POLICE FIRING ON ANTI-EAST COAST THERMAL POWER PROJECT AGITATORS OPDR F.F.C. REPORT

POLICE FIRING ON ANTI-EAST COAST THERMAL POWER PROJECT AGITATORS OPDR F.F.C. REPORT

Srikakulam, 6^th Mar, 2011 : On 28-02-2011, at Vadditandra Village in the north coastal part of Srikakulam district, Andhra Pradesh, police opened fire on the agitators fighting against the East Coast Thermal Power Project. To enquiry on the incident, OPDR appointed a fact finding committee. On 5^th and 6^th March, 2011, the committee visited Vadditandra, Kakarapalli, Telugupenta, H.N.Peta, Nagiripenta, Antlavaram, Vaddivada, Akasa Lakkavaram, Seeravanipeta etc. villages and enquired the people of these villages, members of movement committee, the tahsildar of Santhabommali Mandal, the revenue divisional officer of Tekkali, Police officials, the family members of the deceased, the injured people and found certain facts :

1) Supreme Court’s judgment pronounced that “All tanks, ponds, canals, rivers, sea coast etc., are the sole property of the people. Government, on behalf of the people, is a trustee only to protect these natural resources. These are all for the public utility without any hindrances. State Government should not privatize any one of the above public property. As per the Electricity Act 2003, “establishing thermal power projects in cultivating agricultural lands” is prohibited. It is known that wet lands and fertile lands that yield two crops a year are shown as dry lands on record by the Govt. officials and the company and acquired permission to the Bhavanapadu Thermal Power Plant from the Central Government.

2) The claim of the Company that the thermal power project was built in 1240 acres, which was totally a Govt. land is absolutely false. In fact the Company occupied 3333 acres and brought into vogue that it was bought from APIIC.

3) Treating people, agitating peacefully since 200 days, as criminals, and the police from the lowest cadre to the highest official in chorus stating that ‘firing was opened only for self protection’ is travesty of truth. The police killed and the police themselves judge the act as for self protection. Then what for the courts and laws? The claim of the police that only rubber bullets were used is anotherfalsehood. The spinal injury of Bathini Barkaiah occurred only by iron bullets.

4) Why police took thumb impressions on blank papers from the family members of the deceased, Jeeru Nageswara Rao and Seerapu Yerraiah ?

2

It is clear that the police used both rubber and iron bullets. Two persons who were injured by iron bullets died, where as the remaining are tossing between life and death. Those who were hit by rubber bullets were left with serious injuries. The smoke bombs used by the police were out dated by 2002 itself. People with in 100 mts. were injured due to smoke bombs.

Law says that the permission of the District’s Highest Executive Magistrate is required by the police to take such action against the agitating masses.

The police, even with the least discretion for children, women and the old, lathi charged and opened fire as if they were fighting with the enemy, burnt houses and fodder (dry gross).Jeeru Nageswara Rao received seven bullet injuries in genital region where as Yerraiah had injuries on hand, and on the left lower chest, killing them and the spinal injuries of Barikaiah show clearly that firing was opened with an intention to kill.

5) The tampara tank extended over 3000 acres approximately is a source of livelihood to the people. 540 fishing families live depending on this tank. Since 1945, they are paying

lease to the Government. Thousands of families earn their food by selling the gross (Tunga – used for the roofs of thatched houses) grown in the waters of the tank. 20000 acres of land is irrigated under this tank directly or indirectly, apart from fulfilling the drinking water requirement.

6) In spite of the Govt’s. order to pay compensation not only to those who lost their cultivating lands, but also to those that lost their livelihood, none was paid compensation. Neither the Thermal Project owners, nor the Government have concern in this regard.

People loosing their livelihood, cultivating lands and shelter, all united and agitating peacefully against the Thermal Power Project, fighting for their ‘Right to Live’ is absolutely justified and constitutional.

7) 70% of power in the country is generated through thermal projects. Because of the pollution caused thermal power Projects should not be established in future.

3

In Andhra Pradesh10000 M.W. power is obtained from various resources, deficit is just 3000 M.W. But, the Govt. gave permission to 35 power plants, with a projected generation of 40000 M.W. Though the Govt. is not disclosing the purpose of this disproportionately high generation of power, it is known that the power will be utilized

in the petroleum and petro-chemical industries, to be established in the coastal area. Both are highly polluting industries. Thermal power projects in the state burn 1 lakh tons of coal per day, resulting in pollution of water, soil and air. If 4 C. increase of temperature is added to the existing atmospheric temperature, the Himalayan snow melts resulting in the increase of water levels in the sea up to 6 feet, submerging all the coastal regions permanently leading to the death of millions of people. The Govt. has dedicated itself to transform the state into an ocean of pollution. The capitalist system, dependent on foreign countries is being implemented by the Govt. subsequently lead to such anti-people practices.

In our country 13000 M.W. power only is generated through wind mills- 4900 M.W. in Tamil Nadu, 2900 M.W. in Maharashtra, 1500 M.W. in Karnataka where as our state is generating a meagre 136 M.W. power through wind mills. We need to concentrate on wind power (Wind Power in China 25000 M.W, America 36000 M.W., Germany 25000 M.W) It is highly necessary to think off alternative power generating resources like tydal and solar energy.

We request all the democratic forces to come on to a single platform, leaving all the district territorial and regional differences, to fight against the disastrous industrialization, which ultimately converts the state, an ocean of pollution.

Demands :-

1) Rs.20.00 lakhs to the deceased and Rs.10.00 lakhs to the injured must be paid to the families immediately.

