Pipelines by virtue of their linear nature provide interesting dilemmas that environmental managers and EIA practitioners are faced with while addressing cumulative environmental impacts. Since pipelines create a long linear landscape, they affect a multitude of stakeholders, jurisdictions, ecological regions and topographic features, and thus present unique and challenging issues. The severity of problems depend a great deal on demographic profile, landscape features and the resource status of the project area. When the developments were few, and the number of people small, concerns were generally less and the impacts on life sustaining ecosystems fewer. However with the accelerated growth of human population and the increasing pace of development, the earth’s resources and its people move closer to the thresholds of unsustainability. As a result, government agencies, legislators, resource managers and even the average citizen want to know the consequences and impacts of developmental changes prior to project approval.

The environmental impact assessment becomes an extremely powerful management tool to determine which environmental attributes will be affected, what mitigation options are available and what is the anticipated significance of the residual environmental effects.

1.1 Pipeline Projects and Environmental Considerations.

Pipelines have been considered as the most effective means of transporting fossil fuels from their original sources thousands of meters below the earths’ surface to processing facilities or oil tankers for following reasons:

Expansion of the pipeline capacity can be ensured through design modification in the pumping unit.

• The transportation of multiple products is possible without additional costs.
   

• Low cost of transportation for moving large quantum of product for long distance.
   

• Minimum product loss during transit.
   

• The supply of product to consumption locations remain uninterrupted as the transportation is not affected by natural calamities such as flood.
   

• Transportation involves no containers thereby reducing likely rail/road traffic hazards associated with container movements.

At the same time, past and recent studies (Dean 1984; Scupholne & Smith 1988; Fryer et al. 2000; Wostmann, 2001) establish that oil and gas pipelines have serious environmental consequences that range from soil, air, and water pollution, to direct impacts on wildlife, increased deforestation, and acid rain. In addition to these ecological impacts on the people and the environment, pipeline construction projects have contributed to human rights abuses and social instability in many parts of the world (Anon. 2000).

The effects of pipelines on the natural environment have been recognized in their expansion into wilderness areas leading to fragmentation of critical habitats and consequent disturbance to wildlife populations inhabiting such habitats and even destruction of rare and endangered species. The proposed pipeline in Georgia is routed through Ajmeti Nature Resource (Chichua 2001). The proposed Alliance Pipeline Project in British Columbia would traverse the habitat of forty seven species of rare plants (Fryer et al. 2000). The proposed pipeline between Bolivia and Brazil would traverse the pristine tracts of Amazonian forests that are the remnants of largest tropical biomes. Impacts of pipelines on endangered species such as great Indian bustard (Ardeotis nigriceps), leopard (Panthera pardus) and Indian grey wolf (Canis lupus) have been well documented in India (WII 1993; WII 1995a & 1995b). The vital statistics of the world’s 10 most controversial pipeline projects (Anon. 2000) amply demonstrates the wide ranging impacts of pipelines that are complex enough to challenge the rationale of the project planning.

Considering the growing significance of environmental threats associated with pipeline projects, it becomes imperative to undertake environmental assessment of such projects prior to their breaking ground.

1.2 Proposed Mumbai-Manmad Pipeline (MMPL) Extension Project

M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) proposes to lay a product pipeline between its existing Manmad terminal in Maharashtra and Manglya in Madhya Pradesh as an extension of its earlier laid Mumbai – Manmad Pipeline Project. The proposed petroleum product pipeline will start from the existing BPCL terminal at Manmad (20o15”N 74o30”E) in Maharashtra with an elevation of approximately 572 meters and extend upto Manglya near Indore (22o48”N 75o55”E) in Madhya Pradesh at an elevation of 535 meters (Fig. 1).

