Ref.

Ares(2020)2318357 - 30/04/2020

EUROPEAN COMMISSION
DIRECTORATE-GENERAL
ENVIRONMENT
Directorate A – Green Economy
ENV.B.3 – Waste Management & Secondary materials

Brussels, 6 April 2020

ABR/MF/env.b.3(2020)

MEETING OF THE WASTE EXPERT GROUP – Single Use Plastics (SUP)

Wednesday 11 March 2020, 14.00 - 18.00, Videoconference

Chair: Silvija AILE, Deputy HoU, DG ENV

Commission: Bettina Lorz, DG ENV
Anna Bobo Remijn, DG ENV
Rana Pant, DG ENV
Maja Desgrées du Loû, DG ENV
Leonardo Mazza, DG ENV
Florencia Sanchez Acosta, DG ENV
XXX, DG ESTAT
ECHA participant (see below)
Member States: Austria (1), Belgium (2), Czech Republic (2), Germany (4), Spain (1), Finland
(1), Malta (3), Romania (2), Portugal (1), Sweden (2), Norway (1) (EEA),
France (1)

External consultants: Deloitte/ in Extenso, Ramboll

1. Welcome and Adoption of the Agenda

The agenda was adopted without changes.

The Chair greeted the participants and recalled the exceptional circumstances related to the spread
of the COVID-19 pandemic that made the Commission decide to hold this meeting via a
videoconferencing system. Given the importance of the meeting for the continuation of our work,
it was decided that the meeting should not be cancelled altogether.

The Chair explained that this was the first attempt to organise such a meeting and that if it
functioned well, could serve as a model for future meetings in the time of this pandemics, while
improving some of the technical aspects. The Chair announced that the meeting would be run as
closely as possible to an actual expert group meeting taking physically place in Brussels.

The chair then called out the names/countries of the participants. 11 Member States and Norway
were identified as participating. She explained that after each presentation, Member States would
be given the floor in alphabetical order to make comments/ask questions.

The participants were informed that external experts may be invited to give presentations under
individual agenda items. This was the case for the current meeting with agenda item no.2 and no.3
for which the contractor of the SUP support study (Ramboll consortium), would present the
interim results of the study that Ramboll is carrying out on behalf of the European Commission.
The participants were also informed that given the different format, the meeting was expected to
take longer than first planned. Therefore, it was suggested to shorten the presentations, and to give
more time for questions and comments from Member States. The slides of the presentation were
distributed to participants to enable them to better follow the flow of the presentations.

2. Guidelines under Directive 2019/904 on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic
products on the environment (‘SUP Directive’, article 12(2)) (presentation by Ramboll)

The Chair introduced the presentation by Ramboll. The contractor has been working on a guidance
document as called for in Article 12(2) of Directive 2019/904 on the reduction of the impact of
certain plastic products on the environment. On the basis of this work, the Commission will have
to publish guidelines on the single-use plastic products covered by the Directive. The Guidelines
are due by July 2020, and will provide clarification of the general definitions and the specific
product criteria.

In a first part, the presentation reviewed the objectives and scope of the SUP Directive. In a second
part, Ramboll presented an overview of the general terms and definitions, focusing on the
definition of plastic in the SUP Directive, which is also still under consideration internally within
the Commission, involving ECHA. The contractor also explained the distinction between single
and multiple use plastics. In the third part, the presentation focused on the product definitions of
the following single-use plastic products: food containers, beverage containers and beverage
bottles, packets and wrappers, wet wipes, sanitary towels, tampons and tampon applicators. For
each item, the following aspects were reviewed: the general and specific product specific criteria,
were reviewed the differentiation between single and multiple use, and the distinction with other
SUP product categories.

To complement Ramboll’s presentation, a representative from ECHA presented its considerations

on the elements of the ‘plastic’ definition, focusing on two specific elements of the definition,
namely ‘natural polymer’ and ‘not chemically modified’. Regarding the first element, ECHA
referred to the Guidance on monomers and polymers under REACH. For the element of ‘not
chemically modified’, ECHA presented the potential options to be considered, relating to the
intentionality of the modification during the manufacturing process or to the end point of the
manufacturing process. The potential implications of the adoption of the different definitions were
then presented. ECHA underlined that the decision on the definitions to adopt requires policy
decisions also taking into account the goals set in the SUP Directive.

Following these two presentations, the Chair invited Member States to a first round of comments.
Overall, Member States announced that they would be sending detailed comments in writing after
the videoconference. They also encouraged the Commission to share the questions raised by the
other Member States, as well as the feedback from COM. Some Member States asked whether the
Guidelines would be descriptive, which the Commission confirmed. The Guidance will start from
the definition and explain all the elements of the definition and how they should be interpreted.

