Japan EPD Program by SuMPO

Emission Factor Data Evaluation andOperation Rules(General Rules, Requirements, and Procedures)

Document ID: JR-05-05
Sustainable Management Promotion Organization
Revision history
Version

Date

Page

05

April 1, 2022-

Modifications due to changes in the program name.

04

October 1, 2019-

Modifications due to changes in the program operator.

03

July 17, 2019

Delete Appendix 1 and move Appendix 2 forward.

02

February 16, 2018

Review accompanying revisions to emission factor
classification.

01

April 28, 2017-

Details

Document created. Newly published following integrationof EcoLeaf Program and CFP Program.

JR-05-05

Table of Contents
Section 1 General Rules........................................................................................................ 3
1.1 Types of Emission Factor Data .................................................................................. 3
1.2 Requirements for Emission Factor ............................................................................. 3
1.3 Assessment Criteria for Emission Factor .................................................................... 3
1.4 Procedures for Emission Factor Assessment.............................................................. 3
1.5 Period of Validity and Review of Emission Factors ..................................................... 3
1.6 Provision of Emission Factor ...................................................................................... 4
1.7 Request for Revision to Registered Data by SuMPO .................................................. 4
1.8 Revocation of Registered Data ................................................................................... 4
1.9 Establishment of a Review Panel................................................................................ 4
1.10 Appointment of Emission Factor Evaluators............................................................... 4
Section 2 Requirements for Emission Factor ......................................................................... 4
Requirements for Emission Factor Data - A....................................................................... 5
Appendix 1 .................................................................................................................... 6
Requirements for Emission Factor Data - B....................................................................... 7
Section 3 Procedures for Emission Factor Assessment......................................................... 8
3.1 Procedures for Evaluating Registered Data ................................................................ 8
3.1.1 Evaluation policy .................................................................................................. 8
3.1.2 Documents used in evaluations ........................................................................... 8
3.1.3 Conducting evaluations ........................................................................................ 8
3.1.4 Evaluation results report ...................................................................................... 9
3.1.5 Confirmation and final decision by the review panel ............................................. 9
3.1.6 Confidentiality ...................................................................................................... 9
3.2 Updating and Modifying Registered Data.................................................................. 92

JR-05-05
These rules specify the evaluation and use of emission factor data used in the Japan EPD Programby SuMPO (the “Program”) implemented by the Sustainable Management Promotion Organization(“SuMPO”).
Section 1 General Rules
1.1 Types of Emission Factor Data
The two following types of emission factor data are covered in these rules.
(1) Designated database
The emission factor database IDEA v2 shall be used as a rule as the basis forquantification. The number of viewable values differs between licensed users of IDEA (those
who have purchased the program) and unlicensed users. The use of IDEA is stipulated
below. The use of emission factor databases other than IDEA is separately determined.
(a) Basic data: The emission factor data available to all businesses who have applied forverification is called basic data; the data selected by SuMPO from IDEA fall under thiscategory.
(b) Available data: Emission factor data selected additionally from IDEA with limits tocomplement the basic data is referred to as available data.
The total of (a) and (b) shall be within 1000 items of data. However, this limit shall not
apply to those with the right to use IDEA.
(c) Unavailable data: Data that are inappropriate for use in the Program set forth by SuMPO
are referred to as unavailable data.
(2) Registered data
If appropriate emission factors are not available in IDEA, the applicant shall generate
emission factors to supplement the database, and the emission factor data approved by areview panel is called registered data. Data used exclusively for a specific PCR are called
PCR emission factors.
1.2 Requirements for Emission Factor
Emission factor requirements are set forth in the “Requirements for Emission Factor” in Section 2of these rules.
1.3 Assessment Criteria for Emission Factor
Criteria for evaluating and using emission factors are specified in “JR-05S Emission Factor
Assessment Criteria”.
1.4 Procedures for Emission Factor Assessment
Procedures for evaluating and using emission factors are specified in “Procedures for Emission
Factor Assessment” in Section 3 of these rules.
1.5 Period of Validity and Review of Emission Factors
The validity period of the emission factors used in this Program shall be five years.
The designated database shall be reviewed by the technical working group once every five years
to ensure data quality.