2) The criminal cases imposed on 315 people of various villages must be withdrawn unconditionally and those imprisoned must be released immediately.

3) Criminal cases must be filed on the police officers, that are causative to the death of Jeeru Nageswara Rao and Seerapu Yerraiah and be prosecuted under IPC Section 302.

4

4) The environment permission issued to east coast thermal power plant must be cancelled. The pre-existing tank must be restored.

5) A criminal case must be filed against the revenue officials and Company owners, for misleading the Central Environment Department with their false report stating cultivating lands as dry lands and be prosecuted.

6) Names of the share holders, board of directors, details of shares they hold and how could they get these shares etc, must be revealed immediately.

7) New houses must be constructed and given to the people of Vadditandra village that lost their houses. People who lost household utensils, cloths, food grains etc. must be given adequate compensation and new ration cards must be issued to those whose houses were burnt.

F.F.C. Members :-

1) Ch.Sudhakara Rao, State President, OPDR.

2) V.Narayana Reddy, OPDR Organizing Secretary &

Advocate, Hyderabad.

3) Chayaraj, Poet, Writer, Janasahithi.

People's groups stage dharna

People's groups stage dharna VISAKHAPATNAM: People's organisations and political parties lashes out at government for allowing the East Coast Energy Private Limited to start construction of a super critical thermal power plant on wetlands at Kakarapalli in Srikakulam district and demanded that all permissions given to the plant withdrawn immediately, at a dharna organised in front of the Collectorate here on Monday. Two persons died and several were injured in the police action on the protestors on February 28 and earlier, when the villagers tried to stop construction of the plant. Representatives of the organisations and parties said since the beginning the officials did not give the correct information on the nature of the land, the environmental damage the plant would cause and only gave ‘false reports'. They said that they had been telling the government that local people would be uprooted from their lands and lose their lands and fishing in the sea would not be possible but the government did not bother and insisted that the plant should come up. State secretary of Human Rights Forum V.S. Krishna said most of the pollution-making units received sanction during the term of present Union Minster for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh while CPI district secretary J.V. Satyanarayana Murthy questioned when the power plant had no permits how the officials of Srikakulam allowed construction to commence. Probe demanded The dharna participants also demanded the government to withdraw all the cases filed against the villagers, order a judicial inquiry into the police firing on Feb. 25 and 28 and take over the land allotted to ECEPL and ensure that the wetlands are protected. Others who have participated in the dharna were Chalasani Prasad (Virasam), M. Lakshmi (POW), M. Nandana (fisheremen union), M. Venkateswarlu (IFTU), B. Ganga Rao (CPI(M)), M. Pydiraju (CPI), G. Jayanth (APCLC), K. Venkata Ramana (Jai Bheem Cultural Association), J.V. Ratnam (NAPM), Teddu Sankar (fishermen youth association), P.V. Ramana (anti-privatisation struggle committee), etc. © Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu

FBV for high-level probe into allotment of coastline to single family

Special Correspondent FBV for high-level probe into allotment of coastline to single family ‘State has openly flouted law which makes competitive bidding mandatory' PM asked to form an inter-disciplinary team to look into the matter ‘AP has a coastline of 975 km, out of which 346 km is given to one family' VISAKHAPATNAM: Expressing its concern over allotment of large stretch of coastline for various projects in Andhra Pradesh to a single family, the Forum for Better Visakha (FBV) has sought a high-level probe into deals entered during past five to six years. In a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, FBV convener and former IAS officer E.A.S. Sarma said the case in point was the way some political leaders had handed over large stretches of the AP coastline to a single family at a throwaway price and with an “exclusive” right over it. The same family had taken control of the other two scarce national resources, namely, land and minerals, in a fairly significant measure. All this had happened with the State Government openly contravening its own law, the AP Infrastructure Development Enabling Act, 2001 (Act No. 36 of 2001) that made it mandatory for the State to go through the competitive bidding procedure for allotting resources for all mega projects, he stated. Mr. Sarma asked the Prime Minister to constitute an inter-disciplinary team of investigating agencies including CBI, Enforcement Directorate, CBDT, RAW and others to trace the funds of the family in question to ascertain its domestic and external investments, especially its links to the tax havens abroad in Mauritius, Cayman Islands, Switzerland, Lichtenstein and so on. AP has a coastline of 975 km, out of which 346 km has been handed over to a single family, operating with different names from three different locations. These three ports are Krishnapatnam, Vanpic and Machlipatnam, all promoted by a single family. Public resource Mr. Sarma, who served as Union Power Secretary, said the allotments had been done in gross defiance of the Directive Principle enshrined in sub-clauses (b) and (c) of Article 39 of the Constitution. He pointed out that the coastline was in the nature of a public resource and the government could at best be a trustee for managing the same on behalf of the people. “Alienation of such a public resource, I am afraid, goes counter to the Doctrine of Public Trust, a judicial principle well established by the courts in India and elsewhere.In the Indian conditions, the maximum requirement of a typical port is perhaps 25 to 30 kilometres.” The letter said “Visakhapatnam, a major port in operation since 1930, has a coastline of hardly 15 km. In AP, in the name of developing “non-major” private ports, the political leaders have grabbed most of the coastline and allotted the lion's share of it to one family. Smaller but fairly sizeable stretches have similarly been allotted to the other favoured private parties on a nomination basis.”

