FGD & ESP Tobe Installed in India Power Plants

1
Report No 81
Recommended action and schedule for the expeditious implementation of
the 7.12.2015 emission standards for thermal power plants (TPPs), which
was to be complied within 2 years, that is, by 8.12.2017
February 14, 2018

Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority for NCR (EPCA)
1. Background
On 7.12.2017, MoEF&CC filed an affidavit in compliance with the order the

Hon’ble Court dated 17.11.2017, which had issued notice, based on the
application moved by the Amicus Curie: “Direct the implementation of the 2015
emission standards for power plants as per schedule, i.e. by December 2017.
The 2015 emission standards for thermal power plants (TPPs) had been notified
under the Environment (Protection) Amendment Rules 2015 and had set norms,
for the first time, for emissions of SO2, NOx, Mercury and water consumption.
The standards had also tightened the emissions from particulates (Annexure 1).
The revision in this standard has happened after nearly 25 years and so was long
over-due.
At the very outset, it is key to note the critical importance of these 2015
standards. Studies by Centre for Science and Environment (CSE)1show that
thermal power plants in India are responsible for 70 per cent of the total
freshwater withdrawal by all industries; over 60 per cent of the particulate
matter emissions; 50 per cent of SO2, NOx emissions and more than 80 per cent
of mercury emissions by the industrial sector in the country.
According to CPCB2 the implementation of the 2015 standards will lead to

reduction in PM, SO2 and NOx by 40-50 per cent in the country. It will also
reduce mercury emissions by 60 per cent and water consumption by another 40
per cent. This is not a small achievement, given the enormous pollution load and
water-stress in the country.
It is also well known that gaseous emissions of NOX and SOX, when they interact
with moisture in the air, convert into particulates. These ‘secondary’ particles
are a key source of air pollution across the country. The IIT-Kanpur report for
Delhi/NCR had found that as much as 25-30 per cent of the winter sources are
secondary particles, which are emitted from vehicles, power plants and
industries. It is also for this reason that the Hon’ble Court has issued directions
on curtailing use of pet coke, furnace oil and is deliberating how to increase the
1 CSE 2015, Heat on Power: Green Rating of Coal-Based Thermal Power Plants
2CPCB presentation as included in February 1, 2017, submission of Ritwick

Dutta
2
use of natural gas in industry and thermal power plants. Therefore, there is an
urgent need to implement the 2015 emission standards across the country.
In its affidavit of 7.12.2017, MOEF&CC has stated the following:
“The Ministry of Power (MOP) has submitted that coal based generation
contributes about 80% of electricity requirements in the country. Ministry of
Power has expressed its commitment to comply with new environment norms
subject to technical feasibility and time required to install emission control
systems…Procurement and installation of emission control equipment, like Flue
Gas Desulfurization (FGD) for SO2 control, in a unit takes about 3 years time
followed by shut down of the unit for making necessary connections. Electricity
being an essential commodity and un-interrupted power supply in the country
needs to be ensured at all times, therefore, many units cannot be out for
retrofitting at the same time and it has to be done in phases, so as to avoid
problem in the power supply. That considering the above issues, an earliest
practical feasible plan extending up to December 2022 has been prepared for
the installation of FGDs and other pollution control equipment at the
identified coal based units in consultation with Regional Power Committee
and the utilities.
Based on the above, MOEF&CC has stated that “in view of the practical difficulties
there appears to be some substance that some more time is required to meet the
standards by thermal power plants (TPPs)… “In view of the aforesaid, this
matter is placed before the Hon’ble Court seeking appropriate order having
regard to aforesaid facts.”
On February 1, 2018, MOEF&CC has filed affidavit in compliance with the

13.12.2017 order the Hon’ble Court. In this (page 5), “it is stated that specific
directions have been issued by SPCB for phase-wise compliance of the standards
by TPP. The action plan submitted by MOP for 7 years, up to 2024, was observed
to be too long and accordingly after several rounds of discussion, Ministry
decided to commence the implementation from 2018 and to complete by 2022
with respect to all pollutants.” The schedule is enclosed in the affidavit.
On February 1, 2018, Advocate Ritwick Dutta has filed submissions regarding the
extension of time sought by MOEF&CC for implementation of the standards.
Based on the above submissions and subsequent consultations with officials of

the MOEF&CC, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), Ritwick Dutta and
researchers from the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) who have
worked extensively on power plant emissions, EPCA is submitting this report.
2. Key issues for examination
The following are the issues that arise out of the affidavits and consultations:
1. If MOEF&CC has taken a contrary position at NGT as against its stand in
Supreme Court, as explained in the submissions of Ritwick Dutta;
3
2. If the extension granted to power companies by CPCB is “illegal” as

submitted by Ritwick Dutta;
3. If the suggested timelines for plants to phase in new emission norms by
2022 is acceptable or new timelines can be recommended for faster
implementation of the standards;
4. If the draft amendment diluting the water consumption from TPPs is
acceptable.
5. If the monitoring protocol for emissions is sufficiently robust.
3. Divergence in MOEF&CC position in NGT and Supreme Court

Ritwick Dutta has stated in his submission of February 1, that in NGT the
MOEF&CC had taken a consistent stand that it is serious about implementing the
standards and that it has written to CBCB and SPCBs to ensure compliance. This
position had been reiterated in Rajya Sabha. On 3.4.2017 the then Minister,
MOEF&CC had told Parliament that the standards would come into force from
December 6, 2017 and there is no proposal to dilute the December 2015
notification (Annexure F of Ritwick Dutta affidavit to Hon’ble Supreme Court on
February 1, 2018). The October 2017, Affidavit filed in NGT by MOEF&CC says
that it has written to CPCB for the compliance report and also to the regional
office for submission of the compliance report of the concerned thermal power
plant.
It is therefore, clear that till October 2017, MOEF&CC had not informed NGT of
the fact that the TPPs would not be compliance with the notification of December
2015. It is also clear that in its affidavit filed on 7.12.2017 – day before the
standards were to come into force – MOEF&CC had found merit in the proposed
extended deadline of 2022 and had requested the Hon’ble Supreme Court to
“pass appropriate orders order having regard to aforesaid facts.”
EPCA discussed this issue with representatives of MOEF&CC who attended its
meeting on February 13, 2018. They have explained that the ministry was
engaged in extensive discussions with MOP during the period beginning March
2017 till October 2017. It was only in October 13, 2017 that the proposal was
finalized and the schedule of 2022 was arrived at. The case was listed before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court and so they filed an affidavit on the decisions that had
been arrived.
4. ‘Illegality” of the extension given to power companies

MOEF&CC in its affidavit of 1.2.2018, has enclosed its 7.12.2017 letter to CPCB to
exercise “powers vested in Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act 1986
to direct all the thermal power plants who are not in a position to comply with
the norms laid down in the 7.12.2015 notification in accordance with the revised
plan submitted by the Ministry of Power dated 13.10.2017 including NOx by
2022, failing which action will be initiated under the appropriate section of EP
Act 1986 (Annexure R 6 of February 1, 2018 MOEF&CC affidavit of February 1,
2018).
Based on this letter, on December 11, 2017, CPCB, through its chairman A K
Mehta (chairman S P Singh Parihar was on leave and so officiating chairman A K
4
Mehta, also Additional Secretary in MOEF&CC had signed the letter in his
absence) had written to all TPP, extending the timelines for implementation
based on the MOP schedules (Annexure I of Ritwick Dutta affidavit to Hon’ble
Supreme Court on February 1, 2018).
Ritwick Dutta in his submission has stated that the CPCB has no power or
authority under the EP Act 1986 to extend the deadline for compliance of the
emission and water consumption norms, since the same were issued under
Section 6 and Section 25 of the EP Act, which only empowers the Central
government to frame rules. Furthermore, it is his contention that the delegation
of powers (Notification No SO 157 (E) of 27.2.1996 and SO730 (E) dated
10.7.2002) to Chairman CPCB to issue directions to any industry or any local
body any other authority for violations of the standards and rules notified under
the EP Act, do not give powers to grant extension. It is his contention, that “the
above powers of the Chairman is only with respect to violations of standards and
rules and can by no stretch of imagination extend to Amending the Rules notified
under Section 6 and Section 25 of the Act or in legalizing an illegality and violation
of law.”
The December 2015 notification was issued in exercise of the powers conferred
under Section 6 and 25 of the EP Act 1986. The standards are an amendment in
the Environment (Protection) Act and the rules are called the Environment
(Protection) Amendment Rules 2015.
Section 6 gives powers to Central government to make rules and Section 5 gives
the Central government to issue directions.
The question is if the deadline set through the notification as an Amendment in

the EP Act can be extended through a direction or if it requires a fresh
amendment to the EP Act. The question also is if the extension on the timeline in
the Amendment can be issued as a direction under Section 5 of the Act?
The view of the MOEF&CC needs to be sought on this matter.
5. If the 2022 deadline is acceptable or is advancement possible

The December 2015 Notification had divided the emission norms based on the
age of the thermal power plants. It had also set specific norms for pollutants.
As per the affidavit filed by MOEF&CC as cited in letter of December 7, 2017 the
following is the situation of the total capacity of installed of 1,96,667 MW (650
units) of coal based power plants.
Schedule of phase-in of 2015 emission norms: MOP and MOEF&CC
Compliant Non- Year TPP units MW

compliant
1. PM 1,15,214 65,925 MW
MW (231 units) by
2022. The
phase-in
compliance to
5
be kept co-
terminus with
installation of
FGD extending
up to 2022.
2018 1 unit 500
2019 2 units 1300
2020 28 units 10705
2021 97 units 23495
2022 94 units 28525
2022 9 units 1400
(plan to be
made)
2. SO2 16,769 1,61,552 MW
MW* + (415 units) as
8967 MW per schedule
identified extending up to
for 2022**
retirement/
already
retired
2018 1 unit 500
2019 8 units 4940
2020 55 units 27230
2021 172 units 64027
2022 178 units 64,704
2022 1 unit (150 150
MW plan
being
prepared)**
*
3. NOX 3 years to meet No specific
the standards deadline
of 600mg/NM3 given.
and also sought Letter says
relaxation of in
standards of accordance
100 and 300 with the
mg/NM3 to revised plan
600. The submitted
standard of by MOP
300 and 100 dated 13.10.
mg/NM3 2017
would require including
installation of NOx by
selective non- 2022
catalytic
reduction
(SNCR) or
selective non-
catalytic
reduction
(SCR). While
these
technologies
are established
globally, these
are not
6
established for
Indian coal,
which has high
ash content.
Therefore,
technology
validation is
required.
Source: Compiled from December 7 2017, letter by MOEF&CC to CPCB and excel sheets attached of schedule
Note 1* Includes 3205 MW, which is being verified by state pollution control boards if it meets revised norms.
Note 2** Some 16789 MW would not be able to install FGD due to constraints of space etc. MOP has requested to allow
these units to operate without FGD till retirement.
Note 3*** Haldia power plant, not yet commissioned.
EPCA has examined this schedule in terms of technologies to mitigate different

pollutants. It has received a submission from Ritwick Dutta on 10.2.2018
(Annexure 2) and detailed plan from CSE titled, No Room for Delay (Annexure 3).
EPCA has also examined data given to it by CPCB from its monitoring systems for
67 plants in the country.
5.1: Advancement/compliance with PM emissions

The December 2015 notification sets emission standards based on the age of the
plants.
For plants set up before 2003, particulate matter (PM) standards of 100
mg/NM3 have been set. It is important to note that the last revision of PM
standards was in 1989, when the standard for PM was set at 150 mg/NM3. Since
then technology has greatly advanced to control PM emissions. Plants set up
before December 2003 were already required to meet 150 mg/NM3 and
therefore, compliance with 100 mg/NM3 is not difficult.
In TPP set up since 2003, the vast majority of environmental clearances (EC)
require TPPs to meet 50 mg/NM3 – therefore, all the December 2015 standard
has done is to ask for compliance with the EC condition.
According to MOP data, 56 per cent of the plants already meet the set standards.
Out of the total power generation capacity (196 GW), roughly 66.5% of the
plants are already compliant with the new PM norms – 130,742 MW.
This can be done expeditiously.
It is also clear that a large number of plants that do not meet the standards are
old and therefore, due for retirement/shut down. This list needs to be finalized
and the list of plants requirement upgrade will therefore, come down
substantially.
In TPPs set up since January 2017, the norm is easily achieved, as the plant
would be designed to meet the set standard.
Based on the above, there is no reason, therefore, for the PM standard to be

deferred and made co-terminus with the installation of FGD. In fact, it can be
implemented within the next 2 years, at the most. The suggested schedule is:
7
Recommended schedule for advancement of PM norms
Year Standard Recommended schedule

(mg/NM3)
1 Plants before December 100 2018-2019
31, 2003
2 Plants between January 50 2018
1, 2003 and December
31st 2016
3 Plants from January 30 Must comply before
2017 commissioning
5.2: Advancement/compliance with SO2 emissions

The control on SO2 is critical for air pollution control. But it is also true that the
highest investment needed for pollution control is in installation of FGD. The
current plan of MOP schedules the installation of FGD till 2022, with only 9 units
being commissioned in 2018-2019 and the remaining 405 units from 2020
onwards.
The question is if this schedule can be advanced, keeping in mind the high
priority and critically polluted regions. CSE in its plan (Annexure 3) has
recommended that FGD phase in should be prioritized for areas with population
density of more than 400 people per sq km and the highly polluted CEPI –
Comprehensive Environment Pollution Index of MOEF&CC -- districts.
The schedule can also be advanced, so that the equipment is ordered

expeditiously and then installed in a phase-wise manner to account for shut-
down.
CSE has also contested data that suggests that all plants require FGDs. According
to its analysis, FGD is required for 60 per cent of the capacity – only in units,
which are over 500 mw. Also it is found that most of these above 500 mw units
are newer plants, installed after 2003.
Based on the above discussions, the recommended schedule is:

Year Standard (mg/NM3) Recommended
schedule
1 Plants before 200-600 (based on By December 2020
December 31, 2003 capacity)
2 Plants between 200-600 (based on By December 2020
January 1, 2003 and capacity)
December 31st 2016
3 Plants after January 1, 100 Must comply before
2017 commissioning
8
5.3: Advancement/compliance with NOx emissions

There is no clarity in the final decision that has been taken on control of NOx.
The MOEF&CC letter says that NOx schedule will be in accordance with MOP
decision, which is to meet standards by 2022. However, no schedule is provided.
It also notes that MOP has asked for upward revision of NOx standard of 100
mg/NM3 and 300 mg/NM3 to 600 mg/NM3. It also notes that technologies will
need to be validated for the use of Indian coal to meet even 300 mg/NM3.
However, this may not be the complete case.
The fact is that MOEF&CC based on the directions of this Hon’ble Court has set
NOx standards on October 23, 2017. These standards for pet coke and other fuels
(including Indian grade coal) set the standard at 300 mg/NM3. Therefore, it is
technological achievable.
This is also evident from the analysis of current emissions of TPPs. EPCA has
analyzed the data from the NOx data collected by CPCB for 57,780 MW capacity
for the recent periods.
This finds the following:

As much as 50 per cent of the power plants have reported that they already meet
the relevant NOx norms (300 mg/Nm3/or 600 mg/Nm3
Of this, 18,260 MW are compliant with the 300 mg/Nm3 standard.
10,120 MW are compliant with the 600 mg/Nm3 standard.
Interesting a proportion of the older plants (installed before 2003) even meet
the 300 mg/Nm3
NOx emissions from existing TPPs (see Annexure 4 for list)

Category Capacity in MW
3
Compliant (300 mg/Nm ) 18,620
3
Compliant (600 mg/Nm ) 10,120
3
Non-compliant (300 mg/Nm ) 25,730
3
Non-compliant (600 mg/Nm ) 3,310
9
Therefore, it is clear that technologies exist and in fact are being used to mitigate
emissions and to bring level of NOx to 300 mg/Nm3.
New boilers come equipped with low NOx burners. Furthermore, technologies
like Over-fire-Air (OFA) dampers and low NOx burners (LNB) are proven and
widely used in power plants and established to meet 300 mg/NM3 as are
technologies like selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) or selective non-
catalytic reduction (SCR).
However, there is a technology challenge for meeting the 100 mg/NM3, which is
required for plants established after January 2017. The list of these plants and
their technology plans needs to be detailed before a decision can be taken. It is
also understood that NTPC has installed technologies to pilot and to check if the
standards can be set. Based on this data and other best practices, MOEF&CC and
CPCB should review the technological options for meeting this standard in
consultation with MOP. The upward revision in the standard, if needed, should
only be considered for 100 mg/NM3 to 300 mg/NM3.
The recommended schedule is:

