Dr. Lasky's Blog

Last week was an active week for RoHS 2 and Greenpeace issues. Greenpeace declared that several game consoles, although meeting RoHS standards, were still hazardous.

Furthermore, the IPC sent around the following note Re Inclusion of additonal ROHS prohibited materials:

    The öko Institute was retained by the EU Commission to study the inclusionof additional substance restrictions in the RoHS Directive. One of the substances identified is Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA), the flame retardantused to protect more than 80 percent of printed circuit boards and found to be safe by a comprehensive European Union Risk Assessment. In addition to TBBPA, the Institute suggests banning Hexabromocylcododecanes (HBCDD), several phthalate plasticizers, and all organic compounds containing chlorine and bromine.

    The Institute held a workshop on 6 May to review and discuss the draft report (overviewed in http://files.ipc.org/RoHSOkoPPT.ppt). The draft report relies upon biased and flawed methodology, which is discussed further below. Despite our substantial technical expertise and obvious interest as the representative of significant stakeholders in any RoHS expansion, IPC was denied permission to attend this meeting. The Institute staff actually suggested that only "scientific experts were invited to the workshop and that the meeting room was at capacity." We are very concerned that the Institute did not make a serious effort to involve all stakeholders.

     Here's how you and your company can help. IPC believes the potential expansion of RoHS is of vital importance to the electronics industry. While we have already sent a letter to the commission alerting them to the circumstances under which the Institutes report was prepared, we do not believe this is enough. We have scheduled a meeting in Brussels on 18 June 2008 to include all interested stakeholders. We have invited the EU commissioners and staff to this meeting so they can directly hear your concerns regarding the potential expansion of RoHS. This meeting will only be successful if we gather a substantial number of technical experts from our member companies who can explain to commission staff the issues concerning the Institute's incomplete and flawed report.

The apparent exclusion of IPC is very troubling and unlike earlier RoHS efforts.  I have been supportive of the need for RoHS 1 to enable safe recycling.  RoHS 2 seems to be starting out in an unsettling way.  It is time for us stakeholders to raise our voices and be heard.

Cheers,

Dr. Ron

Thanks to faithful reader's Carl and Rick Short for input on this post.