A. Balraj, formerly EAC chairman who cleared Kakarapalli has joined the Board of Athena Demwe, the promoters of which company-EAS Sarma

A. Balraj, formerly EAC chairman who cleared Kakarapalli has joined the Board of Athena Demwe, the promoters of which company are as follows.

Athena Energy Ventures Private Limited
Athena Demwe Power Limited (ADPL) is promoted by Athena Energy Ventures Private Limited (AEVPL), which in turn is a Joint Venture of AIP Power Pvt. Ltd. (AIP Power) formally Athena Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd (AIPL), M/s. PTC India Limited and M/s. Infrastructure Development Finance Company Limited.

PTC India Limited (PTC) is a pioneer in establishing power markets in India and continues to be the electricity trader with largest volume share in India’s evolving power markets. PTC has also been mandated by the Government of India to handle a significant part of electricity trade with neighbouring countries like Bhutan and Nepal. With initiatives in associated areas like financial services, mining and energy exchange, PTC has a balance sheet size of nearly Rs. 1550 Crores as at the end of Financial Year 2008-09.

Infrastructure Development Finance Company (IDFC) is a specialist financial intermediary for infrastructure. IDFC was created in 1997 at the initiative of Government of India and structured as a public-private partnership (PPP) entity. IDFC has reached a balance sheet size of nearly Rs.30,000 Crores as at the end of Financial Year 2008-09. Energy is a focus area for IDFC, with nearly 36% of its outstanding disbursements at the end of Financial Year 2008-09 to energy sector projects.

AIP Power Pvt Ltd is a power and energy sector focused project development enterprise. Incubation of new business and building organizations with lasting value is AIP Power’s mantra. AIP Power and Athena Projects Pvt. Ltd. (APPL) affiliates collectively have interest in diverse areas like power, real estate and infrastructure. AIP Poweris promoted by a group of professionals and entrepreneurs who are all formidable names in their respective fields, besides being high networth individuals. Some of the key promoters of AIP Power are Mr. M. S. Ramakrishna (founder Director of Karvy Financial Services), Mr. M. S. P. Rao (formerly with Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilisers and Reliance Industries), Dr. S. Narayan (former Secretary to Government of India) and Mr. N. Prasad (entrepreneur; pharmaceuticals industry).

East Coast promoters:

PROMOTERS

The Principal Promoters/ Sponsors of East Coast Energy Private Limited (ECEPL) are Asian Infrastructure Pte Ltd (AIL), Athena Energy Ventures Pvt. Ltd (AEVPL) and Athena Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd (AIPL). The sharing of the equity between these investment vehicles is in the ratio of; AIL 51%, AEVPL 26% & AIPL 23%. Brief profiles of these investment vehicles are furnished below: ASIAN INFRASTRUCTURE PTE LTD (AIL) Singapore a holding company with investments in the Infrastructure Projects in the emerging markets. It has invested in ~ 4000 MW power generation assets in India. ATHENA ENERGY VENTURES PVT LTD (AEVPL) was incorporated by Athena Projects Private Limited, PTC India Limited and Infrastructure Development Finance Company (IDFC). ATHENA INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD (AIPL) focuses on developing power projects (Thermal and Hydro projects) in India. The company has highly experienced management team and a network of ind

Dharna seeking cancellation of eco nod to ECEPL today

http://www.hindu.com/2011/03/07/stories/2011030752360500.htm

Special Correspondent Dharna seeking cancellation of eco nod to ECEPL today Several rights organisations, political parties to participate Officials withhold vital ecological information, alleges Human Rights Forum Declaration of Naupada wetland system as a conservation reserve sought VISAKHAPATNAM: Several rights organisations and political parties will stage a protest dharna at Collectorate here on Monday at 10 a.m. demanding cancellation of the environmental clearance accorded to East Coast Energy Pvt Ltd (ECEPL) for constructing a thermal plant in Kakarapalli wetland in Srikakulam district. The dharna will also press for dropping cases foisted on local people in the wake of incidents witnessed on February 25 and 28. State general secretary of Human Rights Forum (HRF) alleged that right from the beginning, both State officials as well as the project proponents withheld vital ecological information , falsified the ecological significance of the wetland, concealed sensitive information, fabricated data and destroyed evidence. “They continue to treat environmental regulations with contempt. We have been saying all along that the project location conflicts with both livelihood and conservation objectives. However, the government insisted on facilitating the project on this precious wetland, thereby leading to tragic loss of two lives in police firing on February 28. Following the killings, the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has only temporarily suspended ECEPL's construction and has called for a meeting of its Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) on March 7 to review the clearance regime for the project,” he stated. HRF demand HRF demanded scrapping of all clearances given to the ECEPL and action against all officials who colluded with the project proponent. The entire land handed over to the ECEPL must be resumed by the government and the Naupada wetland system must be declared a conservation reserve. © Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu

One private party has cornered most of Andhra Pradesh coastline- Demand for a comprehensive investigation-EAS Sharma

E.A.S.Sarma Visakhapatnam

14-40-4/1 Gokhale Road March 6, 2011

Maharanipeta

Visakhapatnam 530002

Tel. Nos. 0891-6619858/ 9866021646

To

Dr. Manmohan Singh

Prime Minister

Dear Dr. Manmohan Singh,

Subject:- One private party has cornered most of Andhra Pradesh coastline- Demand for a comprehensive investigation

I have come across a highly disturbing report on the above subject in one of the local language news papers today. I have enclosed a copy of the same for your ready reference. Someone could translate it into English for your perusal.

