National Green Tribunal
Venkatapati Raja Yenumula vs Ministry Of Environment Forest And ... on 2 August, 2022
Author: K. Ramakrishnan
Bench: K. Ramakrishnan
Item No.1:- Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
(Through Video Conference)
Original Application No.175 of 2020 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Venkatapathi Raja Yenumula
H.No.2-232, Kesavadasupalem
Razolu Taluk, Sakhinetipalli Mandal
East Godavari District,
Andhra Pradesh - 533 252
...Applicant(s)
Versus
Union of India
Through its Secretary
Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change
Indira Paryavaran Bhavan,
Jorbagh, New Delhi and Ors.
...Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s): Mr. Sravan Kumar along with
Ms. Kothai Muthu Meenal S.M.
For Respondent(s): Mr. G.M. Syed Nurullah Sheriff for R1.
Mr. A.R. Sakthivel for R2.
Mr. R. Sankaranarayanan, ASGI for R3.
Mr. P.V.S. Giridhar along with
Mr. Muraleedaran for R4.
Mrs. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R5, R7 to R12.
Mrs. P. Jayalakshmi along with
Mr. D.S. Ekambaram for R6.
Judgment Pronounced on: 02nd August 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Mr. SAIBAL DASGUPTA, EXPERT MEMBER
Page 1 of 155
ORDER
Judgment pronounced through Video Conference. The original application is disposed of with directions vide separate Judgment.
Pending interlocutory application, if any, shall stand disposed of.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, J.M. Sd/-
Shri. Saibal Dasgupta, E.M. O.A. No.175/2020 (SZ), 02nd August 2022. Mn.
Page 2 of 155 Item No.1:- Court No.1
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI
(Through Video Conference)
Original Application No.175 of 2020 (SZ)
IN THE MATTER OF:
Venkatapathi Raja Yenumula
H.No.2-232, Kesavadasupalem
Razolu Taluk, Sakhinetipalli Mandal
East Godavari District,
Andhra Pradesh - 533 252
...Applicant(s)
Versus
1) Union of India
Through its Secretary
Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change Indira Paryavaran Bhavan, Jorbagh, New Delhi - 110 003.
2) Union of India Represented by its Secretary Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas Sastry Bhavan, New Delhi -1.
3) Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited Represented its Chairman Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gases Deendayal Urja Bhavan 5A, Nelsan Mandela Marg VasanthKunj, New Delhi - 110 070.
4) GAIL (India) Limited Represented by its Chairman & Managing Director GAIL Bhavan, 16, Bikajikama Place R.K. Puram, New Delhi - 100 066.
5) State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Chief Secretary Secretariat, Velagapudi Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh - 522 503.
6) Central Pollution Control Board Through Member Secretary Parivesh Bhawan, CBD Cum Office Complex East Arjun Nagar, Delhi - 110 032.
Page 3 of 1557) Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board Represented by its Member Secretary D.No. 33-26-14/D2, Pushpa Hotel Centre Chalamvari Street, Kasturibaipet Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh - 520 010.
8) Director General Fire Services Office of the Director General, State Disaster Response & Fire Service Department, Near Police Control Room, Governorpet, Vijayawada - 534 006.
9) Andhra Pradesh Police Department Represented by its Deputy Inspector General of Police Eluru Range, Eluru, Andhra Pradesh - 522 501.
...Respondents No.1 to 910) Directorate General of Mine Safety Represented by its CIM & Director General Dhanbad, Jharkhan - 826 016.
(Deleted as per order of the Tribunal dated 08.09.2020)
11) The District Collector and Magistrate East Godavari at Kakinada Andhra Pradesh - 533 001.
12) District Collector and Magistrate West Godavari District Ammenapaeta, Eluru, Andhra Pradesh - 534 006.
13) Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Managing Authority Represented by its Chairman Chalamvari Street, Kasturibaipeta Vijayawada - 520 010.
...Rearrayed Respondents No.10 to 12/ Original Respondent No.11 to 13 For Applicant(s): Mr. Sravan Kumar along with Ms. Kothai Muthu Meenal S.M. For Respondent(s): Mr. G.M. Syed Nurullah Sheriff for R1.
Mr. A.R. Sakthivel for R2.
Mr. R. Sankaranarayanan, ASGI for R3.
Mr. P.V.S. Giridhar along with Mr. Muraleedaran for R4.
Mrs. Madhuri Donti Reddy for R5, R7 to R12.
Mrs. P. Jayalakshmi along with Mr. D.S. Ekambaram for R6.
Page 4 of 155Judgment Reserved on: 27th May 2022.
Judgment Pronounced on: 02nd August 2022.
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE Mr. SAIBAL DASGUPTA, EXPERT MEMBER Whether the Judgment is allowed to be published on the Internet - Yes.
Whether the Judgment is to be published in the All India NGT Reporter - Yes.
JUDGMENT Delivered by Justice K. Ramakrishnan, Judicial Member
1. The above application was filed by the applicant on the allegation that on account of the operation of Respondents No.3 & 4 units, large scale air, sound, soil and water pollution are being caused in East and West Godavari Districts.
2. The units are engaged in natural gas manufacturing and distribution of the same. They have not provided necessary pollution control mechanism to check the probable pollution that is likely to be caused on account of their activities. The units are involved in lot of environmental degradation activities like discharging polluted water into the sea, water bodies and open land, causing gas leakage due to not providing necessary leakage detection system and conducting blasting in Kesavadasupalem, Kesanapally, Antarvedi, Nagaram, Nagicheruvu, Uppudi and about 100 villages of East Godavari District and West Godavari districts of Andhra Pradesh. Their activities amount to violation of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Disaster Management Act, 2005, CRZ Notification and Biological Diversity Act, 2002. Their activities are broadly divided into the following categories:
(i) Releasing of huge black smoke into air at Kesanipalli Gas collection station.
(ii) Damaging sea coast in East Godavari for conducting exploration activities.Page 5 of 155
(iii) Releasing polluted oil mixed black water into Bay of Bengal, nearby ponds/water bodies, agricultural lands.
(iv) Regular leakage of gas and causing damage to agriculture, accidents in villages of East Godavari and West Godavari districts.
(v) Odour/foul smell coming from ONGC, GAIL plants/pipes.
(vi) Lack of supervision on Oil and Gas pipelines
(vii) Misuse of funds which are supposed to spend for providing drinking water, restoring environment etc. in the activity area.
3. The constant drilling, supplying of gas, releasing of effluents so mentioned is causing severe impact and causing irreparable loss to the sea coast region, agriculture lands, water bodies, flora and fauna and also affecting the health of the residents and farmers in that area. It also posed a threat to the safety of the villagers in both districts. They were also not having proper Consent to Operate and Consent to Establish and were committing violation of the conditions of permissions and clearance granted thereby causing huge health impact in that locality. There were lot of oil and gas leak incidents which occurred resulting in disaster and in respect of one such incident that happened in 2017 led to public protest and due to intervention of the member of Parliament and other political leaders, it was resolved that Respondent Nos.3 & 4 will take necessary remedial measures to avoid such things in future. Respondent Nos.3 & 4 were conducting massive gas and oil exploration and supply activities in Andhra Pradesh and their activities are being carried on in onshore of Bay of Bengal and offshore of East Godavari, West Godavari and Krishna Districts of Andhra Pradesh. The details of activities were mentioned in the ONGC Disaster Management Plan, 2015. They were doing activities in Adavipalem field which is having GCS - I, Endamuru - GCS. Further, they have explained their activity in Amalapuram field, Kesanapalli field, Pasaralapudi field, Ponnamonda field, Tatipaka field, Narasapur field, Lingala field, Kaikaluru field, Nandigama field in the gap of various years as part of their expansion. There were frequent gas and oil leaks which occurred in that area resulting in accident causing loss of life and health hazards. On 31.01.2020, gas leak developed in ONGC pipeline at Antarvedi and on 03.02.2020 high pressure gas leakage occurred on Uppudi Village of East Godavari District which was published in 'The Hindu' newspaper where it was mentioned that evacuation of 2,500 people from that area took Page 6 of 155 place to avoid further disaster on 04.02.2020, due to the failure on the part of Respondents Nos.3 & 4 in arresting leak. There were further leaks which occurred in that area on 16.05.2020 where another ONGC pipe leakage incident occurred at Kesanipalli Village of Malikipuram Mandal of East Godavari District; similarly on 27.05.2020 another gas leak incident occurred in Achanta Vemavaram Village in which fire broke out from the bore well and on 20.08.2020 another gas leak incident occurred in Pasarlapudi Kaikalapeta Village, Mamidikuduru Mandal of East Godavari District. All these incidences were reported in the newspaper and visual media. The District Collector had conducted a review meeting with the officials and directed them to take all precautions to control leakage in the district and this was published in 'The Hans English Newspaper' dated 10.05.2020. They were releasing untreated effluents into the Bay of Bengal and they are doing the same against the Consent to Establish/Operate granted on 13.08.2015. The ONGC pipelines are discharging untreated effluents on beach instead of carrying out to the deep sea disposal and this resulted in marine pollution. They also produced certain photographs to show the nature of damage caused to the water bodies on account of their activities of the Respondent Nos.3 & 4. They further alleged that they have not paid compensation to the farmers for acquisition of lands for this project and they were not following the directions issued by the District Collector - East Godavari vide Ref. No.G5/4311/2013 dated 29.01.2015. No action was taken by the Police and GAIL on Nagaram explosion till date, in which 15 persons died. The applicant had produced several newspaper reports regarding various incidents reporting of gas leak explosions from the plant and pipelines maintained by Respondent Nos.3 & 4. There were some writ petitions filed earlier as W.P. No.13341 of 2008 and in respect of environmental impact on drilling for oil explosion in Krishna and KG Basin by ONGC, an Expert Committee was appointed to study these aspects by the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the Expert Committee had submitted the report dated 23.10.2009, where they have given the following conclusion and recommendations:-
"6. Conclusions and Recommendations:
(i) There is no direct evidence available to the Committee to indicate any land subsidence in the gas field or the adjoining areas in the KG Basin. From geological considerations also, this region does not appear to be prone to significant land subsidence. It is, however, suggested that an expert organization like the Indian School of Page 7 of 155 Mines may be entrusted with a detailed study on existing or likely land subsidence in this region.
(ii) The problem of underground water getting saline in certain locations has been observed. The exact reason needs to be studied. Some studies have suggested that extensive aquaculture in the region could be a factor. This could also be due to construction of dams in the upstream and erosion of part of the delta. A survey of the entire delta region needs to be carried out.
(iii) Since land subsidence has been reported & observed in the areas where extensive extraction of underground water, oil & gas or mining in various parts of the world including India (coal mines) has been carried out, this aspect needs to be taken into consideration while taking up any project on underground extraction.
(iv) Measurement of ground level as baseline data has therefore to be included in the EIA study and periodic monitoring of the level needs to be carried out, during the operational phase.
(v) In case, geological factors indicate likelihood of land subsidence and consequential impacts, remedial measures need to be planned by the project proponent. Provision of such measures needs to be taken into consideration while evaluating the projects for environmental clearance.
(vi) A study on likely impact of Offshore extraction of Oil / Gas, if any, on land close to the coast in respect of land subsidence or movement or ground water quality, should be taken up."
4. The applicant had produced the report of the Expert Committee submitted in W.P. No.13341 of 2008 as Annexure - A3. They are not strictly following the conditions imposed in the Environmental Clearance (EC) and the MoEF&CC guidelines in this regard. They were not properly utilizing the CSR fund. They are not providing proper maintenance and replacing the old pipes with new pipes which results in frequent disaster. When certain incidents occurred earlier, an Original Application was filed before this Bench as O.A. No.66 of 2020 (SZ) and this Tribunal appointed a Joint Committee and the Joint Committee submitted the report on 20.07.2020 and they made certain suggestions which reads as follows:-
"5. Suggestions:-
Committee felt that the steps/ measures taken by ONGC for the control of pipeline leakage are not sufficient, because the leakages and its locations are being identified after physical appearance of oil on the soil surface. Pipelines are being laid 2mt. below the ground level. After deliberate discussions, the following measures are suggested by the committee to avoid oil pipeline leak and to maintain the soil fertility.
1) Present method of flow based measurement at receiving end to identify the leakage of oil is not effective, because exact location of oil leak point is not able to be identified until its physical appearance in the top soil. The flow based measurement shall be carried out by providing flow meters in all pipelines with certain distance from well to receiving point, so that the area of pipeline leak shall be identified easily at initial stage itself. These flow meters shall be connected to any system like SCADA, PLC etc.
2) The periodic assessment of Pipe Integrity (including internal crack, corrosion & erosion) shall be made at least once in five years, so that the status of the pipeline shall be known and accordingly replacement period for the pipe shall be decided.
3) Pigging operation shall be carried out to reduce water accumulation and subsequent scaling & corrosion inside the pipeline.
4) External Corrosion Protection of pipeline shall be provided in all underground pipelines such as sacrificial anode method, impulse current method, poly ethylene coating etc. to avoid external corrosion of pipe.
5) Revalidating of appropriate inhibitors and rate of feeding based on well fluid characteristics (crude oil), can be done by frequent sampling and analysis of well fluid.
6) ONGC has informed that old pipelines are flushed once if it is not going to be used further in future. Evidence shall be provided to the committee during field visit to ensure that old unused pipelines are flushed properly.
7) ONGC shall also submit evidence of mothballing of pipeline which is Page 8 of 155 temporarily not in use.
8) ONGC informed that the oil spilled soil (contaminated soil) is removed upto affected depth from the farmland and taken for in-house bioremediation. The contaminated soil excavated area is re-filled with soil taken from other location. It was informed that the refilled soil is also having good fertility. However, during this course of action the refill soil quality should be tested as well as it should possess similar characteristics of the existing natural farm soil so as to avoid yield loss.
9) ONGC is advised to carry out the assessment of soil quality in all locations, wherever the soil is refilled due to oil spillage/leakage and accordingly corrective measures needs to be taken.
10) An action plan for continuous monitoring of affected areas periodically by ONGC shall be submitted to avoid long term issues."
5. There was another case as O.A. No.43 of 2020 (EZ) and O.A. No.44 of 2020 (EZ) field before the Eastern Zonal Bench which was considered by the Principal Bench in respect of oil and gas leakage that occurred in Assam State and accepting the report of the Joint Committee, Rs.151 Crores (Rupees One Hundred and Fifty One Crore only) was ordered as interim compensation. They also committed violation of CRZ Notification by discharging untreated effluent into the beach instead of exploring the possibility of discharging the same in deep sea method as permitted in permission granted. Since the authorities have not taken any proper steps, they filed the application seeking the following reliefs:-
(i) Appoint a committee similar to O.A. No.43 & 44 of 2020 (SZ) or O.A. No.66 of 2020 to find the loss caused to environment by the respondent No.3 & 4 in Krishna Godavari Basin of Andhra Pradesh by conducting comprehensive survey by taking the representations from the affected villagers, aggrieved persons etc.
(ii) Directed the respondents No.1, 2 & 5 to take action on the persons responsible for continuous environmental disaster such as accidents, gas leakages due to lack of effective monitoring in the KG Basin region.
(iii) Direct respondent 1,5, 8, 10, 11, 12 to conduct cumulative study on damage caused to ecology, agriculture lands, Bay of Bengal, ground water, water bodies etc due to the activities of ONGC and GAIL in East Godavari and West Godavari districts of Andhra Pradesh.
(iv) Impose exemplary fine on respondents No.3 & 4 for the continuous irreparable damage caused to environment, sea, loss of health to the people, fertility of agriculture land, biodiversity etc. in East Godavari and West Godavari districts.
(v) Direct respondent No.4 to pay compensation to the people/victims who were denied justice in Nagaram fire tragedy and implement the assurances made at the time of massive fire accident due to GAIL gas pipeline leakage.
(vi) Direct respondent No.3, 4, 8 & 9 to record all the incidents of gas leakages/environmental disasters and register an FIR immediately in future.
(vii) Direct Respondent No.3, 4 & 8 to provide fire safety measures to save ecology by setting up of Fire Stations at all Gas Collection stations and important places as the large scale oil and gas activities are taking place in East Godavari and West Godavari districts of Andhra Pradesh as the Environmental Clearance issued by Union Environment, Forest and CC and Consent for Operation orders issued by Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board mandates the project proponent to provide safety measures in the plant and the place of operation.
(viii) Direct the respondent No.1 to 5 implement the Corporate Social Responsibility funds transparently and complete all the pending works initiated under CSR programs by respondent No.3 & 4 in accordance with Office Memorandum No.3-11013/25/2014- IA.I, dated 11.08.2014 of MoEF.
(ix) Punish the responsible negligent persons who have caused death of 23 persons and injury 17 persons, damaging the houses, agriculture, horticulture etc. and illegal Page 9 of 155 beach sand mining by the contractors of ONGC for the construction of Odarevu Gas Collection Station for the past 5 years.
(x) Direct the respondent No.2 to 5 to take appropriate measures to control erosion, rising of sea in East Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh due to the activities of ONGC and GAIL in Krishna Godavari Basin.
(xi) Pass any such order, as this Hon‟ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
6. As per order dated 08.09.2020, this Tribunal admitted the matter as it was satisfied that there arose a substantial question of environment which required interference of this Tribunal and appointed a Joint Committee comprising (i) a Senior Officer from Regional Office, Ministry of Environment & Climate Change (MoEF&CC), Chennai, (ii) a Senior Officer from Regional Office, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), Chennai, (iii) a Senior Officer from Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) as deputed by the Chairman, (iv) the District Collector, East Godavari and West Godavari Districts or a Senior Officer not below the rank of Assistant Collector/Sub Divisional Magistrate designated by the respective District Collectors and (v) an Expert on Petroleum Engineering from Andhra University College of Engineering, Visakhapatnam to inspect the area in question and submit a factual as well as action taken report, if there is any violation found. The Joint Committee was given liberty to co-opt any other expert to assist them in preparing the report in the field of Petroleum Engineering in respect of the safety measures to be taken to avoid such things in future.
7. The Joint Committee was directed to go into the following aspects:-
a. Whether there was any air, water, soil and sound pollution caused on account of the activities of the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 in these areas;
b. Whether they have committed any violation of Environmental Clearance and CRZ Clearance granted and if so, what was the impact of those on environment and the nature of damage caused to the environment and assess environmental compensation accordingly;
c. Whether the pollution control mechanism provided by Respondent Nos.3 & 4 are adequate to meet the situation and Page 10 of 155 if not, what are the up gradation and improvement required to minimize or to avoid such incidents in future and also to prevent causing of pollution in that locality;
d. Conduct Ambient Air Quality test, Ground water quality and quality of water test in water bodies and sea and if there is any contamination caused, the nature of remediation to be taken to restore the same to its original position; e. Whether there was any damage caused to the residence of the locality on account of any of the violation committed by the units of Respondent Nos.3 & 4 and that may also be taken into consideration while assessing the environmental compensation to be recovered from them;
8. The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), Regional Office, Chennai was designated as nodal agency for co-ordination and for providing necessary logistics for that purpose.
