IPC expresses concerns on possible ROHS revisions
IPC today reported on its recent ROHS-revision focused workshop in Brussels and — like a growing number of electronics supply chain companies, organizations, and experts – noted concerns with the Öko-Institut’s proposed expansion of ROHS substance restrictions.
Öko-Institut was contracted by the European Commission to study the inclusion of additional hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment under ROHS. Right now, ROHS still stands at restricting the original six materials: lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyl and polybrominated diphenyl ether.
In the Öko-Institut’s draft report to the EC, it recommended the restriction of TBBPA (Tetrabromobisphenol A), a flame retardant used to protect more than 80% of printed circuit boards and found to be safe by a comprehensive European Union risk assessment, according to IPC. In addition to TBBPA, HBCDDs (Hexabromocylcododecanes), several phthalate plasticizers, and all organic compounds containing chlorine and bromine are included in the report as suggested bans.
“IPC is concerned that Öko-Institut’s recommendations are arbitrary and lack a sound scientific basis. Implemented, these recommendations will have a significant negative impact on our members,” Fern Abrams, IPC’s director of government relations and environmental policy, said in the organization’s statement today.
IPC isn’t alone in its concerns. Newark’s Gary Nevison recently contributed a Critical Links blog to EDN on the banning of flame retardants and the harmful affect doing so could have. In “Flame retardants ignite controversy,” Nevison questioned the risk-benefit balance based on assessments of the ROHS directive. He, like Abrams, has also expressed concerns over the Öko-Institut’s practices and wonders if the EC is keeping immediate human safety, like that from electronics fires, in mind when setting its regulations.
Abrams, who I recently interviewed on this topic, noted that IPC held the meeting in Brussels to make sure that all technical issues were considered by the commission when they drafted the ROHS revisions.
Attendees at the IPC meeting included members of the EC and the ROHS Technical Advisory Committee from Brussels and the United Kingdom; and representatives from European Space Agency; EU Commission consultant ERA Technology; Rockwell Collins; AT&S (Austria Technologies & Systemtechnik); Philips Healthcare; Henkel; BAE Systems Platform Solutions; Lockheed Martin; Aerospace Industries Association of America; American Embassy Brussels; Avantec; Isola GmbH; and EADS.
IPC said that it is working with the meeting attendees to develop a white paper in response to the proposed restrictions.
What are your thoughts on the Öko-Institut’s proposed revisions to ROHS? Share them below.
Fred commented:
Bonkers commented:
Yellow brick road commented:
Ted Marek commented:
rohs not commented:
Policebox commented:
desert rat commented:
Confused over lead-free commented:
Dufus commented:
Reality "check please" commented:
Tom commented:
JD commented:
