CIPS PlasticRoad

CENTRE FOR INNOVATIONS IN PUBLIC SYSTEMS
An Autonomous body of the Government of India
Use of Plastics in Road Construction
Implementation of Technology and Roll out
November 2014
Knowledge Partner : Knowledge Advisory Services and

Consultancy
ı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Document Control Page
TITLE Title: Use of Plastics in Waste Construction

Version: Final Draft
Copyright: Centre for Innovations in Public Systems (CIPS)
CIPS take no responsibility for any incorrect information supplied by contributors or other
sources of information. Information provided here is based primarily on interviews and
public sources of information can therefore be subjective. CIPS shall not be liable if the
content of the document is used in any other manner than the purpose intended.
Duplication, copying, selling, or disclosing contents of the document without explicit
written permission of CIPS is strictly prohibited and shall be liable for legal action.
Approved by Dr. D. Chakrapani,
Designation: Director
Centre for Innovations in Public Systems (CIPS)
College Park Campus of ASCI, Road number 3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, 500 034, Andhra
Pradesh, India
Email : chakrapani@cips.org.in , director‐cips@nic.in
Edited by Mrs. Vidhisha Kalra,
Designation: Joint Director
CIPS Centre for Innovations in Public Systems (CIPS)
College Park Campus of ASCI, Road number 3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, 500 034, Andhra
Pradesh, India
Email : Vidhisha.kalra@cips.org.in
Knowledge Kshitij Aditeya Singh

Partner
Designation: Managing Director
Knowledge Advisory Services and Consultancy Private Limited,
2/134 Vijay Khand, Gomti Nagar,
Lucknow ‐ 226010, India
Email: kas@knowledgeadvisory.com
› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
India generates 1,88,000 tons garbage every day. Plastic Waste in different forms is found to be almost
9% to 12% in municipal solid waste, which is toxic in nature. Non‐biodegradability of plastic in the
environment has created numerous challenges for both urban and rural India. Common problems are
choking of drains, stagnation of water, release of toxic gases upon open incineration.
Research experiments in the public and private sector have been undertaken to address the growing environmental
challenge.
One of the solutions proposed and demonstrated was by Professor Vasudevan in utilising waste
environmental plastic in road construction. Road construction projects were pioneered in the state of
Tamil Nadu followed by Karnataka as early as 2001. Both states have made significant progress since in
rural and urban roads respectively. Other states such as Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Jharkhand, Delhi, and
Maharashtra have demonstrated projects in other states as well.
CIPS with the purpose of encouraging this practise has engaged in documenting learnings to enable other
states in adopting the methods. The primary objectives of the project were to understand administrative
processes, implementation strategy and cost, identify key organizations and roles, assess roll out and inter‐
linkages, review approvals for execution, impact of the initiative, structure for collection of plastic waste,
financial models and implementation monitoring methods. Secondary objectives included assessing the
economic viability in larger and smaller cities, coordination methodology of urban local bodies for
waste collection, need for additional legislation, and the role of media.
The technical objectives also included understanding the scientific background and process, assessing
relevant guidelines and rules of the Indian road Congress, use of alternative materials, assessing the
integration of technological and engineering decision of use, road construction into the policy framework
and execution.
The scope of the project was limited by the focus of plastics in road construction as identified by the
India Road Congress Standard SP‐98. The evaluation aspects included Technical, Financial,
Organisation and Administrative aspects. 3 field visits were the limited to the most performing states.
The scope of technical assessment was limited to desktop scientific research and no
3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

experiments were to be conducted. The methodology applied was participatory and applied.
Methods included primary research, secondary research, interviews and focus group discussions.
Bitumen plays an important role in binding the aggregate together by coating over the aggregate
thereby imparting strength to the road. However, due to poor resistance towards water and high costs
involved, there is a demand for high quality bitumen at low costs. This can be accomplished by modifying
the rheological properties of bitumen by using additives such as plastic or rubber.
Plastic waste can be used in hot mix to improve physical properties of bituminous aggregate mix by
‘Dry Process’ or ‘Wet Process’. The technology as developed by Dr Vasudevan, incorporates the use of
‘Plastone’, a mixture of stone chips and waste plastic bags (thickness 40‐70 μm) which is heated at 150‐
170 degree C during production, in laying roads, pavements and flooring purposes as an alternative to
interlocking paver blocks. At this processing temperature, the plastic waste is heated enough to act as an
adhesive in binding stone chips and not generating any toxic gases. The aggregate becomes water proof
after getting coated with molten plastic. This step is followed by the addition of hot plastic‐aggregate mix
to hot bitumen while maintaining the process temperature.
This approach is known as ‘Dry Process’. The ‘Wet Process’ involves mixing of plastic to hot bitumen
followed by mixing with hot aggregate. Both the processes lead to the formation of plastic modified
bituminous aggregate mix with enhanced properties imparting strength, stability and durability to the
roads.
Plastic‐tar roads have benefits over conventional roads such as the overall reduction in bitumen
consumption by 8%, enhanced load carrying strength, reduced wear and tear, prevents release of 3 tonnes
of CO2 (through disposal by burning) into the atmosphere, increased road strength, excellent resistance to
water and water stagnation, no stripping and potholes formation, enhanced binding, reduced rutting and
ravelling, improved soundness property, negligible maintenance cost of the road, no leaching of
plastics and no effect of UV radiation. Waste plastic that can be used include cups, carry bags,
polythene and polypropylene foams and thermocol. Polyvinylchloride cannot be used as it is toxic in
nature.
The focus of the report has been on three different models followed in the states of Tamil Nadu,
Karnataka and Jharkhand. Tamil Nadu as a pioneering state has significant achievement in
implementation of plastic rural roads. The model followed in Tamil Nadu involves self‐help groups.
Karnataka has made significant progress in urban road construction using waste plastic. The model
q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

followed in Karnataka is based on a memorandum of understanding with a contractor. States such as

Jharkhand have not made tremendous progress but is the only example of a private sector utility
constructing plastic roads. Himachal Pradesh had started constructing a few plastic roads, the state has now
banned plastic as a result of that, and no new plastic roads are now being undertaken.
Tamil Nadu in achieving the objective, involved different government departments like Municipal
Administration, Rural Development, Panchayats, Districts Rural Development Agency (DRDA), National
Rural Roads Development Agency, Environment and Forest Department, Women Development,
Social Welfare and Road Contractor collaborated to deliver effective results.
Tamil Nadu Corporation for Development of Women Ltd, operating under the Rural Development and
Panchayati Raj Department has been a key stakeholder in the development of Self Help Groups (SHGs).
SHGs have been formed for collection and segregation of waste plastics. Shredding units have also been
established to provide waste plastic to the required size specification. The SHGs provide shredded
waste plastics to Road Contractors in suitable form at reasonable rates. The responsibility of
procurement at the DRDA specified rate of ₹ 30 per kilogramme resting with the road contractor.
The first road using waste plastics was laid in Kovilpatti village of Tuticorin district in October 2002. Over
the last ten years, the use of plastics in rural road construction has been widely adopted in Tamil
Nadu. The state agencies have constructed more than 16,000 kilometres of rural road connectivity
using the innovative method. The primary allocations of funding in the state come through the Ministry
of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj. This has been supplemented by the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak
Yojana administered by National Rural Road Development Agency.
Through the Environment Protection and Renewal Energy Development fund of the Tamil Nadu
Environment and Forest Department budget had been marked specifically for construction of plastic roads.
Tamil Nadu in the current financial year has allocated ₹ 20 crore through the Ministry of Rural
Development and Panchayati Raj. Through the PMGSY scheme, 10% of the budget allocated for the state
in the present year has been directed to plastic road construction. This amounts to ₹11 crores. The
Environment and Forest Department of Tamil Nadu through a notified fund has allocated ₹
24.18 crore in the current financial year.
y © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Tamil Nadu’s DRDA agency had taken special measure to create training manuals and programmes for
engineers and contractors who would be involved in plastic road construction. Encouragement for using
waste plastic received support from media channels such as Doordarshan and private TV channels. In
order to motivate the stakeholders the state government has instituted three State level awards for
recognising the best plastic free village panchayat, best plastic free school and self‐ help group.
Tamil Nadu faced specific challenges while rolling out the plastic roads programme in the state. The
primary challenge was in setting up of shredding units and to provide plastic to these units. Plastic
generation hot‐spots were not identified at an early stage, therefore the supply constraints were
experienced. Lack of consistent demand was also experienced by some of the SHGs that place
significant financial strain on the units.
Noteworthy roll out practise that other states can learn from is the convergence between self‐help
groups and DRDA. The expansion of the SHG network and capacity building across districts has been an
excellent practise that other states may implement. Endorsement support and monitoring of the scheme at
the highest level has been instrumental in roll out of the programme.
Karnataka has also been one of the pioneering states in the implementation of plastic roads.
Directorate of Municipal Administration including Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP)),
Karnataka Road Development Corporation limited, Karnataka Rural Roads Development Agency
(KRRDA), Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, National Rural Roads Development Agency, and KK
Plastic Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., are contributing to constructing roads using waste plastics.
BBMP has remained an important participant in encouraging and delivery of plastic roads in the city of
Bengaluru over the last 12 years. BBMP is responsible for civic and infrastructural requirements in the city
Bengaluru. Since 2002, about 2500 kilometres of plastic roads have been laid in Karnataka by reusing more
than 10,000 tons of plastic waste so far. BBMP decided to pass a resolution in 2006 for using plastic
admixtures in construction of all black top roads in the city, recommending the price of procurement
of processed waste plastic to be set at ₹ 27 per kilogram. The roll out in Karnataka was undertaken in
3 year phases where 500 km of urban roads were paved using waste plastic as a binder. BBMP has
provided 100% funding for plastic roads construction.
A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed between the BBMP and KK Plastics which has
been renewed at regular intervals. The last MoU was signed in 2012 between BBMP and KK Plastics

for a period of 2 years. According to the understanding, KK Plastic agreed to acquire waste plastic
from dry waste processing centres created by BBMP in Bangalore at a rate of ₹ 10 per kilogram. The
responsibility of acquiring, processing and delivering the waste plastic to the Hot‐Mix plant was
assigned to KK Plastic. The responsibility of mixing, training and manning the patented machines for
mixing processed waste plastic was also entrusted to KK Plastic.
KRRDA as a Nodal agency is implementing the Government of India programme of construction of rural
roads under the PMGSY Scheme is another key state agency for plastic roads. KRRDA is
implementing these projects through the Project Implementation Units (Divisions). It also
implements the construction of rural roads under the state scheme of Namma Gramma Namma Raste
(NGNRY). In a model different to the one followed by BBMP, the rural road sector promoted by KRRDA
is allowing procurement of waste plastic at ₹ 6 per kilogram. This is paid to the public health workers
for collection of waste. The agency has commenced from the current financial year, the construction of
plastic roads in rural Karnataka. The price of procurement of processed waste plastic at ₹ 27 per kilogram
has been included in the schedule of rates. KRRDA through the PMGSY scheme is implementing 190
kilometres of plastic roads with a funding allocation of ₹81.70 crores spread over 32 projects in the
current financial year.
Other notable aspects of roll out in Karnataka have been the engagement with schools and colleges in
generating awareness. Significant engagement has been undertaken with national and international
organisations. Media has provided very high levels of coverage to the problem of waste management and
remediation through plastic road construction.
A number of challenges were observed during the roll out in Karnataka. The primary one was the
absence of a schedule of rate for processed waste plastic. Availability of adequate bins for waste
collection and transportation, lack of training of collection workers, poor compensation of collection
workers are some waste management challenges. Other challenges such as limited documentation, lack of
engineering data, and constant movement of engineers has been a detriment.
Aspects of roll out in Karnataka, that would serve as learning for other states is the convergence of
Solid Waste Management group and Road Engineering within the BBMP. The MoU model for plastic
waste contractor and BBMP has also been unique in assisting fast adoption of the method. KRRDA
practises worth emulating in other states are signing of tripartite agreement with stakeholders, internal
communication, multi‐level monitoring and documentation of work conducted.
The third implementation model has been followed in Jamshedpur, Jharkhand where Jamshedpur Utility
and Services Company (JUSCO Limited, subsidiary of Tata Steel established in year 2004) have been
trying to deal with the hazard of waste plastic and use it in a productive manner. Jamshedpur city
does not have a Municipal corporation and is managed by Tata group of companies.
JUSCO is responsible for planning, maintenance, providing civic and municipal services in an
integrated manner along with waste water management services, power distribution, engineering and
construction services, municipal solid waste management and public health services, with horticulture
and a couple of other services. JUSCO Ltd. runs the operations of the utility in Jamshedpur with a
population of 8,00,000 inhabitants spread over an area of 64 square kilometres.
The partnering agencies were Tarapore & Co. Jamshedpur (building and civil construction) and Singh
industries Jamshedpur. All the activities, viz., collection of waste plastics, segregation, shredding,
transportation and use in road construction, usually associated with Municipal Corporation were
carried out by these private organizations.
The broad process that was followed for road construction in Jharkhand commenced from door‐to‐ door
collection of waste plastics from the source, segregating the waste and shredding the same into 2‐4 mm
size. The mixing of shredded plastic over the aggregates in road construction provides tremendous
strength at no additional cost. Plastic gets coated over stone and the hot plastic coated stone is mixed with
bitumen (tar) and the mix is used for road laying. As per a general estimation, to lay one km of plastic
road 4 m wide, 8% bitumen will be replaced by waste plastics. There was a saving of ₹ 60,000 per
kilometre.
JUSCO purchases items and waste plastics as per the Schedule of Rates provided by Public Works
Department of Jharkhand. These rates are not frequently updated therefore JUSCO amends them,
increasing the values by 5‐10% as per market rates. The model followed by JUSCO was the client‐
sponsor one, where the invoice generated was paid for by Tata Steel.
JUSCO found limited support from Government in executing plastic road projects in the Jamshedpur. Other
challenges faced were collection and transportation from source, poor public participation in the waste
management. The initiative has created a large number of jobs and has reduced the risk to public health.
The model can be replicated by the private sector in different parts of the country
where large scale townships and industrial projects are being conducted by private sector companies.
The three models of operations provide a number of key lessons that can be translate by other states in
to more effective programmes for waste management and road construction. The proposed roll out
strategy for states takes in to consideration aspects of policy pronouncement for rural and urban roads,
planning requirements of plastic roads, implementation models of operations, finance, monitoring
mechanism, training and awareness generation, and capacity building. State schemes may be allied with
national schemes to improve effectiveness.
The policy pronouncements should be made with due consideration and collaboration of state agencies
involved in rural and urban road development. It is recommended that 15% of annual rural roads built
through state financing may introduce the technology. 10 % of roads built by the state nodal agency
implementing the PMGSY scheme may be constructed using waste plastic. All road strengthening,
resurfacing and improvement projects in urban areas are advised to use waste plastic with bitumen. 15%
of fresh road paving in urban areas of municipal limits may use plastic with bitumen. Mandatory
implementation of IRC – SP‐ 98 standard for plastic roads may be promoted.
Prior to the launch of the plastic roads scheme, due diligence and assessment is required for effective
planning and execution. Conducting a planning survey for the plastic roads programme is recommended
before roll out. Planning plastic roads for urban or rural areas may be selected based on volume of plastic
waste generated and capacity for managing it. 3 phases of implementation is recommended for roll out
of urban and rural roads.
The implementation model of plastic roads may consider the formation of a flagship programme. The
framework of the flagship programme could pursue one or all of the three different implementation
models – SHGs, Contractor MoU, and Private Sector Utility. The flagship programme requires direct
support and endorsement of the Chief Minister to be successful. Constant monitoring at the highest
administrative level is required for effective roll out and adoption of plastic roads.
A number of training and awareness building measures are essential for ensuring the success of the
flagship programme of the state. Conscious effort by the state and private sector media in celebrating
and generating awareness of environmental issues is extremely important. Large scale public awareness
programme need to be initiated through the CSR funds of Plastic Manufacturers in schools for students.
Awareness programme to be conducted by Municipal corporations and road
Q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

construction department as a part of roll out of the flagship programme. PWD engineers responsible for
road construction should be provided mandatory training in the IRC‐SP‐ 98 standard implementation.
The onus of awareness generation and participation in safe use and disposal of plastics should be
placed on plastic manufacturers. Colour coded bins could be introduced in urban communal areas, housing
societies, schools and public buildings for the purpose of segregation at source.
Capacity building is essential for the roll out of a flagship programme. Training of workers at SHGs and
Urban Dry Collection centres is mandatory for health and safety of the workers concerned.
Corporate Social Responsibility funds of large public or private sector undertaking must be gainfully
applied for training especially those involved in production of plastic and petroleum products. State
Governments could consider the need for setting up an independent regulatory and monitoring
authority for cleanliness and environment protection. Extensive engagement between government,
academia and industry required for continually improving understanding is highly recommended.
Other capacity building methods such as E‐learning content and E‐monitoring may be included in the roll
out plan.
Financial benefits resulting from the implementation of plastic roads and the resulting longevity of
roads are key drivers for the roll out. Launching a savings programme to be initiated by the Finance
Ministry of the state ensuring a saving range of ₹ 26,000 ‐ 60,000 per lane kilometre from the cost of
bitumen. Capacity building measure maybe financed through departments such as urban and rural
development, public works, livelihood missions and corporate social responsibility funds. In states that are
financially distressed, 10% of road length can be reduced from the total annual outlay for road
construction in the state to enable the plastic roads programme. Formation of a multi‐action
environmental fund may be considered by the state in the roll out.
The monitoring mechanism remains the most significant and critical aspect of implementing the
flagship programme for plastic roads in the state. Three dimensions of monitoring maybe considered by the
state through technical monitoring, administrative monitoring and citizen charter monitoring. Technical
monitoring may be undertaken through state technical agencies, external monitors, assessors and
experts from the field of road construction. National agencies may be involved in the process where
additional quality parameters are to be assessed. Administrative monitoring remains of highest priority in
ensuring the flagship programme is successful in the state. Administrative monitoring may be
structured in to urban roads, rural roads and punitive action. Citizen involvement
ıo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

in monitoring of public funding may be considered as a method for enhancing public service delivery.
An information dissemination website may be considered, along with inclusion of provisions for the
use of right to information under section 2(j) of the act.
Awards and recognition are essential for maintaining the buoyancy of the state flagship programme on
plastic roads. The programme, participating agencies may consider a structured approach to
recognition of high performing individuals and groups involved in the roll out of plastic roads.
‘Paryavaran Seva’ award has been recommended for individuals and organisations delivering
exceptional service. Soft non‐financial incentives may be considered for project implementation units that
deliver on time and to the required quality.
The experience in pioneering states has been very encouraging. The outcomes have reduced the risks to
public health from large dumps of waste plastic. Using this waste in roads has been of benefit to road
construction, improving the quality and lifetime of the roads. The benefits have been realised and
demonstrated for numerous communities in the pioneering states. A well planned and executed
programme in a given state would have the potential of transforming urban waste management and
road construction to a very significant degree.
ıı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

PREFACE
The document on the use of Plastic in Road construction was written with the purpose of providing
information to the administrative and technical functionaries in the state involved with municipal
administration and road construction. The document has been structured to provide a basic overview
through the executive summary. The layout of the document is clearly articulated through the table of
contents, list of figures and the list of tables. Information can be accessed directly using these lists
from any part of the document.
The introduction provides a background and overview of the project undertaken by the Knowledge Partner.
The structure to the project was provided by the scope, methodology and analytical framework. The
information supporting the introduction has been provided in Annexe A. The details of all engagements,
undertaken as a part of the project methodology, with stakeholders have also been provided in Annexe
B.
The technical section provides information about the technical background of plastics, roads and the use of
both together. The section was written with the view of providing information to technical
administrators who have experience and understanding of road construction. The section has
references to a number of journal scientific papers. A large part of the section is devoted to the Indian
Road Congress standard SP‐98 and scientific literature on the subject matter.
A glossary of terms has been provided for non‐technical administrators in Annexe C.6. This will provide
clarification on technical terms and the definition. Technical tables and contained parameters in this
section have been provided for the benefit of engineers and their managerial authority. Supporting
information has been included in Annexe C.
Case studies are written taking in to consideration the organisational, administrative and financial aspects
of use of plastics in road construction. Stakeholders in each of the three states were
ı› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

engaged with to acquire understanding of key analytical questions. These have been structured through a
common framework in to case studies.
The information in the case study is supported by government orders, notifications, memorandum of
understanding, contractual agreements, project information, work orders, internal communication
documents, media items, photographs and performance studies. These have been included in Annexe D, E
and F. Additional information about Himachal Pradesh has been included in Annexe G. HP was initially
included in the scope of work, though currently work on plastic roads has been stopped due to a ban on
plastic, thus limited information is available.
The final section is the strategy for roll out in states that are yet to commence a programme or to
enhance the existing programme for plastic roads. The roll out strategy is a recommended approach based
on learnings from the pioneering states. The strategy may be applied based on an assessment of systems,
structures and finances of the state considering the implementation. The application of the technology has
yielded a multi‐fold benefit in the pioneering states and should do so for any other state.
ı3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

TABLE OF CONTENT
Executive Summary...............................................................................................................................3
Preface.................................................................................................................................................12
Table of Content..................................................................................................................................14
List of Abbreviations...........................................................................................................................20
List of Figures.....................................................................................................................................23
List of Tables.......................................................................................................................................26
1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................28
1.1 Background................................................................................................................................28
1.2 Objectives..................................................................................................................................29
1.3 Scope of Work...........................................................................................................................30
1.4 Methodology..............................................................................................................................31
2. Technology: Innovation and Process...........................................................................................33
2.1 Technology behind the innovation.............................................................................................33
2.2 Plastic Modified Bituminous Road versus Conventional Bituminous Roads.............................40
2.3 The Outlook of Central Road Research Institute........................................................................41
2.4 Guidelines of Indian Roads Congress........................................................................................42
2.5 Technological and Engineering Decisions.................................................................................43
2.6 Characterisation of Plastic Waste Coated Aggregate (PCA) Bitumen Mix................................47
2.7. Other Modifying and Binding Materials...................................................................................49
3. Tamil Nadu Case Study...............................................................................................................54
3.1 Title...........................................................................................................................................54
3.2 Brief Description of the innovation............................................................................................54
ıq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

3.3 Application‐Innovation Context................................................................................................55
3.4 New Approach...........................................................................................................................57
3.5 Implementation strategy............................................................................................................58
3.6 Challenges in implementation....................................................................................................62
3.7 Benefits of innovation................................................................................................................63
3.8 Financial Model.........................................................................................................................64
3.9 Potential for replication.............................................................................................................66
4. Karnataka Case Study..................................................................................................................68
4.1 Title...........................................................................................................................................68
4.4 New Approach...........................................................................................................................71
4.8 Financial Model.........................................................................................................................81
5. Jharkhand Case Study......................................................................................................................85
5.1 Title...........................................................................................................................................85
5.4 New Approach...........................................................................................................................88
5.8 Financial Model.........................................................................................................................93
6. Roll Out Strategy.............................................................................................................................95

6.1 Rural Roads: Policy Pronouncements........................................................................................95
6.2 Urban Roads: Policy Pronouncements.......................................................................................96
6.3 Assessment and Planning...........................................................................................................96
6.4 Implementation Model...............................................................................................................98
6.5 Training and Awareness Building............................................................................................101
6.6 Capacity Building....................................................................................................................102
6.7 Finance....................................................................................................................................104
6.8 Monitoring Mechanism............................................................................................................105
6.9 Awards and Recognition..........................................................................................................109
Annexure...........................................................................................................................................111
A: Key list of Analytical Questions...............................................................................................111
A.1Project specific....................................................................................................................111
A.2Technical.............................................................................................................................113
A.3Administrative.....................................................................................................................114
A.4Financial..............................................................................................................................115
A.5Organisational.....................................................................................................................115
A.6Innovation............................................................................................................................116
B: List of Interviews and Focus group discussion..........................................................................117
B.1 Tamil Nadu..........................................................................................................................117
B.2 Karnataka.............................................................................................................................119
B.3 Jharkhand.............................................................................................................................121
B.4 Central Organisation............................................................................................................122
C: Technical Assessment..........................................................................................................................124
C.1 Test for Assessing Physical Characteristics of Plastic Roads...............................................124
C.2 Technological USE..............................................................................................................125
C.3 Biodegradable Polymers......................................................................................................126
C.4 Recycling Of Standard Roads..............................................................................................127
C.5 A Best Possible Solid Waste Disposal Method?..................................................................129

C.6 Glossary of Technical Terms...............................................................................................129
C.7 Performance Comparative Study.........................................................................................133
C.8 References...........................................................................................................................134
D: Tamil Nadu Case study ‐ Additional information.....................................................................138
D.1 Project Information – Rural Road 1.....................................................................................138
D.2 Project Information – Rural Road 2.....................................................................................141
D.3 Government Gazette Notification Clause: Use of Plastics in Road Construction................144
D.4 Government Sanction Notification......................................................................................145
D.5 Environmental Fund Notification (SEPT 2014)..................................................................148
D.6 Environmental Fund Notification (FEB 2014)....................................................................153
D.7 Government order for relaying of roads using plastic waste – Release of Funds.................156
D.8 Government for relaying of roads using waste plastic – Release of funds...........................157
D.9 Government Order for release of funds for monitoring and inspection of plastic roads......158
D.10 Government Order for drive to clear plastics accumulated................................................159
D.11 Chennai Corporation.........................................................................................................160
D.11 Self help group Awards.....................................................................................................161
D.12– Technical Information of Project Evaluation..................................................................164
D.13 Information Awareness Brochures....................................................................................171
D.14 References.........................................................................................................................173
E: Karnataka Case study ‐ Additional information........................................................................174
E.1 Project Information – Sub urban Road.................................................................................174
E.2 Project Information – Urban Road.......................................................................................178
E.3 Memorandum of Understanding..........................................................................................184
E.4 Patent – Dry Process Mixing Method..................................................................................185
E.5 BBMP Road Estimate..........................................................................................................186
E.6 BBMP Supply order.............................................................................................................187
E.7 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation order.................................................................188
E.8 BBMP Supply Orders..........................................................................................................189

E.9 Karnataka Pollution Control Board certificate.....................................................................194
E.10 Public Engagement............................................................................................................197
E.11 Societal Recognition..........................................................................................................201
E.12 Media Coverage.................................................................................................................204
E.13 List of Upcoming KRRDA Projects...................................................................................207
E.14 KRRDA Schedule of RAtes Example................................................................................208
E.15 Tripartite Technology Agreement......................................................................................211
E.16 MoRD Clearance Order.....................................................................................................212
E.17 KRRDA – Internal Communication...................................................................................213
E.18 References..........................................................................................................................214
F: Jharkhand Case study ‐ Additional information.........................................................................215
F.1 Project Information – Urban Road.......................................................................................215
F.2 Project Information – Urban Road 2....................................................................................218
F.3 Project Information – Urban Road 3....................................................................................221
F.4 MoEF Gazzette Notification................................................................................................224
F.5 Photos of the Project............................................................................................................225
F.6 References............................................................................................................................226
G – Information from the Himachal Pradesh ban..........................................................................227
G.1 Brief overview on plastics roads in HP................................................................................227
G.2 BAN on plastics..................................................................................................................228
G.3 Ban Notification..................................................................................................................230
G.4 References...........................................................................................................................236

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ABIDE ‐ Bengaluru Agenda Infrastructure Development Task Force BBMP ‐
Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike
BBT‐ Benkelman Beam test BC ‐
Bituminous Concrete
BDA‐ Bengaluru Development Authority
BOOT‐ Build‐own‐operate‐transfer
BOT ‐ Build‐operate‐transfer
CEO – Chief Executive Officer
CIPS ‐ Centre for Innovations in Public Systems
CM – Chief Minister
CoM‐ Conventional Mix
COO – Chief Operating Officer
CRRI ‐ Central Road Research Institute
DBOOT ‐ Design ‐ build‐own‐operate‐transfer
DRDA ‐ Districts Rural Development Agency
EPC ‐ Engineering Procurement and Construction GoI –
Government of India
HDPE ‐ High Density Poly Ethylene
IISc – Indian Institute of Sciences
IIT – Indian Institute of Technology
›o © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

IRC ‐ Indian Road Congress
JUSCO ‐ Jamshedpur Utility and Services Company
KRRDA ‐ Karnataka Rural Roads Development Agency
LDPE ‐ Low Density Poly Ethylene
MBM ‐Modified Bitumen Mix
MNREGA – Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act
MoEF ‐ Ministry of Environment and Forests
MoRD ‐ Ministry of Rural Development
MoRT&H‐ Ministry of Roads, Transport and Highways
MoU ‐ Memorandum of Understanding
NGNRY ‐ Namma Gramma Namma Raste
NGO ‐ Non‐Government Organizations
NIC – National Informatics Centre
NQM ‐ National Quality Monitors
NRRDA ‐ National Rural Roads Development Agency
O&M ‐ Operation and Maintenance
OBC ‐ Optimum Bitumen Content
PCC ‐ Portland cement concrete
PET ‐ Polyethylene Terephthalate
PIU ‐ Project Implementation Units
PMGSY ‐ Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana
PP ‐ Polypropylene
›ı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

PS‐ Polystyrene
PVC ‐ Poly Vinyl Chloride
PWD – Public Works Department
R&D – Research and Development
RAP ‐ Reclaimed asphalt pavement
RTI – Right to Information
SBS ‐ Styrene Butadiene Styrene
SDBC‐ Semi‐dense Bituminous Concrete
SHGs‐ Self Help Groups
SQM ‐ State Quality Monitor
STA ‐ State Technical Agencies
TCE ‐ Thiagarajar College of Engineering
TGA ‐ Thermo Gravimetric Analysis
TPD ‐ Tons per day
TV – Television
ULB ‐ Urban Local Bodies
WPMCC ‐ Waste plastic modified cement concrete
›› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1‐ A flow chart demonstrating classification of Asphalt mix.............................................................34