9. The 12th Respondent/Andhra Pradesh Coastal Zone Management Authority filed counter affidavit contending that as per record, M/s. ONGC had obtained the following CRZ Clearance from the MoEF&CC, Government of India, New Delhi:-
"(i) Laying of pipeline for Integrated Development of GS-15 and G-1 offshore fields in Godavari Basin and expansion of onshore terminal facilities at Odalarevu in K.G. Offshore, East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh, vide order dated 22.12.2000.
(ii) Development of Vashishta and S-1 fields of K.G. Offshore, Eastern Offshore Asset at Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh and expansion of Odalarevu Onshore Terminal, A.P. vide order dated 12.11.2015.
(iii) Development drilling of 45 wells at block KG-DWN-98/2, KG offshore, Tehsil Allavaraam, District East Godavari, Andhra Pradesh by M/s ONGC Ltd. , vide order dated 22.01.2016.
(iv) Marine disposal of treated effluent of 1500 Cu m/day into sea at 1500 mts offshore in water depth of 6.7 mts C.D, vide order dated 11.08.2016.
(v) Laying of 20 Inch pipeline of 31 Km length from Offshore platform, through mouth of Gauthami& Godavari River, Part of Yanam (Puducherry) and terminating at ONGC Onshore plant at Mallavaram Village, TallarevuMandal, East Godavari District, vide order dated 15.10.2020."
10. It is further contended that as per the CRZ Clearance, the project proponent shall follow all the guidelines prescribed for carrying out the activities and also take necessary safety measures. The Project Proponent shall also ensure that the ecologically sensitive areas in the project area are not disturbed due to their activities being carried out. As far as the Page 11 of 155 enforcement of the recommendations of CRZ Notification and Clearance, the monitoring agency to monitor the compliance with the terms and conditions of the CRZ Clearance is Regional Office, MoEF&CC. As per the Office Memorandum dated: 05.08.2011. M/s. ONGC had obtained CRZ clearance from the MoEF&CC, GOI, New Delhi for Marine disposal of treated effluent of 1500 Cu.m./day into sea at 1500 mts offshore in water depth of 6.7 mts C.D., vide order dated 11.08.2016. Any violation of CRZ condition has to be monitored by the Regional Office, MoEF&CC. So, they prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders.
11. The 4th Respondent filed counter affidavit denying the allegations made against them. They have detailed the background of formation of their company which was originally incorporated as Maharatna 'Central Public Sector Undertaking' in August 1984 in the name of Gas Authority of India Limited, Government of India with 52.1% share capital with Government of India. Thereafter, the name was changed from 'Gas Authority of India Ltd. to 'GAIL (India) Limited in November, 2002. They were engaged in pipeline transportation of gas and supply. They had contributed to the growth and development of natural gas pipeline infrastructure and natural gas market. They are having an existing 13,718 kilometres of gas pipeline network with a capacity of 204 MMSCMD. They are having network connection over 20 States including State of Andhra Pradesh and two Union Territories. They are promoting the policy of the government to provide clean fuel not only for domestic but also for commercial purposes. It was later extended to transport facilities as well. They are functioning in three segments - 'Upstream', 'Midstream' and 'Downstream'. The 'Upstream' activities include exploration, drilling, and extraction, 'Midstream' businesses are those that are focused on transportation and they are the one responsible for moving the extracted raw materials to refineries to process the oil and gas. The Midstream companies are characterized by shipping, trucking, pipelines, and storing of the raw materials. 'Downstream' involves the actual selling and distribution of Natural Gas and Oil based products. Presently, many large oil companies are integrated, in that they maintain all three, viz., Page 12 of 155 Upstream, Midstream, and Downstream units. The Upstream or Exploration and Production (E&P) companies, find reservoirs and drill oil and gas wells and this process is taken care to a large extent by ONGC (3rdRespondent) in KG Basin, for both onshore as well as offshore. Some other players like Cairn Energy, Reliance and BP, OIL India do operate primarily in offshore exploration and production. The 4th Respondent had no exploration activities, either onshore or offshore in KG Basin and they were involved only in the midstream and downstream segments of oil and gas industry in KG Basin. They supply gas to some of the important Power Generation Plants, Fertilizer Plant and other industries thus contributing to the growth of the nation. Presently in KG Basin, the 4thRespondent receives Natural Gas from ONGC & CEIL and supplies the same to the various consumers through underground pipeline network. Not only Government of India,but also internationally, the distinct advantages of gas transportation by Pipelines have been recognized and pipeline transportation is accepted as the only mode of transportation for gaseous consignment over long distances for the following reasons:
"(a) Pipelines, being underground, will provide lesser direct contact with the populace thereby reducing its hazardous impact as well as provide better overall security
(b) Pipeline mode is the safest and reliable mode of transportation.
(c) Availability of the highway / railways for transporting other materials / goods will improve.
(d) Uninterrupted supply of gas will be ensured.
(e) As processing of gas is not involved, there is no emissions / discharge. Hence, it is environmentally friendly.
(f) Natural gas does not need any storage. Hence, the naphtha storage tanks, the major fire source is eliminated.
(g) Natural gas is lighter than air. Hence, it does not get spread in case of leakage.
(h) Movement of naphtha/oil tankers on the road will be eliminated.
Reducing congestion on the roads."
12. They designed and constructed the pipelines taking into account all safety aspects as follows:-
"(a) Pipelines are designed as per International Standard ASME B 31.8 and OISD-226.
(b) Pipelines are protected against corrosion by 3-layer PE coating followed by permanent cathodic protection
(c) 100% radiography for all weld joints to ensure zero failure.
(d) Hydro test is done at 1.5 times of the designpressure.
(e) Pigging facility for the pipeline.
(f) Remote Operation of Sectionalizing Valves (SVs) are done through SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) system.
(g) Pipeline is laid minimum of 1 Meter below the ground.Page 13 of 155
(h) Anti-buoyancy measures at all major water crossings are provided.
(i) During construction, Project Management Consultancy (PMC) engaged throughout the completion of project.
(j) Third Party Inspection Agency (TPIA) for inspection and verification during construction stage.
(k) Approvals are required from statutory bodies, i.e., Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB) and Petroleum & Explosives Safety Organization (PESO) for operation of pipelines."
13. They following security provisions were also provided:-
"(a) Pipeline markers (RoU boundary markers, Aerial markers, warning boards at all crossings) for facilitating easy identification of line are being installed.
(b) All pipeline installations are guarded round the clock by ex-servicemen who are being monitored through regular and surprise checks.
(c) All installations are provided with boundary walls as per MHA guidelines.
(d) Round the clock deployment for protection of men, material and information."
14. They have adopted the following monitoring system for their pipelines:-
"(a) Daily foot patrolling line walkers engaged from nearby villages.
(b) Foot patrolling once in a year along the pipeline is carried out by the employees of the Applicant.
(c) Quarterly air surveillance by helicopter.
(d) Dedicated Internal Communication facilities are available through own OFC network. A toll free number is also available for general public.
(e) Awareness programs for public are conduced periodically to create awareness about pipeline activities.
(f) Safety pamphlets for awareness about the hazards involved and channel of communication in case of emergencies are distributed to villagers in the surrounding areas."
15. They further contended that the committee appointed by this Tribunal made certain observations against them and none of the orders passed in O.A. No.43 of 2020 and 44 of 2020 and O.A. No.66 of 2020 are related to the facts of this case. They are confined to the facts of that particular case. The Tribunal had without considering its scope, entertained the application against this respondent and as such, the same is not maintainable and they prayed for dismissal of the application.
16. The 3rd Respondent filed counter affidavit contending that the application is not maintainable. They denied most of the allegations made against them regarding pollution being caused on account of their activities etc. Maharatna ONGC is the largest crude oil and natural gas Company in India, contributing around 71% to Indian domestic production. Crude oil is the raw material used by downstream companies like IOC, BPCL, Page 14 of 155 HPCL and MRPL (Last two are subsidiaries of ONGC) to produce petroleum products like Petrol, Diesel, Kerosene, Naphtha and Cooking Gas, LPG. ONGC has a unique distinction of being a company with in- house service capabilities in all areas of Exploration and Production of oil & gas and related oil-field services. Being the Winner of the Best Employer award, they had a dedicated team of around 28,500 professionals to do their dedicated work round the clock in challenging locations. It is a Central Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Corporate Registered Office at Deen Dayal Urja Bhawan, No.05, Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. They had onshore production installation of 262 Nos., 268 offshore installations, 69 drilling (plus 37 hired) and 54 work-over rigs (plus 25 hired), owned and operated more than 25,500 kilometres of pipeline in India, including 4,500 kilometres of sub-sea pipelines. The Government of Indiais having 60.41% share in ONGC as on 31 December 2020. It is the largest natural gas company ranking 11th among global energy majors. It is the only public sector Indian company to feature in Fortune's Most Admired Energy Companies' list and ONGC ranks 18th in Oil and Gas operations' and 220 overall in Forbes Global 2000. ONGC's wholly owned subsidiary and overseas arm ONGC Videsh is India's largest international oil and gas E&P Company with 39 projects in 18 countries. They are strictly carrying out their activities in accordance with the guidelines and conditions imposed. They denied the allegation that they are damaging the sea coast in East Godavari by conducting oil exploration etc. They had obtained necessary clearances/licenses for this purpose. They denied the allegation that they are releasing polluted oil mix black water into Bay of Bengal, nearby ponds, water bodies and agricultural lands, thereby causing damage to the environment. They denied the allegation that there were regular incidents of oil and gas leak resulting in pollution and damage to the environment. They are having their own system to monitor the Ambient Air Quality and the sample results will go to show that they are within the limits. They have got standard mechanism for maintenance and carrying out their operations. They are strictly complying with the norms for utilization of CSR funds for the activities identified by the District Collector and Revenue and Page 15 of 155 other statutory authorities. The following are the safety measures undertaken by the ONGC in monitoring their pipelines:-
"i. All the operations are carried out on round-the-clock basis by taking all the safety precautions and time to time up-gradations. Except occasional leaks under abnormal conditions, the environment pollution caused is minimum and also there is no damage to coast line.
ii. During round the clock operations there is a possibility of line leakages/oil spillage which can be caused either by miscreant activity or by unexpected conditions/accidents.
iii. The leakage of oil/gas that is so caused, is immediately detected and action is initiated to restore the land (soil) free from oil. Hence leakages are not frequently happening in a specific area.
iv. The following measures are taken in order to minimize the damages in the shortest possible time like immediate isolation of the line, deployment of the maintenance teams for repair/arresting the leakages, repair of the line, assessment of the damage and payment to the individual and partial statement of the compensation amounts paid. V. The oil and gas wells are connected to the nearby GGS/GCS with underground pipe line pipe lines, which are hydro-tested with pressure ranging from 1.25 times of the flowing pressure. Safety device called "High low safety valve" is installed in high pressure wells. Monitoring of the flow and pressure is done on real time basis through "SCADA" (Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition) system at each production installation.
vi. The Flow line from well to GGS carrying gas, water are laid underground of 1 meter below the earth. Most of the pinhole leaks occurs due to internal corrosion of sand and water in the crude oil. The pinhole leakages occur in the flow line with a hole of approximately 1-2 mm in size causing the release of flow line fluid at the point of damage. These leaks are very minor in nature causing very less damage.
vii. If gas leakage occurs, the nearby GGS/GCS crew rushes to the site, immediately. They close the well and stop the source gas. Then the entrapped gas/liquid is depressurized to the flare line in the GGS/GCS. The entire activity takes place in less than 30minutes. Thereafter, consent from the farmers with assessment of suitable land compensation is taken. Therefore, the repair work of the pipe line is being carried out in priority basis to restore normal production."
17. They further contended that whenever incidents of leak happened or otherwise, the same is being attended quickly and all necessary steps were taken to prevent damage caused to the environment. They have got a proper Disaster Management Plan to deal with the following aspects:-
"i. Patrolling the pipeline networks through three-tier system, namely, (1) Special Protection Force (2) Production teams and (3) Crisis Management Team on 24x7 basis for monitoring the wells to avoid any untoward incident.
ii. Display of dos and don't s at all well sites and nearby places for creating awareness among public.
iii. The Asset has 24X7 toll free helpline No. 1800-425-7535 to ensure safety and security of pipelines.
iv. The Fire stations are always continuously available."
18. The various authorities inspect the area, whenever complaints are received and they are complying with the directions issued by the authorities to avoid further complaints. They are having their own ETPs which are intended for the purpose of treating the effluents generated and they are strictly complying with the marine disposal of treated effluent as per the guidelines issued by the MoEF&CC and as per the Page 16 of 155 conditions in CRZ Clearance and Environmental Clearance granted. They never discharged untreated effluent into the beach area. The details of the cases mentioned are nothing to do with the allegation made in the present application. Whenever incidents of leak occurred and any damage has been caused to the agricultural land owners, they were making necessary arrangements for remedying the situation. The allegation that they have not paid the compensation for the land acquired for their project is not correct. Whatever compensation suggested had been paid by them. They are properly replacing the damaged pipes whenever it is brought to their notice and they were following the guidelines and safety measures provided by the various authorities in carrying out their activities. Writ Petition No.13341 of 2008 was filed by Krishna Godavari Parirakshna Samiti before the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi seeking for a direction declaring the action of respondents in not considering the issue of subsidence and other geo hazards due to large scale exploration of oil and natural gas in Krishna Godavari Basin of Andhra Pradesh as unconstitutional and claiming other reliefs. The Hon'ble High Court appointed a Expert Committee and the Expert Committee filed a report, wherein they have mentioned that there was no direct evidence available to the committee to indicate any land subsidence in the gas field or the adjoining area in K.G. Basin. From geological consideration also, this region does not appear to be prone to signification land subsidence. It is however suggested that an expert organization like the Indian School of Mines may be entrusted with a detailed study on the existing or likely land subsidence in this region. On the basis of that report, the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, by order dated 23.06.2014 directed the ONGC to respond to the recommendation of the report of the Expert Appraisal Committee appointed by the MoEF&CC, Government of India and take action based on the recommendations and measures suggested by the said committee. Subsequently, the Delta Studies Institute, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam had conducted an elaborate study in terms of the given scope of work and submitted interim reports with the main conclusion as follows:-
"There is no specific trend of subsidence observed in the study area even at / near producing wells. Hence there is no relation of subsidence with respect to extraction of oil & gas in the KG Basin. The salinity increase is due to mixing of Page 17 of 155 marine water with groundwater due to back/ tidal waters/ aqua culture ponds/ excess sand mining from the river beds."
19. The Joint Committee appointed by this Tribunal inspected various villages and residential areas and also appreciated the CSR activities undertaken by the respondent in and around the operational area of ONGC. They denied the allegation that they have not carried out the proper maintenance work which resulted in damage to the environment. They had obtained necessary Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate and they are strictly complying with the conditions. They have also given paragraph wise reply to the allegations made in the application in tabular form which reads as follows:-
Page 18 of 15520. So, they prayed for accepting their contentions and passing appropriate orders in this matter.
21. The 2nd Respondent filed counter affidavit denying the allegation that Respondent Nos.3 & 4 are causing pollution as alleged in the application. As regards the 2nd Respondent is concerned, they are concerned with exploration and production of Oil & Natural Gas, refining, distribution Page 19 of 155 and marketing, import, export and conservation of petroleum products. The Ministry is responsible for the implementation and execution of the provisions under the Oilfields (Regulation and Development) Act, 1948 and the rules framed there under for regulating petroleum exploration licenses, petroleum mining leases, and the collection of royalties. Respondent Nos.3 & 4 viz., ONGC and GAIL respectively are Indian Government Corporations under the ownership and administrative control of the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas. As per the contract conditions, every operator, including ONGC and GAIL who have been granted Petroleum Mining Lease (PML) by Respondent No.2, have to follow applicable laws and ensure compliance of stipulated safeguard measures. The said operators are required to obtain all environmental clearances and comply with the mitigation measures suggested in the clearance letters of MoEF&CC and Consent to Establish (CTE)/ Consent to Operate (CTO) from the respective State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs). The stipulated conditions in EC letters are monitored by MoEF&CC through the designated Integrated Regional Office (IRO) of the Ministry. In addition, the contractor is also required to submit regularly the compliance reports to IRO/MoEF&CC for verification. Any violation of environmental rules and regulations by ONGC and GAIL shall have to be dealt with by the MoEF&CC and by the respective State Pollution Control Boards. The MoEF&CC is the Nodal Ministry for assessing the impacts of various activities during grant of Environmental Clearance (EC) under the established procedure of EIA Notification 2006 and various legislations including CRZ (Coastal Regulation Zone) Notification, 2011 and 2019 and Biodiversity Act, 2002 and that will not fall within the purview of the 2nd Respondent Ministry. As per the Disaster Management Plan, all accidents have to be registered and informed to the Disaster Management authorities and Respondents No. 3 and 4 have to follow the procedures as per the Disaster Management Plan. References have been made in Para Nos. 7 to 9 about the Disaster Management Plan-2015 of ONGC and the disasters which have taken place in various districts during the year 2020. Some reports which were published in local newspapers have been quoted in the application. The procedure provided under the Disaster Management Plan has to be Page 20 of 155 carried out by the ONGC and GAIL and any violation has to be dealt with by the respective regulators. There are various provisions provided to meet the accidents under the Disaster Management Plan including both emergency and other provisions and mitigation plans to avoid such things in future as well. They are carrying out the CSR activities as per the provisions of law. Whenever such accidents happened, the respective department, including Fire Services, Civil defence, Medical, Police, Army, Voluntary organizations etc. used to attend the issue and resolve the issue permanently. It is for the regulators like MoEF&CC and Pollution Control Board to ascertain the violation of discharging untreated effluents into the sea including other violations of Environmental Clearance. The pipelines will have to be properly maintained by Respondent Nos.3 & 4. Some of the incidents mentioned in the application appeared in the newspaper and it is also understood that the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 have taken necessary steps to resolve the same as well. Recommendations made by the committee appointed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in writ petition mentioned have to be implemented by Respondent Nos.3 & 4 and Respondent Nos.3 & 4 have to strictly adhere to the guidelines issued by the MoEF&CC in this regard. Any violation of CRZ Regulations has to be dealt with by the State Coastal Zone Management Authority. Most of the reliefs were claimed against Respondent Nos.3 & 4 and the 2nd Respondent is issuing necessary directions and guidelines as to how the manufacture, exploration and distribution have to be dealt with and it is for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 to consider the same. The Joint Committee had made certain recommendations which will have to be carried out by Respondent Nos.3 & 4. It is seen from the report of the Joint Committee that there was no contamination caused to the soil. So, they prayed for accepting their contention and passing appropriate orders.
22. The Joint Committee has filed the report dated 09.04.2021, e-filed on 10.04.2021 which reads as follows:-
Page 21 of 1551.0 Preamble An application was filed in Hon'ble NGT Southern bench alleging that air, sound, soil and water pollution is caused on account of the activities of the M/s GAIL India Ltd (formerly Gas Authority of India Ltd) and M/s ONGC (Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd) units in the State of Andhra Pradesh along the Krishna-Godavari Basin located in East Godavari and West Godavari District of Andhra Pradesh. According to the applicant oil leakage is being caused in the pipe lines established by these units causing damage to the agricultural land and also affecting the water bodies. It is also alleged that the units are not following the pollution control mechanism and there is no proper maintenance of pipelines. In order to ascertain the impact of the activities of M/s GAIL and M/s ONGC in Krishna Godavari River bed in East Godavari and West Godavari District, Hon'ble NGT has appointed a Joint Committee.
