GEC Criteria Development Process
Proposed Release of GEC Criteria Development Process
Public Comment Period
October 17, 2022 through December 16, 2022
The Global Electronics Council (GEC) reviews policies and procedures on an annual basis to determine ifchanges are warranted. As part of this process, GEC is proposing revisions to GEC Criteria Development
Process (P74) and seeks stakeholder feedback. This document identifies the process followed by GEC todevelop criteria, revise criteria, and evaluate criteria for use in its ecolabels, including the EPEAT
Program.

Stakeholder feedback and insights are an essential part of GEC’s management of the EPEAT
Program. As such, GEC is holding a 60-day comment period and welcomes stakeholder
feedback on the release of GEC Criteria Development Process (P74). The comment period is
open from October 17 through December 16, 2022. Comments must be provided in the EPEAT
Public Comment Form and submitted electronically to EPEAT@GEC.org.
GEC reserves the right to not consider comments received after 11:59 pm North America
Pacific Time on December 16, 2022.
All comments will be thoughtfully considered before either document is finalized and published. GEC
intends to publish a stakeholder comment report summarizing comments received and attributing thecomments to the submitting party.
GEC proposes to publish the document on February 15, 2023. Unless otherwise identified in the
document, the document will become effective as of February 15, 2023.

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process – Proposed Revisions
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© 2020 Green Electronics Council

Page iProposed Revisions October 17, 2022

Summary of Proposed Changes
Throughout this document, proposed revisions to GEC Criteria Development Process (P74) are identified
using tracked changes, with the exception of correcting typos or grammatical errors, minor changes tosentence structure, and minor formatting changes. Table A below provides a summary of the key
proposed clarifications (additional clarity on existing requirements), changes (changes to an existing
requirement), and additions (new requirements).
Table A: Summary of Key Proposed Clarifications, Changes, and Additions in P74
Topic

SectionSummary

Dynamic Criteria
Development Process

2.0

Addition: Added second stakeholder comment period.

State of Sustainability
Research

2.1

Clarification: Stakeholder comment report is provided directly to all
public commenters and made available to interested stakeholders
upon request.

Criteria Drafting

2.2.1

Clarification: Section updated to further clarify that processes alignwith ISO 14024 (Sections 5.7 and 6.5).
Change: Moved last paragraph in Section 2.2.1 to be first paragraphin Section 2.3.

Selection of Verification
Requirements

2.2.2

Addition: New section added to describe the selection of verification
requirements and to further clarify that processes align with ISO
14024 (Sections 5.10, 5.11 and 6.4.2.5).

Required and Optional
Criteria

2.2.3

Addition: New section added to describe Required and Optional
EPEAT criteria and to further clarify that processes align with ISO
14024 (Sections 5.6.2, 5.10 and 5.13).

Expert Ad Hoc Groups

2.3

Change: Moved last paragraph in Section 2.2.1 to be first paragraphin Section 2.3.

Expert Ad Hoc Group
Membership

2.3.1

Change: Removed requirement for Expert Ad Hoc Groups to becomprised of 4-12 stakeholders.
Clarification: Reworded to better describe stakeholder grouprepresentation in Expert Ad Hoc Groups.

Technical Committee
Member

2.5.1.1

Clarification: Criteria Development Organization is responsible forfinal selection of Technical Committee Members and participation on
the Committee does not constitute an endorsement of EPEAT.
Reordered paragraphs.

Public Consultation

2.5.2

Addition: Added second stakeholder comment period.

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process – Proposed Revisions
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© 2020 Green Electronics Council

Page ii

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

Table A: Summary of Key Proposed Clarifications, Changes, and Additions in P74
Topic

SectionContinuous Maintenance

2.6

Summary
Clarification: When GEC may consider revising criteria based on arequest from a stakeholder and additional details about GEC
assessment process when determining if criteria need to be revised.
Addition: Further details on taking assessment to EPEAT Advisory
Council to reflect existing language in EPEAT Policy Manual (P65).

Complaint and Appeals

2.7

Clarification: Examples provided to add clarity.

Conflicts of Interest

2.8

Addition: New section added to describe GEC’s approach to
mitigating and eliminating conflicts of interest.

Revisions and Effective Date

4.0

Addition: Section added to identify annual review and revisionschedule and indicate that revisions may become effective at an
earlier or later date than annual schedule.

Definitions

5.2

Addition: Definition for “consensus body”.

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process – Proposed Revisions
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© 2020 Green Electronics Council

Page iii

GEC Criteria
Development
Process

This document identifies the process followed by the Global Electronics Council (GEC) to develop
criteria, revise criteria, and evaluate criteria for use in its ecolabels, including the EPEAT Program.
GEC reviews GEC Criteria Development Process (P74) on an annual basis to determine if revisions are
required.
The latest revisions to this document were published on February 15, 20232022. These revisions,
unless otherwise noted, are effective as of July 1, 20232022.
Please direct any questions on this document to CRITERIA@GEC.org.

