A leading waste and recycling industry expert has warned that the method of testing being proposed to determine whether a lower rate of landfill tax should be applied to fines material is impractical.
Responding to comments made by members of the waste management sector last week, LRS consultant and former Veolia deputy chief executive Paul Levett told letsrecycle.com he was unconvinced that loss on ignition (LOI) testing to measure the biodegradable element of the waste in trommel fines would be practical.
LOI testing, which is favoured by the waste sector trade body the Environmental Services Association and a number of its members – involves igniting a sample of material to determine how much moisture is lost – as an alternative to visual tests, which it is claimed are open to exploitation by some operators.
Mr Levett said: If you wanted to target a specific waste stream you could use LOI testing but given the delay in getting those results back it does not seem practical. Whats more, it is relatively simple for a landfill operator to tell the difference through the odour and the temperature of the material.
And, he warned the proposed new system could see whole loads being landfilled.
He explained: Recyclers have to transport materials, sort them and extract and then transport outputs. It’s not a low cost operation. To the extent that certain flows or plants are no longer economic, the gross flow will go to landfill, losing the opportunity to extract the valuable resources which are currently put back to use in the UK economy.
Mr Levett is chairman of LRS Consultancy and is involved with a number of waste and recycling businesses including Powerday where he is a non-executive advisory board member.
Rules
The tightening up of the rules covering trommel fines, first announced by Her Majestys Revenue and Customs (HMRC) in May 2012, sees fines from trommels and screens which would once have been charged the lower rate of landfill tax of 2.50 for inert material, charged the full rate of 72 a tonne for active material.
The consultation by HMRC on guidance notes for the changes is drawing to a close with a deadline for submissions of October 20. The proposed changes are due to come into force from November 11 2013 (see letsrecycle.com story).
‘If you wanted to target a specific waste stream you could use LOI testing but given the delay in getting those results back it does not seem practical.’
Paul Levett, LRS Consultancy chair
The testing regime for materials is a crucial part of the debate over implementation of the rules. The Environmental Services Association has spoken in favour of the LOI test and explaining this stance, a spokesman explained: ESA believes that additional scientific testing methods are required, in addition to this HMRC guidance to provide enough certainty for landfill operators to determine the correct landfill tax classification.
We believe that the proposed testing system must be implemented urgently to ensure that responsible waste management companies are not undercut by less scrupulous operators.
‘Subjective’
Another view came from consultancy Eunomia with managing director Mike Brown calling a visual test too subjective. But, he conceded that uncertainty remained about what could be classified as incidental amounts of non-qualifying material in a load made predominantly up of qualifying, inert material.
Mr Brown has previously warned that materials recycling facilities (MRFs) and waste transfer stations locked into fixed price contracts with clients would be squeezed by the rate (see letsrecycle.com story). He argued however that HMRC guidance would act to drive up recycling rates.
Commenting on the proposed changes today, he said: There were very strong suggestions that some operators a year ago were shredding material that clearly was not inert, but because they were being defined as material for landfill cover, the material was being accepted at the inert rate.
If youre spending a lot on material sorting and all of a sudden you can dispose of it at 2.50 per tonne tax and a 5-10 gate fee, material that could otherwise have been recycled is sent to landfill.
Enforcement
Mr Brown also explained the problem now faced by HMRC and the Environment Agency would be enforcement of the statutory guidance, warning the clarifications might not be enough to prevent operators finding loopholes.
Register for free to comment