The EU has successfully created a single market for goods and services, and thus primary materials can flow easily and without controls across EU. However, it is not case for secondary raw materials. Shipment of secondary raw materials or waste resources has been regulated by the Waste Shipment Regulation (1013/2006). The Waste Shipment Regulation was developed in 2006 and focussed on the protection of the environment and human health. In the meantime, in 2015, the Circular Economy Action Plan was adopted. The creation of a dynamic market for secondary raw materials in the EU is a key enabler for a European circular economy. However, national authorities and stakeholders indicated that certain provisions of the Waste Shipment Regulation were causing an unnecessary administrative burden as well as delays and additional costs for shipments of waste.
Making the Waste Shipment Regulation more “circular”
In order to make the Waste Shipment Regulation more „circular“, European Commission included revision of the rules on waste shipments in the new EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy and on 30 January 2020 presented working document Evaluation of Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 on shipments of waste. Most business operators that were consulted disagree with the idea that the Waste Shipment Regulation is well adapted to technical and scientific progress. They have argued that too stringent controls and lengthy administrative procedures hinder the companies’ abilities to shift to circular economy business models. The Evaluation emphasizes several specific issues.
Differences in classification
Different waste classification among Member States, especially regarding green-listed wastes, results in companies not having legal clarity on shipments. One issue that was mentioned is the classification of wastes listed in Annex III and III A and the thresholds for impurities to consider the waste as mixed waste. Whereas some Member States allow for higher amounts of impurities, other Member States classify waste as ‘mixed waste’ if they detect the presence of relatively low quantities of impurities.
Additionally, the differences in the way that Member States decide on what is a waste and what ceases to be waste have been repeatedly raised as an important problem by actors involved in the shipment and treatment of waste in the EU. For example, a material can be considered a non-waste in the country of dispatch, but it may be classified as a waste in the country of the facility that is receiving the material – which may then cause the shipment to be sent back.
A financial guarantee
A specific cost is related to the financial guarantees or the equivalent insurance, including the associated administrative burden. Stakeholders, both from public and private sectors, highlighted that financial guarantees were very rarely used in order to meet the costs of returning waste shipments. Bank guarantees are reported as expensive and administratively time-consuming. Each country has its own approach on financial guarantees (including the levels required): some destination countries insist on having guarantees that comply with their own levels, rather than the levels set by the country of origin.
An export of non-hazardous waste to non-OECD countries (Commission Regulation (EC) No 1418/2007)
Public authorities and businesses consistently pointed to the issue that since 2014 the European Commission has not undertaken work to update Regulation (EC) 1418/2007, even though in the meantime, many third countries have changed their rules on acceptance or not of waste materials and have made applicable procedures stricter. Regulation 1418/2007 assumes that the position of countries on whether to accept certain types of waste is well-informed and will remain unchanged in the future. However, countries may wish to amend their position on whether or not to accept a certain type of waste and the European regulation only reflects this belatedly.
Registration of waste carriers
Member States appear to not mutually recognize each other’s registrations for carriers, which leads to many parallel registrations, which is administratively demanding for the carriers. Furthermore, in practice it is said to be very complicated for carriers to make registrations in non-home states.
In consequence transports are delayed because carriers awaiting the registration lose the assignments. The Stakeholder Group supported the suggestion to ensure mutual recognition of waste carrier registrations.
What is the Croatian waste shipment policy?
- The Croatian Ministry of Environmental Protection established policy for by-products and end of waste by the Ordinance on By-products and End of Waste Status (OG, 117/14). The Ministry keeps a of producers and type of by-products and end- of- waste status products. The registered materials can be shipped abroad as a primary material not as a waste.
- The Ordinance on Waste Management (OG 117/17) has prescribed a method of calculation of the Financial Guarantee and Equivalent Insurance for waste that is subject of notification procedures according to the formula: FG = N x (CT + CDR + CS) x 1,2. FG = Financial Guarantee (bank guarantee or an equivalent insurance), N = amount of waste shipped (tonne), CT = Cost for transport per km per tonne, CTO = Cost of disposal or recovery (including interim storage) per tonne, CS = Costs for storage over a period of 90 days per tonne, 1,2 = safety factor the take-back transport costs, the treatment operation, the storage
- In regard Commission Regulation (EC) No 1418/2007 (amended by the Regulation 674/2012) Croatia has following position: for import of all waste listed in Annex III and mixtures of wastes listed in Annex IIIA the general information requirements laid down in Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 apply. Additionally an importer has to be registered by the Ministry of Environmental Protection.
- Croatia accepts waste carrier registrations from all EU-EEA member.
If you have any questions regarding Croatian waste shipment policy, please do not hesitate to contact us.