|
ISSN 1977-0677 |
||
|
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127 |
|
|
||
|
English edition |
Legislation |
Volume 58 |
|
|
|
Corrigenda |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Text with EEA relevance |
|
EN |
Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period. The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
II Non-legislative acts
REGULATIONS
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/1 |
COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) 2015/791
of 27 April 2015
amending Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 (1), and in particular Article 58(7) thereof,
Whereas:
|
(1) |
Article 19(1) of Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 (2) provides for a revision of the multiannual financial framework in the event of the adoption after 1 January 2014 of programmes under shared management for, inter alia, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development in order to transfer to subsequent years, in excess of the corresponding expenditure ceilings, allocations not used in 2014. |
|
(2) |
The rural development programmes of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, Romania, Sweden and certain regional programmes of Belgium, Germany, France and the United Kingdom were not ready for adoption by the end of 2014. |
|
(3) |
Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 has been revised accordingly by Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2015/623 (3) transferring, for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, the corresponding unused 2014 allocations into 2015 and 2016 expenditure ceilings. |
|
(4) |
Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013, which lays down the breakdown of Union support for rural development for the period 2014 to 2020, should therefore be amended accordingly. |
|
(5) |
As this Regulation is essential for a smooth and timely adoption of rural development programmes, it is appropriate that it enters into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 is replaced by the text in Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the 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, 27 April 2015.
For the Commission
The President
Jean-Claude JUNCKER
(1) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 487.
(2) Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884).
(3) Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2015/623 of 21 April 2015 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (OJ L 103, 22.4.2015, p. 1).
ANNEX
‘ANNEX I
BREAKDOWN OF UNION SUPPORT FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT (2014 TO 2020)
|
(current prices in EUR) |
||||||||
|
|
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
TOTAL 2014-2020 |
|
Belgium |
40 855 562 |
97 243 257 |
109 821 794 |
97 175 076 |
97 066 202 |
102 912 713 |
102 723 155 |
647 797 759 |
|
Bulgaria |
|
502 807 341 |
505 020 057 |
340 409 994 |
339 966 052 |
339 523 306 |
338 990 216 |
2 366 716 966 |
|
Czech Republic |
|
470 143 771 |
503 130 504 |
344 509 078 |
343 033 490 |
323 242 050 |
321 615 103 |
2 305 673 996 |
|
Denmark |
90 287 658 |
90 168 920 |
136 397 742 |
144 868 072 |
153 125 142 |
152 367 537 |
151 588 619 |
918 803 690 |
|
Germany |
664 601 903 |
1 498 240 410 |
1 685 574 112 |
1 404 073 302 |
1 400 926 899 |
1 397 914 658 |
1 394 588 766 |
9 445 920 050 |
|
Estonia |
103 626 144 |
103 651 030 |
111 192 345 |
122 865 093 |
125 552 583 |
127 277 180 |
129 177 183 |
823 341 558 |
|
Ireland |
|
469 633 941 |
469 724 442 |
313 007 411 |
312 891 690 |
312 764 355 |
312 570 314 |
2 190 592 153 |
|
Greece |
|
907 059 608 |
1 007 736 821 |
703 471 245 |
701 719 722 |
700 043 071 |
698 261 326 |
4 718 291 793 |
|
Spain |
|
1 780 169 908 |
1 780 403 445 |
1 185 553 005 |
1 184 419 678 |
1 183 448 718 |
1 183 394 067 |
8 297 388 821 |
|
France |
4 353 019 |
2 336 138 618 |
2 363 567 980 |
1 665 777 592 |
1 668 304 328 |
1 671 324 729 |
1 675 377 983 |
11 384 844 249 |
|
Croatia |
|
448 426 250 |
448 426 250 |
282 342 500 |
282 342 500 |
282 342 500 |
282 342 500 |
2 026 222 500 |
|
Italy |
|
2 223 480 180 |
2 231 599 688 |
1 493 380 162 |
1 495 583 530 |
1 498 573 799 |
1 501 763 408 |
10 444 380 767 |
|
Cyprus |
|
28 341 472 |
28 345 126 |
18 894 801 |
18 892 389 |
18 889 108 |
18 881 481 |
132 244 377 |
|
Latvia |
138 327 376 |
150 968 424 |
153 066 059 |
155 139 289 |
157 236 528 |
159 374 589 |
161 491 517 |
1 075 603 782 |
|
Lithuania |
230 392 975 |
230 412 316 |
230 431 887 |
230 451 686 |
230 472 391 |
230 483 599 |
230 443 386 |
1 613 088 240 |
|
Luxembourg |
|
21 385 468 |
21 432 133 |
14 366 484 |
14 415 051 |
14 464 074 |
14 511 390 |
100 574 600 |
|
Hungary |
|
742 851 235 |
737 099 981 |
488 620 684 |
488 027 342 |
487 402 356 |
486 662 895 |
3 430 664 493 |
|
Malta |
|
20 905 107 |
20 878 690 |
13 914 927 |
13 893 023 |
13 876 504 |
13 858 647 |
97 326 898 |
|
Netherlands |
87 118 078 |
87 003 509 |
118 496 585 |
118 357 256 |
118 225 747 |
118 107 797 |
117 976 388 |
765 285 360 |
|
Austria |
557 806 503 |
559 329 914 |
560 883 465 |
562 467 745 |
564 084 777 |
565 713 368 |
567 266 225 |
3 937 551 997 |
|
Poland |
1 569 517 638 |
1 175 590 560 |
1 193 429 059 |
1 192 025 238 |
1 190 589 130 |
1 189 103 987 |
1 187 301 202 |
8 697 556 814 |
|
Portugal |
577 031 070 |
577 895 019 |
578 913 888 |
579 806 001 |
580 721 241 |
581 637 133 |
582 456 022 |
4 058 460 374 |
|
Romania |
|
1 723 260 662 |
1 751 613 412 |
1 186 544 149 |
1 184 725 381 |
1 141 925 604 |
1 139 927 194 |
8 127 996 402 |
|
Slovenia |
118 678 072 |
119 006 876 |
119 342 187 |
119 684 133 |
120 033 142 |
120 384 760 |
120 720 633 |
837 849 803 |
|
Slovakia |
271 154 575 |
213 101 979 |
215 603 053 |
215 356 644 |
215 106 447 |
214 844 203 |
214 524 943 |
1 559 691 844 |
|
Finland |
335 440 884 |
336 933 734 |
338 456 263 |
340 009 057 |
341 593 485 |
343 198 337 |
344 776 578 |
2 380 408 338 |
|
Sweden |
|
386 944 025 |
378 153 207 |
249 386 135 |
249 552 108 |
249 710 989 |
249 818 786 |
1 763 565 250 |
|
United Kingdom |
475 531 544 |
848 443 195 |
851 819 320 |
755 518 938 |
755 301 511 |
756 236 113 |
756 815 870 |
5 199 666 491 |
|
Total EU-28 |
5 264 723 001 |
18 149 536 729 |
18 650 559 495 |
14 337 975 697 |
14 347 801 509 |
14 297 087 137 |
14 299 825 797 |
99 347 509 365 |
|
|
||||||||
|
Technical assistance (0,25 %) |
34 130 699 |
34 131 977 |
34 133 279 |
34 134 608 |
34 135 964 |
34 137 346 |
34 138 756 |
238 942 629 |
|
Total |
5 298 853 700 |
18 183 668 706 |
18 684 692 774 |
14 372 110 305 |
14 381 937 473 |
14 331 224 483 |
14 333 964 553 |
99 586 451 994 ’ |
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/5 |
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/792
of 19 May 2015
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Maçã de Alcobaça (PGI))
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,
Whereas:
|
(1) |
Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Portugal's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Maçã de Alcobaça’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 (2). |
|
(2) |
Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation. |
|
(3) |
As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Maçã de Alcobaça’ (PGI) are hereby approved.
Article 2
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, 19 May 2015.
For the Commission,
On behalf of the President,
Phil HOGAN
Member of the Commission
(1) OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 of 12 June 1996 on the registration of geographical indications and designations of origin under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 (OJ L 148, 21.6.1996, p. 1).
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/6 |
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/793
of 19 May 2015
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Agnello di Sardegna (PGI))
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,
Whereas:
|
(1) |
Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined Italy's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected geographical indication ‘Agnello di Sardegna’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 138/2001 (2), as amended by Commission Regulation (EU) No 1166/2010 (3). |
|
(2) |
Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (4) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation. |
|
(3) |
As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Agnello di Sardegna’ (PGI) are hereby approved.
Article 2
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, 19 May 2015.
For the Commission,
On behalf of the President,
Phil HOGAN
Member of the Commission
(1) OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 138/2001 of 24 January 2001 supplementing the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 on the entry of certain names in the ‘Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications’ provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 23, 25.1.2001, p. 17).
(3) Commission Regulation (EU) No 1166/2010 of 9 December 2010 approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications [Agnello di Sardegna (PGI)] (OJ L 326, 10.12.2010, p. 70).
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/7 |
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/794
of 19 May 2015
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Chevrotin (PDO))
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,
Whereas:
|
(1) |
Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined France's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Chevrotin’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1357/2005 (2). |
|
(2) |
Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation. |
|
(3) |
As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments should be approved, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Chevrotin’ (PDO) are hereby approved.
Article 2
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, 19 May 2015.
For the Commission,
On behalf of the President,
Phil HOGAN
Member of the Commission
(1) OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1357/2005 of 18 August 2005 supplementing the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 as regards the entry of a name in the Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications Chevrotin (PDO) (OJ L 214, 19.8.2005, p. 6).
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/8 |
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/795
of 19 May 2015
approving non-minor amendments to the specification for a name entered in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Pont-l'Evêque (PDO))
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,
Whereas:
|
(1) |
Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 53(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission has examined France's application for the approval of amendments to the specification for the protected designation of origin ‘Pont-l'Evêque’, registered under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 (2). |
|
(2) |
Since the amendments in question are not minor within the meaning of Article 53(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, the Commission published the amendment application in the Official Journal of the European Union (3) as required by Article 50(2)(a) of that Regulation. |
|
(3) |
As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the amendments to the specification should be approved, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The amendments to the specification published in the Official Journal of the European Union regarding the name ‘Pont-l'Evêque’ (PDO) are hereby approved.
Article 2
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, 19 May 2015.
