Information on Hazardous
Substances in Waste
 A current state assessment over Swedish
waste managers’ needs regarding end-of-life
vehicles and waste electrical and electronic
equipment
Goodpoint AB
i
Goodpoint AB
PREFACE
This study was commissioned by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and performed by
Goodpoint AB.
This study is part of the Governmental commission regarding resource-efficient and non-toxic material
cycles that the Swedish Government has commissioned the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
The study presents the current state on information transfer in the material cycle between actors and
identifies needs of stakeholders in order to improve it. The study was performed by conducting
interviews with stakeholders in the waste/recycling industry. The interviews took place in November
and December 2015. The study was performed by Niklas Gonzalez, Karin Carlqvist, Anna Persson,
Maria Danielson and Caroline Rosenberg, Goodpoint AB. The study was performed in collaboration
with Elisabeth Österwall, Erika Nygren and Ola Larsson, Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
This report is written by Goodpoint AB and the opinions expressed are the writers’ unless otherwise
stated.
2016-06-27
Goodpoint AB
ii
Goodpoint AB
iii
Goodpoint AB
SUMMARY
The Swedish Generation Goal defines the direction of the environmental policy in Sweden and the
status of the environment within one generation. One mean to achieve the goal is to establish
resource-efficient material cycles that are, as far as possible, free from hazardous substances.
The 7th Environmental Action Programme adopted by the EU recognizes the importance of adopting a
green and competitive low-carbon economy. The key to achieve increased resource efficiency is to
promote and facilitate reuse, recovery and recycling.
As a part of the Governmental commission of non-toxic and resource-efficient material cycles the
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) is commissioned to provide the material for future
proposals of amendments in EU legislation. Improved flow of information regarding the substances in
articles has been identified by the SEPA of key importance to achieve resource-efficient material cycles.
The EU has adopted several waste and chemical related legislatives acts. The following legislation were
within the scope of the study: Directive 2009/125/EC (Ecodesign) , Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006
(REACH), Directive 2011/65/EU (RoHS), Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 (Construction Products),
Directive 2008/98/EC (Waste), Directive 2000/53/EC (ELV) and Directive 2012/19/EU (WEEE).
This study has focused on the implications of the legislation on end-of-life vehicles (ELV) and waste
electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) with the aim of understanding the following:
a) What information on hazardous substances do Swedish waste treatment facilities have access to
today;
b) What information on hazardous substances do they want;
c) What information on hazardous substances do they need to increase the efficiency of recycling?
The study was conducted through interviews with waste managers and stakeholders in the Swedish
waste industry. In addition, several referrals were also conducted with stakeholders to the waste
industry, such as trade organisations and experts within the public sector. An ideal flow of information
was developed and a GAP analysis was made between actual and ideal states to identify where
improvements can be made.
In the case of ELV there are channels to supply information to treatments facilities; however, the ELV
Directive only specifies a limited number of substances with an information duty to treatment facilities.
A major part of the ELV industry is the retail of used components, an important venture for increased
resource efficiency. In this capacity, the ELV industry could be considered distributors and thus may
have the obligation of informing customers if their articles contain substances on the candidate list, as
described by Article 33 in REACH. There are established information channels for treatment facilities
to access this information but lack of knowledge of them and disinterest from consumers leave the
information channels unused.
Treatment facilities of WEEE receive no information on hazardous substances as described in the WEEE
Directive. Instead, supply of information is often part of contracts between companies since there is a
correlation between the value of the WEEE and its content. However, the practice is only possible if
the transaction is between two industrial actors, such as a manufacturer and waste manager.
Importantly, this is not applicable when the WEEE is from individuals via municipal collection sites.
The study shows that one reason for the lack of compliance with the WEEE Directive can partly be
explained by the lack of pressure on manufacturers from waste managers to provide the information
iv
Goodpoint AB
since waste managers do not rely on the information when it is provided since the quality is considered
poor.
Furthermore, the WEEE Directive states the information transfer to be done through manuals or
electronic media, e.g. CD-ROM or online services. All interviewed parties agreed that the practice of
going though manuals, CDs or databases is not feasible in a cost-efficient process since the separation
is often done manuall. A more suitable mean of information transfer for vehicles and EEE would be to
have the information on the article itself, either through physical marks or through electronic tags.
In the ELV Directive, only certain metals have a clear information duty. On the other hand, the WEEE
Directive establishes an information duty on all dangerous substances without further definition on
what is dangerous and what is not. In future amendments to better the information flow there is a
need to state on which substances there is an information duty. The candidate list is seen as a good
place to start as it lists specific hazardous substances and it is continuously updated.
v
Goodpoint AB
SAMMANFATTNING
Det svenska generationsmålet styr inriktningen på Sveriges miljöarbete. Målet ger en vägledning om
vilka värden som ska skyddas och den samhällsomställning som krävs för att nå önskad miljökvalitet
inom loppet av en generation. Svensk miljöpolitik ska främja resurseffektiva kretslopp som så långt
som möjligt ska vara fria från farliga ämnen.
EU:s sjunde miljöhandlingsprogram värdesätter implementeringen av en grön, konkurrenskraftig och
koldioxidsnål ekonomi. Nyckeln till att uppnå en ökad resurseffektivitet bedöms vara att främja och
förenkla för återanvändning, behandling och materialåtervinning.
Naturvårdverket har fått ett uppdrag av regeringen att kartlägga möjligheten att åstadkomma giftfria
och resurseffektiva kretslopp. I detta deluppdrag ingår det att analysera hur avfalls- och
kemikalielagstiftningen tillämpas och var det finns behov av förbättringar. Naturvårdverket har tidigare
identifierat att bättre flöde av information om varors innehåll har stor betydelse för att uppnå målet.
EU har antagit flera kemikalie- och avfallsrelaterade lagstiftningar och följande lagstiftningar har varit
ansetts relevanta för detta uppdrag: Direktiv 2009/125/EG (Ekodesign), Förordning (EG) nr 1907/2006
(REACH), Direktiv 2011/65/EU (RoHS), Förordning (EU) nr 305/2011 (Byggprodukter), Direktiv
2008/98/EG (Avfall), Direktiv 2000/53/EG (Uttjänta bilar) och Direktiv 2012/19/EU (WEEE).
Studien har fokuserat på konsekvenserna av lagstiftningen på hanteringen av uttjänta bilar och avfall
från elektriska och elektroniska produkter. Syftet med studien är att förstå följande:
a) Vilken information om farliga ämnen har svenska avfallshanterare tillgång till i dagsläget?
b) Vilken information om farliga ämnen vill de ha?
c) Vilken information om farliga ämnen behövs för att öka effektiviteten i
materialåtervinningsflödet?
Studien genomfördes genom intervjuer med avfallshanterare och intressenter inom avfallsindustrin.
Utöver dem har andra berörda parter kontaktats, såsom branschorganisationer och experter inom den
offentliga sektorn. Ett idealiskt informationsflöde har utformats och en GAP-analys utfördes mellan
reell och ideal situation för att identifiera var det finns utrymme för förbättringar.
I fallet med uttjänta bilar finns det befintliga kanaler för att lämna information till avfallsanläggningar,
dock belägger ELV-direktivet endast ett fåtal substanser med informationsplikt. En viktig del av
bildemonterares verksamhet är handel av begagnade komponenter, vilket är viktigt för ökad
resurseffektivitet. I denna roll kan fordonsindustrin anses vara återförsäljare och därmed ha skyldighet
att informera kunder om deras artiklar innehåller ämnen på kandidatförteckningen så som det
föreskrivs i artikel 33 av REACH. För avfallshanterare finns det etablerade informationskanaler som kan
ge tillgång till denna information men brist på kunskap och avsaknad av konsumentkrav gör att
informationskanaler inte utnyttjas.
Avfallshanterare av WEEE får ingen information om farliga ämnen så som beskrivs i WEEE-direktivet.
Istället är tillgång på information ofta skrivet i avtal mellan företag eftersom det finns ett samband
mellan WEEE:s värde och dess innehåll. Detta är i praktiken endast möjligt om transaktionen är mellan
två företag, något som inte är fallet när WEEE kommer privatpersoner via kommunala insamlingar.
Studien visar att orsaken till bristande efterlevnad av WEEE-direktivet, kan delvis bero på ointresse
från avfallshanterare att komma åt informationen då de anser att kvalitén på informationen är
undermålig.
vi
Goodpoint AB
I WEEE-direktivet anges det att informationsöverföringen ska ske genom manualer eller elektroniska
media så som CD-ROM eller online tjänster. Alla intervjuade parter var överens om att
tillvägagångssättet att gå igenom handböcker, CD-ROM eller databaser inte ger en kostnadseffektiv
process. Att söka upp information för varje enskild varumodell kräver stora resurser och är inte
ekonomiskt gångbart. En mer lämplig metod för informationsöverföring för uttjänta fordon och WEEE
skulle vara att själva varan skulle kunna bära informationen, antingen genom fysiska markeringar eller
genom elektroniska chip.
