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 SV-2019-01
1. Overview of Verification Round
Verification Round SV-2019-01 investigated targeted criteria from the NSF/ANSI 426 – 2018 standard
with randomly chosen products. Four Level 1 investigations were completed in the Verification Round.
In Level 1 investigations, an Auditor assesses Conformance to a criterion by examining information
submitted by a Manufacturer. The Manufacturer was required to provide detailed and accurate
information in a 60-day period.
The products and criteria were selected as follows:•

All products currently active on the Registry were eligible for inclusion and were chosen firstthrough a random selection process.

•All geographies and Manufacturers were eligible for inclusion.

•No Manufacturer was subject to more than 2 investigations during this Round.

•

The Server standard was been updated via a continuous maintenance process after the original
set of criteria were published. This Verification Round excluded verification of criteria whichwere updated in continuous maintenance process (2018) in order to ensure adequate time for
Manufacturers to come into Conformance with the new requirements.

The four criteria which were investigated during this Round were all Required criteria. They are asfollows:••••

5.1.1 – Required – ENERGY STAR
6.1.5 – Required – Conformance with supply chain communication provisions of European Union
REACH
9.1.1 – Required – Design for repair, reuse and recycling
12.4.1 – Required – Manufacturer conformance with occupational health and safety
performance (corporate)

2. Summary of Outcomes
For new product categories, most criteria have been recently Desk Reviewed. Therefore, it is likelythat criteria investigated will be in Conformance. This was the case for this first Server Verification
Round SV-2019-01:•4 Investigations completed•

4 Decisions of Conformance

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round SV-2019-01

Page 1
May 2019

3. Key Lessons
As no Non-Conformances were found, there are no key lessons to share.

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 the “Help & FAQ” under 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 orto 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 be
prepared 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:
There are no more Verification Rounds planned for the Server product category in 2019.
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 under “Help & FAQ” in MyAccount.

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round SV-2019-01

Page 2May 2019

6. 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 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 SV-2019-01

Page 3
May 2019