Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2018)340 - Reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment - Main contents

Please note

This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.

dossier	COM(2018)340 - Reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment.
source	COM(2018)340
date	28-05-2018

1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL

• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal

The amount of plastic marine litter in oceans and seas is growing, to the detriment of ecosystems, biodiversity and potentially human health, and causes widespread concern. At the same time, valuable material that could be brought back into the economy is lost, once littered. Plastic makes up 80-85% of the total number of marine litter items, measured through beach counts.

Single Use Plastic (SUP) items represent about half of all marine litter items found on European beaches by counts. The 10 most found SUP items represent 86% of all SUP items (constituting thus 43% of all marine litter items found on European beaches by count). Fishing gear containing plastics accounts for another 27% of marine litter items found on European beaches. This initiative focuses therefore on the 10 most found SUP and fishing gear, which together represent around 70% of these marine litter items by count.

Plastics is widely available, persistent, and often has toxic and other harmful impacts. Due to its persistency, the impacts of plastic litter are growing as each year more plastic waste accumulates in the oceans. Plastic residues are now found in many marine species – sea turtles, seals, whales, birds as well as in several species of fish and shell fish and therefore enter the food chain. In addition to harming the environment and potentially human health, plastic marine litter damages activities such as tourism, fisheries and shipping.

The underlying drivers of the increase in plastic waste and its dispersal in the marine environment are linked both with the plastics value chain and market, and with individual behaviour and social trends. Several factors have led to the current situation including the wide availability of plastic, consumption trend for convenience, lack of incentives to ensure a proper collection and treatment of waste leading to poor management and insufficient infrastructure.

Europe has a responsibility to tackle marine litter originating from Europe and it has also committed to act at a global level, notably through the G7 and G20 but also through the implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals ¹ . This initiative will place the EU at the forefront of global efforts, giving credibility and strength to its international action in the field.

The problem of marine litter is transboundary by nature, as litter moves in the marine environment and litter originating from one country can affect others. Joint action is needed to reduce marine litter while ensuring a single market with high environmental standards and legal certainty for businesses. Therefore, as part of its Plastics Strategy ² , the European Commission committed to look into further action to address plastic marine litter that builds on the piecemeal efforts underway in EU Member States, and that follows the approach used of light-weight plastic carrier bags.

This initiative focusses on the European contribution to macro plastic marine litter. It complements other European policies tackling marine litter such as the EU waste, waste water and marine environment framework legislations as well as the EU legislation on port reception facilities.

The main objective of this initiative is the prevention and reduction of plastic marine litter from single use plastic items and fishing gear containing plastic by complementing the measures already envisaged under the EU Plastics Strategy, addressing the identified gaps in the existing actions and legislation, and further reinforcing the EU’s systemic approach to this issue. The Plastics Strategy already includes specific measures on microplastics, which constitute an important share of marine plastic litter: restrictions through REACH ³ for deliberately added microplastics in products and oxo-plastics as well as measures for microplastics from other sources (tyres, textiles and plastic pellets). This initiative hence focusses on single use plastics and fishing gear containing plastic, which are macro-plastics.

The initiative should be seen in the broader context of the transition to a circular economy. It will support innovative solutions for new business models, multi-use alternatives and alternative single use products. This systemic change and material substitution will also promote bio-based alternatives and an innovative bioeconomy, bringing new opportunities for businesses and improving consumer convenience.

Further, in particular related to beverage bottles, the initiative will have a direct, positive impact on collection rates, the quality of the collected material and subsequent recycling, offering opportunities for recycling businesses and the increase of recycled content into products.

Tackling marine litter creates economic opportunities. The circular economy boosts the competitiveness of our businesses by contributing to the creation of a resource-efficient, decarbonised economy and jobs to sustain it. Innovation in product design to avoid plastic litter and microplastics, but also investments into marine litter prevention (e.g. in waste and waste-water treatment, in port reception facilities or recycling of fishing nets) and into sustainable alternative materials, products and business models can create jobs as well as strengthen technical and scientific skills and industry competitiveness in areas of growing global interest.

Marine litter has been monitored for several years on European beaches based on harmonised methods based on counts ⁴ . Beach litter item counts are internationally accepted as a reasonable indicator of the composition of marine litter, suitable to inform policy.

A short overview of the single-use plastic items and fishing gear and the measures foreseen in the Commission’s proposal is attached in the table below.