I ELV-direktivet har endast ett fåtal substanser en tydlig informationsplikt. Däremot fastställer WEEEdirektivet en informationsplikt över farliga ämnen utan att ytterligare definiera vad som menas med
farligt. I framtida ändringar för att förbättra informationsflödet finns det ett behov att specificera för
vilka ämnen det finns en informationsskyldighet. Kandidatförteckningen är ett bra instrument att
använda då den klart och tydligt listar farliga ämnen och uppdateras kontinuerligt.
vii
Goodpoint AB
CONTENTS
1
DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................................... 1
2
BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................. 4
3
2.1
ECODESIGN DIRECTIVE ............................................................................................................ 4
2.2
REACH REGULATION................................................................................................................ 4
2.3
RoHS (II) DIRECTIVE ................................................................................................................. 5
2.4
CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS REGULATION .............................................................................. 6
2.5
WASTE FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE............................................................................................. 6
2.5.1
END-OF-LIFE VEHICLES .................................................................................................... 7
2.5.2
WASTE ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT ....................................................... 7
CIRCULAR ECONOMY....................................................................................................................... 8
3.1
ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................ 8
3.1.1
3.2
RECYCLING ....................................................................................................................... 9
CHEMICALS IN PRODUCTS ....................................................................................................... 9
4
AIM OF STUDY ............................................................................................................................... 11
5
DELIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 12
6
METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................................. 13
7
6.1
ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT .......................................................................... 13
6.2
VEHICLES................................................................................................................................ 14
CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................... 15
7.1
7.1.1
INFORMATION ACCESS .................................................................................................. 15
7.1.2
INFORMATION NEEDS ................................................................................................... 15
7.2
8
ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICAL EQUIPMENT ...................................................................... 16
7.2.1
INFORMATION ACCESS .................................................................................................. 16
7.2.2
INFORMATION NEEDS ................................................................................................... 17
GAP-ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................... 18
8.1
9
AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY ....................................................................................................... 15
LEGISLATION .......................................................................................................................... 18
8.1.1
VEHICLES ........................................................................................................................ 18
8.1.2
ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICAL EQUIPMENT .............................................................. 21
8.2
NEED OF GUIDANCE .............................................................................................................. 23
8.3
IDEAL INFORMATION CYCLE .................................................................................................. 25
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................... 26
9.1
PRE-EMPTIVELY REDUCING WASTE....................................................................................... 26
9.2
INFORMATION TRANSFER CHANNELS ................................................................................... 26
viii
Goodpoint AB
9.3
COMPARISON WITH OTHER LEGALISATION IN TERMS OF INFORMATION TRANSFER AND
MARKING ........................................................................................................................................... 27
9.4
WEEE AND ELV....................................................................................................................... 28
9.5
INFORMATION NEEDED......................................................................................................... 28
9.6
NEED OF GUIDANCE AND INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS ........................................................ 29
10 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................... 30
ix
Goodpoint AB
1 DEFINITIONS
The following definitions apply in the report, see below. Definitions found in legislations are marked
with their source.
‘article’, as in Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, means an object which during production is given a
special shape, surface or design which determines its function to a greater degree than does its
chemical composition;
‘BVB’, means the Swedish system of “Byggvarubedömningen”;
‘B2B’, means business-to-business;
‘candidate list’, refers to the list referred to in Article 59(10) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006;
‘CiP’, means Chemicals in Products;
‘CMR’, means “carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic”;
‘construction product’, as in Regulation (EU) No 305/2011, means any product or kit which is produced
and placed on the market for incorporation in a permanent manner in construction works or parts
thereof and the performance of which has an effect on the performance of the construction works
with respect to the basic requirements for construction works;
‘dangerous substance’, see definition of ‘hazardous substance’;
‘distributor’, as in Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, means any natural or legal person established within
the Community, including a retailer, who only stores and places on the market a substance, on its own
or in a mixture, for third parties;
‘Electrical and Electronic Equipment’ or ‘EEE’, as in Directive 2012/19/EU, means equipment which is
dependent on electric currents or electromagnetic fields in order to work properly and equipment for
the generation, transfer and measurement of such currents and fields and designed for use with a
voltage rating not exceeding 1 000 volts for alternating current and 1 500 volts for direct current;
‘ELV’ or ‘End-of-Life-Vehicle’, means a vehicle which is waste within the meaning of Article 1(a) of
Directive 75/442/EEC;
‘ELV Directive’, refers to Directive 2000/53/EC on end-of-life vehicles;
‘energy-related product’, as in Directive 2009/125/EC, means any good that has an impact on energy
consumption during use which is placed on the market and/or put into service, and includes parts
intended to be incorporated into energy-related products covered by Directive 2009/125/EC which are
placed on the market and/or put into service as individual parts for end-users and of which the
environmental performance can be assessed independently;
‘EoW’, means end-of-waste;
‘harmful substance’ see definition of ‘hazardous substance’;
‘hazardous substance’ means a substance that has been classified as hazardous in accordance with
Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. ‘dangerous substance’ is sometimes used interchangeably with
‘hazardous substance’, in this report the latter is used unless there is specific reason to use the former,
e.g. if ‘dangerous’ is used in the legislation discussed;
1
Goodpoint AB
‘IDIS’, means international dismantling information system;
‘IMDS’, means international material data system;
‘importer’, as in Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, means any natural or legal person established within
the Community who is responsible for import;
‘manufacturer’, as in Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, means any natural or legal person established
within the Community who manufactures a substance or article within the Community;
‘material company’, means any legal person undertaking arranging the recovery or disposal of waste
on behalf of others, including such material companies who do not take physical possession of the
waste;
‘municipal waste’, as in Directive 1999/31/EC, means waste from households, as well as other waste
which, because of its nature or composition, is similar to waste from household;
‘REACH’ refers to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation
and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH);
‘recovery’, as in Directive 2008/98/EC, means any operation the principal result of which is waste
serving a useful purpose by replacing other materials which would otherwise have been used to fulfil
a particular function, or waste being prepared to fulfil that function, in the plant or in the wider
economy. Annex II of 2008/98/EC sets out a non-exhaustive list of recovery operations;
‘recycling’, as in Directive 2008/98/EC, means any recovery operation by which waste materials are
reprocessed into products, materials or substances whether for the original or other purposes. It
includes the reprocessing of organic material but does not include energy recovery and the
reprocessing into materials that are to be used as fuels or for backfilling operations;
‘re-use’, as in Directive 2008/98/EC, means any operation by which products or components that are
not waste are used again for the same purpose for which they were conceived;
‘RFID’, means radio frequency identification;
‘stakeholder’, means any actor in the material cycle;
‘substance’, as in Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, means a chemical element and its compounds in the
natural state or obtained by any manufacturing process, including any additive necessary to preserve
its stability and any impurity deriving from the process used, but excluding any solvent which may be
separated without affecting the stability of the substance or changing its composition;
‘SVHC’, means substance of very high concern;
‘vehicle’, means (a) any vehicle used for the carriage of passengers and comprising no more than eight
seats in addition to the driver's seat; (b) any vehicle used for the carriage of goods and having a
maximum weight not exceeding 3.5 metric tons;
‘waste’, as in Directive 2008/98/EC, means any substance or object which the holder discards or
intends or is required to discard;
‘waste electrical and electronic equipment’ or ‘WEEE’, as in Directive 2012/19/EU, means electrical or
electronic equipment which is waste within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2008/98/EC,
including all components, sub-assemblies and consumables which are part of the product at the time
of discarding;
2
Goodpoint AB
’waste manager’, means legal person managing waste and individuals employed at a facility that
manages waste;
‘WEEE Directive’, refers to Directive 2012/19/EU on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE);
‘WFD’, refers to Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (Waste Framework Directive).
3
Goodpoint AB
2 BACKGROUND
In the undertaking of promoting free movement of goods within the European Union, it has adopted
numerous Directives and Regulations harmonising conditions throughout the European Union. A short
description of the relevant legislations is presented (see below) together with a brief analysis of its
impact on the aim of the project. The EU directives are implemented in the Member States’ national
legislation, in this study only the communal directives are studied and not the national
implementations.
2.1 ECODESIGN DIRECTIVE
DIRECTIVE 2009/125/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 21 October 2009
on establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products
The Directive establishes a framework that allows for adopting implementing measures (as defined in
the Ecodesign Directive) for specific energy-related product types and is applied to many energy
consuming and energy-related products. The framework defines the characteristics of energy-related
products that are within the scope of the Directive and can be regulated in the implementing
measures. The implementing measures in place today are developed to promote higher energy
efficiency.