For the Commission,
On behalf of the President,
Phil HOGAN
Member of the Commission
(1) OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 of 12 June 1996 on the registration of geographical indications and designations of origin under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 (OJ L 148, 21.6.1996, p. 1).
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/9 |
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/796
of 21 May 2015
amending Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 as regards the entry for the United States in the list of third countries, territories, zones or compartments from which certain poultry commodities may be imported into or transit through the Union in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza following further outbreaks in that country
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Directive 2002/99/EC of 16 December 2002 laying down the animal health rules governing the production, processing, distribution and introduction of products of animal origin for human consumption (1), and in particular the introductory phrase of Article 8, the first subparagraph of point 1 of Article 8, point 4 of Article 8 and Article 9(4)(c) thereof,
Having regard to Council Directive 2009/158/EC of 30 November 2009 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in, and imports from third countries of, poultry and hatching eggs (2), and in particular Articles 23(1), 24(2) and 25(2) thereof,
Whereas:
|
(1) |
Commission Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 (3) lays down veterinary certification requirements for imports into and transit, including storage during transit, through the Union of poultry and poultry products (‘the commodities’). It provides that the commodities may only be imported into and transit through the Union from the third countries, territories, zones or compartments listed in columns 1 and 3 of the table in Part 1 of Annex I thereto. |
|
(2) |
Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 also lays down the conditions for a third country, territory, zone or compartment to be considered as free from highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). |
|
(3) |
The United States is listed in Part 1 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 as a third country from which imports into and transit through the Union of the commodities covered by that Regulation are authorised from certain parts of its territory depending on the presence of HPAI outbreaks. That regionalisation was recognised by Regulation (EC) No 798/2008, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/243 (4), Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/342 (5) and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/526 (6) following outbreaks of HPAI in the States of California, Idaho, Oregon, Washington and Minnesota. |
|
(4) |
An Agreement between the Union and the United States (7) provides for a swift mutual recognition of regionalisation measures in the event of outbreaks of a disease in the Union or in the United States (‘the Agreement’). |
|
(5) |
The United States confirmed further outbreaks of HPAI of subtype H5 in poultry flocks in the States of Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas, North and South Dakota, Montana, Wisconsin and Iowa. The veterinary authorities of the United States immediately suspended issuing veterinary certificates for consignments of commodities intended for export to the Union from the affected States. The United States has also implemented a stamping-out policy in order to control HPAI and limit its spread. |
|
(6) |
Following the outbreaks in the abovementioned States the United States submitted updated information on the epidemiological situation on its territory and the measures it has taken to prevent the further spread of HPAI which has now been evaluated by the Commission. On the basis of that evaluation, as well as the commitments laid down in the Agreement and the guarantees provided by the United States, it is appropriate to modify the prohibition on the introduction into the Union of certain commodities to cover the entire States of Minnesota, South Dakota, Wisconsin and Iowa and parts of Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas, Montana and North Dakota, which the veterinary authorities of the United States have placed under restrictions due to the current outbreaks. |
|
(7) |
The entry for the United States in the list in Part 1 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 should therefore be amended to take account of the current epidemiological situation in that third country. |
|
(8) |
Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 should therefore be amended accordingly. |
|
(9) |
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
Part 1 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the third 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, 21 May 2015.
For the Commission
The President
Jean-Claude JUNCKER
(1) OJ L 18, 23.1.2003, p. 11.
(2) OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 74.
(3) Commission Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 of 8 August 2008 laying down a list of third countries, territories, zones or compartments from which poultry and poultry products may be imported into and transit through the Community and the veterinary certification requirements (OJ L 226, 23.8.2008, p. 1).
(4) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/243 of 13 February 2015 amending Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 as regards the entry for the United States in the list of third countries, territories, zones or compartments from which certain poultry commodities may be imported into or transit through the Union in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza (OJ L 41, 17.2.2015, p. 5).
(5) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/342 of 2 March 2015 amending Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 as regards the entry for the United States in the list of third countries, territories, zones or compartments from which certain poultry commodities may be imported into or transit through the Union in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza following outbreaks in the States of Idaho and California (OJ L 60, 4.3.2015, p. 31).
(6) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/526 of 27 March 2015 amending Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 798/2008 as regards the entry for the United States in the list of third countries, territories, zones or compartments from which certain poultry commodities may be imported into or transit through the Union in relation to further outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza in that country (OJ L 84, 28.3.2015, p. 30).
(7) Agreement between the European Community and the Government of the United States of America on sanitary measures to protect public and animal health in trade in live animals and animal products, as approved on behalf of the European Community by Council Decision 1998/258/EC (OJ L 118, 21.4.1998, p. 1).
ANNEX
In Part 1 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 798/2008, the entry for the United States is replaced by the following:
|
ISO code and name of third country or territory |
Code of third country, territory, zone or compartment |
Description of third country, territory, zone or compartment |
Veterinary certificate |
Specific conditions |
Specific conditions |
Avian influenza surveillance status |
Avian influenza vaccination status |
Salmonella control status |
|||||||||||||||||
|
Model(s) |
Additional guarantees |
Closing date (1) |
Opening date (2) |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
6A |
6B |
7 |
8 |
9 |
|||||||||||||||
|
‘US — United States |
US-0 |
Whole country |
SPF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
EP, E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
S4 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
US-1 |
Area of the United States, excluding the territory US-2 |
BPP, BPR, DOC, DOR, HEP, HER, SRP, SRA |
|
N |
|
|
A |
|
S3, ST1 |
||||||||||||||||
|
WGM |
VIII |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2 |
Area of the United States corresponding to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.1 |
State of Washington:
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
19.12.2014 |
7.4.2015 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.2 |
State of Washington: Clallam County |
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
19.12.2014 |
11.5.2015 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.3 |
State of Washington: Okanogan County (1):
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
29.1.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.4 |
State of Washington: Okanogan County (2):
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
3.2.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.5 |
State of Oregon: Douglas County |
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
19.12.2014 |
23.3.2015 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.6 |
State of Oregon: Deschutes County |
WG |
VIII |
P2 |
14.2.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.7 |
State of Oregon: Malheur County |
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
20.1.2015 |
11.5.2015 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
State of Idaho:
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.8. |
State of California: Stanislaus County/Tuolumne County: A zone of a 10 km radius starting with N point on the circular Control Zone border and extending in a clockwise fashion:
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
23.1.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.9 |
State of California: Kings County: A zone of a 10 km radius starting with N point on the circular Control Zone border and extending in a clockwise fashion:
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
12.2.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.10 |
State of Minnesota |
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
5.3.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.11 |
State of Missouri:
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
8.3.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.12 |
State of Missouri:
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
9.3.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.13 |
State of Arkansas:
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
11.3.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.14 |
State of Kansas:
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
13.3.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.15 |
State of Kansas:
|
WGM |
|
P2 |
9.3.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.16 |
State of Montana:
|
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
2.4.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.17 |
State of North Dakota: Dickey County |
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
11.4.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.18 |
State of South Dakota |
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
1.4.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.19 |
State of Wisconsin |
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
11.4.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
US-2.20 |
State of Iowa |
WGM |
VIII |
P2 |
14.4.2015 |
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
POU, RAT |
|
N P2 |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
(1) Commodities, including those transported on the high seas, produced before this date may be imported into the Union during a period of 90 days from this date.
(2) Only commodities produced after this date may be imported into the Union.’
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/17 |
COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2015/797
of 21 May 2015
establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1),
Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors (2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,
Whereas:
|
(1) |
Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto. |
|
(2) |
The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to this Regulation.
Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day 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, 21 May 2015.
For the Commission,
On behalf of the President,
Jerzy PLEWA
Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development
ANNEX
Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
|
(EUR/100 kg) |
||
|
CN code |
Third country code (1) |
Standard import value |
|
0702 00 00 |
AL |
69,6 |
|
MA |
98,6 |
|
|
MK |
102,7 |
|
|
ZZ |
90,3 |
|
|
0707 00 05 |
AL |
41,5 |
|
MK |
47,0 |
|
|
TR |
111,1 |
|
|
ZZ |
66,5 |
|
|
0709 93 10 |
TR |
120,5 |
|
ZZ |
120,5 |
|
|
0805 10 20 |
EG |
58,7 |
|
IL |
70,8 |
|
|
MA |
60,9 |
|
|
ZZ |
63,5 |
|
|
0805 50 10 |
BO |
147,7 |
|
BR |
107,1 |
|
|
MA |
111,5 |
|
|
TR |
101,5 |
|
|
ZZ |
117,0 |
|
|
0808 10 80 |
AR |
90,7 |
|
BR |
102,9 |
|
|
CL |
119,8 |
|
|
NZ |
157,8 |
|
|
US |
119,0 |
|
|
UY |
68,9 |
|
|
ZA |
117,0 |
|
|
ZZ |
110,9 |
|
(1) Nomenclature of countries laid down by Commission Regulation (EU) No 1106/2012 of 27 November 2012 implementing Regulation (EC) No 471/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on Community statistics relating to external trade with non-member countries, as regards the update of the nomenclature of countries and territories (OJ L 328, 28.11.2012, p. 7). Code ‘ZZ’ stands for ‘of other origin’.
DECISIONS
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/19 |
COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/798
of 11 May 2015
authorising the European Commission to negotiate, on behalf of the European Union, amendments to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 192(1) and Article 218(3) and (4) thereof,
Having regard to the recommendation from the European Commission,
Whereas the Commission should be authorised to negotiate, on behalf of the Union, amendments to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (1) and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (2),
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The Commission is hereby authorised to negotiate, on behalf of the Union, as regards matters falling within the Union's competence and in respect of which the Union has adopted rules, amendments to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer and the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer at the Conference of the Parties to that Convention and at the Meetings of the Parties to that Protocol in 2015 and 2016.
Article 2
1. The negotiations shall be conducted by the Commission in consultation with the special committee designated by the Council, and in accordance with the negotiating directives of the Council set out in the Addendum to this Decision.
2. The Council may review those negotiating directives at any time. To that effect, the Commission shall report to the Council on the outcome of the negotiations after each negotiating session and, where appropriate, on any problem that may arise during the negotiations.
Article 3
To the extent that the subject matter of the amendments referred to in Article 1 falls within the shared competence of the Union and of the Member States, the Commission and the Member States should cooperate closely during the negotiating process, with a view to ensuring unity in the international representation of the Union and its Member States.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Commission.
Done at Brussels, 11 May 2015.
