance with EP Act Non Compliance (Collection and treatment with the Non Compliance Non Compliance with of leachate will be a Non Compliance Environmental with the EP Act due the EP Act due to permanent installation The with the EP Act due Protection Act to continued untreated leachate and will be operated Environment to untreated leachate due to continued emissions and discharge to water during the Operation and 1 Protection Act discharge to water emissions and discharges to bodies (air emissions Maintenance Phase of the and Rules, bodies (air discharges to receiving water will be controlled and Remediation project), 1986 emissions will be receiving water bodies and treated by means of (air emissions will be controlled) bodies and atmosphere hot flaring) controlled and treated by atmosphere means of oxidation in compost filter)

The Water Non Compliance Compliance with Water Compliance with Water Non Compliance Non Compliance (Prevention and with the Water Non Compliance with Act Act with the Water Act with the Water Act Control) of Act due to the Water Act as no 2 due to continued as no leachate Pollution, Act, continued surface leachate treatment is surface and ground treatment is 1974 and Rules and ground water envisaged water pollution envisaged 1975 pollution

183

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

OPTIONS Applica- bility of Option 3.1: Option 4: Reduced S. various Option 3.2: Option 5: Option 2: Reduced infiltration with No. Acts, Rules Option 1: Do Reduced Impermeable cover Simplified infiltration and leachate collection and nothing infiltration and and passive gas closure concept passive gas and treatment (and Regulations gas treatment control control gas handling)

The Water Applicable as (Prevention and ground water Applicable as ground Applicable as ground Applicable as ground Control) of extraction is water extraction is water extraction is water extraction is 3 Not Applicable Not Applicable Pollution Cess envisaged for envisaged for watering envisaged for watering envisaged for watering of Act, 1977 and watering of the of the cover layer of the cover layer the cover layer Rules 1978 cover layer

Applicable since Applicable since ground Applicable since ground ground water is Applicable since water is being abstracted. water is being abstracted. being abstracted. ground water is being However, no special However, no special However, no special abstracted. However, permission is required permission is required West Bengal permission is no special permission since the area lies in safe since the area lies in safe 4 Ground Water Not Applicable Not Applicable required since the is required since the zone and since zone and since Act 2005 area lies in safe zone area lies in safe zone abstraction will be less abstraction will be less and since and since abstraction than 2000 m3/day. than 2000 m3/day. abstraction will be will be less than 2000 less than 2000 m3/day. m3/day.

184 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

OPTIONS Applica- bility of Option 3.1: Option 4: Reduced S. various Option 3.2: Option 5: Option 2: Reduced infiltration with No. Acts, Rules Option 1: Do Reduced Impermeable cover Simplified infiltration and leachate collection and nothing infiltration and and passive gas closure concept passive gas and treatment (and Regulations gas treatment control control gas handling)

Partial compliance Full Compliance with In Compliance to MSW Partial compliance to to MSW Rules (as MSW Rules as leachate Rules, top cover will be MSW Rules (as top Non Compliance top cover is treatment as well as gas provided and leachate The Municipal cover is provided) with the MSW Non Compliance as provided) however flaring is envisaged management by Solid Wastes however non- Rules as the site is the top cover is not non-compliance Installation of Leachate 5 (Management compliance with an open historic in accordance with with regards to Treatment Facility is and Handling) regards to leachate dump without any rules leachate provided. Rules, 2000 management (since liner system management (since leachate is not being leachate is not being treated) treated)

Partial compliance Partial compliance Partial compliance with Partial compliance with Non Compliance with the Hazardous with the Hazardous the Hazardous Wastes the Hazardous Wastes Non Compliance The Hazardous with the Wastes Rules since Wastes Rules since the Rules since the landfill Rules since the landfill with the Hazardous Wastes Hazardous Waste the landfill will be landfill will be will be partially will be partially Waste Rules as (Management, Rules as potential partially excavated partially excavated for excavated for re- excavated for re- potential hazardous 6 Handling and hazardous wastes for re-profiling, and re-profiling, and profiling, and during that profiling, and during that wastes (for e.g. Trans (for e.g. waste during that process, during that process, process, identified process, identified waste asbestos- boundary) asbestos-cement identified hazardous identified hazardous hazardous wastes (e.g. hazardous wastes (e.g. cement sheets) have Rules 2008 sheets) have been wastes will be wastes will be asbestos waste) will be asbestos waste) will be been observed at site observed at site segregated and segregated and segregated and disposed segregated and disposed disposed as per the disposed as per the as per the Authorisation as per the Authorisation Authorisation Authorisation secured secured under the Rules secured under the Rules

185

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

OPTIONS Applica- bility of Option 3.1: Option 4: Reduced S. various Option 3.2: Option 5: Option 2: Reduced infiltration with No. Acts, Rules Option 1: Do Reduced Impermeable cover Simplified infiltration and leachate collection and nothing infiltration and and passive gas closure concept passive gas and treatment (and Regulations gas treatment control control gas handling) secured under the under the Rules from from the WBPCB. from the WBPCB. Rules from the the WBPCB. WBPCB.

Partial compliance Partial compliance with Partial compliance with with the Hazardous the Hazardous Wastes the Hazardous Wastes Wastes Rules since Partial compliance Rules since the landfill Rules since the landfill the landfill will be with the Hazardous will be partially will be partially partially excavated Wastes Rules since the excavated for re- excavated for re- Non Compliance Non Compliance for re-profiling, and landfill will be profiling, and during that profiling, and during that with the Bio- with the Bio- during that process, partially excavated for process, identified bio- process, identified bio- The Bio- medical Wastes medical Wastes identified bio- re-profiling, and medical wastes (e.g. with medical wastes (e.g. with Medical Wastes Rules as possible Rules as possible medical wastes will during that process, infectious properties) infectious properties) will 7 (Management bio-medical bio-medical wastes be segregated and identified bio-medical will be segregated and be segregated and and Handling) wastes (for e.g. (for e.g. syringes) disposed as per the wastes will be disposed as per the disposed as per the Rules, 1998 syringes) have have been observed Authorisation segregated and Authorisation secured Authorisation secured been observed at at the site secured under the disposed as per the under the Rules from the under the Rules from the the site Rules from the Authorisation secured WBPCB. WBPCB. WBPCB. under the Rules from the WBPCB.

186 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

OPTIONS Applica- bility of Option 3.1: Option 4: Reduced S. various Option 3.2: Option 5: Option 2: Reduced infiltration with No. Acts, Rules Option 1: Do Reduced Impermeable cover Simplified infiltration and leachate collection and nothing infiltration and and passive gas closure concept passive gas and treatment (and Regulations gas treatment control control gas handling)

Active gas treatment Active gas treatment in Active gas treatment in in the form of hot the form of hot the form of oxidation in a flaring will be used to flaring/oxidation I compost filter will be mitigate methane compost filter will be used to mitigate methane emissions. This will used to mitigate methane emissions. This will Passive gas controls result in emission of emissions. This will result in emission of Non Compliance will be used by pollutants, namely result in emission of pollutants, namely SO , Non Compliance as 2 as site will deploying a compost SO2, NOx and pollutants, namely SO , NOx and Particulates Air (Prevention site will continue to 2 continue to cause layer to mitigate Particulates amongst NOx and Particulates amongst others, as by- and Control) of cause air pollution air pollution methane emissions. others, as by-products amongst others, as by- products of the methane 8 Pollution Act including methane including methane However, this is a of the methane products of the methane combustion process. 1981 and Rules releases (windblown releases and basic treatment that combustion process. combustion process. However, since these are 1982 particulates will be windblown will reduce but not However, since these However, since these are expected to be within controlled) particulates eliminate methane are expected to be expected to be within specified norms (under emissions within specified norms specified norms (under the National Ambient Air (under the National the National Ambient Quality Standards), they Ambient Air Quality Air Quality Standards), will be compliant with Standards), they will they will be compliant the Air Act. be compliant with the with the Air Act. Air Act.

187

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

OPTIONS Applica- bility of Option 3.1: Option 4: Reduced S. various Option 3.2: Option 5: Option 2: Reduced infiltration with No. Acts, Rules Option 1: Do Reduced Impermeable cover Simplified infiltration and leachate collection and nothing infiltration and and passive gas closure concept passive gas and treatment (and Regulations gas treatment control control gas handling)

Moderate increase Moderate increase Moderate increase in Moderate increase in Moderate increase in in noise levels in noise levels noise levels during noise levels during noise levels during during construction during construction construction phase and construction phase and Noise Pollution construction phase and phase and minor phase and minor minor during the after- minor during the after- (Regulation minor during the after- 9 Not Applicable during the after- during the after- closure period. closure period. and Control) closure period. closure period. closure period. Compliance with the Compliance with the Rules 2000 Compliance with the Compliance with the Compliance with the Rules will be Rules will be maintained. Rules will be Rules will be Rules will be maintained. maintained. maintained. maintained.

Dhapa lies Dhapa lies adjacent Dhapa lies adjacent Dhapa lies adjacent to Dhapa lies within a Dhapa lies within a adjacent to a to a protected to a protected a protected wetland, protected wetland, protected wetland, protected wetland, wetland, namely the wetland, namely the namely the East namely the East Kolkata namely the East Kolkata namely the East East Kolkata East Kolkata Kolkata Wetlands, a Wetlands, a Ramsar Wetlands, a Ramsar The Wetlands Kolkata Wetlands, Wetlands, a Ramsar Wetlands, a Ramsar Ramsar Convention Convention site. In this Convention site. In this (Conservation a Ramsar Convention site. In Convention site. In site. In this plan since plan since the landfill plan since the landfill will 10 and Convention site. this plan since the this plan since the the landfill will be will be covered with a be covered with an Management) If the landfill is landfill will be landfill will be covered with a semi- semi-permeable layer impermeable layer which Rules, 2010 left open without covered with a covered with a semi- permeable layer which which will further reduce will further reduce a suitable closure permeable layer permeable layer will further reduce leachate generation as leachate generation as plan, it will which will reduce which will further leachate generation as compared to the Option compared to the Option 4 continue to leachate generation. reduce leachate compared to the 2. Further, leachate will leading to elimination of pollute the ground However, it will generation as Option 2. However, it be treated in this option, leachate, due to drying,

188 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

OPTIONS Applica- bility of Option 3.1: Option 4: Reduced S. various Option 3.2: Option 5: Option 2: Reduced infiltration with No. Acts, Rules Option 1: Do Reduced Impermeable cover Simplified infiltration and leachate collection and nothing infiltration and and passive gas closure concept passive gas and treatment (and Regulations gas treatment control control gas handling) water, surface continue to pollute compared to the will continue to leading to prevention of after few years. water and soil in the ground water, Option 2. However, pollute the ground pollution to ground Application already surroundings and surface water and it will continue to water, surface water water; surface water and submitted to the East pose a threat to soil in surroundings pollute the ground and soil in soil, hence NOT pose a Kolkata Wetland the wetlands. and pose a threat to water, surface water surroundings and pose threat to the wetlands. Authority for getting the wetlands. and soil in a threat to the necessary approval / surroundings and wetlands. permission / clearance for pose a threat to the the Remediation / Closure wetlands. and Containment of the Dump site along with leachate treatment facility.

Dhapa lies Dhapa lies adjacent Dhapa lies adjacent Dhapa lies adjacent to Dhapa lies within a Dhapa lies within a adjacent to a to a protected to a protected a protected wetland, protected wetland, protected wetland, East Kolkata protected wetland, wetland, namely the wetland, namely the namely the East namely the East Kolkata namely the East Kolkata Wetlands namely the East East Kolkata East Kolkata Kolkata Wetlands, a Wetlands, a Ramsar Wetlands, a Ramsar (Conservation 11 Kolkata Wetlands, Wetlands, a Ramsar Wetlands, a Ramsar Ramsar Convention Convention site. In this Convention site. In this and a Ramsar Convention site. In Convention site. In site. In this plan since plan since the landfill plan since the landfill will Management) Convention site. this plan since the this plan since the the landfill will be will be covered with a be covered with an Act, 2006 If the landfill is landfill will be landfill will be covered with a semi- semi-permeable layer impermeable layer which left open without covered with a covered with a semi- permeable layer which which will further reduce will further reduce a suitable closure permeable layer permeable layer will further reduce leachate generation as leachate generation as

189

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

OPTIONS Applica- bility of Option 3.1: Option 4: Reduced S. various Option 3.2: Option 5: Option 2: Reduced infiltration with No. Acts, Rules Option 1: Do Reduced Impermeable cover Simplified infiltration and leachate collection and nothing infiltration and and passive gas closure concept passive gas and treatment (and Regulations gas treatment control control gas handling) plan, it will which will reduce which will further leachate generation as compared to the Option compared to the Option 4 continue to leachate generation. reduce leachate compared to the 2. Further, leachate will leading to elimination of pollute the ground However, it will generation as Option 2. However, it be treated in this option, leachate, due to drying, water, surface continue to pollute compared to the will continue to leading to prevention of after few years. water and soil in the ground water, Option 2. However, pollute the ground pollution to ground Application already surroundings and surface water and it will continue to water, surface water water; surface water and submitted to the East pose a threat to soil in surroundings pollute the ground and soil in soil, hence NOT pose a Kolkata Wetland the wetlands. and pose a threat to water, surface water surroundings and pose threat to the wetlands. Authority for getting the wetlands. and soil in a threat to the necessary approval / surroundings and wetlands. permission / clearance for pose a threat to the the Remediation / Closure wetlands. and Containment of the Dump site along with leachate treatment facility.

The Contract Labour 12 (Regulation Not Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable and Abolition) Act 1970

190 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

OPTIONS Applica- bility of Option 3.1: Option 4: Reduced S. various Option 3.2: Option 5: Option 2: Reduced infiltration with No. Acts, Rules Option 1: Do Reduced Impermeable cover Simplified infiltration and leachate collection and nothing infiltration and and passive gas closure concept passive gas and treatment (and Regulations gas treatment control control gas handling)

The Companies 13 Not Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Bill, 2012

Labour Laws 14 (ESI Act 1948 Not Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable etc.)

National Rehabilitation 15 and Not Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Applicable Resettlement Policy, 2007

Based on the comparison of the above two options, Option 5 was selected as most suitable option along with Leachate Treatment Facility

191

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

9 Conclusions and Recommendations

The Dhapa closed dumpsite, spread over 12.14 ha, has been in use for dumping of municipal solid wastes (MSW) generated in the city of Kolkata for 22 years before it was closed in 2009. Along with MSW, the dumpsite has also been used for industrial hazardous waste disposal till 2006 as there was no specialised hazardous waste disposal facility in the state till that time. The dumpsite is unlined and uncovered and has no environmental protection arrangements and it is obvious that such long term waste dumping in the area, without adequate pollution prevention and control measures, has had a substantial negative impact on the neighbouring environment.

Although the dumping has ceased, the site still poses significant hazard to the environment and neighbouring community as the dumpsite has not been closed in an environmentally sound manner. An environmental and social assessment conducted in the area as part of this project has identified the hazards and has further established the need for scientific closure and containment of the dumpsite. The neighbouring habitations in the Dhapa area are the major receptors identified in the risk assessment study, especially the Makaltala village which is adjacent to the closed dumpsite.