The Circular Economy package recently adopted by the European Commission stipulates the position
of the Commission on the development of the Ecodesign Directive to promote durable, easy to repair
and recyclable energy-related products.1 Greater winnings in the energy saving, and upgradeability of
energy-related products are also recognised as future areas of development of the Directive.
Although the Directive does not treat waste or chemicals aspects in energy-related products today,
theoretically it could be used to implement these characteristics in individual product-specific
implementing measures.
2.2 REACH REGULATION
REGULATION (EC) No 1907/2006 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 18
December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals
(REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing
Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council
Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and
2000/21/EC
Article 57 of REACH sets out criteria for classifying a substance as a “substance of very high concern”
(SVHC). The candidate list is a compilation of SVHCs that have been prioritised for promotion of
restriction in handling. Usage of substances on the candidate list comes with certain duties, one of
them being a duty of information on articles if the concentration is above 0.1 weight-% (Article 33).
The information must be supplied at the latest by time of delivery if the receiver is a business.
Consumers however must request the information and the business supplying the goods has a 45-day
time window to respond.
Article 2(2) of REACH exempts waste (as defined in the WFD) from the regulation. As a result,
requirements on information transfer on manufacturers from REACH do not extend to waste
treatment actors, e.g. safety data sheets are not required to be supplied and the duty of information
for articles referred to in Article 33 is not enforceable. One noteworthy circumstance where the waste
1
Press Release from the commission IP/15/6203
4
Goodpoint AB
aspect in substances’ and mixtures’ life cycle is taken into account is in the exposure scenarios
described in Annex I of REACH. Exposure scenarios include information on potential risks coupled with
waste treatment. However, even then waste managers have no legal ground to access these.
As soon as waste ceases to be waste (as defined in WFD Article 6(1) and (2)) REACH does apply. Waste
managers may have obligations if the change from waste to product occurs within their company.
Article 2(7)d regulates which obligations under REACH are exempted for recovered products:
”The following shall be exempted from Titles II, V and VI: d) substances, on their own, in mixtures or in
articles, which have been registered in accordance with Title II and which are recovered in the
Community if:
(i) the substance that results from the recovery process is the same as the substance that
has been registered in accordance with Title II; and
(ii) the information required by Articles 31 or 32 relating to the substance that has been
registered in accordance with Title II is available to the establishment undertaking the
recovery.”
If the resulting substance from recovery is the same substance as one previously registered it does not
need to be registered again. The establishment undertaking the recovery must thus identify the
substance and evaluate whether it in fact is the same or not. It is up to the legal entity to collect the
information required to have a solid ground on which to base the identification and evaluation.
Noteworthy is the fact that the presence of contaminants, as may occur in recovered substances, do
not necessarily exclude from the REACH definition of “same substance”; however, the contaminants
may impact the hazard profile which is within the responsibility of the recovering establishment to
identify and communicate downstream.
Article 31 states the requirements for when a safety data sheet is required to be provided. Article 32
states the duty to communicate information down the supply chain for substances on their own or in
mixtures for which a safety data sheet is not required. As mentioned earlier, waste is not under REACH
jurisdiction, thus are Articles 31 and 32 not applicable to waste do not benefit waste managers.
2.3 RoHS (II) DIRECTIVE
DIRECTIVE 2011/65/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 8 June 2011 on
the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment
The hazardous substances that are currently regulated in the RoHS Directive are Lead, Mercury,
Cadmium, Hexavalent chromium, Polybrominated biphenyls (PBB) and Polybrominated diphenyl
ethers (PBDE). From 22th July 2019 four phthalates, Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), Butyl benzyl
phthalate (BBP), Dibutyl phthalate (DBP) and Dibutyl phthalate (DIMP)2, will be added to the list3.
Maximum allowed concentration of restricted substances in homogeneous material is 0.1 weight-%
with the exception of Cadmium that has a limit of 0.01 weight-%. In Annex III there is a list of
applications exempted from restrictions.
The manufacturer/importer/distributor certifies that the article complies with EU legislation e.g. RoHS
by placing the CE mark4 on the article. In addition, it is also important to notice that the manufacturer
is only obliged to submit the required information to the authorities not to their customers or the
2
Directive (EU) 2015/863 of 31 March 2015, amending Annex II to Directive 2011/65/EU of the European
Parliament and the Council as regards the list of restricted substances
3
Medical devices and monitoring and control instruments are exempted until 22th July 2021.
4
The CE-marking is the manufacturer’s declaration that the EEE meets the requirement of the applicable ECDirectives.
5
Goodpoint AB
waste collectors. RoHS contains no information transfer obligation that would benefit the material
cycle.
2.4 CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS REGULATION
REGULATION (EU) No 305/2011 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 9 March
2011 laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing
Council Directive 89/106/EEC
The Regulation establishes union-wide harmonised conditions for affixation of CE marking. It
establishes a procedure for adopting harmonised standards applicable to specific construction product
types and a framework for voluntary CE marking of construction products not covered by harmonised
standards with the introduction European assessment documents (EAD). Declarations of performance
are required to accompany construction products. The declaration of performance contains
information on essential characteristics of the construction product, including an evaluation of its
effects on health and the environment and data referred to in Articles 31 or 33 of REACH.
A declaration of the construction product constituents is not required per se; however, release of
dangerous substances (if applicable as stated in the respective standard/EAD) are evaluated. There is
no legal obligation to disclose constituents in construction products unless they fall under the
circumstances explained above, i.e. specifically targeted in harmonised standard or EAD, or subject to
Article 33 of REACH.
2.5 WASTE FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE
DIRECTIVE 2008/98/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 19 November 2008
on waste and repealing certain Directives
The waste framework directive (WFD) addresses the general treatment on waste. It sets a waste
hierarchy describing how different waste treatment measures should be prioritized. The Directive also
defines the stage at which waste ceases being waste, hence, when it is no longer within the scope of
the Directive. By-products are considered in Article 5 of the WFD. Article 5 sets criteria for when byproducts can considered not being waste under the definition of waste (see section 1). The Directive
outlines when waste ceases to be waste, i.e. when all of the following statements found in Article 6(1)
apply:
a) the substance or object5 is commonly used for specific purposes;
b) a market or demand exists for such a substance or object;
c) the substance or object fulfils the technical requirements for the specific purposes and meets
the existing legislation and standards applicable to products;
d) the use of the substance or object will not lead to overall adverse environmental or human
health impacts.
The EoW criteria in Article 6(1) can be supplemented with criteria for specific waste streams to ensure
the quality of the secondary raw material6 compared with virgin material. Such supplements have been
implemented for e.g. glass cullet and scrap metal.
The WFD Article 8 allows the Member States to introduce national legislation expanding the concept
of producer responsibility to include public distribution of information regarding articles suitability for
5
6
As referred to in WFD.
As used by the European Commission in the context of circular economy
6
Goodpoint AB
reuse or recycling. Responsibility of manufacturers already exists for specific article types through
other Directives (see below).
2.5.1 END-OF-LIFE VEHICLES
DIRECTIVE 2000/53/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 18 September 2000
on end-of-life vehicles
Directive 2000/53/EG, commonly referred as the ELV Directive was developed in response to the
immense waste generated by vehicles when disposed. Its primary objective is to work proactively in
reducing the generation of waste, and secondly to promote and facilitate reuse and recycling of vehicle
subassemblies. The vehicles within the scope of the Directive are those defined as M1 or N1 class in
Directive 70/156/EEC, i.e. “vehicles used for the carriage of passengers and comprising no more than
eight seats in addition to the driver's seat” and “vehicles used for the carriage of goods and having a
maximum weight not exceeding 3.5 metric tons.”
In keeping with the Directive, manufacturers are required to supply dismantling information to
treatment facilities for each model set on the market. Moreover, coding standards are required to
facilitate identification of components7 and materials7 that are hazardous or assessed as suitable for
reuse or recycling. Treatment facilities shall remove hazardous components and materials in separate
waste streams to facilitate reuse and recycling. The Directive specifically targets heavy metals, i.e.
mercury, lead, hexavalent chromium and cadmium, in specific applications to be marked and removed
prior to further treatment.
2.5.2 WASTE ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
DIRECTIVE 2012/19/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 4 July 2012 on
waste electrical and electronical equipment (WEEE)
A key term in the WEEE Directive is responsibility of manufacturers. In broad terms, it defines a duty
on an actor, who puts an EEE on the market, which includes a responsibility on the waste it will produce
at its time of disposal. Through this, manufacturers are encouraged to design the EEE so that it
generates as little waste as possible, alternatively easily reused or recycled.