Year Standard Recommended schedule
(mg/NM3)
1 Plants before December 31, 600 2018-2019
2003
2 Plants between January 1, 300 2018-2019
2003 and December 31st
2016
3 Plants from January 2017 100 To test technologies for
meeting standard and based
on results, if needed to
revise standard upward.
Ensure compliance by 2019.
10
6.If dilution of water standard is necessary
The December 2015 notification set a water discharge standard – this was a
critical addition as TPPs withdraw large amounts of water for their cooling and
other requirements.
The standard for all plants, except those installed after January 2017, was set at
3.5 m3/MWh.
For TPP installed after January 2017, it was set at 2.5 m3/MWh and the plants
were expected to achieve zero discharge.
On October 16, 2017, MOEF&CC issued a draft notification to amend the

standards to do the following:
a. To exclude thermal power plants using sea water

b. To increase the water consumption in plants installed after January 1,
2017 from 2.5 m3/MWh to 3m3/MWh
Ritwick Dutta in his affidavit of February 1 2018has stated that while on the one
hand, the MOEF&CC on its part did not take any proactive steps to implement the
standards and on the other it issued draft Amendment for diluting the standards
with respect to water consumption. Furthermore, in his submission of February
10, 2017 he has stated that there is no need for dilution of the water requirement
for new plants, as it is understood that plants with FGD installed can operate
within prescribed limit of 2.5 m3/MWh. Hence, with 100 per cent ash utilization,
efficient water management systems should ensure minimum use of water.
It must be understood that Indian thermal power plants are known to be among
the most wasteful consumers of water. CSE’s 2015 study found that on an
average, Indian TPPs consumed 4 m3/MWh, as against the best practice of 1.34
m3/MWh in South Africa and 2.45 m3/MWh in China. The highest use of water in
TPPs in during the cooling process – roughly 65 per cent and the other bulk user
is flyash management – during discharge and disposal. Also, the more energy
inefficient the plant, the higher its water use. Given the looming scarcity of water,
it is clear that water budgeting is critical and therefore, there is no reason to
dilute the standards for the upcoming plants – January 2017 onwards.
In fact, best Indian plants already achieve 2 m3/MWh (CESC-Budge Budge,

JSWEL-Toranagallu etc). They do this through improvements in internal water
budgeting as well as fly ash management. There is no evidence to suggest that
the state of the art plants, which will be installed after January 2017, cannot meet
this objective – particularly, when India needs to be water frugal.
However, the coastal plants can be exempt from this norm, as they use and then
discharge seawater. The concern here is to ensure that the discharge of the
seawater, after use in the TPP is managed in terms of its temperature and other
discharge factors. In other words, it needs to be ensured that this use and
11
discharge of seawater is not detrimental to the coastal ecology. This should be

decided during the grant of EC.
7. Systems for effective compliance and monitoring

There are two key issues that need to be examined:
a. What can be done to ensure compliance with the extended scheduled
deadlines for pollution control, after these are finalized through the
appropriate directions of the Hon’ble Court?
b. What will be the system for monitoring that the TPPs meet the pollution
standard?
Ritwick Dutta in his submission has said that the only way the compliance with
the TPP standards can be assured if the standards and the compliance plans are
included in the Environmental Clearance (EC) for each plant. He has also asked
for Plant owner to put data on emissions in the public domain and for CPCB to
make data public on compliance in terms of the various milestones to be
achieved.
CSE in its submission has suggested an independent body that has oversight,
collects quarterly progress reports from all plants and can take corrective steps
if needed.
CSE has also suggested a penalty mechanism to avoid a repeat of what has
happened. This penalty should be pegged at Rs 1 lakh per day per non-compliant
pollutant. Their calculations show that assuming on average 3 non-compliant
pollutants (this is an over-estimation as 65% plants meet the PM norms and half
meet the NOx norms), a unit would need to pay Rs 11 crore per year.
The question still remains if the system for monitoring of emissions is robust and
if this data can be used for regulatory purposes. CPCB on 5.2.2014 had issued
directions under section 18(1) b of the Water and Air Acts to the State Pollution
Control Boards and Pollution Control Committees to direct 17 categories of
highly polluting to install online systems for emission and effluent monitoring.
However, there are concerns that this Continuous Emission Monitoring (CEMs)
system requires to be improved to ensure that equipment is calibrated and that
data is made available, not just to the state boards and to CPCB but to the public.
More importantly, it is important that the CEMs data is used for regulatory
purposes, which is not being done currently.
MOEF&CC and CPCB need to review and strengthen the monitoring systems for
emissions at the earliest and revert back to the Hon’ble Court.
8. Recommendations for consideration of the Hon’ble Court
Based on the above examination of the issues, EPCA would make the following
recommendations for consideration of the Hon’ble Court.
12
1. The timeline of 2022 can be advanced substantially and MOEF&CC may be

directed to revise the deadlines accordingly.
i. The final deadline for all plants to meet all emission norms should
be advanced to 2020, as against 2022.
ii. All plants must be required to meet PM and NOX standards within
the next two years; 2018-2019.
iii. TPPs must be required to meet SO2 norms by 2020, but the
schedule for phasing in the norms should be based on population
density and pollution. Therefore, the plants located in critically
polluted areas and with high population density should be
required to meet the norm by 2019. It takes 24 months to install
FGDs, therefore, if the process is started expeditiously, it can be
completed by 2020 at the latest.
iv. MOEF&CC, in consultation with MOP, must finalize the list of
plants, which will not be required to meet the standards as they
are scheduled for shut-down/retirement. The list of these plants
must be made available to the Hon’ble Court so that there is clarity
and closure on this matter and no plant is in non-compliance post
2020.
v. All new plants installed after January 2017 must be required to
meet PM and NOx norms before being commissioned. All these
plants must be required to meet SOx norms by 2019. A list of these
plants and their schedule must also be given to the Hon’ble
Supreme Court so that there is careful monitoring of the
directions.
vi. TPP, which have got EC but have not yet been commissioned,
should not be allowed to be operational without meeting the 2015
standards.
vii. No new TPP should be given EC or commissioned, without full
compliance with the 2015 standards.
2. MOEF&CC in consultation with CPCB may be directed to review the

technical feasibility of NOx standard of 100 mg/NM3, which is for plants
installed after January 2017 and revise it if necessary. However, no
further dilution of NOx standard should be allowed and all plants should
meet the set standard (600 mg/NM3 or 300 mg/NM3) in the next 2 years.
3. MOEF&CC may be directed not to revise the water consumption standard

for plants installed after January 2017. But it could consider allowing
coastal plants to be exempt from the water norm, provided the EC
conditions set the necessary environmental safeguards.
4. MOEF&CC in consultation with CPCB may be directed to review the

protocol for continuous emission monitoring (CEMs) and to revise it to
make it more robust, transparent and issue guidelines for its use for
regulatory purposes in a time-bound manner. This work is urgently
required as otherwise all the effort to improve emission profiles, by
installing equipment for pollution control will be negated.
13
5. The Hon’ble Court may consider imposing a penalty for ensuring effective
and expeditious compliance with its orders. The penalty of Rs lakh per
day per non-compliant pollutant can be considered effective from January
1, 2018 or January 1, 2019. This will provide an incentive to industry to
make the transition at the earliest.
It is also important to note that the timeline for implementation can be more
aggressive because of the special circumstances of power availability in the
country, which is in surplus. According to 2017 data of the Central Electricity
Authority3, the country has an installed capacity of 3,14,642 MW, of which
1,88,487 is coal based generation and another 25,329MW is gas based power
plants. The same report shows that the coal and lignite plants are working at
between 50-60 per cent of the Plant Load Factor (PLF) at best through the year
and across the different regions. It is well known that gas plants are working at
even less of their PLF. Therefore the scheduling of closure for installing pollution
equipment can be more aggressive and expeditious.
It is also clear that the sector has lost two years, since the notification was issued.
Given the dire urgency of the air pollution emergency across the country, EPCA
firmly believes that it is possible to advance the now extended deadline with
more aggressive actions to source equipment and to phase-in shutdowns for
installation.
3
January 2017, Central Electricity Authority, Ministry of Power, Report on Power Sector
http://www.cea.nic.in/reports/monthly/executivesummary/2017/exe_summary-01.pdf
3 (ii)]
(NOx)
TKT(Hg) 0.03 mg/Nm3
€MWr ^r ^t ^nf %
R+irfl ^FT ^t if f sfR ^
. H. ^-15017/40/2007-41 41
n, ^ 3, ^ws (ii) ^ $. ^T.STT. 844(sr) 1 9

1986 gTRT 5^TRm f%tT Trrr ^- 3^ ^njr q^rraSRff ^T.3TT. 433(3T) cTrftw 18 srfcr, 1987 ;
176(sr) m^ 2 srt^f, 1996; ^rr.^r.R 97 (ar), cfrftw 18 VhÔ, 2009 ; ^Tr.^T.f% 1 49(3T)
4 TIT^, 2009 ; m.^r.fW. 543(sr) ?nfrw 22 ^nt, 2009 ; m.^r.fW. 739(sr) rnft^ 9
2010 ; m.^T.fW. 809(3T) crrfra" 4 SR^T, 2010, m.^T.f^. 215(3T) dldy 15 fTTf, 2011 ; ^
221 (BT) rrrfm 18 nrf, 2011 ; ^rr.^r.fW. 354(sr) rnfr^ 2 ^rf, 2011 ; m.^r.R 424(ar)
^pr, 2011 ; m.^r.R 446(3T) rrrftsr 13 ^r, 2011 ; HT.^r.R 152(sr) mfrw 16 TTr^, 2012 ;
HT.^r.ft. 266(3r) ^rrfrw 30 imf, 2012 ; m.^.t^. 277(sr) cnft^ 31 nrf, 2012; *rr.^.1%. 820(sr)
cnfrw 9 ?r^Rr7:i 2012 ; HT.^T.R. 176(sr) di^y 18 *rnf, 2013 ; ^rr.w.R 535(ar) cnfrw 7 SFTRT,
2013 ; ^T.^r.tW. 771 (sr) mfr^ 11 R«H<, 2013 ; HT.^r.R 2(sr) frffw 2 ^^^-0, 2014 ;
. 229(-3T) rnfr^ 28 irrf , 2014 ; m.^T.R 232(3T) cfrftw 31 ^TT^, 2014 ; m.^T.tW. 325(ar")
7 Trf, 2014, ^r.?T.t%. 6i2(sr) grfhi- 25 smw, 2014 5frc srf^nr ^ft«pr w.^.R 789(3T)
1 1 ^TRR, 2014 f%4T n^rr «rr i
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE

NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 7th December, 2015
S.O. 3305(E).— In exercise of the powers conferred by sections 6 and 25 of the Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules further to
amend the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, namely:—
1 . (1) These rules may be called the Environment (Protection) Amendment Rules, 2015.
(2) They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
2. In the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, in Schedule - 1, -
(a) after serial number 5 and entries relating thereto, the following serial number and entries shall be
inserted, namely:-
Sr. No. Industry Parameter Standards
1 2 3 4
"5A. Thermal Power Water I. All plants with Once Through Cooling (OTC)
Plant (Water consumption shall install Cooling Tower (CT) and
consumption limit) achieve specific water consumption upto
maximum of 3.5m3/MWh within a period
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART n—SEC. 3(ii)]
of two years from the date of publication
of this notification.
II. All existing CT-based plants reduce specific
water consumption upto maximum of
3.5m3/MWh within a period of two years from
the date of publication of this notification.
ill. New plants to be installed after l sl January,
2017 shall have to meet specific water
consumption upto maximum of 2.5 m'/MWh
and achieve zero waste water discharged";
(b) for serial ntunber 25, and the entries related thereto, the following serial number and entries
shall be substituted, namely:-
Sr. No. Industry Parameter Standards
1 2 3 4
"25. Thermal TPPs ( units) installed before 31S| December, 2003*
Power Plant
Particulate Matter 100 mg/Nm3
Sulphur Dioxide ( SOi) 600 mg/Nm 3 (Units Smaller than 500MW
capacity units)
200 mg/Nm 3 (for units having capacity of
500MW and above)
Oxides of Nitrogen ( NOx) 600 mg/Nm 3
Mercury ( Hg) 0.03 mg/Nm 3 (for units having capacity of
500MW and above)
TPPs ( units) installed after 1" January,2003, upto 31" December" 2016*
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) 600 mg/Nm3 (Units Smaller than 500MW
capacity units)
200 mg/Nm3 (for units having capacity of
500MW and above)
Oxides of Nitrogen ( NOx) 300 mg/Nm3
Mercury ( Hg) 0.03 mg/Nm 3
TPPs ( units) to be installed from 1st January, 2017**
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) 100 mg/Nm 3
Oxides of Nitrogen ( NOx) 100 mg/Nm 3
Mercury ( Hg) 0.03 mg/Nm 3
TPPs (units) shall meet the limits within two years from date of publication of this notification.
Jg
9 Includes all the TPPs (units) which have been accorded environmental clearance and are under
construction".
9 [F. No. Q-15017/40/2007-CPW]
Dr. RASHID HASAN, Advisor
s
1
Annexure 2
SUGGESTIONS FOR ENSURING EMISSION CONTROL AND
REDUCTION IN WATER CONSUMPTION IN COAL FIRED
THERMAL POWER PLANTS
Submitted by Ritwick Dutta, Advocate
in
Writ Petition(s) (Civil) No. (s) 13029/1985
IN THE MATTER OF
M.C MEHTA PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS
Dated 10-2-2018
2
INTRODUCTION:
On 7thDecember 2015 MoEF&CC issued Notification No. S.O. 3305(E)
under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for air pollutant emissions
and water consumption for thermal power plants. The Notification aims
at regulating emissions of particulate matter (PM), Sulphur dioxide
(SO2), Oxides of Nitrogen(Nox),Mercury (Hg) and water consumption
and zero waste water discharge by thermal power plants. It should be
noted that this is the first time India had any standards for water and
other air pollutants other than PM, whereas USA, EU, China have been
having standards (in some cases even stricter than Indian standards)for
many years. It is pertinent to point out that before Dec 2015 India had
standards only for Particulate matter (PM).
In a presentation made on 18th May 2016 by Central Pollution Control
Board on “Environmental Regulations for coal based thermal power
plants”, it is stated that Coal based thermal power plants are
responsible for more than 80% of mercury emissions of all industrial
emissions. In addition, coal fired power plants are responsible for 90%
of the pollution load for PM 10, PM 2.5, SO2, and NOx among all
3
industrial sectors. With respect to water, 70% of the industrial water
consumption is from the power sector. The Economic Survey of India
Vol 2, 2016-2017, Published by the Government of India states the
following as the loss of life due to thermal power plants in India.
“The health impact of coal combustion is manifested in the
form of negative impact on the respiratory system,
cardiovascular diseases, neurological effects, etc. This is in
addition to the health impacts onthe coal miners who are at a
higher risk of chronic bronchitis and other lung diseases. The
annual number of deaths linked to coal based power plants
pollution is estimated to be around 115000 and the total
monetary cost is around US$4.6billion.”(27,600Cr)
Benefits of implementing the new standards: According to CPCB
includes the following : Reduction in PM emissions by 40%; reduction in
Sulphur Dioxide emissions by 48%; reduction in NOx emissions by 48%;
reduction in mercury emissions by 60% and reduction in water
consumption by 40%.
4
The Emission Norms of 7th December 2015 have been followed in its
breach. In order to ensure that no further breach takes place it is
suggested that the following measures/ action are undertaken:
(i) Creating Firm Retirement Plans and Deadlines for Power
Plants which cannot Comply with the December 7th, 2015
Notification: Each of the four regions in India has identified units that
will be retired due to lack of space for FGD and other controls. These
retirements should be made legally enforceable, with a firm retirement
date for each such plant/unit. The plant by plant retirement schedule is
essential to ensure full compliance with the Emission norms.
(ii) Creating Compliance Plans for Existing Units and Plants:
Compliance plans for meeting emission and water norms in each existing
unit be expeditiously developed by the plant owner or operator using
currently available Continuous Emission Monitoring System(CEMS) data
and water use related data. Such plans should be submitted to
MoEF&CC within 3 months and MoEF&CC shall review such plans and
approve with any modifications necessary to ensure compliance with the
TPP standards by December 2020 – April 2021. CPCB should make unit
wise CEMS data available in the public domain. Even though the start
date for compliance is December 2015, according to documents

5
submitted to the court, Its clear that no power plant has started the
process till March 2017. However CEA put its compliance schedule in
public domain in May 2017. Hence, The starting date for compliance
should be considered from May 2017.
(b) For existing 273 units of 72659MW that do not meet the PM
standards, meeting PM and mercury standards will require upgrading
existing ESPs or installing fabric filter baghouses, which are more
effective than ESPs. Either approach can be done in approximately 24
months;
(c) The 2015 NOx standards for existing units installed before January 1,
2017 can be met using burner upgrades and the installation of SNCR in
many cases. These can be implemented in 18 months. CEA should
submit a unit wise schedule for NOx compliance like how they have
submitted for PM and SO2.
(d) For existing 482units of 170931MW capacity that need FGD to meet
the SO2 (and PM and Hg) standards, FGD should be implemented be
implemented in 36 to 42 months, that is between May 2020 – December
2020
6
(e) All the existing units which came into operation before 1st January
2017 would meet the water norms of 3.5m3/MWh as expeditiously as
possible and ideally within 24 months.
(iii) Creating Compliance Plans for New Units and Plants:
(a) All new power Plants which are commissioned or starting generation
after 1st January, 2017 should be strictly adhering to the norms
prescribed under the December, 2015 Notification which includes (PM -
30mg/Nm3, SO2 - 100mg/Nm3, NOx - 100mg/NOx, mercury – 0.03
mg/Nm3, and 2.5m3/MW for water consumption and Zero Waste Water
discharge).
(b) No new plant shall be allowed to commence operation if they are not
meeting the standards prescribed for plants after 1st January 2017.
(c) Those plants which were commissioned between 1st Jan 2017 to till
date but not complying with the stricter standards should comply to the
Rules before December 2019.
(d) No dilution of the water requirement for new plants as its
understood that plants with FGD installed can operate within the
prescribed limit of 2.5 CuM/MWh. Hence, with 100% ash utilization and
7
efficient water management systems should ensure minimum use of
water.
(e) Any plant which is unable to utilize 100% of the ash as per the Fly
Ash Notification, 2009, should be allowed only to operate with a
capacity within which is can dispose its generated ash so as to ensure
that impact on water, land and local communities are minimized.
(iv) Ensuring that the TPP Standards are Enforceable:
(a) Compliance with the TPP standards can be assured only if
provisions to make the standards and the compliance plans
enforceable are included in the Environmental Clearance (“EC”) for
each plant.
(b) To ensure the enforceability of the TPP standards, the following
terms and conditions should be required to be included in the EC
for any new or existing plant:
a. Requirement that emissions of SO2, NOx, PM10, and Hg be
measured on the basis of an hourly average for purposes of
evaluating compliance.
b. Requirement that the owner or operator of the plant
maintain and make publicly available on their website at

