FEAD welcomes clarified definition on the Final Recycling Process

399
EU Parlament (Foto: PIRO4D / Pixabay)

Brussels — FEAD, representing the private waste management and resources industry, has followed with great interest the outcome of the vote in yesterday’s ENVI Committee on the final report regarding the Waste Framework Directive (WFD). FEAD members welcome that the definition of municipal waste shall apply regardless of the public or private status of the operator, thereby clearly stressing the neutrality principle and the need for open markets and fair competition towards a move from a linear to a circular economy.

However, FEAD regrets that the “quantity” criterion has not been retained following a very narrow voting. This way the similarity of household waste to municipal waste is merely defined based on its “nature” and “composition”. The European Parliament thereby misses the chance to make a clear distinction between municipal waste and Commercial and Industrial Waste despite the adopted Compromise Amendment on C&I waste. As a consequence, there is a huge risk for municipal waste to be broadened, thereby including the collection and treatment of larger quantities of C&I waste to be financed by tax payers’ money. FEAD members are confident that this “mistake” can and will be rectified during the plenary vote.

FEAD welcomes the adoption of ambitious targets set by the European Parliament and the clarification of the definition on “Final Recycling Process” which is now coherent with the existing definition on recycling. However, by deleting the derogation as proposed by the EC regarding the point of measurement for calculating the recycling target, FEAD members deem the “input into final recycling” as not always feasible and are convinced that this will not lead to an improved reliability and comparability of statistics across the EU. Depending on the waste flows and where the waste material will effectively be reprocessed, the output of sorting as point of measurement is the point at which harmonization at EU level can be reached, hence it should have been kept as equal alternative. FEAD members trust that the member states, who have to implement the calculation method, will be able to convince the EP of the need for both point of measurements in view of the upcoming negotiations with the Council.

Separate collection at source of recyclables and bio-waste at source should be the norm. FEAD however welcomes that the EP has adopted a derogation allowing Member States to exclude sparsely populated areas in cases where local conditions do not always allow for separate collection and it can be demonstrated that it is not the best overall environmental outcome.

Finally, FEAD welcomes very much all adopted measures aiming at maximising the uptake of secondary raw materials and the use of EU funds to be used in line with the waste hierarchy when investing in waste management infrastructure.

Source: FEAD – European Federation of Waste Management and Environmental Services