For the Council
The President
J. DŪKLAVS
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/20 |
COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/799
of 18 May 2015
authorising Member States to become party, in the interest of the European Union, to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel, of the International Maritime Organization
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 46, Article 53(1) and Article 62 in conjunction with point (a)(v) of Article 218(6) and the first subparagraph of Article 218(8) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
Having regard to the consent of the European Parliament, (1)
Whereas:
|
(1) |
The International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel (‘the Convention’) of the International Maritime Organization (‘IMO’) was adopted on 7 July 1995 at the International Conference convened by the IMO in London. |
|
(2) |
The Convention entered into force on 29 September 2012. |
|
(3) |
The Convention represents a significant contribution to the fishing sector at international level by promoting the safety of life and property at sea, thereby also contributing to the protection of the marine environment. It is therefore desirable that its provisions be implemented as soon as possible. |
|
(4) |
Fishing at sea is one of the most hazardous professions, therefore appropriate training and qualifications are an essential means by which to cut the number of accidents. The embarking of personnel on board Member States fishing vessels should in any case be done without prejudice to maritime safety. |
|
(5) |
In the framework of Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (‘the Agreements’) with third countries, it is important that personnel on board fishing vessels flying the flag of a Member State possess appropriate professional qualifications proven by certificates accepted by the flag State, so that recruitment under the conditions laid down in the Agreements is possible. Member States should make every effort to avoid friction between international and Union law, including any possible negative impact on the conclusion and the implementation of the Agreements, when applying the Convention. Furthermore, relevant third countries should be encouraged to become parties to the Convention. |
|
(6) |
The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission promote safety at sea and safety at work as well as the enhancement of the professional qualifications of personnel on board fishing vessels. The Union financially supports training in the fishing sector, namely through the European Fisheries Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund. |
|
(7) |
Chapter I, Regulation 7 of the Annex to the Convention falls within the exclusive competence of the Union as regards the rules of the Union on the recognition of professional qualifications held by certain categories of fishing vessel personnel and affects the Treaty provisions and secondary Union law, in particular Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), in so far as Union citizens who possess relevant certificates issued by a Member State or by a third country are concerned. |
|
(8) |
The Union cannot become party to the Convention, as only states can be parties thereto. |
|
(9) |
Some Member States have not yet become party to the Convention, while others already have. Those Member States which have fishing vessels flying their flag, ports receiving seagoing fishing vessels which fall within the scope of the Convention, or training institutions for fishing vessel personnel, and which have not yet become party to the Convention, are invited to do so. |
|
(10) |
Until all Member States which have fishing vessels flying their flag, ports receiving seagoing fishing vessels which fall within the scope of the Convention, or training institutions for fishing vessel personnel have become party to the Convention, each Member State party to the Convention should apply the flexibility provided by the Convention to ensure legal compatibility with Union law, notably the provisions of Chapter I, Regulation 10 of the Annex to the Convention on equivalents, to align the application of the Convention with Directive 2005/36/EC. |
|
(11) |
While recognising the professional qualifications — in accordance with Directive 2005/36/EC — of migrant workers from Member States not party to the Convention, each Member State party to the Convention should ensure that the professional qualifications of the workers concerned have been assessed and have been found to correspond to the minimum standards set by the Convention. |
|
(12) |
In accordance with Article 2(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Council should therefore authorise the Member States to become party to the Convention, in the interest of the Union, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Member States are hereby authorised to become party to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel, of the International Maritime Organization, adopted on 7 July 1995, in respect of those parts falling under the competence of the Union.
Member States, when reporting to the Secretary-General of the IMO in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention, shall, if appropriate, with reference to Chapter I, Regulation 10 of the Annex to the Convention, provide information on relevant national provisions regarding the recognition of certificates of competency of personnel on board fishing vessels covered by the Convention, taking into account obligations laid down by relevant Union law on the recognition of qualifications.
Article 2
Member States which have fishing vessels flying their flag, ports receiving seagoing fishing vessels which fall within the scope of the Convention, or training institutions for fishing vessel personnel, and which have not yet become party to the Convention, shall endeavour to take the necessary steps to deposit their instrument of accession to the Convention with the Secretary-General of the IMO within a reasonable time and, if possible, by 23 May 2017. The Commission shall present a report to the Council reviewing the progress of accession by 23 May 2018.
Article 3
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 18 May 2015.
For the Council
The President
M. SEILE
(1) Not yet published in the Official Journal.
(2) Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ L 255, 30.9.2005, p. 22).
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/22 |
COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2015/800
of 21 May 2015
amending and extending Decision 2013/233/CFSP on the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 28 and Articles 42(4) and 43(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
Whereas:
|
(1) |
On 22 May 2013, the Council adopted Decision 2013/233/CFSP (1) establishing the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya). Decision 2013/233/CFSP expires on 21 May 2015. |
|
(2) |
On 20 May 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/294/CFSP (2) amending Decision 2013/233/CFSP and providing a financial reference amount for the period until 21 May 2015. |
|
(3) |
Following the security and political situation in Libya, EUBAM Libya personnel were relocated and reduced in number at the end of 2014 to a limited capacity, continuing with a further reduction in 2015. Following the strategic review of EUBAM Libya, the Political and Security Committee (PSC) decided that the on-hold status of the Mission should be maintained and that the Mission should be extended for a further period of 6 months, until 21 November 2015. |
|
(4) |
Decision 2013/233/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly. |
|
(5) |
EUBAM Libya will be conducted in the context of a situation which may deteriorate and could impede the achievement of the objectives of the Union's external action as set out in Article 21 of the Treaty, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Decision 2013/233/CFSP is amended as follows:
|
(1) |
in Article 4, paragraph 4 is deleted; |
|
(2) |
Article 6 is amended as follows:
|
|
(3) |
in Article 7, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following: ‘5. The conditions of employment and the rights and obligations of international and local staff shall be laid down in the contracts to be concluded between EUBAM Libya and the staff member concerned.’ |
|
(4) |
the following Article is inserted: ‘Article 12a Legal arrangements EUBAM Libya shall have the capacity to procure services and supplies, enter into contracts and administrative arrangements, employ staff, hold bank accounts, acquire and dispose of assets and discharge its liabilities, and to be a party to legal proceedings, as required in order to implement this Decision.’ |
|
(5) |
Article 13 is replaced by the following: ‘Article 13 Financial arrangements 1. The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUBAM Libya for the period from 22 May 2013 to 21 May 2014 shall be EUR 30 300 000. The financial reference amount intended to cover the expenditure related to EUBAM Libya for the period from 22 May 2014 to 21 November 2015 shall be EUR 26 200 000. 2. All expenditure shall be managed in accordance with the rules and procedures applicable to the general budget of the Union. Participation of natural and legal persons in the award of procurement contracts by EUBAM Libya shall be open without limitations. Moreover, no rule of origin for the goods purchased by EUBAM Libya shall apply. Subject to the Commission's approval, the Mission may conclude technical arrangements with Member States, the host State, participating third States and other international actors regarding the provision of equipment, services and premises to EUBAM Libya. 3. EUBAM Libya shall be responsible for the implementation of the Mission's budget. For that purpose, EUBAM Libya shall sign an agreement with the Commission. 4. Without prejudice to the provisions on the status of EUBAM Libya and its personnel, EUBAM Libya shall be responsible for any claims and obligations arising from the implementation of the mandate, starting from 22 May 2015, with the exception of any claims relating to serious misconduct by the Head of Mission, for which the Head of Mission shall bear the responsibility. 5. The implementation of the financial arrangements shall be without prejudice to the chain of command as provided for in Articles 4, 5 and 6 and the operational requirements of EUBAM Libya, including compatibility of equipment and interoperability of its teams. 6. Expenditure shall be eligible as from the date when the agreement referred to in paragraph 3 is signed.’ |
|
(6) |
the following Article is inserted: ‘Article 13a Project Cell 1. EUBAM Libya shall have a Project Cell for identifying and implementing projects which are consistent with the Mission's objectives and contribute to the mandate's delivery. EUBAM Libya shall, as appropriate, facilitate and provide advice on projects, implemented by Member States and third States, under their responsibility in areas related to EUBAM Libya and in support of its objectives. 2. Subject to paragraph 3, EUBAM Libya shall be authorised to seek recourse to financial contributions from Member States or third States to implement projects identified as supplementing EUBAM Libya's other actions in a consistent manner, if the projects are:
EUBAM Libya shall conclude an arrangement with those States, covering in particular the specific procedures for dealing with any complaint from third parties concerning damage caused as a result of acts or omissions by EUBAM Libya in the use of the funds provided by those States. Under no circumstances may the contributing States hold the Union or the HR liable for acts or omissions by EUBAM Libya in the use of the funds provided by those States. 3. Financial contributions from third States to the Project Cell shall be subject to acceptance by the PSC.’ |
|
(7) |
in Article 16, the second paragraph is replaced by the following: ‘It shall apply until 21 November 2015.’ . |
Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.
It shall apply from 22 May 2015.
Done at Brussels, 21 May 2015.
For the Council
The President
E. RINKĒVIČS
(1) Council Decision 2013/233/CFSP of 22 May 2013 on the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya) (OJ L 138, 24.5.2013, p. 15).
(2) Council Decision 2014/294/CFSP of 20 May 2014 amending Decision 2013/233/CFSP on the European Union Integrated Border Management Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM Libya) (OJ L 151, 21.5.2014, p. 24).
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/25 |
COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2015/801
of 20 May 2015
on reference document on best environmental management practice, sector environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence for the retail trade sector under Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the voluntary participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS)
(notified under document C(2015) 3234)
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the voluntary participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS), repealing Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 and Commission Decisions 2001/681/EC and 2006/193/EC (1), and in particular Article 46(1) thereof,
Whereas:
|
(1) |
Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 establishes an obligation for the Commission to develop sectoral reference documents in consultation with Member States and other stakeholders. These Sectoral Reference Documents must include best environmental management practice, environmental performance indicators for specific sectors and where appropriate benchmarks of excellence and rating systems identifying environmental performance levels. |
|
(2) |
Communication from the Commission — Establishment of the working plan setting out an indicative list of sectors for the adoption of sectoral and cross-sectoral reference documents, under Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009, of 25 November 2009, on the voluntary participation of organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS) (2) — sets out a working plan and an indicative list of priority sectors for the adoption of sectoral and cross-sectoral reference documents including the wholesale and retail trade sector. |
|
(3) |
Sectoral reference documents for specific sectors, including best environmental management practices, environmental performance indicators, and where appropriate, benchmarks of excellence and rating systems identifying environmental performance levels, are necessary to help organisations to better focus on the most important environmental aspects in a given sector. |
|
(4) |
The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established pursuant to Article 49 of Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009, |
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The sectoral reference document on best environmental management practice, sector environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence for the retail trade sector is set out in Annex.
