Waste


This cross-cutting theme is now closed for comments.

You can read comments made since the start of the Red Tape Challenge in April 2011 below.

You can also still submit comments to the Red Tape Challenge inbox by clicking here.

These regulations aim to reduce the volume and environmental impact of different types of waste (including household, hazardous, construction, mining and quarrying waste). In some cases they make businesses financially responsible for collecting, treating and recycling the products they produce when they reach the end of life, and contribute towards the green economy.

They include provisions on packaging waste; site waste management plans; commercial and industrial waste; construction and demolition; waste shipments; hazardous waste control and tracking; flytipping; landfill limits; batteries; electrical and electronic equipment; and waste disposal.

You can find all 40 regulations that relate to waste below to the left.

The Waste and Air Pollution (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2007

This instrument makes minor amendments to the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 (S.I 2005/894) “the HWRs”) in order to correct drafting errors in those Regulations.

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 2007

To achieve requirements of EU Directive 94/62/EC (as amended) by setting packaging recycling targets on larger UK businesses.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Major Accident Off-Site Emergency Plan (Management of Waste from Extractive Industries) (England and Wales) Regulations 2009

Transpose Directive 2006/21/EC on the management of waste from extractive industries and amending Directive 2004/35/EC in respect of the requirements in Article 6 of the Mining Waste Directive concerning the preparation of an off-site (external) emergency plan, which must specify the measures to be taken off-site in the event of an accident

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Site Waste Management Plans Regulations 2008

Require any person intending to carry out a construction project with an estimated cost greater than £300,000 to prepare a site waste management plan.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011

To transpose the requirements of the revised EU waste framework directive (2008/98/EC).

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Regulations 2007 (as amended)

Set out rules to control the movement of waste into, out of, or through the UK. They also set out offences and penalties for non-compliance and appoint the competent authorities for shipments of waste.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005

Set out the regime for the control and tracking of the movement of hazardous waste for the purpose of implementing the Hazardous Waste Directive (Directive 91/689/EC). Implement the Hazardous Waste elements of the Revised Waste Framework Directive.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Sludge (Use in Agriculture) Regulations 1989

To implement the requirements of Directive 86/278/EEC

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Controlled Waste (Registration of Carriers and Seizure of Vehicles) Regulations 1991

Sets out provisions for seizure and retention and return/disposal of any vehicles seized in relation to suspected flytipping offences (i.e. offences under section 33 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (using powers in section 6 of the Control of Pollution (Amendment) Act 1989)).

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Controlled Waste Regulations 1992

Categorises controlled wastes as household, commercial or industrial.
Controlled Waste must include all waste which falls within the scope of the Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2008/98).

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

List of Wastes (England) Regulations 2005

These Regulations transpose the European list of wastes into domestic legislation, so that for statistical and reporting purposes the correct waste codes can be used. These codes are also used for the purposes of waste classification under other waste legislation. The regulations implement Commission Decision 2000/532/EC.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategies (Disapplication of Duties) (England) Regulations 2007

The Waste and
Emissions Trading Act 2003 contains a statutory duty to produce Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategies, the Act also exempts many authorities from producing them based on their performance in meeting recycling targets and obtaining an ”excellent” in their Comprehensive Performance Assessment. These exemptions are no longer valid and we will consult local authorities on options for the future of JMWMS.

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Landfill (Scheme Year and Maximum Landfill Amount) Regulations 2004

These Regulations specify the maximum amount by weight of biodegradable municipal waste that is allowed to be sent to landfill, for the UK (and England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland separately) consistent with UK obligations under Article 5(2) of the Landfill Directive. The original (2004) Regulations are being replaced with new Regulations to reflect a new interpretation of municipal waste as agreed with the European Commission.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Landfill Allowances and Trading Scheme (England) Regulations 2004

The Regulations provide the detail for the operation of the Landfill Allowances Trading Scheme (LATS) in England, a cap and trade scheme to reduce the amount of waste landfilled by waste disposal authorities.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Waste (Household Duty of Care) England and Wales Regulations 2005

Places a duty on occupiers of domestic property to transfer household waste produced on the property only to those authorised to take it e.g. a waste collection authority (council) or registered waste carrier. (Amends section 34 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (i.e. the Duty of Care as respects waste) and implements Article 15 of the revised Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC)).

