Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Community Ecolabel scheme {SEC(2008) 2118} {SEC(2008) 2119} /* COM/2008/0401 final - COD 2008/0152 */

Brussels, 16.7.2008

COM(2008) 401 final

2008/0152 (COD)

Proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on a Community Ecolabel scheme

{SEC(2008) 2118}

{SEC(2008) 2119}

(presented by the Commission)

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1. Content of the Proposal

1.1. Objective

The overall objective of this Regulation is to encourage the sustainable production and consumption of products, and the sustainable provision and use of services, by setting benchmarks for the good environmental performance of products and services, based on the top performers in the market. By guiding consumers towards them, the Ecolabel logo should promote those products and services that have met these benchmarks compared to others in the same category.

These benchmarks will also be used for developing and implementing other environmental policy tools, where consistency within the single market is desirable, such as for providing environmental criteria for public purchasers to use and giving recommendations on potential future minimum standards for products.

1.2. General context

According to Article 20 of the Ecolabel Regulation [1], the EU Ecolabel scheme, which has been in place since 1992, has to be reviewed and the Commission must then propose any appropriate amendments to the Regulation. As highlighted in different reports published by the European Environment Agency and others, the state of the environment gives rise to increasing concerns. Global warming is just one – and currently the most prominent – issue in this context but there are many others such as biodiversity, air and water pollution or ozone depletion.

A more detailed description of the policy background and a justification of the choice of instrument is provided in the impact assessment.

1.3. Existing Community provisions

The Proposal is designed to replace Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 on a revised Community Ecolabel award scheme.

1.4. Consistency with other policies and rules

This proposal for a Ecolabel scheme is well linked and integrated into the wider Sustainable Consumption and Production policy framework of the European Commission. There is a need for reducing the negative impacts of production and consumption patterns on the environment, health and natural resources. It is a high priority for the Commission to set an overall framework for an integrated implementation of a mix of instruments aimed at reducing this negative impact on the environment, health and natural resources. As discussed in the impact assessment, a multi-criteria, third-party accredited ecolabel based on 'life cycle thinking' [2] can constitute an important element of such a mix of SCP policy instruments, and the importance of an ecolabel scheme has already been emphasised in earlier policy documents such as the Commission's Communication on Integrated Product Policy [3] and the 6th Environmental Action Programme [4].

2. Results of consultations with the interested parties and impact assessments

2.1. Consultations

The Ecolabel review and impact assessment process began in February 2002, with the launch of a large-scale evaluation study on the Ecolabel [5]. In addition to the review, a number of stakeholder consultations have taken place culminating in a public internet consultation at the beginning of 2007.

The results of the consultations were fed into the Impact assessment and are summarised below.

2.2. Impact assessment

Potential benefits of the Ecolabel scheme:

Within a single market, a single set of guidelines benchmarking the environmental credibility of products is the logical way forward, as opposed to having different benchmarks in each Member State. An EU-wide scheme makes it easier for businesses wishing to market more 'environmentally friendly' products within the EU and it means consumers can purchase so-called 'greener' products, wherever they are, safe in the knowledge that these products share common environmental credentials. The EU Ecolabel is the only formal scheme for the entire internal market - existing national or regional ecolabel schemes cover it only in part.

If consumers, as well as private and public purchasers, are to take environmental criteria into consideration when they choose their products and services in the market, it is important that they can find easily understandable and credible criteria to enable them to distinguish the truly 'green' products from their competitors. Ecolabels can play an important role in any package of measures aiming at promoting development and sales of greener products; they set a clear benchmark for the market and, for example, ecolabel criteria can also be included in calls for tender in green public procurement.

Success of the current scheme:

The Ecolabel evaluation and consultation showed that at micro-level, the scheme is successful, as it helps to improve the environmental performance of participating organisations. The consultation also showed that the original idea behind the scheme remains valid and desirable from the EU policy perspective. It gives EU consumers an environmental certification they can trust and it can give businesses the opportunity to use one label for all their pan-European or global marketing.

The EU Ecolabel also provides a useful benchmark of environmental performance in other ways:

– The EVER study [6] confirms that the EU Ecolabel criteria are used even by non-participating companies, with more than half of such companies interviewed declaring that they to use the Ecolabel to benchmark their environmental performance, even when they do not apply for the label.

– Under the Eco-design Directive for energy-using products [7], any product which has been awarded the Ecolabel is automatically considered as compliant with the implementing measures.

– EU Ecolabel criteria have also been used by other ecolabel schemes like the Austrian Ecolabel or the Nordic Swan. Both have chosen to directly adopt the EU criteria word-for-word for some of their own product groups.

However, while the scheme has experienced growth recently in the number of companies holding licences, there are still only 26 products groups established and around 500 companies producing Ecolabel products. With total sales of Ecolabelled products of more than €1 billion per year, this represents a very small fraction of the potential EU market.

Proposed approach:

The impact assessment shows that the current scheme is not achieving its objectives as it suffers from low awareness of the label and low uptake by industry, resulting from overly bureaucratic processes and management.

The following package of measures was therefore proposed for the modification and simplification of the scheme:

– Design the Regulation to fit better with other sustainable production and consumption actions

– Open up the scope of the label

– Introduce measures to encourage harmonisation with other ecolabelling schemes.

– More product groups / quicker criteria development

– Introduce a template for criteria documents to ensure they are more user-friendly

– Incorporate guidance for Green Public Purchasing into criteria development

– Abolition of the annual fees and simplification of assessment procedures

– Peer review for Competent Bodies

– Boost marketing

– Propose mandatory environmental performance standards for products

– simplify criteria documents, focusing more on the most significant environmental impacts of products, while keeping the ambition levels high.

Expected results/objectives:

This revision of the Ecolabel is aimed at giving the EU Ecolabel:

– High awareness, understanding and respect in the EU-27 and around the world. The medium-term benchmark for success should be that the Ecolabel is recognised by consumers and by companies throughout the EU.

– Criteria are for the products and services where the Ecolabel can provide the most benefits, especially product groups with a substantial environmental impact and therefore with high potential for improvement. (Moving from 25 product groups to 40 -50 by 2015)

– Many more Ecolabel products on the shelves for consumers to choose from. (With a 10% market share in product groups covered by the label)

– Criteria documents which can easily be used by public purchasers.