8
least the past five years of quarterly reports of emissions
monitoring results, exceedances, and times when emissions
monitors were not operating.
c. The Central Pollution Control Board should submit quarterly
report on the status of complaince in terms of the various
milestone to be achieved.
d. In case there are any violation of the TPP Standards, any
person shall be at liberty to approach the National Green
Tribunal for seeking appropriate action against the defaulting
unit.
FLYASH MANAGEMENT
Massive quantities of fly ash are being generated in the country every
year. In 2015-16, 176 million tons of fly ash was generated, that is
almost 3 times the total solid waste of 62 million tons generated in the
country in the year For solid waste, PIB release of 5 April 2016, for Fly
ash generation, CEA Report on Fly Ash Generation and Utilisation 2016-
17). In spite of some improvement in utilisation, huge quantities remain
un-utilised, leading to a current cumulative accumulation of more than a
billion tons of ash, lying in ash ponds and ash dumps around the
9
country. There are limitations to the use the various uses of ash – in
cement production (due to limits on demand of cement), in recovery of
low lying land and other uses (pollutions and contamination risks), due
to transport costs etc. There only solution to the ash problem is to
ensure that generation matches the utilisation i.e Power Plants should
not be allowed to use more coal and generate more ash than they can
utilize. As Per CEA which brings out annually the Status of generation
and utilsation of flyash in the country, the Status of compliance in 2016-
2017 as per CEA is as follows:
"TABLE –VIII
STATUS OF UTILIZATION OF FLY ASH AS PER MOEF’S NOTFICATION DATED 3 rd NOVEMBER,

2009 FOR THE YEAR 2015-2016
Sl.No. Description No.s of TPS
(1) (2) (3)
1 No.s of TPS which have achieved the target of fly ash 54

utilization as per MoEF’s Notification of 3rd November,
2009
2 No.s of TPS which have not been able to achieve the 90

target of fly ash utilization as per MoEF’s Notification of
3rd November, 2009
3 No.s of TPS which have not generated any significant fly 7

ash or any fly ash
Total 151
It may be seen from Table-VIII above that:
During the year 2015-16, out of 151 (One hundred fifty one) thermal
power stations for which was received, 54 (fifty-four) power station have
achieved the targets of fly ash utilization as per MoEF’s Notification of 3rd
November, 2009
10
In order to control the flyash problem it is essential that the following
direction is issued:
(i) Ensure complete compliance with the fly ash notification of 2009
(S.O 2804 dated 3-11-2009) which requires all coal and lignite based
power plants to achieve 100 Percent utilisation of flyash within 4 years
of commissioning. The concerned SPCB shall take penal action under the
provisions of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 against those Plants
which are in violation of the Notification and the action taken should be
submitted in the Quarterly Report that is submitted to the Hon'ble
Supreme Court.
(ii) The MoEF & CC, should undertake preparation of an updated
Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Flyash and its Various Uses. This is
important in view of the fact that there are a number of studies have
shown the serious risk of contamination of land, water and air due
heavy metals and radioactivity contained in flyash. A number of studies
have been mandated by directions of the National Green Tribunal,
Expert Appraisal Committee and as conditions in the environmental
clearance's issued by the MoEF&CC. However, there is no effort as of
now to inform decisions with regard flyash utilization based on the

11
outcome of these studies. It is therefore essential that MoEF&CC in
association with relevant institution undertake Comprehensive Risk
Assessment of flyash and its various uses in accordance with the
Precautionary Principle.
Submitted by
Ritwick Dutta, Advocate

N-73 LGF, Greater Kailash 1, New Delhi
[email protected]
ANNEXURE3
Research director: Priyavrat Bhati
Writer: Rohit Pathania
Research support: Randhir Kr. Gupta, Pranav Phadke, Soundaram Ramanathan
Design: Ajit Bajaj
Cover: Ajit Bajaj
Production: Rakesh Shrivastava and Gundhar Das
Disclaimer: The analysis in this document has been made based on the minutes of meetings of the CEA
committee for phase-in plans for implementation of new emission norms, held between September and
October 2017. The analysis also considers notices issued by CPCB to power stations under Section 5 of
the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Updates and data from subsequent discussions has not been
considered in this report. CSE claims no responsibility for any discrepancies in the reported data.
Also, the views / analysis expressed in this report / document do not necessarily reflect the views of
Shakti Sustainable Energy Foundation. The Foundation also does not guarantee the accuracy of any data
included in this publication nor does it accept any responsibility for the consequences of its use.
CSE is grateful to Shakti Sustainable Energy Foundation for their support. Shakti Sustainable Energy
Foundation works to strengthen the energy security of the country by aiding the design and
implementation of policies that encourage energy efficiency, renewable energy and sustainable transport
solutions, with an emphasis on sub sectors with the most energy saving potential. Working together with
policy makers, civil society, academia, industry and other partners, The Foundation takes concerted action
to help chart out a sustainable energy future for India (www.shaktifoundation.in).
© 2018 Centre for Science and Environment
Material from this publication can be used, but with acknowledgement.
Citation: Priyavrat Bhati and Rohit Pathania, 2018, No Room for Delay: Analysis of
CEA Plans to Implement New Norms for Coal Power Plants, Centre for Science and
Environment, New Delhi
Published by
Centre for Science and Environment
41, Tughlakabad Institutional Area
New Delhi 110 062
Phones: 91-11-40616000
Fax: 91-11-29955879
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.cseindia.org
“For private circulation only”
No Room for Delay.indd 2 07/02/18 12:17 PM

ANALYSIS OF CEA PLANS TO IMPLEMENT NEW NORMS FOR COAL POWER PLANTS
OVERVIEW
POLICY BRIEF 2 0 1 8
In December 2015, the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEF&CC)
announced tighter emission standards for coal-based thermal power plants1. The new
standards aim to drastically reduce emissions of NOx, SO2, PM, and mercury. In order to
comply with these revised standards, existing plants were given two years (upto December
2017), while plants commissioned after 1 January 2017 were required to comply from the
start of their operations.
In September 2016, Nine months after the norms were announced, Central Electricity
Authority (CEA) asked Regional Power Committees (RPCs) to formulate a phasing plan for
installing emission control technologies. CEA held several rounds of inconclusive meetings
that produced reports with ever changing assessment of pollution control needs and timelines.
On September 1, 2017, the MoEF&CC and the Ministry of Power (MoP) met to discuss
the phase in/retirement plans submitted in April 2017 by the RPCs2. MoEF&CC and MoP
agreed that the April 2017 plan needs to be tightened such that all power stations meet the
environmental norms latest by 2022. Accordingly, the four RPCs were asked to come up with
revised plans. In late September the RPCs released new plans.3-6
CSE’s analysis of the RPC plans shows a dismal picture. First, very few plants are expected
to comply in the next three years; the vast majority are asking for 4-5 years of extension.
Second, even these weak plans don’t seem credible as they are not based on evaluation of
progress made by plants and current status or detailed project planning. There are neither
any firm commitments by plants nor have the regulators proposed any penal action in case
of another round of delays. CSE has suggested an alternate plan that is more ambitious
requiring the sector to comply within a much shorter, yet achievable timeframe. Moreover,
CSE’s recommendations are based on parameters such as population density and ambient
pollution levels, which should logically drive implementation schedule.

41, Tughlakabad Institutional Area, New Delhi 110 062, India, Ph: +91-11-40616000 Fax: +91-11-29955879
E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.cseindia.org 5

NO ROOM FOR DELAY
RPC’s PHASE-IN PLANS

The latest RPC plan claims that roughly one third of the total capacity is non- compliant with
the PM standards. They will have to undertake measures for compliance. (see Table 1: Plans
to meet with PM norms identified by the four RPCs). Also, there was no discussion about 121.1
GW capacity in the RPC plan - we understand that CEA believes these plants are compliant
(Indeed, CEA’s April 2017 report said that approx 115 GW of capacity complies with PM
norms). We believe this is an optimistic picture of compliance level; however, in the absence
of detailed, reliable emissions data, we can neither confirm nor refute CEA’s estimate.
TABLE 1: PLANS TO MEET PM NORMS AS IDENTIFIED BY THE FOUR RPCs

(CAPACITIES IN GW)
Only 53 GW capacity will have to undertake measures for compliance
Regions SR WR ER NR Total
Non-compliant 15.6 17.8 14.1 21.1 68.7
ESP up-gradation 0.6 12.4 13.0
Through FGD 11.0 13.7 8.7 7.2 40.1
To be retired 5.2 4.0 4.7 1.5 15.5
Compliant 23.6 58.8 18.0 20.7 121.1
Total 39.3 76.6 32.1 41.8 189.8
NOTE: SR = Southern Region; WR = Western Region; ER = Eastern Region; NR = Northern Region

Source: Regional power committees, 2017
For SO2 emission control, RPCs identified that 160 GW capacity will have to install Flue Gas
Desulphurization (FGDs) (see Table 2: Overview – region-wise FGD plan). As per this plan,
however, only 20% of the capacity is targeted for compliance by 2020 (see Table 3: FGD
installation roadmap identified by the RPCs) with significant back loading.
TABLE 2: OVERVIEW – REGION-WISE FGD PLAN (CAPACITIES IN GW)

85 percent capacity will install FGD
Regions SR WR ER NR Total
Non-compliant 31.4 65.5 27.4 39.0 163.3
FGD planned 31.4 65.5 27.4 36.2 160.6
FGD not possible 2.8 2.8
Compliant 7.8 11.1 4.7 2.8 26.5
CFBC 1.4 2.1 3.5
FGD installed 1.2 4.9 1.3 7.5
To be retired 5.2 4.1 4.7 1.5 15.5
Total 39.3 76.6 32.1 41.8 189.8

TABLE 3: FGD INSTALLATION ROADMAP IDENTIFIED BY THE RPCs
(CAPACITIES IN GW)
Almost three-fourths capacity is scheduled for compliance in 2021-22
TARGET YEAR SR WR ER NR Total
2019 3.6 0.0 0.0 1.3 4.9
2020 5.5 8.6 0.8 12.2 27.1
2021 7.9 34.5 9.0 12.4 63.8
2022 14.5 22.5 7.4 10.3 54.6
2023 - - 9.0* - 9.0
Not Defined - - 1.1 - 1.1
Total 31.4 65.5 27.4 36.2 160.6
*RPCs were asked to prepare a phase-in plan to comply by 2022. However ERPC plan continued to show that 9 GW
will comply in 2023.
Weaknesses of the RPC plan

• Unavailability of Credible Emissions Data: Even after two years of the introduction
of standards, detailed, credible emissions data is unavailable. This indicates lack of
seriousness in the planning process. It is difficult to analyze needs of individual plants
and overall timelines in the absence of emissions data.
• Space constraint – A non issue: For two years, CEA and RPCs insisted that space is a
constraint to install FGDs – however, the number of plants for which space was an issue
kept decreasing. Now, CEA thinks that FGDs should be installed in 160 GW capacity,
which we believe is not the appropriate strategy. For 77 GW capacity consisting of units
that are smaller than 500MW, the RPC plans suggest that a vast majority will install
FGDs to meet the 600 mg/Nm3 norm. We feel this is unwarranted investment and has
contributed to the industry asking for more time for compliance. We suggest alternatives
(given later in CSE plan)
• Back-loaded Plan: There is heavy back loading on the commitments from power stations to
install new equipment, especially FGD for SO2 control. Almost all power stations commit
to complete the exercise by 2022, without identifying specific, intermediate timelines on
any steps that would be undertaken. This indicates that the proposed timelines have been
given without commitment and will not be met unless there is credible penal action in the
event of delay.
• No Plan for NOx Control: Only the Southern RPC identified a schedule for NOx control.
The other RPCs have not given details about either the measures they will undertake or
the timelines. Since NOx emissions are directly linked to boiler efficiency, they deserve
greater attention. In fact, CEA reports had concluded that NOx control is a relatively
minor retrofit that can be achieved during annual overhaul. The fact that most plants
have not taken any steps to comply with NOx norms is inexplicable.
• Unclear ESP Timelines: Timelines for ESP upgrades for non-compliant power stations
were not given by three of the RPCs. Many stations intend to install FGDs to meet even
ESP standards; only few plants plan to upgrade ESP upgrade. Given that FGD needs the
inlet dust to be less than 100mg/Nm3, ESP upgrade would anyway be needed. Therefore,
lack of ESP plan is a serious weakness.


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
CPCB’s REVISED DEADLINES

On 11 December 2017, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) issued section 5 notices to
thermal power stations, asking them to take action for compliance with the 2015 norms7.
This came after MoEF&CC’s December 2017 deadline.
As per these notices, power stations totaling 163GW of capacity have been asked to implement
the measures by December 2022. This is broadly in line with regional power committee
timelines. For FGD installations, about 14GW capacity – mostly located around Delhi NCR
- has been fast tracked for compliance by 2019 as compared to RPC plan8 (see Table 4: FGD
installation roadmap identified by the CPCB).
TABLE 4: FGD INSTALLATION ROADMAP IDENTIFIED BY THE CPCB

(CAPACITIES IN GW)
Acceleration of timelines for plants in NCR. Overall, the plan is still back-loaded
TARGET YEAR SR WR ER NR Total Capacity (GW)
Immediately 0.8 1.3 - 1.5 3.6
2018 - 0.5 - - 0.5
2019 2.4 - - 12.0 14.4
2020 5.8 8.7 1.2 6.7 22.3
2021 7.7 33.8 8.8 9.5 59.7
2022 14.7 22.2 17.3 8.2 62.2
No Comments - 0.6 - - 0.6
Total Capacity (GW) 31.4 66.9 27.3 37.8 163.4
Source: CPCB Directions under Section 5 of Environment (Protection) Act to power stations, 2017
Unlike the RPC plan, CPCB has identified a PM compliance roadmap for 163GW capacity.
Of this, 76 GW has been asked to take steps immediately (see Table 5: ESP roadmap to meet
PM norms identified by CPCB). This is in contrast with the RPC plan which identified only
68GW capacity for action. However, the timelines for plants are invariably the same as those
for FGDs, which makes little sense since ESP retrofit can be finished much faster than FGD.
TABLE 5: ESP ROADMAP TO MEET PM NORMS IDENTIFIED BY CPCB

(CAPACITIES IN GW)
There is no mention of 23GW capacity in the CPCB action plan
Immediately 13.2 39.2 10.9 13.3 76.6

2019 1.3 4.7 6.0
2020 2.7 2.5 0.5 2.3 8.0
2021 2.8 10.7 3.1 6.1 22.6
2022 7.7 5.8 7.5 6.3 27.3
No Comments 3.6 8.7 5.4 5.1 22.8

CPCB has asked plants to adopt immediate measures for NOx control. However, the deadline
for actual compliance has been set at 2022 for nearly all power plants. The 2022 timeline
seems to have been based on RPC plans which said that plants need to install SCR/SNCR
to meet the norms. While Section 5 notices by CPCB said that plants need to use measures
such as low NOx burner/OFA (which can be done during annual overhaul), they erroneously
retained the longer timelines. (see Table 6: NOx roadmap identified by CPCB).
TABLE 6: NOX ROADMAP IDENTIFIED BY CPCB (CAPACITIES IN GW)

No action for NOx control till 2022
2019 - - - 12.0 12.0
2022 31.4 66.9 27.3 25.8 151.4
Weaknesses of the new CPCB plan

• Compliance with NOx norms by 2022 despite the fact that suggested retrofit can be done
during annual overhaul.
• ESP upgrade plans coincide with the FGD plans for most power stations. Inaction in the
intervening period to at least control PM emissions is incomprehensible.
• Plants commissioned in 2017 should be compliant with the norms announced in 2015.
It is higly unlikely that any of those plants are compliant with all norms, however, it
seems that pollution control boards or CEA have not sought compliance status from
these plants. For example, Rattan India’s power station (5 X 270MW) claims to be norms
compliant as per the RPC. However, CPCB has identified a target date of 2021 & 2022,
without verifying compliance.
• Some plants had been identified as norms compliant by the RPCs; they were however
asked to verify this. CPCB has taken no evident action on asking for proof of compliance
from these power stations.
• There is no clarity about the applicability of the 2015 norms to captive power stations,
especially those of capacity >100MW. No such plant has been issued any notices by CPCB
so far.
• Inconsistency with RPC phase out plan: Plants that have been identified for phase-out’s
by the RPCs and/or retirement have also been issued notices. E.g. Guru Hargobind
thermal power station in Punjab has been identified for FGD installations by CPCB.
However, it is slated for retirement by 2019 as per the RPC plan.
• There are other evident discrepancies in issuing notices from CPCB. For instance,
consider the following:
o CLP’s Jhajjar power station has been given a deadline of 31 January 2019 to install
FGD. However, the plant has been running an FGD since 2012.
o Unit 5 of Tata Power in Trombay has already installed FGD. However, it has been
given a target date of 2018.