Annex II of the Directive stipulates minimum requirements on what the waste treatment must include;
it specifies what components and fluids must undergo selective treatment, i.e. removal prior to further
treatment.
Article 15 of the Directive establishes an information transfer between manufacturers and treatment
facilities. It establishes a requirement to supply information facilitating “… re-use and the correct and
environmentally sound treatment of WEEE, including maintenance, upgrade, refurbishment and
recycling …” on “… the different EEE components and materials, as well as the location of dangerous
substances and mixtures in EEE.” The Directive contains no further definition on “dangerous
substances”. An interesting remark, but considered outside the scope, is that in the Swedish
7
As referred to in the ELV Directive.
7
Goodpoint AB
implementation, there is a definition of “dangerous substances and mixtures”8; no other country’s
implementation has been studied so no comparison has been performed.
EEE are often very complex in the sense that they are assembled from multiple articles and contain
numerous chemical substances. If a treatment facility desires a complete overview on what an EEE
contains, they lack a legally obligating channel in which that information can be obtained.
WEEE is divided into application categories, each category having a set of reuse, recover, and recycling
targets. An overall collection target, i.e. WEEE regardless of category, is set.
3 CIRCULAR ECONOMY
It is essential to apply the principle of the circular economy when encouraging resource-efficient
material life cycles. To ensure sustainable growth and development adopting the model of the circular
economy is crucial. Natural resources need to circulate in closed material loops, minimizing withdrawal
of earth’s finite resources.
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES
The United Nations, through the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) has identified
several environmental focus areas, where one is “Resource Efficiency” and another one is “Chemicals
and Waste”. Decoupling economic growth from resource use is a concept used in UNEP and central to
the feasibility and realistic implementation of the circular economy.
The 7th Environmental Action Programme9 (EAP) was adopted by the EU in 2013 setting out priority
areas of improvement. Concepts of the circular economy are found in the second priority objective:
“To turn the Union into a resource-efficient, green and competitive low-carbon economy”. The EU
recognises its important role in supporting a transition towards circular economy.
European legislation is in the process of evolving more and more towards promoting the basic
principles behind the circular economy, i.e. reuse, recovery, and recycling. The European Commission
recently adopted a package10 of amendment proposals to existing waste-related Directives with a clear
objective of promoting and stimulating development towards a circular economy within the European
Union. The European Union identifies not only environmental benefits in promotion of circular
economy but also competitive advantages as well as protection against resource-scarcity.
Ideally, secondary raw materials and virgin material should have equal quality. The EU recognises
difficulties to operators regarding the quality of secondary raw materials and will launch work on
developing EU-wide quality standards1.
The Swedish parliament has adopted a set of environmental objectives independently of the EU but
the global nature of environmental problems requires intergovernmental solutions. To assess the
8
‘Hazardous substances and mixtures’ means in this Regulation substances and mixtures that fulfil the criteria
for classification as hazardous in accordance with: 1) REGULATION (EC) No 1272/2008 OF THE EUROPEAN
PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of
substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending
Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, in the saying of COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No758/2013; or 2) Provisions
on classification and labelling of chemical products available from the Swedish Chemicals Agency (KemI),
translated by the authors.
9
DECISION No 1386/2013/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 20 November 2013 on
a General Union Environment Action Programme to 2020 ‘Living well, within the limits of our planet’
10
Press Release from the commission IP/15/6203
8
Goodpoint AB
progress on the objectives, milestone targets have been developed11. One of the milestone targets is
to make information regarding hazardous substances in articles available for all relevant stakeholders
by 2020; achievement of this target shall occur by legislation or agreements, EU or international12.
3.1.1 RECYCLING
The use of secondary raw materials, i.e. recycled waste is crucial in the circular economy. As means of
promotion of resource efficiency and mandate recycling in the Member States, the EU has set targets
for the Member States to achieve. By expanding the manufacturers’ responsibility of their articles to
the disposal phase of the article, the European Union encourages the development of resourceefficient and easily recycled articles. The targets often consist of two parts, one on reuse and/or
recovery, and the second on recycling. A non-exhaustive list of article groups that fall under
responsibility of manufacturers with set targets and the levels of the targets are presented in Table 1.
The circular economy package recently adopted by the Commission includes several measurements
relating to recycling targets such as stricter targets, harmonising of calculation methods, and
introduction of an Early Warning System for monitoring compliance with targets13.
Table 1. Selection of recycling targets in EU Directives.
Directive
Target
Reuse and recovery
ELV14
95 %
16
Category
Recovery
1,
10
85 %
WEEE15
3, 4
80 %
2, 5-9
75 %
Recovery incl. energy recovery
Packaging and packaging waste17
60 %
Reuse and recycling
85 %
Recycling
80%
70 %
55 %
Recycling
55 %
3.2 CHEMICALS IN PRODUCTS
One milestone to reach the environmental objective “A non-toxic environment” set by the Swedish
Parliament (see section 3.1) is that information regarding health and environmentally hazardous
substances in articles shall be accessible for all relevant stakeholders by year 2020. Another milestone
target is that recycled material shall be considered safe from a health and environmental perspective18.
Thus, to increase recycling and reach the above-mentioned milestone target, there is a major need for
stakeholders, in the articles’ life cycles, to know the chemical content of the articles. In addition, the
stakeholders also need to know the chemical content to assure compliance with chemical legislation.
The multi-stakeholder policy framework SAICM19 has identified lack of information on chemicals in
products as one of six so called Emerging Policy Issues (EPI´s). In 2015 SAICM20 decided to welcome the
11
http://www.miljomal.se/sv/etappmalen/Farliga-amnen/Information-om-farliga-amnen-i-varor/
Miljömålen, Årlig uppföljning av Sveriges miljökvalitetsmål och etappmål 2015, Rapport 6661, Mars 2015,
Naturvårdsverket.
13
Clear Targets and Tools for Better Waste Management, Fact sheet, European Commission
14
Targets valid from the January 2015
15
Targets valid from August 2015.
16
For definitions of categories, see the WEEE Directive ANNEX I.
17
Targets valid from December 2008.
18
http://www.miljomal.se/sv/etappmalen/Farliga-amnen/Giftfria-och-resurseffektiva-kretslopp/
19
Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management, http://www.saicm.org
20
At its Fourth International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM4)
12
9
Goodpoint AB
Chemicals in Products (CiP) programme, developed by UNEP together with various stakeholders. Its
aim is to assist stakeholders in sharing and accessing information on chemicals in articles. The
objectives and principles of the CiP programme are now established, but raising awareness amongst
manufacturers and other stakeholders is necessary to increase knowledge of the programme and its
benefits.
10
Goodpoint AB
4 AIM OF STUDY
This study has focused on the implications of the legislation on “end-of-life vehicles” and waste EEE
with the aim of understanding the following:
d) What information on hazardous substances do Swedish waste treatment facilities have access to
today;
e) What information on hazardous substances do they want;
f) What information on hazardous substances do they need to increase the efficiency of recycling?
11
Goodpoint AB
5 DELIMITATIONS
In this study the following delimitations have been made:



Focus is on the ELV and WEEE Directives.
The study is on Swedish stakeholders’ needs.
Field studies to assess the life cycle of an article objectively were not part of the project.
12
Goodpoint AB
6 METHODOLOGY
The method to identify information needs for the various stakeholders in the two chosen fields,
recycling of EEE and vehicles, is described in this section (see Figure 1).
Relevant stakeholders were identified through professional network, both the writers’ as well as the
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency’s network. In some cases, the identified stakeholder gave
the recommendation that an additional stakeholder should be interviewed to supplement the picture.
In order to achieve as much as possible through the interviews; questions were prepared and e-mailed
in advance to allow the interviewees to gather facts and to reflect over the topics.
Identification of relevant stakeholders
Design of questionnaire
Execution of interviews
Contacting referrals
Analysis
Figure 1. The method used in the project to identify information needs in the recycling industry of EEE and
vehicles.
The interviews were conducted by phone and lasted from 45 minutes up to 1.5 hours. During the
interviews not only the sent questions were discussed but also other topics raised by the interviewee
related to the scope of the project. In the cases, where the interviewee was not able to answer a
specific question, e.g. due to the question not being within the scope of their responsibility, contact
details to the person responsible were taken and an interview was conducted with this person.
In some cases, the interviewees referred to decisions made by governmental agencies, municipalities
or manufacturer’s practices. If there clarification of a remark of the interviewees was needed, the
referrals were contacted.
The general response from interview objects was overwhelmingly positive and they were happy to
contribute to the study. Nevertheless, as participation in the study was voluntary there were cases
where interview objects declined participation.
6.1 ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
Below is a list of the companies that have participated in the study and the positions of the
interviewees.