	Consumption reduction	Market restriction	Product design requirement	Marking requirements	Extended producer responsibility	Separate collection objective	Awareness raising measures
Food containers	X				X		X
Cups for beverages	X				X		X
Cotton bud sticks		X
Cutlery, plates, stirrers, straws		X
Sticks for balloons Balloons		X
				X	X		X
Packets & wrappers					X		X
Beverage containers, their caps & lids - Beverage bottles			X		X		X
			X		X	X	X
Tobacco product filters					X		X
Sanitary items: - Wet wipes - Sanitary towels				X	X		X
				X			X
Lightweight plastic carrier bags					X		X
Fishing gear					X		X

• Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area

Given its focus on more efficient resource use and an overall more effective and circular plastics economy with better economic and environmental performances, the initiative is fully in line with the objectives of the Circular Economy policy. The Circular Economy is an integral part of the 10 priorities of the President Juncker Commission, in particular the first priority on jobs, growth and investment. This initiative was also announced in the EU Plastics Strategy, as part of the key actions planned under the Circular Economy Action Plan.

The proposal is consistent with and complements the EU’s established legislation in the field of waste and water, in particular the Waste Framework Directive ⁵ , the Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste ⁶ , Marine Strategy Framework Directive ⁷ and the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive ⁸ .

The existing waste legislation establishes general waste prevention and waste management objectives with regard to prevention and reduction of marine litter while leaving the choice of measures to the Member States. This proposal provides specific objectives and measures to tackle the most littered SUP and fishing gear containing plastic. It therefore complements the objective established in Article 9 of the Waste Framework Directive, as amended in 2018, that Member States shall take measures aimed at halting the generation of marine litter and measures to prevent, combat and clean-up litter. The proposal also supplements Article 8 of the Waste Framework Directive by establishing extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes at Member States level in order to cover the costs of prevention of littering and waste management, including clean-up of litter of single-use plastic products.

This proposal complements the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, which requires Member States to reach Good Environmental Status of marine waters by 2020. With one descriptor dedicated to marine litter, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive requires Member States to establish Programmes of Measures to ensure that 'quantities and composition of marine litter do not cause harm to marine or coastal environment'. The long lasting work undertaken under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive to monitor marine litter on European beaches constitutes the scientific base of this legislative proposal. For specific items, this proposal goes further than the Marine Strategy Framework Directive requirements by regulating individual sources of pollution thanks to the identification of drivers and pathways of marine plastic pollution.

Consistency is also ensured with the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, which provides requirements for the collection and treatment of urban waste water and quality criteria for the treatment. While the Directive allows capturing a significant part of the pollution emitted, it is currently not sufficiently effective, notably for storm water overflows capture and treatment. In addition, some flushed items such as plastic cotton bud sticks and sanitary applications are not well captured in the existing facilities and therefore end up on the European beaches. This legislative proposal comes as a complement to that Directive by proposing to act upstream of wastewater treatment through awareness raising, extended producer responsibility and labelling requirements for certain single-use plastic products.

This proposal also introduces measures for the improved management of waste fishing gear containing plastic returned to shore and its financing. These mechanisms and incentives are expected to increase the share of recovered fishing gear at the end of their life. The handling of waste generated from fishing gear is regulated and financially supported to a certain extent through a range of EU instruments, tackling in particular the link between overall rules on waste and litter from sea based sources and fishing gear, and the tracking and reporting of lost or abandoned fishing gear at sea. This proposal complements existing legislation on port reception facilities ⁹ for the delivery of waste from ships, which is currently under revision ¹⁰ . The proposed review includes fishing vessels in the 100% indirect fee system, giving these vessels the right of delivery in ports of all their waste, including derelict fishing gear. In addition, it also complements the envisaged revision of Fisheries Control Regulation ¹¹ which strengthens provision for reporting on lost gear, and those relative to retrieving lost gear.

The current proposal addresses only a part of the issue of plastic marine litter. It is included into an overall integrated and consistent European approach to tackle all sources of plastic marine litter as detailed in the recently adopted Plastics Strategy. This Strategy highlights the gaps or shortcomings in the current legal and policy framework to tackle plastic marine litter and proposes targeted measures to improve the prevention, collection and recyclability of plastics, in particular, of plastic packaging. It also aims to develop a regulatory framework for plastics with biodegradable properties to prevent harm to ecosystems. The European Chemicals Agency is preparing restriction dossiers concerning microplastic particles intentionally added to preparations, such as cosmetics, and the use of oxo-degradable plastics; measures are under preparation for microplastics not intentionally used in products but generated during their use, such as from tyres and textiles, as well as for reducing leakages of preproduction plastic pellets.

• Consistency with other Union policies

In addition to the environmental objectives described above, the proposal aims at preserving the internal market from additional fragmentation, one of the key objectives of the Union.

The initiative fully subscribes the innovation principle, and the related enabling actions under the Plastics Strategy to stimulate innovation and investment towards circular solutions such as the EU research funding under Horizon 2020 and the European Structural and Investment Funds.

More generally, this initiative will help achieve United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 12 and 14 ¹² , the objectives of the Communication on International Ocean Governance ¹³ and the commitments taken in Malta at the Our Ocean Conference in 2017. This initiative is coherent with the 2017 Strategy ‘Towards the Outermost Regions’ ¹⁴ that recognizes their potential for growth in tourism and the blue economy as well as the circular economy.

