COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC-Treaty concerning the Common position of the Council on an amended proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation on a revised Community eco-label award Scheme

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT concerning the Common position of the Council on an amended proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation on a revised Community eco-label award Scheme

I. PROCEDURAL MATTERS

The Proposal (COM (96) 0603 - C4 - 0157/97 - 96/0312 (SYN)) was forwarded to the Council on 19 March 1997 and to the European Parliament on 8 April 1997 (in accordance with the co-operation procedure under Article 175 (1) (ex Article 130 S (1)) of the Treaty).

The European Parliament gave its opinion in a first reading on 13 May 1998, and the Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs of the Economic and Social Committee adopted its opinion on 10 July 1997. The Committee of the Regions received the Proposal on 13 July 1997 but decided not to give an opinion.

Following the opinion of the European Parliament and pursuant to Article 250 (2) (ex Article 189 A (2)) of the Treaty, the Commission adopted an amended Proposal (COM (1999) 21 final, OJ C 64 of 6 March 1999) and forwarded its amended Proposal to the Council on 18 January 1999.

On 11 November 1999 the Member States in Council agreed unanimously upon the Common Position.

II. PURPOSE OF THIS COMMUNICATION

The objective of the Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation on a revised Community Eco-label award Scheme is to clarify the nature of the EU Eco-label Scheme, the principles on which it is based and its methodological approach. Particular attention is also given to improve and streamline the operation of the Scheme.

III. COMMISSION COMMENTS

1. General Comments

The Commission accepted totally, partially or in principle seven of the forty-two amendments proposed by the European Parliament in the first reading. They were incorporated into the amended Proposal COM (1999) 21 final of 18 January 1999.

All of these amendments have been incorporated in the Common Position totally, partially or in principle. Moreover, the Common Position incorporates most of the amendments tabled by the European Parliament, which had not been retained in the Commission amended Proposal. These amendments include essential provisions, such as the following:

- extension of the scope of the EU Eco-label to services.

- introduction of two boxes (logo plus informative box) for the description of the Eco-label (instead of a graded label, as originally envisaged by the Commission).

- establishment of a European Union Eco-labelling Board (EUEB), composed of the Competent Bodies and the Consultation Forum, instead of an independent organisation (the European Eco-label Organization (EEO), as originally proposed by the Commission.

Due to the process of redrafting, in some instances it is the principle of the amendment and not the exact wording which has been retained in the Common Position.

The Common Position is quite different from the 1996 Commission Proposal. However, the Commission considers that the original spirit of improving the efficiency of the Scheme is maintained and even reinforced.

2. Detailed Comments

2.1. (a) Parliamentary amendments accepted by the Commission in the amended Proposal and incorporated in full or in part in the Common Position

References to Recitals and Articles refer to the numbering as used in the Common Position.

- Recital 5 includes a reference to the role of environmental NGOs and consumer organisations in the setting and development of criteria for the award of Community eco-labels (amendment no. 2).

- Recital 11 states that in the various stages of the award of an Eco-label efforts must be made to ensure a high level of environmental protection (amendment no. 4).

- Recital 12 states that it is necessary to provide more information on the label about the reasons for the award in order to assist consumers in understanding the significance of the award (amendment no. 10).

- Article 1.1. includes a reference to a high level of environmental protection (amendment no. 10).

- Article 2.5. now states that the Regulation shall not apply to medical devices (amendment no. 15). In order to clarify the scope of this provision, it is stated that the Regulation shall not apply to medical devices, as defined by Council Directive 93/42/EEC, that are intended only for professional use or to be prescribed or supervised by medical professionals.

- Article 4.1., which deals with Eco-label criteria and assessment and verification requirements and includes a reference to requirements relating to the product's fitness in meeting the needs of the consumers. It therefore considers the point developed by the European Parliament in its amendment no. 13, where it stated that the degree of technical reliability relating to the quality of the product should be addressed.

- Article 7 states that the competent bodies shall be informed about significant modifications in the characteristics of products which do not affect compliance with the criteria. Amendment no. 18 stated that competent bodies should be informed about all modifications in the characteristics of products which did not affect compliance with the criteria.

2.2. (b) Parliamentary amendments accepted in total or in part by the Commission in the amended Proposal, but not incorporated into the Common Position

All the Parliamentary amendments accepted in total or in part by the Commission in the Amended Proposal have been incorporated into the Common Position.

