IMAGING EQUIPMENT WORKING GROUP MINUTES
Thursday, September 17, 2009
1 - 3 PM EDT
Welcome from Pamela Brody-Heine and Holly Elwood, co-chairs.
Michael Anderson (Eastman Kodak) Barbara Kyle (Electronics TakeBack Coalition)
Ligia Bejat (Lexmark International Inc) Susan Landry (Albemarle)
Cate Berard (EPA) Sergei Levchik (Israel Chemicals)
Mike Biddle (MBA Polymers) Judy Levin (Center for Environmental Health)
Pamela Brody-Heine (Eco Stewardship Ron Mateas (Epson)
Strategies/Zero Waste Alliance) Pat McPhail (Toshiba)
Joe Burquist (HP) Jennifer Miyamoto (Xerox Corporation)
Sandra Cannon (U.S. Department of Energy) Jeffrey Olsen (PA DEP)
Stephanie Castorina (IPC) Wayne Rifer (GEC)
Sue Chiang (Center for Environmental Health) Tim Ringo (Konica Minolta Holding USA,
Mark Corbett (Pitney Bowes Inc.) Inc)
Jim Crossland (InfoPrint Solutions) Mario Rufino (Canon USA, Inc)
Derek Dao (Samsung Electronics Co.) Mark Sajbel (USDA)
Patty Dillon (Dillon Environmental Assoc.) Chris Saunders (Lexmark)
Holly Elwood (USEPA) Steve Scherrer (Bromine Science & Env.
Holly Evans (Strategic Counsel) Forum)
Faridoon Ferhut (CIWMB) Nicola Schirru (self)
Ashley Foster (SCS) Ted Smith (Electronics TakeBack Coalition)
Joshua Gallegos (Sandia Nat. Labs) Miwa St. Onge (RISO)
Jack Geibig (Univ. of TN) Jenny Stephenson (US EPA)
Michael Gell (Xanfeon) Katherine Stewart (TerraChoice)
Don Greene (NY State) Paul Swoveland (self)
Laura Heywood (UK Cartridge Lucian Turk (Dell)
Remanufacturers Association) Ed Weil (Polytechnic Inst., NYU)
Brian Hilton (RIT) Sarah Westervelt (BAN)
Richard Kerr (Bayer) Cat Wilt (Univ. of Tennessee)
Michael Kirschner (Design Chain Assoc.)
Observers and Others Attendees:
David Caldwell (Lexmark) Yuichi (Sam) Somemori (Sharp Electronics)
Justin Lehrer (StopWaste.org)
The co-chairs reviewed the agenda. There were no comments or questions.
Approval of July Minutes
The minutes were posted on the website. The minutes from the 7/23/09 meeting were approved
as presented, with one revision on the attendance, and will be posted in the public area of the
The co-chairs provided an update on the following:
1680 and 1680.1 Status. These are in the midst of their 3rd circulation right now, in order to
comply with an IEEE requirement on referencing trademarks.
Face-to-Face Meeting Logistics
Joint meeting of the 1680.2 and 1680.3 Working Groups is scheduled for November 17th and
18th in Washington D.C.:
Tuesday November 17th – 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM
Wednesday November 18th – 8:00 AM to 3:00 PM
Our June meeting was postponed due to travel restrictions, and consequently this will be our
first face-to-face meeting, and also a critical meeting in our process to develop the two
environmental leadership standards for imaging equipment at televisions.
The agenda includes presentations and discussion of the first draft of criteria developed by
subgroups, as well as breakout working time for the subgroups. This meeting will be an
opportunity for the Working Groups to provide input and feedback to the subgroups on their
draft criteria as well as issues that subgroups are facing. We have two blocks of subgroup
breakout time, and we know that many of you participate in more than one subgroup. We
will do our best to schedule the subgroup breakouts to minimize the overlap, but there is no
way to completely avoid it.
Please note that for those wanting additional background on EPEAT, we have scheduled an
optional pre-meeting EPEAT Introductory Presentation on November 17th from 7:30 AM to
The meeting will be held at U.S. EPA Headquarters, EPA East Building, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, N.W. Information about hotels will be sent out soon.
We are looking for sponsors for lunches, morning coffee, and
an evening networking reception. Please contact Pamela or Cat Wilt if your organization
might be interested in being a sponsor.
o The document included in meeting materials titled “16802_Timeline_090901.doc.”
shows targeted timelines and milestones for this process. The next major milestone
is the November meeting, where subgroups will present first draft set of criteria for
review/input by the Working Group.
o Please note that we have also added a face to face meeting for the spring of 2010.
This meeting will be held in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Call for Patents
o The co-chairs provided an opportunity for participants to identify patent claims of
which the participant is personally aware and that may be essential for the use of the
standard. No patents were identified on this call.
Code of Conduct & Decision Making Review
Pamela reviewed the code of conduct and decision making process. These have been reviewed
in the past on both working group and subgroup calls. Pamela referenced the following
documents included in the meeting materials: “1680 WG Code of Conduct.doc” and “Summary
of Decision Making Process for 1680 Family of Standards.doc”.