– An Ecolabel very well harmonised with other labels, globally and nationally.

– An Ecolabel that can be attained by companies with limited costs and efforts for them while still maintaining a high ambition in order to ensure credibility of the label with consumers and environmental groups.

3. Legal elements of the Proposal

3.1. Legal basis

The instrument is clearly motivated by environmental policy considerations as laid down in Article 175 ECT. This was already the legal basis of Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 on a revised Community Ecolabel award scheme.

3.2. Subsidiarity and proportionality

This proposal for a Ecolabel Regulation sets the framework for setting benchmarks at the EU level for the good environmental performance of products based on technical criteria. The proposal then provides a framework for companies wishing to demonstrate that they meet the criteria to do so under the supervision of Member States.

3.3. Choice of instruments

A Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council appears to be the obvious choice, given the need for clear and common rules on the operation of the scheme throughout the Community. In the past the European Ecolabel award scheme had always been based on Regulations (No 880/1992 and No 1980/2000). There is no change in the framework conditions for the operation of the scheme that would justify a change of instrument.

4. Budgetary implication

See financial fiches in annex.

5. Additional Information

5.1. Simplification

This proposal delivers the relevant commitment undertaken in the Commission's Simplification Rolling Programme, see COM (2008)33.

It is not possible to quantify the total administrative costs, including costs to public authorities of administering the scheme, because we are dealing with a voluntary instrument where costs to a large extent depend on the uptake by industry and the associated costs of market surveillance of the conformity of those using the label.

It is also possible to look at the impact of the selected micro-options on the administrative costs of individual procedures. It also needs to be emphasised that according to the strict Commission definition of administrative costs, the Ecolabel Regulation does not impose any administrative costs on companies because it is a voluntary scheme where companies are free or not to participate.

Design Regulation to better fit into the other sustainable production and consumption actions of the Commission will mean that synergies between different product related policy instruments can be enhanced and therefore mean that there is a harmonisation of the framework in which criteria are presented. This will reduce the administrative burden on companies.

Introducing measures to encourage harmonisation with other ecolabelling schemes: For companies wishing to apply for more than one ecolabel, harmonising measures can only reduce their administrative burden. Costs of tests could be reduced by 100% if one label is already held as no additional testing or verification would be required. This reduced financial burden may be particularly interesting for small and medium sized enterprises.

More product groups / quicker criteria development: Simplified procedure for criteria development would reduce costs for all parties involved (less meetings to attend) but development of more product groups clearly has an associated cost.

One of the aspects of the option "modify the scheme" will be allowing work that has already been done by others to be used more easily by the Ecolabel – for example by Member States' national labels, by the Global Ecolabelling Network or in the context of other Commission work such as that of the Energy Using Products Directive or new Sustainable Consumption and Production Action Plan. This will save time and money because developing Ecolabel criteria in isolation will be avoided.

Introduce a template for criteria documents to ensure they are more user-friendly: Making criteria documents standardised and more user-friendly will mean reduced administrative burden for companies and purchasing bodies using criteria for technical specifications.

Incorporate guidance for Green Public Purchasing into criteria development: As already indicated in the previous point, procurement officers will have easier access to EU-wide harmonised criteria and companies will have a level playing field if the same criteria are used across Europe in technical specifications for contracts. Member States will also save money because the same criteria can be used for eco-labelling and public purchasing.

Abolition of annual fees: The current direct income for competent bodies from fees is around €1million per year in EU 27. This direct income will be lost if fees are abolished, however the administrative burden will be reduced for companies. The administrative savings could be around half a man-day per year for a company, along with the benefit of not having to pay an annual fee. For Member States, the administrative burden of operating the scheme will remain the same as the work required to administer and undertake assessment and verification in the current scheme will be equal to the work required to undertake market surveillance under the new proposals. Simpler criteria should, however, help to reduce the administration required.

5.2. Repeal of existing legislation

The existing Ecolabel Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 will be repealed.

5.3. Review/ revision / sunset clause

A review clause is included.

2008/0152 (COD)

Proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on a Community Ecolabel scheme

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 175 (1) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission [8],

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee [9],

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions [10],

Acting in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 of the Treaty [11],

Whereas:

(1) The aims of Council Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 of 17 July 2000 on a Community eco-label award scheme [12] were to establish a voluntary Community eco-label award scheme intended to promote products with a reduced environmental impact during their entire life cycle and to provide consumers with accurate, non-deceptive and scientifically based information on the environmental impact of products.

(2) The experience gained during the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 has shown the need to amend the Community eco-label scheme in order to increase its effectiveness and streamline its operation.

(3) In order to avoid the proliferation of environmental labelling schemes, and to encourage higher environmental performance in all sectors for which environmental impact is a factor in consumer choice, the possibility of using the Community Ecolabel should be extended. However, it is necessary to ensure a clear distinction between this Regulation and Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 [13].

(4) The Community Ecolabel scheme is part of the sustainable consumption and production policy of the Community, which aims at reducing the negative impact of consumption and production on the environment, health and natural resources. The scheme is intended to promote those products which have a high level of environmental performance through the use of the Ecolabel. To this effect, it is appropriate to require that the criteria which products must comply with in order to bear the Ecolabel be based on the best environmental performance achieved by products on the Community market. Those criteria should be simple to understand and to use and should therefore be limited to the most significant environmental impacts of products.

(5) It is desirable that any interested party may lead the development or revision of Ecolabel criteria provided that common procedural rules are followed and that the process is coordinated by the Commission. In order to ensure the overall coherence of the Community's action, it is also appropriate to require that the latest strategic objectives of the Community in the field of the environment, such as Environment Action Programmes, Sustainable Development Strategies and Climate Change Programmes, be taken into account in the development of the Ecolabel criteria.

(6) In order to simplify the Community Ecolabel scheme and to reduce the administrative burden linked to the use of the Ecolabel, the assessment and verification procedures should be replaced by a registration system.

(7) In order to increase the use of the Ecolabel and in order not to penalise those whose products meet the Ecolabel criteria, the costs of using the Ecolabel should be reduced.

