CB Forum Meeting, 16 June 2014

Transcription

1 CB Forum Meeting, 16 June 2014 Avenue de Beaulieu 5, B-1160 Brussels, meeting room C Monday 16 June 10:30 17:00 Actions to be performed are highlighted in yellow, please check the points which concern you! Last name First name Organisation Phone number address MACHEFAUX Emilie ADEME emilie.machefaux@ademe.fr GAUVAIN Murielle AFNOR Certification Murielle.gauvain@afnor.org DE RIDDER Kathelijne Belgian CB kathelijne.deridder@milieu.belgie.be SCHORPION Hannelore Belgian CB Hannelore.Schorpion@milieu.belgie.be Fabienne.godin@environnement.belgiqu GODIN Fabienne Belgian CB e.be +44 (0) VAUGHAN Paul British CB paul.vaughan@oakdenehollins.co.uk STOYANCHEVA Galya Bulgarian Ministry of Environment and Water gstoyancheva@moew.government.bg HRUBY Pavel CENIA Pavel.hruby@cenia.cz HAJEK Daniel Czech Ministry of Environment Daniel.hajek@mzp.cz WAIDTLOW Jakob Danish CB jwa@ecolabel.dk VLOT Ineke Dutch CB ivlot@smk.nl AURANMAA Kirsi Ecolabelling Finland Kirsi.auranmaa@ecolabel.fi DE SOUSA PINTO Carla European Commission DG ENV Carla.pinto@ec.europa.eu LEES Liisi European Commission DG ENV HEUTLING Susanne German CB susanne.heutling@uba.de CARMAN BURGOS Stéphanie Helpdesk (BIO by Deloitte) +33 (0) ecolabel@bio.deloitte.fr NYARI Eszter Hungarian CB nyari.eszter@okocimke.hu CESAREI Gianluca Ispra technical support Italian CB Gianluca.cesarei@isprambiente.it SCALET Bianca Maria Italian CB Biancamaria.scalet@mise.gov.it STAMATIOU George Ministry of Environment Greek CB asaos@prv.ypeka.gr GUBERINA Blanka Ministry of Environmental & Nature Grahovac Protection Croatia Blanka.grahovacgubernia@mzoi.hr HAJEK Daniel MoE Daniel.hajek@mzp.cz TKACZYK Joanna Polish CB jtkaczyk@pcbc.gov.pl GONCALVES Rodrigo Portuguese Ministry of Economy DGAE/CB (+351) rodrigo.goncalves@dgae.pt RIMKUS Andrea RAL ggmbh Andrea.rimkus@ral-ggmbH.de SCHOLTZ Henning RALgGmbH Henning.scholtz@ral_gGmbH.de KAUFMAN Peter Slovak Environmental Agency Peter.kaufman@sazp.sk FIBICHOVA Monika Slovakian Ministry of Environment monika.fibichova@enviro.gov.sk 1

2 1. Welcome, adoption of agenda and of the minutes of last CB meeting (Chair) (10:30-10:35) The 2014 March CB Forum minutes and the June 2014 agenda were adopted. 2. Follow-up on the tasks from last CB meeting (10:35-11:25) a. Presentation on CB Proposals on EU Ecolabel Logo Guidelines (Helpdesk) (10 mins) See PowerPoint presentation on CIRCA This task was carried out in response to Germany s initially proposed changes (March 2014). The goal was to collect the feedback of all CBs on Germany s proposals. 13 CBs responded by extended deadline: 14 April Helpdesk extracted the comments and paraphrased them in the PPT presentation. The HD will use the conclusions to create an updated draft of the logo guidelines. The HD will clearly identify what sections need to be discussed with CBs again (open questions). CBs will use this document to formulate final opinions on the proposed changes, and to discuss them at the November CB Forum. The HD will take into account the final discussion points, and will integrate the final changes into the document. b. Update on fee structure on EU Ecolabel website (EC) (5 mins) The goal of this exercise is to publicly post each CB s fee structures on the EU Ecolabel website in order to make this information transparent and available. Some CBs are still in the process of changing fees, therefore the EC is still waiting for 5 countries to respond. France: Within the fee structure template, indicating a 0 within the inspections column is not clear. Propose to either write included in application fee or write 0 if it actually is free. EC: There is no way to change this template in order for it to suit all CBs fee structures. The template was created in a way that it is generally applicable to all CBs. Therefore, either a numerical value for the cost of inspections shall be indicated within this column, or 0 will be indicated if it is free. The EC will upload all received fee structures to the website by the end of July/beginning of September; if they do not receive the remaining 5 fee structures by that time, they will indicate that those particular CBs omitted their information against the EC s request. 2