Stena Metall AB
Stena Recycling AB
WEEE recycling enterprise
Sims Recycling Solution AB
– Coordinator- Sustainability and Public Affairs
– Product Area Manager -Hazardous waste
– Project leader -Value enhancement of recycling
– SHEC manager
13
Goodpoint AB

El-kretsen AB
– Development officer
6.2 VEHICLES
Below is a list of the organisations that have participated in the study and the positions of the
interviewees.



BIL Sweden22
Swedish car dismantler organisation
Dismantling business
– Environmental officer
– Chairman
– Environmental coordinator
14
Goodpoint AB
7 CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT
The current state assessment was performed according to the methodology described in section 6.
7.1 AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY
7.1.1 INFORMATION ACCESS
Information access in the automotive industry is regulated through the ELV Directive. Most major
vehicle manufacturers use the IMDS database; all suppliers have to declare the chemical content in
their sub-assemblies to 100 % in the IMDS database. Shortly explained, the IMDS database is a tool to
supply information to vehicle manufacturers as well as to facilitate information exchange for suppliers
to multiple manufacturers. IMDS is provided free of charge to suppliers and dismantlers21. Although
the use of the database is not a legislative requirement, its existence make it compulsory for the vast
majority of all global vehicle suppliers to declare the chemical content of their articles. As mentioned
previously, dismantlers may be granted access to the IMDS database; however, dismantlers seem to
be unaware of its existence and its availability. The IMDS existed prior to REACH (it was launched in
the year 2000 as a response to the ELV Directive) and gave the automotive industry a head start in
complying with REACH regulation as well as eliminating the need to develop new tools and practices
to ensure REACH compliance.
The mandatory information transfer of dismantling information by manufacturers to dismantlers
regulated in Article 8 in the ELV Directive is fulfilled through another database, IDIS. In IDIS, all
mandatory information for dismantling is listed; sub-assemblies that contain any ELV-Directive
regulated substance: lead, mercury, cadmium and chromium (VI) and instructions on how to dismantle
the sub-assembly from the vehicle is available in IDIS. BIL Sweden22, via the network BilRetur,
recommends all dismantlers to use IDIS. Unfortunately, it appears that not all dismantlers use this
database23. It appears that dismantlers consider the IDIS database too time-consuming i.e. the
dismantling-process would become cost-inefficient. Instead, dismantlers rely on in-house expertise23.
According to one stakeholder, all sub-assemblies in a vehicle including plastic are coded and, in theory,
it would be feasible to recycle even the plastic. Plastic used in vehicles is of high quality and
manufacturers have come far in reducing the different types of plastics used in order to facilitate
recycling24. However, in reality little plastic recycling occurs since the process is not cost-beneficial due
to cheap virgin material. Therefore, the industry practice is to let plastics undergo energy recovery. If
the market were to change and it would become cost-beneficial to recycle plastic, waste managers
should be in a position to separate plastics into separate waste streams for recycling.
Interestingly, the stakeholders within the automotive industry state very differently regarding the
coding standards. Whilst one interviewee states that all sub-assemblies are coded as directed by ELV
directive, another stakeholder, a dismantler, stated there are no codes on the sub-assemblies.
Unfortunately, this project did not include a field study to verify the statements.
7.1.2 INFORMATION NEEDS
7.1.2.1 KNOWN NEEDS
Representatives of the automotive industry would like to see more easily accessible information
regarding substances in vehicles overall. It is important to notice that dismantlers do not only want
21
Personal communication, IMDS Service Centre
Swedish Vehicle Manufacturers’ and Importers’ Association
23
Personal communication BIL Sweden and dismantler
24
Personal communication, dismantler.
22
15
Goodpoint AB
information about hazardous substances but also about valuable substances, e.g. precious metals and
rare earth elements.
All interviewees said that it would be beneficial if Safety Data Sheets on chemicals such as oil in an
end-of-life vehicle, were transferred to the recycling handling phase as it is in the supply chain. Since
there is no legal requirement on manufacturers to supply safety data sheets to waste managers
dismantlers are often charged for access to the data sheets. Instead of paying, they often search online.
REACH establishes a duty of information regarding substances on the candidate list in articles to
downstream users25. Vehicle dismantlers are omitted from the definition of downstream users in
REACH as REACH does not regulate waste and, hence, have no legal ground on which to claim the
information. The representatives from the vehicle recycling industry agree that it would be beneficial
to have access to more information easily accessible, as it would facilitate identification of components
suitable for recycling.
Furthermore, in those cases were sub-assemblies of a vehicle are reused, the waste managers do not
have essential information to fulfil REACH Article 33, see section 2.2.
Manufacturers are required to supply dismantling information within six months from release to the
market (Article 8, ELV). The period may appear reasonable but dismantlers express difficulties when
new models need to be dismantled and/or recycled.
7.1.2.2 UNKNOWN NEEDS
The tools for providing mandatory information to dismantlers are in place today through the IDIS
database. The industry acknowledges that it would be beneficial if the list of substances regulated
under ELV would be expanded, e.g. with information on location of valuable substances. A prerequisite
for determining the suitability for a component to be recovered and reused is, besides its functionality,
its chemical composition.
If a component is recovered and intended for sale as a spare part, a transfer of goods occurs and it
could be argued that the dismantler business falls into the definition of distributor under REACH26. The
ELV Directive only legislates information transfer for certain heavy metals in sub-assemblies (see
section 2.5.1), and not the substances on the candidate list.
7.2 ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICAL EQUIPMENT
7.2.1 INFORMATION ACCESS
In the WEEE Directive, Article 15, it is stated that ”Member States shall take the necessary measures
to ensure that producers provide information free of charge about preparation for re-use and treatment
in respect of each type of new EEE placed for the first time on the Union market within one year after
the equipment is placed on the market. This information shall identify, as far as it is needed by centres
which prepare for re-use and treatment and recycling facilities in order to comply with the provisions
of this Directive, the different EEE components and materials, as well as the location of dangerous
substances and mixtures in EEE. It shall be made available to centres which prepare for re-use and
treatment and recycling facilities by producers of EEE in the form of manuals or by means of electronic
media (e.g. CD-ROM, online services).”
25
REACH Article 33(1)
In a recently published (June 2016) report by the Swedish Chemicals Agency, the applicability of Article 33 of
REACH on recovered articles is discussed concluding that guidance on the interpretation of Article 33 is needed
as arguments can be made for both cases. Rapport 7/16 “Vägen till giftfria och resurseffektiva kretslopp”
(2016) KemI
26
16
Goodpoint AB
Compliance to this part of the Directive appears not to be the common practice. Multiple interviewees
tell that they receive no information from manufacturers in accordance with Article 15. For businessto-business (B2B) transactions, some information is transferred between the producer and the
recycling centres. The reason for this appears mostly be due to the correlation between the price of
accepting the WEEE and the quality of the WEEE e.g. if the WEEE contains precious metals or
considered as high quality due to low contamination. A requirement on providing information on WEEE
is also in some cases added to the business contract between companies and waste treatment
facilities.
In the case of WEEE collected from individuals via municipal programmes, and via a material company,
there is no information regarding the chemical content of the collected WEEE. There is no requirement
on individuals to supply information on WEEE when discarding.
One reason for the lack of WEEE compliance can partly be explained by the lack of pressure on
manufacturers from waste managers to provide the information since waste managers do not rely on
information when it is provided since the quality is considered poor. Waste managers or recycling
actors have built their own in-house bank of knowledge.
7.2.2 INFORMATION NEEDS
7.2.2.1 KNOWN NEEDS
All the recycling centres state that there is no immediate need to receive the information regarding
chemicals in the format Article 15 of the WEEE Directive states.
The reasons for this are:


The quality of the information they receive today is so poor that it is not reliable i.e. the quality
of the information must increase so the recycling centres can rely on it.
Since dismantling and waste stream separation is performed manually, it is not cost-effective
to go through a manual, CD-ROM or search in an online database.
However, there is a known need for more information to achieve purer waste streams since pure waste
streams is a prerequisite in order to achieve resource-efficient cycles. Moreover, another prerequisite
for material recovery is that the waste stream is free from contaminants that could contaminate
recycled materials. Ideal, according to one of the recycling centres, would be to convey information
during the production process e.g. if there could be physical marks or information on a RFID tag on the
various components indicating their chemical content. This would facilitate, in a cost-efficient way,
recycling as waste stream separation is often done manually.
7.2.2.2 UNKNOWN NEEDS
All stakeholders wanted to increase their recycling rate, and they need to know more about WEEE to
be able to do this. An increase in amount and quality of article information throughout the whole value
chain including recycling centres, would benefit both recycling centres and circular economy. It would
be easier for the recycling centres to build up systems to achieve purer waste streams that could be
recycled with a higher price margin.