Article 2
It is an obligation for an EMAS registered organisation in the retail trade sector to demonstrate in the environmental statement how the described Best Environmental Management Practices and Benchmarks of Excellence from the sectoral reference document have been used to identify measures and actions, and possibly to set priorities for improving their environmental performance.
Article 3
Meeting the benchmarks of excellence identified in the sectoral reference document is not mandatory for EMAS registered organisations since the voluntary character of EMAS leaves the assessment of the feasibility of the benchmarks, in terms of costs and benefits, to the organisations themselves.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels, 20 May 2015.
For the Commission
Karmenu VELLA
Member of the Commission
ANNEX
1. INTRODUCTION
This document is the first Sectoral Reference Document (SRD) according to Article 46 of Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 on the voluntary participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS). With a view to facilitating the understanding of this SRD, this introduction provides an outline of its legal background and its use.
The SRD is based on a detailed scientific and policy report (1) developed by the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), one of the seven institutes of the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC).
Relevant legal background
The Community Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) was introduced in 1993 for voluntary participation by organisations, by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1836/93 (2). Subsequently, EMAS has undergone two major revisions:
|
— |
Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3), |
|
— |
Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009. |
An important new element of the latest revision, which came into force on 11 January 2010, is the development of sectoral reference documents (SRDs) reflecting best environmental management practice for specific sectors, introduced by Article 46 of Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009. They include best environmental management practices (BEMPs), environmental performance indicators for specific sectors and, where appropriate, benchmarks of excellence and rating systems identifying performance levels.
How to understand and to use this document
The Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) is a scheme for voluntary participation by organisations which commit to continuous environmental improvement. Within this framework, the present Sectoral Reference Document (SRD) provides sector-specific guidance to the retail trade sector and points out a number of options for improvement and best practices. The SRD is aimed at helping and supporting all organisations which intend to improve their environmental performance by providing ideas and inspiration as well as practical and technical guidance.
The SRD primarily addresses organisations that are already EMAS-registered, secondly organisations that consider registering with EMAS in the future, and thirdly also those which have implemented another environmental management system or those without a formal environmental management system wishing to learn more about best environmental management practices in order to improve their environmental performance. Consequently, the objective of this document is to support all organisations and actors in the retail trade sector to focus on relevant environmental aspects, both direct and indirect, and to find information on best practices, as well as appropriate sector specific environmental performance indicators to measure their environmental performance, and benchmarks of excellence.
According to Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009, EMAS-registered organisations are required to prepare an environmental statement (Article 4(1)(d)). When assessing the environmental performance, the relevant SRD shall be taken into account. Commission Decision 2013/131/EU (4) establishing the user's guide setting out the steps needed to participate in EMAS (the ‘EMAS User's Guide’) also refers to the legal character of the EMAS Sectoral Reference Documents. Both the EMAS User's Guide and this decision state that it is an obligation for an EMAS registered organisation to clarify in the environmental statement how the SRD, when available, was taken into account; i.e. how the SRD has been used to identify measures and actions, and possibly to set priorities, to (further) improve the environmental performance. In addition, this decision also states that meeting the identified benchmarks of excellence is not mandatory because the voluntary character of EMAS leaves the assessment of the feasibility of the benchmarks, in terms of costs and benefits, to the organisations themselves.
The information in this document is based on the direct data supplied by stakeholders themselves followed by a subsequent analysis of the European Commission's Joint Research Centre. A Technical Working Group, comprising experts and stakeholders of the sector, applied their expert judgement together with the European Commission's Joint Research Centre and ultimately agreed and approved the described benchmarks. This means that the information provided on the appropriate sector specific environmental performance indicators and the benchmarks of excellence in this document correspond to the levels of environmental performance that can be achieved by the best performing organisations from the sector. With respect to the environmental statement, Article 4(1)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 refers to ANNEX IV to that Regulation, where it is stated that the environmental statement shall also contain reporting on the core indicators and on other relevant existing environmental performance indicators. The so-called ‘other relevant existing environmental performance indicators’ (ANNEX IV(C)(3)) relate to the more specific environmental aspects as identified in the environmental statement and shall be reported in addition to the core indicators. For this purpose, the SRD shall be taken into account also (ANNEX IV(C)(3)). Where justified on technical grounds, an organisation may conclude that one or more of the EMAS core indicators and one or more of the sector-specific indicators presented in the SRD are not relevant for them and may not report on them. For instance, for a non-food retailer, it is not necessary to report on energy efficiency indicators for commercial food refrigeration as this is not relevant for them. When choosing the relevant indicators, it should be considered that some indicators are closely linked to the implementation of certain best practices. Therefore, their applicability is limited to organisations implementing such best environmental management practices. However, if a best environmental management practice is suitable to an organisation, even if not applied, it is recommendable that the organisation report on the associated indicator, at least, to establish a comparable baseline.
The indicators presented were selected as those most commonly used by exemplary organisations within the sector. Organisations may check which of the selected environmental performance indicators (or appropriate alternatives) are the most suitable in each case.
EMAS environmental verifiers shall check if and how the SRD was taken into account by the organisation when preparing its environmental statement (Article 18(5)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009). This means that when undertaking their activities, accredited environmental verifiers will need evidence from the organisation on how the SRD has been taken into account. They shall not check compliance with the described benchmarks of excellence, but they shall verify evidence on how the SRD was used as a guide to identify proper voluntary measures that the organisation can implement to improve its environmental performance.
EMAS registration is an ongoing process. This means that every time an organisation plans to improve its environmental performance (and reviews its environmental performance) it shall consult the SRD on specific topics to provide inspiration about which issues to tackle next in a step-wise approach.
Structure of the Sectoral Reference Document
This document consists of four chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the EMAS legal background and describes how to use this document, while Chapter 2 defines the scope of this SRD. Chapter 3 briefly describes the different best environmental management practices (BEMPs) together with information on their applicability, mainly with respect to new and existing installations and/or new and existing stores as well as to SMEs. For each BEMP, the suitable environmental performance indicators and the related benchmarks of excellence are also given. For each of the different measures and techniques outlined, more than one environmental performance indicator is mentioned to reflect the fact that different indicators are used in practice.
Finally, Chapter 4 presents a comprehensive table with the most relevant environmental performance indicators, associated explanations and related benchmarks of excellence.
2. SCOPE
This SRD addresses the environmental management of retail trade sector organisations. This sector is characterised within the statistical classification of economic activities established by Regulation (EC) No 1893/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5) with NACE code 47 (NACE Rev. 2): ‘retail trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles’. Retailing of services, e.g. restaurants, hairdressers, travel agents are excluded.
It covers the whole value chain for the products sold in retail stores, as described in the following input/output scheme.
Figure 2.1
Overview of inputs and outputs of the Retail Trade sector
Personal care, Sports, …
NACE 20.4, 32
Wood, paper, …
NACE 16, 17, 31
Distribution and Logistics
The RETAIL trade sector
NACE 47
transport, packaging, refrigeration, lighting, recycling, selective sorting, waste management, working conditions, …
Recycling/Reuse (bottles, batteries, lamps, electric equipment etc.)
Environmental labels
Consumers
Waste Heat
Waste Water
Emissions to air
Solid Waste
Indirect Aspects
Direct Aspects
Supply Chain
Chemical Auxiliaries
Water
Energy
Indirect Aspects
Computers, Electronics, …
NACE 26, 27.5
Food, Beverage, …
NACE 10, 11, 12
PRODUCTION
Products
other …
Textiles, Apparel, …
NACE 13, 14, 15
CONSUMPTION
Wholesale
The main environmental aspects to be managed by the organisations belonging to the retail trade sector are set out in Table 2.1.
For each category, the table shows the aspects covered in this SRD. These environmental aspects were selected as the most relevant for retailers. However, the environmental aspects to be managed by specific retailers should be assessed on a case by case basis. Environmental aspects, such as waste water, hazardous waste, biodiversity or materials for other areas than those listed could also be relevant.
Table 2.1
Main environmental aspects covered in this document
|
Category |
Character (6) |
Aspects covered in this document |
|
Energy performance |
Direct |
Building, Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning system (HVAC), refrigeration, lighting, appliances, renewable energy, energy monitoring |
|
Air Emissions |
Direct |
Refrigerants |
|
Supply Chain |
Indirect |
Business strategies, product prioritisation, improvement mechanisms, choice editing, environmental criteria, information and dissemination, environmental-labelling (including own-brand products (7)) |
|
Transport and logistics |
Direct/Indirect |
Monitoring, procurement, decision-making, transport modes, distribution network, planning, packaging design |
|
Waste |
Direct |
Food waste, packaging, return systems |
|
Materials and resources |
Direct |
Paper consumption |
|
Water |
Direct |
Rainwater collection and treatment |
|
Influence on consumers |
Indirect |
Environmental aspects associated with consumption, e.g. plastic bags |
Consequently, the ‘Best Environmental Management Practices (BEMPs)’ presented are grouped as follows:
|
— |
BEMPs to improve the energy performance, including refrigerants management |
|
— |
BEMPs to improve the environmental sustainability of retail supply chains |
|
— |
BEMPs to improve transport and logistics operations |
|
— |
BEMPs concerning waste |
|
— |
other BEMPs (reduced consumption and use of more environmentally-friendly paper for commercial publications, rainwater collection and reuse, and influencing consumer environmental behaviour). |
The BEMPs cover the most significant environmental aspects of the sector.
3. BEST ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, SECTOR ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS AND BENCHMARKS OF EXCELLENCE FOR THE RETAIL TRADE SECTOR
3.1. Energy performance including refrigerants management
3.1.1. Design and retrofitting the building envelope for optimal energy performance
BEMP is to improve the envelope of existing retailers' buildings to minimise energy losses to an acceptable and feasible level, through the application of several techniques, such as those shown in Table 3.1. Moreover, BEMP is to optimise the building envelope design in order to fulfil demanding standards going beyond existing regulations, especially for new buildings.
