It is concerned about “extreme” prices being offered for evidence of the recycling of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) by certain schemes harbouring a surplus of collections compared to their members' producer responsibility requirements.
As a result, it is now requesting other schemes “commercially agreed transport cost” to hand over waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) collected at their sites.
REPIC is also offering to collect WEEE with its own transport if required.
The letter to rival schemes came after a summer in which REPIC investigated local authorities via Freedom of Information Act requests in order to ascertain how they decided upon producer compliance schemes to collect WEEE from their civic amenity sites or transfer stations under the summer's new WEEE Regulations.
“Extreme” prices
The scheme, which boasts producers including Hoover, Indesit UK. Kenwood, Panasonic UK and Philips Electronics UK as members, issued a statement to letsrecycle.com this month confirming that it “has become aware of extreme WEEE evidence price models”.
It 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.
In the letter to other schemes sent last week, REPIC chief executive Dr Philip Morton stated his belief that if his rivals “unnecessarily, deliberately or inadvertently” take in too little or too much WEEE compared to their members' needs would face withdrawal of their government approval.
Dr Morton warned his rivals: “There is no reason why any organisation (PCS) needs to over or under process WEEE to excess and risk having their PCS approval withdrawn.” In the WEEE legislation itself, however, there is no clear definition of what too much or too little WEEE collections involves.
The REPIC chief executive said he had already entered into “bilateral agreements” with other compliance schemes under his offered terms, which also include promises of REPIC handing over any surplus evidence or WEEE it might have to other schemes that need it.
Dr Morton revealed his hope that schemes “do not need to buy or sell evidence as a way of achieving compliance, other than small balancing quantities in the settlement phase of compliance in May of each year.”
We feel that the government has made its position very clear, signaling that it will act if there are attempts to jeopardise or undermine what has to be a successful implementation
Dr Philip Morton, REPIC
Despite REPIC's stated intention to settle up in May of each year, one particular scheme with surplus evidence to spare – Electrolink – has demanded immediate settlement with those schemes that need evidence, or they will add interest costs to the evidence prices (see letsrecycle.com story). Such a move would increase the costs to REPIC members for every tonne of their WEEE obligations compared with other schemes.
Local authorities
Earlier this summer, following the start of the WEEE producer responsibility regime on July 1, REPIC set about asking local authorities to divulge how they chose their WEEE producer compliance scheme partners.
Explaining the move to letsrecycle.com, Dr Morton said: “We are aware that a number of DCFs are yet to sign-up in these early days and others are still reviewing their decision – there is clearly insecurity in the market. It is likely to be several months before there is a clear picture.
“We have asked local authorities to disclose information on their selection process and the response has been encouraging. We are also working very successfully with other schemes to ensure the fair distribution of WEEE in accordance with the code of practice, which prevents schemes being put at risk.
“The UK government, through BERR, Defra, the Environment Agencies and other bodies have worked hard to set up a system to ensure the UK can deliver lowest cost compliance which could be the flagship system in Europe. REPIC has become aware of extreme WEEE evidence price models. There is every reason to expect the UK WEEE costs to be at least as competitive as those in the rest of Europe. We feel that the government has made its position very clear, signaling that it will act if there are attempts to jeopardise or undermine what has to be a successful implementation,” Dr Morton added.
Settlement
Energy minister Malcolm Wicks said earlier this month that around 75% of councils “have or are finalising agreements for clearance of their sites by producer compliance schemes”.
In a written answer to a Parliamentary question he said: “We expect all local authorities to have reached agreements with schemes in the next couple of months. Where agreements are not yet in place, local authorities can arrange for any waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) they separately collect to be treated by approved authorised treatment facilities, and then recover their costs via the Settlement Centre.”
The Settlement Centre is expected to be up and running soon, operated by Glasgow firm Real Time Engineering (see letsrecycle.com story).
There has been little or no trading of WEEE evidence between compliance schemes so far, with data from the first compliance quarter not due in until later in the autumn and figures on electronics sales not available until the year end.
Other major compliance schemes have told letsrecycle.com they are fairly comfortable in the amount of collection sites they are operating and are “just keen to get on with it”.
They are expecting that any trading they carry out of WEEE evidence will mostly take the form of swapping evidence of certain WEEE types to balance the specific needs of their members' obligations.
Register for free to comment