Page 10 - Policy Brief on Designing a Business Model for Sustainable Management of End-of-Life Vehicles (ELVs) in India
P. 10
TERI Policy Brief
ELV. However, if a vehicle which is less than 10 years standards such as the impervious floor, etc.
old but has failed the road worthiness test twice detailed in AIS129
should be subject to deeper investigation to identify
the reasons for failure. 5. Setting up of Automotive Recycling Promotion
Centre (ARPC): This needs to be a non-
2. Encouraging Declaration of ELV: governmental body which acts as regulator as well
as an auditor for ELV recycling operators. This body
• Make it mandatory to obtain a ‘Certificate of also manages the ELV Fund; they are required to
destruction’, which certifies that the owner provide monetary incentive (refunding ELV cess)
has brought his ELV for de-registration. This for owners who wish to surrender their vehicle
will remain a pre-requisite for getting ELV cess for scrapping. It also monitors the functioning of
refunded. Once the car reaches its end of life and electronic manifestation system which helps in
it does not get deregistered, the vehicle owner regulating by keeping a record of ELV movement
faces a penalty. Random checks by the transport at various stages- when a vehicle gets deregistered,
policy officials can be used to assign credibility to where is it depolluted, where it gets dismantled and
the levying of penalty. For existing ELVs, RTOs so on. ARPC would develop an overall index/label
can also notify the vehicle owners to get their indicating the recovery and recyclability of resources
ELVs deregistered. at the end of life of the vehicle.
• Increasing road tax on re-registration of vehicles, 6. Benchmarks/Certification / Labeling/Targets:
dis-incentivising re-registration when the vehicle
is close to its end of life. • Quality standard for secondary raw material
will help in creating the market for secondary
• The RTO database overtime can also be resources. Further such standards could be used
strengthened to create a mapping of vehicles to develop efficiency targets which require the
with its owners and ensuring that the owners use of a certain percentage of recyclable materials
have disposed off their old vehicles (which have in new cars as part of a shift to emphasizing design
reached their end of life) before they have bought for the environment.
their new vehicles.
• Setting up minimum benchmark requirements
3. Designated Collection Points: Regional Transport that informal sector needs to follow for carrying
Offices (RTOs) should be allowed to also operate
as Designated Collection Points that legally issues a
“Certificate of Destruction” and/or ‘Certificate of
Deregistration’ and then transfers them to accredited
dismantling facilities or authorized treatment
facility and/or manufacturer owned and operated
collection and treatment facilities. The cost of the
logistics to be borne out of the ELV fund. Over time,
vehicle manufacturers could be mandated to set up
collection facilities
4. Infrastructure support:
• Land for setting up requisite infrastructure
including auto shredder facilities. Here
Government could initially waive off the rental
for few initial years, and overtime when the
facility becomes economically viable, reasonable/
market rent could be laid. The current informal
sector engaged in the ELV management could be
relocated to this land, away from the residential
areas and having to meet the minimum hygiene
10 MARCH 2017
ELV. However, if a vehicle which is less than 10 years standards such as the impervious floor, etc.
old but has failed the road worthiness test twice detailed in AIS129
should be subject to deeper investigation to identify
the reasons for failure. 5. Setting up of Automotive Recycling Promotion
Centre (ARPC): This needs to be a non-
2. Encouraging Declaration of ELV: governmental body which acts as regulator as well
as an auditor for ELV recycling operators. This body
• Make it mandatory to obtain a ‘Certificate of also manages the ELV Fund; they are required to
destruction’, which certifies that the owner provide monetary incentive (refunding ELV cess)
has brought his ELV for de-registration. This for owners who wish to surrender their vehicle
will remain a pre-requisite for getting ELV cess for scrapping. It also monitors the functioning of
refunded. Once the car reaches its end of life and electronic manifestation system which helps in
it does not get deregistered, the vehicle owner regulating by keeping a record of ELV movement
faces a penalty. Random checks by the transport at various stages- when a vehicle gets deregistered,
policy officials can be used to assign credibility to where is it depolluted, where it gets dismantled and
the levying of penalty. For existing ELVs, RTOs so on. ARPC would develop an overall index/label
can also notify the vehicle owners to get their indicating the recovery and recyclability of resources
ELVs deregistered. at the end of life of the vehicle.
• Increasing road tax on re-registration of vehicles, 6. Benchmarks/Certification / Labeling/Targets:
dis-incentivising re-registration when the vehicle
is close to its end of life. • Quality standard for secondary raw material
will help in creating the market for secondary
• The RTO database overtime can also be resources. Further such standards could be used
strengthened to create a mapping of vehicles to develop efficiency targets which require the
with its owners and ensuring that the owners use of a certain percentage of recyclable materials
have disposed off their old vehicles (which have in new cars as part of a shift to emphasizing design
reached their end of life) before they have bought for the environment.
their new vehicles.
• Setting up minimum benchmark requirements
3. Designated Collection Points: Regional Transport that informal sector needs to follow for carrying
Offices (RTOs) should be allowed to also operate
as Designated Collection Points that legally issues a
“Certificate of Destruction” and/or ‘Certificate of
Deregistration’ and then transfers them to accredited
dismantling facilities or authorized treatment
facility and/or manufacturer owned and operated
collection and treatment facilities. The cost of the
logistics to be borne out of the ELV fund. Over time,
vehicle manufacturers could be mandated to set up
collection facilities
4. Infrastructure support:
• Land for setting up requisite infrastructure
including auto shredder facilities. Here
Government could initially waive off the rental
for few initial years, and overtime when the
facility becomes economically viable, reasonable/
market rent could be laid. The current informal
sector engaged in the ELV management could be
relocated to this land, away from the residential
areas and having to meet the minimum hygiene
10 MARCH 2017