Figure 2 ‐ A flow chart demonstrating various types of aggregate mixes used for road construction 34
Figure 3‐ A flow chart illustrating the road construction processes using plastic waste...............................36
Figure 4‐ A flow chart demonstrating the ‘dry process’ of making plastic Bitumen road material (7) 37
Figure 5‐ Tamil Nadu Women Development Corporation.............................................................................59
Figure 6‐ Organization Chart Tamil Nadu Road Department........................................................................60
Figure 7‐ Karnataka Rural Road Development Agency (KRRDA) Organisation Chart........................................71
Figure 8 ‐ Preparation of Raw Material for Road Construction.....................................................................72
Figure 9 ‐ Karnataka Municipal Acts and Amendments................................................................................74
Figure 10 ‐ Organisational Chart of JUSCO...................................................................................................87
Figure 11 ‐ Process of collection of Waste Plastic in Jamshedpur (Source: JUSCO Ltd.)............................89
Figure 12 ‐ Process of segregation and shredding of Waste Plastics (Source: JUSCO Ltd.)........................89
Figure 13‐ Classification of recycling methods based on processes (45)....................................................128
Figure 14‐ Tamil Nadu Rural Road project ‐1.............................................................................................139
Figure 15 ‐ Tamil Nadu Rural Road Project 1 ‐ Culvert on Plastic Road....................................................140
Figure 16 ‐ Sudeshi SHG and Processed Plastic..................................................................................................140
Figure 17 ‐ Tamil Nadu Rural Road Project 2.............................................................................................142
Figure 18 ‐ Tamil Nadu Rural Road Project 2‐ First Local Road................................................................143
Figure 19 – MoEF Gazette Notification ‐ Use of Plastics in Road: Section 6(h)........................................144
Figure 20 ‐ 13th Finance Commission Sanction..........................................................................................145
Figure 21 ‐ RIS Sanction 2013‐14................................................................................................................146
Figure 22‐ RIS Sanction 2014‐15.................................................................................................................147
Figure 23‐ Environment Fund Notification..................................................................................................148
Figure 24‐ Environment Fund Notification 2014 ‐ Page 2...........................................................................149
Figure 25 ‐ Environment Fund Notification 2014 ‐ Page 3..........................................................................150
Figure 26‐ Environment Fund Notification 2014 ‐ Page 4...........................................................................151
Figure 27 ‐ Environment Fund Notification 2014 ‐ Page 5..........................................................................152
Figure 28‐ Government Notification for Release of Environment Funds (2013)........................................156
Figure 29‐ Government Notification for Release of Environment Funds 2012...........................................157
Figure 30 ‐ Environment Fund Notification for Release of funds 2012......................................................158
›3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Figure 31‐ Government Order for Cleaning of Plastic 2011..............................................................159

Figure 32 ‐ Chennai Corporation intent to build plastic roads...........................................................160
Figure 33 ‐ Self Help Group Award Notification...............................................................................161
Figure 34 ‐ SHG Awards Notification 2............................................................................................162
Figure 35 ‐ Clean Village Award Notification...................................................................................163
Figure 36‐ Velacherry Main Road at Madurai‐ Tamil Nadu..............................................................168
Figure 37 ‐ A Report appeared in the daily about the performance of Plastic tar Road 2007.............168
Figure 38‐ Trisool Road, Chennai.....................................................................................................169
Figure 39 ‐ Kovilpatti (Lenin Street), Tamil Nadu............................................................................169
Figure 40‐ Jambulingam Street Road at Chennai...............................................................................170
Figure 41‐ Information Awareness Brochure 1..................................................................................171
Figure 42‐ Information Awareness Brochure 2..................................................................................172
Figure 43 – Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement photograph......................................................................177
Figure 44 ‐ Junction oF Reclaimed asphalt pavement and Bitumunious Mix Road Photograph.................177
Figure 45 ‐ MoRTH Project on Waste Plastic modified Bitumen near Devanhalli, Karnataka..........180
Figure 46 ‐ MoRTH Project on NRMB near Devanhalli, Karnataka.................................................181
Figure 47 ‐ MORTH Project on PMB Near Devanhalli, Karnataka...................................................181
Figure 48 ‐ MORTH Project on CRMB Near Devanhalli, Karnataka................................................181
Figure 49 ‐ BBMP Road made from Waste Plastic Modified Bitumen.............................................182
Figure 50 ‐ Arterial BBMP Road constructed from Waste Plastic Modified Bitumen.......................182
Figure 51 ‐ KK Plastic Shredding Operation at the Bengaluru Workshop.........................................183
Figure 52 ‐ Shredded Plastic Emerging from a Unit at the KK Plastic Workshop.............................183
Figure 53‐ MoU between BBMP: KK Plastic....................................................................................184
Figure 54‐ Patent – KK Plastic..........................................................................................................185
Figure 55 ‐ BBMP Road Estimate.....................................................................................................186
Figure 56 ‐ BBMP Supply Order Copy.............................................................................................187
Figure 57‐ Work Order Example – Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation................................188
Figure 58‐ Karnataka PWD – Rechipping of road.............................................................................189
Figure 59‐ BBMP Work Order..........................................................................................................190
Figure 60‐ BBMP Work Order Sample.............................................................................................191
Figure 61 ‐ BBMP Work Order.........................................................................................................192
Figure 62‐ BBMP Work Order..........................................................................................................193
›q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Figure 63 ‐ State Pollution Control Board Certificate........................................................................194

Figure 64‐ KSPCB Certificate...........................................................................................................195
Figure 65 ‐ KSPCB – Example of Bureaucracy.................................................................................196
Figure 66‐ Public Engagement ‐ Doordarshan...................................................................................197
Figure 67‐ Engagement – Schools.....................................................................................................198
Figure 68‐ Engagement – Technical Institutions...............................................................................199
Figure 69‐ RV College of Engineering Certificate............................................................................200
Figure 70 ‐ Letter of Recognition by MP...........................................................................................201
Figure 71‐ MEA Pathbreaker Letter..................................................................................................202
Figure 72‐ UN Human Settlement Programme..................................................................................203
Figure 73 ‐ International Herald Tribune coverage............................................................................204
Figure 74‐ Business Asia Coverage...................................................................................................205
Figure 75 ‐ The Hindu Coverage.......................................................................................................206
Figure 76 – Tripartite Technology Providers Agreement: KRRDA...................................................211
Figure 77 – Clearance Order for PMGSY‐II in Karnataka................................................................212
Figure 78 ‐ KRRDA Chief Operating Officer Order..........................................................................213
Figure 79 ‐ MoEF Gazette Notification.............................................................................................224
Figure 80 ‐ First Plastic Tar Road in Jharkhand (Circuit House Area Jamshedpur)...........................225
Figure 81 ‐ Plastic Tar Road in Jharkhand (Marine drive area Jamshedpur)......................................225
Figure 82 ‐ Organization Chart Himachal Pradesh PWD...................................................................227
Figure 83 ‐ Organization Chart Rural Development HIMACHAL PRADESH.................................228
Figure 84 ‐ HP Ban Notification June 2013.......................................................................................231
Figure 85 ‐ HP Notification on two Month Deferment of Prohibition of Plastics USE September 2011
............................................................................................................................................................ 232
Figure 86 ‐ HP Ban Notification on the use of Plastic March 2011...................................................233
Figure 87 ‐ HP Notification on One Month Deferment of Ban August 2009.....................................234
Figure 88 ‐ HP Notification on Complete Ban ‐ July 2009................................................................235
›y © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 ‐ List of plastic materials used for road construction with the threshold temperature above
which toxic gases may be released into the environment...............................................................................39
Table 2 ‐ A comparison of various aspects of pavements constructed using bituminous concrete mixes
with and without plastic waste.............................................................................................................40
Table 3‐ Consolidated test results of the sites in Tamil Nadu (15)................................................................41
Table 4 ‐ A summary of IRC guidelines regarding the use of plastic in roads/other constructs (12)............42
Table 5 ‐ Summary of technological aspects of processing plastic‐bitumen mixes to be used for
construction purposes as recommended in the guidelines by associated authorities.....................................45
Table 6 ‐ Comparison of the properties of bitumen mixes with and without plastic (18).....................45
Table 7‐ Design criteria for waste plastic modified dense graded bituminous pavement layers (12) . 46
Table 8‐ Summary of results of Studied plastic‐Bitumen roads (15) (22).....................................................46
Table 9 ‐ summary of other major waste materials being used as additives in the construction material
.............................................................................................................................................................50
Table 10 ‐ List of new materials that can be used as additives in construction material as accredited by
IRC (32)..............................................................................................................................................51
Table 11 ‐ Comparison of engineering properties of bituminous mix (4.5‐6.0 % bitumen content)
modified using different modifiers......................................................................................................53
Table 12‐ Year‐wise Allocations for Plastic Roads........................................................................................66
Table 13 ‐ List of Focus Group Meetings and Interviews in Tamil Nadu...................................................117
Table 14‐ Locations Visited for the Tamil Nadu Case Study......................................................................119
Table 15 ‐ List of Focus Group Meetings and Interviews in Karnataka......................................................119
Table 16‐ List of Locations Visited in Karnataka........................................................................................121
Table 17 ‐ Jamshedpur interview details......................................................................................................121
Table 18‐ Visit to Central Organisations......................................................................................................122
Table 19 ‐ Physical properties of 60/70 and 80/100 Bitumen grades (20)...................................................125
Table 20‐ Required properties of aggregates (21)........................................................................................125
Table 21‐ Performance Comparative study..................................................................................................133
Table 22 ‐ Project 1 Information on Tamil nadu Rural Roads.....................................................................138
Table 23 ‐ Project 2 Information on Rural Tamil nadu Plastic Roads.........................................................141
Table 24 ‐ List of Roads laid using waste plastics(Source: TCE)................................................................164

Table 25 ‐ Technical information on Plastic Roads (SOURCE: TCE)...............................................166
Table 26 ‐ Plastic Road Surface Conditions (SOURCE: TCE)..........................................................167
Table 27‐ Karnataka Plastic Road ‐ Project Information 1.................................................................174
Table 28 ‐ Karnataka Plastic Road ‐ Project Information 2................................................................178
Table 29 ‐ List of Upcoming Projects in Rural Karnataka: KRRDA.................................................207
Table 30 – KRRDA Schedule of Rates..............................................................................................208
Table 31‐ Jharkhand Project information 1........................................................................................215
Table 32 ‐ Jharkhand Project Information 2.......................................................................................218
Table 33 ‐ Jharkhand Project Information 3.......................................................................................221
Table 34 ‐ HP Notification on Plastic Ban.........................................................................................229
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
India generates 1,88,000 tons of garbage every day. Plastic Waste in different forms is found to be almost
9% to 12% in municipal solid waste, which is toxic in nature. It is a common sight in both urban and
rural areas to find empty plastic bags and other type of plastic packing material littering the roads as
well as drains. Due to poor biodegradability it creates stagnation of water and associated hygiene
problems.
In order to contain this problem, experiments have been carried out to know whether this waste
plastic can be reused productively. The experimentation at several institutes, private organisations indicate
that the waste plastic, when added to hot aggregate bituminous mix will form a fine coat of plastic
over the aggregate and such aggregate, when mixed with the binder is found to give higher strength
to the road, higher resistance to the water and better performance of the road over a period of time.
Waste plastic such as carry bags, disposable cups and laminated pouches like chips, pan masala,
aluminium foil and packaging material used for biscuits, chocolates, milk and grocery items can be used
for surfacing roads.
Roads using plastic waste have been constructed through simple process innovation in various states like
Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh and to a lesser degree in Goa, Maharashtra and Andhra
Pradesh. The concept of “Use of Plastic Waste in Road Construction” was implemented in 2001 as a
solution to the serious problem of disposal of Plastic Waste in India.
With the above benefits in the background, CIPS has embarked on the documentation of the usage of
waste plastic in road construction is intended for creating a document on prevalent technologies and its
related economic and environmental, structural and technological issues together at one place for the
dissemination of this innovation and possible replication in other states for the betterment of society
as a whole.
1.2 OBJECTIVES
The primary objectives of the project were:
 To understand administrative processes involved in usage of plastic waste in road

construction
 To evaluate implementation strategy of the state government, concerns faced by
implementing agencies and resolution mechanism
 To assess key organizations involved and their specific roles and their coordination
required with each other
 To formulate details of roll out orders for utilizing plastic waste
 To identify inter‐linkages between implementing agencies and effectiveness
 To review details of Statutory and Non‐statutory approvals in execution
 To highlight implementation cost involved in execution
 To review impact of the initiative ‐ Pre and Post implementation
 To present structure required and recommended for collection of plastic waste based on
lessons learnt from states implementing
 To assess the process followed in incorporating the relevant guidelines and rules of the
Indian Roads Congress regarding use of plastic in road various types of road
constructions
 To assess the integration of technological and engineering decision of use of plastic in road
construction into the policy framework and execution
 To ascertain processes that can be reproduced on a national scale
 To establish financial models and implementation monitoring methods
 To provide a synoptic description of other waste materials (other than plastics) being used
in road construction etc.
 To identify any unresolved and challenging concerns
The secondary objectives were to:
 Assess the extent to which the innovation could address the issue of best possible
disposal of solid waste (of plastic) faced by urban governing bodies.
›Q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

 Evaluate coordination methods between urban bodies dealing with disposal of plastic
waste and road construction departments using waste in the road building.
 Review economic viability of implementing the innovation in smaller towns and rural
areas in comparison to metros and bigger cities.
 Report need for legislation required for better coordination of the stake holders and for
implementation of the innovation.
 Recognise need for media role in creating public awareness in replication of this
innovation.
1.3 SCOPE OF WORK
The scope of work included:
 assessment of plastics such as polyethylene, polypropylene, polystyrene among

others mentioned in the IRC standard SP‐98, would include but not be limited to
them.
 Report would include assessment of durability of plastic as compared to other

materials comparing the use and on a limited scale the performance.
 Evaluation aspects would include – Technical, Financial, Administrative and

Organisational efficiency aspects of operational and implementation of plastic roads.
 Financial models and implementation monitoring was included in the project.
 Qualitative assessment through interviews and field visit would be limited to 3

specific locations within India.
 Assessment geography would be limited to states and union territories of India.
 Assessment would be selective to highlight best practise and operational

parameters.
 Scientific review included desktop research and would not involve any field
assessments.
3o © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

1.4 METHODOLOGY
The engagement team utilised participatory and applied research methods in achieving objectives identified
earlier. The participatory method involved engaging with multiple stakeholders involved in the
implementation of plastic roads. In order to develop a complete understanding and impact of the
successful innovative practice, stakeholders were involved in the learning exchange process.
Applied research methods were used for producing the case studies for the states. These were
written with a view to exchange knowledge for replication of the best practise. The emphasis in the
case studies was on strategy‐oriented documentation. An analytical framework was developed for the
case study. The lists of key analytical questions have been presented in Annexe A. The framework
was analysed through qualitative and quantitative measures.
Four key methods were applied for execution of the project:
 Primary Research
Primary research involved field visits and interacting with operational participants and
stakeholders involved in plastic road construction. The goal of primary research was to
collect data qualitative and quantitative along with supporting documents. This was
conducted with a view to improve service deliver and enhance replication prospects
elsewhere in the country.
Primary Research was critical in developing a nuanced understanding of implementation of

plastic roads. In the event of not being able to meet field operatives, telephonic interviews
were conducted. Field visits assisted in developing observations of use by beneficiaries and
semi‐structured interviews of key stakeholders.
 Secondary Desktop Research

Secondary research involved desktop analysis of technical, administrative, regulatory and
organisational aspects of the project. The scope of these references varied from global,
regional and local. Secondary research scope of sources included:
‐ Journal papers, patents, government reports, working papers, and case studies for
developing a holistic understanding of the context and need for the innovation.
3ı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

‐ Reputed media sources for developing general awareness of the context and
issues about plastic roads.
 Interviews
Key stakeholders were identified and contacted through a formal e‐mail and phone call
before the state visit. Interview questions were based on secondary research conducted on the
subject. The lists of key analytical questions have been presented in the Annexe A.
Questions were framed to provide an analytical framework to the project. They were framed
to fill gaps in understanding and to expand knowledge gathered from secondary research.
The list of interviews conducted in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Jharkhand and Central Organisations
have been included in Annexe B (tables 13, 15, 17, 18).
The qualitative and quantitative information gathered through structured and semi ‐ structured
interviews during field visit were transcribed and analysed subsequently. Key learnings
emerging from the analysis was factored in roll out programme proposed for other states. The
learnings encompassed programme approach and innovations, challenges and opportunities, and
the impact of the project against the objectives. These learning on implementation models
have been included in the case‐studies.
 Focus Group Discussion

Focus group discussions were used as a qualitative research tool to bring out understanding,
opinions and perceptions of the stakeholders in a semi‐structured discussion. Focus group
meetings were held on the key issues and analytical questions (Annexe A) with implementing
agencies, contractor, self –help group, societal beneficiaries, policy makers.
Small focus group meetings were also held between functional groups to get a better
understanding of working dynamics and implementation challenges. Limited scale focus
group discussions were also held with beneficiaries.
The focus group discussions held in formulating the case study have been mentioned in
Annexe B (tables 13 and 15). Qualitative analysis of the discussion outcomes have been
included in the case study and distilled to reflect in the roll out strategy for other states.
3› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

2. Technology: Innovation and Process
2.1 Technology behind the innovation
The quantum of plastic waste is estimated to be roughly 10 thousand tons per day (TPD). The two
major categories of plastics are (i) Thermoplastics and (ii) Thermosetting plastics. The Thermoplastics
include Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET), Low Density Poly Ethylene (LDPE), Poly Vinyl Chloride
(PVC), High Density Poly Ethylene (HDPE), Polypropylene (PP), Polystyrene (PS) etc. and are
recyclable. Thermosetting plastics constitute alkyd, epoxy, ester, melamine formaldehyde, phenolic
formaldehyde, silicon, urea formaldehyde, polyurethane, metallised and multilayer plastics etc. A
mismanagement of plastics waste is a threat to the environment in the following ways (1):
1. Drains are choked and public places become filthy due to the littered plastics
2. The emission of polluting gases due to burning of garbage containing plastics may cause air
pollution
3. Garbage mixed with plastics hinders the waste processing facilities may be a cause of issues in
landfill operations
4. Some unhygienic hazards to the environment are being caused by recycling industries operating in
non‐conforming areas.
One of the ways of managing waste plastic is by using it in construction material for pavements and
roads which serves the dual purposes of imparting stability and durability to the roads and resolving the
issue of environmental hazard due to ever increasing waste plastics. To understand the role of plastics
in construction material, one must be familiar with the material specific properties and the processes
used in laying roads. Having said this, further discussion details the use of each component and the
processes involved in creating construction material.
Bitumen plays an important role in binding the aggregate together by coating over the aggregate
thereby imparting strength to the road. However, due to a poor resistance towards water and high costs
involved, there is a demand for high quality bitumen at low costs. This can be accomplished by modifying
the rheological properties of bitumen by using additives such as plastic or rubber. Following are the
drawbacks of using only bitumen in road construction (2):

• The performance of road is reduced at high temperature due to bleeding of bitumen.

• Cracking phenomenon takes place due to oxidation of bitumen.
• Potholes are easily formed as bitumen strips off from the aggregate as it is water repellent material.
This reduces the life of the road constructed.
• The material and processing costs are much higher.
Bitumen based concrete mixes may be further classified into Bituminous Concrete (BC), Modified
Bitumen Mix (MBM) and Semi‐dense Bituminous Concrete (SDBC) as revealed in fig 1. BC is a
conventional concrete mix which performs satisfactorily; however, it needs an improvement in the
properties for certain special applications, such as heavy traffic. MBM has exhibited improved
properties such as fatigue life, resistance to permanent deformation of paving mixtures and enhanced
stability of the pavements by the addition of modifiers such as sulphur, crumb rubber, polymers etc.
SDBM is a high density and thoroughly controlled hot mixed material composed of graded mineral,
aggregate, filler and bitumen (3).
Asphalt mix
Semi‐dense Bituminous Concrete (SDBC)

Bituminous Concrete (BC)
Modified Bitumen Mix (MBM)
FIGURE 1‐ A FLOW CHART DEMONSTRATING CLASSIFICATION OF ASPHALT MIX
The road construction involves the use of aggregate mixes which can be of different types as shown in
figure below.
3q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Granite
Gravel
(Crushed natural stone)
Limestone
Aggregates
(Crushed sedimentary rock)
Secondary (crushed
constructive waste)
Slag (crushed smelter

slag)
FIGURE 2: A FLOW CHART DEMONSTRATING VARIOUS TYPES OF AGGREGATE MIXES USED FOR
ROAD CONSTRUCTION
Plastic waste can be used in hot mix to improve physical properties of bituminous aggregate mix by
‘Dry Process’ or ‘Wet Process’. The technology as developed and explained by Dr Vasudevan, a
Chemistry Professor at Thiyagaraja College of Engineering, Madurai, incorporates the use of
‘Plastone’, a mixture of stone chips and waste plastic bags (thickness 40‐70 µm) which is heated at
150‐1700C during production, in laying roads, pavements and flooring purposes as an alternative to
interlocking paver blocks. At this processing temperature, the plastic waste is heated enough to act as an
adhesive in binding stone chips and not generating any toxic gases. The aggregate becomes water proof
after getting coated with molten plastic. This step is followed by the addition of hot plastic‐aggregate
mix to hot bitumen while maintain the process temperature. This approach is known as ‘Dry Process’.
The ‘Wet Process’ involves mixing of plastic to hot bitumen followed by mixing with hot aggregate.
Both the processes lead to the formation of plastic modified bituminous aggregate mix with enhanced
properties imparting strength, stability and durability to the roads. Recently, a new method called
‘Cold Mix’ has been developed which incorporates mixing of
3y © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

materials at lower temperatures (see Figure 3). The process offers the following advantages over hot mix
(4):
1. The heating of aggregate and binder is not required.
2. It is an environmental friendly approach which conserves energy. An impressive 50% of energy
saving in case of cold mix over hot mix has been reported (5). Therefore, it can be considered to
be a green bituminous mix for road construction.
3. It is a straightforward preparation using only a small set up on site. A manual production for
small scale job is also feasible.
4. It is a suitable method particularly for construction of roads in remote and isolated areas of a
country.
5. The method is suitable for road construction in wet or humid condition.
6. Cold mix is a versatile method due to availability of a large number of grades of emulsion and
cut backs.
7. It offers an economical and high production approach.
The dry process employing 8% plastic waste as a partial replacement of Optimum Bitumen Content (OBC)
in Conventional Mix (CM) has been found to enhance the fatigue, strength, stiffness and hence the
performance of the road pavements in comparison to wet process (6). For these reasons, dry process
(Figure 4) has been widely accepted as a standard method for blending plastic into bituminous mix to
be used for constructing road pavements.
Plastic as
binder
Dry process (plastic mixed
to hot aggregate)
Hot mixes
Plastic as
modifier Wet process (Plastic mixed
to hot bitumen)
Road construction
processes
Others – recycled plastic,
modified processes, new additives
Cold mixes
FIGURE 3‐ A FLOW CHART ILLUSTRATING THE ROAD CONSTRUCTION PROCESSES USING PLASTIC WASTE
0
Segregating plastic from waste Aggregate heated to 170 C
Aggregate transferred to puddling

Shredding required sized
chamber
plastic
Plastic coated hot aggregate
Hot Bitumen added
Plastic‐bitumen aggregate mixture
FIGURE 4‐ A FLOW CHART DEMONSTRATING THE ‘DRY PROCESS’ OF MAKING PLASTIC BITUMEN ROAD
MATERIAL (7)
The technique involving the use of plastic waste in road construction offers advantages as mentioned
below (2):
 Surface property of aggregates is enhanced.

 Coating technique is straightforward and temperature requirements are the same as that of road
laying process.
 Flexible films of all types of plastics can be used.
 Doubles the binding property of aggregates.
 Bitumen bonding is strong than normal.
 The coated aggregates show increased strength.
 Higher cost efficiency is possible.
 Is suitable for all type of environmental conditions.
 No toxic gases released during the heating process
 Easy disposal of plastic waste
 Offers an eco‐friendly technology
 Offers job for public health workers
Mentioned below are the pluses of plastic‐bitumen roads over conventional roads (7):
 Overall reduction in bitumen consumption by 6‐8%

 Enhanced load carrying strength and road strength ( Increased Marshall Stability Value)
 Limited wear and tear thus longer life of the roads
 Laying 1 Km of road requires up to 10 Lakh carry bags
 Prevents release of 3 tonnes of CO2 (through disposal by burning) into the atmosphere
 Excellent resistance to water and water stagnation
 No stripping and potholes have been reported on sections studied
 Enhanced binding and better bonding of the mix.
 Less rutting (vertical deformation of a pavement surface) and ravelling (loosening of aggregate from
the surface).
 Improved soundness property.
 Negligible maintenance cost of the road
 No leaching (removing of substance through a chemical reaction) of plastics
 No effect of Ultra‐violet radiation
Waste plastic that can be used include cups, carry bags, polythene and polypropylene foams and
thermocol. Polyvinylchloride cannot be used as it is toxic in nature. Also, care must be taken while
processing plastic at a standard temperature mentioned in the process as different plastic material releases
toxic gases at different temperatures, which is only slightly higher than the processing temperature.
Table 1 enlists plastic materials that can be used for the process with the threshold temperature at
which each one of them starts releasing toxic gases. The processing temperature of waste plastic in hot‐
mix plant is 150‐170 degree C that is significantly lower than the temperature where toxic gases are
released.
TABLE 1 ‐ LIST OF PLASTIC MATERIALS USED FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION WITH THE THRESHOLD TEMPERATURE ABOVE
WHICH TOXIC GASES MAY BE RELEASED INTO THE ENVIRONMENT
Plastics Toxic gases released T (0C) References
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Lighter hydrocarbons (C5‐C10) >200 (8)

Polypropylene (PP) C2H6 270‐300 (9)
Poly Vinyl Acetate (PVA) CH3COOH >190 (10)
Poly Vinyl Chloride (P (PVC) HCl 250 (11)
Polystyrene (PS) C6H6 300‐350 (9)
Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) CH4, C2H6 270‐350 (9)
High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) CH4, C2H6 270‐350 (9)
In order to determine physical characteristics of the road constructed using plastic modified bitumen mixes,
some important tests have been recommended by Dr Vasudevan. These tests are Benkelman Beam test,
Sand Texture Depth test, Skid resistance, Merlin test and Field Density. The details of the tests can be
obtained from Annexure C.1 (9). Besides above mentioned tests, plastic waste is checked for impurity
and melt flow value for each day work or in cases when the source of plastic waste is changed (12).
Rigid pavements have also been modified using waste plastic (13)(14). M20 concrete, commonly used for
constructional work, has been modified using waste plastic. The optimum modifier content was found to
be 5% and the strength of the road constructed was found to be enhanced in comparison to plain
cement concrete road. Following are the advantages of rigid pavements laid using optimum quantities
of waste plastic modified cement concrete (WPMCC).
1. The compressive strengths of WPMCC increases by 20% more than that of plain cement
concrete.
2. The overall thickness of the rigid pavement is decreased.
3. The amount of cement used is decreased by 5%.
4. Construction cost is reduced.
5. WPMCC can be used to lay rigid pavements, to construct small drainage and concrete tiles of
footpath walkers as the load carrying capacity is higher than plain cement concrete.
6. The rigid pavements constructed using WPMCC can withstand fatigue at higher
temperatures, making them suitable for tropical regions.
3Q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

2.2 PLASTIC MODIFIED BITUMINOUS ROAD VERSUS CONVENTIONAL BITUMINOUS

ROADS
Table 2 provides an insight on various aspects of pavements constructed using bituminous concrete mixes
with and without plastic waste. It is evident that plastic modified bituminous roads offer more
stability, durability and cost effectiveness in comparison to conventional bituminous roads.
TABLE 2 ‐ A COMPARISON OF VARIOUS ASPECTS OF PAVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED USING BITUMINOUS CONCRETE

MIXES WITH AND WITHOUT PLASTIC WASTE
Criteria Bituminous roads Plastic Modified Bituminous roads References
 Dry process can be practiced under all

climatic conditions.
 % of plastic can be varied to modify
the process to suit different climatic
Expensive method
Technology conditions and topographical (15)
conditions
 Cost effective as 10‐15% less bitumen
is used and waste plastic is consumed
thereby reducing carbon footprint
Cost (1Km x 3.75 m

(16)
road) ₹ 3,93,750 ₹ 3,67,875
Maintenance 5 years Nil up to 10 years (17)
Fatigue resistance (or
Indirect Tensile 1.42 1.83 (18)
Strength, MPa)
Rutting Yes No (15)
More bumps Less Bump
Roughness (15)
5200 <4000
Stripping 5% in 24 h NIL if plastic content is > 6% (18)
Moisture 4% 0‐2% (15)
qo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

2.3 The Outlook of Central Road Research Institute
To evaluate the performance of plastic‐bitumen roads, Central Road Research Institute (CRRI) and
Indian Road Congress (IRC) New Delhi suggested some key parameters which include roughness
survey, skid resistance, sand patch test, Benkelman beam deflection, cracking, ravelling, potholes
and edge breaks. The evaluation process involved survey of six different sites in the State of Tamil
Nadu namely Jumbulingam road (site I), Veerbadhra Street (site II), Vandiyur Main road (site III),
Vilacherry Main road (site IV), Canteen road (site V), and Bitumen Road (site VI) as per the above
stated parameters and the consolidated results are tabulated below (Table 3) (15). The results
clearly demonstrate that the performance of plastic roads is significantly enhanced compared to
plain bitumen roads. The performance of each parameter is much better for plastic roads.
TABLE 3‐ CONSOLIDATED TEST RESULTS OF THE SITES IN TAMIL NADU (15)
* 1. Unevenness / Roughness; Source IRC: SP: 16‐2004
qı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

2. Skid Resistance/ Skid Number; Standardized in UK under BS: 812‐1967

3. Sand Texture Depth; BS 598 part 105 (1990)
4. Rebound Deflection / Benkelman Beam; IRC: 81‐1997
5. Field Density; Highway Engineering by S. K. Khanna, C.E.G. Justo; New Chand & Bros, Roorkee
(U.A); Eighth edition ; 2001
Structural, functional and conditional evaluation studies were conducted to monitor the test roads. In
general, the performance of all the roads laid over a period from 2002 to 2006 is excellent despite
their age as concluded from above studies. Not even a small crack or pothole was found to have
developed on these roads. Despite the fact that the sites chosen were widely distributed over various
localities of Tamil Nadu and exposed to varied environmental conditions such as temperature, rainfall,
etc., the roads have been found to perform very well with good skid resistance, texture value, less
amount of progressive unevenness over a period of time. However, the majority of bitumen roads are
unable to demonstrate good performance under similar conditions (15).
2.4 Guidelines of Indian Roads Congress
The Indian Road Congress is the highest body of highway engineers in the country. The society was set‐up
by the recommendations of the government of India. The organisation over the years has been
contributing to enhancement of the roads and bridges in India. IRC had in the H‐2 committee meeting
of members on the 15th of June 2012 had decided to formulate guidelines for utilising waste plastic with
bitumen in road construction. The guidelines formulated by the committee were approved by the
Council of IRC in August 2013. Key items of the IRC published guidelines are mentioned in the table
below.
TABLE 4 ‐ A SUMMARY OF IRC GUIDELINES REGARDING THE USE OF PLASTIC IN ROADS/OTHER CONSTRUCTS (12)
Technology/Material Sub‐category IRC Guideline
 LDPE, HDPE, PU, PET permissible

