Policy

CPCB Cracks Whip. 52 Firms Issued Notice Over Plastic Waste Norms

The Central Pollution Control Board or CPCB took a hard stance against noncompliance of Plastic waste management rules and asked 52 companies from 9 industries to come up with Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) plan. The EPR plans will be in accordance with the Plastic Waste Management (PWM) rules, 2016.

The notices dated 24 April, 2019 were issued by the Pollution watchdog to these errant companies.

“All companies using any kind of plastic packaging are required to undertake EPR registration either from CPCB or State Pollution Control Board (SPCB)/Pollution Control Committee (PCC) as the case may be,” said SK Nigam, former additional director, CPCB.

The CPCB estimates about 25,940 tonnes of plastic waste is generated in the country daily, and the largest contributor is the packaging industry. Roughly about 60% of the waste generated reach processing while the remaining 10,000 tonnes lies unsegregated, blocking landfills and drains.

The agency opened an online registration of producers and brand owners under EPR and producer responsibility organizations (PROs) last year. According to the data, by March around 49 brand owners and two producers of plastic had registered under the EPR and submitted the EPR plan with the CPCB. These companies have promised to recollect and dispose 20% of used multi-layered plastic (MLP) and other plastics by their brand. This is eventually escalated to 100% in three years’ time.

[related_post]

In India, the principle of EPR has been an integral part of the waste management rules for ULABs, e-waste, and plastics. Based on the polluter-pays-principle, it increases the accountability of producers by making them responsible for the environmental impacts associated with their products throughout their life cycle. However, a March 27, 2018 amendment to PWM rules substituting “non-recyclable multi-layered plastic” with “multi-layered plastic which is non-recyclable or non-energy recoverable or with no alternate use” has weakened the rules, which were already soft to begin with.

This has given the ‘producers’ an escape route by claiming that the packaging material, if not recycled, can be put to some other use. MLP manufacturers used this loophole to continue to use the material.

Many producers have been following a wait-and-watch policy since 2016. Few of the companies have been working on the take back systems but have neither registered under the EPR clause and nor submitted their EPR plan.

I am Renew

Recent Posts

India’s Infistar Renewables, Finland’s Arciplug to make modular CBG plants in India

India’s Infistar Renewables has entered into a joint venture with Finland-based Arciplug Oy to manufacture…

14 hours ago

Assam Cabinet clears CBG policy; other sustainability measures

The Assam Cabinet has approved the Assam Compressed Biogas (CBG) Policy, 2026, setting the stage…

14 hours ago

Tamil Nadu to bring battery storage & recycling policy

Tamil Nadu is set to introduce a dedicated policy for Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS)…

14 hours ago

As “Day Zero” Warnings Persist, India’s Cities Still Aren’t Catching the Rain They Get

Down To Earth's August 1–15 print edition leads with a factsheet on a problem this…

1 day ago

IOCL agrees to build two CBG plants in Delhi

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Indian…

2 days ago

India’s ethanol programme being fuelled by rice & maize

Rice and maize have become the dominant feedstocks for ethanol production in India, with maize…

2 days ago