Ref. № 02-00-5/ 20.1.2021 г.

 

 

MRS. IVELINA VASILEVA

CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMISSION ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER AT 44TH NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

Subject: Bill amending and supplementing the Waste Management Act, № 102-01-1, submitted by the Council of Ministers on 05.01.2021.

 

DEAR MRS. VASILEVA,

As a representative organization of the employers in the Republic of Bulgaria, BIA expresses the following positions and proposals on the presentation and discussion for the first vote in the Commission of the draft law amending the Waste Management Act: 

  1. According to §6. After providing a number of financial incentives for the application of the waste hierarchy, in order to motivate consumers to participate in separate collection schemes, the tax levied on individuals should be crossed out (Article 13, paragraph 1, item .2, b. (D) of the Personal Income Tax Act) upon delivery of separately collected waste to the persons authorized for that, for which a number of proposals have been made by the branch organizations. This will lead to the correct application of the new para 4, item 2. The procedure for charging this tax also has a significant administrative burden for businesses, creates disinterest in the population for separate waste collection and leads to significant problems in collecting information on waste.

Although it is not within the scope of this bill, it is necessary to speed up the process of introducing the quantity as a basis for calculating the municipal waste tax.

  1. According to the requirements for the schemes for extended liability of producers - §10, § 11 and §13, the main part of the general minimum requirements for the schemes for extended liability of producers need to be regulated by bylaws - the regulations under Art. 13, para. 1 of the WMA. BIA has repeatedly expressed the opinion that these requirements should be regulated at a legal level, in the Waste Management Act, and not in bylaws, as public funds are affected, which are accumulated by organizations and the requirements for different waste flows should be the same.

It is not clear how the relationship between defining clear roles and responsibilities and increasing the transparency of schemes and reducing possible conflicts of interest between marketers, operators who contract waste activities and consumers who pay product charges works so that it covers the costs of the widespread waste management. In addition, Directive (EU) 2018/851 provides the introduction of a procedure for the selection of waste management operators, and the AIA of the WMA provides for the disclosure of information about the procedure without any additional requirements. Therefore, we believe that in §10 item 2, in addition to the roles and responsibilities, clear and specific requirements should be added to the selection of operators in the field of waste and operators carrying out re-use and preparation for re-use and applications of the economic instruments and measures under Art. 6, para. 4.

For BIAs’ members placing on the market goods that generate widespread waste after their use, it is important not to make them a "net payer" of any costs, and by transposing the Directive more precisely in this part, we propose the following additional editions:

Under §11 in the main text of the new para. 10 of Art. 14 - to delete the words "at least", as Article 8a (4) (a) of Directive 2008/98 / EC explicitly states, without the option to supplement, the types of costs to be covered by the financial contributions, paid by the product manufacturer for the fulfillment of his/hers obligations arising from the ROP;

In addition, item 1 of para. 10 before the words “and investment costs” to add “inclusive”, given the fact that investments in maintenance and development of separate collection systems are a basic condition and element of the costs for achieving the specified purposes in the Ordinances under Art. 13, para 1, and cannot be considered separately. The proposed wording reflects precisely this meaning. Similarly, the targeted costs under item 3 (educational campaigns and information activities to promote separate collection systems) should be considered as necessary for the implementation of the recycling targets. In this sense, their indication within the framework of para 10 should be made by listings in item 1 after the reference to the investment costs.

Under §11, para 12, item 3 we offer the following wording:

“According to art. 6, para 4, item 4;” should be added after …after the word “waste”

The optimization of the expenses, which are covered by the persons under par. 1, and / or the criteria for determining the remuneration to the persons under para. 2, item 2 will be achieved by accepting the made proposal. This is in accordance with Directive (EU) 2018/851, which provides for the introduction of a procedure for the selection of waste management operators in order to reduce the possibility conflicts of interest arising between organizations performing the obligations coming from extended producer responsibility and operators operating in the field of waste with which those organizations enter into contracts, as well as in order to ensure cost-orientation, efficiency and transparency of spending the funds from the financial contributions of the producers.

The requirements of §13 for audit reports to certify the accounts of organizations require factual findings on the quality of the data, which is by no means sufficient to meet the requirements of the Directive. Long-term practice shows that monitoring and control are ineffective and do not provide opportunities for the traceability of waste from its occurrence to its final disposal.

The issue of the status of the Enterprise for Management of Environmental Activities (EMEPA) has not been resolved either.

In this regard, we propose an addition to Article 58 of the WMA with the following content:

§… art. 58, para 1, item 1 after the figures “59” shall be added “… which are spent according to art. 14, para 12, item 3;”

  1. §14 states that the mayors of municipalities have to ensure the separate collection of textile waste, which requirement should enter into force with the publication of the AIA of the WMA in the State Gazette. As Directive (EU) 2018/851 provides for implementation to take effect from 1.01.2025, this deadline should be indicated in the text or dropped. The possibility to apply the requirement as of 1.1.2025 will allow adaptation of the business and will lead to the improvement of the activity of the municipalities for their better interaction for effective implementation.
  2. In §16 art. 31, item 1 and item 2 on the utilization of the household waste are set goals with already expired terms - 31.12.2020. If these goals are met, they should not be in the law, and if they are not, new deadlines should be set.
  3. § 21 of the Law on Public Procurement proposes the creation of public registers of persons who place packaged goods, footwear and textiles on the market kept by the Executive Director of the EEA and entry into force from the date of promulgation of the law in the State Gazette.

