COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION of Directive (EC) 2000/53 of 18 September 2000 on end-of-life vehicles
Date: 2021-03-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, application of EU law, disclosure of information, environmental protection, motor vehicle industry, prevention of pollution, vehicle, waste, waste disposal, waste recycling

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 15.3.2021  SWD(2021) 61 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION  of Directive (EC) 2000/53 of 18 September 2000 on end-of-life vehicles {SWD(2021) 60 final}  
 
 
Executive summary 

The Directive 2000/53/EC of 18 September 2000 on end-of-life vehicles (hereinafter – ELV 
Directive)  was  never  substantially  amended  since  its  adoption  20  years  ago.  It  aims  at 
minimising  the  impact  of  end-of-life  vehicles  on  the  environment.  To  this  end,  the  ELV 
Directive  sets  out  restrictions  on  the  use  of  hazardous  substances  in  new  cars,  obligations 
relating to the collection and treatment of ELV, as well as targets by 2015 for re-use/recovery 
and re-use/recycling.  

Each  year,  around  11  million  of  vehicles  leave  the  stock  of  registered  vehicles  in  the  EU, 
representing  a  potential  of  about  11  million  tonnes  of  waste.  The  majority  of  waste  from 
ELVs consists of ferrous and non-ferrous metals, with a growing share of plastic waste and 
electronic waste, reflecting the increasing use of lightweight materials and electronics in new 
cars,. These new materials and components present specific challenges for their recovery and 
recycling from ELVs. The growing number of electric vehicles on the EU market will further 
contribute  to  this  trend  and  bring  considerable  new  challenges  for  the  ELV  sector.  The 
measures adopted to mitigate the impact of the COVID 19 pandemic on the automotive sector 
are also likely to accelerate the transition to electric mobility.  

The evaluation of the ELV Directive takes this evolving context into account, as well as (i) 
the  orientations  set  out  by  the  European  Green  Deal,  notably  reflected  in  the  EU  Circular 
Economy Action Plan, and (ii) the recently adopted EU legislation on the waste framework 
directive and other waste streams.  

In  line  with  the  EU  better  regulation  principles,  the  evaluation  looked  at  the  effectiveness, 
efficiency, coherence relevance and EU added value of ELV Directive. 

Effectiveness  

The evaluation shows that the ELV Directive has been effective in the delivery of many of its 
initial  objectives  (notably  elimination  of  hazardous  substances  from  cars,  increase  in 
collection  points  for  end-of-life  vehicles,  attainment  of  the  recovery  and  recycling  targets). 
The major problem in the implementation of the Directive is, however, the large number of 
“missing vehicles”, which represent about 35% of all de-registered vehicles each year. While 
around  6.5  million  ELVs  are  reported  to  be  treated  according  to  the  ELV  Directive, 
approximately 4 million vehicles annually remain of unknown whereabouts, with a risk that a 
great proportion of them are not treated according to the requirements of the ELV Directive 
when they reach the end of their life. The flaws in the national vehicle registration systems, 
the lack of interconnection between the Member States on registration and de-registration of 
vehicles, as well as illegal treatment  and export of ELVs appear to be the main reasons for 
this problem.  

The  evaluation  also  concludes  that  the  provisions  of  the  ELV  Directive  encouraging  the 
design  of  new  vehicles  to  facilitate  their  dismantling  and  recycling,  as  well  as  the  use  of 
recycled materials,  are not  sufficiently detailed, specific and measurable, and as such had a 
very  limited  impact  on  the  design  and  manufacturing  of  new  vehicles.  The  provisions 
requiring  car  producers  to  make  available  and  share  information  on  the  materials  and 
components contained in vehicles have been criticised for being insufficient to help properly 
companies in the repair, dismantling and recycling sectors performing their activities.  