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Waste Management (England and Wales) Regulations 2006

This regulation amends various other regulations. It includes amendments to the EPA in relation to unauthorised waste disposal (prohibits disposal of household waste within the curtilage of a domestic property if it’s likely to pollute the environment or harm human health), Environment Act in respect of charging for env licenses, 1991 carriers seizure regs (amendment omitted by the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011), Controlled Waste Regs, Waste Management Licensing Regs 1994 (now revoked for England and Wales by the Waste (England and Wales) Regs 2011), Groundwater Regs 1998, Landfill Regs, & Hazardous Waste Regs 2005.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Sludge (Use in Agriculture) (Amendment) Regulations 1990

Amended the Sludge (Use in Agriculture) Regulations 1989 major amendments included definitions of the occupier of a dedicated site, concentration of substances listed, and bar against sale or offer of crops for human consumption grown on land where actual concentration exceeds permitted concentration, and clarified use of sludge on agricultural land.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Joint Waste Authorities (Proposals ) Regulations 2009

Sets out the information that local authorities which wish to make a Joint Waste Authority proposal have to submit

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Waste Batteries and Accumlators Regulations 2009

Regulations to transpose Directive 2006/66/EC, putting in place requirements for battery producers to contribute towards the establishment of schemes that increase the collection and recycling of waste batteries.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) (Amendment No 2) Regulations

Amends 2007/871 by revising the requirements for accrediting an exporter of packaging waste, giving the Environment Agency more discretion as to what constitutes sound evidence of reprocessing

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) (Amendment) Regulations 2010

Introduces targets into SI 2007/871 for 2011 and 2012. Makes a number of technical changes to reduce admin burdens and improve efficiency. Makes changes to the above in order to improve transparency of funding flows.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The End-of-Life Vehicles Regulations 2003

Regulations to implement certain aspects of Directive 2000/53/EC on the design of cars/light goods vehicles and their collection, treatment and recycling when they become waste.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The End-of-Life Vehicles (Producer Responsibility) Regulations 2005

Regulations to implement remaining aspects of Directive 2000/53/EC on the collection, treatment and recycling of cars/light goods vehicles when they become waste.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The End-of-Life Vehicles (Amendment) Regulations 2010

Regulations that amend certain aspects of the ELV Regulations 2003 relating to the design of new cars and light goods vehicles.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The End-of-Life Vehicles (Producer Responsibility) (Amendment) Regulations 2010

Regulations that amend certain aspects of the ELV Regulations 2005 relating to the collection and treatment of waste cars and light goods vehicles.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (Amendment) Regulations 2010

Changes some technical definitions in the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006 relating to dangerous substances.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 2009

Amends reporting requirements placed on producers as defined by the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (Amendment) Regulations 2009

Simplifies the approval system for Producer Compliance Schemes and simplifies data reporting requirements in the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipement Regulations 2006.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (Amendment) Regulations 2007

Amends the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006 to encourage the prioritisation of reuse of whole electrical appliances in preference to recycling the materials from them.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006

Implements the provisions of the WEEE Directive 2002/96/EC. Its broad aim is to address the environmental impacts of electrical and electronic equipment at end of life and requires producers to take financial responsibility for the products they place on the market when they become waste.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Joint Waste Disposal Authorities (Levies) (England) Regulations 2006

This enables Joint Waste Dispoal Authorities (JWDAs) to manage waste more sustainably in partnership with their Waste Collection Authorities (WCAs) by introducing a link between the WCAs payments and the tonnage of waste they deliver to their JWDA for disposal. This was intended to encourage WCAs to work together more closely with their JWDA to increase recycling and reduce waste. The legislation introduced a tonnage-based default levy from 1 April 2006 (including transition arrangement for a number of JWDAs and their councils).

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Joint Waste Disposal (Recycling Payments) (Disapplication) England Order 2006

Joint Waste Disposal Authorities no longer have to pay recycling credits to Waste Collection Authorities for the waste they collect and recycle in Waste Disposal Authorities area. It joined up with the JWDA (Levies)(England) Order 2006, which ensured a link between the WCA payments and the tonnage of waste they delivered to JWDA for disposal.