Orders of the Hon'ble Tribunal Hon'ble NGT, Southern Bench, Chennai in Original Application No. 175/2020(SZ) in the matter of Venkatapathi Raja Yenumala Vs Union of India & Ors vide order dated 08-09-2020 has directed " In order to ascertain the impact of the activities of the respondents 3 & 4 in the area in question namely Krishna Godavari River bed in East Godavari and West Godavari District, we feel it appropriate to appoint a Joint Committee comprising of 1) a Senior Officer from Regional Office, Ministry of Environment & Climate Change (MoEF&CC), Chennai, 2) a Senior Officer from Regional Office, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), Chennai, 3) a Senior Officer as deputed by the Chairman of the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board (APPCB), 4) the District Collector, East Godavari and West Godavari Districts or a Senior Officer not below the rank of Assistant Collector/Sub Divisional Magistrate designated by the respective District Collectors and 5) an Expert on Petroleum Engineering from Andhra University College of Engineering, Visakhapatnam to inspect the area in question and submit a factual as well as action taken report, if there is any violation found." Copy of Hon'ble NGT order is placed as Annexure-I. In compliance to Hon'ble NGT order, committee comprising of following members was composed:
Name & designation of the Department with address official Page 22 of 155 Sh. Himanshu Kaushik, IAS Sub Collector and Sub Divisional Magistrate Amalapuram, East Godavari Sh. K S Viswanathan, IAS Sub Collector and Sub Divisional Magistrate Narsapuram West Godavari Dr. C. Palpandi Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change, Scientist-C Regional Office, Chennai Prof. M. Deepa Dept. of Chemical Engineering, A.U College of Engineering (A) Andhra University, Visakhapatnam Sh. P. Ravindranath Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board, Zonal Senior Environmental Engineer Office, Visakhapatnam Smt. Mahima T Central Pollution Control Board Scientist-D Regional Directorate, Chennai The Committee has been vested with the mandate to visit and inspect the area in question and vested with following scope vide Order dated 08.09.2020:
1. To inspect the area in question, to verify if any air, water, sound and soil pollution is caused in these areas due to activities of M/s GAIL and M/s ONGC.
2. To verify whether the units have committed any violation of Environmental Clearance and CRZ Clearance and if so what is the impact of those on environment and the nature of damage caused to the environment and assess environmental compensation.
3. To ascertain whether the pollution Control mechanism provided by the units is adequate or not and if not, what are the upgradation and improvement required to minimize or avoid such incidents in future and also to prevent causing of pollution to the people in the locality
4. To conduct Ambient Air Quality test, ground water quality and quality of water test in water bodies and sea and to verify whether if there is any contamination caused The committee convened the first meeting on 12.11.2020 and prepared road map for completing the task vested on the committee. Subsequently, the second meeting was convened on 19.11.2020 to decide the list of parameters to be analyzed. The committee visited the site from 8th to 11th December, 2020 and carried out first round of ambient air quality monitoring for all notified parameters & noise, fugitive emission monitoring, collection of water & Page 23 of 155 wastewater samples and soil samples. The committee again visited the site during 24th to 26th February and carried out second round of ambient VOC monitoring.
3.0 About M/s ONGC, Rajahmundry Asset Fig: crude oil processing at ONGC Rajahmundry asset Well fluid comprising of oil, water and gas is transferred from well head to installation via flow lines and are separated into three phases: oil, water and gas. The high pressure gas is compressed, dehydrated by glycol dehydration, filtered into cartridge filters to scrub out any entrained liquid from the gas and gas at high pressure is fed to GAIL trunk line after treatment.
If well delivers low pressure gas, the gas compressors will boost the gas to required pressure to push the gas in Gas grid.
The liquid in the form of emulsion containing oil water mix is further stabilized in the heater treater along with demulsified chemicals for separating oil from water. After stabilization in heater treater, oil is stored into oil storage tanks. The drained out water after further treatment is disposed as per conditions stipulated in CFO. Purified oil is transported either to Tatipaka Refinery or to S-Yanam/EIPL Vizag for further transportation to HPCL Vizag through Cairn India limited. The quantity of producer water generated from the extraction well varies from well to well and depends mainly on age of the well. When the well fluid contains more than Page 24 of 155 98% water content, the well is abandoned. As the well gets old, the quantity of water increases in the well fluid and quantity of oil reduces. Totally 106 wells in East Godavari district and 16 wells in West Godavari district are flowing/ operational by M/s ONGC. ONGC has obtained environmental clearance for all wells. M/s ONGC is operating 13 facilities and the details of the facilities operated are given in table 1.
M/s ONGC has obtained EC from MOEFCC for on land development and production of oil & Gas from development of total 61 wells in East Godavari district and 34 wells in West Godavari district. M/s ONGC is operating 13. The treatment capacities of ETP for all installations is given in table1a & 1b and details of the facilities operated are given in table 1c. Table1a: Effluent generation Vs treatment capacity Present ETP capacity in Qty of effluent in KLD Sl. approximate qty KL Installation as specified in CFO No of effluent issued during 2015 generated in KLD Kesanapalli(W) 2000 ETP-1 750 1 GGS 600 KLD(old ETP not 2 Adavipalem GCS 70 53 in operation) 3 Ponamanda GCS 50 20 ETP-2 1500 4 Mori GCS 41 85 KLD Total effluent to be treated in Kesanapalli ETP-2 2158 Tatipaka Complex 310 Tatipaka ETP-500 5 (GCS + Refinery) 225+15 KL capacity 6 Mandapeta-GCS 37 20 Total effluent to be treated in Tatipaka ETP 330 KLD No ETP, ED well 66 7 Endamuru-GCS 40 injection 8 Kavitam EPS 10 15 No ETP, disposed in KMDB ED well 90 9 Narsapur GCS 55 injection 10 Pasarlapudi-GCS 53 64 Gopavaram ETP -
11 Gopavaram-GGS 6 1130 KLD 600 KL Page 25 of 155 GMAE injection facility500 KLD 1194 KLD 12 Odalarevu 60 60 Odalarevu ETP Total operational Effluent disposal (ED) well: 20no ETP total Capacity: 2600 m3/day (Kesanapalli ETP -2no: 1500KLPD+ Gopavaram ETP:
600KLPD+TatipakaETP-500KLPD) GMAE injection facility (Part of Gopavaram GGS): 500m3/day KMDB injection facility: 100m3/day Total quantity of effluent generated: 3838m3/day (East /west Godavari Dist average for year 2020-21 Quantity of effluent untreated and discharged directly into ED well: 1238KLD Underground pipe lines are laid by M/s ONGC for transfer of effluent from installation to ED well and distance from ETP to Effluent disposal wells varies from 500m to 5km. in Pasarlapudi/ Mandapeta/ Narasapur GCS where road tankers are being used for effluent transportation around and distance is around 50km.
Table 1b: details of ETP
Effluent Treatment Type of Capacity[KL/Day] Qty of Effluent Remarks
Plant [ETP] Disposal received KLD
Tatipaka ETP ED well 500 330 adequate
disposal
Kesanapalli-ETP I ED well 750 Not in operation
disposal
Kesanapalli-ETP II Sea 1500 2158 Not adequate
Disposal
Gopavaram -ETP ED well 600 1130
disposal
Page 26 of 155
Table 1c: details of facilities operated by M/s ONGC in East and West Godavari districts Consented production Water Effluent Generation Address and Natural (average Sl. GPS Details of the CFO Gas (Lakh Condensate Consumption perday-
No Location ETP Details
activity validity till m3 per Oil (m3/day) (utility/firefighting) 2020-
day) 21)and
disposal
point
Gen:
16° 24' 07" 53m3/d By pipe line to
1 Adavipalem GCS N, 81° 51' 31.07.2023 4.15 35 3 Disposal: Kesanapalli-W ETP
37" E ED well
injection
Gen:
66m3/day
16° 51' 31"
Separator; ED well Injection
2 Endamuru GCS N, 82° 08' 31.07.2023 3.15 5 8
Disposal: in the installation
17" E
ED well
injection
Page 27 of 155
Gen:
KSP(W) ETP-1:
2000m3/d
750 KLPD;
16° 24' 27" Disposal:
KSP(W) ETP-2:
3 Kesanapalli GGS N, 81° 55' 31.07.2023 2.69 530 56 ED well
1500 KLPD
12" E injection/
((Marine disposal)
Marine sea
disposal
Gen:
16° 48' 52" 20m3/d;
By Tanker to TPK
4 Mandapeta GCS N, 81° 54' 31.07.2023 4.16 11 8 Disposal:
ETP
04" E ED well
injection
Gen:
16° 22' 19" 85m3/d; By pipe line to
5 Mori GCS N, 81° 47' 31.07.2023 3.00 8.8 5 Disposal: Kesanapalli-W ETP
29" E ED well
injection
GVM ETP: 600
16° 30' 39" Gen:
KLPD along with
6 Gopavaram GGS N, 82° 04' 30.09.2023 1.00 350(Crude Oil) 7 1130m3/d;
GMAE injection
05" E Disposal:
facility(500m3/day)
Page 28 of 155
ED well
injection
Gen:
16° 31' 15" 64m3/d;
By Tanker to TPK
7 Pasarlapudi N, 81° 58' 31.07.2023 8.73 28 5 Disposal:
ETP
41" E ED well
injection
Gen:
16° 26' 20" 20m3/d; By pipe line to
8 Ponnamanda N, 81° 54' 31.07.2023 3.61 20.5 3 Disposal: Kesanapalli-W ETP
40" E ED well
injection
Gen:
16° 29' 57" 310m3/d;
TPK ETP: 500
9 Tatipaka GCS N, 81° 53' 31.07.2023 18.52 56 116 Disposal:
KLPD
49" E ED well
injection
Naphtha 60
16° 30' 08"
TPD
10 Tatipaka Refinery N, 81° 53' 30.09.2022 - 166 15m3/day
Kerosene 40
46" E
TPD
Page 29 of 155
Diesel 40 TPD
LSHS 60TPD
Gen: 15 ;
16° 36' 28"
Disposal:
11 Kavitam EPS N, 81° 46' 31.05.2024 1.5 50 3
ED well
01" E
injection By tanker to
Gen: KMDB injection
16° 27' 34" 90m3/d; facility(100m3/day)
12 Narsapur GCS N, 81° 42' 31.07.2023 5.0 1.0 13 Disposal:
35" E ED well
injection
13 Odalarevu 31.10.2021 - 60 - ED well
ED well: effluent disposal well
From table 1a, 1b and 1c, it is observed that the present actual quantity of effluent generation is exceeding the consented quantity of effluent generation as per consent order issued by APPCB during 2015.Page 30 of 155
3.a. Sources of emissions from the facilities and measures taken to comply with standards
3.a. i Flare stack emissions Flaring is essentially required in these facilities. The excess gas if any and liberated gas from low pressure system will be routed to flare system. The composition and volume of gas handled in flare stack in different facilities is given below:
Table 2: flare stack emissions Present Sl. Flare Type Gas Flare Flare stack capacity No Installation (Elevated/ Compositio (SCMD) [SCMD] . Ground) n [C1 %] Kesanapalli(W) 85.64 1500 160000 1 GGS Elevated 2 Ponamanda GCS Elevated 91.77 500 50000 Tatipaka 92.76 500 3000000 3 Complex Elevated 4 Mori GCS Elevated 99.07 5000 1000000 5 Adavipalem GCS Elevated 86.96 200 250000 6 Endamuru-GCS Elevated 93.46 800 200000 7 Mandapeta-GCS Elevated 88.05 2200 700000 8 Narsapur GCS Elevated 95.81 200 300000 9 Kavitam EPS Elevated 79.5 0 50000 10 Pasarlapudi-GCS Elevated 93.53 600 100000 11 Gopavaram-GGS Elevated 90.76 20000 100000 SCMD: standard cubic meters per day GGS: Group gathering station. Four to six wells are connected to one cluster and five clusters are connected to GGS.
3.a. ii Emissions during dehydration of gas for achieving water dew point Moisture content in the gas is removed and dry gas is sent to M/s GAIL. The moisture content separated from gas contains hydrocarbon which may contribute to significant emissions if it is not treated properly. Rajahmundry Asset has adopted tri-ethylene glycol based dehydration to achieve water dew point and hydrocarbon dew point.
Page 31 of 155In this process, moisture in the gas is absorbed using glycol. rich glycol after absorbing moisture from gas, is sent to the flash drum to remove the dissolved hydrocarbons, if any. The rich glycol will be passed through series of filters and then routed to heat exchangers where the hot lean glycol from the regeneration column will transfer heat to the rich glycol. Thus the preheated rich glycol will be routed to the regenerated column where the absorbed moisture in the glycol will be vaporized through re-boiler system. The liberated water vapor is released from the top of the regeneration column.
3.a.iii Fugitive emissions from storage tanks, process area etc., sources include valves of all types, flanges, pump and compressor seals, pressure relief valves, sampling connections and process drains iv H2S emission Natural gas produced from Kesanapalli (w) GGS, Tatipaka and Gopavaram fields contains H2S concentration in the range of 15-50 ppm from the flowing wells. This gas needs to be treated to meet PNGRB (Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board) guidelines of H2S concentration less than 3 ppm before supply to M/s GAIL. Treatment of sour gas for reducing H2S concentration is called sweetening. Liquid scavenger system is being used in all the above installations to bring down level of H2S to less than 3ppm. Presently new Liquid H2S Scavenger is being dosed continuously round the clock at above installations for sweetening of natural gas to meet PNGRB guidelines and H2S Scavenger is being dosed in LP and HP lines through atomizers. Sweetening of gas is one of the contributor to emissions.
Sources of effluent and its treatment
3.b.i ETP process Description in Rajahmundry asset Raw effluent is first passed through de-oiler, free Oil is separated by gravity, which is collected by Oil skimmer and flows to slop oil sump by gravity. Further oil is removed by corrugated plate interceptor (CPI) separator with De-oiler and Induced Gas Floatation. The free oil again flows to the slop oil sump and sludge to the sludge pit. The oil free effluent is treated in SBR (Sequential batch reactor) followed by media filter. Treated effluent is stored in guard ponds and disposed as per conditions stipulated in consent.
Page 32 of 155Totally four effluent treatment plants are in operation in East and West Godavari districts to treat the produced water from the production installations. From table 1a,1b & 1c it is clear that Gopavaram ETP and Kesanapalli ETP-II are not adequate in terms of capacity to treat the actual quantity of effluent generated. In Gopavaram GCS, in the CFO it is mentioned as 6.0 KLD which is not matching with the actual effluent generated. The installations shall augment their treatment capacities.
ii Status of Storm water drains and mode of disposal of storm water. Onsite drainage system and sediment control measures The storm water drains are available in the installations for drain out of the accumulated rain water during the rainy season. During inspection, it was observed that the drains in Tatipaka, Kesanapalli, Malkipuram, odalarevu were blocked and filled with effluent but the drains were not cleaned. It was reported that whenever the drains are filled & choked with the sediments, they are manually cleaned but however there is no standard procedure followed by the unit for cleaning of drains, frequency of cleaning and for removal of sediments.
Page 33 of 155Prevailing Pipeline leakage detection and repair methodology in place In Rajahmundry asset, most of the pipelines are well flow lines of dia 4" non piggable lines. Leakage if any is reported by well maintenance team, flow line patrol party, villagers and locals.
Most of the underground pinhole leaks in the flow line occurs with a hole of approximate size 1-2 mm develops causing the release of flow line fluid at the point of damage due to internal corrosion due to sand and water due to matured brown fields. The following actions are taken after detection of leak:
The nearby GGS/ GCS crew visits the site The well is closed and source gas is stopped immediately. The entrapped gas/ liquid is depressurized to the flare line in the GGS/GCS. Leaked pipeline is repaired through clamping/ sleeve welding/ partial replacement based on the pipeline conditions. After the leakage, the spilled water/ oil is evacuated with a tanker to nearby installations and soil is restored back to its original conditions The farmers/ land owners are compensated based on the assessment of Committee for the crop compensation and land restoration The facilities are normally using Steel pipelines with design life of 20 years. In Rajahmundry Asset, old pipelines laid during 1988 and new pipelines laid during 2020 are existing. The age of pipelines ranges from about 30 years to 3 months old. At present flow lines are replaced based on the condition of pipelines. There is no specific guideline or time frame for replacement of pipeline. Earlier (till 2009) CTE (coal tar enamel) coated pipes were in use, now since 2010, only 3 LPE pre-coated pipes are being used. As this type of coating is better and stronger, external corrosion of pipelines have minimized. Replacement of all CTE coated pipelines are being done systematically in a phased manner by the facility. Table 3: Pipeline specification Sl.No Diameter of pipelines 4" dia 7.9 mm thickness, API 5l - X 46 grade, 3 LPE coated 1 Hydro-testing All new pipe line are Hydro-tested at 150 Kg/Cm2 2 Depth below which pipelines Minimum 1 meter underground are laid 3 Total Length of Pipeline 989 Kms Page 34 of 155 4 New Lines (less than 20 yrs) 738 Kms 5 Replacement Lines 351 Kms i Measures in place for upkeep of pipelines Use of corrosion inhibitors to mitigate internal corrosion of pipelines Installation of Gravel packing, sand filters in the sand bearing gas wells to mitigate sand incursion and prevent internal leakage due to sand abrasion.
Periodic hydro testing of pipelines to check the integrity of pipelines. Identification and systematic replacement of old and vulnerable pipelines Ultrasonic Thickness measurement of 235 KM length had been done to assess the integrity of pipelines.
ii Measures taken by the units to prevent pipeline leakages Sand traps are installed to control sand production from low producing wells All High productive wells are installed with GP kits to ensure complete control over the sand production from the reservoir to the surface through well tubing 16no of old flow lines were replaced with new 19 flow lines Nine out of 20 flowing wells are provided with gravel pack near the perforation as on September, 2020. This measures are reported to reduce entrainment of sand in pipelines.
3.c.iii Measures taken by M/s ONGC to avert accidents Post 27.06.2014 explosion in M/s GAIL facility PNGRB has notified the Gas quality specifications as per Gazette of India implemented for gas supply through pipeline from ONGC installations to GAIL grid, which is as follows:
Table 4: PNGRB Gas quality specifications Parameters Limit Hydrocarbons dew point (Degree Celsius, max) * 0 Water dew point (Degree Celsius, max) * 0 Hydrogen Sulphide (ppm by wt.max.) 5 Total Sulphur (ppm by wt.max.) 10 Carbon dioxide (mole % max) 6 Total inserts (mole %) 8 * At the pipeline operating pressure Page 35 of 155 As per the decision of MoPNG in Nov2014, treatment facilities are to be installed at ONGC locations after GAIL accident in Jun 2014 and gas need to be supplied as per PNGRB guidelines in the GAIL trunk pipe line. Accordingly, Rajahmundry Asset has hired GDU facilities at seven installations namely Pasarlapudi, Narsapur, Endamuru, Mandapeta, Tatipaka, Kesanapalli (W) and Mori for supplying dry gas to M/s GAIL grid after the treatment of the wet Gas through gas dehydration and dew point depressant facilities as per PNGRB guidelines. For sales gas specification to M/s GAIL, it was decided that dry gas (WDP & HDP max. at 00 C) is being supplied to consumers through GAIL trunk line.
