EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
EPEAT CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT PROTOCOLS
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
4.4.1 Manufacturer warranty/service agreement
4.4.1.1 Required—Availability of additional three year warranty or service
agreement
Verification Guidance
This criterion will be verified for conformance in geographic regions or countries. Subscriber must
demonstrate that the criterion is met in all declared regions/countries.
IEEE Interpretations and PVC
Verification Clarifications
Interpretation 1-8
References and Details
None available.
Verification Requirements
1. Declaration from manufacturer (see 4.0 Verification
Requirement – Declaration from manufacturer)
The term ‘additional’ in 4.4.1.1 means that regardless of the
terms of a standard warranty, an additional warranty or service
contract of at least three-years duration must be offered for
purchase.
2. Documentation of warranty or service contract
4.4.1.1 Verification Requirement
Documentation of warranty or service contract
Verification Protocols
1. Request for data submission to
subscriber
1. Declaration from manufacturer that additional 3-year
warranty is available in all declared to regions
AND
2. Documentation showing:
•
The standard warranty/service contract with the
product
•
An additional 3 year warranty or service contract being
offered to purchasers
•
How the 3 year warranty or service contract is being
4.4-1
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
offered to purchasers
2. Examples of potential evidence for
conformance – generally more than
one item of evidence may be provided
such that conformance is adequately
demonstrated
3. Questions to assess conformance
•
Website
•
Sample contracts
•
Sample warranty/service contract
Is there evidence that an additional 3 year warranty/service
exists and is “in addition” to the standard offering?
Does the documentation show that the offer of an additional
warranty is made visible and accessible to all purchasers?
4. Evaluation guidance
Actual warranty/contract does not need to be provided,
however the details to prove the additional warranty/service
does actually exist and how it is offered to purchasers is
needed.
4.4-2
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
4.4.2 Upgradeability
4.4.2.1 Required—Upgradeable with common tools
Verification Guidance
IEEE Interpretations and PVC
Verification Clarifications
At the time of this document, no interpretations or
clarifications have been issued for this criterion.
References and Details
Upgrading of product may be limited to designated service
entities or manufacturer.
Verification Requirements
1. Declaration from manufacturer (See 4.0 Verification
Requirement – Declaration from manufacturer)
2. Supporting documentation demonstrating that the product
is upgradeable with commonly available tools. Examples of
documentation include:
•
A list of the commonly available tools required to
upgrade product, and instructions for upgrading the
product, or
•
A statement from a minimum of three computer
service, upgrade or refurbishment entities individually,
or at least one computer service, upgrade or
refurbishment entity working under an independent
entity with electronics upgrade expertise that is not a
trade organization, confirming that the product design
meets requirements of 4.4.2.1
4.4.2.1 Verification Requirement
Supporting documentation demonstrating that the product is upgradeable with commonly
available tools.
•
A list of the commonly available tools required to upgrade product, and instructions for
upgrading the product, or A statement from a minimum of three computer service,
upgrade or refurbishment entities individually, or at least one computer service,
upgrade or refurbishment entity working under an independent entity with electronics
upgrade expertise that is not a trade organization, confirming that the product design
meets requirements of 4.4.2.1
Verification Protocols
4.4-3
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
1. Request for data submission to
subscriber
1. Documentation showing:
•
A list of components that can be upgraded, and
•
A list of commonly available tools required to remove
existing components and install upgraded components,
and
•
Instructions for disassembly and reassembly that show
how the components can be upgraded with the
available tools
•
The capability and capacity to upgrade the applicable
components via USB or IEEE 1394 serial buses.
OR
1. A written statement signed by qualified recyclers that
demonstrates familiarity with the product and asserts the
conditions of the criterion
•
Qualified recyclers shall include either a minimum of
three recyclers individually, or at least one recycler
working under an independent entity with electronics
recycling expertise that is not a trade organization,
confirming that the product design meets requirements
of 4.4.2.1
AND
2. Written evidence that the recycler(s) signing the statement
meet(s) the required qualification
2. Examples of potential evidence for
conformance – generally more than
one item of evidence may be provided
such that conformance is adequately
demonstrated
•
List of components that can be upgraded
•
List of tools
•
Disassembly instructions in user guide, DFE or DFX report
•
Demonstration of USB or IEEE 1394 serial bus capability and
capacity to upgrade the applicable components
•
Statement/documentation from recyclers/remanufacturers
4.4-4
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
3. Questions to assess conformance
Documentation provided shows that the product can be
upgraded with common available tools.
Has a list of components that can be upgraded been provided?
Is the serial bus capability and capacity adequate to practically
upgrade the applicable components?
AND
Has the subscriber provided a list of commonly available tools
required to remove existing components and install upgraded
components and
Have disassembly instructions been provided?
Do the disassembly instructions demonstrate that that the
components can be upgraded with the available tools and show
how it is done?
OR
Is there a written statement signed by qualified recyclers that
demonstrates familiarity with the product and asserts the
conditions of the criterion?
Is there written evidence that the recycler(s) signing the
statement meet(s) the required qualification?
4. Evaluation guidance
Upgradability should at least include optical drives, memory,
hard drive and cards.
Qualified recyclers shall include either a minimum of three
recyclers individually, or at least one recycler working under an
independent entity with electronics recycling expertise that is
not a trade organization, confirming that the product design
meets requirements of 4.4.2.1.
•
“independent” means that the individual does not have
an ongoing business relationship with the manufacturer
•
“entity” could be a recycler or another entity that has
expertise in electronics recycling
Note that upgrading of the product may be limited to
designated service entities or the manufacturer.
4.4-5
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
4.4.2.2 Optional—Modular design
Verification Guidance
IEEE Interpretations and PVC
Verification Clarifications
Clarification 6-1
The criterion requires that the processor must be changeable
independent of other components such as the circuit board to
which it is attached.
