Specification language · Free to use
Health-based requirements
for your devices.
Turnkey specification language for screen protection and display health performance — ready to fold into an RFP, a district standard, an enterprise device standard or a category requirement. Free to use, free to share, and written to be met by more than one supplier.
A requirement several suppliers can already meet — conforming product ships today from Dell · HP · Lenovo · Acer · BenQ · Gigabyte · LG Display · ZAGG and others →
How it works
Three steps to a requirement.
“Blocks blue light” appears on products that perform very differently. This page replaces the claim with a measurable specification:
The evidence
Guiding research & health rationale.
The requirement is built on two narrow parts of the visible spectrum, each identified by a different international body. It requires a measured optical result and makes no health claim. The detail, for the committee that asks:
The two ranges and the mechanism
435–440 nm
Retinal health
The range associated with the greatest risk to retinal health, per ICNIRP (2013) and ANSI (2015). This is the range the blue-light hazard weighting function peaks over, and the range RPF is computed around. Retinal research →
480–500 nm
Circadian rhythm
The range associated with melatonin suppression and disruption to circadian rhythms, per CIE S 026/E:2018. This is the range CPF is computed around, and why evening and overnight use is specified separately. Sleep and circadian research →
Key guiding research
ANSI (2015)International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation ProtectionDefine the blue-light hazard weighting function and identify 435–440 nm as the range of greatest risk to retinal health. The basis for RPF.
Cajochen et al. (2011)Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · Journal of Applied PhysiologyReported that evening use of light-emitting screens suppresses melatonin and delays sleep timing relative to non-emissive reading.
None of these organisations endorse Eyesafe or any product — the requirement rests on their work, not on ours. eyesafe.com/research
Outcomes — studies and workplace case studies
Eyesafe-sponsored study
Screen protection, measured objectively
In a randomised, counterbalanced crossover study conducted in-home (SleepScore Labs, 2024; n = 36; 1,088 nights), CPF70 screen protection delivered objectively measured gains in sleep quality and deep sleep (p < 0.05) — with the phone’s Night Shift, True Tone and Dark Mode all turned off, isolating the physical filter from software modes.
Eyesafe-sponsored study · SLEEP 2026
Certified displays, in daily work
A nine-week in-home study of laptops with certified display panels and Eyesafe IQ software (n = 21; 700+ nights) reported improved self-reported sleep quality and visual comfort. The abstract is published in SLEEP, Vol. 49, Abstract Supplement, A161 (doi:10.1093/sleep/zsag091.0364), presented at SLEEP 2026.
Patient study · Southwest Eye Care
Preferred nearly 6-to-1
In a two-period patient study conducted with Southwest Eye Care (2026; n = 29), participants used a clear protector for two weeks, then CPF70 screen protection — with the phone’s night-mode software disabled. Among those expressing a preference, CPF70 was preferred nearly 6-to-1, and reported sleep quality improved (p = .013).
Case study · Fortune 10 pilot
Call-center workforce, 8–11 hours on screens
A Fortune 10 company piloted Eyesafe screen protection in one of its call centers. In the post-implementation survey, 80% of participants reported relief in symptoms associated with excessive screen time, and employees reported a 66% improvement in sleep quality and quantity.
Case study · Sysco
15,000 screens after one pilot
Sysco’s Modern Workspace Team piloted Eyesafe screen protection, then invested in over 15,000 screens for laptop deployments across North America — 76% of employees reported improved wellness benefits, 85% a positive installation experience, with zero downtime and no impact to equipment warranties.
Sponsored studies do not carry the requirement — the independent literature does. They demonstrate feasibility: products that exist, ship at scale, tested at the graded levels the requirement names.
The two scales
What the numbers mean.
Two measured values do the work — both computed from a full spectral measurement, reproducible in any accredited laboratory.
