WRITTEN QUESTION E-0519/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 February 2001)

Subject: Procurement of computers versus environmental criteria

The Swedish Agency for Administrative Development has been commissioned by the Swedish Government to procure 400 000 new personal computers for government ministries, agencies and local and regional authorities. In its invitation to tender the Agency has specified that the computers must not contain certain toxic chemicals such as flame retardants and heavy metals such as cadmium and antimony.

The Commission has questioned whether the Agency has specified the environmental criteria in the proper manner in what is the biggest PC procurement contract yet in Sweden. The Commission reportedly claimed that the criteria might constitute obstacles to trade. The Agency claims that the environmental criteria are reasonable and balanced.

Can the Commission explain why it does not consider that the Agency has specified its environmental criteria in the proper manner?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 2001)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that, in the specifications for the contract in question, Statskontoret provides for the exclusion of bidders whose tenders do not meet certain minimum technical requirements concerning the presence in the plastic mechanical parts of the computers of certain heavy metals, such as cadmium and antimony, and certain substances such as brominated flame retardants. Only insofar as including these criteria in specifications had discriminatory effect would the Commission have to consider them unlawful pursuant to Articles 28-30 (ex articles 30-36) of the EC Treaty.

The Commission notes that at least one of the substances that the Swedish authorities do not accept, antimony, is unregulated both at Community level and in Sweden. Other substances are only partially regulated. Consequently, products containing this and other substances forbidden in the tendering procedure can be legally sold and marketed in all Member States including Sweden, and no information has so far been presented to justify the exclusion of this substance. Against this background, such a limitation, which could favour or eliminate certain suppliers or products, may be contrary to Articles 28-30 of the EC Treaty.

The Commission still has to examine the various supplementary pieces of information conveyed to it by the interested parties in this case before taking a position on the action to be taken and proposing, if appropriate, to initiate infringement proceedings on the basis of Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty. In its examination, the Commission will also take account of the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment(1).

Applying criteria bound up with considerations relating to tenderers' environmental capacities in evaluating offers is only compatible with the rules on public supply contracts(2) if these criteria concern the deliverables or the implementing rules and contribute to the choice of the tender offering the best value for money.

(1) OJ C 365 E, 19.12.2000.

(2) Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts (OJ L 199, 9.8.1993).