Plastic Impact Protocol™ v4.5

The Platinum Standard for Plastic Credit Governance

The Plastic Impact Protocol™ v4.5 is the governing standard issued by Global Environmental Impact Solutions, LLC for the registration, validation, verification, issuance, transfer, burn, retirement, and claim governance of Plastic Impact Credits™.

Version 4.5 is effective June 1, 2026 and supersedes Plastic Impact Protocol™ v4.4. The Protocol is issued by Global Environmental Impact Solutions, LLC, a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business, Wyoming LLC, SAM.gov registered entity, and patent-pending standards issuer.

The Protocol is designed to bring structure, auditability, legal defensibility, and evidence-backed accountability to the plastic credit market. It governs how plastic recovery activity becomes verified impact, how credits are issued, how ownership is tracked, how credits are burned, and what claims a buyer may make after retirement.

The Protocol controls. All GEIS systems, including the Registry, dApp, on-chain token architecture, developer documentation, partner materials, marketing claims, and technical specifications, are subordinate to the Plastic Impact Protocol™.

Why the Protocol Exists

Plastic credits have the potential to fund real-world plastic recovery, recycling, and waste-diversion infrastructure. However, the voluntary plastic credit market has suffered from serious structural weaknesses, including weak evidence standards, double counting, unclear chain-of-custody, incineration being marketed as recycling, unsupported certificate issuance, poor additionality testing, and claims that buyers cannot legally or reputationally defend. GEIS created the Plastic Impact Protocol™ to address those failures at the governance level.

PIP v4.5 establishes a published, versioned, publicly auditable standard that defines how eligible plastic impact is measured, verified, issued, transferred, retired, and claimed. It is built for corporate buyers, ESG teams, institutional investors, project developers, materials recovery facilities, regulators, auditors, secondary-market participants, and technology partners who require clear rules rather than vague sustainability language.

What a Plastic Impact Credit™ Represents

Under the Plastic Impact Protocol™, one Plastic Impact Credit™ represents one metric tonne of eligible verified plastic impact. The Protocol uses a kilogram-level accounting system called Verified Plastic Kilograms™. One Verified Plastic Kilogram™ equals one kilogram of eligible plastic impact. One thousand Verified Plastic Kilograms™ equal one Plastic Impact Credit™.

Verified Plastic Kilograms™ are internal accounting units only. They are not tradeable, they are not minted on-chain, and they are not displayed as whole credits. Only whole Plastic Impact Credits™ may be issued. This structure allows GEIS to track plastic impact at the kilogram level while only issuing credits when a full metric tonne of eligible verified impact has been confirmed.

Active Credit Classes

PIP v4.5 currently supports three active issuance classes:

PIC-C™ — Collection Class

The Collection Class applies to eligible plastic collection activity where recovered plastic is documented, measured, verified, and transferred through an approved downstream pathway.

PIC-MR™ — Mechanical Recycling Class

The Mechanical Recycling Class applies to eligible plastic processed through approved mechanical recycling pathways, including qualified facilities and downstream recycling or remanufacturing partners.

PIC-T™ — Treegens / Tier 4 Coastal International Class

The Treegens / Tier 4 Coastal International Class applies to eligible international coastal and waterway collection activity under the Treegens network. Issuance under this class is gated by per-nation qualification and must satisfy the Protocol’s international safeguards, evidence requirements, and verification standards.

Reserved Annexes and Hard Gates

PIP v4.5 also includes several reserved annexes that are not active for issuance unless GEIS publishes a formal activation notice.

Reserved annexes include:

• Advanced Recycling

• Reuse and Repurposing

• Pre-processing and Aggregation

• Plastic Avoidance Class

• Biodegradable Processing Class

These pathways are treated as Hard Gates. That means no Verified Plastic Kilograms™ may be recorded and no Plastic Impact Credits™ may be issued under these annexes until the applicable methodology is formally activated by GEIS.

