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 IE-2019-04
1. Overview of Verification Round

Verification Round IE-2019-04 investigated randomly chosen criteria from EPEAT’s Imaging Equipment
criteria and randomly chosen products. Fifty-four (54) Level 1 investigations were assigned during thisRound. In Level 1 investigations, an Auditor assesses Conformance to a criterion by examining
information submitted by a Manufacturer. The Manufacturer is required to provide detailed andaccurate information in a 60-day period.
The products and criteria were selected as follows:• All products that are currently active in the Registry were eligible for inclusion, and were chosen
first through a random selection process.
• All criteria were eligible for inclusion, and were chosen randomly for each selected product.
• All geographies and Manufacturers were eligible for inclusion.
• Exception is as follows: If a criterion was randomly selected for a product and that product had
been investigated against that criterion in the last six months, a new criterion was randomly
selected for the product.
• No Manufacturer was subject to more than 16 investigations during this Round.

2. Summary of Outcomes
54 Level 1 investigations were assigned during the round.
46 findings of Conformance
3 findings of Nonconformance
5 investigations were Cancelled

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round IE-2019-04
Outcomes Report IE-2019-04 FINALPage 1
January 15, 2020

Figure 1. Overall Conformance Status for IE-2019-04(as a percentage of total investigations)
9%
6%

85%

Conformance

Nonconconformance

Cancelled

Figure 2. Reasons for Nonconformance
3.53
2.5
22

1.5
10.5

10
Insufficient evidence to demonstrate conformance
Demonstrated nonconformance

3. Key Lessons
Criterion 4.2.3.1 Declaration of Product Weight
Please ensure the weight declared on the EPEAT registry matches the weight supported byevidence.

Criterion 4.6.2.1 End of Life Processing Requirements
This criterion has many requirements and it is difficult to demonstrate conformance. Manufacturers
are advised to ensure they can support any of the criterion requirements with evidence.
Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round IE-2019-04Page 2
January 15, 2020

Criterion 4.8.4.1 Provision of take-back service for packaging
It is important for manufacturers to be able to provide evidence regarding what happens topackaging after it is collected.

4. General Message to Manufacturers
Understanding documentation requirements for Verification Rounds:
You can find more guidance and examples of conformance documents in the Conformity Sample
Packets located in My Account. Go to epeat.net to log in.
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:
2020 Verification Activities are still being planned.
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 on www.epeat.net in My Account.

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round IE-2019-04

Page 3January 15, 2020

6. Investigations Table

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

ProductKodak Alaris

Alaris S2070
ScannerCountryUnitedStates
Undisclosed dueto Minor NC

ScannerCriterion

4.6.2.1

Requiredor Optional

Optional

Criterion Description

End of life processing
requirements

NC Finding Description

Corrective Action Taken

Insufficient
documentation to prove
conformance

If NC due to insufficientevidence, Manufacturer
provided additional
evidence to demonstrate
conformance.

Demonstrated nonconformance

If NC due todemonstrated nonconformance,
Manufacturer provided
evidence of changes
made resulting inconformance.

Insufficient
documentation to prove
conformance

If NC due to insufficientevidence, Manufacturer
provided additional
evidence to demonstrate
conformance.

Undisclosed dueto Minor NC

UnitedStates
Konica Minolta

Product TypeMultifunctio
n Device

4.2.3.1

Required

Declaration of productweightNone-Corporate
Criterion

Australia

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round IE-2019-04

N/A

4.8.4.1

Optional

Provision of take-backservice for packaging

Page 4January 15, 2020

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 a
Conformity 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 theManufacturer’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 theManufacturer’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 IE-2019-04

Page 5January 15, 2020