Ms. Margot Wallstrom
Commissioner for the Environment
European Commission
45, Avenue D'Auderghem
Brussels B-1040 Belgium
Tel: 32-2-298-18-00
Fax: 32-2-298-18-99

Mr. Erkki Liikanen
Commissioner for Enterprise and Information Society
European Commission
45, Avenue D'Auderghem
Brussels B-1040
Tel: 32-2-295-79-85
Fax: 32-2-295-85-61

Mr. Pascal Lamy
Commissioner for Trade
European Commission
45, Avenue D'Auderghem
Brussels B-1040
Fax:32-2-298-13-99

Mr. David Byrne
Commissioner of Health and Consumer Protection
European Commission
45, Avenue D'Auderghem
Brussels B-1040 Belgium

Fax: 32-2-298-14-98

Dear Ms. Wallstrom, Mr. Liikanen, Mr. Lamy, and Mr. Byrne:

We support the European Union (EU) initiatives on Producer Responsibility, as noted in our letter to Commissioners Bjerregaard, Currie and Bangemann, sent in Spring 1999. A good final directive will have international benefits, since it will encourage similar Clean Production initiatives outside Europe, particularly within the United States.

However, we note that the latest draft of the Directive has been considerably weakened. In particular, we are alarmed that the provisions mandating the use of recycled plastic have been dropped and those concerning brominated flame retardants have been weakened.

We understand that the weakening of the Directive is a direct consequence of the lobbying activities of the US Trade Representative at the request of the American Electronics Association (AEA), the largest trade association of the electronics industry, with more than 3000 members. The AEA is using international trade law as a weapon to dictate global health and environmental policy to protect the economic interests of its members.

We are now writing to encourage you to stay strong and vigilant in the face of this aggressive lobbying and reinstate the provisions in the earlier drafts. We want to re-emphasize the need to uphold the following three points.

First, we are in complete agreement with you that the producer or distributor of all electronic products and electrical equipment must be financially responsible for managing the product at the end of its life. This is because only the producer has control over the design of a product. We do not believe local authorities or the public at large should have to pay for waste management costs because we, as consumers, have no participation in the decision-making process at the product design state. Proposals that place the costs of waste management on local authorities require that local taxpayers have to pay not only for the product but also for the costs of managing the hazardous materials that producers choose to use within their products such as PVC plastics, flame retardants, lead and other hazardous materials. We believe that placing the financial responsibility for take-back on the producer will encourage better product design such as durability, repair-ability and cleaner material use.

Second, we strongly support the current requirement of the European Commission to ensure, as a minimum, the phase-out brominated flame retardants, cadmium, lead, mercury and hexavalent chromium within electronic products. These chemicals are highly hazardous and persistent in the environment, are a known health danger and some are even acknowledged hormone-disrupting chemicals. The use of these chemicals in domestic products must be phased out as a priority. Only this will help to clean up the entire product chain and alleviate worker health problems within the electronic industry, as well as to reduce these hazardous emissions to the environment upon disposal. However, this is only a beginning and we ask that the Commission include PVC plastic and all halogenated materials for phase-out as well. The goal of this Directive should be the elimination of all carcinogenic, toxic and endocrine-disrupting chemicals in all electronic and electrical equipment.

Third, we agree with the draft text that incineration or energy recovery from incineration is not considered reuse or recycling. We oppose the use of incineration as a possible disposal route for end of life electronic and electrical waste. We believe that producers should first design products for durability and upgradability, thus reducing the flow of materials from resource use to final end of life. Recycling of materials at the end of a product's life must eventually cause no harm to worker health or the environment, hence the need for toxic-free materials within the product. We note that the first draft directive had no inclusion of incineration as a possible disposal route, but now this has been reinstated as a possibility for 10-30 percent of electronic scrap of some products. We urge the Commission to re-instate the previous exclusion of all incineration.

Yours sincerely, (organizations for identification purposes only)