The Plastic Waste Rules 2011 – A baby step instead of a giant leap.

- Dharmesh Shah

The plastic consumption in India, as per estimate in 2008 by CPCB was 8 million tons/annum, out of which about 5.7 million tons of plastics are converted into waste annually i.e. 15,722 tons of plastic waste, is generated per day. Of this, approximately 6289 tons per day (TPD) i.e. 40% of plastics are neither collected, nor recycled and find their way into drains, open lands, rivers, railway tracks and coasts[1].

Recognizing the magnitude of the problem, in February 2011 the Ministry of Environment and Forests notified the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2011. These rules propose to address the growing environmental crisis caused by the mismanagement of plastic wastes within the country. Despite some progressive provisions like integration of waste pickers in the collection systems and a ban on manufacture/use of bags below 40 microns; the rules seem like baby steps at a juncture when a leap frog approach is required.

Some of the salient features of the rules are:

• Sachets using plastic material shall not be used for storing, packaging or selling of tobacco and gutkha.
• Municipal authorities should engage agencies or groups working in waste management including waste pickers into the system.
• Use of recycled plastics or compostable plastics for storing, carrying or packing foodstuffs is prohibited.
• Plastic carry bags of less than 40 microns in thickness are banned.
• No carry bags shall be made available free of cost to consumers. The municipal authority may by notification determine the minimum price for plastic carry bags.
• The municipal authority can ask the manufacturers to establish plastic waste collection centres, either collectively or individually, in line with the principle of ‘Extended Producers Responsibility (EPR)’.
• Marking or labeling provisions that mandate manufacturers to print the name, registration number and thickness.

EPR as a fig leaf!

Upon comparison with the recommendations of the Expert Committee constituted to examine the draft rules[2]; it is clear that the notified rules have suffered primarily due to the intervention of the plastic and packaging industry that has forced the dilution or removal of certain key recommendations of the expert committee. The rules are being hailed principally for its provision on EPR. In its report “to Evolve Road Map on Waste Management in India (March 2010)”, the expert committee recommended the following responsibilities for Manufacturers and Processors:

• Paying for both recyclable & non-recyclable plastics and their ultimate waste management options
• Providing incentives for adopting non-burn and novel technologies for non-recyclables.
• Undertaking mandatory responsibility of producers for R&D activities on plastic waste mitigation.

In a rather weak interpretation of the term EPR, the rules ultimately restrict the role of the manufactures to providing the required finance to establish collection centers in lines with the “principles of EPR”. This effectively means that the manufacturers can now get away with making a small contribution and not be inconvenienced with the responsibility of managing the waste it creates. Thus the onus of management eventually falls upon the urban local bodies that have already displayed adequate inefficiency in waste management.

No Penalties

Though the guidelines of use and disposal of plastics are clearly laid out, there are no penalties within the rules for violations, rendering the whole legislation toothless against violators. However, violations can be prosecuted in a convoluted manner through the Environment Protection Act, under which these rules are notified. An avenue to strengthen the rules is at the state level where the central rules will be used as guidelines to sketch out stronger state rules. Public interest groups and environmental organizations can use the opportunity to work with respective state governments in strengthening the local Plastic Waste rules.

Exporting Harm

The restrictions on manufacture and use of plastic sachets and bags less than 40 microns prescribed under Section 5 of the rules are not applicable to exporters. Included after the suggestion of the Commerce Ministry, this provision further weakens the rules as it does not consider the ground realities. With the dismal monitoring mechanism in place the leakage of the export designated carry bags into the domestic markets cannot be contained. Secondly, India needs to make ethical considerations on exporting such products to other countries.

End of the Pipeline clauses

Conversely, the rules also contains one of the most regressive provisions - Section 6(h) of the rules state “municipal authorities shall encourage the use of plastic waste by adopting suitable technology such as in road construction, co-incineration etc.” This is an extremely short sighted provision that fails to recognize the environmental damage caused by plastic incineration. The market uses a wide array of materials including toxic ones like Vinyl and in the absence of any collection and segregation system for different kinds of plastics excluding them before co-incineration is impossible.

Using plastics for laying roads is yet another toxic and end of the pipeline solution resorted to in a desperate attempt to dispose plastics. Because the plastics only melt in the process (and are not destroyed); use of plastics in road laying is similar to creating open landfills that will eventually disintegrate and be much harder to contain. Secondly, it is a common sight to see unmasked and bare handed migrant workers engaged in road laying across India, if plastics are included in the process it would only further expose these workers to extremely toxic emissions.

Decentralized monitoring

A positive feature of the rules is that there is an earnest attempt to decentralize the monitoring, enforcement and implementation. To monitor its implementation, a State Level Advisory Body consisting of experts, NGO, academics and government has to be formed under the aegis of the Department of Urban Development. The state Pollution control Boards/Committees are responsible for reporting on the implementation of the rules to the Central Pollution Control Board which in turn has to present a consolidated annual report to the government. The involvement of multiple agencies might ensure better efficiency and greater accountability in the functioning.

Informal sector

The most positive aspect of the rules is the inclusion of waste pickers in to the system. The Plastic Waste rules are the first to legally recognize waste pickers and will go a long way in ensuring that the rights of the informal workers within the sector are secured.

At a stage where we are discovering islands of plastic in the ocean and when cities are inundated because of plastic clogged drains – we need to think unreasonably. The Plastic Waste Rules 2011 are disappointing for curbing the “plastic menace” realistically.

---

[1] Report of the Committee to Evolve Road Map on Management of Wastes in India – MoEF, March 2010 - http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/Roadmap-Mgmt-Waste.pdf

[2] Report of the Expert Committee to examine the comments and suggestions including economic instruments in the draft Plastics (Manufacture, Usage and Waste Management) Rules, 2009 http://moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/draft-plastic-rules-2009.pdf