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

Contents
1.0

Introduction ................................................................................................................ 2

2.0

Dynamic Criteria Development Process ....................................................................... 3
2.1

State of Sustainability Research............................................................................................ 4

2.2

Criteria .................................................................................................................................. 5
2.2.1 Criteria Drafting ........................................................................................................ 5
2.2.2 Selection of Verification Requirements .................................................................... 6
2.2.3 Required and Optional Criteria ................................................................................. 6

2.3

Expert Ad Hoc Groups ........................................................................................................... 6
2.3.1 Expert Ad Hoc Group Membership ........................................................................... 7

2.4

Full Draft Criteria Document ................................................................................................. 8

2.5

Voluntary Consensus Process ............................................................................................... 8
2.5.1 Technical Committee Participation........................................................................... 9
2.5.1.1 Technical Committee Member .................................................................. 9
2.5.1.2 Technical Committee Observers .............................................................. 10
2.5.1.3 Invited Experts ......................................................................................... 11
2.5.2 Public Consultation ................................................................................................. 11

2.6

Continuous Maintenance.................................................................................................... 11

2.7

Complaints and Appeals ..................................................................................................... 12

2.8

Conflicts of Interest ............................................................................................................. 14

2.9

Patent Policy ....................................................................................................................... 14

3.0

Use of Criteria by GEC................................................................................................ 15

4.0

Revisions and Effective Date ...................................................................................... 15

5.0

Supplementary Information ...................................................................................... 15
5.1

References .......................................................................................................................... 15

5.2

Definitions ........................................................................................................................... 15

5.3

Document Change History .................................................................................................. 17

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 1

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

1.0

Introduction

The Global Electronics Council (GEC) is a mission driven non-profit working to create a more sustainable
and just world. To achieve this goal, we focus on technology and supporting institutional purchasers inprocuring only credible sustainable and circular technology products and services. GEC owns andoperates EPEAT®TM, a comprehensive voluntary sustainability ecolabel that helps purchasers identify
more sustainable and circular technology products and services. GEC ecolabel criteria address priority
impacts throughout the life cycle of the product, based on an evaluation of scientific research andinternational best practices. Criteria are developed in balanced, voluntary consensus processes thatalign with and draw from the characteristics of voluntary consensus defined in:•

ISO 14024 Environmental labels and declarations – Type 1 environmental labelling – Principles
and procedures1, and•U.S. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, OMB Circular A-119:
Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in
Conformity Assessment Activities2.

With its Dynamic Criteria Development Process, and specifically through the use of modular criteria, GEC
implements an efficient and scalable voluntary consensus process that encourages broad and balanced
stakeholder participation. GEC develops a Business Case to decide whether to launch a Dynamic Criteria
Development Process; the Business Case identifies the landscape of relevant technology providers,large-scale purchaser demand, and where criteria have the potential to reduce sustainability impacts.
The Dynamic Criteria Development process, combined with routine maintenance of criteria, ensuresthat purchasers are able to procure technology products and services that respond to evolving science,leverage best practices and integrate a global perspective.
GEC Criteria are owned by GEC and, unless noted otherwise, their use is constrained to the tools andresources developed by GEC as part of its mission activities. GEC is interested in the harmonization ofenvironmental and social criteria with existing regulations and global standards, as well as otherecolabels and voluntary programs, and welcomes requests to collaborate. All GEC Criteria are publicly
available free of charge.

1
2

Available at: https://www.iso.org
Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/revised_circular_a-119_as_of_1_22.pdf

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 2

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

2.0

Dynamic Criteria Development Process

The key goals of GEC’s Dynamic Criteria Development Process, as illustrated in Figure 1, are:•

Criteria are science-based and address priority environmental and social impacts throughout
the life cycle of electronic products and services, and harmonized with international bestpractices, where applicable.

•

Criteria developed with and adhering to the principles of transparency and voluntary
consensus, including a process that is open without discrimination to interested parties andrepresenting a balance of stakeholder interests.

•

Criteria are continually maintained to ensure relevance, credibility and reflect market
innovation in addressing sustainability impacts.
Figure 1: GEC Dynamic Criteria Development Process

As shown in the process schematic in Figure 2, GEC performs preparatory work for criteria development,
including State of Sustainability Research and compiling existing criteria that address identified
sustainability impacts. GEC then brings together subject matter experts in Expert Ad Hoc Groups todevelop and/or refine draft criteria. These criteria are provided as a starting point for the voluntary
consensus process undertaken by the multi-stakeholder Technical Committee. GEC partners with thirdparty Criteria Development Organizations, to manage the Technical Committee, and ensure theobjective adherence of the process to the principles of voluntary consensus.
Public consultation is actively sought and open to all stakeholders at two critical points in the Dynamic
Criteria Development Process: 1) on the State of Sustainability Research; and 2) on the Full Draft Criteria
Document. These documents are initially available for public consultation for a period of no less than 60days. A second stakeholder comment period may also occur to solicit feedback on changes made to theFull Draft Criteria Document after the initial public consultation. When a second stakeholder comment
Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 3

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

period is held, the comment period is open for no less than 30 days. GEC notifies stakeholders of public
consultation through GEC newsletters and specific announcements.
Each of the steps in the process are described in more detail below.
Figure 2: Steps in Criteria Development Process

2.1State of Sustainability Research

GEC publishes State of Sustainability Research as the initial step in the development and revision of
criteria. The research identifies science-based social and environmental impacts across the life cycle oftechnology products and services, and strategies to reduce the identified sustainability impacts. The
research also identifies best practices, existing regulations and existing voluntary leadership programs
designed to reduce sustainability impacts. The data and analyses in the State of Sustainability Research
serves as the foundation for the development and revision of criteria, as well as identification ofopportunities for harmonization. GEC may contract with third parties for research and data analysis
assistance during this step.
GEC makes the draft State of Sustainability Research available for public consultation for a minimum of
60 days. In the public consultation process, GEC invites stakeholders to review the scientific evidence
presented in the State of Sustainability Research, identify gaps in the data, and share additional data andimpact mitigation strategies. GEC notifies stakeholders of the availability of State of Sustainability
Research for public consultation through GEC newsletters and announcements. All comments are
considered, and, if appropriate, the State of Sustainability Research modified. The final State of
Sustainability Research is published and made available on the GEC website. GEC also prepares a
stakeholder comment report that summarizes comments received and how the research was modified
in response. The stakeholder comment report includes a list of organizations who provided comments.
The stakeholder comment report is provided directly to all public commenters and is available tointerested stakeholders upon request.

