As the EU enters the final phase of negotiations on the End-of-Life Vehicle (ELV) Regulation, key decisions are being made that will shape the future of vehicle reuse, recycling, and sustainability. Henk Jan Nix, General Secretary of the European Group of Automotive Recycling Associations (EGARA), emphasises the urgent need to protect responsible parts reuse and ensure that legislation supports, rather than undermines, a truly circular automotive economy. With trilogue discussions underway, now is the critical moment for stakeholders to speak up.
The final phase of the EU law-making process for the ELV/Circular Vehicle Regulation has commenced. The Members of Parliament (MEPs) have made the last amendments in the version dated 3 July. The so-called trilogues refer to negotiations among the European Commission (EC), the European Parliament (EP), and the Council regarding the final details of the Vehicle Regulation text. The first one will be on 16th October.
Influence possible
For EGARA and for all Member States (MS), this means it’s the last chance to influence the final text with all lobbying possibilities you can think of. Why? Because the 11 June and 3 July versions differ in parts reuse, it becomes clear what the battery regulation ultimately turns out to be for battery reuse.
Main points of concern
EGARA focuses on these points, but there are more details, and of course, the situation in every country is different, which means priorities can vary. But we think this covers most of the main concerns of all our members:
- All parts must be reused
- Battery reuse, including lead-acid batteries
- Definition ATF
- PROs shall make contracts for all that apply to the conditions
- Treatment and terms
- Scam in parts sales
Here’s a brief overview of the key concerns:
Parts not to be reused
In the 11 June version, article 31 stated that a group of parts (mainly safety parts like airbags and emission parts such as particle filters) cannot be reused unless it was B to B. This condition is omitted in the next version of 3 July, which means these parts cannot be sold by ATFs for reuse. This is a significant loss for ATFs in terms of circularity and sustainability, and a substantial gain for the criminal and illegal sector.
We feel it will:
- Contribute to illegals who will sell these parts anyway
- Contribute to criminality, as these parts will be stolen from cars like radios in the past
- Make the footprint of cars bigger if they have no cheap way for maintenance and repair
- Make the footprint of cars bigger if used parts are the only source when new ones are no longer available
- Make the footprint of parts bigger so they can last longer on a receiving vehicle
- Make the footprint of parts bigger if they are new, and put them on a 17-year-old vehicle
- Contribute to fraud if a consumer thinks he bought a safe vehicle, but the airbags are missing, and only empty covers are used to hide them
- For sure, contradicting the producer’s statement that there’s so much positive value in an ELV
- If unreliable airbags, such as those from Takata, are the problem, we can utilise the lists issued and avoid selling airbags from certain brands and series
We hope this will be rectified in the trilogues, but it will only happen if we encourage our contacts to use the right motivations. This is a job for all of us!
Battery reuse
It appears that some Member States consider that if a battery originates from an ELV (waste), the battery is considered waste and therefore subject to the battery regulations.
Taking the battery out is considered ‘preparation for reuse,’ and as such, the dismantler is regarded as a producer, complete with EPR obligations. We believe this frustrates reuse in an undesired way.
Legislation is designed to be circular and sustainable, green, and eco-friendly, but in the same effort, rules are created that make this impossible to achieve. This is 100% counter-effective. We believe it would be more beneficial to follow the path in which the Vehicle Directive applies to the complete ELV, and as soon as we remove a part, it becomes a product. When we remove a battery, we’re not extracting waste; we’re retrieving a product that is already suitable for reuse. That would be so much more logical, and if not, European legislators should find a way to make this possible again. If the goal is to make every battery a waste battery that cannot simply be reused, why do we even care?
Definition of an ATF
It should be avoided that shredders, dealers or collection points can act as ATFs without fulfilling the ATF obligations. The ATF is to carry out the collection and storage of end-of-life vehicles or of their parts and components, the issuance of the COD, the depollution of ELVs, and the removal of parts and components and parts, where technically feasible and economically sustainable.
Contracts
OEMs and PROs should allow all who meet the standards to obtain contracts. Nobody should be excluded. All contracts should be the same in an MS.
Treatment
Confusion about treatment (only depollution or complete dismantling) and terms must be avoided. It should be clear to all that depollution is completed within a month, and the total treatment is completed within 3 years. Not every ELV should remain in a yard for the full 3 years, but for some very young accident vehicles, it is necessary to keep them longer than others.
Scam
In some countries, scammers misuse the data and identity of Authorised Treatment Facilities (ATFs) to deceive consumers into buying parts that are never delivered. When complaints arise, the blame often falls on the legitimate ATF. We strongly advocate for stricter regulations governing the sale of parts from End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) to prevent such fraud.
Lobby
Continued lobbying through all available contacts is essential. The current landscape involves many stakeholders, some of whom do not operate in our best interest.
Please reach out if you need further information or support in this effort.
