OMCs Reject Karnataka's Claim of Excess Ethanol in Petrol, Question Testing Procedure

Public sector oil marketing companies (OMCs) have rejected the Karnataka government's allegation that petrol sold at certain retail outlets in the state contained ethanol levels exceeding the prescribed 20 per cent limit, saying the findings were not based on tests conducted under established procedures.

In a joint statement on Friday, Indian Oil Corporation (IOCL), Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) said they had taken note of the state government's claim that tests had detected ethanol content ranging from 26 per cent to 31.2 per cent in petrol samples.

The allegations were based on samples collected from Bengaluru, Kolar, Chikkaballapura, Bengaluru Rural, Ramanagara, Mangaluru and Tumakuru, Food, Civil Supplies, Consumer Affairs and Legal Metrology Minister Rizwan Arshad had said.

The OMCs maintained that the E20 petrol supplied across the country, including Karnataka, complies with Bureau of Indian Standards specification IS 17021 for ethanol-blended motor gasoline.

They questioned the sampling methodology adopted during the October 2026 exercise, stating that the Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel Control Order, 2005, read with the Marketing Discipline Guidelines (MDG) 2024, prescribes a specific procedure for sample collection, retention, testing and communication of results.

Under the guidelines, six one-litre samples must be drawn, with copies distributed among the dealer, oil company or department and a designated laboratory. Sample labels must also carry joint signatures.

The companies said the October exercise reportedly involved sample collection without OMC representatives and that they had not received retention samples, outlet-wise details or complete laboratory reports despite seeking them.

They also questioned the reliance on third-party laboratory certificates, saying these lacked sufficient technical details for independent verification.

The OMCs said the procedural shortcomings had denied them and the dealers an opportunity to seek verification or retesting of the reported findings.