3JR-05-05
SuMPO shall also review the classification of basic data and available data about once a year
based on emission factor data usage in the Program.
Registered data shall also be reviewed by the creator of the emission factor every five years intime for the review. Records of these reviews are managed by SuMPO as the emission factor list
revision history.
1.6 Provision of Emission Factor
SuMPO shall, as a rule, provide emission factor data to applicant businesses throughquantification tools.
1.7 Request for Revision to Registered Data by SuMPO
If SuMPO judges that changes to the registered data are required, it will prepare a proposal andissue a request for changes to the applicant business with the registered data.
1.8 Revocation of Registered Data
SuMPO may revoke registration of registered data when facts that do not suit the purpose of theProgram are discovered.
1.9 Establishment of a Review Panel
SuMPO shall establish a review panel to refer the final decision on the evaluation of registereddata. The review panel’s paperwork shall follow the “JR-03 Review Panel Establishment andOperation Rules”, prescribed separately.
1.10 Appointment of Emission Factor Evaluators
To refer evaluation of the registered data, SuMPO shall appoint an emission factor evaluator who
possesses knowledge of SuMPO’s emission factors, is an expert in LCA methodology, or an
external expert if necessary.

Section 2 Requirements for Emission Factor
The designated database must meet the “Requirements for Emission Factor Data - A”.
Registered data must meet the following “Requirements for Emission Factor Data - B” or“Requirements for Emission Factor Data - A” if necessary.

4Section 2 Requirements for Emission Factor

Requirements for Emission Factor Data - A
Emission factor data shall comply with all of the following requirements.
Conformity to recommendations is not a criterion for passing but is preferred.
Items(1) Basic Requirements for Data
1 ･ Author

Details

The author (organization) of the data and their contact
information are written

Supplementary remarks

The author (organization) of the data and their contact information are written on the report (the “Report”) describing registereddata submitted by the applicant for evaluation and how the data was created.

2 ･ Description of purpose and application The data is available for use in the Japan EPD Program byof data collection
SuMPO
3 ･ Naming of processes and flows
Generic names are used in description

There is nothing written in the Report that prevents the use of this data in the Japan EPD Program by SuMPO.

4 ･ Setting functional unit (reference flow) The functional unit is clear, and there is input and output foreach functional unit

The input/output per functional unit can be verified in the Report using a list of all item names and quantities for input/output flows
used in the data quantification (the “Input/Output Chart”).
(Example: The functional unit is clearly set, such as “per kg for product XX,” and input/output per functional unit can be verified
using the Input/Output Chart.)

5 ･ RepresentativenessThe names of data written in the Report are not specific product names or other proper nouns, but generic names.

The input/output data represents the appropriate target region, “...represents the target region, time period, and technology appropriately” means that, unless otherwise specified, the target
time period, and technology
region is Japan, the target time period does not significantly deviate from the present, and target technology is technology thatexists in reality. When specifying a different target region, time period, or technology when creating data, the basis for doing so
can be verified in the Report. However, specific coverage ratios are not required.

Requirement or
recommendation

Mandatory
Mandatory
Mandatory

Mandatory

Mandatory

6 ･ System boundary

System boundaries are written

The Report includes an outline of the applicable system boundaries in a chart or in the text.

7

Process charts are available

If the process in question covers multiple single operations (Example: cutting, finishing, washing, etc.), the main procedures andcontents of these operations can be verified in the Report.

Recommended

8 ･ Types of impact evaluation

Elementary flow input/output is written in a flowchart of each
substance prior to characterization results

Numerical values for elementary flow are described in the Report not by CO 2 equivalent (CO2e), but by each emission, such as
CO2, CH4, N2O, etc. However, COD can be used as an indicator for emissions to the hydrosphere.