In view of the environmental and social hazards, the remediation of the closed dumpsite is being considered under this project. Various remediation options have been evaluated and it has been recommended that the dumpsite is covered and arrangements are made for collection and treatment of leachate and landfill gas.

The proposed remediation will contain the pollutants in the closed dumpsite and prevent their migration into the neighboring environment. It will help minimize the environmental and health risks in the surrounding area and improve the aesthetics of the area. It will improve the social life of the neighboring inhabitants and will also translate into potential savings due to lower health care costs. Short term benefits will include generation of

192 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT temporary employment for local people in the remediation works, which women may be given priority wherever feasible.

The remediation will not only improve the environment in the Dhapa area but will also act as a pilot to demonstrate environmentally safe closure of unplanned, crude dumpsites to pave the path for more sustainable and environment friendly waste disposal practices. In addition to the local environmental benefits, the remediation will have global benefits with reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

Other than the short term air and noise pollution expected during the remediation activities and some minor temporary social problems like access restrictions and presence of migrant labour / outsiders in the area, the remediation activities are not likely to have any major negative impacts. No major negative impacts on livelihood are expected. In fact, the social survey has revealed that the proposed remediation is highly welcome by people in the area, specifically those in Makaltala.

Considering the several benefits of the scientific closure and containment of the closed dumpsite, it is concluded that the remediation is essential and should be implemented as soon as possible.

193

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

References

Bandyopadhyaya, T., Dutta, J., Saha, T and Ray, A (2004). Final Report on Preliminary Study on Biodiversity of Sewage EFD Fisheries of East Kolkata Wetland Ecosystem (submitted to Department of Environment, Govt. of West Bengal); Institute of Wetland Management and Ecological Design; Salt Lake City, Kolkata.

Dasgupta, R. (1973). Contribution of Botany of a portion of Salt Lakes, West Bengal. Indian Museum Bulletin Calcutta 8(1): 36-43.

Ghosh, A.K. (2004). Avian Diversity in East Calcutta Wetlands. Environ 9(1): 8-13.

Ghosh D. (2002). Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS). The East Calcutta Wetlands.

Ghosh, A.K. (1997). Management of East Calcutta Wetlands and Canal System. Dept. of Environment, Govt. of West Bengal assisted by the UK, Overseas Development Administration.

Ghosh, A.K. (1990). Biological Resources of wetlands of East Calcutta. Indian Journal of Landscape System and Ecological Studies 13(1): 10-23.

IWMED (Institute of Wetland Management and Ecological Design) (2004). Preliminary study on biodiversity of sewage fed fisheries of East Kolkata Wetland Ecosystem. Kolkata, 40 p.

Kolkata Municipal Corporation (2006) - India: Kolkata Environmental Improvement Project (Supplementary Financing). Environmental Assessment Report Summary Initial Environmental Examination. Project Number: 29466. Prepared by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation for the Asian Development Bank (ADB). August 2006

194 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Kundu N., M. Pal and S. Saha (2008). East Kolkata Wetlands: A resource Recovery System Through Productive Activities. Sengupta M and Dalwani R (eds) Proceedings of Taal2007: The 12th World Lake Conference: 868- 881

Mallick, J.K .(2009); Endemic Marsh Mongoose Herpestes palustris ( Carnivora : Herpestidae) of East Kolkata Wetland, India: a status report; Journal of Threatened Taxa, 1(4):Pgs.215-220

Maiti S. K., S. Saha and T Saha (2011). Study of phytoplankton diversity in East Kolkata Wetlands, West Bengal, India Institute for Environmental Studies and Wetland Management, Kolkata Young Ecologists Talk and Interact. A conference for ecology students and researchers in India 2011.

Mukherjee D. P. (2011). Stress of urban pollution on largest natural wetland ecosystem in East Kolkata-causes, consequences and improvement. Scholars research library Archives of Applied Science Research, 2011, 3 (6):443-461 (http://scholarsresearchlibrary.com/archive.html) ISSN 0975- 508X

Nandi, N.C., S.R. Das, S. Bhuinya & J.M. Dasgupta (1993). Wetland Faunal Resources of West Bengal 1. North and South 24-Parganas Districts. Records of the Zoological Survey of India, Occasional Paper No. 150: 10. Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata. 50pp.

Nature Environment & Wildlife Society (2012). Study on Marsh Mongoose (Herpestes palustris Ghose) in the East Kolkata Wetland. http://www.naturewildlife.org/Activities.htm

Ray, L. et al. (2010). Heavy metal contamination in fruits and vegetables in two districts of West Bengal, India. EJEAFChe, 9 (9) pp 1423-1432]

SWREJ (2007). Monitoring and modelling of discharge of dry water flow (DWF) to East Kolkata Wetlands (EKW). For Preparation of initial environmental examination (IEE) report for such discharge. Final report. Prepared for Kolkata Environmental Improvement Project by the School of Water Resources Engineering. Jadavpur University. Kolkata-700 032. June 2007.

Environmental and Social Assessment Report submitted by ICT

Ghosh, D., Bal, B., Kashyap, V. K. and Pal, S., Molecular phylogenetic exploration of bacterial diversity in a Bakreshwar (India) hot spring and culture of Shewanella-related thermophiles. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 2003, 69, 4332–4336.

Green, J. L. et al., Spatial scaling of microbial eukaryote diversity. Nature, 2004, 432, 747–750.

195

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Klaus-Joerger, T., Joerger, R., Olsson, E. and Granqvist, C., Bacteria as workers in the living factory: metal-accumulating bacteria and their potential for material sciences. Trends Biotechnol., 2001, 19, 15–20.

Heavy metals polluting Kolkata’s groundwater by Maureen Nandini (2007).

Hydrogeology of Kolkata by Sengupta P. K. (2009), Jadavpur Centre for Study of Earth Science.

Regional Hydrostratigraphy and groundwater flow modeling in the arsenic- affected areas of the Western Bengal basin, West Bengal, India by Mukherjee et al 2007, Hydrogeology Journal

Circular soil remediation 2009 - revision 3 April 2012, Gazette of the Netherlands, nr. 6563

Indian Standard Drinking water - specification (second revision of IS10500), Bureau of Indian Standards, January 2005

Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000, Ministry of Environment and Forests, 25th of September 2000

RIVM, 2008. Risicotoolbox Bodem. Last updated may 2012. Available online: http://www.risicotoolbox.nl/

Dhapa Dumpsite, Inception report, March 2012, COWI in association with Kadam, Witteveen+Bos and Tauw

Dhapa Dumpsite, Site investigation, sampling protocol and quality assurance/quality control program, July 2012, COWI in association with Kadam, Witteveen+Bos and Tauw

Dhapa Dumpsite, Sample Analysis and Assessment of Site Pollution Levels, Final report, February 2013 (Revision 14 June 2013)

196 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexures

197

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

198 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexure 1: Long Term Climatological Tables (1961-1990) Kolkata, Alipore Station

Appendix 1: Climatological Tables

201

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexure 2: Sampling Locations Map for Environmental Baseline

203

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexure 3: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Results near Closed Dumpsite

COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF GROUND WATER SAMPLES AROUND THE DUMP SITE - THREE CAMPAIGNS STANDARDS FOR DRINKING WATER - GROUND WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (1st CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (3RD CAMPAIGN) IS 10500 - 2004** Parameter BH - 1 (GW-1) BH - 2 (GW-2) BH - 3 ( (GW-3) BH - 4 (GW-4) BH - 1 (GW-1) BH - 2 (GW-2) BH - 3 ( (GW-3) BH - 4 (GW-4) BH 9 (GW-9) BH - 1 (GW-1) BH - 2 (GW-2) BH - 3 ( (GW-3) BH - 4 (GW-4) BH 9 (GW-9) Minimum Average Maximum Sr No Unit Value Value Value Date of Sampling 08-06-2012 09-06-2012 09-06-2012 11-06-2012 24-07-2012 25-07-2012 23-07-2012 23-07-2012 24-07-2012 12-09-2012 12-09-2012 11-09-2012 11-09-2012 11-09-2012 Desirable Limit Permissible Limit

CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: SGS Certificate 312008464 312008458 312008457 312008577 3120012559 3120012497 3120012553 3120012554 3120012557 3120013770 3120013768 3120013709 3120013710 3120013713 A GENERAL PARAMETERS

1 Ammonia as NH3 mg/l 0.36 10.34 4.37 0.16 <0.10 0.18 15.79 12.67 <0.10 <0.10 2.9 51 0.44 <0.10 0.16 9.8 51 _ _

2 BOD @ 27°C for 3 days mg/l 14 220 142 70 13 55 325 217 <2.0 11 38 23 17 <2.0 11 95.4 325 _ _

3 COD mg/l 72 674 441 225 65 378 2573 1845 12 65 378 162 108 11 11 500.6 2573 _ _ 4 Chlorides mg/l 464.54 2501.35 1214.94 678.93 456.42 2336.86 3213.19 2336.86 46.74 456.42 2555.95 584.22 712.01 116.84 46.74 1262.5 3213.19 250 1000

5 Colour Hazen Units Colourless Straw Yellow Straw Yellow Straw Yellow PALE BROWN YELLOWISH DEEP BROWN DEEP BROWN COLOURLESS PALE YELLOW LIGHT YELLOW LIGHT YELLOW STAW YELLOW COLOURLESS 0 0.0 0 5 25 microsiemen/ 6 Conductivity at 25°C 3330 13550 7750 4650 3330 13320 22800 20700 347 3500 13750 5250 5150 655 347 8434.4 22800 _ _ cm 7 Cyanide (as CN) mg/l <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 No Relaxation

8 Dissolved Oxygen mg/l 0.4 0.5 0.5 3.5 0.03 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.03 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.03 0.6 3.5 _ _

9 Iron (Fe) mg/l 10.32 1.61 7.32 3.15 14.25 6.47 4.78 3.2 2.26 13.84 7.85 3.93 20.38 0.41 0.41 7.1 20.38 0.3 1 10 Fluoride as F mg/l 0.27 0.17 0.44 0.67 0.54 0.37 3.73 0.57 0.3 0.4 0.74 0.45 0.63 0.11 0.11 0.7 3.73 1 1.5 11 Manganese (Mn) mg/l 2.82 1.74 1.12 1.78 2.65 2.57 0.12 0.1 0.06 1.91 2.58 0.86 1.38 0.19 0.06 1.4 2.82 0.1 0.3 Mineral Oil * *Mineral Oil is analysed as 12 mg/l < 2 2.9 2.4 3.8 <2.0 3.3 8.4 4.9 <2.0 <2.0 2.9 2.3 2.1 <2.0 2.1 3.7 8.4 0.01 0.02 Oil and Grease by Gravimetric method

13 Nitrite (NO2) mg/l 0.17 43.71 42.1 0.09 0.02 0.8 0.42 0.43 0.05 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 6.3 43.71 45 No Relaxation

14 Nitrate (NO3) mg/l 57.92 58.47 67.01 95.66 78.15 56.21 252.49 220.22 6.26 25 41.11 22.58 21.42 8.24 6.26 72.2 252.49 _ _

15 pH @ 25°C - 7.9 7.6 7.5 7.3 6.75 6.66 6.94 6.9 8.7 6.57 6.66 7 6.92 7.56 6.57 7.2 8.7 6.5 - 8.5 No Relaxation

Phenolic compounds (as 16 mg/l < 0.05 0.32 0.46 0.17 <0.05 <0.05 47 0.15 <0.05 <0.05 0.52 0.2 0.11 0.06 0.06 5.4 47 0.001 0.002 (C6H5OH) 17 Phoshorous as P mg/l 0.34 1.2 0.24 0.31 <0.10 1.06 0.38 1.17 <0.10 <0.10 1.49 0.46 0.24 <0.10 0.24 0.7 1.49 _ _

18 Odour (Smell) - Odourless Light Pungent Light Pungent Odourless ODOURLESS ODOURLESS PUNGENT PUNGENT ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS 0 0.0 0 Agreeable Agreeable

19 Temperature °C 21.7 22.3 21.9 33.2 37.1 36.4 36.6 34.9 32.1 30.6 33 33.8 37.6 32.1 21.7 31.7 37.6 _ _

20 Turbidity NTU 126 35.5 85.4 81.4 325 118 66 150 54.4 158 145 33.7 270 9.99 9.99 118.5 325 510

Total Organic Carbon 21 mg/l 25 143 124 6 24 22 197 649 6 25 158 73 54 8.6 6 108.2 649 _ _ (TOC) Total Dissolved Solids 22 mg/l 2120 7920 4420 2720 2340 9168 15216 13982 258 2412 9102 3538 3498 484 258 5512.7 15216 500 2000 (TDS) Total Suspended Solids 23 mg/l 126 76.8 123.64 40.8 69 70 57 164 11 30 145 29 306 6 6 89.6 306 _ _ (TSS)

24 Total Nitrogen as N mg/l 19.72 343.77 181.6 30.41 36.55 59.07 2869.45 2559.77 1.55 25.34 765.28 67.85 68.33 2.04 1.55 502.2 2869.45 _ _

B MICROBIAL GROWTH

1 E-coli MPN/100 ml Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent 0 0.0 0 Absent/100 ml _

2 Total Coliforms MPN/100 ml <1.8 MPN <2 MPN <2 MPN <1.8 MPN <1.8 <1.8 <1.8MPN <1.8MPN <1.8MPN <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 0 0.0 0 Absent/100 ml Absent/100 ml

C HEAVY METALS

1 Lead (Pb) mg/l 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.01 <0.005 <0.005 0.03 0.07 0.04 <0.005 <0.005 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.0 0.07 0.01 No Relaxation

2 Arsenic (As) mg/l <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.03 0.006 <0.005 0.008 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.006 0.0 0.03 0.01 0.05

3 Cadmium (Cd) mg/l <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0 0.0 0 0.003 No Relaxation

4 Chromium (Cr) mg/l 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.02 <0.01 0.04 0.19 0.09 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.01 0.03 <0.01 0.01 0.1 0.19 0.05 0.05

5 Copper (Cu) mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.03 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 <0.01 0.01 0.0 0.03 0.05 1.5

6 Mercury (Hg) mg/l <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.008 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.001 No Relaxation

7 Molybdenum (Mo) mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.0 0.01 0.07 No Relaxation 8 Silver (Ag) mg/l <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0 0.0 0 _ _ 9 Zinc (Zn) mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.32 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.12 0.16 0.23 0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.05 0.11 0.01 0.1 0.32 5 15 10 Nickel (Ni) mg/l 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.02 <0.01 0.02 0.22 0.07 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 <0.01 0.01 0.1 0.22 0.02 No Relaxation D VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC'S) 1 Benzene µg/l 0.4 BDL 0.57 BDL BDL BDL 2.52 1.49 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.4 1.2 2.52 _ _ 2 Bromobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 3 Bromochloromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 4 Bromodichloromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 5 Bromoform µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 6 n-Butyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