Draft Pyrolysis-to-Secondary-Material Methodology

Version 4.5 includes a Draft Pyrolysis-to-Secondary-Material Methodology in Annex C. This annex is open for public comment, but it is not active for issuance. No credits may be issued for pyrolysis, advanced recycling, plastic-to-fuel conversion, co-processing, cement-kiln activity, waste-to-energy incineration, or similar pathways unless and until GEIS formally activates a dedicated annex with the required technology-specific emissions, environmental-performance, and chain-of-custody methodology. This distinction is critical. The presence of a draft annex does not authorize credit issuance.

Regulatory Alignment Framework

PIP v4.5 adds a Regulatory Alignment Framework designed to support data integrity, audit readiness, chain-of-custody documentation, claim substantiation, and structured evidence organization in regulatory environments where plastic accountability obligations are emerging or enforceable.

The Protocol is designed to support evidentiary alignment with frameworks such as:

• EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation

• Extended Producer Responsibility programs in the European Union, United Kingdom, and United States

• EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive

• Voluntary and contractual plastic impact claim environments

• Corporate ESG reporting and audit workflows

PIP does not replace legal compliance. It does not constitute a legal opinion, compliance certification, regulatory filing, or substitute for any applicable law. Project Proponents, Burning Parties, and Market Participants remain responsible for their own legal obligations. The Protocol provides evidence infrastructure, registry controls, claim governance, and machine-readable data that may support audit readiness and substantiation.

PPWR Producer Responsibility Baseline

PIP v4.5 adds a PPWR Producer Responsibility Baseline for activities connected to the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation. Where a producer is already legally required to meet recycled-content targets, recovery obligations, or producer responsibility quotas, that required activity does not automatically qualify as additional impact under the Protocol. Only the clearly documented surplus portion above mandatory obligations may be eligible for credit issuance.

This prevents companies from claiming credits for activity they were already legally required to perform.

Jurisdictional Tagging Framework

PIP v4.5 introduces a controlled Jurisdictional Tagging Framework. Each Batch Record and PIC Lot may receive a structured jurisdictional tag to identify the primary regulatory environment relevant to the activity.

Jurisdictional Tags may include categories such as:

• EU-PPWR

• EU member-state EPR programs

• United Kingdom EPR

• U.S. state EPR programs

• Voluntary plastic impact activity

• ESG substantiation use

• Multi-jurisdiction activity

Jurisdictional Tags are organizational tools only. They do not constitute legal compliance determinations, regulatory filings, or representations that an activity satisfies a specific legal obligation. The purpose is to make Registry data easier for corporate buyers, ESG teams, legal teams, auditors, and regulators to review.

Registry Supremacy

The GEIS Registry™ is the authoritative legal record for all projects, kilogram balances, credit issuances, transfers, burns, cancellations, invalidations, corrections, metadata, and claims. Tokens, dashboards, secondary-market interfaces, marketing materials, and Claim Package™ documents are subordinate to the Registry.

A token burn alone does not create a valid retirement. A burn is valid only when the GEIS Registry™ first sets the applicable credits to burned status. The on-chain burn is the final action, not the initiating action. This structure prevents token activity from being mistaken for legal retirement or verified impact attribution.

Zero Double Counting Rule

PIP v4.5 includes a Zero Double Counting Rule. Each verified kilogram of recovered plastic may support exactly one Plastic Impact Credit™, and each Plastic Impact Credit™ may support exactly one environmental claim.

This is enforced through registry-level controls including:

• Integrity Lock Flag™

• Claim Lock Flag™

• Evidence Partitioning™

• Burn Attribution Records™

• Evidence Partition Records™

Once verified kilograms are committed to a credit issuance lot, they cannot support another issuance. Once claim evidence is assigned to a burning party, that same evidence cannot be claimed by another party.

Evidence and Monitoring Requirements

The Protocol requires documented, verifiable evidence for eligible activity.