(8) In light of the simplified procedures for use of the Ecolabel, it is appropriate to provide for the conditions under which the Ecolabel may be used and, in order to ensure compliance with those conditions, to require competent bodies to undertake verifications and to prohibit the use of the Ecolabel where the conditions for use have not been complied with. It is also appropriate to require Member States to lay down the rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation and to ensure that they are implemented.

(9) It is necessary to raise public awareness of the Community Ecolabel through promotion actions in order to make consumers aware of the meaning of the label and to enable them to make informed choices.

(10) In order to facilitate the marketing of products bearing environmental labels at national and Community level and to avoid confusing consumers, it is also necessary to enhance the coherence between the Community Ecolabel scheme and national Ecolabel schemes in the Community.

(11) In order to ensure a harmonised application of the registration system and of the market surveillance and control of the use of the Ecolabel throughout the Community, competent bodies should take part in a peer evaluation system.

(12) The measures necessary for the implementation of this Regulation should be adopted in accordance with Council Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission [14].

(13) In particular, the Commission should be empowered to adopt the criteria that products must comply with in order to bear the Ecolabel and to amend the Annexes to this Regulation. Since those measures are of general scope and are designed to amend non-essential elements of this Regulation, inter alia by supplementing it with new non-essential elements, they must be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny provided for in Article 5a of Decision 1999/468/EC.

(14) For reasons of clarity and legal certainty, Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 should therefore be replaced by this Regulation.

(15) Appropriate transitional provisions should be provided to ensure a smooth transition between Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 and this Regulation,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Subject matter

This Regulation lays down rules for the establishment and application of the Community Ecolabel scheme.

Article 2

Scope

This Regulation shall apply to any goods or services which are supplied for distribution, consumption or use on the Community market whether in return for payment or free of charge (hereinafter " product").

Concerning food products as defined in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council [15], it shall only apply to processed food and to the products of fishing and aquaculture.

Article 3

Definitions

For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions shall apply:

1. "product group" means a set of goods or services that serve similar purposes and are similar in terms of use and consumer perception.

2. "consumer" means any natural or legal person that purchases or receives a product on the market either for use or consumption, or for manufacturing or distribution.

3. "environmental impact" means any change to the environment resulting wholly or partially from a product during its life cycle.

4. "environmental performance" means the result of a manufacturer's management of those characteristics of products that cause environmental impact.

Article 4

Competent bodies

1. Each Member State shall designate the body or bodies responsible for carrying out the tasks provided for in this Regulation (hereinafter referred to as "the competent body" or "the competent bodies") and ensure that they are operational. Where more than one competent body is designated, the Member State shall determine those bodies' respective powers and the coordination requirements applicable to them.

2. The composition of the competent bodies shall be such as to guarantee their independence and neutrality and their rules of procedure shall be such as to ensure transparency in the conduct of their activities as well as the involvement of all interested parties.

Article 5

European Union Ecolabelling Board

1. The Commission shall establish a European Union Ecolabelling Board (EUEB), and appoint its members consisting of representatives of the competent bodies referred to in Article 4 and of representatives of other interested parties. The EUEB shall contribute to the development and revision of the Ecolabel criteria and to the review of the implementation of the Community Ecolabel scheme. It shall also provide the Commission with advice and assistance in these areas and, in particular, issue recommendations on minimum environmental performance requirements.

2. The Commission shall ensure that, in the conduct of its activities, the EUEB observes a balanced participation of all relevant interested parties concerned with each product group, such as competent bodies, manufacturers, retailers, importers, environmental protection groups and consumer organisations.

Article 6

General requirements for the Ecolabel criteria

1. The Ecolabel criteria shall be based on the environmental performance of products, taking into account the latest strategic objectives of the Community in the field of the environment.

2. The environmental performance of products shall be determined on the basis of the best performing products on the Community market. To this end, the most significant environmental impacts during the life cycle of products, in particular the impact on climate change, impact on nature and biodiversity, energy and resource consumption, generation of waste, emissions to all environmental media, pollution through physical effects and use and release of hazardous substances, shall be considered.

3. The Ecolabel criteria shall set out the environmental requirements that a product must fulfil in order to bear the Ecolabel.

4. In setting the environmental requirements, consideration shall be given to the net environmental balance between the environmental benefits and burdens, including health and safety aspects, at the various life stages of the products being considered.

5. Those criteria shall include requirements intended to ensure that the products bearing the Ecolabel function adequately in accordance with their intended use.

6. The Ecolabel criteria shall take into account the criteria established for other environmental labels where they exist for that product group.

Article 7

Development and revision of the Ecolabel criteria

1. Following consultation of the EUEB, the Commission shall establish and lead the development or revision of the Ecolabel criteria.

Following consultation of the EUEB, Member States, competent bodies and other stakeholders may also initiate and lead the development or revision of the Ecolabel criteria.

The party which initiates and leads the development or revision of the Ecolabel criteria shall, in accordance with the procedure set out in Annex IA, establish the following documents:

(a) a preliminary report;

(b) a draft criteria proposal;

(d) a final report;

(e) a manual for potential users of the Ecolabel and competent bodies;

(f) a manual for authorities awarding public contracts.

2. Where criteria have already been developed under another Ecolabel scheme for a product group for which no Community Ecolabel criteria have been established, any Member State in which the other Ecolabel scheme is recognised may, after consultation of the Commission and the EUEB, propose those criteria for development under the Community Ecolabel scheme.

In such case, the shortened criteria development procedure laid down in Annex IB may apply provided that the proposed criteria have been developed in line with Annex IA.

3. Where criteria are developed for processed food other than the products of aquaculture, those criteria shall relate only to processing, transport or packaging..

Article 8

Establishment of the Ecolabel criteria

1. The Commission shall, following consultation of the EUEB, adopt measures to establish specific Ecolabel criteria for each product group.

Those measures, designed to amend non-essential elements of this Regulation, by supplementing it, shall be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 16(2).