2.3. (c) Changes made by the Council to the amended Proposal

Recitals

Recital 3 mentions the planning of the Regulation as an important element to be improved.

Recital 5 recognises the important role that environment and consumer NGOs have in the development and setting of eco-label criteria.

Recital 7 refers to products as including also services, in line with the Common Position, according to which the EU Eco-label will be extended to services (as proposed by the European Parliament in its amendments no. 3 and 14).

Recital 11 introduces the concept of efficient use of resources along the various eco-label stages.

Recital 12 deletes any reference to the graded eco-label.

Recital 13 reflects the political wish according to which the Eco-label Scheme should in the long term be mainly self-financing, with no increase in the financial contributions from the Member States.

Recital 14 reflects the composition of the European Union Eco-labelling Board (EUEB), including both the Competent bodies and the Consultation Forum.

Recital 17 expressly refers to the continuing existence of national eco-label schemes. It underlines the necessity of co-ordinating them with the Community eco-label in order to promote the common objectives of sustainable consumption, in line with the Common Position.

Article 1 - Objectives and Principle

Article 1 has been modified in order to consider both goods and services as "products". The Commission notes that both the European Parliament (amendments no. 3 and 14) and the Council, acting unanimously, have agreed on the necessity of extending the scope of the Eco-label Regulation to services. For this reason, a thorough redrafting of the provisions has taken place in the Common Position, in order to ensure a correct extension of the scope of the EU Eco-label to services. The Indicative Assessment Matrix in Annex I has been also modified to allow for the extension to services. Moreover, it has been proven that there is no technical impediment to extend Life Cycle Considerations to services, as provided for in International Standards. Therefore, the Commission has no further reservation on the extension of the Scheme to services, and admits it could constitute an interesting development for the EU Eco-label Scheme.

According to Article 1.1 of the Common Position, the objective of the Community Eco-label award Scheme will be pursued through the provision of guidance and accurate, non-deceptive and scientifically based information to consumers including professional purchasers. The express reference to professional purchasers is acceptable, as it is a way of enhancing the role they can play in the diffusion of products with reduced environmental impacts in the market.

According to Article 1.4., the implementation of the Scheme shall comply with the provisions of the Treaties, including the Precautionary Principle, with the instruments adopted pursuant thereto and the Community environmental policy, as specified in the Fifth programme of Policy and Action in relation to the Environment and Sustainable Development. Such provision, which somewhat clarifies the objectives of the Scheme, as well as its position in the general context of the Community environmental policy, is also acceptable to the Commission.

Article 2 - Scope

Article 2 of the Common Position is based in what was previously Article 4 of the Commission Proposal.

A definition of product groups has been inserted, to include goods or services which serve similar purposes and are equivalent in terms of use and consumer perception. The Commission accepts that such definition is in line with the extension of the scope of the Eco-label award Scheme to services.

The conditions a product group must fulfil to be included in the Scheme are maintained. The only relevant modification is that, in order to be included in the Scheme, it shall be ensured that a significant part of the sales volume of the product group shall be sold for final consumption or use. This minor change from the original Commission Proposal (which stated that a significant part of the sales volume had to be sold to the final consumer) can be accepted.

Finally, the Common Position states in Article 2.4. that the Eco-label will not be awarded to goods manufactured by processes which are likely to significantly harm man and/or the environment, or in their normal application could be harmful to the consumer. This issue is indeed taken into account in the everyday practice of the EU Eco-label. The existing Eco-label criteria already deal with this issue, taking the most appropriate approach and targeting the key classes of substances, such as carcinogenic or potentially sensitising dyes in textiles and mattresses. The Commission can therefore accept the amendment.

Article 3 - Environmental requirements

Article 3 of the Common Position is based on what was previously Article 2 of the Commission Proposal. The substance of the Article remains the same, although the text is structured in a different way.

The only important change in the Article refers to the fact that, when evaluating the comparative improvements of the products, a reference to the consideration of health and safety aspects is inserted. This amendment is acceptable to the Commission, as it formalises an existing practice when setting Eco-label criteria for products.

Article 4 - Eco-label criteria and assessment and verification requirements

Minor changes, which serve to clarify and improve the procedure related to the assessment and verification requirements, have been made to Article 4 (previously, Article 3 of the Commission Proposal). The reference to the market penetration has been switched to Article 5 of the Common Position, when referring to the Working Plan.

