Remediation (Clean Up) of the Bhopal Plant Site Status of the Former UCIL Plant Site The Bhopal plant closed after the 1984 methylisocyanate (MIC) gas release and never resumed normal operations. While the Bhopal gas release litigation was in progress, no steps could be taken to remediate the site because the MIC unit was considered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) as “evidence” in the criminal case. All activity at the site was closely monitored and controlled by the CBI, the Indian courts and the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board (MPPCB). UCIL was finally permitted to undertake clean-up work in the years just prior to the sale of its stock by UCC in 1994, and spent some $2 million on that effort, which included beginning construction of a secure landfill to hold the wastes from two on-site solar evaporation ponds. The central and state government authorities approved, monitored and directed every step of the clean-up work. Following the sale, it appears that UCIL, now renamed Eveready Industries India Limited (EIIL), continued some clean-up work and completed the construction of the secure landfill on the site. In 1998, the Madhya Pradesh State Government (MPSG), which owned and had been leasing the property to EIIL, cancelled the lease; took over the facility; and assumed all accountability for the site, including the completion of any additional remediation According to media reports, court-ordered remediation efforts directed at the government entities have proceeded slowly. Furthermore, proposals made by private companies have similarly been questioned or rejected. For example, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) protested against and blocked remediation attempts by those who offered to help raise funds for clean up or to conduct pro-bono remediation. The disposal of the waste has consistently proved to be a non- starter, and was further hindered after a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Madhya Pradesh High Court in 2004. (UCC is not involved in that litigation.) The media reported in 2007 that the Supreme Court of India had directed the central and state governments to pay for collection of waste on the site and to have it landfilled or incinerated, as appropriate. While some of the waste had been landfilled, public interest groups again challenged the Court\'s incineration directive, as did the states where waste incineration facilities were located. However, in 2012, the Supreme Court selected the Pithampur waste treatment storage and disposal facility (TSDF) in Madhya Pradesh’s Dhar district as the most suitable facility for incinerating the waste. Though environmental NGOs claimed the facility failed to meet desired safety parameters, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) submitted an affidavit in 2014 verifying the suitability of the facility to carry out the incineration. According to The Indian Express, 10 tons of trial waste were transferred to the site in July 2015 and the trial incinera.

1. Remediation (Clean Up) of the Bhopal Plant Site
Status of the Former UCIL Plant Site
The Bhopal plant closed after the 1984 methylisocyanate (MIC) gas release and never resumed
normal operations. While the Bhopal gas release litigation was in progress, no steps could be
taken to remediate the site because the MIC unit was considered by the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) as “evidence” in the criminal case. All activity at the site was closely
monitored and controlled by the CBI, the Indian courts and the Madhya Pradesh Pollution
Control Board (MPPCB).
UCIL was finally permitted to undertake clean-up work in the years just prior to the sale of its
stock by UCC in 1994, and spent some $2 million on that effort, which included beginning
construction of a secure landfill to hold the wastes from two on-site solar evaporation ponds. The
central and state government authorities approved, monitored and directed every step of the
clean-up work. Following the sale, it appears that UCIL, now renamed Eveready Industries India
Limited (EIIL), continued some clean-up work and completed the construction of the secure
landfill on the site. In 1998, the Madhya Pradesh State Government (MPSG), which owned and
had been leasing the property to EIIL, cancelled the lease; took over the facility; and assumed all
accountability for the site, including the completion of any additional remediation
According to media reports, court-ordered remediation efforts directed at the government entities
have proceeded slowly. Furthermore, proposals made by private companies have similarly been
questioned or rejected. For example, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) protested against
and blocked remediation attempts by those who offered to help raise funds for clean up or to
conduct pro-bono remediation. The disposal of the waste has consistently proved to be a non-
starter, and was further hindered after a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Madhya
Pradesh High Court in 2004. (UCC is not involved in that litigation.)
The media reported in 2007 that the Supreme Court of India had directed the central and state
governments to pay for collection of waste on the site and to have it landfilled or incinerated, as
appropriate. While some of the waste had been landfilled, public interest groups again
challenged the Court's incineration directive, as did the states where waste incineration facilities
were located.
However, in 2012, the Supreme Court selected the Pithampur waste treatment storage and
disposal facility (TSDF) in Madhya Pradesh’s Dhar district as the most suitable facility for
incinerating the waste. Though environmental NGOs claimed the facility failed to meet desired
safety parameters, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) submitted an affidavit in 2014
verifying the suitability of the facility to carry out the incineration.
According to The Indian Express, 10 tons of trial waste were transferred to the site in July 2015

