Basel Convention on "E-waste" Export for Repair

What DOES the Basel Convention say about Export for reuse, repair and refurbishment?  This is Annex IX, B1110, which specifies "what is the good stuff", the language describing those things that are definitely not banned for export under Basel Convention (which USA has not ratified anyway).

"B1110 Electrical and electronic assemblies:

• Electronic assemblies consisting only of metals or alloys

• Waste electrical and electronic assemblies or scrap⁽¹³⁾ (including printed circuit boards) not containing components such as accumulators and other batteries included on list A, mercury-switches, glass from cathode-ray tubes and other activated glass and PCB-capacitors, or not contaminated with Annex I constituents (e.g., cadmium, mercury, lead, polychlorinated biphenyl) or from which these have been removed, to an extent that they do not possess any of the characteristics contained in Annex III (note the related entry on list A A1180)

• Electrical and electronic assemblies (including printed circuit boards, electronic components and wires) destined for direct reuse,⁽¹⁴⁾ and not for recycling or final disposal⁽¹⁵⁾

14. Reuse can include repair, refurbishment or upgrading, but not major reassembly.

15. In some countries these materials destined for direct re-use are not considered wastes."

This pretty clearly says that CRT glass is bad if it is not exported for reuse, repair, refurbishment and upgrading, but that if it is for those re-uses, that it is not an illegal waste.  

BAN has said that I am not qualified to read or interpret this.  When I have said we have legal authorities from overseas nations who agree with us and grant import permits in writing, BAN says to tell them who they are so that BAN, the small Seattle NGO, can write to them and dissuade them.

 

Here is BAN's argument (regarding MPPI, the mobile phone issue).  Please read it.  In my opinion, it's extremely not entirely very clarifying, but in their own words is best.  Here is why the Convention actually says "tested working" and "no export for repair", according to Basel Action Network.  

BAN's protest of this definition.

Anyone can grab an obscure international treaty (I would pick the Doha round of the WTO) and start a non-profit, take pictures of children, provide no data (only anecdotes and estimates), and form a consensus around protest opinions, based on the phenomenon that no one else reads the actual text of he actual treaty.  This is insane.