7 Sec-Butyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

8 Ter-Butyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 9 Carbontetrachloride µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 10 Chlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.48 BDL BDL BDL 2.76 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.48 2.1 2.76 _ _ 11 Chloroform µg/l 0.21 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 7.46 BDL BDL 0.72 BDL 3.97 0.21 3.1 7.46 _ _

12 2-Chlorotoluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF GROUND WATER SAMPLES AROUND THE DUMP SITE - THREE CAMPAIGNS STANDARDS FOR DRINKING WATER - GROUND WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (1st CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (3RD CAMPAIGN) IS 10500 - 2004** Parameter BH - 1 (GW-1) BH - 2 (GW-2) BH - 3 ( (GW-3) BH - 4 (GW-4) BH - 1 (GW-1) BH - 2 (GW-2) BH - 3 ( (GW-3) BH - 4 (GW-4) BH 9 (GW-9) BH - 1 (GW-1) BH - 2 (GW-2) BH - 3 ( (GW-3) BH - 4 (GW-4) BH 9 (GW-9) Minimum Average Maximum Sr No Unit Value Value Value Date of Sampling 08-06-2012 09-06-2012 09-06-2012 11-06-2012 24-07-2012 25-07-2012 23-07-2012 23-07-2012 24-07-2012 12-09-2012 12-09-2012 11-09-2012 11-09-2012 11-09-2012 Desirable Limit Permissible Limit

CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: SGS Certificate 312008464 312008458 312008457 312008577 3120012559 3120012497 3120012553 3120012554 3120012557 3120013770 3120013768 3120013709 3120013710 3120013713 13 4-Chlorotoluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

14 Dibromochloromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 2299.12 BDL BDL BDL BDL 2299.12 2299.1 2299.12 _ _ 1,2-Dibromo-3- 15 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ chloropropane 16 1,2-Dibromoethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

17 Dibromomethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

18 1,2-Dichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.22 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.22 0.2 0.22 _ _

19 1,3-Dichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

20 1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

21 1,1-Dichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

22 1,2-Dichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.98 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.98 1.0 0.98 _ _

23 1,1-Dichloroethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

24 Cis-1,2-Dichlororethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Trans-1,2- 25 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Dichloroethene 26 1,2-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

27 1,3-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

28 2,2-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

29 1,1-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

30 Cis-1,3-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Trans-1,3- 31 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Dichloropropane 32 Ethylbenzene µg/l BDL BDL 0.1 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.1 0.1 0.1 _ _

33 Hexachloro Butadine µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

34 Isopropylbenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 35 p-Isopropyltoluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 12.15 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.84 0.84 6.5 12.15 _ _ 36 Dichloromethane µg/l 0.85 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.85 0.9 0.85 _ _ 37 Naphtalene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 14.77 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 2.53 2.53 8.7 14.77 _ _ 38 Propylbenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 39 Styrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 1,1,1,2- 40 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2- 41 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Tetrachloroethane 42 Tetrachloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 43 Toluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.63 1.3 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.63 1.0 1.3 _ _ 44 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 45 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 46 1,1,1-Trichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 47 1,1,2-Trichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 48 Trichloroethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 49 1,2,3-Trichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 50 1,2,4-Trimethyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 51 1,3,5-Trimethyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 52 m & p-Xylene µg/l BDL BDL 0.33 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.33 0.3 0.33 _ _ 53 o-Xylene µg/l BDL BDL 0.34 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.34 0.3 0.34 _ _ 54 Trichlorofluoromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ E Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)

1 Acenaphthlyene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

2 Acenaphthene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

3 Anthracene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

Benzo(alpha) 4 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Anthracene

5 Benzo(alpha) Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

6 Benzo(b) Fluorathene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

7 Benzo(g,h,i) Perylene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

8 Benzo(k) Fluorathene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

9 Crysene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Dibenzo(a,h) 10 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Anthracene 11 Fluoranthene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF GROUND WATER SAMPLES AROUND THE DUMP SITE - THREE CAMPAIGNS STANDARDS FOR DRINKING WATER - GROUND WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (1st CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (3RD CAMPAIGN) IS 10500 - 2004** Parameter BH - 1 (GW-1) BH - 2 (GW-2) BH - 3 ( (GW-3) BH - 4 (GW-4) BH - 1 (GW-1) BH - 2 (GW-2) BH - 3 ( (GW-3) BH - 4 (GW-4) BH 9 (GW-9) BH - 1 (GW-1) BH - 2 (GW-2) BH - 3 ( (GW-3) BH - 4 (GW-4) BH 9 (GW-9) Minimum Average Maximum Sr No Unit Value Value Value Date of Sampling 08-06-2012 09-06-2012 09-06-2012 11-06-2012 24-07-2012 25-07-2012 23-07-2012 23-07-2012 24-07-2012 12-09-2012 12-09-2012 11-09-2012 11-09-2012 11-09-2012 Desirable Limit Permissible Limit

CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: SGS Certificate 312008464 312008458 312008457 312008577 3120012559 3120012497 3120012553 3120012554 3120012557 3120013770 3120013768 3120013709 3120013710 3120013713

12 Fluorene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

13 Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

14 Naphtalene µg/l BDL BDL 0.61 0.79 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.61 0.7 0.79 _ _

15 Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

16 Phenanthrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

F Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)

1 2-Chlorobiphenyl µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 0.0005 No Relaxation

2 2,3-Dichlorobiphenyl µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

3 2,4,5-Trichlorobiphenyl µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

2,2',4,4'- 4 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Tetrachlorobiphenyl 2,2',3'4,6- 5 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Pentachlorobiphenyl

2,2',4.4'5,6'- 6 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Hexachlorobiphenyl

2,2',3,3',4,4',6- 7 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Heptachlorobiphenyl

2,2',3,3',4,5',6,6'- 8 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Octachlorobiphenyl G PESTICIDES 1 Alpha- HCH mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ 0.01

2 Beta-HCH mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ 0.04

3 Gamma - HCH (Lindane) mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ 2

4 Delta - HCH mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ 0.04 5 O,P - DDT mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 6 P,P - DDT mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

7 O,P - DDD mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

8 P,P - DDD mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

9 O,P - DDE mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 10 Alpha-Endosulphan mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 11 Beta-Endosulphan mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

12 Endosulphan Sulphate mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

13 Monocrotophos mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 14 Ethion mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 15 Chlorpyrifos mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

16 Phorate mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

17 Phorate Sulphoxide mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

18 Phorate Sulphone mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 19 2,4-D mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

20 Butachlor mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

21 Isoproturon mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

22 Alachlor mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 23 Atrazine mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 24 Methyl Parathion mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

25 Methyl Paraoxan mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

26 Malathion mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

27 Malaoxon mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

28 Aldrin mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

29 Dieldrin mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ **Note: Comparision of Ground Water Quality is made with the Drinking Water Quality Standards as per IS " - " Data not available Exceeding limits 207

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexure 4: Leachate (Groundwater) Monitoring Results near the Dumpsite

COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF GROUND WATER (LEACHATE) SAMPLES - THREE CAMPAIGNS STANDARDS FOR DRINKING GROUND WATER SAMPLES (LEACHATE) TEST RESULTS (1ST CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER (LEACHATE) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER (LEACHATE) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (3RD CAMPAIGN) WATER - IS 10500 - 2004** Parameter STANDARDS FOR BH - 5 (GW-5) BH - 6 (GW-6) BH - 7 (GW-7) BH - 8 (GW-8) BH - 5 (GW-5) BH - 6 (GW-6) BH - 7 (GW-7) BH - 8 (GW-8) BH - 5 (GW-5) BH - 6 (GW-6) BH - 7 (GW-7) BH - 8 (GW-8) Minimum Average Maximum LEACHATES DISPOSAL AS Sr No Unit Value Value Value PER MSW RULES (Inland Desirable Permissible Date of Sampling 09-06-2012 11-06-2012 11-06-2012 15-06-2012 23-07-2012 24-07-2012 23-07-2012 25-07-2012 11-09-2012 12-09-2012 11-09-2012 12-09-2012 Surface Waters) Limit Limit CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: SGS Certificate 312008456 312008579 312008578 312008951 3120012556 3120012558 3120012555 3120012496 3120013712 3120013769 3120013711 3120013767 A GENERAL PARAMETERS

1 Ammonia as NH3 mg/l 47.98 17.59 37.32 53.31 0.77 13.95 <0.10 115.57 28.46 24.23 25.7 16.89 0.77 34.7 115.57 - _ _

2 BOD @ 27°C for 3 days mg/l 1535 800 1225 1270 42 170 29 233 383 383 238 125 29 536.1 1535 30 _ _

3 COD mg/l 2941 2157 2941 3762 233 1408 155 1893 2486 1847 1441 968 155 1852.7 3762 250 _ _

4 Chlorides mg/l 3930.7 2680.02 3216.02 2590.69 803.3 2300.35 766.78 1752.65 3468.78 2647.23 2008.24 1460.54 766.78 2302.1 3930.7 1000 250 1000

5 Colour Hazen Units Yellowish Brown Dark Yellowish BrownDark Yellowish BrownDark Yellowish Brown YELLOWISH GREYISH BROWN LIGHT GREEN YELLOWISH BROWN BROWNISH YELLOW BROWNISH BROWNISH YELLOW BROWNISH YELLOW - - - - 5 25

microsiemen/ 6 Conductivity at 25°C 22500 19650 23800 28000 5850 18250 4900 19860 23100 19700 16800 12600 4900 17917.5 28000 - _ _ cm 7 Cyanide (as CN) mg/l <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0 0.0 0 0.2 0.05 No Relaxation

8 Dissolved Oxygen mg/l 0.5 3.9 4.2 0.4 0.5 0.02 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.2 0.02 1.0 4.2 - _ _

9 Iron (Fe) mg/l 8.32 8.62 5.38 41.6 2.59 14.59 22.66 4.88 12.28 69.2 11.46 2.21 2.21 17.0 69.2 - 0.3 1

10 Fluoride as F mg/l 4.52 0.6 1.08 1.84 0.51 0.51 0.64 1.07 4.52 0.86 0.75 1.67 0.51 1.5 4.52 2 1 1.5 11 Manganese (Mn) mg/l 0.32 0.34 0.27 1.18 0.8 0.52 0.97 0.13 0.15 2.21 0.33 0.19 0.13 0.6 2.21 - 0.1 0.3 Mineral Oil * *Mineral Oil is analysed as 12 mg/l 6.2 5 7.2 <2.0 3 4 2.6 5.6 6.4 4.8 4.2 3.4 2.6 4.8 7.2 - 0.01 0.02 Oil and Grease by Gravimetric method

13 Nitrite (NO2) mg/l 0.47 0.45 0.65 0.73 0.77 0.23 0.5 0.32 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.4 0.77 - 45 No Relaxation

14 Nitrate (NO3) mg/l 172.79 108.97 140.73 182.16 56.58 126.15 34.6 192.66 244.95 102.94 167.76 110.12 34.6 136.7 244.95 - _ _

15 pH @ 25°C - 7.7 7.47 7.9 7.3 7.06 6.95 7.16 7.41 7.16 6.98 7.2 6.97 6.95 7.3 7.9 5.5 - 9 6.5 - 8.5 No Relaxation

Phenolic compounds (as 16 mg/l 0.08 <0.05 0.18 <0.05 0.24 0.07 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.07 0.1 0.24 1 0.001 0.002 (C6H5OH) 17 Phoshorous as P mg/l 0.19 2.78 2.1 0.66 0.13 <0.10 <0.10 1.61 1.79 5.01 5.65 3.73 0.13 2.4 5.65 - _ _

18 Odour (Smell) - Pungent Pungent Pungent Pungent ODOUR LESS PUNGENT ODOUR LESS PUNGENT PUNGENT PUNGENT PUNGENT PUNGENT - 0.0 - - Agreeable Agreeable

19 Temperature °C 22.1 32.7 37.1 34.4 34.1 36.4 40.4 40.5 33.8 31.2 38.9 40.1 22.1 35.1 40.5 - _ _

20 Turbidity NTU 82 235 57.2 165 37.6 540 680 82.4 20.2 540 196 22.2 20.2 221.5 680 -510

Total Organic Carbon 21 mg/l 946 547 946 532 91 493 52 800 1047 553 581 407 52 582.9 1047 - _ _ (TOC) Total Dissolved Solids 22 mg/l 14120 15970 14960 21520 3894 12464 3420 13782 15214 12994 11106 8360 3420 12317.0 21520 2100 500 2000 (TDS) Total Suspended Solids 23 mg/l 67.6 60 36.8 110 78 1700 876 85 40 2375 249 24 24 475.1 2375 100 _ _ (TSS)

24 Total Nitrogen as N mg/l 1158.71 799.65 578.57 3012.19 118.85 2462.87 9.83 5393.6 2308.19 3032.13 2033.72 2156.8 9.83 1922.1 5393.6 100 _ _

B MICROBIAL GROWTH

1 E-coli MPN/100 ml Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent 0 0.0 0 - Absent/100 ml _

2 Total Coliforms MPN/100 ml <2MPN <1.8 MPN <1.8 MPN <1.8 MPN <1.8MPN <1.8MPN <1.8MPN <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 0 0.0 0 - Absent/100 ml Absent/100 ml

C HEAVY METALS

1 Lead (Pb) mg/l 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.25 <0.005 0.09 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.5 0.08 <0.005 0.02 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.01 No Relaxation

2 Arsenic (As) mg/l 0.04 <0.005 <0.005 0.023 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.02 0.05 <0.005 0.02 <0.005 0.02 0.0 0.05 0.2 0.01 0.05

3 Cadmium (Cd) mg/l <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0 0.0 0 2 0.003 No Relaxation

4 Chromium (Cr) mg/l 0.25 0.23 0.28 1.17 0.03 0.2 0.03 0.18 0.31 0.59 0.27 0.05 0.03 0.3 1.17 2 0.05 0.05

5 Copper (Cu) mg/l 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.11 <0.01 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.41 0.04 <0.01 0.01 0.1 0.41 3 0.05 1.5

6 Mercury (Hg) mg/l <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.02 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.02 0.0 0.02 0.01 0.001 No Relaxation

7 Molybdenum (Mo) mg/l 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.0 0.02 - 0.07 No Relaxation 8 Silver (Ag) mg/l <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 1.56 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 1.56 1.6 1.56 - _ _ 9 Zinc (Zn) mg/l 0.11 0.13 0.17 0.46 0.02 0.23 0.05 0.11 0.15 1.03 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.2 1.03 5 5 15 10 Nickel (Ni) mg/l 0.28 0.13 0.16 0.88 0.03 0.11 0.02 0.2 0.35 0.21 0.15 0.07 0.02 0.2 0.88 3 0.02 No Relaxation D VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC'S) 1 Benzene µg/l BDL 2.8 0.75 3.43 BDL 7.93 BDL BDL 3.13 12.78 2.58 2.26 0.75 4.5 12.78 - _ _ 2 Bromobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 3 Bromochloromethane µg/l BDL BDL 0.28 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.28 0.3 0.28 - _ _ 4 Bromodichloromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 329.72 BDL BDL BDL 329.72 329.7 329.72 - _ _ 5 Bromoform µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 6 n-Butyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