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 4

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

2.2

Criteria Drafting

2.2.1

Criteria Drafting

GEC Criteria are intended to meet the six Principles for GEC Criteria in Table 1.
Table 1: Principles for GEC Criteria
1.

Criteria address priority sustainability impacts, as identified in the State of Sustainability Research, andthroughout the life cycle of products and services, inclusive of the supply chain.

2.

Criteria establish baseline leadership performance by specifying criteria that are required to be met, while
incentivizing continuous improvement and innovation through the use of optional criteria.

3.

Criteria represent leadership and current best practice for reducing identified sustainability impacts, withdue consideration of life-cycle trade-offs, and of the ability of the market to meet the criterion within areasonable timeframe.

4.

Criteria differentiate environmentally and socially preferable products from others in the market based on
measurable differences in impact, acknowledging that the ability to quantify the outcome may be limited
under some circumstances.

5.

Criteria align with international leadership best practices, whether regulations, standards or voluntary
programs and do not create obstacles to international trade.

6.

Criteria requirements can be independently verified through objective measures and commonly accepted
tools, methodologies, or standards.

Criteria are required to address sustainability impacts throughout the technology life cycle as identified
in the State of Sustainability Research. Typically, this includes impacts in the areas of climate change,sustainable use of resources, chemicals of concern and corporate environmental, social and governanceperformance. Criteria may also address impacts unique to a specific product type or category.
Criteria address four sustainability impacts, including climate change, sustainable use of resources,chemicals of concern, and corporate social performance. Table 2 illustrates criteria topics by the productlife cycle. Product function characteristics are taken into account, which may result in variation in
criteria by product type. Criteria are also developed to address product function characteristics such as
durability, safety, repairability, and upgradability. These concepts are often addressed by criteria
developed to reduce or mitigate sustainability impacts related to the impact areas identified above.For
example, chemical product emissions are considered for products using toner and ink cartridges; andpercentage of recycled content in the product based on product composition and size.
Criteria include performance requirements as well as documentation and methods for the verification ofconformance.
Draft criteria may originate from different sources, including, but not limited to:•

Existing GEC or EPEAT Criteria, if available and representing leadership, with or without
modifications.

•

GEC staff or partner organizations.

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 5

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022•

Submissions from stakeholders.

•Expert Ad Hoc Groups.

All draft criteria are reviewed and revised, as needed, by Expert Ad Hoc Groups before consideration by
the consensus body, referred to as the Technical Committee. The delivery of fully drafted criteria to theTechnical Committee streamlines the voluntary consensus process in order to broaden multistakeholder participation.
2.2.2

Selection of Verification Requirements

GEC, in conjunction with the Technical Committee, ensures all elements of a criterion can be
independently verified in a manner that reduces bias and uncertainty, uses the best quality qualitativeand quantitative data available, and to the extent possible, aligns with internationally recognizedmethods.are verifiable Verification requirements are developed for every criterion and , and they that
identify the evidence necessary a manufacturer must submit to demonstrate conformance with thecriterion requirements. Verification requirements align with all required elements of the criterion, andto the extent applicable, specify published test methods, international standards (e.g., ISO, IEC) andcertifications, regional and national standards (e.g., EU CEN, US ENERGY STAR), and recognizedvoluntary programs. Consideration is also given to the availability of qualified organizations, such aslaboratories or certification bodies, to perform any required testing or evaluation of specific criteria
elements. Where applicable, verification requirements may also outline alternative evidence that will
demonstrate conformance to the criterion.
2.2.12.2.3

Required and Optional Criteria

Criteria are identified as Required and Optional and EPEAT-registered products are identified in the
EPEAT Registry by tier as EPEAT Bronze, EPEAT Silver or EPEAT Gold. The tiers differentiate products by
the percentage of Optional EPEAT Criteria the products meet.
The Technical Committee is responsible for determining which criteria are identified as Required or as
Optional, as part of the voluntary consensus process. Required Criteria must be met for a product toappear in the EPEAT Registry, and these criteria outline baseline sustainability leadership performancerequirements for the EPEAT ecolabel. When designating criteria as Required, consideration is given to
the ability of the market to meet the criterion in a reasonable timeframe, demonstrated best practices
and availability of standardized methods, and the capacity of small and medium-sized enterprises toconform to the criterion.
Optional Criteria are used to incentivize innovation, to promote continuous improvement in product andsupply chain performance, and to further develop methods and approaches to impact reduction.
Products meeting all Required Criteria and a minimum of 50% of the available points for Optional
Criteria achieve the EPEAT Silver tier recognition. Products meeting all Required Criteria and a minimumof 75% of the available points for Optional Criteria achieve EPEAT Gold tier recognition.

