EPEAT Program
Continuous Monitoring Outcomes Report
Computers and Displays
CD-2022-04
March 27, 2023

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 called
Rounds. 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 nonconformances and the actions taken to restore accuracy of the
EPEAT Registry.
This document summarizes the activities and results of Continuous Monitoring Round CD-2022-04 conducted
for the Computers and Displays category.

2.0 Overview of Continuous Monitoring Round CD-2022-04
2.1

Investigation Activities

As per the published Round Plan, Continuous Monitoring Round CD-2022-04 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 Rev2)

Page 1 of 9

CD-2022-04 Outcomes Report

2.2

March 27, 2023

Criteria InvestigatedContinuous Monitoring Round focused on corporate criteria with annual disclosure requirements, to confirm
that Participating Manufacturers are fulfilling annual reporting requirements for the criteria investigated. Since
one Criterion was required, and two were Optional, Participating Manufacturers received up to three
investigations. If a Participating Manufacturer was investigated for any of the selected Criteria in another 2022
Continuous Monitoring Round, the Criterion was not assigned again in this Round, given the annual disclosure
requirements. The products for investigation were selected randomly using a random number generator.
Table 1: Criteria Investigated in Round CD-2022-04
Criteria Number

Criterion Title

4.8.2.2

Corporate Greenhouse Gas emissions from product transport

4.9.2.1

Corporate environmental performance reporting by manufacturer

4.10.1.2

Corporate socially responsible manufacturing: OHS

3.0 Summary of Investigations and Final Decisions on Conformity for CD-2022-04
Highlights from this Continuous Monitoring Round are:•51 investigations completed•

34 decisions of Conformance•

17 decisions of Nonconformance

Further details provided in Section 4. Of these 17
nonconformances, seven were due to CAB failure to submit
an Investigation Report.

Figure 1: Final Conformity Decisions for CD-2022-04(shown as percentage of total investigations)Global Electronics Council

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev2)

Page 2 of 9

CD-2022-04 Outcomes Report

March 27, 2023

4.0 Further Details on Nonconformances for CD-2022-04
Figure 2 below provides a further breakdown of the nonconformances by Criterion. The EPEAT Program
recognizes two types of nonconformances: nonconformance, and nonconformance due to CAB inaction ordelay not attributable to the Participating Manufacturer.
Figure 2: Breakdown of Nonconformances by Criterion for CD-2022-04(shown as a percentage of total nonconformances)

Figure 3 provides a further breakdown by the underlying reason for the nonconformances.

Figure 3: Underlying Reason for Nonconformances in CD-2022-04(shown as a percentage of total nonconformances)

Global Electronics Council

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev2)

Page 3 of 9

CD-2022-04 Outcomes Report

4.1

March 27, 2023

Minor Errors Versus Nonconformances

All nonconformances must be categorized as either a minor error, nonconformance, or nonconformance due
to CAB inaction or delay not attributable to the Participating Manufacturer. Minor errors are non-critical or
clerical in nature and do not materially affect the validity of conformance with EPEAT Criteria. Allnonconformances that do not meet the definition of minor errors are categorized as nonconformances (unlessthey are due to CAB inaction or delay).
Figure 4: Minor Error versus Nonconformances for CD-2022-04(shown as a percentage of total nonconformances)

4.2

Minor Errors

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

All minor errors found in Round CD-2022-04 were demonstrated nonconformances.
4.3

Nonconformances

In Continuous Monitoring Round CD-2022-04, seven nonconformances were due to CAB inaction or delay not
attributable to the Participating Manufacturer, while the remaining ten nonconformances were demonstrated
nonconformances. Demonstrated nonconformances were found for all three selected Criteria. Each Criterion
selected for this Round has multiple Criterion elements that must be met to demonstrate conformance.
Further information on these Criteria can be found in Section 6, Key Findings.

