The system being proposed by the bloc's legislators is an attempt to promote the use of more environmental-friendly materials, with the eventually aim of cutting down on the amount of waste ending up in landfills.
The EU's packagers are lobbying the bloc's legislators to vote against the draft revision, claiming that it would be too costly to industry and provide no further benefit to the environment. They want the status quo to remain in place.
The change is currently being considered separately by the Parliament and the Council of Ministers, the EU's top decision-making bodies. The change would require national governments to establish a strict hierarchy of preference between reuse, recycling and other recovery options.
The packagers, supported by the food sector, say that such a rigid system would impose a heavy financial burden on businesses, and would leave authorities with no flexibility to take into account local circumstances.
Policies to cut down on the amount of packaging used for products and hence reaching the waste stream would be given the highest priority under the system. Governments would also be required to put policies in place giving preference to reuse, over recycling, and recycling over incineration. The lowest level, waste going to landfill, would be discouraged through the policy.
Julian Carroll, managing director of Europen, says if such emphasis is put on one waste management method over another, packagers could end up paying hundreds of thousands of euros each to justify keeping one particular type of packaging for individual brands. Europen is the bloc's industry association for packagers.
The position was endorsed by the Confederation of the Food and Drink Industries of the EU (CIAA), among others, as a long-standing position on the issue.
Carroll estimates that processors and packagers could end up spending about €100,000 on each brand to justify the environmental benefits of using a recyclable plastic for their product rather than a reusable bottle.
"This proposal is a big threat to industry," Carroll told FoodProductionDaily.com. He also noted that the system does not take into account the growing use of biodegradable packaging, which can be returned to landfill.
Europen notes that a Commission proposal made in December 2005, and subsequently amended in Parliament, restates the principles held in the current waste framework directive. This does not set a hierarchical system between re-use, recycling and other recovery methods, such as incineration.
"It provides for a flexible application of the hierarchy and does not explicitly make a preference between the different recovery options such as re-use, recycling and recovery of energy for example," Europen states in a position paper on the issue.
However legislators subsequently put forward the five step hierarchical system, which is now being considered at the committee stage. Another amendment has been introduced that allows manufacturers to submit life-cycle assessments and cost-to-benefit analyses proving that an alternative treatment option has a better record for a specific waste stream.
The assessments would allow member states to grant exceptions to the rules.
Europen says waste management policy needs to be flexible enough to take account of local factors, such as the nature and composition of the waste streams, the availability of recovery facilities, the feasibility of using different recovery measures, public support, as well as geographic, demographic, economic and environmental conditions.
"Local authorities (and hence consumers) would face higher costs if prevented from choosing the optimal waste management solution in their particular local circumstances," the association argues.
The proposal to put a hierarchal system in place forms part of a revision of the EU's framework waste management framework, a series of policies setting out agreed upon objectives for all member states.
The bloc also aims to achieve a unified regulatory system for packaged products in the EU, allowing companies to more easily trade across national borders. Different packaging regulations in the EU can serve to restrict or prevent market access.
Europen's position was put foward in an open letter to the Parliament and Council, urging legislators to reconsider their plans.
"Scientific studies and basic principles of EU law such as proportionality and equal treatment within the internal market all point towards maintaining the current EU policy and European Commission proposals on the matter," Europen stated. "That means placing prevention as the highest priority, final disposal as the least favoured option and keeping a flexible approach to the choice of recovery options."
Finland, which holds the EU presidency, wants to put the directive up for vote before the end of the year.
Other organisations supporting Europen's position include the Alliance for Beverage Cartons and the Environment (ACE), European Brands Association (AIM), Beverage Can Makers in Europe (BCME), European Federation of Bottled Water (EFBW), EuroCommerce, European Federation of Corrugated Board Manufacturers (FEFCO), PlasticsEurope and the European Soft Drinks Industry (UNESDA).