Article 5 - Working Plan

Article 6 - Procedures for the setting of eco-label criteria

Article 5 of the Common Position is an original proposal from the Council. Article 6 was previously Article 5 of the Commission Proposal.

The Council felt it was necessary to ensure greater transparency in the functioning of the system, and a clearer definition of the objectives of the Scheme. Therefore, a new mechanism, namely the Working Plan was agreed. The Working Plan shall include a strategy for the development of the Scheme, which should set out objectives for the environmental improvement and the market penetration for the next three years. The Plan should establish a non-exhaustive list of product groups which will be considered as priorities for Community action; as well as plans for coordination and cooperation between the Community Scheme and other eco-label award Schemes in Member States. The Working Plan shall also provide measures for the implementation of the strategy, and shall include the planned financing of the Scheme. It shall also outline the services to which the Scheme is not applicable, taking into account the EMAS Regulation. The Working Plan shall be adopted according to the Comitology procedure.

The Working Plan is therefore a key instrument in the development of the Scheme. It is a way of ensuring the establishment of clear objectives and targets at EU level, as well as being a means for cooperation and development of synergies between the Community and national eco-labelling Schemes. The existence of the Working Plan is essential to the future development of the Scheme, and can therefore be accepted by the Commission.

Article 6 has also been redrafted. While the Working plan shall set the targets of the Scheme, Article 6 sets the basic procedural framework. The Commission shall begin the procedure on its own initiative or at the request of the EUEB. It shall give mandates to the EUEB to develop and periodically review the eco-label criteria as well as the assessment and compliance verification requirements related to those criteria. The EUEB shall draft the Eco-label criteria and inform the Commission of this. The Commission will determine whether the mandate has been fulfilled such that the draft criteria can be submitted to the Committee, or whether the mandate has not been fulfilled, in which case the EUEB shall continue its work on the draft criteria. Once adopted, the Eco-label criteria, and updates thereof, will be published in the Official Journal, L Series (as stated in Amendment no. 46 of the European Parliament's Proposal).

Although the procedural guidelines remain similar to those envisaged in the Commission Proposal, it is clear that some changes have been made. These modifications are due to the fact that neither the Council nor the European Parliament (amendments no. 6, 7, 9, 16, 17, 19-22 and 25) supported the establishment of a European Eco-label Organisation (EEO), with independent legal personality, as proposed by the Commission. The Commission will therefore continue to bear the political responsibility for the setting of the Eco-label criteria, as it has been doing until now.

Article 7 - Awarding the eco-label

Article 7 is based on Article 6 of the Commission Proposal.

Manufacturers, importers, service providers and traders may submit applications for the Eco-label. The Commission can accept the extension of the scope of the Eco-label award Scheme, as it includes service providers (in line with the extension of the Scheme to services) and traders (which are a broader category than retailers, and can include other actors such as wholesalers).

Other minor changes have also been inserted in the Common Position, with a view to clarifying the way the application shall be presented to a Competent Body. It is important to point out that, according to new drafting of Article 7.4, where Eco-label criteria require production facilities to meet certain requirements, they shall be met in all facilities where the product is manufactured. This amendment is acceptable to the Commission, as it will ensure better transparency of the Scheme, as well as a more efficient implementation of the ecological requirements, through a deeper control by Competent Bodies of the facilities where products are manufactured.

Article 8 - The eco-label

Article 8 was Article 7 of the Commission Proposal.

According to the Common Position, there is no further reference to the adoption of a graded label. The Commission is aware of the fact that neither the Council nor the European Parliament (amendments no. 5, 12 and 26) supported this reform of the logo, and can therefore accept the alternative solution proposed by these two institutions, as set out in Annex III. The compromise solution ensures that a certain amount of information is communicated to the consumer.

Article 9 - Terms of use

Article 9 is based on the first paragraph of Article 8 of the Commission Proposal. Article 8.3. of the original Commission Proposal has been reintroduced in Article 12 of the Common Position.

Contracts between the applicant and the Competent Body shall state that participation in the Scheme shall be without prejudice to environmental or other regulatory requirements of Community or national law applicable to the various life stages of goods, and where appropriate to a service. The Commission can accept this provision, as it is in line with the reference to respecting Community and national environmental requirements provided for in Article 1, and is in line with Internal Market provisions.