We support the text by proposing the inclusion of vehicles on the market. In practice, motor vehicles are the only group that is covered by the ROP, and there is no register for it. As a representative of responsible businesses, we support measures aimed at ensuring compliance with legal requirements and equality of all debtors. We also believe that the tool of registration and maintenance of a public register of debtors would contribute to the accountability for the implementation of statutory recycling targets. In this context, we do not consider the proposed requirement as an unnecessary administrative burden, but we would nevertheless like to draw attention to the following: Paragraph 23 amending Art. 48, para 8 determines the order for keeping the registers, the reporting and the provision of information to be settled by a by-law - in particular by the Ordinances of art. 13, para. 1 and Art. 48, para. 1. At the same time, paragraph 45 provides for the deferred entry into force of certain provisions, including, quite logically, § 21 (1) (a), (5) and (6), which extend the scope of the obligors subject to registration, as in a specific deadline is set for it - from 1 June 2021. Compliance with the deadline is a function of both the timely adoption of amendments to the cited regulations (within a period sufficiently shorter than the specified period), but should also take into account the possibilities for fulfilling the obligations for registration by the persons (a significant number), as well as of the administrator - with regard to the processing of the applications and the keeping of the register. With the understanding we have that the registration will be carried out electronically and its scope will follow the data / information set in the law, in order to run the process smoothly, incl. the electronic possibilities created in the administrative body, we consider that the provision under paragraph 45 of the Bill needs to be amended. In our opinion, a suitable approach would be - providing a certain period - for example from 2 or 3 months after the adoption of the amendments to the respective Ordinances, as the specific period must be sufficient for the fulfillment of the requirement by the obligated persons, and to ensure functionality of the system for keeping the register by the competent authority (EEA).

The discussion of the wording of the transitional provision under paragraph 45 in conjunction with paragraph 21, item 1, letter "a", items 5 and 6; It is also important from the point of view of the risk in case of delay in the adoption of the ordinances, the obligated persons to be in violation and to be punished with the property sanction provided for in paragraph 40 for non-fulfillment of the registration obligation amounting to BGN 5,000 to 10,000.

  1. Under §41 - additional provisions we suggest item 1. in § 1. c) item 10, only the first sentence to obtain the following wording:

"Filling" is a recovery operation in which suitable non-hazardous waste is used for the restoration of excavation areas, including in the process of operation and reclamation of landfills or for engineering purposes in the landscaping.

In the process of public discussion, it was suggested to refine the definition of "backfill" and we support this proposal to use appropriate non-hazardous waste in the intermediate "clogging" of landfills as substitutes for the non-waste materials used (earth masses). The proposal was not accepted by the MoEW with unconvincing arguments. In essence, the possible alternative materials are mostly deposited on other sites, which also disrupts the landscape. If the additional seizure of soil is taken into account, the negative impact on nature becomes greater. The use of land masses must remain in the final stages of landfill filling and reclamation. "Filling" is not only about improving the condition of the soil, but according to the Directive it aims at "restoration of excavation areas". This cannot be considered equivalent to the replacement text proposed by the MoEW "for reclamation purposes in excavated areas". The "excavation restoration" referred to in the Directive logically implies both filling (if necessary) and reclamation. The proposed project narrows the scope of the application amd does not lead to better results from waste management activities. In European practice, this non-hazardous waste is still widely used in road construction and landscape, and in some countries the extraction and use of non-waste materials is not allowed if there is suitable non-hazardous waste.

  1. We also suggest adding a definition of "secondary raw materials" mentioned in § 15, art. 30, para 3, item 4, item (c), such as:

"Secondary raw materials" are recyclable materials.

Under §44, of proposals for the establishment of Art. 21b of the Law on Protection from the Harmful Impact of Chemical Substances and Mixtures, we believe that the text "using the form and tools provided by the European Chemicals Agency" should be deleted. In Art. 9 (1) (b) 'and' of Directive (EU) 2018/851, that text is not contained but is actually required '... any supplier of a product as defined in Article 3 (33) of Regulation (EC) ( Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council shall provide the European Chemicals Agency with the information referred to in Article 33 (1). " In practice, the added text exceeds the scope of Art. 33 (1) of Regulation (EC) № 1907/2006 with the inclusion of additional data such as: identifier (EAN, GTIN, catalog number, part number), product category (CN / TARIC code)) categories of materials and mixtures, limits of concentrations and locations of substances of very high concern, etc. Also, we do not agree that the text "using the form and tools provided by the Agency for this purpose" is only explanatory, as claimed by the MoEW, because it is through the form and tools that include the data we dispute that suppliers oblige to provide information for which there is no explicit legal requirement. It is worrying that such requirements are imposed by developed forms and tools from a non-legislative agency.

 

DEAR MRS. VASILEVA,

We believe that by taking into account the positions of the interested business and debtors, it will lead to a significant improvement of waste management, incl. increasing transparency, reducing conflicts of interest, applying the principles of the circular economy and, last but not least, creating new business opportunities and jobs.

 

WITH RESPECT,

 

RADOSVET RADEV

Chairman of the Board of BIA


Subject: Bill amending and supplementing the Waste Management Act
Add comment