3 c. s on investigation: Russian translation of EU Ecolabel text Please collect used paper for recycling See note in Annex (Finland) (5 mins) The temporary conclusion from the March CB Forum indicated that EU Ecolabel products have to be available on the EU market; otherwise it does not respect Article 2 of the EU Ecolabel Regulation. Denmark would allow the licence holder to market and sell the product within the EU market, as well as abroad. Denmark would accept the Russian translation, even if it is not an EU language. According to Article 2 of the Regulation, the EU Ecolabel applies to any goods or services which are supplied for distribution, consumption or use on the Community market whether in return for payment or free of charge. Therefore an EU Ecolabel product cannot be conceived exclusively for the extra EU market and it can be sold extra EU only if the same product is available also on the EU market. In these cases the sentence in English shall be kept (for all non-eu official languages). d. Possible amendment to peracetic acid (EC) (10 mins) The EC previously contacted Germany and Denmark for their input. Within the context of laundry detergents, peracetic acid, which is produced by mixing in hydrogen peroxide, it can be considered as one of the most environmentally friendly and frequently used bleaching products. The Nordic Ecolabel criteria exempts peracetic acid. The calculation for the critical dilution volume does not have a specific derogation. Peracitic acid is highly unstable, which means that during the washing process, it separates as acidic acid and hydrogen peroxide. There are alternative bleaching solutions such as: boric acid, borates and perborates, sodium hypocholorite (however, the latter is toxic to the environment). Peracitic acid was initially foreseen as a substance that could be used within EU Ecolabel product formulas because it is friendlier. Since criterion 2 allows peracetic acid but criterion 4b does not, it should be excluded, however a solid conclusion was not established. Denmark suggests that when the conclusion is made, it should be added to the professional laundry detergents user manual. e. s on investigation about vinegar in APC (Belgium/EC) (10 mins) Denmark: Only chemical substance mixtures are allowed as APC. Belgium: Could adding a fragrance make the substance a mixture? France: This is similar to if electrolised water could be an APC. Begium: We do not accept electrolised water, but will see with our expert to find out if vinegar can be considered an APC (under the condition that it passes the test). Germany: Vinegar may not meet VOC levels. 3

4 The EC believes that a single substance can be considered as a mixture by adding any other substance to it (i.e. perfume, color), with the exception of water. Vinegar (if it is a mixture) may be submitted for testing and could be considered as an APC if it complies with all EU Ecolabel applicable criteria. A special notice should be taken on if it meets VOC levels and the applicable performance test. As for electrolized water, it cannot be accepted at all since there is a German court case that moved it out of the market stating that the so called activated water is no better than tap water. f. Update on DID calculation sheets (Germany) (10 mins) On 1 October 2014, the old DID list should be surrendered and the new one should be adopted. The English version of the DID list (Part A and Part B) is already available on the EU Ecolabel website within each of the cleaning up categories tabs. Its translations in all European languages will be ready by October Calculation sheets are almost completed, only 2 product groups are still not finalized at the moment, but they will be soon. 3. Logo Use: EU Ecolabel (bumper) stickers, tissue-handkerchief See note in Annex (Helpdesk/Chair) (11:25-11:40) - USE OF EU ECOLABEL STICKER ON A THIRD PARTY COMPANY S SOAP DISPENSERS Denmark: Would allow it, but we would require for there to be the soap s EU Ecolabel licence number and a visible written explanation from the company communicating to the consumer what they will do when the EU Ecolabel soap s validity reaches expiration. Chair: If this is implemented, this means that the EU Ecolabel soap licence holders will have to have high surveillance on third party companies that use a sticker to advertise their EU Ecolabel soap. France: The consumer may find the sticker confusing and wonder if it is the dispenser or the soap that is EU Ecolabel awarded. Chair: As done for other PGs, an additional solution could be to omit the logo and write the sentence: The soap contained in this dispenser is awarded with the EU Ecolabel (XX/YYY/ZZZ). However, it would be preferable to have transparent dispensers that allow seeing the logo on the primary packaging of the EU Ecolabel refill. Third party companies should use a dispenser that allows one to see the logo on the primary packaging containing the EU Ecolabel soap. Stickers should not be used on dispensers. The HD will add this conclusion to the logo guidelines. - LICENCE HOLDERS PROVIDE CERTIFICATES TO CLIENTS, FOR DISPLAY IN THEIR PUBLIC RESTROOMS: 4