A reference to the adoption of a standard contract (which shall be adopted following the Comitology procedure) is inserted. This amendment is acceptable to the Commission, as it is a way of ensuring a more efficient development of the Scheme.

Article 10 - Promotion of the eco-label

This Article is divided into two subparagraphs. According to the first paragraph, not only Member States, but also the Commission and members of the EUEB shall facilitate the development of the Scheme by promoting awareness raising actions and information campaigns for consumers, producers, retailers and the general public. This provision, which tends to ensure the sharing of the financial burden for the development of the Scheme, is acceptable to the Commission, which is currently fulfilling promotional tasks.

The second paragraph states that in order to encourage the use of eco-labelled products the Commission and other institutions of the European Community, as well as other public authorities at national level, should, without prejudice to Community law, set an example when specifying their requirements for products. Such provision is in line with amendment no. 11 of the European Parliament, and ensures full compatibility with Community law provisions. The current wording is a "moral commitment", a wish that national and Community institutions shall set an example - in accordance with public procurement requirements and guidelines - when specifying requirements for their products.

Article 11 - Other eco-label schemes in the Member States

According to the Common Position, Eco-label Schemes in the Member States may continue to co-exist with the Community Eco-label Scheme. Cooperation and coordination measures shall be established in accordance with the Comitology procedure, including, inter alia, those envisaged in the Working plan.

The Presidency text is the result of a compromise between countries with national Eco-label Schemes and countries that do not have such Schemes. The text clearly suggests the need for a common European strategy in the field of eco-labelling. Within this structure the EU Eco-label will play a fundamental propulsive role in the context of Integrated Product Policy. The objective of a co-operation strategy with the national Schemes will be the widespread promotion of the concept of Sustainable Consumption among European consumers. The Commission will bear the political and operational responsibility of the Scheme. For these reasons, and as long as clear mechanisms of cooperation and coordination are established, the Commission can accept the new drafting of Article 11.

Article 12 - Costs and fees

Article 12 is based on the third paragraph of Article 8 of the original Commission Proposal. The Article 17 Committee must intervene to fix the level of fees. This was the only way to find a compromise among the different positions of Member States on fees.

Articles 13 - European Union Eco-labelling Board

Article 14 - Competent Bodies

Article 15 - Consultation Forum

While Article 14 is based on Article 9 of the Commission Proposal, Article 13 is inspired from the wording in Article 5, and Article 15 from Annex IV.

Through these provisions, the role of the European Union Eco-labelling Board (the EUEB), the Competent Bodies and the Consultation Forum is clarified. The EUEB shall consist of the Competent Bodies and the Consultation Forum. The establishment of the EUEB is in line with the amendments introduced by the European Parliament when referring to the Technical Committee for the Eco-label (TCEL). The EUEB shall have no legal personality. The Commission notes the express rejection of both the Council and the European Parliament (amendments no. 6, 7, 9, 16, 17, 19-22 and 25) to the establishment of an independent European Eco-label Organisation, and can agree with the establishment of the new body as provided in the Common Position. The Commission will establish the rules of procedure of the EUEB in accordance with the Comitology procedure, providing for the development of an efficient procedural framework.

Article 15 contains an express reference to the Consultation Forum, as included in Amendments no. 27 and no. 45 of the European Parliament Proposal. In order to ensure a balanced participation of all interested parties, the Consultation Forum is extended to sectors such as service suppliers or hand crafts and their business organisations. The new wording in article 15 is acceptable to the Commission, as a way of ensuring full participation and transparency of the Scheme.

Article 16 - Adaptation to technical progress

Article 16 is the unchanged Article 12 of the original Commission Proposal.

Article 17 - Committee

Article 17 was Article 13 of the Commission Proposal.

The committee procedure has been changed to a type III as opposed to the Advisory committee contained in the Commission's original Proposal. All Member States, due to the key role the Committee will play in the development of the Scheme, unanimously accepted this change in the Comitology procedure. The type III committee, as recently amended, will ensure deep involvement of Member States in the management of the Eco-label Scheme, as well as the participation of the European Parliament according to the rules thereby established.