RPF — Radiance Protection Factor
How much hazard-band light is removed
Weighted by the ICNIRP/IEC 62471 blue-light hazard function, which peaks over 435–440 nm. Scale 0–100; higher means greater filtration. Normalized to luminance, so a product cannot raise its RPF by dimming.
CPF — Circadian Protection Factor
How much circadian-active light is removed
Weighted by the melanopic action spectrum of CIE S 026:2018, evaluated over 480–500 nm — the wavelengths that drive melatonin suppression. Higher scores mean less circadian disruption. Used on OLED and wherever evening use matters.
Why a scale and not a percentage. "Blocks 60% of blue light" is a number without a band, a weighting or a reference. RPF and CPF fix all three — write the scale into the requirement and comparison becomes arithmetic instead of argument.
Category one
Screen protection
For phone, tablet, laptop and monitor screen protection — including privacy filters — bought by districts, enterprise IT, agencies and health systems.
(a) Blue light performance. Screen protection shall achieve Eyesafe RPF[__] or greater under Eyesafe Screen Accessory Requirements 3.0 (2025), meeting every criterion for that grade: peak filtration at 435–440 nm, blue light toxicity reduction, maximum correlated color temperature shift, and maximum luminance reduction. See the grade table below and insert the grade required.
(b) Measurement. Peak filtration shall be computed as the maximum difference in spectral irradiance with and without the product, at 1 nm increments across 435–440 nm. Correlated color temperature shift shall be the absolute difference with and without the product. Luminance reduction shall be computed relative to luminance without the product. Percentage figures computed over any other wavelength range shall not be accepted as evidence of conformance.
(c) Privacy filters. Where privacy performance is also specified, the 2-way or 4-way privacy luminance reduction limit for the grade shall apply in place of the standard luminance limit. An additional 5% luminance reduction is permitted for overlays not directly laminated to the display.
(d) OLED displays. Where the protected display is OLED, a Circadian Protection Factor of CPF[__] (CPF20 minimum) shall be specified in place of (a), evaluated over 480–500 nm and meeting every criterion for that grade in the OLED table below.
(e) Conformity assessment. Conformance shall be demonstrated by current independent third-party verification (e.g., Eyesafe® Accessory Requirements 3.0, or equal) or by test reports from an ISO/IEC 17025-accredited laboratory documenting (a)–(d). For product manufactured to this solicitation and not yet verified, conformance documentation shall be delivered prior to acceptance.
(f) Trade Agreements Act. Products shall be TAA-compliant end products per FAR 52.225-5.
Insert your grade into clause (a) or (d). Specifying RPF60 rather than RPF20 raises the bar on every column at once — a product must meet its whole row, not the filtration column alone.
| Grade · LCD/LED | Peak filtration 435–440 nm | Blue light toxicity reduction |
CCT shift | Luminance reduction | 2-way privacy luminance reduction |
4-way privacy luminance reduction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RPF20 | ≥ 20% | ≥ 15% | ≤ 250K | ≤ 20% | — | — |
| RPF30 | ≥ 30% | ≥ 15% | ≤ 250K | ≤ 20% | — | — |
| RPF40 | ≥ 40% | ≥ 20% | ≤ 350K | ≤ 20% | — | — |
| RPF50 | ≥ 50% | ≥ 20% | ≤ 350K | ≤ 20% | — | — |
| RPF60 | ≥ 60% | ≥ 30% | ≤ 500K | ≤ 20% | ≤ 40% | ≤ 45% |
| RPF70 | ≥ 70% | ≥ 30% | ≤ 500K | ≤ 20% | ≤ 45% | ≤ 50% |
| RPF80 | ≥ 80% | ≥ 40% | ≤ 500K | ≤ 30% | ≤ 45% | ≤ 55% |
| Grade · OLED | Peak filtration 480–500 nm | Circadian impact change 380–780 nm |
CCT shift | Luminance reduction | 2-way privacy luminance reduction |
4-way privacy luminance reduction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CPF20 | ≥ 20% | 5.0% | ≤ 150K | ≤ 10% | — | — |
| CPF30 | ≥ 30% | 7.5% | ≤ 150K | ≤ 15% | — | — |
| CPF40 | ≥ 40% | 10.0% | ≤ 150K | ≤ 15% | — | — |
| CPF50 | ≥ 50% | 15.0% | ≤ 250K | ≤ 20% | — | — |
| CPF60 | ≥ 60% | 18.0% | ≤ 250K | ≤ 20% | ≤ 40% | ≤ 50% |
| CPF70 | ≥ 70% | 20.0% | ≤ 350K | ≤ 25% | ≤ 45% | ≤ 50% |
| CPF80 | ≥ 80% | 30.0% | ≤ 500K | ≤ 30% | ≤ 45% | ≤ 55% |
Both tables as published in Eyesafe Screen Accessory Requirements 3.0 (2025). An additional 5% luminance reduction is permitted for privacy overlays not directly laminated to the display.