5 Germany: Does not believe that this should be allowed. Denmark and the UK would allow these certificates. Since handing out certificates is not explicitly excluded, CBs will determine on a case to case basis if their licence holders certificates are appropriate, along with the licence number and logo usage. This informal validation will be done only if the CB has been notified by the licence holder of their initiative. The HD will notify CBs of any certificate use requests submitted to them. The HD will add this conclusion to the logo guidelines. - EU ECOLABEL BUMPER STICKER USAGE ON TOURIST ACCOMMODATION COMPANY C ARS It is possible that individuals may think that the car was awarded with the EU Ecolabel. Denmark: It is a good marketing opportunity for services. Knowing that EU Ecolabel services have limited marketing/communication opportunities, it shall be allowed for services. Licence holders shall exclusively use the EU Ecolabel logo (black & white or color) along with the licence number and accompanying text stating that their hotel (include name) is awarded with the EU Ecolabel. The HD will add this conclusion to the logo guidelines. - LOGO PRINTED ON TISSUE NAPKINS Although the EU Ecolabel logo is typically displayed on the packaging of the ensemble of tissue napkins, licence holders may display the EU Ecolabel logo on each napkin, as long as all logo color and proportions are respected (see EU Ecolabel logo guidelines). Furthermore, all dyes used shall pass their corresponding tests. 4. ECAT Proposal for field changes See note in Annex (Helpdesk) (11:40-11:55) See presentation on CIRCA The first questionnaire on ECAT fields was sent out after the 2014 March CB Forum by the HD. Thanks to the first round of votes, we were able to identify several permanent changes that will be made to the ECAT. For the fields that had a close number of votes (4 votes or less), CBs shall respond to the HD s follow up (deadline 11 July). The conclusions from this final vote will be sent by the HD to the IT Team, who will then make the permanent changes to ECAT (by the end of summer, beginning of fall). The new ECAT User Manuals will be released once the changes have been made. 5

6 5. ECAT Presentation on uploading statistics via ECAT Import Template in preparation for September 2014 reporting period (following EC guidelines on how to count licences and products) (Helpdesk) (11:55-12:05) See presentation on CIRCA for tutorial on uploading licences via the ECAT Import Template. The HD asked for feedback on if CBs believed that it would be feasible for them to insert all existing products/licences that have not yet been inserted into the ECAT by September 2014 (statistic reporting period). If this exercise is completed, and furthermore, if CBs updated ECAT regularly, it will avoid CBs having to report their internal data to the HD twice a year. This presentation tutorial can be used by CBs as guidelines to importing all licences/products that have not yet been inserted in ECAT to contribute to transparency. The HD will get back to CBs to assess the feasibility of importing statistics by September Proposal to include EU Ecolabel licence holder listings on online databases: (i.e. BookDifferent) (Helpdesk) (12:05-12:15) EC: In light of staying consistent with previous requests, (taking into account that a similar request was submitted by TraveLife, discussed at the 2013 November CB Forum, this request should be rejected. UK: These sorts of requests should be further studied and not so easily dismissed, especially since BookDifferent is an affiliate of Booking.com. HD: We could provide them with ECAT extractions every 2-3 months; although the ECAT does not include all EU Ecolabel tourist accommodations licences, the ECAT does not provide false information, therefore we do not see an issue. We can furthermore ask the company to add EU Ecolabel licence numbers on the listings to ensure transparency. This would be a good marketing opportunity. Should we ask for an authorization to companies before submitting their data to these online database? Similarly to the TraveLife request, these types of requests are not currently feasible to grant, since this web listing would require CBs to monitor them. The Helpdesk/Chair will give a brief follow up presentation on this topic at the 2014 November CB Forum. 7. Chair Update on the conclusions taken at the Virtual CB Forum (APC, copying and graphic paper, tourist accommodations) conclusions (Chair) (12:15-12:30) - APC WUR (WEIGHT UTILITY RATIO) CALCULATION FOR A TRIGGER SPRAY PRODUCT 6