Table 3.1
Building envelope elements and associated techniques
|
Envelope element |
Technique |
|
Wall/façade/roof/floor — cellar ceiling |
Change insulation materials |
|
Techniques to increase the insulation thickness |
|
|
Windows/glazing |
Change to more efficient glazing |
|
Change to more efficient sashes and frames |
|
|
Shading |
Use of external and internal shading devices |
|
Air tightness |
Improvement of doors |
|
Fast acting doors |
|
|
Sealing |
|
|
Introduce buffer sections |
|
|
Overall envelope |
Orientation |
|
Maintenance |
Technically, it is feasible for every new and existing building or building unit. Tenants may implement mechanisms to influence owners and should be aware of the importance of the building envelope in their environmental performance. Building envelope retrofitting requires significant investment. Generally, this BEMP produces cost savings, but with long payback times and, therefore, it is recommendable to apply this BEMP along with other major renovations of the store (e.g. store layout, lighting, safety, structural, extensions, etc.) in order to reduce its cost.
The applicability of this BEMP to small enterprises (8) is usually quite limited, due to the high investment needed and the lack of influence on the building characteristics.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||
|
|
3.1.2. Design premises for existing and new Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning systems
BEMP is to retrofit existing HVAC (Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning) systems in order to reduce energy consumption and improve indoor air quality. BEMP is to optimise the design of HVAC systems in new buildings, using innovative systems to reduce primary energy demand and to increase efficiency.
The application of best design practices should allow best integration within the building envelope, avoiding oversizing and using the orientation of the building as a way of minimising overall energy consumption. In particular, for new stores, the following may be relevant: the use of glazing, waste heat from refrigeration, renewable energy, heat pumps, and other innovative systems. Indoor air quality monitoring and energy management systems are considered best practices regarding HVAC maintenance.
This BEMP is fully applicable to new buildings. In any existing building, the HVAC system can be retrofitted in order to reduce energy consumption, although building characteristics would have an influence on the impact of retrofitting the HVAC system. The climatic influence is very relevant in order to select what techniques can be implemented. The application of new HVAC systems in an existing building, e.g. the installation of cogeneration plants, heat recovery systems and integrated design concepts, such as the Passive House standard, can be applied partially with acceptable economic performance. The store layout has a strong influence on the performance of HVAC, especially those design specifications related to the refrigeration process, where a huge amount of waste heat can be recovered.
For small enterprises, the degree of influence on the HVAC design can be negligible, although they should participate in the implementation and recommendation of the described BEMP.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||
|
|
3.1.3. Use of integrated design concepts for buildings
BEMP is to use integrated design concepts for the whole building or for parts of it to reduce the energy demand of the store. Integrated concepts minimise the energy use and associated costs of a building, while achieving good thermal comfort conditions for the occupants. Some exemplary requirements are shown in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2
Examples of requirements for integrated design concepts
|
Requirements |
Examples of measures to achieve them |
|
The building energy need for space heating and cooling must be lower than 15 kWh/m2yr The specific heat load must not exceed 10 W/m2 The building must not leak more air than 0,6 times its volume per hour Total primary energy use cannot be higher than 120 kWh/m2yr |
Improved insulation. Recommended U-values less than 0,15 W/m2K Design without thermal bridges Windows U-values lower than 0,85 W/m2K Air tight. Mechanical ventilation with heating recovery from exhaust air Install solar thermal systems or heat pumps (final energy demand excludes the contribution of solar and ambient energy used on site to produce heat) |
Integrated concepts are usually implemented during the design of new buildings. The concept is partially suitable for existing buildings, as several elements can be integrated without high investment costs. The climatic conditions can also influence the decision to apply this concept. For example, the Passive House standard was mainly developed by German and Swedish researchers, but it may be implemented in warmer climates. The investment costs of a building designed according to exemplary integrated approaches do not exceed 10-15 % of extra cost compared to a conventional construction. The life cycle cost analysis reveals that the passive house building design represents the minimum life cycle cost, as the heating system required is relatively simple and the heating power installed is limited.
For small enterprises, the use of integrated design concepts to minimise energy demand of new buildings can be regarded as a cost-efficient procurement activity, without any specific restriction other than extra initial investment.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||
|
|
3.1.4. Integration of refrigeration and HVAC
BEMP is to recover the waste heat from the refrigeration cycle and to maximise its use. Food retailers are able, under certain circumstances, to produce excess heat even after using the heat for space heating, which can be delivered to other parts of the same building or to other buildings.
The measures should be taken into account for new or existing buildings of food retailers and the operation of these systems would have different results depending on different factors:
— Building size and use: large retailers' stores are usually not alone in their buildings. Therefore, the ‘neighbourhood’ (e.g. small shops in a shopping centre) is a potential consumer of the excess heat. As a general rule, a grocery store with a typical refrigeration load and an optimised envelope would recover enough energy to heat twice its own surface.
— HVAC design and maintenance: all the elements of the HVAC system should be correctly designed and maintained. Exhaust air heat recovery, on-demand control of ventilation with CO2 sensors and monitoring of air tightness and indoor air quality are strongly recommended techniques.
— The refrigeration load: smaller shops offer more refrigerated goods per square metre of sales area and the efficiency in refrigeration is lower. In addition, the trend to increase the amount of refrigerated goods available is also important. The size of the shop does not influence the technical applicability of integrated approaches, but the cost-efficiency of the whole system is lower for small shops.
— Climatic conditions: in cold climates, the load for refrigeration is lower than for warmer regions. At the same time, the heat demand of northern European buildings is high, so the integration would depend on the quality of the building envelope. For the warmest climates, e.g. Mediterranean countries of Europe, the cooling demand can be very significant and the air tightness of the building can make the internal gains increase. An optimised ventilation design is, therefore, necessary. Mechanical cooling at night and variable indoor temperature (e.g. 21-26 °C) are also recommended techniques.
— Ambient temperature: in the integration of the refrigeration cycle, there is a limit to ambient temperature, which depends on the system design, where the waste heat generation rate is not enough to keep a comfortable temperature inside the buildings. An extra heating source may be needed but this, again, depends on the quality of the building envelope.
— Building ownership: many shops are integrated in a residential or commercial building, which belongs to a third party. Better integration of heat recovery, therefore, must involve actual building owners.
This BEMP is applicable to any new and existing refrigeration system to be installed in new or renovated stores, being fully applicable to small enterprises (given the conditions above). Nevertheless, small companies may require outsourcing technical assistance.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||
|
|
3.1.5. Monitoring the energy performance of stores
BEMP is to monitor the energy use of the processes inside a store (at least of the most energy-consuming processes such as heating, refrigeration, lighting, etc.), as well as at store and/or organisation levels. Also, it is BEMP to benchmark the energy consumption (per process) and to implement preventive and corrective measures.
A monitoring system can be applied to any sales concept. It requires the allocation of extra resources if there is not an appropriate business management structure. This practice may require extra efforts for existing stores.
Small enterprises managing one or a few stores may require a good business management structure and shared responsibility approaches to establish and maintain an appropriate monitoring system. There may be affordability problems for the application of this BEMP to existing stores.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmarks of excellence |
||||||||||
|
|
3.1.6. Efficient refrigeration, including refrigerants use
BEMP is to implement energy-saving measures in the refrigeration system of a grocery store, especially the covering of refrigeration display cases with glass lids, when the energy-saving potential produces relevant environmental benefits.
BEMP is to use natural refrigerants in grocery stores, as the environmental impact would be reduced substantially, and to avoid leakages by ensuring that installations are tightly sealed and well maintained.
This practice is applicable to food retailers with a significant load of refrigeration. Covering of cabinets can have short payback times (less than three years) when anticipated savings are equal to or higher than 20 %. Covering of display cases may also have an impact on the thermal behaviour of the store, as well as on the humidity of the indoor environment. In addition, the application of natural refrigerants, apart from the environmental benefit, may reduce the energy consumption under certain circumstances of food retailer operation.
The applicability to small enterprises may be restricted to organisations using commercial refrigeration systems, both plug-in and remote systems.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
3.1.7. Efficient lighting
BEMP is to design smart lighting strategies with enhanced efficiency and reduced consumption, to use daylight without affecting the sales concept and to use intelligent controls, appropriate system design and the most efficient lighting devices to ensure optimal lighting levels.
This technique is applicable to any sales concept. Specific lighting for marketing purposes is also affected. However, the influence of increased glazing, allowing further use of day lighting, on the thermal balance of the store should be carefully considered. The definition of an optimal lighting strategy and using the most efficient devices can lead to savings higher than 50 % compared to current performance.
Use of smart lighting systems and efficient devices is feasible for small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||
|
|
3.1.8. Secondary measures for improving energy performance
BEMP is to implement energy saving measures in distribution centres, to audit energy use periodically within the environmental management system, to train staff regarding energy savings and to communicate the energy saving efforts of the organisation internally and externally.
There is no limitation on the size, type or geographical location of the retailer to establish a comprehensive energy management system, taking into account appliances, distribution centres, specific energy uses or communication and training.
For small enterprises, procurement of efficient appliances, staff training and communication are feasible and affordable measures.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||||
|
|
3.1.9. Use of alternative energy sources
After minimising the energy demand, BEMP is to integrate renewable energy sources in stores. Meeting the energy demand with renewable energy has substantial environmental benefits. However, it is crucial to first reduce the energy demand and increase the efficiency as explained in 3.1.1 to 3.1.8 and then integrate renewables for the remaining energy demand. The implementation of heat pumps and combined heat and power systems should also be considered.
In principle, it is applicable to any store format. Important limitations are the availability of renewable sources, accessibility of land or roof installations and stability of demand for combined heat and power systems.
Green purchasing can be a good solution for micro enterprises. For small enterprises, the use of renewable energy or other alternative sources is achievable.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||
|
|
3.2. Retail supply chain
Figure 3.1
Proposed sequence of key questions and actions (shaded rectangular boxes) representing best practice for systematic supply chain improvement, divided into prerequisites and two strategies (S1 and S2) (13)
S1. Drive widespread improvement
Improved core assortment
Expanded front-runner niche market
Work with major suppliers to improve eco-efficiency
Establish and audit supplier/product env. requiremens
Exclude worst products
Require third party certification
Promote front-runner products
Scope for efficient intervention?
Possible to set product/supplier env. requirements?
Relevant front-runner label
Relevant widely applicable third party env. standard?
Exclusion criteria (e.g. red-listed fish)?