Depending on the methodology, required evidence may include:

• Weight tickets

• Certified scale records

• -confirmed collection data

• Photo evidence

• Custody Transfer Records

• Field-to-Facility Weight Reconciliation

• Approved downstream facility documentation

• Individual Participant Records

• Monitoring Reports

• Independent verifier review

The dApp and Registry must use controlled fields, controlled status codes, required evidence uploads, source category restrictions, and validation checks. Free-text claims and unsupported weight entries are not sufficient.

For collection activity involving individual collectors or group cleanup events, Individual Participant Records represent the highest-integrity evidence tier. These records may include participant ID, collection date, GPS location, verified collected weight, payment status, custody transfer record, and submission timestamp.

Facility Approval and Chain-of-Custody

Any facility relied upon for issuance must be approved by GEIS for the applicable methodology. Ad-hoc destinations are prohibited.

Approved facilities must demonstrate lawful operation, appropriate permits, capacity to produce weight tickets or certified scale records, and a documented downstream chain through to the applicable recycling, recovery, or processing endpoint.

For eligible activity involving field collection followed by facility intake, Field-to-Facility Weight Reconciliation is required. This means field weight and facility intake weight must both be documented, and any difference must be explained.

Independent Validation and Verification

PIP v4.5 distinguishes between validation and verification. Validation reviews the project design before issuance. It evaluates baseline, additionality, eligibility, safeguards, monitoring plans, and methodology applicability.

Verification reviews the actual monitored results after activity occurs. It evaluates reported quantities, evidence sufficiency, chain-of-custody, reconciliation, and whether the claimed impact satisfies the Protocol.

Plastic Impact Credits™ may not be issued until the applicable validation and verification requirements have been satisfied. The Protocol also includes an Approved Verifier Framework, independence requirements, corrective-action procedures, and controls against volume-based verifier compensation.

Safeguards and Social Integrity

PIP v4.5 requires projects, facilities, and downstream handling stages to satisfy minimum safeguards. These include lawful operation, worker health and safety controls, prohibition of forced labor, prohibition of child labor except lawful non-hazardous light work where applicable, and access to a documented grievance channel.

Projects operating in or near residential communities must document community consultation where required. For projects affecting indigenous peoples, tribal communities, or communities with recognized customary land rights, the Protocol requires Free, Prior, and Informed Consent where applicable. Consultation alone is not enough where consent is required. FPIC must be free of coercion, obtained prior to commencement, and based on complete information provided in an accessible form.

Claim Package™

When a Plastic Impact Credit™ is burned, GEIS generates a Claim Package™.

The Claim Package™ includes:

• Legal Burn Certificate

• Attribution Summary

• Machine-readable JSON output

• Curated Evidence Package

• Burn Attribution Record™

• Evidence Partition Records™

The Claim Package™ identifies the burning party, the retired credits, the assigned evidence, the relevant impact data, the jurisdictional information, and the claim language permitted under the Protocol. Buyers do not receive broad, unsupported claim rights. Claims are limited to what the Registry confirms and what the Claim Package™ supports.

Claim Governance

Holding Plastic Impact Credits™ does not create an environmental claim. Transferring Plastic Impact Credits™ does not create an environmental claim. Only burning Plastic Impact Credits™ through the GEIS Registry™ creates a valid claim.

PIP v4.5 governs what a Burning Party may and may not say publicly after retirement. Claim language must match the underlying evidence, attribution, credit class, burn status, and Registry record. This protects buyers from unsupported sustainability claims, double claims, greenwashing risk, and reputational exposure.

Hybrid Claim Architecture™

PIP v4.5 uses a Hybrid Claim Architecture™ that separates credit ownership, burn retirement, evidence attribution, and claim rights. This allows Plastic Impact Credits™ to be transferred or held while preventing claim rights from attaching until retirement. At burn, the Registry calculates the burning party’s proportional attribution, locks the claim, partitions the evidence, and generates the Claim Package™. This architecture allows secondary-market functionality while preserving evidence integrity and preventing double-counting.