7 The majority of answers showed r=2 for the trigger, and r=1 for all other components (bottle, label). See Virtual CB Forum Excel sheet on CIRCA for full details. Belgium: Asked the EC how we proceed with those products on the market not following this shared common approach. They suggest that CBs that have already given licences with a different WUR calculation, give their licence holders a time frame to comply with the decided upon conclusion. EC: If Belgium wants action to be taken by the EC for them to assess how CBs award these particular licences, a formal complaint will have to be submitted. Belgium: Rather not submit a formal complaint against another CB. Since they only know about two licences on the market that are not compliant, they will contact the relevant CBs to sort it out. The EC needs to receive a formal complaint to intervene. Otherwise, CBs will have to solve the issue internally. Interested CBs will contact their licence holder to try to fix the issue and will give them a period of time to adapt and comply with the 2014 March CB Forum conclusions/virtual CB Forum conclusions. - COPYING AND GRAPHIC PAPER: In criterion 4 (a-b), the CLP generic/specific concentration limits also apply for the H317/R43 substances. See Virtual CB Forum Excel sheet on CIRCA for full details. - TOURIST ACCOMMODATIONS FOOD DISTRIBUTERS Although food distributors are not explicitly excluded in the 2009/578/EC Decision, no single dose packaging is allowed for food services according to criterion 20, therefore vending machines are indirectly excluded. See Virtual CB Forum Excel sheet on CIRCA for full details. Lunch (12:30-13:30) 8. Overall issues concerning handling applications (13:30-14:30) a. s on laboratories/test institutions 2 nd reporting period 2014 (EC) See note in Annex (15 min) See presentation on CIRCA This exercise is done to understand how companies apply via test methods. At least for 2014, this reporting period will occur 3 times a year, and will be turned in by the Helpdesk 2 weeks before CB forum meeting. 2 January - 21 February 2014 s first reporting period had doubtful responses, therefore the EC sent out guidelines for how to properly fill out the Excel sheet. Are the number of licences or the number of products supposed to be reported? o The number of licences. 7

8 Greece: Why are these options indicated? o EC: These testing options are laid out in the EU Ecolabel Regulation, therefore, there is no room to change them. CBs should always aim to use Option 1, and if it is not feasible, they should go to Option 2, 3, etc. s At the November 2014 CB Forum, the EC will present the 2014 compiled results along with a draft list of equivalent test methods. b. Licence registration number discrepancies (Helpdesk) - Please refer to the note in the Annex (5 min) Poland and Hungary added on an extra set of numbers to their TV licence extension numbers: XX/YYY/ZZZ/?? because they were unable to register extensions via ECAT following the normal process, outlined in the ECAT User Manuals. Poland and Hungary find it advantageous to separate their extensions on ECAT so that they are able to quantify them for their internal statistics. Chair: Internally, we use an application number to differentiate our extensions, however in practice, and when inserting them into ECAT, it falls under the same licence number. Poland and Hungary will contact the HD with a list of their licence extensions so that they can then collaborate with the IT Team to fix this in ECAT. All countries are expected to respect the registration number guidelines in the EU Ecolabel Regulation. c. How to deal with Classification, labelling, and packaging (CLP) s 2nd ATP imposing to write on packaging H317- EU H208 phrases? (Chair/Cyprus ) (10 mins) See note in Annex How should EU Ecolabel licences holders communicate the packaging changes? Will a formal extension or new application have to be submitted by the licence holder, or is a general notification to the CB viable? Similar problem occurs for Soaps and Shampoos: The Cosmetic Regulation impose the CPNP, therefore companies ask if they have to communicate the new CPNP notification number and new packaging to CBs. Belgium: Since the packaging change does not affect the criteria therefore the licence holder should just have to notify the CB. If the licence holder just makes a small change to the packaging of a product, and no criteria are affected by this change, it will not be considered as legible for a new application or an extension. The affected product groups are mainly: detergents family, soaps and shampoos, and indoor and outdoor paints and varnishes. 8

