January 7, 2011

Representative Darrell E. Issa

Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-6143

Dear Chairman Issa,

IPC – Association Connecting Electronics Industries thanks you for the opportunity to provide
insight on existing and proposed regulations that have negatively impacted the economy and job
growth.

We would like to call your attention to three regulations that will have a significant negative
impact on manufacturers, and therefore warrant oversight:
 The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) proposed modifications to the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) Rule (EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2009–0187). By requiring all manufacturers that recycle byproducts to report
those byproducts as new chemicals, the EPA will create burdensome, costly and
unnecessary regulatory requirements that penalize manufacturers for doing the right thing
- recycling.
 The EPA’s reopening of the Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) rule (EPA–HQ–RCRA–
2002–0031). The EPA’s decision to reopen the DSW rule, which was finalized in
October 2008 to lessen regulatory burdens blocking the recycling of secondary materials,
would impose significant regulatory burdens on recycling.
 The Security and Exchange Commission’s (SEC’s) proposed regulations on conflict
minerals (SEC Release No. 34-63547; File No. S7-40-10). The regulations being
developed by the SEC under Section 1502 of the recent Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
and Consumer Protection Act could impose extremely burdensome reporting
requirements on manufacturers, such as electronics manufacturers, that use tin, gold,
tantalum, and tungsten in their products.
Our concerns regarding these regulations are detailed below. Additionally, the comments we
submitted to the respective agencies on these issues are attached for your reference.
Representative Darrell E. Issa
January 7, 2011
Page 2

About IPC and the Electronic Interconnect Industry

IPC represents all facets of the electronic interconnect industry, including design, printed board
manufacturing and electronics assembly. Printed boards and electronic assemblies are used in a
variety of electronic devices that include computers, cell phones, pacemakers, and sophisticated
missile defense systems. IPC has 1,795 member companies located in the U.S. which employ an
estimated 90,000 people.

The U.S. has a competent, competitive and organized electronic interconnect industry. However,
an ever increasing number of regulatory burdens placed on companies have resulted in lost
business opportunities, lost revenue, lost jobs, and a dramatic consolidation of the industry. The
number of U.S. companies in the electronic interconnect industry has been significantly reduced
over the past twenty years.

In just the printed board industry alone, costly regulatory burdens combined with intense global
competition has resulted in a fifty percent reduction in the number U.S. PCB companies
and associated high-quality U.S. jobs. The ongoing reduction is troubling since U.S.
electronics companies provide much-needed jobs in the U.S. Companies comprising the U.S.
electronic interconnect industry need Congressional oversight on regulations impacting their
ability to conduct business, remain viable, and keep their staff employed.

EPA’s Proposed Modifications to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory Update
Reporting (IUR) Rule
We strongly believe that the EPA’s proposed modifications to the TSCA IUR rule warrant
oversight. We are concerned that EPA has proposed a number of changes to the TSCA IUR
reporting requirements that are extremely burdensome and provide no clear benefit to the public
or the environment. If finalized as proposed, the rule would subvert Congress’ original intent to
exempt byproducts from burdensome TSCA reporting requirements. The IUR rule is intended to
regulate new chemicals that are produced for a commercial intent/purpose; not byproducts.
EPA’s absurd interpretation that would render a byproduct a new chemical feedstock undermines
Congress’ intent and overreaches beyond TSCA’s mandate. If the TSCA IUR rule is finalized as
it currently reads, manufacturers that recycle byproducts will be required to submit costly, time-
consuming reports that may be useless due to poor data quality. We strongly encourage you to
conduct oversight of EPA’s proposed modifications to the TSCA IUR rule to ensure
manufacturers are not unduly burdened by erroneous reporting requirements.

Additionally, EPA’s proposed modifications to the TSCA IUR rule raise significant timing and
data quality concerns. The proposed modifications will apply to data collected in 2010, yet EPA
has not finalized the reporting requirements. EPA expects to finalize the rule in May 2011 that
will require reporting to begin on June 1, 2011, less than a month after the rules are promulgated.
This unfeasible short period will leave manufacturers with scant time to gather the required new
data or even understand the complex new reporting requirements. In addition to imposing a
significant and disruptive burden on manufacturers, it is likely that the data quality will be poor
Representative Darrell E. Issa
January 7, 2011
Page 3

due to the extremely limited time provided for manufacturers to gather and report data. We hope
that as a result of your oversight, EPA will delay the reporting requirements under the new
TSCA IUR guidelines by a minimum of one year to provide a more reasonable timeframe for
data gathering and reporting.

EPA’s Re-opening of the Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) Rule

Congress should also conduct oversight on EPA’s decision to reopen the DSW rule, a rule
finalized in October 2008, due to Environmental Justice (EJ) concerns raised by environmental
groups. The DSW rule was published to address multiple court decisions that EPA had
overreached their authority by regulating recycled secondary materials as hazardous waste. By
de-regulating secondary materials that are legitimately recycled, the DSW rule reduced
regulatory burdens on manufacturers recycling secondary materials. Now, in re-opening the rule
to readdress EJ issues that were already adequately addressed, EPA would greatly increase the
burden on manufacturers that are recycling secondary materials. We encourage you to conduct
oversight on the EPA’s attempts to undermine the ability of the DSW rule to promote the
recycling of secondary materials.

Proposed Security and Exchange Commission’s Regulations on Conflict Minerals

While IPC supports the underlying goal of Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which is to
prevent the atrocities occurring in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), we are concerned
about the potential significant effects that the implementation of the regulations may have on
U.S. manufacturing industries.

We are also concerned that the proposed regulations may cause unnecessary disruptions of the
minerals trade, which is vital to the livelihood of the people of the DRC. In order to minimize
these effects, without undermining the underlying legislative goals, IPC has recommended that
the SEC allow companies the flexibility to develop appropriate due diligence measures,
recognize ongoing efforts to improve the transparency of the supply chain, address the need to
phase in requirements, and provide the necessary time to implement these measures.

It is important that the regulations acknowledge the realities of the situation on the ground in the
DRC, the complexities of the international minerals trade, and the broad and diverse global
electronics supply chain. We encourage your office to work with the SEC in an oversight
capacity to ensure the development of regulations meet legislative intent without unduly
burdening U.S. manufacturing.

Conclusion
Thank you for the opportunity to identify proposed and existing regulations that will be a burden
to industry, job creation and the economy. We believe that the EPA’s proposed modifications to
the Toxic Substances Control Act Inventory Update Reporting rule, EPA’s re-opening of the
Definition of Solid Waste rule, and the SEC’s proposed regulations on conflict minerals all
would impose costly and unnecessary regulatory requirements on U.S. manufacturers in
Representative Darrell E. Issa
January 7, 2011
Page 4

electronics and other industries. We therefore encourage you to conduct oversight of these
burdensome regulations and the implementing agencies.

We would be pleased to discuss the aforementioned issues in more detail. Fern Abrams, IPC’s
director of government relations and environmental policy will contact your office to schedule a
meeting in the coming weeks.

Sincerely,

Dennis P. McGuirk
President

Attachments

1. Comments of the IPC – Association Connecting Electronics Industries on the SEC

Regulatory Initiatives Under the Dodd-Frank Act Title XV: Miscellaneous Provisions-
Section 1502 Conflict Minerals

2. Comments of the IPC – Association Connecting Electronics Industries on the TSCA

Inventory Update Reporting Modifications Proposed Rule

3. Comments of IPC – Association Connecting Electronics Industries on the Definition of Solid

Waste Rule