APPENDIX 14
Memorandum submitted by Brunner Mond
1. Brunner Mond fully supports the policy
objective to eliminate, reduce or at least render harmless all
hazardous waste.
2. The UK waste management industry requires
significant development before it will have working facilities
to meet the needs of hazardous waste producers and the targets
set by the European Union.
3. Legislation and accompanying guidance
relating to hazardous waste must be pragmatic and flexible, and
targets must be achievable. The Government must also encourage
more investment in the waste management industry if the timescale
requirements of the Landfill Directive are to be met.
4. Industry is still confused between the
use of the terminology "special waste" and "hazardous
waste" and how UK legislation ties in with the enormous volume
of EU legislation in relation to hazardous waste.
5. It is important that there is clear guidance
on the classification of hazardous waste at EU level to ensure
a level playing field across Europe.
6. Neither Government nor Environment Agency
officers should be allowed to "gold plate" European
Directives in the way they implement their requirements.
7. The Government should consult and liaise
with industry on a wider basis to investigate the options which
may be available for the treatment and re-use of hazardous waste
materials.
8. Some waste is recoverable (ie can be
recycled or reused) but is disposed of because the UK does not
have a sophisticated system of waste segregation or sufficient
opportunities for recycling waste streams. The UK is significantly
behind many other European States in this regard.
9. The burden of environmental taxation
should be lifted from organisations who can demonstrate compliance
with the environmental policy objectives of the tax.
10. The Environment Agency needs to adopt
a more consistent and pragmatic approach when dealing with UK
industries in relation to the classification, management and regulation
of hazardous waste.
11. The Government should prioritise the
full review of the Special Waste Regulations to avoid any further
confusion and unnecessary costs being imposed on industry.
INTRODUCTION
Brunner Mond (UK) Limited is the only UK producer
of soda ash and associated products which are used as a base material
for a wide variety of industrial, pharmaceutical, chemical and
household products. Brunner Mond is a major direct and indirect
employer in the North West and operates within a fiercely competitive
European and US market.
Brunner Mond uses high volumes of raw materials
in the soda ash manufacturing process and accordingly manages
significant quantities of waste materials from its factories in
Northwich, Cheshire. Brunner Mond operates its manufacturing plant
within the requirements of its IPPC permit and is registered for
the International Environmental Management Standard ISO14001.
Brunner Mond aims to minimise both the production
and the environmental impact of its waste materials as far as
possible within economic constraints. Most of the waste produced
by Brunner Mond is non-hazardous, but some materials are classified
as hazardous (special) waste and accordingly Brunner Mond wishes
to submit written comments for the Hazardous Waste Inquiry to
be undertaken by the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.
OBJECTIVES AND
GUIDANCE
Brunner Mond fully supports the policy objective
to eliminate, reduce or at least render harmless all hazardous
waste. Accordingly, Brunner Mond welcomes in principle the programme
for the reduction of hazardous waste at a European level.
It is important, however, that the Government
provides industry with clear guidance on how it intends to meet
the waste minimisation obligations required by European Law, such
as the Landfill Directive, taking into account the current state
of the waste management industry in the UK. It is our belief that
the UK waste management industry requires significant development
before it will have working facilities to meet the needs of hazardous
waste producers and the targets set by the European Union. The
Committee should also note that the timescales can be long and
the capital costs can be enormous in connection with the design,
permitting, construction and operation of plant for the treatment,
incineration or disposal of hazardous waste.
Total elimination of hazardous waste is unrealistic
and there will always be a residual quantity of hazardous waste
produced by industry. It would be unacceptable to industry if
regulations relating to the handling of hazardous waste are so
strict and the costs so high that the UK waste management industry
refuses to take hazardous waste. Legislation and accompanying
guidance relating to hazardous waste must therefore be pragmatic,
flexible and achievable. The Government must also encourage more
investment in the waste management industry if the timescale requirements
of the Landfill Directive are to be met.