4.0 Details of monitoring at installations The committee carried out ambient air monitoring, fugitive emission monitoring, collected soil samples, water samples at Tatipaka GCS & refinery, Kesanapalli GGS and Odalarevu as alleged in the application. Observations made by the committee and monitoring & analysis results ae summarized below.
Tatipaka GCS and mini refinery: the capacity of GCS system is 7lakh m3/ day and capacity of mini refinery is 300m3/ day. The CFO issued by APPCB is valid till 31.07.2023. Common ETP from both GCS and refinery and treated effluent is disposed by deep well injection. Four abandoned wells are used for effluent disposal. i Non-compliances observed:
a. KG basin is close to sea and during rainy season water logging is normally observed in the region and the same is reported in other committee report submitted to Hon'ble NGT in the matter OA 91/2020 (SZ). The storm water from the installation is discharged into main drains laid outside the unit premises. During inspection the committee observed that due to heavy rains and water logging, effluent was getting mixed with storm water and from the main drain it may ultimately join sea. b. The tilted plate interceptor and slop oil tank are not working properly. The capacity and retention time of plate interceptor is not adequate to treat the effluent. Hence the oil removed from effluent is stagnated and overflowing. The unit has obtained consent from APPCB during 2015 and subsequently the consent is renewed (online consent monitoring and management system) but however post 2015 due to ageing of wells the quantity of producer water is increasing and there by the quantity of effluent generated is also increased. But the units have not amended the consent for the revised quantity effluent generated. Thereby presently the effluent generated from the Page 36 of 155 installation is more than the quantity specified in the CFO issued by APPCB and moreover the existing ETP is not adequate in terms of capacity to treat the present effluent generated. Sludge drying beds are not in operation. As per the CFO issued to Tatipaka GCS on 27.02.2015 the quantity of effluent is 225 KLD but presently effluent generated is more than 500 KLD. In addition, 15 KLD of effluent generated from Tatipaka mini refinery, Endamuru GCS and Mandapeta GCS has to be treated. Hence the existing ETP of capacity 500KL is not adequate to treat the present quantity of effluent generated.
c. TVOC levels measured using handheld PID analyzer in the ETP area is varying from 2.2ppm to 4.0ppm.
d. There is no dedicated hazardous waste storage shed. ETP sludge, empty barrels, slop oil are stored haphazardly within the unit premises. e. In old GCS plant drain effluent is joining storm water drains and pH of drain effluent was 14 and same was joining storm water drain.
f. LDAR of refinery is not carried out. TVOC levels near the valves of distillation column is around 5ppm and near sampling point is 70ppm. g. In the gas dehydration unit in the re-boiler system, rich glycol (containing moisture) is heated to 2000C and moisture is knocked out into the atmosphere. During knocking out some glycol vapors is carried along with moisture. There was odor nuisance in the area.
4.a. ii Water and wastewater analysis: The committee collected raw effluent, treated effluent and effluent from guard ponds to ascertain whether unit is treating the effluent or not. The committee collected ground water samples from four different places surrounding the installations. The detailed water, effluent analysis, stack monitoring report, fugitive emission Page 37 of 155 monitoring report and ambient air quality monitoring report is enclosed as Annexure-IIa. The key parameters from the analysis results are reproduced in table 5a. Oil & grease, phenols, benzene and TPH are the key indicators for pollution from the installations. Table 5a: Analysis results of ground water samples collected from different places surrounding the installation & effluent- Tatipaka GCS & refinery for key parameters Sample description Oil and TPH TOC Phenols Benzene Grease (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/L) (µg/l) (mg/l) Std-0,5 Borewell at K.Rajeswararao House.D .
BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ: No:1-307,Near 12 :4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005) Peerlacheravu,Nagaram(m ),manidikudura.- Tatipaka Borewell at P.Nanibabu House S/O P.Gandhi D.No BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ: 3 1-185 Nagaram village :4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005) Pin-533247. - Tatipaka Borewell at L.Nagarutham S/O Sesherao House D.No BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ: 5 8/14 Molletviveri Meraka. :4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005) - Tatipaka Borewell at Venkateshwararao S/O BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ: 3 Swamy House Molletiveri :4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005) Meraka. - Tatipaka
Table 5b: Effluent analysis results- Tatipaka GCS TSS mg/L Oil & grease mg/L location Measured value Standard limit Measured value Standard limit GP-1 - Tatipaka 14 BDL(DL:4.0) 100 10 GP-2 - Tatipaka 20 BDL(DL:4.0) Page 38 of 155 Raw Effluent - Tatipaka 63 620 Treated Effluent -
78 BDL(DL:4.0) Tatipaka TOC- Total organic carbon, GP- guard pond, BDL- below detection limit, TPH- Total petroleum hydrocarbon (mineral oil) From table 5b, based on effluent results it is concluded that the unit is meeting the standards w.r.t deep well injection.
In the borewell samples benzene, TPH, O&G and phenols are below detection limit. Since the key indicator parameters are not present in the borewell water samples, based on the current analysis report the committee opines that ground water surrounding Tatipaka GCS and refinery is not contaminated.
Ambient air quality monitoring in and around Tatipaka: Ambient air quality monitoring was carried out in two phases. During first round of monitoring (December 2020) there was odour nuisance and the unit submitted to the committee that it shall take up corrective measures and initiated clean-up of wastes dumped in open, the flanges were sealed. Again second round of ambient VOC monitoring was carried out during February, 2021. Ambient air monitoring was carried out for all notified parameters namely Sulphur Dioxide as SO2, Nitrogen Dioxide as NO2, particulate matter (PM10), particulate matter (PM2.5), ozone, lead, carbon monoxide, ammonia, benzene, Benzo(a) pyrene, arsenic and nickel.
The key parameters in ambient monitoring is Benzene and key parameter results are given in table 5c: Ambient air quality monitoring results in and around Tatipaka Sample description Ambient Benzene (µg/m3) Std limit-05 µg/m3 First round of monitoring during December, 2020 Near CISF - Tatipaka 697 Near Raw Water treatment plant- Tatipaka 92 Near ETP -Tatipaka 1018 Near Pump House -Tatipaka 2051 Average ambient benzene/ VOC contributed by the 964.5 µg/m3 installation Page 39 of 155 Second round of ambient & fugitive VOC monitoring (copy of the results enclosed as Annexure-IIb) Balla Sathya Narayana House,Babu Nagar Nagaram 0.14 Panchayat,NE Corner Kattamurai Kanagaraj,Mulletivari Nanakka Manepalli 0.02 Road,Nagaram Panchayat.
Ramprasath house,seshayya Kalya Gatta
0.31
Road,Nagaram Panchayat
Vananasi Vani Marekka,Nagaram Village Door.no:5- 0.48
54. ONGC Tallipakka,Near ETP Plant inside- fugitive 0.10 During the first round of monitoring it was observed that the unit is complying with ambient air quality standards w.r.t all parameters except Benzene. The unit has taken corrective measures and it is observed that during second round of monitoring the unit is complying with ambient standards w.r,t Benzene also.
From the results it is evident that the unit has not taken proper preventive measures and thereby has contributed towards ambient VOC's/ Benzene. Subsequently the unit has implemented corrective actions and the values have drastically reduced and within the ETP section also the benzene concentration is low.
Stack monitoring: Crude furnace stack was monitored during December, 2020. From the results it is observed that the unit is complying with stack monitoring results. Table 5d: Crude furnace stack monitoring Tatipaka Location -Crude Furnace Stack - Tatipaka S.NO Parameter Result Unit 1 Stack Temperature 627 °C 2 Velocity 3.01 m/Sec 3 Volume of Gas Discharge 5817 Nm3/Hr 4 Oxygen as O2 12.7 % 5 Carbon Monoxide as CO BDL(DL:1.14) mg/m3 6 Carbon Dioxide as CO2 6.4 % Page 40 of 155 7 Particulate Matter 12.6 mg/Nm3 8 Sulphur Dioxide as SO2 209 mg/Nm3 9 Oxides Of Nitrogen as NO2 10 mg/Nm3 10 Moisture 3.7 % 11 Hydrogen Sulphide BDL(DL0.02) mg/m3 12 Vanadium as V BDL(DL0.03) mg/m3 13 Nickel as Ni BDL(DL0.03) mg/m3
4.a. v Ambient Noise Monitoring: The committee monitored ambient noise levels both during day time and night time. From the noise monitoring, it is observed that the unit is complying with ambient air quality standards w.r.t noise. Table 5e: Ambient Noise monitoring Tatipaka S.NO Location Noise Day Standard Noise Night standard Noise level db A Near CISF- 75 70 3 Tatipaka 64.8 62.9 Near Raw Water 4 Treatment Plant -
Tatipaka 56.8 54.8
Near ETP -
5
Tatipaka 63.4 59.8
Near Pump house
6
-Tatipaka 57.2 52.4
4.a.vi Environmental compensation from Tatipaka refinery EC for EC=PI x N x R x S x LF violation of Where, CFO EC = Environmental Compensation in INR conditions PI = Pollution Index of industrial sector (red-80) N = Number of days of violation took place (from the date of violation to date of compliance- 01.11.2015 to 25.02.2021=1943days Page 41 of 155 Date of non-compliance: the unit has installed TEG dehydration system during November, 2015 without recovering glycol vapors te moisture was knocked out which was one of the major source of benzene. Post 2015, the unit has not amended the consent for the actual quantity of effluent generated. Present ETP is not adequate in terms of capacity to treat the actual effluent generated. The unit has not maintained any records for hazardous waste disposed. During first round of monitoring ambient benzene was in the range of 92 to 2051 µg/m3 against the standard limit of 05 µg/m3. Considering these points the date of non- compliance is considered from 01.11.2015 R = A factor in Rupees for EC (Rs. 250/-) S = Factor for scale of operation (large-1.5) LF = Location factor (population is varying between 1 to 5 lacs =1.25) =80*1943 days*250*1.5*1.25 =7,28,62,500 Seven crores eighty-six lacs sixty two thousand five hundred only * TEG gas dehydration system is installed during November, 2015 post accident at M/s GAIL facility due to which the glycol vapors are let out into environment while knocking out moisture. At Tatipaka facility this is one of the main source of ambient Benzene. Hence for assessment of violation, date is taken as 01.11.2015 Kesanapalli GGS:
Non-compliances observed
1. Effluent is getting mixed with storm water and storm water is discharged into main drain outside the unit premises. pH of the storm water was 12. In addition the leaves and garden waste is in the drain and getting putrefied in the drain itself.
2. The effluent stored in treated effluent sump was red in color and ph was more than 12.Page 42 of 155
Storm water drains treated effluent sump ETP area where oil spill is covered by fresh soil
3. There is no dedicated hazardous waste storage sheds
4. The unit was disposing the effluent by means of marine disposal but however the unit has not obtained necessary permissions from APPCB for marine disposal. Further, part of the pipeline used for deep sea disposal (1000m stretch of pipeline taking deep sea) is broken and washed away. presently the unit is disposing the effluent in the coast. The unit had obtained CRZ clearance for laying of pipelines.
5. Water logging observed at the entrance of the unit.
6. In the ETP area, the unit had covered with fresh soil. The committee excavated the portion of the soil and found that black oily soil was present below upto depth of 1m. On enquiring it was informed that there was oil spill and the unit had covered with fresh soil.
7. Opposite to new ETP boundary wall, waste oil & sludge is dumped on land to an extent of two to three acres.
Page 43 of 155Two to three acres of Area opposite to ETP likely to be contaminated ETP Waste dumped in the unit premises Satellite image 10/2018 satellite image 12/2020 Page 44 of 155 On comparison of satellite images of 2018 and 2020, it is clear that the unit has cleared green belt for waste disposal.
Water and wastewater analysis results: The committee collected effluent & sediment samples and carried out ambient air quality monitoring. The details water, wastewater, sediment analysis report and ambient air quality and fugitive emission monitoring report of Kesanapalli is enclosed as Annexure-III.
Table 6a: effluent analysis results for key parameters for kesanapalli GGS Sample description Oil and Phenols TPH TOC Benzene Grease (mg/L) (mg/l) (mg/l) (µg/l) (mg/l) - Std-0,5 Borewell Vaddeeswara BDL(DL Rao, Malkipuram house, BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ:
25 :4.0) Turupalam village- 0.001) Q:20) 0.005) Kesanapalli Near Security Gate(GGS BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ:
Plant ) Strom water drain 12
:4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005)
into outside -Kesanapalli
Stagnated pond water opp BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO
60 1.39
to DG Room -Kesanapalli :4.0) 0.001) Q:20)
From the ground water results it is understood that ground water is not contaminated due to activities of M/s ONGC and M/s GAIL. Sample was collected from the water logged area and it contains TPH which implies that effluent is mixed with storm water in the unit premises.
Table 6b: Analysis results of effluent samples collected in Kesanapalli TSS mg/L Oil & grease mg/L location Measured value Standard limit Measured value Standard limit Old ETP Raw Effluent
- -
Inlet-Kesanapalli 100 10 Old ETP Collection tank -
61 5 T 103 inlet-Kesanapalli Page 45 of 155 Old ETP filter feed sump and pump shed- 14 BDL(DL:4.0) Kesanapalli Old ETP outlet- 43 BDL(DL:4.0) Kesanapalli New ETP Inlet- 75 240 Kesanapalli Near ETP Waste Water Joining Abandoned SBR- 16 BDL(DL:4.0) Kesanapalli New ETP Treated Effluent after media filter- 31 BDL(DL:4.0) Kesanapalli New ETP Gate Value pit connected to treated 27 BDL(DL:4.0) effluent water sump- Kesanapalli Turpupalem Beach deep well injection Effluent 26 BDL(DL:4.0) collection Sump- Kesanapalli
Effluent samples are complying with deep injection well standard.
Sediment analysis results: The committee collected sediment samples and results of key parameters are as follows:
Table 6c: sediment analysis results collected near Kesanapalli installation Benzene TPH Phenols Iron Mercury Lead mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg Screening values 50 5000 3,8 - 50 600 In between SBR BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ Abandoned sump (LOQ:20 (LOQ:0. 3392 [LOQ:2. [LOQ:2.
(LOQ:0.1)
and treated ) 1) 0] 0]
Page 46 of 155
effluent collection
sump -sediment-1
-Kesanapalli
Near Beach-
BLQ BLQ BLQ
Turpupalam-
(LOQ:20 0.1018 (LOQ:0. 13186 [LOQ:2. 12.3
sediment-2 -
) 1) 0]
Kesanapalli
Near Beach-
BLQ BLQ BLQ
Turpupalam- BLQ
(LOQ:20 (LOQ:0. 5090 [LOQ:2. 3.4
sediment-3 - (LOQ:0.1)
) 1) 0]
Kesanapalli
Stagnated pond
water Sludge
BLQ(LO
opposite to DG 2.8992 4.36 5932 201 4.5
Q:20)
room -
Kesanapalli
In around 5acres of land opposite to DG room the effluent & sludge is accumulated. From the sediment sampling it is learnt that mercury is present in the range of 201 mg/Kg. As per Guidance document for assessment and remediation of contaminated sites in India the screening value of mercury for identification of probably contaminated site is 50mg/Kg and in the soil collected since the mercury concentration is exceeding the screening values, it is identified as probably contaminated site. APPCB shall take up a detailed analysis in the area and re-ascertain whether the area is contaminated or not.
The unit shall dismantle the abandoned sump present in the Kesanapalli GGS and the effluent present in the sump shall be treated properly in ETP and after complying with APPCB discharge standards shall be disposed as per condition stipulated in CFO. The committee observed that naturally the beach sand in kesanapalli area is having high iron content due to which the color of the beach sand is slightly black.Page 47 of 155
Environmental compensation to be levied from Kesanapalli GCS EC for EC=PI x N x R x S x LF violation of Where, CFO EC = Environmental Compensation in INR conditions, sea PI = Pollution Index of industrial sector (red-80) disposal N = Number of days of violation took place (from the date without of violation observed to date of compliance- obtaining The unit was not granted permission by APPCB for deep sea disposal. As permission per CFO issued by APPCB treated effluent has to be disposed by deep well from APPCB injection. As per records unit is disposing effluent by sea disposal since february, 2018 hence date of non-compliance is taken as 25.02. 2018 to 25.02.2021=1096 days (after 25.02.2021, APPCB may levy additional compensation till compliance is achieved R = A factor in Rupees for EC (Rs. 250/-) S = Factor for scale of operation (large-1.5) LF = Location factor (population is varying between 1 to 5 lacs =1.25) =80*1096*250*1.5*1.25 =Rs. 4,11,00,000/-
Rupees Four crore eleven lakhs nine lacs only M/s GAIL and ONGC Odalarevu plant ONGC onshore terminal and M/S GAIL gas terminal are located adjacent to each other at odalarevu. The dry gas after treatment is sent from ONGC to GAIL. In KG basin M/s GAIL is not involved in the extraction of gas from the wells and is having only gas terminals where dry gas is received from ONGC terminals.
Non compliances observed in M/s ONGC onshore terminal
1. The ETP is not functioning properly. Oil is removed from slop oil tank and then effluent is stored in holding ponds. Multimedia filters were not in operation on the day of the visit. effluent is disposed on the ground without treatment. The detailed analysis and monitoring results of odalarevu facility water is enclosed as Annexure-IVa.
2. Severe odour nuisance and VOC levels inside unit premises was varying from 4.0ppm to 6.0ppm when measured using handheld PID (photo ionic detector) analyzer.
Page 48 of 1553. During the visit, there were rains and water logging was observed in the area. Both Effluent mixed with storm water was present in the unlined lagoon in more than 10acres of land between M/s GAIL and M/s ONGC terminals. The pH of the lagoon water was around 5.
4. The storm water drains are completely clogged and was filled with thick oily sludge.
5. Reported that the unit is facing water logging issues since 2017 onwards. Reported that the ETP is not properly working since 2017 and the unit is yet to replace worn out pumps
6. The committee collected water & sediment samples, conducted ambient air quality monitoring during December, 2020 and carried out exclusive ambient VOC monitoring during February, 2021.
Non-compliances observed in M/s GAIL terminal: Pigging operations are carried out once in six months to remove the waste deposited in pipelines. The pigging waste are hazardous in nature, the unit is storing the waste in open near to the pipelines. Though the unit reported that waste was sent to TSDF but however no records were found.
