IEC 62474 – Material Declaration for Products of and for the Electrotechnical Industry
Industry Regulations like RoHS, WEEE, REACH, Prop 65 and Conflict Minerals have sprouted from product chemical composition management. Collecting material declaration has thus become the foundation of compliance management in the electrical and electronics industry. Multiple compliance regulations across the globe today, drive manufacturers in tracking and managing this information on a continuous basis. The electro-technical industry and various companies associated with it make use of material declarations for tracking and declaring specific information regarding the material composition of the various final products. The new international standard of IEC 62474 aims to harmonize the requirements of various members within the supply chain and also improve economic efficiencies. The role of new standard IEC 62474 To synchronize the requirements across the industry and to reduce the cost of data management, IEC has come up with a new standard called IEC 62474. This standard can act as the basis of data exchange for material composition data and provide material declarations. IEC 62474 specifies: Material declaration content, including terms of substances, substance class and material groups. It also provides data standards for software developers to create applications to manage this data. Information offered in the IEC 62474 database There are four types of information provided in the IEC 62474 database Declarable substance groups and declarable substances: This section contains substances and substance groups with information like “reportable applications”, “reporting threshold” and “reporting requirement” Reference Substances: This section contains an indicative list of specific substances that are included with in the substance group. This list is an informative list and not an exhaustive one. Material classes: This list includes designated material classes that need to be included in material declarations, if contained in the product. XML schema for materials declaration: In this category an XML schema and developer table is available for download. Getting material declarations for the entire product Bill of Material is an important activity in the compliance effort of most companies. IEC 62474 is a step forward to support the mammoth task undertaken by companies every year to conform to the Environmental Compliances. What are the substances that should be declared? The substances that form a part of the products manufactured in the electrical and electronics industry should be mentioned or declared in this material declaration file as set according to the IEC 62474 standard. The manufacturing chemicals or substances that react and form other chemicals and/or otherwise do not continue to remain within the product are not needed to be reported. Nevertheless, in certain cases, a chemical reaction once started may not reach completion and traces of some unreacted quantities of any intermediate chemical substance may continue to remain within the finished product. Such chemicals must be reported at all circumstances. If the intermediate chemicals are presented in the declarable substances list of IEC 62474 and quantity of this component remains above reporting threshold in final product, then that needs to be included in the report. If that is not done, then the material declaration is not going to be in compliance with the requirements of IEC 62474. A user may simply state that their firm within the electrotechnical industry is compliance with the norms as presented by the IEC 62474 provided they have included in the list all the reportable substances and the varied substance groups which are present within the final product in quantities above the final reporting threshold.
The path ahead in Conflict Mineral Compliance
In May, 2014 (deadline for submitting the Conflict mineral compliance report to SEC for the year 2013), we saw many listed companies submitting their form SD and conflict mineral reports to SEC to complete their reporting obligations. During the same period most of the associated frameworks were also undergoing changes. This caused amplified challenges for the electronic industry and its supply chain, to manage the compliance effort comprehensively. However the efforts undertaken by EICC, GeSI, CFSP, OECD and IPC to give clarity and direction to the industry in a short time frame were noteworthy. We reviewed the SD form submissions of several publicly listed companies to understand the nature of research done that led to the ‘conflict mineral declaration of 2014’. We observed, towards the end of 2013 and beginning of 2014 all companies frantically sent out CMRTs and started collecting responses from their supply base. Also most of the companies gave out their CMRT forms at a company level without effectively identifying the smelters in their supply chain. Additionally the effort done on implementing the due diligence process was very limited. This resulted in responses that were similar across the supply base and comprised very limited mineral traceability information. The final outcome was, most companies provided their compliance status as ‘Unknown’. We understand that the conflict mineral compliance and reporting process is expected to evolve further in the coming years, hence in this article we are sharing a few areas of primary concern for the companies: The upcoming challenge in conflict mineral compliance will be to show incremental progress in the efforts on a year-on-year basis. Most companies will have to invest effort in identifying smelters in their supply chain. Identifying the product chemical composition and driving product level CMRT declarations from the suppliers will be a crucial step for companies to channelize their efforts towards high impact suppliers, who account for the major percentage of conflict minerals in their products. The due diligence process implementation will have to be performed in alliance with expert consulting companies. Because of the already existing regulations in compliance (including ROHS, REACH, WEEE and Prop 65), most electronic companies will have to reach out to their supply base to collect diverse information. Due to the vast depth of efforts and the evolving nature of conflict minerals compliance, most companies might resort to end-to-end conflict mineral solution providers rather than running this as a special project within their finance or compliance department. Most software solution providers in the environmental compliance area have already extended their solution to include conflict mineral modules which will make this consolidation more easy and achievable. The ideal strategy for the industry will be to consolidate these activities with the conflict mineral RCOI.