9 d. How to communicate that a pulp type is ok for EU Ecolabel (Chair/Finland) (10 mins) See note in Annex How can a pulp producer communicate that its pulp has been approved to be used for the EU Ecolabel? (Question is similar to lubricants Lusc List). The CB may provide a declaration: Pulp producers are then obliged to give CBs their latest emission values for other parameters and all the information needed for the CB s EU Ecolabel emission calculations and application purposes. UK: Since this is similar to the Lusc List, agree with creating an informal list of pulp producers so that licence holders can effectively identify already approved pulp producers. Chair: Knew of a paper producer that had trouble finding pulp producers. Supports the idea of a list, however, should specify that it is a non-exhaustive and loose guideline and that the presence of a pulp in this list doesn t necessarily mean that this pulp can be used at any percentage in any EU Ecolabel mix. Denmark: Concerned about how the pulp producer will market themselves via this list. These pulp producers should only use it to be easily identified with a printed paper company, but they cannot openly advertise the fact that they are on the list. Netherlands: Agrees with Denmark. A pulp producer that wants to share their experience for the EU Ecolabel should do so privately and orally. EC: Believes that if a pulp producer list is made, pulp producers will use it as a communication channel. Concerned that this list will not be updated regularly and will become obsolete. Germany: There would have to be someone in charge of this initiative to coordinate efforts. EC: CB cannot issue and sign a declaration stating that the pulp producer is approved. Netherlands: Convinced that during the revision of the EU Ecolabel Regulation, there will be issues regarding how to integrate intermediary products, like pulp. Portugal: it will get messy with intermediary products. More discussion needs to cover this topic, could be mentioned during the evaluation on the implementation of the EU Ecolabel Regulation. The general understanding was that pulp producers cannot market or communicate themselves as being associated with the EU Ecolabel. e. Do WC blocks fall within scope of APC? (AT) (10 mins) - See note in Annex WC blocks are not directly excluded in the APC criteria, therefore they technically could fall within APC. However, they may not be considered able to clean. How do CBs interpret this? WC blocks are not intended for cleaning, and are not used for routine removal (they are mainly for covering smell). However, consumer tests could indicate that they indeed are good cleaning agents. Belgium: The packaging requirements for APC are not designed for WC blocks. 9

10 Although WC blocks are not explicitly excluded, the fitness for use would probably exclude them from being awarded the EU Ecolabel under the APC criteria. It would probably not fit all of the requirements. The next revision could take this discussion into account. f. Tissue Paper: Which emissions to provide when using Recycling Fibers + use of converting broke as recycling fibers (Italy) (10 mins) See note in Annex Question 1: If an applicant (paper mill) uses recycled paper that he buys from a distributor, which data should be requested for the recycled paper? Question 2: Do CBs accept broke produced by a tissue paper converting as recycled fibres? The emission data for the recycled bought fibres should be set to zero, the distributor would not be able to provide these in fact. According to the Commission Decision establishing EU Ecolabel criteria for tissue paper, paper mills cannot use mill-broke (produced or purchased) as recycled fibres; according to the FAQ excel sheet conclusion for Graphic Paper as of 01/09/2011: The waste paper coming from paper converters and printing houses is pre-consumer waste material and can legitimately be called recycled fibres it is not mill broke. Therefore it can be used. Therefore, waste paper from converters and printing houses can be considered recycled fibres, unless the converter belongs to the paper mill and is located in the paper mill itself. In that case, the broke produced should reflect the emissions of the paper mill (worst case scenario) Coffee break (14:30-14:45) 9. AOB (14:45-15:45) a. Invalid Links in EU Ecolabel Criteria (Czech Republic) On some criteria, certain links no longer work/expired. Although the properly working links can be found elsewhere on the website, there should be a link between the broken links and the proper ones. The Czech Republic shall indicate the exact links that no longer work, and the EC will ask the webmaster to see if it is possible to fix this, by adding a forwarding option to the correct link. In the future, links to the website will be avoided in EU Ecolabel criteria documents. A corrigendum will not be prepared, as the link to the EU Ecolabel website will be easily found. b. INTERGRAF proposal to modify the UM for Printed Paper In order to clarify the situation, the following questions could be asked to CBs: o Are you, as CB, granting EU Ecolabel licences for printed paper for single products with unique titles or with the unique customer name? (Examples: Vogue, Bild, Bilka, brochure X for customer Y) 10