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations

Regulations to amend Regulation 2005 No.894. (The Hazardous Waste Regulations) in order to reduce burdens.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Lists of Wastes (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2005

Regulations to amend errors in amended errors in SI 2005/895 (The Lists of Waste Regulations)

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Transfrontier Shipment of Waste (Amendment) Regulations 2008

SI 2008 9 amended SI 2007 No.1711 to create an offence for failure to comply with the requirements of the new EC Regulation No 1418/2007 concerning the export for recovery of certain waste listed in Annex III or IIIA to Regulation 1013/2006”.

EU regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Waste Regulation and Disposal (Authorities) Order 1985

Set up (i) 7 authorities to take over waste regulation functions, establishing a WR Authority for London, and, (ii) in certain areas, to take over the waste disposal functions for certain abolished large councils, from 1st April 1986.

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Collection and Disposal of Waste Regulations 1988

Make provision for various matters concerning the collection and disposal of controlled waste under Part I of the Control of Pollution Act 1974

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Waste Management (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997

Designates relevant offences for the purpose of the “fit and proper person” test in section 74(3)(a) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, a provision that has been repealed in England and Wales.

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The Environmental Protection (Waste Recycling Payments) Regulations 2006

Sets out the requirements by which waste disposal authorities have a duty to make payments to waste collection authorities for increasing recycling within their area, and waste collection authorities have a power to make payments to third parties for increasing recycling in their area.

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

The London Waste and Recycling Board Order 2008

Sets out the membership and constitution of the London Waste and Recycling Board under the Greater London Authority Act 1999 – number of members, how they are chosen, their tenure, board procedural matters and requirements for reporting, public access to meetings and documentation.

 UK regulation

Read More… (opens in a new window)

Tell us what you think should happen to these regulations and why, being specific where possible:

For example, Defra recently removed requirements for accredited reprocessors of packaging waste to produce an Independent Audit report for the purposes of the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations. This saved reprocessors around £300,000 per year in costs. Are there similar simplifications or amendments that could be made to other regulations in this category?

162 responses to Waste

  • christine said on May 11, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    I can’t see why all general waste cannot be put into one bin taken to a sorting facility and through various machines and people (would create a demand for technology and robotics that don’t already exist to increase efficiency) it can be organised into groups of recyclables where then each group i.e. metals plastic etc are sent off to the relevant recycling factory and whatever is left sent to landfill. The bin should not be the end of a product it should be the half way point upon which in can be used to create another product. There is a massive logistical chain and whole industries just to get a product from out of the ground to a consumer it should be the same when the original use of the product has been exhausted. Would there be a need for waste Regulations then?

  • Sarah Alsbury said on May 8, 2013 at 4:23 pm

    I think there should be a minimum amount of (non-hazardous) waste, belowwhich any of the waste Regulations do not apply. This would enable simple recycling schemes to work without fear e.g. staff taking home scrap paper, to use at home, restaurants putting out plastic containers and crates for people to take.

  • Jim White said on April 17, 2013 at 4:22 pm

    The WEEE regulations as they apply to me are bonkers.

    First, my company produces less than 1 tonne p.a. of computers and is registered with the EA as a producer of WEEE through a compliance scheme. This costs c. £500 year and is worthless.
    There is so much good recyclable components in a computer that my scheme charges a few pence / tonne for recycling and there are many recyclers who will collect equipment for free. So nearly 100% of the costs of this unnecessary scheme go on administration of the EA registration only.

    Fine, make it illegal to dump WEEE. But in relation to high tech equipment there should be no cost to either the producer or the user for recycling. This is done simply to satisfy Europe.

    Second, I am not allowed to help with the process! The regulation prevents me from transporting used computers to a local recycling centre as I do not have the hugely expensive licence to carry waste. Again this is bonkers. I can help solve the problem of recycling systems (both of my own manufacture and not) for my customers without harm to the environment and at very low cost. Instead this unnecessary regulation means that either, I cannot, or I must break or bend the law to do the right thing.

    Finally, I cannot begin to estimate the cost to the state. I once had a visit from the EA to check my paperwork. It took half a day and I knew much more about the scheme than the official. I am one of many thousands of small producers. I expect I am one of less than 5% that have registered. The cost of finding and enforcing the others must be prohibitive because I have heard of no prosecutions in my industry. Even big registered comapnies ignore the rules. My mistake was attending the expensively delivered seminar at the Queen Elizabeth Hall on the subject and putting my head above the parapet!

