Sita Metal Recycling Ltd has been fined £4,000 and ordered to pay full costs of £4,456 in the first prosecution of its type by the Environment Agency for breaching new regulations designed to reduce the overall environmental impacts of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE).

The offences came to light in an audit carried out by an officer from the Norwich office of the Environment Agency, Norwich Magistrates’ Court heard.

Sita pleaded guilty to four offences, following a hearing to determine a point of law.

The regulations, introduced in 2006, are designed to make sure that electrical and electronic equipment is either repaired and refurbished and put back on the market or dismantled with parts being recycled or disposed of safely.

Producers of the equipment are not required to collect their own WEEE, but join schemes which do so on their behalf.

WEEE contains different materials such as metals and plastics.   It is necessary under the regulations to record and report how much of each type of material has been recovered or recycled.

Companies that treat or export WEEE must be approved by the Environment Agency.

Approved authorised treatment facilities issue evidence notes documenting either the refurbishment or treatment of WEEE that takes place in the UK.  Approved exporters issue evidence notes documenting the export of untreated WEEE which is exported.

Mrs Anne-Lise McDonald, prosecuting, said that there had been a number of different offences and errors made by Sita which ‘showed a lack of management focus’.

The company exported treated WEEE but the it had not been approved to export.  It exported 1,967 tonnes of WEEE.

Sita issued evidence for the treatment of WEEE before it was approved to issue evidence. The company was approved in April 2008.

Sita was charged with two sets of offences.

• In 2007 and 2008 the company issued evidence for the treatment of WEEE that was subsequently exported not through an approved exporter; and
• In 2008 the company issued evidence for the treatment of WEEE which was received prior to Sita being an approved authorised treatment facility (AATF).

In mitigation, Mr Stephen Tromans QC said, it was a genuine mistake.  He said it happened during a period of management change.  He said there was no direct impact to the environment or commercial benefit.

Sita pleaded guilty to:

1. Between 1 July 2007 and 31 December 2008 as an operator of an Approved Authorised Treatment Facility you failed to comply with Regulation 49(1) and Condition 11 of Part 2 of Schedule 8 of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006 in that you treated Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment which you subsequently exported not through an approved exporter.

 Contrary to Regulation 49(1) and 73(7)(a) Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006. Fined £1,000

2. On 18 March 2009 you issued an evidence note reference 0003752 under regulation 47(2) of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006 in relation to the treatment of waste electrical and electronic equipment received by you between 1 January 2008 and 31 January 2008 which was not in a relevant approval period.

 Contrary to Regulation 46(1) and 73(8)(a) Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006. Fined £1,000

3. On 18 March 2009 you issued an evidence note reference 003750 under regulation 47(2) of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006 in relation to the treatment of waste electrical and electronic equipment received by you between 1 February 2008 and 29 February 2008 which was not in a relevant approval period.

 Contrary to Regulation 46(1) and 73(8)(a) Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006. Fined £1,000

4. On 18 March 2009 you issued an evidence note reference 003751 under regulation 47(2) of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006 in relation to the treatment of waste electrical and electronic equipment received by you between 1 March 2008 and 31 March 2008 which was not in a relevant approval period.

 Contrary to Regulation 46(1) and 73(8)(a) Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2006. Fined £1,000