1.2.1 Project Justification

BPCL is currently transporting petroleum products produced at their Mumbai crude oil refinery through a 18 inch diameter multi product pipeline to their Manmad terminal. Mumbai – Manmad multi – product pipeline and marketing terminal at Manmad with road and rail loading facilities were commissioned in 1998. BPCL now desires to extend their existing pipeline system from Manmad to Manglya (Indore). Manmad – Manglya section of the proposed pipeline and tankages at Manglya shall be designed for the flow rate of 1.052 MMTPA for the year 2003 – 04 to 2.555 MMTPA for the year 2009 – 10. The proposed section of the pipeline section shall transport Motor Spirit (M.S), Superior Kerosene Oil (S.K.O) and High Speed Diesel (H.S.D) and naptha in future.

1.2.2 Project Setting

The proposed pipeline will originate from the existing dispatch terminal located at Manmad in Maharashtra and will terminate at the receiving terminal at Manglya about 14 km from Indore in Madhya Pradesh. The pipeline route passes through three districts, six taluka and seventy four villages in Maharashtra and four districts, twelve taluka and one hundred and eleven villages in Madhya Pradesh.

 The major pipeline crossings are:

Road (nos.) - 147

Rail (nos.) - 3

Streams (nos.) - 180

Ponds/Reservoir (nos.) - 5

Major river (nos.) - 3

 Minor river (nos.) - 21

Canal (nos.) - 4

Cultivated (length) - 268 km

Forest (length) - 28.62 km

 1.2.3 Project Design
The proposed route of 357 km long pipeline was finalized after careful consideration of three design alternatives. These alternatives primarily focused on avoidance of forests, water bodies, habitations and built up area and selection of route alignment option that involves minimal bends and avoids rocky areas. The proposed pipeline would be used for the transportation of M.S., S.K.O, HSD and naptha in future at a flow rate of 168 m3/hr with a design pressure of 75 kg/cm2(g) in the first phase and 398 m3/hr with a design pressure of 94 kg/cm2(g) in the second phase.

For laying the pipeline, a linear corridor 18 m wide (9 m wide on both the sides of the center of the pipeline) would be acquired for RoU (Right of Use). After laying the pipeline the land would be handed over to the landowner for resuming the cultivation practice. Construction of permanent structures or planting of any deep-rooted trees subsequently would not be allowed on the land acquired for RoU. A one time compensation for land would be paid to the landowner whereas, the crop compensation for seasonal crop would be paid only for season corresponding with the construction and maintenance phases of the project. In the forest areas, the RoU would remain limited to a 10 m wide strip, which will be 5 meters wide on both the side from the center of the pipeline.

1.2.4 Project Associated Facilities
The project intends to transport 1.052 MMTPA in year 2003 – 04 and 2.535 MMTPA in year 2009 –10. Therefore in the first phase the pumping facility would be provided at existing terminal in Manmad and in the second phase intermediate pumping station will be provided at Julwania. Facilities proposed for the pipeline system at various terminals and along the cross country portions of the pipeline are as follows.

Main Pipeline

 Buried portion of the main pipeline will be coated with Coal Tar Enamel (CTE) coating /three-layer PE /PPE as appropriate.

1.2.5 Pipeline Associated Facilities
Cathodic protection, sectionalizing valves and repeater station to be provided along the pipeline route would be as per Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 Proposed cathodic protection, sectionalizing valves and repeater stations along the pipeline

 Note: In addition to above, CP stations/Repeater Stations provided at Manmad, Julwania and Manglya stations will be manned.

a) One intermediate pigging station at chainage 102 has been envisaged.

b) One pigging station has been planned at the proposed IP station at Julwania.

c) At Julwania, the pigging station shall be augmented to pumping station second phase.

Manmad Terminal

• A hook-up at suitable location shall be taken at Manmad for heart-cut pumping of products being received from Mumbai through existing Mumbai-Manmad pipeline in order to meet specified contamination levels of various products for further transportation. Design of the proposed pipeline system is based on the pumping of heart-cut products only.
   

• Provision to draw products from the existing product tankages at Manmad for further transporation to Manglya through the proposed pipeline has also been kept.