Clause (b) stops the percentage games. "Blocks 90% of blue light" usually reports the 380–420 nm violet edge. The requirement measures at 435–440 nm and pairs filtration with color and luminance limits, so a grade cannot be bought by darkening or tinting the screen.
Category two
Devices
For laptops, monitors, tablets and all-in-ones where the protection is built into the display rather than applied to it.
(a) Blue light performance. The display shall achieve a Radiance Protection Factor of RPF35 or greater under Eyesafe Display Requirements 3.0 (2025), measured from the spectral output of the display in its default (Standard) mode at 100% brightness with automatic brightness disabled, weighted for blue-light toxicity per the ICNIRP guidelines, and verified by third-party testing. Grades run RPF35, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80 and 90; a buyer wanting a higher bar inserts a higher grade.
(b) Color gamut coverage. In the color mode offered, the display shall achieve: sRGB mode ≥ 95% of the standard sRGB color space; Adobe RGB mode ≥ 90%; DCI-P3 mode ≥ 90%; NTSC mode ≥ 72% (≥ 45% for battery-powered products) — each measured in CIE 1931.
(c) Correlated color temperature. The correlated color temperature of the display white point, measured at 100% brightness, shall be between 5500K and 7000K, per Eyesafe Display Requirements 3.0.
(d) Circadian performance (optional; specify where evening or overnight use is relevant). The display shall achieve a Circadian Protection Factor of CPF35 or greater, computed from melanopic equivalent daylight (D65) luminance per the CIE system for ipRGC-influenced responses to light (CIE S 026).
(e) Conformity assessment. Conformance shall be demonstrated by current independent third-party verification (e.g., Eyesafe® Display Requirements 3.0, or equal) or by test reports from an ISO/IEC 17025-accredited laboratory documenting (a)–(d). For product manufactured to this solicitation and not yet verified, conformance documentation shall be delivered prior to acceptance.
(f) Trade Agreements Act. Products shall be TAA-compliant end products per FAR 52.225-5.
Clause (b) is what stops a night mode from passing. The usual way to cut blue light is to warm the white point — and a warm shift collapses color gamut coverage. Requiring RPF35 and ≥95% sRGB together means the reduction has to come from spectral engineering rather than from tinting the screen. The two clauses only pass together.
Written to last. Eyesafe Requirements 4.0 is in development, extending this structure with graded, user-selectable protection levels and an evening wind-down mode. The values on this page are the published 3.0 floors and are designed to remain valid floors under 4.0 — language adopted today will not need to be rewritten. This page will be updated when 4.0 publishes.
Rider · Televisions & large format
Sets shall achieve RPF ≥ 35 under Eyesafe Display Requirements 3.0, measured in a named picture mode, with color fidelity and luminance retention held against the same mode unprotected. Buyers who want protection on out of the box add one line: that mode shall be the default as shipped.
Rider · Phones & tablets
Written as a device-eligibility line rather than a spec section — a single sentence for a contract attachment or an approved-device list. Included in the pack.
