Describes some of the options for proper disposal and the legal basis for this. Special case: The car goes abroad.
Photo documentation of illegally operated scrap yards in Germany and illegal exports of end-of-life vehicles
3.2 Structure of the take-back obligations
The take-back must be free of charge. The obligation to take back vehicles free of charge applies from the moment they are handed over to a recognized take-back facility or to a recognized dismantling facility designated by the manufacturer. According to the definition in Section 2 (1) No. 15 AltfahrzeugV, a collection point is defined as a collection point where end-of-life vehicles are taken back by the manufacturer or a third party commissioned by the manufacturer without the end-of-life vehicles being treated there.
However, according to the definition in Section 2 (1) No. 14 of the ELV Ordinance, collection points are establishments or parts of establishments that accept end-of-life vehicles for provision and forwarding to dismantling facilities without being dismantling facilities themselves. In this context, dismantling facilities are, according to the definition in Section 2 (1) No. 26 of the ELV Ordinance, facilities or parts of facilities in which end-of-life vehicles are treated for the purpose of subsequent recovery. This may also include take-back. Ultimately, this means that the last holder must bear the costs until the vehicle is handed over to a recognized collection point or a recognized dismantling facility designated for this purpose by a manufacturer.
Insofar as the take-back obligations name the manufacturers of vehicles as addressees (Section 3 (1) of the End-of-Life Vehicles Ordinance), these are, according to the definition in Section 2 (1) No. 3 of the End-of-Life Vehicles Ordinance, the manufacturers of vehicles as shown on the vehicle registration document or the commercial importers of a vehicle as well as the manufacturers or commercial importers of vehicle parts and materials and their legal successors. If the legislator refers exclusively to the manufacturer when defining the take-back obligations, this nevertheless refers to the addressees covered by the definition.
The take-back obligations do not apply in all circumstances. According to Section 3 (4) AltfahrzeugV, they do not apply to vehicles that were not registered or last registered in the EU. They also do not apply to vehicles that were registered for less than one month before they were decommissioned and to end-of-life vehicles without essential parts or components, in particular without a drive, body, chassis or catalytic converter or electronic control units for vehicle functions. In practice, such end-of-life vehicles are said to have been "robbed". The abolition of take-back obligations also applies to end-of-life vehicles that have been filled with waste and to end-of-life vehicles for which a vehicle registration document or comparable document cannot be handed over. In addition, the take-back obligations for vehicles of category M1 (passenger transport) or N1 (goods transport) that are not manufactured in a single-stage process are limited to the part of their manufacturing stage (Section 3 (7) of the ELV Ordinance). The parties obliged to take back vehicles are obliged to issue a certificate of destruction (Section 4 (2) of the ELV Ordinance). This applies if the vehicle is handed over to a recognized collection point or a recognized dismantling facility for disposal. The certificate of destruction is used to declare the transfer. Certificates of destruction can only be issued by recognized dismantling facilities or certificates of destruction can only be issued on behalf of recognized dismantling facilities by recognized collection facilities or recognized take-back facilities (Section 4 (2) of the ELV Ordinance).
Finally, the content of the take-back obligations is also further defined by the fact that the disposal of end-of-life vehicles can only be carried out by companies recognized in a list. To this end, provision is made for the transfer of end-of-life vehicles from recognized collection points and recognized take-back facilities exclusively to recognized dismantling facilities (Section 4 (3) of the ELV Ordinance) and the transfer of body shells from recognized dismantling facilities to recognized shredder facilities (Section 4 (4) of the ELV Ordinance). In this way, the chain of recognized facilities, which runs from acceptance/return to dismantling and reprocessing, is defined in order to specify product responsibility through the manufacturer's take-back obligation for the disposal of end-of-life vehicles.
3.3 Disposal obligations of economic operators
In addition to the take-back obligations of manufacturers, disposal obligations have been regulated that are to be measured in recycling rates. These disposal obligations apply to all economic operators. The definition of economic operators in Section 2 (1) no. 22 of the ELV Ordinance includes manufacturers and distributors as well as operators of collection facilities, collection points, dismantling facilities, shredder facilities, other facilities for further treatment, recovery facilities and other facilities for the treatment of end-of-life vehicles including their components and recyclable materials as well as vehicle insurance companies. In addition to the manufacturers, all addressees mentioned in the definition of "economic operators" are thus obliged to ensure compliance with the recovery rates (Section 5 (1) of the ELV Ordinance).
The recovery quotas have been regulated for different periods of time, for the period from 1.1.2006 and for the period from 1.1.2015. The recovery quotas for the first period mentioned have expired. The current recycling quotas relate to reuse and recycling with at least 95% by weight and reuse and recycling with at least 85% by weight. In this respect, the higher recycling quota also includes other recycling.
