International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

During 2007/08, the Environment Agency also examined MRF data and how
authorities verify the information they report on the data reporting system, waste
dataflow (WDF). They found that reported reject rates from MRFs varied considerably,
with some authorities reporting an implausible zero percent reject rate, and cases
arising where the reject rates reported by authorities using the same facility varied
significantly (see Table 55-4).
Table 55-4: Reject Rates Reported by Local Authorities Using MRFs
821
Reject Reject rates rates
rates
International Review of Waste Policy: Annexes
No. No. of of authorities* authorities* with
with
reported reported MRF rejects in
this this this range range
range
zero reject 32
Above zero less than 5 per cent 62
5 per cent to less than 10 per cent 43
10 per cent to less than 15 per cent 24
15 per cent to less than 20 per cent 11
20 per cent or more 10
Source: Environment Agency (2008) Report on the Landfill Allowances and Trading Scheme 2007/08,
November 2008.
From 2008/09, the Environment Agency intends to serve notice on authorities that
report zero reject rates, asking them for firm evidence to substantiate reporting zero
reject rates (which is likely to be impossible to provide). The EA will also review reject
rates which are low and inconsistent with the MRF’s own data and that of other
authority users.
Another consequence of the sorting of commingled materials is that it is well known
that some materials sent from sorting facilities to reprocessors is rejected at the
reprocessors’ gates. As part of our auditing process in 2008/09 we will build on the
work already carried out during 2007/08 in this area.
55.12 Lessons Learned
There have been a number of lessons learned already in the relatively short lifetime
of the LASs:
� Sanctions have proved to be critical in ensuring that local authorities take not
of the scheme. Targets are not worth setting if there is no intention to enforce
them;
� The approach to assessing the reduction in biodegradability achieved by MBT
processes emerged late, and was confusing. The test methods used are
expensive and unfamiliar. It was impossible for MBT processes to demonstrate
their ability to comply with the requirements set out in tenders in early years of
the scheme because of the lateness and obscurity of the proposed
mechanisms for assessment;