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
CSE RECOMMENDATIONS
CSE believes that an aggressive timeline needs to be pursued in light of the gravity of the
problem and lack of any meaningful effort by a majority of plants. Any relaxation may
encourage further delays down the road.
1. Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)

To maximize benefits from investment in pollution control, we believe densely populated
and/or highly polluted areas should be first targeted. Both CEA and MoEF have indicated
that this approach makes sense. Second, techno-economic considerations are also important
– this means that larger (>500 MW size) and newer units which have to meet the tighter
standard should prioritize FGD installation. Further, CPCB has now prioritized installation
of control technology for power stations in states neighboring Delhi; however, air pollution is
a problem in the entire Northern and Eastern Region. CSE therefore proposes that these be
considered in the following manner:
• Population Density: Pollution control measures should be prioritized in areas with
significant population. We have used population density of the district where a plant is
located as a measure to figure out the number of people affected. Population density of
400/sq.km can be taken (average of India was 382 persons/sq.km. as per 2011 Census) to
prioritize plants for installation of FGDs.
• Pollution Levels: CPCB had identified 43 highly polluted areas under the Comprehensive
Environmental Pollution Index (CEPI) exercise9. Power stations located in these areas
should also be prioritized.
For 111 GW (greater than 500MW units), densely populated and highly polluted areas should
be prioritized in the first phase. With this we can achieve a compliance of 57 GW by December
2019. The balance should be asked to comply by December 2020 (see Table 7: FGD Phase-in
Plan for Units of 500MW and above).
TABLE 7: FGD PHASE-IN PLAN FOR UNITS OF 500MW AND ABOVE

Densely populated and highly polluted areas must be prioritized
Criteria Capacity (GW) Compliance
Population density more than 400 per sq.km.+ highly polluted 56.7 * Dec 2019
districts as per CEPI
Population density below 400/ sq.km. 51.5 Dec 2020

Subtotal 108.2
FGD installed 3.5
Total 111.7
*Includes two 490MW units of NTPC, Dadri
For the balance 78 GW (smaller than 500MW units), RPC plans suggest that no action is
required on 12.4 GW capacity as they are in compliance because either they are CFBC boilers
or have installed FGDs or are using low sulphur coal. In addition, RPC plans show that 15.5
GW would be retired. The RPC plans suggest that a vast majority of the remaining capacity
will install FGDs to meet the 600 mg/Nm3 norm.
10

Our recommendation is that the remaining units totaling 48.8 GW may be asked to install
alternative SO2 control measures, including partial FGDs, lime injection in boilers, etc. or
exploring fuel change (low sulphur coal) (see Table 8: SO2 control Plan for Units less than
500MW capacity). Here also, a phased approach considering population and pollution levels
should be adopted.
TABLE 8: SO2 CONTROL PLAN FOR UNITS LESS THAN 500MW CAPACITY
Alternatives to FGD must be considered
Category Capacity in GW Compliance
No Action needed 27.9
CFBC/FGD Installed 7.3
In compliance (low sulphur coal etc) 5.1
Retirement 15.5
SO2 control (lime injection etc.) 48.8
Population density more than 400 per sq.km.+ highly 30.5 December, 2018
polluted districts as per CEPI
Population density below 400/ sq.km. 14.3 December 2019
Total 77.7
2. Particulate matter (PM)

As per the RPCs reports, about 121 GW (~64 percent) does not require ESP retrofit, which we
take to mean are in compliance. This seems to be an optimistic figure - compliance should be
reconfirmed by plants and cross-checked by regulators by March 2018. Our estimate is that
around 100GW may be in compliance. We believe that a majority of the balance (around 21
GW) comprises plants that were installed after 2008 and designed to meet the new standards
but they may be exceeding the PM norms by a small number – this small share of capacity that
may need to refurbish the ESP should do it by March 2018 (see Table 9: ESP retrofit plans).
TABLE 9: ESP RETROFIT PLANS

Majority can achieve compliance in a short span of time
Capacity in GW To comply PM norms by
121.1 March 2018 (in compliance or minor retrofits)
53.1 (a) March 2019
15.5 (b) To be retired
189.8 Total
a) Approx. 53 GW should be asked to comply by March 2019. Of this, 40 GW capacity plans to install FGD to cut
emissions and meet the PM norms. Since optimal FGD would require low PM concentration (50-100mg/Nm3),
we suggest these should overhaul the ESPs in addition to 13GW of capacity that plans to upgrade ESP.
b) To reiterate, this number is based on RPC plans. Over 34 GW of capacity is more than 25 years old and we believe
most of it is non-compliant. There, a larger number of plants can be retired
3. Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)

As per the continuous emissions monitoring data (CEMS) data collected from CPCB for
93 GW of monitored capacity, about 50 percent capacity complies with the relevant NOX
standards. Using this as the benchmark, we may assume that 50 percent of all power stations
are compliant with the NOx standard. Hence, NOx control measures should be implemented


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
in two stages (see Table 10: Retrofit plans to comply with norms for oxides of nitrogen) –
• 135.1 GW may be asked to complete the installation in the next overhaul cycle by
December 2018,
• Balance 47 GW can be given the deadline of December 2019.
TABLE 10: RETROFIT PLANS TO COMPLY WITH NORMS FOR OXIDES OF

NITROGEN
Full compliance can be achieved by 2019
To comply by Capacity in GW
To be retired 15.5
December, 2018 135.1
December, 2019 40.1
Total 189.8
In summary, we recommend that:

• About 67% capacity meet PM standards by December 2017. If some of these are not able
to meet by a small margin, they could be asked to do minor retrofits and meet PM norms
by March 2018. The remaining one-third capacity should meet PM norms by March
2019.
• 90% of the capacity should meet SO2 norms by December 2020. The remaining 10%,
which are located in sparsely populated areas should meet standards by December 2021.
• 135.1 GW plants should be asked to comply with the NOx norms by December 2018. The
remaining can meet the norms during annual maintenance by December 2019.
• Overall, in the next 3 years, we can achieve close to 90% compliance which would be a
great achievement.
• The plant-wise compliance schedule is attached in Annexures 2 to 5.
Finally, we note our report of charting timelines as a starting point for discussions. Getting
detailed emissions data will be immensely helpful to further refine what plants need and how
much time they need. CEA, RPCs, and CPCB should immediately share emissions data –
we assume that at the very least RPCs have collected recent emissions data through manual
sampling conducted recently. This is important since CEMS data is still not fully reliable. Also,
RPCs should be asked to release documents/reports used to arrive at the phase-in schedule
for each plant. It will help MoEF/CPCB confirm the credibility of the plans. Second, they can
form the basis of committed action plan backed by punitive action to enforce compliance.
12

REFERENCES
1. Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, Gazette Notification SO 3305(E),
7th December 2015. http://www.moef.gov.in/sites/default/files/Thermal%20plant%20
gazette%20scan.pdf
2. Ministry of Power, Government of India office order no. FU-1/2015-IPC dated
21/09/2016. Committee constituted for preparing a phasing plan for implementation of
new environmental norms
3. Minutes of 36th (special) TCC meeting of NRPC held on 14th September 2017 at NRPC,
New Delhi
4. Minutes of Special TCC Meeting of WRPC held on 28th September 2017 at WRPC,
Mumbai
5. Minutes of 36th TCC meeting of ERPC held on 13th September 2017 at Bhubaneswar
6. Minutes of special meeting on preparation of the phasing plan for implementation of
new environmental norms for Thermal Plants of SRPC held on 18th September 2017 at
Bengaluru.
7. Directions under section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 regarding
compliance of emission limits notified vide notification number S.O. 3305 (E) dated
07/12/2015.
8. Affidavit on behalf of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change to IA No.
123849 of 2017 in compliance of the order dated 17/11/2017 and 04/12/2017 of Hon’ble
Supreme Court.
9. Critically Polluted Industrial clusters / areas http://cpcbenvis.nic.in/industrial_pollution.
html#


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 – OBSERVATIONS AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RPC AND CPCB PLANS
Parameter RPC Plan October 2017 CPCB Plan December 2017
PM • 121 GW will not be opting for any • Detailed plans have been identified for
action for SPM control. While this level ESP upgrades/retrofits for these power
of compliance seems optimistic, we stations. Implementation dates have
note that almost 110 GW was installed been given on a unit wise basis as well,
after 2008 – most of this capacity was totaling to 140 GW.
likely designed to meet the new norms
so at most some plants will need to • CPCB has asked units totaling to 76
upgrade the ESPs. GW to retrofit their ESPs immediately.
• Retrofit requirements have been • No comments have been issued for

identified for about 68 GW to meet about 23GW power stations.
SPM norms. Of this, 42 GW employ
FGD to meet the PM norms but have
no plans to upgrade the ESP. About 15
GW has retirement plans. Only 13 GW
have identified an ESP retrofit plan.
SO2 • RPCs agree that installation of FGD • CPCB has accelerated compliance
systems in power plants close to urban deadlines for power stations located
settlements should be prioritized, in Punjab, Haryana and Western UP
considering the impacts on human to 2019. This has been done keeping
health. However, it is unclear if this in mind the air pollution problem in
parameter has been factored in Delhi-NCR. Few other power plants
drawing the schedule. located in urban centers have also
been given accelerated timelines.
• 160 GW has been identified for FGD
installations to meet the SO2 norms. • 163 GW has been identified for FGD
However, the target for 2019 is a mere installations to meet the SO2 norms.
5 GW. FGD installations for 64 GW The target for 2019 is 18 GW. FGD
(40 percent of identified capacity) are installations for 55 GW (40 percent of
targeted for the year 2021, while 55 identified capacity) are targeted for
GW (about 35 percent) is targeted for the year 2021, while 62 GW (about 40
2022. percent) is targeted for 2022.
NOx • Only the Southern RPC has identified • Power plants have been asked to
a schedule for NOx control, which was implement Low NOx burners and Over
within the next annual overhauling fire air (OFA) dampers or any other
schedule. suitable measure.
• The other RPCs are unclear on the • NOx control targets have been stated
measures they will undertake, and the clearly. Deadline has been set at 2022
timeline of compliance. for most plants. There are accelerated
deadlines of 2019 for plants which also
have accelerated FGD deadlines.
14

ANNEXURE 2 – PHASE IN PLAN FOR FGD INSTALLATION (UNITS LARGER THAN 500 MW)
COMPLY BY DEC 2019 - Located in districts that have population density in excess of 400/
sq.km. or are critically polluted
POPULATION DENSITY
(PERSON PER SQ.KM)
COMMISSIONING
CAPACITY IN MW
UNIT NUMBER
PLANT NAME DISTRICT STATE
SECTOR
YEAR
DR. N.TATA RAO TPS VIJAYAWADA ANDHRA PRADESH 2009 STATE 7 500 519
SIMHADRI (STAGE 1) VISHAKHAPATNAM ANDHRA PRADESH 2002 CENTRAL 1 500 519
VIZAG TPP VISHAKHAPATNAM ANDHRA PRADESH 2014 PRIVATE 1 520 519
VIZAG TPP VISHAKHAPATNAM ANDHRA PRADESH 2014 PRIVATE 2 520 519
KAHALGAON BHAGALPUR BHAGALPUR BIHAR 2008 CENTRAL 5 500 1180
BARH SUPER THERMAL

PATNA BIHAR 2014 CENTRAL 5 660 1803
POWER PLANT STAGE-II
BARH SUPER THERMAL

PATNA BIHAR 2014 CENTRAL 4 660 1803
POWER PLANT STAGE-II
MARWA THERMAL POWER

JANJGIR CHHATTISGARH 2014 STATE 1 500 421
PLANT
MARWA THERMAL POWER

JANJGIR CHHATTISGARH 2014 STATE 2 500 421
PLANT
BARADARHA TPS JANJGIR-CHAMPA CHHATTISGARH 2014 PRIVATE 1 600 421
BARADARHA TPS JANJGIR-CHAMPA CHHATTISGARH 2014 PRIVATE 2 600 421
NARIYARA THERMAL
POWER PLANT JANJGIR-CHAMPA CHHATTISGARH 2013 PRIVATE 1 600 421
(AKALTARA)
NARIYARA THERMAL
POWER PLANT JANJGIR-CHAMPA CHHATTISGARH 2013 PRIVATE 2 600 421
(AKALTARA)
KORBA STPS KORBA CHHATTISGARH 2010 CENTRAL 7 500 183
KORBA-WEST TPS
KORBA CHHATTISGARH 2013 STATE 5 500 183
(HASDEO)
HISAR (RAJIV GANDHI) HISAR HARYANA 2010 STATE 1 600 438
HISAR (RAJIV GANDHI) HISAR HARYANA 2010 STATE 2 600 438
ARAVALI THERMAL
CENTRAL-
POWER PLANT (INDIRA JHAJJAR HARYANA 2011 1 500 522
STATE JV
GANDHI)
ARAVALI THERMAL
CENTRAL-
STATE JV
GANDHI)


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
POPULATION DENSITY
(PERSON PER SQ.KM)
COMMISSIONING
CAPACITY IN MW
UNIT NUMBER
SECTOR
YEAR
ARAVALI THERMAL
CENTRAL-
STATE JV
GANDHI)
MAHATMA GANDHI
JHAJJAR HARYANA 2012 PRIVATE 1 660 522
THERMAL POWER STATION
MAHATMA GANDHI
JHAJJAR HARYANA 2012 PRIVATE 2 660 522
THERMAL POWER STATION
MAITHON RIGHT BANK

DHANBAD JHARKHAND 2010 PRIVATE 2 525 1284
THERMAL POWER PLANT
MAITHON RIGHT BANK

DHANBAD JHARKHAND 2010 PRIVATE 1 525 1284
THERMAL POWER PLANT
CENTRAL-
KODARMA KODERMA JHARKHAND 2013 1 500 427
STATE JV
CENTRAL-
KODARMA KODERMA JHARKHAND 2013 2 500 427
STATE JV
BOKARO ‘A’ TPS BOKARO JHARKHAND 2016 CENTRAL 1 500 716
YERMARUS RAICHUR KARNATAKA 2015 STATE 1 800 457
YERMARUS RAICHUR KARNATAKA 2016 STATE 2 800 457
CHANDRAPUR (MAH.) CHANDRAPUR MAHARASHTRA 2015 STATE 9 500 192
KHAPARKHEDA NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA 2011 STATE 5 500 470
KORADI TPS NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA 2015 STATE 9 660 470
MAUDA THERMAL POWER

NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA 2016 CENTRAL 4 660 470
PLANT
MAUDA THERMAL POWER

PLANT
MAUDA THERMAL POWER

PLANT
MAUDA THERMAL POWER

PLANT
DERANG ANGUL ORISSA 2014 PRIVATE 1 600 199

DERANG ANGUL ORISSA 2014 PRIVATE 2 600 199
TALCHER KANIHA ANGUL ORISSA 1995 CENTRAL 1 500 199
16

POPULATION DENSITY
(PERSON PER SQ.KM)
COMMISSIONING
CAPACITY IN MW
UNIT NUMBER
SECTOR
YEAR
RAJPURA THERMAL
PATIALA PUNJAB 2014 PRIVATE 1 700 596
POWER PLANT
RAJPURA THERMAL
PATIALA PUNJAB 2014 PRIVATE 2 700 596
POWER PLANT
METTUR TPS SALEM TAMIL NADU 2014 STATE 5 600 663
NORTH CHENNAI POWER

TIRUVALLUR TAMIL NADU 2013 STATE 4 600 1049
CO. LTD.
NORTH CHENNAI POWER

TIRUVALLUR TAMIL NADU 2013 STATE 5 600 1049
CO. LTD.
VALLUR THERMAL POWER

TIRUVALLUR TAMIL NADU 2014 CENTRAL 1 500 1049
PLANT

PLANT

PLANT
BARA TPP (PRAGYARAJ) ALLAHABAD UTTAR PRADESH 2015 PRIVATE 1 660 1087
BARA TPP (PRAGYARAJ) ALLAHABAD UTTAR PRADESH 2015 PRIVATE 2 660 1087
DADRI (NCTPP) DELHI UTTAR PRADESH 2010 5 490
DADRI (NCTPP) DELHI UTTAR PRADESH 2010 6 490
ANPARA C SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 2011 PRIVATE 2 600 270
ANPARA C SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 2011 PRIVATE 1 600 270
ANPARA TPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 1994 STATE 4 500 270
RIHAND STPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 1988 CENTRAL 1 500 270
SINGRAULI STPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 1986 CENTRAL 6 500 270
SINGRAULI STPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 1987 CENTRAL 7 500 270
CENTRAL-
MEJIA BANKURA WEST BENGAL 2012 7 500 523
STATE JV
CENTRAL-
MEJIA BANKURA WEST BENGAL 2012 8 500 523
STATE JV
CENTRAL-
DURGAPUR STEEL TPS BURDWAN WEST BENGAL 2013 1 500 1100
STATE JV
CENTRAL-
DURGAPUR STEEL TPS BURDWAN WEST BENGAL 2013 2 500 1100
STATE JV
SAGARDIGHI MURSHIDABAD WEST BENGAL 2016 STATE 4 500 1334
SAGARDIGHI MURSHIDABAD WEST BENGAL 2016 STATE 3 500 1334