Noteworthy, one risk with the current state that has been identified is that many recycling centres,
especially the less serious ones, could commit transgression of labour laws. It appears as some actors
might, in their ignorance, let people that are not aware of the risks handle WEEE. For example, it is
known that municipalities have let people in work-training separate waste27.
27
Erfarenheter av ansvar inom avfallsbranschen, Rapport 5244 Okt 2002, Naturvårdsverket
17
Goodpoint AB
8 GAP-ANALYSIS
The GAP analysis performed on the information transfer during the life cycles of vehicles and EEE
respectively, are illustrated in Figures 2 to 7. When the information transfer in the life cycles is studied,
it becomes clear that there are similarities between the information needs in the two article groups.
The same areas need addressing for both vehicles and EEE; however, since the legislation and the
information flow that affects the article groups differ, the needs will differ as well (see Figure 4-7).
Figure 4 and 5 demonstrate the area with gaps in the information chain and Figure 6 and 7 demonstrate
where stakeholders have a need of guidelines. The GAP analysis is based on information received
during conducted interviews (see section 7).
8.1 LEGISLATION
8.1.1 VEHICLES
In theory, dismantlers in the automotive industry have access to all relevant information on chemical
substances in components thanks to the two global databases, IDIS and especially IMDS (section 7.1.1).
However, Swedish dismantlers’ awareness of IMDS appears to be low and it is unclear if there is any
interest in accessing the information; the information in IDIS is considered by dismantlers, non-useful
in order to have a cost-efficient process. IDIS is the database that was developed to assure vehicle
manufacturers’ compliance with Article 8(3) in the ELV Directive. The interviewed parties relied instead
on in-house expertise for complying with Article 8. Nevertheless, according to two interviewees, the
metals regulated in the ELV Directive (and thus in the IDIS database) have lessened considerably in use
in vehicles. Whether it is a consequence of the ELV Directive is likely but not definitely concluded.
It is important to notice that it is only feasible to receive information about the vehicles that are listed
in the IMDS database e.g. only vehicles produced after the implementation of IMDS.
Vehicle dismantler representatives interviewed in this study recognized the importance and agreed
with the waste hierarchy stated in the WFD28. In fact, the dismantling industry is based on the concept
of reuse and recovery. According to ELV Directive, Article 8(1), manufacturers shall “… use component
and material coding standards, in particular to facilitate the identification of those components and
materials which are suitable for reuse and recovery.” The current state assessment (section 7) shows
that the manufacturers consider that they comply with the ELV Directive regarding coding standards;
however, vehicle dismantlers state that the sub-assemblies do not contain any codes. Today
dismantlers use third-party databases29 to identify the sub-assemblies’ article numbers. Without
access to IDIS or IMDS, it is not possible to evaluate whether IDIS or IMDS could be used instead for
this purpose.
28
29
Personal communication, dismantler.
E.g. Bildelsbasen or Laga
18
Goodpoint AB
Figure 2. Actual information transfer (green) and legally required information transfer (purple) for vehicles.
Figure 3. Actual information transfer (green) and legally required information transfer (purple) for EEE.
19
Goodpoint AB
It appears that it is not common practice for dismantlers to have a chemical management routine to
screen in IMDS if the spare parts to “Service and Maintenance” and “Vehicles in Use” (see Figure 4)
contain substances listed on the candidate list.
Spare parts sold by the dismantlers are non-waste and thus articles due to the stance “once an article,
always an article” 26,30. The interviews with the dismantlers confirmed the picture of them not having
system to ascertain whether the articles they distribute contain substances on the candidate list and
them having limited knowledge on the chemical composition whatsoever. Furthermore, their
knowledge of REACH Article 33 and their possible obligations under it were non-existent.
Figure 4. Actual information transfer (green) and legally required information transfer (purple) for vehicles.
The grey ellipse highlights the area where the information transfer is inadequate.
It is important to acknowledge that REACH has, in certain aspects, been constructed to “simplify” the
process of recycling. Article 2(7)d of REACH provides exemption from registering recovered
substances. If the resulting substance from recovery is the same substance as one previously
registered, it does not need to be re-registered; however it is up to the establishment undertaking the
recovery to provide this evidence, see section 2.2.
In terms of metals, one could assume that most metal recovery falls under Article 2(7)d of REACH.
However, it is unclear if all smelting plants are aware of this exemption. To benefit from the exemption
an identity needs to be assigned to the recovered substances i.e. the name and data that sufficiently
identifies the recovered substance need to be available. If the substance has not previously been
registered, the recovery operator cannot place their substance on the market until they or any other
actor has registered the substance. The interviews conducted with waste managers gave no indication
that there is an interest from their customers to know whether substances in their goods are on the
candidate list.
30
Case C-106/14, European Court of Justice
20
Goodpoint AB
In conclusion, in theory dismantlers should be able to access all the information they need to fulfil
their information obligation as supplier with the exemption of the restrictions mentioned above.
However, the GAP analysis brings forward a lack of knowledge in the dismantling industry
concerning the duty of information on substances on the candidate list.
8.1.2 ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICAL EQUIPMENT
WEEE can either be collected from manufacturers or from a material company. The material company
can receive WEEE from either manufacturers or municipal waste collections.
It is important to notice that for WEEE that is collected from the municipal waste collections there is
no information submitted to the waste manager i.e. the requirements in Article 15 of the WEEE
Directive are not met. Today, with the current system of municipal WEEE collection, there is no system
to submit the legally required information. Even if information about the EEE chemical content were
submitted to the consumer at the time of purchase, it is not realistic to place obligations on consumers
to submit this information when the EEE turns into WEEE. In the proposal31,32 from the European
Commission regarding potential amendments in the WFD, large sections were focusing on the subject
of municipal waste33. However, the proposal to the WFD do not address the lack of information of
municipal WEEE.
In cases where WEEE is collected from the manufacturer, some information regarding chemical
presence in WEEE is often submitted (see section 7.2.1). Interestingly, this information appears often
not be given to the material company but directly to the waste manager as a result of business
agreements. Manufacturers often dispose in larger quantities of similar WEEE which gives waste
managers an opportunity to achieve efficient recycling as it makes it cost-efficient to look up articlespecific recycling information and achieve separation into purer waste streams.
A severe consequence of this gap in information transfer regarding municipal WEEE occurs when the
waste manager sells the whole EEE on a second-hand market or in pieces as spare-parts, a practice
that should be promoted to achieve resource-efficient material cycles. EEE and its sub-assemblies
should not be considered waste but an article due to the stance “once an article, always an article”30.
In the case recovery and recycling, the same reasoning concerning Article 2.7d in REACH discussed
earlier (section 8.1.1) concerning vehicles is valid and of uttermost concern to address in WEEE.
In conclusion, if waste managers shall be able to fulfil their responsibility as a supplier in REACH it is
essential that they have access to all relevant information on EEE’s chemical content.
31
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Directive
2008/98/EC on waste, European Commission, 2015/0275.
32
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Directive
2008/98/EC on waste, European Commission, 2015/0275 (COD)
33
‘municipal waste’ as defined in Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE
COUNCIL amending Directive 2008/98/EC on waste, European Commission, 2015/0275.
21
Goodpoint AB
Figure 5. Actual information transfer (green) and legally required information transfer (purple) for EEE.
Unfilled green arrows represent potential information flows, but these flows are not common practice and on
a voluntary basis. The grey ellipse highlights the area where the information transfer is inadequate.
It is important to acknowledge that there are optional systems34, 35 that address this issue, systems
similar to the IMDS database. These systems aim to provide an information exchange system on
chemicals in articles; however, it appears these systems are not common practice since none of the
interviewees mentioned them. Furthermore, none of the referrals, including a representative for the
EEE trade association, could confirm that any manufacturer used these systems.
WEEE recycling industry is aware of the need of a better treatment system to enhance the recycling
ratio and have developed a standard36. The standard provides guidance for how to enhance routines
for collection, logistics and treatment for WEEE. Unfortunately, it appears unclear if this standard is in
use and to what extent37.
It is important to acknowledge that even if there are legal requirements to inform customers whether
an article contains substances listed on the candidate list, compliance is the exception rather than the
rule even before that article ends up at the waste manager. The reason for this is likely to be both the
long supply chain where the information gets lost as well as lack of knowledge regarding suppliers’
obligations38.
In conclusion, Article 15 has not resulted in the desired information transfer to treatment facilities.