2.3

Expert Ad Hoc Groups

All draft criteria are reviewed and revised, as needed, by Expert Ad Hoc Groups before consideration by
the consensus body, referred to as the Technical Committee. The delivery of fully drafted criteria to the
Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 6

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

Technical Committee streamlines the voluntary consensus process in order to broaden multistakeholder participation.
GEC convenes Expert Ad Hoc Groups by impact topic, mitigation strategy, or cluster of closely related
criteria associated with an impact identified in the State of Sustainability Research. The Expert Ad HocGroups review draft criteria and evaluate whether the draft criteria, as proposed, have the potential tomitigate the identified sustainability impacts and meet the Principles for GEC Criteria in Table 1. Expert
Ad Hoc Groups may be asked to develop draft criteria to address a specific impact identified by the Stateof Sustainability Research.
The goal of Expert Ad Hoc Groups is to provide technical guidance on the approach, requirements, andlanguage of draft criteria for the assigned topic to be included in the full draft of criteria submitted to
the Technical Committee. GEC considers the Principles for GEC Criteria in Table 1 to determine criteria
language to forward to the Technical Committee. GEC may choose to forward 2 or more criteria options(e.g., Option A and B) to the Technical Committee if upon evaluation it is determined that alternative
approaches to draft criteria meet the Principles for GEC Criteria and address the impacts identified in
the State of Sustainability Research. A summary of the Expert Ad Hoc Group discussions, rationale, andany points of technical dissension is documented and transmitted to the Technical Committee, alongwith the criteria recommendations.
Expert Ad Hoc Groups typically meet by teleconference on a schedule acceptable to participants, and toaccommodate diverse time zones, as needed. The review of criteria by Expert Ad Hoc Groups also may
be executed by electronic mail.
2.3.1

Expert Ad Hoc Group Membership

GEC’s goal is to assembles 4-12 stakeholders with expertise and perspectives on the topic underconsideration for each Expert Ad Hoc Group. GEC seeks balanced representation from the following
stakeholder categories, which are the same stakeholder categories assembled for the TechnicalCommittee: manufacturers; sustainability advocates and government policy; purchasers and ecolabel
criteria users; and other industry in the supply chain, as relevant to the criteria topic. GEC strives toinclude representation from each of these stakeholder categories; however, the primary focus is toensure the Expert Ad Hoc Groups include expertise relevant to the topic under consideration. See Table
2 for the definition of each stakeholder category.

Table 2: Stakeholder Categories
Manufacturers

Manufacturers of products or services covered by the scope of the criteria andtheir trade associations.

Other Industry

Other businesses commercially engaged with the products or services such as:• Suppliers and their trade associations• Recyclers, repair and refurbish companies, asset management service
providers, and their trade associations• Other types of businesses commercially engaged with the product.

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 7

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

Table 2: Stakeholder Categories
Sustainability Advocatesand Government Policy

Individual from a public agency (local, regional, state, federal, or international)or represents a professional public/environmental health/safety organization,
academia, or not-for-profit environmental organization.

Purchasers and Ecolabel
Criteria Users

An individual whose organization purchases, uses, or specifies products orservices covered in the scope of the criteria. User/consumers and their tradeassociation representatives, institutional purchasers, third-party conformity
assessment bodies (e.g., testing laboratories), and retailers are included in thismembership classification.

GEC notifies stakeholders of the opportunity to join Expert Ad Hoc Groups, following publication of thedraft State of Sustainability Research. Any interested stakeholders may participate in Expert Ad HocGroups by notifying GEC staff of their interest. GEC may also recruit individuals with relevant technicalexpertise and stakeholder perspectives. Only one member from a single organization may serve on an
Expert Ad Hoc Group to help maintain a balance of perspectives, unless the representatives represent
different stakeholder categories. A member may designate a proxy if they are unable to attend ameeting. Individuals must complete GEC’s Participant Agreement prior to joining an Expert Ad HocGroup. A list of organizations participating in Expert Ad Hoc Groups is made available to the TechnicalCommittee and is publicly available.
If stakeholder category representation or expertise relevant to the criteria is not achieved for an Expert
Ad Hoc Group, GEC may reach out to stakeholders not represented or underrepresented on the Expert
Ad Hoc Group to bring in their perspectives. However, the work of the Expert Ad Hoc Group willproceed.

2.4

Full Draft Criteria Document

GEC compiles a comprehensive Full Draft Criteria Document based on the recommendations of theExpert Ad Hoc Groups and submits it to the Technical Committee as the starting point for theirdeliberation. GEC confirms that the Full Draft Criteria Document addresses the environmental and social
impacts identified in the State of Sustainability Research. If gaps are identified in the Full Draft Criteria
Document, GEC prepares a plan for addressing the gaps and provides it to the Technical Committee.
The Full Draft Criteria Document is accompanied by a summary that includes the origins of the criteria,
key discussion points, as well as areas of technical disagreement identified by the Expert Ad Hoc, toprovide context for the Technical Committee. This summary also identifies whether an Expert Ad Hoc
was unable to develop a recommendation to address an impact identified in the State of Sustainability
Research, and why.

2.5

Voluntary Consensus Process

GEC partners with third-party Criteria Development Organizations to manage the multi-stakeholder
consensus body, called the Technical Committee. Since credible and objective criteria development isimportant to GEC’s mission, GEC selects partner organizations with experience in managing voluntary
Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 8

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

consensus processes of diverse stakeholders. GEC only partners with organizations that maintainimpartiality in its management of the Voluntary Consensus Process. The Criteria Development
Organization must have documented procedures that address and adhere to the five characteristics ofvoluntary consensus in Table 3.

