Attachments don't get distributed to forum members - please just include
the URL to the document in the msg
Regards,
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Leadfree [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Timothy McGrady
Sent: 28 March 2007 22:10
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [LF] FW: [RoHS] New study on RoHS
Gordon:
I saw the document you have been referring to, but I also saw another,
more
official-looking document on RoHS posted on the europa website. I've
attached it, but I'm not sure it will go through to the entire forum.
If it
does not, I can send it to anyone who wants a copy. There were also
other
documents on WEEE concerning the same issues.
Tim McGrady
----- Original Message -----
From: "Davy, Gordon" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: [LF] FW: [RoHS] New study on RoHS
Chris James has posted a link to an official publication of the EU
regarding the RoHS and WEEE Directives that is so at variance with every
other pronouncement I have seen that I had to double-check to convince
myself that it had not been issued by some other entity. I note that its
origin is the General Enterprise and Industry Directorate, while the
Directives are the work of the Environment Directorate. It is the first
evidence that I have seen that there might be some sort of backlash.
The title of the eight-page document is "Request for Services - List of
Tasks for a Study on RoHS and WEEE Directives." The intent is to solicit
bids from contractors to conduct a study. The final report is to be
delivered to the European Commission within nine months of contract
signing.
For ROHS, the study is to analyze the impacts on the economy and the
environment and propose revisions "with a view to improving its
cost-effectiveness while maintaining the same level of environmental
protection" that will replace the "current legislative approach" with
"more efficient, flexible, and proportionate instruments." Up to now,
the official position of the EU regarding environmental legislation has
been that cost impact is irrelevant and is not to be considered by those
evaluating requests for exemption.
The first task the document identifies is to "carry out a (static)
cost-benefit analysis" that will "take into account the full life cycle
of the products" and "consider the feasibility and costs of
enforcement." The other tasks identified are to assess the impact on the
Internal Market, on innovation, and on products and sectors not covered
by the ban (specifically mentioning military and transport equipment),
and to "assess potential synergies and conflicts with other policy
objectives."
The introduction refers to a Communication on "Strategy for the
simplification of the regulatory environment." "The objective of the
simplification exercise is ... to make legislation less burdensome,
easier to apply and therefore more effective in meeting its goals." ...
"Particular attention will be given to SME's [small- and medium-sized
enterprises] that suffer disproportionately from legislative and
administrative burdens." Has anyone ever seen any EU interest before in
simplifying the impact of regulations?
It says further that "the Commission: 1) has carried out a research
study into the implementation of the WEEE directive by the Member
States; ... 3) has identified an external consultant to analyse the
information gathered ... 3) [sic] is in the process of launching two
further research studies analysing the impact and implementation of the
WEEE Directive and potential changes (looking respectively at the costs
and benefits of collection and treatment of different categories of
WEEE... 4) will carry out an impact assessment in 2007 ..."
In discussing the ROHS Directive the document acknowledges that "the
practical implementation of the [RoHS] directive faces some
difficulties." It identifies these difficulties. "Firstly, ... [a]
possible non harmonized interpretation of the scope ... across member
states with potential implications for the functioning of the Internal
Market. Secondly, the criteria for exemptions are of difficult
interpretation.... [Consequently] the absence of cost-benefit
considerations may lead to decisions that are unbalanced compared to the
objectives of the legislation. Thirdly, the ban is general and applies
to any type of application, including applications using a very small
amount of hazardous substances..."
It enumerates three "shortcomings" I quote these in their entirety.
* The number of exemptions is very high. The Commission has granted
to date over 29 exemptions. The number of requests is not tailing off.
This is causing a cumbersome workload to Commission services and the
TAC, with consequent severe delays in the process;
* Some exemptions concern very small quantities of banned substance
(for example, one exemption covers 0.01 Kg lead per year in the whole of
the European Union). However, such exemption requests are subject to the
same assessment procedure as for exemptions concerning larger quantities
of banned substances;
* Some exemptions concern very big quantities of banned substances,
which reduce the Directive's potential positive impact on the
environment. For example, the exemption granted to lead in CRT [sic]
alone concerns a big part of lead in EEE (excluding batteries).
If anyone has any information on how this request got published, the
story that has to go with it, it would be of great interest to this
forum.
Gordon Davy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------Leadfee
Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
To temporarily stop/(start) delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks
send:
SET Leadfree NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site
http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16
for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask]
or
847-615-7100 ext.2815
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------Leadfee Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV
1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text
in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
To temporarily stop/(start) delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks
send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site
http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100
ext.2815
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
-----------------------------------------
This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose. If you
are not the intended recipient, delete this message. If you are
not the intended recipient, disclosing, copying, distributing, or
taking any action based on this message is strictly prohibited.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Leadfee Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
To temporarily stop/(start) delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