1 

 
 
 
 
With regard to  the targets  on for re-use/recovery  and re-use/recycling, most  Member States 
reported  that  they  have  been  met.  The  different  options  available  for  reporting  on  the 
attainment  of  the  targets  means  that  their  quality  varies  across  Member  States,  which 
questions the comparability of the achievements by the different Member States. In addition, 
the calculation is based on the overall weight of vehicles, which does not provide an incentive 
to recycle materials beyond metal waste, and results in suboptimal recovery and recycling of 
glass,  plastics  or  critical  raw  materials.  The  fact  that  the  definition  of  recycling  is  broader 
than in the rest of EU legislation and includes backfilling, as well as the absence of separate 
target for “re-use” are other shortcomings of the ELV Directive.  

Efficiency 

It  is  generally  considered  that  the  total  benefits  of  the  Directive  outweigh  its  costs.  The 
environmental  benefits  are  linked  to  the  safe  treatment  of  ELVs,  which  avoid  leakage  of 
pollutants in  the environment.  The most important  economic benefits  of the ELV Directive 
have  been  to  help  consolidating  the  vehicle  dismantling  and  recycling  sector  in  the  EU 
Member States and providing the consumers with the possibility to dispose of their ELV free 
of charge. There is no evidence nor claims that the ELV Directive has a negative impact on 
the competitiveness of the automotive industry within the EU. 

The distribution of costs associated with the implementation of the ELV Directive is an issue 
with diverging views across the various stakeholders. There is notably no definitive data on 
the  profitability  of  companies  (mostly  SMEs)  from  the  dismantling  sector,  even  though 
available information seems to show that their economic situation is generally fragile (which 
has been exposed during the COVID-19 crisis).  

There  is  no  evidence  of  unnecessary  regulatory  burden  or  costs  stemming  from  the  ELV 
Directive.  

Relevance 

The  scope  of  the  ELV  Directive  leaves  out  a  stock  of  about  45  million  of  vehicles,  e.g. 
motorcycles and trucks, which are not subject to any specific provisions with regard to how 
they should be treated at the end of their life.  

The  ELV  Directive  is  not  suited  to  ensure  a  high  level  of  recovery  and  recycling  of 
increasingly used valuable materials, such as gold, silver, palladium, tantalum and other rare 
earth  metals,  contained  in  the  electric  and  electronic  components.  This  is  also  the  case  for 
plastics or carbon-reinforced plastics.  

Coherence 

An  important  challenge  for  the  ELV  Directive  today  is  to  ensure  better  coherence  with  the 
European  Green  Deal  and  the  Circular  Economy  Action  Plan,  notably  in  the  eco-design  of 
vehicles to facilitate re-use, remanufacturing and recycling, the promotion of more ambitious 
and specific targets for reuse and recycling, and the use of recycled content materials in the 
manufacturing of vehicles.  

The evaluation also looks into the coherence of the ELV Directive with the EU policies on 
climate change and against air pollution, which are driving changes in the manufacturing of 
vehicles and accelerating the transition of the sector to electric models.  

2 

 
 
 
 
 
Unlike  other  waste  stream  specific  legislation,  there  is  no  fully  extended  producer 
responsibility  system  established  by  the  ELV  Directive,  meaning  that  the  role  played  by 
producers in financing the costs of ELV management remains unclear.  

The link with the future EU legislation on batteries is  critical  to  ensure complementarity in 
the recycling of batteries and its link with other parts and components in vehicles. 

Finally, better coherence is needed with the EU legislations on vehicle registration, as well as 
on car type-approval. 

EU added value 

to  harmonising  environmental 
The  EU-added  value  of 
requirements,  lies  notably  in  the  establishment  of  an  EU  framework,  which  ensured  the 
smooth  operation  of  the  internal  market  for  the  automotive  sector  at  large  and  avoided 
distortions of competition in the EU. 

the  Directive, 

in  addition 

The elements  presented  in  the evaluation  of the ELV Directive will feed into the review of 
the ELV Directive, which is expected to result in a legislative proposal in 2022.  

3