Harmonisation of Procedures within EU Ecolabel Competent Bodies Workshop 18th November 2013 Paul Vaughan

Today’s Workshop Outline Background Approach Findings Practice recommendations Discussion & amendment Ask questions as we go along Important purpose of today is to add to, agree or disagree with recommendations

Background

Background – Project Aims To identify a core set of procedures To build upon the experience and expertise of Competent Bodies (CBs) To check how they are implementing those procedures, and To produce a manual of ‘good and best practice’

Background – ‘Good’ & ‘Best’ practice Good practice Meets minimum requirements efficiently and effectively Room for improvement Best Practice Goes beyond the minimum requirements Extra assurance NB Likely requires extra resources

Background - Timeline Mid March 2013 April to September 2013 CBs selected and confirmed April to September 2013 Questionnaire issued Visits to CBs 18 November 2013 Workshop at CB Forum

Approach

8 EEA Member States selected

Areas covered (linked to Regulation) Questionnaire Areas covered (linked to Regulation) Competent Body Organisation Impartiality & Independence Assessment & Award Market Surveillance & Control of the use of the EU Ecolabel Promotion Penalties

Visits Denmark May 1/2 Belgium May 14 Germany May 23/4 Romania June 11 Ireland June 25 France July 8/9 Malta July 12 Italy July 24 Norway Sept 10

Findings – Competent Body Organisation

Competent Body Organisation Regulation –Article 4 CB(s) designated Operational Procedural rules to ensure Transparency in conduct Involvement of interested parties

Competent Body Organisation Member State Differences Legislation or contract Committee/Commission More than one CB Profit / NfP / Government Standards Organisations Scale Economies Funding Reporting Stakeholder involvement

Practice Recommendations – Competent Body Organisation

Competent Body Organisation Stakeholder Involvement - Good Practice Meetings as required with various interests e.g. Industry/Licence holders NGOs – environmental/consumer Other parts of Government Obtain views on specific issues e.g. Criteria development

Competent Body Organisation Stakeholder Involvement – Best Practice Regularity e.g. a standing committee Leverage experience e.g. marketing Induction training Ecolabel ambassadors

Competent Body Organisation Accountability - Good Practice Public reporting Website Internal Reporting KPIs Licences Products Timescales Assessments – progress

Competent Body Organisation Funding - Good Practice Some government support necessary Alternative funding sources e.g. training

Competent Body Organisation Accountability - Best Practice Public Reporting Published Annual Report KPIs Consumer recognition Consumer understanding

Findings – Impartiality & Independence

Impartiality & Independence Regulation –Article 4 & Annex V Guaranteed impartiality of management and assessors including sub-contractors Verification is independent of applicant Activities that may conflict with CB’s independence and impartiality are prohibited Remuneration is not dependent on numbers of assessments or their results

Impartiality & Independence Member State Differences Civil servants Use of sub contractors Other commercial activities EN 45011 / 17021 accredited Organisational separation

Practice Recommendations – Impartiality & Independence

Impartiality & Independence Good Practice Agree a policy Nominate an individual who is responsible for its implementation Write policy requirements into employment contracts including with sub- contractors

Impartiality & Independence Best Practice An impartiality committee Organisational separation of commercial activities from ecolabelling activities

Findings – Assessment & Award

Regulation –Article 9 & Annex V Assessment & Award Regulation –Article 9 & Annex V Assessment within 2 months May inspect production sites T & A costs chargeable (o/s MS) Use of the Ecolabel only if fees paid Technically competent, experienced and professional staff Assessments recorded etc Written procedures for assessments Share CB forum information, follow guidance and participate if possible

Member State Differences Assessment & Award Member State Differences Guidance to applicant Written procedures Fee policies Supporting systems Record keeping Quality assurance

Practice Recommendations – Assessment & Award

Assessment & Award – Good Practice Guidance to applicants Available on web site Procedures Timescales Fees Use of the logo Maintaining compliance FAQs Acceptance of electronic applications Template structure

Assessment & Award – Good Practice Procedures Payment before assessment Screening applications Assessment log to record process/decisions Inspections if high risk QA of all assessments Record mixtures/substances assessed Record major issues and how resolved

Assessment & Award – Good Practice CB Forum Monthly briefings Agendas/Minutes circulated Attendance by assessment staff

Assessment & Award – Best Practice Organisational separation of activities (where applicable) EN 9001 certified or EN 45011 accredited Bespoke application form, to include: Checklist A draft control plan

Assessment & Award – Best Practice Meeting with each applicant Timescales, Fees, Use of logo, FAQs etc Agree work plan Inspection of all facilities Discuss how to jointly promote Agree control plan for ongoing compliance Time recording

Assessment & Award – Opportunities Develop databases of assessed substances and mixtures Facilitate sharing of guidance documents, forms, checklists, agendas, folder structures. Shared/Approved list of auditors based outside EEA Database of approved suppliers e.g. in Textiles – only if permission granted Support and distribute application software

Findings – Market Surveillance & Control of the use of the Ecolabel

Surveillance & Control Regulation –Article 10 Regular check that ecolabelled products/services maintain compliance with the relevant criteria Maintain confidentiality and security of information supplied by the applicant or obtained during site verifications

Surveillance & Control Member State Differences Policies/Planning Frequency Fees Risk based Link to Assessment Product testing

Practice Recommendations – Market Surveillance & Control of the use of the Ecolabel

Surveillance & Control Good Practice Plan from start – applicant declaration Focus on labelling / logo misuse Annual check of sample of products sold Annual check of websites and marketing literature Annual declaration of compliance Complaints policy

Surveillance & Control Good Practice Risk based approach: Issues raised in assessment Major variations National and local surveillance authorities Complaints policy Length of time licence held Product group e.g. complex criteria, long supply chain

Surveillance & Control Best Practice Annual visit to each production facility (or at least once for period of licence validity) Regular product testing required – cost to be met by licence holder

Findings – Promotion of the Ecolabel

Promotion of the Ecolabel Regulation –Article 12 Awareness raising, information and public education campaigns Encouraging uptake especially by SMEs

Promotion of the Ecolabel Member State Differences Some to none Legislative requirements Earmarking of licence fees

Practice Recommendations – Promotion of the Ecolabel

Promotion of the Ecolabel Good Practice Planning Use web site Licence holders club Participation in workshops, conferences etc Case studies Newsletter

Promotion of the Ecolabel Best Practice Users club Social media Link with key intermediaries Dedicated web site Endorsements Press kit, link with interested journalists Market analysis

Promotion – Opportunities Facilitate sharing of marketing collateral A club for users at the EEA level An ecolabel smartphone ‘app’

Findings – Penalties

Penalties Regulation –Article 17 Establish Penalties including applicability and enforcement

Member State Differences Penalties Member State Differences None or some: Maxima range from €500 to €3000 Legislative requirements Focus on misuse of the logo/label

Practice Recommendations – Penalties

Penalties Best Practice Legal basis Clarity Deterrence Allows legal action by other parties

Next Steps Further comments by 27th November Publication of Practice Guide early 2014