Yes I understand that, it was more the fact that some “consultants” are allegedly suggesting product manufacturers (note I don’t say downstream users (DSU)) need to analyse the chemical content of their products down to the last molecule e.g. document the complete chemical content of say a capacitor (and every other part of the product). Whilst the regulation does place some obligations on DSU’s this is not one of them.
Regulation 1907/2006 Art 3 Cl 13 says: downstream user: means any natural or legal person established within the Community, other than the manufacturer or the importer, who uses a substance, either on its own or in a preparation, in the course of his industrial or professional activities. A distributor or a consumer is not a downstream user. A re-importer exempted pursuant to Article 2 (7)(c) shall be regarded as a downstream user; ECHA DSU guidance is here: http://echa.europa.eu/doc/reach/080417%20ECHA_08_GF_02-EN_Downstream_User.pdf So, as a product manufacturer you may be a DSU if you use a substance in your product, let’s say penetrating oil. If you use the oil in line with the oil mfrs guidance you have no obligation, if you however use it in a way not prescribed then you do have an obligation. If on the other hand you are just using resistors and capacitors you have no obligation as a user to analyse them. You may for business continuity want to ask the question back up the chain as to whether the resistor and capacitor might be discontinued due to REACH but that is all. A capacitor or resistor is an “article” and the Cl 56 of the Regulation says (part of relevance here is in bold between >> <<): Part of the responsibility of manufacturers or importers for the management of the risks of substances is the communication of information on these substances to other professionals such as downstream users or distributors. >>In addition, producers or importers of articles should supply information on the safe use of articles to industrial and professional users, and consumers on request. << This important responsibility should also apply throughout the supply chain to enable all actors to meet their responsibility in relation to management of risks arising from the use of substances. Chris ________________________________ From: lauren_cr...@amat.com [mailto:lauren_cr...@amat.com] Sent: 15 December 2008 15:53 To: James, Chris Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org; Nick Williams Subject: RE: Revision of the WEEE and RoHS directives Chris, Elaboration --> It is frustrating how many laws in general in a country, and the EU specifically (though not a country), affect similar classes of products but do not reference each other. For example, a small aerosol can of specialized oil for a machine might be within scope of the EU Narcotics Precursor Regulation, the REACH Regulation, the Dangerous Preparations Directive, the Aerosol Dispensers Directive and the Prepackaged Products directive, but the laws do not always cross reference each other (though there is some). In this same way, EEE within scope of RoHS could easily contain materials relevant to the restrictions of REACH (Annex XVII) or the "Candidate List" materials of REACH. It is nice to see the RoHS directive explicitly mention REACH (see the following) and to say it applies even though RoHS might also. REACH, of course, is the acronym for Regulation 1907/2006. Reference to REACH -> "This Directive shall apply without prejudice to requirements of Community legislation on safety and health, on chemicals, in particular Regulation (EC) 1907/2006 as well as of specific Community waste management legislation." Hope that helps Lauren - external use - Save paper and trees! Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. "James, Chris" <c...@dolby.co.uk> 12/15/2008 03:35 AM To Lauren Crane/APPLIED MATERIALS@AMAT cc <emc-p...@ieee.org>, "Nick Williams" <nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk> Subject RE: Revision of the WEEE and RoHS directives Lauren, Please elaborate or what you mean by "Yep, you gotta do REACH too." Chris ________________________________ From: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] On Behalf Of lauren_cr...@amat.com Sent: 12 December 2008 16:25 To: Nick Williams Cc: emc-p...@ieee.org Subject: Re: Revision of the WEEE and RoHS directives Nick, Yes. These proposed revisions to WEEE and RoHS are very interesting. Some of what I see; * RoHS has its "own scope" now. Essentially the Annex from WEEE has been pulled into RoHS. * For WEEE the situation is reversed - It now points to RoHS for scope. * The RoHS "spare parts" exemption is changed and, I think, eroded. Three scenarios provide exemption- military equipment; components of out-of-scope equipment that "fulfills its function only if part of that equipment"; and equipment not intended to be placed on the market as a single functional or commercial unit" - all rather vague concepts that will, no doubt, require much guidance and source much debate. * RoHS contains a new criteria prohibiting the "big 6" RoHS materials from spare parts for the repair or reuse of EEE (ref art. 4.1) * There is a new Annex III with 4 materials list and a very confusing linkage of these materials to risk assessment and the REACH candidate list in Art. 4.7 * RoHS is now a CE Marking directive (sigh....) * RoHS takes steps to make it clear that importers are "manufacturers" (regardless of whether there is an OEM external to the EU). * Use exemptions in RoHS annex V and VI are extended to be exemptions also >from REACH authorization criteria (once any get crafted). * The definition of "homogeneous material" is now defined in RoHS. * WEEE has exemptions similar to RoHS. * Both directives now kindly give a nod towards REACH and essentially say "Yep, you gotta do REACH too." * Scope of WEEE is now explicitly on waste from private households or users other than private households (this seems to be all users). I guess WEEE was just silent on this point prior. * EN 50419 is now "the" reference for the ex-bin symbol (one of the few cases where a directive mandates the use of a standard). =========== I am particularly interested in how RoHS's new treatment of integrated parts would apply in the following scenario.... A large scale stationary industrial tool (LSIT), say a printing press, is imported to the EU. It might be considered an "electrical tool" but is exempt because of the LSIT exemption in Annex I.6. The printing press has a power supply in it. The power supply manufacturer also happens to market their supply in the EU as a single commercial unit. The printing press manufacturer has no intention of marketing the power supply as a separate commercial unit, but they do provide it as a spare part in their support supply chain. Must the printing press company ensure the power supply is RoHS compliant as an industrial control instrument (controlling voltage)? Regards, Lauren Crane Product Regulatory Analyst Corporate Product EHS Lead Applied Materials Inc. Austin, TX 512 272-6540 [#922 26540] - External Use - Save paper and trees! Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. Nick Williams <nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk> Sent by: emc-p...@ieee.org 12/12/2008 04:38 AM To emc-p...@ieee.org cc Subject Revision of the WEEE and RoHS directives I'm sure many readers here will be interested in the information at the following location: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAct on.do?reference=IP/08/1878&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en Nick. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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 <emcp...@ptcnh.net> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald: <dhe...@gmail.com> - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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 <emcp...@ptcnh.net> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com> ________________________________ This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose. If you are not the intended recipient, delete this message. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosing, copying, distributing, or taking any action based on this message is strictly prohibited. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <emc-p...@ieee.org> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ 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 <emcp...@ptcnh.net> Mike Cantwell <mcantw...@ieee.org> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <j.bac...@ieee.org> David Heald <dhe...@gmail.com>
