|
Verification Overview
In the EPEAT system, manufacturers add their products
to the registry by declaring that the products meet specific
individual criteria of IEEE 1680. As with Energy
Star and other voluntary declaration programs, there is no verification of this
declaration at the time the product is registered,
though manufacturers must be able upon request to produce the supporting
evidence for product declarations spelled out in the IEEE standard. This ensures that new products
appear on the registry as soon as they are released, with no delay in
time-to-market, and also keeps the cost of operating EPEAT down.
In order to maintain the credibility of
the declarations, EPEAT periodically selects products from the registry
and verifies that they meet the criteria as declared. Verification is
performed on a batch of products and criteria called a “round”. The
verification
process may simply require the manufacturer to provide production
reports, lab analysis or other data, but may also entail EPEAT
independently obtaining products and inspecting them -- even performing
detailed laboratory analysis or destructive disassembly.
All criteria of all products on the registry are
subject to verification at any time. Criteria
are selected for investigation by the Product Verification Committee (PVC)
– based on random selection, environmental significance, or expectation that a
criterion may be difficult to meet, among other factors. Stakeholders are
encouraged to contact EPEAT if they have good reason to doubt the veracity
of a declaration; their concern can motivate an investigation of
criteria or products in an upcoming verification round or on an individual
basis.
While EPEAT will work with manufacturers to correct
or clarify a declaration, if a manufacturer is found over time to be an
untrustworthy user, they may be barred from using the EPEAT system.
More
detail on the verification process
Verification reporting
The results of each round of verification are
published in two forms:
1) A statistical report identifying the criteria that
were investigated, the number of investigations performed, the guidelines
with which products were selected, and the statistical results, and
2) A report that is distributed to purchasers and
others who have signed up to receive it, that identifies the products that
were affected by verification actions.
EPEAT
Verification Round Reports
Current Verification Status
EPEAT
was launched in July of 2006 and the first round of verification was initiated
on 6 March 2007. As of June 2008, two full verification rounds have been
completed and the results are contained in the verification reports listed
below.
Verification Documents
Round Four Documents
Verification Plan
- a PVC-issued document that lists the criteria that are being
verified and other details of Round Four.
Round Three Documents (Verification
Plan,
Outcomes Report)
Round Two Documents (Verification Plan, Outcomes Report)
Round One
Documents (Verification Plan,
Outcomes Report )
Standard Interpretations and Clarifications
Over the course of EPEAT’s verification
rounds, the need for clarification and interpretation of some portions of the
IEEE 1680 standard has become clear. In response, an IEEE Stakeholder
Interpretations Group has issued some formal Interpretations of IEEE 1680, and
the EPEAT Product Verification Committee (PVC) has issued statements clarifying
how they will interpret and apply specific criteria during verification. A
detailed Index of Standard
Interpretations and Clarifications provides an overview of these items.
General Guidance Documents
Verification Clarifications Reports
Clarifications Reports are documents
issued by EPEAT and/or the PVC, usually in response to questions posed by
subscribing manufacturers when they declare their products, that are intended
to clarify how EPEAT and the PVC interpret certain requirements of IEEE 1680.
Verification Personnel
Two different independent parties are
involved in EPEAT verification.
Product
Verification Committee
The Product Verification Committee or
“PVC” oversees the verification process, develops and approves the plan for
each verification round, and makes the final decisions regarding each product’s
conformance or nonconformance to each criterion.
The members of the PVC are independent
experts on electronics and the environment and are contractors to EPEAT. Their
pay is independent of their decisions, they are required to maintain
independence from any EPEAT subscribing manufacturers, and they are generally
blind to the identity of the products and manufacturers they are deciding.
Qualified
Verifiers
Each specific investigation is assigned
to a Qualified Verifier (QV). The QV obtains and evaluates the data and makes a
recommendation of conformance or nonconformance for review by the PVC. QVs are
independent experts on electronics and the environment on contract to EPEAT;
they are required to maintain independence from EPEAT-subscribing
manufacturers, and their pay is independent of their recommendations. QV’s
usually communicate with manufacturers to obtain the information they need to
complete verification processes.
Contacting verifiers:
To maintain their independence, stakeholders are discouraged from contacting
the Product Verification Committee or individual Verifiers directly regarding
EPEAT and verification. They may be contacted through EPEAT if needed.
Verification Process Details
Verifications are typically performed in batches
called “rounds,” so that they can be carefully planned to maximize the
coverage within a given budget. Some products and criteria are selected
essentially at random but many are selected because they are considered
difficult to meet or are particularly environmentally important. The
selections are also influenced by the results of previous verifications
and by credible input that we receive from purchasers or other interested
parties.
Stakeholders are encouraged to contact EPEAT if they have good
reason to doubt the veracity of a declaration.
When a round of verifications is launched a
“snapshot” is taken of the product registry and verification proceeds to
its conclusion based on the products and declarations on the registry at
that time.
Each investigation (the checking of one criterion of one product)
generally results in a finding of conformance or of non-conformance. Manufacturers
have opportunities to correct problems that are found, but ultimately if a
manufacturer is unable to adequately demonstrate conformance they are
compelled to correct the declaration. This may result in the product becoming
unregistered or may simply reduce the number of optional points toward
EPEAT Silver or Gold for that product.
Results
of verification investigations are publicly reported in a
Verification Round Outcomes report, which includes information on the
manufacturers and products investigated.
If a manufacturer is found over time to
not be a trustworthy user they may be barred from using the EPEAT
system.
|