    Please scrap this stupid unfair legislation that is unnecessary, disproportionate, riddled with ambiguity, and is largely unenforceable

  • Brian Harvey said on March 7, 2013 at 4:57 pm

    It is my view that this body of legislation serves a very important purpose. Because of the plethora of regulations, it is difficult to comprehend. It is in desperate need of simplification and streamlining. I suggest consideration be given to using the Regulatory Reform Act to achieve this.

  • Jack Churchill said on November 15, 2012 at 10:37 am

    Introduce a minimum of 1 ton, like the battery and packaging scheme have. It is crazy for small companies to be paying out £500 a year on red tape. And wasting so much time filling in forms.

    Comment Tags: Waste, weee

  • Paul Guckian said on November 1, 2012 at 8:52 am

    I agree with the SME comments below. We are a B2B distributor, and we have contracts with all our resellers to manage WEEE waste. Therefore we generate about 2kg of waste per year. The £500 fees for this are just ridiculous, and unnecessary. Just because we fill out a bunch of forms doesn’t make us dispose of waste correctly.

    My suggestion is that if we are trying to manage waste, then we look at how that waste is disposed. You declare what “waste” you are generating, and you show that you disposed of that waste correctly by having receipts. You must offer a facility to customers for the WEEE waste. Just in the same way you collect VAT where appropriate and show that you accounted for it correctly.

    I agree that local authority should collect waste up to 20kg from any SME business in their local area (at a reasonable cost). Its silly that I can drop off the waste as a person, but technically as a business I cannot do the same.

    Comment Tags: weee

  • Tim Croot said on May 17, 2012 at 7:36 am

    • Tim Croot said on May 17, 2012 at 7:41 am

      Waste (Household Duty of Care) England and Wales Regulations 2005 should be ammended so that if the source of the waste is found guilty of this offence (i.e. not transfering the waste to an authorised person) that they to can be passed the cost for the clear up if the fly tipper cant be found or identified.

  • Andrew Fleckney said on May 14, 2012 at 10:14 am

    I believe that he Site Waste Management Plan Regs have improved the management of waste on site and the control of waste from site to tip. Scrapping it would, I believe, be a retrograde step and lead to more fly-tipping

    • Emma Thompson said on October 11, 2012 at 3:50 pm

      Agreed

  • malcolm perry said on May 11, 2012 at 3:46 pm

    The array of overlapping legislation that is required to be kept up to date for a ISO 14001 legal register is horrible. As a business we are required to know of and keep up to date all the articles as they affect our waste contractors. Has anyone got any idea how much time this takes? Please consolidate and make it a one stop shop for operators and users of services alike.
    Businesses must act responsibly towards their neighbours and its stake holders and reduce its global environmental impact but they must also remain competitive. By streamlining and simplifying legislation and practical enforcement will assist in keeping people in employment and help the environment.

  • David Goadby said on March 13, 2012 at 2:19 am

    I own a one man band business. I have turnover of less than £50K and am VAT registered. I manufacture small electronic assemblies with a total weight per annum of around 20Kg (that’s 0.02 Tonnes). The equipment has a life of around 10 years in general and there are never any returns, ie I never scrap anything other than my own equipment.

    The problem is I have to register with a Producer Compliance Scheme with a total cost to the business of £500 per annum for absolutely nothing. I register my sales weights and that is it.

    It I require to recycle equipment then it is only a few pence per Kg BUT with a minimum charge of £100. And a lorry will drive over 200 miles round trip to perform the collection – not CO2 friendly at all!. For 1Kg scrap that is a massive cost and hardly an incentive to comply.

    Yet, my neighbours can scrap as many TV’s a year (weighing more times my annual scrap rate) at the local civic amenity (aka tip) for free. I am classed as trade so the local authority refuses to let me take even 1Kg of electronics waste to their facility.

    This is NUTS.

    I fully applaud the idea of recycling but the current system is an unfair burden to very small businesses. For even smaller electronics start-ups it is seen as a start-up tax.

    My recommendations:

    1) Like the battery directive, have a minimum qualifying weight. Although for batteries this is 1 Tonne, I would be happy to have a limit if 100Kg of electronic goods per annum. I would call it the “low-weight” scheme.

    2) Create a registration system for “low weight” scheme SME’s that is lower cost. A simple on-line registration is all that is required.

    3) I still think a WEEE registration is a god idea for monitoring, tracing etc so we would still affix unique CE/WEEE labels to equipment that we manufacture.