This as an open process and new members can join at any time. However, there is no
requirement to revisit issues that have already been resolved and decisions that have been made
for the benefit of new members. The co-chairs strongly recommended that subgroups clearly
document decisions that have been made, and issues that have been resolved.
The group discussed participation requirements and rostering requirements, especially as related
to voting status. The P&Ps outline the participation requirements for maintaining rostered
member status, but do not specify how many meetings a new member must attend before they
have voting rights. There is precedence that was set in the TV Study Group whereby members
had to have participated in at least one meeting prior to voting on whether to move forward with
standards development. The EPEAT leadership team will discuss this issue and decide if further
clarification is needed.
EPEAT Standards Development Principles:
Referenced the document, “EPEAT New Stds Development Principles 09-09-10.doc.” The
EASC has just approved this document for use by the 1680 family of standards. It is meant to
create a common understanding of the background of the principles for developing EPEAT
standards. One co-chair noted that the EASC requested clarification of the initial intent of one
bullet in the document (“be low cost, user friendly and cause minimal time to market”),
specifically, whether this bullet was in reference to the EPEAT tool or individual criteria.
There was significant discussion about how these principles should be used within the
subgroups, especially as it pertains to our current development of leadership criteria that can
drive environmental improvement in the marketplace. The EPEAT leadership team will explore
developing a definition of “leadership” to help guide the discussions.
Environmentally Sensitive Materials:
The ESM subgroup recently held an informative learning session on organohalogens with
speakers representing multiple stakeholder categories; academia, NGO and industry.
We have reviewed our code of conduct with the subgroup and the RoHS/REACH
Three subteams have been formed to work on draft criteria; RoHS/REACH,
bromine/chlorine and performance goals for safer alternatives
The RoHS/REACH team is currently meeting, thus far three criterion have been drafted
but we have a longer action register, the other subteams will begin in October/November
Material Selection: This Subgroup is considering 4 areas of criteria, including recycled content,
bio-based materials, declaration of product weight, and a new category of LCA-based
considerations for a GHG- or carbon-based metric for materials decisions.
Design for End of Life/Product Longevity: This Subgroup has looked at Blue Angel as one
template for design for EOL, which includes “deep disassembly.” There has been some initial
discussion about whether this is an area for that cuts across all products within the IE scope, or
would a required criterion eliminate some products from consideration? They have also been
looking at balance amongst the criteria that are being considered, especially when all criteria
from other subgroups are joined, so that we don’t unwittingly over-weight a specific
Energy Conservation: This Subgroup has been meeting every two weeks. They have drafted a
couple of stand-by power criteria (one mandatory and one optional), based on FEMP and EU
requirements. They are also looking at GHG emissions criteria, as well as how to separate
product-specific criteria vs. OEM-wide criteria (the latter of which has been kicked to the
Corporate Performance subgroup). They will likely not be setting threshold criteria for
embodied energy, as there is so much variability in the data that is available. Ultimately they
will be discussing duplexing and power management.
EOL Management: The EOL Management subgroup met on September 14 following two
webinars on the developing R2 and e-Stewards certification systems. Two options had been
proposed for a mandatory criterion referencing one or both of these certification systems. At the
September 14 meeting the subgroup decided by consensus to provide manufacturers the choice
of requiring either R2 or e-Stewards as a mandatory take-back requirement. Specific criterion
text is still to be developed and a new sub-subgroup of the EOL Management subgroup was
formed to begin drafting criterion/a text. Also another sub-subgroup is working to determine a
process for determining equivalency to the certification systems to be referenced in the
Corporate Performance: This Subgroup has more than 29 draft criteria ideas on the table, and
they are working on merging and winnowing those concepts. There is a task group that is
tackling the various suggested criteria related to GHG.
Packaging: On the last call, the subgroup agreed to amendments to the existing 1680.1 language
on toxic constituents in packaging; most of the suggested changes were made to bring the
existing language up to date with changes in the Model Toxics in Packaging legislation. They
have been discussing other packaging criteria addressed in 1680.1 as well, and are making
headway on language related to separable packaging materials and declarations of recycled
content. The subgroup is beginning to develop a declaration form for recycled content materials
that can be used by manufacturers.
Consumables: Since the July 23 working group meeting, the Consumables subgroup has met 4
times. The group had one update from the material selection subgroup to identify potential areas
of overlap. However, the bulk of the subgroup’s time has been spent on two topics: paper
criteria and toner cartridge issues. On the former, the subgroup has made good headway on
developing criterion language. On the latter, the subgroup is struggling with scope
considerations of how far to delve into environmental and design issues related to the use of
remanufactured cartridges vs. original equipment cartridges which are included within the IE
IAQ: The IAQ Subgroup did not report out due to insufficient time.
Next Call: Our next call will be on October 22 from 1-3 p.m. eastern time.