Satellite image of the installations Page 49 of 155 water and wastewater analysis results Table 7a: Water analysis results for key parameters for kesanapalli GGS Sample description Oil and TOC Phenols Benzene TPH Grease (mg/l) (mg/L) (µg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) Storm Water Drain opp to BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LOQ:
fire Water pump 21 31.24
:4.0) 0.001) 0.005)
(S1 Vashita) - Odalarevu
Contaminated Strom water
BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ:
Drain (Near ETP Area) - 28
:4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005)
Odalarevu
Stagnated Water -1 Beside BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO
25 0.05
Gail Pipe Line-Odalarevu :4.0) 0.001) Q:20)
Near Land Fall KP -6
BDL(DL BLQ(LO
Road(ONGC pipe line 94 0.2 0.08
:4.0) Q:20)
indicator)-Odalarevu
Sample collected from
BDL(DL BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ:
unline lagoon beside gail 661 2.7
:4.0) Q:20) 0.005)
pipe line - Odalarevu
Borewell - Vashita
BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ:
borewell (Opposite to 3
:4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005)
admin block) - Odalarevu
Near Condenstate storm BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ:
5
water pit - Odalarevu :4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005)
Storm Water drain outlet
BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ:
outside in the industry - - 3
:4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005)
Odalarevu
Tatipaka Near gail pipe
BDL(DL BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ:
line Nagaram - Odalarevu 10
:4.0) 0.001) Q:20) 0.005)
accident spot
Page 50 of 155
Table 7b: Effluent analysis results
Sample description
TSS Standard Oil and Standard
(mg/l) limit mg/L Grease (mg/l) limit mg/L
ETP Inlet 1-Odalarevu 75 BDL(DL:4.0)
Treated Efflent before
15 100 BDL(DL:4.0) 10
Injection-Odalarevu
ETP Inlet 2 -Odalarevu 79 BDL(DL:4.0)
The raw effluent is having benzene in the range of 603µg/L to 1159 µg/L. benzene being volatile in nature escapes into the atmosphere when effluent is stored in holding tanks. The treated effluent is meeting the standards w.r.t. deep well injection Samples were collected from main storm water drain outside the unit premises and found that it is not contaminated with effluent.
The installation is located very close to the sea and there were no bore well near the installation hence committee could not conduct ground water sampling. Effluent collected from lagoon is having BOD 447mg/L, COD 1762 mg/L and TOC 661 mg/L Sediment analysis results The committee collected sediment samples and analysis results are as follows:
Table 7c: Sediment analysis results Odalarevu Sediment analysis results Odalarevu location Benzene TPH phenols Screening values 50 5000 3,8 Storage tank Sludge - Odalarevu BLQ(LOQ:20) 41.5191 3.60 Sediment-Near ETP arae -
BLQ(LOQ:20) 179.5684 0.62
Odalarevu
Sediment 2 beside gail pipe line -
BLQ(LOQ:20) 1.1571 BLQ(LOQ:0.1)
Odalarevu
Sediment -Tadipaka Near Gail pipe
BLQ(LOQ:20) 1.7317 1.79
line Nagaram- Odalarevu
Page 51 of 155
Sediment - Kesandasipalam
Accident Point from 2014 - 9.77 BLQ(LOQ:0.1) BLQ(LOQ:0.1)
Odalarevu
From the sediment analysis results, it is observed that sediment samples Odalarevu ETP and near sludge storage tank is not contaminated. Under the supervision of APPCB the unit shall restore it to original position.
Fugitive emission monitoring The committee carried out ambient air quality monitoring during December, 2020 and ambient VOC & fugitive monitoring during February, 2021. The results of key ambient parameters is given below:
Table 7d: Ambient air quality monitoring Odalarevu for key parameter Benzene Sample description Benzene (µg/m3) First round of monitoring during December, 2020 Near Odalarevu village adjacent to ETP 122 Near Security Main gate -Odalarevu 68.8 Second round of VOC monitoring (copy enclosed as Annexure-IVb) Near ETP oddalarevu BLQ (LOQ-0.1) Church,Odalarevu BLQ (LOQ-0.1) Peddinti Narashima Phanikumar house Odalarevu,Near BLQ (LOQ-0.1) ramalayam Temple Marilamma center,Kandapalli Rambabu House BLQ (LOQ-0.1) Environmental Compensation The unit is complying with ambient air quality standards w.r.t noise EC for EC=PI x N x R x S x LF violation of Where, CFO EC = Environmental Compensation in INR conditions, sea PI = Pollution Index of industrial sector (red-80) disposal N = Number of days of violation took place (from the date without of violation observed to date of compliance- reported by obtaining unit since January, 2017 ETP is not working properly to Page 52 of 155 permission 25.02.2021=1516 days (after 25.02.2021, APPCB may from APPCB levy additional compensation till compliance is achieved R = A factor in Rupees for EC (Rs. 250/-) S = Factor for scale of operation (large-1.5) LF = Location factor (population is varying between 1 to 5 lacs =1.25) =80*1516*250*1.5*1.25 =5,68,50,000/-
Rupees Five crore sixty eight lakhs fifty thousand only 5.0 Observations in Previous accident sites The committee visited two sites where previously accidental leakage has took place. One is Kesanadasipalem and the other is Nagaram. It was observed during committee inspection that area where previously accident has took place is completely restored. The soil was excavated till the pipeline is visible. No leakage was observed. There was no odour nuisance and VOC was monitored using handheld PID analyser and it measured 0ppm in both sites. Sediment samples were collected at locations where the leakages have occurred and on comparison of the results with MOEFCC screening values for identification of hazardous waste contaminated soil it is found that the soil in both the locations are not contaminated. This implies that the unit has completely restored the nagaram area and Kesanadasipalem area where previously accident had took place.
Photo: Nagaram Kesanadasipalem Page 53 of 155 Table 8: Sediment analysis results in Nagaram and Kesanadasipalem Sediment analysis results in previous accident sites Nagaram and Kesanadasipalem Benzene TPH mg/kg Phenols Arsenic Vanadium Mercury Chromium Lead location mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg Total) mg/kg mg/kg Screening levels for 50 5000 3,8 12 130 50 64 70 Agriculture Sediment -Tadipaka Near Gail BLQ(LOQ:20) 1.7317 1.79 3.2 73.8 4.4 36.8 10.4 pipe line Nagaram- Odalarevu Sediment - Kesandasipalam BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ Accident Point from 2014 - 9.77 61.2 (LOQ:2.0 10.9 4.6 (LOQ:0.1) (LOQ:0.1) (LOQ:2.0) Odalarevu ) The sediment samples collected at accident sites Nagaram and Kesaadasipalem were compared with the soil screening values for agricultural purposes as per the Guidance document for assessment and remediation of contaminated sites and it is found that the sites are not contaminated.
During visit also it was observed that normal plantation has come up in the area and area is restored.
Page 54 of 155Conclusions and Recommendations i. The design life period of pipes are 20 years. In KG basin, CTE pipelines older than 30 years are still in use. The unit shall prepare guidelines or time frame for replacement of old pipelines. Very Old CTE coated pipes may be replaced with 3 LPE pre-coated pipes. ii. Presently nine out of 20 flowing wells are provided with gravel pack to minimize sand entrainment. The unit shall provide gravel pack near the perforation to all flowing wells to reduce entrainment of sand in pipelines thereby reduce the chances of pipeline leakage.
iii. M/s ONGC and M/s GAIL in KG basin are more focused on production and extraction of oil & gas which is essentially required for the development but the environmental aspects and pollution mitigation measures within their premises is not much focussed. The effluent treatment plants are not properly operated, hazardous wastes such as ETP sludge, slop oil is not disposed as per Hazardous Waste and Management Rules, high fugitive benzene emissions, not complying with APPCB CFO conditions and CRZ violation w.r.t Kesanapalli marine disposal. On verification of records the committee observed that any leakages or accident outside the unit premises in farmers land is immediately attended and addressed with 24 hours (all minor pinhole leakages are closed with 24hrs) and the unit has taken measures to restore the area as so to prevent any public outcry.
iv. It is observed that while knocking out moistire in gas dehydration system using tertiary ethylene glycol, glycol vapors are escaping with moistureTo ensure that moisture from gas dehydration- TEG unit is collected separately treated so as to remove the glycol vapours and then moisture is let into atmosphere. IN no case the unit shall knock out the untreated moisture containing glycol vapours into the atmosphere. v. The unit has dumped the ETP sludge within its premises, oil spill inside the premises is not cleaned up, effluent is getting mixed with storm water, ambient benzene in the unit premises is very high, LDAR is not carried out. But however the committee observed that the unit has not dumped any waste outside its premises. vi. Around five acres of land inKesanapalli GGS is probably contaminated with mercury.
The committee submits to Hon'ble NGT to direct unit to clean & restore the probably contaminated area under supervision of APPCB as per procedure laid in the " Guidance document on Assessment and remediation of contaminated sites" .
Page 55 of 155vii. Kesanapalli GGS shall immediately stop disposal of treated effluent by marine outfall near the coast and dispose the treated effluent as per the conditions stipulated in CFO issued by APPCB.
viii. During monsoon due to heavy rains and water logging effluent is mixed with storm water due to which around three acres of land in Tatipaka near to old ETP and 10 acres of land in odalarevu in between GAIL and ONGC terminals is having high COD, bod and TOC. The unit shall ensure that effluent will not allowed to mix with storm water. ix. The committee carried out Ambient air quality monitoring in two installations namely Tatipaka and odalarevu installations during December, 2020 for all notified parameters namely Sulphur Dioxide as SO2, Nitrogen Dioxide as NO2, particulate matter (PM10), particulate matter (PM2.5), ozone, lead, carbon monoxide, ammonia, benzene, Benzo(a) pyrene, arsenic, nickel and noise. Both installations are complying with ambient air quality standards w.r.t all parameters except Benzene. The ambient benzene concentration in the Tatipaka unit premises is ranging between 92 µg/ m3 to 2051 µg/ m3 and in odalarevu installation 68.8 µg/ m3 and 122 µg/ m3 against the ambient standard of 05 µg/ m3. One of the reason for high ambient benzene concentration within the unit premises may due to placing the monitoring station close to fugitive source. The unit submitted to the committee that it has undertaken corrective actions like arresting fugitive emissions etc. The committee again carried out ambient benzene monitoring both inside and outside the unit premises in the villages both upwind and cross-wind directions. The ambient benzene concentration in the villages in Tatipaka is ranging from 0.02 µg/ m3 to 0.48 µg/ m3 and within unit premises it is reduced to 0.1 µg/ m3. Both Tatipaka and odalarevu facilities shall install continuous ambient monitoring facility and VOC sensors within the unit premises and results shall be displayed at the entrance of the unit for public and also the results shall be connected to APPCB server.
x. The committee observed during both the visits that the treatment plants are not properly operated and storm water drains are filled with sludge. Records on hazardous waste disposal was not shown to the committee. The ETP sludge and oily sludge from slop oil tank is stored in open. The unit has not taken any measures for the cleanup of sludge and storm water drains under the supervision of APPCB. The units shall ensure that the hazardous waste generated shall be disposed as per the conditions stipulated in CFO and in compliance with Hazardous Waste Management Rules, 2016.
Page 56 of 155xi. The units shall pay Environmental compensation to CPCB as follows:
Tatipaka GGS Rs. 7,28,62,500 Kesanapalli GGS Rs. 4,11,00,000/-
Odalarevu GGS Rs. 5,68,50,000/-
xii. During visit the committee observed that the storm water drains are clogged, filled with effluent, oily sludge is deposited in the drains in ETP area. Firstly the units shall ensure that the entire storm water from the unit shall be collected and reused with in the unit premises and it shall not sent outside the unit premises. The committee submits to Hon'ble NGT to direct APPCB to impose this as one of the consent conditions as not to discharge any storm water outside the unit premises. The unit shall have a fixed frequency for cleaning the drains and oily sludge settled in the drains shall be sent to TSDF or as directed by APPCB.
xiii. The unit has obtained consent from APPCB during 2015 and subsequently the consent is renewed (online consent monitoring and management system) but however post 2015 due to ageing of wells the quantity of produce water is increasing and there by the quantity of effluent generated is also increased. The actual quantity of effluent generated is higher than the quantities stipulated in the CFO. The unit shall either apply for amendment of consent issued by APPCB for the actual quantity of effluent generated or shall restrict their effluent generated to the quantities specified in CFO. Presently all units are having valid CFO issued by APPCB. xiv. There are four ETP's to treat effluent generated from 12 installations. Capacity of Tatipaka ETP is 500 KL against the quantity of effluent received 330 KLD, Capacity of Kesanapalli ETP-2 is 1500 KLD against quantity of effluent received 2158 KLD and capcity of Gopavaram ETP is 600 KL against quantity of effluent received 1130 KLDwhich implies that the Kesanapalli and Gopavaram ETP's are inadequate to treat the actual effluent generated. The units shall augment their treatment capacity so as to treat the actual effluent generation or restrict their production so as to minimize the generation of produce water to the tune of their ETP capacity. Based on raw effluent and treated effluent results, ambient air quality results, stack monitoring it is concluded that Tatipaka GCS, Kesanapalli GCS and Odalarevu GCS is complying with the standards w.r.t deep well injection, ambient air quality w.r.t noise and all other parameters except benzene. Post implementation of corrective measures the unit is found complying with ambient benzene standards also. samples collected from the borewell samples around the Page 57 of 155 installation do not contain benzene, TPH, O&G and phenols. Since the key indicator parameters are not present in the borewell water samples, based on the current analysis report the committee opines that ground water surrounding Tatipaka GCS & refinery, Kesanapalli GCS and odalarevu GCS is not contaminated. Sediment samples were collected from nagaram & Kesanadasipalem area where major accidents are reported to have taken place. The analysis results were compared with soil screening values for agricultural purposes as per "Guidance document for assessment and remediation of contaminated sites" and it is found that the sites are not contaminated. During accident site visit the committee observed that plantation has come up in the area."
23. Respondent Nos.3 & 4 have filed their respective objections to the Joint Committee report.
24. The ONGC has filed their status report regarding the Joint Committee observations and compliance dated 04.01.2022 which reads as follows:-Page 58 of 155 Page 59 of 155 Page 60 of 155 Page 61 of 155 Page 62 of 155 Page 63 of 155 Page 64 of 155 Page 65 of 155 Page 66 of 155 Page 67 of 155 Page 68 of 155 Page 69 of 155 Page 70 of 155 Page 71 of 155 Page 72 of 155 Page 73 of 155 Page 74 of 155 Page 75 of 155 Page 76 of 155 Page 77 of 155 Page 78 of 155 Page 79 of 155 Page 80 of 155 Page 81 of 155 Page 82 of 155 Page 83 of 155 Page 84 of 155 Page 85 of 155 Page 86 of 155 Page 87 of 155 Page 88 of 155 Page 89 of 155 Page 90 of 155 Page 91 of 155 Page 92 of 155 Page 93 of 155 Page 94 of 155 Page 95 of 155 Page 96 of 155 Page 97 of 155
at large. The Respondent ONGC is also adopting and properly implementing the standards set forth by the APPCB."
25. The 3rd Respondent has filed their reply in respect of CSR funds used for every year.
26. As per order dated 19.01.2022, the Joint Committee has filed the further report dated 23.03.2022 regarding the compliance of the recommendations by the ONGC which reads as follows:-
"JOINT INSPECTION REPORT OF COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY HON‟BLE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL, SOUTHERN BENCH, CHENNAI IN COMPLIANCE TO HON‟BLE NGT ORDER DATED 19.01.2022 IN THE MATTER OF OA NO. 175 OF 2020 (VENKATAPATHI RAJA YENUMALA VS UNION OF INDIA & ORS) IIa. Composition of the Committee In compliance to Hon'ble NGT order, committee comprising of following members was composed:
Name & designation of the Department with address official Sh. C Vishnu Charan, IAS Sub Collector and Sub Divisional Magistrate Narsapuram West Godavari Sh. Vasatha Rayudu, RDO, Amalapuram, East Godavari Dr. Suresh B Pasupuleti Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change, Scientist-D Regional Office, Vijayawada Prof. M. Deepa Dept. of Chemical Engineering, A.U College of Engineering (A) Andhra University, Visakhapatnam Sh. P. Ravindranath Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board, Zonal Senior Environmental Engineer Office, Visakhapatnam Smt. Mahima T Central Pollution Control Board Scientist-D Regional Directorate, Chennai The committee visited the site from 8th to 11th March, 2022 and carried out ambient air quality monitoring, collection of water &wastewater samples and soil samples. Committee interacted with villagers, village heads, school authorities and interacted with the applicant over phone.Page 98 of 155
III Compliance Verification of the units In compliance to Hon'ble NGT orders, post committee inspection M/s ONGC has taken corrective actions. M/s ONGC has submitted in the Compliance Report that following actions are implemented in all installations in Kakinada and Rajahmundry asset:
a. Units have taken measures for periodical cleaning and desilting of drains. b. Measures are taken for disposal of sludge. Tenders are invited for bio-remediation of sludge.
c. Closed loop system for VAP sampling(Tatipaka) d. Initiated for construction of sludge pit of 1000 m3 capacity (Tatipaka) e. Construction of Two sheds, One for Hazardous waste and the other for hazardous chemicals f. Units have initiated measures to install flowmeters at inlet of ED (effluent disposal well) g. LDAR (leak detection and repair) is carried out internally by the units and necessary corrective actions are taken to arrest leakages.
Compliance status of specific installation is described in below sections.
IV. Compliance Verification of Tatipaka GCS
Sl. Non-compliances Compliance status Current status of Remarks
N observed by submitted by the unit and compliance as verified
o committee during Upgradations/ by the committee
first visit Modifications made by the
unit
1 The storm water Oil catchers are provided in Unit has desilted and Partially
from the two storm water drains cleaned the drains and complying
installation is located near process area the oily sludge settled in
discharged into and any oil carried over the drains are removed.
main drains laid from the process area is but however mode of
outside the unit recovered in the oil catcher. disposal of silt & oily
premises. During Unit has taken measures to sludge was not available.
inspection the desilt and clean the storm Near the effluent
committee water drains twice a year to collection tank and near
Page 99 of 155
observed that due prevent logging. Unit has effluent tanker unloading
to heavy rains and submitted that all the drains tank, effluents were
water logging, were cleaned and unit has present in the drain.
effluent was taken measures to recover There are cracks in tank
getting mixed with oil from the storm water used for collecting
storm water and drains. effluent from tankers and
from the main Unit claims as complying effluent was seeping into
drain it may adjacent ground.
ultimately join Storm water is
sea. discharged outside the
unit. Unit has not made
any arrangements to lift
the first flush of rain
water (for 30minutes)
and to treat the same in
ETP.
2 The tilted plate ETP Upgradation work is Tilted plate interceptor is Not-
interceptor and yet to be undertaken. not upgraded but only complying
slop oil tank are Support structure of Tilted supporting civil structure
not working Plate interceptor is (wall) is strengthened.
properly. The strengthened and is in The capacity and
capacity and operation as per the design retention time of plate
retention time of capacity of 21 cum per hour interceptor is not
plate interceptor is which is adequate as per the adequate to treat the
not adequate to design criteria of ETP. effluent. Oil separators
treat the effluent. Unit claims as works under are not properly
Hence the oil progress. working.
removed from
effluent is
stagnated and
overflowing.
Page 100 of 155
3 The units have not ETP upgradation works is Unit is yet to obtain Complying
amended the yet to be undertaken. amendment of the w.r.t
consent for the Post committee inspection, consent order for effluent
revised quantity of Tatipaka GCS is taking increased quantity of discharge
effluent generated. effluent from other effluent generated. limits.