2. and the trial incineration was conducted over a five-day period in mid-August. Operated by the
Ramky Group Company, the TSDF was monitored by the CPCB, as well as private firms CVR
Labs of Chennai and Vimta Lab of Hyderabad. The Express reported that officials associated
with the trial said the levels of emissions and ambient air quality from the burning were within
permissible limits, with the air quality being monitored at three locations in and around the
facility, including a station representing Tarpura village adjacent to the facility.
Solution
Remediation (Clean Up) of the Bhopal Plant Site
Status of the Former UCIL Plant Site
The Bhopal plant closed after the 1984 methylisocyanate (MIC) gas release and never resumed
normal operations. While the Bhopal gas release litigation was in progress, no steps could be
taken to remediate the site because the MIC unit was considered by the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) as “evidence” in the criminal case. All activity at the site was closely
monitored and controlled by the CBI, the Indian courts and the Madhya Pradesh Pollution
Control Board (MPPCB).
UCIL was finally permitted to undertake clean-up work in the years just prior to the sale of its
stock by UCC in 1994, and spent some $2 million on that effort, which included beginning
construction of a secure landfill to hold the wastes from two on-site solar evaporation ponds. The
central and state government authorities approved, monitored and directed every step of the
clean-up work. Following the sale, it appears that UCIL, now renamed Eveready Industries India
Limited (EIIL), continued some clean-up work and completed the construction of the secure
landfill on the site. In 1998, the Madhya Pradesh State Government (MPSG), which owned and
had been leasing the property to EIIL, cancelled the lease; took over the facility; and assumed all
accountability for the site, including the completion of any additional remediation
According to media reports, court-ordered remediation efforts directed at the government entities
have proceeded slowly. Furthermore, proposals made by private companies have similarly been
questioned or rejected. For example, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) protested against
and blocked remediation attempts by those who offered to help raise funds for clean up or to
conduct pro-bono remediation. The disposal of the waste has consistently proved to be a non-
starter, and was further hindered after a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed in the Madhya
Pradesh High Court in 2004. (UCC is not involved in that litigation.)
The media reported in 2007 that the Supreme Court of India had directed the central and state
governments to pay for collection of waste on the site and to have it landfilled or incinerated, as
appropriate. While some of the waste had been landfilled, public interest groups again

3. challenged the Court's incineration directive, as did the states where waste incineration facilities
were located.
However, in 2012, the Supreme Court selected the Pithampur waste treatment storage and
disposal facility (TSDF) in Madhya Pradesh’s Dhar district as the most suitable facility for
incinerating the waste. Though environmental NGOs claimed the facility failed to meet desired
safety parameters, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) submitted an affidavit in 2014
verifying the suitability of the facility to carry out the incineration.
According to The Indian Express, 10 tons of trial waste were transferred to the site in July 2015
and the trial incineration was conducted over a five-day period in mid-August. Operated by the
Ramky Group Company, the TSDF was monitored by the CPCB, as well as private firms CVR
Labs of Chennai and Vimta Lab of Hyderabad. The Express reported that officials associated
with the trial said the levels of emissions and ambient air quality from the burning were within
permissible limits, with the air quality being monitored at three locations in and around the
facility, including a station representing Tarpura village adjacent to the facility.