Seminar Vienna Illegal shipment of wastes, responsabilities and duties

1. Seminar ViennaIllegal shipment of wastes,responsabilities and duties Mag. Christian Glasel Div. VI/1 - Austrian Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management

2. Illegal shipment from Austria to Slovak Republic WASTE: approx. 900 tons of household and household-like waste from trade and industry SHIPMENTS: under the title “alternative fuel” (PRODUCT) EXPORTER: The Austrian company “M.” dealed with pre- treated fraction of household-like wastes to be used as alternative fuel in cement kilns or coal power stations. In Dec 2003 a German company became the new partner of “M”. STORAGE SITE: Slovak Republic: Partizanske Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment

3. Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment

4. DETECTION OF SHIPMENT: 2005 It was stated by the Slovak companies and Slovak authorities that the waste exporter had been the Austrian Company “M” (information from accompanying documents of the Shipments, weight notes). CONSIGNEE: the real Slovak consignee is still unknown. At the Partizanske site different Slovak companies are located, which act as property owner or renter and stated not to have arranged any of these waste shipments. Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment

5. PROBLEMS: Meanwhile the Austrian exporter “M” entered into liquidation; A representative of this company stated that wood wastes, mattresses, PVC-shoes or packaging waste found at Partizanske site had never been contained in any of their produced “alternative fuels”, as the wastes had been pre-treated in Austria. The view that the produced “alternative fuels” are non-waste is not shared by the Austrian Ministry for Environment. Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment

6. Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment • COMPANY CONSTRUCTION: • The company “M” used a special company construction. • Besides the company “M” ( = a single person company) a limited • liability company “M. Ltd” was founded. • A representative of the single person company “M” was the • managing director, but was not employed at the “M. Ltd” and • worked on the basis of a management contract. • It was stated that the company “M. Ltd” acquired the wastes • (operative business). But “M. Ltd” entered into liquidation after • the illegal shipments had been detected.

7. Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment • The single person company “M” states not to be responsible for • these illegal shipments. The proof is very difficult. • STATUS: case is still pending at the administrative authorities • COSTS: Originally it was discussed at the Austrian Ministry for • Environment which percentage of the costs should be paid for • treatment of the wastes by each of the authorities concerned. • The Slovak Republic argued, that the whole costs have to be borne • by Austria as country of dispatch. • Austria agreed to take back the wastes and to bear the costs in • advance. • This approach shall not prejudice the procedure in further cases • of illegal shipment in the future.

8. Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment • Meanwhile a cost-intensive European wide tendering procedure • took place and an the Austrian Ministry of Environment accepted • the tender to an Austrian company. • After long negotiations it was agreed with the Slovak Authorities • to treat the main part of the waste in the Slovak Republic, • although before starting the tendering procedure the Slovak • authorities had explained that they never would agree on a • recovery or disposal of the wastes in the Slovak Republic. • In fact all the waste in question was treatet in the Slovak Republic.

9. Seminar Vienna - Illegal shipment • In august 2007 the Polish Inspection of Environmental Protection informed our ministry that on the area of the company Mi. in Zabrze (Poland) waste brought from the Austrian company A. was detected • No notification procedure was made • The Polish Inspection requested, that the waste should be repatriated to Austria • In the letter of the Polish Inspection no amount of the illegal shipped waste was mentionned • Poland classified the waste as waste from mechanical treatment

10. Seminar Vienna - Illegal shipment • The Austrian company A became bankrupt • The Polish company Mi. became bankrupt • A check of the papers of A. proved that Mi. has received 19.000 € from A. for the treatment of the waste • Austria asked Poland to co-finance the costs of return shipment • Poland refused the co-finance the costs • Austria and Poland agreed to have a common inspection of the waste • Austria asked BALSA to assist the ministry

11. Seminar Vienna - Illegal shipment • The inspection took place in february 2009, samples were taken by our ministry • It came out that there were 890 t of mixed plastic/paper waste • Austria proposed, that Austria will pay the treatment, while Poland should overtake the costs of transport • In september 2009 Poland made the suggestion that Poland will pay for the loading in Poland and Austria should pay the rest • The case is still pending • A tender is obligatory

12. Illegal shipment – Zabrze (Poland)

13. Illegal shipment – Zabrze – taking samples

14. AUSTRIAN APPROACH on ILLEGAL SHIPMENTS The Austrian Ministry in general takes the view that in comparable cases the responsibility should be shared between the person, which should have acted as notifier and the consignee or respectively between the countries of dispatch and destination. The main question is, how to share the costs between both countries concerned in practise. Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment

15. Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment • AT takes the view that in cases of more than one singleillegal shipmentof wastes, which requires notification, there is a co-responsibility of the consignee, because he/she is obliged to confirm the receipt of the wastes within 3 daysafter delivery and to confirm proper treatment of the waste on the consignment note. • If notifiable wastes arrive from abroad without consignment note and the consignee does not act in conformity of the WSR , this will be a clear infringement of the obligations of the WSR 1013/2006 and constitute also an illegal action of the consignee.

16. Seminar Vienna - Illegal Shipment • If the consignee was paid for taking over and treatment/storage/ • dumping of the waste by the person, who should have acted as • notifier, AT would like to propose, that this transferred amount of • money shall be taken as partial coverage for the costs of • alternative treatment and/or return of the wastes to the state of • dispatch. • If – for whatever reason – the transferred money is not available • any more, the state of destination has subsidiary responsibility • to bear these costs.

17. Illegal shipment/parameters of table 5 Annex IX WSR • Waste identification code • Quantity • Country of destination • Country of dispatch • Reason for illegality • Responsible for illegality -> notifier, consignee • Measures taken including possible penalties

18. Illegal shipments Austria (January – October 2009) • Shipments without notification: 28 • Permitted amount exceeded: 1 • Permitted timeframe exceeded: 5 • Violation of Art. 18 WSR: 39

19. Responsabilities and duties • § 82 AWG 2002 Participation of Security Organs: • The public security organs shall participate concerning notification of waste • 1.) taking preventive measures against violations of administrative law • 2.) taking measures that are necessary for the initiation of penal proceedings • Financial guarantee from 360 € to 2180 € • Collection of fines up to 120 € • Prevention of the continuation of the shipment

20. Responsabilities and duties • § 83 AWG 2002: Responsabilities and duties customs • Control of notification papers • Asking for a declaratory decree • Financial guarantee from 360 € to 2180 € • Collection of fines up to 120 € • Prevention of the continuation of the shipment

21. Thank you for your attention • MR Mag. Christian Glasel • Tel. 0043-1-51522-3514 • christian.glasel@lebensministerium.at