The EU Commission has proposed an EU Conflict Minerals regulation that will focus on controlling the importation of 3TG metals and ores (tin, tantalum, tungsten, and gold). The proposal which is titled “REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL setting up a Union system for supply chain due diligence self-certification of responsible importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating in conflict affected and high-risk areas” would directly impact importers of the ores and metals, who in turn, tend to be closely involved with the smelters. The regulation is proposed to be a self-certification.

Here’s a useful excerpt from the EU Commission press release:

The Commission proposes a draft Regulation setting up an EU system of self-certification for importers of tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold who choose to import responsibly into the Union. Self-certification requires EU importers of these metals and their ores to exercise ‘due diligence’ – i.e. to avoid causing harm on the ground – by monitoring and administering their purchases and sales in line with the five steps of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Due Diligence Guidance. The aim is to act at the most effective level of the EU supply chain for these minerals and to facilitate the flow of due diligence information down to end users. The Regulation gives EU importers an opportunity to deepen ongoing efforts to ensure clean supply chains when trading legitimately with operators in conflict-affected countries.

Overall, this proposal is good news for EEE manufacturers that tend to be several levels removed from the smelters. However, the draft proposal will now enter the EU regulatory process, including review by the European Parliament which has traditionally taken a strong stand for environmental performance and human rights.

Stay tuned on this blog for further analysis of the draft regulation.

ECHA has begun a public consultation on four substances for addition to the REACH SVHC Candidate List. The four substances were proposed by Denmark and Sweden based of their status as carcinogenic and/or toxic for reproduction. The four substances are:

• 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dihexyl ester, branched and linear
• Cadmium chloride
• Sodium perborate; perboric acid, sodium salt
• Sodium peroxometaborate

The deadline for the public consultation is April 17, 2014

The draft RoHS Annex II dossier for the diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP) suggests that DIBP has minimal use within EEE products. One objective of the public consultation for DIBP is to update this information based on industry responses. DIBP may be used in nearly all of the same applications as the Phthalate DBP and is commonly used as a substitute; however, it also has similar hazard properties and environmental impact. The EU Commission is obviously concerned that the restriction of DBP under RoHS will cause significantly increased use in DIBP.

If the conclusion that DIBP is not significantly used in EEE stands — or likely to be used as a substitute; there will be little justification for the EU Commission to list DIBP as a RoHS Annex II restricted substance.

The “Study for the Review of the List of Restricted Substances under RoHS2” had already recommended four substances for potential restriction under the RoHS 2 Directive (see February 5, 2014 blog post). The EU Commission has now signalled that they intend to consider a fifth substance for possible restriction by requesting a detailed assessment of the impacts of a possible restriction of diisobutyl phthalate (DIBP) in EEE. DIBP had been identified as one of eight the highest priority substances in the study. The EU Commission is concerned that the restriction of the DBP Phthalate will lead to additional use of DIBP as a substitute. However, DIBP has many of the same hazards as DBP and these hazards will become more prevalent with increased use of the substance.

The EU Commission is undertaking the new study to (1) conduct a detailed assessment of DIBP, and (2) capture additional usage data for 21 of the priority substances in EEE. The EU Commission expects the consultants to conduct Stakeholder consultations as part of the process.

The public consultation closes on April 4, 2014. The overall duration of the contract is expected to be 5 months, suggesting that the EU Commission will try to hit it’s July 22, 2014 goal for completing the review of the RoHS 2 Annex II list of restricted substances and producing a delegated act to amend the Annex.

The final report delivered to the EU Commission by Umweltbundesamt on the study to review substances for potential RoHS restrictions identified and ranked a priority list of 4 substance groups, 56 substances and 11 elements. These 71 entries were assigned to eight priority levels based on hazard categories and waste management criteria.

Eight substances were identified in the highest priority category of which four were subject to detailed technical assessments and were ultimately recommended for restriction. The substances recommended for restriction are the brominated flame retardant Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD) and the three Phthalates (DEHP, BBP and DBP). The other four substances in the highest priority category were the Phthalate DIBP, the chlorinated flame retardant tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate, the brominated flame retardent 2,3-dibromo-1-propanol, and Dibromoneopentyl-glycol.

Four substances were identified in the second highest priority category, comprising:

• antimony trioxide
• diethyl phthalate (DEP)
• Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) and
• medium-chain chlorinated paraffins

Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) is dear to many electronics manufacturers because of its common use in FR4 printed circuit board material and its listing as a priority substance has been particularly controversial.

Polyvinylchloride (PVC) (CAS# 9002-86-2) is the lone substance in the third priority group. PVC is not considered to be particularly hazardous in its plastic form during the use phase of a product; however, it poses environmental challenges during waste management.

The fourth, fifth, and sixth highest priority groups include five, four, and two substances respectively:
Fourth priority group:

• the Be-(compounds): beryllium metal and beryllium oxide (BeO)
• the Ni-compounds: nickel sulphate and nickel sulfamate (=Nickel bis sulfamidate) and
• Indium phosphide

Fifth Priority group:

• di-arsenic pentoxide;
• di-arsenic trioxide;
• cobalt dichloride; and
• cobalt sulfate.

Sixth Priority group:

• cobalt metal;
• nonylphenol.

The substances identified in the top several priorities are likely to undergo more detailed assessment for possible restriction in future RoHS reviews of Annex II (Restricted Substances). EEE manufacturers and suppliers should be monitoring the use of these substances in their products.

The report is available from the consultant’s website.