From Matt Hale with the US EPA..... Dear Colleagues: As you know, EPA has been working for a while now on an updated analysis of management of select electronics wastes in the US – notably TVs, personal computers and cell phones. We have now posted on our web site (www.epa.gov/ecycling/manage.htm) the Following items: Two detailed reports (draft final) which analyze annual sales and weights of selected electronic products; the amounts and types of electronic products that are stored and/or reused in a given timeframe; and the amounts and types of electronic waste that are recycled or disposed in a given year. These reports offer distinct but complementary views of the same issues. Each report uses unique sets of input data and a different life span methodology to provide corroborating models and information on the fate of the products in question. Also included is an Overview which summarizes the findings of the two draft final reports, providing range estimates for the key outcomes measured. Looking at both reports together, it is evident that the results are quite similar, lending credibility to the overall range of results and enabling readers to see the data from slightly different angles. Finally, copies of the spreadsheet models associated with the two analyses are also attached. These models are provided so that stakeholders can better understand how we constructed the analyses and reached the conclusions we did. Stakeholders also can use the models to make their own estimates according to their own needs and assumptions. Stakeholder Input to Date: Last May we sought comment from stakeholders on several methodological and data issues related to this effort. At that time, we sent out a draft report entitled “Electronics Waste Management in the United States: Request for Comment on Several Methodological Issues.” We received several comments, including a suggestion that we better distinguish between the life span of commercial and household electronics, which we have attempted to do. While we specifically asked stakeholders to express a preference for one of two lifespan methodologies we proposed, there was little stakeholder input on this issue. After taking into account stakeholder input, we decided to present results using both methodologies. Doing so demonstrates that the results do not vary substantially and also offers additional insights that using a single methodology alone would not. Additional Input is Welcome Because this is the first time we are making available detailed estimates of, among other things, storage, recycling and disposal, we are interested in knowing whether these estimates track with the experience and expectations of the stakeholders. We are also interested in whether the models, assumptions and data inputs yield information useful for their needs. Please let us know if you have any concerns or input by contacting Christina Kager (_kager.christina@xxxxxxxx) or Clare Lindsay (_lindsay.clare@xxxxxxx)_. Web Address for Draft Final Reports The reports discussed above have been posted on our e-cycling web site. They can be found at www.epa.gov/ecycling/manage.htm. #### ** This list is PUBLICLY archived. ** PLEASE don't post personal or sensitive information unless you wish for it to be in the public domain. To post to the list send email to frgeek-michiana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx The archive is available at //www.freelists.org/archives/frgeek-michiana/ You may unsubscribe or change your list settings by going to the list website at //www.freelists.org/webpage/frgeek-michiana