Thereby presently installations only on very As per the records,
the effluent rare occasions and effluent average effluent
generated from the generated from Tatipaka generated from the Not
installation is GCS is only treated in the installation is 350m3/day complying
more than the ETP. but the capacity of w.r.t CFO
quantity specified effluent collection tank conditions
in the CFO issued Unit claims as work under is 40 KL. Unit is not
by APPCB and progress having capacity to store
moreover the the effluent for even a
existing ETP is day.
not adequate in ETP comprises of
terms of capacity collection tank slop oil
to treat the present tankclarifierMMF
effluent generated. ED wells. Committee
As per the CFO collected effluent sample
issued to Tatipaka from inlet and outlet of
GCS on ETP and the analysis
27.02.2015 the results are given in table
quantity of 1 and treated effluent is
effluent is 225 meeting with ED well
KLD but presently disposal limits.
effluent generated
is more than 500 Old ETP which is not in
KLD. In addition, use is filled with
15 KLD of effluent. Oily effluent is
effluent generated still present in clarifier.
Page 101 of 155
from Tatipaka Unit shall submit time
mini refinery, bound action plan to the
Endamuru GCS treat the effluent present
and Mandapeta in old ETP and to
GCS has to be dismantle old ETP.
treated. Hence the
existing ETP of
capacity 500KL is
not adequate to
treat the present
quantity of
effluent generated.
Table 1: Wastewater analysis results of Tatipaka GCS Location TSS mg/L Oil & grease mg/L ETP inlet - Tatipaka 1670 66.7 mg/L ETP Outlet- Tatipaka 15 BDL(DL:4.0) APPCB standards 100 10 Guard pond Water- Tatipaka 12 BDL(DL:4.0) From the results it is clear that the treated effluent is meeting the APPCB standards for ED well disposal. From the guard pond effluent is discharged to ED well. Detailed wastewater analysis results are enclosed as Annexure-II.
4 Sludge drying Unit has invited tenders for Oily sludge generated Not-
beds are not in disposal of sludge. from the inception of the complying operation Oily sludge is collected in unit is stored in open in Sludge storage tank. sludge tanks upto brim Tendering work is in of the tank. It was progress for Oil recovery reported by the unit that from Sludge (E-tender No. the spillages were K16JC21015) removed and transferred followed by Bioremediation to the tank itself. During of residual for which NOA rainy season, runoff Page 102 of 155 exist with TERI. water from sludge tank Unit claims as work under is likely to carry sludge progress. particles with it to the surrounding area.
Committee collected sediment samples near effluent collection tank and tanker unloading tank and analysis results for core parameters are as follows (detailed sediment analysis results is submitted as Annexure-III:
Table 2: Sediment samples analysis results of Tatipaka Location Total Iron Mercury Lead Benzene Benzo(a)py Phenols TPH (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) rene (µg/kg (mg/kg) mg/Kg Sediment sample adjacent to 40 BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ 411.84 KL effluent (LOQ:11.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) collection tank Sediment sample adjacent to BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ 752.67 729.61 effluent tanker (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) unloading tank Sediment sample BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LO BLQ(LOQ: BLQ(LOQ:
98.13 3148.15 3.88 near sludge tank 2.0) Q:20) 20) 0.1) sediment analysis results indicates that effluent may be seeping into the soil from effluent collection tank and tankers unloading tank.
5 TVOC levels Online Hydrocarbon TVOC levels was Complying
measured using detectors are installed to measured using
handheld PID monitor fugitive emissions. handheld PID analyzer
analyser in the in the ETP area and
ETP area is Guard pond and storm water TVOC levels was
varying from drains cleaning has been varying between 0ppm
2.2ppm to 4.0ppm carried out and TVOC levels to 2ppm.
are within the limits
Page 103 of 155
Unit claims as complying
6 There is no Hazardous waste and Unit has constructed one Complying
dedicated chemical sheds are shed for storage of
hazardous waste constructed. hazardous waste- lube
storage shed. ETP Storage of hazardous waste oil but however lube oil sludge, empty & chemicals are being stored was not stored in the barrels, slop oil in the designated sheds. shed. Reported that lube are stored Unit claims as complying oil was disposed during haphazardly February, 2022.
within the unit
premises
7 In old GCS plant Drain channels are cleaned. It was observed that no Complying
drain effluent is The pH levels are observed effluent was joining the joining storm to be within the limits. drain in old GCS plant water drains and Unit claims as complying and drains were in dry pH of drain condition. There were no effluent was 14 rains in the area during committee inspection.
8 LDAR of refinery Unit is periodically Unit is yet to carry out Partially is not carried out. monitoring TVOC levels Leak detection and Complying TVOC levels near internally. Unit has carried repair (LDAR) study the valves of out LDAR internally. through certified distillation column Unit claims as complying agencies.
is around 5ppm and near sampling point is 70ppm 9 In the gas The Boiling point of TEG is There was no odor Complying dehydration unit more than 240oC whereas, nuisance. VOC levels in the re-boiler the re-boiler temperature is was measured using system, during maintained at 190oC. So the handheld VOC analyzer knocking out chances of glycol and it was 0ppm.
Page 104 of 155 some glycol vaporisation is nil.
vapors is carried Unit claims as complying
along with
moisture. There
was odor nuisance
in the area.
10 Odour nuisance Due to cleaning of drains, There was no odour Complying
removal of oily sludge and nuissance. Ambient air controlled knock out quality monitoring was emissions TVOC levels are conducted inside the unit within the limits and hence and in malletivara there is no odour nuisance. merakinagalam village, Unit claims as complying Peerlacheruvu nagar village and pedapatinam nagarm village surrounding the installation and found that it is meeting ambient air quality.
Ambient air quality
results are enclosed as
Annexure-IV
11 CFO validity Tatipaka GCS has Complying
obtained Consent under
the Water Act, 1974, the
Air Act, 1981 and
Hazardous Waste
authorization valid till
31.07.2023. Copy of
Tatipaka CFO is
enclosed as Annexure-V
Page 105 of 155
Photo 1: drains in Tatipaka after cleaning Photo 2: tilted plate interceptor
Photo 3: Hazardous waste Photo 4:waste oil drums Photo 5: Clarifier filled with
storage shed stored in open effluent in old ETP
Photo 6: Effluent treatment plant Photo 7:Treated effluent storage
tank
Page 106 of 155
Photo 8: Sludge tank Photo 9: area surrounding the sludge tank
IVa. Environmental compensation from Tatipaka GCS EC for EC=PI x N x R x S x LF violation of Where, CFO EC = Environmental Compensation in INR conditions PI = Pollution Index of industrial sector (red-80) N = Number of days of violation took place (from the date of violation to date of compliance- 25.02.2021 to 11.03.2022= 379 days committee had calculated compensation till 25.02.2021 and committee re- inspected during 08-03-2022 to 11-03-2022 and observed following non- compliances:
1. Tilted plate interceptor is not properly working
2. Effluent is seeping into soil from effluent collection tank and tanker unloading tank
3. Oily sludge (hazardous waste) is laying in open in sludge tank for more than 5 years.
4. Effluent and oily sludge is present in Old ETP which is not in use for more than 3 years.
R = A factor in Rupees for EC (Rs. 250/-) S = Factor for scale of operation (large-1.5) LF = Location factor=1 Page 107 of 155 =80*379 days*250*1.5*1 = 1,13,70,000/-
Rupees One crore thirteen lacs seventy thousand only Considering that unit has made improvements and is mainly complying with effluent disposal standards, committee has not imposed repeated violation factor.
V. Compliance Verification of Kesanapalli-W: GGS
Sl. Non-compliances Compliance status Current status of compliance Remarks
No observed by submitted by the as verified by the committee
committee during unit and
first visit Upgradations/
Modifications
made by the unit
1 Effluent is getting Drains were Unit has cleaned storm water Partially
mixed with storm cleaned. drains but however Oil catchers complying
water and storm are not installed in the drains and
water is discharged measures to prevent entry of
into main drain effluent into storm water drains
outside the unit is not taken up. Measures to lift
premises. pH of the or pump first flush of rain water
storm water was 12. into ETP is not taken.
In addition the Records on the quantity of oily
leaves and garden sludge removed from the drains
waste is in the drain and mode of disposal of this
and getting putrefied sludge was not made available to
in the drain itself committee.
Page 108 of 155
2 The effluent stored Red colored Reported that red colored Complying
in treated effluent effluent is taken to effluent from treated effluent sump was red in ETP for treatment. storage tank was again taken color and pH was Unit informed that back to ETP for re-treatment. more than 12 awareness was During committee insoection no created among the red colored effluent wss present workers as not to inside the unit premises. Treated add any chemicals effluent samples were taken and into treated water or analysis results are given table 3. fresh water sumps.
Unit claims as
complying
3 There is no Dedicated storage Unit has constructed two Partially
dedicated hazardous sheds for hazardous separate sheds for chemical complying
waste storage sheds waste and storage and hazardous waste (shed is
chemicals have storage. Unit is generating two constructed)
been built. categories of hazardous waste:
Unit claims as ETP sludge/ oily sludge and
complying waste lube oil. Currently unit
continues to store ETP sludge/
oily sludge openly in sludge tank
and unit has proposed to store
only waste lube oil in the shed.
But however on the day of
inspection, the shed was empty
and waste lube oil was not
present.
Page 109 of 155
4 The unit was ONGC having CFE Unit is having two ETP's. Not
disposing the and auto renewal of Capacity of old ETP is 750 m3/ complying
effluent by means of CFO for the day and capacity of new ETP is
marine disposal but operation of 1500 m3/day. Old ETP
however the unit has Kesnapalli-w ETP comprises of
not obtained which is available tilted plate interceptor flash
necessary upto 31.07.2023. mixer flocculation tank
permissions from CRZ clearance was dissolved air floatation dual
APPCB for marine also obtained for media filter guard pond ED
disposal. Further, laying disposal line. well.
part of the pipeline New contract/tender On the day of inspection, raw
used for deep sea was awarded for effluent was directly taken to
disposal (1000m laying New Marine DAF and pre-treatment units
stretch of pipeline disposal line in were not in operation.
taking deep sea) is place of broken line New ETP comprises of
broken and washed (which is expected Corrugated plate interceptor
away. Presently the to be completed by induced gas floatation Nutche
unit is disposing the March-2022, in the filter sequential batch
effluent in the coast. favourable climate reactor media filters treated
The unit had window) effluent storage tank sea
obtained CRZ Meanwhile, disposal.
clearance for laying temporary Unit has obtained CRZ clearance
of pipelines arrangement was for laying of pipeline for marine
made with 8"casing disposal. Copy of CRZ clearance pipe and GRE is placed as Annexure-VI.
flexible connection Unit has obtained CFE from in place of the APPCB for laying of pipeline for washed out portion marine disposal. Copy of CFE is (till the permanent placed as Annexure-VII.
line will be made APPCB has not granted CFO to
available). the unit for marine disposal but
Page 110 of 155
Also additional however unit claims that consent
arrangement was fees is paid by the unit for
done to take a marine disposal line. However
substantial portion committee has clarified that unit of N.ETP treated has to obtain prior consent from effluent to ED wells APPCB for marine disposal.
ETP(old) for disposal for deep Marine disposal pipelines of well injection, and 1000m was broken and washed subsequently to away during 2018 and currently reduce marine only 60m marine disposal disposal quantity pipeline is present against the from New ETP. requirement of 1000m of deep Additional high sea disposal. Unit continues to pressure water dispose around 1200KLD of injection pump was effluent through marine disposal.
installed for this purpose. Unit has completed laying of Also additional 1500 m HDPE line with diffuser Effluent disposal in the sea during February, 2022 wells were and trenching work (post-burial commissioned after work) by dredger pontoon WOR for effluent Marine is in progress. The new
disposal (deep well pipeline will be commissioned injection) for during March, 2022. The new capacity expansion. pipeline is at a distance of 150m from the old pipeline. The unit is Unit claims as work laying a new pipeline by under progress deviating the alignment of old pipeline in the CRZ area, Hence it is mandatory that unit has to Page 111 of 155 obtain CRZ clearance and CFE from APPCB for laying new pipeline but however unit has not obtained any clearances for laying new pipeline.
Currently, around 1200 KLD of
effluent from new ETP is
disposed through marine
disposal.
During inspection, villagers approached the committee and informed that effluent is discharged outside Kesanapalli GGS into empty land. Committee visited the area and observed that outside the boundary wall of the unit, water stagnation (lagoon/ pond) was present at two locations and villagers informed that it is effluent discharged from the installation. At one location just beside the boundary wall of the unit large quantity of slightly reddish colored water was present. The boundary walls of the unit are weak, cracks & small openings are developed on the wall towards old ETP. Committee collected inlet & outlet samples of old & new ETP, samples from two water stagnation points and beach water (near to disposal line) and analysis results for core parameters are as follows:
Table 3: Old ETP Kesanaplli analysis results Location TSS mg/L O & G mg/L Old ETP inlet Raw Effluent-Kesanapalli 171 BDL(DL:4.0) Old ETP outlet Effluent-Kesanapalli 13 BDL(DL:4.0) APPCB standards for ED well disposal 100 10 Table 4: New ETP Kesanapalli analysis results Sl.No Parameter New ETP inlet New ETP outlet CPCB marine outfall standards 1 pH 7.98 7.08 5.5 -9.0 2 TSS mg/L 53 17 100 Page 112 of 155 3 Zinc mg/L 0.10 BLQ (LOQ:0.005) 2 4 BOD mg/L 3708 44 30 5 COD 15862 172 100 6 Chlorides 8697 9197 600 7 Sulphates 69 43 1000 8 TDS 15675 8411 2100 9 Oil & grease BDL (DL:4.0) BDL (DL:4.0) 10 10 cyanides BDL (DL:0.1) BDL (DL:0.1) 0.2 11 flourides 0.21 0.11 1.5 12 Sulphides BDL (DL:1.0) BDL (DL:1.0) 2.0 13 T. Cr 0.06 BLQ (LOQ:0.005) 1.0 14 Copper 0.07 BLQ (LOQ:0.005) 0.2 15 Lead BLQ (LOQ:0.005) BLQ (LOQ:0.005) 0.1 16 Mercury 0.04 0.01 0.01 17 Nickel BLQ (LOQ:0.005) BLQ (LOQ:0.005) 37 Table 5: Analysis results of wastewater at Kesanapalli Location pH TPH mg/L BOD mg/L COD mg/L TOC mg/L Beach sea water 8.02 3.23 274 427 171 Water stagnation (small) around 8.77 55.6 33 121 45 250m away from industry boundary Kesanapalli Large water stagnation besides 9.01 971.17 89 345 129 the boundary wall of industry towards old ETP - Kesanapalli From the analysis results in Table 5, it is observed that traces of TPH is present in beach sea water and at water stagnation point 250m from industry boundary. TPH of 971.17 mg/L is present in water adjacent to industry boundary which indicates that effluent may be leaking or may be discharged into adjacent land.Page 113 of 155
5 Water logging Area is cleared of Unit has levelled the area to Complying observed at the water logging. prevent water logging.
entrance of the unit Levelling and
cleaning was done.
Now the premise is
properly
maintained.
6 In the ETP area, the After excavation of The committee excavated soil in Complying
unit had covered the area, where ever the ETP area and as well at other
with fresh soil. The oily soil was locations to check for oil
committee excavated observed and which spillages or dumping of sludge the portion of the was removed and on ground. Sediment samples soil and found that transferred to were collected and observed that black oily soil was sludge bed for only traces of TPH is present present below upto bioremediation. which implies that unit has depth of 1m cleaned the area. Results are given in table 6.
7 Opposite to new The said area was Opposite to new ETP boundary Complying ETP boundary wall, allowed to dried up wall, sediment samples were waste oil & sludge is water, where ever collected and TPH in the dumped on land to oily soil was sediment samples is 3.55 mg/kg an extent of two to observed and was which implies that unit has three acres removed and cleaned the area while traces of transferred to oily sludge is present. Unit has sludge bed for initiated plantation in the area.
bioremediation .After cleaning properly, initiative was taken to bring this area under green belt (by Page 114 of 155 growing greenery) 8 In around 5acres of The area allowed to It was reported by the unit that Complying land opposite to DG dry water and wherever oily sludge was room the effluent & where ever present, it was cleaned by the sludge is contaminated soil unit. Mercury in the soil sample accumulated. From was observed and is below limit of quantification the sediment that portion was sampling it is learnt cleared from the that mercury is area to sludge pit.
present in the range Now greenery is
of 201 mg/Kg visible in the area.
The soil analysis by
HECS, shows
mercury levels
below the
quantifiable limit.
Table 6: Kesanapalli sediment samples and analysis results are as follows:
TPH Iron Mercury Lead Benzene Benzo(a) Phenols Location (mg/Kg) (mg/Kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) pyrene (µg/kg (mg/kg) Kesanapalli large water BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ stagnation 6.52 966.23 (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) outside unit premises kesanapalli BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ beach sludge-5.89 2494.66 (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) kesanapalli Page 115 of 155 (sludge) behind transfer pump- BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ 93.53 2519.68 kesanapalli (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) (sludge) behind ows -
BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ
kesanapalli 55.60 1223.52
(LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1)
(sludgel)
sediment sample
behind old ETP
BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ
dmf feed sump-319.19 1894.93
(LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1)
kesanapalli
(sludge)
sediment sample
in front of new
etp control BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ
3.55 1329.06
building - (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1)
kesanapalli
(sludge)
Analysis results indicates that small quantity of spills/ leaks is present behind old ETP feed sump.
9 CFO validity Kesanapalli GGS has obtained Complying Consent under the Water Act, 1974, the Air Act, 1981 and Hazardous Waste authorization valid till 31.07.2023. Copy of CFO is placed as Annexure-VIII Page 116 of 155 Photo 10: water stagnation outside the unit Photo 11: water stagnation outside the premises (small pond) industry slightly reddish in color (large pond) Photo 12: New ETP at Kesanapalli Photo13: new ETP treated effluent storage tank Photo14 : Effluent disposal on the shore through Photo15: laying of new pipeline existing pipeline of 60m Page 117 of 155 Photo 16: old ETP area Photo 17: Sludge tanks V.b Environmental compensation to be levied from Kesanapalli GGS EC for EC=PI x N x R x S x LF violation of Where, CFO EC = Environmental Compensation in INR conditions, sea PI = Pollution Index of industrial sector (red-80) disposal N = Number of days of violation took place (from the date without of violation observed to date of compliance- 379 days obtaining committee had calculated compensation till 25.02.2021 and committee re- permission inspected during 08-03-2022 to 11-03-2022 and observed following non-
from APPCB compliances Old ETP was not properly operated Unit is generating more than consented quantity of effluent Page 118 of 155 Oily sludge is stored in open in sludge tank for more than five years Unit is disposing effluent through marine outfall against the consented mode of ED well disposal Marine outfall pipeline is broken and effluent is disposed with pipeline of 60m.