    4) Force local authorities to accept electronic waste from registered “low-weight” SME’s – This would reduce collection costs and encourage compliance by companies current avoided the system altogether.

  • patricia borlenghi said on February 23, 2012 at 2:43 pm

    We all have an individual responsibility to do more in this area. Packaging really does need to be replaced by less cumbersome and more biodegradable materials. The regulations in place need to be more stringent.

    Comment Tags: triciab

  • K Morgan said on February 14, 2012 at 1:23 am

    The End-of-Life Vehicles Regulations 2003 limit both the method and place vehicles can be disposed of at end of life without due regard to the existance of small businesses that may be carrying out recycling of specific components.
    There is no logical reason behind motor trade premises which are already registered as waste producers and have facilities for disposal of waste oils and fluids, or for that matter the general public in cases of one off vehicle dismantling disposing of such oils and fluids through approved waste disposal facilities not being able to dismantle vehicles and sell for parts through such channels [Deleted Text]
    Currently a vehicle at end of life could not be disposed of in this manner as there may be no remaining components from which a certificate of destruction could be issued, though all components could still be traceable. Without the certificate of destruction the vehicle would need to remain on SORN for an indefinate period of time , increasing processing costs for both the dvla and taxpayer.

    Comment Tags: end of life vehicles

  • Mark Stanbrook said on January 12, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    Small quantities of construction waste generated by domestic renovation work I carry out require me to pay for its disposal through approved disposal contractors.
    This cost has to be passed onto the client.
    If I leave the waste at the clients home they can take it to the local authority municipal recycling centre.
    I am liscensed with the Environment Agency as a carrier of controlled waste which costs me £175.00 for three years.Surely there must be a way of allowing registered waste carriers to legally dispose of the same waste, without cost, at the local authority sites that my clients use for free!
    This I am sure is one of the main reasons that fly tipping of construction waste is so prevalent!!

    Comment Tags: builders trade waste

  • Dr Anne-Gaelle Collot from the Chemical Industries Association said on October 3, 2011 at 10:33 am

    We are supportive of the revised Waste Framework Directive which clarifies the definition of waste (by introducing a definition of by-product) and introduces a flexible 5- step waste hierarchy. These new requirements are in line with the Chemical Industries Association Sustainable Development programme (http://www.cia.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Sustainability%20brochure7.pdf ).

    Resource efficiency: waste and by-product:
    We are however concerned about Defra’s interpretation of the definition of waste which we believe is in conflict with the current Government approach on resource efficiency as well as Responsible Care which is the chemical Industry Global voluntary programme on health, safety and environment (http://www.cia.org.uk/ResponsibleCareRoot/ResponsibleCare.aspx).
    Processes used to make chemical products usually produce by-products. These by-products often have very few impurities and are suitable for use without further treatment; chemical companies often design processes to use these by-products. Chemical processes are regulated under the EU Integrated Pollution Control Directive (IPPC) which imposes strict controls on use of by-products on site.
    In December 2005 Defra changed its interpretation of the definition of waste which resulted in many by-products being reclassified as wastes and therefore some becoming subject to the Waste Incineration Directive (WID) if used as fuel for on-site energy use. WID implementation is very expensive which make on site use of by-products unsustainable leading to negative environmental impacts as by-products are transported and disposed of off site and chemical sites have to use more virgin fuel in place of burning by-products. The revised Waste Framework Directive adopted in October 2008 defines waste and by-products and it is the CIA’s belief that some of the materials currently classified as waste are in fact by-products.
    We have worked very closely with the Environment Agency to find pragmatic solutions (via the end of waste protocol) but it took considerable time (~5 years) and effort to resolve while these are simply examples of resource management good practice. We are aware of a number of similar examples in our industry which still have not been resolved.

    Practicability of implementation of the waste hierarchy:
    We are also concerned about the implementation of the waste hierarchy for industrial waste being sent off site. Waste producers in England and Wales (this requirement does not exist in Scotland) are required from 29 September to declare in each waste consignment note that they have complied with the waste hierarchy. This additional responsibility leaves the waste producer vulnerable to justifying the declaration if further questioned. Ultimately, the duty would be “to take all measures available….” but this would be an onerous task to demonstrate for each waste disposal decision.
    We question the practicability of the self-declaration in the waste consignment notes for each waste stream. This is because the wording of the declaration is aimed at the person signing the transfer note and that he/she will often be a logistics operative who will be aware of the content of the waste load but not necessarily be aware that the waste hierarchy has been applied. As a solution we propose to include the decisions on the adherence with the hierarchy for waste streams in the regular waste review, as required by the Environmental Permitting Regulations. The person adding the signature can then just use this as a reference, when completing the transfer note.

