LEGAL REGULATIONS AND CONTROLS

this study a test of these key functions would have been sufficient to prevent export under the product regime. It is necessary to define the tests for the key functions mentioned in more spe-cific terms. This can be done though in subordinate regulations. It appears in any case to be necessary to link breaches of the requirements of Appendix I with fines or penalties.

The proposals can be made by the BMU in the discussion on the amendment of the WEEE di-rective in a European context.

By way of support, a simple matrix should be developed for the information of exporters, as well as for use with export controls and by the authorities responsible for exports in the federal states which adopt the differentiation between appliances in categories A to G (see chapter 4.9) proposed in this study. The matrix presented in a project workshop by the Hamburg Environ-ment Office can be used here as a starting point.

The timetable for the revision of the WEEE directive suggests that it may take another 3 to 5 years before it is implemented in national law and actually comes into force. For some types of equipment, this period is too long as for example CRT monitors and televisions are now being exported in great volumes as they are being replaced by flat screens. With other used appli-ances the requirements of for example the RoHS directive (on the restriction of the use of cer-tain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment) will not show any real effects with used appliances for a couple of years, whereby the need for action is greater now. It is not possible to make an appropriate change to the Electrical and Electronic Equipment Law (Elek-troG) while the WEEE directive is being revised (block on changes). The legal obligation to en-sure the requirements of the Correspondents' Guidelines at national level in the short term also carries the risk that exports will be redirected to ports in other member states.

The analysis on the origin of exported appliances (see chapter 5) showed that a range of sources is relevant and therefore also that a range of intervention points should be processed.

Based on experience and the fact that the personnel resources for enforcement are instead be-ing reduced, monitorbe-ing of these points appears to be difficult. As a result, export controls at the points where the appliances are stowed into sea containers or where the containers are shipped become particularly important.

While the city of Hamburg has managed to employ two additional people in the area of waste shipment, in view of the large number of containers this cannot though sufficiently replace per-sonnel resources in other federal states. The analysis of the areas of origin has shown that the monitoring of export hubs will remain of great importance for improving export processes and that relevant volumes of appliances are not export via the Port of Hamburg, but via ports in other member states (e.g. Antwerp).

The knowledge and awareness of collection points for electrical and electronic equipment for export (see section 5.1) is still very limited in the federal states. It is recommended that first of all a systematic survey on the number, facilities, approval type and status and turnover of the collection points in the federal states takes place. Criteria for the identification and control of collection points should be developed for this purpose (Measure 3b). As the goods collected and traded here often fall in the grey area between waste and non-waste, the situation at the collection points can for example be assessed against the background of the re-quirements of the Electrical and Electronic Equipment Law (ElektroG) and Appendix I of the amendment of the WEEE directive.

Appropriate initiatives could be proposed by the BMU to the LAGA.

In some federal states and in Europe collection points are already being monitored in relation to exports of electrical and electronic equipment. It was emphasised that it is not possible to moni-tor every container which is packed for export. The goal is rather to control by way of example and to talk with exporters and gather their information on the requirements concerning the ex-port electrical and electronic equipment under the product regime. An extension of such controls and discussions to more collection points should be initiated by the responsible monitoring au-thorities in cooperation with the responsible police forces. Where applicable this is also possible in the form of more concerted actions in which the experiences of the various federal states can be included.

It became clear that the effective cooperation between the police, customs and the responsible waste authorities is an essential requirement for successful waste export controls and a harmo-nised and high standard of control. The legal responsibility of the police for the area of waste transport controls is at least considered to be sensible in the inland and sea port cities. An im-portant element for effective controls is also that the police obtain access to databases for ex-port registrations. This access, which has been established in Hamburg but is not ensured for future database systems, is considered an important requirement for identifying suspected cases using the police and being able to carry out targeted inspections. For this purpose the risk profiles of such exports should be further developed and there should be more in-tensive exchange between the responsible authorities (Measure 3c).

Based on the IT information on export registrations, container check routines can be applied which also differentiate between the environmental risk potential of the appliances.

• With refrigerators, the statistical comparisons suggest that a significant share of the appli-ances contain CFCs. Here a high frequency of controls and monitoring of the appliance-specific information, as recommended by the Correspondents' Guidelines, makes sense.

• CRT monitors are currently the most significant type of appliance in terms of volume being exported to the countries of destination investigated. The environmental risk potential and the currently very strong drivers for non-working appliances to also be exported (domestic treatment costs, lack of recycling opportunities for the highest-volume fractions) also make a high inspection frequency appear sensible.

This practice, which already takes place in some federal states, should be harmonised in its ap-plication.

In addition, the on-the-ground work of the environment offices with container inspections should be foreseen.

The exchange between the federal states and between German, Dutch and Belgian sea ports on the investigative profiles of exports where the risk of exporting waste as products is particu-larly high should be intensified.

According to the police they could gather more detailed information on the areas of origin if, for example, after a transport is stopped the responsible authority issued such a request to the po-lice. The gaps in information on the origin of exported appliances (see chapter 6 and in particu-lar sections 6.6 and 6.8) show the importance of such a procedure. Investigations using the police in certain potential areas of origin for exported UEEE/WEEE (appliances which were already in the waste regime and are exported as used appliances) should be initi-ated (Measure 3d).

The exchange of information between the federal states is considered a sensible way of collat-ing and uscollat-ing experience in all states. This can be done by developcollat-ing a network of regional au-thorities and by exchanging employees. In the process, the experiences from the IMPEL-TFS projects concerning exchanging experience can be built upon. This could be initiated in the short term by Germany’s coordinating centre for the Basel Convention.