Impact of the ROHS2 directive on Medical Device Manufacturers
While Medical Device manufacturers have had complex rules governing the manufacture and sale of their products, they have been exempted from most environmental regulations regarding hazardous substances. However, with the extension in scope of European Union’s (EU) ‘Directive 2011/65/EU’ in July 2014, RoHS compliance became mandatory for Medical Device manufacturers. ‘Directive 2011/65/EU’ (RoHS2 recast) focuses on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment, thereby requiring every manufacturer selling to the EU market to re-evaluate their inventory and ensure compliance with the recast RoHS and WEEE directives. Medical Device manufacturers are obligated to ensure and demonstrate compliance with the directive. The implications of Non-Compliance to the RoHS2 directive are grave and will prevent the product from carrying a ‘CE’ mark and eventual removal of the product from the market. In order to demonstrate compliance to the RoHS2 recast, Medical Device Manufacturers are required to Define their product and identify the directives applicable to it Source RoHS compliant material from suppliers & analyse and identify material changes needed to comply with the RoHS2 directive Show proof of compliance to RoHS2 recast by drawing up required technical documentation surrounding their product including conformity risk assessment report, test reports for each part Cite relevant harmonized standards applicable to the device Maintain a register of non-conforming products Provide explanations as to why certain parts do not include test reports Analyze their internal production and implement an appropriate internal production control procedure in line with the recast Draw up an EC declaration of Conformity and affix the ‘CE’ mark on the finished product Be wary of new materials introduced to the medical equipment and ensure that the equipment is tested & re-certified Include a complete evaluation of the product against the list of Restricted Substances by 2014 Medical Device Manufacturers now facing the daunting task of understanding the RoHS2 directive, identifying the rules and regulations impacting their products and providing relevant documentation to demonstrate full compliance. Medical Device Manufacturers have to get comfortable with requirements of RoHS2 directive as fast as they can in order to maintain their competence in EU market.
How the US Court stay going to affect your Conflict Mineral efforts.