During the last five to six years, private agencies have scrambled to get command over three national resources, land, minerals and access to the sea through the coastline. Unethical politicians and civil servants have colluded with them to make it possible.

The case in point is the way some political leaders have handed over large stretches of the AP coastline to a single family at a throwaway price and with an “exclusive” right over it. The same family has taken control of the other two scarce national resources, namely, land and minerals, in a fairly significant measure. All this has happened with the State government openly contravening its own law, the AP Infrastructure Development Enabling Act, 2001 (Act No. 36 of 2001) that made it mandatory for the State government to go through the competitive bidding procedure for allotting resources for all mega projects.

This is a case of gross defiance of the Directive Principles enshrined in sub-clauses (b) and (c) of Article 39 the Constitution that read as follows.

“The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing

(b) that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good;

(c) that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment”

The coastline is in the nature of a public resource and the government can at best be a trustee for managing the same on behalf of the people. Alienation of such a public resource, I am afraid, goes counter to the Doctrine of Public Trust, a judical principle well established by the courts in India and elsewhere.

In the Indian conditions, the maximum requirement of a typical port is perhaps 25 to 30 kilometres. Visakhapatnam, a major port in operation since 1930, has a coastline of hardly 15 km. In Andhra Pradesh, in the name of developing “non-major” private ports, the political leaders have grabbed most of the coastline and allotted the lion’s share of it to one family. Smaller but fairly sizeable stretches have similarly been allotted to the other favoured private parties on a nomination basis.

AP has a coastline of 975 km, out of which 346 km has been handed over to a single family, operating with different names from three different locations. These three ports are Krishnapatnam, Vanpic and Machlipatnam, all promoted by a single family. The State’s leaders have not only allocated the coastline but, in the guise of “Port Exclusive Zone” (similar to SEZ?), the water front extending over thousands of hectares. This is unheard of in terms of the sheer magnitude of the plunder of a scarce national resource like the sea coast. I am told that a similar modus operndi is being adopted in the other States as well.

I am aware that the so called “major ports” are at Item 27 of the Union List whereas the so called “non-major ports” are at Item 31 of the Concurrentn list. While the distinction between the two is no longer clear, it has been misused by the State’s politicians to plunder the nation and its water front.

I believe that the case of one family cornering the State’s coastline to the detriment of the public good represents a scam comparable to the 2-G and S-Band spectrum cases. From the public’s point of view, I demand that the Central government intervenes in the matter and takes such action that would put a stop to this loot and save the country’s limited coastline. I have the following suggestions for your consideration.

1. The proposal to enact the Indian Ports Act by merging the existing Major Ports Act, 1963 and the Indian Ports Act of 1908 should be quickly transformed into an Ordnance and promulgated with immediate effect to empower the Central government to step in and save India’s coastline from these unethical marauders trying to grab the coast to aggrandize themselves and their political associates
2. Restrict through the Ordnance the limit of the coastline to 20-30 km per port with no exclusive rights.
3. Constitute an inter-disciplinary team of investigating agencies including CBI, Enforcement Directorate, CBDT, RAW and others to trace the funds of the family in question to ascertain its domestic and external investments, especially its links to the tax havens abroad in Mauritius, Cayman Islands, Switzerland, Lichtenstein and so on. My letter of January 13, 2009 already referred to such clandestine investments.
4. This family has apparently obtained many other mega projects pertaining to mining, thermal power plants, metro projects etc. The investigation cited above should be comprehensive enough to cover all such projects that have come up in violation of AP Infrastructure Development Enabling Act, 2001 (Act No. 36 of 2001) as far AP is concerned. It is suspected that this family has links to projects in the other States of India and even other countries.
5. The same team should look at similar plunder of the national resources in the other States as well.
6. In all these cases of moneys stashed abroad, it is possible that there are serious national security implications that need to be investigated

The ongoing proceedings before the Hon’ble Supreme Court on black money may have direct relevance to the cases I have mentioned above. The quantum of black money stashed abroad by these families is a direct index of the magnitude of corruption in politics and the severity of crime committed within India. It is not confined to tax evasion. It is much more than that. The government seems to take shelter behind the bilateral tax treaties to hide the names of the owners of the black moneys in foreign banks. Such tax treaties cannot condone the concealment of the facts when the moneys involved also represent the much larger crimes committed by these anti-social elements.

Mr. Prime Minister, I hope you will acknowledge the receipt of this letter and proceed on the lines suggested above. Delay of action in such matters will amount to abetment of these offences on the part of the government.

