UL-7004:2017 pdf free download – Sustainability Standard for Household Cooking Appliances.
6 Point allocation system
6.1 Products shall be allocated points for performance in each of the attribute categories in accordance with the point system. The points from all attributes shall be added together to produce a total score. A product can achieve a maximum score of 100 points from the sum of points when evaluated against the required four attributes.
6.2 The fifth attribute, innovation, is a bonus attribute. A maximum of 10 innovation points may be added to the product score if it has less than 100 points, but the product score shall not receive innovation points that take the total score above 100 points.
6.3 For products to be considered as having some level of recognized sustainability under this Standard, such products shall:
a) have received a minimum of 60 points; and
b) have some points in each of the required attributes [i.e., Items (a) to (d) in Clause 6.5];
Note: An example of a balanced manner for the product to achieve the 60 point level is for it to receive 20 points in the energy consumption during use attribute? 20 points in the materials attribute, 5 points in the end of life attribute, and 15 points in the manufacturing and operations attribute.
c) have satisfied the applicable prerequisites and received at least 1 point in one or more of the following Clauses under the materials attribute: 9.1.2.2.2(e), 9.1.3.2.2(a), 9.1.3.2.2(b), 9.1.4.2.2(a), 9.1.4.2.2(b), and 9.1.5.2.2 (b);
d) have satisfied the applicable prerequisites and received at least 1 point in one or more of the following Clauses under the manufacturing & operations attribute: 9.3.4.2.1(d), 9.3.5.3.1(c), 9.3.6.2.1(a), 9.3.6.2.1(b), and 9.3.6.2.1(d): and
e) have satisfied the applicable prerequisites and received at least 1 point in one or more of the following Clauses under the end-of-life attribute: 9.4.2.1(b), 9.4.2.1(c), 9.4.2.1(d), 9.4.3.1(b), 9.4.3.1(c), and 9.4.3.1(d).
6.4 In instances where points are awarded for demonstrating progress, reduction, or some equivalent language that implies a reduction in the product’s overall environmental burden, the points shall not be awarded unless that progress or reduction is significant.
Note:The interpretation of whether or not an action is significant should be in keeping with the General Principles of the Federal Trade Commission’s Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims (October 1, 2012). In 16 CFR 260.3, the Guides provide examples of claims that overstate an environmental attribute. Section 260.3(c) states “[a]n environmental marketing claim should not overstate, directly or by implication, an environmental attribute or benefit. Marketers should not state or imply environmental benefits if the benefits are negligible.” Further, section 260.4(c) states that to ‘avoid deception. marketers should use clear and prominent qualifying language that limits the claim to a specific benefit or benefits. Marketers should not imply that any specific benefit is significant if it is, in fact, negligible.” The interpretation of whether or not an action is significant should also be in keeping with the Canadian Competition Bureau’s guidelines on environmental labels and claims in Canada.