2. In the measures referred to in paragraph 1 the Commission shall:

(a) establish requirements for assessing the compliance of specific products with the Ecolabel criteria;

(b) indicate, where appropriate, the three key environmental characteristics that shall be placed on the Ecolabel;

3. The period of validity of the criteria and of the assessment requirements shall be specified within each set of Ecolabel criteria for each product group.

Article 9

Registration for use of the Ecolabel

1. In order to use the Ecolabel, manufacturers, importers, service providers, wholesalers or retailers who wish to use the Ecolabel shall register with one of the competent bodies referred to in Article 4 in accordance with the following rules:

(a) where a product originates in a single Member State, the registration shall be made with the competent body of that Member State;

(b) where a product originates in the same form in several Member States, the registration may be made with a competent body in one of those Member States;

(c) where a product originates outside the Community, the registration shall be made with a competent body in any of the Member States in which the product is to be or has been placed on the market.

The Ecolabel shall have one of the forms depicted in Annex II.

The Ecolabel may only be used in connection with products covered by a registration and complying with the Ecolabel criteria applicable to the products concerned.

2. Applications for registration shall specify the name and address of the trader, as well as the product group in question and contain a full description of the product.

Applications for registration shall include all relevant documentation, as specified in the relevant Commission measure establishing Ecolabel criteria for the product group in question.

3. The competent body to which an application for registration is made may charge a fee of up to € 200 for processing the registration. If a fee is charged, the use of the Ecolabel shall be conditional upon the fee having been paid in due time.

4. Within two month of receipt of an application for registration, the competent body concerned shall check the documentation referred to in paragraph 2.

Provided that the documentation is complete, the competent body shall assign a registration number to each product.

5. On receiving the registration number, the trader may place the label on the product. In such a case, the trader shall also place the registration number on the product.

6. The competent body which has registered a product shall notify each registration to the Commission. The Commission shall establish a common register and update it regularly. That register shall be publicly available.

7. The Ecolabel may be used on the products covered by the registration and on their associated promotional material.

8. The registration shall be without prejudice to environmental or other regulatory requirements of Community or national law applicable to the various life stages of the product.

9. The right to use the Ecolabel shall not extend to the use of the Ecolabel as a component of a trademark.

10. Where the Ecolabel is placed on processed food other than the products of aquaculture that do not fulfil the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, it shall be supplemented by an indication in the same visual field to the effect that the label relates only to the environmental performance of processing, transport or packaging of the product.

The first subparagraph shall also apply to processed food labelled in accordance with Article 24 of Regulation (EC) No 834/2007.

Article 10

Market surveillance and control of the use of the Community Ecolabel

1. Any false or misleading advertising or use of any label or logo which leads to confusion with the Community Ecolabel shall be prohibited.

2. The competent body which has registered the product shall proceed to verifications on a regular basis, or upon complaint, in relation to registrations made with them. Those verifications may take the form of random spot checks.

The competent body which has registered the product shall inform the user of the Ecolabel of any complaints made concerning the product bearing the Ecolabel, and may request the user to reply to those complaints. The competent body may withhold the identity of the complainant from the user.

3. The user of the Ecolabel shall allow the competent body which has registered the product to undertake all necessary investigations to monitor the on-going compliance by the user with the product group criteria and Article 9.

4. The user of the Ecolabel shall upon request by the competent body which has registered the product grant access to the premises in which the product concerned is produced.

The request may be made at any reasonable time and without notice.

5. Where, after giving the user of the Ecolabel the opportunity to submit his observations, the competent body which has registered the product finds that products bearing the Ecolabel do not comply with the relevant product group criteria or that the Ecolabel is not used in accordance with Article 9, it shall prohibit the use of the Ecolabel on those products. The user of the Ecolabel shall not be entitled to repayment of the fee set out in Article 9(3), either in whole or in part.

The competent body shall without delay inform all other competent bodies and the Commission of that prohibition.

6. The competent body which has registered the product shall not disclose, or use for any purpose unconnected with the registration for use of the Ecolabel, information to which it has gained access in the course of assessing the compliance by a user of the Ecolabel with the rules on use of the Ecolabel set out in Article 9.

It shall take all reasonable steps to secure the protection of the documents provided to it against falsification and misappropriation.

7. If a competent body is made aware of a product on the market bearing the Ecolabel that may not be in compliance with the product group criteria and Article 9, it shall inform the Commission and the competent body which has registered the product immediately.

The competent body which has registered the product shall take the necessary steps to investigate the compliance of the product with the product group criteria and Article 9. The procedure set out in paragraph 5 shall apply.

Article 11

Ecolabel schemes in the Member States

Where Community Ecolabel criteria for a given product group have been published, other nationally recognised Ecolabel schemes which do not cover that product group at the time of publication may only be extended to that product group if the criteria developed under those schemes are at least as strict as the Community Ecolabel criteria.

Article 12

Promotion of the Ecolabel

Member States and the Commission shall, in cooperation with the EUEB, promote the use of the Community Ecolabel by awareness-raising actions and information campaigns for consumers, producers, public purchasers, traders, retailers and the general public, thus supporting the development of the scheme.

Article 13

Peer evaluation

In order to ensure a harmonised application of Articles 9 and 10, competent bodies shall undergo a peer evaluation. The peer evaluation shall be operated on the basis of sound and transparent evaluation criteria and provisions.

The Commission shall oversee the rules and the proper functioning of the competent bodies' peer evaluation. The competent bodies shall communicate a report on the peer evaluation to the Commission which shall forward it for information to the EUEB and make it publicly available.

Article 14

Report

By [set a specific date - five years from the date of publication) at the latest, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council a report on the implementation of the Community Ecolabel scheme. The report shall also identify elements for a possible review of the scheme.

Article 15

Amendment of Annexes

The Commission may increase the maximum fee provided for in Article 9(3) and amend the Annexes.

Those measures, designed to amend non-essential elements of this Regulation, shall be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 16(2).

Article 16

Committee

The Commission shall be assisted by a Committee.

Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 5a (1) to (4) and Article 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, having regard to the provisions of Article 8 thereof.

Article 17

Penalties

Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to infringements of the provisions of this Regulation and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. The Member States shall notify those provisions to the Commission by ... at the latest and shall notify it without delay of any subsequent amendment affecting them.