For the take-back system, the interface of gratuitousness is regulated from the time the vehicle is handed over; up to this point, the last holder (owner) pays the costs, in particular for the logistics service of transporting the vehicle in a no longer usable condition to the acceptance/return point.
3.4 Possible circumvention of the disposal chain
In addition, according to current market conditions, the last holder is also obliged to pay the costs for the disposal service, in particular the draining by pre-treatment for the transfer of the residual body to the shredder plant. The disposal service includes not only the draining by removal of all fluids, but also the dismantling of components that can be reused, as well as the dismantling of large plastic parts and the ignition of airbags. These various services as part of the pre-treatment of the end-of-life vehicle and the associated costs are offset against the proceeds from the steel scrap when the residual body is handed over to the shredder plant and charged to the last holder (owner) together with the excess costs of disposal.
In particular, these costs to be paid by the last holder represent an incentive for him to avoid handing over the end-of-life vehicle to the disposal chain. According to statistics on end-of-life vehicle disposal, as recently published in a study by the Federal Environment Agency, around 500,000 end-of-life vehicles are recycled in the Federal Republic of Germany, around 1.4 million end-of-life vehicles are exported to other EU and non-EU countries as used vehicles, and the whereabouts of around 1.4 million end-of-life vehicles remain unclear. This situation gives reason to think about solutions to ensure that a larger proportion of end-of-life vehicles are recycled. Various approaches have already been introduced into the technical discussion.
First of all, a reversal of the burden of proof could be considered, similar to the situation with the export of used electrical and electronic equipment. This would mean that vehicles with certain characteristics that can no longer be produced in a roadworthy manner within the scope of the German legal regulations with reasonable effort and would therefore have to be classified as end-of-life vehicles could only be shipped abroad if there is proof of further use or recycling in the country of destination. The same should apply if, in individual cases, the vehicle is predominantly reused for essential components and at least recycled in the country of destination. To this end, it is necessary to determine which vehicles should be subject to such a reversal of the burden of proof, i.e. to develop criteria that characterize a used vehicle or represent its waste status. It could also be considered that vehicles of a certain age become waste vehicles or end-of-life vehicles. According to the statistics, this applies to vehicles that have exceeded the average age of 16 years. In addition, it could be considered that vehicles that no longer meet the requirements for registration in accordance with the Road Traffic Licensing Regulations or corresponding regulations with economically reasonable repair costs are also subject to the reversal of the burden of proof. In any case, a reversal of the burden of proof should be provided for such vehicles.
However, consideration could also be given to promoting the recycling of end-of-life vehicles by using a so-called "scrappage premium" to give old vehicles an economic incentive to be returned to the disposal chain. In the past, a corresponding regulation has led to a much larger number of end-of-life vehicles being handed over to recognized companies. Such measures belong in the context of incentive taxes, which are used to influence the behavior of those legally obliged to do so.
3.5 Europe-wide registration of vehicles
Even more far-reaching are ideas that provide for the payment of recycling costs with the new vehicle price ("advance disposal fee"). The associated administrative costs would have to be borne by those obliged to do so as part of product responsibility. In this case, the manufacturer would have to manage the disposal fee already paid during the life of the vehicle by paying it into a fund. The vehicle would be passed on from the first owner to the second owner to the last owner within the European Union with the right to free take-back by the manufacturer. The free take-back would also refer to the fact that the disposal service is free of charge.
This would be accompanied by the creation of a complete information system on the vehicle stock in the European Union, because the recycling costs managed for the respective vehicle would be recorded in this way. This would also make it possible to trace the material flows from production to recycling. Finally, this would also make it possible for the responsible monitoring authorities to efficiently trace a reversal of the burden of proof, insofar as this would still be necessary at all. Such an information system would also help to reduce the number of unreported cases of the unexplained whereabouts of end-of-life vehicles.
In any case, in addition to the current take-back system, further regulations are needed to prevent the illegal export of end-of-life vehicles as so-called "used cars" and to offer additional incentives to return the end-of-life vehicles to the existing take-back system with sufficient capacity. Such incentives are created by financial means, whether through additional charges in the absence of proof of recycling or through tax concessions in connection with proper recycling. Experience to date in enforcing the provisions of the ELV Ordinance clearly shows that further economic incentives must be created in addition to the obligations already regulated in order to help achieve the goals for greater resource efficiency from end-of-life vehicle recycling. ultimately, end-of-life vehicles are the raw material stores that would be useful to economic operators for closing the cycles for vehicles in the future.
- to be continued -