Table 3: Characteristics of Voluntary Consensus
1.

Openness: The process is open to participation by all interested parties. Such parties are provided
meaningful opportunities to participate in criteria development on a non-discriminatory basis. The
procedures or processes for participating in criteria development and for developing the criteria aretransparent.

2.

Balance of interests: The process includes a balance of stakeholder interests with no single interest
dominating decision-making.

3.

Due process: The process includes documented and publicly available policies and procedures, adequate
notice of meetings and other activities, sufficient time to review drafts and prepare views and objections,access to views and objections of other participants, and a fair and impartial process for resolving
conflicting views.

4.

Appeals process: A process must be available for the impartial handling of procedural appeals.

5.

Consensus: Consensus is defined as general agreement, but not necessarily unanimity, and includes aprocess for attempting to resolve objections by interested parties. All comments must be fairly considered,each objector must be advised of the disposition of his or her objection(s) and the reasons why, and theconsensus body members must be given an opportunity to change their opinion after reviewing thecomments.

The Criteria Development Organization must also have procedures in place to objectively selectTechnical Committee members, safeguard against anti-competitive behaviors, and avoid the use ofcommercial terms and other requirements that may restrict trade and competition. Approved minutesof Technical Committee meetings must be publicly available.
2.5.1

Technical Committee Participation

GEC establishes general parameters, as identified throughout Section 2.5.1, for the operation of theTechnical Committee to ensure that the process of criteria development is open and transparent to allinterested organizations, while also fostering meaningful dialogue and the exchange of perspectives
among the four stakeholder interest groups in Table 2. GEC provides stakeholders with the following
opportunities for participation in the Technical Committee process: 1) Technical Committee Member; 2)
Technical Committee Observer; and 3) Invited Expert. GEC notifies stakeholders of the opportunity toparticipate on the Technical Committee through GEC newsletters and announcements.
2.5.1.1

Technical Committee Member

GEC seeks individuals with expertise on the topics under consideration by the Technical Committee toparticipate on the consensus body. Interested stakeholder must submit an application, including

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 9Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

documentation of experience and qualifications, for membership on the Technical Committee. The
Criteria Development Organization processes applications for Technical Committee membership, in
consultation with GEC. The Criteria Development Organization is responsible for the final selection ofTechnical Committee Members.
GEC requires balanced representation of stakeholders with Technical Committee Member status fromthe four interest categories listed in Table 3. Balanced is defined as no one interest category
representing more than 25% of voting Technical Committee Members. If balanced representation is notachieved on a Technical Committee, weighted voting may be applied in balloting for criteria approval toachieve equal representation among the four stakeholder categories.3
Technical Committee Members are selected from among applications received for each stakeholder
category using objective evaluation factors, including technical qualifications of the applicant on thecriteria topic, balance of stakeholder interests, and geographic representation. For the manufacturer
stakeholder group, the selection process also considers the inclusion of small and medium-sizedenterprises and the type(s) of products manufactured by the brand. Applicants not selected forTechnical Committee Member status are invited to participate as a Technical Committee Observer (seeSection 2.5.1.2)
Technical Committee Members must complete GEC’s Participant Agreement in advance of the first
Technical Committee meeting, or risk forfeiture of Technical Committee membership.
GEC requires balanced representation of stakeholders with Technical Committee Member status fromthe four interest categories listed in Table 2. Balanced is defined as no one interest category
representing more than 25% of voting Technical Committee Members. If balanced representation is notachieved on a Technical Committee, weighted voting may be applied in balloting for criteria approval toachieve equal representation among the four stakeholder categories.
The role of the Technical Committee is to evaluate the criteria against the Principles for GEC Criteria in
Table 1, address public comments, and reach consensus on criteria. For transparency, tThe names ofTechnical Committee membersindividuals and their organizations that they represent as TechnicalCommittee Members affiliation are publicly available. Participation on the Technical Committee does
not constitute an endorsement of the EPEAT Program by the individual or their affiliated organization.
2.5.1.2

Technical Committee Observers

Stakeholders may also choose to sign up for observer status on the Technical Committee by notifying
the Criteria Development Organization that is managing the Technical Committee. Observer statusallows individuals to attend Technical Committee meetings and receive documents provided to theTechnical Committee, such as meeting agendas and updates to the Full Draft Criteria Document.
Technical Committee Observers may only observe meeting discussions, unless invited by the TechnicalCommittee Chair to contribute to the meeting, either verbally or electronically. Technical Committee

3

In the application of weighted voting, each of the four stakeholder categories receives 25% of the voting power.
The value of votes cast by individual members of the Technical Committee is dependent on the number of voting
members in the stakeholder category casting a vote.
Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 10

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

Observers submit comments through the public consultation process (see Section 2.5.2) and get nospecial treatment of their comments by the Technical Committee.
Technical Committee Observers are limited to one representative from an organization. Organizations
that have a representative with Technical Committee Member status are not eligible to have a TechnicalCommittee Observer. All Observers must sign an Observer Agreement before receiving TechnicalCommittee documents or attending meetings. The names and affiliations of all Technical Committee
Observers are publicly available.
2.5.1.3

