In message <[email protected]>, dated Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Christine Rodham <[email protected]> writes:
>The lead is in the tin film (7%) and NOT on the component wire leads >connected to the the capacitor. The lead is entirely sealed inside the >capacitor. > >Would this be a good argument to apply for an exemption? No, because the threat from lead is almost exclusively in the manufacturing process and the recycling process when the equipment is discarded. >If they pursue applying for an exempt status what is a typical time >frame for this process. > It is likely to take a very long time: think a year or so. But it's very unpredictable: sometimes there is luck. In any case, I don't see any grounds for an exemption if pure tin can in fact be used. The 7% lead would prevent the allotropic change that tin can suffer at low temperatures, but that can't be what it's there for, surely? Anyway, that argument didn't exempt organ pipes! -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk Murphy's Law has now been officially re-named The Certainty Principle John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