7 Sec-Butyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

8 Ter-Butyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

9 Carbontetrachloride µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ STANDARDS FOR DRINKING GROUND WATER SAMPLES (LEACHATE) TEST RESULTS (1ST CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER (LEACHATE) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER (LEACHATE) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (3RD CAMPAIGN) WATER - IS 10500 - 2004** Parameter STANDARDS FOR BH - 5 (GW-5) BH - 6 (GW-6) BH - 7 (GW-7) BH - 8 (GW-8) BH - 5 (GW-5) BH - 6 (GW-6) BH - 7 (GW-7) BH - 8 (GW-8) BH - 5 (GW-5) BH - 6 (GW-6) BH - 7 (GW-7) BH - 8 (GW-8) Minimum Average Maximum LEACHATES DISPOSAL AS Sr No Unit Value Value Value PER MSW RULES (Inland Desirable Permissible Date of Sampling 09-06-2012 11-06-2012 11-06-2012 15-06-2012 23-07-2012 24-07-2012 23-07-2012 25-07-2012 11-09-2012 12-09-2012 11-09-2012 12-09-2012 Surface Waters) Limit Limit CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: SGS Certificate 312008456 312008579 312008578 312008951 3120012556 3120012558 3120012555 3120012496 3120013712 3120013769 3120013711 3120013767 A GENERAL PARAMETERS 10 Chlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL 0.76 BDL 1.25 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.76 1.0 1.25 - _ _ 11 Chloroform µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

12 2-Chlorotoluene µg/l BDL 0.72 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.72 0.7 0.72 - _ _

13 4-Chlorotoluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

14 Dibromochloromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 1,2-Dibromo-3- 15 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ chloropropane 16 1,2-Dibromoethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

17 Dibromomethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

18 1,2-Dichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

19 1,3-Dichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

20 1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

21 1,1-Dichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

22 1,2-Dichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.2 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.2 0.2 0.2 - _ _

23 1,1-Dichloroethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

24 Cis-1,2-Dichlororethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

25 Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

26 1,2-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

27 1,3-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

28 2,2-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

29 1,1-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

30 Cis-1,3-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ Trans-1,3- 31 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ Dichloropropane 32 Ethylbenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.96 1.11 1.36 1.28 0.96 1.2 1.36 - _ _

33 Hexachloro Butadine µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

34 Isopropylbenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 35 p-Isopropyltoluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.61 1.07 BDL 8.55 2.58 BDL 0.96 0.96 3.0 8.55 - _ _ 36 Dichloromethane µg/l 2.1 BDL BDL 95.6 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 2.1 48.9 95.6 - _ _ 37 Naphtalene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 7.02 BDL 13.52 BDL 7.02 10.3 13.52 - _ _ 38 Propylbenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 39 Styrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 7.94 BDL BDL 7.94 7.9 7.94 - _ _ 1,1,1,2- 40 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2- 41 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ Tetrachloroethane 42 Tetrachloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 43 Toluene µg/l BDL 3.22 BDL 2.45 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.9 BDL 1.89 0.36 0.36 1.8 3.22 - _ _ 44 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 45 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.29 BDL 0.29 0.3 0.29 - _ _ 46 1,1,1-Trichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 47 1,1,2-Trichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 48 Trichloroethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 49 1,2,3-Trichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ 50 1,2,4-Trimethyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.46 BDL 0.46 0.5 0.46 - _ _ 51 1,3,5-Trimethyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL 0.1 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.42 BDL BDL 0.1 0.3 0.42 - _ _ 52 m & p-Xylene µg/l 0.14 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 2.23 BDL BDL 0.14 1.2 2.23 - _ _ 53 o-Xylene µg/l 0.26 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.54 1.13 0.26 0.6 1.13 - _ _ 54 Trichlorofluoromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ E Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)

1 Acenaphthlyene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

2 Acenaphthene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

3 Anthracene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

4 Benzo(alpha) Anthracene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

5 Benzo(alpha) Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

6 Benzo(b) Fluorathene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

7 Benzo(g,h,i) Perylene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

8 Benzo(k) Fluorathene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ STANDARDS FOR DRINKING GROUND WATER SAMPLES (LEACHATE) TEST RESULTS (1ST CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER (LEACHATE) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) GROUND WATER (LEACHATE) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (3RD CAMPAIGN) WATER - IS 10500 - 2004** Parameter STANDARDS FOR BH - 5 (GW-5) BH - 6 (GW-6) BH - 7 (GW-7) BH - 8 (GW-8) BH - 5 (GW-5) BH - 6 (GW-6) BH - 7 (GW-7) BH - 8 (GW-8) BH - 5 (GW-5) BH - 6 (GW-6) BH - 7 (GW-7) BH - 8 (GW-8) Minimum Average Maximum LEACHATES DISPOSAL AS Sr No Unit Value Value Value PER MSW RULES (Inland Desirable Permissible Date of Sampling 09-06-2012 11-06-2012 11-06-2012 15-06-2012 23-07-2012 24-07-2012 23-07-2012 25-07-2012 11-09-2012 12-09-2012 11-09-2012 12-09-2012 Surface Waters) Limit Limit CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: SGS Certificate 312008456 312008579 312008578 312008951 3120012556 3120012558 3120012555 3120012496 3120013712 3120013769 3120013711 3120013767 A GENERAL PARAMETERS

9 Crysene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

10 Dibenzo(a,h) Anthracene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

11 Fluoranthene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

12 Fluorene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

13 Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

14 Naphtalene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

15 Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL 0.59 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.59 0.6 0.59 - _ _

16 Phenanthrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

F Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)

1 2-Chlorobiphenyl µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - 0.0005 No Relaxation

2 2,3-Dichlorobiphenyl µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

3 2,4,5-Trichlorobiphenyl µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _

2,2',4,4'- 4 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ Tetrachlorobiphenyl 2,2',3'4,6- 5 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ Pentachlorobiphenyl

2,2',4.4'5,6'- 6 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ Hexachlorobiphenyl

2,2',3,3',4,4',6- 7 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ Heptachlorobiphenyl

2,2',3,3',4,5',6,6'- 8 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ _ Octachlorobiphenyl G PESTICIDES 1 Alpha- HCH mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 - _ 0.01

2 Beta-HCH mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 1.0 0 - _ 0.04

3 Gamma - HCH (Lindane) mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 2.0 0 - _ 2

4 Delta - HCH mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 3.0 0 - _ 0.04 5 O,P - DDT mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 4.0 0 - _ _ 6 P,P - DDT mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 5.0 0 - _ _

7 O,P - DDD mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 6.0 0 - _ _

8 P,P - DDD mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 7.0 0 - _ _

9 O,P - DDE mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 8.0 0 - _ _

10 Alpha-Endosulphan mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 9.0 0 - _ _ 11 Beta-Endosulphan mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 10.0 0 - _ _

12 Endosulphan Sulphate mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 11.0 0 - _ _

13 Monocrotophos mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 12.0 0 - _ _ 14 Ethion mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 13.0 0 - _ _ 15 Chlorpyrifos mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 14.0 0 - _ _

16 Phorate mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 15.0 0 - _ _

17 Phorate Sulphoxide mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 16.0 0 - _ _

18 Phorate Sulphone mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 17.0 0 - _ _ 19 2,4-D mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 18.0 0 - _ _

20 Butachlor mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 19.0 0 - _ _

21 Isoproturon mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 20.0 0 - _ _

22 Alachlor mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 21.0 0 - _ _

23 Atrazine mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 22.0 0 - _ _ 24 Methyl Parathion mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 23.0 0 - _ _

25 Methyl Paraoxan mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 24.0 0 - _ _

26 Malathion mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 25.0 0 - _ _

27 Malaoxon mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 26.0 0 - _ _

28 Aldrin mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 27.0 0 - _ _ 29 Dieldrin mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 28.0 0 - _ _ **Note: " - " Data not available 211

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexure 5: Groundwater Quality Monitoring Results of Existing Tube wells in the Study Area

COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF GROUND WATER (TUBEWELL) SAMPLES STANDARDS FOR DRINKING GROUND WATER (EXISTING TUBEWELLS) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) ADDITIONAL EXISTING WELLS IN STUDY AREA WATER - IS 10500 - 2004**

Parameter Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Borehole Existing Borehole Borehole at Borehole at Borehole at Borehole AT Existing Borewell Existing Borewell Existing Borewell Minimum Average Maximum Sr No Unit at Durgapur (TS- at ITC Sonar Martinpara (TS-Malaktala Village Dump Site near Bone Factory (TS- at Uchhupota at Khanaberia at Anantabadal Value Value Value 4) Bangla (TS-5) Desirable Permissible 6) (TS-1) Makaltala Village 3) (TS-2) Limit Limit Date of Sampling 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 24-07-2012 15-06-2013 15-06-2013 15-06-2013 CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: KG-13- KG-13- KG-13- SGS Certificate 3120012502 3120012498 3120012499 3120012500 3120012501 3120012560 004569.001 004569.002 004569.003 A GENERAL PARAMETERS

1 Ammonia as NH3 mg/l <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.21 0.14 0.28 0.14 0.0 0 _ _

2 BOD @ 27°C for 3 days mg/l <2.0 <2.0 2 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 1.1 0.7 1 0.7 1.2 2 _ _ 3 COD mg/l 14 10 16 <5.0 8 8 5.12 3.42 5.12 3.42 8.7 16 _ _ 4 Chlorides mg/l 419.91 456.42 429.03 438.16 438.16 419.91 374.46 392.29 481.45 374.46 427.8 481.45 250 1000

5 Colour Hazen Units COLOURLESS COLOURLESS COLOURLESS COLOURLESS COLOURLESS COLOURLESS 40 5 15 5 20.0 40 5 25 microsiemen/ 6 Conductivity at 25°C 1810 1914 1887 1980 1996 1724 1804 1823 2120 1724 1895.3 2120 _ _ cm 7 Cyanide (as CN) mg/l <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0 0.0 0 0.05 No Relaxation

8 Dissolved Oxygen mg/l 0.9 0.7 0.3 0.5 1.2 1.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.9 1.9 _ _ 9 Iron (Fe) mg/l 1.02 1.62 0.9 0.05 0.08 0.25 2.7155 0.1171 0.285 0.05 0.8 2.7155 0.3 1 10 Fluoride as F mg/l 0.36 0.36 0.33 0.36 0.37 0.4 0.53 0.23 0.39 0.23 0.4 0.53 1 1.5 11 Manganese (Mn) mg/l 0.22 0.38 0.29 0.39 <0.18 0.3 0.2178 0.3751 0.3658 0.2178 0.3 0.39 0.1 0.3 Mineral Oil * 12 *Mineral Oil is analysed as mg/l <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 0 0.0 0 0.01 0.02 Oil and Grease by Gravimetric method

13 Nitrite (NO2) mg/l 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.13 0.1 0.12 0.01 0.1 0.13 45 No Relaxation

14 Nitrate (NO3) mg/l 1.65 1.06 1.31 0.69 1.35 0.73 0.05 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.8 1.65 _ _

15 pH @ 25°C - 7.02 6.99 7.04 7.1 7.16 7.02 6.24 6.13 6.22 6.13 6.8 7.16 6.5 - 8.5 No Relaxation Phenolic compounds (as 16 mg/l <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0 0.0 0 0.001 0.002 (C6H5OH) 17 Phoshorous as P mg/l <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0 0.0 0 _ _

18 Odour (Smell) - ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS 0 0.0 0 Agreeable Agreeable 19 Temperature °C 33.7 29.8 35.8 37.4 36.4 30.2 29.1 28.8 28.9 28.8 32.2 37.4 _ _ 20 Turbidity NTU 1.3 24.8 13.5 0.02 9.99 4.12 94.2 2.75 7.14 0.02 17.5 94.2 5 10 Total Organic Carbon 21 mg/l 1.46 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 3 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 1.46 2.2 3 _ _ (TOC) Total Dissolved Solids 22 mg/l 1268 1478 1460 1524 1536 1328 1176 1184 1384 1176 1370.9 1536 500 2000 (TDS) Total Suspended Solids 23 mg/l <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 11.04 2.36 4.84 2.36 6.1 11.04 _ _ (TSS) 24 Total Nitrogen as N mg/l 0.53 0.4 0.46 0.32 0.45 0.31 0.9 0.49 0.74 0.31 0.5 0.9 _ _

B MICROBIAL GROWTH 1 E-coli MPN/100 ml Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 0 0.0 0 Absent/100 ml _

2 Total Coliforms MPN/100 ml < 2 23 < 2 7.8 < 2 <1.8MPN 9.2 350 <1.8 7.8 97.5 350 Absent/100 ml Absent/100 ml C HEAVY METALS

1 Lead (Pb) mg/l <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.02 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.0068 0.0054 0.0054 0.0 0.02 0.01 No Relaxation

2 Arsenic (As) mg/l <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0 0.0 0 0.01 0.05 COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF GROUND WATER (TUBEWELL) SAMPLES STANDARDS FOR DRINKING GROUND WATER (EXISTING TUBEWELLS) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) ADDITIONAL EXISTING WELLS IN STUDY AREA WATER - IS 10500 - 2004**

Parameter Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Borehole Existing Borehole Borehole at Borehole at Borehole at Borehole AT Existing Borewell Existing Borewell Existing Borewell Minimum Average Maximum Sr No Unit at Durgapur (TS- at ITC Sonar Martinpara (TS-Malaktala Village Dump Site near Bone Factory (TS- at Uchhupota at Khanaberia at Anantabadal Value Value Value 4) Bangla (TS-5) Desirable Permissible 6) (TS-1) Makaltala Village 3) (TS-2) Limit Limit Date of Sampling 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 24-07-2012 15-06-2013 15-06-2013 15-06-2013 CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: KG-13- KG-13- KG-13- SGS Certificate 3120012502 3120012498 3120012499 3120012500 3120012501 3120012560 004569.001 004569.002 004569.003

3 Cadmium (Cd) mg/l <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0 0.0 0 0.003 No Relaxation

4 Chromium (Cr) mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0.0 0 0.05 0.05

5 Copper (Cu) mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0.0 0 0.05 1.5

6 Mercury (Hg) mg/l <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0 0.0 0 0.001 No Relaxation 7 Molybdenum (Mo) mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0.0 0 0.07 No Relaxation 8 Silver (Ag) mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0.0 0 _ _ 9 Zinc (Zn) mg/l 0.01 0.83 0.7 0.03 4.29 <0.01 1.0298 2.5268 4.9098 0.01 1.8 4.9098 5 15 10 Nickel (Ni) mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0 0.0 0 0.02 No Relaxation D VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC'S) 1 Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 2 Bromobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 3 Bromochloromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 4 Bromodichloromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 5 Bromoform µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 6 n-Butyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 7 Sec-Butyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 8 Ter-Butyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 9 Carbontetrachloride µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 10 Chlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.84 BDL BDL BDL 0.84 0.8 0.84 _ _ 11 Chloroform µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 12 2-Chlorotoluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 13 4-Chlorotoluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 14 Dibromochloromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 1,2-Dibromo-3- 15 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ chloropropane 16 1,2-Dibromoethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 17 Dibromomethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 18 1,2-Dichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 19 1,3-Dichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 20 1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 21 1,1-Dichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 22 1,2-Dichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.57 BDL BDL BDL 0.57 0.6 0.57 _ _ 23 1,1-Dichloroethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 24 Cis-1,2-Dichlororethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Trans-1,2- 25 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Dichloroethene 26 1,2-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 27 1,3-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 28 2,2-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 29 1,1-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 30 Cis-1,3-Dichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Trans-1,3- 31 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Dichloropropane 32 Ethylbenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 33 Hexachloro Butadine µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 34 Isopropylbenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 35 p-Isopropyltoluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 36 Dichloromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 37 Naphtalene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 38 Propylbenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 39 Styrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 1,1,1,2- 40 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Tetrachloroethane COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF GROUND WATER (TUBEWELL) SAMPLES STANDARDS FOR DRINKING GROUND WATER (EXISTING TUBEWELLS) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) ADDITIONAL EXISTING WELLS IN STUDY AREA WATER - IS 10500 - 2004**

