Continued from page 39


What needs to happen next in Europe if we’re to avoid the same uncertainty and legislative intervention that we have seen in the US market? These challenges unite oil companies, workshops, transmission OEMs and additive suppliers, and everyone should be a part of this important conversation. Ensuring the ATF market retains integrity during its growth phase without attracting excessive legislation is critical and, if we fail, the fallout affects everyone including OEMs.


EU is going automatic


Given the unlikelihood of a single industry standard being feasible, specifying which product claims can or cannot be made under which circumstances is a positive step forward for Europe. Tim Bates, Technical Committee Chairman of the Union of the European Lubricants Industry (UEIL) has clarified the current ATF position in Europe following a number of EU regulations.


In a similar move, the US National Council for Weights and Measures (NCWM) defined ATF labeling rules in July 2017. These dictate that claims must be clear and accessible, and that marketers must have the data to support their claims – this can include additive suppliers’ field data as well as other validation. Finally, fluid conformance does not entitle suppliers to ignore OEM licensing obligations. The prevailing response of US ATF marketers to these rules appears to have been relief. Holly Alfano, CEO of the Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association (ILMA), confirmed that ‘ILMA actively supported the provisions’ and welcomed the NCWM’s lack of discrimination against multi-vehicle ATFs because they are ‘helping to manage an increasingly complex service fill market’.


Licensed OEM approvals are another way to help maintain confidence in the ATF service fill market as it grows in Europe. At present only GM’s DEXRON®


and Ford’s MERCON®


of their own genuine fluids, in future OEMs may wish to start considering their contribution to a healthier and higher quality market by exploring licensing options with the support of their partners,’ suggests Burgess.


Although specifications are important, they are not the only source of product claims. Closer technical support from an additive partner can offer a perfect opportunity for marketers to differentiate their products from the competition. ‘Talking about added value in other areas can generate deeper interest in a product: be it the tangible performance benefits that appeal to drivers; clear application guidelines for service technicians or minimising risks for workshop managers,’ advises Macpherson. ‘While robust spec-based claims will help the ATF market to thrive, it’s added value claims that will help quality ATF products to flourish.’


UEIL update: 1. “OEMs must provide all technical information, including technical specifications on lubricants and other functional fluids, to whomever services or uses these products to enable correct application.”


2. “If a vehicle manufacturer wants to contest the use by you of a specific lubricant, it is its responsibility to prove that this lubricant does not meet the Vehicle Manufacturer’s technical requirements”


have an


accessible system of licensed approvals for passenger car ATF. Once approvals are obtained, product claims can be enhanced by the use of OEM protected trademarks. ‘Although the interest of OEMs may currently lie in driving sales


3. “A lubricant manufacturer who produces a fluid which fully meets the requirements of a technical specification can indicate on their documentation that the product meets this specification.”


4. “An OEM cannot oblige a lubricant manufacturer to go through an approval procedure to be able to do so. It can only prevent a lubricant manufacturer from claiming their product has formal approval if it is not


The first and most important step is to ensure clear and robust labelling standards. The UEIL has gone some way towards outlining what constitutes an acceptable marketing claim, but large swathes of uncertainty still exist that require the application of judgement; this is where the potential for continued conflict and confusion lies. The second step is ensuring that all partners work sufficiently closely with technology providers to ensure an appropriate level of rigour for product testing and consequent marketing claims.


Everyone involved needs to ask themselves this question: do I fully understand the performance claims I am making and am liable for? Ultimately, if you are not challenging ATF claims then those claims will end up challenging you.


LINK www.aftonchemical.com


40


LUBE MAGAZINE NO.142 DECEMBER 2017


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73