Regards,

Yours sincerely

E.A.S.Sarma

Former Secretary to GOI

--

E.A.S.Sarma

14-40-4/1 Gokhale Road

Maharanipeta

Visakhapatnam 530002

Mobile: 91-9866021646

Website: http://eassarma.in

Blinded By Power

http://www.outlookindia.com/printarticle.aspx?263784

National MAGAZINE | JAN 25, 2010 Watch the barbs The 2,640-MW Bhavanapadu power plant ANDHRA PRADESH: POWER VS ECOLOGY Blinded By Power AP’s nod to a rash of power projects spells doom for its ecology MADHAVI TATA It didn’t take much for the late Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy to promise free power to farmers. The gambit paid off too, as he returned to power in the 2009 assembly elections. The Andhra farmer wasn’t complaining either. But when the time came to honour the commitment, the ‘free’ bit of the deal started pinching the state exchequer. Looking to augment the state’s power output, the Andhra government began clearing the construction of a cluster of six thermal power plants and one nuclear project. The projects will come up on a 90-km wetland stretch from the Naupada swamps to the Itchapuram lagoon, along the virgin coastline of Andhra’s northern Srikakulam district. Characterised by marshes, swamps and bogs, the wetlands are rich in biodiversity, visited by a wide variety of migratory birds and comparable, in terms of the species they support, to tropical rainforests or coral reefs. The emergence of power plants here, environmentalists point out, will destroy the local ecology and livelihood. But, typically, the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) reports have been prepared by fly-by-night consultants and are riddled with errors. East Coast Energy Pvt Ltd in the Santhabommali mandal of Srikakulam was the first to storm the ecologically fragile Naupada swamps. Work on its “super-critical technology” plant—the 2,640- MW Bhavanapadu Thermal Power Plant on 2,050 acres—has already commenced, to the chagrin of local farmers, fisherfolk and agitating environment NGOs. Filling and raising of marshland in the project area is changing the character of the Naupada swamps and causing irreversible ecological damage. Barely three km away from the site is the Telineelapuram bird sanctuary which the Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) and Birdlife International recognise as a globally Important Bird Area (IBA). In an apparent rush to seek environmental clearance for the East Coast Energy project, AP’s special chief secretary (environment, forests, science and technology) in February 2009 submitted a CRZ (coastal regulatory zone) demarcation report and NOC from the AP government to the Union ministry of forests and environment. The report listed the legal status of quarry land and detailed drainage plan. However, what it conveniently ignored were reports on the ecological value of the wetland and migratory bird breeding in Telineelapuram. Painted storks Telineelapuram sanctuary The Naupada swamps attract 123 species of migratory birds. In a report submitted to the standing committee of the National Board for Wildlife in December 2009, Dr Asad R. Rahmani of BNHS and Prof Asha Rajvanshi of the Wildlife Institute of India called the East Coast project’s EIA report inaccurate and misleading. “The EIA,” the duo pointed out, “was conducted in summer (March-May) when water is at its lowest in the swamps and migratory birds are not seen. The report says there are no migratory routes or endangered animal species within 10 km of the site, which is again false.” Worried that the project has already cast its ecological footprint, Rahmani and Rajvanshi find fault with the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation for selling the site, classifying it as revenue land. “As it is a wetland, it was considered ‘wasteland’ by district authorities,” they observed. “Ideally, East Coast Energy Pvt Ltd should vacate this ecologically important wetland which should be declared as a conservation reserve in its entirety,” they concluded. Similar arguments rage against the 495-MW Meghavaram Power thermal plant on 500 acres of swamp abutting the Bhavanapadu plant, and the 2,640-MW plant of the Nagarjuna Construction Company (NCC) in Sompeta mandal. “The government is presiding over the destruction of natural ecosystems, violating our economic laws.”E.A.S. Sarma, Forum For Better Visakha Coal-based plants will turn these lush green marshes into hellholes, feels former Union expenditure secretary E.A.S. Sarma, who heads the NGO, Forum for Better Visakha. Sarma says that setting up thermal power plants in wetlands is in clear violation of the 1971 Ramsar International Treaty (which India signed in 1982) on Conservation of Wetlands. “Both the state and central governments are bound by the statutory commitments of this treaty to conserve this wetland stretch in Srikakulam,” says Sarma. “The government is presiding over the destruction of natural ecosystems and the rash manner in which these projects are being set up point to a criminal violation of economic laws of the country.” Pointing out that East Coast Energy, which had agreed to shift a polluting ash pond and gave up 500 acres of marshy land, has now reclaimed the same land for the Meghavaram project in the guise of a different company, Sarma says corporates are pros at hoodwinking people. Once the Bhavanapadu project is fully operational, a normal rainfall in the area, Sarma fears, can cause flooding in 30,000 acres of farmland because of the altered water routes. Highlighting that NCC’s power plant on the beela (as the water body is known locally) at Sompeta will affect 1.5 lakh people of 30 villages, Human Rights Forum general secretary V.S. Krishna calls for immediate central intervention. “The thermal plant, which will occupy about 1,882 acres, is encroaching on a wetland area of 1,200 acres. This will devastate the lives of thousands of farmers and fisherfolk and will surely destroy the biodiversity of the swamp. Water from the beela is a lifeline for a two-crop paddy over 5,000 acres. Inland fishing sustains the Kandra and Agnikulashatriya communities. It is preposterous that such a fertile, life-sustaining area could be described by revenue officials as a wasteland,” Krishna fumes. Meanwhile, K.J.B.V. Subramanyam, vice-president (projects,) NCC Infrastructure Holdings Ltd, maintains that based on expert studies conducted at Sompeta, “the plant site does not fall in an environmentally sensitive ecosystem. There are no threatened categories of plant or animal species as cited in Red Data lists which occur as natural inhabitants. There are no signs of any features of marshy lands in and around the site.” For several months now, local groups Teerapranta Machhikara Aikya Vedika and Parivaranana Parirakshana Sangham have been agitating against the Sompeta plant under the leadership of Y. Krishna Murthy. “We are ready to sacrifice our lives to prevent the power plant from coming up,” he declares. “NCC bribed panchayat presidents to pass a resolution in favour of the plant without explaining to villagers the consequences.” There are other plants in the pipeline: the 2,500-MW thermal plant APGenco at Itchapuram, and a nuclear one at the Kovvada Matsyalesam village in Ranasthalam mandal. Sri Surya Chakra Power Corporation is also doing some recce on a site in the district. The plan is to generate 10,000 MW eventually, say government sources. But so blinded is the AP government by the shining megawatts ahead that it’s oblivious to the dark days ahead for its ecology.

http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/1733

Clearance based on false claims

Author(s):

Sumana Narayanan

Issue Date:

2010-8-31

Panel confirms Sompeta and Bhavanapadu thermal project sites are wetlands

Bhavanapadu thermal plant site (Courtesy: Telegu TV channel)A COMMITTEE set up by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests has confirmed the existence of wetland at the thermal plant near Sompeta and the Bhavanapadu thermal plant site near Kakrapalli village in Srikakulam district of Andhra Pradesh.