11 o Are you as CB granting EU Ecolabel licences for printed paper for groups of printed products? (Examples: books, magazines, catalogues, brochures, retail products printed in heat set offset) DK: All trade names that would be covered by the EU Ecolabel licence have to be reported to the CB, in order to be included in the appendix of the contract (and should also be registered in ECAT). NL: Would prefer to have the same approach as it is implemented for textiles PG. It was clarified that it was not expected to have the answers of these questions during this meeting, due to the fact INTERGRAF letter was sent only a few days ago to the CBs. The EC will ask the 11 CBs, who have awarded EU Ecolabel licences for printed paper (source: ECAT) how they interpret the current guidance provided in the User Manual. All CBs are additionally invited to provide their opinion on this issue. After the EC analyses the feedback from CBs, the User Manual will be changed accordingly and CBs will be requested to strictly follow the guidance, in order to create a level playing field amongst companies across Europe. c. Classification of the final product due to the newly adopted derogations in the cleaning products groups (DK) Due to the derogation, we risk having an EU Ecolabel product for households labelled as H411. Only one feedback remark was received on the text sent for written vote; afterwards, the vote was closed. Final products cannot be listed in derogations. The EC indicated that the requested change would imply a more comprehensive investigation, as well as the start of a new inter-service consultation, a new voting process, which would delay the amendment. It was agreed that no new EU Ecolabel licences would be awarded before the amendment is published, (the EC understood that it was urgent to have this amendment adopted). Since IPTS started the revision of all detergents PGs this year, this problem will be solved through the future criteria documents. Therefore, the risk to have EU Ecolabel products classified as H411 will not be for long. d. SMEs located in the same geographical area willing to apply for EU Ecolabel: allow fee reductions? They could form a consortium but they would need to have a legal representative to sign the contract. e. Ecolabel tissue paper advertised as Medical sheets Can the name, "medical sheet be misinterpreted and create a conclusion that these products do not fall within the scope of the EU Ecolabel? 11

12 CB Forum suggested changing the name of the product. Belgium recommended for it to be changed to: "Investigation table sheets". f. Update on user manuals tentatively availability for the last published PGs Toilets and Urinals: Mid-June2014 Imaging Equipment: Mid-June2014 Paints and Varnishes: June2014 Water Based Heaters: End of July 2014 Absorbent Hygiene Products: September 2014 Bed mattresses and Textiles: Mid-July 2014 Converted Paper: July 2014 (but not developed by IPTS) g. Brief update on the Originate guidelines The last version of the Guideline document, which was finalized last year (by Denmark, Jakob Wegener Waidtlow) will be uploaded to CIRCA by the EC. h. Converted paper: envelopes Windows and silicon band in envelopes are counted in 10% of non-paper component. There is an envelope manufacturer who complies with the criteria but sells the product to a second company who does overprinting. In that case, does the final product also have EU Ecolabel? o Once a company is awarded a licence for converted paper, there are no indications on how the licence holder applies it via their products. For this reason, there is some grey area between converted paper and printed paper PGs. Regardless, the act of printing is not in the scope of converted paper EU Ecolabel criteria. Therefore, no, the second company that prints on the certified converted paper cannot advertise the EU Ecolabel. In order to do so, they would have to apply for the printed paper product group 12

13 Annex / Notes to the agenda: 2.c s on investigation: Russian translation of Please collect used paper for recycling (Finland) - A Finnish printing house which prints EU Ecolabel certified publications has a Russian customer who wants to have the EU Ecolab el logo on his ordered printed paper products. They would like to know if they can translate the text that appears near the EU Ecolabel certified paper Please collect used paper for recycling into Russian, even if it is not an EU language. - Questions arose whether or not this product had a link to the EU market. If not, then it should not have been initially awarded the EU Ecolabel. This will be reported on by Finland. 3. Logo Use: Communicating the EU Ecolabel via (bumper) stickers and company-made certificates (Helpdesk/Chair) - Situation 1: A non-eu Ecolabel licence holder supplies EU Ecolabel certified soap in their public restrooms. They would like to put an EU Ecolabel sticker on their permanent soap dispensers to communicate to restroom visitors that the soap that they are using is EU Ecolabel certified. - Situation 2: - An EU Ecolabel certified company distributes company-made certificates indicating that their customer s restrooms are equipped with EU Ecolabel certified tissue paper. - Situation 3: - A tourist accommodation licence holder would like to put an EU Ecolabel bumper sticker on their company car to promote the fact that they are EU Ecolabel certified. They have proposed to adapt the Good for you good for the environment logo to include the phrase certified establishment EU Ecolabel (see Figure 1 below). Figure 1: Situation 3 13

