Green Electronics Council
227 SW Pine Street, Suite 300 • Portland, OR 97204 • V: (503) 279-9382 • F: (503) 279-9381 • www.epeat.net

OUTCOMES REPORTEPEAT VERIFICATION ROUND PC-2018-01
1. Overview of Verification Round
Verification round PC-2018-01 included Level 2/3 testing on 10 randomly selected products from 10
manufacturers whose products had never been Level 2/3 tested. 56 total investigations wereconducted, based on which of the following criteria each product was claiming:
Criterion

Description of Criterion

Level 2Level 3

4.1.1.1

Required – Compliance with provisions of European
RoHS DirectiveX

4.1.5.1

Optional – Elimination of intentionally added
hexavalent chromiumX

4.1.8.1

Optional – Large parts free of PVC

X

4.3.1.3

Required – Easy disassembly of external enclosures

X

4.3.1.5

Required – Identification and removal ofcomponents containing hazardous materials

X

4.3.1.7

Optional – Molded/glued in metal eliminated orremovableX

4.3.1.9

Optional – Minimum 90% reusable / recyclable

X

4.8.2.1

Required – Separable packing materials

X

4.8.2.2

Optional – Packaging 90% recyclable and plastics
labeledXX

All geographies were eligible for selection, and no manufacturer was subject to more than 6
investigations during the round.

2. Summary of Outcomes
56 total investigations conducted
50 decisions of Conformance
4 decisions of Nonconformance
2 decisions of Inconclusive
Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round PC-2018-01

Page 1April 2019

3. Key Lessons
4.1.1.1 Compliance with Provisions of European Union RoHS Directive
This criterion requires that all tested components do not exceed the stipulated thresholds forrestricted substances listed in the European Union RoHS Directive. It is common for certain
components to be at a higher risk of exceeding these thresholds than others, so it is advisable for
manufacturers to carefully manage their supply chains for RoHS-related risks.

Criterion 4.8.2.2 Optional – Packaging 90% recyclable and plastics labeledThis criterion requires that plastics be labeled appropriately. Failure to label the plastics hinders
recycling and will result in a Non-Conformance.

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round PC-2018-01

Page 2April 2019

4. General Message to Manufacturers
Understanding documentation requirements for Verification Rounds:You can find more guidance and examples of conformance documents in the Conformity Guidance
Packets located in “Help and FAQ” in your account on the EPEAT Registry.
Initial response to Auditors:
When contacted regarding participation in a Verification Round, Manufacturers should respond tothe Auditor as soon as possible to let them know they are communicating with the correct person or
to inform them of the correct contact. This also helps the Auditor know that the e-mail address isvalid.
Conformance of products that may share similar traits and/or supply chains:
If a Non-Conformance is found for a particular criterion and product, Manufacturers should beprepared to determine if other products on the EPEAT Registry are similarly impacted due to use ofsimilar materials and/or supply chains, and develop corrective action plans to address the future
conformance of these other products.

5. Looking Forward
Plans for Future Verification Activities:
Two verification rounds are planned in 2019 on the newly implemented 1680.1 (2018) standard for
Computers and Displays.
Conformity Sample Packets:
This and all future Verification Rounds have and will be conducted according to the guidance
provided in the Conformity Sample Packets posted under “Help and FAQ” in your EPEAT Registry
account.

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round PC-2018-01

Page 3April 2019

6. Investigations Table

TABLE 1: Specific Non-Conformance Findings and Corrective Action Taken
Participating
Manufacturer

ProductCountry

Product Type

Criterion

Requiredor Optional

Criterion Description

NC Finding Description

Corrective Action Taken

Login Informatica

L4100

BrazilDesktops

4.1.1.1

RequiredCompliance with provisions ofEuropean RoHS Directive

Demonstrated NC

If NC due to demonstrated nonconformance, Manufacturer
provided evidence of changesmade resulting in conformance

Northern Micro Inc.

Spirit Q170-AS

CanadaDesktops

4.8.2.2

Optional

Packaging 90% recyclable andplastics labeled

Demonstrated NC

If NC due to demonstrated nonconformance, Manufacturer
provided evidence of changes
made resulting in conformance

Onyx Healthcare Inc.

ONYX-BE182DT-F11010

United States

Integrated
Desktop
Computers

4.1.1.1

RequiredCompliance with provisions ofEuropean RoHS Directive

Demonstrated NC

Manufacturer left the Registryprior to the start of thecorrective action phase

XMA Limited

Viglen Genie Ultra
Pro Vig830S EnergyStar CertifiedUnited
Kingdom

Desktops4.1.1.1

RequiredCompliance with provisions ofEuropean RoHS DirectiveDemonstrated NC

Product archived byManufacturer

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round PC-2018-01

Page 4April 2019

7. BackgroundTo assure the credibility of the EPEAT Registry, verification of the claims by Participating
Manufacturers are rigorous, independent and transparent. Verification is conducted according topolicies and procedures described in documents provided on www.epeat.net. Manufacturers aregiven no forewarning that their products will be verified, and verification is performed based on thedeclarations as they are in the Registry at the time the Verification Round begins.
Investigations are performed by expert technical contractors called Auditors working for aConformity Assurance Body approved by the Green Electronics Council (GEC). Auditors are free ofconflicts of interest, and their recommended decisions are reviewed and finalized by the Conformity
Assurance staff of GEC. Decisions of conformity are made blind to the identity of the products andcompanies they are judging, based only on evidence collected and analyzed by Auditors. A serious
consequence of receiving a Major Non-Conformance is that it is published publicly in an Outcomes
Report, for purchasers, competitors, and others to see.
•In a Level 0 investigation, an Auditor assesses Conformance to a criterion by examining publicly
available information only – no products are obtained for inspection or testing, and theManufacturer is not asked to submit documentation. If the publicly available information isinconclusive (i.e. was not available, could not be found from public sources, or did not provide
enough details to determine conformance), the Auditor may be instructed to proceed with aLevel 1 investigation.

•In a Level 1 investigation, an Auditor assess Conformance to a criterion by examining
information submitted by a Manufacturer. The Manufacturer is required to provide detailed andaccurate information in a timely manner.

•In Level 2 investigations, the Conformity Assurance Body obtains a product without the
Manufacturer’s knowledge or involvement, and has the product disassembled and inspected toassess conformance with one or more criteria.

•In Level 3 investigations, the Conformity Assurance Body obtains a product without the
Manufacturer’s knowledge or involvement, and has the product analytically tested to assess
conformance with one or more criteria.

Manufacturers must correct Non-Conformances, either by bringing the product into Conformance,by un-declaring the criterion until Conformance is achieved, or by removing the product from theRegistry. The Green Electronics Council also requires that Manufacturers examine other registeredproducts to determine if their declarations should be corrected as well. If a Manufacturer corrects
the Non-Conformance by un-declaring the criterion and the criterion is an optional criterion, theylose that point, and possibly the product drops a tier. If it is a required criterion, they must archive
the product. If it is a required corporate criterion, they must archive all of their registered products.

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round PC-2018-01

Page 5April 2019