Waste plastic Type
 Black coloured plastic waste, PVC must not be used
 Size 2.36 mm
Properties
 Dust and other impurities should not be more than
q› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

1%.
 The melt‐flow value of plastic‐binder mix shall be
tested as per ASTM D 1238‐2010 (permissible values
for LDPE: 0.14‐58 gm/10 min; HDPE: 0.02‐9.0 gm/10
min)
 The Indian Standard Specifications for viscosity graded
Bitumen paving bitumen (VGPB) IS 73
 IRC: 111‐2009 (for grade of VGPB)
 IRC: 111‐2009 (for dense graded mixes)
Aggregates  IRC: 14‐2004, IRC: SP: 78‐2008 and IRC: 110‐2005
(open graded mixes)
Filler  IRC: 111‐2009 (dense graded mixes)
Plastic must not be heated beyond 1800C as it may cause
Technology
release of harmful gases
Design of mix Dense graded mixes See Table 5
Open graded mixes Waste plastic at 6‐8% of weight of bitumen can be used
1. Collection of waste plastic
2. Cleaning and shredding of waste plastic
Manufacturing of
Dry process 3. Shredding machine
bitumen‐plastic mix
4. Mixing of shredded waste plastic, aggregate and
bitumen in central mixing plant
Construction Dense graded mixes IRC: 111‐2009, IRC: 14‐2004; IRC: 110‐2005
Open graded mixes IRC:SP: 78‐2008
Controls Dense graded mixes IRC: 111‐2009, IRC: 14‐2004; IRC: 110‐2005
Open graded mixes IRC:SP: 78‐2008
 Shall be examined for impurity and melt flow value
Waste plastic  Three samples be tested for each day work or when
there is change in the source of plastic
2.5 Technological and Engineering Decisions
The technology of using waste plastics in making flexible pavement has been patented in the year
2006 (19). Table 5 presents a summary of technological aspects of processing plastic‐bitumen mixes
q3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

to be used for construction purposes as recommended by Government policy framework authorities.
Evidence has demonstrated that dry process is better than wet process and therefore former is
recommended in the guidelines for laying roads by Indian Road Congress, Central Pollution Control Board
and National Rural Roads Development Agency, Ministry of Rural Development, GOI. Following are
the advantages of dry process (17):
 Use higher percentage of plastics waste

 Reduce the need of bitumen by around 8%
 Increase the strength and performance of the road
 Avoid the use of anti stripping agents
 Reduce the cost by nearly 26,000 per kilometre of single lane road (see table 2)
 Carry the process in situ
 Avoid industrial involvement
 Avoid disposal of plastics waste by incineration and land filling
 Generates job for public health workers
 Add value to plastic waste
 Develop a technology, which is eco‐friendly
There are some limitations of using waste plastic as modifier and binder in bituminous mixes which
are listed below (12):
1. Only low density polyethylene (LDPE) or high density polyethylene (HDPE) and PET shall be
considered for the construction material mixes
2. Repeated recycling of plastic results in black coloured plastic waste and therefore should not be used.
3. The use of PVC is not recommended since they release lethal levels of dioxins (toxic gases).
4. A gas evolution and thermal degradation of thermoplastics has been indicated beyond 1800C by the
Thermo Gravimetric Analysis (TGA), hence, misuse or wrong implementation of this technology
may cause release of harmful gases, premature degradation making it essential to maintain the
temperatures during construction.
qq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

TABLE 5 ‐ SUMMARY OF TECHNOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF PROCESSING PLASTIC ‐BITUMEN MIXES TO BE USED FOR
CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES AS RECOMMENDED IN THE GUIDELINES BY ASSOCIATED AUTHORITIES
Percentage of Bitumen grades Processing temperature

Government Policy plastic waste used of plastic—
framework authorities (%) bitumen aggregate
0
mix ( C)
With reference to 10 80/100 170
Dr Vasudevan’s
work 8 60/70 or 80/100 165
CRRI
IRC 6‐8 IRC: 111‐2009 165‐180
NRRI 8 60/70 or 80/100 165
CPCB 5‐20 60/70 or 80/100 155‐163
Further, the physical properties of 60/70 and 80/100 penetration grade bitumen (as per IS 73:1992) and
aggregates that are required to attain optimum quality of bituminous concrete mixes for pavement
construction are summarised in annexe C.2. Table 6 below compares the properties of bitumen mix
with and without plastics.
TABLE 6 ‐ COMPARISON OF THE PROPERTIES OF BITUMEN MIXES WITH AND WITHOUT PLASTIC (18)
S.No. Properties With waste Without waste Requirement of bituminous

plastics (6% by plastics concrete (BC) mix (MoRT&H,
weight of 2001)
bitumen)
1 Marshall Stability (kN) 17.50 15.60 9 (Min)

2 Bulk Density (gm/cc) 2.41 2.40 ‐
3 Air Voids (%) 3.50 3.23 3‐6
4 Voids Filled Bitumen (%) 76.76 75.30 65‐75
5 Flow (mm) 3.00 3.25 2‐4
6 Retained Stability (%) 90.00 96.00 Minimum 75
7 Marshall Quotient (kN/mm) 5.83 4.80 3‐6
The design criteria for waste plastic modified dense graded bituminous pavement layers as per IRC‐ 2013
guidelines is summarised in table 7. The key aspect of the design criteria to monitor technically
qy © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

and administratively is the temperature (150‐170 degree C) and quantity of waste plastic (6‐8% by
weight). The waste plastic is to be added as a replacement for bitumen.
TABLE 7‐ DESIGN CRITERIA FOR WASTE PLASTIC MODIFIED DENSE GRADED BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LAYERS (12)
Minimum stability (kN at 600C) 12.0
Flow (mm) 2‐4

Marshall Quotient (kN/mm) 2.5‐5.0
Compaction level (Number of blows) 75.0 blows on each of the two faces of the
specimen
Air voids (%) 3.0‐5.0
Retained stability (%) 98.0
ITS (min) MPa 0.9
VMA 16.0
VFB 65.0‐75.0
Quantity of waste plastic (% by weight of bitumen) 6.0‐8.0
Various plastic‐tar roads constructed in different states have been evaluated and all of them were
found to perform well with no potholes and cracking. Table 8 presents consolidated results of all
major plastic‐tar roads which have been evaluated scientifically post construction. A majority of
plastic roads constructed in different parts of the country were not evaluated post construction for the
scientific and technical parameters.
TABLE 8‐ SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF STUDIED PLASTIC‐BITUMEN ROADS (15) (22)
Roads Year laid Characteristics of the road
Jumbulingam road, Chennai 2002 No pothole, cracking, deformation or edge flaw

Veerbadhra Street, Erode 2003 No pothole, cracking, deformation or edge flaw
Vandiyur Main road 2004 No pothole, cracking, deformation or edge flaw
Vilachery Main road 2005 No pothole, cracking, deformation or edge flaw
Canteen road 2006 No pothole, cracking, deformation or edge flaw
Thyagaraja College of 2002 No pothole, cracking developed, road is in good
Engineering, Madurai condition
q6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Lenin Street, Kovilpatti 2002 No potholes, cracking, rutting developed
Mannar College Road, 2002 No potholes, cracking developed. Road is in good
Madurai condition
Brindavanam Street, Salem 2003 No potholes, cracking developed. Road is in good
condition
Bharat Petroleum Plant, 2004 Road functioning is satisfactory
Tanjore
Parry & Co, Ranipet, Chennai 2003 Road condition is good and stable
Asaripallam, Nagercoil 2003 Road condition is good and stable
Kuzhithurai, Nagercoil 2003 No potholes, cracking. Road condition is good and
stable
New Prabhadevi Road, 2004 No potholes, cracking. Road condition is good and
Mumbai stable
Further the success of the plastic‐bitumen roads is revealed by the fact that the technique has been
adopted well and employed in constructing roads by various huge organisations such as Reliance Industries
Limited, National Rural Roads Development Agency, Ministry of Rural Development, GoI, Ministry of
Environment and Forests, Delhi and a number of cities in India. For example, Hazira manufacturing
unit of Reliance Industries Limited has constructed a 900 m stretch of road using 5% plastic waste, in
partnership with Gujarat Engineering Research Institute (GERI) and Road & Building Division. Several
roads in Delhi have also been constructed using plastic waste modified mixes (23) and other states.
2.6 Characterisation of Plastic Waste Coated Aggregate (PCA) Bitumen Mix
The employment of plastic waste as modifier is successful only if it coats the aggregate well and the
aggregate becomes non‐wetting with enhanced mechanical properties. In order to check for the
inclusion of plastic in the aggregate bitumen mix, various characterisation techniques have been used and
listed here:
1. Stripping test (IS: 6241‐1971): PCA bitumen mix made by dry process is immersed in water for
long hours. Absence of stripping of the plastic material from aggregate mix ensures good
resistance towards water due to excellent coating of plastic waste over aggregate making it
non‐wetting. Further, this would also ensure better binding of bitumen with the aggregate through
the plastic layers.
2. Marshall Stability Test: Effective binding of bitumen with the aggregate mix through plastic
layers would have a positive effect on the stability of the bitumen‐aggregate mix. Marshal
stability values determined for PMB mixes are generally much higher than pure bitumen
mix.
3. Water absorption test: Aggregate mix is dried, weighed and then immersed in water for a day
and dried again. The weight was determined to check for the amount of water absorbed by
aggregate mix. Then a known amount of aggregate mix is heated and coated with plastic and the
plastic coated aggregate mix is immersed in water, removed, dried and weighed. The process
is repeated three times for each sample. The same experiment was carried out for aggregates
coated with different amounts of plastics. The water absorption decreases with the coating of
plastic over aggregate.
4. Extraction of bitumen: Bitumen is extracted from aggregate coated with bitumen only,
plastic coated aggregate mix (using Dry process) and aggregate mixed with plastic waste
blended bitumen (Wet process) using benzene as a solvent. Removal of bitumen is difficult in
case of plastic waste coated aggregate mix (Dry process) than plastic waste blended
bitumen mix. This confirms that the dry process is better than the wet process.
5. Estimation of amount of coated plastic waste: This is achieved in the following ways:
a) Solvent extraction method – Refluxing a known quantity of plastic waste coated aggregate after
removing the bitumen with solvent Decaline for about 20 minutes. This removes the polymer
and the stone aggregate left is separated, dried and weighed. The loss in the weight accounts for
the quantity of polymer.
b) Thermal method – Heating the known quantity of plastic coated aggregate mix at around
7500C for 30 min which burns all the plastic. This leaves the aggregate mix behind which is
cooled and weighed. The method is repeated to obtain a constant weight. The weight
difference corresponds to the quantity of polymer coated.
2.7. OTHER MODIFYING AND BINDING MATERIALS
A rise in the quantity and variety of waste being generated has led to a waste disposal crisis. Such issue
can be resolved by reusing some of these waste materials to replace a known percentage of the primary
materials used in construction of roads. This way natural resources are conserved and rising waste
disposal crisis is resolved.
It has been indicated by numerous studies that the optimum amount of such waste materials or
modifiers, when added to bitumen mixes, leads to enhancement in various physical characteristics of the
road. Improvement in the strength of the road, resistance to cracking and rutting, skid resistance, and
durability, and reduction in the maintenance costs, and the noise levels are some of the common
characteristics of the roads made up of modified bituminous mixes.
One such example is the use of crumb rubber as a modifier in the bitumen mix which has demonstrated
viscosity values about 1.5 times higher than in case of unmodified binder after aging tests. This result is
based on a field study conducted on a test track constructed with 25 mm thick semi‐dense bituminous
concrete resurfaced with various modified and unmodified bituminous binders. It has also been
highlighted in the same study that the waste plastic modified bitumen is unable to fulfil the elastic
recovery properties after aging (24).
Polymers such as Styrene Butadiene Styrene (SBS), as a binder, have shown significant improvement in
the property of bitumen aggregate mix over other modifiers. Enhanced properties such as stiffness,
phase angle, rut resistance and persistent elasticity are some of the characteristic features of SBS polymer
modified bitumen mix. The study concludes with the following order of performance of the semi‐
bituminous concrete mixes with different binders (24):
1. SBS modified binder
2. Crumb rubber modified binder
3. Waste plastic modified binder
4. Natural rubber modified binder
5. Unmodified binder
The table below summarises major waste materials, other than plastics, which can be considered for
recycling.
QQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

TABLE 9 ‐ SUMMARY OF OTHER MAJOR WASTE MATERIALS BEING USED AS ADDITIVES IN THE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL
S.No. Additive % of additive Characteristics of the road References
1 Fly ash 10  Increase in compressive strength by 13%; (25) (26)

tensile strength by 3%; flexural strength by
16%;
 The impact strength for first crack is 25% and
final failure is 58%.
2 Rubber 18–22  Reduces Reflective Cracking in Asphalt (27) (28)
Overlays (29)
 Reduces Maintenance Costs
 Improves Resistance to Cracking in New
Pavements
 Improves Resistance to Rutting in New
Pavements
 Increases Pavement Life
 Improves Skid Resistance
 Decreases Noise Levels
 Beneficially Uses 500‐2,000 scrap tires per lane
mile
 Lower rutting potential because of higher
stiffness and tensile strength at high
temperatures
3 Glass 0‐20%  Compressive, splitting, and flexural strengths (30)
higher than that of normal concrete mixture;
 The long‐term durability and strength affected
by the high alkali content of aggregates with
glass additive
4 Crushed Up to 20%  Lower compressive and splitting‐tensile (30)
concrete strength than that of normal concrete
 13% reduction in compressive strength of
recycled crushed concrete considered to be
acceptable if taken into consideration in the
design stage
yo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

5 Jute‐  A progressive degradation of JGT observed (31)

Geotextiles 
The rates of the two contrasting phenomenon
i.e. degradation of JGT and improvement of soil are in consonance providing the required strength to the roa
Similarly, there are several other new materials that have been accredited by IRC (29) to be used on trial
basis for a period of 2 years. These new materials are listed in table below.
TABLE 10 ‐ LIST OF NEW MATERIALS THAT CAN BE USED AS ADDITIVES IN CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL AS
ACCREDITED BY IRC (32)
S.No. Additive Usage
1 Processed steel slag For use in bituminous bound mixes;

Alternate aggregate for flexible pavements
2 Iter PPS 1000 CV Bitumen additive for use in flexible pavement
3 Superplast Bitumen additive for use in flexible pavement
4 Advanced Reinforced Composite Rebar For use in roads, bridges, and structures
SAPL‐R‐09
5 Stainless Steel Reinforcement Bars Structural Steel for reinforced concrete structures
6 Asphaltoseal On concrete decks for waterproofing purposes in lieu of
mastic asphalt under BC overlay
7 Shell Thiopave Asphalt modifier additive used for enhancing the
mechanical properties of the pavement
8 ShaliPatch Ready‐to use material for repairing pot holes/other
openings in bitumen/concrete surfaces
9 BITUTEX® Glass Grids, Composites & Used to reinforce the asphalt layers and prevent
STARgrids deformation
10 Woven Jute Geotextiles To improve properties of sub‐grade of roads and hill
slopes
11 Metallurgical Slag (Waelz Kiln Slag) Used in embankment, sub‐base and bituminous/concrete
pavement
12 HZL Process Waste, Jarofix Used as filler material in road embankments
yı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

13 Evotherm Warm Mix Technology Eco‐friendly pavement construction technology

14 Granulated Copper Slag For road and embankment construction
15 TitanTM 7686 Used for enhancing performance of modified bitumen
16 Formtex For improving concrete cover making it impermeable to

chlorine, sulphate and carbon dioxide attack leading to much
longer life of concrete structures, in particular those
coming in direct contact with water
17 RBI Grade 81 Soil stabilisation
18 Soil Stabilizer‐JGRS Soil stabilisation
19 Soil tech MK‐III Soil stabilisation
20 RoadCem Soil stabilisation

21 RoadstaB Technology Soil stabilisation
22 Zycosoil Nanotechnology Anti‐strip additive in hot mix binder and Soil & aggregate
waterproofing
23 TechFab Geocomposites Soil reinforcement and subgrade stabilisation
24 TechFab Woven Geotextiles Soil stabilisation
25 TechGeo Non‐Woven Geotextiles Soil stabilisation
26 TechGlass Geogrids & TechGlass Rehabilitation and preservation of pavements
Composites
27 TechGrid Geogrids System Soil stabilisation
28 SYMPAFORCE® Geogrids Soil stabilisation
Similarly, other waste material which pose environmental problems and can be used in construction
material for laying roads and pavements include blast furnace slag, cement kiln dust phosphogypsum,
waste plastic bags, foundry sand, carbon fibres, GI fibres, Alumina, fibres asbestos, roofing shingles and
colliery sand (33). The table below compares the properties of modifiers.
y› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

TABLE 11 ‐ COMPARISON OF ENGINEERING PROPERTIES OF BITUMINOUS MIX (4.5 ‐ 6.0 % BITUMEN CONTENT)
MODIFIED USING DIFFERENT MODIFIERS
Modifiers Marshall Stability (kg) Bulk Density Air Voids (%) Flow (mm) References
(gm/cc)
Crumb Rubber (10%) 1402.4 2.56 3.92 3.02 (34)

Steel slag 450‐500 2.1 65‐85 > 2.0 (35)
Glass (5%) 2.4 2.8 2.9 (36)
Fly Ash (5%) 1560 2.4 4.2 2.3 (37)
Plastic fibre (0.5%) 920 2.4 5.3 3.1 (20)
Biodegradable polymers are being researched in different laboratories across the world. Further
information about developments has been mentioned in Annexe C.3.
y3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

3. TAMIL NADU CASE STUDY
3.1 TITLE
Tamil Nadu state government building rural road connectivity providing environmental
remediation in partnership with self‐help groups
3.2 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE INNOVATION
The use of waste plastics in development of roads has been an important subject for the
government of Tamil Nadu. It was first introduced by the state government in the year 2001 based
on experimental laboratory research conducted by Professor R. Vasudevan from the Thiagarajar
College of Engineering (TCE) in Madurai.
The purpose of this initiative is to liberate the environment of materials like plastics, polythene,
polystyrene, polypropylene which are non‐bio‐degradable and cannot be effectively recycled. In this
regard, an eco‐friendly process developed at TCE was been adopted by the state to mix shredded
waste plastics with bitumen for enhanced binding and improvement in resistance to permanent
deformation of the roads constructed.
The innovation is focused on developing roads with waste plastics provides numerous benefits as
highlighted in technical section, particularly protection from weather erosion, considerably
reduction in the cost of the constructed road component, reduction in maintenance requirements
of roads. The initiative promotes an effective and prolific technique of disposal of waste plastics
being generated in municipal urban, sub‐urban and rural clusters.
In achieving the objective, different government departments like Municipal Administration,

Rural Development, Panchayats, Districts Rural Development Agency (DRDA), National Rural Roads
Development Agency (NRRDA, for administrative and technical support to Pradhan Mantri
yq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY)), Environment and Forest Department, Women Development, Social
Welfare and Road Contractor collaborated to deliver effective results.
Self Help Groups (SHGs) have been formed for collection and segregation of waste plastics.
Shredding units have also been established to provide waste plastic to the required size
specification. The SHGs provide shredded waste plastics to Road Contractors in suitable form at
reasonable rates.
3.3 APPLICATION ‐ INNOVATION CONTEXT
In recent times and due to poor municipal handling of waste, plastic has been the cause of land
and water pollution. The scale of the problem is growing rapidly with increasing proliferation of
plastic in societal use. Plastic waste is known to clog drains and water bodies in community areas.
Lack of segregation at the source remains one of the main challenges in waste management that is
leading to a growing catastrophe. Limitations in construction practises have at the same time led to
the development of poor roads that require frequent maintenance. Erosion of roads during
rainfalls is the common cause of pot hole formation increasing risk for the commuters. Plastic
Roads have proved to be durable through heavy rains (Annexe D.12, Figure 37).
In order to mitigate the environmental risk of plastics and enhance the quality of roads, use of
waste plastics in the development of roads is being promoted by the Tamil Nadu state
government. The state government through city corporations and rural road development agencies
has undertaken the construction of plastic roads.
The first road using waste plastics was laid in Kovilpatti village of Tuticorin district in October
2002 (Annexe D.12, Figure 39). Over the last twelve years, the use of plastics in rural road
construction has been widely adopted in Tamil Nadu. The state agencies have constructed more than
16000 kilometres of rural road connectivity using the innovation method. Detailed performance
evaluation studies have been conducted by different Institutions over the last 12 years. Project
specific performance is included in Annexe D.12.
yy © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

According to Rural Development and Panchayati Raj department, the selection and execution of
projects is done through the decision making of District Collector and their sub‐ordinates for a
particular district. The primary allocations of funding in the state come through the Ministry of
Rural Development and Panchayati Raj (₹ 20 Crores Reference Letter No. Lr.No.32324/Tu2/2013
Dated 22nd Jan 2014). This has been supplemented by the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana
administered by National Rural Road Development Agency (Under Phase VIII ₹ 1130.1 Crores have
been sanctioned, out of which ₹ 11 Crores have been allocated for the Plastic Roads).
Through Environment and Forest Department, the State Government earmarks limited budget
specifically for construction of such type of roads (₹ 24.818 Crores for the year 2014‐15).
Environment Protection and Renewal Energy Development fund is a scheme created for waste plastic
elimination and the fund is used in development of plastic roads. The Rural department receives a
budget between 8 to 10% for plastics roads construction.
Tamil Nadu Corporation for Development of Women Ltd, operating under the Rural Development
and Panchayati Raj Department has been a key stakeholder in the development of Self Help Groups.
The corporation acted as an enabler in setting up centres for processing the waste plastics that are
operated by Self Help Group of Women across the majority of districts in Tamil Nadu (21454
centres in 29 districts, presently).
These centres are aided by the State Government in allocation of land and facilitation of
procurement procedures. The budget helps this group for training, collection, segregation and
shredding of the waste plastics. The contractor for building the road is the main implementation
link between SHGs and road projects. The responsibility of procurement at the DRDA specified rate of
₹ 30 per kilogramme (as per Rural Department and Panchayati Raj, Engineer ‐in ‐Chief) resting with
the road contractor.
Two key projects have been highlighted as achievements of DRDA in Tamil Nadu. These projects
have been located at the border of Madurai and Dindigil districts. The beneficiaries of these
projects were local rural community. The benefit to the community is noteworthy as the plastic
roads were the first roads to be paved since India became independent. Prior to plastic roads
y6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

they travelled on gravel which was heavily damaged in each rainfall. Details of both the projects
and photographs have been included in Annexe D.1 and D.2.
The Rural Department has acted as an enabler by conducting frequent workshops for capacity building
for engineers, contractors, administrative personnel and other associates in developing a better
understanding of the process specified by the Indian Road Congress (IRC) guidelines SP‐
98. Prior to the establishment of the standard, training support and process literature was
proactively provided by Professor Vasudevan’s group at TCE. Example of TCE information
brochure is shown in Annexe D.13. DRDA has a training manual that outlines the use of plastics in
road construction. These are available from the agency upon request.
3.4 NEW APPROACH
The Technical innovation after over 11 years of practise and trials was turned in to a standard
process for road construction. In December, 2013, Indian Road Congress (IRC) released the code, IRC:
SP: 98: 2013, for application of the ‘plastic road technology’. The code provides the standard for the
use of waste plastics in construction of roads. A separate cost head was also created to allow
engineers to get shredded waste plastics and get it mixed with bitumen through the schedule of
rates.
As per a general estimation, to lay one km of plastic road 3.75 m wide, 9 tonnes of bitumen and 1
tonne of waste plastic are required for coating whereas a normal road requires, 10 tonnes bitumen
for each kilometre so a plastic road saves 1 tonne bitumen for every kilometre laid. There will be
an approximate saving of ₹ 50,000 to ₹ 60,000 per kilometre. In addition the environment will
remain free from toxic side effect of plastic waste. One tonne of plastic waste is equivalent to 10
lakhs carry bags.
Development of plastic roads has majorly been done in rural areas by the Rural Department and in
Chennai, these roads have been constructed by the Municipal Corporation of Chennai. In order to
bring about greater synergy and better coordination in implementing various schemes for Self
Help Groups, Tamil Nadu Corporation for Development of Women Ltd was brought
under the control of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department from July 2006. Self
Help Groups collect Waste Plastics from everywhere, dump yard, wasteland and segregate during
the waste collection. Awareness programmes for use of plastics have been conducted by the
Engineering Staff who are constructing the plastic mixed roads and vital information like for
shredding waste plastics of the size less than 60 Microns should be used and the waste plastic with
size more than 60 Microns should be used for recycling is imparted.
The Road Contractor workers add the segregated plastics into the heated aggregate and then the
molten plastic gets coated around the metal. Then, it gets transferred to Bitumen mixer unit; there
bitumen is coated over the plastic pre‐coated metal. There is mechanism to monitor addition of
plastic is done by Road Contractor, this is done by a lower level staff for each and every road
during construction of the road.
3.5 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
For implementation of this innovative technology, Tamil Nadu has undertaken some new practices
which include creation of SHGs for collection, segregation and shredding of solid waste and plastics.
The SHGs collect waste plastics from everywhere, dump yard, wasteland and segregate during the
waste collection. Within Rural Development and Panchayati Raj (RDPR) department, a separate
agency, Tamil Nadu Corporation for Development of Women which deal with the daily wages of the
collection centre workers, support activities, training and monitoring. The Swadesi SHG based in
Madurai has the capacity in an eight hour working day to produce 50‐ 60 kilograms of shredded
plastic waste that is sold to DRDA for Plastic Roads at ₹ 30 per kilogram. As per Rural
Development and Panchayati Raj department Executive Engineer, pricing per kilogram of waste
plastics is calculated by this agency through informal discussions.
The formation of SHGs for plastic processing was implemented in a phased manner in Tamil
Nadu, initially, 10 districts were chosen and then 10 more districts were added in the next phase.
At present, there are 25 operational districts are there and another 5 will be added this year. SHGs
are monitored by the Women Development Corporation. There is Women Development
Corporation office in each district which is under the control of Joint Director. There is Project
Officer supported by an assistant. Assistant Project Officer in each district is
responsible for maintaining formal co‐ordination between the Rural Development and Self Help
Groups. The organisational structure of the Women’s Corporation is shown in the figure below.
Project Officer
Assistant
Project Officer
Self Help Group Members

FIGURE 5‐ TAMIL NADU WOMEN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
The Key Organisation Structure of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj department to manage,
execute and monitor various road projects include Engineer‐In‐Chief, Superintendent Engineer for
each district, 1 Executive Engineer (5 districts in Tamil Nadu have 2 Executive Engineers), 2
Associative Executive Engineers for roads exclusively, for 5‐20 Panchayat Blocks having 2‐4
Assistant Engineers. The figure below represents the organisation chart for Tamil Nadu Road
department with Administrative and Execution blocks.
YQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 6‐ ORGANIZATION CHART TAMIL NADU ROAD DEPARTMENT
Training and awareness programmes for the use of plastics are conducted by the engineering
staffs who are constructing the plastic mixed roads. A size less than 60 Microns is used for
shredding waste plastics while the waste plastic with size more than 60 Microns is used for
recycling also instructing not to use PET bottles, Flux boards, PVC articles as specified by the
standard.
No other state agency is involved in procurement of waste plastics. Contractors have been
instructed informally to procure waste plastics from the SHGs. RDPR have provided broad
guidelines to the Districts. The District officials procuring waste plastics based on their needs and
implementation plans for rural roads.
The road contractor workers add the segregated plastics into the heated aggregate and then the molten
plastic gets coated around the metal. Then, it gets transferred to Bitumen mixer unit; there
bitumen is coated over the plastic pre‐coated metal. There is mechanism to monitor addition of
plastic is done by Road Contractor, this is done by a lower level staff for each and every road
during construction of the road.

In the present scenario, there is no use of Information Technology for real time monitoring or any
other purposes. Though, an online application developed by NIC is being used by the department
Assistant Engineers even at Block level to upload the details and update the progress status of the
ongoing projects, which is generally used when any meeting is there for updating details of the
project. Due to lack of regular updates, this application is not really effective. The department
workforce find it difficult to perform this additional work of updating the status of project work
online as due to number of projects and miscellaneous field work items to attend.
To overcome this lacuna, the department has planned to provide a mobile based application to the
field engineers to update real time progress at the site and the validity of the uploaded information
can be checked by the department instantaneously from anywhere. Geo‐tagging would also be
used in uploaded photographs which will restrict duplication. Currently monitoring of quality of
roads is conducted by independent personnel retired from the department. There is State
Technical agency as part of PMGSY for monitoring purpose. To measure pre‐ and post‐
implementation effects, there had been no Citizen Forum discussions or impact measurement analysis
conducted by the department. The department would be paving plastic roads funded by the PMGSY
programme in the near future. The programme would enhance the feedback mechanism and
measurement practises in the state.
For encouragement of use of waste plastics, support from media has also been enlisted to create
awareness about the environment. Broadcasting mediums such as Doordarshan, Private TV Channels,
and Ministry of Information & Broadcasting have assisted in propagating the idea of usage of
plastics to provide better quality of roads.
In order to motivate the stakeholders the state government has instituted three State level awards.
The awards provide recognition for the best plastic free village panchayat, best plastic free School and
Self Help Groups. Cash is awarded as incentive amounting to ₹ 5 Lakh for the first prize, ₹ 3 lakh
for the second prize and ₹ 2 lakh for the third prize. (D11 ‐ SHG Awards)

3.6 CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTATION
Adoption of innovative processes are challenging at the early stage. This resistance due to initial inertia
can be overcome through proper guidance, capacity building and change management. Some of the
challenges faced by Tamil Nadu in their initial phase were:
a) Implementation of the initiative in the state has depended on shredding units that were
limited for the need of the entire district. This led to delays in getting raw material
(shredded plastics) on time. Another concern for urban areas was the supply side bottle neck
of waste plastics on account of local and political issues.
b) Identification of critical hot spots of waste plastics generation was not done at the
planning stage so projects could be identified in and around those areas. Further, plastic
processing centres could have been set up around those areas to avoid additional
transportation costs.
c) A well‐managed dedicated team is required for collection, segregation and shredding of waste
plastics. The training and maintenance of this group has financial implications which have
to be defined and budgeted. In Tamil Nadu, Self Help Groups are carrying out these
activities. In the absence or delay of consistent shredded plastic demand from DRDA, the
SHGs have experienced tremendous financial strain.
d) The quality of waste plastic should be monitored and maintained as per guidelines (IRC: SP:
98: 2013, refer to Annexure 3 for IRC guidelines) and use of Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC), Flux
sheets must be restricted and this quality check should be done in phased manner. The
following types of waste plastic can be used in the construction of rural roads:
i. Films (Carry Bags, Cups) thickness up to 60 micron (PE, PP and PS)
ii. Hard foams (PS) any thickness
iii. Soft Foams (PE and PP) any thickness.
iv. Laminated Plastics thickness up to 60 micron (Aluminium coated also) packing
materials used for biscuits, chocolates, etc.