Parameter Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Borehole Existing Borehole Borehole at Borehole at Borehole at Borehole AT Existing Borewell Existing Borewell Existing Borewell Minimum Average Maximum Sr No Unit at Durgapur (TS- at ITC Sonar Martinpara (TS-Malaktala Village Dump Site near Bone Factory (TS- at Uchhupota at Khanaberia at Anantabadal Value Value Value 4) Bangla (TS-5) Desirable Permissible 6) (TS-1) Makaltala Village 3) (TS-2) Limit Limit Date of Sampling 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 24-07-2012 15-06-2013 15-06-2013 15-06-2013 CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: KG-13- KG-13- KG-13- SGS Certificate 3120012502 3120012498 3120012499 3120012500 3120012501 3120012560 004569.001 004569.002 004569.003 1,1,2,2- 41 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Tetrachloroethane 42 Tetrachloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 43 Toluene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 44 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

45 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 46 1,1,1-Trichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 47 1,1,2-Trichloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 48 Trichloroethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 49 1,2,3-Trichloropropane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 50 1,2,4-Trimethyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _

51 1,3,5-Trimethyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 52 m & p-Xylene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 53 o-Xylene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 54 Trichlorofluoromethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ E Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) 1 Acenaphthlyene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 2 Acenaphthene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 3 Anthracene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Benzo(alpha) 4 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Anthracene 5 Benzo(alpha) Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 6 Benzo(b) Fluorathene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 7 Benzo(g,h,i) Perylene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 8 Benzo(k) Fluorathene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 9 Crysene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Dibenzo(a,h) 10 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Anthracene 11 Fluoranthene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 12 Fluorene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 13 Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 14 Naphtalene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 15 Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 16 Phenanthrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ F Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) 1 2-Chlorobiphenyl µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 0.0005 No Relaxation 2 2,3-Dichlorobiphenyl µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 3 2,4,5-Trichlorobiphenyl µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 2,2',4,4'- 4 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Tetrachlorobiphenyl 2,2',3'4,6- 5 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Pentachlorobiphenyl 2,2',4.4'5,6'- 6 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Hexachlorobiphenyl 2,2',3,3',4,4',6- 7 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Heptachlorobiphenyl 2,2',3,3',4,5',6,6'- 8 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ Octachlorobiphenyl G PESTICIDES 1 Alpha- HCH mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ 0.01 2 Beta-HCH mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ 0.04 3 Gamma - HCH (Lindane) mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ 2 4 Delta - HCH mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ 0.04 5 O,P - DDT mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 6 P,P - DDT mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF GROUND WATER (TUBEWELL) SAMPLES STANDARDS FOR DRINKING GROUND WATER (EXISTING TUBEWELLS) SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) ADDITIONAL EXISTING WELLS IN STUDY AREA WATER - IS 10500 - 2004**

Parameter Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Borehole Existing Borehole Borehole at Borehole at Borehole at Borehole AT Existing Borewell Existing Borewell Existing Borewell Minimum Average Maximum Sr No Unit at Durgapur (TS- at ITC Sonar Martinpara (TS-Malaktala Village Dump Site near Bone Factory (TS- at Uchhupota at Khanaberia at Anantabadal Value Value Value 4) Bangla (TS-5) Desirable Permissible 6) (TS-1) Makaltala Village 3) (TS-2) Limit Limit Date of Sampling 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 10-07-2012 24-07-2012 15-06-2013 15-06-2013 15-06-2013 CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: KG-13- KG-13- KG-13- SGS Certificate 3120012502 3120012498 3120012499 3120012500 3120012501 3120012560 004569.001 004569.002 004569.003 7 O,P - DDD mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 8 P,P - DDD mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 9 O,P - DDE mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 10 Alpha-Endosulphan mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 11 Beta-Endosulphan mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 12 Endosulphan Sulphate mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 13 Monocrotophos mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 14 Ethion mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 15 Chlorpyrifos mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 16 Phorate mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 17 Phorate Sulphoxide mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 18 Phorate Sulphone mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 19 2,4-D mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 20 Butachlor mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 21 Isoproturon mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 22 Alachlor mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 23 Atrazine mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 24 Methyl Parathion mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 25 Methyl Paraoxan mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 26 Malathion mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 27 Malaoxon mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 28 Aldrin mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ 29 Dieldrin mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0 _ _ **Note: Comparision of Ground Water Quality is made with the Drinking Water Quality Standards as per IS 10500 " - " Data not available Exceeding Limits

216 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Annexure 6: Surface Water Quality Monitoring Results near the Dumpsite

COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 3 CAMPAIGNS SURFACE WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (1ST CAMPAIGN) SURFACE WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) SURFACE WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (3RD CAMPAIGN) GENERAL Parameter STANDARDS FOR SW - 1 SW - 2 SW - 3 SW - 4 SW - 5 SW - 1 SW - 2 SW - 3 SW - 4 SW - 5 SW - 1 SW - 2 SW - 3 SW - 4 SW - 5 Minimum Average Maximum DISCHARGE OF Sr No Unit Date of Sampling 06-12-2012 06-12-2012 06-12-2012 06-12-2012 06-12-2012 11-07-2012 11-07-2012 11-07-2012 11-07-2012 11-07-2012 07-09-2012 07-09-2012 07-09-2012 07-09-2012 07-09-2012 Value Value Value POLLUTANTS TO CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: INLAND SURFACE SGS Certificate 3120008580 3120008613 3120008581 3120008610 3120008612 3120012470 3120012471 3120012473 3120012475 3120012474 3120013413 3120013414 3120013415 3120013416 3120013417 WATERS (CPCB) ** A GENERAL PARAMETERS

1 Ammonia as NH3 mg/l 1.87 12.26 <0.10 <0.10 2239.1 < 0.1 5.87 1.3 110.31 1.93 <0.10 8.81 6.61 0.81 24.24 0.81 219.4 2239.1 5

2 BOD @ 27°C for 3 days mg/l 53 525 29 37 14000 4 38 4.5 750 12 3.2 77 68 21 1100 3.2 1114.8 14000.0 30

3 COD mg/l 186 1520 118 147 22549 34 184 36 3009 57 29 423 410 110 2702 29 2100.9 22549.0 250

4 Chlorides mg/l 607.47 1429.34 117.92 110.77 1786.68 525.29 766.78 182.57 1862.19 135.1 387.04 547.7 547.7 146.05 1825.68 110.77 731.9 1862.2 _ All efforts should be LIGHT PALE DARK YELLOW BROWNISH made to remove colour 5 Colour Hazen Units DARK YELLOW COLOUR LESS COLOURLESS COLOURLESS YELLOWISH COLOURLESS COLOURLESS COLOURLESS PALE YELLOW PALE YELLOW COLOURLESS BROWNISH 0 0.0 0.0 YELLOW BROWN YELLOW and unpleasant odour as far as practicable microsiemen/ 6 Conductivity at 25°C 2420 8200 810 775 28200 2090 4040 1156 21700 895 1910 3450 3400 1240 12680 775 6197.7 28200.0 _ cm 7 Cyanide (as CN) mg/l <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.15 0.15 0.2 0.2 0.2

8 Dissolved Oxygen mg/l 8.1 1.2 0.9 0.9 0.6 9.2 3.1 2.1 2.3 1.5 7.2 3.9 3.9 4.2 0.5 0.5 3.3 9.2 _ 9 Iron (Fe) mg/l 0.18 15.54 0.58 2.09 2.75 0.12 0.18 0.85 1.25 0.42 0.34 9.76 2.42 3.5 2.16 0.12 2.8 15.5 3 10 Fluoride as F mg/l 0.21 0.47 0.19 0.19 0.83 0.32 0.44 0.31 0.68 0.29 0.23 0.35 0.25 0.22 0.27 0.19 0.4 0.8 2 11 Manganese (Mn) mg/l 0.18 0.36 0.16 0.16 0.37 0.07 0.14 0.15 0.05 0.11 0.18 0.46 0.35 0.25 0.27 0.05 0.2 0.5 2 Mineral Oil * 12 *Mineral Oil is analysed as mg/l 3.6 6.4 2.8 3.2 55 <2.0 2.9 <2.0 9.6 <2.0 <2.0 3 3 2.1 7.5 2.1 9.0 55.0 10 Oil and Grease by Gravimetric method

13 Nitrite (NO2) mg/l 3.67 181.53 11.47 4.47 0.57 0.76 0.1 0.45 0.41 0.71 2.36 0.01 0.25 0.03 0.03 0.01 13.8 181.5 _

14 Nitrate (NO3) mg/l 9.07 6.31 25.46 68.69 119.76 12.28 108.46 23.03 212.66 28.43 2.61 70.78 65.56 2.59 130.76 2.59 59.1 212.7 10

15 pH @ 25°C - 9.1 7.6 6.8 6.9 9.6 7.2 7.4 7.5 7.5 7.9 7.61 7.77 7.61 7.4 7.6 6.8 7.7 9.6 5.5 - 9.0 Phenolic compounds (as 16 mg/l 0.05 <0.05 0.11 <0.05 0.11 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.11 <0.05 <0.05 0.19 0.22 <0.05 1.21 0.05 0.3 1.2 1 (C6H5OH) 17 Phoshorous as P mg/l <0.10 0.15 0.12 0.22 5.27 0.19 0.8 0.69 1.78 0.86 0.76 1 1.63 0.94 1.76 0.12 1.2 5.3 5 All efforts should be made to remove colour 18 Odour (Smell) - Odourless Pungent Odourless Odourless Pungent ODOURLESS ODOURLESS ODOURLESS PUNGENT ODOURLESS ODOURLESS PUNGENT PUNGENT PUNGENT PUNGENT 0 0.0 0.0 and unpleasant odour as far as practicable Shall not exceed 5 °C 19 Temperature °C 36.6 36.4 35.1 34.3 39.6 34.4 37.3 33.9 33.7 35.1 35.8 32.7 34 35.7 37.5 32.7 35.5 39.6 above the receiving water temperature 20 Turbidity NTU 9.56 39.5 7.26 28.5 640 4.2 13.7 9.9 410 33.2 7.54 50.6 50.6 48.2 _ 4.2 96.6 640.0 _ Total Organic Carbon 21 mg/l 6 295 6 31 5736 18 15 15 904 12 12 88 118 22 824 6 540.1 5736.0 _ (TOC) Total Dissolved Solids 22 mg/l 1632 5232 574 496 18812 1380 2652 792 14780 624 1350 2392 2348 902 8406 496 4158.1 18812.0 _ (TDS) Total Suspended Solids 23 mg/l 27 67.2 16 12.8 2100 <5 17 10 916 43 19 142 92 262 516 10 302.9 2100.0 100 (TSS) 24 Total Nitrogen as N mg/l 7.55 449.02 28.45 18.79 2990.73 3.17 330.52 58.69 4446.22 37.58 1.49 204.98 226.56 39.9 785.54 1.49 641.9 4446.2 100

B MICROBIAL GROWTH 1 E-coli MPN/100 ml Absent Absent Absent Absent Absent 21 48 6.8 Absent 4 70 110 48 94 32 4 48.2 110.0 _ 2 Total Coliforms MPN/100 ml 920 920 1600 1600 1600 920 1600 350 540 170 2200 2800 920 3500 1600 170 1416.0 3500.0 _ C HEAVY METALS

1 Lead (Pb) mg/l 0.01 0.35 0.01 0.02 0.03 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.02 0.01 0.15 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.01 0.1 0.4 0.01

2 Arsenic (As) mg/l <0.005 0.02 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 0.016 0.016 0.0 0.0 0.01

3 Cadmium (Cd) mg/l <0.005 0.01 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.003

4 Chromium (Cr) mg/l 0.02 5.7 0.02 0.06 0.16 <0.01 0.02 0.01 <0.01 0.61 <0.01 0.18 0.12 0.06 0.97 0.01 0.7 5.7 _

5 Copper (Cu) mg/l <0.01 0.56 0.01 0.03 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 <0.01 0.03 <0.01 0.14 0.08 0.04 0.15 0.01 0.1 0.6 0.05

6 Mercury (Hg) mg/l <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0 0.0 0.0 0.001 7 Molybdenum (Mo) mg/l <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.03 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.07 8 Silver (Ag) mg/l <0.005 0.01 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.01 0.0 0.0 _ 9 Zinc (Zn) mg/l 0.02 3.44 0.04 0.09 0.08 <0.01 0.02 0.14 0.05 0.2 0.03 0.31 0.13 0.12 0.3 0.02 0.4 3.4 5 10 Nickel (Ni) mg/l 0.01 0.11 0.01 0.02 0.07 <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 <0.01 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.1 0.01 0.0 0.1 0.02 D VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC'S) 1 Benzene µg/lBDL 0.13 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.13 0.1 0.1 _ 2 Bromobenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 3 Bromochloromethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 4 Bromodichloromethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 5 Bromoform µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 _ 6 n-Butyl Benzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 7 Sec-Butyl Benzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 8 Ter-Butyl Benzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 9 Carbontetrachloride µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 10 Chlorobenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL 0.56 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.56 0.6 0.6 _ 11 Chloroform µg/lBDL 1.17 BDL 1.67 0.51 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.45 0.76 BDL BDL BDL 0.45 0.9 1.7 _ 12 2-Chlorotoluene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 13 4-Chlorotoluene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 14 Dibromochloromethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 1,2-Dibromo-3- 15 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ chloropropane 16 1,2-Dibromoethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 17 Dibromomethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 18 1,2-Dichlorobenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 19 1,3-Dichlorobenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 20 1,4-Dichlorobenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 21 1,1-Dichloroethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 22 1,2-Dichloroethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.53 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.53 0.5 0.5 _ 23 1,1-Dichloroethene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 24 Cis-1,2-Dichlororethene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 25 Trans-1,2-Dichloroethene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 3 CAMPAIGNS SURFACE WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (1ST CAMPAIGN) SURFACE WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN) SURFACE WATER SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (3RD CAMPAIGN) GENERAL Parameter STANDARDS FOR SW - 1 SW - 2 SW - 3 SW - 4 SW - 5 SW - 1 SW - 2 SW - 3 SW - 4 SW - 5 SW - 1 SW - 2 SW - 3 SW - 4 SW - 5 Minimum Average Maximum DISCHARGE OF Sr No Unit Date of Sampling 06-12-2012 06-12-2012 06-12-2012 06-12-2012 06-12-2012 11-07-2012 11-07-2012 11-07-2012 11-07-2012 11-07-2012 07-09-2012 07-09-2012 07-09-2012 07-09-2012 07-09-2012 Value Value Value POLLUTANTS TO CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: CA: GL: INLAND SURFACE SGS Certificate 3120008580 3120008613 3120008581 3120008610 3120008612 3120012470 3120012471 3120012473 3120012475 3120012474 3120013413 3120013414 3120013415 3120013416 3120013417 WATERS (CPCB) ** 26 1,2-Dichloropropane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 27 1,3-Dichloropropane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 28 2,2-Dichloropropane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 29 1,1-Dichloropropane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 30 Cis-1,3-Dichloropropane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ Trans-1,3- 31 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ Dichloropropane 32 Ethylbenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 33 Hexachloro Butadine µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 34 Isopropylbenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 35 p-Isopropyltoluene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 36 Dichloromethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 3.66 BDL BDL 3.66 3.7 3.7 _ 37 Naphtalene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 38 Propylbenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 39 Styrene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 40 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _

41 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 42 Tetrachloroethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 43 Toluene µg/lBDL BDL 2.78 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.13 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.13 1.5 2.8 _ 44 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 45 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 46 1,1,1-Trichloroethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 47 1,1,2-Trichloroethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 48 Trichloroethene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 49 1,2,3-Trichloropropane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 50 1,2,4-Trimethyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _

51 1,3,5-Trimethyl Benzene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 52 m & p-Xylene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 53 o-Xylene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 54 Trichlorofluoromethane µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ E Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) 1 Acenaphthlyene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 2 Acenaphthene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 3 Anthracene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 4 Benzo(alpha) Anthracene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 5 Benzo(alpha) Pyrene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 6 Benzo(b) Fluorathene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 7 Benzo(g,h,i) Perylene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 8 Benzo(k) Fluorathene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 9 Crysene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 10 Dibenzo(a,h) Anthracene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 11 Fluoranthene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 12 Fluorene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 13 Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 14 Naphtalene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 15 Pyrene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 16 Phenanthrene µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ F Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) 1 2-Chlorobiphenyl µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 0.0005 2 2,3-Dichlorobiphenyl µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 3 2,4,5-Trichlorobiphenyl µg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 2,2',4,4'- 4 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ Tetrachlorobiphenyl 2,2',3'4,6- 5 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ Pentachlorobiphenyl 2,2',4.4'5,6'- 6 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ Hexachlorobiphenyl 2,2',3,3',4,4',6- 7 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ Heptachlorobiphenyl 2,2',3,3',4,5',6,6'- 8 µg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ Octachlorobiphenyl G PESTICIDES 1 Alpha- HCH mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 2 Beta-HCH mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 3 Gamma - HCH (Lindane) mg/l BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 4 Delta - HCH mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 5 O,P - DDT mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 6 P,P - DDT mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 7 O,P - DDD mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 8 P,P - DDD mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 9 O,P - DDE mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 10 Alpha-Endosulphan mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 11 Beta-Endosulphan mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 12 Endosulphan Sulphate mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 13 Monocrotophos mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 14 Ethion mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 15 Chlorpyrifos mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 16 Phorate mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00002 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00002 0.0 0.0 _ 17 Phorate Sulphoxide mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 18 Phorate Sulphone mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 19 2,4-D mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 20 Butachlor mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 21 Isoproturon mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 22 Alachlor mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 23 Atrazine mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 24 Methyl Parathion mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 25 Methyl Paraoxan mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 26 Malathion mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 27 Malaoxon mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 28 Aldrin mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ 29 Dieldrin mg/lBDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0 0.0 0.0 _ Comparision of Surface Water Quality is made with the CPCB "GENERAL STANDARDS FOR DISCHARGE OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS PART-A : EFFLUENTS, Part (a): Discharge to **Note: Inland Surface Waters", as part of The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, [SCHEDULE – VI] (See rule 3A) " - " Data not available Exceeding Limits

218 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Annexure 7: Soil Quality Monitoring Results near the Dumpsite

COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF SOIL SAMPLES

COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF SURFACE SOIL / SEDIMENT SAMPLES

SURFACE SOIL / SEDIMENT SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (1ST CAMPAIGN) SOIL SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN)

Surface Sediment Samples Mixed Waste Soil Samples from Boreholes Surface Soil Samples Dutch Standards for Soil Parameter Unit Sample from BH - SW - 1 SW - 3 SW - 56. 7 and 8 BH - 1 BH - 2 BH - 3 BH - 4 BH - 5 BH - 8 BH - 2 BH - 3 BH - 4 BH - 5 Minimum Average Maximum Sr No Date of Sampling 12-06-2012 12-06-2012 12-06-2012 12-06-2012 18-05-2012 26-05-2012 24-05-2012 22-05-2012 21-05-2012 13-06-2012 17-07-2012 17-07-2012 13-07-2012 17-07-2012 Value Value Value GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- 006488.003 & 006488.002 & 006488.001 & 006967.001 & 005914.001 & 005988.001 & 005915.001 & 005914.002 & 005914.003 & 006594.001 & 007603.003 & 007603.002 & 007603.001 & 007603.004 & SGS Certificate LIBV THV CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: 3110028779 3110028753 3110029721 3110029754 3110024811 3110025935 3110025569 3110024815 3110024816 3110029084 3110031918 3110031917 3110031915 3110031919

Depth of Sampling 0 - 0.2 0 - 0.2 0 - 0.2 0 - 0.3 7 6 5 6 7 31 0 - 0.1 0 - 0.1 0 - 0.1 0 - 0.1

A GENERAL PARAMETERS

1 Iron mg/kg 7008.15 4490.52 4728.45 702.62 11805.84 11497.45 10664.53 13123.07 14672.67 7761.22 7186.98 4384.52 11428.57 6844 702.62 8307.04 14672.67 _ _

2 Moisture % 36.25 35.51 31.45 31.05 28 32.6 44.85 29 29 33.12 27.05 40.14 18.51 24.7 18.51 31.52 44.85 _ _

3 Mineral Oil mg/kg 2.37 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.28 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.28 1.33 2.37 BDL 1000

4 Total Organic Carbon (TOC) % 3.57 3.07 2.68 3.23 0.54 1.6 1.75 0.71 0.69 0.81 2.41 8.98 1.8 1.04 0.54 2.35 8.98 _ _

B HEAVY METALS

1 Lead (Pb) mg/lkg 40.06 67.28 25.65 51.56 5.94 31.96 84.57 12.99 31.62 13.47 332.94 136 78.12 96.19 5.94 72.03 332.94 58.1 499

2 Arsenic (As) mg/lkg 0.86 1.03 0.79 2.43 2.44 5.92 5.3 3.03 3.77 1.41 0.92 0.94 1.27 0.86 0.79 2.21 5.92 5.6 71

3 Cadmium (Cd) mg/lkg 1.1 3.46 0.44 0.82 <0.1 <1 0.54 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.5 1.75 2.12 1.41 0.10 1.22 3.46 0.6 11

4 Chromium (Cr) mg/lkg 19.81 200.72 37.19 82.38 10.62 24.38 2.31 13.45 21.65 7.69 469.83 109.68 100.32 90.58 2.31 85.04 469.83 23 191

5 Copper (Cu) mg/lkg 33.25 44.58 21.16 48.83 9.23 50.25 13.78 19.37 27.5 13.4 107.7 173.83 71.02 70.06 9.23 50.28 173.83 38.9 174

6 Mercury (Hg) mg/lkg 0.32 0.3 0.11 0.32 <0.1 <0.5 2.54 0.19 <0.1 0.12 0.9 0.93 0.67 0.19 0.11 0.60 2.54 1.4 36

7 Molybdenum (Mo) mg/lkg 0.15 0.25 0.13 0.5 <0.1 <1 0.71 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.13 0.35 0.71 0.7 190

8 Silver (Ag) mg/lkg 0.69 < 0.1 0.18 0.56 <0.1 <1 4.14 0.17 <0.1 0.17 1.77 0.9 1.2 1.12 0.17 1.09 4.14 2.4 15

9 Tin (Sn) mg/lkg 0.63 1.09 0.37 1.4 <0.1 <1 3.13 0.17 <0.1 <0.1 3.91 3.61 2.39 0.77 0.17 1.75 3.91 1.9 985

10 Zinc (Zn) mg/kg 98.29 221.21 80.99 137.52 14.52 70.77 190.48 21.11 43.02 37.55 443.10 370.16 203.16 144.38 14.52 148.30 443.10 130.6 705

C Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)

1 Naphthalene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 BDL _

2 Acenaphthlyene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 BDL _

3 Acenaphthene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 BDL _

4 Fluorene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 BDL _

5 Phenanthrene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.57 0.13 0.47 0.10 0.10 0.57 1.57 BDL _

6 Anthracene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.56 < 0.10 0.38 < 0.10 0.38 0.47 0.56 BDL _

7 Fluoranthene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 2.70 < 0.10 0.83 0.18 0.18 1.24 2.70 BDL _

8 Pyrene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 2.70 < 0.10 0.83 0.18 0.18 1.24 2.70 BDL _

9 Benz (a) anthracene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 2.60 < 0.10 0.81 0.25 0.25 1.22 2.60 BDL _

10 Chrysene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 < 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 BDL _

11 Benz (a) fluoranthene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.67 0.11 0.41 0.26 0.11 0.61 1.67 BDL _

12 Benz (k) fluoranthene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.67 0.11 0.41 0.26 0.11 0.61 1.67 BDL _

13 Benzo (a) pyrene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 4.18 0.31 1.31 0.50 0.31 1.58 4.18 BDL _

14 indeno (1.2.3 cd) pyrene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.19 < 0.10 0.36 0.16 0.16 0.57 1.19 BDL _

15 Dibenz (ah) anthracene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL < 0.10 0.42 < 0.10 0.36 0.36 0.39 0.42 BDL _

16 Benzo (ghi) perylene mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1.19 < 0.10 0.36 0.16 0.16 0.57 1.19 BDL _

D Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) 2.4.4-Trichilrobyphenyl 1 mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ (PCB28) 2.2'.5.5'- Terachlorobyphenyl 2 mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ (PCB52) 2.2'.4.5.5'- 3 Pentachlorobyphenyl mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ (PCB101) 2.3'4.4.'5' - 4 PPthlbihlentachlorobiphenyl mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0000.00 0000.00 0000.00 _ _ (PCB118)

2.2'3.'4.4.'5 - 5 mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ Hexachlorobiphenyl (PCB138) COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF SOIL SAMPLES

COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS OF SURFACE SOIL / SEDIMENT SAMPLES

SURFACE SOIL / SEDIMENT SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (1ST CAMPAIGN) SOIL SAMPLES TEST RESULTS (2ND CAMPAIGN)

Surface Sediment Samples Mixed Waste Soil Samples from Boreholes Surface Soil Samples Dutch Standards for Soil Parameter Unit Sample from BH - SW - 1 SW - 3 SW - 56. 7 and 8 BH - 1 BH - 2 BH - 3 BH - 4 BH - 5 BH - 8 BH - 2 BH - 3 BH - 4 BH - 5 Minimum Average Maximum Sr No Date of Sampling 12-06-2012 12-06-2012 12-06-2012 12-06-2012 18-05-2012 26-05-2012 24-05-2012 22-05-2012 21-05-2012 13-06-2012 17-07-2012 17-07-2012 13-07-2012 17-07-2012 Value Value Value GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- GG12- 006488.003 & 006488.002 & 006488.001 & 006967.001 & 005914.001 & 005988.001 & 005915.001 & 005914.002 & 005914.003 & 006594.001 & 007603.003 & 007603.002 & 007603.001 & 007603.004 & SGS Certificate LIBV THV CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: CH:GL: 3110028779 3110028753 3110029721 3110029754 3110024811 3110025935 3110025569 3110024815 3110024816 3110029084 3110031918 3110031917 3110031915 3110031919

Depth of Sampling 0 - 0.2 0 - 0.2 0 - 0.2 0 - 0.3 7 6 5 6 7 31 0 - 0.1 0 - 0.1 0 - 0.1 0 - 0.1

2.2'4.4.'5.5' - 6 mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ Hexachlorobiphenyl (PCB153)

2.2'3.'4.4.'5.5' - 7 mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ Hexachlorobiphenylhl b h l (PCB180) ( )

E PESTICIDES 1 Monocrotophos mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

2 Phorate mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

3 Methyl Parathion mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

4 Malathion mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ 5 Phorate Sulphoxide mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ 6 Phorate Sulphone mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

7 Malaoxon mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

8 Aldrin mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

9 Dieldrin mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

10 Butachlor mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ 11 Chlorpyrifos mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

12 Atrazine mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

13 Ethion mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

14 Alachor mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ 15 2.4 - D mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

16 Isoproturon mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

17 O.P-DDT mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

18 P.P-DDT mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ 19 O.P.-DDE mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

20 P.P.-DDE mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

21 O.P-DDD mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

22 P.P-DDD mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

23 Alpha HCH mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _ 24 Beta HCH mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

25 Gama HCH(Lindane) mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

26 Delta HCH mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

27 Alpha -Endosulfan mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

28 Beta-Endosulphan mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

29 Endosulfan sulphate mg/kg BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ _

**Note:Comparision of Soil Quality is made with the Dutch Standards for Soil " - " Data not available Values above THV Limits Values above LIBV and below THV 221

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexure 8: Landuse Map of the Study Area (i.e. 2 kms around the Closed Dumpsite):

223

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexure 9: Social Survey Questionnaire in Local Language (Bangla, followed by English)

224 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

225

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Socio-Economic Questionnaire for Dhapa Landfill Site

Respondent & Family Details

1 Name of the Respondent

2 Household Address

3 Name of HOH

4 Relationship with HOH

5 Age

6 Total No. of Family Members

GC ST 7 Social Group Others (Specify) OBC SC

8 Do you have a ration card Yes No

9 Do you have Voter Card Yes No

Respondent Type 10 (Check documents if possible and Owner Tenant mention type of document)

11 Household Type Joint Nuclear Extended

12 Electrical Connection Available Yes No

In the house Joint

13 Do you use latrine Community(how many Open houses use one latrine)

Family, Occupation and Income Details (before and after is applicable for Makaltala village mainly)

Pry Names of Sec Sl Relati Se Marit Pry Sec family Occu . on x Ag al Educ Ski Incm Inc member(be Occu p N with F/ e Statu a-tion ll gin with p HOH M s o HOH) B A B A B A B A

1

2

3

226 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Family, Occupation and Income Details (before and after is applicable for Makaltala village mainly)

Pry Names of Sec Sl Relati Se Marit Pry Sec family Occu . on x Ag al Educ Ski Incm Inc member(be Occu p N with F/ e Statu a-tion ll gin with p HOH M s o HOH) B ABAB ABA

4

5

Note: Before Closure – B and After Closure –A

Primary Occupation: Pry Occup/ Secondary Income- Sec Occup/

Primary Income- Pry Incm/ Secondary Income- Sec Incm

Disability in Family

1. Anyone in the family has any disability

2. Yes

3. No

4. Type of Disability

5. Duration of Disability (Since When)

Livestock Details

Type Cows Buffalo Sheep Goat Pig Poultry Others

Numbers

Income from Livestock

Income Details (in Rs.)