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
POPULATION DENSITY
(PERSON PER SQ.KM)
COMMISSIONING
CAPACITY IN MW
UNIT NUMBER
SECTOR
YEAR
RAGHUNATHPUR
CENTRAL-
(STAGE 1) THERMAL PURULIA WEST BENGAL 2014 1 600 468
STATE JV
POWER PLANT
RAGHUNATHPUR
CENTRAL-
(STAGE 1) THERMAL PURULIA WEST BENGAL 2014 2 600 468
STATE JV
POWER PLANT
FARAKKA STPS MURSHIDABAD WEST BENGAL 1992 CENTRAL 4 500 1334
VINDHYACHAL STPS SINGRAULI MADHYA PRADESH 2012 CENTRAL 11 500 157
NIGRI SINGRAULI MADHYA PRADESH 2014 PRIVATE 1 660 157
NIGRI SINGRAULI MADHYA PRADESH 2014 PRIVATE 2 660 157
MAHAN TPP SINGRAULI MADHYA PRADESH 2013 PRIVATE 1 600 157
TOTAL 56,750
18

COMPLY BY DEC 2020 – Units larger than 500MW located in districts with population density
below 400 persons/sq/km.
POPULATION DENSITY
(PERSON PER SQ.KM)
COMMISSIONING
CAPACITY IN MW
CENTRAL/STATE/
UNIT NUMBER
PRIVATE
YEAR
SGPL TPP KRISHNAPATNAM ANDHRA PRADESH 2015 PRIVATE 1 660 227
SGPL TPP KRISHNAPATNAM ANDHRA PRADESH 2015 PRIVATE 2 660 227
NELCAST ENERGY
CORPORATION LTD. NELLORE ANDHRA PRADESH 2015 PRIVATE 1 660 227
(PANAIPURAM)
NELCAST ENERGY
CORPORATION LTD. NELLORE ANDHRA PRADESH 2015 PRIVATE 2 660 227
(PANAIPURAM)
SRI DAMODARAM
NELLORE ANDHRA PRADESH 2014 STATE 1 800 227
SANJEEVAIAH TPS
SRI DAMODARAM
NELLORE ANDHRA PRADESH 2014 STATE 2 800 227
SANJEEVAIAH TPS
SIPAT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH 2007 CENTRAL 4 660 322
ADANI KORBA WEST

POWER STATION RAIGARH CHHATTISGARH 2014 PRIVATE 1 600 211
(AVANTHA BHANDAR)
TAMNAR RAIGARH CHHATTISGARH 2014 PRIVATE 1 600 211
RAIKHEDA TPP RAIPUR CHHATTISGARH 2014 PRIVATE 1 685 310
RAIKHEDA TPP RAIPUR CHHATTISGARH 2014 PRIVATE 2 685 310
UKAI TPS TAPI GUJARAT 2013 STATE 6 500 249
BELLARY (KUDITINI
THERMAL POWER BELLARY KARNATAKA 2012 STATE 1 500 300
STATION)
BELLARY (KUDITINI
STATION)
BELLARY (KUDITINI
STATION)
KUDGI STPP BIJAPUR KARNATAKA 2016 CENTRAL 1 800 207
KUDGI STPP BIJAPUR KARNATAKA 2017 CENTRAL 2 800 207
M B POWER LTD. ANUPPUR MADHYA PRADESH 2014 PRIVATE 2 600 200
M B POWER LTD. ANUPPUR MADHYA PRADESH 2014 PRIVATE 1 600 200
SEIONI TPP SEONI MADHYA PRADESH 2016 PRIVATE 1 600 232


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
POPULATION DENSITY
(PERSON PER SQ.KM)
COMMISSIONING
CAPACITY IN MW
CENTRAL/STATE/
UNIT NUMBER
PRIVATE
YEAR
SASAN ULTRA MEGA
SIDHI MADHYA PRADESH 2013 PRIVATE 1 660 232
POWER PLANT
SASAN ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
SASAN ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
SASAN ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
SASAN ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
SASAN ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
ADANI TIRORA
GONDIA MAHARASHTRA 2012 PRIVATE 1 660 253
(PHASE 1)
ADANI TIRORA
(PHASE 1)
ADANI TIRORA
(PHASE 2)
ADANI TIRORA
(PHASE 2)
ADANI TIRORA
(PHASE 2)
BHUSAWAL TPS JALGAON MAHARASHTRA 2012 STATE 4 500 359
BHUSAWAL TPS JALGAON MAHARASHTRA 2012 STATE 5 500 359
STERLITE ENERGY LTD. JHARSUGUDA ORISSA 2010 PRIVATE 1 600 274
TALWANDI SABO
THERMAL POWER MANSA PUNJAB 2013 PRIVATE 2 660 350
PLANT
TALWANDI SABO
PLANT
TALWANDI SABO
PLANT
KALISINDH JHALAWAR RAJASTHAN 2014 STATE 1 600 227

KALISINDH JHALAWAR RAJASTHAN 2014 STATE 2 600 227
MUTHIARA TPP TUTICORIN TAMIL NADU 2014 PRIVATE 1 600 367
MUTHIARA TPP TUTICORIN TAMIL NADU 2014 PRIVATE 2 600 367
TUTICORIN (JV) TPP TUTICORIN TAMIL NADU 2015 CENTRAL 1 500 367
TUTICORIN (JV) TPP TUTICORIN TAMIL NADU 2015 CENTRAL 2 500 367
RAMAGUNDEM STPS KARIMNAGAR TELANGANA 1988 CENTRAL 4 500 322
KOTHAGUDEM-VI KHAMMAM TELANGANA 2011 STATE 3 500 322
20

POPULATION DENSITY
(PERSON PER SQ.KM)
COMMISSIONING
CAPACITY IN MW
CENTRAL/STATE/
UNIT NUMBER
PRIVATE
YEAR
SINGARENI MANCHERIAL TELANGANA 2015 STATE 1 600 170
SINGARENI MANCHERIAL TELANGANA 2016 STATE 2 600 170
KAKATIYA WARANGAL TELANGANA 2010 STATE 1 500 274
KAKATIYA WARANGAL TELANGANA 2016 STATE 2 600 274
LALITPUR TPP (LPGCL) LALITPUR UTTAR PRADESH 2015 PRIVATE 1 660 242
ADANI MUNDRA
KUTCH GUJARAT 2011 PRIVATE 5 660 46
(PHASE 2)
ADANI MUNDRA
(PHASE 2)
ADANI MUNDRA
(PHASE 3)
MUNDRA ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
MUNDRA ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
MUNDRA ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
MUNDRA ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
MUNDRA ULTRA MEGA

POWER PLANT
ADANI MUNDRA
(PHASE 3)
ADANI MUNDRA
(PHASE 3)
SALAYA JAMNAGAR GUJARAT 2012 PRIVATE 1 600 153
SALAYA JAMNAGAR GUJARAT 2012 PRIVATE 2 600 153
SANJAY GANDHI UMARIA MADHYA PRADESH 2007 STATE 5 500 158
MALWA THERMAL
POWER PLANT (SHRI KHANDWA MADHYA PRADESH 2014 STATE 1 600 178
SINGHAJI)
MALWA THERMAL
POWER PLANT (SHRI KHANDWA MADHYA PRADESH 2014 STATE 2 600 178
SINGHAJI)
KAWAI TPP BARAN RAJASTHAN 2014 STATE 1 660 175
KAWAI TPP BARAN RAJASTHAN 2014 STATE 2 660 175
TOTAL 51,530


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
ANNEXURE 3 – PHASE IN PLAN FOR SO2 CONTROL (UNITS SMALLER THAN 500 MW)
TO COMPLY BY DEC 2019 (low sulphur coal, lime injection etc) - Population density more than
400/sq.km. or critically polluted
POPULATION DENSITY
AGE IN YEARS
NAME OF PLANT DISTRICT SECTOR STATE
CAPACITY
UNIT NO
BEGUSARAI BEGUSARAI STATE BIHAR 7 105 32 1540
BEGUSARAI BEGUSARAI STATE BIHAR 6 105 34 1540
MUZAFFARPUR TPS MUZAFFARPUR CENTRAL JHARKHAND 4 195 0 1506
MUZAFFARPUR TPS MUZAFFARPUR CENTRAL BIHAR 3 195 2 1506
RAMAGUNDEM STPS KARIM NAGAR CENTRAL TELANGANA 3 200 33 1449
FARAKKA STPS MURSHIDABAD CENTRAL WEST BENGAL 3 200 30 1334
SAGARDIGHI TPS MURSHIDABAD STATE WEST BENGAL 1 300 9 1334
SAGARDIGHI TPS MURSHIDABAD STATE WEST BENGAL 2 300 10 1334
KAHALGAON TPS BHAGALPUR CENTRAL BIHAR 1 210 25 1180
GH TPS (LEH.MOH.) BHATINDA STATE SECTOR PUNJAB 3 250 9 1180
GH TPS (LEH.MOH.) BHATINDA STATE SECTOR PUNJAB 4 250 9 1180
GH TPS (LEH.MOH.) BHATINDA STATE PUNJAB 2 210 19 1180
GH TPS (LEH.MOH.) BHATINDA STATE PUNJAB 1 210 20 1180
BANDEL TPS HOOGHLY STATE WEST BENGAL 5 210 35 1076
HALDIA TPP PURBA MEDINIPUR PRIVATE WEST BENGAL 2 300 2 1076
HALDIA TPP PURBA MEDINIPUR PRIVATE WEST BENGAL 1 300 2 1076
INDIA POWER TPP PURBA MEDINIPUR PRIVATE WEST BENGAL 1 150 0 1076
KOLAGHAT TPS PURBA MEDINIPUR STATE WEST BENGAL 5 210 24 1076

SANTALDIH TPS PURULIA STATE WEST BENGAL 6 250 6 1076
SANTALDIH TPS PURULIA STATE WEST BENGAL 5 250 10 1076
HARDUAGANJ TPS ALIGARH STATE SECTOR UTTAR PARDESH 9 250 5 1007
HARDUAGANJ TPS ALIGARH STATE SECTOR UTTAR PARDESH 8 250 6 1007
PANIPAT TPS PANIPAT STATE SECTOR HARYANA 8 250 12 949
PANIPAT TPS PANIPAT STATE SECTOR HARYANA 7 250 13 949
PANIPAT TPS PANIPAT STATE HARYANA 6 210 16 949
BUDGE BUDGE TPS SOUTH 24 PARGANAS PRIVATE WEST BENGAL 3 250 8 819
22

POPULATION DENSITY
AGE IN YEARS
CAPACITY
UNIT NO
NABI NAGAR TPP AURANGABAD CENTRAL BIHAR 2 250 0 760
NABI NAGAR TPP AURANGABAD CENTRAL BIHAR 1 250 1 760
UNCHAHAR TPS RAEBARELI CENTRAL UTTAR PRADESH 2 210 28 739
BOKARO BOKARO CENTRAL JHARKHAND 1 210 31 716
JOJOBERA TPS BOKARO PRIVATE JHARKHAND 3 120 15 716
JOJOBERA TPS BOKARO PRIVATE JHARKHAND 2 120 16 716
BOKARO BOKARO CENTRAL JHARKHAND 2 210 27 716
NEYVELI (EXT) TPS CUDDALORE CENTRAL TAMIL NADU 2 210 14 702
NEYVELI (EXT) TPS CUDDALORE CENTRAL TAMIL NADU 1 210 15 702
NEYVELI TPS -II CUDDALORE CENTRAL TAMIL NADU 7 210 24 702
TAQA, NEWELL CUDDALORE PRIVATE TAMIL NADU 2 250 15 702
DADRI (NCTPP) DELHI CENTRAL UTTAR PRADESH 3 210 24 702
YAMUNA NAGAR TPS YAMUNANAGAR STATE SECTOR HARYANA 2 300 9 687
YAMUNA NAGAR TPS YAMUNANAGAR STATE SECTOR HARYANA 1 300 10 687
PRIVATE
ROSA TPP PH-I SHAHJAHANPUR UTTAR PRADESH 4 300 5 684
SECTOR
PRIVATE
SECTOR
PRIVATE
SECTOR
PRIVATE
SECTOR
JAMSHEDPUR JAMSHEDPUR PRIVATE JHARKHAND 3 120 6 648


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
POPULATION DENSITY
AGE IN YEARS
CAPACITY
UNIT NO
MAHADEV PRASAD STPP JAMSHEDPUR PRIVATE JHARKHAND 2 270 4 648
MAHADEV PRASAD STPP JAMSHEDPUR PRIVATE JHARKHAND 1 270 5 648
MEJIA TPS BANKURA CENTRAL WEST BENGAL 6 250 10 523
DR. N. TATA RAO TPS VIJAYAWADA STATE ANDHRA PRADESH 7 210 8 519
BUTIBORI TPP NAGPUR PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 2 300 4 470
BUTIBORI TPP NAGPUR PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 1 300 5 470
PRIVATE
GOINDWAL SAHIB TARN TARAN PUNJAB 1 270 1 464
SECTOR
PRIVATE
GOINDWAL SAHIB TARN TARAN PUNJAB 2 270 1 464
SECTOR
RAICHUR TPS RAICHUR STATE KARNATAKA 3 210 26 457
UCHPINDA TPP JANJGIR-CHAMPA PRIVATE CHHATTISGARH 3 360 1 421
UCHPINDA TPP JANJGIR-CHAMPA PRIVATE CHHATTISGARH 1 360 2 421
IB VALLEY TPS JHARSUGUDA STATE ODISHA 2 210 22 274
IB VALLEY TPS JHARSUGUDA STATE ODISHA 1 210 23 274
JHARSUGUDA JHARSUGUDA PRIVATE ORISSA 1 350 2 274
JHARSUGUDA JHARSUGUDA STATE ORISSA 1 210 23 274
JHARSUGUDA JHARSUGUDA STATE ORISSA 2 210 23 274
ANPARA TPS SONBHADRA STATE UTTAR PRADESH 3 210 29 270

OBRA TPS SONBHADRA STATE UTTAR PRADESH 13 200 35 270
SINGRAULI STPS SONBHADRA CENTRAL UTTAR PRADESH 5 200 33 270

24

POPULATION DENSITY
AGE IN YEARS
CAPACITY
UNIT NO
BINJKOTE TPP RAIGARH PRIVATE CHHATTISGARH 1 300 0 211
OP JINDAL TPS RAIGARH PRIVATE CHHATTISGARH 2 250 9 211
DHARIWAL TPP CHANDRAPUR PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 2 300 3 192
DHARIWAL TPP CHANDRAPUR PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 1 300 4 192
EMCO WARORA TPS CHANDRAPUR PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 2 300 4 192
EMCO WARORA TPS CHANDRAPUR PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 1 300 4 192
WARDHA WARORA TPP CHANDRAPUR PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 4 135 6 192
BALCO TPS KORBA PRIVATE CHHATTISGARH 2 300 1 183
BALCO TPS KORBA PRIVATE CHHATTISGARH 1 300 2 183
BANDAKHAR TPP KORBA PRIVATE CHHATTISGARH 1 300 2 183
DSPM TPS KORBA STATE CHHATTISGARH 1 250 10 183
DSPM TPS KORBA STATE CHHATTISGARH 2 250 10 183
PATHADI TPP KORBA PRIVATE CHHATTISGARH 2 300 7 183
PATHADI TPP KORBA PRIVATE CHHATISGARH 1 300 8 183
TOTAL 30,720


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
TO COMPLY BY DEC 2020 (low sulphur coal, lime injection etc) - Population density less than
400/sq.km.
AGE IN YEARS
POPULATION
CAPACITY
NAME OF PROJECT DISTRICT SECTOR STATE
UNIT NO
DENSITY
PARICHHA TPS JHANSI STATE SECTOR UTTAR PRADESH 6 250 4 398
PARICHHA TPS JHANSI STATE SECTOR UTTAR PRADESH 5 250 5 398
PARICHHA TPS JHANSI STATE UTTAR PRADESH 3 210 11 398
PARICHHA TPS JHANSI STATE UTTAR PRADESH 4 210 11 398
NASIK (P) TPS NASIK PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 5 270 0 393
KOTA TPS KOTA STATE RAJASTHAN 5 210 23 374
MUNDRA TPS KUTCH PRIVATE GUJARAT 4 330 7 374
JALGAON TPS JALGAON STATE MAHARASHTRA 3 210 35 359
JALGAON TPS JALGAON STATE MAHARASHTRA 2 210 38 359
TORANGALLU TPS EXT BELLARY PRIVATE KARNATAKA 2 300 8 300
TORANGALLU TPS EXT BELLARY PRIVATE KARNATAKA 1 300 8 300
BANDEL TPS KOLKATTA STATE WEST BENGAL 4 60 51 280
SOUTHERN REPL, TPS KOLKATTA PRIVATE WEST BENGAL 1 68 26 280
SOUTHERN REPL, TPS KOLKATTA PRIVATE WEST BENGAL 2 68 27 280
RAYALASEEMA TPS KADAPA STATE ANDHRA PRADESH 5 210 6 274
KAMALANGA TPS DHENKANAL PRIVATE ODISHA 3 350 3 268