Finally, the initiative is consistent with the EU's international obligations in the area of trade policy, notably by ensuring non-discrimination between products produced in the EU and imported products.

The proposal will also help achieve priority objective 1 of the 7th Environment Action Programme to 2020: ‘To protect, conserve and enhance the Union’s natural capital’ ¹⁵ . It also fits under priority objective 4, which requires that the public has access to clear environmental information at national level. To that end, the proposal makes cross-references and guarantees consistency with the requirements of Directive 2003/4/EC ¹⁶ and the INSPIRE Directive ¹⁷ .

The proposal also aims to ensure simple monitoring and reporting obligations, thereby limiting the administrative burden on Member States, in line with the EU’s Better Regulation approach ¹⁸ and the Fitness check on Reporting and Monitoring ¹⁹ .

2. LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY

• Legal basis

The main objective of the proposal is to prevent and to reduce the impact of certain plastic products on the environment, in particular the aquatic environment. This is achieved by defining specific waste prevention and waste management objectives and measures in relation to single-use plastic products that are most found on the beaches in the Union and fishing gear containing plastic. By doing so in a coordinated way throughout the Union, the proposal will also contribute to the smooth functioning of the Union market. In view of that, the proposal is based on Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

• Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)

Given the propensity of litter to be carried by wind, currents and tide, the problem of plastic pollution and marine litter is transboundary in nature and therefore cannot be tackled in isolation by Member States sharing the same seas and waterways. The actions to be taken have to be coordinated to make sure that the efforts made on one side of the seas are not jeopardised by the lack of actions on the other side. For that reason, marine litter can only be effectively prevented and reduced through a coherent and comprehensive policy approach and measures at the EU level. Furthermore, given the global dimension of the problem, this cooperation is reinforced by European actions and involvement in the European Regional Seas Conventions having all adopted regional action plans to combat marine litter, as well as global commitments taken by the EU and its Member States, for instance, such as under UNEA and the SDGs.

There is a risk of market fragmentation when Member States take measures in an uncoordinated manner, differing in scope, focus and ambition level. Current actions target various plastic products and adopt different approaches (such as Italy’s ban on plastic cotton buds, French rules restricting the marketing of single-use plastic glasses and plates unless they comply with specific biodegradability criteria). This could lead to a variety of restrictions of market access among the Member States, barriers to the free movement of goods and to the level playing field between producers in different countries, jeopardizing the efficient attainment of the objective of reducing marine litter, which has broader impacts at EU and international level. For this reason, it is necessary to establish a harmonised legislative framework setting common objectives and measures at EU level to prevent and reduce marine litter so that Member State measures are focused to specific single use plastic products and fishing gear containing plastic. The type of measures to be used, while based on a common assessment, is differentiated according to the type of plastic item, taking into account the added value of potential EU action and complementarity with the action undertaken by EU Member States.

For some items, the problem of littering (e.g. caps and lids for plastic beverage containers) and other impacts on the environment can be most efficiently tackled through changes in product design and switch to more sustainable substitutes (e.g. replacement of plastic content). In such cases, where there is a clear link to product requirements and market access in the internal market, a level playing field for businesses is important.

Furthermore, in line with the subsidiarity principle, this legislative proposal leaves for some measures certain flexibility to Member States –to choose the most appropriate specific implementation and data collection methods. For instance, Member States have a wide margin of discretion in deciding on national measures as appropriate, depending on local conditions, to implement the EU objective of a significant reduction in consumption of certain items.

• Proportionality

The proposal is targeted and proportionate as it focuses on the most found macro plastic items on European beaches by count, namely SUP and fishing gear. Considering the items by counts is the best available indicator of the environmental, social and economic impacts. This initiative focusses on the ten most found SUP items representing 86% of all SUP items by count (constituting thus 43% of all marine litter). Regulating all single-use plastic products, as found on beaches, would not be proportionate compared to the potential added value. It would lead to unnecessary costs and burden on Member States.

The measures on fishing gear are based on the polluter-pays principle, aiming in particular at ensuring that producers of fishing gear containing plastic take responsibility for the waste phase of their products, in particular, improving its separate collection and treatment, in particular, recycling, as well as re-use. These measures facilitate positive incentives for fishers to return gear to shore, while ensuring that they do not disproportionately burden fishing operators, in particular small-scale operators.

The proposal is suited to address an urgent environmental problem and, together with the existing legislation and the actions planned in the Plastic Strategy, to deliver ambitious environmental results, while achieving positive economic impacts, having a limited but positive effect on net employment, encouraging innovation, ensuring public acceptance, and contributing to wider resource efficiency.

The accompanying impact assessment provides more details on the proportionality of the elements in this legislative proposal.

