old cable after a job

[Paul_C]

Thanks - So that covers non-business/profit transportation. So now how do we define "controlled waste" for the purposes of this legislation? After all, one man's waste is another man's useful material.

As in the example I quoted above, if I bring a couple of yards of left-over cable home from a job with the intent that it will be useful for something else, then as far as I'm concerned it's not waste. But is there anything in all those cross-referenced acts and statutory instruments which says otherwise?

And what about that peculiar definition of controlled waste as "household, industrial and commercial waste or any such waste" - What exactly is that supposed to mean? It doesn't make much sense.

 

[stillp]

Of course you can do that. But you need a Waste Carrier's Licence.

Yes, so it seems - but, as Paul has intimated, if the law is written in such a way as to make it unlawful for Joe Public to transport any of his own waste without a Licence, the whole thing is plain ridiculous (maybe written by vthe same person who wrote Part P?)!

Kind Regards, John.

John, it is very clear from the Environment Agency's guidance at http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Business/Who_should_register.pdf that a householder does not need to be a registered carrier to take their own waste to the council tip (sorry, local authority recycling and waste management facility!).
However, it does look as if an electrician removing scrap cable "with a view to a profit" will have to register as a waste carrier.

 

[JohnW2]

John, it is very clear from the Environment Agency's guidance at http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Business/Who_should_register.pdf that a householder does not need to be a registered carrier to take their own waste to the council tip (sorry, local authority recycling and waste management facility!).

Indeed - BAS has just clarified that.

However, it does look as if an electrician removing scrap cable "with a view to a profit" will have to register as a waste carrier.

Yes, that seems fairly clear - and, depending upon scale, maybe righly so. However, as I've just written to BAS, it leaves one wondering about 'waste' being removed in the course of business which cannot possibly generate a profit (far more likely a loss) - the wording seems capable of covering anything to do with a business - even the wrapping from the electrician's sandwiches!

On reflection, I'm not actually sure that the scrap cable situation is all that reasonable. If one recalls that the main reason for the legislation (and Licences) is to prevent 'fly tipping', no-one is going to 'fly tip' waste which is worth good money - in fact, it's the 'valueless scrap' which is likely to be the issue/risk!

Kind Regards, John.

 

[stillp]

John, it is very clear from the Environment Agency's guidance at http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Business/Who_should_register.pdf that a householder does not need to be a registered carrier to take their own waste to the council tip (sorry, local authority recycling and waste management facility!).

Indeed - BAS has just clarified that.

Quite, I was just making a reference to the more recent guidance.

 

[Paul_C]

If one recalls that the main reason for the legislation (and Licences) is to prevent 'fly tipping', no-one is going to 'fly tip' waste which is worth good money - in fact, it's the 'valueless scrap' which is likely to be the issue/risk!

Indeed - And isn't the government always trying to encourage recycling when possible? Demanding that extra amounts be paid in order to facilitate the legal transportation of scrap cable to where it can recycled hardly seems like a way to encourage that.

But again - Is it really "waste" as such in that situation? We have the legal definition of "controlled waste" in the legislation, but it appears to define it as specific types of waste without defining what "waste" itself is supposed to include or exclude.

 

[stillp]

But again - Is it really "waste" as such in that situation? We have the legal definition of "controlled waste" in the legislation, but it appears to define it as specific types of waste without defining what "waste" itself is supposed to include or exclude.

If it can be considered "scrap metal", which seems reasonable, then it is specifically excluded form the Controlled Waste Regulations 1992.
I'm glad I don't have to deal with waste regulations...

 

[JohnW2]

If it can be considered "scrap metal", which seems reasonable, then it is specifically excluded form the Controlled Waste Regulations 1992.

Certainly sounds like scrap metal to me! Are we therefore now suggesting that a Waste Carriers Licence is not required to transport 'scrap copper'?

Kind Regards, John.

 

[stillp]

If it can be considered "scrap metal", which seems reasonable, then it is specifically excluded form the Controlled Waste Regulations 1992.

Certainly sounds like scrap metal to me! Are we therefore now suggesting that a Waste Carriers Licence is not required to transport 'scrap copper'?

Kind Regards, John.

I wouldn't go that far, that would be much too clear! There are a multitude of regulations affecting waste collection/transfer/disposal, and they're a load of, um, garbage!
The situation after 2013 will be interesting, since the waste from cutting a chase could be interpreted as resulting from a demolition activity and hence will require a waste carrier's licence, yet will not be permitted in domestic refuse. Yet another obstacle to DIY.

 

[EFLImpudence]

in the course of any business of his or otherwise with a view to profit, to transport any controlled waste to or from any place in Great Britain.."

That means we can transport other business's waste as long as we do not charge.

So all we have to do is swap waste with other trades.

No, that can't be right.

 

[JohnW2]

in the course of any business of his or otherwise with a view to profit, to transport any controlled waste to or from any place in Great Britain.."

That means we can transport other business's waste as long as we do not charge.

Indeed, that's what 'the words of the law' appear to say - yet again, we seem to be dealing with poorly drafted legislation!!

The only 'catch' I see here is that if one did swap waste with another tradesman in order to avoid costs (licence etc.), I guess that could be regarded as 'a profit' - hence 'with a view to profit'!!

Kind Regards, John.

 

[EFLImpudence]

It is strange that they included "of his".

 

[securespark]

It is incredible badly worded, but my company interprets it as,

"If you have generated waste through a profit-making venture..."

 

[westie101]

It is incredible badly worded, but my company interprets it as,

"If you have generated waste through a profit-making venture..."

You'll find that the EA interprets it the same.

 

[JohnW2]

It is incredible badly worded, but my company interprets it as, "If you have generated waste through a profit-making venture..."

That interpretation may work for your company but, taken literally, would fail to catch some of those that the Act was mainly created to counter - those who collect waste (for a price) from members of the public and then 'fly tip' it, - they don't 'generate' any waste, but merely collect and transport it!

Kind Regards, John.

 

[WabbitPoo]

Whether or not you take away waste for profit is redundant if you did so as part of a business. It says

You must identify whether specified person is ‘normally and regularly’ carrying the waste ‘in the course of any business’ OR with ‘a view to profit

My emphasis.

Even if you take it because you like shiny things, if its produced as part of your normal business then it falls under this stupid legislation.

At least, that's how I read it.

Seems I dont HAVE to register until 2013. Wohoo.