  • James Morgan said on September 30, 2011 at 7:29 am

    At present there are many ways to record the amount of waste i.e. volume / tonnage etc. I propose that only tonnage be an acceptable method of recording waste data as it is the only truly accurate way to record waste.
    Using the estimate of volume method could be drastically overestimating the amount of waste being removed from site as it is effectively human interpretation. During a site test of volume estimation against actual weights it was estimated that 25-40% more waste was estimated than was actually present. This alone would put the countries statistics on waste massively higher than they actually are.

  • Colin Porteous said on September 29, 2011 at 11:43 am

    The waste regulations have led to significant improvements in the way waste is now managed. You just have to look at the legacy of unregulated waste activities from 20 years ago, which will be with us in many cases for at least the next fifty years. It involves so many stakeholders, that it is hard to see a “one size fits all” approach to the legislation. One area where it could probably be made simpler is in merging the Transfrontier Shipment 2007 regs with the Hazardous Waste 2005 regs as they cover common ground.

    Comment Tags: Waste

  • Anne Delaney said on September 27, 2011 at 12:02 pm

    To be honest the majority of waste carriers do not know (or ignore) their duty when it comes to waste documentation. I help companies implement ISO14001 and I see time and time again waste transfer notes without the mandatory information eg waste codes, descriptions etc. Perhaps it’s because nobody uses a standard template, maybe this would help.
    Even with regards to the new waste regs major waste management companies are still producing WTNs without incorporating the new requirements (SIC code etc), so what hope do smaller companies have with amending their documentation.
    Maybe as part of the WCL application a copy of the waste carrier’s proposed WTNs could be reviewed at the same time, then maybe this will help ensure WTNs meet the requirements?

    Personally I do not see the benefit with adding the SIC code and a tick box to say the producer complies with the waste hierarchy. I can see the intention, but in practice I cannot see anyone not ticking the box, even if they don’t understand what they are ticking. I believe the increase in disposal costs will increase the use of the waste hierarchy rather than somebody ticking a box.

    Also with regards to consignment notes, it can be a bit of a nightmare chasing and receiving Part E’s, there must be a more practical and less administrative way of confirming the information on the consignment note is correct. The amount of paper/postage etc used must outweigh the benefit??

  • B Chapman said on September 22, 2011 at 12:20 pm

    We need strong and well enforced legislation to reduce the generation of waste to a minimum, increase re-use, and increase recycling. This needs to include incentives and the facilities to enable this to happen at large and small business and individual levels. Voluntary measures alone will not achieve a reduction in waste.

  • Ros Ward said on September 21, 2011 at 7:08 pm

    It has taken a long time to get this far but we are still way behind many of our European neighbours. The government cannot seriously consider making legislation weaker in this area. Green businesses are not going to be able to grow – as hoped for by the government – unless legislation relating to waste reduction is strengthened. The government must also make sure through effective legislation that our waste does not end up polluting other countries and their less well protected citizens.

  • Daniel Davies said on September 21, 2011 at 5:31 pm

    A voluntary code for waste management? The government is seriously considering this? Surely, as many others have pointed out already, we must have statutory codes in place to protect against corporate greed and nefarious interest. Good government means leading, not being led by giants such as supermarkets. Why are they allowed to package food indiscriminately, whilst greenwashing us all with waste reduction policies?

    In order to reduce waste; first of all we need a national approach. At present it is largely dependent on your post code. Take plastic recycling for example, living on the boundary between two councils, I am only able to recycle plastic bottles, every other type of plastic goes to land fill (ridiculously, even it is also code 1 or 2), whilst my neighbour is able to recycle plastics 1-3. Actually, why isn’t plastic 1-7 recycling mandatory across the whole of the UK yet, like it is in most European countries? There will be no ‘big society’ without some ‘big leadership’, and the ‘greenest government ever’ could end up with a lot of green egg on it’s face, whilst us, the general public, pay for the cost of the cleanup.

    Comment Tags: recycling

Bookmark and Share