Establish supplier data exchange
Product and standard development
Identify control points
Priority product group?
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Environmental assessment
S2. Encourage eco consumption
CORE PRODUCT GROUPS
Prioritise supply chain improvement
Prerequisites
3.2.1. Integrate supply chain environmental sustainability into business strategy and operations
BEMP is for top-level management to integrate supply chain environmental sustainability into the business strategy, and for dedicated management personnel (ideally within a dedicated unit) to coordinate implementation of necessary actions across retail operations. Actions should at least be coordinated across individuals or departments responsible for procurement, manufacturing, quality assurance, transport and logistics, and marketing. The establishment of quantitative environmental sustainability targets that are widely communicated and highly weighted in the corporate decision-making process is particularly important, both as an indicator and driver of actions to improve supply chain environmental sustainability. A sequence of best practice actions for systematic improvement of product supply chains, determined according to chronological order and environment effectiveness, is proposed in Figure 3.1. BEMP is the implementation of this sequence of actions (also reflecting BEMPs described subsequently).
Integration of an environmentally sustainable supply chain strategy into retail management structure and operations is possible for any retailer. For large retailers, this BEMP is more complex and requires extensive training and reorganisation to establish environmentally sustainable sourcing priorities. Integrating management of supply chain environmental sustainability into retail organisations can improve long-term economic performance, by creating a strong value-added brand identity, and by securing efficient and sustainable product supplies into the future.
For small enterprises, such actions may be relatively straight-forward to implement and may be associated with a change in market positioning to emphasise a more sustainable value-added product assortment.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||||
|
|
3.2.2. Assess core product supply chains to identify priority products, suppliers and improvement options and identify effective product supply chain improvement mechanisms
As per the sequence of BEMPs applicable to environmental improvement of retail supply chains (Figure 3.1), retailers should identify priority products, processes and suppliers for improvement through environmental assessment of product supply chains, using existing scientific information, consultation with experts (e.g. NGOs), and lifecycle assessment tools. Then, retailers must identify the relevant improvement options available for priority product groups. One important aspect of this is the identification of relevant widely-recognised third-party environmental standards that may be used to indicate higher levels of supplier and/or product environmental performance. The applicability and level of environmental protection represented by such standards vary considerably.
Some standards are widely applicable (Table 3.4 to Table 3.7) and best practice for them is ensuring that all suppliers/products are certified with them. The Energy Labelling Directive 2010/30/EU created a legal framework that allows consumers but also retailers to concentrate their product portfolio on the highest energy efficiency class. Other standards are not based on criteria that can be widely applied to improve the environmental sustainability of all products and suppliers, but instead seek to identify front-runner products (Table 3.3). For example, the EU Ecolabel is awarded to products that demonstrate lifecycle environmental performance equivalent to the top 10-20 % of products within the relevant category. Best practice for high requirement standards, such as ISO type-I environmental labels (14) and organic standards, is to promote their selection by consumers.
Table 3.3
Illustrative and non-exhaustive examples of front-runner ‘environmental product’ certification standards and product groups to which they apply
|
Standard |
Product groups |
|
Blue Angel EU Ecolabel Nordic Swan EU Energy Labelling (highest efficiency class) |
Non-food products |
|
Organic (as per Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 (15) and Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (16)). Includes GOTS, KRAV, Soil Association, BioSuisse, etc. |
Food and natural fibre products |
For widely applicable standards, a simple classification scheme is proposed, using some commonly-used standards as examples. Table 3.4 details proposed criteria that standards would mandate to products and their manufacturing in order for such standards to be considered ‘basic’, ‘improved’ or ‘exemplary’.
Table 3.4
Proposed classification criteria for ‘basic’, ‘improved’ and ‘exemplary’ standards for products sold by retailers
|
Basic |
Improved |
Exemplary |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Examples of basic, improved and exemplary environmental standards, and product groups to which they apply, are listed in Table 3.5, Table 3.6 and Table 3.7, respectively.
The Tables 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 contain illustrative and non-exhaustive examples that constitute no official endorsement of ‘basic’, ‘improved’ and ‘exemplary’ standards for product groups.
Table 3.5
Illustrative and non-exhaustive examples of ‘basic’ environmental standards and product groups to which they apply
|
Standard |
Product groups |
|
GlobalGAP (Good Agricultural Practice) and benchmarked standards |
Crops and livestock |
|
Oeko-Tex 1000 |
Textiles |
|
National/regional production certification (e.g. Red Tractor British origin certification) |
All products |
|
Red-listed fish (deselection) |
Fish |
Table 3.6
Illustrative and non-exhaustive examples of ‘improved’ environmental standards and initiatives and the product groups to which they apply
|
Standards and initiatives |
Product groups |
|
BCI (Better Cotton Initiative) |
Cotton products |
|
BCRSP (Basel Criteria on Responsible Soy Production) |
Soy (feed supporting dairy, egg and meat) |
|
BSI (Better Sugarcane Initiative) |
Sugar products |
|
4C (Common Code for the Coffee Community Association) |
Coffee |
|
Fair-trade |
Agricultural products from developing regions |
|
RA (Rainforest Alliance) |
Agricultural products from tropics |
|
RSPO (Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil) |
Palm oil products |
|
PEFC (Programme for the Endorsement of Forestry Certification) |
Wood and paper |
|
RTRS (Round Table on Responsible Soy) |
Soy (feed supporting dairy, egg and meat) |
|
UTZ |
Cocoa, coffee, palm oil, tea |
Table 3.7
Illustrative and non-exhaustive examples of ‘exemplary’ environmental standards and initiatives and the product groups to which they apply
|
Standard |
Product groups |
|
FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) |
Wood and paper |
|
MSC (Marine Stewardship Council) |
Wild-catch seafood |
Where widely-applicable environmental standards are not available, retailer best practice is to specify within contractual agreements environmental criteria that address supply chain environmental hotspots, or to intervene to improve supply chain performance through best practice dissemination and environmental performance benchmarking.
Any retailer can identify the most effective supply chain improvement mechanisms. For large retailers with own-brand products, all aspects of this BEMP can be implemented.
For small enterprises, this technique is restricted to identification of priority products for choice editing or green procurement based on third-party certification. Implementation of a systematic and targeted approach over time does not entail significant expenditure.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||
|
|
3.2.3. Choice editing and green procurement of priority product groups based on third party certification
BEMP is to exclude the most unsustainable products (e.g. endangered species), and require widespread (i.e. target of 100 % sales share) certification according to third party environmental standards for products that have been identified as priorities for environmental improvement. Environmental standards apply to products and/or suppliers, and are broadly classified as basic, improved or exemplary according to the rigour and comprehensiveness of environmental requirements (see Table 3.8 for illustrative and non-exhaustive examples). BEMP is to apply the highest level of widely-recognised environmental standard available.
Table 3.8
Illustrative and non-exhaustive examples of best practice underpinning benchmarks of excellence for this BEMP across product groups
|
Product group |
Best practice examples (actual or target sales shares for different standards) |
|
Coffee, tea |
100 % Fair-trade; 100 % 4C |
|
Fruit and vegetables |
100 % Global GAP |
|
Fats and oils |
100 % RSPO; 100 % RTRS |
|
Seafood |
100 % MSC |
|
Sugar |
100 % Fair-trade |
|
Textiles |
100 % BCI |
|
Wood and paper |
100 % FSC |
This BEMP applies to all retailers. The benchmark of excellence is expressed in relation to own-brand products sold by larger retailers.
Small enterprises without own-brand product ranges should avoid the most environmentally-damaging products (e.g. endangered species of fish) and stock branded products that have been certified according to relevant environmental standards (e.g. Table 3.3).
Third-party environmental standards may not cover all relevant environmental aspects and processes along the supply chain, and environmentally-rigorous, widely-applicable standards are not available for all product groups. Product groups not referred to in Table 3.8 may be targeted for supply chain improvement through the enforcement of product/supplier requirements, retailer intervention (e.g. supplier benchmarking) and the promotion of front-runner ‘eco products’, as described in subsequent BEMPs.
If environmental certification is specified as an ‘order qualifying’ criteria, compliance and certification costs are borne by suppliers and not passed on to retailers. However, best practice involves retailers providing support to existing suppliers to achieve certification, in which case costs are shared. For suppliers, compliance costs may be regarded as an investment to expand market acceptance of their products and possibly to implement price premiums. For retailers, additional costs associated with this technique may be balanced against supply chain risk reduction and potential pricing and marketing advantages.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||||||
|
|
3.2.4. Enforce environmental requirements for suppliers of priority product groups
BEMP is to establish environmental criteria for priority products and their suppliers, targeting identified environmental hotspots, and to enforce compliance of these criteria through product and supplier auditing.
This BEMP is applicable to large retailers and for own-brand priority products. Auditing of supplier environmental performance can be integrated into social auditing and product quality control systems to minimise additional costs. For suppliers, compliance costs may be balanced against improved security of demand and enhanced marketability for their products, and any price premiums they may consequently realise. For retailers, costs may be balanced against reduced reputational and medium-term business supply chain risks associated with unsustainable practices, and against price and marketing premiums they may consequently realise.
This BEMP is not applicable to small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||||||
|
|
3.2.5. Drive supplier performance improvement through benchmarking and best practice dissemination
BEMP is to drive supplier improvement by establishing information exchange systems that can be used to benchmark suppliers, and by disseminating better management practices. The latter aspect may assist supplier compliance with third party standards and retailer-defined criteria.
This BEMP is applicable to large retailers and for own-brand priority products. Retailers may offer suppliers a small price premium to encourage participation in improvement schemes, and pay for data collation and dissemination of better management practice techniques. These costs should be balanced against reduced reputational and medium-term business supply chain risks associated with unsustainable practices, and against price premiums that retailers may consequently implement. The dividends of any identified efficiency improvements may be shared with retailers through contractual agreement.
This BEMP is not applicable to small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||||||
|
|
3.2.6. Collaborative research and development to drive widespread supply chain improvement and innovation
BEMP is to strategically collaborate with other stakeholders to identify and develop innovative supply chain improvement options, and to develop widely accepted environmental standards.
Any large retailer with own-brand supply chains can collaborate with research institutes or consultancies to improve supply chain sustainability. Retailers may want to focus such research and development on product groups for which there are no existing commercially viable and widely applicable improvement options. This practice can be regarded as an investment in securing sustainable and economically competitive supply chains.
This BEMP is not applicable to small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmarks of excellence |
||||||
|
— |
3.2.7. Promote front-runner ecological products
BEMP is to promote front-runner certified ecological products. Awareness campaigns, sourcing, pricing, in-store positioning and advertising are important components of this technique, which can be effectively implemented through development of own-brand ecological ranges.
All retailers can stock and encourage consumption of front-runner ecological products. Large retailers can implement this technique more extensively, through the development of own-brand ecological ranges. Supplier costs associated with front-runner certification may be passed on to retailers. Certified front-runner ecological products are associated with significant price premiums and higher profit margins. Own-brand ecological ranges are also likely to increase a retailer's overall own-brand product sales through a positive ‘halo effect’.
This BEMP is applicable to small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmarks of excellence |
||||||||||||
|
|
3.3. Transport and logistics
3.3.1. Green procurement and environmental requirements for transport providers
BEMP is to integrate environmental performance and reporting criteria into the procurement of transport and logistics services provided by third parties, including requirements for implementation of BEMPs described in this document.
All retailers purchase at least part of their transport and logistics operations from third party providers, and can make purchasing decisions according to efficiency or environmental criteria. Nevertheless, improving the efficiency of transport and logistics operations reduces operating costs, and requires effective monitoring and reporting. Efficient third party transport providers may be able to offer lower cost services to retailers.
Small retailers are usually dependent on third party providers.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmarks of excellence |
||||||||||||
|
|
3.3.2. Efficiency monitoring and reporting for all transport and logistics operations
BEMP is to report on the efficiency and environmental performance of all transport and logistics operations between first-tier suppliers, distribution centres, retailers and waste management facilities, based on monitoring of in-house operations and data provided by third party operations.
This practice is applicable by all retailers. Reporting on in-house transport and logistics operations will only apply to larger retailers. Effective monitoring and reporting requires small investment in necessary information technology systems and management but can identify options to improve the efficiency of transport and logistics operations.
For small enterprises, basic data on average emission factors for different modes of transport are available to estimate emissions.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmarks of excellence |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
3.3.3. Integrate transport efficiency into sourcing decisions and packaging design
BEMP is to integrate transport efficiency into sourcing decisions and packaging design, based on life cycle assessment of products sourced from different regions, and through designing product packaging to maximise the density of transport units.
This practice is applicable to large retailers with own-brand ranges. It is highly dependent on product and source location, related to a multitude of sourcing factors. For packaging, increasing the density of packaged goods can considerably improve transport efficiency and therefore reduce transport costs.
This BEMP is not applicable to small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||||||
|
|
3.3.4. Shift towards more efficient transport modes
BEMP is to shift towards more efficient transport modes, especially rail, water-based transport and larger trucks, and to minimise air-freight, for as much of the transport distance as possible. The possibility to make such shifts may be limited to primary distribution, from supplier distribution centres (DCs) to retailer DCs, given that the first and final kms often necessitate road transport. Modal shifts therefore require optimisation of distribution networks to accommodate intermodal transfers (e.g. siting distribution centres with access to rail and water networks). Shifting from smaller to larger trucks, including trucks with double-deck trailers, is included in this technique owing to the considerably greater efficiency of large compared with small trucks. Modal shifts may also inform product sourcing decisions where transport represents a significant component of product lifecycle environmental impacts (considering all relevant lifecycle implications).
Table 3.9
Ranking of transport modes in order of environmental preference (highest first)
|
Ranking |
Transport mode |
|
1 |
Freight train |
|
2 |
Ocean ship |
|
3 |
Inland waterway |
|
4 |
Large truck |
|
5 |
Medium truck |
|
6 |
Small truck |
|
7 |
Air freight |
All retailers can take action to shift product transport onto less polluting modes, at least based on vehicle size, and most large retailers can shift at least some primary distribution from road to rail or water. However, achieving large-scale shifts in retail goods transport from road to rail and inland waterways will require improvements in national rail and waterway infrastructures and greater cross-border coordination by operating companies. Therefore, national transport infrastructure and policy (e.g. road pricing) can have a significant influence on retailers' scope for improvement and decision-making regarding transport mode.
It is not applicable to small enterprises, except where available procurement choices enable selection of more efficient transport modes for particular products.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmarks of excellence |
||||||||
|
|
3.3.5. Optimise the distribution network
BEMP is to optimise the distribution network through the systematic implementation of the most efficient of the following options: (i) strategic centralised hubs to accommodate rail and water-based transport, (ii) consolidated platforms, (iii) and direct routing.
This is applicable to large retailers with in-house transport and logistics services and for third party transport providers, especially when products are sourced over longer distances. This practice does not require significant investment. Building new central hubs integrated with rail and water-based transport networks does require significant investment. In both cases, increased loading efficiency and the use of more efficient modes for longer distance routes can significantly reduce operating costs.
It is not applicable to small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||||||||
|
|
3.3.6. Optimise route planning, use of telematics and driver training
BEMP is to optimise operational efficiency through efficient route planning, use of telematics, and driver training. Efficient route planning includes back-loading store delivery vehicles with waste and with supplier deliveries to distribution centres, and making night deliveries to avoid traffic congestion.
This is applicable to all products to be supplied to large retailers with in-house transport and logistics services, and for third party transport providers. Driver training usually produces savings of 5 % of fuel. Route optimisation may require significant investment in information technology, but can reduce capital investment costs (fewer trucks required) and significantly reduce operating (fuel) costs.
It is applicable to small enterprises if they have their own transport vehicles (e.g. delivery vans).
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmarks of excellence |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
3.3.7. Minimise the environmental impact of road vehicles through purchasing decisions and retrofit modifications
BEMP is to minimise the environmental impact of road vehicles through purchasing choices and retrofit modifications. This includes the purchase of alternatively powered vehicles, efficient and low-pollution vehicles and low-noise vehicles, aerodynamic modifications, and the application of low rolling resistance tyres.
This is applicable for all products to be supplied to large retailers with in-house transport and logistics services, and for third party transport providers. For vehicles driven long distances at higher speeds (> 80 km/h), small investments in aerodynamic modifications and larger investments to upgrade to more aerodynamic tractor and trailer units offer payback periods of up to two years. The same payback time periods apply to installing low rolling resistance tyres. Alternatively-powered vehicles require considerably higher investment costs.
It is applicable to small enterprises if they have their own transport vehicles (e.g. delivery vans).
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmarks of excellence |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
3.4. Waste management
3.4.1. Food waste minimization
BEMP is to integrate environmentally friendly practices to avoid food waste generation, such as monitoring, auditing, prioritising, logistic issues, better preservation mechanisms, in-store temperature and humidity control, distribution centres and delivery trucks, staff training, donation, advice to consumers, etc. and to avoid landfilling or incineration of food waste through fermentation processes.
This is a cost-efficient measure, applicable to food retailers of any size and in any Member State. However, policies may be in place to avoid/discourage food donation.
All small enterprises can apply preventive measures to avoid food waste generation. Management costs would be compensated by cost savings derived from less product losses and less generated waste.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||||||||||
|
|
3.4.2. Integration of waste management in retailers activities
BEMP is to integrate waste management practices where prevention is prioritised. Best practices include:
|
— |
In-house management practices:
|
|
— |
Organisation management practices:
|
The described techniques are applicable to any retailer. Best practices should be suitable to retailers managing a significant number of stores and distribution centres. The allocation of resources to the effective reduction of waste would be economically justified. Bulk transportation back to distribution centres would allow the reduction of the treatment cost if it is compared to the costs negotiated at local or store level.
Small enterprises producing a huge amount of wastes should allocate resources and train staff in good waste management practices.
Associated environmental performance indicator and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicator |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||
|
|
3.4.3. Return systems for PET and PE bottles and for used products
BEMP is to implement take-back systems and to integrate them in the company logistics, as, for example, for PET or PE bottles.
Food retailers, especially large chains, can implement this BEMP. It needs the allocation of resources, maintenance and equipment. In some countries it is already mandatory (e.g. Netherlands, Sweden and Germany).
For small enterprises, it requires extra resources for the daily operation of the return system.
Associated environmental performance indicator and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicator |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||
|
|
3.5. Use of less and certified/recycled paper for publications
BEMP is to reduce the impact through a decrease in the consumption of materials, such as paper optimisation for commercial publications, or the use of more environmentally friendly paper.
All retailers, especially large chains producing huge amounts of printed commercial publications, can benefit from the implementation of this BEMP. A well implemented practice to reduce paper consumption can lead to cost savings.
This BEMP is applicable to small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicators and benchmarks of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicators |
Benchmarks of excellence |
||||||||||||||||
|
|
3.6. Rainwater collection and reuse
BEMP is to collect and reuse and/or infiltrate on site rainwater from roofs and parking areas.
Retailers owning their own buildings and/or parking areas and in sites with the right conditions can implement this practice. Climatic conditions and standard rainwater collection system in the municipality can affect the application of this technique. It is a cost intensive measure.
This BEMP is applicable to small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicator and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicator |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||
|
|
3.7. Prevention of single-use plastic bags or other measures to influence consumer behaviour
BEMP is to influence consumers to reduce their environmental impact, through campaigns, such as the removal of plastic bags, responsible advertising and providing best guidance information to consumers.
All retailers can implement this practice. Usually, regulations are the main drivers for their implementation.
This BEMP is applicable to small enterprises.