Clarification 11
While some criteria require paperwork that pre-dates a
declaration, this particular criterion, 4.4.2.2, does not, since the
requirement for this criterion is met by the design and
manufacture of the product.
References and Details
None available.
Verification Requirements
1. Declaration from manufacturer (see 4.0 Verification
Requirement – Declaration from manufacturer)
2. Description of product modules
3. Description of module change method
4.4.2.2 Verification Requirement
Description of product modules
Verification Protocols
1. Request for data submission to
subscriber
2. Examples of potential evidence for
conformance – generally more than
one item of evidence may be provided
1. A list and description of product modules that can be
changed/upgraded, including major components such as:
•
Hard drive and optical drives
•
Battery
•
Motherboard
•
Graphic and other cards
•
Display panel assembly
List and description of product modules
4.4-6
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
such that conformance is adequately
demonstrated
3. Questions to assess conformance
Is there a list of product modules that can be
changed/upgraded?
Are each of the modules described?
Are all of the modules listed readily replaceable?
What CPU are you using? Is it soldered to the motherboard?
4. Evaluation guidance
This criterion applies to parts that are integrated into the
system in such a way that the user can remove and replace
them and would typically include items like memory, hard
drives, CD/DVDs, CPUs and internal power supplies (for
desktops). The availability of USB ports or other external ports
does not qualify as “modular design”.
The product does not have to have ALL of the above listed
items able to be user replaceable but should have a selection of
them.
Certain types of popular CPU’s are generally soldered to the
motherboard and therefore not considered to be of modular
design per Clarification 6-1
4.4.2.2 Verification Requirement
Description of module change method
Verification Protocols
1. Request for data submission to
subscriber
1. Description on how the modules can be changed/upgraded
2. Examples of potential evidence for
conformance – generally more than
one item of evidence may be provided
such that conformance is adequately
demonstrated
•
Disassembly and upgrade instructions on the web or
shipped with upgrade module
•
User Manual/Service Manual
•
WEEE documentation
4.4-7
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
3. Questions to assess conformance
Is there a document detailing the procedures for upgrading
modules including disassembly and reassembly instructions, list
of tools needed and potential safety precautions?
Are all of the modules listed easily removable, have standard
connectors and are readily replaceable?
4. Evaluation guidance
Modularity means that major components must be easily
removable, have standard connectors, and are readily
replaceable.
Processor cannot be soldered to motherboard.
Note that criterion does not require that modules must be
changeable by user and may be limited to designated service
entities or the manufacturer. However, stating “take item to
service entity” does not fulfill the “description of the module
change method”, which must be provided for the service entity.
4.4-8
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
4.4.3 Product life extension
4.4.3.1 Optional—Availability of replacement parts
Verification Guidance
This criterion will be verified for conformance in geographic regions or countries. Subscriber must
demonstrate that the criterion is met in all declared regions/countries.
IEEE Interpretations and PVC
Verification Clarifications
Clarification 6-3
The following principles shall be applied in determining
conformance with criterion 4.4.3.1:
•
The whole product is not a part. The intent of the
criterion is to extend the life of the product by
replacing parts. So replacement of the whole product
does not meet the intent.
•
The replacement parts must be available regardless of
whether the user has taken an extended warranty.
•
Any charges for replacement parts are up to the
subscriber, or their designated agent (the party who
provides the replacement parts).
•
The subscriber is responsible for assuring that any
agent designated to provide replacement parts will
meet the replacement part requirements for the
required period of time – 5 years after end of
production.
•
The subscriber can determine for which parts
replacement parts will be made available.
•
Parts may, at subscriber’s choice and user notification,
be available only through service centers that do the
replacement.
•
Replacement parts may be after-market, or
refurbished, etc.
•
EPEAT can verify, within the 5-year period after end-ofproduction, that this criterion is met for products that
have been archived.
The finding of an NC for this criterion should trigger EPEAT staff
to request the subscriber to check that corrective action is
taken for all their products, where needed. EPEAT staff will
subsequently check with the subscriber to make sure that such
4.4-9
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
actions have been taken
References and Details
Verification Requirements
None available.
1. Declaration from manufacturer
2. Description of how product user is informed about how to
obtain replacement parts
4.4.3.1 Verification Requirement
Description of how product user is informed about how to obtain replacement parts
Verification Protocols
1. Request for data submission to
subscriber
1. Provide evidence that the criterion is met in all declared-to
regions
AND
2. Documentation indicating the company has policy and
procedures in place for:
2. Examples of potential evidence for
conformance – generally more than
one item of evidence may be provided
such that conformance is adequately
demonstrated
3. Questions to assess conformance
•
Assuring the availability of spare parts for five years
after the end of production of the product
•
Informing the user about sources of replacement parts
•
Assuring that any user anywhere the product is sold can
obtain replacement parts
•
Sample contract language
•
Service manual information
•
Disassembly/upgrade instructions
Is there adequate evidence that spare parts are available for
five years after the end of production of a product?
Has documentation been provided demonstrating that the user
has been informed about sources of replacement parts and can
obtain them anywhere the product is sold?
4. Evaluation guidance
This criterion is about part replacement, not whole unit
replacement and applies to all parts except those that are
structural and/or highly unlikely to need replacement.
Note that some service parts may only be available through
4.4-10
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.
EPEAT Conformity Assessment Protocols
4.4 Product longevity/life cycle extension
Version 1.4 – March 2012
product servicing by service entities or manufacturer because
they may require professional installation.
4.4-11
Please note, this document is intended to be used as a companion guidance document to the IEEE
1680.1 standard. Please refer to the 1680.1 document for the exact product criterion details.