Exporters of metal packaging waste will be able to receive accreditation even if they do not know the identity of the overseas processor at the time, under government plans to resolve the "broadly equivalent" issue.
The proposal is the favoured option of three put forward in a consultation from the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs on Tuesday (18 March).
The consultation comes after months of wrangling over the issue between metal industry associations and the government.
Until now, before they received accreditation, exporters had to provide documentary evidence that overseas reprocessors were operating under "broadly equivalent" conditions to those in the UK.
The cost of doing this deterred some from seeking accreditation, meaning that any metal waste that they had reprocessed did not go towards recycling targets.
Other factors were the costs to overseas reprocessors of producing suitable evidence relative to the low tonnages they handled from UK sources, and the use of traders and brokers who have been unwilling to provide details of their reprocessor clients to UK exporters for commercial reasons.
However, under the new proposals, exporters would in future receive accreditation provided they operated under broadly equivalent standards and certain conditions were met.
Packaging waste must have been segregated at source or processed to ensure it is exported within a shipment of similar material. In addition, the material must have a high economic value and recycling it must have a clear environmental benefit, and the exported material must meet the required quality.
Defra said this option would make it "more likely" that sufficient Packaging Recovery Notes or Packaging Export Recovery Notes were generated for producers and compliance schemes to meet their obligations.
The department's other options include keeping things are they are and setting up a database of accredited reprocessors.
If it does nothing, Defra said compliance costs for packaging producers with a steel obligation could rise by £51m a year and up to £5.6m for those with an aluminium obligation.
Alupro executive director Rick Hindley said it was "essential" that the proposals go through so that "true recycling figures" were put towards targets, especially as the high value of aluminium and steel ensures that it is being recycled.
"The consultation is also trying to streamline the flow of evidence to make it simpler," he added.
Hindley said he was also in favour of establishing a database of accredited reprocessors because "it makes a lot of sense and will ensure consistency".
Defra also proposed that metals trade associations write to the governments of the main importing countries to seek reassurance about the broadly equivalent status of the facilities that take scrap metals.
The department suggested that a proportion of PRN revenue could be diverted to Environment Agencies to fund inspection of overseas sites, or be used by exporters to employ an expert witness to ascertain which countries had the relevant regulatory schemes in place.
The proposals are contained in a consultation that will seek the views of packaging producers, compliance schemes, waste management companies and special interest groups. The consultation closes in six weeks' time on 29 April. Visit http://www.defra.gov.uk/
The proposal is the favoured option of three put forward in a consultation from the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs on Tuesday (18 March).
The consultation comes after months of wrangling over the issue between metal industry associations and the government.
Until now, before they received accreditation, exporters had to provide documentary evidence that overseas reprocessors were operating under "broadly equivalent" conditions to those in the UK.
The cost of doing this deterred some from seeking accreditation, meaning that any metal waste that they had reprocessed did not go towards recycling targets.
Other factors were the costs to overseas reprocessors of producing suitable evidence relative to the low tonnages they handled from UK sources, and the use of traders and brokers who have been unwilling to provide details of their reprocessor clients to UK exporters for commercial reasons.
However, under the new proposals, exporters would in future receive accreditation provided they operated under broadly equivalent standards and certain conditions were met.
Packaging waste must have been segregated at source or processed to ensure it is exported within a shipment of similar material. In addition, the material must have a high economic value and recycling it must have a clear environmental benefit, and the exported material must meet the required quality.
Defra said this option would make it "more likely" that sufficient Packaging Recovery Notes or Packaging Export Recovery Notes were generated for producers and compliance schemes to meet their obligations.
The department's other options include keeping things are they are and setting up a database of accredited reprocessors.
If it does nothing, Defra said compliance costs for packaging producers with a steel obligation could rise by £51m a year and up to £5.6m for those with an aluminium obligation.
Alupro executive director Rick Hindley said it was "essential" that the proposals go through so that "true recycling figures" were put towards targets, especially as the high value of aluminium and steel ensures that it is being recycled.
"The consultation is also trying to streamline the flow of evidence to make it simpler," he added.
Hindley said he was also in favour of establishing a database of accredited reprocessors because "it makes a lot of sense and will ensure consistency".
Defra also proposed that metals trade associations write to the governments of the main importing countries to seek reassurance about the broadly equivalent status of the facilities that take scrap metals.
The department suggested that a proportion of PRN revenue could be diverted to Environment Agencies to fund inspection of overseas sites, or be used by exporters to employ an expert witness to ascertain which countries had the relevant regulatory schemes in place.
The proposals are contained in a consultation that will seek the views of packaging producers, compliance schemes, waste management companies and special interest groups. The consultation closes in six weeks' time on 29 April. Visit http://www.defra.gov.uk/
Source: packagingnews
No comments:
Post a Comment