The committee pointed out that the 2,640 MW proposed power plant at Sompeta, by Nagarjuna Construction Company (NCC), and the 2,640 MW Bhavanapadu plant, promoted by East Coast Energy Pvt Ltd (ECEPL), would irreversibly damage surrounding wetland and ecology.

The environment ministry had commissioned its regional office in Bengaluru to inspect the two controversial sites. The four-member team toured the sites between July 17 and 19. In its report, the team pointed out the state administration distorted facts. NCC and ECEPL had submitted studies by research organisations and the state government to substantiate their claim that the projects were not in the wetland area. Based on this, the environment ministry's expert appraisal committee (EAC) granted them clearances. But the inspection revealed the mandatory environment impact assessments (EIAs) had been conducted during dry season (March to May), giving a skewed idea of the area's ecology.

The team's findings reiterate what the National Environment Appellate Authority found during its field visit of the Sompeta project in June. The NEAA was hearing an appeal against the plant's environmental clearance. On July 15, the authority cancelled the clearance. The appeal against the Bhavanapadu project is pending.

NCC had submitted a report to show that its project did not require clearance under the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification of 1991 because it was not influenced by tidal action. The claim, accepted by EAC, was proved false by the appellate authority and the Bengaluru team's site visits. "EAC gave the clearance based on the fact that stringent mitigation measures were made mandatory. The committee also considered it because quite a bit of money, especially public money, had been spent on the project," Asha Rajvanshi, an EAC member, said.

In the case of Bhavanapadu, the appraisal committee had asked ECEPL to move the project; its sub-committee had found the site was an important wetland. The company tried to sidestep by claiming it had erroneously marked the region as mudflats, which indicate presence of wetlands.

The company submitted reports that included documents from the state government and a high-tide line study from the National Institute of Oceanography in Goa. The study stated that the area was not in CRZ. The institute certified the place is flooded only seasonally, but the company used this to show the area was not a wetland.

EAC will now examine the Bengaluru team's report. "After all these reports how can the matter go back to EAC? The ministry should just cancel the clearances," said E A S Sarma of Forum for a Better Visakha who has been involved in the protests against the two projects.

---

Facts & Realities of Bhavanapadu Thermal Power Project (TPP) -Capt J.Ramarao

Facts & Realities of Bhavanapadu Thermal Power Project (TPP)

1) The TPP is being located in ecologically sensitive Naupada Swamps/ Wetlands of considerable importance

A) Extract from the Minutes of 34 th meeting of EAC held on 10-11 Nov 2008

In accordance with the decision taken during the EAC meeting held on June 11-12, 2008, the site visit was made by a sub group of EAC during July 21-23, 2008 and the sub group presented its observations which are as under:-

The project site is a swamp area, and is an integral component of unique eco system of marine, terrestrial, brackish and fresh water ecological site with their own specific floral and faunal characteristics. The component of these unique eco systems are the Naupada swamps (Marine), Telineelapuram area (Terrestrial) and Tekkali creek (Brackish and Marine). This swamp / mud flat together serve as biologically rich wetland. It is ecologically rich and diverse and a home for some of the highly endangered species of Evi fauna. Further, the region also includes an identified important bird site (IBS at Telineelapuram). The area command high ecological importance as wetland habitat, priority area for conservation as important bird area, feeding areas for winter migrants, breeding area for spot billed pelicans and representative area of remnant salt water marsh lands. A position of the project is therefore likely to directly conflict with conservation objectives.


B) In the 17 th Meeting of the Standing Committee of National Board for Wild Life held on 22-12-2009, under the chairmanship of the Minister for E&F, the site inspection report of Dr.Asad Rahmani and Dr, Asha Rajvanshi had clearly stated that Naupada Swamps area was an excellent habitat for Migratory Birds and was classified as Important Bird Area (IBA). It also stated that the entire area of the project, starting from the approach road to the project site is marshy land and the EIA Report ignored Bio diversity of the area.

C)The NEAA in its Order dated 30-8-10 observed that even after leaving 500 acres of land in southern portion, thereby shifting the southern boundary of the facility by1.35 km, the remaining area (part of which already raised), was still found to be a marshy/wetland. The Authority further observed that as stated by the expert of BHNS & agreed by Dr.Kaul, an internationally renowned expert on Wetlands, elevation of the project site by the project proponent, after the grant of E C, has caused irreversible changes in the character of the Wetland. The Authority also observed that these wetlands have been converted for agricultural use & at least 10% in the locality has since been converted so far, including the raised project site and being Ecologically Important, there should be a Total Ban on further conversion

2) The EAC ignored all the representations, including the observations of its Sub-Committee regarding the ground realities about Naupada Swamps and recommended the project for granting E.C and MoEF had chosen to issue the EC for the project by its Letter dated 2-4-2009 and remained silent spectator there after. The NEAA observed that various reports in this regard, including that of sub-committee of EAC were found to be incorrect. The EAC & in turn the MOEF has relied on these reports for granting E.C for the Power Project of ECEPL at Bhavanapadu.