For large volume and pure waste streams (single or few articles) information transfer is regulated in
34
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 62474 (Material Declaration for Products of and for
the Electrotechnical Industry)
35
Institute for Printed Circuits (IPC) Standard 1752A (Materials Declaration Management)
36
SS-EN 50625-1. Collection, logistics & Treatment requirements for WEEE - Part 1: General treatment
requirements
37
Personal communication, interviewee.
38
Tillsyn 5/12, Tillsyn av informationsplikten i REACH, Inspektionsprojekt 2011-2012, KemI
22
Goodpoint AB
business contracts. The low volume or mixed WEEE streams have little to no information transfer.
There are standards and third-party systems that could be used, however they are not.
8.2 NEED OF GUIDANCE
It became clear, during the interviews for both article types, that there is one specific area where there
is a need of guidance, i.e. when waste ceases to be waste and becomes non-waste i.e. chemical
substance, mixture or article (see Figure 6 and 7). The interviewed stakeholders were of the opinion
that developing EoW criteria for specific waste streams is not a suitable way to improve recycling, since
the existing criteria39,40 are set too high; the limits on pollutants are too demanding. The waste
managers believe that it is not cost-efficient to refine the materials to the level of EoW criteria.
In an information sheet published by the European Commission, it is stated that the Commission would
develop standards to ensure the quality of secondary raw material. It is unclear if the Commission has
a strategy to address the issue with too high standards described by the waste managers41.
Figure 6. Actual information transfer (green) and legally required information transfer (purple) for vehicles.
The peach ellipse highlights the area where the industry seeks guidance.
For metallic sub-assemblies, it appears that waste ceases to be waste not at the waste treatment plant,
but at the smelting plant (see Figure 6 and 7); since recovery steps which do not result in a non-waste
material are considered part of the waste treatment process i.e. subject to waste legislation. For the
purpose of REACH, recovered substances should only be understood as substances that, after having
been part of waste material, have ceased to be waste according to the WFD.
39
COUNCIL REGULATION (EU) No 333/2011 of 31 March 2011 establishing criteria determining when certain
types of scrap metal cease to be waste under Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council
40
COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 715/2013 of 25 July 2013 establishing criteria determining when copper
scrap ceases to be waste under Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
41
From waste to resources, Closing the loop, Circular economy, European Commission
23
Goodpoint AB
It appears that stakeholders do not know how to interpret this part of the legislation. One of the
interviewees, an environmental solicitor, stated that this area was a grey zone where the boundaries
between the legislation acts were unclear and hence avoided classifying their product as waste or nonwaste.
The stance from interviewees that EoW-criteria are set too high to be practical in the recycling industry
could be true. However, interviewees have also said that waste managers have an interest in classifying
their material waste since they consider the administration burden greater if the material is reclassified to a substance/mixture/article. It is unclear if waste managers, in general, have understood
the exceptions provided by Article 2(7)d of REACH on the duty of registration of recovered substances.
Figure 7. Actual information transfer (green) and legally required information transfer (purple) for EEE.
Unfilled green arrows represents information flows where there is optional information transfer channels,
although not common practice or legislated. The peach ellipse highlights the area the industry seeks guidance.
In terms of plastic, there is today very little recycling, the majority of plastic from the waste managers
of WEEE and vehicles let plastic go to energy recovery. They state that the cost to separate the plastic
into pure fractions exceeds the potential income (see section 7); hence, it is not cost-beneficial for
them to recycle plastic. One interviewee placed their mixed plastic on the Asian market, since
according to the same interviewee it is not feasible to place mixed plastic on the Swedish market. The
most important information required by plastic recovery establishments is information to comply with
legislative requirements; one of the most important being REACH Article 3342. Another important
information aspect is the characteristics of the waste plastic, the more information regarding the
characteristics, the higher demand. Plastic recovery is at its height of efficiency when the thought of
application is similar to its original application. Additives will then be a prerequisite for the intended
application and, hence, suitable for recycling.
42
Personal communication, IKEM
24
Goodpoint AB
The Commission has promised a strategy to address plastic issues such as recyclability and presence of
hazardous substances of concern in certain plastics41. However, it appears still unclear how the strategy
will be implemented.
Interviewees sought a clear and non-bureaucratic path to single-case decisions in regards to recovery
of oil and other chemical substances43. WFD Article 6(4) states:
“Where criteria have not been set at Community level under the procedure set out in paragraphs 1
and 2, Member States may decide case by case whether certain waste has ceased to be waste
taking into account the applicable case law.”
The guidance from ECHA44 regarding waste and recovered substances focus on requirements on
recovered substances and only refers to the WFD to define when waste ceases to be waste.
Furthermore, it could be useful for the waste treatment chain to have specific guidelines how their
waste/substance/article is defined at the various stages for each waste stream.
The commission has stated that it will promote non-toxic material cycles involving less and better
traced chemicals of concern41. It is unclear if this involves any strategies to facilitate the minor recycling
loops, such as recycling an oil at a waste manager facility.
In conclusion, guidance on the step waste to non-waste is sought and would promote, facilitate and
equalize conditions for waste treatment establishments with regards to reuse, recycling and
recovery.
8.3 IDEAL INFORMATION CYCLE
In summary, the ideal information cycle would require a system, such as IMDS database, were all
suppliers and manufacturers added information about their articles. It is important that this system
does not only contain information regarding hazardous substances but also useful recycling material
information, e.g. presence of precious metals, to stimulate use of the database. One major concern
with such a system is the issue regarding intellectual property and has to be properly addressed prior
to implementation. It is likely the EEE industry can take a leaf out of the ELV industry’s history book to
avoid regrettable pot holes. An issue that needs addressing in order to increase usage of such a
database is the information transfer. Stakeholders speak of cost-efficiency and current systems are
not. Stakeholders speak of speed and simplicity to access information for different articles as most
important in order to have a cost-efficient process.
43
44
Personal communication, Interviewee
Guidance on waste and recovered substances, Version 2, May 2010, ECHA
25
Goodpoint AB
9 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
9.1 PRE-EMPTIVELY REDUCING WASTE
Several WEEE-interviewees mentioned the importance to stimulate the manufacturers to make
“cleaner articles”. Waste managers state that they can only do so much to achieve the recycling targets
(see Table 1) if the articles are not adapted for recycling. The waste hierarchy in the WFD ranks preemptive reduction of waste as the most desired waste treatment. Design for waste reduction has been
legislated in product-specific directives, e.g. ecodesign and ELV.
Currently the Ecodesign Directive is focused on increasing energy efficiency, but, theoretically, it could
in the future also regulate other parameters e.g. chemicals use and also introduce information
transfer45. The European Commission has expressed its opinion on how the Directive should evolve
when stating it “will support product requirements under the Ecodesign Directive that makes energyrelated products more durable, and easier to repair and recycle”46.
The statement from the Commission could be interpreted as encouraging this development since it
mentions easier recycling. Unfortunately, at the time of writing, the European Commission has not
given more details regarding this statement or adopted any proposals for amendments of the
Ecodesign Directive. An Ecodesign work plan spanning the years 2015-2017 had an initial publication
date of January 2015 but the final report has not been published yet (December 2015).
Vehicles are currently exempted from the Ecodesign Directive. However, the ELV Directive incorporates some of the concepts of ecodesign, i.e. to design to minimize waste generation and design
with recycling in mind. To include vehicles in the Ecodesign Directive by removing its present
exemption would lead to dual legislation, thus require extensive work from the European Union.
An evaluation of the Ecodesign Directive presented in 2012 found that in principle, extension of the
Ecodesign Directive to cover non-energy-related products would make a very important instrument
for sustainable growth. However, if any extension of the Directive is not to be an empty gesture, it is
necessary to ensure that implementation and enforcement of legal requirements is feasible,
practicable and cost-efficient47. Furthermore, one report published by the Swedish Chemical Agency
in 2012 also stated, “Today there are neither resources at the Commission nor a methodology within
the frame of Directive of ecodesign to handle chemical aspects.”48
9.2 INFORMATION TRANSFER CHANNELS
The WEEE actors suggested marking the article and/or sub-assemblies with the substances it contains
is a good idea. One suggestion is that the mark could be a chip that would follow the article from
manufacturer to waste manager. Another suggestion is physical indelible marking on the article. Both
methods have their advantages and disadvantages. Physical marks could be added to sub-assembly by
the supplier and the information would follow the article to the waste treatment plant, where the
substances would be easy identifiable. A chip has the advantage of being able to transfer much more
information. If the chip carries a unique identification number that couples to a digital database that
is instantly available to the waste manager when scanning, much more information can be supplied,
and perhaps most important, in a cost-efficient way. A chip can be scanned from a distance removing
the need of first locating of the chip. The technology suggested is the use of one RFID-chip per EEE.
45
Bättre EU-regler för en giftfri miljö-rapport från ett regeringsuppdrag, KEMI 1/12.