Invited Experts

The Criteria Development Organization, at their discretion, may invite technical experts to join aTechnical Committee meeting for the express purpose of providing technical expertise on a discussion
topic.
2.5.2

Public Consultation

The Full Draft Criteria Document is made publicly available for review and comment. The Criteria
Development Organization administers the public consultation process, which must be open for no lessthan 60 days. If the Technical Committee makes substantive modifications to the Full Draft Criteria
Document, the Criteria Development Organization may provide stakeholders with a second opportunity
to provide comments. The second public consultation is limited to changes to the document and must
be open for no less than 30 days. GEC notifies stakeholders of the public consultation period throughGEC newsletters and announcements.
The Technical Committee considers comments submitted through the public consultation process as
part of the Voluntary Consensus Process. The Criteria Development Organization prepares a comment
resolution report, and notifies public commenters of the resolution of their comments, and makescomment resolution publicly available.

2.6

Continuous Maintenance

GEC implements a Continuous Maintenance Process to ensure that the criteria remain relevant,continue to be impactful and incentivize leadership performance, and recognize change in technology,
science, and best practice. Criteria revisions are published no more frequently than on an annual basis. A
revision may be considered upon request of stakeholders for several reasons, including the need forclarification or correction of criteria language, availability of new scientific evidence, and emerging bestpractices to reduce sustainability impacts.
GEC assesses the need for a full criteria revision three years after Criteria were initially adopted for use
for within an ecolabela product category. If the assessment determines results in a recommendation forthat a revision is required, within six months of completing the assessment GEC restarts the Dynamic
Criteria Development Process beginning with State of Sustainability Research (Section 2.1) andproceeding through criteria drafting and voluntary consensus (Sections 2.2 – 2.5) determining that arevision is required. The results of the assessment are included in the State of Sustainability Research. A
60-day public consultation period provides interested stakeholders with the opportunity to provide
comments on the assessment for a full revision. If the assessment results in a recommendation
Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 11

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

determines that a revision is not required, GEC evaluates the need for a full revision of the Criteria every
12 months thereafter.
The following factors are considered when evaluating whether criteria require revisions:•

Stakeholder feedback and/or requests.

•

Age and impact of existing criteria, including how many manufacturers are claiming optional
criteria.

•

Comparison of existing criteria against the current State of Sustainability Research to ensure
criteria reflect existing knowledge and best practices.

•

Potential impact on and current capability of manufacturers to meet updated criteria including
design implementation, product life cycle, and testing timeline.

•

Ability of existing criteria to meet institutional purchaser needs.

GEC shares the outcome of the assessment with the Advisory Council and seeks their input on whether
to proceed with a full revision.
GEC makes the final decision as to whether any revision to EPEAT Criteria is warranted. Any full revision
to EPEAT Criteria is conducted in accordance with the principles and procedures of GEC’s Dynamic
Criteria Development Process

2.7

Complaints and Appeals

GEC operates a complaints and appeals process to allow stakeholder concerns about criteria
development to be addressed fairly. GEC has a documented process to receive, evaluate, and makedecisions on complaints and appeals regarding GEC’s Dynamic Criteria Development Process.
•Complaints may be raised, in writing, by any party and may address any aspect of GEC’s
Dynamic Criteria Development Process.

•Any party may appeal, in writing, any procedural matter (actions or inactions) in theimplementation of GEC’s Dynamic Criteria Development Process. Examples of procedural
matters include but are not limited to whether procedures were followed to address public orTechnical Committee member comments or whether the voluntary consensus processprocedures were followed. Appeals regarding technical or substantive content of GEC Criteria
or GEC’s Criteria Development Process are not permitted; however, appeals may be submitted
on whether a technical issue was afforded due process according to procedures. The
membership and recommendations of Expert Ad Hoc Groups cannot be appealed on either
technical or procedural grounds.

•

Complaints and appeals pertaining to the Voluntary Consensus Process must first be directed
to, and investigated by, the Criteria Development Organization managing the Voluntary
Consensus Process. If the complainant/appellant is not satisfied with the resolution of thecomplaint/appeal, then the complainant/appellant may raise the complaint or appeal, in
writing, directly with GEC.

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 12

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

Complaints and appeals must be made in writing to GEC within 30 calendar days of the decision or
action prompting the complaint or appeal, and must include the following information to be considered
complete:
1.

The reason for the complaint/appeal;2.

If the complaint or appeal was first raised with a Criteria Development Organization regarding
the Voluntary Consensus Process, the reason why the complainant/appellant does not deem
the resolution satisfactory;

3.

If the complaint/appeal is regarding GEC’s Dynamic Criteria Development process,identification of the relevant clause(s) of this document, GEC Criteria Development Process(P74) against which the complaint or appeal is based;

4.

Evidence substantiating the basis for the complaint/appeal;

5.

The specific damage(s) or disadvantage(s) caused by the decision, or action or inaction; and6.

The specific resolution requested.