Monitoring of the implementation of process guidelines to the required standard remains

the weakest link.
e) There is resistance within the department in adoption of this technique due to vested
interests of the officials who apprehend decline in road maintenance work as the
durability and quality of these plastic roads is far superior to the normal roads. The
implementation and increase in life of road quality will impact the maintenance funds that
have been informally reported as a source of corruption within these departments in
general.
3.7 BENEFITS OF INNOVATION
There are various benefits which have been realised by implementation of this innovative technology. To
enumerate a few of these advantages are:
 The cost in laying road will reduce as there will be lesser quantity of bitumen used.
 This is a very simple technology which does not involve any special machines
deployment or other advanced skilled professionals.
 There is spot use of the waste plastic.
 These water proof roads provide considerably increased durability.
 No stripping of roads happens as this kind of roads resist the permeation of water.
 This innovation provides road with double strength, thus increasing higher load ‐
carrying capacity.
 No maintenance will be required for years as the surface remains without any cracking or
potholes.
 As part of this process, women can be empowered through employment in Self Help
Groups.
 More employment can be generated as labours will be required in collection,
segregation and shredding of waste plastics.
 Multi‐layer films can be used which provide strength and durability.
 No new machinery required so any additional infrastructure or cost is not required for
this technology implementation.

 No industry involvement or expert consultancy is required which could add cost.

 No granulation or powdering of plastics‐ only shredding is required.
3.8 FINANCIAL MODEL
The primary allocation of funding in the state has been allocated through the Ministry of Rural
Development and Panchayati Raj (₹ 20 Crores Reference Letter No. Lr.No.32324/Tu2/2013 Dated 22nd
Jan 2014). This has been supplemented by the Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana administered by
National Rural Road Development Agency (Under Phase VIII ₹ 1130.1 Crores have been sanctioned,
out of which ₹ 11 Crores have been allocated for Plastic Roads).
Through the Environmental Department, the Government has earmarked some limited budget
specifically for construction of such type of roads. Environment Protection and Renewal Energy
Development fund is a fully‐funded scheme created for waste plastic elimination and the fund is used
in development of plastic roads. The fund was established and notified though a government order
in August 2010. An initial sum of ₹ 10 crore was provided. An empowered committee comprising
of the Chief Secretary, Secretaries of Environment and Forests, Finance, Energy, Agriculture,
Principal Chief Conservator, CEO of Tamil Nadu Energy Development Agency, and Director of
Environment are responsible for implementation and allocation of funds. The Director
Environment is the controlling authority of the fund with monitoring of fund implementation
overseen by a sub‐committee.
In November 2011, the department of Environment and Forest allocated ₹ 5 crore for clearing of
plastics by setting up 50 plastic collection centres in Tamil Nadu. The fund was allocated to
Commissionerate of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Directorate of Town Panchayat,
Commissionerate of Municipal Administration, Corporation of Chennai and awareness
campaigns. The agencies were required by direction of the government to undertake the
administrative and technical action for setting up these centres within a period of 3 months and
furnish utilisation certificate of the funds. (Annexe D.10)
The Empowered Committee of the fund directed the government through another order in January
2012. The government order release ₹ 50 crore allocated in the budget for relaying of

roads using waste plastic collected by local authorities. The fund was distributed between
Commissionerate of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Directorate of Town Panchayat,
Commissionerate of Municipal Administration, and Corporation of Chennai. The departments were
provided a period of 3 months for estimate generation, technical and administration process
mobilisation and furnishing the utilisation certificate. (Annexe D.8)
Subsequent to the this order the Empowered Committee of the fund furnished an order in the
financial year 2012‐13 for laying of plastic roads allocating a fund of ₹ 100 crore. The fund was
distributed between Commissionerate of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Directorate of Town
Panchayat, Commissionerate of Municipal Administration, Forest department and Arignar Anna
Zoological Park were allocated ₹ 84.90 crore for relaying of roads with plastic waste. In addition
an amount of ₹ 10 lakh was allocated for monitoring of implementation through setting up of a
committee of retired official for inspection of roads. A fund of ₹ 60 lakh was allocated to Director
of Environment and Arignar Anna Zoological Park for creating awareness in reducing the use of
plastics. The government order instructed department for laying plastic roads through its own funds
from the year 2013‐14. The implementing agencies were given a period of 6 months of implement
the funds and provide the utilisation certificate. (Annexe D.9)
In the financial year 2013‐14, the Empowered Committee of the Environment Protection and
Renewable Energy fund allocated ₹ 50 crore for relaying roads using waste plastic. The fund was
distributed between Commissionerate of Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, Directorate of Town
Panchayat, Commissionerate of Municipal Administration, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,
Director Arignar Anna Zoological Park and Executive Director Kalakad Mundanthurani Tiger
Conservation Foundation. The implementation agencies were required to nominate a nodal officer
for furnishing proposals, sending monthly progress reports, documentation and evidence of work,
and coordination of monitoring team visits. (Annexe D.7)
Plastic in different forms is found to be almost 5% in solid waste, which is toxic in nature. It is a
common sight in both urban and rural areas to find empty plastic bags and other type of plastic
packing material littering the roads as well as drains. Due to its poor biodegradability, it creates
stagnation of water and associated hygiene problems. In order to curtail this problem, use of waste
plastic in laying of Roads was included in the notification by the MoEF (Annexure D.3). The

department has included PMGSY budget as well for construction of these types of roads. Large scale
implementation is expected to result from these government orders.
From the year 2011‐2012 to 2013‐14, a sum of Rs.44.50 crores was allotted to 181 Roads for
laying 236.154 Km of plastic roads under Environment Protection and Renewal Energy
Development Fund. (7)
TABLE 12‐ YEAR‐WISE ALLOCATIONS FOR PLASTIC ROADS
Year No. of Roads Length Amount

(in Km) (₹. in crores)
2011‐2012 90 108.756 18.00

2012‐2013 69 96.748 20.00
2013‐2014 22 30.650 6.50
Total 181 236.154 44.50
Establishment of Self Help Groups for implementation of plastic roads is economically viable.
3.9 POTENTIAL FOR REPLICATION
Tamil Nadu has excelled at implementing plastic roads for rural connectivity. The state
government and institutions developed over the last ten years have developed capacity across the
majority of districts for wide scale implementation in partnership with women self ‐help groups.
Nearly 16,000 kilometres of rural roads have been paved with waste plastic.
The practices used in Tamil Nadu can easily be replicated in other States which are initiating
construction of “plastic roads” as this new technology does not involve and new infrastructure or
machines. New states rolling out plastic road initiatives can adopt procedures to use segregated
plastics for road construction especially in the rural connectivity.

Convergence with Self Help Groups, Women Development Corporation will provide better result in
this initiative in solid waste management and will provide employment to weaker sections or
women. Local NGOs participation can be considered in the roll out plan which can be supported by
SHGs, by providing job opportunities, trainings and help in other economic development
activities. The societal group’s participation has been the greatest driving force in the delivery of
public services.
Capacity building of SHGs in Tamil Nadu is a practise that could be emulated in the other parts of the
country. The SHGs network extends within all districts of Tamil Nadu and is a well‐developed eco
system. Waste plastic processing capacity was built in each of the districts through the funds of rural
livelihood missions. Other states could develop a similar model of developing a well‐ entrenched
network of SHGs on similar lines.
The large scale implementation of plastic roads particularly in rural Tamil Nadu was enabled
through the endorsement and support of the Chief Minister. This was closely supported by
intensive and close monitoring of the parallel roll out in all the districts at the level of the
Secretary. The close multi‐layered monitoring and assessment of converged capacity empowered
the vast roll out in the state. The high degree of Institutional support and championing the
programme at the highest level is required and can be taken as a best practise for the roll out in
other states.
4. KARNATAKA CASE STUDY
4.1 TITLE
Private Participation in delivery of public services through management of plastic waste and
enhancing the durability of roads
Every industry including agriculture, automobile, building construction, communication or

information technology has been practically dependent on the applications of plastic. Use of this
non‐biodegradable product is growing so rapidly that end of useful life has turned out to be an
unavoidable predicament. Therefore, rather than abandoning plastics, its rational reuse should be
given more importance.
With a vision to provide improved performance of roads meeting international standards and
helping a progressive state like Karnataka to have an environment free of pollution, Directorate of
Municipal Administration (Karnataka Urban Development and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) including
Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), Karnataka Road Development Corporation limited,
Karnataka Rural Roads Development Agency (KRRDA), Rural Development and Panchayati Raj
(implementing MNREGA), National Rural Roads Development Agency (NRRDA, for
administration and technical support to Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (PMGSY)), and KK
Plastic Waste Management Pvt. Ltd., are contributing to constructing roads using waste plastics in
bituminous mix of concrete through a memorandum of understanding.
KK Plastic has patented this technology (Annexe E.4), and presently is the only company in
Karnataka to have successfully commercially implemented. The process patent (Number 196416)
granted to the company allows proprietary rights to the company in using the methodology for
mixing waste plastic in bituminous mixture for road surfacing.
The scope of the initiative is to recycle waste plastic and mix it with bitumen to save cost, though
durable and stronger roads in urban, sub‐urban and rural areas of Karnataka. The disposal of
plastic waste is a great problem. These are non‐biodegradable product due to which the material
poses challenges of environmental pollution and health hazards. By suitably utilizing the waste
plastics in road construction, the pollution and disposal problems may be
effectively reduced thus accomplishing higher economic returns as 8% of the Bitumen quantity is
replaced by waste plastics.
Several million metric tons plastic wastes are produced every year in Karnataka. On heating
plastics such as polyethylene, polypropylene and polystyrene at certain relevant temperatures, plastics
soften and exhibit good binding properties. Waste plastic mixed with bitumen results in construction
material with enhanced properties that improves the road life and reduce the need for
maintenance. These roads withstand loads due to heavy traffic, rain and temperature variation. The
process for laying out the bituminous mix and overlay design has been provided in Annexe E
constructed by BBMP.
In 2002, the Chief Minister of Karnataka announced the use of waste plastics for road
construction for a 50 kilometres stretch at the outset and later it was adopted in the construction of
Ring road, Bond road, TV tower Road, CV Raman Road, Bangalore City and BBMP. Karnataka
Rural Road Development Agency and Karnataka Road Corporation have been experimenting with
different additives to get a best ecological and economical solution to frequently wrecked roads.
Starting with Green manure which is a solid waste from domestic areas which was used as an
additive in road construction about 50 years back, 3000 to 4000 tonnes of this type of waste is
being produced which has should be free from plastics (non‐bio‐ degradable matter). Then, Crumb
bitumen (external layer of the vehicle tyres) was then used as additive in road construction then
polymers were used as additives. In 2009, World Bank had funded Karnataka Municipal Reforms
Project through which 140 to 180 kilometres of roads were constructed using all three types of
additives to compare longevity. The plastic roads were found to be better without any pothole
development. Thereafter which BBMP (City Corporation) issued a circular that waste plastics as
additive should be used in road construction. BBMP has remained an important participant in
encouraging and delivery of plastic roads in the city of Bengaluru over the last 12 years. BBMP
roads constructed using waste plastics have lasted several years without any requirement for
maintenance. Examples of two roads can be seen in figure 49 and 50 (Annexe E.2).
BBMP is responsible for civic and infrastructural requirements of the city Bengaluru. It often
works in conjunction with other civic bodies such as the Bengaluru Agenda Infrastructure

Development Task Force (ABIDE) and the Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA). A Mayor and
Deputy Mayor of the council are also elected for a period of one year who head and execute
functions of Municipal Corporation for cities or urban regions. In the absence of a Mayor or
Deputy Mayor, BBMP is run by an Administrator or Commissioner. BBMP has 8 Zones and each zone
is headed by a Joint Commissioner. Each zone is further divided into circles and divisions. The main
functions of BBMP are:
1. Urban planning or town planning of Bengaluru City
2. Regulation of land use and construction of buildings
3. Roads and bridges construction
4. Water supply for domestic, commercial and industrial purposes
5. Solids waste management
6. Protection of environment and promotion of ecological aspects
KRRDA as a state level nodal agency implements the Government of India programme of
construction of rural roads under the PMGSY Scheme. KRRDA is implementing these projects
through the Project Implementation Units (Divisions). It also implements the construction of rural
roads under the state scheme of Namma Gramma Namma Raste (NGNRY), funded by the Chief
Minister programme for rural roads. Functions of KRRDA include rural roads planning, sectorial
coordination, management of funds, road works, quality management and maintenance. KRRDA
has two‐tier system of working through Central office and Project Implementation Units (PIU).
PIU is headed by Executive Engineers. PIU prepares annual project proposals which is vetted by
KRRDA management and then placed before State Level Standing Committee (SLSC) for clearance in
accordance with guidelines. Thereafter, NRRDA along with Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD)
provide approval. After clearance, KRRDA invites tenders from qualified contractors. The selected
contractor implements the work under supervision of Executive Engineer. The organisation chart
for KRRDA is shown in the figure below. An example of the KRRDA project has been included in
table 28 (Annexe E.2).

FIGURE 7‐ KARNATAKA RURAL ROAD DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (KRRDA) ORGANISATION CHART
Other agencies such as Karnataka State Highway Improvement Project (KSHIP) are also active in using
waste plastic in road construction. An example of reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) project has been
included in table 27 (Annexe E.1). The RAP was used to construct a 600m stretch road in the Hoskote
taluk of Karnataka. Waste plastic modified bitumen was used in the process of laying the rural road with
limited traffic volume. The test track was executed through collaboration between KSHIP, SKSJTI
and KK Plastic. A process patent is pending for approval.
4.4 NEW APPROACH
Study and experiments have been carried out by institutes like R.V. College of Engineering
Bangalore, Sri Krishnarajendra Silver Jubilee Technological Institute (provides reports on
performance aspects) to understand utility of waste plastics and polymers and other materials in
construction of high performance roads. Reports of Centre for Transport Engineering (Civil
Engineering department) and Central Road Research Institute (CRRI, New Delhi) state that the

compressive strength of bituminous concrete mix increase by three times and life of the road
increases manifolds with addition of plastic modifier.
Through the collective efforts of Government departments and a private company KK Plastics,
Karnataka has developed an innovative approach for implementation of this type of more efficient
roads. With the objective of reduction in carbon footprint, improving properties and reducing
bitumen use, a process has been established for preparation of road material.
The basic workflow of the process for preparation of raw material for plastic roads is explained in
the figure below.
FIGURE 8 ‐ PREPARATION OF RAW MATERIAL FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION
The plastic waste made out of Poly ethylene (PE), Polypropylene (PP), and Poly Styrene (PS) are
separated, cleaned and shredded to small pieces. 8% of the bitumen quantity is replaced and added
to the mix bin. The aggregate is heated in the mini hot mix plant and the shredded plastic waste is
added, it gets softened and coated over the aggregate. Immediately, the hot bitumen is

added and mixed well. As the polymer and the bitumen are in the molten state, they get mixed and
the blend is formed at surface of the aggregate. The mixture is transferred to the road and the road
is laid. The road thus built has high stability value and another important observation was that the
bituminous mixes prepared using the treated binder could withstand adverse soaking conditions
under water for longer duration.
The various factors based on which use of this technology is dependent are the amount of waste
generated, collection mode, common treatment and disposal method.
Transportation of waste is another key component in determining the economies of waste

management. It is estimated to be 20‐30% of the total budgetary allocation. The vehicles with
closed mechanical loading system are preferred to prevent garbage spilling. Vehicles with
segregated compartments for collecting different types of wastes should be used.
Effective planning based on these factors is required as well for desired result and economic
viability. Recycling of Roads is a methodology being actively experimented with in Karnataka.
The process of road recycling is highlighted in Annexe C.2. A project in road recycling using
waste plastic bituminous mix has been highlighted in E.1, table 27. The process is a cost effective
model for developing rural roads that do not have significant traffic burden.
Karnataka Government has always stressed upon development of the State in all aspects. In this
respect, for productive Solid Waste Management important Municipalities acts and amendments
have been suggested by the Government. The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) has
published the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 under the Environmental
(Protection) Act, 1986 on 4th February 2011 and the Plastic Waste (Management and Handling)
Amendment Rules, 2011 under the Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986 on 2nd July 2011.
Karnataka State Pollution Control Board issued a public notice highlighting the provisions of the
Plastic Waste (Management and Handling) (Amendment) Rules, 2011 in order to create awareness and
for its effective implementation. The Board issued a letter addressed to Public Works Department and
Director of Municipal Administration, Government of Karnataka to utilize waste plastic in bitumen
for asphalting roads.

FIGURE 9 ‐ KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL ACTS AND AMENDMENTS
Since 2002, about 2500 kilometres of plastic roads have been laid in Karnataka by reusing more than
10,000 tons of plastic waste so far. IRC guidelines SP: 98 are being followed which restrict use of
PVC, flex sheets. Dry process is preferred and used for road construction.
BBMP passed a resolution No.53 (15/05‐06) dated the 27.09.2006 for using plastic admixtures in
construction of all black top roads in the city. The decision recommending the price of
procurement of processed waste plastic to be set at ₹ 27 per kilogram, was made by a committee
comprising of the Engineer in Chief BBMP, Chief Engineer of National highways, Bangalore,
Professor of Civil Engineering at IISc Bangalore.
The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) has been signed between the BBMP and KK Plastics to
lay 250 km of roads and since then many such road have been laid using waste plastics which
include Millers Road, Cunningham Road, Old Madras Road, J C Road, Lalbagh Road, almost all roads
in Jayanagar, and Mysore Road till Kanakpura junction. The most recent MoU document is available
in Annexe E.3.

The last MoU was signed in 2012 between BBMP and KK Plastics for a period of 2 years.
According to the understanding, KK Plastic agreed to acquire waste plastic from dry waste
processing centres created by BBMP in Bangalore at a rate of ₹ 10 per kilogram. The
responsibility of acquiring, processing and delivering the waste plastic to the Hot‐Mix plant was
assigned to KK Plastic. The responsibility of mixing, training and manning the patented machines for
mixing processed waste plastic was also entrusted to KK Plastic.
KK Plastic operations are regulated by the Water Prevention and Pollution Control Act of 1974
and Air Prevention and Pollution Control Act of 1981. The consent for discharge of effluents and air
emissions act has been granted by the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board for processing 20 tons
of waste plastic per month. The company has a limit of 1.5 kilolitres of domestic discharge daily
and the permission to operate a diesel generator set of 60 KVA. The process does not generate any
other hazardous waste. The onus of monitoring and reporting rests with the company on a quarterly
basis. The 8 year approval document has been included in the Annexure E.9, figure 63. In addition,
permission has also been granted to the company for processing waste cable encapsulated PVC
material without any additional capacity addition, as included in Annexe E.9, figure 64.
As a new methodology, many dry waste collection centres have been established to collect wastes
from apartments, schools, hotels, offices, factories and streets. These centres are run by Non‐
Government Organizations (NGO) and Contractors. Karnataka generates 10,000 – 20,000 tonnes of
solid waste everyday out of which about 100 ‐ 200 tonnes is plastic. In a model different to the
one followed by BBMP, the rural road sector promoted by KRRDA is allowing procurement of
waste plastic at ₹ 6 per kilogram. This is paid to the rag pickers for collection of waste.
There is coordination mechanism between the BBMP collection contractors from Solid Waste
Management department and road construction department; the BBMP contractors provide waste
plastics to plastic processing contractors. Convergence with Health department and Pollution
control board is required for use of plastics in road construction as rotten plastics need proper
cleaning and odour removal. Several awareness programmes have been conducted to train department
engineers on the use of waste plastics. Currently, there is no mechanism in the department to verify
the plastic quantity that has been mixed as it cannot be extracted from the bitumen mix, thus the
change in the behaviour of the mix helps in the quality verification

analysis. For rigorous process adherence, KRRDA provides Engineering hand book to its
Supervising Officers, Engineers and PIUs to verify the construction practice, mandatory field tests
and quality control of works.
There is no need for additional legislations but enforcement of existing regulations is essential for
better coordination and implementation of this innovation. The projects that are funded by World
Bank have additional manpower involved in the execution. Project Management Consultants were
involved in implementation and monitoring in building of plastic roads. The implementation
model followed by BBMP does not involve such Consultants.
There was no exceptional use of Information Technology or Enterprise Resource Planning

application in preparation of roads by BBMP, which could provide assistance in maintenance of
records, planning of work and management of resource. IT was used only in documentation. IT has
been used in PMGSY programme for reporting the current status of road construction through
upload of pictures to the servers where Quality Monitors could have immediate access. This
methodology adds to the quality monitoring and efficiency in their execution of projects.
In Karnataka, BBMP roll out has been done in phases from year 2002‐2005, 2005‐2008, 2008‐ 2011,
2011‐2014 and in stretch of 3 years about 500 km of roads have been constructed. KRRDA has
recently started the roll out in rural roads under the PMGSY scheme. About 190 kilometres of
road in Karnataka are to be paved using waste plastic (Annexe E.16).
Media engagement has played a significant role in promoting waste management and motivating
citizens for waste plastic collection, canvassing and propaganda. The role of widely spreading the
message of cleanliness and green environment has been performed by both the public and private
sector participant through the print and broadcasting media.
The Central Pollution Control Board launched a series on programmes in collaboration with
Doordarshan on environmental issues. KK Plastic methods and operational practises were
telecasted focused on plastic waste management through a 30 minute programme on plastic bags
(Annexe E.10, figure 66).
Large scale engagement with schools was undertaken in Bengaluru over a ten year period.
Children’s movement for civic awareness, a civil society organisation present in 363 civic hubs across
6 cities, has engaged in an awareness generation programme working with KK Plastics

educating children about recycling of plastics and waste management in urban areas (Annexe E.10,
figure 67).
Engagement with research institutions and central organisations has also helped in developing a better
understanding of waste plastic use in road construction. Supplier of processed waste plastic KK
Plastic worked free of cost in a research project sponsored by the Ministry of Road, Transport and
Highways in collaboration with IIT Chennai. The objective of the project was to evaluate the field
performance of bituminous mix with modified binders such as CRMB, PMB, Natural rubber and
waste plastic (Annexe E.10, figure 68). The outcomes of the research evaluation have been
included in the technical section of the report. Photographs of the project can be seen in figure 45‐
48.
Engagement with students of engineering colleges has enhanced the understanding of

environmental, civil and chemical engineering departments, of plastic and waste management issues
associated with urban areas. Student in groups and as individuals have conducted project work on the
use of waste plastics in road construction. RV College of Engineering affiliated to Bangalore
University is one good example of this practise (Annexe E.10, figure 69).
Recognition from leading figures, national institutions, international bodies, and print media
create a positive impact on those involved in the ecosystem for implementation. United Nations Human
Settlement programme has listed the use of waste plastic in road construction as a good practise for
human settlements as early as 2004. This was included amongst 402 global best practises. The best
practise database created by the Technical Advisory Committee enables the production of case books,
in sharing knowledge and expertise and showing for training and development (Annexe E.11,
figure 72).
KK Plastic has been recognised for the societal contribution being made by the company to the
city of Bangalore. The company was shortlisted in the top five for Namma Bengaluru awards
among thousands in the year 2010. Lokayukta Santosh Hedge declared all the finalists’ winners on
account of the work conducted (Annexe E.11, figure 70).
The Ministry of External Affairs, Public Diplomacy Division had commissioned a documentary film
called ‘Pathbreakers’ in the year 2010, to showcase the ground breaking achievements of Indian to
the world. KK Plastic and its work were included in Pathbreakers, showcasing the use of plastics in
road construction to the world (Annexe E.11, figure 71).
The large scale work in Bengaluru has been widely covered by the domestic and international
print media. Newspapers such as the New York Times, International Herald Tribune, Business Asia,
Khaleej Times, Live Mint, The Hindu, DNA, The Outlook, Deccan Chronicle, Deccan Herald,
Hindustan Times, Times of India, have documented the practise for dissemination to larger
society. Article coverage has also been provided in periodicals such as Construction World,
Modern Plastics and Polymers. Such large scale coverage provides societal recognition and
support for furthering meaningful causes, examples have been included in Annexe E.12.
Schools like Delhi Public School, St. Claret School, Government High Schools at Hejmadikodi and
Allahiparaga, Army Public School, in Bangalore are contributing to collection of waste plastics,
awareness drive to avoid wastage, door‐to‐door campaigns, school seminars and environment
education and motivation to others. Awards such as Paryavaran Mitra sponsored by Ministry of
Environment and Forests (Government of India) inspire schools, teachers and students to
participate in environment protection, devising methodologies for awareness creation and in
interacting with different stakeholders.
While, the process of construction of plastic roads is fairly simple and with ease adaptable but
there are certain challenges which are required to be addressed for necessary advantages. The few
known challenges faced by Karnataka are:
1. Absence of the schedule of rates in the early stages of adoption was a challenge for the
development of plastic roads. The Schedule of Rates is being adopted post the
development of the IRC standard SP‐98 is helping in the adoption of plastic roads.
2. Inadequate planning of various key components required for proper disposal of solid
waste such as availability of sufficient collection bins and transportation vehicles.
Availability of bins for collection of waste plastic in schools and apartments has been
raised regularly by the State Pollution Control Board with BBMP without much result
(clarification letter, Annexe E.9).
3. Insufficient training of various stakeholders, including the general public, untrained

workers in factories and Municipal Corporation have been the main hurdle in the waste
management.
4. Segregation of waste at source into biodegradable, recyclable and hazardous is required. The
quality of waste plastic should be monitored and maintained as per guidelines (IRC: SP: 98:
2013) and use of Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC), Flex sheets must be restricted and this quality
check should be done in phased manner. The following types of waste plastic can be used in
the construction of rural roads:
5. Inadequate finance and infrastructure for manpower required and waste disposal will can
create challenges in implementation.
6. Communication gap and team working spirit in City Corporation create barriers in
effective operations.
7. High attrition of collection workers due to lack of sufficient economic benefit and other
reasons.
8. There is problem of overflowing bins or disposal vehicles so assessment of garbage

quantity and extra‐space for accommodation of sufficient garbage for its proper disposal must
be done.
9. Huge cost of transportation requires decentralised locations for waste management and door
to door collection of household waste.

10. Lack of encouragement and motivation of organizations and workers to participate in

waste management. Awards or incentives should be there to promote cleanliness.
11. Organisations such as KRRDA have short term assignments. According to the recent order
of the state government, engineers would be shifted within 1 year. The constant movement
of engineers results in disruptions of implementation. Longer term assignments for
Engineers at the agency will be beneficial for capacity building and implementation
effectiveness.
12. Limited documentation of projects implemented in organisations such as City

Corporations, makes it difficult to track the history of project. Compulsory maintenance of
an online transparent register is required.
13. No Engineering data has been maintained for the projects implemented. Regular
performance monitoring of the road quality would be immensely helped by creation of
data monitoring portals.
14. Limitations of execution and monitoring have been reported for extremely backward and
remote areas of the state that are still not adequately connected.
There are various benefits which are drawn by implementation of this innovative technology. To
 The risks to public health and security will decrease with proper waste management.
 The cost in laying road is significantly reduced due to the reduced quantity of bitumen
used.
 These water proof roads provide considerably increased durability.
 No stripping of roads happen as this kind of roads resist the permeation of water.
 This innovation provides road with durable strength, thus increasing higher load ‐
carrying capacity.
 No maintenance will be required for years as the surface remains without any cracking or
potholes.

 With involvement of private companies, there will be sharing of responsibilities and it

would be easier for Government bodies to implement better roads efficiently.
 There will be more possibility of research on different alternatives conducted with the
involvement of private companies or organizations.
 Awareness about environment, hygiene and waste management in schools, factories,
companies and to general public can be done by different parties so its effectiveness will
increase.
 Awareness about elimination of myths about the plastic waste by providing a scientific
technology for permanent disposal of plastic waste can be promoted.
 Increased employment opportunities can be generated as more work force will be
required in collection, segregation and shredding of waste plastics.
4.8 FINANCIAL MODEL
The budget allocation and workforce employment for management of solid waste varies from one city
Municipal Corporation to another. BBMP has a 100% funding provision for the plastic roads
construction. Funds have been allocated over a 12 year period from resurfacing, maintenance,
widening, strengthening, and fresh laying of the city roads. Examples of BBMP work orders have
been included in the Annexe E.6.
The private sector contractor involved in processing procures the waste plastic at a fixed rate as stated
in the MoU. The value addition through cleaning, segregation and shredding was thereafter
charged to BBMP at a higher rate as stated in the MoU. The processed plastic waste has been
consistently provided at ₹ 27 per kilogram over several years to state agencies implementing the
road project.
A typical work order based on a sanctioned amount related the specific work details to length of
the road, estimated amount for the road, name of the implementing agency, quantity of bitumen
(or concrete) used, plastic quantity for bitumen, semi‐dense bitumen concrete, plastic quantity for
semi‐dense bitumen, total plastic quantity, rate per kilogram and total amount.
Sample work orders have been included in Annexe E.8.