5.0 Actions to Restore Conformance
Where the final conformity decision is nonconformance (including minor errors and those due to CAB inaction
or delay), Participating Manufacturers must make corrections to restore the accuracy of the EPEAT Registryduring the Corrective Action Phase. These activities may include providing additional evidence to demonstrate

Global Electronics Council

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev2)

Page 4 of 9

CD-2022-04 Outcomes Report

March 27, 2023

conformance with the criterion or unselecting the criteria in the EPEAT Registry. Where the product was foundnonconformant 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”).
The following actions were taken to restore accuracy to the EPEAT Registry as a result of Continuous
Monitoring Round CD-2022-04:•

9 investigations

Additional data provided by Participating Manufacturers, bringing the products
into conformance with the Criterion•

1 investigation

Product archived by the CAB or by the EPEAT Program•

7 investigations

CAB reviewed evidence originally submitted by Participating Manufacturers,
which demonstrated conformance

Table 2 in Section 7 identifies the Participating Manufacturers and products that received nonconformances inContinuous Monitoring Round CD-2022-04.

6.0 Key Findings
6.1

Conformance with all Elements of Criterion 4.10.1.2

Participating Manufacturers are reminded to ensure that they meet all elements of this Criterion, including:ensuring supplier requirements are incorporated into agreements with directly contracted suppliers, including
language requiring suppliers to apply requirements to their own directly contracted suppliers; that theprioritization assessment to determine supplier facilities in scope is performed annually and providing theassessment; providing evidence to demonstrate that all facilities in scope meet the criterion requirements; andensuring the annual public disclosure is updated annually.
6.2

Third-Party Assurance of Environmental Data for Criterion 4.9.2.1

Participating Manufacturers are reminded to ensure that the independent third-party assurance for Criterion
4.9.2.1 Required—Corporate environmental performance reporting by manufacturer, verifies eachenvironmental aspect, including water, energy and greenhouse gas emissions.
6.3

Conformance with all Elements of Criterion 4.8.2.2

Participating Manufacturers are reminded to ensure they address all elements of Optional Criterion 4.8.2.2—
Greenhouse gas emissions from product transport. This includes the scope of the criterion, specifically, that itcovers greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from supply chain transportation activities for products declared toconform to this category, from the point of final product assembly to location of the purchaser, and that it
includes well-to-wheel GHG emissions from all modes of freight movement utilized. Participating
Manufacturers must confirm the scope in the evidence provided.

Global Electronics Council

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev2)

Page 5 of 9

CD-2022-04 Outcomes Report

March 27, 2023

In addition, Participating Manufacturers must demonstrate that they have used one or more of the approaches
identified in the Criterion. The emissions reduction goal must be specific to greenhouse gas emissions fromproduct transport.

Global Electronics Council

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev2)

Page 6 of 9

CD-2022-04 Outcomes Report

March 27, 2023

7.0 Identification of Nonconformances and Corrections Made by Participating Manufacturers
In the interest of transparency, the EPEAT Program identifies the Participating Manufacturers and products that received nonconformances and the actions taken to restore accuracy of the EPEAT Registry.
Minor errors 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 Nonconformances and Corrections Made by Participating Manufacturers
Participating
Manufacturer

Product

Product TypeCountry

Criterion
NumberApple

Apple MacBook Air

Notebook

United States

4.9.2.1

Corporate environmental performance
reporting by manufacturer

Apple

Apple Mac Studio

Desktop

Canada4.10.1.2

Apple

Apple 12.9-inch iPad
Pro Wi-Fi + Cellular

Tablet / Slate

CanadaBenQ

GW2283,GW2283E(GW2280-T)
dynabook Portege
X40-G PMR41E

MonitorDynabook Americas

Required or
Optional

Underlying Reason for Nonconformance

Corrective Action Taken

Required

CAB inaction or delay not attributable to
the Participating Manufacturer

Corporate Socially responsible
manufacturing: OHS

Optional

CAB inaction or delay not attributable to
the Participating Manufacturer

4.8.2.2

Greenhouse gas emissions fromproduct transport

Optional

CAB inaction or delay not attributable to
the Participating Manufacturer

Germany

4.9.2.1

Required

Demonstrated nonconformance

Notebook

France4.9.2.1

Corporate environmental performance
reporting by manufacturer
Corporate environmental performance
reporting by manufacturer