Some Member States voiced concern concerning the introduction of volume criteria, especially
for wrappers. As regards the definition of ‘chemically modified’, the question was raised whether
thermoplastics would fall under the scope of the directive. The representative from ECHA
answered in the affirmative. Regarding criteria on volume in case of wrappers, the Commission
explained that it may serve as an indicator (among others) to differentiate between a single serve
portion and multiple serve portion. Other Member States urged the Commission to provide
answers to their questions submitted already in writing. The Commission assured participants that
these questions will be taken into account in the Guidelines in the coming months. Other Member
States inquired about the approach of the Commission on the interpretation of the definition of
2
plastics, in particular the exemption for ‘natural polymers, which have not been chemically
modified. The Commission stated that it has not taken a final position yet on the issues and that
discussions are ongoing, also taking into account the outcome of the stakeholders’ meeting in
December with industry experts, NGOs and ECHA. The Commission is in close contact with
ECHA on the next steps, and will fully take account of the Member State’s comments and
positions in this process. The Commission announced the intention that in the next Expert Group
meeting a more concrete proposal on the definition will be discussed. Additionally, ESTAT
mentioned that Guidelines for the food waste data collection are being finalised and that similar
challenges regarding definitions are encountered. For this, other legal acts derived from the Waste
Framework Directive may provide relevant definitions that could help to provide further guidance.

3. Feed-back stakeholder workshops 24/25 February 2020 (organized under the SUP
support study)

a. Separate collection plastic bottles (Article 9 and Article 13, WP3)

The contract team then presented the work done in the context of the SUP support study on the
development of methodologies for calculation, verification and reporting of single-use plastic
beverage bottles separately collected. The contractor summarized the relevant input and feedback
from the last stakeholder meeting (24 February). The key results of the stakeholder consultation
and survey of Work Package 3 were presented. Among 550 online questionnaires that were sent,
88 stakeholders participated in the online survey and 17 participated in more detailed interviews.
41 stakeholders registers for the workshop that took place on 24 February 2020. Three key topics
were addressed during the consultation, relating to data “placed on the market” with two data
source options and the topic of separate collection. Finally, the options for methodology of Work
Package 3 were presented, based on the feedback of the workshop. In drafting the options for
calculation and reporting the contractor has taken into account the input from stakeholders. Open
questions still remain, particularly relating to data confidentiality, the sorting analysis, comingled
collection and collection of bottles from residual household waste.

b. Consumption reduction food containers and cups (Article 4 and Article 13, WP 5)

The contractor presented the report of the stakeholders’ workshop on methodologies for
calculation and verification and reporting on reduction in consumption of single-use plastic cups
for beverages and food containers. The presentation included the key results of the stakeholder
consultation and survey of Work Package 5. Among 550 online questionnaires that were sent, 80
stakeholders participated in the online survey and 15 participated in more detailed interviews. 43
stakeholders registered for the workshop that took place on 24 February 2020. During the
workshop three key topics were addressed, namely data collection of “food containers/cups placed
on the market”, calculation of consumption reduction and reporting. Finally, the options for
methodology of Work Package 5 were presented, based on the feedback of the workshop. The
methodology submitted by the contractor addressing the quantities of SUP beverage and food
containers placed on the market integrate this feedback in the reporting, guidance and quality
check stages. Open questions still remain, particularly relating to data confidentiality, the issue of
airline carriers and the expected administrative and financial burdens.

c. Post-consumption waste tobacco products with filters (Article 13, WP 4)

The contractor presented the report of the stakeholders’ workshop on methodologies for
calculation and verification and reporting of post-consumption waste of tobacco products with
filters made of plastic. The presentation included the key results of the stakeholder consultation
and survey of Work Package 4. Among 550 online questionnaires that were sent, 39 stakeholders
participated in the online survey and 13 participated in more detailed interviews. 26 stakeholders
3
registered for the workshop that took place on 25 February 2020. During the workshop three key
topics were addressed, namely: data “placed on the market”, post consumption waste and litter
prevention measures. Finally, the options for methodology of Work Package 4 were presented,
based on the feedback of the workshop. The contractor presented their methodology addressing
the quantities of tobacco products with filters and filters marketed for use in combination with
tobacco products placed on the market as well as the methodology addressing quantities of post-
consumption waste of tobacco products with filters and filters marketed for use in combination
with tobacco products. Both methodologies integrate the workshop’s feedback in the reporting,
guidance and quality check stages. Open questions remain, particularly relating to the acceptance
of an EU-wide industry approach, to synergies in litter studies, to sorting analysis and data
confidentiality.

d. EPR Guidelines litter clean up (Article 8(4), WP6)