BHILAI TPS DURG CENTRAL CHHATTISGARH 2 250 8 268
BHILAI TPS DURG CENTRAL CHHATTISGARH 1 250 9 268
D.P.L. TPS DURGAPUR STATE WEST BENGAL 6 110 32 268
D.P.L. TPS DURGAPUR STATE WEST BENGAL 7 300 10 268
D.P.L. TPS EXT. DURGAPUR STATE WEST BENGAL 8 250 3 268
26

AGE IN YEARS
POPULATION
CAPACITY
NAME OF PROJECT DISTRICT SECTOR STATE
UNIT NO
DENSITY
PARLI TPS BEED STATE MAHARASHTRA 8 250 1 242
NAWAPARA TPP RAIPUR PRIVATE CHHATTISGARH 2 300 0 211
AMARKANTAK EXT TPS ANUPPUR STATE MADHYA PRADESH 5 210 9 200
CHANDRAPURA(DVC) CHANDRAPURA CENTRAL JHARKHAND 7 250 8 192
CHANDRAPURA(DVC) CHANDRAPURA CENTRAL JHARKHAND 8 250 7 192
NORTH CHENNAI TPS CHENNAI STATE TAMIL NADU 3 210 21 192
SURATGARH TPS GANGANAGAR STATE SECTOR RAJASTHAN 6 250 8 179
SURATGARH TPS GANGANAGAR STATE RAJASTHAN 3 250 16 179
CHHABRA TPP BARAN STATE SECTOR RAJASTHAN 1 250 8 175
SATPURA TPS BETUL STATE MADHYA PRADESH 11 250 3 157
SATPURA TPS BETUL STATE MADHYA PRADESH 10 250 4 157
SIKKA REP TPS JAMNAGAR STATE GUJARAT 4 250 2 153
SIKKA REP TPS JAMNAGAR STATE GUJARAT 3 250 2 153
TOTAL 14,466


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
ANNEXURE 4 – PHASE IN PLAN FOR ESP UPGRADATION

Plants to comply by March, 2019
CAPACITY
UNIT NO
DR. N.TATA RAO TPS VIJAYAWADA ANDHRA PRADESH 7 500
MAUDA THERMAL POWER PLANT NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA 4 660
BARA TPP (PRAGYARAJ) ALLAHABAD UTTAR PRADESH 3 660
SINGRAULI STPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 7 500
SRI DAMODARAM SANJEEVAIAH TPS NELLORE ANDHRA PRADESH 1 800
TRN ENERGY PVT. LTD. (NAWAPARA TPP) RAIGARH CHHATTISGARH 2 300
TUTICORIN (JV) TPP TUTICORIN TAMIL NADU 2 500
KAKATIYA WARANGAL TELANGANA 1 500
UNCHAHAR TPS RAEBARELI UTTAR PARDESH 6 500
SAGARDIGHI TPS MURSHIDABAD WEST BENGAL 1 300
BINJKOTE TPP (SKS POWER) RAIGARH CHHATISGARH 1 300
CHHABRA TPP BARAN RAJASTHAN 5 660
RAYALASEEMA TPS KADAPA ANDHRA PRADESH 5 210
KUTCH LIGNITE TPS (GSECL) KUTCH GUJARAT 4 75
SURAT LIGNITE (CFBC) SURAT GUJARAT 3 125
SURAT LIGNITE (CFBC) SURAT GUJARAT 4 125
AKRIMOTA (CFBC) KUTCH GUJARAT 1 125
AKRIMOTA (CFBC) KUTCH GUJARAT 2 125
TENUGHAT TPP TENUGHAT JHARKHAND 1 210
SOLAPUR TPS (NTPC) SOLAPUR MAHARASHTRA 1 660
CHANDRAPUR (MAHA GENCO) CHANDRAPUR MAHARASHTRA 8 500
KHAPARKHEDA NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA 1 210
KORADI TPS NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA 7 210
METTUR TPS SALEM TAMIL NADU 1 210
ANPARA TPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 7 500
RIHAND STPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 2 500

SINGRAULI STPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PRADESH 6 500
MEJIA BANKURA WEST BENGAL 7 500
MEJIA BANKURA WEST BENGAL 8 500
UKAI TPS TAPI GUJARAT 3 200
VINDHYACHAL STPS SINGRAULI MADHYA PRADESH 9 500
BHUSAWAL TPS (MAHAGENCO) JALGAON MAHARASHTRA 4 500
BHUSAWAL TPS (MAHAGENCO) JALGAON MAHARASHTRA 5 500
TUTICORIN (JV) TPP TUTICORIN TAMIL NADU 1 500

28

CAPACITY
UNIT NO
SANJAY GANDHI TPS (MPPGCL) UMARIA MADHYA PRADESH 1 210
RAICHUR TPS RAICHUR KARNATAKA 1 210
ROSA TPP PH-I SHAHJAHANPUR UTTAR PARDESH 3 300
ROSA TPP PH-I SHAHJAHANPUR UTTAR PARDESH 1 300
KOLAGHAT TPS PURBA MEDINIPUR WEST BENGAL 2 210
SANTALDIH TPS PURULIA WEST BENGAL 6 250
SANTALDIH TPS PURULIA WEST BENGAL 5 250
SAGARDIGHI TPS MURSHIDABAD WEST BENGAL 2 300
BALCO TPS KORBA CHHATISGARH 2 300
BALCO TPS KORBA CHHATISGARH 1 300
SINGRAULI STPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PARDESH 1 200
IB VALLEY TPS JHARSUGUDA ODISHA 2 210
IB VALLEY TPS JHARSUGUDA ODISHA 1 210
SATPURA TPS (MPPGCL) BETUL MADHYA PRADESH 11 250
SATPURA TPS (MPPGCL) BETUL MADHYA PRADESH 10 250
AMARKANTAK EXT TPS ANUPPUR MADHYA PRADESH 5 210
PARLI TPS BEED MAHARASHTRA 8 250


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
CAPACITY
UNIT NO
NASIK TPS NASIK MAHARASHTRA 4 210
NASIK TPS NASIK MAHARASHTRA 5 210
PARICHHA TPS JHANSI UTTAR PARDESH 6 250
WANAKBORI TPS (JECL) KHEDA GUJARAT 1 210
NASIK RATTAN INDIA TPP NASIK MAHARASHTRA 1 270
PARAS TPS (MAHAGENCO) AKOLA MAHARASHTRA 3 250
PARAS TPS (MAHAGENCO) AKOLA MAHARASHTRA 4 250
RAJWEST POWER JODHPUR RAJASTHAN 7 135
BAJAJ ENERGY PILIBHIT UTTAR PARDESH 1 45
BAJAJ ENERGY PILIBHIT UTTAR PARDESH 2 45
BAJAJ ENERGY KHERI UTTAR PARDESH 1 45
BAJAJ ENERGY KHERI UTTAR PARDESH 2 45
BAJAJ ENERGY GONDA UTTAR PARDESH 1 45
BAJAJ ENERGY GONDA UTTAR PARDESH 2 45
BAJAJ ENERGY SHAHJAHANPUR UTTAR PARDESH 1 45
BAJAJ ENERGY SHAHJAHANPUR UTTAR PARDESH 2 45
BAJAJ ENERGY UTRAULA UTTAR PARDESH 1 45
BAJAJ ENERGY UTRAULA UTTAR PARDESH 2 45
SIMHADRI (STAGE 2) VISHAKHAPATNAM ANDHRA PRADESH 3 500
SIMHADRI (STAGE 2) VISHAKHAPATNAM ANDHRA PRADESH 4 500
KORBA STPS (NTPC) KORBA CHHATTISGARH 4 500
BOKARO 'A' TPS BOKARO JHARKHAND 1 500
YERMARUS RAICHUR KARNATAKA 2 800
KORADI TPS NAGPUR MAHARASHTRA 10 660

TALCHER KANIHA (NTPC) ANGUL ORISSA 5 500
TALCHER KANIHA (NTPC) ANGUL ORISSA 6 500
FARAKKA STPS MURSHIDABAD WEST BENGAL 4 500

30

CAPACITY
UNIT NO
KUDGI STPP (NTPC) BIJAPUR KARNATAKA 2 800
KUDGI STPP (NTPC) BIJAPUR KARNATAKA 3 800
RAMAGUNDEM STPS (NTPC) KARIMNAGAR TELANGANA 2 200
MEJIA TPS BANKURA WEST BENGAL 6 250
NABI NAGAR TPP AURANGABAD BIHAR 2 250
KAHALGAON TPS BHAGALPUR BIHAR 1 210
MUZAFFARPUR TPS MUZAFFARPUR BIHAR 4 195
MUZAFFARPUR TPS MUZAFFARPUR BIHAR 3 195
ANPARA TPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PARDESH 3 210
OBRA TPS SONBHADRA UTTAR PARDESH 13 200


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
CAPACITY
UNIT NO
IND-BARATH TPS JHARSUGUDA ORISSA 1 350
SURATGARH TPS (RRVUNL) GANGANAGAR RAJASTHAN 6 250
NORTH CHENNAI TPS (TANGEDCO) CHENNAI TAMIL NADU 3 210
D.P.L. TPS DURGAPUR WEST BENGAL 6 110
D.P.L. TPS DURGAPUR WEST BENGAL 7 300
D.P.L. TPS EXT. DURGAPUR WEST BENGAL 8 250
TORANGALLU TPS EXT (JSW ENERGY) BELLARY KARNATAKA 2 300
TORANGALLU TPS EXT (JSW ENERGY) BELLARY KARNATAKA 1 300
KOTA TPS KOTA RAJASTHAN 5 210
TOTAL 57,950
Please Note: This plan is based on section 5 directions issued by Central Pollution Control Board. CSE bears no
responsibility on the veracity of the data provided by them
32

ANNEXURE 5 -LIST OF STATIONS IDENTIFIED FOR RETIREMENT
PHASE OUT PLAN
CAPACITY IN MW
AGE IN YEARS
NAME OF PROJECT SECTOR STATE
UNIT NO
BARAUNI TPS STATE BIHAR 6 105 34
BARAUNI TPS STATE BIHAR 7 105 32
MUZAFFARPUR TPS CENTRAL BIHAR 1 110 32 12/31/2023
MUZAFFARPUR TPS CENTRAL BIHAR 2 110 31 12/31/2024
BOKARO B TPS CENTRAL JHARKHAND 1 210 31
CHANDRAPURA(DVC) CENTRAL JHARKHAND 1 130 53
PATRATU TPS STATE JHARKHAND 1 40 51
PATRATU TPS STATE JHARKHAND 7 105 40 12/31/2017
TENUGHAT TPS STATE JHARKHAND 1 210 23
TENUGHAT TPS STATE JHARKHAND 2 210 21
IND BARATH TPP PRIVATE ODISHA 1 350 1
TALCHER (OLD) TPS CENTRAL ODISHA 1 60 50 12/31/2023
TITAGARH TPS PRIVATE WEST BENGAL 1 60 32
D.P.L. TPS STATE WEST BENGAL 3 70 53
DURGAPUR TPS CENTRAL WEST BENGAL 3 130 50
DURGAPUR TPS CENTRAL WEST BENGAL 4 210 36
SANTALDIH TPS STATE WEST BENGAL 1 120 44


NO ROOM FOR DELAY
PHASE OUT PLAN

CAPACITY IN MW
AGE IN YEARS
UNIT NO
DR. N. TATA RAO TPS STATE ANDHRA PRADESH 1 210 38 12/31/2018
TUTICORNI (P) TPP PRIVATE TAMIL NADU 1 150 4 12/31/2019
TUTICORNI (P) TPP PRIVATE TAMIL NADU 2 150 3 11/30/2020
NEYVELI TPS -I CENTRAL TAMIL NADU 1 50 55
ENNORE TPS STATE TAMIL NADU 1 60 47
TUTICORIN TPS STATE TAMIL NADU 1 210 38 11/30/2018
TUTICORIN TPS STATE TELANGANA 5 210 26 6/30/2021
KOTHAGUDEM TPS (NEW) STATE TELANGANA 9 250 20 7/31/2020
KOTHAGUDEM TPS (NEW) STATE TELANGANA 10 250 19 6/30/2021
KOTHAGUDEM TPS A STATE TELANGANA 1 60 51

KOTHAGUDEM TPS B STATE TELANGANA 5 120 43
KOTHAGUDEM TPS B STATE TELANGANA 6 120 43
KOTHAGUDEM TPS C STATE TELANGANA 7 120 40
KOTHAGUDEM TPS C STATE TELANGANA 8 120 39
RAMAGUNDEM-B TPS STATE TELANGANA 1 63 46
KORBA-II STATE CHHATTISGARH 1 50 51

34

PHASE OUT PLAN
CAPACITY IN MW
AGE IN YEARS
UNIT NO
KORBA-III STATE CHHATTISGARH 1 120 41 12/31/2018
KORBA-III STATE CHHATTISGARH 2 120 36 3/31/2019
KORBA-WEST TPS STATE CHHATTISGARH 1 210 34 1/31/2020
GANDHI NAGAT TPS STATE GUJARAT 1 120 40
GANDHI NAGAT TPS STATE GUJARAT 2 120 40
SIKKA REP TPS STATE GUJARAT 1 120 29
SIKKA REP TPS STATE GUJARAT 2 120 24 6/30/2017
UKAI TPS STATE GUJARAT 1 120 41
UKAI TPS STATE GUJARAT 2 120 41
SABARMATI PRIVATE GUJARAT 15 30 55 12/31/2017
SABARMATI PRIVATE GUJARAT 16 30 54 12/31/2017
SATPURA TPS STATE MADHYA PRADESH 6 200 38
GEPL TPP PH-I PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 1 60 5 3/31/2018
GEPL TPP PH-I PRIVATE MAHARASHTRA 2 60 5 3/31/2018
BHUSAWAL TPS STATE MAHARASHTRA 2 210 38 4/1/2017
CHANDRAPURA STPS STATE MAHARASHTRA 1 210 34
CHANDRAPURA STPS STATE MAHARASHTRA 2 210 33
KORADI TPS STATE MAHARASHTRA 5 200 39
PARLI TPS STATE MAHARASHTRA 3 210 37
BADARPUR TPS CENTRAL DELHI 1 95 44 JULY'18
GND TPS (BHATINDA) STATE PUNJAB 1 110 43 DEC'17
ROPAR TPS STATE PUNJAB 1 210 33 DEC'17
OBRA TPS STATE UTTAR PRADESH 8 94 42 DEC'18
PANKI TPS STATE UTTAR PRADESH 3 105 41 DEC'18
PANKI TPS STATE UTTAR PRADESH 4 105 40 DEC'18
TOTAL 15,552


ANNEXURE – REVISED PHASE-IN PLANS RECOMMENDED BY CSE
This phasing plan is based on the Office Memorandum F. No. FU-1/2017-IPC sent by the Ministry of
Power (MoP), to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) on 13 October
2017 (Annexure 1). The plan submitted by MoP focuses on FGD and ESP upgradation only. CSE’s
previous phasing plan was based on the phasing plans released by the Regional Power Committees
under the Central Electricity Authority (CEA).
Annexure 2 - Phase-in plan for Flue gas desulphurisation systems (FGD) installation
TO COMPLY BY DEC 2019 – Located in districts that have population density in excess of 400/sq.km
or are critically polluted
S Name of Project Unit Total State FGD Phasing CSE Phasing Plan
commissioning
No No Capacity Plan for
(MW) Year of Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
1 TROMBAY TPS 5 500 1984 Maharashtra 31/03/2018 December 2019

2 MAHATMA 1 660 2012 Haryana 31/01/2019 December 2019
GANDHI TPS
3 MAHATMA 2 660 2012 Haryana 31/01/2019 December 2019
GANDHI TPS
4 NORTH CHENNAI 1 600 2013 Tamil Nadu 31/12/2019 December 2019
Ext. TPS
5 VIZAG TPP 2 520 2016 Andhra 30/09/2019 December 2019
Pradesh
6 SINGRAULI STPS 7 500 1987 Uttar Pradesh 31/12/2020 December 2019
7 DADRI (NCTPP) 1 210 1991 Uttar Pradesh 31/12/2020 December 2019
10 TENUGHAT TPS 1 210 1994 Jharkhand 31-12-2020 December 2019
12 TENUGHAT TPS 2 210 1996 Jharkhand 31/12/2020 December 2019
13 TAQA, Neyveli 2 250 2002 Tamil Nadu 30/06/2020 December 2019
14 PANIPAT TPS 8 250 2005 Haryana 31/12/2020 December 2019
15 SAGARDIGHI TPS 1 300 2008 West Bengal 31/12/2020 December 2019
16 Dr. N.TATA RAO 7 500 2009 Andhra 31/12/2020 December 2019
TPS Pradesh
17 INDIRA GANDHI 1 500 2010 Haryana 31/10/2020 December 2019
STPP
STPP
STPP
22 METTUR TPS Ext. 1 600 2012 Tamil Nadu 31/12/2020 December 2019
23 RIHAND STPS 6 500 2013 Uttar Pradesh 31/12/2020 December 2019
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)