Introduction to Conflict mineral law : The United States Dodd Frank Act, Section 1502 requires manufacturing companies to identify and disclose to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the source of 3TG minerals- tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold used in their products when those minerals originate from or around the the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Obligation of Conflict Mineral manufacturers : The SEC law transpired in to an induistry compliance process as below. 1 Determine Applicability – Does the issuer fall under the regulation? Do products and parts contain 3TG minerals? 2 Perform RCOI – Identify if the country of origin of the 3TG minerals is in the DRC region. 3 Due Diligence – For 3TG minerals sourced from the DRC region, conduct due diligence over the chain of custody 4 Determine Status – Assess supplier, part and product level conflict mineral status 5 Report – Fulfill SEC and customer reporting requirements. Challenge to the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court : U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and the National Association of Manufacturers — had argued that the SEC conducted a flawed rulemaking and failed to weigh the costs of new regulations. The challenge by these association is that, the conflict minerals rule and Section 1502 of Dodd-Frank represent, government compelled speech in breach of the First amendment. The Manufacturers asserted that the conflict minerals regime is unlawful and compels companies to make an ideologically driven, rather than fact based, statement about their own products, namely, that the products have not been found to be conflict-free. They argued that, this type of speech forces companies to denounce their own products based on information that is speculative, rather than fact based. The Manufacturers also objected to the requirement that companies post conflict minerals reports and information on their corporate websites, arguing that those websites are “Our space”. During argument the Manufacturers clarified that they do not challenge the requirement to report factual information about conflict minerals in their products to the SEC. Their First Amendment challenge does not extend to the SEC’s ability to take that factual information and make its own judgments about whether a company’s products are conflict free. Rather the objection is to the requirement that companies apply that ideological label to their own products and post conflict minerals information on their own corporate websites. Stay by US court : On April 14, 2014, the U.S. Court of plea for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC“) rule requiring issuers to disclose whether they use “conflict minerals” in their products was unconstitutional because it would compel speech in violation of the First Amendment.The circuit court remanded the matter to the district court, from where this case was appealed, for further consideration The circuit court found the label conflict free to be a “metaphor that conveys moral responsibility for the Congo war and that forcing a company to use that language interferes with First Amendment protections. The SEC argued that rational basis review is appropriate because the conflict free label discloses purely non- ideological information. The circuit court disagreed, finding that rational basis review is the exception, not the rule in First Amendment cases. While the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that rational basis review applies to certain disclosures of purely factual and uncontroversial information, the circuit court relied on a previous ruling to hold that this is limited to cases in which disclosure requirements are reasonably related to the State’s interest in preventing deception of consumers. No party in the case had suggested that the conflict minerals rule was related to preventing consumer deception, and in the district court the SEC admitted that it was not. The circuit court found that the SEC failed to present any evidence that a less restrictive approach would not achieve the rule’s intended purpose. The circuit court considered alternatives to regulating speech for example issuers could use their own language to describe their products or the government could compile its own list of products that it believes are affiliated with the Congo war based on information issuers submit to the SEC. Without any evidence that alternatives would be less effective, the circuit court dismissed the SEC’s claim that the restriction to speech as enforce by the disclosure requirement is to achieve the rule’s purpose. As a result, the circuit court found the SEC’s conflict minerals disclosure rule violates the First Amendment, to the extent the SEC rule and the underlying statute require issuers to report to the SEC and to state on their websites that certain of their products have not been found to be DRC conflict free. SEC Partial Stay : The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a partial stay of its conflict minerals rule. The SEC’s order stayed the effectiveness of only those portions of Rule 13p-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and Form SD that would require issuers to make statements in conflict minerals reports that the U.S. Court plea’s for the District of Columbia Circuit held would violate the First Amendment. Thus, only the requirement that issuers report in a conflict minerals report to be filed with the SEC and posted on the issuer’s publicly available website that any of their products have not been found to be DRC conflict free is stayed. The stay will remain in place pending conclusion of the litigation involving the rule. In addition, the order denied the motion for stay filed with the SEC by the appellants in the case before the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, who had petitioned the SEC to stay the effectiveness of the entire rule. The SEC’s order is consistent with the recent statement published by the Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance (CorpFin) in response to the court’s ruling (Statement) that indicated June 2, 2014 remains the deadline for issuers to file any required Form SDs and conflict minerals reports and indicated that the CorpFin
