Wastecare -one of the producer compliance schemes being urged by REPIC to hand over its surplus of WEEE recycling evidence to meet the shortfall of others - has proposed a "mirror approach" instead.

The Leeds-based company was one of around 30 schemes approached by REPIC last month to hand over waste electronics collected from their sites (see letsrecycle.com story). REPIC has a large member obligation and  is keen to collect evidence to meet their requirements.

However, Wastecare has suggested a "much simpler" system in which companies with insufficient evidence hand over their surplus members instead.

Under this system, Wastecare proposes to extend its service to additional members "without further charge", and says that at the end of the compliance period members would be free to choose their scheme again for the next period.

Writing in a letter to REPIC chief executive Dr Philip Morton, Wastecare managing director Peter Hunt said: "In tune with the Government's predilection for virtual trading, I suggest a much simpler way of balancing the demand with the supply of evidence. Simply, the scheme with insufficient evidence passes across their surplus member to a scheme with spare capacity."

Mr Hunt explained that the approach was "very similar" to that taken by the insurance industry to help companies not take on more than they could underwrite.

He added: "I appreciate this is a mirror approach to your own suggestion. It would therefore be interesting to establish the support amongst all the schemes as to the way forward so far."

Response

Wastecare's letter, which was also sent to other producer compliance schemes, was written in response to correspondence from REPIC on September 21 in which the company requested that other schemes "commercially agreed transport cost" to hand over waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) collected at their sites.

The company claimed that it had already entered into "bilateral agreements" with other compliance schemes under his offered terms.

REPIC boasts producers including Hoover, Kenwood and Philips Electronics UK as members, but faces the concern that other schemes with more collection sites at their fingertips than their members need to meet WEEE obligations may hold it to ransom for WEEE evidence.

Responding to REPIC's suggestions, Mr Hunt said that it would "not only be disruptive but would potentially render much of this equipment redundant."

He claimed that in most cases, waste management companies had entered into long standing service agreements with councils to handle waste arising from CA sites, involving "heavy" investment in personal, vehicles and recovery equipment.

REPIC was unavailable for comment.