• Choice of the instrument

A dedicated legislative instrument is proposed to address all single-use plastic products targeted in one legal instrument by defining specific objectives and measures with a view to preventing and reducing their impact on marine litter. Such dedicated legislative instrument is considered most suitable in order to avoid a fragmented legal landscape, as compared to the alternative approach that would have involved amending several legal instruments, such as the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive, the Waste Framework Directive, the Port Reception Facilities Directive, or the Fisheries Control Regulation.

While for some products harmonization at EU level is necessary, for other single-use plastic products and fishing gear containing plastic, in line with the existing EU waste legislation, it is necessary to leave some flexibility to Member States to choose the most appropriate legal, administrative and economic instruments to implement the defined objectives and measures. Therefore, a directive is the appropriate legal instrument for the attainment of the envisaged objectives and measures.

3. RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

• Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation

For the purpose of this legislative proposal, an exhaustive panorama of existing legislation has been drawn to understand where complementary EU actions are needed to tackle littering of SUP and their impact on the environment. That legislation often targets different pathways, it is fragmented in terms of focus and ambition and has not yet had the necessary impact on marine litter.

As explained in section 2 above, the recently adopted Plastics Strategy identifies a need for a EU level legislative proposal specifically targeting SUP.

According to the EU waste legislation all waste should be subject to collection and proper treatment. This legislation defines recycling targets for municipal waste (65% by 2030) and plastic packaging waste (55% by 2030) which will further increase the capture of plastic waste. However, Member States can reach these targets without enhanced efforts on littering. The most recent amendments to the Waste Framework Directive will require Member States to take measures to identify the main sources of marine litter and to take measures to prevent and reduce litter from those sources. Nonetheless, a variety of factors linked to inadequate waste infrastructure and inappropriate consumer behaviour will still result in littering and leakage of plastics into the environment. The present initiative complements the new waste legislation by providing solutions at European level for a significant part of the sources of littering. It highlights the relevance of a product-focused legal instrument, confirmed by the results obtained by the Plastic Bags Directive that has been the first European instrument of that nature and has achieved a real reduction in the consumption and its related environmental impacts of the targeted item.

The assessment of the programs of measures carried out in the framework of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive shows that they provide a useful overview of the actions undertaken or planned, but that additional measures are needed to make them effective. This legislative proposal goes further by regulating individual sources of pollution thanks to the identification of drivers and pathways of marine plastic pollution.

One of the limitations of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive, which is currently being evaluated, relates to the requirements on capture and treatment of the storm waters overflows, which would need to be re-considered. This new legislative proposal aims at tackling this issue by encouraging awareness campaigns and labelling requirements to prevent flushing of single-use plastic items which are not well captured by all sewage treatment systems.

Waste from fishing gear is regulated through a range of EU instruments. Gaps are however still notable. Particularly, there is currently no specific incentive for operators to ensure a maximum return rate for fishing gear waste to shore and there are no burden-sharing mechanisms in place. Thus, the ongoing revision of the Port Reception Facilities Directive comes in pair with this proposal to regulate fishing gear as it tackles previous disincentives for ships to bring back their garbage as well as fished up waste to shore. Moreover, the revision of the Fisheries Control Regulation requires marking gear to carry retrieval equipment on board, to retrieve lost gear or to report its loss in case it cannot be retrieved through daily electronic reporting. However, the current legislative framework can be further strengthened by providing incentives for managing of fishing gear more efficiently as a specific waste management and recycling stream. This new legislative proposal aims at tackling this through an extended producer responsibility scheme.

• Stakeholder consultations

The public consultation, that took place between December 2017 and February 2018, received more than 1800 contributions. 98.5% of respondents considered that action to tackle SUP marine litter is “necessary”, and 95% consider it “necessary and urgent”. More than 70% of manufacturers and more than 80% of brands and recyclers considered action “necessary and urgent”. Only 2% of respondents believed that there should be no new measures at European level and 79% believed that unless measures are taken at the EU level, they would remain ineffective.

Respondents to the public consultation overwhelmingly favoured the use of extended producer responsibility schemes to cover the costs of cleaning up litter which is a key added value of this legislative proposal in comparison to the minimum requirements defined in the EU waste legislation for extended producer responsibility schemes. Moreover, the public consultation showed support to legislative requirements to better design as one of the most effective approach, followed by reduction targets, which was taken into account in the proposal as key measures to be implemented by Member States.

Regarding fishing gear, 88 % of respondents were in favour of measures creating incentives to bring fished up litter and end-of-life gear ashore and 77% wished for better collection and sorting facilities on vessels and at ports.