Your Responsibility in EU REACH Compliance
Posted Under: REACH Compliance Services About REACH Compliance Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) is the system for controlling chemicals in the EU/EEA. REACH entered into force in 1 June 2007. REACH addresses most of the chemical substances that are manufactured in, or imported into, the EU. This can be A substance on its own A substance in a mixture A substance that makes up an ‘Article’ REACH is the strictest law to date regulating chemical substances and will affect industries throughout the world. REACH entered into force in 1 June 2007, with a phased implementation over the next decade. How REACH Compliance helps Companies? Information on the properties and hazards of substances are needneeded to be collected and assessed as per this regulation. REACH establishes procedures for it. Companies need to register their substances and to do this they need to work together with other companies who are registering the same substance. The substances manufactured or imported into the EU in quantities of 1 tonne per year or more need to be registered. In principle, REACH applies to all chemical substances; those used in industrial processes, day-to-day lives, cleaning products, paints , articles such as clothes, and furniture etc. Therefore, the regulation has an impact on most companies across the EU. What is important Before starting the procedures for becoming REACH compliant, it is important to identify who you are and what is your role under REACH. And you need to understand the ways it might affect you. First you have to ask yourself what you do in your business and where chemicals might be used. REACH impacts on a wide range of companies across many sectors, even those who may not think of themselves as being involved with chemicals. Almost every company in the European Union will be bounded by a new responsibility under REACH. There are different types of REACH duty holder, which are explained below to see how you fit in. Duty holders If you make chemicals, either to use yourself or to supply to other people (even if it is for export), You are called Manufacturer under REACH and you will probably have some important responsibilities under REACH. If you buy anything from outside the EU/EEA, It may be individual chemicals, mixtures for onwards sale or finished products, like clothes, furniture or plastic goods;you are called Importer and you likely to have some responsibilities under REACH. Most companies use chemicals, sometimes even without realizing it, any business using chemicals can be categorized under Downstream users, which probably includes most businesses in some way .Therefore you need to check your obligations if you handle any chemicals in your industrial or professional activity. You might have some responsibilities under REACH. Other actors in the supply chain such as distributors also can be a part of this category. If you are a company established outside the EU, your category is Companies established outside the EU, and you are not bound by the obligations of REACH, even if you export their products into the customs territory of the European Union. The responsibility for fulfilling the requirements of REACH, such as preregistration or registration lies with the importers established in the European Union, or with the Only Representative of a non-EU manufacturer established in the European Union. Obligations Manufacturer Manufacturer: A manufacturer is somebody based in the EU/EEA that produces or extracts a substance. This could be by chemical synthesis, by smelting or by extracting them from another sources. Companies that simply blend substances together not generally manufacturers; however,they should check this, especially when mixing acids and bases. Duty: If you want to continue to manufacture chemicals covered by REACH you will need to register them with the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) in Helsinki. Registration means providing a package of technical information on the chemical and its hazards. Registration is phased over a period of years based on tonnage levels and in some cases the hazards of the chemical. EU manufactures shall ask for or prepare the latest Safety Data Sheets according to REACH and CLP regulation if the substances or preparations meet the criteria for classification as hazardous. They shall communicate information about the safe use of chemicals (risk management measures) along the supply chain in the format of SDS/exposure scenario Importer Importer: If you directly import anything from outside the EU/EEA, be it chemical substances (including metals), mixtures, articles, or articles that substances intended for release, then its quite possible that you may have some responsibilities under REACH. Duty: If you want to continue to import chemicals covered by REACH you will need to register them with the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) in Helsinki. Companies outside the EU cannot register chemicals themselves but can appoint an EU-based agent called ‘Only Representative’ to act on behalf of their EU-based importer. EU importers will be exempt from REACH registration if their non-EU suppliers have registered by appointing REACH Only Representative(OR); however, importers need to confirm with their suppliers’ OR that they are on the inventory of importers and their tonnage and uses are covered by the registrations of OR. This can be done by asking for REACH Certificate of Compliance from the only representative. Rest of your obligations are very same as that of manufacturers which described already. Downstream user Downstream user: They are companies or individuals who use a chemical substance,either on its own or in a mixture, in the course of their industrial or professional activities. Downstream users have a key role to play in advancing the safe use of chemicals by implementing safe use at their own site and communicating relevant information both to their suppliers and their customers. They can be Distributors. Distributors are anyone who only stores and places on the market a substance (on its own or in a mixture) for third parties. Placing on the market may be supply or simply making a substance available, and may be in return for payment or free of charge. A retailer is a
