Two new studies have been started by the European Commission regarding the RoHS Directive. One is considering the case for ALL existing exemptions plus some new requests, the other is looking at adding more substance restrictions to RoHS beyond the existing 6. Both studies will have major implications on the legality of existing designs which rely on current exemptions, which may be withdrawn or substances which may be banned.
ERA attended a Member State RoHS workshop organised by BERR (formerly the UK DTI) on 26 October 2007 to discuss options for improving the RoHS exemptions process. Applicants have experienced long periods of uncertainty with no indications of progress and the Commission has found it difficult to reach decisions because of the technical complexity of many of the requests. Steve Andrews of BERR will present the conclusions from the workshop at the next TAC meeting in November.
The Commission has recently awarded two study contracts to the Öko Institut; the review of all existing exemptions in the RoHS Directive Annex plus seven new requests and a study into the possibility for adding more substances to the current RoHS 6. The latter study forms part of the current review of the RoHS Directive that will eventually be amended. These studies will have profound implications to all sectors of the electronics industry including those that are currently excluded because the scope of RoHS could be changed to include many new product types.
It is now important for manufacturers to act swiftly to counter unacceptable changes. Once the Commission’s proposals are presented to the European Parliament and Council of Ministers, it will be much more difficult to make changes - so now is the time to act.
Study 1- Exemption Review
All existing exemptions will be reviewed including those that many manufacturers take for granted such as those for:
- lead in glass of electronic components: required for many passive surface mount devices such as chip resistors and potentiometers, and also hermetically sealed ICs and through hole mounting diodes,
- lead in high melting point alloys: required for power devices such as rectifiers, regulators and solid state relays,
- lead in ceramics: required for, piezoelectrics, chip resistors, and some MLCCs,
- lead in solder for network infrastructure and servers etc. ,
- cadmium in switch and relay contacts .
The process for granting or maintaining of exemptions is extremely rigorous. The onus is squarely on industry to demonstrate they need an exemption and to present the evidence for this. The Commission’s consultants will recommend that exemptions are deleted if there is any evidence that substitutes exist. Industry will need to take a pro-active approach and provide data from recent research that has looked for substitutes but shows that these are technically unsuitable or have more negative impacts on human health or the environment than the RoHS substances. Letters of support and pleas to continue the exemptions are of very limited value, as the consultants need technical evidence that will convince them, the EC and European Parliament that exemptions should continue. The Commission accepts that research into substitutes will mainly be carried out by large multi-nationals, not by SMEs although SMEs are clearly affected by RoHS exemptions and should make contributions to the study by providing results of their efforts to find substitute materials and designs and also by encouraging their OEM component suppliers to submit technical data. Doing nothing and relying on others is very risky as almost all electrical products rely on at least one exemption.
Study 2 - Additional substances
This study is equally important to the electrical industry. It is likely that NGOs and Member States will suggest many substances be considered and these could be restricted if industry does not provide clear technical evidence that substances cannot be replaced or that possible substitutes would be more harmful to the environment or human health.
The whole life cycles of substances should be considered and lead in solders provides a good example of why. Lead is clearly a toxic material but a full life cycle assessment comparing tin/lead solders with lead-free solders carried out by the US EPA showed that the lead-free alternatives were not better (or worse) but different and overall provide no benefit to the environment, especially if lead is adequately controlled. The results of this LCA are not enough to allow an exemption for lead in solders now that lead is restricted by RoHS but would have been substantive evidence when the restriction of lead under RoHS was first considered.
Clearly it is preferable to prevent substances from being added to the RoHS restricted list than having to request new exemptions in the future. It is essential that all manufacturers, including SMEs review their products to determine if they are relying on hazardous substances and to provide technical data to the consultants as soon as possible.
Substances that are likely to be considered for restriction include arsenic, beryllium, diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP plasticiser) and many types of flame retardants. Another consideration is that many alternatives are not fully tested so the risks from their use is unknown, one of the main reasons for the REACH regulations.
Taking action
Both studies have started and Öko need to complete their work by mid 2008. This means that the major data gathering exercise will be from now until about April 2008. ERA counsels the following steps:
1. Audit your products and the components they contain. Do any rely on existing exemptions? If so do RoHS compliant equivalents exist which are suitable substitutes?
2. If you rely on existing exemptions and cannot find substitutes,
a. carry out searches of published research for evidence that can be submitted to the consultants to justify continuing exemptions or prevent new substances from being restricted,
b. collaborate with drafting submissions to ensure that they are credible and convincing.
3. Audit your products to identify hazardous substances which may be restricted in the future. Can they be substituted? If not, compile evidence and submit this to the study.
Note that it is important that manufacturers of category 8 (medical) and 9 (monitoring and control) equipment as well as other products currently outside scope of RoHS contribute because these sectors may be included in RoHS as a result of the review.
ERA offers support to industry
ERA has long experience in this area having both reviewed exemptions for the Commission and helped industry define the case for exemptions. Having “worked on both sides of the fence” we are fully aware of the requirements in putting together a rigorous objective case which will hold water.
ERA is offering to support industry in carrying out all the above actions, helping coordinate exemption applications, compiling and assessing evidence, and preparing substantive and convincing cases for submission to these reviews. We welcome approaches from industry
ERA can be contacted on ++44 (0)1372 367444
or at era.co.uk/rfa
Directive Decoder
Subscribe to this blog's feed