Article 18 - Infringements

An infringement clause is introduced, in order to ensure that Member States shall take appropriate measures in case of non-compliance with the provisions of this Regulation. The Commission welcomes the introduction of such wording.

Article 19 - Transitional provisions

Article 19 was Article 14 of the original Commission Proposal

The decisions based upon Regulation (EEC) No. 880/92 shall remain in force until they are revised or have expired. The Commission welcomes this statement, as it will ensure that the Scheme will continue to be operational with regard to previous decisions on product groups and ensure a proper transition to the new system.

Article 20 - Revision

Article 20 is the unchanged Article 15 of the original Commission Proposal

Article 21 - Final provisions

Article 21 was previously Article 16.

There is no longer reference to the European Eco-label Organisation (EEO), in line with the changes commented above.

Annex I - Indicative Assessment Matrix

Annex I has been adapted so as to extend the Indicative Assessment matrix to services. The service matrix is divided into three phases. The first phase, acquisition of products for service performance, refers to the acquisition of both goods and services, when they are needed for the service performance. This phase is similar to the pre-production/raw materials phase of the goods matrix. The second phase, service performance, includes all the activities performed to provide the service. This phase is analogous to the sum of production, distribution and use phases of the goods life cycle. Finally, the third phase, waste management, includes all the activities for the reduction of environmental impacts generated from the waste materials. This amendment is in line with the extension of the scope of the Scheme, and can therefore be accepted by the Commission.

Other minor changes, such as the express reference to raw materials (in line with International Standards), and the use of the word "biodiversity" instead of "Eco-system protection", for the purpose of greater clarity, have been also introduced.

Annex II - Methodological Requirements for Setting of Eco-label Criteria

Annex II has been redrafted. Reference is made to Life Cycle Considerations (instead of Life Cycle Analysis), in line with the wording in International Standards to ensure compatibility with the extension of the Scheme to services. The process of identifying and selecting the key environmental aspects will include a feasibility study, as well as a Proposal of the criteria in the final stage. The principles set out in ISO 14040 and ISO 14024 standards will be considered. The Commission can accept these amendments, which try to clarify the methodological requirements for the setting of Eco-label criteria.

Annex III - Description of the Eco-label

Following the European Parliament's amendments (amendments no. 5, 12 and 26), the EU Eco-label shall be structured in two parts: the EU logo and a box with information about the reasons to award the Eco-label, relating to specific environmental impacts. The Commission notes that its Proposal for the introduction of a graded label has not been supported by either the Council nor the Parliament, and accepts the Common Position as a way of ensuring a better description of the Eco-label award Scheme.

The changes referring to the new wording of the logo ("EUROPEAN UNION ECO-LABEL - awarded to goods or services which meet the environmental requirements of the EU eco-labelling Scheme") and to the inclusion in the product of the license registration number (as a way of avoiding misuse of the logo) can also be accepted.

Annex IV - Procedural Principles for Establishing Eco-label Criteria

Minor changes, which serve to clarify the text, have been made to Annex IV. The reference to the EEO and the application by the EEO of decision-making procedures in conformity with practice of European standardisation bodies is deleted. This is a logical consequence of the internal character that the EUEB will have, with no independent legal personality. An open consultation on the content of the report will be carried out before submission of the criteria to the Committee, in accordance with the Comitology procedure that has been established for the setting of Eco-label criteria.

Annex V - Fees

As stated in the Common Position, the application and annual fees shall be set according to the Comitology procedure. In the case of SMEs and product manufacturers as well as service providers of developing countries, the application fee should be reduced. The proposed ceiling of fees and minimum figure are not mentioned anymore.

The specific figures will therefore be established in a subsequent Decision, under the Comitology procedure. This is the current practice for the setting of fees, as it provides for sufficient flexibility to accommodate different approaches and interests of national delegations. The express consideration of SMEs and developing countries is maintained (as provided for in amendment no. 34 of the European Parliament). For these reasons, the Commission can accept Annex V as it currently stands.

3. Conclusion

The Common Position takes on board many of the amendments of the European Parliament, which have been carefully assessed. The amendments introduced in the text do not affect the spirit of the original Commission Proposal of improving the efficiency of the Scheme. This key objective is maintained and even reinforced. The Scheme will become more transparent in the eyes of consumers and of economic operators.

The Commission is also satisfied that the Common Position received the unanimous support of all Member States.