Total Family Income (per month) (Calculate Total Income from all Sources)

Quality of Accommodation Description of house structures currently occupying and its use: (Code from code sheet)

No. of Type of Building Use of Structure

227

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Floors Residential Commercial: Residential+ Kutcha Pucca Semi Pucca Shanty :1 2 Commercial:3

Expenditure, Assets Owned and Indebtedness Details Expenditure Pattern in the family in the last one month: (Before and After specifically for Makaltala; for Unchupota use the second column)

Items Before closure of dump After closure of dump / at present

Amount spent per month (Rs.) Amount spent per month (Rs.)

Food

Health

Rent (all rents)

Addiction

Electricity Charges

Education

Water Expenses

Travel

Agriculture Implements

Payment to Labour (if used in farming)

Implements for Fishing/Pisciculture

Fodder for Livestock

Inputs for commercial purposes (shops, etc)

Others (Festivals, Telephone, Clothes, Fuel, Loan repayment,

Dowry, etc.)

Total for last month

Indebtedness

Source Amount Taken Amount Returned Purpose

228 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Expenditure, Assets Owned and Indebtedness Details Expenditure Pattern in the family in the last one month: (Before and After specifically for Makaltala; for Unchupota use the second column)

Items Before closure of dump After closure of dump / at present

Bank

Private Money Lender

Loan under Govt. Scheme

Micro Credit (NGO)

Other (specify)

Assets Owned by the Household (Multiple Coding)

Type of Assets Nos. Type of Assets Nos. Type of Assets Nos.

House Mobile 11. Computer

Land Cable Connection 12. Laptop

Cycle Two Wheeler 13. Music System

Car Refrigerator 14. Any Other (Specify)

TV 10. A.C

K. Land & Productivity Details (for farmers) (Land cultivated and cultivation arrangements)

Sl Size of Plot Cultivated Land Owner Type of Agreement with No (acres/decimals) Owner (take name if not owned by self)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

L. Crop Details

Sl No. Season Crop Name Yield Quantity Consumed Quantity Sold Income from Sale

1.

2.

229

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

L. Crop Details

Sl No. Season Crop Name Yield Quantity Consumed Quantity Sold Income from Sale

3.

4.

5.

M. Details of Trees

Trees Planted Fruiting Trees Non-Fruiting Trees

Yes No Tree Name Number Income Tree Name Number Income

230 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

N. Details of Vegetables

Si No. Vegetables Grown Name of Season Quantity Quantity Income from Vegetables Consumed Sold Sale

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

O. Labour Employed in Cultivation (for crops/vegetations)

Type of Labour Number How many months per year Wages paid per month /per day

Full Time

Part Time

P. Have you availed any benefit under Central or State Govt. scheme

Schemes Schemes Availed Purpose Amount Training Received Type of Availed training Received

Yes No Yes No

Swarna Jayanti Shahari Rozgar Yojana (SJSRY)

Urban Self Employment Programme (USEP)

Janani Suraksha Yojna

Nehru Rozgar Yojana (NRY)

Urban Basic Services for the Poor (UBSEP)

Prime Minister's Integrated Urban Poverty Eradication Programme

Others (Specify)

231

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Q. Other Issues

Please suggest from your perception – three challenges that require immediate redressal in the village/project area

Give three major impacts of the closure of the dump.

Q. Other Issues

Three major impacts of dump closure on women

Three major impacts of dump closure on rag pickers

Observation and comments by field investigator

Signature of Investigator Signature of Supervisor

Date of Survey

232 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexure 10: Regulatory Framework (Applicable National / Regional Legislation)

Table 0-1: Environment Protection Act, 1986; Environment Protection Rules, 1986

Environmental Area Pollution Prevention and Abatement - General Protection of the Environment

Legislation Status Current

Summary

This act was enacted by Parliament as an aftermath of the Bhopal gas tragedy and its primary aim is to prevent such incidences and protect environment, life and property. This is the most important and powerful environmental legislation in India, giving powers to the Central Government to legislate on any issue, which, in its opinion is required for protection of the environment, which as defined, includes water, air and land and the inter-relationship which exists among and between water, air and land, and human beings, other living creatures, plants, micro-organism and property. In its 4 chapters covering Introduction and definitions; general powers of the central government; prevention, control, and abatement of environmental pollution; and miscellaneous issues, the Act gives sweeping powers to the Central Government to: › Close, prohibit or regulate any industry, operation or process, › Stop or regulate the supply electricity and/or water or any other service, or › Remediate pollution, in case pollutant discharges exceed specified limits Several environment rules & notifications have been formed under the EP Act such as: › Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Tran boundary) Rules, 2008 (amended in 2009 & 2010) › Manufacture Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules, 1989 (amended in 2000) › The Batteries Management and Handling Rules, 2001. › The EIA Notification, 2006 amended in 2009, 2010 and 2011 › The CRZ Notification, 2011 › Bio-Medical Wastes (Management & Handling Rules)

Relevance to Site

The site has been an historic municipal waste dump site and is generating gaseous emissions and leachate due to that. Owing to the nature of activities that have happened at the site in the past, it is therefore falling under the general purview of the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (EP Act). It is also bound to comply with relevant portions of the Rules framed under the EP Act, including the MSW Rules as well as the EP Rules.

Duty / Prohibition, Compliance Requirements and Responsibilities

Standards for environmental control of several different processes and industries as mentioned in the Environment Protection Rules require to be maintained. These include: › Effluent & Air Emissions › Wastes › Submission of an annual environmental statement as per Rule V of the EP Rules

Enforcing Authority

› West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator › Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), New Delhi › Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) – supervisory regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

Environment Protection Act – http://envfor.nic.in/legis/env/env1.html, Environment Protection Rules - http://envfor.nic.in/legis/env/env4.html

233

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-2: EIA Notification, 2006 amended in 2009

Environmental Area Pollution Prevention and Abatement – Planning and Impact Assessment (Regulatory)

Legislation Status Current

Summary

This is a notification under sub-rule (3) of Rule 5 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 imposing certain restrictions and prohibitions on new projects or activities or on the expansion or modernization of existing projects or activities based on their potential environmental impacts as indicated in the Schedule to the notification. This notification provides information for Environmental Clearance (EC) procedure. Criteria for project schedule under A or B is given under Notification. Form I should be duly filled by project proponent with authorized signatory and submitted to SEAC/MoEF, followed (as relevant) by setting of Terms of References (ToRs) by the Regulators, Environmental Studies and Reporting, Public Consultation, Updation of the Reports and finally presentation and approval of the project by the Regulators

Relevance to Site

The landfill capping project does not require Environmental Clearance as per the screening done under the EIA Notification. New landfills would however require EC. Further, in case a power plant using municipal solid waste (containing non- hazardous wastes only) is constructed at site with a capacity in excess of 15 MW, EC will be required.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

Specific condition and general condition as mentioned in EC letters require to be complied. Project Proponents require submitting half-yearly compliance reports in respect of the stipulated prior environmental clearance terms and conditions in hard and soft copies to the regulatory authority concerned.

Enforcing Authority

› West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator, › State Expert Appraisal Committee (SEAC) › State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) › Impact Assessment Authority (IAA), Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), New Delhi, & › Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) – supervisory regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

EIA Notification, 2006 – http://envfor.nic.in/legis/eia/eia-2006.htm Amended EIA Notification in 2009 - http://envfor.nic.in/legis/eia/so195.pdf

234 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-3: The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 & Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1982

Environmental Pollution Prevention and Abatement - Air Quality Management Area

Legislation Status Current

Summary

The Act (referred to the Air Act, 1981, in short) has been made to provide for the prevention, control and abatement of air pollution, and has empowered the Pollution Control Boards to achieve these ends. The Rules define the organisational set-up for implementing the Act. Air Pollution is defined as solid, liquid or gaseous substance (including noise) present in the atmosphere in such concentration as may be or tend to be injurious to human beings or other living creatures or plants or property or environment. Officials of the Boards are empowered to enter any facility and sample air exhausts and ambient air quality. An air consent issued under the Act lists the permitted sources of emissions and lays down limits for air pollutants from exhausts and stacks as well as defines standards for Ambient Air Quality at the site. It prohibits the permitted facility from exceeding the stipulated norms.

Relevance to Site

The site generates air emissions in the form of releases of methane and carbon-di-oxide. On occasion, methane releases catch fire leading to secondary air pollutants in the form of sulphur- di-oxides, nitrogen-di-oxide, and particulate emissions. Air emissions from controlled point sources may result on completion of the landfill capping project.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

Individual air consents(these may require to be taken once the capping project is completed depending on the nature of emissions) typically lists a number of key requirements including: › Limits to air emissions › The quality of ambient air must be as prescribed in the consent › Mandatory installation of air pollution control measures is required to be done. › Accordingly the following compliance is required: › Stack monitoring and ambient air quality monitoring is to be done regularly and records require to be maintained for the same.

Enforcing Authority

› West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator › Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), New Delhi › Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) – supervisory regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 – http://envfor.nic.in/legis/air/air1.html Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1982 – http://envfor.nic.in/legis/air/air2.html

235

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-4: Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000

Environmental Pollution Prevention and Abatement - Noise Quality Management Area:

Legislation Current Status:

Summary

The Noise Rules have been framed under the Environment Protection Act 1986, and specify ambient air quality standards in respect of noise for different areas / zones for night and day times. State Governments are expected to take measures for abatement of noise including noise emanating from vehicular movements, and ensure that the existing noise levels do not exceed the ambient air quality standards specified under these rules. The organization is required to monitor noise pollution in ambient air and maintain the levels as per the ambient air quality standards. The noise level from high noise producing machines (e.g. DG sets or compressors) needs to be controlled. The exposure of the workers to high noise areas should be controlled by proactive and corrective measures. Noise limits have been set as follows (day is defined as the duration between 0600 hrs – 2200 hrs and night is defined as the duration between 2200 hrs – 0600 hrs): › For industrial areas: <75 dB(A)leq during day and 70 dB(A)leq during night › For commercial areas: <65 dB(A)leq during day and 55 dB(A)leq during night › For residential areas: <55 dB(A)leq during day and 45 dB(A)leq during night › For silence zone: <50 dB(A)leq during day and 40 dB(A)leq during night

Relevance to Site

Currently there are no issues with noise at the site owing to its isolated nature and resultant low background noise levels. In the future, especially during construction, and depending on the final after use, after capping and remediation, noise related issues would require being studies and managed.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

Suitable management of noise control strategies during construction and after use phases would require being implemented to ensure that the noise levels are met.

Enforcing Authority

› West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator › Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), New Delhi › Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) – supervisory regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation http://envfor.nic.in/legis/noise/noise.html

236 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-5: The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 & Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1975

Environmental Pollution Prevention and Abatement - Water Resources’ Protection Area

Legislation Current Status

Summary

The Act (8 chapters) and the Rules (11 chapters) lay down the organisational structure for water pollution control in India, including the establishment of the CPCB, the State level boards (such as WBPCB) and delegates in them responsibilities and authority to implement requirements laid down in the Act and Rules. These include entry into facilities for collection of waste water samples and analysis of these samples in laboratories set up by the boards. They also make it mandatory for a polluting facility to apply for, and receive a permit (called ‘consent’) to establish, i.e. CtE or simply a No-Objection Certificate (NOC) and then a permission, namely Consent to Operate (CtO) to discharge waste water as per certain conditions as laid down in the CtO. The discharge norms (i.e. limits) are specified in the consent order. The organization has to submit periodic environmental returns to the WBPCB as specified in consent order.

Relevance to Site

The site generates leachate from the historic dumping of municipal solid waste that has occurred in the past. It is important to treat this leachate prior to reuse or discharge. A suitable treatment system would require to be devised as part of the capping and remediation programme to ensure that the leachate is treated and meets the requirements laid down in the Water Act and Rules.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

Consent under the Water Act and Rules would require to be The treated wastewater limits as laid down under the Water Act and Rules would require to be met for a range of parameters. Discharge would require to be done as per the Consent.

Enforcing Authority

› West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator › Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), New Delhi › Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) – supervisory regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974: http://envfor.nic.in/legis/water/wat1.html Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1975: http://envfor.nic.in/legis/water/water2.html

237

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-6: The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 & The Water Cess Rules, 1978 as amended in 2003.

Environmental Pollution Prevention and Abatement - Water Resources’ Protection Area

Legislation Current Status

Summary

The Act and Rules require facilities to affix water meters to their inlets. An annual payment is to be made on the basis of total water consumed during the year. The amendments to the Act in 2003 essentially increased the rates and made payment of water cess applicable to a wider range of activities than prescribed earlier. It also set dates after which the amended Act became enforceable. The water cess is to be paid for all types of end uses including drinking water.

Relevance to Site

The Water Cess Act and Rules would require being complied with in case the after use requires consumption of water (it would possibly require the same for landscaping / green belt development or other purposes)

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

› Units would require submitting Form No. I under water cess (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 & Rule 1978. › Annually submission of water cess return to WBPCB › Every consumer should furnish monthly water cess return on or before 5th of next calendar month to the concerned authority.

Enforcing Authority

› West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

Access to Detailed Regulation: › Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 – http://envfor.nic.in/legis/water/water7.html Water Cess Rules, 1978 as amended in 2003.– http://envfor.nic.in/legis/water.htm

238 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Table 0-7: The Central Groundwater Authority Notification, 1997 amended in 1999 & 2000

Environmental Pollution Prevention and Abatement - Water Resources’ Protection Area

Legislation Current Status

Summary

The Central Government has constituted the Central Ground Water Board as an Authority for the purposes of regulation and control of Ground Water Management and Development. The Authority shall exercise the powers to regulate and control management and development of ground water in the country and to issue necessary regulatory directions for this purpose. The CGWA notifies the areas that have serious ground water shortage and prohibits drilling of fresh abstractions wells in such areas unless permitted by it. The CGWB also mandates that sites defined by it is as over-exploited, critical, semi-critical undertake artificial recharge of rainwater into the ground as per norms issued by it.

Relevance to Site

The site is currently not notified for ground water abstraction. The CGWB also does not consider the site to be over-exploited indicating that there are sufficient ground water reserves available for use.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

Depending on the status of the site at the time a ground water abstraction well is drilled (if at all) as part of the future capping, remediation, closure and after use options, a suitable call would require being taken on the legal requirements such as permission for recharge or other, as relevant.