Article 18

Repeal

Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 is repealed.

Article 19

Transitional provisions

Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 shall continue to apply to contracts concluded under Article 9 thereof until the date of expiry specified in those contracts.

Article 20

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels,

For the European Parliament For the Council

The President The President

ANNEX I

Procedure for the development and revision of the Ecolabel criteria

A. Standard procedure

The following documents shall be established:

1. Preliminary report

The preliminary report shall contain the following elements:

– Quantitative indication of the potential environmental benefits related to the product group, including consideration of the benefits coming from other similar European and national ecolabel product groups;

– Reasoning for choice and scope of product group;

– Consideration of any possible trade issues;

– Analysis of other environmental labels’ criteria;

– Current laws and ongoing legislative initiatives related to the product group sector;

– Intra-community market data for the sector, including volumes and turnover;

– Current and future potential for market penetration of the Ecolabelled products;

– Extent and overall relevance of the environmental impacts associated with the product group, based on new or existing life cycle assessment studies. Other scientific evidence may also be used. Critical and controversial issues shall be reported in detail and evaluated.

– References of data and information collected and used for issuing the report.

The preliminary report shall be made available on the Commission's dedicated Ecolabel website for comment and reference during the development of the criteria.

2. Draft criteria proposal and associated technical report

Following the publication of the preliminary report, a draft proposal and a technical report in support of the draft proposal shall be established.

The draft criteria shall comply with the following requirements:

– they shall be based on the environmental performance throughout the life-cycle of the product of the best performing products on the market and correspond, as far as possible, to 10% of the best performing products available on the market;

– they shall be based on the most significant environmental impacts of the product, be expressed as far as reasonably possible via technical key environmental performance indicators of the product, and be suitable for assessment according to the rules of this Regulation;

– they shall be based on sound data and information, representative as far as possible of the entire community market;

– they shall be based on life cycle data and quantitative environmental impacts, where applicable in compliance with the European Reference Life Cycle Data Systems (ELCD);

– they shall take into consideration the views of all interested parties involved in the consultation process;

– they shall guarantee harmonisation with existing legislation applicable to the product group when considering definitions, test methods and technical and administrative documentation;

– they shall take into account relevant Community policies and work done on other related product groups.

The draft criteria proposal shall be written in a way that is easily accessible to those wishing to use them. It shall provide justification for of each criterion and explain the environmental benefits related to each criterion.

The technical report shall include at least the following elements:

– the scientific explanations of each requirement and criterion;

– a quantitative indication of the overall environmental performance that the criteria are expected to achieve in their totality, when compared to that of the average products on the market;

– an estimation of the expected environmental/economic/social impacts of the criteria as a whole;

– the relevant test methods for assessment of the different criteria;

– an estimation of testing costs;

– for each criterion, information about all tests, reports and other documentation that shall be produced by users on request from a competent body under Article 10(3).

The technical report and the draft criteria proposal shall be made available for public consultation on the Commission's dedicated Ecolabel website for comment. The party leading the product group development shall distribute the report and the proposal to all interested parties.

At least two open working group meetings shall be held on the draft criteria, in which all interested parties, such as competent bodies, industry (including SMEs), trade unions, retailers, importers, environmental and consumer organisations, shall be invited. The Commission shall also participate in those meetings.

The draft criteria proposal and the technical report shall be made available at least one month before the first working group meeting. Any subsequent draft criteria proposal shall be made available at least one month before subsequent meetings. The reasoning behind any changes to the criteria in subsequent drafts shall be fully explained and documented with reference to discussions in the open working groups meetings and comments received in public consultation.

Responses shall be given to all comments received during the criteria development process, indicating whether they are accepted or rejected and why.

3. Final report and criteria

The final report shall contain the following elements:

Clear responses to all comments and proposals, indicating whether they are accepted or rejected and why. European Union and non-European Union interested parties shall be treated on an equal footing.

It shall also include the following elements:

– a one page summary of the level of support for the draft criteria by the competent bodies;

– a summary list of all documents circulated in the course of the criteria development work, together with an indication of the date of circulation of each document and to whom it has been circulated, and a copy of the documents in question;

– a list of the interested parties involved in the work or which have been consulted or have expressed an opinion, together with their contact information;

– an executive summary;

– a proposal for a marketing and communication strategy for the product group.

Any observations received on the final report shall be taken into consideration, and information on the follow-up to the comments shall be provided on request.

4. Manual for potential users of the Ecolabel and competent bodies

A user manual shall be established in order to assist potential users of the Ecolabel and competent bodies in assessing the compliance of products with the criteria.

5. Manual for authorities awarding public contracts

A user manual providing guidance for the use of the Ecolabel criteria to authorities awarding public contracts shall be established.

Note: The Commission will provide templates for the user manual for applicants and competent bodies and for the user manual for authorities awarding public contracts.

B. Shortened procedure where criteria have been developed by other Ecolabel schemes

A single report shall be submitted to the Commission. This report shall include a section demonstrating that the technical and consultation requirements set out in Annex IA have been met, along with a draft criteria proposal a user manual for potential users of the Ecolabel and competent bodies, and a user manual for authorities awarding public contracts.

If the Commission is satisfied that the report and criteria meet the requirements set out in Annex IA, the report and the draft criteria proposal shall be made available for public consultation on the Commission's dedicated Ecolabel website for a period of two months for comment.

Responses shall be given to all comments received during the public consultation period, indicating whether each comment is accepted or rejected and why. Subject to any changes made during the public consultation period, and if no Member State requests an open working group meeting, the Commission may adopt the criteria.

Upon request from any Member State, an open working group meeting shall be held on the draft criteria, in which all interested parties, such as competent bodies, industry (including SMEs), trade unions, retailers, importers, environmental and consumer organisations, shall participate. The Commission shall also participate in those meeting.

Subject to any changes made during the public consultation period or during the working group meeting, the Commission may adopt the criteria.

ANNEX II

Form of the Ecolabel

The Community Ecolabel shall have one of the following forms:

(...PICT...)

1.2.

Model 1. to be used where the Commission has indicated the three key environmental characteristics that shall be placed on the Ecolabel in accordance with Article 7.