• Collection and use of expertise

In the framework of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, information about marine litter items found on European beaches was gathered from the Joint Research Centre’s Technical Group on Marine Litter activities (monitoring programmes, clean-up campaigns and research projects), collected from 276 beaches of 17 EU Member States and four Regional Seas during 2016. A total of 355,671 items observed during 679 surveys were ranked by abundance, mainly according to the Marine Strategy Framework Directive Master List Categories of Beach Litter Items. The JRC list was then used to compile a shorter list of discrete classifications that provide the relative contributions of items that are alike in terms of source, use or material and are generally under the domain of a defined policy area. This data was also complemented by several already existing ongoing projects such as the Marine Litter Watch ²⁰ developed by the European Environmental Agency.

The European Marine Observation ²¹ and Data Network EMODnet ²² partnership and the Regional Sea Conventions also brought key expertise to this legislative proposal for instance by contributing to the JRC work for assembling and harmonising the data in order to provide a better overall picture of the concentrations of plastic litter in European seas and sea-beds.

Regarding SUP and fishing gear, the European Commission also relied on the work of external consultants. Regarding SUP, based on the JRC's data, they analysed the drivers and pathways to marine litter and the possible key measures to put forward in this new legislative proposal in order to tackle SUP. Regarding fishing gear, a separate in-depth study ²³ was conducted to understand where the legislative gaps are and which measures should complement the existing baseline scenario to reduce the impact of fishing gear on the marine environment. The analysis took account of literature reviews of existing research, workshops involving Commission officials and external stakeholders and desk-based research, including on PRODCOM and EUROSTAT databases (EU external trade, imports, exports and production data).

During the course of the study, a range of formal and informal interviews with stakeholders from public institutions, NGOs, industry associations and businesses were carried out in order to help develop the problem and impact analysis. These interviews examined what was technically feasible and the likely direct effects of certain options. Interviews were also used to gather specific data related to performance and costs and how these may change as a result of potential intervention measures.

• Impact assessment

A summary of the impact assessment is annexed to the proposal. The Regulatory Scrutiny Board issued a negative opinion, followed by a second opinion, positive with reservations ²⁴ , based on a revised impact assessment. In the final opinion the Board acknowledges that the revised report shows more clearly the scope of the initiative, limited to macro-plastics. Further details were asked mainly on the complementary role of a new instrument to the existing legislation both related to (1) fishing gear (added value compared to the Control Regulation, the Port Reception Facilities Directive and the European Maritime and Fisheries fund) and (2) related to SUP (explanation of the lack of ambition of current legislation or weak implementation). The Regulatory Scrutiny Board asked for further information on the harmfulness of SUP as a group and as individual items, and on the fact that individual Member State action could lead to market fragmentation.

As a result, the final impact assessment further clarifies that marine litter causes economic, social and environmental harm and outlines how the gaps of the existing acquis are covered as the existing legislation for waste management, waste water treatment, port reception facilities etc. does not sufficiently address the problem drivers for the impacts of specific items. Related to SUP, waste legislation will have effects mainly on increasing recycling, with less impact on littering. Upstream measures aiming to reduce consumption are more efficient. The impact assessment confirmed that, as a group, the most frequently found single use plastic items and fishing gear constitute a high contribution to macro marine litter. They constitute approximately 70% of beach litter in counts, but also for each individual item their contribution counts. In the case of fishing gear, the development of additional measures was part of the approach followed in the context of the EU Plastics Strategy and the proposed revision of the Port Reception Facilities Directive ²⁵ . In the proposed revision of this Directive, individual fishermen will not be penalised for bringing waste ashore. However port fees will increase if more waste is brought ashore and waste handling facilities need to be upgraded, especially in the small fishing ports that many vessels use. In addition to ensuring strengthened management of fishing gear waste once landed in port, the proposed EPR scheme ensures that producers of fishing gear containing plastic take over the costs of managing the waste stream, including some or all of the costs relative to port reception facilities.

Moreover, the assessment points to an increasing and demonstrated risk of market fragmentation, namely in how regions or individual Member States handle the issue of SUP and fishing gear. This proposal therefore aims at ensuring a minimum of coherence of measures across Member States, in order to avoid an uneven playing field, potentially distorting competitiveness between operators, which would in turn jeopardise the attainment of the objective of reducing litter. This legislative proposal strikes the right balance between the availability of alternatives and the need for harmonization.

Finally, the European Union needs to lead the way on tackling plastic marine litter in the European Seas through the actions of the Regional Seas Conventions but also at international level. By taking action the EU will trigger other countries to act, leading to a global reduction of marine litter in European Seas and beyond.

Direct legal action regarding these items is thus highly relevant to act against marine pollution.

Single-Use Plastics
Scenario 2d - Highest impact on reducing marine litter
Fishing gear

1. Single-Use Plastics

The impact assessment examines a wide range of measures. Four options or scenarios, with a selection of different measures applied to the different items, were modelled. Each subsequent option presents an upward step in ambition level with respect to overall outcomes. An essential consideration in this context was the expected impact on the flow of SUP into the marine environment.

