EPEAT Program
Continuous Monitoring Outcomes Report
Televisions
TV-2020-01
April 14, 2021

1.0 Background
EPEAT® is a comprehensive voluntary sustainability Type 1 ecolabel that helps purchasers identify sustainable
technology products and services. Central to EPEAT are conformity assurance activities that meet the technicalrigor and credibility needs of the institutional purchasers who rely upon EPEAT. The EPEAT Program ensures
the ongoing conformance of EPEAT-registered products through an ongoing surveillance process known asContinuous Monitoring. Continuous Monitoring activities occur throughout the year and test the ability ofParticipating Manufacturers to prove conformance with EPEAT Criteria on an ongoing basis.
Some Continuous Monitoring activities require that Investigations be conducted in discrete timeframes calledRounds. The EPEAT Program develops an individual plan for each Continuous Monitoring Round, which
specifies the EPEAT Criteria to be investigated, the method of investigation that GEC-approved Conformity
Assurance Bodies (CABs) must use and the specific dates when the Investigation activities must be completed.
The EPEAT Program also selects the Participating Manufacturers and EPEAT-registered products and assigns
Investigations to CABs, which must fully participate in and are responsible for implementing Continuous
Monitoring Round activities with their Participating Manufacturer clients. Participating Manufacturers are
required to cooperate fully with their GEC-approved CAB during Round activities.
To maintain the level of transparency relied on by purchasers, the EPEAT Program publishes an Outcomes
Report at the conclusion of each Round to summarize the activities conducted and to identify the products andParticipating Manufacturers that received major nonconformances and the actions taken to restore accuracyof the EPEAT Registry.
This document summarizes the activities and results of Continuous Monitoring Round TV-2020-01 conducted
for the Televisions category.

2.0 Overview of Continuous Monitoring Round TV-2020-01
2.1

Investigation Activities

As per the published Round Plan, Continuous Monitoring Round TV-2020-01 used Level 1 Investigations(documentation review activities to determine Participating Manufacturers’ conformance with specific EPEAT
Criteria). Participating Manufacturers had a discrete time period to provide their CABs with evidence
supporting conformance with the selected EPEAT Criteria. GEC-approved CABs reviewed the documentation,
made recommendations on conformity based solely on the evidence provided by Participating Manufacturers,
and sent Investigation Reports to the EPEAT Program. The EPEAT Program made the final decisions on
conformity for the Investigations.

Global Electronics Council

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev0)

Page 1 of 5

TV-2020-01 Outcomes Report

2.2

April 14, 2021

Criteria InvestigatedCriteria were selected for Continuous Monitoring Round TV-2020-01 based on the positive sustainability
impact the Criteria will have when adopted, and the potential to drive change in the sector. Each Participating
Manufacturer selecting the Criteria was assigned investigations and product were chosen randomly. Any
Participating Manufacturer that received a major nonconformance during 2019 Continuous Monitoring
activities in the Televisions category received an additional Investigation in this Round.
Table 1: Criteria Investigated in Round TV-2020-01
Criteria Number

Criterion Title

4.3.1.1

Ease of disassembly of product4.4.1.1

Upgradeable firmware

3.0 Summary of Investigations and Final Decisions on Conformity for TV-2020-01
Highlights from this Continuous Monitoring Round are:•4 investigations completed•

4 decisions of Conformance
Figure 1: Final Conformity Decisions for TV-2020-01(shown as percentage of total investigations)

4.0 Further Details on Nonconformances for TV-2020-01
There were no nonconformances identified in Continuous Monitoring Round TV-2020-01, however a
description of major and minor nonconformances is included in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 below, for information.
4.1

Major Versus Minor Nonconformances

All nonconformances must be categorized as either major or minor. Minor nonconformances are non-criticalor clerical in nature and do not materially affect the validity of conformance with EPEAT Criteria. Allnonconformances that do not meet the definition of minor are categorized as major.

Global Electronics Council

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev0)

Page 2 of 5

TV-2020-01 Outcomes Report

4.2

April 14, 2021

Minor Nonconformances

For Level 1 Investigations, nonconformances may be categorized as minor for the following reasons:
•••

4.3

Minor human error in data entry (e.g., value cited for EPEAT-product registration is insignificantly
above or below the actual value).
Minor administrative errors (e.g., broken URLs, reports/certificates marginally outdated).
No documentation provided by a Participating Manufacturer where the Participating Manufacturer
indicated the product has reached end-of-life and is no longer available on the market.

Major Nonconformances

Major nonconformances may be found due to a demonstrated nonconformance, insufficient evidence
provided to demonstrate conformance, or because no documentation was provided. All nonconformances that
do not meet the definition of minor must be categorized as major.

5.0 Actions to Restore Conformance
Where the final conformity decision is nonconformance (whether major or minor), Participating Manufacturers
must make corrections to restore the accuracy of the EPEAT Registry during the Corrective Action Phase. Theseactivities may include providing additional evidence to demonstrate conformance with the criterion or
unselecting the criteria in the EPEAT Registry. Where the product was found nonconformant and is no longer
available in the marketplace, the product must be archived.
During the Corrective Action Phase, Participating Manufacturers must also develop Corrective Action Plans forother EPEAT-registered products that may be affected by the same underlying issue causing thenonconformance but were not the subject of investigation (called “similarly affected products”).
Since no nonconformances were identified, no corrective actions were required as a result of Continuous
Monitoring Round TV-2020-01.

6.0 Key Findings
6.1

Statements from Recyclers used as Supporting Evidence

For Criterion 4.3.1.1, if using a statement from at least one recycler to demonstrate conformance, thestatement from a recycler must come from a recycler who meets Criterion 4.6.2.1 and is experienced inprocessing products with similar design technology. Manufacturers are reminded to provide evidence todemonstrate the recycler who provided the statement is conformant with 4.6.2.1.

Global Electronics Council

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev0)

Page 3 of 5

TV-2020-01 Outcomes Report

April 14, 2021

7.0 Identification of Major Nonconformances and Corrections Made by Participating Manufacturers
In the interest of transparency, the EPEAT Program identifies the Participating Manufacturers and products that received major nonconformances and the actions taken to restore accuracy of the EPEAT
Registry. Minor nonconformances are generally clerical in nature and do not materially affect the validity of products in the EPEAT Registry. As such, these are not identified in the table below.

Table 2: Summary of Major Nonconformances and Corrections Made by Participating Manufacturers
Participating Manufacturer

ProductProduct TypeCountry

Criterion
NumberCriterion Title

Required or
Optional

Underlying Reason for Nonconformance

Corrective Action Taken

No major nonconformances were identified in this Round.

Global Electronics Council

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev0)

Page 4 of 5

TV-2020-01 Outcomes Report

April 14, 2021

Document Control and Change History
Issue
1Revision01120Owner
EPEAT Conformity
Assurance Manager
EPEAT Conformity
Assurance Manager
Senior Manager,
Ecolabels andResources

Global Electronics Council

ApproverDirector, EPEAT
ProgramDirector, EPEAT
Program
Senior Director,
Ecolabels andManufacturer
Resources

Description
Initial release

Reformatting of document. Addition ofstandardized text.

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev0)

Approval Date

Effective Date2018 Dec 112018 Dec 112021 Mar 25

2021 Mar 30

Page 5 of 5