Effect of REACH on SME’S
Posted Under: REACH Compliance Services REACH Consulting Services REACH is world’s strictest chemical law, for any business in European Union either large or small.From the starting itself, one of the main concern was how SME’s (Small and medium enterprises) could adapt to the Regulation. After all, almost 27,600 companies in EU market are SMEs (95% of all firms). Already seven years are over after the implementation many of these fears are still hanging around. Assuming no significant changes are introduced to REACH. SMEs importance in European Union (EU) 99% of all companies in the EU are SMEM 23 million SMEs employ 75 million people SME create one in every two new jobs SME are responsible for more than 50% of the total value-added created by businesses in the UK SMEs pay 80% of EU taxes and are therefore essential components of growth of Europe This means that the EU growth strategy depends upon a stable and healthy business environment for SMEs Around 25,000 REACH registrations have already been submitted. By the 31 May 2013, 3,215 companies submitted 9,084 registration dossiers to ECHA. Since the start of REACH in 2008, a total of 6,598 substances have been registered. For the 2010 and 2013 REACH registration deadlines, the amount of dossiers submitted by SMEs amounted to 14% and 20%, respectively About REACH The strictness of the regulation can only be justified, if the benefits are impressive and outplay the costs by a large margin. But ECHA is speaking about health and environmental benefits, And the increase in job opportunities which is not convincing SME’s than its problems. The 2013 REACH Review also tells about benefits which will be effective in only ten to twenty years and acknowledges that the benefits for SME’s do not seem to compensate the costs for the process to get compliant. In general, it is expected that larger companies will have more options and ways available to comply with regulatory demands in comparison to small ones. Cost and administrative problems of REACH for SME Now the REACH has taken its Role on SMEs, which is of serious concern because SMEs are the backbone of the economy, and it is important to have the right balancing conditions to get the economy moving again by helping SMEs. The 2013-2018 deadline means that REACH is highly going to affect on SME now.. Submitting quality dossiers is a significant resource cost for SME The main problem is related to an uneven share of the costs. SMEs will be having more disadvantage compared to bigger or very large companies, particularly as they are dealing with lower volumes of chemicals than bigger firms. This results in higher costs per unit. Most SMEs use consultants for registration activities. It is estimated that the costs of consultants correspond to some 10 % of registration costs, at times more like 10% – 25%. Even though 82% of the pre-registering companies were SMEs , yet only a few of these have actually completed the registration process up to now. In addition, dealing with more substances also implicates that more efforts are necessary to communicate information along the supply chain. As a result, REACH seems to lead to a competitive disadvantage for SMEs, due to costs, training, 1resources required, as well as other factors including uncertainty in the case of some substances. Major sources of costs relate to testing, consultants and other forms of support to navigate through REACH complexity, but costs related to restructuring of existing plants in order to comply with stricter requirements for containment systems may be necessary, too. In addition, the time r enquired to become and remain compliant e.g. fulfil processes like volume tracking, submission/maintenance of registrations, preparation of SDSs (safety data sheets) with exposure scenarios and communication up and down the supply chain is expensive and may draw attention and resources away from other business processes It is to be noted that the financial situation of companies is made more difficult due to REACH, the overall direct costs are much higher than initially published: some 1.1 billion (in euros of 2011) in 2003 as against some 2.1 billion today. The new and more robust estimate, based on empirical evidence this time, is nearly double the amount in the 2003 Commission Impact Assessment. And in absolute terms no less than 1 billion this difference it is sizeable, too. The costs of access to data in a SIEF (for data sharing in case of joint registration, based on so-called Letters-of-Access [LoA] ) were not foreseen In general due to lower volumes, unit costs are higher for SMEs in SIEF’s than for large companies, and when they add up i.e. if there are many substances the cost Competitiveness of SMEs becomes a serious problem. Moreover, additional expenses will have to be incurred when updates of the dossier are needed. Is the diversion of R&D resources to REACH-compliance, which hampers innovation. Besides for direct work on compliance, resources from R&D are also increasingly used