CLASSIFICATION OF
HAZARDOUS WASTE
There is a considerable degree of confusion
and uncertainty within industry in the UK in connection with the
classification of hazardous waste. The legislation is currently
unclear and fragmented. The full review and re-enactment of the
Special Waste Regulations is long overdue and the second Consultation
Paper with revised draft amendment Regulations is urgently awaited.
The draft Regulations laid before Parliament in September 2001
shortly after the first Consultation Paper were premature and
did not address many of the concerns raised in responses to the
first Consultation Paper. Industry is still confused between the
use of the terminology "special waste" and "hazardous
waste" and how UK legislation ties in with the enormous volume
of EU legislation in relation to hazardous waste.
It is our experience that the Environment Agency
is neither consistent nor pragmatic in connection with advice
given relating to hazardous wastes and decisions made concerning
the management of hazardous waste. Some local Environment Agency
field officers seem to be inadequately trained or qualified to
handle hazardous waste issues and there have been a number of
recent attempts to reclassify wastes as hazardous/special which
have not previously been classified as such and which should not
be classified as hazardous. This creates additional unnecessary
burdens, costs and management exercises for industry and could
make UK industries uncompetitive against other European industries.
It is therefore important that there is clear guidance on the
classification of hazardous waste at EU level to ensure a level
playing field across Europe.
Neither Government nor Environment Agency officers
should be allowed to "gold plate" European Directives
in the way that they implement the requirements.
A PRAGMATIC APPROACH
TO REGULATION
The Government should consult and liaise with
industry on a wider basis to investigate the options which may
be available for the treatment and re-use of hazardous waste materials.
In many cases, sensible and environmentally safe options are not
undertaken due to the bureaucracy and cost involved in seeking
permits and other forms of approval from UK regulators. This will
inevitably hinder and delay the UK in meeting the requirements
and targets of the Landfill Directive and other relevant legislation.
Government must recognise that waste streams
arise under different circumstances. For example, some waste arises
because businesses do not make any investment in waste management
and minimisation. Some waste is recoverable (ie can be recycled
or reused) but is disposed of because the UK does not have a sophisticated
system of waste segregation or sufficient opportunities for recycling
waste streams. The UK is significantly behind many other European
States in this regard. Sometimes the type and quantity of waste
produced is inextricably linked with the volume of raw material
used for processing, even where the raw materials are of the highest
purity and the manufacturing process is as efficient as economically
possible; there is therefore a given amount of waste arising per
tonne of product made according to demand where ultimate minimisation
levels have already been reached.
Government policy, legislation and the approach
adopted by the Environment Agency should take into account the
different circumstances mentioned above in which hazardous waste
streams are produced. There should be more stringent regulation
on those industries where there is significant room for improvements
in efficiency of waste management. Where there are poor systems
for waste segregation or recycling in the UK it would be unfair
to penalise industries which have to dispose of those wastes because
there has been insufficient investment in or development of other
waste management techniques.
Where waste streams arising from manufacturing
processes have reached ultimate levels of minimisation, legislation
aimed at achieving waste reduction, such as the Landfill Tax,
should not be used as a general method of raising funds for the
Treasury and the burden of such taxation should be lifted from
organisations who can demonstrate compliance with the environmental
policy objectives of green taxation. An equivalent example is
the exemption from the climate change levy allowed to good quality
CHP plant.
CONCLUSIONS
There is considerable scope for improvement
in Government policy, legislation and guidance in connection with
the classification, management and regulation of hazardous waste.
The Environment Agency needs to adopt a more consistent and pragmatic
approach when dealing with UK industries in relation to hazardous
waste. Until the UK waste management industry has sufficient investment
and development for handling hazardous waste, it is unlikely that
the targets of the Landfill Directive will be met without considerable
adverse impact and cost on UK businesses.
The Government should prioritise the full review
of the Special Waste Regulations to avoid any further confusion
and unnecessary costs being imposed on industry.
Brunner Mond (UK) Limited
16 May 2002
| 