Rider · Eyewear
Lenses shall achieve RPF20 or a higher specified grade under Eyesafe Eyewear Requirements 1.0 (graded RPF20–RPF80, each grade pairing filtration with color-shift and luminance limits), verified by independent third-party testing.
Evaluating responses
Three questions that settle it.
Ask every respondent, including the incumbent. A supplier who can answer all three has a real product.
Question one
What is the measured value?
An RPF or CPF number, not a percentage. If the answer is a percentage, it is not yet comparable to any other bid.
Question two
Over what band was it computed?
It must cover 435–440 nm for RPF, or 480–500 nm for CPF. A figure computed over the violet edge below 420 nm produces a large number that describes very little.
Question three
Who verified it, and when?
A current third-party certificate, or a test report from an ISO/IEC 17025-accredited laboratory. Ask for the certificate identifier so it can be looked up in UL Verify.
Who checks the number.
Every certified product is evaluated against the published requirements and listed in a public registry — today that includes UL Solutions’ Verify database, where any certificate can be looked up by its identifier, and the certified-product listings at eyesafe.com/products. Certificates expire — check the identifier and the date, not the logo. About verification →
The requirement does not depend on any single body. Test reports from any ISO/IEC 17025-accredited laboratory documenting the same characteristics are equally acceptable under the conformity clause. Independent verification is what the specification requires; the mark is the most convenient way to demonstrate it, not the only way.
Screen Health Specification Pack
Built to be forwarded.
One editable document plus a PDF — nothing gated, nothing tracked. Purchasers paste from it; manufacturers and resellers forward it whole.
What a completed form looks like
Two responses to the same requirement. Only one of them can be evaluated.
| Field | Supplier A | Supplier B |
|---|---|---|
| Metric and value | RPF60 | “Blocks up to 90% of blue light” |
| Wavelength range | 435–440 nm | Not stated |
| CCT shift | 410 K | Not stated |
| Luminance reduction | 16% | Not stated |
| Testing laboratory | ISO/IEC 17025-accredited | Manufacturer’s own data |
| Certificate identifier | Provided, searchable | None |
| Valid through | Date given | Not stated |
Illustrative. Supplier B’s figure may well be accurate — but with no range, no method and no verification it cannot be compared with anything, which is precisely what the form is for.
Specification pack (.docx) Supplier response form (.xlsx) Circulating copy (.pdf)
No form, no email address, no registration.
Common questions
Before you paste it in.
Do we have to use Eyesafe products to use this language?
No. Every block keeps “or equal” and accepts test reports from any ISO/IEC 17025-accredited laboratory. A buyer who adopts this language is buying a measurable result, from whoever can deliver it.
Can our existing suppliers meet it?
Several of the largest manufacturers ship conforming products today — see the names at the top of this page. Ask any supplier for the measured value and the band it was computed over; clause (b) exists to make that a normal question.
Is this a health requirement?
No. It is a measured performance requirement for emitted and transmitted light. It makes no clinical claim and should not be justified as one.
Can we change the thresholds?
Yes. The values are the floor of the current published requirements; a buyer wanting a higher bar picks a higher grade without changing the structure. Evaluating responses costs nothing — conformance is demonstrated by documentation the offeror supplies.
Has anyone done this before us?
The products came first: conforming displays and screen protection have shipped at scale since 2019. The requirement language is newer than the products that meet it — which is exactly the safe order to adopt in. If your committee wants to speak with an organisation that has adopted the language, ask us and we will connect you where we can.
Where the detail lives: the requirement families · Display Requirements 3.0 white paper · RPF · CPF · the research library · products carrying the mark
Adapting this for a solicitation?
We will help you fit the language to your vehicle and category — no cost, no obligation to specify Eyesafe. Early adopters get direct help from the team that wrote the requirements, and the option to be a published reference deployment others can call.