This is the first substantial guidance that has been produced in respect of this fundamental shift in how the United Kingdom is to process recyclables in accordance with EU Law as of 1 January 2015. However, the Environment Agency stresses that this should not be construed as statutory guidance but information to “help those affected to meet the requirements”.

The Regulations

From 1 January 2015, an establishment or undertaking which collects waste paper, metal, plastic or glass must do so by way of separate collection. These requirements apply where separate collection is:

  1. necessary to ensure that waste undergoes recovery operations in accordance with Articles 4 and 13 of the Waste Framework Directive, and to facility or improve recovery (the “Necessity” test); and
  2. technically, environmental and economically practicable (the “TEEP” test).

Environment Agency Guidance – What collectors must do!

Within the guidance, the Environment Agency states that:

 

  • every collector (Waste Collection Authority or establishment or undertaking collecting waste) must, when making arrangements for the collection of waste paper, metal, plastic or glass, ensure that those arrangements are by way of separate collection if the Necessity and TEEP tests are met;
  • collectors who currently do not have separate collection arrangements should review their practices and consider if and how they comply ensuring that the Necessity and TEEP test are “rigorously” applied;
  • collectors who conclude that it is not necessary or not TEEP to operate collection arrangements should keep, and able to provide for inspection, an audit trail which will assist the Environment Agency to understand the basis of that decision-making process;
  • the Environment Agency specifically advises collectors to consult their lawyers to ensure that they are compliant with the new Regulations;
  • collectors are expected to ensure in all cases that their customers can avoid putting paper, plastic, metal or glass in the same collection containers as general waste and, subject to the Necessity and TEEP tests, are expected to collect paper, plastic, metal and glass separately from each other;
  • the Environment Agency expects producers and collectors (and brokers where applicable) to “work together” to find the right collection system to maximise recycling and compliance with the law.

 

Environment Agency Guidance – “risk-based regime”

The Environment Agency have announced a “risk-based regime” which is aimed to help collectors achieve compliance but that will at the same time be robust with those who “deliberately ignore their obligations”. The intention is to work with collectors by holding practical conversations or issuing “advisory letters” in the first instance if breaches are found.

Compliance will be reviewed by monitoring sources of information, such as WasteDataFlow and the WRAP website, which will act as indicators of whether a collector is complying with the regulations. The guidance includes an Indicators of Compliance Table (“IoC Table”) to assess whether further scrutiny by the Environment Agency is required. The IoC Table is as follows:

 

 

 

Level of Compliance

Indicator

Level of Intervention

 

 

High

 

 

  • Collections which are providing an on-site or doorstep separate collection, or kerbside sorting, of each paper, glass, plastics and cans.
  • Collectors who have rigorously applied the Necessity and TEEP tests and collection arrangements are based on well-evidence, documented and justified decision-making.

 

 

Low

 

 

Medium(Possibly failing the Necessity or TEEP test)

 

 

  • Collectors who send co-mingled collections to a MRF which is producing poor quality recyclates.
  • A collector advertising a new contract that is prescriptive about type of collection/sorting service unless it is clear it wants a multi-stream/separate collection.
  • A collection which has moved away from separate collection to co-mingling, or renewed to co-mingling since 2012.
  • If one or more of the four materials is only collected through a CA site or bring banks.

 

 

Medium

 

 

Low/non-compliant

 

 

  • Evidence that good quality recyclate collections deliberately sent for disposal or incineration or remixed with other waste.
  • No or little attempt to apply the regulations. No response to requests for information.
  • Evidence from site inspections or audits where collections have led to poor management causing environmental harm, or illegal activity such as mis-description or illegal export.

 

 

High

 

 

 

As suggested in the name, the IoC Table is not an exhaustive list of applicable indicators and collectors should tread carefully when assessing their compliance. To date many collectors have sought to argue that compliance with the new Regulations immediately from 1 January 2015 is impracticable because collection contracts are often for a number of years and the collection infrastructure can have a long lifespan. However, whilst acknowledging that they will act “reasonably in considering such matters”, the collection industry has known for several years that the legislation was due to come into effect this January and, as a result, the Environment Agency expects to see “improvement measures” being undertaken to contracts that should have taken into account the requirements of the Regulations.

Where, in the Environment Agency’s opinion, the indicators above suggest non-compliance, the below “intervention measures” will be engaged, in order, taking into consideration the “suspected” level of compliance and the intent of the operator concerned.

 

 

 

Intervention Measures

 

 

Stage 1

Advisory phone call or letter – to seek to explore and understand the collection activity, and whether improvements can or should be made.

 

 

Stage 2

Meeting with operator/collector for discussion

 

 

Stage 3

Site inspection

 

 

Stage 4

Site audit

 

 

Stage 5

Enforcement notice

 

 

Stage 6

Warning letter

 

 

Stage 7

Formal caution

 

 

Stage 8

Prosecution

 

 

 

Each stage is aimed at ensuring and encouraging compliance with the Regulations and a number of discussions will no doubt be had at each stage to seek compliance.

Conclusion

The guidance clearly establishes the Environmental Agency’s position in respect of the Regulations.  It expects collectors to comply with the duty to separately collect waste unless compliance isn’t required due to the Necessity and/or TEEP tests.

During the course of January-March 2015, collectors should expect to be contacted by the Environment Agency requesting the disclosure of information on collection methods and, where appropriate, seeking evidence on the application of the Necessity and TEEP tests. Contractors and collectors should therefore be already reviewing their practices, and documentation, in anticipation of contact from the Environment Agency.

Should you wish to discuss the new guidance, or your organisation’s compliance with the Regulations, please contact Mrs Gayle Monk or Mr Cynyr Rhys for an informal discussion. Both Gayle and Cynyr were involved in the Judicial Review which led to the amended Regulations being published.

A full copy of the Environment Agency’s Briefing Note can be found by clicking here.

For more information

Please contact:

Cynyr Rhys on 0121 214 3619 | cynyr.rhys@anthonycollins.com; or

Gayle Monk on 0121 214 3630 | gayle.monk@anthonycollins.com

Is £400m enough?
Is £400m enough?

The government announced on 16 May that it will provide a fund of £400m to cover the costs of removal and replacement of cladding to high rise residential blocks which have failed tests.

The problems with co-owned properties and attorneys
The problems with co-owned properties and attorneys

Whilst some people are under the impression that preparing a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) is simply a case of completing a form and ticking a few boxes, it is about far more than this.

What's mine is (not) yours!
What's mine is (not) yours!

A big fear for some people facing divorce and the inevitable carving up of the matrimonial assets. They seek assurances that such assets will be “ring-fenced” and retained for them.

How to avoid the PET trap
How to avoid the PET trap

When an individual is thinking about making a gift to another individual, consideration needs to be given to the Potentially Exempt Transfer (PET) trap.

Fictitious divorces
Fictitious divorces

Arising from the recent Family Division announcement, people who think they are legally divorced may in fact still be married.