REUSE, RECOVERY AND RECYCLING Tina Garrity looks at the adoption of the end-of-life vehicles directive

The motor vehicle industry will shortly be feeling the force of the EU's drive towards a more environmentally sustainable future with the adoption of the end-of-life vehicles directive. The directive sets out clear, quantified targets for reuse, recycling and recovery of vehicles and their components and urges producers to manufacture new vehicles with a view to their recyclability. The directive deals with "prevention" in Article 4. Member states will be required to encourage manufacturers to reduce the presence of hazardous substances in vehicles, to build in recovery and recyclability to new vehicle designs and to use more recycled materials in vehicles and other products. The article includes a prohibition on lead, mercury, cadmium and hexavalent chromium in materials and components of new vehicles, from 1 July 2003, with the exception of certain listed products.

Article 5 deals with "collection" and operators in the motor vehicle sector will be required to establish collection systems for end-of-life vehicles and, where technically feasible, for waste used parts. Member states have to ensure the adequate provision of collection facilities and the transfer of vehicles to authorised treatment facilities. Transfer will be a condition of deregistration and a certificate of destruction will be issued to vehicle owners/holders upon transfer to a treatment facility or to agents acting on their behalf who will need to register with the public authorities.

Under Article 6, which covers "treatment", all establishments undertaking treatment will be required to obtain permits or be registered with the competent authorities in accordance with directive 75/442/EC on waste. They must also be encouraged to introduce certified environmental management systems. Details of what the treatment processes must entail are set out in the directive.

With regard to "reuse and recovery" (Article 7) member states are obliged to take the necessary measures to encourage the reuse of components or their recovery where reuse is not possible and to give preference to recycling when environmentally viable. The article sets out the following targets:

• By 1 January 2006: reuse and recovery to be increased to a minimum of 85 per cent and reuse and recycling to 80 per cent by an average weight per vehicle and year (lower targets may be set for pre-1980 vehicles but no lower than 75 per cent and 70 per cent respectively).
• By 1 January 2015: the targets will be 95 per cent and 85 per cent respectively for all vehicles.

To assist in the treatment process, the Commission is tasked with promoting the preparation of European standards on dismantlability, recoverability and recyclability of vehicles. The Commission is also required to establish, no later than 21 October 2001, component and material coding standards which producers must use. New vehicle types will have to be accompanied by dismantling information which must, for treatment purposes, identify the different vehicle components and materials and the location of hazardous substances. Without prejudice to commercial confidentiality component manufacturers must give appropriate information about their components to authorised treatment facilities.

The implementation date for the directive is 21 April 2002. Provided the objectives of the directive are met, certain provisions may be transposed by way of agreements between the competent authorities and the economic sectors concerned, subject to certain provisos such as the agreements being enforceable and made publicly available.

Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on end-of-life vehicles. OJ L269. 21.10.00 pp 34-43.

SIMPLIFIED FOOD SAFETY LEGISLATION?

The CIEH has responded to the Commission's proposals to simplify European legislation on food safety, Tina Garrity reports

The CIEH has welcomed the Commission's decision to simplify EU food safety legislation. However, in a sixteen-page response to the five draft regulations issued for consultation earlier this year, it says that the Commission should have taken the opportunity to remove the anomaly of having specific rules addressing foods of animal origin as distinct from all other food. The application of Haccp makes obsolete any historical requirement for separate legislation. With regard to food safety controls in meat plants, the CIEH suggests a move away from post-mortem veterinary inspection in abattoirs towards a Haccp-based system with food inspectors conducting frequent, in-depth inspections to ensure full application of Haccp principles. This could include microbiological sampling. Vets could retain responsibility for all pre-mortem inspection.

On the issue of objective/goal-based legislation, as opposed to the traditional prescriptive approach, the CIEH welcomes the trend towards the former but cautions the Commission against any temptation to deregulate. While many food businesses operate exemplary standards, it says, many do not. The Commission must protect consumers against any temptation on the part of business to put profit before safety.

The CIEH welcomes the requirement for documented Haccp systems to be introduced and sees no reason why Haccp should not be extended to cover primary production also. It does say, however, that the application of Haccp must be sufficiently flexible to apply in small businesses. It recommends translating national industry guides into the various languages of the Community and making them available to businesses in all member states. The Chartered Institute also wants the Commission to look at information leaflets and packages which can be distributed to proprietors of small food businesses. This will assist them in applying Haccp and help to ensure a level playing field across the EU.

Alternatively, it suggests that the Commission could consider giving businesses the choice of applying a full Haccp system or complying with prescriptive legislation to be produced by the Commission. Such a system, which already exists in New Zealand, would recognise both those businesses which have Haccp expertise and those which do not. The CIEH goes on to say that in addition to Haccp there must be licensing with prior approval of all food businesses if consumers are to be fully protected.

With regard to the draft regulation on official control, the CIEH says that the move towards a more goal-based system of regulation will by its very nature allow for more flexibility of interpretation and application and it suggests that the Commission encourage member states to develop guidelines for the consistent application of legislation by official control bodies. It also suggests that the Commission consider requiring minimum standards of service provision by competent authorities which could be monitored by the Food and Veterinary Office. Such standards should not only include quantity and quality of inspections but also minimum qualifications for enforcement officers. Service provision must be undertaken across the food chain to ensure consumer confidence and thus should include primary producers. Regarding imports from third countries, the CIEH is concerned that the existing system of checks and balances is insufficient to protect consumers. It urges the Commission to produce guidance on required levels of sampling at points of entry in the EU commensurate with the results of scientific investigations and the level of health protection required.

On the detail of the proposed food hygiene regulation, the CIEH makes a number of suggestions for improvement or clarification. Amongst these are a suggestion that vehicles used for the transport of both food and non-food items should carry a log containing information on previous consignments and the cleaning and treatments undertaken as a consequence. Primary producers should be required to prevent biological or chemical contamination of food through the application of untreated waste and human waste to farmland. Food businesses should be required to inform the competent authority of all withdrawals from the food market and guidance must be given to businesses on the term "serious risk" as used in the regulation. Businesses should also be required to keep records of client premises supplied and distribution patterns.

Within the requirement for business to offer assistance to the competent authority there should be an explicit requirement to make available persons for interview. The CIEH welcomes the requirement for Haccp training and suggests extending the training section to require training commensurate with food handlers' level of responsibility.

A copy of the full response can be found on the CIEH website at: www.cieh.org.uk/about/policy/response/food_ecregs.htm