R = A factor in Rupees for EC (Rs. 250/-) S = Factor for scale of operation (large-1.5) LF = Location factor 1 =80*379*250*1.5*1* repeated violation factor of 2 =Rs. 2,27,40,000/-
Rupees Two crore twenty-seven lacs forty thousand only Considering serious nature of violation, committee has assessed EC for repeated violation VI. Compliance Verification of Odalarevu GCS Sl. Non-compliances Compliance status Current status of compliance Remarks No observed by submitted by the as verified by the committee committee during unit and first visit Upgradations/ Modifications made by the unit 1 The ETP is not Unit has improved ETP was in operation. ETP is Not functioning housekeeping and designed to treat 160 m3/day of Complying properly. Oil is maintenance (26 m3 /day of producer water w.r.t ED well removed from slop activities. with inlet TSS of 500 ppm and disposal limit oil tank and then Unit has replaced oil & grease of 500 ppm and 134 for oil & effluent is stored in corroded valves, m3/ day of storm water). grease holding ponds. serviced pumps & Committee collected samples of Multimedia filters pipelines, producer water (inlet of ETP) Page 119 of 155 were not in installation of new and treated effluent (outlet of operation on the day diaphragm pump, ETP) and from storm water of the visit. Effluent replacement of drain. It is found that treated is disposed on the media of multi- effluent is not meeting with ED ground without media filters. well discharge standards w.r.t oil treatment. ETP is & grease. Flow meters are not properly Unit is producing installed at inlet and outlet of working since 2017 18-30 m3/day of ETP. TPH is present in drain and the unit is yet to effluent which is sample in traces which implies replace worn out processed in 3-5 that effluent is not discharged pumps hours and injected into drain. Results are given as into effluent disposal follows:
wells.
The ETP is
operational and
functioning properly
and operated in
batches depending
upon load to ETP.
Unit claims as
Complying
Table 7: Odalarevu raw and treated effluent analysis results Oil and Grease TPH Location pH TSS (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) Storm water drain beside Security 1.48 8.01 11.6 22 Gate at Vashishta gate - Odaleruvu ETP inlet - Odaleruvu 6.47 116 52 NA ETP outlet - Odaleruvu 5.87 8 14 NA APPCB ED well disposal limits 100 10 Page 120 of 155
2 Severe odour Oil in the CRWS No odour nuisance sensed by the Complying nuisance and VOC tank and other committee members. VOC was levels inside unit operational area pits measured using handheld PID premises was have been processed analyser and value was 0ppm.
varying from and being
4.0ppm to 6.0ppm maintained regularly
when measured within limits so that
using handheld PID VOC and odour
(photo ionic nuisance is not
detector) analyzer available in the
premises anymore.
3 During the visit, Unit claims that Since there was no rains, there Partially
there were rains and MEG barrels were was no water logging. Unit has complying
water logging was placed near the not taken any measures for the
observed in the area. referred lagoon cleanup of the area. Black oily
Both Effluent mixed having an area of sludge is still present in the area.
with storm water 1.25 acres (not 10 Top layer of soil is not fully
was present in the Acres) during removed and only in certain
unlined lagoon in construction areas top 10cm of soil is
more than 10acres of activities. removed however bund is not
land between M/s Unintended and constructed. Committee
GAIL and M/s inadvertent leakage collected three sediment samples
ONGC terminals. of one of the barrel at different at various points
The pH of the of MEG in the area where ONGC pipelines are
lagoon water was might have resulted passing and from sediment
around 5 into low pH value in analysis results, it implies that
the sample. The the it contains total petroleum
same has been hydrocarbons in the range of 297
rectified. mg/kg to 421 mg/Kg. No other
Top layer of soil has heavy metals is present. The been recovered and summary of the results is as Page 121 of 155 shall be processed follows:
for bio
remediation/Transfer
to TSDF for landfill
depending upon
sample analysis.
After removal of the
top layer of soil, the
area will be properly
protected with bund
and rain water shall
be stored in the
pond.
Unit claims as
Complying
Table 8: Odalarevu Sediment sample analysis results Location Total Benzo(a) Iron Mercury Benzene Phenols TPH Lead (mg/kg) pyrene (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) mg/Kg (µg/kg Beside security gate BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ at vashishta gate- 693.54 1441.86 (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) odaleruvu (soil) Area between GAIL BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ and ONGC-odalerevu 297.17 31.35 (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) (soil) Lagoon Area between BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ GAIL and ONGC- 335.57 153.73 (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) odalerevu (soil) lagoon between GAIL and ONGC BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ 421.74 846.43 2.28 near watch tower- (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) odalarevu (soil) ETP beside settling BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ BLQ 10019.79 1553.94 tank -odalarevu (soil) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:2.0) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:20) (LOQ:0.1) Page 122 of 155 Analysis results indicate the presence of TPH in the range of 297 mg/Kg to 10019 mg/Kg. Unit has to take measures to prevent oil spillages/ leakages and to clean the existing spills.
4 The storm water The storm water Storm water drains are cleaned Complying drains are drains are being and reported that the oily sludge completely clogged cleaned periodically and silt removed from drains was and was filled with in phase wise transferred to sludge tank but thick oily sludge. manner to remove however the records on how the vegetation. much quantity of sludge was removed from drains is not made available to committee. Drains were dry and no effluent was transferred through drains.
5 CFO validity Unit has applied for consent and renewal is awaited. Consent fees is paid.
VI.a Environmental compensation to be levied from Odalarevu GCS EC for EC=PI x N x R x S x LF violation Where, EC = Environmental Compensation in INR PI = Pollution Index of industrial sector (red-80) N = Number of days of violation took place (from the date of violation observed to date of compliance- 379 days committee had calculated compensation till 25.02.2021 and committee re- inspected during 08-03-2022 to 11-03-2022 and observed following non- compliances treated effluent not complying with ED well disposal limits oily sludge is laying beside settling tank in the ETP area R = A factor in Rupees for EC (Rs. 250/-) S = Factor for scale of operation (large-1.5) Page 123 of 155 LF = Location factor 1 =80*379*250*1.5*1 =Rs. 1,13,70,000 Rupees One Crore thirteen lacs seventy thousand only Considering unit has made improvements and unit is complying with effluent discharge standards committee has not assessed repeated violation factor VII Compliance verification of Gopavaram GGS Sl. Non-compliances Compliance status Current status of compliance Remarks No observed by submitted by the as verified by the committee committee during unit and first visit Upgradations/ Modifications made by the unit 1 Unit is generating Unit is in the process As per the CFO issued by Not 1800 KLD of of upgrading ETP APPCB, quantity of effluent is 6 Complying effluent but the and augmenting the KLD but actual effluent capacity of ETP is capacity. generation varies from 1500 600 KL Unit claims as work KLD to 1800 KLD. ETP is under progress having capacity to treat 600 KLD of effluent and both treated & untreated effluent is discharged into ED (effluent disposal) wells. Committee collected samples from inlet (producer water) and outlet of ETP, storm water drain at north-
east corner and from unlined lagoon. From the analysis results it is found that effluent is getting Page 29 of 39 Page 124 of 155 mixed with storm water.
Untreated Effluent is discharged into ED wells. Storm water drains are filled with oily sludge.
Oil contaminated wastewater is stored in unlined lagoon in the premises. Land in the premises is observed to be contaminated at several places indicating discharge of untreated oil bearing effluents on open land.
Hazardous waste is stocked in a concrete tank without disposal since commission of the premises. Treated effluent is complying with discharge limits.
Copy of CFO is enclosed as Annexure-IX Table 9: Gopavaram raw and treated effluent analysis results Oil and Grease TPH Location pH TSS (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) ETP Inlet - Gopavaram 7.58 29 BDL(DL:4.0) NA ETP Outlet- Gopavaram 7.66 11 BDL(DL:4.0) NA Storm water drain North east corner- 731.78 8.07 6 BDL(DL:4.0) Gopavaram Storm water collected from unlined 185.53 7.50 71 BDL(DL:4.0) lagoons in Gopavaram Page 125 of 155 Photo 18: Effluent treatment area Photo 19: effluent stagnation Photo 20: oily sludge dumped on the ground Page 126 of 155 VII.a Environmental compensation to be levied from Gopavaram GGS EC for EC=PI x N x R x S x LF violation Where, EC = Environmental Compensation in INR PI = Pollution Index of industrial sector (red-80) N = Number of days of violation took place (from the date of violation observed to date of compliance- 379 days committee had calculated compensation till 25.02.2021 and committee re- inspected during 08-03-2022 to 11-03-2022 and observed following non- compliances oily sludge is laying beside settling tank in the ETP area untreated effluent is discharged through storm water drains Sediment contains high concentration of sludge indicating dumping of oily sludge R = A factor in Rupees for EC (Rs. 250/-) S = Factor for scale of operation (large-1.5) LF = Location factor 1 =80*379*250*1.5*1 =Rs. 1,13,70,000 Rupees One Crore thirteen lacs seventy thousand only VIII Utilization of CSR funds by M/s ONGC in Rajahmundry and Kakinada assets ONGC has devised framework for utilization of CSR funds. Though the installations at Kakinada asset and Rajahmundry asset are currently operating under loss but however the overall profit made by M/s ONGC nationwide is considered for CSR fund utilization. Reported that 5% of the overall profit made by M/s ONGC is utilized for CSR activities and the total profit is divided among all installations. Based on the CSR proposals received by various modes such as through District Collector, NGO's, Public representatives etc are compiled and approval is obtained through their key executive/ corporate head. Kakinada asset & Rajahmundry asset prepare a CSR plan based on the proposals received and on the allocated amount to each installation. Both Page 127 of 155 Rajahmundry and Kakinada asset are having a CSR co-ordinator for implementation of CSR activities.
The CSR proposals received from various domain are first examined by the CSR co-ordinator by way of field visit or verifying the DPR etc and after examining the proposals it is put up to an internal screening committee and then to virtual corporate committee. These committee further examine and recommend the activities after which approval is obtained. Based on the proposal received CSR activity is implemented and then it is monitored by either CSR co-ordinator or project monitoring team. Post implementation & monitoring, documents are obtained such as utilization certificates etc and activity is completed.
For ground trothing purposes, committee verified the CSR records for last five years (2017 onwards) and also visited areas where activities are implemented such as installation of water tanks, providing cycle stand for school children etc. Committee interacted school Principle, Tehsildar and it was reported that CSR activities are taken up the units.
Four village heads met the committee and requested the committee to direct M/s ONGC to release more amount to the villages where the wells are located rather than spending the amount in diverse manner and in other villages. Committee clarified the Village heads that committee is verifying as to whether CSR funds are properly utilised or not. M/s ONGC Rajahmundry asset has spent around Rs. 21.04 crores on CSR activities during 2018-19, Rs. 23.05 crores during 2019-20 and Rs. 8.08 crores during 2020-21 respectively. Reported that during 2020-21, M/s ONGC has contributed to PM cares fund and hence hence there is a decline in amount spent on CSR activity in the region.
The committee interacted with the applicant and objections were raised on installation of two Water ATM's in Antharvedi Devasthanam and nearby village. Committee visited both the water ATM's and discussed with the M/s ONGC team. Based on the proposals received, M/s ONGC has proposed to two install water ATM's. Water ATM's are water treatment machines (basically RO system) which either draw surface or ground water treat the water and clean water is provided through tap. Each villager was given a card and on inserting the card, each villager gets Page 128 of 155 around 20 liters of water per day. M/s ONGC has implemented the project on the condition that M/s ONGC will only bear the capital expenditure (only the cost of water ATM machine) and one year AMC and subsequently the village has to maintain the water ATM. The land required for installing ATM was identified by the villagers, electricity was provided by village/ temple authorities. After lapse of one year the expenditure towards O &M cost/ AMC cost of the water ATM had to borne by the village. Reported that water ATM installed at Antharvedi Devasthanam was operational for one year and afterwards no one has taken responsibility and currently it is not operational. While the water ATM in the village is not put to use. During committee visit, both the water ATM's were not in operation.
The process flow followed by M/s ONGC for CSR is given in the below image. Further two case studies are given as Annexure-X. Image: Process flow followed for CSR projects at ONGC Page 129 of 155 Image: CSR abstract of Rajahmundry asset from 2018- 2021 IX Conclusions and Recommendations Hon'ble NGT vide order dated 19.01.2022 directed the committee to inspect the units and verify the compliance status of the units. Committee observed that as compared to previous visit, there are improvements but units are yet to achieve compliance and few serious & significant violations were observed by the committee.
Page 130 of 155i. Currently, Tatipaka GCS is operating the ETP and unit is testing the quality of treated effluent as to whether it is meeting the discharge standards or not and after ensuring that unit complies with discharge limits, treated effluent is discharged through ED wells. Unit has maintained records on the quantity of effluent generated, characteristics of effluent at inlet & outlet of ETP and quantity of effluent disposed through ED well. However unit has not taken adequate measures in handling the oily sludge, slop oil and washings. Spillages or oil deposition near the ETP area is not fully cleaned. Effluent oily sludge stored in the old ETP shall be treated and old ETP shall be dismantled. Sludge stored in the sludge tank shall be disposed. Unit shall ensure that it will comply with Hazardous Waste Management Rules, 2016 and dispose the hazardous waste within 90 days from the date of generation.
ii. Kesanapalli ETP is handling around 1800 KLD of effluent against the consented quantity of 600 KLD and is having two ETP's. Old ETP was not properly operated however treated effluent is meeting the discharge limits for ED well disposal. New ETP is handling 1500 KLD of effluent and treated effluent is disposed in the sea with existing marine outfall pipeline of 60m against consent condition of ED well disposal. Outside the unit premises water stagnation was observed and TPH (Total Petroleum Hydrcarbons) is around 971.17 mg/L which indicates that effluent may be leaking/ discharged outside the unit premises or runoff from old ETP area has stagnated outside the unit premises. Sediment samples collected around old ETP contains TPH of 319mg/Kg indicating mixing of spillages on the ground. Unit shall ensure that ETP is properly operated, effluent is disposed as the per conditions stipulated in CFO and ensure that no effluent is discharged outside the unit premises. Sludge shall be properly managed and prevent the spillages. Kesanapalli GGS shall immediately stop disposal of treated effluent by marine outfall near the coast and dispose the treated effluent as per the conditions stipulated in CFO issued by APPCB iii. Laying of new pipe line in CRZ area by Kesanapalli GGS does not have prior CRZ clearance from Ministry and Consent approvals from APPCB. Kesanapalli GGS shall Page 131 of 155 immediately approach concerned authorities for obtain prior permissions for the new pipe line.
iv. Effluent generation is around 1800 KLD and ETP at Gopavaram is having capacity to handle 600 KLD of effluent. Hence untreated effluent is discharged outside the unit premises. Water present in the storm water drain and in unlined lagoon contained TPH of 731.78 mg/L and 185.53 mg/L indicating the presence crude oil/ effluent in the sample. Sediment samples collected from Gopavaram GGS contains high concentration of TPH in the range of 644.07 mg/Kg to 30,698 mg/Kg which indicates that oily sludge is dumped on the ground. Since unit is not having ETP of adequate capacity, untreated effluent is discharged through ED wells. Unit shall take measures to augment the treatment capacity and ensure that only treated effluent is discharged through ED wells. Till the ETP capacity is enhanced, unit shall restrict its production so that quantity of effluent generation is proportionate with ETP capacity.
v. Whenever any oil spills/ leakages takes place within the unit premises or whenever sludge is carried with runoff, unit is covering it with fresh soil and not taking measures to clean up. Units shall ensure that during any untoward incidences of oil spill/ leakages, unit shall take measures to remove the entire quantity of spills/ leaks and scrap the underlying soil and store it in sludge tank and dispose the same along with oily sludge.
vi. During rains, the first flush of rains is likely to carry the pollutants into adjacent area and it is essential for the industry to have facility to lift the first flush of rain water and treat the same in effluent treatment plant.
vii. During previous committee visit it was observed that thick oily sludge was present in the storm water drains. Currently all the units have cleaned the drains and they were in dry condition. Units have also devised plan for periodical cleaning of drains. However units have not maintained records on the quantity of sludge removed from drains and mode of disposal of the silt/ sludge. Unit will take measures to install oil catchers in the drains located near process area & ETP. Based on the characteristics of the silt/ sludge present in the drains, units will safely dispose the same.
Page 132 of 155viii. There was no odour nuisance during this visit and ambient air quality in the installations and in the villages is meeting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Committee observed huge flames from flare stack at Tatipaka GCS. Units have not maintained proper records on the volume of the gas handled in the flare stack. It was reported that unit has already proposed to install new flare stack at Tatipaka and Kesanapalli. Unit may submit time bound action plan for replacement of flare stacks.
ix. The unit has obtained consent from APPCB during 2015 and subsequently the consent is renewed (online consent monitoring and management system) but however post 2015 due to ageing of wells the quantity of produce water is increasing and there by the quantity of effluent generated is also increased. The actual quantity of effluent generated is higher than the quantities stipulated in the CFO. All the stacks installed in the installations are not covered under the purview of the Consent order. For instance stack installed at TEG unit is not included in the consent order. M/s ONGC shall ensure that every installation obtains Consent For Operation from APPCB under the Water Act, 1974 and Air Act, 1981 for the actual quantity of products manufactured, actual quantity of wastewater received and include all the stacks installed in the unit.
x. Committee observed that M/s ONGC are utilizing the CSR funds for environmental & social development activities and other essential activities identified by the District Magistrate/ Corporate Head office/ Public representatives/ registered NGO's.
xi. The units shall pay Environmental compensation to CPCB as follows:
Name of the EC amount assessed EC amount assessed Total EC amount in installation during first visit of during second visit INR to be paid to the committee CPCB Tatipaka GCS Rs. 7,28,62,500/- Rs. 1,13,70,000/- Rs. 8,42,32,500/- Kesanapalli GGS Rs. 4,11,00,000/- Rs.2,27,40,000/- Rs.6,38,40,000/- Odalarevu GCS Rs. 5,68,50,000/- Rs. 1,13,70,000/- Rs.6,82,20,000/- Gopavaram GGS - Rs. 1,13,70,000/- Rs. 1,13,70,000/- Total Environmental Compensation to be paid by M/s ONGC to CPCB 22,76,62,500/-Page 133 of 155
is Rs. Twenty Two crores Seventy Six lacs Sixty Two Thousand and Five hundred only xii. The units shall implement the corrective actions, shall submit time bound action plan for disposal of sludge. Unit shall ensure that hazardous waste are disposed within 90 days from date of generation as per the conditions stipulated in the Hazardous Waste Authorization. Unit shall submit time bound action plan for removal of oily sludge deposited in the soil at Gopavaram, Kesanapalli and at Tatipaka. APPCB shall monitor that the oily sludge is disposed as per action plan."
27. The 3rd Respondent filed additional affidavit regarding the pendency of the application for Consent to Operate and subsequently, it was mentioned in the affidavit that the application was rejected by the Pollution Control Board vide their Proceedings dated 09.03.2021, as earlier they have mentioned that the application was pending.