Associated environmental performance indicator and benchmark of excellence
|
Environmental performance indicator |
Benchmark of excellence |
||||
|
|
4. RECOMMENDED SECTOR SPECIFIC KEY ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS
|
Indicator |
Common Units |
Short description |
Recommended minimum level of monitoring |
Related core indicator according to Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 (Section C.2) |
Benchmark of excellence and related best environmental management practice |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ENERGY PERFORMANCE |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
kWh/m2yr |
Energy use (electricity, heat, other fuels) per unit of sales area and year. Indications:
|
Per store (site), distribution centre or other and at the organisational level (aggregated value) Per main energy-consuming processes: heat, electricity for refrigeration (where applicable) and electricity for all other uses |
Energy efficiency |
Specific energy use per m2 of sales area for heating, cooling and air conditioning lower or equal to 0 kWh/m2yr if waste heat from refrigeration can be integrated. Otherwise, lower or equal to 40 kWh/m2yr for new buildings and 55 kWh/m2yr for existing buildings. (see BEMPs: 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.1.4) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
kWh/myr |
Energy use of the refrigeration system per linear metre of display case and year. Indications:
|
Per store (site) |
Energy efficiency |
Specific (linear) consumption of centralised refrigeration of 3 000 kWh/myr. (see BEMP: 3.1.6) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
W/m2 |
Installed lighting power to meet illumination needs (basic and for product presentation purposes) per unit of sales area and year. Indications:
|
Per store (site), distribution centre or other Per store area and per day period, where appropriate |
Energy efficiency |
Installed lighting power lower than 12 W/m2 for supermarkets and lower than 30 W/m2 for specialist shops. (see BEMP: 3.1.7) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
Percentage of stores monitored in the energy management system. Indications:
|
Per store (site) Per process |
Energy efficiency |
100 % of stores and processes monitored. Benchmarking mechanisms implemented. (see BEMPs: 3.1.5, 3.1.8) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
Loss of refrigerants in relation to total refrigerant load of the installation. Indications:
|
Per store (site), distribution centre or other and at the organisational level (aggregated value) Per type of refrigerant |
Emissions |
— (see BEMP: 3.1.6) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
Percentage of stores using natural refrigerants out of the total number of stores with refrigeration cabinets. Indications:
|
Organisation level |
Emissions |
General use of natural refrigerants. (see BEMP: 3.1.6) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
SUPPLY CHAIN PERFORMANCE |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(y/n) |
This indicator states whether supply chain improvement programmes are implemented systematically for priority product groups. Indications:
|
Organisation level, per product supply chain |
Supply chain environmental performance improvements cover:
|
Systematic implementation of supply chain improvement programmes across priority product groups. (see BEMP: 3.2.1) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(y/n) |
This indicator refers to the assessment of supply chain environmental impacts and to the identification of effective product supply chain improvement mechanisms. Indications:
|
Organisation level, per product supply chain |
Supply chain environmental performance improvements cover:
|
Implementation of systematic assessment (independently or through consortia) of core product supply chains. (see BEMP: 3.2.2) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Percentage sales of products certified to specified environmental performance level |
The following rates should be considered. Percentage sales of:
|
Organisation level, per product group |
The environmental standards address:
|
100 % certification, within a product group, according to third party environmental standards. 100 % private label sales, within a product group, complying with retailer-defined environmental standards. 10 % sales within food product groups certified as organic. 50 % cotton sales certified as organic. 10 % sales within non-food product groups certified according to official (ISO Type-I) ecolabels. (see BEMPs: 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5, 3.2.6, 3.2.7) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
TRANSPORT AND LOGISTICS PERFORMANCE |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MJ/tkm |
Direct fuel energy consumption per tonne kilometre transported, for total transport and by mode to compare modal options. Indications:
|
Organisation level Per transport mode and major route |
Energy efficiency Material efficiency |
— (see BEMPs: 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.5, 3.3.6, 3.3.7) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
kg CO2 eq./tkm |
Provides an indication of the environmental efficiency of transport operations. Indications:
|
Organisation level Per transport mode and major route Per fuel type |
Material efficiency Emissions |
— (see BEMPs: 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.5, 3.3.6, 3.3.7) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
kg CO2 eq./m3 (or pallet) delivered kg CO2 eq./per tonne product delivered |
Provides an indication of the final environmental impact of transport operations. This indicator reflects the distance the products are transported over. It is lower if the products are sourced locally/regionally. Indications:
|
Organisation level Per transport mode and major route Per product group |
Material efficiency Emissions |
— (see BEMPs: 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.5, 3.3.6, 3.3.7) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
This indicator shows the share of more efficient transport modes out of the total transport activities of the retailer. Indications:
|
Organisation level Per major route or at least distinguishing between transport over land and overseas transport |
Energy efficiency Material efficiency |
Over 50 % of transport over land between first-tier suppliers and retail distribution centres (tkm or sales value) is by inland water/rail (where infrastructure allows). Over 99 % of overseas transport, according to sales value, is by ship. (see BEMP: 3.3.4) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(y/n) |
This indicator reflects whether the retailer has implemented a systematic optimisation of its distribution networks through the implementation of strategic hub locations, consolidated platforms, and direct routing. This includes back-hauling waste and supplier deliveries on store deliveries return journeys, use of telematics, and extended delivery windows. |
Organisation level |
Energy efficiency Material efficiency |
Systematic optimisation of route planning. (see BEMP: 3.3.5, 3.3.6) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
Indications:
|
Organisation level |
Emissions |
100 % trucks comply with the EURO V standards. (see BEMP: 3.3.7) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
WASTE MANAGEMENT |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
kg/yr tonnes/yr kg/m2yr |
Weight of produced waste per year. Indications:
|
Organisation level Per type of waste: e.g. food waste, plastic, paper and cardboard, wood, metal, hazardous materials, etc. Per destination: reuse, external recycling, fermentation, donation, etc. |
Waste |
— (see BEMP: 3.4.1, 3.4.2) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
Percentage of food waste that is not sent to recovery operations, such as fermentation, out of the total food waste generated. |
Organisation level |
Waste |
0 % food waste sent to landfill or incineration. (see BEMP: 3.4.1) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
Weight of recycled materials divided by total amount of waste. Indications:
|
Organisation level |
Material efficiency Waste |
A waste management system is integrated in the store and its objective is to recycle or reuse 100 % of secondary packaging materials. (see BEMP: 3.4.2) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
Consumer return rate of product packaging, such as plastic bottles, and used products, such as batteries and electronic equipments, out of the total sales of such products. Indications:
|
Per type of returnable packaging/product |
Material efficiency Waste |
Consumer return of 80 % without deposit. Consumer return of 95 % with deposit. (see BEMP: 3.4.3) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
MATERIALS CONSUMPTION EXCLUDING REFRIGERANTS |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
Percentage of certified paper (e.g. FSC) or recycled paper used for commercial publications |
— |
Material Efficiency Waste |
100 % certified or recycled paper. (see BEMP: 3.5) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
WATER MANAGEMENT |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
% |
Percentage of stores with a system of rainwater collection and/or rainwater infiltration systems |
— |
Water |
Rainwater collection and/or on-site infiltration are integrated in the water management system. (see BEMP: 3.6) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
# |
Number of plastic bags given or sold at checkout counters. Indications:
|
Free one-use plastic bags, free one-use biodegradable plastic bags, sold one-use plastic bags, sold reusable bags |
Material Efficiency Wastes |
Zero single-use bags available at check-outs. (see BEMP: 3.7) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
(1) The scientific and policy report is publicly available on the JRC/IPTS website at the following address: http://susproc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/activities/emas/documents/RetailTradeSector.pdf The conclusions on best environmental management practices and their applicability as well as the identified specific environmental performance indicators and the benchmarks of excellence contained in this Sectoral Reference Document are based on the findings documented in the scientific and policy report. All the background information and technical details can be found there.
(2) Council Regulation (EEC) No 1836/93 of 29 June 1993 allowing voluntary participation by companies in the industrial sector in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (OJ L 168, 10.7.1993, p. 1).
(3) Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 allowing voluntary participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS) (OJ L 114, 24.4.2001, p. 1).
(4) Commission Decision 2013/131/EU of 4 March 2013 establishing the user's guide setting out the steps needed to participate in EMAS, under Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the voluntary participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS) (OJ L 76, 19.3.2013, p. 1).
(5) Regulation (EC) No 1893/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 establishing the statistical classification of economic activities NACE Revision 2 and amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 3037/90 as well as certain EC Regulations on specific statistical domains (OJ L 393, 30.12.2006, p. 1).
(6) This is an approximate classification of the nature of environmental aspects according to the definitions given in Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009. The direct or indirect nature of each environmental aspect should be assessed for each specific case.
(7) Those products manufactured by a company which are sold under another company's (e.g. a retailer's) brand. Own-brand products are also called private labels.
(8) A small enterprise is defined as an enterprise which employs fewer than 50 persons and whose annual turnover and/or annual balance sheet total does not exceed EUR 10 million (Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36)).
(9) This benchmark can also be seen in the light of the Directive 2010/31/EU on the energy performance of buildings and the national definitions of nearly zero energy buildings (NZEB). An illustration/example of this is a threshold 20 kWh/m2yr (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52013DC0483).
Note: under the Energy Efficiency Directive large enterprises have an obligation to undertake energy audits, carried out by qualified experts, every four years, the first by 5 December 2015.
(10) This benchmark should also be seen in light of the EU GPP criteria for retail indoor lighting, which is 3,5 W/m2/100 lux (core criteria) or 3,2 W/m2/100 lux (comprehensive criteria). See: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/pdf/criteria/indoor_lighting.pdf
(11) The energy management system can be part of EMAS.
(12) Alternatively, on-site or nearby renewable energy ratio according to prEN15603.
(13) Core products refer to high sales volume (by value) products.
Priority products, instead, are the ones high in both sales volume (by value) and environmental impact: Once a retailer has identified its core products, an environmental assessment of their foot-print is carried out and only the most relevant are considered.
(14) Type-I environmental labels: Third Party Certified Environmental Labelling (ISO 14024).
(15) Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products with regard to organic production, labelling and control (OJ L 250, 18.9.2008, p. 1).
(16) 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 (OJ L 189, 20.7.2007, p. 1).
(17) EURO VI standard for vehicle emissions entered into force at the end of 2012, therefore it may be considered as benchmark of excellence in the future years.
Corrigenda
|
22.5.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
L 127/61 |
Corrigendum to Definitive adoption (EU, Euratom) 2015/371 of Amending budget No 7 of the European Union for the financial year 2014
( Official Journal of the European Union L 73 of 17 March 2015 )
On page 516, in the column ‘New amount’, in the ‘Title 1 — OWN RESOURCES’ row:
for:
‘ 124 290 661 280 ’
read:
‘ 128 387 935 513 ’
and, in the ‘GRAND TOTAL’ row:
for:
‘ 134 936 959 482 ’
read:
‘ 139 034 233 715 ’
on page 518, in the column ‘New amount’, in the ‘Chapter 1 4’ and ‘Article 1 4 0’ rows:
for:
‘ 90 516 325 930 ’
read:
‘ 94 613 600 163 ’
and, in the ‘Title 1 — Total’ row:
for:
‘ 124 290 661 280 ’
read:
‘ 128 387 935 513 ’
on page 519, in the column ‘New amount’ of the table:
for:
‘ 90 516 325 930 ’
read:
‘ 94 613 600 163 ’