Work orders have been provided to KK Plastics through funds allocated for repair of roads
damaged through flooding by Municipal Corporations of other states such as Andhra Pradesh, Tamil
Nadu, Kerala, Maharashtra and Delhi. The responsibility of procurement, processing, supply and
mixing entirely rested on the company which would be compensated by the sanctioned funds. A
sample outside state order has been included in Annexe E.7.
To support KK Plastics (Private firm) engaged in research and as waste plastic supplier, Municipal
Corporation has made it mandatory for the Road Contractors to purchase the waste plastics from
KK Plastics in Bengaluru.
Karnataka Rural Roads Development agency has announced the implementation of PMGSY scheme in
the year 2014. Under the second phase of the scheme 315 road projects have been sanctioned by the
Ministry of Rural Development at a cost of ₹ 1044.59 through the recommendation of the
empowered committee (Annexe E.16).
KRRDA under the scheme has announced the implementation 190 kilometres of rural roads at a cost
of ₹ 81.70 crore utilising waste plastic. The funding allocation is spread over 32 projects.
These projects have been sanction across Karnataka, with a minimum length of 3.5 kilometres and a
maximum of 14.7 kilometres. The project is estimated to provide the nodal agency a saving of ₹
57.14 lakh in road construction by using waste plastic. Table 29 in Annexe E.13, provides an
analysis of projected savings in the various projects in Karnataka.
There is immense potential for replication as adoption of this technology is quite simple and cost
effective. Other States can easily adopt the Karnataka model simply by selecting the right team for
implementation and result oriented approach. As of now, Karnataka has developed more than
2500 kilometres of urban roads.
Based on the learning and best practices of the projects in Karnataka other States can also use this
technology for economically viable alternatives in road construction. BBMP has also decided to use
the poly blend compound for all its future road construction projects. Convergence of Solid Waste
Management and Road Engineering under the BBMP organisation is one of the key drivers in the
implementation and adoption of plastic roads. Such convergence is required in other states for
coordination and implementation.

For desired consequence, the States need relentless drivers, continuous effort needed for permanent
segregation, focused follow up, good officer driven mechanism needed for local bodies, human
resource needed for environmental management along with technical people and implementation.
KRRDA has been very proactive in experimenting and evaluating the use of new, novel,
alternative materials for construction of rural roads in Karnataka. The use of alternative
materials has been documented in technical chapter 2. Engagement with State Technical
agencies, conducting research, documentation and monitoring are key strengths of the
programme conducted by KRRDA.
KRRDA has been successful in creating tripartite relationship between the technology provider, the
agency and the road contractor. The tripartite relationship clearly identifies the obligations and rights
of the three stakeholders involved in delivering quality roads. A sample agreement has been
included in the Annexe E.15. Other state agencies would find it beneficial to create similar
industry structures for improving the quality of rural roads in their respective states.
KRRDA has developed excellent practise in internal communication for execution of the projects. The
internal communication of the government order lucidly communicates the details by referencing
past orders, the summary of the past order and providing further clear instructions to other
organisational stakeholders and linkages for execution of the order. Technical notes have been
highlighted simply in these order and other authorities have been informed appropriately. An
example of the order is included in Annexe E.17. The clarity of communication is a good example to
be replicated.
The multi‐level Monitoring conducted by KRRDA is an excellent practise that could be replicated in
other parts of the country. In this methodology at the project level, the testing of the road blocks is
conducted by the Project Implementation Unit (PIU) located at the sub‐divisional or divisional
level in the presence of the executive engineer or divisional engineers. The testing laboratory is
maintained by the contractor and each stage of the road is tested, the report for which is provided
to next level of the monitoring chain.

The second tier comprises of the State Quality Monitor (SQM), conducts evaluations twice during
the construction and once after. A state coordinator based out of the KRRDA head quarter
organises the visits of the State Quality monitor. Assessments are conducted based on information
provided by PIU. SQMs who are eligible retired superintendent engineers trained by NRRDA are
provided an allowance for assessment. Standard formats are created where each assessment is graded in
one of the three categories – satisfactory, satisfied with improvement needed (additional quality
monitoring check), and unsatisfactory.
Finally the third tier for monitoring is through National Quality Monitors (NQMs). Samples of
roads are selected after completion of work by a technical committee. The NQM performs
assessment based on detailed guidelines provided under the PMGSY scheme available on the ministry
website. Multiple checks on the road are performed that are approved by the technical committee
according to the required quality norms.
The monitoring process followed by KRRDA involved online documentation of all assessment. Photos
of projects are uploads by PIU and SQMs through a smart phone provided to engineers. Other
practises worth emulating in other states is the e ‐tendering, e ‐procurement and e ‐ payment system
followed by the Government of Karnataka. The Citizens charter also empowers citizens to engage
systematically with the project.

5. JHARKHAND CASE STUDY
5.1 TITLE
Plastic Road Construction by a Private Sector Utility Company
The determination, willingness and intention to serve the community and its land are not the
exclusive responsibility of the Government bodies alone. In India, there are private institutions
and business houses which are capable of taking charge of works such as construction of houses, roads,
power generation and cleanliness. Jamshedpur, the Steel city of India, is one such example where
Tata Steel and Jamshedpur Utility and Services Company (JUSCO Limited, subsidiary of Tata Steel
established in year 2004) have been trying to deal with the hazard of waste plastic and use it in a
productive manner. Jamshedpur city does not have a Municipal corporation and is managed by Tata
group of companies, entirely. The Executive Engineer of the Public Works department, highlighted
that waste plastics roads are not constructed by Government in Jamshedpur, JUSCO has initiated
early stage pilot projects.
The Tata group has many eco‐friendly initiatives to its credit so this experiment of building a
‘futuristic’ plastic road was approved. The first attempt was not successful as the aggregate spread in
the heating tray could not reach the temperature of 100 degree Celsius therefore mixing with
plastic was not achieved. In the next attempt, the experiment was successful and Jamshedpur residents
had the benefit of the first plastic road successfully constructed in the year 2011. The photograph of
the first project can be seen in figure 80 (Annexe F.5).
The partnering agencies were Tarapore and Company Jamshedpur (building and civil
construction) and Singh industries Jamshedpur. All the activities, viz., collection of waste plastics,
segregation, shredding, transportation and use in road construction, usually associated with
Municipal Corporation were carried out by these private organizations.

With the objective to save the environment from hazardous plastic waste that clog drains, cause
flooding, choke animals to death which eat it, end up in landfills and incinerators, would rather be
used to double eco‐benefits through its reuse in road construction.
The use of the pioneering technology, in Jamshedpur Township, is based on a patent by Dr. R.
Vasudevan (Dean, Thiagrajar College of Engineering, Madurai, Tamil Nadu) who had pioneered the
idea and supported construction of plastic roads over the last decade. These plastic roads are more
durable, maintenance free, recyclable, cheaper and water resistant. Inspired and mentored by Dr.
Vasudevan’s plastic‐tar road technology, an Environment Engineer of JUSCO Ltd. proposed the
extension of this idea to be used in Jamshedpur.
JUSCO is responsible for planning, maintenance, providing civic and municipal services in an
integrated manner along with waste water management services, power distribution, engineering
and construction services, municipal solid waste management and public health services, with
horticulture and a couple of other services. JUSCO Ltd. runs the operations of the utility in Jamshedpur
with a population of 8,00,000 inhabitants spread over an area of 64 square kilometres.

JUSCO
Engineering Procurement Construction DivisionIntegrated Township Management Division

Power Service Division
Industrial Construction Household Consumer

Civil and Electrical
Design and Township Management

Industrial Consumer
Water
Municipal Function
Municipal Solid Waste
City Roads
Horticulture
FIGURE 10 ‐ ORGANISATIONAL CHART OF JUSCO
JUSCO has organised the functions in three key verticals of operations. The Engineering
Procurement and Construction (EPC) division looks after Industrial Construction, Design and
Township Management. The Power Service division provides ensures power service delivery to
households, industrial consumer and for municipal functions. The Integrated Township
Management Division provides the function of civil and electrical maintenance, water, municipal solid
waste management, city roads and horticulture services. The organisational chart in figure above
shows the key functions and services offered by JUSCO.
JUSCO provides an integrated management system for the city. The services provided by the
function are waste transfer both secondary collection and transportation, transfer station
management, composting, engineering secured landfills, landfill capping, integrated waste
recycling and reclamation, recycling of municipal and specialised waste. JUSCO provides project
management services on EPC, Turnkey Basis, Build ‐own ‐operate ‐transfer (BOOT), Build ‐operate ‐ transfer
(BOT), Design ‐ build‐own‐operate‐transfer (DBOOT), Operation and Maintenance (O&M) models
of implementation.
JUSCO Ltd. developed a better understanding of the process specified by the Indian Road
Congress (IRC) guidelines SP‐98 and set up process of door‐to‐door collection of municipal solid
waste, its segregation, cleaning and shredding. The shredded plastic to be added on to heated
aggregate. Plastic melts and coat aggregate making it water proof thus these roads are not prone
to pot‐holes without any release of lethal fumes.
5.4 NEW APPROACH
In February 2011, the Government notification by Ministry of Environment and Forest was issued
directing Municipal authorities to use waste plastics in road construction. JUSCO ltd. follows the
Indian Road Congress (IRC) released (in December, 2013) code, IRC: SP: 98: 2013 (refer to guidelines),
for application of the ‘plastic road technology’. The code provides the standard for the use of
waste plastics in construction of roads.
The broad process that is followed for road construction in Jharkhand is that JUSCO has door‐to‐ door
collection of waste plastics from the source, segregates the waste and shreds the same into 2‐4mm size.
The process for collection of plastic and subsequent transportation to shredding location is shown
in the figure below.
FIGURE 11 ‐ PROCESS OF COLLECTION OF WASTE PLASTIC IN JAMSHEDPUR (SOURCE: JUSCO LTD.)
FIGURE 12 ‐ PROCESS OF SEGREGATION AND SHREDDING OF WASTE PLASTICS (SOURCE: JUSCO LTD.)
The process followed by JUSCO in implementing plastic waste incorporation in road construction is
demonstrated in figure 12 above. The mixing of shredded plastic over the aggregates in road

construction provides tremendous strength at no additional cost. Plastic gets coated over stone
followed by the hot plastic coated stone is mixed with bitumen (tar). The mix is used for road
laying. As per a general estimation, to lay one km of plastic road 4 m wide, 10% bitumen will be
replaced by waste plastics. There will be an approximate saving of ₹60,000 kilometre. Landfills or
incineration of waste plastic pollute environment as extremely toxic fumes are high temperature (table
1). Through the use of this innovative technology, waste plastics in bitumen do not add toxic
fumes to the environment. Examples of the projects executed by JUSCO have been presented in
Annexe F.1, F.2, F.3.
There are two different processes, namely wet and dry process, to incorporate waste plastics into
the bituminous mixes. JUSCO Limited is using the Dry process of implementing plastic roads in
Jamshedpur. Dry process is asphalting technique of roads in which the coating of plastic is created
over aggregates which in turn increase the binding property of the aggregates thus improving the
strength of the road. JUSCO purchases items and waste plastic as per the Schedule of Rates
provided by Public Works Department of Jharkhand. The rates are not frequently updated, thus
JUSCO amends the price increasing the values by 5‐10% as per market rates.
The utility company runs a 100 metric tonnes per year of plastic processing unit. The unit
functions with 4 workers and 1 operator on a daily basis. Management of Solid Waste is done by
JUSCO ltd. through public health workers who collect waste from citizens, residences, schools, hotels,
offices, factories and streets. JUSCO Ltd. carries out the following steps to mix waste plastics in
construction of the roads.
Step I: Plastic waste made out of PE (Poly Ethylene), PP (Poly Propylene) and PS (Poly Styrene) cut
into a size between 2.36mm and 4.75mm using shredding machine.
Step II: Similarly the bitumen is to be heated to a maximum of 1700C to have good binding and to
prevent weak bonding. (Monitoring the temperature is very important)
Step III: At the mixing chamber the shredded plastic waste is to be added to the hot aggregate. It
gets coated uniformly over the aggregate within 30 Seconds, giving an oily look plastic coated
aggregate is obtained.
QO © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Step IV: Hot bitumen is then added over the plastic coated aggregate and the resulting mix is used
for road construction. The road laying temperature is between 1100C to 1200C. The roller used is
8‐ton capacity.
Burying plastic forever into roads is the safest alternative as the test samples show improvement in
resistance to water‐soaking, hence ideal for sub‐grade. There is improvement in fatigue life of roads.
Presently, about 12 kilometres of plastic roads have been constructed by JUSCO, at a cost of
approximately ₹ 400 per square metre of road according to the Manager.
There is plethora of advantages in implementation of this technology. The few known challenges faced
by JUSCO ltd. in Jharkhand were:
1. There is no involvement of Government fund or department in the process. Involvement

would enhance implementation and the life of road immensely.
2. Due to vested interest of officials and contractors, this technology is not adopted or
promoted as these roads require almost no maintenance requirement. The contractors who
flourish on recurring road maintenance do not support the use of this innovation.
3. Segregation of waste at source into biodegradable, recyclable and hazardous type is a

pressing requirement. The quality of waste plastic should be monitored and maintained as per
guidelines (IRC: SP: 98: 2013) and use of Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC), Flex sheets must be
restricted and this quality check should be done in phased manner. The following types of waste
plastic can be used in the construction of rural roads:
QI © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

4. Inadequate finance and infrastructure for manpower required and waste disposal from
Government will not be able to provide project benefits to whole state completely.
5. There is problem of overflowing of bins or disposal vehicles so assessment of garbage

quantity and extra‐space for accommodation of sufficient garbage for its proper disposal must
be done.
6. Huge cost of transportation requires decentralised locations for waste management and door
to door collection of household waste.
7. Attractive incentives or awards are not much there to promote citizens towards
cleanliness.
8. Cleaning workforce should carry the burden on enforcement and implementation.
9. Adequate salary and incentives are needed for the workers executing cleanliness.
10. Not many private or public organizations are there who are ready to invest on such types of
researches and innovations.
There are various benefits which are drawn by implementation of this innovative technology. To
 The risks to public health and security reduce with proper waste management.
 The cost in laying road reduces as quantity of bitumen is saved.
 This is a very simple technology which does not involve any special machines
deployment or other advanced skilled professionals.
 More employment can be generated as labours will be required in collection, segregation
and shredding of waste plastics. According to the Senior Manager of JUSCO Ltd. to run a
processing unit, 4 workers and 1 supervisor/ operator are required on daily
Q› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

basis. Presently, about 900 workers have been deployed by JUSCO ltd. for collection of
wastes from whole of Jamshedpur.
 Private institutions can be motivated to use their resources for implementation and
research of such projects which can benefit the environment and the civilians.
5.8 FINANCIAL MODEL
JUSCO Ltd. is India's only comprehensive urban infrastructure service provider. It is responsible for
development and planning of the Jamshedpur township. The project of constructing roads using
waste plastics is fully funded by Tata Steel. JUSCO presents an invoice to Tata Steel at the end of
the project. JUSCO has projects all over India in cities such as Kolkata, Mysore, and Haldia. The
company is principally into water and waste water management services, power distribution,
engineering and construction services, municipal solid waste management and public health
services, with horticulture and a couple of other services.
With regard to implementation of innovative technology of use of waste plastics in roads

construction in Jamshedpur, JUSCO ltd. has supported the adoption with no additional
investment. The end result was a reduction in the cost and saving of bitumen. There is no
maintenance expenditure for five years. The procurement of raw material was done as per
schedule of charges provided by Public Works Department Jharkhand. Since the schedule of rates was
not recent, so JUSCO Ltd. revises the charges after incrementing percentages as per the present
scenario. JUSCO Ltd. is delivering services to other Municipal corporations through municipal solid
waste management contracts.
There are many institutions and business houses willing to stand up to social challenges. This requires
significant support from the citizens of the country. Awareness of citizens must be improved for
cleanliness and a pollution free environment.
The implementing agencies in different states require a dedicated team which will provide continuous
support needed for training, implementation, environmental management, coordination and follow‐
ups for desired and optimum outcomes.
Q3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Similar to the Jamshedpur Utilities and Services Company Ltd., other states would also find it
beneficial to create similar industry interventions for improving the quality of rural roads in their
respective states. The co‐ordination between government, private organization and citizen is required
to understand needs, challenges and objectives in achieving the successful implementation of
plastic roads. In Jharkhand, Tata Steel ltd. had established the Jamshedpur R&D Centre in 1937 and is
one of the oldest industrial R&D centres in the country.
Since its inception, this centre has played a pivotal role in the development of steel products and
process routes that have given the Company a competitive advantage in local and global markets.
The innovative processes and superior quality of output is reflected in 42 filed and 36 granted
patents during the past years along with publication of 56 papers in top international peer‐
reviewed journals. Such initiatives should be promoted within different organizations to get rapid
economic and social growth. Ventures like this provide sufficient opportunity for jobs creation,
environment awareness, close coordination between Government and citizens in improving the
quality of urban life.
Private sector utilities operating in Industrial townships have the potential of replicating this
practise in the region of focus. The decision making is simpler and ability to mobilise resources a lot
fast that most other organisations. The requisite organisational structures, competencies and financial
capability of the private sector utility are key parameters that would support implementation of
plastic road construction by the private sector.

6. ROLL OUT STRATEGY
The proposed roll out strategy for states takes in to consideration aspects of policy pronouncement for rural
and urban roads, planning requirements of plastic roads, implementation models of operations,
finance, monitoring mechanism, training and awareness generation, and capacity building. State
schemes may be allied with national schemes to improve effectiveness. The recommendations for the
roll out are as follows:
6.1 RURAL ROADS: POLICY PRONOUNCEMENTS
The policy pronouncements should be made with due consideration and collaboration of state
agencies involved in rural road development. The pronouncements may include:
a. Identifying new rural roads that need to be built by the state through established
surveying methods.
b. Policy pronouncement by state governments implementing the rural road

construction for using plastic waste. It is recommended that 15% of annual rural
roads built through state financing may introduce the technology.
c. Policy pronouncement to consider paving of 10% of plastic roads using the road
recycling methodology. Aging urban roads could be recycled to pave rural roads
with processed waste plastic.
d. 10 % of roads built by the state nodal agency implementing the PMGSY scheme may be
constructed using waste plastic.
e. Mandatory implementation of IRC –SP‐ 98 standards for all plastic roads should be
encouraged.
QY © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

6.2 URBAN ROADS: POLICY PRONOUNCEMENTS
The policy pronouncements may be made with due consideration of urban development and central
agencies supporting state projects and initiatives. The pronouncements may include:
a. All road strengthening, resurfacing and improvement projects to use waste plastic with
bitumen.
b. 15% of fresh road paving in urban areas of municipal limits to use plastic with
bitumen.
c. Mandatory implementation of IRC – SP‐ 98 standard for plastic roads is

recommended.
6.3 ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING
Prior to the launch of the plastic roads scheme, due diligence and assessment is required for
effective planning and execution. This may be conducted in collaboration with converging
departments:
a. Conduct a planning survey for the plastic roads programme through the following
specific actions:
i. Identifying plastic hot spots in the state. This would require the assessment of
volume of municipal solid waste and an estimate of type of plastic in the
waste.
ii. Identifying capacity gaps for Municipal Solid Waste and Plastic Management in
the state, in particular collection of plastic and availability of shredders.
Q6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

iii. Survey of key roads, traffic loading and frequency of traffic in particular
for high density population areas.
iv. Assessment of climatic conditions and relationship with materials used.
v. Assessment of recyclable material availability in the state.
vi. Identifying capability and possibility of recycling aging roads.
vii. Identifying capability of using cold mix technique in the state.
b. Planning plastic roads for urban or rural areas based on volume of plastic waste
generated and capacity for managing it.
c. All participation processes may be conducted through the established practises of E‐

tendering, E‐procurement and E‐payments to ensure ease of conducting work and
maintaining transparency.
d. 3 phase implementation in Urban areas may consider :

i. Pilot implementation in 2‐3 districts of the state based on the policy
pronouncement over a 6 month period. It is recommended that the location
should be suggested based on visibility and accessibility for demonstration
purposes.
ii. Based on the appraisal of the pilot districts, a roll out in half of the district
municipal corporations could be undertaken in the second phase. The roll out
period may be spread over 18‐24 months.
iii. The remaining districts may commence the roll out at the end of the 2 year
period. This may further continue for an 18‐24 month period until all
districts have been included in the programme.
iv. The goal of the three phase implementation is to ensure that each district
develops the necessary capacity and experience in construction of plastic
roads. The scaling up of waste plastic processing should be limited to the
foreseeable demand in plastic road construction.
e. 3 phase implementation in Rural areas may be considered:
i. Pilot implementation through the state nodal agency in 3 locations

simultaneously paving roads of 3 kilometres in each location.
ii. In the second phase of implementation the nodal agency could undertake
parallel implementation under the PMGSY scheme in the districts where the
technical committee has made a recommendation based on surveying
outcomes. This should be implemented in the stipulated timeframe identified
by NRRDA.
iii. The final phase of implementation should extend the programme to

extremely backward and inaccessible regions where road connectivity has not
yet reached. Time bound implementation may be defined according to state
priorities.
6.4 IMPLEMENTATION MODEL
The implementation model of plastic roads may consider the formation of a flagship
programme. The framework of the flagship programme could pursue one or all of the three
different implementation models – SHGs, Contractor MoU, and Private Sector Utility. The state
may consider the following measures for implementation:
a. Launching a flagship programme

i. Plastic roads programme of the state government to bring together
partnering government agencies and departments.
ii. The programme must have direct support and endorsement of the Chief
Minister.
iii. Participation and involvement should be at the highest level of

administration and technical functions of road construction, and municipal
waste management.
b. SHGs model for rural roads may consider :

i. Shredding machines for plastic processing to be provided through the funds of
National Rural Livelihood Mission, Women’s Corporation and
Empowerment.
ii. Land and Shed for operations may be provided by Directorate of Municipal
Administration.
iii. Operational output may be paid for by Rural Development, Panchayat Raj or
State Corporations implementing rural road construction.
iv. Demand of shredded plastic ought to be balanced by production of

shredded plastic. Excess capacity creation that does not match policy
pronouncements will create undue systemic stress.
v. Recommended creation of waste plastic processing units should be limited to

district headquarters. An extensive collection network can be built around each
processing unit.
c. Contractor – MoU model for urban roads may consider the following:
i. Inclusion of waste plastic as a construction material should be included in the
schedule of rates of city corporations.
ii. 1 Acre of land to be provided by City Corporation to the contractor on a

term lease coinciding with the MoU period.

iii. Power supply of up to 112 KW and 1.5 kilolitres of daily water discharge
certificates are recommended for urban processing operations. The cost of
equipment, power supply and power charges are borne by the Contractor.
iv. Pollution Control Board clearance may be provided through a nodal contact at
City Corporation.
v. Single window processing system for set up of waste plastic processing units can
be considered.
vi. Segregation rules to be implemented at the sources under the Plastic Rules of
2011.
vii. Shredded plastic may be paid for by the municipal corporation road
construction and maintenance budget.
viii. The responsibility of transporting processed plastic in 30 kg bags to the hot‐ mix
plant should rest with the Contractor. The responsibility of mixing the plastic
shreds should also rest with the contractor and training of staff would also be
conducted by them.
ix. Duration of the MoU is suggested to be 3 years, which could be renewed for
a further 3 years based on the performance appraisal.
d. Private Sector Utility
i. Private sector utility and service company model is extremely limited in the
Indian context. The private sector provides municipal waste management and
road construction activities through such companies in Industrial townships
in different parts of the country. Plastic roads may be actively
ıoo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

created through the initiative of such private sector utility companies applying
the best practises from the public sector.
6.5 TRAINING AND AWARENESS BUILDING
A number of training and awareness building measures are essential for ensuring the success of the
flagship programme of the state. The following measures may be considered during the roll
out:
a. Public and media involvement
Conscious effort by the state and private sector media in celebrating and generating
awareness of environmental issues is extremely important. Disseminating case studies
and highlighting the achievement of individuals would be beneficial for the
programme. A regular ongoing educational series is needed for citizens through
channels of Doordarshan and privately operated ones in the local language.
b. Student and school awareness programmes
Large scale public awareness programme need to be initiated through the CSR funds of
Plastic Manufacturers in schools for students. In particular awareness building should
begin at an early age through programmes conducted as workshops.
c. Training of all contractors and road workers
Awareness programme to be conducted by Municipal corporations and road

construction department as a part of roll out of the flagship programme. This training
should involve awareness of both plastic waste management and use in road
construction. Manual for engineers and contractors may be drafted in the state
language.
ıoı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

d. Training to PWD engineers
PWD engineers responsible for road construction should be provided mandatory training
in the IRC‐SP‐ 98 standard implementation through class‐room, site visits in other states
and e‐learning content on computing devices.
e. Involvement of Plastic manufacturers
The onus of awareness generation and participation in safe use and disposal of plastics
should be placed on plastic manufacturers. Mandatory participation through CSR
programmes need to be implemented urgently.
f. Segregation of waste plastic at source
Colour coded bins could be introduced in urban communal areas, housing societies,
schools and public buildings. Colour code bins for separation of plastic, paper,
metallic objects, glass and biological waste. Plastic waste segregation at source is the
most important pillar of the recycle and reuse philosophy.
6.6 CAPACITY BUILDING
Capacity building is essential for the roll out of a flagship programme. The state run programme
may consider the following:
a. Worker training for collection and segregation
Training of workers at SHGs and Urban Dry Collection centres is mandatory for
health and safety of the workers concerned. An understanding of the type of waste
and methods of handling should be imparted by the implementing agency. Standard
formats in states where this has been implemented successfully may be adopted.
ıo› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

b. To be paid by CSR funds of Plastic Manufacturers
Corporate Social Responsibility funds of large public or private sector undertaking

must be gainfully applied especially those involved in production of plastic and
petroleum products. This CSR fund should be applied in generating awareness,
improving welfare and providing training to waste collection workers.
c. Burden of reuse on Plastic Manufacturers
Statutory notifications to be served to all plastic manufacturing units in the state to

ensure that plastic is being reused or recycled and not ending in landfill sites or
incinerators. Any manufacturing units found failing in extended responsibility as
highlighted in the MoEF notification of 2011 ought to face serious punitive fines.
d. Buy back of plastic by large companies
Buy back of waste plastic that is not used up in urban dry waste collection centre for
recycling should be made mandatory by large plastic product manufacturers.
e. Need for an Institution and agency
State Governments could consider the need for setting up an independent regulatory
and monitoring authority for cleanliness and environment protection. Such a regulator
could be mandated with overseeing the use of waste plastics in road construction.
f. Exchange between government, research institutions and industry
Extensive engagement between government, academia and industry is required for

continually improving understanding of best practises for environmental
remediation from material hazards. These exchanges may take place through
seminars, conferences and round table discussions.
ıo3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

g. E‐learning content for training
States are encouraged to adopt e‐training packages for implementing the use of waste
plastic in road construction. These could be developed as standalone modules that are
utilised in imparting training to engineers and other stakeholders in the system. E‐
learning may be allied with the National Skills Development Mission.
h. E‐monitoring of implementation
Information Technology could be used more extensively for monitoring the

implementation of plastic roads. State government could empower engineers,
contractors and quality monitors to upload photographs of the execution in real
time using smart phones. The uploaded data can be simultaneous accessed by the
Quality Monitoring network in the state and at the national level through a
governmental intranet. Specific measures could be considered:
i. IT infrastructure to be created for the flagship programme at district level

ii. Dedicated webserver with application from monitoring, training,
procurement, payments and information dissemination
6.7 FINANCE
Financial benefits resulting from the implementation of plastic roads and the resulting
longevity of roads are key drivers for the roll out. The following measures may be considered by
the state:
a. Launching a savings programme to be initiated by the Finance Ministry of the state

ensuring a saving range of ₹ 26,000 ‐ 60,000 per lane kilometre from the cost of
bitumen.
ıoq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

b. Capacity building measure to be financed through existing programmes of the

central and state government departments such as urban and rural development, public
works, livelihood missions and corporate social responsibility funds.
c. Where additional funds are required in the set‐up stage to provide for expansion in
capacity of processing units, training and development, 10% of road length can be
reduced from the total annual outlay for road construction in the state. This fund can
be redirected for plastic roads.
d. Formation of a multi‐action environmental fund for waste management,

environmental remediation, climate change and infrastructure development such as
plastic roads.
6.8 MONITORING MECHANISM
The monitoring mechanism remains the most significant and critical aspect of implementing the
flagship programme for plastic roads in the state. Three dimensions of monitoring maybe
considered by the state through technical monitoring, administrative monitoring and citizen
charter monitoring. The three dimensions have been further elaborated in the following
section:
6.1 Technical Monitoring

Technical monitoring may be undertaken through state technical agencies, external monitors,
assessors and experts from the field of road construction. National agencies may be involved in
the process where additional quality parameters are to be assessed. The following parameters
and methods may be applied:
a. Checking temperature of mix
i. Temperature sensors are to be installed at all hot‐mix plants. The mixing

temperature for plastic and bitumen according to the dry process should be
ıoy © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

maintained as per the IRC – SP 98 standard. It should not exceed 170 degree C.
b. Quantity: Bitumen and Type
i. The bitumen grade and temperature of mixing correspond closely. The

Bitumen must be mixed according to the specified temperature based on the
IRC guidelines.
c. Right mixture
i. Waste plastic shredded to the size after being cleaned. The waste plastic mix is
added to replace 6‐8% of bitumen.
d. Right type of plastic
i. Plastic grades and types are according to IRC – SP 98 standard.
e. Size : 2‐4mm
f. Top layer plastic :1.6 – 2.5mm
g. Testing and estimation: Check dry or wet process

i. Process for auditing
ii. Checking each road
h. Verification Test to check for presence of IRC grade plastic can be performed at any
stage after the completion of the project. The verification tests can be done to check
the quality of plastic waste coated aggregates and for the road parameters. They are as
follows:
ıo6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

i. Characterisation of plastic waste coated aggregates can be done by
Stripping test, Marshall Stability test, Water Absorption test, extraction of
bitumen and estimation of plastic through solvent extraction method and
thermal methods.
ii. Physical Characteristics of the constructed road can be tested using
Benkelman beam test, Sand texture depth test, Skid resistance, Merlin test and
field density test.
6.2 Administrative Monitoring
Administrative monitoring remains of highest priority in ensuring the flagship programme is

successful in the state. Administrative monitoring may be structured in to urban roads, rural roads
and punitive action. The following measures may be considered:
a. Urban
Two Tier structure for implementation monitoring may be adopted:
i) Involvement of State Technical Agencies at the planning and execution

monitoring stage. Independent STA participation would enable adherence to
specifications and guidelines right from the planning stage.
ii) State wide quality assessment through a State Quality Monitor checking
implementation against pre‐specified criteria. Quality Registers should be
maintained for each implemented project by the implementing agency.
iii) Overall monitoring by the heads of the Institution required for effective
implementation through regular visits.
iv) Rigorous scanning of utilisation certificates correlating it to evidence of

implementation is required at each stage of urban plastic road construction.
b. Rural
Three Tier structure for implementation monitoring may be adopted for rural roads:
i) District Quality Monitor