3) Suppression of facts and Misleading Information The EIA Report in respect of ECEPL TPP appears to have deliberately suppressed/ concealed the information regarding the location of the project in Wetland Area & failed to mention the presence of Telineelapuram–Important Bird Area Site (IBAS) within 2.5 Km from the project site.
With regard to ecological sensitivity of the area, the certification by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests of AP that there are no National Parks, Sanctuary, Elephant/Tiger Reserve, Migratory Path (existing as well as proposed) within 10 Km radius of the project site is nothing but deliberate misleading information and suppression of the fact of the presence of Telineelapuram –IBAS- within 2.5 Km from the proposed project site.
The MOEF justified the granting of Environmental Clearance for the ECEPL Project, in spite of the reservations expressed by the Sub-committee of EAC, saying that Dept. of E&F, Govt of AP, vide its letter of 09-02-09, confirmed that the project site does not fall within Naupada Swamps and there are no conservation sites near the project site. This suppresses the fact of the presence of Telineelapuram –Important Bird Area Site (IBAS) within 2.5 Km from the project site. and the ground reality that the project site is marshy/wetland. It also ignores the fact that Naupada Swamps is one of the 55 wetlands prioritized for conservation by the AP Forest Dept

4) Cancellation of E.C by Regulatory Authority

As the Environmental Clearance (EC) granted by MoEF to Bhavanapadu Thermal Power Project, is based on misleading information, and suppression of the ground realities, the EC is liable for cancellation in accordance with Paragraph 8 (vi) of EIA Notification of 2006 which stipulates deliberate concealment and/or submission of false or misleading information or data which is material to screening or scoping or appraisal or decision on the application shall make the application liable for rejection, and cancellation of prior environmental clearance granted on that basis.

Permitting the project to continue in the present location amounts to violation of Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgment dated 28, January, 2011 in Civil Appeal No1132 /2011 with regard to Common Lands.
Conclusion:
No useful purpose will be served by taking up review of compliance of conditions of Environmental Clearance (EC) by the Expert Appraisal Committee, which is a party for recommending E C based on incorrect / misleading reports/ information, ignoring the facts and ground realities brought to its notice. It will only result in further delay and amount to window dressing to cover up the lapses.
The E.C granted to Bhavanapadu TPP of ECEPL at the present location, based on incorrect reports as observed by NEAA,, be cancelled by MOEF which is the competent Regulatory Authority, after giving a personal hearing to the Project Proponent, and following the principles of natural justice, with out delaying further by going through the process of EAC Meeting which has become irrelevant now.
The G.O.Ms.No 1108 of 15-09-2008 allotting Govt Wetlands to the project be cancelled by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, in compliance with Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgment dated 28, January, 2011 in Civil Appeal No.1132/2011 with regard to Common Lands.
Necessary penal action be considered & initiated in accordance with Sections 15, 17 and 19 of The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, against the Officials responsible for suppressing the ground realities & submitting incorrect/misleading reports in respect of the project.
_________________________________________________

WET LANDS ARE NOT WASTE LANDS!!

http://countercurrents.org/nazareth030311.htm

Wetlands Are Not Wastelands!

By Marianne de Nazareth

03 March, 2011
Countercurrents.org

It’s a constant battle to save wetlands everywhere in the world by environmentalists, with the galloping pressure of human populations exploding by the minute. With industrialization too land use patterns are changing and wet and marshy lands which are considered wasteland by the common man are being dredged and built over. It is in the hands of environmentalists and the media to educate policy and decision makers about the importance of these wetlands and the need to preserve them.

To define a weland : Wetlands are the transitional area between aquatic and oceanic areas and dry terrestrial ecosystems. The Ramsar Convention has defined wetlands as "areas of marsh, fen , peatland or water, whether natural or artifical, permanent or temporary with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low t ide does not exceed six meters". Wetlands include, marshes, swamps, open water bodies, mangroves, tidal flats and salt marshes which exist in every country.

Questions abound as to why it is necessary to save a wetland. In India, they are were regarded as ‘wasteland’ to the common man.Wetlands however are integral to a healthy environment,as they help to retain water during dry periods, thus keeping the underground water table high and relatively stable. During periods of flooding, they help to reduce flood levels and to trap suspended solids and nutrients before they flow directly into lakes.

Therefore they act like a live filter and the removal of such wetland systems because of urbanization or otherwise causes the quality of water in the lakes to degenerate. In addition, wetlands are important feeding, breeding and drinking areas for wildlife and are home to large numbers of migratory water birds. As with any natural habitat, wetlands are important in supporting the diversity of species and have a complex and important part to play in the food chain. In a recent millenium assessment of ecosystems, freshwater biodiversity has been placed on the top as the most threatened of all types of biodiversity due to vanishing wetlands.

Saraswati speaking to villagers about wetland

The value of wetlands is now being brought home to the common man through activists and environmental journalists like us in India. That is why Saraswati Kavula an environmental activist rushed out to Kakrapalli village in Andhra Pradesh, India, to lend support to the villagers when they were protesting loss of wetlands in their village.
The villagers have been protesting peacefully against the construction of 2400 MW of Coal Fired Thermal Power plant of M/s East Coast Energy Pvt. Ltd since August 2010. “Instead of listening to the peoples requests, the police have been set on them and they are going from door to door beating up the villagers,” said Saraswati Kavula Joint Convener National Alliance of People’s Movements (AP Chapter) her voice shrill with emotion.