This resulted in three categories of items:

·The items for which there are available sustainable alternatives, the objective is to promote less harmful alternatives.

·Items for which the alternatives do not exist. For these items, the objective is to limit damages by better informing the consumers and making the producers financially responsible of the consequences on the environment.

·Items which are already well captured where the objective is to make sure that they land in the existing (or forthcoming) separate collection and recycling circuit.

The four scenarios were compared to the baseline scenario 1 and are described below.

Scenario 2a – Lower impact on reducing marine litter

This scenario would address the drivers in a limited way. It includes information campaigns, voluntary actions and labelling could increase general awareness (e.g. on the litter issue, typical pathways, correct disposal), and thus consumer behaviour. However, it is unclear what the outcome will be as there is little evidence of such awareness actually changing people’s behaviour.

Scenario 2b - Medium impact on reducing marine litter,

This scenario is more effective than 2a, while becoming more challenging to implement, bringing with it more costs and burden for those affected.

Scenario 2c – Medium-high impact on reducing marine litter (chosen option)

This scenario would address the underlying drivers more adequately and goes further to change consumer behaviour. It includes product design measures for drink bottles for tethered caps would have a direct impact on the leakage of caps into the environment.

2. Scenario 2d - Highest impact on reducing marine litter

This scenario further improves addressing the underlying drivers, notably the lack of incentive to collect and manage properly SUP at the end of their life, but at a higher cost, namely with regard to wastewater treatment. It includes the introduction of a deposit refund scheme or equivalent systems and would entail an additional cost (around 1,4 billion € for the EU) but would further significantly reduce marine litter as well as improve the quality of the collected material and recycling rates. As in all extended producer responsibility schemes the cost of introducing and running a deposit refund scheme is usually born by the economic actors involved in the relevant supply chain depending on the set-up, but not by the public authorities. Best practices for wastewater treatment works would improve infrastructure but requiring an important additional investment of around 7.7 billion Euros per annum. This measure is difficult to justify if the objective would be only solving the problem of wet wipes, but is relevant to a much wider range of pollution releases. The ongoing evaluation of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive will provide more detailed data on this issue.

To avoid unintended consequences regarding economic, environmental and social impact, it is considered that the transition towards alternatives should be outcome-oriented and have a broad potential solution space. Such an approach is in line with the innovation principle, making the legislative proposal forward-looking (‘future-proofing’) and innovation-friendly.

In line with the analysis conducted on the different policy options and regarding specificities of each targeted SUP item, Scenario 2c has been chosen as the preferred option. It includes the following actions:

·Restrictions on placing on the market of SUP with readily available alternatives (e.g. straws);

·General reduction targets (e.g. beverage cups, food containers) allowing Member States to adopt their own measures to achieve the reduction. The costs to implement these measures will then depend on the choice and design of the measures adopted at national level;

·Awareness raising measures and extended producer responsibility schemes for all items not falling under the market restriction measure, in order to contribute to the cost of prevention, waste management, including clean-up of litter, excluding fishing gear;

·Labelling requirements to inform consumers about appropriate waste disposal operations or disposal means to be avoided (e.g. wet wipes);

·Product design measures (e.g. drink bottles related to tethered caps).

The IA however demonstrates that deposit refund schemes or equivalent systems for plastic beverage bottles leading to similar high collection rates (examined as part of option 2d) can be a very efficient instrument to lead to high collection rates, preventing littering and marine litter in particular. Deposit refund schemes were therefore added to the preferred policy mix. They have a direct positive impact on collection due to the deposit fee, and they lead to improved quality of the collected material and subsequent high quality recyclate. While leaving flexibility to Member States to choose the appropriate instruments, it is therefore proposed to establish a minimum separate collection target that is set at a level that mirrors the median level of collection rate of existing single use plastic bottles deposit refund schemes in the EU (90%). Deposit refund schemes or equivalent systems may also offer solutions and infrastructure for attaining better collection of beverage containers made from other materials, subject to recycling targets for packaging, in particular from aluminium. Therefore, Member States should consider such measures also for beverage packaging made from other materials.

For reasons of implementation feasibility, for wet wipes the eventual proposal is to choose option 2b which foresees extended producer responsibility obligations, labelling requirements and awareness raising measures. For sanitary towels, labelling requirements and awareness raising measures are proposed.

There is already existing legislation, i.e. Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste, which lays down consumption reduction objectives for lightweight plastic carrier bags, including very lightweight plastic carrier bags, which are also part of the most found items on Union beaches. This proposal envisages complementary EPR and awareness raising measures for all light weight plastic carrier bags.

3. Fishing gear

The first considered scenario consists of the full implementation of existing measures and proposal already on the table, leading to the following drawbacks:

·Under the revised Control Regulation, there is no particular specific incentive for fishers to increase the quantity of gear they do not report as lost and bring back to shore.