The Ecolabel registration number shall also appear on the product. It shall take the following form:

(...PICT...)

Where XX refers to the country of registration and YYYYY refers to the registration number given by the competent body.

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT

1. NAME OF THE PROPOSAL:

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on a Community Ecolabel scheme

2. ABM / ABB FRAMEWORK

Policy Area(s) concerned and associated Activity/Activities:

0703 – Implementation of Environmental Policy

3. BUDGET LINES

3.1. Budget lines (operational lines and related technical and administrative assistance lines (ex- B..A lines)) including headings:

07 01 04 01: LIFE+ (Financial Instrument for the Environment — 2007 to 2013) — Expenditure on administrative management

07 03 07: LIFE+ (Financial Instrument for the Environment — 2007 to 2013)

3.2. Duration of the action and of the financial impact:

The action (Ecolabel Regulation) is expected to come into force in 2009. For the period 2009 – 2013, operational expenditure will be covered under the LIFE + Financial instrument.

3.3. Budgetary characteristics

07010401 | Non-comp | Non-diff [16] | NO | NO | YES | No 2 |

070307 | Non-comp | Diff/ | NO | NO | YES | No 2 |

4. SUMMARY OF RESOURCES

4.1. Financial Resources

4.1.1. Summary of commitment appropriations (CA) and payment appropriations (PA)

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

Expenditure type | Section no. | | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 and later | Total2009-2013 |

Commitment Appropriations (CA) | 8.1. | a | 0,990 | 4,710 | 3,210 | 3,210 | 0,710 | - | 12,830 |

Payment Appropriations (PA) | | b | 0,660 | 3,338 | 3,214 | 3,410 | 1,543 | 0,665 | 12,830 |

Administrative expenditure within reference amount [18] | | | | |

Technical & administrative assistance (NDA) | 8.2.4. | c | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |

Commitment Appropriations | | a+c | 0,990 | 4,710 | 3,210 | 3,210 | 0,710 | - | 12,830 |

Payment Appropriations | | b+c | 0,660 | 3,338 | 3,214 | 3,410 | 1,543 | 0,665 | 12,830 |

Administrative expenditure not included in reference amount [19] | | |

Human resources and associated expenditure (NDA) | 8.2.5. | d | 0,424 | 0,940 | 1,156 | 1,156 | 1,156 | - | 4,832 |

Administrative costs, other than human resources and associated costs, not included in reference amount (NDA) | 8.2.6. | e | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | - | 1,000 |

Total indicative financial cost of intervention |

TOTAL CA including cost of Human Resources | | a+c+d+e | 1,614 | 5,850 | 4,566 | 4,566 | 2,066 | | 18,662 |

TOTAL PA including cost of Human Resources | | b+c+d+e | 1,284 | 4,478 | 4,570 | 4,766 | 2,899 | 0,665 | 18,662 |

Co-financing details

If the proposal involves co-financing by Member States, or other bodies (please specify which), an estimate of the level of this co-financing should be indicated in the table below (additional lines may be added if different bodies are foreseen for the provision of the co-financing):

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

Co-financing body | | Year n | n + 1 | n + 2 | n + 3 | n + 4 | n + 5 and later | Total |

…………………… | f | | | | | | | |

4.1.2. Compatibility with Financial Programming

Proposal is compatible with existing financial programming.

Proposal will entail reprogramming of the relevant heading in the financial perspective.

Proposal may require application of the provisions of the Interinstitutional Agreement [20] (i.e. flexibility instrument or revision of the financial perspective).

4.1.3. Financial impact on Revenue

Proposal has no financial implications on revenue

Proposal has financial impact – the effect on revenue is as follows:

EUR million (to one decimal place)

Budget line | Revenue | | | [Year n] | [n+1] | [n+2] | [n+3] | [n+4] | [n+5] [21] |

4.2. Human Resources FTE (including officials, temporary and external staff) – see detail under point 8.2.1.

Annual requirements | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 and later |

Total number of human resources | 5 | 13 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 15 |

Currently, 3,5 AD -grades, and 1 AST-grade are working on the Ecolabel within DG ENV.

5. CHARACTERISTICS AND OBJECTIVES

5.1. Need to be met in the short or long term

The overall objective of this revised Regulation is to better encourage the sustainable production and consumption of products, and the sustainable provision and use of services, by setting benchmarks for the good environmental performance of products and services. By guiding consumers towards them, the Ecolabel should promote those products and services that have met these benchmarks compared to others in the same category.

The Ecolabel scheme will better define these benchmarks of good environmental performance based on the top performers in the market at the time of criteria definition.

5.2. Value-added of Community involvement and coherence of the proposal with other financial instruments and possible synergy

Within a single market a single set of guidelines benchmarking the environmental credibility of products is the logical way forward, as opposed to having different benchmarks in each Member State. EU-wide scheme makes it easier for businesses wishing to market more "environmentally friendly" products within the EU and it means consumers can purchase so-called "greener" products wherever they are, safe in the knowledge that these products share common environmental credentials. The EU Ecolabel is the only such label for the entire internal market - existing national or regional Ecolabel schemes cover it only in part.

5.3. Objectives, expected results and related indicators of the proposal in the context of the ABM framework

The overall objectives of the revision of the scheme are:

1. To encourage the sustainable production and consumption of products, and the sustainable provision and use of services, by setting benchmarks for good environmental performance. By guiding consumers towards them, the Ecolabel should promote those products and services that have met these benchmarks compared to others in the same category.

2. The revised Ecolabel scheme needs to be designed in a way to ensure that is usable as an integral and effective part of the wider Sustainable Consumption and Production policy framework of the European Commission. The new Regulation needs flexibility to link easily with other instruments, such as GPP, EMAS, Eco-design, ETAP, etc.

3. A much more influential Ecolabel in terms of supporting other SCP policies and setting benchmarks for good environmental performance for policy makers, for companies or for educating the public.

Operational objectives are:

· High awareness, understanding and respect in the EU-27 and around the world. The medium-term benchmark for success should be that the Ecolabel is recognised by consumers and by companies throughout the EU at a similar level to the recognition of the Blue Angel or Nordic Swan in their respective countries of operation.

