COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Annexes IV and V to Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council on persistent organic pollutants
Date: 2021-10-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for Environment, European Commission
Subjects: dangerous substance, environmental protection, international convention, market approval, organic chemical, organic pollution, pollution control measures, protocol to an agreement, public health, waste management

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 28.10.2021  SWD(2021) 301 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Annexes IV and V to Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council on persistent organic pollutants {COM(2021) 656 final} - {SEC(2021) 379 final} - {SWD(2021) 299 final} - {SWD(2021) 300 final}  
 
 
Policy context 

Persistent  Organic  Pollutants  (POPs)  are  chemicals  that  persist  in  the  environment,  bio-
accumulate and can cause significant adverse effects to human health or the environment. 
This  impact  assessment  addresses  options  to  change  the  thresholds  that  apply  to  certain 
POPs in waste and that are set out in Annex IV of the POPs Regulation. If POPs are present 
in  waste  at  concentrations  that  are  equal  to  or  higher  than  these  thresholds,  then  the  waste 
cannot  be  recycled;  in  most  cases,  it  should  be  disposed  of  in  such  a  way  that  the  POPs  it 
contains are destroyed or irreversibly transformed.  

What is the problem? 

The POPs Regulation covers a total of 26 POP substances (or groups of substances), but this 
impact assessment looks at a limited number of POPs, that either: 

 

 

are already listed in the POPs Regulation, and for which tightening the limit values in 
Annex  IV  could  be  justified,  to  adapt  their  limit  values  to  scientific  and  technical 
progress: PBDEs, HBCDD, SCCPs, dioxins and furans, and dioxin-like PCBs1.  

have  recently  been  listed  as  POPs  under  the  Stockholm  Convention,  and  therefore 
have  to  be  reflected  in  Union  legislation  (i.e.  the  POPs  Regulation):  PFOA,  dicofol  
and pentachlorophenol (PCP)2.   

These POPs  are, with  limited exceptions,  generally  not used any more  in  new products  in 
Europe, but past use means they are still found in waste.  If the waste materials in which the 
POPs  are  contained  (e.g.  plastic,  wood,  paper)  are  recycled,  then  they  may  re-enter  the 
economy, harming the environment and human health.  

Setting  a  limit  value  for  these  substances  determines  the  way  in  which  waste  that  contains 
POPs has to be managed, the ultimate goal being to ensure that this waste is managed in an 
environmentally sound way. Generally, this means that waste exceeding the limit values for 
POPs  content  will  have  to  be  destroyed  or  irreversibly  transformed  through  incineration  or 
other permitted disposal operations, stopping POPs from re-entering the economy.  

This action may limit the uptake of secondary raw materials that could otherwise be obtained 
from  waste,  reducing  the  potential  for  these  materials  to  contribute  to  a  circular  economy. 
However,  this  may  also  help  to  improve  trust  in  secondary  raw  materials  in  terms  of  their 
level of contamination. The resulting substitution of secondary material by primary material 
can also have adverse effects, often contributing to greenhouse gas emissions.    

What do we want to achieve? 

The specific objective of the initiative is to set or revise limit values for this limited number of 
POPs  in  waste,  in  a  way  that  achieves  the  best  possible  balance  between  three  general 
objectives: 

 
 
 

the transition to high-quality, toxic-free material cycles; 
increasing recycling and circularity; 
reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 

1  PBDEs  are  polybrominated  diphenyl  ethers;  HBCDD  is  Hexabromocyclododecane;  SCCPs  are  short-chain 

chlorinated paraffins; and PCBs are polychlorinated byphenyls.  

2 PFOA is used here to refer to perfluorooctanoic acid, its salts and PFOA-related compounds. 

1 

 
 
 
                                                           
Finding the right  balance will ensure  environmentally sound management of POP waste. 
This will meet the overarching objective of the POPs Regulation, of protecting human health 
and the environment, and ensure that the measure also contributes to the climate and circular 
economy objectives in the European Green Deal, to the greatest extent possible.   

What are the options? 

  Policy Option 1: Baseline – assumes no change in the list of substances and no new 

limit values are set. 

  Policy  Option  2:  Middle  value  –  sets  limit  values  under  Annex  IV  for  the  new 
substances and also for POPs already listed in the Regulation, where tightening these 
values could be justified. 

  Policy Option 3: Low value – sets stricter limit values under Annex IV.   

  Policy  Option  4  considers  a  fourth,  even  lower  limit  value  in  Annex  IV  for  dioxins 

and furans and dioxin-like PCBs. 

What is the preferred option and why? 

The  impact  assessment  analyses  how  to  achieve  the  best  balance  between  the  objective  of 
eliminating  POP  substances  from  the  environment  while,  at  the  same  time,  increasing 
circularity and recycling and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The stricter (i.e. the lower) 
the limit value, the more waste will be destroyed instead of being available for recycling.  

The following environmental, social and economic impacts are among those considered:  

  Changes in the mass flows of POPs – amount removed/destroyed, thus avoiding health 

and environmental impacts. 

  Effectiveness of the measure – comparison of projections of emission reductions and 

other existing emissions/sources of exposure.  

  Changes  in  the  amounts  of  waste  sent  to  different  treatment  options  (recycling, 

incineration, landfill, etc.). 

  Costs  and  benefits  for  waste  producers  and  waste  operators  (especially  for  SMEs) 
resulting from the different treatment outcomes. Relevance of novel waste sorting and 
decontamination technologies.  

  Administrative burdens for economic operators and public administrations.  

  Changes in the availability of secondary material resulting from recycling. 

  Changes in greenhouse gas emissions associated with the different options. 

The  preferred  option  is  a  combination  of  Option  2  and  Option  3,  depending  on  the  specific 
POP.  For  HBCDD  and  SCCPs,  the  preferred  option  is  at  intermediate  level.  For  the  other 
substances,  the  preferred  option  is  for  the  lower  values,  in  some  cases  slightly  modified 
compared  to  the  initial  approach,  to  allow  for  more  effectiveness  or  better  implementation. 
For example, for PBDEs, the preferred option is an initial limit value of 500 mg/kg, followed 
by a reduction to 200 mg/kg 5 years after the measure enters into force. 

There are financial costs related to some of the measures. For most of the substances, these 
will  not  be  significant  either  for  waste  management  services  or  economic  operators  more 

2 

 
 
 
 
generally. For example, the net cost for PBDEs could be around two million Euro a year. For 
HBCDD  and  for  dioxins  and  furans,  additional  waste  management  costs  from  diverting  the 
waste  concerned  from  recycling/non-hazardous  landfill  to  hazardous  waste  disposal  could 
exceed  135  and  55  million  Euro  a  year,  respectively,  but  the  estimates  are  uncertain.  There 
will also be a small increase in administrative burdens, related to additional testing costs. 

In  all  cases,  the  estimated  benefits  clearly  outweigh  the  costs.  The  values  proposed  will 
reduce the release of POPs that are intrinsically dangerous to the environment and to human 
health. 

3