Comments of the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) on the Draft TECHNICAL Guidelines

Comments of the information Technology INdustry Council (ITI) on the draft TECHNICAL Guidelines on transbouNdary movements of electronic and electrical WASTE (e-waste), in particular regarding the distinction between waste and non-waste

June 15, 2012

The Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) is pleased to submit these comments and recommendations on the Secretariat’s draft Technical Guidelines on Transboundary Movements of Electronic and Electrical Waste (E-waste), in Particular Regarding the Distinction Between Waste and Non-waste (draft Technical Guidelines). ITI and its member companies support national and international efforts aimed at promoting legitimate refurbishment and reuse operations while ensuring end-of-life electrical and electronic equipmentis managed in an environmentally sound manner. Our member companies have

demonstrated a commitment to ensuring e-waste is recycled properly, and many companies have

adopted e-waste management standards that exceed national and international legal

requirements.

ITI is an active member of the Basel Convention’s Partnership for Action on

Computing Equipment (PACE), and our member companies continue to work with governments

worldwide to promote improved collection and recycling of end-of-life equipment. ITI supported the decisions taken by the parties to launch further work on the development of these Technical Guidelines as we believe they can help ensure that the Convention’s obligations are consistently applied to promote the proper management of e-waste while minimizing unnecessary restrictions on movements of valuable used devices for legitimate repair or reuse.

ITI’s overarching recommendations are as follows:

The Technical Guidelines should clarify the Convention’s applicability to transboundary movements of hazardous end-of-life electrical and electronic products destined for materials recovery or disposal.
The Technical Guidelines should avoid classifying as “wastes”certain used or unused products for which there is no intent to discard, includingcertain warranty returns, lease returns and shipments for repair to producers under documented servicearrangements where protocols for movement and management as productare transparent and well documented.
The parties should seek a balanced approach that recognizes the economic and environmental benefits arising from legitimate reuse and repair operations. New barriers to these exports would likely cause equipment holders to prematurely divert valuable equipment to waste recycling channels, thereby expanding the volume of e-waste generated. This approach would also reduce the availability of refurbished products that are critical to many communities in the developing world.

ITI recommends the Secretariat revise the draft Technical Guidelines so that the document explicitly encourages governments and stakeholders to:

Reduce the amount of e-waste generated by providing producers with the flexibility needed to move equipment for repair and continued use as products;
Reuse equipment directly or following repair or refurbishment to conserve energy and resources that would otherwise be consumed through the manufacture and distribution of new products; and,
Recycle end-of-life equipment in a manner that is consistent with the requirements for environmentally sound management of the Basel Convention, national legislation and the goal of promoting efficient materials recovery.

In light of the work underway as part of the Country-Led Initiative, ITI requests that the parties take a broader view of the issues surroundingthe management of used electrical and electronic equipment (EEE). We suggest that the parties consider a combination of actions under the Convention and in other contexts that will allow legitimate repair operations to continue, while improving the controls applied to movementsof end-of-life equipment destined for materials recovery or final disposal. ITI has offered specific drafting suggestions in the attached document that are consistent with the approach outlined above. We have also responded below to the questions presented in the Secretariat’s drafting Note on the Technical Guidelines dated May 8, 2012.

Should the Guidelines include a new appendix with non-hazardous equipment and hazardous components and substances?

ITI does not see value in attempting to draft new appendices to the Guidelines that would list non-hazardous equipment and, separately, equipment and components regarded as hazardous. In addition to the constituents and waste streams listed in Annex I, Annexes VIII and IX already describe certain types of e-waste that are presumptively hazardous and presumptively non-hazardous. Moreover, the technical guidelines developed under MPPI and PACE provide further detail on constituents and components of concern. We support the approach in the current draft(paragraph 50) in which additional guidance on hazardous constituents is provided. (Please note that ITI has recommended technical corrections to this section.)

Moreover, the drafting of more comprehensive appendices listing hazardous and non-hazardous EEEat end-of-life would present significant technical challenges; require frequent updating to reflect evolving product design and materials use; and encounter difficultywith reflecting the variation in national approaches to waste classification that typically inform the scope of the Convention in particular cases.

Should the Appendix II [functionality tests] be further developed, and if so, which additional tests would be available apart from the updated material from PACE?

Or, alternatively, would it be better to delete the Appendix and refer to the source material as suggested by the EU?

ITI supports the EU recommendation of deleting the current Appendix. For purposes of this document, a general approach and framework should be sufficient, provided agreement is reached on definitions (e.g., “Fully Functional”) and appropriate references are made to related guidance approved by the parties (e.g., from MPPI and PACE).

Should an appendix be added and should forms such as developed by PACE and adapted as appropriate be included in that Appendix?

