SMT - The Evolution of Environmentally Conscious Material Management

Now that the July 1, 2006, European Union (EU) RoHS deadline has come and gone, the electronics industry is left looking back — trying to determine the impact that this legislation has had on our industry. At one EMS provider*, through work with a diverse global customer base, it has been noted that this legislation has affected not only original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) that place product onto the market, but many other companies as well.

In the consumer product market, for example, most OEMs that predicted that RoHS would impact them conducted a bill of materials (BOM) risk analysis. During that process, companies attempted to access the global supply base, and actively surveyed suppliers to obtain comprehensive information on the compliance status of components. Typically, these organizations would also access component-engineering skills to interpret the validity of the data collected, also taking into consideration any information that could affect manufacturing processes. With some exceptions that required re-design and re-qualification, the majority of components were either identified as compliant, or drop-in replacements were found and completely RoHS-compliant assemblies were ready for the 2006 deadline.

Across the industry, OEMs took several different approaches to complete BOM risk analyses. Initially, it was believed that obtaining certificates of compliance (CoC) from the supply base would be a sufficient way for OEMs to demonstrate component compliance. As time progressed, however, it was suggested that some EU member states would require a "due diligence" approach, through which a risk-mitigation strategy must be developed to evaluate each component that was to be used. The level of risk would depend on the material-content information available, and the probability of non-compliance and high-risk parts may warrant the need for material analysis to validate compliance status. This type of component testing could vary from relatively straightforward X-ray fluorescence (XRF) screening to full-scale chemical analysis using inductively coupled plasma (ICP) spectroscopy, gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GCMS), and ultra-violet/visible (UV/Vis) spectroscopy to determine chemical compositions of all homogeneous materials used in the component preparations (Figure 1).

For companies in high-reliability sectors that were not required to eliminate lead from their assemblies (i.e. exempt and out-of-scope companies), another challenge emerged — depletion in the supply of non-compliant components. This was driven by the reliance of these sectors on high-volume components that were in high demand by consumer electronics companies, many of which had transitioned to RoHS compliance. To complicate things further, components were often being changed over to lead-free without notice — leaving companies with unforeseen shortages that drove the need for expensive and resource-consuming recovery plans.

Based on the current view of the entire electronics supply chain, and experience with multiple industries and product types, we are aware that it is becoming increasingly difficult for OEMs to procure tin/lead components and other non-compliant components in today's environment. This results in price and minimum order quantity (MOQ) increases for non-compliant parts, and in some cases, component obsolescence. Once predictions, these issues now are becoming a reality, and may inadvertently act as a catalyst for exempt and out-of-scope OEMs — driving them to move compliance schedules forward or reconsider transitioning to compliance.

Component solder finish issues can escalate quickly from a supply chain problem to a technical problem. To date, a number of reliability concerns have been raised about using lead-free components at tin/lead process temperatures. Conversely, many tin/lead components cannot be processed at the higher processing temperatures required for lead-free components without resulting in significant reliability issues. In fact, studies have shown that dealing with mixed-metal assemblies actually is more challenging than dealing with lead-free assemblies. It is recommended that mixed-metal assemblies only be introduced when no other alternative exists, and after all appropriate qualifications are completed successfully.

A number of instances have come about in which lead-free parts arrive at a company's shipping dock without warning. For this reason, it is imperative that shipping-and-receiving staff and operators on the manufacturing floor understand how to identify and resolve this issue to mitigate the risk of mixed-metal assemblies on the production floor, and the potential for reliability and non-compliance issues.

Now that most players in the electronics industry are coming to terms with the affect of the EU's RoHS legislation, closer attention is being paid to new legislative initiatives surfacing in other regions. China, Japan, Korea, and several U.S. states all are in various stages of enacting some form of legislation similar to RoHS — each with a different approach to controlling potentially harmful substances. In addition to RoHS, the EU has three other major environmental laws beyond RoHS that are taking shape: Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE), Energy Using Products (EUP), and Registration, Evaluation, and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH).

Due to the outlined challenges, and this emerging global legislation, we are witnessing resurgence in BOM analyses in the electronics industry, as well as a slightly altered approach to environmental responsibility. OEMs are realizing that it is no longer enough to understand whether or not your assembly is compliant, it also is necessary to ensure that an intimate knowledge of chemical compositions, potentially toxic substances, expected availability, and high-risk components are available throughout an entire organization. This will not only ease compliance with new global legislation, but will also help eliminate potential surprises in the supply chain. In essence, it is quite simple — know what materials are inside your product, and understand their impact on the planet. SMT
*Celestica, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Marjory Craw-Ivanco, global engineering services director, Celestica, may be contacted via e-mail: mcrawiva@celestica.com. Andrew Dreyer, global engineering services, Celestica, may be contacted via e-mail: adreyer@celestica.com.

Add RSS Feed