Ext. TPS
25 MAHAN TPP 1 600 2013 Madhya 31/12/2020 December 2019
Pradesh
26 NIGRI TPP 1 660 2014 Madhya 30/06/2020 December 2019
Pradesh
27 PRAYAGRAJ TPP 2 660 2015 Uttar Pradesh 30/06/2020 December 2019
28 VIZAG TPP 1 520 2015 Andhra 30/06/2020 December 2019
Pradesh
29 BARADARHA TPS 2 600 2015 Chhattisgarh 30/09/2020 December 2019
30 BANDAKHAR TPP 1 300 2015 Chhattisgarh 31/03/2020 December 2019
31 NIGRI TPP 2 660 2015 Madhya 30/09/2020 December 2019
Pradesh
33 GOINDWAL SAHIB 1 270 2016 Punjab 30/04/2020 December 2019
34 GOINDWAL SAHIB 2 270 2016 Punjab 28/02/2020 December 2019
36 CHANDRAPUR 9 500 2016 Maharashtra 31/03/2020 December 2019
STPS
37 KORADI TPS 10 660 2016 Maharashtra 31/12/2020 December 2019
38 UNCHAHAR TPS 6 500 2017 Uttar Pradesh 31/08/2020 December 2019
40 Binjkote TPP 1 300 2017 Chhattisgarh 30/09/2020 December 2019
41 MOUDA TPS 4 660 2017 Maharashtra 31/12/2020 December 2019
December 2019
44 WANAKBORI TPS 1 210 1982 Gujarat 31/12/2021 December 2019
52 KOLAGHAT TPS 3 210 1985 West Bengal 30/09/2021 December 2019
53 RAICHUR TPS 1 210 1985 Karnataka 31/03/2021 December 2019
STPS
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)

STPS
60 NEYVELI TPS- II 2 210 1987 Tamil Nadu 30/09/2021 December 2019
65 KHAPARKHEDA 1 210 1989 Maharashtra 31/03/2021 December 2019
TPS
67 GANDHI NAGAR 3 210 1990 Gujarat 31/12/2021 December 2019
TPS
TPS
TPS
STPS
STPS
75 IB VALLEY TPS 1 210 1994 Odisha 30/09/2021 December 2019
STPS
TPS
81 VINDHYACHAL 7 500 1999 Madhya 30/06/2021 December 2019
STPS Pradesh
STPS Pradesh
TPS
TPS
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
86 NEYVELI ( EXT) 1 210 2002 Tamil Nadu 30/06/2021 December 2019

TPS
87 NEYVELI ( EXT) 2 210 2003 Tamil Nadu 31/12/2021 December 2019
TPS
STPS Pradesh
93 SANTALDIH TPS 5 250 2007 West Bengal 31/03/2021 December 2019
94 YAMUNA NAGAR 1 300 2007 Haryana 31/12/2021 December 2019
TPS
95 DSPM TPS 1 250 2007 Chhattisgarh 30/06/2021 December 2019
96 DSPM TPS 2 250 2007 Chhattisgarh 30/09/2021 December 2019
STPS Pradesh
98 YAMUNA NAGAR 2 300 2008 Haryana 31/10/2021 December 2019
TPS
99 PATHADI TPP 1 300 2009 Chhattisgarh 31/03/2021 December 2019
100 MEJIA TPS 7 500 2010 West Bengal 30/09/2021 December 2019
101 ROSA TPP Ph-I 1 300 2010 Uttar Pradesh 31/12/2021 December 2019
103 PATHADI TPP 2 300 2010 Chhattisgarh 31/03/2021 December 2019
104 WARDHA 1 135 2010 Maharashtra 30/09/2021 December 2019
WARORA TPP
WARORA TPP
106 KODARMA TPP 1 500 2011 Jharkhand 31/12/2021 December 2019
107 MAITHON RB TPP 1 525 2011 Jharkhand 30/09/2021 December 2019
108 DURGAPUR STEEL 1 500 2011 West Bengal 30/06/2021 December 2019
TPS
112 HARDUAGANJ TPS 8 250 2011 Uttar Pradesh 31/12/2021 December 2019
TPS
WARORA TPP
WARORA TPP
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
116 DURGAPUR STEEL 2 500 2012 West Bengal 30/06/2021 December 2019
TPS
119 HARDUAGANJ TPS 9 250 2012 Uttar Pradesh 31/10/2021 December 2019
STPS Pradesh
121 BUTIBORI TPP 1 300 2012 Maharashtra 30/06/2021 December 2019
122 BARH II 4 660 2013 Bihar 30/09/2021 December 2019
123 KODARMA TPP 2 500 2013 Jharkhand 31/12/2021 December 2019
124 KORBA-WEST Ext. 5 500 2013 Chhattisgarh 30/09/2021 December 2019
TPS
STPS Pradesh
126 BUTIBORI TPP 2 300 2013 Maharashtra 31/03/2021 December 2019
127 DERANG TPP 1 600 2014 Odisha 31/03/2021 December 2019
128 Nabha TPP 1 700 2014 Punjab 30/04/2021 December 2019
(Rajpura TPP)
129 Nabha TPP 2 700 2014 Punjab 28/02/2021 December 2019
(Rajpura TPP)
130 MARWA TPS 1 500 2014 Chhattisgarh 30/06/2021 December 2019
131 BARADARHA TPS 1 600 2014 Chhattisgarh 30/06/2021 December 2019
132 DERANG TPP 2 600 2015 Odisha 31/03/2021 December 2019
133 ANPARA TPS 6 500 2015 Uttar Pradesh 30/06/2021 December 2019
134 BALCO TPS 1 300 2015 Chhattisgarh 30/09/2021 December 2019
135 CHANDRAPUR 8 500 2015 Maharashtra 31-03-2021 December 2019
STPS
137 NABI NAGAR TPP 1 250 2016 Bihar 31/12/2021 December 2019
139 YERMARUS TPP 1 800 2016 Karnataka 31/12/2021 December 2019
141 MARWA TPS 2 500 2016 Chhattisgarh 31/03/2021 December 2019
142 UCHPINDA TPP 3 360 2016 Chhattisgarh 31/12/2021 December 2019
144 OBRA TPS 11 200 1977 Uttar Pradesh 31/12/2022 December 2019
145 SABARMATI 1 120 1978 Gujarat 31/12/2022 December 2019
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
150 KORBA STPS 1 200 1983 Chhattisgarh 31/12/2022 December 2019

151 KORBA STPS 2 200 1983 Chhattisgarh 31-12-2022 December 2019
155 FARAKKA STPS 1 200 1986 West Bengal 31/12/2022 December 2019
STPS Pradesh
STPS Pradesh
STPS Pradesh
STPS Pradesh
STPS Pradesh
STPS Pradesh
176 KAHALGAON TPS 1 210 1992 Bihar 31/12/2022 December 2019
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
TPS
186 KAHALGAON TPS 3 210 1995 Bihar 31-12-2022 December 2019
187 TALCHER STPS 1 500 1995 Odisha 31/12/2022 December 2019
TPS
TPS
193 BUDGE BUDGE 1 250 1997 West Bengal 31/12/2022 December 2019
TPS
195 GH TPS 1 210 1997 Punjab 30/04/2022 December 2019
(LEH.MOH.)
(LEH.MOH.)
TPS
203 SIMHADRI 1 500 2002 Andhra 31/03/2022 December 2019
Pradesh
Pradesh
215 OP JINDAL TPS 1 250 2007 Chhattisgarh 31/03/2022 December 2019
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)

(LEH.MOH.)
(LEH.MOH.)
TPS
224 RAJIV GANDHI 1 600 2010 Haryana 30/04/2022 December 2019
TPS
225 RAJIV GANDHI 2 600 2010 Haryana 28/02/2022 December 2019
TPS
229 ANPARA C TPS 1 600 2011 Uttar Pradesh 31/08/2022 December 2019
Pradesh
231 MAHADEV 1 270 2012 Jharkhand 30/06/2022 December 2019
PRASAD STPP
232 MAITHON RB TPP 2 525 2012 Jharkhand 30/06/2022 December 2019
233 ANPARA C TPS 2 600 2012 Uttar Pradesh 30/06/2022 December 2019
Pradesh
235 VALLUR TPP 1 500 2012 Tamil Nadu 30/06/2022 December 2019
237 MAHADEV 2 270 2013 Jharkhand 30/06/2022 December 2019
PRASAD STPP
239 AKALTARA TPS 1 600 2013 Chhattisgarh 30/06/2022 December 2019
240 DHARIWAL TPP 1 300 2013 Maharashtra 31/03/2022 December 2019
241 EMCO WARORA 1 300 2013 Maharashtra 31/03/2022 December 2019
TPS
242 EMCO WARORA 2 300 2013 Maharashtra 31/03/2022 December 2019
TPS
244 RAGHUNATHPUR 1 600 2014 West Bengal 31/03/2022 December 2019
TPP
246 AKALTARA TPS 2 600 2014 Chhattisgarh 31/03/2022 December 2019
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
247 DHARIWAL TPP 2 300 2014 Maharashtra 31/03/2022 December 2019

248 BARH II 5 660 2015 Bihar 31/03/2022 December 2019
249 MUZAFFARPUR 3 195 2015 Bihar 31/12/2022 December 2019
TPS
250 HALDIA TPP 1 300 2015 West Bengal 31/12/2022 December 2019
251 HALDIA TPP 2 300 2015 West Bengal 31/12/2022 December 2019
253 UCHPINDA TPP 1 360 2015 Chhattisgarh 31/03/2022 December 2019
254 BOKARO À` TPS 1 500 2016 Jharkhand 30/06/2022 December 2019
255 IND BARATH TPP 1 350 2016 Odisha 31/03/2022 December 2019
256 RAGHUNATHPUR 2 600 2016 West Bengal 31/03/2022 December 2019
TPP
259 MUZAFFARPUR 4 195 2017 Bihar 31/12/2022 December 2019
TPS
261 India Power TPP 1 150 2017 West Bengal December 2019
TOTAL 95,512 MW
TO COMPLY BY DEC 2020 – Located in districts that have population density in below 400/sq.km
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
1 KOTHAGUDEM TPS 11 500 2011 Telangana 30/09/2019 December 2020

(NEW)
2 DAMODARAM 2 800 2015 Andhra 31/12/2019 December 2020
SANJEEVAIAH TPS Pradesh
3 SINGARENI TPP 2 600 2016 Telangana 30/09/2019 December 2020
4 SINGARENI TPP 1 600 2016 Telangana 31/12/2019 December 2020
December 2020
5 BELLARY TPS 1 500 2007 Karnataka 31/12/2020 December 2020
6 RAYALASEEMA TPS 3 210 2007 Andhra 30/09/2020 December 2020
Pradesh
Pradesh
8 KAKATIYA TPS 1 500 2010 Telangana 31/03/2020 December 2020
9 MUNDRA UMTPP 1 800 2012 Gujarat 30/06/2020 December 2020
10 KAWAI TPS 1 660 2013 Rajasthan 31/08/2020 December 2020
11 KAWAI TPS 2 660 2013 Rajasthan 30/06/2020 December 2020
13 TUTICORIN (JV) TPP 2 500 2015 Tamil Nadu 30/06/2020 December 2020
14 TALWANDI SABO TPP 2 660 2015 Punjab 31/12/2020 December 2020
15 RAIKHEDA TPP 1 685 2015 Chhattisgarh 30/06/2020 December 2020
18 SEIONI TPP 1 600 2016 Madhya 31/03/2020 December 2020
Pradesh
19 RAIKHEDA TPP 2 685 2016 Chhattisgarh 30/09/2020 December 2020
20 LALITPUR TPS 1 660 2016 Uttar 31/12/2020 December 2020
Pradesh
21 SOLAPUR 1 660 2017 Maharashtra 31/12/2020 December 2020
22 CHHABRA TPP 5 660 2017 Rajasthan 30/04/2020 December 2020
23 NAWAPARA TPP 2 300 2017 Chhattisgarh 30/09/2020 December 2020
24 UKAI TPS 4 200 1979 Gujarat 31/12/2021 December 2020
26 NASIK TPS 3 210 1979 Maharashtra 31/03/2021 December 2020
29 BHUSAWAL TPS 3 210 1982 Maharashtra 31/03/2021 December 2020
31 PARLI TPS 4 210 1985 Maharashtra 31/03/2021 December 2020
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
33 SOUTHERN REPL. TPS 2 67.5 1990 West Bengal 31/12/2021 December 2020
34 KUTCH LIG. TPS 1 70 1990 Gujarat 31/12/2021 December 2020
36 SANJAY GANDHI TPS 2 210 1993 Madhya 31/03/2021 December 2020
Pradesh
Pradesh
Pradesh
Pradesh
Pradesh
Pradesh
Pradesh
Pradesh
46 AMARKANTAK EXT 5 210 2008 Madhya 31/03/2021 December 2020
TPS Pradesh
47 SIPAT STPS 4 500 2008 Chhattisgarh 31/12/2021 December 2020
56 SALAYA TPP 2 600 2012 Gujarat 31/03/2021 December 2020
57 SALAYA TPP 1 600 2012 Gujarat 30/06/2021 December 2020
60 TIRORA TPS 3 660 2013 Maharashtra 31/09/2021 December 2020
63 SHRI SINGHAJI TPP 1 600 2013 Madhya 31/03/2021 December 2020
Pradesh
64 SATPURA TPS 11 250 2013 Madhya 31/03/2021 December 2020
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)
Pradesh
Pradesh
66 SASAN UMTPP 2 660 2013 Madhya 30/06/2021 December 2020
Pradesh
Pradesh
68 PARICHHA TPS 6 250 2013 Uttar 31/12/2021 December 2020
Pradesh
69 KAMALANGA TPS 1 350 2013 Odisha 31/12/2021 December 2020
73 TAMNAR TPP 2 600 2014 Chhattisgarh 31/12/2021 December 2020
77 SHRI SINGHAJI TPP 2 600 2014 Madhya 31/03/2021 December 2020
Pradesh
Pradesh
79 KALISINDH TPS 1 600 2014 Rajasthan 30/06/2021 December 2020
81 NASIK (P) TPS 1 270 2014 Maharashtra 31/03/2021 December 2020
Pradesh
84 KALISINDH TPS 2 600 2015 Rajasthan 30/04/2021 December 2020
85 PAINAMPURAM TPP 2 660 2015 Andhra 30/09/2021 December 2020
Pradesh
86 PAINAMPURAM TPP 1 660 2015 Andhra 31/12/2021 December 2020
Pradesh
88 Sembcorp Gayatri 1 660 2016 Andhra 31/12/2021 December 2020
P.Ltd. Pradesh
Pradesh
Pradesh
92 Sembcorp Gayatri 2 660 2017 Andhra 30/09/2021 December 2020
P.Ltd. Pradesh
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)

94 RAMAGUNDEM STPS 1 200 1983 Telangana 31/03/2022 December 2020
97 D.P.L. TPS 6 110 1985 West Bengal 31/03/2022 December 2020
101 SOUTHERN REPL. TPS 1 67.5 1991 West Bengal 31/03/2022 December 2020
102 KOTA TPS 5 210 1994 Rajasthan 31/12/2022 December 2020
103 SURATGARH TPS 1 250 1998 Rajasthan 31/12/2022 December 2020
Pradesh
Pradesh
113 BHILAI TPS 1 250 2008 Chhattisgarh 31/12/2022 December 2020
114 TORANGALLU TPS 2 300 2009 Karnataka 30/09/2022 December 2020
EXT
115 TORANGALLU TPS 1 300 2009 Karnataka 30/06/2022 December 2020
EXT
116 BHILAI TPS 2 250 2009 Chhattisgarh 31/12/2022 December 2020
118 CHANDRAPURA(DVC) 7 250 2009 Jharkhand 31/12/2022 December 2020
119 MUNDRA TPS 1 330 2009 Gujarat 31/12/2022 December 2020
121 STERLITE TPP 2 600 2010 Odisha 31/03/2022 December 2020
122 CHANDRAPURA(DVC) 8 250 2010 Jharkhand 31/12/2022 December 2020
commissioning
Year of
(MW) Implementation
(DD/MM/YYYY)

Pradesh
135 AVANTHA BHANDAR 1 600 2014 Chhattisgarh 31/03/2022 December 2020
136 D.P.L. TPS EXT. 8 250 2014 West Bengal 31/03/2022 December 2020
Pradesh
Pradesh
139 MUTHIARA TPP 1 600 2014 Tamil Nadu 30/09/2022 December 2020
140 ANUPPUR TPP 1 600 2015 Madhya 31/03/2022 December 2020
Pradesh
143 SIKKA REP. TPS 4 250 2015 Gujarat 31/01/2022 December 2020
144 SIKKA REP. TPS 3 250 2015 Gujarat 31/01/2022 December 2020
145 ANUPPUR TPP 2 600 2016 Madhya 30/06/2022 December 2020
Pradesh
146 MUTHIARA TPP 2 600 2016 Tamil Nadu 31/12/2022 December 2020
147 KUDGI 1 800 2016 Karnataka 30/06/2022 December 2020
TOTAL 66,840 MW
NOTE: 1,200 MW of capacity already has an FGD (2*600MW Udupi thermal power station), which
was included in the original plan given by the Ministry of Power. This is not included in this table.
Annexure 4 – Phase in plan for ESP upgradation
ANNEXURE 4 – PHASE IN PLAN FOR ESP UPGRADATION
Plants to comply by December, 2018

S.No. Name of Project Unit Total State ESP Phasing CSE’s ESP
commissioning
No Capacity plan for Phasing plan
Year of
(MW) implementation (YYYY)
(DD/MM/YYYY)
by MOP
1 TROMBAY TPS 5 500 1984 Maharashtra 31/03/2018 December 2018