for investigations on substitution of raw materials, either by replacing non-REACH compliant suppliers with REACH compliant suppliers. Extended Safety Data Sheets (eSDS) often requires complex interactions and information Exchange within the supply chain, triggering the need for IT tools to manage these streams Adequately and provide insight in the? ill of materials These tools are available in the Market, but are expensive and need to be tailor made for the company. SMEs often have less overview of their tasks and may look for cheap solutions that in the end meet only a part of their specific needs The administrative burden of supply chain communication is large, as all communications and decisions need to be documented and may need to be made available to the authorities to prove compliance Regarding IT tools like REACH IT, IUCLID, CHESAR, and the frequent updates of these tools from the ECHA side (the latter was often cited as a major source of frustration, because what seems like a minor IT change in Helsinki sometimes requires re-entering a
Hazardous Substances In Electrical And Electronic Toys
Posted Under: RoHS Compliance Services RoHS Consulting Services It is important that the significance of Children’s play toys are recognized as modern European societies face various economic, social and environmental challenges. Children’s play toys have a vital role in this modern world. To improve the intellectual and physical growth in children toys are essential. We can even say that toys are the intimate friends of children. Many countries have implemented rigorous safety measures on toys as most of the children who play with these toys are under the age of 5. Compared to adults, children are more sensitive to chemicals and their bodies should never be exposed to hazardous chemicals or materials. Chemicals are used in toys mainly to make them softer. There are certain chemicals that have been identified as hazardous and they are strictly prohibited from use during the manufacturing processes for toys. Therefore there are regulations created to control and forbid the use of hazardous chemical substances in toys. In July 1989, the British government adopted the EEC toy safety directive ( 88/378/EEC) and this regulation came in to effect on the 1st of January 1990.This directive ensures that there is free circulation of toys and all these toys are required to have a CE marking along with the name and the address of the first supplier. In 2012, a final report was prepared for the European Commission, which revealed that some of the member states had argued stating toys, irrespective of whether their primary function uses electrical energy, they are under the scope of RoHS as these toys are under the category 7 of the WEEE Directive. These Member States are known to have considered all toys that use electrical energy to fall under the scope of RoHS. For MS national legislation all EE toys, including the secondary function toys have been under the scope of RoHS and consequently the expectation is that the national requirement may be that all EE toys must be RoHS 2 compliant by January 2013. The original toy directive that is 88/378/EEC was published in 1988. The EC (European Commission) reviews and updates this directive periodically to ensure that it achieves its objectives. Recent technological developments in the toy industry have raised new issues with regard to the safety of toys in areas such as noise, chemicals, and choking hazards. As a result, a newer EU Toy Safety Directive named 2009/48/EC was introduced to strengthen and update the rules on toy safety. This directive (2009/48/EC) was adopted on May 11 2009 by the European commission and this came into effect on the 20th of July 2011. Benefits of RoHS EU Toy Safety Directive RoHS, an environmental directive, is independent from the EU Toy Safety Directive (2009/48/EC) and may be it would apply to all Electrical and Electronic Equipment, but EE toys are definitely included. In its recast, which is known as RoHS 2, the scope extends from toys with a primary electrical function (RoHS, Category 7) to all EE toys, including those whose electrical function is only secondary to the overall play value. For example, a cuddly toy that talks – its primary function as a cuddly toy was exempt by a guidance document from RoHS 1, but now it will fall under the scope of RoHS 2 because it is electrically powered to fulfill this intended function. Nitrosamines and nitrosatable substances shall be prohibited from use in toys that are intended to be used by children who are under the age of 36 months, or in other toys that are meant to be placed in the mouth if the migration of these substances are equal to or higher than 0.05 mg/kg and 1 mg/kg for nitrosamines and nitrosatable substances respectively. Although the overall level of compliance to RoHS in the EU is high, some of the product categories are problematic. According to all enforcement reports, the biggest problem is the presence of lead in imported electrical toys. In proportion to the Commission’s knowledge, the member states will control those activities that are focused on sold equipment and not on components, as the RoHS restrictions apply to the finished product. The Toy Industry Association supports and facilitates trade between the United States and the European Union. Mutual recognition could address most of the divergences in regulations that would burden companies who sell to both the markets while reinforcing consumer confidence that toys compliant with either standard can be trusted as safe for children. Moreover, establishing a strong regulatory cooperation agreement will ensure a joint U.S. – EU leadership in international regulations.This provides a basis for future trade agreements and also helps to provide a benchmark for the development of other standards pertaining to other countries.
