ACC cement plant in Himachal has complied with green norms; permanent sprinklers recommended to control dust, says joint panel

The committee, comprising Dr Narendra Sharma, Scientist ‘F’, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB); Engineer Pawan Sharma, Himachal Pradesh State Pollution Control Board (HPSPCB); and Bilaspur SDM Abhishek Kumar Garg, submitted its supplementary report before the Tribunal on April 15.

The committee was originally constituted in response to a complaint lodged in September 2024 by Kashmir Singh of Khetad village near Barmana, where the cement plant is located.

During its initial inspection on January 18, the committee had identified three major shortcomings at the plant: inadequate dust control measures, the absence of a three-layer tree plantation, and deficiencies in the installed truck-tyre washing systems. These findings were submitted to the NGT in a report dated January 24.

As per the supplementary report, the committee observed that Singh’s residence is the only dwelling located along a 500-metre stretch of road used by both cement plant trucks and local villagers. This stretch connects the plant’s exit gate to a major district road.

While ACC Ltd had implemented intermittent water sprinkling on this route using tankers, the committee has now recommended installing permanent water sprinklers to control dust generated by truck movement more effectively.

In response to Singh’s request, the committee arranged for the installation of an ambient air quality sampler at his residence. However, the selected location did not fully meet CPCB guidelines due to several technical constraints. These included insufficient distance from the roadside, improper inlet height, and airflow obstructions caused by nearby walls.

Nevertheless, the committee proceeded with the sampling exercise at the complainant’s insistence, while clearly documenting the non-compliance with standard monitoring protocols.

In a separate affidavit, the HPSPCB prayed before the tribunal to dismiss the plea filed by Singh in light of the updated compliance status.

“In view of the submissions made hereinabove and the facts and circumstances of the case, it is respectfully prayed that the petition may kindly be dismissed qua the respondent board. Any other order deemed fit and appropriate may be passed in the interest of justice,” the board stated.

The committee also confirmed that emissions from five major stacks—including those attached to the cooler ESP, coal mill, and cement mills—were within permissible limits.

ACC Ltd reported that it had undertaken a series of pollution control measures to address concerns raised in previous inspections. These include installation of mist fog guns and rain guns across critical locations, including around the boundary wall and internal roads, development of a three-layer plantation near the complainant’s poultry farm and the packing section, with ongoing efforts to green vacant spaces within the premises, deployment of interconnected pollution control systems to prevent dust emissions beyond the plant boundary, coverage of clinker, ash, and cement silos with appropriate devices to minimize emissions.

Other measures undertaken included the use of rain guns on fly ash bulkers, exit routes to control fugitive dust, installation of a 130-metre-long, nine-meter-high MS sheet barrier toward the complainant’s property, with further extension underway, installation of two tyre-washing systems at the raw material and truck exit gates, and an oil and grease separation unit, laying of interlock tiles at the truck exit gate and upgradation of the clinker loading station with sliding doors, mist guns, and coverage of cement loading bays with GI sheets and transparent curtains.