Indicators:

– % of population that know the Ecolabel and its meaning within ten years

– % of companies that know the Ecolabel within ten years

· Building up trust in the label and maintaining its credibility is also vital. The label must be a highly respected benchmark of environmental performance.

Indicator:

– Level of credibility when compared with other environmental labels

· Criteria are needed for all products and services where the Ecolabel can provide benefits, especially product groups with a substantial environmental impact and therefore with high potential for improvement.

Indicator:

– Number of product groups; number of companies per product group; number of items sold per product group; sales volume per product group.

· Many more Ecolabel products on the shelves for consumers to choose from;

Indicator:

– Ecolabel sales as a percentage of total retail sales in this product group.

· Criteria documents which can easily be used by public purchasers and policy makers.

Indicators:

– Use and uptake of Ecolabel criteria by public purchasers monitored by questioning Member States, also hits on GPP website and on Ecolabel criteria documents.

– Number of policies that can be attributed to having used the Ecolabel product information work.

· An Ecolabel very well harmonised with other labels, globally and nationally.

Indicator:

– Frequency of national labelling schemes directly taking on the Ecolabel criteria.

· An Ecolabel that can be attained by companies with limited costs and efforts for them while still maintaining a high ambition in order to ensure credibility of the label with consumers and environmental groups.

Indicator:

– Number of registrations

5.4. Method of Implementation (indicative)

Centralised Management

directly by the Commission

indirectly by delegation to:

executive Agencies

bodies set up by the Communities as referred to in art. 185 of the Financial Regulation

national public-sector bodies/bodies with public-service mission

Shared or decentralised management

with Member states

with Third countries

Joint management with international organisations (please specify)

Relevant comments:

6. MONITORING AND EVALUATION

6.1. Monitoring system

Several measures will allow the monitoring and implementation of the scheme and to evaluate the success of the Ecolabel Regulation:

· The Commission will continue using the Eurobarometer surveys to get data on public awareness of and trust in the Ecolabel.

· The service contract for the collection of statistical information on Green Public Procurement which is currently being prepared by the Commission includes reference to EU-wide Ecolabel criteria. This work will provide input on the use and uptake of Ecolabel criteria by public purchasers.

· The annual statistics exercise will continue as before: Competent Bodies are asked to provide information on the volume of sales of Ecolabelled products, the number of Ecolabelled products, the fees received from registered users and the resources (staff and money) dedicated to the scheme.

· On a continuous basis, the Competent Bodies will report any new registrations to the Commission, which will continue to publish them on the internet in the so-called green store (www.eco-label.com).

· The regular meetings with Member States and stakeholders will also continue to be a source of information on the implementation of the scheme.

· The proposed new peer review mechanism, aimed at ensuring and monitoring a harmonised implementation of the Ecolabel Regulation will make the way the different Competent Bodies deal with issues of assessment and verification of applications by companies more transparent.

6.2. Evaluation

6.2.1. Ex-ante evaluation

The impact assessment undertaken on the Ecolabel Regulation shows that the current scheme is unable to achieve its objectives as it suffers from low awareness of the label and low uptake by industry, resulting from overly bureaucratic processes and management.

6.2.2. Measures taken following an intermediate/ex-post evaluation (lessons learned from similar experiences in the past)

6.2.3. Terms and frequency of future evaluation

The draft proposal will contain a review clause.

7. Anti-fraud measures

Full application of internal control standards No 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, as well as of the principles of the Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities.

The Commission shall ensure that, when actions financed under the present proposal are implemented, the financial interests of the Community are protected by the application of preventive measures against fraud, corruption and any other illegal activities, by effective checks and by the recovery of the amounts unduly paid and, if irregularities are detected, by effective, proportional and dissuasive penalties, in accordance with Council Regulations (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 and (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96, and with Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

8. DETAILS OF RESOURCES

8.1. Objectives of the proposal in terms of their financial cost

Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

(Headings of Objectives, actions and outputs should be provided) | Type of output | Av. cost | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2009-2013 |

Objective 1 development of product group criteria | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Action 1 studies supporting criteria development | | | | | | | | | | | | |

| | 0,050 | 3 | 0,150 | 3 | 0,150 | 3 | 0,150 | 3 | 0,150 | 3 | 0,150 | 15 | 0,750 |

Sub-total Action 1 | 3 | 0,150 | 3 | 0,150 | 3 | 0,150 | 3 | 0,150 | 3 | 0,150 | 15 | 0,750 |

Action 2 support to involvement of civil society groups | | | | | | | | | | | | |

| | 0,070 | 3 | 0,210 | 3 | 0,210 | 3 | 0,210 | 3 | 0,210 | 3 | 0,210 | 15 | 1,050 |

Sub-total Action 2 | 3 | 0,210 | 3 | 0,210 | 3 | 0,210 | 3 | 0,210 | 3 | 0,210 | 15 | 1,050 |

Action 3 translation of criteria documents | | | | | | | | | | | | |

| | 0,020 | 5 | 0,100 | 16 | 0,320 | 16 | 0,320 | 16 | 0,320 | 16 | 0,320 | 69 | 1,380 |

Sub-total Action 3 | 5 | 0,100 | 16 | 0,320 | 16 | 0,320 | 16 | 0,320 | 16 | 0,320 | 69 | 1,380 |

Sub-total Objective 1 | | 0,460 | | 0,680 | | 0,680 | | 0,680 | | 0,680 | | 3,180 |

Promotional & awareness raising activites to support the EU Ecolabel Scheme & new logo (producers, retailers, consumers, GPP) | | | | 0,50 | | 4,00 | | 2,50 | | 2,50 | | - | | 9,500 |

| | | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 |

Sub-total Action 1 | 0 | 0,500 | 0 | 4,000 | 0 | 2,500 | 0 | 2,500 | 0 | 0,000 | | 9,500 |

Website | | 0,015 | 2 | 0,030 | 2 | 0,030 | 2 | 0,030 | 2 | 0,030 | 2 | 0,030 | | 0,150 |

