Post a CommentThere oughta be a (single) law
By Barbara Jorgensen, Senior Editor -- Electronic Business, 7/1/2006
Barring a natural disaster or a last-minute pardon, Europe's Restriction on Hazardous Substances (RoHS) is now in effect. But there's still a lot to be worked out in terms of how to enforce the edict and defining the penalties that will be assessed on scofflaws.
It was tough enough to get the 25 countries that make up the European Union to agree on a common environmental standard. The next step, many industry watchers believe, is getting other countries—in this case, the United States and Canada—to follow suit and adopt their own legislation.
States in the U.S. are passing their own versions of RoHS and Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) laws. Some fear that in the absence of national legislation, varying state laws will cause chaos in the supply chain.
"There are now as many flavors of RoHS being proposed as you find in an ice cream shop," says Paul Tallentire, president of catalog distributor Newark InOne. "I can't imagine my supply chain of four million components having to be made differently to comply with different state laws."
The electronics industry has spent considerable time and expense to comply with RoHS, which bans lead and five other substances from electronic goods. Other countries considering similar legislation—including China—are using RoHS as a guideline, says Ken Stanvick, a principal at Design Chain Associates, a firm that works with electronics firms on RoHS compliance and other issues.
The same is not true in the United States and Canada. Within each country, various states and provinces are drafting their own environmental laws. For example, Nova Scotia last year drafted a proposed amendment to its Environment Act that calls on manufacturers to eliminate toxic substances from electrical products sold in Nova Scotia, says Ken Manchen, corporate director for health and environmental safety affairs at Newark InOne.
California has enacted a rule restricting the toxic substance content of electrical devices sold there. This rule differs from the RoHS directive in that it applies only to products sold via retailers in California. Therefore, products that comply with RoHS may not comply with Nova Scotia or California laws. Makers of electronics products may have to decide whether they will tailor their products for each geography or not sell into certain regions.
"Life was complex with four million products, and with RoHS it has become more complicated," Tallentire says. "For us and our suppliers, quality assurance and other systems have been changed [to comply with RoHS], but if I take a situation where the legislation was different in different states—even five states—I can't imagine that our suppliers could manufacture and assure the quality of that many versions of the same product."
It would also be impossible, he adds, for distributors or even OEMs to ensure that a product is compliant from state to state because components are frequently shipped across state and international boundaries before they reach final production.
Tallentire isn't alone in calling attention to the disparities in state laws. Industry association AeA ( www.aeanet.org) holds regular conference calls on state laws regarding recycling, and in September 2005, Electronics Industries Alliance ( www.eia.org) president and CEO Dave McCurdy testified before a Senate task force on the environment and called for national consistency on electronics recycling laws. Both organizations also cite RoHS as a concern but don't specifically call for action on hazardous waste initiatives.
Tallentire has discussed the issue with some of his vendors and customers and says they're beginning to understand the perverse logic of wanting federal legislation.
"Nobody wants more legislation," he says, "but in this case, I think it would be good for the industry."
| Rule in effect or proposed? | Toxic substance content restriction | Type of electronic devices affected and when | |
| CANADA | |||
| Nova Scotia Sec. 102 Env. Act | Proposed | Eliminate lead, cadmium, mercury, hexavalent chromium, PBB, PBDE | Computers, monitors, printers, TVs, fax machines, scanners, audio/video equipment, cell phones, electronic games—proposed |
| U.S. | |||
| California SB 20, SB 50 | In effect | Cadmium <.01%, lead, mercury, hexavalent chromium <0.1% | Laptops, CRTs, TVs with >4" screens —1/1/07 |
| SOURCE: NEWARK INONE *For a detailed chart on Canada and U.S. WEEE style rules, please go to www.eb-mag.com/canus_weee | |||
