|
Comments
View Comments: newest first | oldest first | threaded
Page 1 of 2   Next >   Last >>
WaqasAltaf
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re: Strict monitoring otherwise....
WaqasAltaf   6/20/2012 10:07:09 PM
NO RATINGS

The government deciding a format of labels and what wordings qualify as being understandable and adequately explanatory of the facts. This can either be in the form of predefinining the wordings (which wont be easy as there are limitless possibility of disposals that can cause healthcare issues) or approving the wordings to be printed on the packaging.


Barbara Jorgensen
User Rank
Blogger
China RoHS
Barbara Jorgensen   6/20/2012 3:49:17 PM
NO RATINGS

Another identity option would be the creation of a UL or CE-type of approval. It would certainly make things easier.

Dorothea Blouin
User Rank
Stock Keeper
Re: Strict monitoring otherwise....
Dorothea Blouin   6/20/2012 11:26:04 AM
NO RATINGS

Earlier wording in drafts of revisions of China RoHS connected this label  specifically to outlining health consequences of improper handling of e-waste (caveat - or at least the translations I saw made this connection - I don't know if the language changed or not in the latest because I can't read Chinese), and India E-waste followed with language for this label that looked similar.   

I don't think producers are qualified to write up something equivalent to a health warning label.  Just trying to think of what you would put on that label escapes me.  "Unsafe dismantling and handling of this product in lieu of proper disposal for purposes of precious metal extraction can lead to lung damage"?  Most warning labels have a format.  I think there is some assumption that "industry will come up with a label" similar to the assumption on the EUP (orange marking) that somehow industry would come up with a number of years for the EUP for each product - China ended up setting up guidelines that everyone uses.

 

WaqasAltaf
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re: Strict monitoring otherwise....
WaqasAltaf   6/20/2012 11:08:45 AM
NO RATINGS

@Dorothea

"Any ideas on how industry can fulfil this new labeling requirement?   Or is this going to be a problem? "

I think this is going to be a problem at first as the manufacturers wont be fully willing to disclose the actual facts completely. What will happen is that manufacturers will try to figure out what level of truth is acceptable to the masses and will not affect their sales. Disclosing beyond that cannot be expected unless strict audit is performed to ensure the compliance which itself will be a headache for the regulators.  

Dorothea Blouin
User Rank
Stock Keeper
Re: Strict monitoring otherwise....
Dorothea Blouin   6/20/2012 10:56:52 AM
NO RATINGS

There is a similar clause in India's E-Waste Handling rules.  This has to do with board cooking for precious metal extraction and other unsafe e-waste handling (and has to do indirectly with dumping, redirection, or exporting of e-wastes). Any ideas on how industry can fulfil this new labeling requirement?   Or is this going to be a problem? 

 

GN
User Rank
Stock Keeper
Re: Clarity unlikely
GN   6/20/2012 10:51:43 AM
NO RATINGS

2007 to 2012 and little progress. May never happen!!!

mfbertozzi
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re: Strict monitoring until....
mfbertozzi   6/20/2012 7:32:42 AM
NO RATINGS

@Ariella: well, I agree with the possibilities you have mentioned, at the end the issue will be still present in the future, definitely, until a worldwide recognized organism will be in charge of rules, controls and financial penalties in case of rules are not respected, isn't it?

Barbara Jorgensen
User Rank
Blogger
Clarity unlikely
Barbara Jorgensen   6/18/2012 4:39:18 PM
NO RATINGS

I agree that there's still a lot of uncertainty regarding China RoHS. The clause that Ariella points to requires exporters to identify and discuss the hazardous substances, yet another part of the law requires products be sent to China-certified authorities for testing. Why take the word of an organization such as the EPA when you are going to test it anyway?

Ariella
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re: Strict monitoring otherwise....
Ariella   6/16/2012 10:29:11 PM
NO RATINGS


The new proposals require that manufacturers and importers of electrical and electronic products provide information about the impact of a product on the environment and human health when the product is misused or disposed of in addition to the name and concentration of hazardous, the name of parts that contain hazardous substances, and whether a part or product can be recycled.

Though that sounds progressive, I am sure that such notices can be hidden and obscured in very unclear language. Would there be regulations about the notice, like say, food labels that have to identify key nutrional facts in a certain size font, etc.?

 


_hm
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re: Strict monitoring otherwise....
_hm   6/16/2012 11:07:17 AM
NO RATINGS

Yes, I agree. It is paradoxical.

 

Page 1 of 2   Next >   Last >>




Twitter Feed
EBN Online Twitter Feed
EBN Dialogue / LIVE CHAT
EBN Dialogue enables you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Open to the entire EBN community of electronics supply chain experts, these conversations see ideas shared, comments made, and questions asked and answered in real time. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats. Stay tuned and join in!
Archived Dialogues
Live Chat 01/15: CPOs Re-Shape Their Business Roles
Increasingly chief procurement officers (CPOs) are re-shaping their organizational role to focus on creating results far beyond cost controls. A new IBM survey explores how.
Live Chat 11/12: Examining the Cyberthreat to Supply Chains
The number of cyberattacks is on the rise and hackers are targeting the supply chain. Drew Smith, founder and CEO of InfoArmor, will be on hand to discuss the reality of today's threat landscape and what to do about it.