Green Electronics Council
Registry Services Department

Outcomes Report

P41
Issue 1 Rev 0

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-2016-02
1. Overview of Verification Round
Verification Round IE-2016-02 for the IEEE 1680.2TM Standard for the Environment Assessment of Imaging
Equipment focused on investigation of 13 criteria as applicable to chosen products. The Verification Roundinvestigated, as applicable, all verification requirements for the following criteria:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

4.1.1.1 Required – Compliance with provisions of European Union RoHS Directive
4.1.2.1 Optional – Further reduction of the use of EU RoHS Directive hazardous substances(cadmium)4.1.4.1 Optional – Reduction of substances on the EU REACH Candidate List of SVHCs
4.1.6.1 Required – Reducing BFR/CFR/CDP content of external plastic casings
4.3.1.1 Required – Ease of disassembly of product4.3.1.2 Optional – Ease of disassembly of consumer products
4.3.2.1 Required – Use of single recyclable plastic type per plastic part4.3.2.2 Required – Restriction on materials not compatible with reuse and recycling
4.3.2.3 Required – Manual separation and marking of plastics
4.8.1.1 Required – Elimination of intentionally added heavy metals in packaging
4.8.2.1 Required – Separable packing materials
4.8.2.2 Optional – Packaging 90% compostable/recyclable
4.8.2.3 Required – Plastics marked in packaging materials

This Round is intended to assure conformance for imaging equipment. This Round involved lab evaluationof two randomly chosen imaging equipment products. The Round consisted of twenty-one (21)
investigations. There were sixteen (16) Level 2 / 3 investigations and five (5) Level 1 investigations. Dueto the expense of one of the selected products, some investigations slated for Level 2 and Level 3 wereinvestigated using Level 1, per GEC policy. A Level 1 investigation involves a review of Manufacturer
submissions. In Level 2 and 3 investigations a lab chosen by the CAB acquires products without theManufacturer’s knowledge, disassembles them, and conducts detailed analytical testing, as appropriate.

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round IE 2016-02

Page 1
1/12/17Figure 1: Criteria Investigated in IE-2016-02
112221222

1

4.1.1.1

4.1.2.1

4.1.4.1

4.1.6.1

4.3.1.1

4.3.2.1

4.3.2.2

4.3.2.3

4.8.1.1

4.8.2.1

Conformity Assurance Bodies with active imaging equipment products and with clients whose products
have never been tested in Level 2 / Level 3 verification rounds to date were eligible in this Round. Each
Conformity Assurance Body involved had lab testing completed on no more than two products. Each
Manufacturer had lab testing completed for no more than 1 product.

2. Summary of Outcomes
Highlights from this Verification Round are:
21 investigations completed

21 decisions of Conformance

FIGURE 2:
Overall Conformance Status for IE-2016-02

21
Conformance (21 of 21 investigations)3. General Message to Manufacturers
Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round IE 2016-02

Page 2
1/12/17

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.

4. Looking Forward
Plans for Future Verification Activities:
There are three Verification Rounds planned for 2017 for 1680.2 (Imaging Equipment). TheseRounds may include Level 0, Level 1, Level 2 and/or Level 3 investigations.
Conformity Assessment Protocols:
The Conformity Assessment Protocols are in the process of being replaced by Conformity Guidance
Packets for each criterion. Manufacturers and Conformity Assessment Bodies can access thisinformation from the “My Account” page of www.epeat.net.

5. 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 a five-person
panel of independent technical experts (called the Conformity Decision Panel) who are also
contractors free of conflicts of interest. Decisions of conformity by the Conformity Decision Panelare made blind to the identity of the products and companies they are judging, based only onevidence collected and analyzed by Auditors. A serious consequence of receiving a NonConformance is that it is published publicly in an Outcomes Report, for purchasers, competitors, andothers 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.

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round IE 2016-02Page 31/12/17



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 product.

Outcomes Report
EPEAT Verification Round IE 2016-02

Page 4
1/12/17