·Whereas the revised Port Reception Facilities Directive reduces significantly the cost and burden disincentive for fishers to bring gear and other litter back to port, it is aimed at improving the collection of waste from ships (including fishing vessels) in general, i.e. it is not targeted at the handling of fishing gear waste specifically. It does not include direct positive incentives for the collection of all waste fishing gear and its subsequent treatment in a way that maximises re-use and recycling potential of the plastic content in fishing gear. Member States' measures aiming at strengthening waste and gear collection capabilities or developing recycling schemes for fishing gear are too heterogeneous and local to be efficient. In view of that, the proposal for the revised Port Reception Facilities Directive envisages that further steps to improve the collection and treatment of fishing gear will be considered under the EU Plastics Strategy. ²⁶

The second considered scenario consists of introducing an EPR scheme for fishing gear containing plastic.

The third considered scenario consists of strengthening the proposal for an EPR scheme by adding a deposit scheme and a recycling target which would further enhance the level of return of gear. It involves however more costs for implementation, potentially increasing costs for the sector whilst also increasing administrative burden. In addition, in the case of fishing gear, and as opposed to land-based plastic material, the risk of losing the deposit is relatively high, potentially diminishing its impact as an incentive.

Part of this option was also the setting of a recycling target. The complexities of defining such a target, and the administrative burden and costs of its monitoring were considered disproportionate, in particular, in a context where the set-up of an EPR scheme in itself is already likely to stimulate the further development of the current small market for the recycling of fishing gear materials.

A fourth scenario adds within the EPR scheme the obligation to fund a compulsory retrieval scheme for fishing gear. This was concluded to be disproportionate, duplicative and unworkable. It would make the producers of fishing gear responsible to cover the costs of retrieval action that is based on voluntary participation and is currently being supported by local, national and EU financial instruments. Gear retrieval is already included as an obligation in the Control Regulation under the Common Fisheries Policy.

Therefore, the most efficient scenario to tackle fishing gear and complement the existing legislations' gaps is the introduction of an extended producer responsibility scheme for producers of fishing gear containing plastic. This option is deemed to have the overall most effective potential impact on the reduction of abandoned, lost and discarded fishing and aquaculture gear contribution to marine litter. It would underpin and facilitate full implementation of other instruments, and further help to decrease the inflow amount of litter from fishing gear. In particular, it builds on and supplements the Control Regulation and the proposed revised Port Reception Facilities Directive by adding a dedicated mechanism facilitating separate collection and return of fishing gear to collection systems and treatment of waste fishing gear, in particular recycling. This will, in particular, contribute to easing cost burdens for small scale ports and/or fishing operators who may face higher costs linked to increased collection and treatment of waste fishing gear once delivered in ports.

This type of positive incentive to bring litter ashore is seen by the majority of stakeholders as the most effective means of reducing the loss of gear into the sea.

• Regulatory fitness and simplification

It was found unjustified to exempt micro-enterprises from the initiative or to foresee lighter regimes for SMEs. However, the measures envisaged in this initiative are expected to increase opportunities for micro-enterprises and SMEs in Europe. European companies who have already adopted circular design and business models will have a larger market and enhanced trade, investment and business opportunities. Most of the 50,000 companies in the plastic converters sector in the EU are SMEs. The effect upon them will depend upon whether their business is dependent upon SUP, and their ability to switch to manufacturing other plastic items. A large part the SUP items targeted with market restrictions are produced outside the EU. Moreover, SMEs such as retailers may be positively impacted where they avoid the need to purchase single use items that accompany or contain the food or drink they sell. Reduced consumer spending will translate into reduce retail sales but there will be rebalancing as consumers spend their money on alternatives, and favour innovative responses. New business models will be developed for making available multi use items to consumers and this could reduce costs, especially as options are scaled up.

To minimise compliance costs for the Member States and the operators, the envisaged monitoring and reporting arrangements are simple and should as far as possible benefit from synergies with existing reporting systems in place as explained in Section 5 below.

• Fundamental rights

The proposal has no consequences for the protection of fundamental rights.

4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS

The proposal has no budgetary implications for the Commission.

5. OTHER ELEMENTS

• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements

Data collection organisation and methods, in line with the principle of subsidiarity, should remain in the competence of the Member States.

The count of items found on beaches remains an efficient indicator to assess the amount of marine litter found on European coast and the evolution of the most found single-use plastic items. For instance in Ireland, a steep decrease of plastic bags found on beaches has been observed, following the implementation of the Plastic Bags Directive. Member States shall use the methodology developed by the Marine Strategy Framework Directive Technical Group on marine litter, also set out in JRC Technical Reports. A revised Commission Decision was adopted in April 2017 establishing criteria and methodological standards. It requires that litter shall be monitored in the coastline in all cases and may additionally be monitored on the sea surface and the seabed; information on the source and pathway of the litter shall be collected, where feasible.