Secondary Market Architecture

PIP v4.5 includes secondary-market governance for Market Participant Accounts. Market Participants may acquire, hold, and transfer Plastic Impact Credits™ without burning them. However, holding or reselling credits does not create impact claim rights.

The Protocol governs Market Participant Accounts, Reseller Agreements, transfer fees, lot standardization, account whitelisting, KYC, holding-period rules, CFTC threshold disclosures, speculative accumulation disclosures, and vintage transparency. This allows market liquidity while maintaining Registry control and claim integrity.

Holding Period Governance

PIP v4.5 includes rules for credits that are held over time. Credits held longer than 24 months require annual attestation. Credits held longer than 60 months are subject to mandatory revalidation of baseline, additionality, and regulatory surplus.

Issuance vintage must remain visible. Marketing language that presents aged credits as newly issued units is prohibited. The Protocol does not impose a vintage premium or discount. Pricing is left to the market. The Protocol governs disclosure, administration, and revalidation.

Buffer Pool

PIP v4.5 includes a mandatory buffer set-aside applied at issuance. The buffer is designed to protect the integrity of issued credits in the event of retroactive disqualification, fraud-detected reversal, facility failure, verifier removal, or similar integrity events. Buffer units are system-controlled by GEIS and may not be transferred to external parties.

Conformance Levels

PIP v4.5 establishes three conformance levels.

Full Conformance

Full Conformance means every applicable requirement of the Protocol has been satisfied without exception. Only Full Conformance permits use of the unqualified phrase “compliant with PIP v4.5.”

Conditional Conformance

Conditional Conformance means the project has one or more documented, time-bounded exceptions accepted by GEIS. Conditional Conformance may authorize issuance only for the unaffected portion of activity and must be disclosed in the Registry.

Certain exceptions cannot qualify for Conditional Conformance, including failures involving additionality, regulatory surplus, chain-of-custody integrity, required individual participant evidence, buffer set-aside, core integrity controls, FPIC where applicable, or prohibited claims.

Pre-Conformance

Pre-Conformance applies to pilot projects, methodology refinement, or onboarding activity. Pre-Conformance does not authorize issuance and does not support environmental impact claims.

Machine-Readable Data Schema

PIP v4.5 adds the GEIS Machine-Readable Data Schema. This schema supports structured JSON output for Claim Package™ data, Registry records, attribution summaries, jurisdictional tags, evidence references, and audit workflows.

The purpose is to make plastic impact data usable by corporate ESG systems, regulatory data environments, auditors, enterprise reporting tools, and independent review processes.

Why PIP v4.5 Matters

The Plastic Impact Protocol™ v4.5 is not a marketing document. It is a governing standard. It defines the rules for how plastic impact is measured, verified, credited, transferred, retired, and claimed. It is designed to close the structural weaknesses that have limited trust in the plastic credit market.

PIP v4.5 brings together:

• Published and versioned governance

• Third-party validation and verification

• Kilogram-level accounting

• Registry-controlled issuance and retirement

• Field-to-facility reconciliation

• Individual participant evidence

• Approved facility controls

• Jurisdictional tagging

• Regulatory surplus testing

• PPWR and EPR baseline awareness

• Machine-readable Claim Package™ data

• Secondary-market governance

• Holding-period controls

• Conformance levels

• Anti-double-counting architecture

• Claim-language restrictions

• Safeguards and FPIC protections

• Hard Gates for inactive methodologies

The result is a plastic credit framework built for real-world recovery, defensible claims, institutional review, and long-term market integrity.

Download the Full Protocol

The full Plastic Impact Protocol™ v4.5 provides the complete governing language, definitions, methodologies, annexes, appendices, data schema, safeguards, registry architecture, verification requirements, claim rules, and implementation standards.

Corporate buyers, project developers, verifiers, regulators, market participants, ESG teams, and technology partners should review the full Protocol before relying on any Plastic Impact Credit™, claim, project, methodology, or Registry record.