Within five business days of receipt of a complaint or appeal, GEC evaluates the complaint or appeal forcompleteness and notifies the complainant/appellant of the outcome of the evaluation. If determined tobe complete, GEC assigns a Complaint/Appeal Manager, conducts an investigation, and convenes aComplaints/Appeals Committee. During the investigation, the complainant/appellant may be asked torespond to questions or provide additional information.
The Complaints/Appeals Committee, which may be comprised of individuals outside of GEC, reviews thecomplaint/appeal, all submitted documentation, and results of the investigation and makes a final
decision on the complaint/appeal. The Complaint/Appeal Manager may also serve as a member of theCommittee.
Complaints and appeals are handled swiftly and as transparently as possible, while still respecting theconfidentiality of all parties involved. Any GEC personnel specifically cited in the complaint or appeal are
not involved in the investigation of that complaint or appeal and are not permitted to serve on the
Complaints/Appeals Committee. GEC ensures that complaints and appeals do not result in
discriminatory actions. No complainant, appellant, or other individual shall be negatively treated forbringing forward a complaint or appeal, providing information related to a complaint or appeal, or
helping to resolve a complaint or appeal.
GEC notifies the complainant/appellant in writing of its decision on the complaint/appeal within 60
business days of evaluating the complaint/appeal for completeness. the start of the investigation. GEC
retains full authority to make the final determination in the case of all complaints and appeals pertaining
to GEC’s Dynamic Criteria Development Process.
All GEC Dynamic Criteria Development and criteria implementation activities continue without limitation
during an investigation into a complaint or appeal.

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 13

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

2.8

Conflicts of Interest

GEC recognizes that impartiality and managing conflicts of interest are fundamental to maintaining the
integrity of the EPEAT Program. To this end, GEC does not allow commercial, financial, or otherpressures to compromise impartiality in the EPEAT Program and eliminates or mitigates conflicts ofinterest that may influence development and maintenance of EPEAT Criteria. The voluntary consensus
process, by design, prevents any single stakeholder group or organization from having undue influencein the development and revision of criteria because the process requires, and ensures, balanced
representation from all stakeholder groups in the consensus body.
More information regarding the EPEAT Program’s approach to managing impartiality and conflicts ofinterest can be found in Section 8.0 of the EPEAT Policy Manual (P65).

2.82.9 Patent Policy
GEC Criteria can include the use of an essential patent claim (one whose use would be required forcompliance with the Criteria) if it is considered that technical reasons justify this approach. Participantsin the criteria development process should bring patents with claims believed to be essential to theattention of GEC.
In order to include an essential patent claim in GEC Criteria, GEC shall receive from the patent holder ora party authorized to make assurances on its behalf, in written or electronic form, either:a)b)assurance in the form of a general disclaimer to the effect that such party does not hold anddoes not currently intend holding any essential patent claim(s); or
assurance that a license to such essential patent claim(s) will be made available to applicants
desiring to utilize the license for the purpose of implementing the GEC Criteria either:i) under reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of any unfair
discrimination; orii) without compensation and under reasonable terms and conditions that aredemonstrably free of any unfair discrimination.

Such assurance shall indicate that the patent holder (or third party authorized to make assurances on its
behalf) will include in any documents transferring ownership of patents subject to the assurance,
provisions sufficient to ensure that the commitments in the assurance are binding on the transferee,and that the transferee will similarly include appropriate provisions in the event of future transfers withthe goal of binding each successor-in-interest. The assurance shall also indicate that it is intended to bebinding on successors-in-interest regardless of whether such provisions are included in the relevanttransfer documents.
When GEC receives assurance from a patent holder the affected GEC Ecolabel or Criteria shall include anote as follows:
NOTE – The user’s attention is called to the possibility that conformance with these criteria requires
use of an invention covered by patent rights. The patent holder has filed a statement with GEC ofwillingness to grant a license under these rights on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms andconditions to applicants desiring to obtain such a license. Details may be obtained from GEC.
Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 14

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

3.0

Use of Criteria by GEC

GEC Criteria are owned by GEC and, unless noted otherwise, their use is constrained to the tools andresources developed by GEC as part of its mission activities. GEC is interested in the harmonization ofenvironmental and social criteria with existing regulations and global standards, as well as otherecolabels and voluntary programs, and welcomes requests to collaborate. All GEC Criteria are publicly
available free of charge.

4.0

Revisions and Effective Date

GEC reviews GEC Criteria Development Process (P74) on an annual basis to determine if revisions are
required. Revisions to this document are generally published on February 15 and take effect on July 1 ofany given year; however, GEC may, at its sole discretion, identify specific revisions which take effect onanother date before or after July 1.
GEC considers programmatic needs when determining the effective date for all revisions and iscommitted to ensuring its decision is transparent and fair for all stakeholders, including Participating
Manufacturers, GEC-approved CABs, and purchasers.

4.05.0 Supplementary Information
4.15.1 References
The following documents are referenced in this document, GEC Criteria Development Process (P74), andare indispensable for its application. Undated references indicate that the latest edition of thereferenced document applies.
•

ISO 14024 Environmental labels and declarations – Type 1 environmental labelling – Principles
and procedures•

ISO/IEC 17020 Conformity assessment—Requirements for the operation of various types ofbodies performing inspection•

ISO/IEC 17065 Conformity assessment—Requirements for bodies certifying products,
processes, and services•

U.S. Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, OMB Circular A-119:
Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in
Conformity Assessment Activities

4.25.2 Definitions
The following definitions are referenced throughout this document, GEC Criteria Development Process(P74), and are indispensable for its application.
Appeal: For the purposes of this document, GEC Criteria Development Process (P74), a written request
for reconsideration of a procedural decision in the development of GEC Criteria that is considered by the
Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 15