3 TENUGHAT TPS 1 210 1994 Jharkhand 31-12-2020 December 2018
5 INDIRA GANDHI STPP 1 500 2010 Haryana 31/10/2020 December 2018
6 BARSINGSAR LIGNITE 1 125 2010 Rajasthan 31/08/2020 December 2018
8 BARSINGSAR LIGNITE 2 125 2011 Rajasthan 30/04/2020 December 2018
14 SOLAPUR 1 660 2017 Maharashtra 31/12/2020 December 2018
15 NAWAPARA TPP 2 300 2017 Chhattisgarh 30/09/2020 December 2018
19 Binjkote TPP 1 300 2017 Chhattisgarh 30/09/2020 December 2018
21 METTUR TPS 1 210 1987 Tamil Nadu 31/03/2021 December 2018
Pradesh
Pradesh
31 KHAPARKHEDA TPS 3 210 2000 Maharashtra 31/03/2021 December 2018
commissioning
Year of
(DD/MM/YYYY)
by MOP

Pradesh
42 BARKHERA TPS 1 45 2011 Uttar Pradesh 30/09/2021 December 2018
43 KHAMBARKHERA TPS 1 45 2011 Uttar Pradesh 30/09/2021 December 2018
44 KHAMBARKHERA TPS 2 45 2011 Uttar Pradesh 30/09/2021 December 2018
45 MAQSOODPUR TPS 1 45 2011 Uttar Pradesh 30/09/2021 December 2018
47 BARKHERA TPS 2 45 2012 Uttar Pradesh 31/03/2021 December 2018
49 KUNDARKI TPS 1 45 2012 Uttar Pradesh 30/09/2021 December 2018
50 KUNDARKI TPS 2 45 2012 Uttar Pradesh 31/03/2021 December 2018
51 MAQSOODPUR TPS 2 45 2012 Uttar Pradesh 31/03/2021 December 2018
52 UTRAULA TPS 1 45 2012 Uttar Pradesh 30/09/2021 December 2018
55 PARICHHA TPS 6 250 2013 Uttar Pradesh 31/12/2021 December 2018
Pradesh
Pradesh
58 JALIPA KAPURDI TPP 7 135 2013 Rajasthan 31/12/2021 December 2018
62 CHANDRAPUR STPS 8 500 2015 Maharashtra 31-03-2021 December 2018
70 OBRA TPS 10 200 1979 Uttar Pradesh 31/102022 December 2018
commissioning
Year of
(DD/MM/YYYY)
by MOP

83 GH TPS (LEH.MOH.) 1 210 1997 Punjab 30/04/2022 December 2018
91 GIRAL TPS 1 125 2007 Rajasthan December 2018
96 GIRAL TPS 2 125 2010 Rajasthan December 2018
Pradesh
Pradesh
103 KATGHORA TPP 1 35 2012 Chhattisgarh December 2018
commissioning
Year of
(DD/MM/YYYY)
by MOP
108 BELA TPS 1 270 2013 Maharashtra December 2018

109 MUZAFFARPUR TPS 3 195 2015 Bihar 31/12/2022 December 2018
110 SWASTIK KORBA TPP 1 25 2015 Chhattisgarh December 2018
112 IND BARATH TPP 1 350 2016 Odisha 31/03/2022 December 2018
113 BOKARO À` TPS 1 500 2016 Jharkhand 30/06/2022 December 2018
121 MUZAFFARPUR TPS 4 195 2017 Bihar 31/12/2022 December 2018
122 Bhavnagar Lignite 2 250 2017 Gujarat December 2018
TPP
123 India Power TPP 1 150 2017 West Bengal December 2018
TOTAL 37,215 MW
Plants to comply by December, 2019
commissioning
ESP Phasing plan
ESP Phasing
Total for
Year of
S. Unit plan for
Name of Project Capacity State implementation
No. No implementation
(MW) (DD/MM/YYYY)
(YYYY) by CSE
by MOP
11 KORBA STPS 2 200 1983 Chhattisgarh 31-12-2022 December 2019
28 VINDHYACHAL STPS 1 210 1987 Madhya Pradesh 31/12/2022 December 2019
commissioning
ESP Phasing plan
ESP Phasing
Total for
Year of
S. Unit plan for
(MW) (DD/MM/YYYY)
(YYYY) by CSE
by MOP
50 SANJAY GANDHI TPS 1 210 1993 Madhya Pradesh 31/03/2021 December 2019
54 NORTH CHENNAI TPS 1 210 1994 Tamil Nadu 31/12/2022 December 2019
58 KAHALGAON TPS 3 210 1995 Bihar 31-12-2022 December 2019
72 AKRIMOTA LIG TPS 2 125 2005 Gujarat 31/12/2020 December 2019
73 AKRIMOTA LIG TPS 1 125 2005 Gujarat 30/09/2020 December 2019
77 RAYALASEEMA TPS 3 210 2007 Andhra Pradesh 30/09/2020 December 2019
78 YAMUNA NAGAR TPS 1 300 2007 Haryana 31/12/2021 December 2019
79 PARAS TPS 3 250 2007 Maharashtra 31/03/2021 December 2019
commissioning
ESP Phasing plan
ESP Phasing
Total for
Year of
S. Unit plan for
(MW) (DD/MM/YYYY)
(YYYY) by CSE
by MOP
86 BAKRESWAR TPS 5 210 2007 West Bengal December 2019
88 YAMUNA NAGAR TPS 2 300 2008 Haryana 31/10/2021 December 2019
89 AMARKANTAK EXT TPS 5 210 2008 Madhya Pradesh 31/03/2021 December 2019
91 Dr. N.TATA RAO TPS 7 500 2009 Andhra Pradesh 31/12/2020 December 2019
93 TORANGALLU TPS EXT 1 300 2009 Karnataka 30/06/2022 December 2019
94 TORANGALLU TPS EXT 2 300 2009 Karnataka 30/09/2022 December 2019
95 BAKRESWAR TPS 1 210 2009 West Bengal December 2019
98 SURAT LIG. TPS 3 125 2010 Gujarat 30/09/2020 December 2019
99 SURAT LIG. TPS 4 125 2010 Gujarat 31/12/2020 December 2019
101 PARAS TPS 4 250 2010 Maharashtra 31/03/2021 December 2019
102 RAJIV GANDHI TPS 1 600 2010 Haryana 30/04/2022 December 2019
104 RAJIV GANDHI TPS 2 600 2010 Haryana 28/02/2022 December 2019
KOTHAGUDEM TPS December 2019
2011
105 (NEW) 11 500 Telangana 30/09/2019
107 UTRAULA TPS 2 45 2012 Uttar Pradesh 31/03/2021 December 2019
108 D.P.L. TPS EXT. 8 250 2014 West Bengal 31/03/2022 December 2019
TOTAL 28,710 MW
Annexure 4: NOX emission data of individual plants as given to EPCA by CPCB, February 2018
Compliant with the standard of 600 mg/Nm3

S.No. Name of Project Unit No Total Year of State Present NOx
Capacity commissioning emission levels
in MW in mg/Nm3
1 UKAI TPS 4 200 1979 Gujarat 300-600
2 UKAI TPS 3 200 1979 Gujarat 300-600
3 SINGRAULI STPS 2 200 1982 Uttar Pradesh 300-600
6 UKAI TPS 5 210 1985 Gujarat 300-600
9 KHAPARKHEDA TPS 1 210 1989 Maharashtra 300-600
10 KOLAGHAT TPS 2 210 1990 West Bengal 300-600
11 GANDHI NAGAR TPS 3 210 1990 Gujarat 300-600
12 DADRI (NCTPP) 1 210 1991 Uttar Pradesh 300-600
13 FARAKKA STPS 4 500 1992 West Bengal 300-600
15 KAHALGAON TPS 1 210 1992 Bihar 300-600
17 ANPARA TPS 4 500 1993 Uttar Pradesh 300-600
18 FARAKKA STPS 5 500 1994 West Bengal 300-600
19 ANPARA TPS 5 500 1994 Uttar Pradesh 300-600
21 VINDHYACHAL STPS 7 500 1999 Madhya Pradesh 300-600
in MW in mg/Nm3
23 NASIK TPS 3 210 1979 Maharashtra less than 300

26 ANPARA TPS 1 210 1986 Uttar Pradesh less than 300
29 VINDHYACHAL STPS 6 210 1991 Madhya Pradesh less than 300
30 KOLAGHAT TPS 1 210 1993 West Bengal less than 300
31 RAYALASEEMA TPS 1 210 1994 Andhra Pradesh less than 300
33 MEJIA TPS 1 210 1996 West Bengal less than 300
36 BUDGE BUDGE TPS 1 250 1997 West Bengal ZERO

TOTAL 10,120 MW
Compliant with the standard of 300 mg/Nm3

in MW in mg/Nm3
in MW in mg/Nm3
4 BHILAI TPS 1 250 2008 Chhattisgarh less than 300
5 MUNDRA TPS 1 330 2009 Gujarat less than 300
6 BHILAI TPS 2 250 2009 Chhattisgarh less than 300
8 UDUPI TPP 1 600 2010 Karnataka less than 300
14 INDIRA GANDHI STPP 1 500 2010 Haryana less than 300
15 ROSA TPP Ph-I 2 300 2010 Uttar Pradesh less than 300
17 ANPARA C TPS 1 600 2011 Uttar Pradesh less than 300
18 UDUPI TPP 2 600 2011 Karnataka less than 300
21 TIRORA TPS 1 660 2012 Maharashtra less than 300
22 MAHADEV PRASAD STPP 1 270 2012 Jharkhand less than 300
24 BELLARY TPS 2 500 2012 Karnataka ZERO
25 MAHAN TPP 1 600 2013 Madhya Pradesh less than 300
26 BARH II 4 660 2013 Bihar less than 300
29 MAHADEV PRASAD STPP 2 270 2013 Jharkhand less than 300
in MW in mg/Nm3
30 SASAN UMTPP 2 660 2013 Madhya Pradesh less than 300
33 MARWA TPS 1 500 2014 Chhattisgarh less than 300
34 SASAN UMTPP 3 660 2014 Madhya Pradesh less than 300
35 BARH II 5 660 2015 Bihar less than 300
36 CHANDRAPUR STPS 9 500 2016 Maharashtra less than 300
37 BELLARY TPS 3 700 2016 Karnataka less than 300
38 Sembcorp Gayatri P.Ltd. 1 660 2016 Andhra Pradesh less than 300
39 Sembcorp Gayatri P.Ltd. 2 660 2017 Andhra Pradesh less than 300
TOTAL 18,620 MW
Non-Compliant with the standard of 600 mg/Nm3

in MW in mg/Nm3
1 SINGRAULI STPS 4 200 1983 Uttar Pradesh over 600
2 SINGRAULI STPS 3 200 1983 Uttar Pradesh over 600
3 FARAKKA STPS 2 200 1986 West Bengal over 600
6 VINDHYACHAL STPS 1 210 1987 Madhya Pradesh over 600
7 UNCHAHAR TPS 1 210 1988 Uttar Pradesh over 600
in MW in mg/Nm3
12 KAHALGAON TPS 2 210 1994 Bihar over 600
TOTAL 3,310 MW
Non-Compliant with the standard of 300 mg/Nm3

in MW in mg/Nm3
1 UNCHAHAR TPS 5 210 2006 Uttar Pradesh 300-600
4 PARLI TPS 6 250 2007 Maharashtra 300-600
6 YAMUNA NAGAR TPS 2 300 2008 Haryana 300-600
7 SIPAT STPS 4 500 2008 Chhattisgarh 300-600
8 PATHADI TPP 1 300 2009 Chhattisgarh 300-600
in MW in mg/Nm3
16 RAYALASEEMA TPS 5 210 2010 Andhra Pradesh 300-600
17 RAJIV GANDHI TPS 2 600 2010 Haryana 300-600
18 KODARMA TPP 1 500 2011 Jharkhand 300-600
19 INDIRA GANDHI STPP 2 500 2011 Haryana 300-600
21 ANPARA C TPS 2 600 2012 Uttar Pradesh 300-600
22 MAHATMA GANDHI TPS 2 660 2012 Haryana 300-600
23 MAHATMA GANDHI TPS 1 660 2012 Haryana 300-600
24 INDIRA GANDHI STPP 3 500 2012 Haryana 300-600
25 MOUDA TPS 1 500 2012 Maharashtra 300-600
29 KORBA-WEST Ext. TPS 5 500 2013 Chhattisgarh 300-600
30 AKALTARA TPS 1 600 2013 Chhattisgarh 300-600
31 UKAI TPS 6 500 2013 Gujarat 300-600
32 MOUDA TPS 2 500 2013 Maharashtra 300-600
33 SATPURA TPS 11 250 2013 Madhya Pradesh 300-600
34 SATPURA TPS 10 250 2013 Madhya Pradesh 300-600
36 SASAN UMTPP 1 660 2013 Madhya Pradesh 300-600
37 HALDIA TPP 2 300 2015 West Bengal 300-600
38 HALDIA TPP 1 300 2015 West Bengal 300-600
39 CHANDRAPUR STPS 8 500 2015 Maharashtra 300-600
in MW in mg/Nm3
40 KUDGI 1 800 2016 Karnataka 300-600
41 UNCHAHAR TPS 6 500 2017 Uttar Pradesh 300-600
42 Binjkote TPP 1 300 2017 Chhattisgarh 300-600
43 YAMUNA NAGAR TPS 1 300 2007 Haryana over 600

44 BELLARY TPS 1 500 2007 Karnataka over 600
45 SANTALDIH TPS 5 250 2007 West Bengal over 600
47 CHANDRAPURA(DVC) 7 250 2009 Jharkhand over 600
48 CHANDRAPURA(DVC) 8 250 2010 Jharkhand over 600
49 RAJIV GANDHI TPS 1 600 2010 Haryana over 600
51 SANTALDIH TPS 6 250 2011 West Bengal over 600
52 MEJIA TPS 8 500 2011 West Bengal over 600
53 AKALTARA TPS 2 600 2014 Chhattisgarh over 600
54 SASAN UMTPP 4 660 2014 Madhya Pradesh over 600
55 SASAN UMTPP 6 660 2015 Madhya Pradesh over 600
56 NAWAPARA TPP 2 300 2017 Chhattisgarh over 600
TOTAL 25,730 MW

FGD & ESP Tobe Installed in India Power Plants

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FGD & ESP Tobe Installed in India Power Plants

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

FGD & ESP Tobe Installed in India Power Plants

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

February 14, 2018

On 7.12.2017, MoEF&CC filed an affidavit in compliance with the order the

According to CPCB2 the implementation of the 2015 standards will lead to

2CPCB presentation as included in February 1, 2017, submission of Ritwick

In its affidavit of 7.12.2017, MOEF&CC has stated the following:

On February 1, 2018, MOEF&CC has filed affidavit in compliance with the

Based on the above submissions and subsequent consultations with officials of

2. Key issues for examination

2. If the extension granted to power companies by CPCB is “illegal” as

3. Divergence in MOEF&CC position in NGT and Supreme Court

4. ‘Illegality” of the extension given to power companies

The question is if the deadline set through the notification as an Amendment in

The view of the MOEF&CC needs to be sought on this matter.

5. If the 2022 deadline is acceptable or is advancement possible

Schedule of phase-in of 2015 emission norms: MOP and MOEF&CC

Compliant Non- Year TPP units MW

EPCA has examined this schedule in terms of technologies to mitigate different

5.1: Advancement/compliance with PM emissions

Based on the above, there is no reason, therefore, for the PM standard to be

Recommended schedule for advancement of PM norms

Year Standard Recommended schedule

5.2: Advancement/compliance with SO2 emissions

The schedule can also be advanced, so that the equipment is ordered

Based on the above discussions, the recommended schedule is:

5.3: Advancement/compliance with NOx emissions

However, this may not be the complete case.

This finds the following:

Of this, 18,260 MW are compliant with the 300 mg/Nm3 standard.

10,120 MW are compliant with the 600 mg/Nm3 standard.

NOx emissions from existing TPPs (see Annexure 4 for list)

The recommended schedule is:

6.If dilution of water standard is necessary

On October 16, 2017, MOEF&CC issued a draft notification to amend the

a. To exclude thermal power plants using sea water

In fact, best Indian plants already achieve 2 m3/MWh (CESC-Budge Budge,

discharge of seawater is not detrimental to the coastal ecology. This should be

7. Systems for effective compliance and monitoring

8. Recommendations for consideration of the Hon’ble Court

1. The timeline of 2022 can be advanced substantially and MOEF&CC may be

2. MOEF&CC in consultation with CPCB may be directed to review the

3. MOEF&CC may be directed not to revise the water consumption standard

4. MOEF&CC in consultation with CPCB may be directed to review the

n, ^ 3, ^ws (ii) ^ $. ^T.STT. 844(sr) 1 9

MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Dr. RASHID HASAN, Advisor

SUGGESTIONS FOR ENSURING EMISSION CONTROL AND

REDUCTION IN WATER CONSUMPTION IN COAL FIRED

THERMAL POWER PLANTS

Submitted by Ritwick Dutta, Advocate

Writ Petition(s) (Civil) No. (s) 13029/1985

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS

On 7thDecember 2015 MoEF&CC issued Notification No. S.O. 3305(E)

at regulating emissions of particulate matter (PM), Sulphur dioxide

(SO2), Oxides of Nitrogen(Nox),Mercury (Hg) and water consumption

and zero waste water discharge by thermal power plants. It should be

standards only for Particulate matter (PM).

In a presentation made on 18th May 2016 by Central Pollution Control

Board on “Environmental Regulations for coal based thermal power

plants”, it is stated that Coal based thermal power plants are