Many recyclers – such as paper merchants and metal recyclers – have long argued that the material they handle is not waste. The most significant proponent of this argument has been the metal recycler Mayer Parry which has become part of European Metal Recycling (EMR). The company argues that because it produces material ready for use in a steel furnace it has reprocessed the material and so should be allowed to issue Packaging Waste Recovery Notes under the UK's PRN system.
Disputed
This is disputed by the government and the first stage of a ruling on the matter from the European Courts is due this week.
It now appears that the UK's Environment Agency accepts that materials which could be deemed waste are not waste if they have a use – in the case of nuclear material at least. This stems from comments from the Agency with regard to the MOX shipment.
Transfrontier
A statement from the Agency said that the fuel is not waste following “a careful investigation into claims by Greenpeace that the British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) cargo needs a transfrontier shipment (TFS) authorisation from the Agency under the Transfrontier Shipment of Radioactive Waste Regulations 1993.”
The statement continued: “BNFL is of the view that the fuel is not waste and, as a result, BNFL has not applied for a TFS authorisation.
A spokesman for EMR said in response: “The Environment Agency’s decision seems to endorse EMR’s long-held view that our secondary raw materials are not waste. Indeed it appears the agency has taken our logical argument one step further by suggesting that even hazardous, unprocessed materials are not waste so long as they are destined to be recycled.”
One industry expert said that the MOX decision also had implications for incinerator bottom ash which is used as a substitute for aggregates.
The Agency said: “BNFL has told the Agency that it intends to recover and reuse the plutonium and uranium in the MOX fuel, and has provided information on the options available to recover these materials.
“Having reviewed BNFL's options for recovery and reuse, the Agency has found them to be technically feasible and credible. Last year, the Secretaries of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and for Health decided that the manufacture of MOX fuel was justified. They stated that “it is clear that there is a significant demand from a range of countries for the manufacture of MOX fuel.”
“A use is foreseen”
The Agency's Chairman, Sir John Harman, said:
“The Environment Agency has made its decision principally on the grounds that a use is foreseen for the fuel”.
The Agency statement said that radioactive waste is defined in the 1993 Regulations as “any material which contains or is contaminated by radionuclides and for which no use is foreseen.”
The statement added: “While the fuel is not subject to the Transfrontier Shipment of Radioactive Waste Regulations, this does not mean its safety is not being regulated. The highest levels of supervision, safety, control and security of this shipment have been specified for this shipment. The Department for Trade and Industry's Office for Civil Nuclear Security and the Department for Transport are actively engaged in ensuring arrangements for its safe passage. On arrival in the UK the MOX fuel will be subject to regulatory control under the Nuclear Installations Act.”
Register for free to comment