The upcoming evaluation of the ELV Directive

1. The upcoming evaluation of the ELV Directive Artemis Hatzi-Hull, LL.M 4th International Conference on Car Recycling Krakow 19 September 2019

2. The ELV Directive • ELVs are a priority waste stream already from 1982s/1990s • Objectives: minimise the environmental impact of ELVs (reduce the final disposal and improve environmental performance of economic operators) and ensure proper functioning of the internal market and avoid distortions of competition • Prevention: design new vehicles taking into account dismantling, reuse and recycling and substance ban for materials and components of vehicles (also spare parts) (Pb, Hg, Cd, CrVI - Applies since 1 July 2003 - List of exemptions in Annex II to be revised by the Commission on a regular basis according to technical and scientific progress) • De facto: an instrument to drive circularity in the automotive sector

3. Achievements of the ELV Directive • Contributed to making the car manufacturing in the EU a more efficient, innovative and more sustainable industry • No more abandoned ELVs, increase in the number of ELVs treated in Authorised Treatment Facilities (ATFs); increase in the number of ATFs and ATFs with environmental standards • Design of new vehicles for disassembly and design for reuse and reduction of hazardous substances • Improved information for dismantling and parts (IDIS) • New Technologies for the treatment of ELVs (e.g. post-shredding) and specific environmental and health improvements (waste oils and fluids, tires etc.) • Proper treatment of recycling/recovery of not only materials with a positive value • Reduction of hazardous substances largely achieved HOWEVER….

4. Challenges and Opportunities • Systemic problem with statistically missing ELVs: 4.6 Mio! • inadequate link between registration and de-registration or re-registration • only a part of deregistered ELVs receive a certificate of destruction (CoD) • Lack of good quality data, also reporting by MS • Recycling infrastructure effectiveness • Design: design for assembly, for manufacture, for recycling/reuse, for environment, for life-cycle (e.g. life-cycle engineering), for quality, for maintainability, for reliability • Innovations are expected, (e.g. concerning material, material separation enhancement, thermo-chemical conversion (gasification and pyrolysis) and recycling/recovery routes of the residue)

5. Legislative changes affecting the ELV legislation • Waste package - Adopted in May 2018 • Proposal for a Review of the ELV Directive by 31 December 2020 • Feasibility of setting targets for specific materials • ELVs of unknown whereabouts – Correspondents Guidelines No 9 • Alignment with Lisbon Treaty (Delegated/Implementing Acts) • Materials and components with hazardous substances to be labelled and stripped before further treatment • MS to report on ELV targets and to consider availability of data and imports/exports of ELVs within 18 months – data to be accompanied by quality check report • End of tri-annual reports • Proposal for a Review of the Batteries and the WEEE Directives

6. Timetable for the evaluation (approximatively) • Roadmap for the evaluation has been published on 4 October 2018 with deadline for contributions 1 November 2018 • 30 replies-feedback to the ELV Roadmap • Evaluation started in March 2019 – duration 12 months • Public stakeholders’ consultation was launched on 6/8/2019 https://twitter.com/EU_ENV/status/1162283314129985536?s=20 (open until 29/10/2019) • Aiming to have a stakeholder’s workshop in February 2020 • Publication of the evaluation report by the Commission (6 months after the end of the evaluation)

7. Main issues flagged in the input to the Roadmap • better implementation, improved inspections of ATFs, CoDs to be issued by ATFs and not collection points; • reduce/eliminate illegal activities and actors to address the missing vehicles, work on better criteria to distinguish used cars and ELVs, introduce incentives to last owners, fortify registration systems in MS; • harmonization of definitions (ELV and WFD to address backfilling, consistency with other legislation (Batteries and WEEE); • design cars in sustainable way; • improve IDIS; • better reporting, introduce reporting per material, better data on exports; • apply EPR for recycling costs; • POPs and REACH : burden on recycling industry; • mandatory dismantling of parts vs shredding (including electronics).

8. Evaluation criteria - 1 Effectiveness : how successful EU action has been in achieving or progressing towards its objectives Examples: • to what extent have the objectives of the Directive been achieved • to what extent has been achieved the elimination of the hazardous substance? • to what extent have the results been effectively monitored • factors that contributed to the achievements of the Directive • factors that hampered the objectives of the Directive • other significant changes or results • measures to address the problem of the “missing ELVs”

9. Evaluation criteria - 2 Efficiency: costs and benefits of the EU intervention Examples: • to what extent are the costs involved proportionate, taking into account the benefits that been achieved • What are the costs and benefits (monetary and non-monetary) associated with the implementation of the Directive for different players • What is the impact of the provisions of the Directive and its harmonisation of requirements on the competitiveness of the automotive industry within the EU? • what factors influence the efficiency • Is there evidence that the implementation of the Directive has caused unnecessary regulatory burden or complexity? • Has the Directive caused unnecessary regulatory burden or complexity? • Are there good or bad practices in terms of efficiency in the achievement of results?

10. Evaluation criteria - 3 Relevance: relationship between the needs and the objectives of the EU intervention Examples: • how well do the objectives of the Directive correspond to the current needs within the EU • Are there needs relevant to the management of ELVs not adequately covered? • Are the definitions up-to-date? • to what extent can the Directive appropriately cover the new challenges related to the ELVs • Does the Directive cover technological developments? • Does the Directive cover new challenges for recycling that contribute to better implementation of the aims of the Directive? • Co-operation between producers and recyclers to achieve better recycling and resource use

11. Evaluation criteria - 4 Coherence: how well or not different actions work together Examples: • To what extent is the Directive internally coherent • To what extent is the Directive coherent with other EU policy instruments and the overall EU and international policy goals EU added value Examples: • what is the added value resulting from the Directive

12. For more information please visit: • http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/elv_index.htm • http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/ • waste/data/wastestreams/elvs • http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database • http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/index_en.htm • http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/target_review.htm • Thank you for your attention! Artemis.Hatzi@ec.europa.eu