Recommended

An input/output flow in which the global warming impact
category can be evaluated is written

For climate change, CO2 and CH4 emissions are listed. However, when there are no direct emissions from chemical reactions,etc., listing the fuel/electric usage amount is considered equivalent.

Mandatory

Mandatory

9 ･ Elementary flow for subjects ofinvestigation

Data covering the important elementary flow for the presumed There are no omissions in major elementary flow usage volume/emissions volume. For example, in climate change, the Report
impact categories are collected
includes the data or a comment (including “unknown”) for all GHGs described in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. In particular,
for greenhouse gases other than CO2, it clearly states that all of them are excluded from evaluation, or that some have been cut
off.

10

Other impact categories, including important elementary flows, Elementary flow is listed for impact categories other than those subject to evaluation.
are written

11 ･ Handling of infrastructure andequipment
12 ･ Definition and handling of direct
department and indirect department

Whether data includes the flow of infrastructure and equipment The Report describes the flow of infrastructure and equipment installation. (“Unknown” is an option.) Those are included can be
is written
verified in the Input/Output Chart.

Mandatory

Whether data includes the flow of the company's activities and The Report describes the flow of the company's activities and services (personnel, financial, public relations, management,
services (personnel, financial, public relations, management,
research and development, environmental departments, business trips, etc.). (“Unknown” is an option.) Those are included canresearch and development, environmental departments,
be verified in the Input/Output Chart.
business trips, etc.) is written

Mandatory

13 ･ Cut-off

How cut-offs are handled is written

The Report clearly states criteria for cut-off.

Mandatory

14 ･ Modeling method

An average value or representative value is used

It can be verified that “average values or representative values from general manufacturing methods are used in modeling” in theReport.

Mandatory

15 ･ Sensitivity checkSensitivity checks are conducted for the elements that
contribute significantly to calculation results

It can be verified that “an investigation was conducted on the extent to which highly variable elements, such as estimated values,
Recommended
affect the quantification of emission factors” in the Report.

16 ･ Limitations

Limitations are explained

The Report describes precautions for using data.
(Example: This data is an annual average; note that there may be large differences due to seasonal fluctuation.)

19 ･ Scope

The scope of the processes is within the scope of the data
creator’s responsibility

The Report describes “the scope of responsibility of data registrant”.

20

Public electricity is quantified separately from the processes

When public electricity is entered, the amount of electricity (kWh, etc.) is described and can be verified in the Input/Output Chart.

Mandatory

21

The balance between input/output can be verified

The balance between input/output can be verified using the Input/Output Chart. If there are flows where input/output is nothabitually described due to the difficulties of data collection (e.g., input of oxygen (O 2), water evaporation, dissolution in
wastewater, etc.), write that in the Report.

Mandatory･ Input/Output flow

Mandatory

Recommended

Recommended
Mandatory

22

Input/output flows that significantly impact results are notmissing

The Input/Output Chart can be used to verify whether main materials or other input/output flows are missing.

23

The flows for auxiliary materials, indirect input, etc. arequantified as well as the flow of main materials

Auxiliary material and indirect input flows assumed to occupy more than 10% of total input/output can be verified for mass andenergy in the Input/Output Chart. When 20% is unknown, it is regarded as nonconformity, and the reason should be written in thecomment column of the evaluation report.

24 ･ General data quality
25 ･ Collection method

Quality is evaluated in the data quality chart (Appendix 1)

Self-checks using the data quality chart and the validity of those results is written in the Report.

The data collection method is written

The Report provides a concise outline of data collection methods.

26

Quantification is performed based on actual operation data

The fact that calculations are made using actual annual performance data can be verified in the Report. (No need to check actual
Recommended
operation data.)

27 ･ Information on time

The data collection period or base year is written

The Report describes the data collection period or base year.

Mandatory

28

Data collection period

The fact that the main data were collected during any one year of the most recent five-year period, or within a range with anequivalent level of validity, can be verified in the Report.

Mandatory

29 ･ Geographic information

The region for data collection is written

The Report states that the target region is “all of Japan”. However, when specifying a target region in Japan, the basis for doing
so can be verified in the Report.

Mandatory

30 ･ Accuracy

Accuracy is written

The Report describes data errors, etc. (Example: standard deviation, probability density distribution graph, etc.)

31 ･ Integrity

Integrity is written

The Report describes the scope of assessment on the integrity of input/output flows that should be collected. This should also be
Recommended
consistent with the actual status of input/output checked in sections 22 and 23.

Mandatory

Mandatory
Recommended
Mandatory

Recommended

32 ･ Methods of estimating insufficient data When input/output flows that are considered important are
unknown, they are complemented using some method of
estimation which is written
33 ･ Handling of carbon offsetting
Reduction by carbon offsetting is not included

If the missing data is supplemented using some form of estimation for confirmation items 22, 23, and 31, then the method of
estimation used is written in the Report and can be verified. The validity of the estimation can be verified for items 22, 23, and 31. Recommended

34 ･ Handling of green electricity

Reduction based on a green electricity certificate is notincluded

The fact that reduction based on a green electricity certificate is not included can be verified in the Report.

35 ･ The effects of carbon fixation within
products
36 ･ Handling of GHG from biomass

The effects of carbon fixation within products are not included
in quantification, regardless of the carbon fixation period

The fact that the effects of carbon fixation within products are not included in quantification, regardless of the carbon fixation
period, can be verified in the Report.

37 ･ Allocation (multifunctional processes)

The balance of input/output quantities can be verified in theprocess before allocation

38

The fact that reduction by carbon offsetting is not included can be verified in the Report.

Renewable bio-derived CO2 is a separate elementary flow as The fact that renewable bio-derived CO2 is a separate elementary flow as biomass-derived basic flow can be verified in thebiomass-derived CO2
Report.
If there is an allocation, the balance of input/output quantities can be verified in the pre-allocation process using the Input/Output
Chart. However, when it is difficult to obtain pre-allocation data, such as with data created from statistics, the balance of the postallocation process data input/output flow and the data processing method can be verified in the Report.

Mandatory
Mandatory
Mandatory
Recommended

Mandatory

The following order of priority is used in consideration: avoid
The fact that the order of allocation on the left is used when performing allocation can be verified in the Report.
allocation (subdivision of a process), physical criteria, introduce
substitute system, and other criteria (social/economic criteria)

Mandatory

39

Allocation procedures are written

Mandatory

40 ･ Handling of land use (modifications)

When including land use (modifications) in the scope ofWhen including land use (modifications) in the scope of assessment, the Report states that evaluation methods established byassessment, evaluation methods established by IPCC or other IPCC or other public organizations are used.
public organizations are used(2) Handling of Upstream Processes and Emissions Treatment Processes
41 ･ Data source
Key secondary data are consistent with the basic data andavailable data of the Japan EPD Program by SuMPO

The fact that the method of section 38 is used when performing allocation can be verified in the Report.

The fact that key secondary data are consistent with the basic data and available data of the Japan EPD Program by SuMPO
can be verified in the Report.

Mandatory

42

The source or the quantification procedures are written

43

Data other than the basic data and available data of the Japan The Report clearly states that information such as the methods for creating major secondary data other than the basic data and
EPD Program by SuMPO is of sufficient quality to comply with available data of the Japan EPD Program by SuMPO and all items meet the criteria.
the verification criteria

Recommended

Processes that emit GHGs over a long period of time (e.g.,
landfill process, etc.), are considered to have persistentemissions

Recommended

44 ･ Time-related evaluation range

The name of the database used, the order of priority when using data, and a list of data sources can be verified in the Report.

Recommended

The report clearly states that processes that emit GHGs over a long period of time (e.g., landfill process, etc.), are considered tohave persistent emissions.

*1 These verification criteria will be revised as needed.
*2 The items listed in (2) are to be verified only when aggregated process data (such as emission factors) are provided.

Conformity to Recommendations:

items

Mandatory

Appendix 1

Data Quality Chart

Technology-based evaluation

Region-based evaluation

Time-based evaluation

Representativeness evaluation

Reliability evaluation

Score

1

2

3

4

5

Data generated based on Data modeled andactual measurements
generated based on
physical and chemical
theories, or, data thatconsiders the input ofsecondary raw materials
using statistics, etc.

Data modeled andgenerated based on
hypotheses

Hypothetical data
Estimated data
(Example: inferences byindustry experts); dataobtained from theoreticalinformation(stoichiometry, enthalpy,etc.)･ Data obtained throughactual measurement･ Data generated fromstatistics only, with
sufficient data collection･ Data obtained throughprocess simulator･ Data generated fromstatistics that have been
supplemented (withvalidation)･ Data from interindustry
relations analysis

Data created based on
chemical reactions andpatent information. Yield,energy loss, etc. are set
based on hypotheses･ Data created statisticallyor individually based only
on theoretical calculations
in which yield, energy loss,
etc. cannot be set
sufficiently･ Data inferred from similar
processes, etc., withminimal supplementation･ Example: data createdfrom main materials andenergy input inmanufacturing designs in
handbooks, etc.

Data that isrepresentative of almost
all production volume forthe target products

Data that isrepresentative of at least
50% or more of
production volume thetarget products

Data representing lessthan 50%, or data that
represents more than
50% but seasonal
fluctuations, etc., havenot been equalized

Data representative of
one site, or data several
sites but over a shortperiod of time

Data that is unclear as towhat site it represents, ordata from very few sites
over a short period oftime･ Almost 100% of the data ･ More than 50% of theon production volume ofdata on production volume
target products is collected of target products iscollected･ Data created fromenvironmental reports ofseveral major companies
and other sources･ Individual data and theaverage of several facilities
when manufacturers of thetarget product are limited･ Individual data of several
facilities whenmanufacturers of the target
product are limited･ Data with a short survey
period that has not beenequalized and cannot becalled an annual average

Data newer than the base Data from within 6 years
year or data from the past of the base year
3 years

Data from within 10 years Data from within 15 years Data 15 years or olderof the base yearof the base year
than the base year orfrom an unknown year

* For multi-year averages,
the final base year is usedin evaluation* Base year is defined as
two years prior to the yearof application
Data from the target
regionAverage data for a region Data for a range smallerthat includes the target
than the target region
region, but is larger than
the target region･ Data generated fromstatistics of the target
region･ Data created where thevalid range is defined as
the entire target region･ Data for the entire world(global average), data for
Asia･ High volume ofindividually created data

Created using data fromall production
technologies for thetarget product

Data was created from the Data was created frommain productionsome of the production
technologies for thetechnologies for thetarget product, but some target product, but thetechnologies were notmain production
considered
technologies were notconsidered, or it was thesame technology but atthe laboratory level･ Data with marketability(mass production, actual
equipment) and versatility･ Data on factories incommercial operation that
already have marketability
and versatility･ The technologies have
･ Data without marketability
marketability and versatility, or versatility
but data are created in partby substituting other similar
technologies (Example:
substituting the processing
technology)

Upper row: quality criteria by pedigree matrix
Lower row: examples to clarify the criteria

Data for an unknown
region or data from adifferent region

The production
technology of the target
product is based on
different technologies atthe laboratory level

Section 2 Requirements for Emission Factor

Requirements for Emission Factor Data - B
PCR emission factor data must conform to the following two requirements.
<Requirements>（1） More than 35 points scored in Table 1.
（2） Meets all requirements in Table 2.
Table 1. Data Source Scoring Table
No

1

2

3

Items

Data source that serves asevidence

Explanations on emission
factor data processing
methods

Creator of emission factor
data

Selection

Score

Process analysis method (volume)
Statistics (volume)
Input/Output Chart (monetary value, including
hybrid methods)
Unknown
Academic paper (peer-reviewed)
Public reports (not peer-reviewed, mass balancecan be viewed)･ Public reports (not peer-reviewed, mass balancecannot be viewed)･ Private reports (with third party checks)
Other/unknown
National research institutes or other publicorganization or industry association
Organizations with expertise in the LCA of theapplicable product area
OthersUnknown

18
15
10
0
20
15
10
0
20
15
10
0

Table 2. Validity Verification Items
No
1

Verification items
Source validity2

Quantification method
validity3

Validity of values

Details･ The data source, creator, geographical region, andpublishing methods are clear.
･ There are no major discrepancies between input andoutput of substances in processes related to the target
product when mass balance is viewable using the process
analysis method (verification not required when massbalance is not viewable).
･ For agricultural products, N2O and CH4 emissions arehandled properly.
･ There are no other obvious mistakes or miscalculationsin the quantification process.
･ There are no significant deviations found by comparison
with the values of the related basic data (if unavailable,
then other similar data). If there are deviations, validity of
the reasons.

JR-05-04
Section 3 Procedures for Emission Factor Assessment
3.1

Procedures for Evaluating Registered Data

3.1.1 Evaluation policy
As a rule, the results of the applicant's self-check on conformity with “Requirements for Emission
Factor Data - B” (and “Requirements for Emission Factor Data - A” if necessary) and the consistencyof substantiating documents will undergo evaluation by an emission factor evaluator and the review
panel.
3.1.2 Documents used in evaluations
The following documents will be used for the evaluation. Additional materials may be requested
from the data provider when the content of the substantiating documents is insufficient.
(1) Items to be prepared by SuMPO･ Requirements for Emission Factor･ Confirmation result report form
(2) Items to be prepared by the applicant
The following documents are collectively referred to as the “Registered data applicationform”:･ Registered data application･ Registered data checklist (self-check results report)･ Registered data information sheet･ Reports on registered data creation methods (substantiating documents)･ Revised PCR draft (when using registered data as PCR emission factor)
Includes the name, unit, emission factor data value (displays number of digits, etc.)(not required), information source, and scope of registered data
3.1.3 Conducting evaluations
An emission factor evaluator appointed by SuMPO will evaluate documents based on the
documents submitted by the applicant. Additional documents may be obtained and verified, and inperson evaluation with the data provider may be conducted as needed.
(1) Conformity to requirements for registered data
<Step 1>
Conformity to Requirements for Emission Factor Data - B
Confirm that the items listed in the checklist meet the following requirements.
･ All required items are “Conforming”, and their basis (citation of substantiating documents)
is appropriate.
＜Step 2>
Conformity to Requirements for Emission Factor Data - A
If deemed inappropriate in Step 1 above, conformity to the Requirements for Emission
Factor Data - A will be checked.

8JR-05-04
3.1.4 Evaluation results report
The emission factor evaluator will prepare and submit an emission factor evaluation report to
SuMPO.
If there are any issues like those below that may require discussion by the review panel, theexplanation and rationale for this shall be included in the emission factor evaluation report.
･ When substantiating documents are deemed inappropriate, or it is unclear whether they areappropriate･ When the value of the data under evaluation is deemed inappropriate in comparison with otherdata under evaluation, or it is unclear whether it is appropriate･ When there are other matters that may require discussion
3.1.5 Confirmation and final decision by the review panel
The review panel shall check and make a final decision based on the emission factor results
report. The applicant shall not, as a rule, participate in the review panel.
SuMPO shall notify the representative of the application of the review panel’s decision.
3.1.6 Confidentiality
The substantiated data checked by the review panel shall not, as a rule, be made public.
3.2

Updating and Modifying Registered Data

Should it become necessary to update or revise the content of the registered data, such as torevise or add a supplementary note to the name, value, unit of the emission factor data, or range ofemission factor due to reporting or suggestion from businesses, SuMPO shall, at its discretion, makea request to the applicant for change or revoke registered data as needed.

End of document.

9