Conflict Minerals Compliance – The Deadline Is Approaching
May 31, 2014 is a key date for all public companies listed with the SEC, as the first Conflict Minerals Report has to be filed by this day. The Conflict Minerals Rule enacted by the SEC,as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, requires certain public companies to provide disclosures on the use of conflict minerals in their products and whether they originated at mines run by warlords in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) or its nine adjoining neighbors. Compliance is mandatory for all SEC “issuers”, including foreign issuers, that manufacture or contract to manufacture products where “conflict minerals are necessary to the functionality or production” of the product. The rule was enacted as part of an effort to curtail human rights abuses in Africa by regulation of US public companies and also to provide transparency into corporate practices. The SEC rule does not specifically ban use of materials from such mines, but it requires companies to track and report the origin of the minerals through their supply chain. The aim is to dissuade companies from using minerals sourced at mines where human rights abuses take place and not engaging in trade that facilitates regional conflict. The SEC disclosure process involves the following steps Minerals that are not conflict free must be listed in the Conflict Minerals Report, which must be audited by an independent auditor. Additional documentation is also required for any materials that come from the affected countries to show that it meets the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) due-diligence procedures documenting and the materials are conflict free. The first Forms under the rule will be required for the calendar year ending December 31, 2013 and will need to be filed by 31 May 2014. For most companies compliance with the Conflict Minerals Rule will not be easy and will be time consuming with the SEC estimating that initial compliance costs could be between $3 billion to $4 billion,as the complete supply chain needs to be analyzed for source of minerals, particularly those contained in procured parts, assemblies or items purchased from vendors. The fact that the supply base is not geared to address these requirements and the information provided by them is not always accurate only adds to the challenge. Hence, it requires multidisciplinary teams working across product lines and tracing multiple supply chains for these materials and their origin. On one hand, committing to using only conflict-free materials can mean paying higher costs for those materials but on the other hand a company’s reputation and goodwill is at risk if its products include conflict minerals. Despite the challenges and oppositions raised against various sections of the rule in court, experts believe that ultimately compliance will be mandatory and in fact will be extended to include more industries currently exempt from the rule. Therefore, a company that is committed to a conflict-free business plan can leverage its status towards strategic competitive advantage and be seen as a good corporate citizen. Enventure is an industry leader in the compliance space and is one of the first companies to offer engineering services that will help you comply with this regulation.
EU RoHS 2 Compliance-Some of the important details that you must know
ROHS, the Directive to limit or rather ban the usage of dangerous substances in electrical and electronic equipments manufacturing, was put-forth by the European Union in February 2003. Five years after the launch of RoHS 1, EU has now adopted the new RoHS Directive or RoHS 2, with more rigid rules to put an end to the usage of toxic substances in electrical & electronic products manufacturing industry. However, there are a lot of companies and factories out there, who are not aware of the new RoHS 2 Directive. According to environmental compliance experts, RoHS 2 Directive will soon create a major impact on electronic industry, and electronic products manufacturing companies. RoHS 2 Directive was initially published in the Official Journal of EU, on July 1st, 2011, and entered in to force on July 21st 2011. According to EU & environmental compliance experts out there, RoHS 2 Directive will replace RoHS 1 on January 3rd, 2013. Hence electronic products manufacturing companies should have a comprehensive idea about the new RoHS Directive rules and regulations RoHS 2 covers a wide range of products including small & large household appliances, IT & telecommunication, consumer equipments, lighting equipments, electric and electronic tools, and medical devices. But RoHS 2 doesn’t apply to certain products like military equipments, space equipments, equipments which are designed and manufactured to form the part of equipments which are not within the scope, large scale industry tools, large scale fixed installations, various means of transport, non-road mobile machines, active implantable medical devices, and photovoltaic panels. Therefore electronic products manufacturing companies should have a very clear