Facilities provided at the Manmad terminal shall be as follows:

• Mainline pumps
   

• Phase-I (1W + 1S)
   

• Phase-II (2W + 1S)
   

• Scraper launcher
   

• Metering units
   

• Control panels (to be located in the existing Control room)
   

• Booster pumps (1 operating + 1 standby)
   

• Filters
   

• Corrosion inhibitor injection facilities
   

• Sump tank /pump
   

• Other utilities would be drawn from existing facilities.
   

• Power shall be drawn from existing electric sub-station.
   

• For utility services backup for emergency/auxiliary power, a DG set will be provided.
   

• Existing building for administrative office and stores shall be used for accommodating personnel and additional stores required for the proposed pipeline facility.

Manglya Receipt Terminal

• Scraper receiver
   

• Filters
   

• Metering units
   

• Products and slop distribution manifold for tankages
   

• Sump-tank with pump
   

• Space provision for future pumping facilities in case of further extension of pipeline.

Table 1.2. Tankages for petroleum products

Transfer pumps for transferring products received at proposed terminal to existing BPCL depot 2 km away shall be as per Table 1.3.

Flow-rate considered for transferring the products is based on capacities of the tankages in the existing depot as per the design basis.

1.2.6 SCADA and Telecom System
The complete system shall be monitored and controlled by Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) System for which Master Control Station (MCS) will be provided at Manmad with extended remote workstation at Manglya. Remote Telemetry Units (RTU) located along the pipeline route at all sectionalizing valve stations and intermediate pumping station at Julwania, shall also be provided.

The communication link for the SCADA system is based on optical fibre system. A state of the art telecommunication system based on Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH) is proposed for the proposed pipeline. Optical fibre system will provide the link for the tele-communication system.

A Pipeline Coating (PLC) - based system is envisaged for pump start-up, shutdown and control. A suitable real time leak detection system with batch tracking is also envisaged which will be integrated with SCADA network.

1.2.7 Project Schedule
The proposed project facilities are scheduled to be completed within 36 months of which the construction phase is likely to extend to a period of 15 months.

The maximum manpower requirement during the construction period would be 500. Local people would be employed as and when required. The skilled labours would be brought everyday to the working place from the permanent camps to be located along the pipeline route. During the operational phase, 20–25 people will be engaged as contract labour for route patrolling, security, maintenance and repair work.

Monitoring and control in the operational phase of the project would be ensured through a dedicated Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA) for which Master Control Station (MCS) would be set at Manmad with an extended remote workstation at Manglya.

The total cost of the project is 317 Crores.

1.3 Objectives of the EIA Study
The feasibility studies undertaken by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited and subsequent surveys undertaken by M/s MASCON M.S.C. Pvt. Ltd., Vadodra, and Engineers India Ltd., Delhi have identified pipeline route for the proposed project based on several engineering, environmental, economic and social considerations. Some of these include shortest pipeline length, easy terrain, ground profile for pipeline hydraulics, accessibility to pipeline route for construction, safety of lives, property and existing utilities (road and rail), and avoidance of habitations. Avoidance of built up areas and Protected and Reserved Forest has also been an important consideration in the selection of pipeline route. It becomes evident that the entire process of route selection has been done in the absence of feasibility studies pertaining to likely impacts on ecological systems.

It therefore becomes necessary to identify the implications of proposed expansion on the ecology of the area. The present study undertaken as a consultancy job for M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Bombay, provides an environmental appraisal of the Mumbai - Manmad – Manglya pipeline extension project with special reference to the impacts on wildlife values.

1.4 Scope of Work

• As per the agreed Terms of Reference (ToR) between Wildlife Institute of India (WII) and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) the following is the scope of work for this study.
   

• Assessment of the status of the wildlife species and their habitats (terrestrial and aquatic) within proposed pipeline corridor.
   

• Identification, predictions and evaluation of impacts of Manmad – Indore on terrestrial and aquatic wildlife values of the habitats en route.
   

• Identification and evaluation of the likely impacts of the project on wildlife species and habitats.
   

• Outline the mitigatory measures for the likely impacts that may result from the implementation of the proposed project.
   

• Outline legal and the statutory obligations to be fulfilled by the project proponent under the Wildlife, Forest and Environment Act.