The first tier monitoring is conducted at the Project Implementation unit. The
Contractor for road construction establishes Quality Control laboratories and
performs the contractually stipulated tests conducted. The test results are recorded in the
prescribed Quality Control Registers. Engineers of the PIU verify the carrying out of a
portion of tests as prescribed in the Quality Control Hand Book. All observations are
recorded in the Quality Control Registers.
ii) State Quality Monitor

The second tier comprises periodic inspection by the State Quality Monitor organised
by the State Quality Coordinator. The team of SQMs is organised by the Nodal
Agency, independent of the PIUs to monitor the implementation of state wide projects.
iii) National Quality Monitor

Retired Senior Engineers with State and Central organizations act as National Quality
Monitors (NQMs) who carry out Quality testing of road works as per prioritization to
ensure that the programme implementation and State Quality Control System is
working satisfactorily.
c. Punitive fines are recommended against implementing agency and stakeholder for ‐
i) Non‐compliance with required time or performance requirements of projects.
ii) Black‐listing of contractors from all projects nationally after three consecutive non‐
compliance fines within 1 year. Such contractors may not participate in public projects
for 5 years.
iii)Non‐compliance report filed through sampling and research investigation post

construction of plastic roads.
6.3 Citizen Monitoring Charter
Citizen involvement in monitoring of public funding may be considered as a method for

enhancing public service delivery. The following measures are suggested:
a) Flagship programmes should dissemination information through the website on the

status of the projects.
b) The programme may select 8 well‐meaning and aware individuals from civil society to
act as Observers on the flagship programme.
c) Information such as government notification, utilisation certificates and photos of pre

and post construction should be made public through the information
dissemination website of the programme.
d) Programme website should enable citizens to post comments and pictures of the status
of project in real time.
e) In the absence of relevant information and poor performance of roads, citizens may file
an online request for information to sample test a cross section of the road under
section 2(j) of the RTI ACT 2005. The sample may be tested by Central Institute of
Road Transport, Pune or Central Road Research Institute, Delhi to verify content and
quality.
f) The results of such sampling may be made public through the information
dissemination websites.
6.9 AWARDS AND RECOGNITION
Awards and recognition are essential for maintaining the buoyancy of the state flagship programme
on plastic roads. The programme, participating agencies may consider a
ıoQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

structured approach to recognition of high performing individuals and groups involved in the roll
out of plastic roads. The following measures may be considered:
a) A state wide award for ‘Paryavarn Seva’ to non‐governmental organisations,

companies or individuals involved in the collection of waste plastic for recycling or
reuse. The award should be instituted at a district level and be given annually. These
awards may be judged by contribution.
b) Government employees, engineers and administrative department workers to receive

similar awards for high degree of performance on an annual basis. These awards may
be directly given by the Chief Minister.
c) Other societal awards for environmental public service may be considered by non‐
governmental organisation.
d) Implementing agencies of the government and project implementation units may

receive special soft incentives for reaching goals set out by the CM, such as
departmental vehicles, field office improvements and additional training and
development budgets.
ııo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

ANNEXURE
A: KEY LIST OF ANALYTICAL QUESTIONS
An analytical framework was prepared to address the key objectives within the scope of work. The
analytical framework comprised of questions related to Project, Technical, Administrative, Financial,
Organisational and Innovation aspects of the use of plastics in road construction. These have been
highlighted in the sub‐sections below.
A.1 PROJECT SPECIFIC
Output linked:
 What is the name of the project?
 What were the key objectives of the project?
 Who was the implementing agency?
 What are the names of partnering agencies?
 What is the period of implementation?
 What was the area of operation?
 What were the key components of the methodology used?
 Who was the beneficiary of the project?
 What was the status before implementation?
 How would you assess the cost reduction from the implementation? Elaborate!
 Has there been a reduction in the corruption? Elaborate!
 Has there been an improvement in service delivery? Elaborate!
 What were the main difficulties and challenges?
ııı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

 Elaborate the key lessons learnt from the project?
 What is the current status of the infrastructure?
 What is the current status of the human resource deployed at the project site for
maintenance?
 What was the Technology and IT infrastructure used for implementation of the project?
What is the current status now?
 Define the resource requirement assessment of the project?
 What was the cost of implementing the project?
 What were the key performance indicators of the project?
 Who were the project champions? Please provide designation
 Please provide contact details for the key project person?
 Were there any awards or nominations that resulted from the project?
 What is the reason for replicating the practise?
 Any links or sources for the project?
Questions related to Goals:
 What were the phases in the implementation of the innovative practice?
 Define the key component of the implementation strategy and concerns faced?
 What was the process of implementation of the innovative practice?
 What was the reporting pattern of the implementation of innovative practice?
 Provide a comparative picture of the models of implementation?
Additional Questions:
 What was the price at which waste plastic material was purchased?
ıı› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

 How was the quality of the material checked?
 How were items such as PVC banned by the IRC checked in the procurement? Are any
specific environmental certifications necessary or recommended?
 How was the purchase price of plastic determined? What was the process for inclusion in
the schedule of charges?
 What was the coordination mechanism adopted for procurement of plastic?
 Which agencies were involved in procurement and sourcing of plastic? Define the supply
chain.
 How was awareness created in PWD Engineers regarding the application of Plastics in road?
 Is there a significant process burden for implementation teams?
What is the user experience? List questions to ask 5 specific profiles.
 How long have you been driving on this road?
 How do you find driving on this road?
 Is the experience better than it was constructed earlier?
 When was the last pot‐hole noticed on the road?
 Is the experience the same across seasons since the new road construction?
 Have you noticed any maintenance on this road in the last 3 years?
A.2 TECHNICAL
 What is the technology of usage of plastic waste in road construction?
ıı3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

 What are the measurable impacts of the initiative ‐ Pre and Post application?
 How has the technological and engineering decision of use of plastic in

road construction been integrated into policy framework and execution?
 What are the other waste materials (other than plastics) being used in road
construction? Is there a comparative study available?
 Does the embedded plastic in aggregate‐bitumen mix have an impact on the ground
water during the period of rains?
 Is there an impact on the environment where plastic roads have been recycled? Quote any
known examples!
A.3 ADMINISTRATIVE
 What are the procedures and processes involved in use of plastics for road construction?
 What were the key components of the rollout orders for utilizing plastic waste?
 Are there any Statutory and Non‐statutory approvals required for the use of plastics?
 Were there any specific concerns faced by implementing agencies and how were they
resolved?
 What was the convergence with other departments in process management?
 Is there a specific sensitization plan for the Government officials for replication?
 What are the issues of disposal of solid waste (of plastic) faced by urban governing
bodies?
 What is the economic viability of using waste plastic in road construction for smaller
towns‐rural areas in comparison to metros and bigger cities?
ııq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

 Is there a legislation required for better coordination of the stake holders and for
implementation of the innovation? If yes, then why and specific benefits?
A.4 FINANCIAL
 What was the funding provision for the implementation of the innovative practice?
 Is there an additional cess or tax raised for this purpose?
 What is the key implementation costs involved in the process?
 What is the financial model and implementation monitoring method?
 What is the potential for replication of the process?
A.5 ORGANISATIONAL
 Who are the organizations involved, task ownership and coordination required with each
other in process management?
 What are the key roles involved in the organisations?
 How is the leadership and organisation structure oriented?
 What are the inter‐linkages for coordination with organisations?
 What are the key organisational structures required and recommended for collection of
plastic waste?
 What is the profile of human resource involved?
 What is the best possible way of coordinating between urban bodies dealing with
disposal of plastic waste and road construction departments?
ııy © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

A.6 INNOVATION
 What are the comparison and commonality of this innovation?
 Define the chronological timeline in the implementation of these innovative practices?
 Who are the stakeholders involved in the adoption and implementation of the
innovative practice and their roles and coordination with each other for the success of
innovation?
 What are the challenges in implementing‐adapting the innovation within the existing
system?
 Is there a need of media role in creating public awareness in replication of this

innovation?
 Are there any specific recognition‐awards for innovation, environmental impact and
state?
ıı6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

B: LIST OF INTERVIEWS AND FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION
B.1 TAMIL NADU
The visit to Tamil Nadu was in alignment with primary research methods to fulfil the objectives of the
project. The field visit was undertaken between the 17th August and 22nd of August. A series of
meetings individual and in small groups were conducted. Theses have been highlighted in the table below.
TABLE 13 ‐ LIST OF FOCUS GROUP MEETINGS AND INTERVIEWS IN TAMIL NADU
Sr. Department Date Duration Focus Group or With | In attendance

No. Interview |
Agenda
1. Rural Development and 18th 40 Interview Mr. K. Meghraj,

Panchayati Raj, August minutes Additional Director
Chennai
2. Rural Development 18th 30 Interview Mr. A. Kuttalingam,
and Panchayati Raj, August minutes Engineer in Chief
Chennai
3. Rural Development 18th 60 Interview Mr. AV Rajesh, Executive
and Panchayati Raj, August minutes Engineer
Chennai
4. Thiagarajar College of 19th and Over 300 Interview | Prof. Vasudevan, Dean
Engineering, Madurai 20th minutes Focus Group| Chemistry | Research
August Presentation | Associate
Laboratory Visit
| Samples
viewing
5. Thiagarajar College of 19th and About 75 Interview | Lab Mr. A. Ramalinga
Engineering, Madurai minutes Visit Chandrashekhar,
20th
August Research Associate
6. Self Help Group, 20th 45 Interview | Focus Mrs Bodhlaxmi | 5 team
Madurai August minutes Group members | 2 DRDA
Engineers
7. Roads and Bridges, 20th Over 240 Interview | Mr. Atma Nathan,
DRDA, Madurai August minutes Focus Group | Assistant Engineer | Mr.
Site Visit GP Sankar, Assistant
Engineer| Mrs. Uma
Chandran, Road
Inspector
8. Environment and Forest 21st 40 Focus Group Dr. H. Malleshappa, IFS,

August minutes Meeting Director | Mrs. N.
Krishnaveni, Executive
Engineer
9. Tamil Nadu State 21st 90 Focus Group Mrs. Santha Shiela Nair,
Planning Commission August minutes Meeting Vice Chairman | Mr.
Selvaraj, Head of
Planning Unit
10. Chennai Corporation 21st 20 Interview Mr. Leslie Joseph, Chief
August minutes Engineer
11. Chennai Corporation 21st 15 Interview Mr. S. Punnuswamy,
August minutes Divisional Engineer
Rural road locations were visited in Tamil Nadu in the district of Madurai on the border with Dindigal.
A self‐help group was also visited to understand the mode of operation and collection practise. The
locations have been highlighted in the table below.
TABLE 14‐ LOCATIONS VISITED FOR THE TAMIL NADU CASE STUDY
Sr. Implementation
Visited Location Date
No. Agency
Sennagarampatty to DRDA, Rural

1. Ammachiammam Kovil Road, Madurai 20th August Development and
Madurai District Panchayati Raj
DRDA, Rural
Melavalaivu to chellikaraipatti
2. Madurai 20th August Development and
road
Panchayati Raj
Self Help Group
3. Sudesi self‐help group Madurai 20th August
B.2 KARNATAKA
The visit to Karnataka in alignment with objectives of work package 2 was undertaken between the 11th
August and 17th of August. A series of meetings individual and in small groups were conducted. Theses
have been highlighted in the table below. The focus of the case study will be urban roads.
TABLE 15 ‐ LIST OF FOCUS GROUP MEETINGS AND INTERVIEWS IN KARNATAKA
Focus Group or
Sr.
Department Date Duration Interview | With | In attendance
No.
Agenda
1. Supplier of 12th Over 20 Interview, Focus

Waste Plastic August hours Group, Site Mr. Rasool Khan, Director |Mr.
th
– 17 interactio Visit, Project Ahemd Khan, MD | KK Plastic
August n Visit
2. BBMP 13th 5 minutes Interview Sri Lakshmi Narayana,
August Commissioner, BBMP
3. BBMP – Solid 13th Over 90 Interview Mr. Yatin Kumar, JC Health and
ııQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Waste August minutes SWM | Mr. Santosh Kumar,

Management Technical Advisor
Group
4. Municipal 14th 30 Focus Group Dr. Manjula N, Director |
Administration August minutes Environmental Engineer, DMA
5. BBMP – Road 16th 60 Focus Group Mr. Prahalad, Executive
Construction August minutes Engineer, BBMP | 1 Assistant
Executive Engineer | Mr. Rasool
Khan
6. Transport 16th 15 Interview Mr. Rama Gowda, Transport
August minutes Commissioner
7. Urban 16th 30 Interview Mr. T.K. Anil Kumar, Secretary
Development August minutes Urban Development
8. Road 16th 90 Interview Mr. Jai Prasadh, Rtd Chief
Infrastructure August minutes Engineer, Karnataka Road
Development
Corporation Ltd
9. KRRDA 17th 150 Focus Group Mr. Mahesh Hiremat, COO –
August minutes KRRDA | 5 Members of KRRDA
Dr. B.V. Kiran Kumar, Asst,
Professor, SKSJTI | Mr. Rasool
Khan, KK Plastic
In accordance with the requirements of the project, specific site visits were undertaken in urban and sub‐
urban areas of Bengaluru. These included projects conducted by the state government, central government
and waste plastic suppliers. The list has been provided in table below.
ı›o © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

TABLE 16‐ LIST OF LOCATIONS VISITED IN KARNATAKA
Sr. Visited Location Date Implementation Agency

No.
1. Kemp Gowda Road ( 1.5 Bengaluru 13th August Bruhat Bangalore

km stretch) Mahanagara Palike
th
2. Basveswara Road ( 1 km Bengaluru 13 August Bruhat Bangalore
stretch) Mahanagara Palike
3. Devanhalli Road ( 20 km Bengaluru 14th August Ministry of Road,
test evaluation track) Transport and Highways
th
4. Chickkanahalli Road (ODR), Bengaluru 14 August Karnataka State Highways
Shivanapura Cross, Hoskote Improvement Project
Taluk (600 m
reclaimed asphalt road)
5. Plastic Recycling and Bengaluru 13th August KK Plastics Waste
cleaning plant Management
B.3 Jharkhand
The interviews for Jharkhand were conducted for the Jharkhand case study over the telephone. There
is limited amount of work executed in Jharkhand, therefore interviews were limited. The details have
been provided in the table below.
TABLE 17 ‐ JAMSHEDPUR INTERVIEW DETAILS
Department
or Date Type of Interaction With | In attendance
Organisation
Public Works Interview over a Satish Chaudhury

1 09‐10‐2014
Department phone call Executive Engineer, PWD
ı›ı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

09/10/2014 Arun Rana

Public Works Interview over a
2 Executive Engineer, PWD,
Department phone call
10/10/2014 Jamshedpur
24/09/2014
30/09/2014
08/10/2014
Jamshedpur
Utility and Interview over a Gaurav Anand
3 10/10/2014
Services phone call Senior Manager, JUSCO
Company
16/10/2014
16/10/2014
B.4 CENTRAL ORGANISATION
The table below list the central organisations visited.
TABLE 18‐ VISIT TO CENTRAL ORGANISATIONS
Sr. Department Date Duration Focus Group or With | In attendance

No. Interview |
Agenda
1. Central Road Research 7th August 60 Interview Dr. PK Jain, Senior

Institute minutes Scientist, Flexible Pavement
Division
2. Ministry of Road, 5th 30 Interview Mr. Sanjay Nirmal,
Transportation and September minutes Superintending Engineer
Highway (Coordination)
ı›› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

3. Indian Road Congress 4th August 45 Interview Mr. RVK Patil, Assistant
minutes Director, Technical
4. Ministry of Road, 18th 15 Interview Mr. R.K. Pandey, Chief
Transportation and September minutes Engineer
Highway
5. Ministry of Road, 18th 10 Interview Director General

Transportation and September minutes
Highway
6. Ministry of Road, 14th 40 Interview Dr. T. Kumar , Additional

Transportation and October minutes Secretary
Highway
ı›3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

C: TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT
C.1 TEST FOR ASSESSING PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PLASTIC ROADS
The physical characteristics of the road constructed using plastic modified bitumen mixes can be
tested as briefly described below (9):
1. Benkelman Beam test (BBT) ‐ BBT is used to determine the visco elastic property of the
bituminous layer. The tolerance value for a good bitumen road lies between 0.5‐1.0 mm.
Using plastic in the bituminous aggregate mix helps maintaining the visco elastic property of
bituminous mix owing to strong bonding and negligible changes in the structure of bitumen.
2. Sand Texture Depth test ‐ The surface texture depth test is essential in establishing various
parameters of the road including unevenness, skid resistance, and failures like rutting,
raveling and cracking. In case of plain bituminous road, a permitted value of texture depth lies
in the range 0.6 – 0.8 mm.
3. Skid resistance ‐ The surface texture of the road layer determines the skidding nature of a
road, mainly in wet condition mainly. The skid resistance of the road is determined as a skid
number and compared with reference value. Lower the skid number higher is the skid
resistance. An approved skid number is < 65 for a well performing road.
4. MERLIN test‐ The unevenness of the road is tested using the MERLIN instrument. The
irregularity in the road surface is mainly caused by poor binding of the mix, resulting in
raveling and loosening of the construction materials. A permitted international roughness index
value is < 4000 mm/Km for a standard bituminous road.
5. Field Density – The field density measurement is performed using Sand Pouring Cylinder and
clarifies the reason behind poor binding, improper compaction, stripping, loosening,
movement at edges, and anomalies in the road surface. The maximum value of field density of the
road as measured before and after the performance has been found to be 2.86 Kg/m3.
ı›q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

C.2 TECHNOLOGICAL USE
Table 19 ‐ Physical properties of 60/70 and 80/100 Bitumen grades (20)
Designation Test Results Permissible Limits as per IS 73: 1992 Test Method
60/70 80/100 60/70 80/100
Penetration at 250C, 65 89 60‐70 80‐100 IS 1203:
100 g, 5 s, d mm 1978
Softening Point, 0C 48 42 40‐55 35‐50 IS 1205:

1978
Ductility at 270C, cm 100+ 100+ 75 (min.) 75 (min.) IS 1208:

1978
Specific Gravity at 1.010 0.998 0.99 (min.) 0.99 (min.) IS 1202:

270C, g/cc 1978
Flash Point, 0C 285 310 175 (min.) 175 (min.) IS 1209:

1978
Table 20‐ Required properties of aggregates (21)
S.No. Property BIS Test methods Results MoRT&H

specification
1 Aggregate impact value % IS:2386 Part IV 18.0 27 Max
2 Combined flakiness & IS:2386 Part I 24.0 30
ı›y © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

elongation index %
3 Specific gravity‐
1. C.A IS:2386 Part II 2.69 Nil
2. F.A IS:1202‐1978 2.67 Nil
4 Water absorption % IS:2386 Part III 0.50 2 Max
C.3 Biodegradable Polymers
It is well known that plastics are made up of artificial synthetic polymers and hence are non ‐
biodegradable. Recent advancements, therefore, have given rise to new materials with characteristic
properties and the usability of plastics which are biodegradable (38). Biodegradable plastics are made
with the aim of single use, disposable packaging, consumer goods, disposable nonwovens, coatings for
paper and paperboard and other non‐packaging markets. They are expected to undergo biodegradation in
suitable waste management infrastructures and time frames to environmentally compatible products such as
CO2, H2O, and compost in a composting infrastructure and do not leave any persistent or toxic residue (39).
Degradable plastics undergo decomposition fairly quickly under specific environmental conditions such
as upon exposure to light, decomposition by bacteria or other living organisms. A major advantage of
biodegradable plastics over non‐biodegradable ones is that they undergo decomposition into natural
constituents and require no separate collection, sorting, recycling or other final waste solution
(disposal at landfills or burning) (38).
Biodegradable plastics can be categorised into plant‐ and oil‐based. The plant‐based biodegradable plastics,
also called bioplastics, are obtained from raw materials including corn and potato starch. This variety has
been proclaimed to be sustainable and biodegradable. Oil‐based variety is obtained from non‐renewable
sources, for instance, crude oil, and are processed using techniques which are energy‐intensive and
environmentally hazardous (40).
ı›6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

A limited supply of oxygen and water causes anaerobic breakdown of biodegradable plastics,
releasing methane, when they are buried in landfill. An innovative solution to this came up as ‘Oxo‐
biodegradable’ plastics which offer an advantage as they decompose without releasing methane. However,
they will not degrade if buried as they require oxygen to enable degradation process. The degradation
process includes two steps. In the first step oxidisation process is initiated by the action of heat or light
causing reduction in the molecular weight of the plastic. This is then followed by microbial breakdown
of the remaining plastic. An example of oxo‐biodegradable plastic is modified polythene, whereby salts of
transition elements including cobalt or iron are added. These salts are known as pro‐oxidants (40).
‘Hydro‐biodegradable’ plastics (or “compostables”), is the second class of biodegradable plastics. These
are based on intermediates of biological origin obtained from crops, and cannot be recycled with common
oil‐based plastics (41)]. Therefore, they need to be segregated from the waste stream and processed
separately. This raises the cost considerably. Additionally, it is hard to physically differentiate
between hydro‐biodegradable and normal plastic (41).
The ‘oxo‐biodegradable’ and ‘hydro‐biodegradable’ plastics offer a way to transform non‐

biodegradable plastics into a form which is degraded into natural products in a stipulated time‐ frame.
Undoubtedly such options offer potential solution to managing plastic waste.
C.4 Recycling Of Standard Roads
Several interacting elements need to be looked at for a successful recycling of road construction and maintenance
materials. These elements are briefly highlighted below:
1. The recovered materials must possess appropriate engineering properties for the planned reuse or
recycling of the material.
2. Adequate quantities of material/s must be available to economically justify the recycling of the
material.
3. No possible harmful environmental effects of the recovered materials must be realised while
reusing or recycling the material.
The concept of ‘highest‐best use’ must be realised and adopted in choosing the technically viable, and eco‐
friendly, reuse and recycling alternatives for materials used for construction and maintenance
purposes (42).
The material from deteriorated pavement, also called reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP), is used in the
recycling process for the fresh construction. The pavement recycling method had some advantages
such as (i) less user delay (ii) energy conservation (iii) preservation of environment (iv) cost‐effective
construction process (v) conservation of construction materials including aggregate and binder (vi)
preservation of original pavement dimensions etc. (vii) higher resistance to shearing and scuffing of
recycled mix enhance rutting resistance (43). (viii) less chances of reflective cracking have been found
with recycled mix (44).
FIGURE 13‐ CLASSIFICATION OF RECYCLING METHODS BASED ON PROCESSES (45)

C.5 A Best Possible Solid Waste Disposal Method?
This technique enables the use of waste polymer such as carry bags, foam, laminated sheets, cups for road
laying. By employing polymers, an equivalent quantity of bitumen is reduced, thereby lowering the
costs involved in laying the road. For paving 1 Km x 3.75 m road, the amount of plastic carry bags
used is 1.125 tons. Also, practically no maintenance of the road is required for more than 7 years,
reducing the cost further. The technique allows saving a huge amount of carbon dioxide emission into
the environment caused by the incineration of waste plastics. These advantages make the process
economical and eco‐friendly (9). According to experts, by using plastics in roads construction,
further damage to the environment is prevented (46).
C.6 Glossary of Technical Terms
Aggregate ‐ A building and road construction granular material composed of minerals, such as sand,
gravel, crushed stone, slags, and crushed concrete.
Asphalt ‐ A cementitious material, dark brown to black in colour, predominantly containing bitumen.
Binder ‐ Material facilitating adherence to aggregate and ensuring cohesion of the mixture.
Biodegradable plastics ‐ Plastics which can fully decompose to simple molecules such as carbon dioxide,
methane, water, biomass and inorganic compounds under aerobic or anaerobic conditions and by the
action of living organisms.
Composting ‐ Processing of organic waste where aerobic microorganisms decompose the material.
ı›Q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Cracking ‐ Visible cracks on the surface of the pavement caused by propagation through to the pavement
surface from the underlying pavement layer or due to shrinkage of old bituminous surfaces.
Dense graded mix ‐ A bituminous mix prepared using graded chip, with or without added mineral filler
and is low in voids.
Flexible pavement – Consists of a number of layers of sub grade and the top layer is of best quality to
withstand maximum compressive stress, wear and tear. Bituminous materials are used to construct
flexible pavements.
Geotextile ‐ A synthetic fabric made up of flexible polymeric materials, which can be woven or unwoven,
and is used in geotechnical or general engineering works.
Grade: Some definitions include.
1. To design the longitudinal profile of a road.
2. To shape or smooth an earth, gravel, or other surface by means of a GRADER or similar

implement.
3. Bitumen penetration grades of 80/100, etc.
4. To arrange aggregates or other material in accordance with particle sizes.
5. A designation given to the size of sealing chips, i.e. Grades 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (from TNZ
M/6 specification for Sealing Chip).
Marshall Stability – A test performed to determine the maximum load sustained by the bituminous
material at a loading rate of 50.8 mm/minute.
ı3o © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Open graded mix ‐ A mixture of bituminous binder, mineral aggregate and filler processed with or
without additives or modifiers, and is mixed, stored, delivered, laid and compacted while hot,
according to the Technical Standard. The mixture contains high percentage of air voids.
Pavement ‐ A portion of the road supported by the subgrade but placed above the design subgrade level
for the support of, and to form a running surface for vehicular traffic.
Plastic – A synthetic material comprised mainly of polymers.
Polymer ‐ A substance of high molar mass composed of repeating structural units.
Portland cement concrete (PCC) ‐ A composite material containing mainly a mixture of cement,
water (binding paste) and particles of fine and coarse aggregates.
Pothole ‐ A hole in the pavement as a result of loss of pavement material caused due to the action of
heavy traffic.
Pulvarisation ‐ Grinding, milling, crunching, or crushing the material to a powder or dust.
Ravelling ‐ The loosening of aggregate from the surface of a pavement.
Recycling ‐ A material after being reclaimed from the waste stream is processed to varying degrees and is
converted to a usable form.
ı3ı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Reuse ‐ A material after being reclaimed from the waste stream and converted to usable form with little or
no processing.
Rigid pavements ‐ Rigid pavements are constructed by placing a Portland cement concrete (PCC)
layer on top of sub‐grade or a single layer of granular or stabilized material.
Roughness – A significant irregularities in the longitudinal profile of a road in reference to the

intended profile.
Rubber crumb – A type of vulcanised rubber obtained from recycled pneumatic tyres and reduced
mechanically to small particles.
Rutting ‐ A vertical deformation of a pavement surface, measured at right angles to the traffic flow and
across the wheel path.
Semi Dense bituminous concrete mix ‐ A superior type of asphaltic pavement specification
comprising of a thoroughly controlled hot mixed material with ingredients such as graded mineral
aggregate, filler and bitumen.
Skid resistance ‐ A frictional resistance offered by the pavement surface to the vehicle tyres while
braking or other manoeuvres, which opposes skidding.
Stabilisation/ stabilise ‐ Modification of a natural material to enhance, rectify a known deficiency, or

maintain its load‐carrying capacity.
ı3› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Tar ‐ A viscous product produced during the process of destructive distillation of carbonaceous material
such as coal.
Viscoelasticity ‐ The combined viscous and elastic response of a material to an applied stress.
Void ‐ An empty space which may be filled with air (Air Voids), water or binder (bitumen).
Void content ‐ The ratio, expressed as %, of volume of voids to total volume of the material.
Wetting ‐ The process defining the spreading of a liquid over a solid.
C.7 PERFORMANCE COMPARATIVE STUDY
TABLE 21‐ PERFORMANCE COMPARATIVE STUDY

C.8 References
1. Plastic waste management. p. 139–44.
2. A. Gawande, G. S. Zamre, V. C. Renge, G. R. Bharsakale ST. Utilization of waste plastic in

asphalting of roads. Sci Revs Chem Commun. 2012;2(2):147–57.
3. A. U. Ravi Shankar, D. Salian KK. Utilization of waste plastic in semi dense bituminous
concrete by dry mixing. Highw Res J. 2009;23–35.
4. R. Choudhary, A. Mondal HSK. Use of Cold Mixes for Rural Road Construction. Int J Comput
Appl. 2012;20–4.
5. Doyle T. Relating laboratory conditioning temperature to in‐situ strength gain for cold mix
pavement in Ireland.
6. M. V. Kumar, R. Muralidhara DJN. Comparative study of wet and dry blending of plastic
modified bituminous mix used in road pavements. Indian Highw. 2013;53–9.
7. Eco Roads of Plastics. WALKABILITYASIA [Internet]. Available from:

http://walkabilityasia.org/2012/07/27/eco‐roads‐of‐plastic/
8. Hujuri U., Ghoshal A. K. GS. Temperature‐dependent pyrolytic product evolution profile for
polyethylene terephthalate. J Appl Polym Sci. 2013;130(6):3993–4000.
9. R. Vasudevan, A. Ramalinga Chandra Sekar, B. Sundarakannan RV. A technique to dispose waste

plastics in an ecofriendly way – Application in construction of flexible pavements. Constr Build Mater.
2012;28:311–20.
10. N. G. The thermal degradation of polyvinyl acetate. 1. Products and reaction mechanism at low
temperatures. Faraday Soc Trans. 1952;48:379–87.
11. Stringer R. JP. Chlorine and the Environment: An Overview of the Chlorine Industry. Springer
Science & Business Media.
12. Specifications for the use of waste plastic in hot bituminous mixes in wearing courses, IRC SP 98‐
2013. 2013 p. 1–8.
ı3q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

13. S.K.A. Sultana KSBP. Utilization of Waste Plastic as a Strength Modifier in Surface Course of
Flexible and Rigid Pavements. Int J Eng Res Appl. 2012;2(4):1185–91.
14. B.V.K.Kumar PP. Use of Waste Plastics in Cement Concrete Pavement [Internet]. p. 1–12.
Available from: http://www.dscengineering.org/
15. J.M.Mauskar. Performance Evaluation of Polymer Coated Bitumen Built Roads [Internet].
Available from: www.cpcb.nic.in
16. Vasudevan R. Utilization of waste plastics in rural roads.
17. R. Vasudevanm S. Saravanavel, S. Rajasekaran DT. Utilization of waste plastics in

construction of flexible pavements. Indian Highw. 5–20.
18. A. U. Ravi Shankar, K. Koushik GS. Performance studies on bituminous concrete mixes using
waste plastics. Highw Res J. 2013;1–11.
19. Thiagarajar College of Engineering, Madurai, Tamilnadu I. A new mix process of waste
plastics‐aggregate‐bitumen for flexible pavement. India: Intellectual Property India, Government of
India; 198254, 2006.
20. P. Kumar RG. Laboratory studies on waste plastic fibre modified bitumen. Highw Res J.
2010;45–60.
21. M. S. Ranadive SHG. Enhancing stability of flexible pavements using plastic waste and fly ash.
Indian Highw. 2011;23–8.
22. Indicative Operaional Guidelines on Construction of Polymer‐Bitumen Roads [Internet].