idea about product categories of EU RoHS. RoHS 1 was brought into force to curb or rather completely ban the usage of 6 major hazardous materials – lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyl, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers. According to the reports of EU, these chemicals are highly toxic to humans and extremely harmful to the environment too. RoHS 2 also restricts the usage of all the above mentioned chemicals, with the help of more rigid rules and regulations. Electrical and electronic products companies in the EU are legally bound to obey the rules of EUL legislation. This also applies to the companies that export electrical and electronic products to any of the countries in the EU. Unawareness of these rules will never be considered as a viable excuse, and therefore it is very important to learn about RoHS , to ensure that your products are fully RoHS compliant. To know about the rules and regulations of EU, companies can contact environmental compliance experts like Enventure Technology Services. We help companies comply to RoHS and its different country flavours, by providing them with a comprehensive audit report about their products, and the materials that they use in the Bills of Materials during product manufacturing. Our experts will also provide environmental compliance consulting services, bill of material assessment, product conversion, and other required solutions to help companies understand and comply with the EU directives. Need any guidance on environmental compliance & RoHS Directive? Drop us a line and we will get back to you as soon as possible!
Must-Know Facts You Probably Don’t Know About Conflict Minerals
It’s been almost a century since Democratic Republic of Congo has been consistently exploited for its vast natural resources & mineral wealth. According to the reports submitted before the Congolese Parliament, a few years back, the investigation committee had uncovered some really shocking details about the ongoing illegal exploitation of Congo‘s natural resources, and the illegal trade of Congo’s Conflict Minerals. Conflict Minerals are mined in conditions of ‘armed conflicts and human rights abuses’. Minerals including casseterite, wolframite, coltan, and gold are widely extracted from Congo, especially from its eastern parts. These minerals are purchased by various multinational electronic companies across the world, and are widely used to manufacture of a variety of electronic devices including mobile phones, laptops, MP3 players, and various other consumer electronic items. Conflict Minerals Regulation Act aims to put an end to the constant exploitation and atrocities going on in Congo, by closely monitoring the issuers & the companies that use Conflict Minerals. According to this act, both domestic and foreign providers of Conflict Minerals, as well as the companies that use them, are forcefully obliged to comply with Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Conflicts Minerals Provision), and therefore should disclose the details of the Conflict Minerals that they use, in their annual reports. This public disclosure will highlight the exploitation and trade of minerals from Democratic Republic of Congo and its adjoining countries. Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was passed by the US Senate on May 20, 2010, and was signed by American President Barack Obama on July 21, 2010. According to experts, this Act will completely purge the funding of armed groups in Democratic Republic of Congo. Armed groups in and around Congo make millions of dollars every year by selling Conflict Minerals and their derivatives, to various companies across the world. According to the Conflict Minerals Regulation Act, companies are legally bound to publically disclose whether their products contain conflict minerals or not, while submitting their annual reports. Companies that use Conflict Minerals should file a separate report along with their annual report, stating the steps taken to properly exercise the due diligence on the source and the chain of custody of the conflict minerals, the details of the products which are not “DRC Conflict Free”, the processing facilities, the country of origin of the Conflict Minerals, and the efforts to determine the origin. Such reports would help in getting better transparency and accountability from those companies & issuers who handle Conflict Mineral ores or their derivatives. Enventure Technologies, global leaders in environmental compliance services, provide Conflict Minerals traceability auditing & consulting services to help companies and businesses understand and comply with the Conflict Minerals Regulation requirements that may impact the manufacture of their products. We have a team of environmental compliance experts who can address your questions regarding Conflict Minerals Disclosure, and provide you with the needed guidance with the compliance requirements of Securities and Exchange Commission. Need any guidance on environmental compliance & Conflict Minerals Disclosure? Drop us a line and we will get back to you as soon as possible!