“The entire project has been given permission by suppressing the facts about the Naupada Wetlands in Srikakulam District calling them ‘wastelands’ and not an important biodiveristy hotspot that they really are.”

The disputed site of M/s East Coast Energy Pvt. Ltd which is setting up a 2460MW Coal fired thermal power plant is located within the internationally recognised Wetland system of Naupada swamps and just 2.5 kms away from an Important Bird Area Site (IBAS) Telineelapuram.The birds of Telineelapuram have been declared endangered species and recorded in the Red Book of IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). Therefore, according to environmental laws of India and the RAMSAR Convention to which India has been a signatory, Wetlands are protected areas, where no polluting activity can be taken up.

“Every year, Siberian birds come to live here. More importantly, about 18 village panchayats with a population of a few thousand households will be losing their livelihood with this construction. Though it is illegal according to Indian law to construct anything on a wetland, they have got the permission and all enviro clearances. When the issue came up in court, the court said, "well since they have already constructed in the 1000 acres, let them leave the rest of the area as it is and continue to complete the project," revealed Saraswati.

In the last monsoon, when the outlets to the sea got blocked due to the construction, the excess water could not go out, and flooded the region and submerged nearly 3000 acres of crop land. The inland fishermen who lived by fishing in the wetland - now don't get any fish as the fish grow only in a mix of the fresh and sea water. Many began to starve, so the local farmers began to stop the car of the Senior General Manger and his colleague when they visited the project area. The local people also started a relay hunger strike which is already into its 150th day.

Saraswati and her colleagues have now written to the Chairperson, Andhra Pradesh Human Rights Commission, Hyderabad and hopes justice will be done.

(The writer is adjunct faculty, St. Joseph’s College and COMMITS, Bangalore and a media fellow with UNFCCC, UNEP and Robert Bosch Stiftung)

Review of Bhavanapadu TPP of ECEPL by EAC should not be an Eye-Wash !-Capt J.Ramarao

Review of Bhavanapadu TPP of ECEPL by EAC should not be an Eye-Wash !-Capt J.Ramarao

Further to letter dated 01-03-2011 regarding Bhavanapadu TPP, this is to bring to your kind attention, the preemptive efforts of ECEPL to dilute the review, by giving front page advertisements in the News Papers stating that they have complied with all Laws & Regulations, all Permits and Clearance obtained, submitting a factual report to EAC on steps taken in full compliance of stipulations and to demonstrate that there have been no violations of any condition whatsoever etc .

Why Review by EAC at this Stage ?

Time and again the suppression of facts & ground realities by the project proponent and the concerned State Govt agencies, just to hasten the formality of getting EC, had been brought to the notice of EAC, MOEF and the State Govt, both before EC was granted and there after. But unfortunately the EAC ignored all the representations, including the observations of its Sub-Committee regarding the ground realities about Naupada Swamps and recommended the project for E.C and MoEF had chosen to issue the EC for the project by its Letter dated 2-4-2009 and remained silent spectator there after.

In the 17 th Meeting of the Standing Committee of National Board for Wild Life held on 22-12-2009, under the chairmanship of the Minister for E&F, the site inspection report of Dr.Asad Rahmani and Dr, Asha Rajvanshi had clearly stated that Naupada Swamps area was an excellent habitat for Migratory Birds and was classified as IBAS. It also stated that the entire area of the project, starting from the approach road to the project site is marshy land and the EIA Report ignored Bio diversity of the area.

The National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA) in its order dated 30-08-2010 observed that even after leaving 500 acres of land in southern portion, the remaining area, was still found to be a marshy. The Authority also observed that various reports in this regard, including that of sub-committee of EAC were found to be incorrect. The EAC and in turn the MOEF has relied on these reports for granting E.C for the project.

Justice Delayed - Justice Denied

After a lapse of nearly two years and Police Firing on 28^th February 2011, leading to killing of two and injuring many innocent, peaceful & unarmed protestors, and a question was raised in Parliament on the subject, the MOEF reacted to the situation, as if it is a fresh case. If only the MOEF had been sensitive, responsive, proactive and not yielded to political pressures, the unfortunate incident could have been avoided. As long as we do not have an independent and autonomous Environment Protection Authority (EPA) for strict enforcement of Environmental Law, we will continue to be terrorized and be the victims of GDP oriented Development and Corporate Terrorists.

Review by EAC is Irrelevant

As the EC granted by MoEF to Bhavanapadu TPP,is based on misleading information, and suppression of the ground realities , the EC is liable for cancellation in accordance with Paragraph 8 (vi) of EIA Notification of 2006.What useful purpose will be served by taking up review of compliance of conditions of E C by the EAC which is a party for recommending E C based on incorrect / misleading reports/ information? It will only result in further delay.

Swift and Decisive Action Required

The E.C granted to Bhavanapadu TPP at the present location, based on incorrect reports as observed by NEAA,, be cancelled by MOEF which is the competent Regulatory Authority, after giving a personal hearing to the Project Proponent, and following the principles of natural justice, with out delaying further by going through the process of EAC Meeting which has become irrelevant now.

The G.O.Ms.No 1108 of 15-09-2008 allotting Govt Wetlands to the project be cancelled by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, in compliance with Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgment dated 28, January, 2011 in Civil Appeal No.1132/2011 with regard to Common Lands.

Necessary penal action be considered & initiated in accordance with Sections 15, 17 and 19 of The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, against the Officials responsible for suppressing the ground realities & submitting incorrect reports in respect of the project.