The contractor presented the report of the stakeholders’ workshop on supporting the development
of guidelines on litter clean-up costs. The presentation included the key results of the stakeholder
consultation and survey of Work Package 6. Among 550 online questionnaires that were sent, 60
stakeholders participated in the online survey. 60 stakeholders participated to the workshop that
took place on 25 February 2020. Based on the results of the survey and of the workshop, three key
topics were addressed with regard to existing litter clean up practices in EU Member States,
namely waste collection in public spaces, litter clean-up, and awareness-raising measures. A
selection of draft definition of each identified practice was presented as well as a selection of draft
recommendation relating to a specific practice. The issue of data on costs of existing practices on
waste collection in public places, litter clean-up and awareness raising measures was highlighted,
with the lack of aggregated and centrally reported Member State data. To finish, the contractor
presented the options for principles, procedures and methodologies for the calculation and and
allocation of the costs. A set of questions still remains open for discussion, including the following:

 Should the costs of cleaning-up SUPs (wet wipes and sanitary items) in municipal
wastewater treatment infrastructure be covered by EPR under the SUP Directive?
 To what extent, and how, can the guidance support public authorities in establishing
thresholds (e.g. appropriate level of cleanliness) to ensure cost-efficiency and
proportionality to the need for cleaning?
 What is the best way to define the costs of litter/waste collection and clean-up and how
best to allocate the costs to different producers?

Following these presentations, the Chair invited Member States to a second round of comments.
Overall, Member States announced again that they would be sending detailed comments in writing
after the videoconference. Some Member States urged the Commission to explain in the guidelines
on separate collection the extent to which collecting bottles from commingled waste can be taken
into account in the calculation of the separate collection targets laid down in article 9 of the SUP
Directive, and whether collecting/sorting bottles from residual waste can be considered separate
collection or not. One Member State specified that Article 10(3)(a) of the Waste Framework
Directive would allow for a derogation from separate collection where the collecting of certain
types of waste together does not affect their potential to undergo preparing for reuse, recycling or
other recovery operations, and the quality of the output from these operations is comparable to the
quality achieved through separate collection. The Commission briefly commented on these issues,
highlighting that article 10(3)(a) of the Waste Framework Directive refers to “certain” types of
waste collected together which is not the same as all waste being collected together (mixed
municipal waste) and that the objectives of the SUP Directive should be taken into account in
interpreting the scope of derogation (see Recital 27, referring to ‘high quality recycling). This
would suggest that only certain, dry and recyclable waste, which has been collected separately
from other waste, can be covered by the derogation from separate collection. In this context, mixed
4
municipal waste should not be considered as comingled waste in the context of Article 10(3)(a) of
the Waste Framework Directive.

The Commission assured the meeting that the issue will be addressed both in the separate
collection guidelines currently being prepared by the Commission as well as in the Implementing
Act on separate collection in the context of article 9 of the SUP Directive.

4. Transposition and implementation: timeline for IAs and Guidelines, and

transposition/implementation MS
The Chair explained that so far, the Commission has received information through notifications
or other means that Member States are already partially transposing the SUP Directive, and in
some cases go beyond the scope of the Directive (for example by banning also products that are
not covered by Article 5 or 4 of the SUP Directive). Meanwhile, complaints have been received
from industry, in particular expressing concerns regarding lack of a level playing field. In this
context, the Commission stressed the importance of a coordinated implementation to ensure full
effectiveness of the Directive and in particular referred to the Administrative letter sent to the MS
in September 2019 on the general terms of transposition/implementation of the SUP Directive,
including the specific application deadlines laid out in its Article 17.

The timeline of future actions includes nine implementing acts and two sets of guidelines. The
following Expert Group meetings have been scheduled: 24 April, 25 May and 19 June (as regards
the latter a TAC meeting has been scheduled) to ensure proper discussions and adoption of those
implementing acts and guidelines foreseen for July 2020.

Regarding the Guidelines on the products covered by the SUPD, the consultations started in
October 2019 with a stakeholder workshop. A second stakeholder workshop should be organized
by the contractors of the SUP support study by the end of the month [update: in the light of Covid,
this has now been rescheduled for 3 April in the form of a SUP webinar].

Regarding the implementing act on the reporting of waste fishing gear, DG MARE is the
responsible service in the Commission, and should participate in the next Member State meeting
scheduled for 24 April 2020 to present progress on this work item, as well as progress made with
respect to the standard on circularity of fishing gear.

The Chair invited the Member States to send their comments on the different Work Packages
presentations and on the open questions for discussion in writing by 25 March at the latest. An
e-mail with instructions to whom comments and questions should be sent, will be circulated by
the Commission shortly after the meeting. The next meeting of the Expert Group on SUP is
scheduled for the 24th of April 2020.