Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR APPRAISAL OF PUBLIC HEARINGS

Name of the person attending the Public Hearing: S.Ramanathan, T.Arulselvam Name and location of the Project: IL&FS Tamilnadu power company limited , Kothatai, Ariayakosti, Villianallur, Selimbimangalam Villages,Parighipattai(port novo) block , cuddalore district, Please provide a brief description of the Project: Proposed to produce a 3600 mw coal based thermal power plant Date and location of Public Hearing: 05-02-2010 , Pudhukuppam village (project proposed site) Whether the Public Hearing was video-recorded by you? If yes, please send a copy of the video-recording or upload it on the Internet Date ___________ NO

Page 1 of 6

1.
1.1

Pre - Public Hearing Checklist


Content of Advertisement

1.1.1

Does the Advertisement contain the following information? 1. Date and time of Public Hearing YES 2. Venue of Public Hearing YES 3. Names of places/offices where the public can access the draft EIA report and the Summary EIA Report before the Public Hearing YES Publication in Newspaper What is the date of publication of the Advertisement in Newspaper/s? : 05-01-2010 Has the notice for the Public Hearing been issued at least 30 days in advance of the hearing? YES Details of Newspapers in which the advertisement has been published-

1.2 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3

SL. NO.

NEWSPAPER

NAME OF

LANGUAGE

PAGE NO. ON ADVERTISEMENT


WHICH THE APPEARED

READERSHIP OF THE NEWSPAPER*

POPULARITY/

1 2

Indian Express Thina tandi

English Tamil

--------------------------

large Large

* The popularity/readership can be rated on the basis of interviews with local persons, local news agencies, or available statistics. You may rate it on the scale of poor, average, reasonable, high, most popular 1.2.4 SL. NO. Size and Visibility of the Advertisement in the Newspapers NAME OF NEWSPAPER SIZE VISIBILITY COPY ANNEXED? YES/NO

1 2

Indian Express Thina tandi

Maxi size -do-

Ok Ok

No (later)

No ( later)

Page 2 of 6

1.2.5 1.2.6

In places where the newspapers do not reach, did the Competent Authority arrange to inform the local public about the Public Hearing by other means such as by way of beating of drums as well as advertisement? YES Have the following made the draft EIA Report available on their respective website? Ministry of Environment and Forests State Pollution Control Board Project Proponent If yes, when? ______ ( we did not check the website ) If yes, when? ______

1.2.7

YES

( we did not check the website )

Has the District Magistrate/s, Zila Parishad or Municipal Corporation, District Industries Office circulated the following documents:
1. Draft Comprehensive EIA report If yes, in which language? English YES YES

2. Draft Rapid EIA Report

If yes, in which language?

English YES

3. Executive Summary 1.2.8

If yes, in which language?

Tamil, English

Whether the documents mentioned above were made available free of cost? NO, only for reference /not for sale

1.2.9

Were the aforementioned documents made available at the following locations? District Magistrates YES YES YES YES

District Industries Office

Zila Parishad or Municipal Corporation

Concerned Regional office of the MoEF

2. Venue Checklist:

Page 3 of 6

2.1 2.2 2.2.1 2.3

What is the distance of the venue of the Public Hearing from the Project Area? Within the project area Is the venue of the Public Hearing easily accessible? YES If not, why not? (e.g. availability of transport, geographical barriers etc. Does not arise Description of venue of Public Hearing (name of place, capacity etc.): Pudukuppam village ,arrangements were made to accommodate more 1000 participants

2.4 2.5

Arrangements made at the venue for the Public Hearing: Yes made arrangements, were made all basic facilities are provided. Number of Police personnel present at the venue: Sufficient number of police personnel were deployed.

2.6

Did all those who were present at the hearing mark their attendance? YES

2.7

Was there any restriction in terms of persons who could participate/enter the venue of the Public Hearing? If yes, please explain the restriction: Does not arise NO

2.8

Were there any protests by persons inside or outside the venue?

NO

If yes, please describe ______________________________________________________

3. Public Hearing Checklist


3.1 Names and designations of Panel Members:

1. Mr. SEETHARAMAN , IAS , District collector, cuddalore district , 2. Mr. T.Sekar, District environment engineer, TNPCB, cuddalore
Page 4 of 6

3.2

Were the proceedings recorded through videography by a representative of the State Pollution Control Board or Union Territory Pollution Control Committee YES Was every person granted an opportunity to seek information or clarifications on the Project YES from the Project Proponent? Was any person denied an opportunity to speak in the hearing? Please describe the incident briefly:________________________ NO

3.3 3.4

3.5 .

Quality of discussion: YES

3.5.1. Were pros and cons of the project discussed?

3.5.1.1. What was the percentage of time for discussion spent on the positive points of the Project? Most of the time spent on discussing the benefits of the project. Please give a brief description of the positive points discussed during the Hearing: Most of discussion are concentrated on the benefits of the proposed project like community development works to be undertake by the company, employment ,economical benefits. 3.5.1.2. What was the percentage of time for discussion spent on the negative points of the Project? 20 % of the time Please give a brief description of the negative points discussed during the Hearing: Impact of the mangrove forest and coastal and fishing impacts ,agricultural .

Page 5 of 6

3.5.2. Time allotted for questions and answers 20 % to 25 % of the total time

3.5.3. Whether the people posed relevant questions with respect to the project
NO

3.5.4. Were clarifications sought by the participants were responded to by the Project Proponent or
Member of the State Pollution Control Board? NO

3.5.5. Was the summary of the Public Hearing accurately reflecting all the views and concerns
audience at the end of the proceedings explaining the contents in the vernacular language? NO

expressed recorded by the representative of the SPCB or the UTPCB and read over to the

3.5.6. Were the minutes signed by the District Magistrate or his or her representative on the same
day and forwarded to the SPCB/UTPCC concerned? NO

(the district collector signed date is 13.02.2010 )

4.

Post-Public Hearing Checklist

4.1. Was a statement of the issues raised by the public and the comments of the Project Proponent prepared in local language and in English and annexed with the proceedings? YES 4.2. Were the proceedings of the public hearing conspicuously displayed at the office of the Parishad, District Magistrate and the SPCB and UTPCC? 4.3. NO Panchayats within whose jurisdiction the project is located, office of the concerned Zila Did the SPCB or the UTPCC display the proceedings on its website for general information? YES

Page 6 of 6

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen