# Official Journal L 127/2015

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 127 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5822 May 2015 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 127

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5822 May 2015

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | 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 | 1 |
| | * | 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)) | 5 |
| | * | 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)) | 6 |
| | * | 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)) | 7 |
| | * | 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)) | 8 |
| | * | 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 (
  1
  ) | 9 |
| | | 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 | 17 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | 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 | 19 |
| | * | 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 (
  1
  ) | 20 |
| | * | 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) | 22 |
| | * | 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)

   (
  1
  ) | 25 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

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

1

*

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))

5

*

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))

6

*

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))

7

*

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))

8

*

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 (
  1
  )

1

9

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

17

DECISIONS

*

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

19

*

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 (
  1
  )

1

20

*

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)

22

*

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)

   (
  1
  )

(notified under document C(2015) 3234)

1

25

| | | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Corrigendum to Definitive adoption (EU, Euratom) 2015/371 of Amending budget No 7 of the European Union for the financial year 2014 ( OJ L 73, 17.3.2015 ) | 61 |

Corrigenda

*

Corrigendum to Definitive adoption (EU, Euratom) 2015/371 of Amending budget No 7 of the European Union for the financial year 2014 ( OJ L 73, 17.3.2015 )

( OJ L 73, 17.3.2015 )

61

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| 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. |
| --- | --- |

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 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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.

1

(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).

2

(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).

3

---

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 ’ |

(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 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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). |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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.

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).

2

(3)  OJ C 468, 31.12.2014, p. 10.

3

---

| 22.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 127/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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). |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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.

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).

2

(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).

3

(4)  OJ C 466, 30.12.2014, p. 8.

4

---

| 22.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 127/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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). |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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.

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).

2

(3)  OJ C 468, 31.12.2014, p. 2.

3

---

| 22.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 127/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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). |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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.

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).

2

(3)  OJ C 463, 23.12.2014, p. 20.

3

---

| 22.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 127/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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. |
| --- | --- |

(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). |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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’). |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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.

1

(2)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 74.

2

(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).

3

(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).

4

(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).

5

(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).

6

(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).

7

---

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: | Benton County |

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:

Benton County

| | Franklin County |
| --- | --- |

Franklin County

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):

| (a) | North: Beginning at the intersection of US 97 WA 20 and S. Janis Road, turn right onto S. Janis Road. Turn left onto McLaughlin Canyon Road, then right onto Hardy Road, then turn left onto Chewilken Valley Road. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

North: Beginning at the intersection of US 97 WA 20 and S. Janis Road, turn right onto S. Janis Road. Turn left onto McLaughlin Canyon Road, then right onto Hardy Road, then turn left onto Chewilken Valley Road.

| (b) | East: From Chewilken Valley Road, turn right onto JH Green Road, then left onto Hosheit Road, then left onto Tedrow Trail Road, then left onto Brown Pass Road to the boundary line of the Colville Tribe. Follow the Colville Tribe boundary west and then south until it crosses US 97 WA 20. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

East: From Chewilken Valley Road, turn right onto JH Green Road, then left onto Hosheit Road, then left onto Tedrow Trail Road, then left onto Brown Pass Road to the boundary line of the Colville Tribe. Follow the Colville Tribe boundary west and then south until it crosses US 97 WA 20.

| (c) | South: Turn right onto US 97 WA 20, then left onto Cherokee Road, then right onto Robinson Canyon Road. Turn left onto Bide A Wee Road, then left onto Duck Lake Road, then right onto Soren Peterson Road, then left onto Johnson Creek Road, then right onto George Road. Turn left onto Wetherstone Road, then right onto Eplay Road. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

South: Turn right onto US 97 WA 20, then left onto Cherokee Road, then right onto Robinson Canyon Road. Turn left onto Bide A Wee Road, then left onto Duck Lake Road, then right onto Soren Peterson Road, then left onto Johnson Creek Road, then right onto George Road. Turn left onto Wetherstone Road, then right onto Eplay Road.

| (d) | West: From Eplay Road, turn right onto Conconully Road/6th Avenue N., then left onto Green Lake Road, then right onto Salmon Creek Road, then right onto Happy Hill Road, then left onto Conconully Road (turns into Main Street). Turn right onto Broadway, then left onto C Street, then right onto Lake Street E, then right onto Sinlahekin Road, then right onto S. Fish Lake Road, then right onto Fish Lake Road. Turn left onto N. Pine Creek Road, then right onto Henry Road (turns into N. Pine Creek Road), then right onto Indian Springs Road, then right onto Hwy 7, ending at US 97 WA 20. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

West: From Eplay Road, turn right onto Conconully Road/6th Avenue N., then left onto Green Lake Road, then right onto Salmon Creek Road, then right onto Happy Hill Road, then left onto Conconully Road (turns into Main Street). Turn right onto Broadway, then left onto C Street, then right onto Lake Street E, then right onto Sinlahekin Road, then right onto S. Fish Lake Road, then right onto Fish Lake Road. Turn left onto N. Pine Creek Road, then right onto Henry Road (turns into N. Pine Creek Road), then right onto Indian Springs Road, then right onto Hwy 7, ending at US 97 WA 20.

WGM

VIII

P2

29.1.2015

POU, RAT

N

P2

US-2.4

State of Washington:

Okanogan County (2):

| (a) | North: Beginning where US Hwy 97 intersects with the Canadian border, continue East along the Canadian border, then turn right onto 9 Mile Road (County Hwy 4777). |
| --- | --- |

(a)

North: Beginning where US Hwy 97 intersects with the Canadian border, continue East along the Canadian border, then turn right onto 9 Mile Road (County Hwy 4777).

| (b) | East: From 9 Mile Road, turn right onto Old Hwy 4777, which turns South onto Molson Road. Turn right onto Chesaw Road, then left onto Forest Service 3525, then left onto Forest Development Road 350, which turns into Forest Development Road 3625. From there, head due west and turn left onto Forest Service 3525, then right onto Rone Road, then right onto Box Spring Road, then left onto Mosquito Creek Road, and then right onto Swanson Mill Road. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

East: From 9 Mile Road, turn right onto Old Hwy 4777, which turns South onto Molson Road. Turn right onto Chesaw Road, then left onto Forest Service 3525, then left onto Forest Development Road 350, which turns into Forest Development Road 3625. From there, head due west and turn left onto Forest Service 3525, then right onto Rone Road, then right onto Box Spring Road, then left onto Mosquito Creek Road, and then right onto Swanson Mill Road.

| (c) | South: From Swanson Mill Road, turn left onto O'Neil Road, then merge south onto US 97. Turn right onto Ellis Forde Bridge Road, then left onto Janis Oroville (SR 7), then right onto Loomis Oroville Road, then right onto Wannacut Lake Road, then left onto Ellemeham Mountain Road, then left onto Earth Dam Road, then left onto an unnamed road, then right onto an unnamed road, then right onto another unnamed road, then left onto an unnamed road, and then left onto another unnamed road. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

South: From Swanson Mill Road, turn left onto O'Neil Road, then merge south onto US 97. Turn right onto Ellis Forde Bridge Road, then left onto Janis Oroville (SR 7), then right onto Loomis Oroville Road, then right onto Wannacut Lake Road, then left onto Ellemeham Mountain Road, then left onto Earth Dam Road, then left onto an unnamed road, then right onto an unnamed road, then right onto another unnamed road, then left onto an unnamed road, and then left onto another unnamed road.

| (d) | West: From the unnamed road, turn right onto Loomis Oroville Road, then left onto Smilkameen Road to the Canadian Border. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

West: From the unnamed road, turn right onto Loomis Oroville Road, then left onto Smilkameen Road to the Canadian Border.

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:

| | Canyon County |
| --- | --- |

Canyon County

| | Payette County |
| --- | --- |

Payette County

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:

| (a) | North: 2,5 miles east from intersection between State Hwy. 108 and Williams Road. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

North: 2,5 miles east from intersection between State Hwy. 108 and Williams Road.

| (b) | North-east: 1,4 miles south-east from intersection between Rock River Dr. and Tulloch Road. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

North-east: 1,4 miles south-east from intersection between Rock River Dr. and Tulloch Road.

| (c) | East: 2,0 miles north-west from intersection between Milpitas Road and Las Cruces Road. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

East: 2,0 miles north-west from intersection between Milpitas Road and Las Cruces Road.

| (d) | South-east: 1,58 miles east of the north end of Rushing Road. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

South-east: 1,58 miles east of the north end of Rushing Road.

| (e) | South: 0,70 miles south of intersection between State Highway 132 and Crabtree Road. |
| --- | --- |

(e)

South: 0,70 miles south of intersection between State Highway 132 and Crabtree Road.

| (f) | South-west: 0,8 miles south-east of intersection between Hazel Dean Road and Loneoak Road. |
| --- | --- |

(f)

South-west: 0,8 miles south-east of intersection between Hazel Dean Road and Loneoak Road.

| (g) | West: 2,5 miles south-west of intersection between Warnerville Road and Tim Bell Road. |
| --- | --- |

(g)

West: 2,5 miles south-west of intersection between Warnerville Road and Tim Bell Road.

| (h) | North-west: 1,0 mile south-east of intersection between CA-120 and Tim Bell Road. |
| --- | --- |

(h)

North-west: 1,0 mile south-east of intersection between CA-120 and Tim Bell Road.

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:

| (a) | North: 0,58 miles north of Kansas Avenue

  NE: 0,83 miles east from CA-43. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

North: 0,58 miles north of Kansas Avenue

NE: 0,83 miles east from CA-43.

| (b) | East: 0,04 miles east from 5th Avenue |
| --- | --- |

(b)

East: 0,04 miles east from 5th Avenue

| (c) | South-east: 0,1 miles east of intersection between Paris Avenue and 7th Avenue |
| --- | --- |

(c)

South-east: 0,1 miles east of intersection between Paris Avenue and 7th Avenue

| (d) | South: 1,23 miles north of Redding Avenue |
| --- | --- |

(d)

South: 1,23 miles north of Redding Avenue

| (e) | South-west: 0,6 miles west of intersection of Paris Avenue and 15th Avenue |
| --- | --- |

(e)

South-west: 0,6 miles west of intersection of Paris Avenue and 15th Avenue

| (f) | West: 1,21 miles east of 19th Avenue |
| --- | --- |

(f)

West: 1,21 miles east of 19th Avenue

| (g) | North-west: 0,3 miles north of intersection of Laurel Avenue and 16th Avenue |
| --- | --- |

(g)

North-west: 0,3 miles north of intersection of Laurel Avenue and 16th Avenue

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:

| | Jasper County |
| --- | --- |

Jasper County

| | Barton County |
| --- | --- |

Barton County

WGM

VIII

P2

8.3.2015

POU, RAT

N

P2

US-2.12

State of Missouri:

| | Moniteau County |
| --- | --- |

Moniteau County

| | Morgan County |
| --- | --- |

Morgan County

WGM

VIII

P2

9.3.2015

POU, RAT

N

P2

US-2.13

State of Arkansas:

| | Boone County |
| --- | --- |

Boone County

| | Marion County |
| --- | --- |

Marion County

WGM

VIII

P2

11.3.2015

POU, RAT

N

P2

US-2.14

State of Kansas:

| | Leavenworth County |
| --- | --- |

Leavenworth County

| | Wyandotte County |
| --- | --- |

Wyandotte County

WGM

VIII

P2

13.3.2015

POU, RAT

N

P2

US-2.15

State of Kansas:

| | Cherokee County |
| --- | --- |

Cherokee County

| | Crawford County |
| --- | --- |

Crawford County

WGM

P2

9.3.2015

POU, RAT

N

P2

US-2.16

State of Montana:

| | Judith Basin County |
| --- | --- |

Judith Basin County

| | Fergus County |
| --- | --- |

Fergus County

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.

1

(2)  Only commodities produced after this date may be imported into the Union.’

2

---

| 22.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 127/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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

---

(1)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

1

(2)  OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.

2

---

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 |

(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 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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

---

(1)  OJ L 297, 31.10.1988, p. 10.

1

(2)  OJ L 297, 31.10.1988, p. 21.

2

---

| 22.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 127/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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.

1

(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).

2

---

| 22.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 127/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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; |
| --- | --- |

(1)

in Article 4, paragraph 4 is deleted;

| (2) | Article 6 is amended as follows:






  (a) | the following paragraph is inserted:
  ‘1a.   The Head of Mission shall be the representative of EUBAM Libya in its area of responsibility. The Head of Mission may delegate management tasks relating to staff and financial matters to staff members of EUBAM Libya under his/her overall responsibility.’; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(2)

Article 6 is amended as follows:

(a)

the following paragraph is inserted:

‘1a.   The Head of Mission shall be the representative of EUBAM Libya in its area of responsibility. The Head of Mission may delegate management tasks relating to staff and financial matters to staff members of EUBAM Libya under his/her overall responsibility.’

| (b) | paragraphs 4 and 8 are deleted; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

paragraphs 4 and 8 are deleted;

| (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.’; |
| --- | --- |

(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.’; |
| --- | --- |

(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.’; |
| --- | --- |

(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:






  — | provided for in the financial statement relating to this Decision, or |
| --- | --- | --- |

(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:

—

provided for in the financial statement relating to this Decision, or

| — | integrated during the mandate by means of an amendment to the financial statement requested by the Head of Mission. |
| --- | --- |

—

integrated during the mandate by means of an amendment to the financial statement requested by the Head of Mission.

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.’. |
| --- | --- |

(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).

1

(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).

2

---

| 22.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 127/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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. |
| --- | --- |

(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, |
| --- | --- |

(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

---

(1)  OJ L 342, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 358, 8.12.2011, p. 2.

2

---

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 761/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3),

| — | Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

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.

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 |

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 energy performance, including refrigerants management

| — | BEMPs to improve the environmental sustainability of retail supply chains |
| --- | --- |

—

BEMPs to improve the environmental sustainability of retail supply chains

| — | BEMPs to improve transport and logistics operations |
| --- | --- |

—

BEMPs to improve transport and logistics operations

| — | BEMPs concerning waste |
| --- | --- |

—

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). |
| --- | --- |

—

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 |

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

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i1) | Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i1)

Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year.

| (i2) | Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year in terms of primary energy. |
| --- | --- |

(i2)

Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year in terms of primary energy.

| (b1) | 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 recovered. Otherwise, lower or equal to 40 kWh/m2yr for new buildings and 55 kWh/m2yr for existing buildings (9). |
| --- | --- |

(b1)

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 recovered. Otherwise, lower or equal to 40 kWh/m2yr for new buildings and 55 kWh/m2yr for existing buildings (9).

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i1) | Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i1)

Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year.

| (i2) | Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year in terms of primary energy. |
| --- | --- |

(i2)

Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year in terms of primary energy.

| (b1) | 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 recovered. Otherwise, lower or equal to 40 kWh/m2yr for new buildings and 55 kWh/m2yr for existing buildings. |
| --- | --- |

(b1)

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 recovered. Otherwise, lower or equal to 40 kWh/m2yr for new buildings and 55 kWh/m2yr for existing buildings.

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) |

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)

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i1) | Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i1)

Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year.

| (i2) | Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year in terms of primary energy. |
| --- | --- |

(i2)

Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year in terms of primary energy.

| (b1) | 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 recovered. Otherwise, lower or equal to 40 kWh/m2yr for new buildings and 55 kWh/m2yr for existing buildings. |
| --- | --- |

(b1)

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 recovered. Otherwise, lower or equal to 40 kWh/m2yr for new buildings and 55 kWh/m2yr for existing buildings.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i1) | Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i1)

Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year.

| (i3) | Recovered heat from the refrigeration system per m2 (sales area) and year. |
| --- | --- |

(i3)

Recovered heat from the refrigeration system per m2 (sales area) and year.

| (b2) | Energy use for space heating of 0 kWh/m2yr (absence of heating system), if waste heat from refrigeration can be recovered. |
| --- | --- |

(b2)

Energy use for space heating of 0 kWh/m2yr (absence of heating system), if waste heat from refrigeration can be recovered.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i4) | Implementation of a monitoring system (y/n) |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmarks of excellence

(i4)

Implementation of a monitoring system (y/n)

| (i5) | Percentage of stores controlled |
| --- | --- |

(i5)

Percentage of stores controlled

| (i6) | Number of controlled processes |
| --- | --- |

(i6)

Number of controlled processes

| (b3) | 100 % of stores and processes are monitored and energy use figures are reported on an annual basis (based on the outcome of an annual energy audit) (*). |
| --- | --- |

(b3)

100 % of stores and processes are monitored and energy use figures are reported on an annual basis (based on the outcome of an annual energy audit) (*).

| (b4) | Benchmarking mechanisms implemented. |
| --- | --- |

(b4)

Benchmarking mechanisms implemented.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i1) | Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i1)

Specific energy use of the store per m2 (sales area) and year.

| (i7) | Specific (linear) energy use of refrigeration per meter of display case and year. |
| --- | --- |

(i7)

Specific (linear) energy use of refrigeration per meter of display case and year.

| (i8) | Percentage of stores using natural refrigerants. |
| --- | --- |

(i8)

Percentage of stores using natural refrigerants.

| (i9) | Leakage control (% of refrigerant). |
| --- | --- |

(i9)

Leakage control (% of refrigerant).

| (b5) | 100 % covered low temperature cabinets. |
| --- | --- |

(b5)

100 % covered low temperature cabinets.

| (b6) | 100 % use of walk-in chilled areas (e.g. in cash and carry) or 100 % covering of medium temperature refrigeration where this can lead to energy savings of more than 10 %. |
| --- | --- |

(b6)

100 % use of walk-in chilled areas (e.g. in cash and carry) or 100 % covering of medium temperature refrigeration where this can lead to energy savings of more than 10 %.

| (b7) | Specific (linear) energy use of refrigeration of 3 000 kWh/myr. |
| --- | --- |

(b7)

Specific (linear) energy use of refrigeration of 3 000 kWh/myr.

| (b8) | General use of natural refrigerants. |
| --- | --- |

(b8)

General use of natural refrigerants.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i1) | Specific energy use of the store per m2 sales area and year. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i1)

Specific energy use of the store per m2 sales area and year.

| (i10) | Installed lighting power per m2. |
| --- | --- |

(i10)

Installed lighting power per m2.

| (b9) | Installed lighting power lower than 12 W/m2 for supermarkets and 30 W/m2 for specialist shops (10). |
| --- | --- |

(b9)

Installed lighting power lower than 12 W/m2 for supermarkets and 30 W/m2 for specialist shops (10).

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i1) | Specific energy consumption of the store per m2 (sales area) and year. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i1)

Specific energy consumption of the store per m2 (sales area) and year.

| (i10) | Installed lighting and/or appliance power per m2. |
| --- | --- |

(i10)

Installed lighting and/or appliance power per m2.

| (i11) | Energy management system (11) in place to drive continuous improvement (y/n). |
| --- | --- |

(i11)

Energy management system (11) in place to drive continuous improvement (y/n).

| (b10) | 100 % of distribution centres who exclusively service the retailer are monitored. |
| --- | --- |

(b10)

100 % of distribution centres who exclusively service the retailer are monitored.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i12) | Specific on-site or nearby alternative energy generation per m2 of sales area per energy source. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i12)

Specific on-site or nearby alternative energy generation per m2 of sales area per energy source.

| (i13) | Percentage of renewable energy produced on-site or nearby, as a ratio of the energy use of the store (12). |
| --- | --- |

(i13)

Percentage of renewable energy produced on-site or nearby, as a ratio of the energy use of the store (12).

| (b11) | To have nearly zero energy buildings (stores or distribution centres) where local conditions allow the production of renewable energy on site or nearby. |
| --- | --- |

(b11)

To have nearly zero energy buildings (stores or distribution centres) where local conditions allow the production of renewable energy on site or nearby.

3.2.   Retail supply chain

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).

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i14) | Public reporting of quantitative corporate targets specifically related to improving the environmental sustainability of priority product supply chains |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i14)

Public reporting of quantitative corporate targets specifically related to improving the environmental sustainability of priority product supply chains

| (i15) | Presence of a high-level business unit with responsibility for driving and coordinating environmental sustainability actions in the supply chain |
| --- | --- |

(i15)

Presence of a high-level business unit with responsibility for driving and coordinating environmental sustainability actions in the supply chain

| (i16) | Quantitative internal performance targets (e.g. for individual employees) specifically related to supply chain environmental sustainability |
| --- | --- |

(i16)

Quantitative internal performance targets (e.g. for individual employees) specifically related to supply chain environmental sustainability

| (b12) | Systematic implementation of supply chain improvement programmes across priority product groups |
| --- | --- |

(b12)

Systematic implementation of supply chain improvement programmes across priority product groups

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 |

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 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| — | compliance with local regulations |

Basic

Improved

Exemplary

—

compliance with local regulations

| — | record keeping for important environmental aspects |
| --- | --- |

—

record keeping for important environmental aspects

| — | implementation of a general management plan |
| --- | --- |

—

implementation of a general management plan

| — | in some cases, exclusion of most damaging practices or products |
| --- | --- |

—

in some cases, exclusion of most damaging practices or products

| — | in some cases, benchmarks for a minority of important environmental aspects |
| --- | --- |

—

in some cases, benchmarks for a minority of important environmental aspects

| — | specific management practices associated with significant environmental improvement |
| --- | --- |

—

specific management practices associated with significant environmental improvement

| — | compliance with quantitative environmental performance benchmarks |
| --- | --- |

—

compliance with quantitative environmental performance benchmarks

| — | demonstrated continuous improvement within a specified framework |
| --- | --- |

—

demonstrated continuous improvement within a specified framework

| — | specific requirements that address important environmental aspects sufficiently robustly and completely that certified products may be defined as environmentally sustainable |
| --- | --- |

—

specific requirements that address important environmental aspects sufficiently robustly and completely that certified products may be defined as environmentally sustainable

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 |

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 |

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 |

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i17) | Percentage of total sales represented by products from supply chains that are environmentally improved through use of certification, or retailer standards, or intervention. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i17)

Percentage of total sales represented by products from supply chains that are environmentally improved through use of certification, or retailer standards, or intervention.

| (i18) | Number of priority product supply chains that have been extensively environmentally improved (improved products represent at least 50 % of sales value within the group) through application of best practice techniques. |
| --- | --- |

(i18)

Number of priority product supply chains that have been extensively environmentally improved (improved products represent at least 50 % of sales value within the group) through application of best practice techniques.

| (b13) | Implementation of systematic assessment (independently or through consortia) of core product supply chains. |
| --- | --- |

(b13)

Implementation of systematic assessment (independently or through consortia) of core product supply chains.

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 |

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

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i19) | Percentage of products sold within a particular product group that are certified according to a particular third party environmental standard, according to sales value |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i19)

Percentage of products sold within a particular product group that are certified according to a particular third party environmental standard, according to sales value

| (i20) | The environmental rigour and completeness of the third party standard, as broadly indicated by categorisation according to basic, improved or exemplary |
| --- | --- |

(i20)

The environmental rigour and completeness of the third party standard, as broadly indicated by categorisation according to basic, improved or exemplary

| (i21) | Number of product groups where more than half of sales are certified according to a third party environmental standard |
| --- | --- |

(i21)

Number of product groups where more than half of sales are certified according to a third party environmental standard

| (b14) | The retailer demonstrates on-track progress within the context of a detailed plan to achieve 100 % certification with an ‘improved’ environmental standard (Table 3.6) of own-brand products within certain product groups such as for example, coffee, tea, fats and oils, sugar and textiles. |
| --- | --- |

(b14)

The retailer demonstrates on-track progress within the context of a detailed plan to achieve 100 % certification with an ‘improved’ environmental standard (Table 3.6) of own-brand products within certain product groups such as for example, coffee, tea, fats and oils, sugar and textiles.

| (b15) | The retailer demonstrates on-track progress within the context of a detailed plan to achieve 100 % certification with certain ‘exemplary’ environmental standard (Table 3.7) product groups such as for example: seafood, wood and paper. |
| --- | --- |

(b15)

The retailer demonstrates on-track progress within the context of a detailed plan to achieve 100 % certification with certain ‘exemplary’ environmental standard (Table 3.7) product groups such as for example: seafood, wood and paper.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i22) | Percentage of own-brand product sales within a product group compliant with specified environmental requirements. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i22)

Percentage of own-brand product sales within a product group compliant with specified environmental requirements.

| (i23) | The environmental performance represented by those requirements. |
| --- | --- |

(i23)

The environmental performance represented by those requirements.

| (i24) | Percentage compliance targets, for product groups where a programme for widespread compliance is being implemented. |
| --- | --- |

(i24)

Percentage compliance targets, for product groups where a programme for widespread compliance is being implemented.

| (i25) | Number of product groups where more than half of sales are compliant with specific environmental requirements. |
| --- | --- |

(i25)

Number of product groups where more than half of sales are compliant with specific environmental requirements.

| (b16) | 100 % own-brand product sales within a product group comply with particular retailer-defined environmental requirements. |
| --- | --- |

(b16)

100 % own-brand product sales within a product group comply with particular retailer-defined environmental requirements.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i26) | Percentage of own-brand product sales that originate from suppliers participating in retail programmes to improve environmental performance. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i26)

Percentage of own-brand product sales that originate from suppliers participating in retail programmes to improve environmental performance.

| (i27) | The level of environmental performance represented by those programmes. |
| --- | --- |

(i27)

The level of environmental performance represented by those programmes.

| (i28) | Percentage participating suppliers targets, for product groups where a supplier improvement programme is being implemented. |
| --- | --- |

(i28)

Percentage participating suppliers targets, for product groups where a supplier improvement programme is being implemented.

| (i29) | Number of product groups where more than half of sales originate from suppliers participating in retail programmes to improve environmental performance. |
| --- | --- |

(i29)

Number of product groups where more than half of sales originate from suppliers participating in retail programmes to improve environmental performance.

| (b17) | 100 % own-brand product sales within a product group are sourced from suppliers participating in retail programmes to improve environmental performance. |
| --- | --- |

(b17)

100 % own-brand product sales within a product group are sourced from suppliers participating in retail programmes to improve environmental performance.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i30) | Expenditure on sustainable supply chain research (expressed in relation to turnover); |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmarks of excellence

(i30)

Expenditure on sustainable supply chain research (expressed in relation to turnover);

| (i31) | Qualitative assessment of whether the research is targeted at innovative, scalable and high-potential improvement options; |
| --- | --- |

(i31)

Qualitative assessment of whether the research is targeted at innovative, scalable and high-potential improvement options;

| (i32) | Specific environmental improvements attributable to implementation of research outputs. |
| --- | --- |

(i32)

Specific environmental improvements attributable to implementation of research outputs.

—

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i33) | Percentage sales within a product group certified according to front-runner exemplary standards. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmarks of excellence

(i33)

Percentage sales within a product group certified according to front-runner exemplary standards.

| (i34) | Number of product groups for which front-runner ecological products are offered. |
| --- | --- |

(i34)

Number of product groups for which front-runner ecological products are offered.

| (i35) | Existence of an extensive own-brand ecological product range (y/n). |
| --- | --- |

(i35)

Existence of an extensive own-brand ecological product range (y/n).

| (b18) | 10 % sales within food product groups certified as organic |
| --- | --- |

(b18)

10 % sales within food product groups certified as organic

| (b19) | 50 % cotton sales certified as organic |
| --- | --- |

(b19)

50 % cotton sales certified as organic

| (b20) | 10 % sales within non-food product groups certified according to official third party verified environmental labels, according to the Type-I ISO definition. |
| --- | --- |

(b20)

10 % sales within non-food product groups certified according to official third party verified environmental labels, according to the Type-I ISO definition.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i36) | Percentage of transport providers certified to environment-related standards (includes registration to reporting programmes). |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmarks of excellence

(i36)

Percentage of transport providers certified to environment-related standards (includes registration to reporting programmes).

| (i37) | Percentage of transport providers complying with specific environmental requirements or BEMPs described in this document. |
| --- | --- |

(i37)

Percentage of transport providers complying with specific environmental requirements or BEMPs described in this document.

| (b21) | 100 % of transport and logistics (T&L) providers comply with either:






  (i) | third-party-verified environment-related standards |
| --- | --- | --- |

(b21)

100 % of transport and logistics (T&L) providers comply with either:

(i)

third-party-verified environment-related standards

| (ii) | specific environmental requirements |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

specific environmental requirements

| (iii) | best environmental management practices described in this document. |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

best environmental management practices described in this document.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i38) | Tonnes CO2 eq. per year emitted by transport and logistics operations. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmarks of excellence

(i38)

Tonnes CO2 eq. per year emitted by transport and logistics operations.

| (i39) | kg CO2 eq. per m3, or pallet delivered. |
| --- | --- |

(i39)

kg CO2 eq. per m3, or pallet delivered.

| (i40) | Whether the following parameters are reported for all relevant transport and logistics operations:






  (i) | number and percentage of km/tonne-kilometre (tkm) by different modes |
| --- | --- | --- |

(i40)

Whether the following parameters are reported for all relevant transport and logistics operations:

(i)

number and percentage of km/tonne-kilometre (tkm) by different modes

| (ii) | kg CO2 eq. per tonne, per m3 or per pallet delivered. |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

kg CO2 eq. per tonne, per m3 or per pallet delivered.

| (i41) | Whether the following indicators are reported for all in-house transport and logistics operations:






  (i) | truck load factor (% weight or volume capacity) |
| --- | --- | --- |

(i41)

Whether the following indicators are reported for all in-house transport and logistics operations:

(i)

truck load factor (% weight or volume capacity)

| (ii) | kg CO2 eq. per tkm. |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

kg CO2 eq. per tkm.

| (b22) | For 100 % T&L operations between first-tier suppliers, retail stores and waste management facilities, including those performed by third party transport providers, the following indicators are reported:






  (i) | percentage transport by different modes |
| --- | --- | --- |

(b22)

For 100 % T&L operations between first-tier suppliers, retail stores and waste management facilities, including those performed by third party transport providers, the following indicators are reported:

(i)

percentage transport by different modes

| (ii) | kg CO2 eq. per m3 or per pallet delivered. |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

kg CO2 eq. per m3 or per pallet delivered.

| (b23) | For all in-house T&L operations between first-tier suppliers, retail stores and waste management facilities the following indicators are reported:






  (i) | truck load factor (% weight or volume capacity) |
| --- | --- | --- |

(b23)

For all in-house T&L operations between first-tier suppliers, retail stores and waste management facilities the following indicators are reported:

(i)

truck load factor (% weight or volume capacity)

| (ii) | kg CO2 eq. per tkm |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

kg CO2 eq. per tkm

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i39) | kg CO2 eq./m3 (or pallet) delivered. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i39)

kg CO2 eq./m3 (or pallet) delivered.

| (i42) | Modal split of transport. |
| --- | --- |

(i42)

Modal split of transport.

| (i43) | Number of product groups where sourcing or packaging has been modified specifically to reduce T&L and life cycle environmental impact. |
| --- | --- |

(i43)

Number of product groups where sourcing or packaging has been modified specifically to reduce T&L and life cycle environmental impact.

| (i44) | Systematic implementation of packaging improvements to maximise density and improve T&L efficiency (y/n). |
| --- | --- |

(i44)

Systematic implementation of packaging improvements to maximise density and improve T&L efficiency (y/n).

| (b24) | Systematic implementation of packaging improvements to maximise density and improve T&L efficiency. |
| --- | --- |

(b24)

Systematic implementation of packaging improvements to maximise density and improve T&L efficiency.

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 |

Ranking

Transport mode

1

Freight train

2

Ocean ship

3

Inland waterway

4

Large truck

5

Medium truck

6

Small truck

7

Air freight

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i45) | Percentage of total product transport (tkm), from first-tier suppliers to stores, accounted for by specified more-efficient modes |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmarks of excellence

(i45)

Percentage of total product transport (tkm), from first-tier suppliers to stores, accounted for by specified more-efficient modes

| (i46) | Percentage of international product transport (tkm) accounted for by specified more-efficient modes |
| --- | --- |

(i46)

Percentage of international product transport (tkm) accounted for by specified more-efficient modes

| (b25) | Over 50 % of overland transport between first-tier suppliers and retail distribution centres, according to sales value, is by water/rail (where infrastructure allows) |
| --- | --- |

(b25)

Over 50 % of overland transport between first-tier suppliers and retail distribution centres, according to sales value, is by water/rail (where infrastructure allows)

| (b26) | Over 99 % of overseas transport, according to sales value, is by ship |
| --- | --- |

(b26)

Over 99 % of overseas transport, according to sales value, is by ship

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i39) | kg CO2 eq. per m3 (or pallet) delivered. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i39)

kg CO2 eq. per m3 (or pallet) delivered.

| (i47) | Number of consolidation platforms in use, or number of strategic central hubs in use, or number of direct transport routes in use. |
| --- | --- |

(i47)

Number of consolidation platforms in use, or number of strategic central hubs in use, or number of direct transport routes in use.

| (i48) | Percentage reduction in T&L GHG emissions through implementation of specified distribution network improvement options. |
| --- | --- |

(i48)

Percentage reduction in T&L GHG emissions through implementation of specified distribution network improvement options.

| (i49) | Outsourcing of T&L operations to a third party provider with an optimised distribution network (y/n). |
| --- | --- |

(i49)

Outsourcing of T&L operations to a third party provider with an optimised distribution network (y/n).

| (i50) | Systematic optimisation of distribution networks through the implementation of strategic hub locations, consolidated platforms, and direct routing (y/n). |
| --- | --- |

(i50)

Systematic optimisation of distribution networks through the implementation of strategic hub locations, consolidated platforms, and direct routing (y/n).

| (b27) | Systematic optimisation of distribution networks through the implementation of strategic hub locations, consolidated platforms, and direct routing. |
| --- | --- |

(b27)

Systematic optimisation of distribution networks through the implementation of strategic hub locations, consolidated platforms, and direct routing.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i39) | kg CO2 eq. per m3 (or pallet) delivered. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmarks of excellence

(i39)

kg CO2 eq. per m3 (or pallet) delivered.

| (i51) | Fleet average percentage load efficiency (volume or mass capacity), or fleet average percentage empty running (truck km), or fleet average g CO2 eq./tkm. |
| --- | --- |

(i51)

Fleet average percentage load efficiency (volume or mass capacity), or fleet average percentage empty running (truck km), or fleet average g CO2 eq./tkm.

| (i52) | Percentage of drivers continuously trained in efficient driving. |
| --- | --- |

(i52)

Percentage of drivers continuously trained in efficient driving.

| (i53) | Implementation of an efficient driving incentive scheme for drivers (y/n). |
| --- | --- |

(i53)

Implementation of an efficient driving incentive scheme for drivers (y/n).

| (i54) | Percentage reduction in T&L GHG emissions through the implementation of specified options (i.e. back-hauling waste or supplier deliveries, telematics, driver training and incentive schemes, off-hour deliveries). |
| --- | --- |

(i54)

Percentage reduction in T&L GHG emissions through the implementation of specified options (i.e. back-hauling waste or supplier deliveries, telematics, driver training and incentive schemes, off-hour deliveries).

| (i55) | Systematic optimisation of routing through back-hauling waste and supplier deliveries on store delivery return journeys, use of telematics, and extended delivery windows (y/n). |
| --- | --- |

(i55)

Systematic optimisation of routing through back-hauling waste and supplier deliveries on store delivery return journeys, use of telematics, and extended delivery windows (y/n).

| (b28) | 100 % of drivers continuously trained in efficient driving, or implementation of an efficient driving incentive scheme for drivers. |
| --- | --- |

(b28)

100 % of drivers continuously trained in efficient driving, or implementation of an efficient driving incentive scheme for drivers.

| (b29) | Systematic optimisation of routing through back-hauling waste and supplier deliveries on store-delivery return journeys, use of telematics, and extended delivery windows. |
| --- | --- |

(b29)

Systematic optimisation of routing through back-hauling waste and supplier deliveries on store-delivery return journeys, use of telematics, and extended delivery windows.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i56) | l/100 km (vehicle fuel consumption) or kg CO2 eq. per tkm. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmarks of excellence

(i56)

l/100 km (vehicle fuel consumption) or kg CO2 eq. per tkm.

| (i57) | Percentage vehicles within transport fleet compliant with different EURO classes. |
| --- | --- |

(i57)

Percentage vehicles within transport fleet compliant with different EURO classes.

| (i58) | Percentage of vehicles, trailers and loading equipment compliant with PIEK noise standards, or equivalent standards that enable night deliveries. |
| --- | --- |

(i58)

Percentage of vehicles, trailers and loading equipment compliant with PIEK noise standards, or equivalent standards that enable night deliveries.

| (i59) | Percentage of vehicles in transport fleet powered by alternative fuel sources, including natural gas, biogas, or electricity. |
| --- | --- |

(i59)

Percentage of vehicles in transport fleet powered by alternative fuel sources, including natural gas, biogas, or electricity.

| (i60) | Percentage of vehicles within transport fleet fitted with low rolling resistance tyres. |
| --- | --- |

(i60)

Percentage of vehicles within transport fleet fitted with low rolling resistance tyres.

| (i61) | Percentage of vehicles and trailers within transport fleet designed or modified to improve aerodynamic performance. |
| --- | --- |

(i61)

Percentage of vehicles and trailers within transport fleet designed or modified to improve aerodynamic performance.

| (b30) | 100 % trucks EURO V (17) compliant and with HGV fuel consumption of less than 30 l/100 km. |
| --- | --- |

(b30)

100 % trucks EURO V (17) compliant and with HGV fuel consumption of less than 30 l/100 km.

| (b31) | 100 % trucks, trailers and loading equipment compliant with PIEK noise standards, or equivalent standards that enable night deliveries. |
| --- | --- |

(b31)

100 % trucks, trailers and loading equipment compliant with PIEK noise standards, or equivalent standards that enable night deliveries.

| (b32) | Operation of alternatively fuelled vehicles (natural gas, biogas, electric). |
| --- | --- |

(b32)

Operation of alternatively fuelled vehicles (natural gas, biogas, electric).

| (b33) | 100 % vehicles fitted with low rolling resistant tyres. |
| --- | --- |

(b33)

100 % vehicles fitted with low rolling resistant tyres.

| (b34) | 100 % vehicles and trailers designed or modified to improve aerodynamic performance. |
| --- | --- |

(b34)

100 % vehicles and trailers designed or modified to improve aerodynamic performance.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i62) | kg or tonne of food waste, absolute value, per m2 or per EUR millions of turnover. |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmark of excellence

(i62)

kg or tonne of food waste, absolute value, per m2 or per EUR millions of turnover.

| (i63) | Percentage of food waste generation referring to total food purchases. |
| --- | --- |

(i63)

Percentage of food waste generation referring to total food purchases.

| (i64) | kg or tonne of food exceeding the sell-by date but not the use-by date, donated to charitable institutions. |
| --- | --- |

(i64)

kg or tonne of food exceeding the sell-by date but not the use-by date, donated to charitable institutions.

| (i65) | kg of food waste sent to recovery operations, such as fermentation. |
| --- | --- |

(i65)

kg of food waste sent to recovery operations, such as fermentation.

| (i66) | kg of food waste sent to landfill or incineration plants. |
| --- | --- |

(i66)

kg of food waste sent to landfill or incineration plants.

| (b35) | Zero food waste sent to landfills or incineration plants. |
| --- | --- |

(b35)

Zero food waste sent to landfills or incineration plants.

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:






  — | segregated collection and specific treatment for reuse: compacting, briquetting for paper and plastic wastes, refrigeration of food wastes, etc. |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

In-house management practices:

—

segregated collection and specific treatment for reuse: compacting, briquetting for paper and plastic wastes, refrigeration of food wastes, etc.

| — | monitoring of waste production |
| --- | --- |

—

monitoring of waste production

| — | preparation for reuse of packaging materials, as pallets and plastic boxes for suppliers, distribution centres, showcases in stores and home delivery |
| --- | --- |

—

preparation for reuse of packaging materials, as pallets and plastic boxes for suppliers, distribution centres, showcases in stores and home delivery

| — | staff training. |
| --- | --- |

—

staff training.

| — | Organisation management practices:






  — | monitoring of waste generated by stores per category and per final destination |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

Organisation management practices:

—

monitoring of waste generated by stores per category and per final destination

| — | implementation of reverse logistics for the management of packaging materials (to be reused or recycled), WEEE and other wastes (such as hazardous wastes) to suppliers, treatment facilities and/or distribution centres |
| --- | --- |

—

implementation of reverse logistics for the management of packaging materials (to be reused or recycled), WEEE and other wastes (such as hazardous wastes) to suppliers, treatment facilities and/or distribution centres

| — | establishment of local and/or regional partnerships for the management of wastes |
| --- | --- |

—

establishment of local and/or regional partnerships for the management of wastes

| — | communication to consumers of responsible management of waste at households. |
| --- | --- |

—

communication to consumers of responsible management of waste at households.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i67) | Recycling and reuse rates. |

Environmental performance indicator

Benchmark of excellence

(i67)

Recycling and reuse rates.

| (b36) | A waste management system is integrated in the store and its objective is to recycle or reuse 100 % of secondary packaging materials. |
| --- | --- |

(b36)

A waste management system is integrated in the store and its objective is to recycle or reuse 100 % of secondary packaging materials.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i68) | Percentage recycling rate from consumers defined per sales of returnable bottle. |

Environmental performance indicator

Benchmark of excellence

(i68)

Percentage recycling rate from consumers defined per sales of returnable bottle.

| (b37) | Consumer return of 80 % without deposit or 95 % with deposit. |
| --- | --- |

(b37)

Consumer return of 80 % without deposit or 95 % with deposit.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i69) | Percentage of paper used that is certified |

Environmental performance indicators

Benchmarks of excellence

(i69)

Percentage of paper used that is certified

| (i70) | Grammage of paper used |
| --- | --- |

(i70)

Grammage of paper used

| (i71) | Percentage of coated paper |
| --- | --- |

(i71)

Percentage of coated paper

| (i72) | Percentage of printing shops certified EMAS or ISO 14001 |
| --- | --- |

(i72)

Percentage of printing shops certified EMAS or ISO 14001

| (b38) | 100 % certified/recycled paper. |
| --- | --- |

(b38)

100 % certified/recycled paper.

| (b39) | Grammage less than 49 gr/m2. |
| --- | --- |

(b39)

Grammage less than 49 gr/m2.

| (b40) | Less than 10 % coated paper. |
| --- | --- |

(b40)

Less than 10 % coated paper.

| (b41) | 100 % print shops EMAS/ISO 14001 certified. |
| --- | --- |

(b41)

100 % print shops EMAS/ISO 14001 certified.

3.6.   Rainwater collection and reuse

BEMP is to collect and reuse and/or infiltrate on site rainwater from roofs and parking areas.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i73) | Rainwater collection and/or infiltration on site are integrated in the water management system (y/n). |

Environmental performance indicator

Benchmark of excellence

(i73)

Rainwater collection and/or infiltration on site are integrated in the water management system (y/n).

| (b42) | Rainwater collection and/or infiltration on site are integrated in the water management system. |
| --- | --- |

(b42)

Rainwater collection and/or infiltration on site are integrated in the water management system.

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.

Applicability

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 |
| --- | --- |
| (i74) | Number of available single-use bags at check-outs |

Environmental performance indicator

Benchmark of excellence

(i74)

Number of available single-use bags at check-outs

| (b43) | Zero single-use bags available at checkouts. |
| --- | --- |

(b43)

Zero single-use bags available at checkouts.

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 |
| 1. | Specific energy use |

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

1.

Specific energy use

kWh/m2yr

Energy use (electricity, heat, other fuels) per unit of sales area and year.

Indications:

| — | Renewable energy use should not be subtracted. |
| --- | --- |

—

Renewable energy use should not be subtracted.

| — | Correction factors can be used to determine sales area (in function of height and other technical parameters). ‘Sales area’ should be defined by the retailer. |
| --- | --- |

—

Correction factors can be used to determine sales area (in function of height and other technical parameters). ‘Sales area’ should be defined by the retailer.

| — | No correction on opening hours is recommended. Annual energy use figures should be reported. |
| --- | --- |

—

No correction on opening hours is recommended. Annual energy use figures should be reported.

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)

| 2. | Specific (linear) energy use for refrigeration |
| --- | --- |

2.

Specific (linear) energy use for refrigeration

kWh/myr

Energy use of the refrigeration system per linear metre of display case and year.

Indications:

| — | Not applicable to shops without refrigeration cabinets, such as non-food retailers. |
| --- | --- |

—

Not applicable to shops without refrigeration cabinets, such as non-food retailers.

Per store (site)

Energy efficiency

Specific (linear) consumption of centralised refrigeration of 3 000 kWh/myr.

(see BEMP: 3.1.6)

| 3. | Lighting Power Density |
| --- | --- |

3.

Lighting Power Density

W/m2

Installed lighting power to meet illumination needs (basic and for product presentation purposes) per unit of sales area and year.

Indications:

| — | It is an indicator related to the design and sales concept, applicable to all sizes and types of retailers. |
| --- | --- |

—

It is an indicator related to the design and sales concept, applicable to all sizes and types of retailers.

| — | Correction factors can be used to determine sales area (in function of height and other technical parameters). ‘Sales area’ should be defined by the retailer. |
| --- | --- |

—

Correction factors can be used to determine sales area (in function of height and other technical parameters). ‘Sales area’ should be defined by the retailer.

| — | Lumens per m2 is a good technical indicator, but the environmental performance should be measured in terms of W/m2. |
| --- | --- |

—

Lumens per m2 is a good technical indicator, but the environmental performance should be measured in terms of W/m2.

| — | It can vary within the store (per zone) and during the day (per period). |
| --- | --- |

—

It can vary within the store (per zone) and during the day (per period).

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)

| 4. | Energy monitoring |
| --- | --- |

4.

Energy monitoring

%

Percentage of stores monitored in the energy management system.

Indications:

| — | The monitoring should include all stores and the most relevant processes. |
| --- | --- |

—

The monitoring should include all stores and the most relevant processes.

| — | Information should be provided about benchmarking mechanisms if implemented |
| --- | --- |

—

Information should be provided about benchmarking mechanisms if implemented

Per store (site)

Per process

Energy efficiency

100 % of stores and processes monitored.

Benchmarking mechanisms implemented.

(see BEMPs: 3.1.5, 3.1.8)

| 5. | Percentage of refrigerant leakages |
| --- | --- |

5.

Percentage of refrigerant leakages

%

Loss of refrigerants in relation to total refrigerant load of the installation.

Indications:

| — | Appropriate for food refrigeration at large installations (centralised systems) |
| --- | --- |

—

Appropriate for food refrigeration at large installations (centralised systems)

| — | It is recommended to calculate it from annual refrigerant purchases. |
| --- | --- |

—

It is recommended to calculate it from annual refrigerant purchases.

| — | It is not environmentally relevant for installations using natural refrigerants. |
| --- | --- |

—

It is not environmentally relevant for installations using natural refrigerants.

Per store (site), distribution centre or other and at the organisational level (aggregated value)

Per type of refrigerant

Emissions

—

(see BEMP: 3.1.6)

| 6. | Percentage of stores using natural refrigerants |
| --- | --- |

6.

Percentage of stores using natural refrigerants

%

Percentage of stores using natural refrigerants out of the total number of stores with refrigeration cabinets.

Indications:

| — | Appropriate for food retailers with refrigeration cabinets. |
| --- | --- |

—

Appropriate for food retailers with refrigeration cabinets.

Organisation level

Emissions

General use of natural refrigerants.

(see BEMP: 3.1.6)

SUPPLY CHAIN PERFORMANCE

| 7. | Systematic implementation of supply chain improvement programmes across priority product groups |
| --- | --- |

7.

Systematic implementation of supply chain improvement programmes across priority product groups

(y/n)

This indicator states whether supply chain improvement programmes are implemented systematically for priority product groups.

Indications:

| — | Applicable for retailers of all sizes. |
| --- | --- |

—

Applicable for retailers of all sizes.

| — | For small enterprises, this refers to the application of green procurement and to encouraging environmentally friendly consumption. |
| --- | --- |

—

For small enterprises, this refers to the application of green procurement and to encouraging environmentally friendly consumption.

| — | For large retailers selling private label products, a higher level of integration of supply chain sustainability into the business strategy is possible. |
| --- | --- |

—

For large retailers selling private label products, a higher level of integration of supply chain sustainability into the business strategy is possible.

Organisation level, per product supply chain

Supply chain environmental performance improvements cover:

| | Energy efficiency |
| --- | --- |

Energy efficiency

| | Material efficiency |
| --- | --- |

Material efficiency

| | Water |
| --- | --- |

Water

| | Waste |
| --- | --- |

Waste

| | Biodiversity |
| --- | --- |

Biodiversity

| | Emissions |
| --- | --- |

Emissions

Systematic implementation of supply chain improvement programmes across priority product groups.

(see BEMP: 3.2.1)

| 8. | Implementation of systematic assessment (independently or through consortia) of core product supply chains |
| --- | --- |

8.

Implementation of systematic assessment (independently or through consortia) of core product supply chains

(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:

| — | If available, data on the lifecycle environmental loadings (CO2 eq., kg SOx eq., kg VOC eq., kg 1,4-DCB eq., kg Sb eq., m3 water, kg PO4 eq.), biodiversity pressures, location-specific water pressures, expressed per product mass or, where more accurate, per functional unit, for the assessed products could be reported. |
| --- | --- |

—

If available, data on the lifecycle environmental loadings (CO2 eq., kg SOx eq., kg VOC eq., kg 1,4-DCB eq., kg Sb eq., m3 water, kg PO4 eq.), biodiversity pressures, location-specific water pressures, expressed per product mass or, where more accurate, per functional unit, for the assessed products could be reported.

| — | High sales products should be considered core products and be prioritised for the assessment. |
| --- | --- |

—

High sales products should be considered core products and be prioritised for the assessment.

Organisation level, per product supply chain

Supply chain environmental performance improvements cover:

| | Energy efficiency |
| --- | --- |

Energy efficiency

| | Material efficiency |
| --- | --- |

Material efficiency

| | Water |
| --- | --- |

Water

| | Waste |
| --- | --- |

Waste

| | Biodiversity |
| --- | --- |

Biodiversity

| | Emissions |
| --- | --- |

Emissions

Implementation of systematic assessment (independently or through consortia) of core product supply chains.

(see BEMP: 3.2.2)

| 9. | Product improvement rate |
| --- | --- |

9.

Product improvement rate

Percentage sales of products certified to specified environmental performance level

The following rates should be considered.

Percentage sales of:

| — | products with third party environmental certification; |
| --- | --- |

—

products with third party environmental certification;

| — | private labels products complying with retailer-defined environmental requirements; |
| --- | --- |

—

private labels products complying with retailer-defined environmental requirements;

| — | food products certified as organic; |
| --- | --- |

—

food products certified as organic;

| — | cotton certified as organic; |
| --- | --- |

—

cotton certified as organic;

| — | non-food products with eco-labels. |
| --- | --- |

—

non-food products with eco-labels.

Organisation level, per product group

The environmental standards address:

| | Energy efficiency |
| --- | --- |

Energy efficiency

| | Material efficiency |
| --- | --- |

Material efficiency

| | Water |
| --- | --- |

Water

| | Waste |
| --- | --- |

Waste

| | Biodiversity |
| --- | --- |

Biodiversity

| | Emissions |
| --- | --- |

Emissions

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

| 10. | Specific transport energy consumption |
| --- | --- |

10.

Specific transport energy consumption

MJ/tkm

Direct fuel energy consumption per tonne kilometre transported, for total transport and by mode to compare modal options.

Indications:

| — | Based on fuel energy contents. |
| --- | --- |

—

Based on fuel energy contents.

| — | For electric power, based on primary energy for electricity generation (e.g. multiply by 2,7). |
| --- | --- |

—

For electric power, based on primary energy for electricity generation (e.g. multiply by 2,7).

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)

| 11. | Specific transport GHG emissions (per product quantity and distance) |
| --- | --- |

11.

Specific transport GHG emissions (per product quantity and distance)

kg CO2 eq./tkm

Provides an indication of the environmental efficiency of transport operations.

Indications:

| — | For fossil fuels, based on direct combustion plus indirect extraction and processing emissions. |
| --- | --- |

—

For fossil fuels, based on direct combustion plus indirect extraction and processing emissions.

| — | For electricity, based on national average specific GHG emissions of electricity generation. |
| --- | --- |

—

For electricity, based on national average specific GHG emissions of electricity generation.

| — | For biofuels, based on lifecycle assessment of GHG emissions for relevant fuel source. |
| --- | --- |

—

For biofuels, based on lifecycle assessment of GHG emissions for relevant fuel source.

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)

| 12. | Specific transport GHG emissions (per product quantity) |
| --- | --- |

12.

Specific transport GHG emissions (per product quantity)

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:

| — | For fossil fuels, based on direct combustion plus indirect extraction and processing emissions. |
| --- | --- |

—

For fossil fuels, based on direct combustion plus indirect extraction and processing emissions.

| — | For electricity, based on national average specific GHG emissions of electricity generation. |
| --- | --- |

—

For electricity, based on national average specific GHG emissions of electricity generation.

| — | For biofuels, based on lifecycle assessment of GHG emissions for relevant fuel source. |
| --- | --- |

—

For biofuels, based on lifecycle assessment of GHG emissions for relevant fuel source.

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)

| 13. | Percentage of water/rail transport between first-tier suppliers and retailer distribution centres |
| --- | --- |

13.

Percentage of water/rail transport between first-tier suppliers and retailer distribution centres

%

This indicator shows the share of more efficient transport modes out of the total transport activities of the retailer.

Indications:

| — | The percentage of transport by mode can be calculated based on tkm or sales value. |
| --- | --- |

—

The percentage of transport by mode can be calculated based on tkm or sales value.

| — | Retailers should distinguish between transport over land (road, rail, inland waterways) and overseas (maritime, air) transport. |
| --- | --- |

—

Retailers should distinguish between transport over land (road, rail, inland waterways) and overseas (maritime, air) transport.

| — | This indicator is applicable to products sourced over longer distances. |
| --- | --- |

—

This indicator is applicable to products sourced over longer distances.

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)

| 14. | Systematic optimisation of route planning |
| --- | --- |

14.

Systematic optimisation of route planning

(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)

| 15. | Percentage of vehicles meeting EURO V standards |
| --- | --- |

15.

Percentage of vehicles meeting EURO V standards

%

Indications:

| — | Applicable to large retailers with in-house transport and logistics services, third party transport providers. |
| --- | --- |

—

Applicable to large retailers with in-house transport and logistics services, third party transport providers.

| — | If possible, also vehicle fuel economy (l/100 km) should be monitored. |
| --- | --- |

—

If possible, also vehicle fuel economy (l/100 km) should be monitored.

Organisation level

Emissions

100 % trucks comply with the EURO V standards.

(see BEMP: 3.3.7)

WASTE MANAGEMENT

| 16. | Generation of waste |
| --- | --- |

16.

Generation of waste

kg/yr

tonnes/yr

kg/m2yr

Weight of produced waste per year.

Indications:

| — | It can be expressed per unit of sales area. |
| --- | --- |

—

It can be expressed per unit of sales area.

| — | It should be monitored separately for different types of waste. |
| --- | --- |

—

It should be monitored separately for different types of waste.

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)

| 17. | Percentage of food waste sent to landfill or incineration |
| --- | --- |

17.

Percentage of food waste sent to landfill or incineration

%

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)

| 18. | Recycling rate of secondary packaging |
| --- | --- |

18.

Recycling rate of secondary packaging

%

Weight of recycled materials divided by total amount of waste.

Indications:

| — | Some retailers include the amount of reused materials. A clear indication thereof should be provided when reporting this indicator. |
| --- | --- |

—

Some retailers include the amount of reused materials. A clear indication thereof should be provided when reporting this indicator.

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)

| 19. | Return rate of packaging and used products |
| --- | --- |

19.

Return rate of packaging and used products

%

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:

| — | For PET and PE bottles return systems, the rate of take-back should be measured per returnable bottles sold. |
| --- | --- |

—

For PET and PE bottles return systems, the rate of take-back should be measured per returnable bottles sold.

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

| 20. | Certified or recycled paper for commercial publications |
| --- | --- |

20.

Certified or recycled paper for commercial publications

%

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

| 21. | Stores with rainwater collection |
| --- | --- |

21.

Stores with rainwater collection

%

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

| 22. | Number of bags |
| --- | --- |

22.

Number of bags

#

Number of plastic bags given or sold at checkout counters.

Indications:

| — | The number of free one-use plastic bags should be controlled but, as well, sold or given with promotional purposes or the number of reusable plastic bags sold |
| --- | --- |

—

The number of free one-use plastic bags should be controlled but, as well, sold or given with promotional purposes or the number of reusable plastic bags sold

| — | It can be reported per customer or per 1 000 customers or per turnover unit. |
| --- | --- |

—

It can be reported per customer or per 1 000 customers or per turnover unit.

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 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

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’

---