Available from: www.cpcb.nic.in
23. P. K. Jain, Sangita, M. P. Singh, G. Sharma GK. Development of Guidelines for Construction of
Bituminous Surfacing using Plastic Waste. p. 1–11.
24. A.Veeraragavan. Investigations on Field Performance of Bituminous Mixes with Modified

Binders, Final Report of the R‐85 Research Project. 2013 p. 1–108.
25. Prahallada M. C. PKB. Effect of Flyash on the Strength Characteristics of Waste Plastic Fibre
Reinforced Concrete ‐ an Experimental Investigation. Int J Eng Sci Res Technol. 2014;3(3):1713–23.
ı3y © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

26. Kumar V. Overview of Fly Ash for Use in Rural Development.
27. Route to peace and quiet… roads made of old tyres: Recycled rubber could soon be used to
resurface nation’s busiest roads. The Daily Mail [Internet]. Available from:
http://www.tyrerecovery.org.uk/route ‐to‐peace‐and‐quiet‐roads‐made‐of‐old‐tyres‐recycled‐ rubber‐
could‐soon‐be‐used‐to‐resurface‐nations‐busiest‐roads/#sthash.4lZkf5E2.dpuf
28. Containing recycled tire rubber; paving and construction materials with high compressive
strength. US 5391226 A.
29. Bertollo SM, Bernucci LB FJ. Mechanical properties of asphalt mixtures using recycled tyre
rubber 3produced in Brazil—a laboratory evaluation. Proceedings of the TRB Annual Meeting. 2004.
30. M. Batayneh, I. Marie IA. Use of selected waste materials in concrete mixes. Waste Manag.
2007;27:1870–6.
31. Sanyal T. Use of Jute Geotextiles in Rural Road Construction. p. 42–7.
32. New Materials /Techniques /Equipment /Prodts Accredited by Indian Roads Congress (valid as
on 30 June 2014) [Internet]. Available from: http://pmgsy.nic.in/
33. T. Sen UM. Usage of Industrial Waste Products in Village Road Construction. Int J Environ Sci
Dev. 2010;1(2).
34. H.Roal, A. Parmar, D. Patel JJ. Effect of the use of crumb rubber in conventional bitumen on the
marshall stability value. Int J Res Eng Technol. 2014;3(1):209–13.
35. Md. R. Hainin, N. IzziMd. Yusoff, Md. F. Mohammad Sabri, Md. A. A. Aziz, Md. A. S. Hameed
WFR. Steel Slag as an Aggregate Replacement in Malaysian HotMix Asphalt. ISRN Civ Eng. 2012;1–6.
36. M. Ghasemi SMM. Laboratory Studies of the Effect of Recycled Glass Powder Additive on the
Properties of Polymer Modified Asphalt Binders. IJE Trans A Basics. 2013;26(10):1183–90.
37. M.S.Ranadive SHG. Enhancing stability of flexible pavements using plastic waste and fly ash.
Indian Highw. 2011;23–8.
38. Krzan A. Biodegradable polymers and plastics. 2012 p. 1–8.

39. Narayan R. Biodegradable Plastics. Opportunities For innovation in Biotechnology. 1993. p. 1–
27.
40. Felice M. Material of the month: Biodegradable plastics. Materials World Magazine, IOM3
[Internet]. 2013; Available from: http://www.iom3.org/feature/biodegradable‐plastics‐
decomposable‐cutlery
41. Plastics O‐B, Association. Reclycling of Plastics [Internet]. 2012 p. 1–4. Available from:
www.biodeg.org
42. Geotechnical JE, Engineering Limited CE. Reuse and Recycling of Road Construction and
Maintenance Materials. 2005 p. 1–50.
43. D.Betenson W. Recycled asphalt concrete in Utah. Proc Assoc Asph Paving Technol.
1979;48:272–95.
44. Mallick BR. Lecture Notes. A 3‐day workshop on recycling and other pavement rehabilitation
methods, IIT Kanpur. 2005. p. 58–350.
45. K. Arvind A Das. Bituminous pavement recycling. p. 1–3.
46. Sinha A. BSL uses plastic waste for road construction. 2013.
D: TAMIL NADU CASE STUDY ‐ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
D.1 PROJECT INFORMATION – RURAL ROAD 1
TABLE 22 ‐ PROJECT 1 INFORMATION ON TAMIL NADU RURAL ROADS
Project : Sennagarampatti to Ammatchiammankoil Road Km 0/0‐1/650
Summary of the Project/ To make a connectivity by upgrading the road up to BT

Intervention & Objective(s)
Name of the Implementing/ Block Development Officer, Block Panchayat, Kottampatti
Partnering Agencies Block
Name of Contractor : M. Abdul Muthalib
Name of Self Help Group : Sudesi and Pavalamalli Self Help
Groups
Period of Implementation 6 Months (06.05.2014 to 11.08.2014)
Place/Area of Operation Sennagarampatti
Methodology Plastic Roads Process Technology
Beneficiaries/Target Group Sennagarampatti, Ammatchiapuram Village People and Sudesi
and Pavalamalli Self Help Groups
Status Before Implementation Gravel Surface
Cost Reduction ‐
Status After Corruption ‐
Implementation Reduction
Service Up to Block Topping Level
Improvement
Difficulties/Challenges 1 Skew Type Culvert is constructed

& Lessons Learnt
Current Status Block Topping Surface
Physical Self Help Group for the Preparation of Plastic admixtures from
Infrastructure waste plastic Bags and for Construction of Road
Resource Human Resource Self Help Group for the preparation of plastic admixtures from
Requirements waste plastic bags and for construction of road
Technology/IT Laying of bitumen layer by using 8 % of plastic by weight of
bitumen
Approximate Cost ₹ 49.30 Lakhs
of
Implementation
Performance Indicators Sustained quality of road topography and surface after rainfall
Project Champions (Along Executive Engineer : A.Vennila
with Designations) Asst. Executive Engineer: S.Arivalagan
Asst. Engineer : D.Veeramani
Contact Person(s) Asst Engineer : D.Veeramani ‐ 7402607976

Other Information ‐
(Awards/Nominations etc.)
Reasons for Replication First road connectivity to rural villages
Sources/Reference Links www.pmgsy.nic.in
Last Updated On 11.08.2014
Database Prepared by Asst Engineer : D.Veeramani and Asst Engineer : G.P.Sankar
The figures below provide images of the project highlighted in the table above. The Sudeshi SHG has
provided processed waste plastic to the above project has also been displayed.
FIGURE 14‐ TAMIL NADU RURAL ROAD PROJECT ‐1
ı3Q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 15 ‐ TAMIL NADU RURAL ROAD PROJECT 1 ‐ CULVERT ON PLASTIC ROAD
FIGURE 16 ‐ SUDESHI SHG AND PROCESSED PLASTIC
ıqo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

D.2 PROJECT INFORMATION – RURAL ROAD 2
TABLE 23 ‐ PROJECT 2 INFORMATION ON RURAL TAMIL NADU PLASTIC ROADS
Project : Melavalaivu to Chellikaraipatti Road Km 0/0 – 0/800 (776m)
Summary of the Project/ To connect by upgrading the road up to BT

Intervention & Objective(s)
Name of the Implementing/ Block Development Officer, Block Panchayat, Kottampatti
Partnering Agencies Block
Name of Contractor : M. Abdul Muthalib
Name of Self Help Group : Sudesi and Pavalamalli Self Help
Groups
Period of Implementation 6 Months (20.04.2014 to 06.08.2014)
Place/Area of Operation Chellikaraipatti
Methodology Plastic Roads Process Technology
Beneficiaries/Target Group Melavalaivu , Chellikaraipatti, Kailampatti Village People and
Sudesi and Pavalamalli Self Help Groups
Status Before Implementation Gravel Surface
Cost Reduction ‐
Status After Corruption ‐
Implementation Reduction
Service Up to block topping level
Improvement
Difficulties/Challenges 1 m Span RCC Slab Culvert is constructed in Water Crossing

& Lessons Learnt Way
Current Status Block Topping Surface
Physical Self Help Group for the Preparation of Plastic admixtures from
Resource Infrastructure waste plastic Bags and for Construction of Road

Requirements Human Resource Self Help Group for the Preparation of Plastic admixtures from
waste plastic Bags and for Construction of Road
Technology Laying of Bitumen Layer by using 8 % of Plastic by weight of
ıqı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Bitumen
Approximate Cost 15.80 Lakhs

of
Implementation
Performance Indicators Sustained quality of road topography and surface after rainfall
Project Champions (Along Executive Engineer : A.Vennila
with Designations) Asst. Executive Engineer: S.Arivalagan
Asst. Engineer : D.Veeramani
Contact Person(s) Asst Engineer : D.Veeramani ‐ 7402607976

Reasons for Replication Provides quality road connectivity for rural villages
Sources/Reference Links www.pmgsy.nic.in
Database Prepared by Asst Engineer : D.Veeramani and Asst Engineer : G.P.Sankar
The figures below provide visual evidence of the project conducted above by Madurai DRDA.
FIGURE 17 ‐ TAMIL NADU RURAL ROAD PROJECT 2
ıq› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 18 ‐ TAMIL NADU RURAL ROAD PROJECT 2 ‐ FIRST LOCAL ROAD
ıq3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

D.3 Government Gazette Notification Clause: Use of Plastics in Road Construction
FIGURE 19 – MOEF Gazette Notification ‐ Use of Plastics in Road: Section 6(h)
ıqq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

D.4 Government Sanction Notification
FIGURE 20 ‐ 13TH FINANCE COMMISSION SANCTION
ıqy © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 21 ‐ RIS SANCTION 2013‐14
ıq6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 22‐ RIS SANCTION 2014‐15
D.5 ENVIRONMENTAL FUND NOTIFICATION (SEPT 2014)
FIGURE 23‐ ENVIRONMENT FUND NOTIFICATION

FIGURE 24‐ ENVIRONMENT FUND NOTIFICATION 2014 ‐ PAGE 2
ıqQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 25 ‐ ENVIRONMENT FUND NOTIFICATION 2014 ‐ PAGE 3
ıyo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 26‐ ENVIRONMENT FUND NOTIFICATION 2014 ‐ PAGE 4
ıyı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 27 ‐ ENVIRONMENT FUND NOTIFICATION 2014 ‐ PAGE 5
ıy› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

D.6 ENVIRONMENTAL FUND NOTIFICATION (FEB 2014)
From To
Thiru. Brajendra Navnit, I.A.S., The District Collector,
Director of Rural Development Chairman, DRDA,
and Panchayat Raj, Concerned Districts.
Panagal Building,
Saidapet, Chennai ‐ 15.
Lr. No.32324/2011/TU2 dated:14.02.14
Sir,
Sub: Plastic Roads‐ EPREDF‐Savings Fund 2012‐13‐ Relaying of Roads using plastic
waste ‐ sanction of Roads – Regd.
Ref: 1. DRD & PR Lr.No.32324/TU2/2013 dated : 22.1.14

2. Proposals received from the Districts.
In the ref 1st cited, proposals were called for, for the savings amount
remaining with the Districts under EPRED Fund 12‐13.
In this regard, sanction is hereby accorded for the list of roads as per the annexure.
The District Collectors are requested to follow the standard procedures as per TTIT Act
1998/Rules 2000 in calling tender. Tenders should be finalised immediately on receipt of this
communication. The progress of the roads should be intimated to this office periodically.
Annexure: 1(list of works)
Sd/‐BrajendraNavnit,
Director
ıy3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

From To
Thiru.Brajendra Navnit, I.A.S., The District Collector,

Director of Rural Development Chairman, DRDA,
and Panchayat Raj, Concerned Districts.
Panagal Building, Saidapet,
Chennai ‐ 15.
Lr.No.32324/Tu2/2013 dated: 22.01.14
Sub: Plastic Roads ‐ Laying of Roads using plastic waste under EPREDF 12‐13 –
Refund of the Saving amount for the Roads taken up – reg.
Ref: 1. G.O.(Ms).No.211, Environment and Forests (EC.2) Department,

dated:23.08.2012.
2. Director of Environment Lr.No.1044/P2/2012, dated 28.8.2012
3. U.C Received from all the Districts.
In the ref 1st cited, Rs.20,00,00,000/‐ has been allocated for relaying of rural roads using
plastic waste mixed bitumen to eliminate waste plastics for the year 2012‐13.
Utilisation Certificate for the completed works have been received from the Districts. It is found
that, there is a balance amount of Rs.9783687/‐ available within the Districts.
In this regard, the following districts (As per Annexure) with the savings more than
Rs.2.00 Lakhs, shall submit Proposals for additional roads to the savings amount within 31.1.14
Director
ıyq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Name of the
Sl. No A.S.Amount Amount spend Balance
District
1 Kancheepuram 7090000 6040781 10,49,219
2 Tiruvallur 11050000 10238637 8,11,363
3 Cuddalore 5546000 5262603 2,83,397
4 Vellore 5563000 5156114 4,06,886
5 Salem 6720000 6029360 6,90,640
6 Erode 6210000 5924599 2,85,401
7 Thanjavur 5255000 5003219 2,51,781
8 Trichy 7320000 6896235 4,23,765
9 Karur 8237000 7548912 6,88,088
10 Madurai 4545000 4153419 3,91,581
11 Ramnad 5795000 5209539 5,85,461
12 Tirunelveli 9130000 6917133 22,12,867
13 Thoothukudi 6423000 6006114 4,16,886
14 Kanniyakumari 3970000 3303089 6,66,911
TOTAL 92854000 83689754 91,64,246
ıyy © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

D.7 GOVERNMENT ORDER FOR RELAYING OF ROADS USING PLASTIC WASTE – RELEASE OF
FUNDS
FIGURE 28‐ GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION FOR RELEASE OF ENVIRONMENT FUNDS (2013)
ıy6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

D.8 GOVERNMENT FOR RELAYING OF ROADS USING WASTE PLASTIC – RELEASE OF FUNDS
FIGURE 29‐ GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION FOR RELEASE OF ENVIRONMENT FUNDS 2012

D.9 GOVERNMENT ORDER FOR RELEASE OF FUNDS FOR MONITORING AND INSPECTION OF
PLASTIC ROADS
FIGURE 30 ‐ ENVIRONMENT FUND NOTIFICATION FOR RELEASE OF FUNDS 2012

D.10 GOVERNMENT ORDER FOR DRIVE TO CLEAR PLASTICS ACCUMULATED
FIGURE 31‐ GOVERNMENT ORDER FOR CLEANING OF PLASTIC 2011
ıyQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

D.11 CHENNAI CORPORATION
FIGURE 32 ‐ CHENNAI CORPORATION INTENT TO BUILD PLASTIC ROADS

D.11 SELF HELP GROUP AWARDS
FIGURE 33 ‐ SELF HELP GROUP AWARD NOTIFICATION

FIGURE 34 ‐ SHG AWARDS NOTIFICATION 2

FIGURE 35 ‐ CLEAN VILLAGE AWARD NOTIFICATION

D.12– TECHNICAL INFORMATION OF PROJECT EVALUATION
The conditions of roads are under observation for the past two years and they are performing well.
The list of roads using waste plastic is shown in the table below.
TABLE 24 ‐ LIST OF ROADS LAID USING WASTE PLASTICS(SOURCE: TCE)
Name of the Road Blend Area Date

Composition
TCE Near Old Canteen 5% PE 60’x 5’ 23nd March ‐02
1% PE
Kovilpatti Lenin Nagar 10% PE 600’x12’ 4th October‐02
Madurai Near Mannar College 15% PE 180’x10’ 5th October‐02
Salem Brindhavan Street 10% PE 1000’x12’ 15th October‐
02
Komara‐ Near Bus stand 10% Mixture 300’x12’ 15th October‐
palayam * 02
Chennai ** Jambulingam Street 12% 600’x18’ 22nd
Mixture * November‐02
Trichy Near Thiruvalluvar Bus 10% Mixture 600’x18’ 10th January‐
Stand * 03
Salem # Astampatti 10% Mixture 5000’x 18’ 17th April‐03
*
Erode Near Veerabadhra 10% Mixture 1500’x 24’ 7th May‐03
Street *
Theni 10% Mixture 300’x18’ 10th May‐03
*
Nagercoil 10% Mixture 1500’x18’ 16th May‐03
*
Madurai‐ Kombadi 10% Mixture 1.4 km
*
Madurai TCE Men’s Hostel 10% Mixture 300mX3.5m 19th Jan’04
Ooty Cantonment 10% Mixture 600m X 3.5 3rd June ‘ 05

m
Kochi Rajagiri College 10% Mixture 600m X 3.5 13th March’05
m
TCE Car Parking 10% Mixture 5000Sq.m 8th July 05
TCE‐ Madurai Canteen Road 10% Mixture 400m 29th Jan’07
Madurai Vilachery Main Road 10% Mixture 1.2Km March 2005
Madurai Vandiyur Main Road 10 % Mixture 900m October 2005
Ettaiyapuram Near Bharathiyar 10% Mixture 500m 7th August
House 2006
Dindugal PSNA College of 10% Mixture 600m 7th July 2007
Engineering
Chennai Tirusul road near 10% Mixture 500m 2004
Airport
Mumbai Prabhavadi Road 10% Mixture 500m 2004
Tanjore Bharath Petroleum 10% Mixture 2.5Km 2004
Hindpur A.P Supreme Textile Mills 10% Mixture 500m 2005
Pondicherry Near Assembly office 10% Mixture 500m 2004
Trivandrum 10% Mixture 500m 2005
Performance of the Plastic Tar road:

The roads were monitored by methods of structural evaluation, functional evaluation and conditional
evaluation studies. All roads constructed between the periods of 2002 to 2006 are performing well.
Bitumen roads under similar conditions have demonstrated significant degradation. The roads are located
across Tamil Nadu in different ambient conditions such as temperature, environmental moisture and
rainfall.

TABLE 25 ‐ TECHNICAL INFORMATION ON PLASTIC ROADS (SOURCE: TCE)
Year laid Unevenness Texture Rebound

Skid Field
Road (mm number Depth Density Deflection
(mm)
/km) (mm)
Jambulingam Street 2002 2700 41 0.63 2.55 0.85
Veerabadhra Street 2003 3785 45 0.70 2.62 0.60
Vandiyur road, 2004 3005 41 0.66 2.75 0.84
Vilachery Road, mai 2005 3891 45 0.50 2.89 0.86
Canteen Road, TCE 2006 3100 45 0.65 2.86 0.86
Plain Bitumen Road 2002 5200 76 0.83 2.33 1.55
Tolerance Value ‐‐‐‐‐‐ 4000 <65 .6‐.8 2.86 0.5‐1
According to the studies conducted by TCE:

 Skid resistance studies of the five stretches it has been proved that the entire road has good skid
resistance values.
 Surface texture studies of the five stretches has proved that the roads inside the campus and the
other two outside roads have good texture values.
 Deflection studies of the five stretches have proved that all the stretches are reasonably
strong.
 Bump integrator studies of the five stretches has proved that the unevenness index value of these
three road sections are nearly to 3000 mm/km, which indicates a good surface evenness.

Performance Details of the roads with visual evidence has been included in the table below.
TABLE 26 ‐ Plastic Road Surface Conditions (SOURCE: TCE)
Site Name Surface Condition Survey Photo
Jumbulingam road, Chennai 1. No Pot hole

(2002) 2. No Cracking
Photo Date: 21‐02‐2008 3. No Deformation
4. No Edge Flaw
Veerbadhra Street, 1. No Pot hole

Erode(2003) 2. No Cracking
Photo Date: 04‐01‐2008 3. No Deformation
4. No Edge Flaw
Vandiyur Main road (2004) 1. No Pot hole

Photo Date: 10‐02‐2008 2. No Cracking
3. No Deformation
4. No Edge Flaw
Vilachery Main road (2005) 1. No Pot hole

3. No Deformation
4. No Edge Flaw
Canteen road (2006) 1. No Pot hole

3. No Deformation
4. No Edge Flaw
Performance Photos of the earliest roads are shown in the figures below.
FIGURE 36‐ VELACHERRY MAIN ROAD AT MADURAI ‐ TAMIL NADU
Laid – March2005 Laid ‐ March 2006
Photo ‐ NOVEMBER 2006
FIGURE 37 ‐ A REPORT APPEARED IN THE DAILY ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE OF PLASTIC TAR ROAD 2007
FIGURE 38‐ TRISOOL ROAD, CHENNAI
FIGURE 39 ‐ KOVILPATTI (LENIN STREET), TAMIL NADU

FIGURE 40‐ JAMBULINGAM STREET ROAD AT CHENNAI

D.13 Information Awareness Brochures
FIGURE 41‐ INFORMATION AWARENESS BROCHURE 1

FIGURE 42‐ INFORMATION AWARENESS BROCHURE 2

D.14 References
1. Tamil Nadu Government (http://www.tn.gov.in)

2. Tamil Nadu: Centrally Sponsored Scheme PMGSY
(http://www.tnrd.gov.in/schemes/cen_pmgsy_13.html)
3. Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (http://pmgsy.nic.in/)
4. Self Help Groups in Tamil Nadu (http://www.tn.gov.in/dtp/shg.htm)
5. Dr. R. Vasudevan – Utilizaton of Waste Plastic Technology –
(http://www.tce.edu/content/utilization_waste_plastic_technology_developed)
(http://tce.edu/staff_profile/faculty/MSCAC/rvchem.html)
6. http://www.tnhighways.gov.in/org.html
7. http://www.tn.gov.in/dtp/schemes/Schemes%20‐%20State%20and%20Central%20‐
%20DSVP,%20Tamil%20Nadu,%20India.htm

E: KARNATAKA CASE STUDY ‐ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
E.1 PROJECT INFORMATION – SUB URBAN ROAD
Formulation of construction methodology for the bituminous mixes containing reclaimed

asphalt materials for low volume roads.
Table 27‐ Karnataka Plastic Road ‐ Project Information 1
Summary of the Project/ The objective of the present study is to formulate construction
methodology, based on evaluation and performance studies of
Intervention & Objective(s) reclaimed bituminous materials obtained from selected road ways
in Karnataka for, the construction of new pavements or to
rehabilitate an existing pavement. This educates and encourages
engineers and contractors about the effective usage of Reclaimed
Asphalt Pavement (RAP) materials in the construction process. In
this regard, in order to validate the suitability of reclaimed
bituminous materials in the construction of surface course for flexible
pavements, overlaying of existing ODR (Chickkanahalli road) at
Shivanapura cross, Hoskote Taluk, Karnataka, for a length of
600m is done in association with M/s K K Plastic Waste
Management Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore, taking various road and traffic
characteristics in to consideration.
Name of the Implementing/ Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project (KSHIP) and
Government S K S J Technological Institute in association with
Partnering Agencies M/s K K Plastic Waste Management Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore.
Period of Implementation June 2014
Place/Area of Operation Chickkanahalli Road (ODR), Shivanapura Cross, Hoskote Taluk

Methodology Stage 1. : Reconnaissance survey and preliminary survey Stage 2. :

Characterization of construction material through various
laboratory tests.
HMA mix design by Marshall method
Note: shredded waste plastic is added as rejuvenating agent for the
bituminous mix containing 100% of recycled aggregates.
Stage 3. : Construction/overlaying of bituminous course.
Stage. 4 : Performance evaluation and study
Beneficiaries/Target Group Public/ Citizens
Status Before Implementation Poor riding quality with IRI greater than 3500 mm/km
Cost Reduction Right now it is par with the current practices, however once the
technology is implemented in large scale there will be a
Status After
Considerable reduction in cost component.
Implementation
Corruption No comments
Reduction
Service Riding quality shows significant improvements

Improvement
Difficulties/Challenges Handling RAP material with respect to reclamation and

storage.
Lessons Learnt Beneficial to the environment
Current Status Test track has been initiated to evaluate its performance
Physical Yes (Process is patent pending)

Infrastructure

Resource
Human Resource Yes

Requirements
Technology/IT Yes (Process is patent pending)
Approximate Cost Contact, M/s K K Plastic Waste Management Pvt. Ltd.

of Implementation Bangalore.
Performance Indicators Proposal submitted to KSHIP, in order to evaluate performance
Project Champions (Along Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project (KSHIP) and
with Designations) Government S K S J Technological Institute in association with M/s
K K Plastic Waste Management Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore.
Contact Person(s) KSHIP Project Director, Dr. Kiran Kumar B V, Shri. Rasool
Khan
Other Information (Awards/Nominations ‐

etc.)
Reasons for Replication Reduces environmental burden and cost of road construction.
Sources/Reference Links ‐
Last Updated On ‐
Database Prepared by Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project (KSHIP) and

Government S K S J Technological Institute in association with
M/s K K Plastic Waste Management Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore.

The photos below provide a visual of the reclaimed asphalt pavements mentioned in the table above.
FIGURE 43 – RECLAIMED ASPHALT PAVEMENT PHOTOGRAPH
FIGURE 44 ‐ JUNCTION OF RECLAIMED ASPHALT PAVEMENT AND BITUMUNIOUS MIX ROAD PHOTOGRAPH
E.2 PROJECT INFORMATION – URBAN ROAD
Improvements to road from Ballahally to K Hemmanahally Via Maratikyathanahally road in Mysore

Taluk, Mysore District.
Table 28 ‐ Karnataka Plastic Road ‐ Project Information 2
Summary of the Project/ Improvements to Road from Ballahally to K Hemmanahally

Via Maratikyathanahally road in Mysore Taluk, Mysore
Intervention & Objective(s) District. From CH. 0.000 to 5.070 Km. ( Conventional
Method Reach From CH. 0.000 to 1.470 Km & Technology
road From CH. 1.470 to 3.585 Km & Conventional Method
Reach From CH. 3.585 to 5.070 Km ).
Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana II, PMGSY ‐II 2013‐
2014
Name of the Implementing/ Karnataka Rural Road Development Agency
Partnering Agencies M/s K K Plastic Waste Management Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore.
Period of Implementation September 2013 ‐ August 2014
Place/Area of Operation Ballahally to K Hemmanahally Via Maratikyathanahally road in

Mysore Taluk , Mysore District
Methodology Conventional Method Reach From CH. 0.000 to 1.470 Km &

Technology road From CH. 1.470 to 3.585 Km & Conventional
Method Reach From CH. 3.585 to 5.070 Km
Beneficiaries/Target Group Public/ Citizens
Status Before Implementation Damaged Roads, shoulders, earthen shoulders, damaged culvert,
fully closed.
Cost Reduction Right now it is par with the current practices, however once the
technology is implemented in large scale there will be a
Status After
considerable reduction in cost component.
Implementation
Reduction
Service Riding quality shows significant improvements

Improvement
Difficulties/Challenges & Beneficial to environment

Lessons Learnt
Current Status
Physical Yes
Infrastructure
Resource
Human Resource Yes

Requirements
Technology/IT No Additional IT infrastructure required
Approximate Cost ₹ 281.50 Lakhs

of Implementation
Performance Indicators
Project Champions (Along Karnataka Rural Road Development Agency

with Designations) M/s K K Plastic Waste Management Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore.