14 - Situation 4: Can the EU Ecolabel Logo be printed on each tissue-handkerchief contained in a packaging already regularly Ecolabelled? A producer has been requested by his client to print the EU Ecolabel Logo on each one of his Eu Ecolabelled tissue hankerchiefs. Is it possible? Moreover they would print only the Flower and the licence number, monochrome. They showed example of already on the market printed tissue paper. 4. ECAT Proposal for field changes - There are (sometimes unnecessary) fields in the ECAT_Admin for the applicant to fill out. There are several mandatory and optional fields that the applicant must or can choose to complete. In an attempt to simplify the ECAT application process, the Helpdesk sent out an excel sheet for all CBs to fill out. - This presentation will outline which fields have been identified to be permanently deleted and which of their statuses will be changed in the ECAT_Admin in order to make the ECAT more user friendly. 8.a Guidelines for choosing laboratories and tests institutes: report on the data submitted by CBs (EC) - CBs shall report this information 3 times per year to the Helpdesk, who will then submit the compiled information to the EC 2 weeks before each CB Forum. The final Excel sheet and PowerPoint will be posted on CIRCA by the Helpdesk. - Guidance on how to fill in excel sheet: - Columns concerning 'Option 1', 'Option 2', 'Option 3', 'Option 4' and 'Option 5' o When selecting each of the possible options, please fill in with a figure representing the total number of EU Ecolabel licence holders choosing a specific option. - Note 1: Will allow us to understand how representative is each option in each country. - Note 2: Please note that when option 5 is chosen, it requires that the laboratory have implemented a quality management system. - Column 'Equivalent laboratory test approved' o This column aims at collecting information on laboratory tests assessed and approved as 'equivalent' with the test method referred to in the EU Ecolabel criteria document by the Competent Body. - Note: The information provided on the 'equivalent laboratory test approved' should be presented in a way that could be easily identified and as complet e as possible. Reference to the laboratories carrying out those tests should be introduced in the 'Comments' column. - Column 'Comments' o This column may be filled with any other information that the Competent Body might consider as relevant. 14

15 o It should be used to report any other sources of information accepted by the CB as proving compliance with a specific EU Ecolabel requirement. - Note 1: References to the 'DID-list' or to the 'LuSC-list' should be inserted in this column. - Note 2: Any clarification on the option (1, 2, 3, 4 or 5) chosen should be also introduced in this column. 8.b Licence registration number discrepancies (Hungary/Poland) One of Hungary s licnece holders has two lincece numbers: HU/022/002 and HU/022/003. These two contracts cover more than 1000 different TV series. It would be impossible to have separate contracts for every 5-6 TV Series, as the applications are handed in by thier licence holders.therefore they assign new numbers to each extension, (i.e. (HU/022/003/51). Are any other CBs experiencing this issue and adding another set of numbers to the end of a licence? How are other CBs handling a large number of products listed under one licence number? 8.c How to deal with Classification, labeling, and packaging (CLP) s 2nd ATP imposing to write on packaging H317-EU H208 (Chair/Cyprus ) The 2nd Adaptation to Technical Progress (ATP) of the CLP Regulation in force from 1 June 2015 lowers the thresholds for the obligation of declaring H317- EU H208 phrases on the packaging of products containing CIT/MIT (product groups like Detergents, Soaps, Paints and varnishes will be affected), many licence holders are contacting us to know how they should behave to communicate these changes. How will you behave with the packaging change? 8.d How to communicate that a pulp type is ok for EU Ecolabel (Chair/Finland) A pulp producer wants to know how they can tell their customers in a sound way about the EU Ecolabel approval of their products? What is allowed to say or to do? They do know that they can t use the logo. They would of course like to take as much advantage as possible of the approval in the marketing. (Problem similar to Lubricant s Lusc List and so on). 8. e Do WC blocks fall within scope of APC? (AT) A producer asks if a WC Block could be awarded with the EU Ecolabel. We once had a discussion on this issue in the CB forum without reaching a final conclusion (question 7 in the table of FAQ CB forum regarding all purpose cleaners as of 11/08/2011): "Temporary conclusion: The critera for all purpose cleaning and sanitary cleaning products does not leave out these products in the latest version of the criteria. Therefor they are allowed to apply for the EU Ecolabel. However it must live up to all requirements that the criteria set up for a sanitary toilet cleaning product. To be taken to the next CB Forum" 15

16 8.f Tissue Paper: Which emissions to provide when using Recycling Fibers + use of converting broke as recycling fibers (Italy) How do you behave when a producer in his pulp mixes uses bought recycled paper whose emissions are not known? Do you ask the seller of the recycled paper to provide all the emissions of this recycled paper? Or do you assign zero emission for these recycled fibers? Moreover, would you accept broke coming from converters (bought or own converter s broke) as recycled fibers? 16