As a major exporter, the NZ industry is facing one of its toughest challenges to date, as the deadline approaches for the European Union’s (EU) implementation of its hazard substance legislation.
The aim of the legislation is simple. Landfill space in a relatively small and densely-populated Europe is at a premium and in the search for better and more efficient ways of dealing with waste, the EU issued the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) directive. It was soon realised, however, that the directive may create a health issue for the recycling industry. In addition, there were continuing environmental concerns with the contamination of groundwater from the electrical and electronic equipment may still find its way into landfill sites despite the WEEE directive. This led to the RoHS directive - a ban on a subset of substances that were known to be harmful.
An explicit message
Under the environmental regulations, as of 1 July 2006, any electrical and/or electronic equipment exported into the European Union has to comply with RoHS (officially known as “Directive 2002/95/EC on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment”).
Although RoHS is an EU Directive, manufacturers of electronics equipment outside Europe will also have to comply with the legislation if the equipment they produce is ultimately imported into the EU.
For companies exporting into the European Union, the message is explicit, non-compliant products will be banned from the Union and electronic companies stand to loose valuable contracts unless they make moves now to adapt their products to meet the directive standards.
“The problem is that many companies don’t know where to start,” says Roland Sommer, an industry consultant. “There is so much information available about being lead-free but virtually nothing on the other banned substances.”
The six substances restricted by RoHS are lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, PBB and PBDE. To be truly compliant with this legislation, the presence of each of these substances must be reduced below their proposed maximum concentration values (MCV) which for lead, mercury, hexavalent chromium, PBB and PBDE up to 0.1 percent by weight in homogenous materials and of up to 0.01 percent by weight in homogenous materials for cadmium. Even at these levels the restricted materials are only allowed as a contamination, not as intentional additives.
Lead is used in conventional solder, chromium is used as a protective layer in sheet steel and aluminium that makes up metal casings, PBB’s and PBDE’s are flame retardants used in cables and plastics and cadmium is used in metal coatings, among other uses.
The biggest challenge to producers is identifying where the banned materials are used in a product. As each component needs to be compliant, an organisation with a diverse range of materials has to be able to track and prove that each of those items conforms to the legislation.
Making sense of the implications
To make sense of these implications and to provide some direction to New Zealand electronic companies, New Zealand Trade and Enterprise (NZTE), Electronics South and the Canterbury Electronics group have set up a web-site at www.electronicssouth.com dedicated to RoHS and its sister directive, WEEE.
“The site is a good example of government, both local and national, working proactively with industry to assist with capability and trade barriers,” says Cate Hlavac, NTZE Christchurch Regional Manager. “Compliance is going to be huge cost for New Zealand businesses and the government recognises it has a role to play in assisting large, small and competing companies to work together for the good of the industry.
“Having information available gives the industry the capability of making informed decisions and to be more efficient and effective about doing it,” says Hlavac.
Sommer says that while WEEE is about reducing the amount of electrical and electronic equipment from entering landfill at the end of its useful life, the role of RoHS is to reduce harmful substances at source, ensuring that these hazardous substances are not leached into the environment by equipment which fails to be recycled.
“While the regulations seem simple enough, the directives are complex and complicated, and raise more questions than answers,” says Sommer.
According to Sommer, few companies have robust strategies in place to answer these questions.
“[The website] is an information portal that will sift through the information, attempt to clarify legislative jargon and keep users up-to-date with any legislative updates. It’s about helping companies put the tools in place so they can conform to the directives.”
For James Saruchera of the Canterbury Development Corporation, Projects Leader - Information and Communications Technology, the website also means companies will have a forum to talk to each other. “This is the opportunity for companies to discuss within a New Zealand context how they plan to deal with the new legislation and how each company is dealing with the changes they are facing.”
Seeking guidance
While industry giants like Tait Electronics have reportedly spent nearly NZ$1.5 million ($1.4 million) on researching lead-free solders, many of the smaller firms don’t have the capacity and resources for the extensive research and development needed. In some instances it may be more cost effective to change to a new model that complies, rather than trying to convert and re-qualify an older model that does not.
“Time is an issue,” says Sommer, “if companies haven’t started looking for alternatives now, they are leaving it too late.
“There is a step-by-step guide for companies that will take them through the process and highlight the action needed.”
NZTE is funding a series of workshops across a number of industries affected by the legislation. Stakeholders in the electronic, electrical, metal working, metal finishing and chemical supply businesses are holding forums to brainstorm workable alternatives and preferred solutions for some the banned substances, in particular Hexavalent chromium.
According to Sommers rather than each company working towards their own solutions, which would drive up costs, because of small chemical import orders and increase risk because of a small supply base. “The workshops will allow a greater leveraging of knowledge across the industry and a co-ordinated approach across the wide range of businesses affected.”
In terms of knowing what products are exempted from the directives, there is detailed information both about the exemption process and industry products that have exemptions until the next review in 2008. The EU, however, is extremely strict and a company would need a watertight case to earn an exemption.
The act of putting a product into the EU after July 2006 is a declaration of compliance says Roland. “A producer needs to keep ‘technical documents’ or ‘other information’ to underpin their self declaration. This information needs to be credible and kept for a period of 4 years after the last product is put on the market. However, if you do face prosecution it is an acceptable defence to show that all reasonable steps were taken and all due diligence was exercised in trying to avoid the offence.”
A key inclusion in the service is the appointment of a lawyer, Graham Howard from Buddle Findlay, because undoubtedly, says Sommer, “there are grey areas and it’s further down the track that there will be a need for expert interpretation.”
It’s also vital for companies to be aware of any legislative developments to get an early warning on any technical changes that are made.
The European Community is not alone in its move towards producer responsibility, as RoHS legislation is due to take effect in China in 2006, while California, Canada and Brazil are also considering similar regulations.
Further information: Kim Triegaardt is a technology writer working for New Zealand Trade and Enterprise.