28. As directed by this Tribunal, by Order dated 19.01.2022, the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board also filed a status of compliance almost reiterating the compliance report submitted by the Joint Committee and gave their conclusions and recommendations as follows:-
"III. Conclusions and Recommendations Hon'ble NGT vide order dated 19.01.2022 directed the APPCB to inspect the units and verify the compliance status observed that, there are improvements with respect to observations of joint committee. But, the facilities are yet to achieve compliance and few serious & significant violations were observed by the APPCB.
i. Tatipaka GGS has not taken proper measures for collection, storage and disposal of oily sludge. Currently, Oily sludge is being stored in open sludge pit which is completely filled up to the brim. Lot of spillages observed all around the sludge pit. As the sludge pit completely filled up to the brim, there is every possible of over flow and contamination of rain water during rainy season. The facility shall obtain amendment of CFO & HWA order from APPCB for increase in effluent generation, inclusion of hazardous oil sludge generation, storage, treatment and disposal. Effluent oily sludge stored in the old ETP shall be treated and old ETP shall be dismantled. Process area, ETP area, Oil sludge storage area, shall be isolated in order to prevent contamination of storm water during rainy season. The facility shall make arrangements for collection and treatment of first flush rain.
ii. Board issued consent to Kesanapalli GGS to discharge 600 KLD of treated water into ED wells. The facility shall obtain amended CFO & HWA order from APPCB for increase in effluent generation, inclusion of hazardous oil sludge generation, storage, treatment and disposal. The facility shall increase the height of the flare stack for better dispersion of flue gases. The facility shall obtain CRZ and CFE from the APPCB for newly laying marine disposal pipeline.
iii. Gopavaram GGS: Effluent generation is around 1800 KLD and ETP capacity 600 KLD of effluent. Hence untreated effluent is discharged outside the unit premises. Water present in unlined lagoon contained COD of 528 mg/l indicating the presence crude oil/ effluent in the sample. The facility shall enhance the effluent treatment capacity as per effluent generation. The facility shall obtain amended CFO & HWA order from APPCB for increase in effluent generation, inclusion of hazardous oil sludge generation, storage, treatment and disposal. Process area, ETP area, Oil sludge storage area, shall be isolated in order to prevent contamination of storm water during rainy season.
iv. As per Hazardous Waste Management & Handling Rules, 2016, hazardous waste shall not be stored not more than 90 days. All the units shall implement the corrective actions, shall submit time bound action plan for disposal of sludge.Page 134 of 155
v. APPCB reviewed the non-compliance of these industries in the External Advisory Committee (Task Force) meeting held on 07.09.2021 and after detailed discussion, the committee recommended to communicate NGT committee findings to the ONGC to submit specific time bound action plan to the Board within a month time and the issue will be examined upon receipt of the action plan from ONGC for each facility. Accordingly, the APPCB vide letter dated 26.09.2021, directed these facilities to submit specific time bound action plan to the Board within a month time, enclosing the NGT committee findings. The facilities have not submitted specific time bound action plan till date. Detailed reports are being sent to Board Office, APPCB for review of non compliance of the facilities with respect to consent conditions, NGT committee observations and Board's directions."
29. The applicant filed their objections to the status report submitted by the Pollution Control Board and also by ONGC and GAIL. ONGC also filed objections to the Joint Committee report dated 23.03.2022 in the form of reply which reads as follows:-
Page 135 of 155 2 Page 136 of 155 3 Page 137 of 155 4 Page 138 of 155 5 Page 139 of 155 6 Page 140 of 155 7 Page 141 of 155 8 Page 142 of 155 9 Page 143 of 15530. The ONGC also filed reply to the compliance report submitted by the Pollution Control Board e-filed on 27.05.2022 more or less reiterating the reply submitted to the Joint Committee report extracted above. So, we are not re-extracting the same again.
31. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and official respondents.
32. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant argued that the report of the Joint Committee will go to show that there are lot of non-compliances and subsequent compliance report submitted by the State Pollution Control Board and the Joint Committee also will go to show that there are still non-compliances on the side of Respondent Nos.3 & 4. The compensation awarded is also not adequate and the compensation for loss sustained by the agriculturists has to be considered. Further, the compensation (if any) recovered may be directed to be utilized for restoration of damage caused in that area. They may also be directed to Page 144 of 155 spend the CSR Fund for the beneficial enjoyment of the project affected area.
33. Mr. R. Sankaranarayanan, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the 3rd Respondent argued that they have complied with the conditions and they are taking all steps to mitigate the possible pollution that is likely to be caused on account of their operation. None of the incident had occurred due to any wilful negligence and whenever incidents were reported, they hadrectified the same and avoiding possible disaster being happening in that area. They were also fulfilling the conditions of the Environmental Clearance (EC) and other clearance granted and there was no violation committed by them. The compensation awarded is excessive and they are spending huge amount from the CSR Fund for beneficial enjoyment of the project affected area in consultation with the District Collector of the respective districts.
34. Mr. P.V.S. Giridhar along with Mr.Muraleedaran, the learned counsel appearing for the GAIL argued that there was no non-compliances mentioned against the GAIL and they are only distributing the gas supplied by ONGC and there was no incident occurred on account of their latches in that area. They are also utilizing their CSR Fund for all necessary purpose. Any directions issued by the Pollution Control Board or other authorities were being complied with by them. According to the learned counsel, they are unnecessary party to the proceedings.
35. Mrs. Madhuri Donti Reddy, the learned counsel appearing for the State Pollution Control Board argued that they are periodically monitoring the activities of Respondent Nos.3 & 4 and whenever deficiency has been observed, the Andhra Pradesh State Pollution Control Board have issued necessary directions and have taken appropriate action.
36. The learned counsel appearing for the MoEF&CC, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and the CPCB argued that they are only policy makers and it is for the regulators to monitor the implementation of the environmental laws and if there is any violation of conditions found, it is Page 145 of 155 for them to take appropriate action.
37. We have considered the pleadings, reports filed by the Joint Committee and other official respondents, objections filed by the parties, written submissions submitted by the parties and also perused the documents available on record.
38. The points that arose for consideration are:-
(i) Whether the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 have committed any violation of conditions of Environmental Clearance (EC) and other permissions granted?
(ii) Whether there was any damage caused to the environment on account of the violations committed by Respondent Nos.3 & 4?
(iii) What is the nature of direction to be given to protect environment applying the „Precautionary Principle‟ to be carried out by Respondent Nos.3 & 4?
(iv) Whether the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 are liable to pay environmental compensation for the violations committed by them and if so, what is the quantum of compensation payable?
(v) Relief and costs.
POINTS:
39. Grievance in this application is regarding the pollution caused on account of the activities of Respondent Nos.3 & 4 mainly against the 3rd respondent on account of whose operation certain incidents of leakage happened causing damage to the environment.
40. It is alleged in the application that the 4th respondent also committed some violation and sought certain reliefs against them as well. They further alleged in the application that Respondent Nos.3 & 4 are not utilizing their CSR Fund in an effective manner and directions will have Page 146 of 155 to be given to implement the same for the benefit of the project affected area. They have further contended that the amount of compensation for land acquired for the purpose has not been paid to the project affected people.
41. Those allegations were denied by Respondent Nos.3 & 4 and according to them, they were strictly complying with the norms and all pollution control mechanism have been provided and they have not committed any violation and whenever gas leak incidents were brought to their notice, immediate steps were taken by them to rectify the same and thereby,no major environmental degradation has been caused as alleged in the application.
42. The fact that there were certain incidents occurred in respect of breach of pipes carrying the natural gas and crude oil operated by the 3rd respondent and certain actions have been taken and a committee was appointed by the Hon'ble High Court in one of the matter and certain studies were directed to be conducted and on the basis of the recommendations, the 3rd respondent was directed to carry out the recommendations as well etc. are not in dispute. It was also seen from the newspaper that the District Collector in that area also conducted inspections after appointing certain committees of the officials and they had also given certain directions to the 3rd respondent to carry out to avoid such incidents in future.
43. It is also seen from the allegations made in the application that there were certain other cases registered by this Tribunal and certain directions were issued in respect of GAIL as well as ONGC in certain areas. The fact that there are certain breaches happening and there are certain latches on the part of the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 in carrying out the operation and whenever it was brought to their notice, authorities were issuing directions to them to rectify those aspects etc. are in a way admitted and established by the documents produced.So, it cannot be said that there was no incident occurred and there was no violation committed by Respondent Nos.3 & 4 as such.
Page 147 of 15544. In order to ascertain the sufficiency of safety measures provided and genuineness of the allegations made in the application, this Tribunal appointed a Joint Committee to go into the question and the Joint Committee has filed a detailed report which was extracted in the earlier paragraph.
45. It was mentioned in the report that in Original Application No.91 of 2020 similar incidents were noticed and during inspection, the committee observed that due to heavy rain and water logging, effluent was getting mixed with storm water in K.G. Basin and from the main drain, it may ultimately join the sea. It was also noticed that the tilted plate interceptor and slope oil tank were not working properly. Certain non-compliances were noticed in Para 4.a.1 of the Joint Committee report dated 09.04.2021. Further, certain non-compliances were noticed for each and every unit and that was subsequently mentioned in the report stated above and they also calculated the compensation to the tune of Rs.7,28,62,500/- (Rupees Seven Crore Twenty Eight Lakhs Sixty Two Thousand and Five Hundred only) in respect of Tatipaka G.S. and mini refinery area operated by the 3rd Respondent. Certain non-compliance were noticed in respect of Kesanapalli GGS and an amount of Rs.4,11,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crore and Eleven Lakhs only) was assessed as compensation in respect of the same. Further, certain non-compliances were noticed in 3rd respondent onshore terminal which was extracted in Para 4.c.1 and in respect of non- compliance of GAIL terminal, it was extracted in Para 4.c.2 of the same report. The Environmental Compensation of Rs.5,68,50,000/- (Rupees Five Crore Sixty Eight Lakh and Fifty Thousand only) was imposed for running the unit without obtaining Consent to Operate for certain period and recommendations were also made by the Joint Committee to be carried out by the ONGC as well as GAIL.
46. The GAIL as well as ONGC has filed their objections to the Joint Committee Report and also status of compliance of the directions issued and subsequent reports were also filed by the Joint Committee as directed by this Tribunal which were extracted in the earlier paragraph.
Page 148 of 15547. The GAIL as well as ONGC also produced the status of the implementation of the CSR Fund within their area of operation. There were certain non-compliances noticed in the case of ONGC by the committee and revisited on the question of compensation and made some modification in the subsequent report filed viz., Report dated 23.03.2022. It was also seen from the report that CRZ Clearance was not obtained in respect of certain area and after considering all the non-compliances in respect of ONGC, they have assessed a total compensation of Rs.22,76,62,500/- (Rupees Twenty Two Crore Seventy Six Lakh Sixty Two Thousand and Five Hundred only) as per the report dated 23.03.2022.
48. The ONGC also filed written submissions, wherein it was mentioned that they have complied with the conditions and they have spent huge amount as CSR Fund for development of that area to the tune of Rs.110 Crore (Rupees One Hundred and Ten Crore only) for the financial year 2016 to 2021.
49. The State Pollution Control Board also filed a report of non-compliance by ONGC which is almost in tune with the report submitted by the Joint Committee.It is seen from the report submitted by the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board that already certain directions have been issued by the Pollution Control Board for non-compliances noticed and also for non-implementation of the recommendations made by the Joint Committee. As regards the 4th Respondent/GAIL is concerned, there was not much violation noticed and it is also seen from the subsequent report that GAIL has complied with the recommendations made. But as regards the 3rd respondent/ONGC is concerned, certain recommendations were not fully complied with and even they are operating the unit without obtaining Consent to Operate and the application submitted by the ONGC for renewal of consent was rejected by the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board. The 3rd Respondent is not fully complying unit and there are lot of non-compliances noted and certain recommendations were made for the purpose of rectifying the recurring incidents of oil/gas leak and certain directions were still not complied with and certain directions were partially complied with. So under such circumstances, it Page 149 of 155 cannot be said that the ONGC is fully compliant unit and they are not liable to pay any compensation as contended by the learned Additional Solicitor General of India.
50. It is needless to say that the Government organizations are expected to be more compliant units and they should be a model for other private sectors. When such latches were found on private sector, the Tribunal will be taking action against them on the basis of the formula evolved by the Central Pollution Control Board for assessing compensation for the violations committed and if there is any further damage caused that also will be taken note of for the purpose of assessing compensation apart from directing them to take steps to remedy the same for restoring the damage caused to the environment. As regards the 4th Respondent/GAIL is concerned, we don't think that there is any necessity to impose any compensation and the Joint Committee also did not find reason for imposing compensation on GAIL, as the violations noted were minor in nature and those things were rectified by them as well. So, under such circumstances, we accept the Joint Committee report with regard to GAIL and we direct the GAIL to strictly comply with the norms in carrying out their operation and strictly comply with the recommendations made by the Joint Committee and the State Pollution Control Board in the consent granted and they must also operate the unit strictly in compliance with the conditions imposed in the consent or other permissions granted. As regards ONGC is concerned, still there are certain non-compliance noticed and renewal of Consent to Operate applied for by ONGC for their unit was rejected by the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board. Further, the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board also issued notices to the 3rd respondent for further non-compliances noticed. So under such circumstances, we don't find any reason to reduce the compensation assessed by the Joint Committee in the subsequent report dated 23.03.2022 which the 3rd Respondent is liable to pay to the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board, failing which, the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board is directed to take steps to recover the amount and utilize the amount after preparing a remediation plan for the purpose of protecting the project affected area in consultation with the District Page 150 of 155 Collector of the concerned district and that amount must be spent in a scientific manner which will be helpful for the purpose of benefiting the project affected area.
51. The State Pollution Control Board is also directed to take appropriate action against ONGC for the violations committed apart from recovery of Environmental Compensation and other actions that are provided under the respective statutes, in accordance with law.
52. We are not going into the question as to whether the compensation for acquisition of land for the project of ONGC has been paid to the project affected people etc., as it is not falling within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal under Section 14 & 15 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
53. In view of the above, we feel that the application can be disposed of with the following directions:-
a. We accept the reports submitted by the Joint Committee on two occasions, one filed on the basis of the directions issued by this Tribunal while admitting the matter and other filed after considering the objections filed by the parties.
b. We reject the contention of the 3rd respondent that they are fully compliant unit and they are not liable to pay any compensation for the violations committed.
c. We direct the 3rd respondent/ONGC to pay the Environmental Compensation of Rs.22,76,62,500/- (Rupees Twenty Two Crore Seventy Six Lakh Sixty Two Thousand and Five Hundred only) assessed by the Joint Committee as per their second report dated 23.03.2022 to the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board within a period of 6 (Six) months, failing which, the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board is directed to take steps to recover the amount from the 3rdrespondent in accordance with law.
d. The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board is also directed to take further action (if any) required against the 3rd respondent for non- compliance of the conditions or operating the unit against environmental laws after following the due process of law and if Page 151 of 155 further violations are noticed, they are at liberty to impose further Environmental Compensation apart from initiating further action as provided under the respective statutes in accordance with law. e. The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board is also directed to monitor the operation of Respondent Nos.3 & 4 periodically and if there is any violation noticed, then they are directed to take appropriate action against them, including imposition of environmental compensation apart from taking further coercive action as provided under the respective statutes in accordance with law. f. The 4th Respondent/GAIL is directed to comply with the recommendations made by the Joint Committee and also directed to carry out the recommendations made and operate their unit strictly complying with the conditions imposed in the consent and other clearances granted.
g. Both the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 are directed to carry out the safety measures which they are expected to carry out as per the guidelines issued by the MoEF&CC and the Ministry of Oil and Natural Gas from time to time so as to avoid any incidents of leakage in future in that area.
h. Respondent Nos.3 & 4 are also directed to strictly comply with the utilization of CSR Fund which they are expected to spend in the project affected area and utilization of the amount by Respondent Nos.3 & 4 has to be monitored by the District Collector of the concerned district. i. The MoEF&CC is directed to monitor the compliance of the conditions of Environmental Clearance (EC), including utilization of CSR Fund, if any imposed and if there is any violation found, they are directed to take appropriate action against the violating unit in accordance with law.
j. On recovery of the compensation amount from the 3rd respondent, the State Pollution Control Board in coordination with the District Collector of the concerned district, is directed to prepare an action plan for providing remedial measures, if any, required in the project affected area and utilize the amount for carrying out that action plan in a scientific manner.
k. The right of the applicant to approach this Tribunal in future for any Page 152 of 155 violations or pollution caused on account of the operation of Respondent Nos.3 & 4 in that area, is left open and the other reliefs claimed by the applicant in the application are rejected.
54. The points are answered accordingly.
55. In the result, the Original Application is allowed in part and disposed of with the following directions:
(i) We accept the reports submitted by the Joint Committee on two occasions, one filed on the basis of the directions issued by this Tribunal while admitting the matter and other filed after considering the objections filed by the parties.
(ii) We reject the contention of the 3rd respondent that they are fully compliant unit and they are not liable to pay any compensation for the violations committed.
(iii) We direct the 3rd respondent/ONGC to pay the Environmental Compensation of Rs.22,76,62,500/- (Rupees Twenty Two Crore Seventy Six Lakh Sixty Two Thousand and Five Hundred only) assessed by the Joint Committee as per their second report dated 23.03.2022 to the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board within a period of 6 (Six) months, failing which, the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board is directed to take steps to recover the amount from the 3rdrespondent in accordance with law.
(iv) The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board is also directed to take further action (if any) required against the 3rd respondent for non-compliance of the conditions or operating the unit against environmental laws after following the due process of law and if further violations are noticed, they are at liberty to impose further Environmental Compensation apart from initiating further action as provided under the respective statutes in accordance with law.Page 153 of 155
(v) The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board is also directed to monitor the operation of Respondent Nos.3 & 4 periodically and if there is any violation noticed, then they are directed to take appropriate action against them, including imposition of environmental compensation apart from taking further coercive action as provided under the respective statutes in accordance with law.
(vi) The 4th Respondent/GAIL is directed to comply with the recommendations made by the Joint Committee and also directed to carry out the recommendations made and operate their unit strictly complying with the conditions imposed in the consent and other clearances granted.
(vii) Both the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 are directed to carry out the safety measures which they are expected to carry out as per the guidelines issued by the MoEF&CC and the Ministry of Oil and Natural Gas from time to time so as to avoid any incidents of leakage in future in that area.
(viii) Respondent Nos.3 & 4 are also directed to strictly comply with the utilization of CSR Fund which they are expected to spend in the project affected area and utilization of the amount by Respondent Nos.3 & 4 has to be monitored by the District Collector of the concerned district.
(ix) The MoEF&CC is directed to monitor the compliance of the conditions of Environmental Clearance (EC), including utilization of CSR Fund, if any imposed and if there is any violation found, they are directed to take appropriate action against the violating unit in accordance with law.
(x) On recovery of the compensation amount from the 3rd respondent, the State Pollution Control Board in coordination with the District Collector of the concerned district, is directed to prepare an action plan for providing remedial measures, if any, required in the project affected area and utilize the amount for carrying out that action plan in a scientific manner.Page 154 of 155
(xi) The right of the applicant to approach this Tribunal in future for any violations or pollution caused on account of the operation of Respondent Nos.3 & 4 in that area, is left open and the other reliefs claimed by the applicant in the application are rejected.
(xii) Considering the circumstances, parties are directed to bear their respective costs in the application.
(xiii) The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the MoEF&CC both New Delhi and Regional Office at Vijayawada, Ministry of Oil and Natural Gas, Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board, District Collector of East Godavari District and West Godavari District, ONGC and GAIL for their information and compliance of directions.
56. With the above observations and directions, this Original Application is disposed of.
Sd/-
Justice K. Ramakrishnan, J.M. Sd/-
Shri. Saibal Dasgupta, E.M. O.A. No.175/2020 (SZ), 02nd August 2022. Mn.
Page 155 of 155