16/05/2005 - On 16 May
2005 Thermoseal Group Limited pleaded guilty
at Birmingham Magistrates to five charges
relating to it failing to meet its obligations
under laws governing the recycling and reuse
of packaging.
The charges were brought by the Environment
Agency under the Producer Responsibility Obligations
(Packaging Waste) Regulations 1997. Thermoseal
Group Limited were fined a total of £10,000
and ordered to pay costs of £795.75p.
Speaking after the case, Claire Daley, one
of our officers involved in the investigation,
said: "Every year packaging amounts for
over nine million tonnes of waste in this
country. It is essential that the amount recovered/recycled
increases and the Producer Responsibility
Obligations Regulations have been implemented
to get companies to take responsibility for
the amount of packaging they pass on to their
customers.
"We are working to develop partnerships
with organisations and industry to promote
ways of cutting packaging and anyone wanting
information concerning the regulations, compliance
and how to start cutting down on the packaging
they produce should contact us on 08708 506
506 ."
For the Environment Agency, David Rees told
the court that the regulations had been introduced
to cut the amount of waste going to landfill
sites and encourage the recovery and recycling
of packaging materials.
Companies which handle over 50 tonnes of
packaging and have a turnover of more than
£2m are required to register with the
Environment Agency or a compliance scheme.
At the end of a year they need to supply evidence
that a proportion of the packing they produced
has been reclaimed and certificate indicating
compliance. Registration is required by April
7 of each year.
In November 2004, Environment Agency investigations
indicated that it was likely that Thermoseal
Group Limited may have been obligated to follow
the regulations. The Environment Agency wrote
to the company informing of this, advising
it that it might wish to take steps to redress
the situation.
Investigations indicated that the company
was required to be registered in 2001, 2002,
2003 and 2004 and it had failed to do so for
each of these years. It was also required
to take reasonable steps to recover and recycle
packaging in these four years and it had failed
to do this. Finally, it should have submitted
a certificate indicating its compliance with
the regulations in 2002, 2003 and 2004 and
it had failed to do so.
In mitigation, Andrew Stacey told the court
that his clients had pleaded guilty, that
they had an unblemished environmental record
and were basically were not aware they would
be caught by the regulations.