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

appellant to be inconsistent with the policies and procedures in this document. Based on definition of
appeal in ISO/IEC 17000 Conformity assessment — Vocabulary and general principles.
Complaint: For the purposes of this document, GEC Criteria Development Process (P74), a written
expression of dissatisfaction, that is not a procedural appeal, related to GEC’s Dynamic Criteria
Development process or the policies or procedures in this document. Based on definition of complaint in
ISO/IEC 17000 Conformity assessment — Vocabulary and general principles.
Consensus Body: The multi-stakeholder Technical Committee charged with reaching consensus on GEC
criteria.
Continuous Maintenance Process: The process for reviewing and revising GEC Criteria to ensure theyremain relevant, continue to be impactful, and recognize changes in technology, science, and bestpractice in reducing impacts.
Criteria Development Organization: The third-party organization that administers all aspects of theTechnical Committee, which is the consensus body for the Dynamic Criteria Development Process.
Dynamic Criteria Development Process: The process used by GEC to develop its Criteria consistent withthe characteristics of voluntary consensus and the requirements of ISO 14024 Environmental label anddeclarations – Type 1 environmental labelling – Principles and procedures.
Expert Ad Hoc Group: A multi-stakeholder group convened by GEC and serving in an advisory capacity toreview and draft criteria that address sustainability impacts for a technology or service.
GEC Criteria: Environmental and social requirement intended to reduce the sustainability impacts of atechnology or service, developed through a balanced, voluntary consensus process, and adopted by GEC
for application it its ecolabel(s).
Full Draft Criteria Document: The compilation of criteria recommendations from the Expert Ad HocGroups into a single document, which is the starting point for deliberation by the Technical Committee.
Impartiality / Impartial: Presence of objectivity, where objectivity is understood to mean that conflictsof interest do not exist or are resolved so as not to adversely influence conformity assurance andprogrammatic activities. Based on the definition of impartiality in ISO/IEC 17000 Conformity assessment— Vocabulary and general principles and ISO/IEC 17065 Conformity assessment—Requirements forbodies certifying products, processes, and services.
Participating Manufacturer: Brand owner that registers products to a GEC ecolabel and is responsible
for ensuring ongoing conformance of the products against the GEC Criteria selected for those products.
Sometimes referred to as Manufacturer.
State of Sustainability Research: The presentation and analysis of available data on the life cycle
sustainability impacts of a technology or service that guides the development of GEC Criteria.
Technical Committee: The multi-stakeholder committee serving as the voluntary consensus body for
GEC Criteria and administered by a third-party Criteria Development Organization.

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 16

Proposed Revisions October 17, 2022

Voluntary Consensus Process: The process used to develop GEC Criteria that aligns with and draws fromsimilar principles for the characteristics of voluntary consensus as defined in ISO 14024 Environmental
labels and declarations – Type 1 environmental labelling – Principles and procedures and in the US
Government’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119: Federal Participation in theDevelopment and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities.

4.35.3 Document Change History
This document, GEC Criteria Development Process (P74), defines the process that GEC follows for thedevelopment, routine maintenance, and revision of criteria. While not solely dedicated to thedevelopment of EPEAT criteria, this document, GEC Criteria Development Process (P74), is controlled aspart of the EPEAT Quality Management System.
Issue

Revision

10

AuthorDescription of Change

ApproverApproval Date

Effective Date

Snr Director,
Category andCriteria
Development
Snr Director,
Category andCriteria
Development
Snr Director,
Category andCriteria
Development
Snr Director,
Category andCriteria
Development

Initial releaseCEO

2021 April 30

2021 April 30

1

1

Added Section 2.8, Patent Policy

CEO2021 May 20

2021 May 20

12

Updated Section 1.0 to reference Business
Case

CEO

2021 June 17

2021 June 17

1

3

Section 2.5.1 Addition of further details on
Technical Committee Participation. New
section 2.5.1.1 for Technical Committee
Member and addition of consideration of
MSMEs. New Section 2.5.1.2 forObservers. New Section 2.5.1.3 for Invited
Experts.
Further clarifications to existing policies:
GEC Criteria available free of charge (1.0,3.0); Expert Ad Hoc Groups (2.3, 2.3.1);
Voluntary Consensus Process (2.5.2);
Weighted voting (2.5.1.1); Continuous
Maintenance (2.6); Complaints andappeals (2.7); Definitions (4.2). New: 60day public consultation instead of 30-day(2.0, 2.1, 2.5.2). Addition of definitions
used in other EPEAT documents (4.2).
Addition of second stakeholder comment
period (2.0, 2.5.2). Clarity on availability ofState of Sustainability Research (2.1).
Further clarity on impacts and productfunction characteristics in criteria (2.2.1).
New sections on Selection of Verification
Requirements (2.2.2), Required andOptional Criteria (2.2.3), Conflicts ofInterest (2.8) and Revisions and Effective
Date (4.0). Additional clarity on Expert Ad
Hoc Group participation (2.3.1), TechnicalCommittee membership (2.5.1.1),
Continuous Maintenance (2.6), Complaints
and Appeals (2.7). New definition forConsensus Body (5.2).

CEO2022 Jan 142022 Jan 14

1

4

Snr Director,
Category andCriteria
Development

CEO2022 Feb 152022 Feb 15

1

5

VP, Criteria
and Category
Development

CEO

Proposed
2023 Feb 15

Proposed
2023 Jul 01

Global Electronics Council

GEC Criteria Development Process
P74 Issue 1 Rev 5 – Released October 17, 2022 for Stakeholder Comment Period© Green Electronics Council

Page 17