Bättre EU-regler för en giftfri miljö - Kemikalieinspektionen

Chemicals Agency and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency intend to take the
initiative regarding an analysis of the following questions:
• Which policy instruments and measures are most effective and suitable in order to
regulate hazardous substances in a life-cycle perspective?
• Which policy instruments and measures are most suitable for use in achieving synergies
between non-toxic and resource-efficient?
• How do we ensure that decisions in the various sets of rules work in the same direction?
Such an analysis is an important basis for the work aimed at a strategy which improves the
coordination between waste, chemicals and product legislation. Results of the analyses are
needed in order to be able to bring about better coordination between the chemicals, products
and waste rules. Work can be initiated nationally in order to be utilised and developed later at
EU level. The consideration of a number of matters can be included in such an analysis, such
as
• increasing the number of hazardous substances in the EU’s existing rules regarding
producer responsibility,
• expanding EU rules on producer responsibility to include more product types,
• analysing how the EU’s rules governing when waste ceases to be waste (i.e. criteria for
End of Waste) can take account of the levels of hazardous substances in waste.
Sweden should, in our opinion, seek to strengthen EU rules governing waste classification
with regard to substances of very high concern, clarifying that POPs and PBT-containing
waste would be classified as hazardous waste. There is reason to review how recycled
substances are handled with regard to the registration and information requirements in
REACH and, finally, it is important to adapt the information in REACH so that it is more
user-friendly and to communicate the information to the waste sector.
Safe destruction of substances of very high concern (Chapter 8.9)
There is a global lack of adequate capacity for the destruction of substances of very high
concern. This constitutes an obstacle to the work on persistent organic pollutants (POPs). The
lack is an obstacle both to good compliance with existing rules and to the willingness of
countries and parties to extend the rules to cover more POPs. Sweden should encourage an
increased destruction capacity globally, and the Swedish EPA could initiate an analysis of the
options for developing such capacity. The results of the analysis could then be used as the
Swedish position in various international negotiations. The analysis can, for example, include:
• working towards achieving that all parties to the Basel and Stockholm conventions have
access to incineration capacity for the destruction of hazardous waste, including POPs
waste at high temperatures;
• possibilities for following up at EU level how the member states have implemented
Article 16 of the Waste Directive regarding working towards suitable treatment capacity
being available in the EU;
• complementing the limit values for POPs in waste with e.g. guidance in order to facilitate
an agreement on safe handling of waste containing new POPs substances
Environmental monitoring (Chapter 8.10)
In the EU there is a lack of instruments which can assist with continuous monitoring relating
to hazardous substances in the environment. There is, however, reason to develop such a
common system, not least for the legislation for control of substances to be uniform. This is
26