CAB reviewed evidence originally submitted byParticipating Manufacturer, which
demonstrated conformance
CAB reviewed evidence originally submitted byParticipating Manufacturer, which
demonstrated conformance
CAB reviewed evidence originally submitted byParticipating Manufacturer, which
demonstrated conformance
EPEAT archived products

Required

CAB inaction or delay not attributable to
the Participating Manufacturer

TECRA A40-J PMM11

Notebook

UnitedKingdom

4.10.1.2

Corporate Socially responsible
manufacturing: OHS

Optional

CAB inaction or delay not attributable to
the Participating Manufacturer

Dynabook Americas

SATELLITE PRO C40-J

Notebook

Canada4.8.2.2

Greenhouse gas emissions fromproduct transport

Optional

CAB inaction or delay not attributable to
the Participating Manufacturer

GoogleGoogle Pixelbook Go
Model G021A

Notebook

United States

4.9.2.1

Corporate environmental performance
reporting by manufacturer

Required

CAB inaction or delay not attributable to
the Participating ManufacturerHP

HP t240 Thin ClientThin Client

Sweden4.8.2.2

Optional

Demonstrated nonconformance

Hyundai IT America
Tech Corp.
IGEL Technology

HYUNDAI R227DPN

MonitorUnited States

4.9.2.1

Required

Demonstrated nonconformance

UD3 M350C

Thin Client

United States

4.9.2.1

Required

Demonstrated nonconformance

Viewsonic

ViewSonic / VS17380/ VP2768-4K

MonitorCanada4.9.2.1

Greenhouse gas emissions fromproduct transport
Corporate environmental performance
reporting by manufacturer
Corporate environmental performance
reporting by manufacturer
Corporate environmental performance
reporting by manufacturer

Required

Demonstrated nonconformance

Dynabook Americas

Global Electronics Council

Criterion Title

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev2)

CAB reviewed evidence originally submitted byParticipating Manufacturer, which
demonstrated conformance
CAB reviewed evidence originally submitted byParticipating Manufacturer, which
demonstrated conformance
CAB reviewed evidence originally submitted byParticipating Manufacturer, which
demonstrated conformance
CAB reviewed evidence originally submitted byParticipating Manufacturer, which
demonstrated conformance
Participating Manufacturer submitted evidence
demonstrating conformance
Participating Manufacturer submitted evidence
demonstrating conformance
Participating Manufacturer submitted evidence
demonstrating conformance
Participating Manufacturer submitted evidence
demonstrating conformance

Page 7 of 9

CD-2022-04 Outcomes Report
Zebra

Global Electronics Council

Zebra ET51 Enterprise
Rugged Tablet WLAN
(8”)

March 27, 2023
Tablet/ slate

United States

4.9.2.1

Corporate environmental performance
reporting by manufacturer

Required

Demonstrated nonconformance

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev2)

Participating Manufacturer submitted evidence
demonstrating conformance

Page 8 of 9

CD-2022-04 Outcomes Report

March 27, 2023

Document Control and Change History
Issue
1

Revision0

Owner
EPEAT Conformity
Assurance Manager
EPEAT Conformity
Assurance Manager
Senior Manager,
Ecolabels andResources

1

1

2

0

2

1

Senior Manager,
Ecolabels andResources2

2

Senior Manager,
Ecolabels andResources

Global Electronics Council

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

Description
Initial release

Approval Date

Effective Date2018 Dec 112018 Dec 11

Reformatting of document. Addition ofstandardized text.

2021 Mar 25

2021 Mar 30

Updated terminology fornonconformances to include“nonconformances” and “minor errors”,
in alignment with revisions to P66.
Updated to reflect new nonconformance
category for CAB inaction or delay

2022 Sep 152022 Sep 30

2023 Mar 92022 Mar 13

Outcomes Report – Level 1 Investigations (P41B Issue2 Rev2)

Page 9 of 9