ITI generally supports the preparation of model documents to facilitate consistent implementation of the Convention. We would support drawing on the work currently underway within PACE, including efforts to expedite notice and consent procedures to facilitate transboundary movements where such shipments are consistent with the requirement of environmentally sound management. However, we would view this work as a lower priority than the more fundamental waste/non-waste issues presented in the current draft Technical Guidelines.

Could examples of guidance for inspections be provided or sources of information be identified?

ITI supports the suggestion by Colombia that practical guidance be developed on health and safety precautions to be taken during the inspection of containers. This issue would appear to be best addressed by governments through a separate training and information sharing project rather than under the current effort to develop technical guidelines on waste/non-waste.

ITI views on the exclusion of warranty returns and other situations where used equipment moved for repair, refurbishment and continued use would not be “waste”

ITI believes it is critical for the parties to craft a well-reasoned and effective approach to ensuring that end-of-life equipment that is hazardous under the Convention is properly controlled, without expanding the Convention’s scope to goods moving in international markets for legitimate re-use. We recognize that some governments may choose to impose restrictions on the import of used goods destined for repair or refurbishment in response to particular environmental or other concerns. Rather than embracing an approach that would encourage allparties to restrict global trade in used equipment through the Convention’s controls and trade bans, we urge the parties to take a more measured approach that addresses the legitimate concerns around improper disposal and recycling while avoiding an expansion of the Convention to legitimate trade in goods destined for reuse.

Warranty Returns. ITI supports an exclusion from the waste definition for warranty returns so as to avoid unnecessary disruptions in customer returns and reverse logistics operations. These operations serve the dual purpose of enabling the prompt return of defective or non-functioning equipment to producers or their contractorsfor evaluation,while reducing the risk of improper disposal of non-functioning products. The parties have already recognized an exclusion for warranty returns under the MPPI, and other governments (including the EU) have adopted a similar approach. Reflecting current industry practice, ITI has offered specific drafting suggestions to ensure that this exclusion allows for the shipment of replacement products to customers from a pool of equipment rather than requiring the specific product to be returned to a specific user.

Lease Returns. ITI and a number of government representatives working under PACE have voiced support for an approach that would clarifythat equipment returned to producers under a documented lease program is outside the Convention’s requirements governing waste shipments. As a legal matter, such equipment should be presumptively non-waste as there is no intention on the part of any actors to “discard” the equipment. Similarly, a lease return would not implicate any of the operations listed in Annex IV of the Convention. Should such shipments be required to be made subject to the Convention, it is likely that large volumes of valuable, post-lease equipment will be prematurely diverted to recycling or disposal rather than recovered for continued use.

Equipment owners typically have detailed insights into the condition of and prospects for continued use of such products after repair, refurbishment or upgrade. ITI proposes that the exclusion be reserved for shipments that are appropriately packaged and accompanied by a proper declaration. As in the case of warranty returns, the clear balance of considerations favors an approach that encourages and facilitates trade in leased equipment . Doing so would promote producer responsibility and waste minimization.

Other Returns to Original Manufacturers and Servicing Programs. ITI has proposed several related limitations on the scope of “wastes” to be covered by the Convention that relate to other situations where used equipment is commonly moved through existing commercial channels back to producers. These operations, which further the goal of product stewardship, waste minimization and product reuse, include movements under contract servicing programs andshipments for root cause analysis at specialized facilities.

Procedure to follow for equipment that is moved for repair and refurbishment

As an interim measure, ITI supports the recommended voluntary procedure for certain shipments of equipment for repair, refurbishment and continued use that do not qualify as wastes. Parties should have the option to either (1) classify used products as wastes subject to the Convention’s controls and trade bans through the application of national legislation; or (2) allow the products to move for legitimate repair and refurbishment outside the Convention (with or without transparency mechanisms such as the proposed voluntary procedure).

As the issues concerning legal definitions and the management of used and end-of-life goodsare currently being addressed by governments as part of the Country-Led Initiative, the Secretariat should allow those discussions to proceed and, as appropriate, inform further development of theseTechnical Guidelines and any future controls on used equipment destined for reuse.

*****

For additional information, please contact Rick Goss, Vice President for Environment and Sustainability at the Information Technology Industry Council at ; +1-202-626-5724.

About ITI

The Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) is the premier voice, advocate and thought leader for the information and communications technology (ICT) industry. ITI is widely recognized as the high-tech sector's most effective advocacy organization in Washington D.C., and in various foreign capitals around the world. For additional information, please see

| Chair, Peter Cleveland, Intel | Vice Chair, Tim Regan, Corning | Dean Garfield, President and CEO |

| John Neuffer, Vice President for Global Policy | Rick Goss, Vice President for Environment and Sustainability |