The production phase of the circular economy, Closing the loop, Circular economy, European Commission
47
Evaluation of the Ecodesign Directive (2009/125/EC), CSES
48
Regler om kemikalier i kretsloppet för varor –en juridisk analys, Rapport 2/14, KemI
46
26
Goodpoint AB
This means that the manufacturer needs to have a database to receive the information from the
suppliers.
Drawbacks in the use of marks or chips is the inevitable risk of their removal or malfunction. The
environment in which the articles function must also be taken into consideration; the heat generated
by a vehicle could damage chips or abrasion remove the physical marks. Moreover, there is the
question of space. Articles could be too small for a mark to be placed. Similar problems arise in the
labelling of chemical substances and mixtures, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP). However, with CLP
the problems have been solved through a series of clauses specifying action on various plausible
scenarios. Furthermore, batteries come in all sizes and have a requirement on marking specific
substances today49.
Although the labelling as in CLP or marking of batteries and accumulators and the marking suggested
here is not identical, they can be examples of that it is possible to make it work. There will always be
drawbacks with systems; before drawing conclusions on the feasibility, a thorough technical evaluation
is needed.
9.3 COMPARISON WITH OTHER LEGALISATION IN TERMS OF INFORMATION
TRANSFER AND MARKING
Both the food and the cosmetic industry are obliged to inform50, 51 their customer about the content
of their products. The information is placed on the packaging; however, these article groups are not a
good comparison to EEE or vehicles. EEE and vehicles are articles that are composed of multiple subassemblies; food and cosmetics are mixtures or in some cases substances. Another major difference is
that EEE and vehicles play an important role in the circular economy (see Figure 2-7); both food and
cosmetics are substances or mixtures that are consumed so there is no need to consider information
flow for re-use or substance recovery. The chain for food and cosmetics is a lot simpler than for EEE
and vehicles and, thus, it is easier to control the content.
The construction product regulation establishes declarations of performance to accompany
construction products. The declarations include information on content of substances on the
candidate list. Recently, the Swedish Chemicals Agency52, presented an overview on the presence of
hazardous substances in construction material in Sweden. Hazardous substances in this context are
those who present CMR characteristics, allergenic properties, and endocrine disruptive properties.
Data from REACH registrations together with other relevant databases was cross checked and resulted
in 46 identified substances present in construction material in Sweden. The report clearly states that
there are uncertainties in the results due to incomplete databases, some of which are voluntary, and
unreliability in data reported to the databases.
Furthermore, the Swedish National Board of Housing is set to release a report where the feasibility
introducing a national documentation system for construction products in new construction53. The
documentation system is envisioned as a journal where ingoing construction products and their
49
Article 21 of DIRECTIVE 2006/66/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 6 September
2006 on batteries and accumulators and waste batteries and accumulators and repealing Directive 91/157/EEC
50
REGULATION (EC) No 178/2002 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 28 January2002
laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety
Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety
51
REGULATION (EC) No 1223/2009 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 30 November
2009 on cosmetic products
52
Kartläggning av farliga ämnen i byggprodukter i Sverige, PM 9/15, Kemikalieinspektionen
53
http://www.boverket.se/sv/byggande/uppdrag/loggboken/ Retrieved: 2015-12-10
27
Goodpoint AB
hazardous substances are registered. At the time of writing (Dec 2015) the project is ongoing and
therefore no further information is available. Due to these recent governmental commissions,
construction products were only briefly studied in the interest of avoiding duplication of effort.
9.4 WEEE AND ELV
According to the interviews since the introduction of the ELV Directive, the content of lead, mercury,
cadmium and hexavalent chromium (the substances mentioned in the ELV Directive), has decreased
considerably. One interviewee of the WEEE industry, did say that information about EEE was more
accessible than before the introduction of WEEE Directive54; however, the waste actors have to collect
the information themselves. This reality is far away from Article 15, WEEE:
” … producers provide information free of charge about preparation for re-use and treatment in respect
of each type of new EEE placed for the first time on the Union market within one year after the
equipment is placed on the market. This information shall identify, as far as it is needed by centres
which prepare for re-use and treatment and recycling facilities in order to comply with the provisions
of this Directive, the different EEE components and materials, as well as the location of dangerous
substances and mixtures in EEE. It shall be made available to centres which prepare for re-use and
treatment and recycling facilities by producers of EEE in the form of manuals or by means of electronic
media (e.g. CD-ROM, online services).”
One explanation could be that in the ELV directive, there are four heavy metals that are specified (see
section 2.5.1) and, thus, is it easier for all stakeholders to know the substances of concern. In
comparison, the WEEE Directive offers no further clarification on what substances must be declared
than the bold text above. This argument is supported by the fact that the RoHS Directive appears to
have more of an impact on the recycling industry than the WEEE Directive. In the RoHS Directive, there
are also a specific number of substances that are restricted (see section 2.3). WEEE actors explain this
by saying there are more controls for RoHS compliance than for WEEE.
Another reason for better ELV compliance compared to WEEE is the introduction of IMDS, which makes
it easier for the manufacturers to have control over the chemical content of their articles, if the article
is cleaner it is easier for the waste actor to recycle the product. It is important to acknowledge that
cleaner articles also make it easier for waste managers to make the process cost-efficient.
One way the EEE manufacturers can assure that waste managers receive the information
manufacturers are obliged to provide is to construct a database similar to IMDS.
The system of coding standards established in the ELV Directive could inspire a similar system for
WEEE. The discrepancies regarding their presence in reality between vehicle manufacturers and
dismantlers raised in the study cannot be explained without a field study on vehicle sub-assemblies.
However, the ELV Directive is clear on mandatory use of these, and if complied with properly and with
appropriate inspections it has the potential to be a good system.
9.5 INFORMATION NEEDED
In order for a Directive to have an impact on the industry there appears to be a need of specifying the
restricted substances. The basis of the statement is the higher impact of both the ELV and RoHS
Directives compare to WEEE Directive discussed previously.
Waste managers have expressed a wish to receive more information regarding hazardous substances.
A tool to use could be the candidate list. Even though not all the substances listed are relevant as
54
Personal communication, Interviewee.
28
Goodpoint AB
substances in articles in vehicles and EEE, it is used in the Construction Products Regulation (see section
2.4) as way to ensure compliance with REACH. By using the candidate list in the ELV Directive and the
WEEE Directive, it would stimulate information transfer, as stakeholders would have specified
substances to work with.
The Swedish milestone target on hazardous substances in articles defines hazardous substances a lot
broader than the substances on the candidate list. However, as mentioned earlier, the candidate list is
a good place to start and once the candidate list is incorporated and the actors have a proper chemical
management system in place, it will facilitate the process to identify other hazardous substances.
The ELV industry expressed difficulties in dismantling new models. The ELV Directive requires such
information to be available within six months of the vehicle model is placed on the market. It is
reasonable to assume that manufacturers have knowledge of how to dismantle vehicles they build,
which makes the delay on the transfer of the information peculiar.
9.6 NEED OF GUIDANCE AND INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS
There is a need of further guidance on the classification of when a product is waste and when not. The
product specific EoW criteria issued have not resulted in facilitating the work of stakeholders and are,
according to our interviewees, little used.
There are studies on the legislative gap; for example, the Swedish Chemicals Agency has published a
legal analysis on the gap between product and waste related legislation48. It could be argued that the
existing legislation and guidelines are clear on the classification; however, the industry does not agree.
For example, establishments undertaking retail of used and refurbished parts are not aware of the
obligations Article 33 of REACH could impose on them. There is need of guidelines not to a single
legislative act but taking into account the entire material life cycle of various articles incorporating all
waste and product related legislation and clarifying what legislation is applicable and when during the
entire reuse, recovery, and recycling process. An information campaign educating stakeholders on
their legislative obligation is a necessity.
29
Goodpoint AB
10 CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions can be drawn from the study:









Customers of the dismantling business have not expressed an interest concerning information
on hazardous substances in articles.
Waste managers agree that more information on substances in waste is needed both
regarding hazardous as well as valuable substances.
Waste managers want the information easily accessible, preferably on the article itself.
Information transfer through physical marks and electronic tags are recommended by waste
managers.
Specific waste stream EoW criteria have not facilitated recycling and are of little use in the
recycling industry.
Retailers of used and refurbished parts are in need of knowledge of their obligations under
REACH.
Information transfer on hazardous substances in ELV and WEEE could be increased by
specifying substances, e.g. by using the candidate list.
There is a need of guidance on which legislative act that is in place at various stages in the
material life cycle.
A field study at vehicle manufacturer and dismantler sites is highly recommended to clarify the
inconsistent statements received from representatives in this study.
30
Goodpoint AB
31