In message 003301cf73df$89a38510$9cea8f30$@cs.com, dated Mon, 19 May
2014, Pete Perkins 0061f3f32d0c-dmarc-requ...@ieee.org writes:
It's one thing to have a Directive which depends upon 'good faith' in
some way - which the RoHS program has been depending upon for some
years now - but to
In message d22e43ccd5394f3d829c9f5b5764a...@thhste15d1be4.hs20.net,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, Charlie Blackham char...@sulisconsultants.com
writes:
Compliance requirements are discussed on
https://www.gov.uk/rohs-compliance-and-guidance
?Due diligence? is the name of the game.
And from
But these are valid in Britain only, not Europe-wide
Yes, but there is (meant to be) co-ordination between enforcement bodies.
It's NOT the percentage that matters; it's the actual mass of toxin. As it
is, (1.1*X)% in a 1 g part is not allowed but X% of a 10 kg part IS allowed.
Most EEE
In message 57e1de017da548f694a6d03394b38...@thhste15d1be4.hs20.net,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, Charlie Blackham char...@sulisconsultants.com
writes:
But these are valid in Britain only, not Europe-wide
Yes, but there is (meant to be) co-ordination between enforcement
bodies.
It's NOT the
What makes even less sense is that RoHS has gone the % per homogeneous material
route, whereas REACH limits are the %age by weight of the complete product.
John C
On 20 May 2014, at 14:08, John Woodgate j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk wrote:
In message
In message c7ef2973-9b5b-45cd-b580-f46862671...@conformance.co.uk,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk
writes:
What makes even less sense is that RoHS has gone the % per homogeneous
material route, whereas REACH limits are the %age by weight of the
complete
One nuance of the RoHS challenge, is its potential impact to the used equipment
market. As recent discussions here have shown, it's hard enough to 'prove'
conformance for products currently in production. Even more so for used
products that will be newly on the EU market (imported). Since it
Yes, equipment imported for own use does not need to be RoHS compliant as you
say. What happens when the importer no longer needs it is an interesting
question, though. It would seem that it can't legally be sold, but it can be
thrown away. This is rather perverse, given that environmental
In message fc549dd1-1f68-46e1-baf5-463482b34...@conformance.co.uk,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, John Cotman john.cot...@conformance.co.uk
writes:
Yes, equipment imported for own use does not need to be RoHS compliant
as you say. What happens when the importer no longer needs it is an
interesting
Of course, RoHS applies to all otherwise-in-scope second-hand products made at
any time that are newly placed on the EU market (from a per-unit perspective,
not a per-model line perspective).
It has recently been interpreted (by Commission and other authorities) as
prohibiting the resale of
In message
e758c0fcde4a41f2b615646852fab...@blupr03mb119.namprd03.prod.outlook.com
, dated Tue, 20 May 2014, Crane, Lauren lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com
writes:
Of course, RoHS applies to all otherwise-in-scope second-hand products
made at any time that are newly placed on the EU market (from a
On 05/20/14, John Woodgatejmw@JMWA.DEMON.CO.UK wrote:At least it seems that the requirement to discard (dead) fish that shouldn't have been caught is being changed. Maybe someone, thinking no further than line fishing in a river, thought that if thrown back they would come alive again.I believe
In message 29772537.1146244.1400616153990.JavaMail.root@vms170027,
dated Tue, 20 May 2014, Dan Roman, N.C.E. danp...@verizon.net
writes:
I believe the reasoning for the fish is if they allowed fisherman to
keep the
by-catch they would have no incentive to avoid catching what they were
not
13 matches
Mail list logo