Monitoring will also be required with regard to measures to reduce the consumption of SUP. It is proposed that such monitoring is based on the data of the relevant single-use plastic products put on the market in a year. Where necessary, harmonised rules on the collection of such data and the reporting format would be established in the waste committee established under EU waste legislation. Where possible it should take advantage of existing EU production and trade databases (PRODCOM ²⁷ and COMEXT ²⁸ ) managed by Eurostat and regularly updated with information provided by Member States. Synergies should also be used with regard to existing reporting mechanisms.

An evaluation is foreseen in the proposal to evaluate the impact of the measures envisaged and take into account future evolutions. It will evaluate, in particular, the need to review the list of single-use plastics and the measures introduced such as consumption reduction targets, where appropriate. Furthermore, the evaluation will address biodegradability issues.

This proposal does not directly address questions of product policy and choices of materials substituting plastic. However, indirectly, by taking of some products of the market and reducing others, the proposal will create important opportunities for innovative solutions on material substitution and substitution of single-use plastic products, as well as for new business models and systems for re-use. Also, in the framework of the EU Plastic Strategy work is currently on-going with a view to developing harmonised rules for defining and labelling compostable and biodegradable plastics taking into account specific applications and concerns about littering, in particular in the marine environment. In view of this work and, where scientific and technical progress allows, the Commission will have assessed by the time of the proposal’s evaluation possible substitutes to plastic in order to determine whether to exempt single-use plastic products from the marketing restrictions proposed in this initiative.

• Explanatory documents (for directives)

No explanatory document is required for the transposition of this Directive given the limited number of measures in this proposal.

• Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal

The most important provisions of this Directive are outlined below.

Article 1 lays down that the objective of the proposed Directive is to prevent and reduce the impact of certain single-use plastic products and fishing gear containing plastic on the environment and human health as well as to promote the transition to a circular economy with environment-friendly innovative business models, products and materials, thus contributing to the efficient functioning of the internal market.

Article 2 defines the scope of the Directive and that it applies to certain single-use plastic products that are identified and defined in the Annex of the proposal and to fishing gear containing plastic.

Article 3 lays down definitions of single-use plastic products, fishing gear and the definition of producer for the purposes of establishing consumption reduction measures, product requirements and extended producer responsibility.

Article 4 requires Member States to take the necessary measures to achieve a significant reduction in the consumption of food containers, cups for beverages that are single-use plastic products.

Article 5 lays down restrictions on the placing on the market of certain single-use plastic products for which alternatives exist on the market.

Article 6 lays down product design requirements for beverage containers that are single-use plastic products, to ensure that their caps and lids with a significant part made of plastic remain attached to the container during its use stage so that such waste does not leak into the environment.

Article 7 lays down marking requirements for certain single-use plastic products to avoid that they are improperly disposed of, for example through flushing in toilets, to inform the consumers on the potential implications of inappropriate disposal of waste in terms of marine litter and the most appropriate waste management practices.

Article 8 establishes extended producer responsibility schemes for fishing gear containing plastic and certain single-use plastic products. While the general minimum requirements for extended producer responsibility schemes established in Directive 2008/98/EC on waste apply to these schemes, this provision also lays down specific and additional requirements for the financial responsibility of producers, in particular, for awareness raising campaigns and in the case of single-use plastics also the clean-up of litter.

Article 9 requires Member States to achieve a minimum separate collection target for single-use plastic beverage bottles.

Article 10 requires Member States to take measures to raise awareness about the impact of littering and inappropriate disposal of waste on the environment, in particular, the aquatic environment and about the available re-use and waste management options.

Article 11 lays down the requirement for Member States to coordinate and ensure consistency of the measures they adopt to implement this Directive with the measures that they adopt to implement to prevent and reduce marine litter under legal instruments regarding the quality of water, waste prevention and management objectives under Directives 2000/59/EC, 2000/60/EC, 2008/56/EC, 2008/98/EC and EU law on port reception facilities.

Article 12 implements the Aarhus Convention with regard to access to justice and is in line with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. It should be possible for citizens and NGOs to ask for legal review of the decisions taken by Member States under this Directive.

Article 13 requires that Member States put in place a data set about the products subject to a consumption reduction objective, to enable monitoring of the implementation of such consumption reduction objective laid down this Directive. The data set should be set up in compliance with Directive 2007/2/EC ²⁹ . To that end, the support of the European Environmental Agency is foreseen, whose role will also be to regularly access the data and provide the Commission with overviews of the Directive’s implementation at Union level, to be used also in the context of future evaluations of the Directive.

Article 15 sets the framework for future evaluations of the Directive. The first evaluation is foreseen after 6 years after the Directive’s transposition deadline.

Please note

Contents

1.

Single-Use Plastics

2.

Scenario 2d - Highest impact on reducing marine litter

3.

Fishing gear