Enforcing Authority

› Central Ground Water Board

Access to Detailed Regulation http://www.nslenlaw.org/water/law-policy/central-ground-water-authority/

Table 0-8: The Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling & Tran boundary) Rules, 2008 as amended to date

Environmental Pollution Prevention and Abatement - Solid and Hazardous Waste Area Management

Legislation Status Current

Summary

This rule includes Procedure for handling Hazardous Wastes in which it is mentioned that occupier shall be responsible for safe and environmentally sound handling of hazardous wastes generated in his establishment and the occupier, recycler, re-processors, re-users and

239

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

operators of the facility may store the hazardous wastes for a period not exceeding ninety days and shall maintain record of sale, transfer, storage, recycling and reprocessing of such wastes and make these records available for inspection. Further to that Treatment, Storage And Disposal Facility (TSDF) for hazardous wastes mentioned in chapter V in which operators of the treatment, storage, and disposal facility shall maintain records of hazardous waste disposal in Form 3.

Relevance to Site

› It is expected that the landfill contours will be worked upon to achieve closure objectives including safe slopes, management of leachate, control of air emissions and suitable after use. › In the past (and largely till date) household hazardous wastes in India are not formally sorted out prior to disposal into landfills. Also due to relatively less stringent access restrictions in the past, landfills have been found to be dumped with hazardous materials. Consequently, it is possible that hazardous materials may still be present in the landfill. › As part of the remediation options, it will be required that portions of the dumped waste are re-shaped, leading to possible identification of certain wastes (during the re-shaping process) that would be considered hazardous under the Rules. In this case, it would be required to manage this waste as per the Rules.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

The Hazardous waste consent lists a number of key requirements including: › Collection & Storage of the hazardous waste should be done safely › Depending on the nature of the hazardous waste, consents specify disposal methodology including being incinerated or land filled or recycled / reused, in conformance with WBPCB requirements.

Enforcing Authority

› West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator › Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), New Delhi › Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) – supervisory regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

Access to Detailed Regulation: http://envfor.nic.in/legis/hsm/hwamdr.html

240 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-9: The Bio-Medical Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 & amended in 2003

Environmental Pollution Prevention and Abatement - Solid and Hazardous Waste Area Management

Legislation Current Status

Summary

These Rules, made under the EP Act, apply to all facilities that generate, collect, receive, store, transport, treat, dispose, or handle bio-medical waste in any form. The Rules define bio-medical wastes and lay down duties of the occupier. They prescribe methods of treatment and disposal, segregation, packaging, transportation and storage of the wastes. They authorise the formation of a ‘prescribed authority’ (the Pollution Control Board, in most states) to look after issues pertaining to bio-medical wastes. The Rules also require each facility managing bio-medical wastes to have an authorisation to do so from the prescribed authority and cover accident reporting in such facilities.

Relevance to site

All units generating bio-medical waste require ensuring that they dispose it as per the legal provisions of the Rules. However, it is entirely possible that in the past bio-medical wastes including waste sharps could have been disposed in the landfill. In case the wastes are required to be reshaped, it is possible that the process could results in identification and collection of bio-medical wastes as well. The bio medical wastes if identified shall be suitably disposed off as per Bio Medical Waste Management and Handling Rules.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

Generators of bio-medical wastes should provide bio medical treatment facilities like incinerator, autoclave & micro wave system for the treatment of waste or ensure requisite treatment of waste at a common waste treatment facility. In this case, it may be prudent to take membership of a bio-medical waste facility for disposal of any identified bio-medical wastes emanating from the landfill closure exercise.

Enforcing Authority

West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

The Bio-Medical Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998 & amended in 2003– http://envfor.nic.in/legis/hsm/biomed.html

241

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-10: Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000

Environmental Pollution Prevention and Abatement - Solid and Hazardous Area Waste Management

Legislation Status Current

Summary

General These rules shall apply to every municipal authority responsible for collection, segregation, storage, transportation, processing and disposal of municipal solid wastes. Any municipal solid waste generated in a city or a town, shall be managed and handled in accordance with the compliance criteria and the procedure laid down in rules. Management of municipal solid waste also includes specification of landfill sites and water quality monitoring and ambient air quality monitoring should be done as per specified norms at landfill site. Composting, treatment of leachate and incineration are also required to be carried out as per standard norms under these Rules. Application for obtaining authorization to commence land filling is given as a Form –I. Closure of Landfills After completion of landfill, a final cover shall be designed to minimize infiltration and erosion. The final cover shall meet the following specifications, namely: › The final cover shall have a barrier soil layer comprising of 60 cms of clay or amended soil with permeability coefficient less that 1 x 10-7 cm/sec. › On top of the barrier soil layer there shall be a drainage layer of 15 cm. › On top of the drainage layer there shall be a vegetative layer of 45 cm to support natural plant growth and to minimize erosion. Post-care of Landfills The post-closure care of landfill site shall be conducted for at least fifteen years and long term monitoring or care plan shall consist of the following, namely: › Maintaining the integrity and effectiveness of final cover, making repairs and preventing run-on and run-off from eroding or otherwise damaging the final cover; › Monitoring leachate collection system in accordance with the requirement; › Monitoring of ground water in accordance with requirements and maintaining ground water quality; › Maintaining and operating the landfill gas collection system to meet the standards. Use of closed landfill sites after fifteen years of post-closure monitoring can be considered for human settlement or otherwise only after ensuring that gaseous and leachate analysis comply with the specified standards.

Relevance to site

The site being a landfill due for remediation and closure, the requirements laid out in the Rules with regards to design, monitoring, closure and after care are especially relevant.

242 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

These are mentioned in the Summary above. Proof of compliance under these Rules would include documentary proof to ensure that the land fill closure and post-care have been carried out as mentioned in the Rules. Such documents could include: › Permit copies › Monitoring data › Closure plans › Post-closure plans

Enforcing Authority

› West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator › Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), New Delhi › Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) – supervisory regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

Municipal Solid waste Rules, 2000 – http://envfor.nic.in/legis/hsm/mswmhr.html

243

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-11: E-Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011

Environmental Pollution Prevention and Abatement - Solid and Hazardous Waste Area Management

Legislation Current Status

Summary

This is a recent notification by the central Government (MoEF) to control the hazardous electronic and electrical waste. The rules became effective from 1st May 2012. The definitions of key terms include e-waste and historical e-waste. The rule is applicable to every producer consumer or bulk consumer involved in the sale, manufacture, purchase and processing of electrical and electronic equipments/components as specified in the Schedule- 1 of the rule. The Rules area also applicable with respect to collection centres, dismantlers and recyclers of e-waste. Micro, small and medium enterprises are exempted from these Rules. These Rules are not applicable for management of waste batteries and radioactive wastes. The Rules define the responsibilities of the collection centres, consumers/bulk consumers, dismantlers and recyclers. The consumers/bulk consumers shall ensure that e-waste generated by them should be sent to authorized collection centres, dismantlers or recyclers. The e-waste can also be returned back to the producer through take (buy) back services. The bulk consumers are required to maintain records of the e-waste generated by them in specified form. The records are should available to state or central pollution control board authorities.

Relevance to Site

The relevance of the Rules to the site may be indirect. A connect between the Rules and the site is the possibility that some e-wastes may be present in the landfill and could be identified during the process of re-shaping the landfill. In that case, such wastes would require being handled as per the Rules.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

› Records would require to be made available for scrutiny by State Pollution Control Board or Central Pollution Control Board when asked for.

Enforcing Authority

› West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) – site regulator › Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), New Delhi › Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) – supervisory regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

E-waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2011 - http://moef.nic.in/downloads/rules-and- regulations/1035e_eng.pdf

244 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-12: The Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2010

Environmental Bio-diversity Conservation and Natural Resource Management - Area Wetland Protection

Legislation Current Status

Summary

Wetlands are an important component of the hydrological cycle, are rich in bio-diversity, ecologically important and also serve aesthetic and socio-cultural functions. However, many wetlands in India face a serious challenge owing to drainage and landfill, pollution, hydrological alterations and over-exploitation of their natural resources. India, being a signatory to the Ramsar Convention on protection of wetlands is committed to ensure that wetlands survive. Consequently, the Government has determined to set up a Regulatory mechanism consistent with the Ramsar Convention and therefore has promulgated the Rules. The Rules: › Define wetlands: which are considered to be inland water bodies (such as lakes, pond, tanks, marshes, fens, peat lands or others), marine waters with a maximum depth of 6 m at low tide (backwaters, creeks, lagoons or estuaries) and their drainage and catchment areas. The wetlands could be artificial or natural, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing and fresh, brackish or salty. Wetlands do not cover main river channels, agricultural fields and areas covered under the Coastal Regulatory Zone Notification. › Define protected wetlands: these include wetlands having an area >500 ha at an altitude < 2500 m and wetlands having an area > 5ha located at altitudes > 2500 m; wetlands under the Ramsar Convention; wetlands located in notified ecologically sensitive areas and areas protected under the Wildlife Protection Act (i.e. Wildlife Sanctuaries and National Parks, coral reefs, mangroves and similar) and wetlands within UNESCO World Heritage Sites and any other wetlands notified as protected by the Government. The Rules are meant to regulate protected wetlands only. › The Rules prohibit the following activities: reclamation; industrial development or industrial expansion; manufacture, handling or storage of hazardous substances (chemicals and wastes) as well as genetically modified organisms; solid waste dumping; discharge of untreated effluents and wastes; construction (within 50 m of the 10 year High Flood Level) of any nature other than boat jetties; and, any other activity that could harm the wetland ecosystem and specified in writing by the Authority formed to administer the Rules. › The Rules regulate the following activities: withdrawal, impoundment, diversion or interruption of water within the catchment area; harvesting of living or non-living resources; grazing; discharge of treated effluent within norms specified by Regulators; plying of motorised boats; dredging; construction of boat jetties; activities within the zone of influence of the wetlands; facilities such as pontoon bridges that do not alter the ecological balance of the wetlands; aquaculture, agriculture or horticulture within the wetland; repair of existing constructions including re-construction; and, any other activity identified by the Authority. › As mentioned, the Rules specify the setting of a Central Wetlands Regulatory Authority for the purpose of implementing and regulating the Rules.

Relevance to Site

The Site lies in close proximity to the East Kolkata Wetlands, a designated wetland under the Ramsar Convention. Consequently, developments at the site need to be in consonance

245

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

with the Rules.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

The prohibited activities as well as the regulated activities have been mentioned in the Summary. The final development plan for the land fill would require to be in consonance with the Rules.

Enforcing Authority

The Central Wetlands Regulatory Authority

Access to Detailed Regulation www.envfor.nic.in

246 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-13: The East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Act, 2006- enacted by the State of West Bengal

Environmental Bio-diversity Conservation and Natural Resource Management - Area Wetland Protection

Legislation Current Status

Summary

The Act has been promulgated by the Government of West Bengal for the conservation and management of the East Kolkata Wetlands which are considered important from the socio- economic as well as ecological perspective. Under this Act, the State Government has formed an Authority called the East Kolkata Wetlands Authority, to demarcate the East Kolkata Wetlands boundaries, prevent unauthorised use or development of the Wetlands, prevent and restrict mining and quarrying within the Wetlands, reduce pollution in the Wetlands, to prepare action plans conforming to the Ramsar Convention and others.

Relevance to Site

The site is close to / part of the East Kolkata Wetlands Area and therefore the management of the site including future management has to be in consonance with the East Kolkata Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Act. Necessarily, the Dhapa Landfill remediation scheme final closure plan and after use will require permission from the East Kolkata Wetlands Authority in addition to the Central Wetlands Regulatory Authority

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

The final plan and scheme will be submitted in necessary formats to the Authority for its approval. Necessary documents and records for the same will require to be provided.

Enforcing Authority

East Kolkata Wetlands Management Authority

Access to Detailed Regulation www.enviswb.gov.in

247

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-14: The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970

Social Area: The Contract Labour (Regulations and Abolition) Act, 1970

Legislation Status: Current

Summary

An Act to regulate the employment of Contractual Labour in certain establishments and to provide for its abolition in certain circumstances and for matters connected therewith. It applies: (a) To every establishment in which twenty or more workmen are employed or were employed on any day of the preceding twelve months as contract labour;

(b) to every contractor who employees or who employed on any day of the preceding twelve months twenty or more workmen: Provided that the appropriate Government may, after giving not less than two months' notice of its intention so to do, by notification in the Official Gazette, apply the provisions of this Act to any establishment or contractor employing such number of workmen less than twenty as may be specified in the Notification. Relevance to Site

During the construction phase the contractual labour will be required, hence this law is applicable.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

Typically, duty and compliance requirements under the Act and Rules as well as Permits issued under these are detailed, and would require compliance such as: › Maintaining daily log books with regards to contractual labour employed at the site. › Down time of any operating components, if any › Any non-conformances against prescribed standards › Regular reporting in prescribed formats to the Site Regulator

Enforcing Authority

Labour Commissioner

Access to Detailed Regulation

Access to Detailed Regulation: http://pblabour.gov.in/pdf/acts_rules/contract_labour_regulation_and_abolition_act_1970.p df

Additional Remarks

The labour contractor should have a valid labour license

248 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Table 0-15: The Inter State Migrant Workmen Act 1979

Social Area The Inter State Migrant Workmen Act 1979

Legislation Status Current

Summary An Act to regulate the employment of inter-State migrant workmen and to provide for their conditions of service and for matters connected therewith. It applies – (a) to every establishment in which five or more Inter-State migrant workmen (whether or not in addition to other workmen) are employed or who were employed on any day of the preceding twelve months; (b) to every contractor who employs or who employed five or more Inter-State migrant workmen (whether or not in addition to other workmen) on any day of the Preceding twelve months. Relevance to Site

During the construction phase there is possibility of employing of staff from other state, hence this law is applicable.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

Typically, duty and compliance requirements under the Act and Rules as well as Permits issued under these are detailed, and would require compliance such as: › Maintaining daily log books with regards to the staff employed from other state at the site. › Any non-conformances against prescribed standards › Regular reporting in prescribed formats to the Site Regulator

Enforcing Authority

Labour Commissioner

Access to Detailed Regulation http://labour.nic.in/upload/uploadfiles/files/ActsandRules/Service_and_Employment/The% 20Inter- State%20Migrant%20Workmen%20(Regulation%20of%20Employment%20and%20Condi

tions%20of%20Service)%20Act,%201979.pdf

249

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Table 0-16: Labour Laws (ESI Act 1948 etc)

Social Area Labour Laws (ESI Act 1948, EPF Act 1952, Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923, Payment of Minimum Wages Act, 1936, Bonus Act, 1965 and several rules related to labour issued by government time to time through notification)

Legislation Status Current

Summary The Labour Laws defines about the working condition of workmen employed in an establishment including Health & Safety. Relevance to Site

All the labour laws will be applicable for the contractor during the Construction Phase.

Duty / Prohibition and Compliance Requirements

Typically, duty and compliance requirements under the Act and Rules as well as Permits issued under these are detailed, and would require compliance such as: › Maintaining daily log books with regards to the staff employed at the site. › Any non-conformances against prescribed standards › Regular reporting in prescribed formats to the Site Regulator

Enforcing Authority

› Labour Commissioner – supervisory regulator

Access to Detailed Regulation

250 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

Annexure 11: KMC Act

251

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

252 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT REPORT