Contact Person(s) Asst. Executive Engineer Project Sub Division, Mysore, Shri. Rasool
Khan, KK Plastic, Bengaluru
Other Information (Awards/Nominations ‐

etc.)
Reasons for Replication Environmentally friendly and reduces cost
Last Updated On ‐
Database Prepared by Asst. Executive Engineer Project Sub Division, Mysore
M/s K K Plastic Waste Management Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore.
FIGURE 45 ‐ MORTH PROJECT ON WASTE PLASTIC MODIFIED BITUMEN NEAR DEVANHALLI, KARNATAKA

FIGURE 46 ‐ MORTH PROJECT ON NRMB NEAR DEVANHALLI, KARNATAKA
FIGURE 47 ‐ MORTH PROJECT ON PMB NEAR DEVANHALLI, KARNATAKA
FIGURE 48 ‐ MORTH PROJECT ON CRMB NEAR DEVANHALLI, KARNATAKA

FIGURE 49 ‐ BBMP ROAD MADE FROM WASTE PLASTIC MODIFIED BITUMEN
FIGURE 50 ‐ ARTERIAL BBMP ROAD CONSTRUCTED FROM WASTE PLASTIC MODIFIED BITUMEN

FIGURE 51 ‐ KK PLASTIC SHREDDING OPERATION AT THE BENGALURU WORKSHOP
FIGURE 52 ‐ SHREDDED PLASTIC EMERGING FROM A UNIT AT THE KK PLASTIC WORKSHOP

E.3 Memorandum of Understanding
FIGURE 53‐ MOU BETWEEN BBMP: KK PLASTIC

E.4 PATENT – DRY PROCESS MIXING METHOD
FIGURE 54‐ PATENT – KK PLASTIC

E.5 BBMP ROAD ESTIMATE
FIGURE 55 ‐ BBMP ROAD ESTIMATE

E.6 BBMP SUPPLY ORDER
FIGURE 56 ‐ BBMP SUPPLY ORDER COPY

E.7 GREATER HYDERABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ORDER
FIGURE 57‐ WORK ORDER EXAMPLE – GREATER HYDERABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

E.8 BBMP SUPPLY ORDERS
FIGURE 58‐ KARNATAKA PWD – RECHIPPING OF ROAD

FIGURE 59‐ BBMP WORK ORDER
IQo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 60‐ BBMP WORK ORDER SAMPLE
IQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

ı
FIGURE 61 ‐ BBMP WORK ORDER
IQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

›
FIGURE 62‐ BBMP WORK ORDER
IQ3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

E.9 KARNATAKA POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD CERTIFICATE
FIGURE 63 ‐ STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD CERTIFICATE
IQq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 64‐ KSPCB CERTIFICATE
IQy © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 65 ‐ KSPCB – EXAMPLE OF BUREAUCRACY
IQ6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

E.10 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
FIGURE 66‐ PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ‐ DOORDARSHAN

FIGURE 67‐ ENGAGEMENT – SCHOOLS
FIGURE 68‐ ENGAGEMENT – TECHNICAL INSTITUTIONS
IQQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 69‐ RV COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING CERTIFICATE
›oo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

E.11 SOCIETAL RECOGNITION
FIGURE 70 ‐ LETTER OF RECOGNITION BY MP
›oı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 71‐ MEA PATHBREAKER LETTER
›o› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 72‐ UN HUMAN SETTLEMENT PROGRAMME
›o3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

E.12 MEDIA COVERAGE
FIGURE 73 ‐ INTERNATIONAL HERALD TRIBUNE COVERAGE
›oq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 74‐ BUSINESS ASIA COVERAGE
›oy © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 75 ‐ THE HINDU COVERAGE
›o6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

E.13 LIST OF UPCOMING KRRDA PROJECTS
Table 29 ‐ List of Upcoming Projects in Rural Karnataka: KRRDA
PROFORMA - B
PRADHANA MANTRI GRAM SADAK YOJANA-II
Name of Road Total Cost as per conventional Technology adopted
Sl No Name of District Name of Taluk Package No. Total Length Construction length in Cost Rs in length in Cost Rs in Savings Type of Technology
From To Km Lakhs Km Lakhs
Cost including
NH-207 (Dabasapet-
Doddaballapur ) (Via
1 Bangalore (R) Doddaballapura KN-02-111 Bommanahalli Galibilikote, Gundasandra, 8.91 290.48 7.38 249.26 7.38 248.36 0.90 Waste plastic
Hanabe, Basappapalya,
Mandibyadrahalli, Kestur)
Bangalore (R) MDR Mullahally via
2 (Ramanagaram) Kanakapura KN-02-122 Aremegaladoddi Gollahalli 6.48 176.61 5.93 216.41 5.93 215.48 0.93 Waste plastic
BBMP limit (Anjanapura

MDR
3 Bangalore (U) Anekal KN-03-48 BDA layout) via 5.01 180.63 3.00 103.60 3.00 103.13 0.47 Waste plastic
Byaladamaradododdi
Kulmepalya, Amruthmahal
Soil Aggregate &
4 Bellary Sandur KS 05-78 S.Gollarahatti SovenaHalli 7.35 305.22 6.50 285.60 6.50 275.79 9.81 Waste
Plastic
Kabballi (MDR) via Open graded Premix Carpet
5 Mysore Gundlupet KN-08-50 Lakkuru Cross Lakkur, shyandralli, 6.68 138.92 6.68 138.15 0.77 with Waste Plastic
Open graded Premix Carpet
6 Mysore KN-08-53 Alahalli Honnur (MDR) 1.500 29.46 1.500 29.30 0.17 with Waste Plastic
Kagalavadi (MDR) Via Open graded Premix Carpet
7 Mysore Yelandur KN-08-54 Changachalli Gulipura 5.840 175.42 5.840 174.82 0.60 with Waste Plastic
8 Chitradurga Chitradurga KN 10‐73 Issamudra G Hatti Kolahal 9.9 497.03 8.70 430.67 8.70 426.52 4.15 Waste Plastic
9 Davanagere Davanagere KN‐12‐88 Jarikatte Shiramagondanahalli(SH) 10.75 361.76 9.09 278.05 9.09 277.55 0.50 Waste plastic
10 3.00 143.37 3.00 140.73 2.64 Waste plastic
Hiregunjal via
11 Dharwad Kundgol KN 13-47 Bagawad Chikkagunjal 5.20 230.10 4.70 217.80 4.70 214.31 3.49 Waste Plastic
12 Gadag Mundaragi KN 14-40 D.Narayanapura Dambala 5.70 252.00 5.20 246.25 5.20 242.05 4.20 Waste Plastic
13 Gulbarga Chincholi Tegaltippi ondampalli via Gadikeshwa 6.00 226.56 6.00 225.64 0.92 Waste Plastic
14.730 654.32
14 Haveri Savanur KN-17-63 Hesarur Kadakol 5.27 201.01 4.00 242.18 4.00 241.58 0.60 Waste Plastic
15 Hassan Hassan KN-16-74 Holalakere Doddametikere (SH‐102) 3.50 132.7 3.00 124.58 3.00 124.28 0.30 Waste Plastic
16 Hassan Hassan KN‐16‐82 Muddenahally Guddenahally 4.50 182.7 3.30 94.11 3.30 93.74 0.37 Waste Plastic
17 Kolar Mulbagal KN 19-132 Reddihalli Mothakapally 5.97 208.35 4 139.6 4.00 139 0.6 Waste Plastic
MDR Beechaganahalli via
Kolar Chendur, Dumakundhalli,
18 Gudibanda KN-19-141 Korenahalli 6.50 251.36 4.50 111.37 4.50 110.82 0.55 Waste plastic
(Chickballapura) Gangadharapura,
Kondavobanahalli
Beeruvally (MDR) Via.
19 Anagramuddanahalli Chowdasamudra, 1.50 40.58 1.50 40.06 0.52 Waste Plastic
Beekanahally, Arenahally
sabbanalli vai kadiluvagilu
20 Mandya Maddur KN-21-76 Madarahalli ( MDR) 7.00 160.32 2.50 11.94 2.50 10.72 1.22 Waste Plastic
L.G.doddi and yadaganalli
Mandya -Nagamangala
road (MDR) via
21 Mandya Mandya KN-21-80 Chakanahalli Gudigenahalli, 5.79 150.86 2.50 11.92 2.50 10.70 1.22 Waste Plastic
Ramegowdanakoppalu, &
Eregowdanakoppalu
22 Kuppali 1.00 31.52 1.00 31.13 0.39 Waste Plastic
Soil Aggregate + Waste
23 Mysore KR Nagara KN-22-94 Hanumanahalli Gandanahalli (MDR) 5.37 252.50 3.80 140.42 3.80 133.49 6.93 plastic
Waste Plastic
Kaggere (MDR) via 2.34 75.58 2.34 75.32 0.26
24 Mysore KR Nagara KN-22-95 Hosur kallahalli 6.06 252.20
Kamenahalli 3.72 114.89 3.72 108.40 6.49 Soil Aggregate
K Hemmanahally (MDR)
25 Mysore Mysore KN-22-96 Ballahally Via Maratikyathanahally 5.07 229.77 2.11 10.07 2.11 10.02 0.02 Waste plastic
26 Shimoga Shimoga KN-24-103 Muduvala(MDR) Ayanur (NH-206) 8.43 367.44 6.30 278.39 6.30 274.55 3.84 Waste plastic
27 Tumkur C N Hally KN 25-100 MDR-2 Kanive cross (MDR-8) 14.00 548.88 5.00 196.30 5.00 195.55 0.75 Waste plastic
27 Tumkur Korategere KN 25-103 Chimpuganahally Mavatturu Road 6.08 318.94 5.48 189.92 5.48 189.19 0.73 Waste Plastic
28 Uttara Kannada Haliyal KN-27-55 Mainal Kerawad(MDR) 5.36 318.47 2.68 247.11 2.68 246.68 0.43 Waste Plastic
29 Uttara Kannada Haliyal KN-27-56 Agasalkatta Alur.(MDR) 4.30 256.50 2.15 164.96 2.15 164.59 0.37 Waste Plastic
30 Uttara Kannada Joida KN-27-59 Vaijgaon (MDR) Velipkumbeli.(SH) 7.66 463.05 3.83 354.35 3.83 353.72 0.63 Waste Plastic
31 Uttara Kannada Yellapur KN-27-66 Upaleswar (SH) Agarimane 10.10 597.76 5.10 459.15 5.10 458.22 0.93 Waste Plastic
32 Uttara Kannada Yellapur KN-27-67 Tudugini (SH) Bharani 5.45 329.55 2.72 263.47 2.72 263.02 0.45 Waste Plastic
190.44 8170.51 628.69 6043.77 628.69 5986.61 57.14
E.14 KRRDA SCHEDULE OF RATES EXAMPLE
Table 30 – KRRDA Schedule of Rates
DATA RATE
Reference to
Sl.N MORD Rate Amount (Rs)
Description Unit Qty
o specificati on (Rs)
Providing, laying and rolling of open‐graded premix carpet of 20mm thickness composed of
13.2 mm to 5.6mm aggregates by using (S‐65) modified bitumen with addition of
processed waste plastic of above 8% by weight of bitumen to required layer, grade and
1
level to serve as a wearing course in a suitable plant, laying with a three wheel 80‐100 KN
static roller capacity, finished to required level and grades to be followed by seal coat of
either Type A or Type B or Type C as per Technical Specification Clause 508.
Bitumen (S‐65)
Unit = sqm
Taking output = 4000 sqm (80 cum)
A Labour
Mate Day 0.52 191.40 99.53
Mazdoor (Unskilled) Day 10.00 191.40 1914.00
Mazdoor (Semi ‐ Skilled) Day 3.00 191.81 575.43
Total 2588.96
B Machinery
Hot mix plant 30/40 t per hour hour 6 4580.0 27480.00

0
Electrical generator set 125 KVA hour 6 562.00 3372.00
Front end loader 1 cum bucket capacity @ 45 hour 6 624.00 3744.00

cum/hour
Tipper 5.5 10 t capacity hour 3.64 240.00 873.60
Paver finisher hour 6 786.00 4716.00
Three wheel 80‐100 KN static roller hour 16.00 386.00 6176.00
46361.60
Total
C Material
Bitumen (S‐65) @ 13.432 (14.60 kg for 10 t 5.37 54084. 290431.08

sqm) replaced 8% by plastic waste 00
14.60x0.92=13.432)
Crushed stone chipping, 13.2mm to 5.6 mm cum 108 850.00 91800.00

@ 0.27 cum
Processed waste plastic ie 8% of bitumen = t 0.467 27000. 12609.00

1.168 kg / 10 sqm 00
Total 394840.08
a+b+c 443790.64
D Overheads @ 10% on (a+b+c) 44379.06
Contractor's profit @ 10% on (a+b+c+d) 48816.97
Cost of 4000 sqm = a+b+c+d+e 536986.67
Rate per sqm = (a+b+c+d+e)/4000 134.25
Rate / Sqm x 0.92 123.51
Zone I 124.00
Zone II 129.00
Zone III 139.00
›oQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Zone IV 155.00
Superintending Engineer,
PRE Circle, Mysore.
›ıo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

E.15 TRIPARTITE TECHNOLOGY AGREEMENT

1
TRIPARTITE TECHNOLOGY
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and executed

on this …… day of ……. month , of Two
Thousand and Fourteen year, ( …/…/ 20 14 )
at Bangalore .
BETWEEN:
Radical Infrastructure,
Represented by……………
Having their office at
# 1/2, La Citadel Apartments,
Flat No.201, Cunningham Cresent Road,
Bangalore - 560
052.
( Herein after referred to as
the Technology Provider)
AND:
Karnataka Rural Development Agency,

Represented by:
Having its Office at
3 rd
floor, “ Grameena Abhivruddi Bhavana ”
, Anadarao circle,
Bangalore – 560 0 09
.
(Herein after referred to as State
Agency)
AND:
………………..
…………………….
(Hereinafter referred to as the
Contractor)
1. Whereas the Technology Provider has

expertise in Pavement Construction using
RBI Grade 81 Stabili zer . RBI Grade 81 is an
inorganic patented material which is mixed
Figure 76 – Tripartite Technology Providers Agreement: KRRDA
›ıı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

E.16 MORD CLEARANCE ORDER
Figure 77 – Clearance Order for PMGSY‐II in Karnataka
›ı› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

E.17 KRRDA – INTERNAL COMMUNICATION
Figure 78 ‐ KRRDA Chief Operating Officer Order
›ı3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

E.18 References
1. Government of Karnataka (https://www.karnataka.gov.in)

2. Directorate of Municipal Administration (DMA) (http://municipaladmn.gov.in);
(http://municipaladmn.gov.in/sites/municipaladmn.gov.in/files/pdf/ActsandRules/dma_organizatio
n_chart.pdf)
3. Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (http://pmgsy.nic.in/)
4. Karnataka Rural Road Development Agency (http://www.krrda.in)
(http://89.238.162.147/krrda.in/(S(1komn155atglbj45yn431545))/KRRDA%20REG‐2013‐14.pdf )
5. Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (http://bbmp.gov.in/home )
›ıq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

F: JHARKHAND CASE STUDY ‐ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
F.1 PROJECT INFORMATION – URBAN ROAD
TABLE 31‐ JHARKHAND PROJECT INFORMATION 1
Construction of Circuit House area (CH Area) Road

Summary of the Project/ Construction of Circuit House area (CH Area) road with
waste plastics using central mixing plant at Bhuyiandih. Road
Intervention & Objective(s) dimension 121.92 meter by 4.65 meter
Name of the Implementing/ Jamshedpur Utilities & Services Company Ltd.
Partnering Agencies Tarapore & Co. Jamshedpur (building and civil construction) and
Singh industries Jamshedpur
Period of Implementation 30 November 2011
Place/Area of Operation Circuit House Area (CH area)
Methodology Collection of waste plastics from the source, segregating the waste and
shredding the same into 2‐4mm size and mixing the shredded plastic
to make a coating over the aggregates used for road construction
providing the road a tremendous strength at no extra cost. Plastic gets
coated over stone and the hot plastic coated stone
is mixed with bitumen (tar) and the mix is used for road laying.
Beneficiaries/Target Group Public/ Citizens, Tata Steel ltd.
Status Before Implementation The roads used to get potholes frequently during the rain.
Status After Cost Reduction Saving of approximately 10% of natural resource bitumen is there which
Implementation is replaced by waste plastics (107 kgs).
›ıy © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Reduction
Service Quality of road improved and there is significant increase in road life.
Improvement
Difficulties/Challenges & Collection of waste and its segregation.

Lessons Learnt
Current Status Road is in good condition. No maintenance required.
Resource Physical Yes

Requirements Infrastructure
Human Resource Yes
Technology/IT Yes (Use of technology patented by Dr. Vasudevan, Dean Thiagrajar

College of Engineering)
Approximate Cost of ₹ 1.50 Lakh

Implementation
Performance Indicators No potholes
›ı6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Project Champions (Along Gaurav Anand, Sr. Manager, Quality Assurance, JUSCO
with Designations) Pratyush Dandpat, Deputy Manager, JUSCO
Santosh Kumar, Road Supervisor, JUSCO
Contact Person(s) Gaurav Anand, Sr. Manager, 09234554945
Reasons for Replication Only example of privately funded model of plastic roads with
environmental benefits
Last Updated On 30th October 2014
Database Prepared by Gaurav Anand, Sr. Manager, 09234554945

F.2 PROJECT INFORMATION – URBAN ROAD 2
TABLE 32 ‐ JHARKHAND PROJECT INFORMATION 2
Construction of road at Marine Drive Jamshedpur

Summary of the Project/ Construction of road with waste plastics at Marine drive Jamshedpur
using central mixing plant at Marine drive.
Intervention & Objective(s) Road dimension 21 meter by 7.5 meter.
Name of the Implementing/ Jamshedpur Utilities & Services Company Ltd.
Partnering Agencies Tarapore & Co. Jamshedpur (building and civil construction) and
Singh industries Jamshedpur
Period of Implementation 09 December 2011
Place/Area of Operation Marine Drive Jamshedpur
Methodology Collection of waste plastics from the source, segregating the waste and
shredding the same into 2‐4mm size and mixing the shredded plastic
coated over stone and the hot plastic coated stone
is mixed with bitumen (tar) and the mix is used for road laying.
Beneficiaries/Target Group Public/ Citizens, Tata Steel ltd.
Status Before Implementation The roads used to get potholes frequently during the rain.
Status After Cost Reduction Saving of approximately 10% of natural resource bitumen is there which
Implementation is replaced by waste plastics (40kgs).
Reduction
Service Quality of road improved and there is significant increase in road life.
Improvement
Difficulties/Challenges & Collection of waste and its segregation.

Lessons Learnt
Current Status Road is in good condition. No maintenance required.
Resource Physical Yes

Requirements Infrastructure
Human Resource Yes
Technology/IT Yes (Use of technology patented by Dr. Vasudevan, Dean Thiagrajar

College of Engineering)
Approximate Cost of ₹ 0.50 Lakh

Implementation
Performance Indicators No potholes
Project Champions (Along Gaurav Anand, Sr. Manager, Quality Assurance, JUSCO PratyushDandpat,
Deputy Manager, JUSCO
with Designations)
Santosh Kumar, Road Supervisor, JUSCO
›ıQ © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Contact Person(s) Gaurav Anand, Sr. Manager, 09234554945
Reasons for Replication Waste plastic free environment and robust roads
Last Updated On 30th October 2014
Database Prepared by Gaurav Anand, Sr. Manager, 09234554945
››o © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

F.3 PROJECT INFORMATION – URBAN ROAD 3
TABLE 33 ‐ JHARKHAND PROJECT INFORMATION 3
Title of the study Project
Summary of the Project/ Plastic waste is a major environmental and public health
Intervention & Objective(s) problem at Jamshedpur. Plastic shopping or carrier bags are one of the
main sources of plastic waste. Plastic bags of all sizes and colors dot the
city‘s landscape due to the problems of misuse, overuse and littering.
Besides this visual pollution, plastic bag wastes contribute to blockage of
drains and gutters, are a threat to aquatic life when they find their way
to water bodies, and can cause livestock deaths when the livestock
consume them. Furthermore, when filled with rainwater, plastic bags
become breeding grounds for mosquitoes, which cause malaria. Burning
of these chlorine‐containing substances releases toxic heavy metals and
emits noxious gasses like dioxins and furans. They are the most toxic
and poisonous substances on earth and can cause a variety of health
problems including damage to the reproductive and immune system,
respiratory difficulties and cancer. Land filling of plastics into properly
designed disposal sites takes up valuable room in the site for a non‐
toxic, non‐leachable, non‐ decomposable material. Whether plastic is a
menace or not depends how we use it and how we dispose of it
minimizing the impacts on the environment. We are collecting the
threat(waste plastics) from the source, segregating the waste and
shredding the same into 2‐ 4mm size and mixing the shredded plastic
coated over stone and the hot plastic coated stone is mixed with
bitumen (tar) and the mix is used for road laying.
Name of the Implementing/ JUSCO and Tarapore Industries

Partnering Agencies
Period of Implementation 30.11.2011
Place/Area of Operation Jamshedpur city, Jharkhand
››ı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Methodology The roads can be constructed with plastic wastes (8%) in

conjunction with bitumen (92%). This process has 2 way benefits –
Reusability of hazardous plastic, which could have otherwise clogged
drains, caused flooding, choked animals that eat them. Burying plastic
forever into roads is the safest. Polymer‐Modified Bitumen is in use
since long. It is approved in the Indian Roads Congress’ Special
Publication 53 guidelines, 1999. Reduced penetration and ductility, a
higher softening point, less rutting and cold cracking. Marshall
Stability value is initially 25% better, later 200‐300% better than
unmodified roads. Test samples show 260% improved resistance to water‐
soaking, hence ideal for sub‐grade. 100% improvement in fatigue life
of roads. Greatly reduced road cracking after 1 year on Bangalore‐
Mysore Rd vs. unmodified road.
• Step I: Plastic waste made out of PE, PP and PS cut into a
size between 2.36mm and 4.75mm using shredding machine.
• Step II: Similarly the bitumen is to be heated to a
maximum of 1700C to have good binding and to prevent
weak bonding. (Monitoring the temperature is very
important)
• Step III: At the mixing chamber the shredded plastic
waste is to be added to the hot aggregate. It gets coated
uniformly over the aggregate within 30 Sec, giving an oily
look Plastic coated aggregate is obtained.
• Step IV: Hot bitumen is then added over the plastic coated
aggregate and the resulting mix is used for road construction.
The road laying temperature is between 1100C to 1200C. The
roller used is 8‐ton capacity.
Beneficiaries/Target Group Tata steel, Citizens of Jamshedpur

Status Before Implementation
Cost Reduction Rs. 45000/‐ per 4000 sq. meter of the road
Status After
Corruption
Implementation
Reduction
››› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Service Road life increases 2 times.

Improvement
Difficulties/Challenges Collection of plastics, Mixed waste etc. Rainy season etc.

& Lessons Learnt
Current Status Ongoing
Physical Waste plastic recycling unit, where segregation and shredding of
Resource Infrastructure plastics take place.
Requirements Human Resource 4 workers‐ For segregation of plastics and shredding of plastics.
Transportation of shredded plastic is done by the user department.
Technology/IT No new technology is required. It can be easily mixed in Central hot mix
plant manually.
Approximate Cost Same cost as conventional type. Initial cost would be more due to
of Implementation procurement of Plastic shredder.
Performance Indicators Life of the road, Quantity of Plastics used, Saving in Bitumen
Project Champions (Along P Dandpat, Manager, Jusco Gaurav
with Designations) Anand, Sr. Manager, Jusco
Contact Person(s) Gaurav Anand

Other Information Paper presentation
Reasons for Replication Tremendous benefit to the environment and significant improvement
in roads
Sources/Reference Links
Database Prepared by Gaurav Anand
››3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

F.4 MOEF GAZZETTE NOTIFICATION
FIGURE 79 ‐ MOEF Gazette Notification
››q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

F.5 PHOTOS OF THE PROJECT
FIGURE 80 ‐ FIRST PLASTIC TAR ROAD IN JHARKHAND (CIRCUIT HOUSE AREA JAMSHEDPUR)
FIGURE 81 ‐ PLASTIC TAR ROAD IN JHARKHAND (MARINE DRIVE AREA JAMSHEDPUR)
››y © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

F.6 References
1. Government of Jharkhand (http://jharkhand.gov.in/)
2. Tata Steel Ltd. (http://www.tatasteelindia.com)
3. Jamshedpur Utilities and Services Company (JUSCO)

(http://www.tata.co.in/company/profile/Jamshedpur‐Utilities‐and‐Services‐Company
››6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

G – INFORMATION FROM THE HIMACHAL PRADESH BAN
G.1 BRIEF OVERVIEW ON PLASTICS ROADS IN HP
Himachal Pradesh Public Works Department is engaged in planning, construction and maintenance of
roads, bridges, ropeways and buildings (both residential and non‐residential of various Govt.
departments) in the State. The department further executes engineering work on behalf of Local
Bodies, Public Undertakings, Boards & other Institutions under Himachal Pradesh Government. The
department is divided into four zones namely Mandi Zone, Hamirpur Zone, Shimla Zone and Kangra
Zone. All the four zones are headed by Chief Engineers. Headquarters of Shimla Zone is at Shimla,
Mandi zone at Mandi, Hamirpur Zone at Hamirpur and Kangra zone at Dharamshala.
Figure 82 ‐ Organization Chart Himachal Pradesh PWD
The Himachal Pradesh Rural Development Department is engaged in the implementation of different rural
development, rural roads and poverty alleviation programmes. The roads will be constructed with
effective and eco‐friendly technologies. The elected representatives and village community will be
involved in the construction, monitoring and maintenance of the roads for transparency in construction
and maintenance. The Rural Development department is implementing schemes and
programmes like Community Development Programme, Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana, National Rural
Employment Guarantee Scheme, Housing Schemes, Total Sanitation Campaign Projects, etc.
Figure 83 ‐ Organization Chart Rural Development HIMACHAL PRADESH
Waste plastics roads had been constructed in between the year 2010 to 2012 before notification on ban on
plastics and polythene was issued by the department of environment, science and technology. About
300 kilometres of plastic roads have been constructed in Shimla, Kullu, Hamirpur, Chamba districts.
G.2 BAN ON PLASTICS
The plastic roads are no longer being constructed as plastic is banned in Himachal Pradesh. Himachal
Pradesh Non‐biodegradable Garbage (Control) Act, 1995 restricts use of such materials in the state.
Following is the list of notifications issued by Environment, Science and Technology department
(refer to next section for notifications):
TABLE 34 ‐ HP NOTIFICATION ON PLASTIC BAN
S. No. Notification Reference No. Date of Issue Remark
1 STE‐E(3)‐9/2010‐II (26‐06‐2013) 26‐06‐2013 Prohibition of storage, supply and

sale of items in the packaging
made of non‐biodegradable
materials like chips, wafers,
biscuits, noodles, etc.
2 STE‐F(4)‐2/2008‐III (28‐09‐2011) 28‐09‐2011 Deferment of prohibition date

from 15‐08‐2011 to 02‐10‐2011.
3 STE‐F(4)‐2/2008‐II (19.03.2009) 19‐03‐2011 Ban on plastics and penalties as

applicable.
4 STE‐F(4)‐2/2008,(13.08.2009) (Hindi 13‐08‐2009 Deferment of prohibition date

Version) from 15‐08‐2009 to 02‐10‐2009.
5 STE‐F(4)‐2/2008,( 07.07.2009) (Hindi 07‐07‐2009 Complete ban on plastics use and

Version) penalties as applicable.
6 STE‐A(3)‐4/2003,( 04.06.2004) 15‐06‐2004 Re‐enforcement of ban on plastics.

Corrigendum in Entry no. 9 and 10 Corrigendum in Entry no. 9 and 10.
7 STE‐A(3)‐4/2003 (04.06.2004) 04‐06‐2004 Re‐enforcement of ban on

plastics.
8 STV(Env.)A(10)‐4/92‐1 (19.07.2000) 19‐07‐2000 Governor authorising Sub

Divisional officers (Civil) to impose
penalties in case of violation of
plastic ban within their
jurisdictions.
9 STV(Env.)A(10)‐4/92‐1 (24.12.1998) 24‐12‐1998 Governor authorising District Food

& Supply Controllers, District Food
& Supply Inspectors, Food&
Supply Grade I & II inspectors and
Weights & Measures inspectors to
››Q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

impose penalties in case of

violation of plastic ban
within their jurisdictions.
10
STV(Env.)A(10)‐4/92‐1 (19.12.1998) 19‐12‐1998 Governor authorising Assistant
Commissioner, Sanitary Inspectors in
Shimla Municipal Corporation,
Secretaries of Nagar Panchayats and
Sanitary inspectors in Municipal
Councils to impose penalties in
case of violation of plastic ban
within their jurisdictions.
11 STV(Env.)A(10)‐4/92‐1 (10.12.1998) 10‐12‐1998 Imposing ban on plastics from 1st

Jan 1999.
12 EDN(S&T)A(3)‐5/98 (26.11.1998) 26‐11‐1998 Imposing ban on plastics from 1st

Jan 1999.

Jan 1999.

Aug 1998.
G.3 BAN Notification
The section provides samples of notification on the government ban in HP on the use of plastic from 2009
onwards.
1. Date of Issue 26‐Jun‐2013 (STE‐E(3)‐9/2010‐II)
›3o © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

FIGURE 84 ‐ HP BAN NOTIFICATION JUNE 2013
›3ı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

2. Date of Issue 28‐Sep‐2011 (STE‐F(4)‐2/2008‐III)
FIGURE 85 ‐ HP NOTIFICATION ON TWO MONTH DEFERMENT OF PROHIBITION OF PLASTICS USE SEPTEMBER 2011
›3› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

3. Date of Issue 19‐Mar‐2011 (STE‐F(4)‐2/2008‐II)
FIGURE 86 ‐ HP BAN NOTIFICATION ON THE USE OF PLASTIC MARCH 2011

4. Date of Issue 13‐Aug‐2009 (STE‐F(4)‐2/2008)
FIGURE 87 ‐ HP NOTIFICATION ON ONE MONTH DEFERMENT OF BAN AUGUST 2009
›3q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

5. Date of Issue 07‐Jul‐2009 (STE‐F(4)‐2/2008)
FIGURE 88 ‐ HP NOTIFICATION ON COMPLETE BAN ‐ JULY 2009
›3y © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

G.4 References
1. Government of Himachal Pradesh (http://himachal.gov.in/)
2. Department of Environment, Science and Technology, Government of Himachal Pradesh.

(http://desthp.nic.in/)

CIPS PlasticRoad

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

CIPS PlasticRoad

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

CIPS PlasticRoad

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CENTRE FOR INNOVATIONS IN PUBLIC SYSTEMS

An Autonomous body of the Government of India

Use of Plastics in Road Construction

Implementation of Technology and Roll out

Knowledge Partner : Knowledge Advisory Services and

ı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Document Control Page

TITLE Title: Use of Plastics in Waste Construction

Approved by Dr. D. Chakrapani,

Centre for Innovations in Public Systems (CIPS)

Email : chakrapani@cips.org.in , director‐cips@nic.in

Edited by Mrs. Vidhisha Kalra,

Designation: Joint Director

CIPS Centre for Innovations in Public Systems (CIPS)

Knowledge Kshitij Aditeya Singh

› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

followed in Karnataka is based on a memorandum of understanding with a contractor. States such as

y © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

6 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

Q © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

ıo © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

ıı © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

ı› © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

ı3 © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

1.3 Scope of Work...........................................................................................................................30

2. Technology: Innovation and Process...........................................................................................33

2.1 Technology behind the innovation.............................................................................................33

2.2 Plastic Modified Bituminous Road versus Conventional Bituminous Roads.............................40

2.3 The Outlook of Central Road Research Institute........................................................................41

2.4 Guidelines of Indian Roads Congress........................................................................................42

2.5 Technological and Engineering Decisions.................................................................................43

2.6 Characterisation of Plastic Waste Coated Aggregate (PCA) Bitumen Mix................................47

2.7. Other Modifying and Binding Materials...................................................................................49

3. Tamil Nadu Case Study...............................................................................................................54

3.2 Brief Description of the innovation............................................................................................54

ıq © Centre for Innovations in Public Systems

3.3 Application‐Innovation Context................................................................................................55

3.4 New Approach...........................................................................................................................57

3.5 Implementation strategy............................................................................................................58

3.6 Challenges in implementation....................................................................................................62

3.7 Benefits of innovation................................................................................................................63

3.8 Financial Model.........................................................................................................................64

3.9 Potential for replication.............................................................................................................66

4. Karnataka Case Study..................................................................................................................68

4.2 Brief Description of the innovation............................................................................................68

4.3 Application‐Innovation Context................................................................................................69

4.4 New Approach...........................................................................................................................71

4.5 Implementation strategy............................................................................................................73

4.6 Challenges in implementation....................................................................................................78

4.7 Benefits of innovation................................................................................................................80

4.8 Financial Model.........................................................................................................................81

4.9 Potential for replication.............................................................................................................82

5. Jharkhand Case Study......................................................................................................................85

5.2 Brief Description of the innovation............................................................................................85

5.3 Application‐Innovation Context................................................................................................85

5.4 New Approach...........................................................................................................................88