Sub-total Action 2 | 2 | 0,030 | 2 | 0,030 | 2 | 0,030 | 2 | 0,030 | 2 | 0,030 | 0 | 0,150 |

| | | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 |

Sub-total Action 3 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 |

| | | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 |

Sub-total Action 4 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 | 0 | 0,000 |

Sub-total Objective 2 | | 0,530 | | 4,030 | | 2,530 | | 2,530 | | 0,030 | | 9,650 |

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

TOTAL COST | | | | 0,990 | | 4,710 | | 3,210 | | 3,210 | | 0,710 | | 12,830 |

8.2. Administrative Expenditure

8.2.1. Number and type of human resources

Types of post | | Staff to be assigned to management of the action using existing and/or additional resources (number of posts/FTEs) |

| | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 |

Officials or temporary staff (XX 01 01) | A*/AD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 |

| B*, C*/AST | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 |

END staff financed by art. XX 01 02 | 2 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |

TOTAL | 5 | 13 | 15 | 15 | 15 |

8.2.2. Description of tasks deriving from the action

Overall management of the scheme, development and revision of product group criteria, management of marketing.

In order for the Ecolabel to be successful, a major Marketing push will be necessary once the new Regulation is adopted. This will be done in the framework of wider pan-european campaign on green consumption and production in partnership with Member States, business and NGOs.

8.2.3. Sources of human resources (statutory)

Posts currently allocated to the management of the programme to be replaced or extended

Posts pre-allocated within the APS/PDB exercise for year n

Posts to be requested in the next APS/PDB procedure

Posts to be redeployed using existing resources within the managing service (internal redeployment)

Posts required for year n although not foreseen in the APS/PDB exercise of the year in question

8.2.4. Other Administrative expenditure included in reference amount (XX 01 04/05 – Expenditure on administrative management)

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

1 Technical and administrative assistance (including related staff costs) | | | | | | | |

Other technical and administrative assistance | | | | | | | |

Total Technical and administrative assistance | | | | | | | |

8.2.5. Financial cost of human resources and associated costs not included in the reference amount

EUR million (to 3 decimal places)

Type of human resources | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 and later |

Officials and temporary staff (XX 01 01) | 0,351 | 0,585 | 0,819 | 0,819 | 0,819 | 0,819 |

Staff financed by Art XX 01 02 (ENDs)(specify budget line) | 0,10116 | 0,40464 | 0,40464 | 0,40464 | 0,40464 | 0,40464 |

Total cost of Human Resources and associated costs (NOT in reference amount) | 0.45216 | 0.98964 | 1.22364 | 1.22364 | 1.22364 | 1.22364 |

Calculation– Officials and Temporary agents |

Reference should be made to Point 8.2.1, if applicable |

The standard salary for 1 official or temporary staff as foreseen in Point 8.2.1 is 0.117 M€. |

Calculation– Staff financed under art. XX 01 02 |

Reference should be made to Point 8.2.1, if applicable |

The standard salary for END as foreseen in Point 8.2.1 is 0.05058 M€. |

8.2.6. Other administrative expenditure not included in reference amount

EUR million (to 3 decimal places) |

| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 and later | 2009 - 2013 |

XX 01 02 11 01 – Missions | 0,020 | 0,020 | 0,020 | 0,020 | 0,020 | | 0,100 |

XX 01 02 11 02 – Meetings & Conferences | 0,090 | 0,090 | 0,090 | 0,090 | 0,090 | | 0,450 |

XX 01 02 11 03 – Committees [23] | 0,090 | 0,090 | 0,090 | 0,090 | 0,090 | | 0,450 |

2 Total Other Management Expenditure (XX 01 02 11) | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | | 1,000 |

3 Other expenditure of an administrative nature (specify including reference to budget line) | | | | | | | |

Total Administrative expenditure, other than human resources and associated costs (NOT included in reference amount) | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | 0,200 | | 1,000 |

Calculation - Other administrative expenditure not included in reference amount |

20 missions at a unit cost of 1 000 € are calculated per year for product group development, participation in meetings with MS and other ecolabel schemes (Global Ecolabelling network).6 meetings of a Regulatory Committee and preparatory meetings for that Committee at a unit cost of 30 000 € are calculated per year. |

The needs for human and administrative resources shall be covered within the allocation that can be granted to the managing DG in the framework of the annual allocation procedure in the light of budgetary constraints.

[1] Regulation (EC) No 1980/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 on a revised Community Ecolabel award scheme

- (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/pdf/regulation/001980_en.pdf)

[2] Life cycle thinking (LCT) is the process of taking into account, as far as possible, all resources consumed and all environmental and health implications that are associated with the life cycle of a product (good or service), considering eg the extraction of resources, production, use, transport, recycling, and waste treatment and disposal. This process helps to avoid the "shifting of burdens", i.e. of impacts or resource consumption, among life cycle stages, geographic areas, and environmental and human health problem fields, such as Climate Change, Summer Smog, Acid Rain, or Resource Depletion etc. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is the standardised quantitative method for compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle (ISO 14040 ff).

[3] (IPP) (COM (2003) 302 final)

[4] (Decision No 1600/2002/EC)

[5] http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/revision_en.htm

[6] http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/revision_en.htm

[7] See http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/eco_design/dir2005-32.htm

[8] OJ C , , p. .

[9] OJ C , , p. .

[10] OJ C , , p. .

[11] OJ C , , p. .

[12] OJ L 237, 21.9.2000, p. 1.

[13] OJ L 189, 20.7.2007, p. 1

[14] OJ L 184, 17.7.1999, p. 23.

[15] OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1

[16] Non-differentiated appropriations hereafter referred to as NDA

[17] Expenditure that does not fall under Chapter xx 01 of the Title xx concerned.

[18] Expenditure within article xx 01 04 of Title xx.

[19] Expenditure within chapter xx 01 other than articles xx 01 04 or xx 01 05.

[20] See points 19 and 24 of the Interinstitutional agreement.

[21] Additional columns should be added if necessary i.e. if the duration of the action exceeds 6 years

[22] Reference should be made to the specific legislative financial statement for the Executive Agency(ies) concerned.

[23] C12000 - Committee for the adaptation to technical progress and application of the Community award scheme for an eco-label (ECO-LABEL).

--------------------------------------------------

52008PC0401