Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
July 2019
INIES program verification rules
Summary
1. Context ................................................................................................................................... 4
2. INIES program characteristics ................................................................................................ 5
2.1. General information .............................................................................................................. 5
2.2. Scope ...................................................................................................................................... 5
2.3. Governance of the INIES program and relations with interested parties ............................. 5
2.3.1. Steering Committee ............................................................................................................... 5
2.3.2. Requester ............................................................................................................................... 6
2.3.3. Operator ................................................................................................................................. 6
2.3.4. Manager ................................................................................................................................. 6
2.3.5. Verifiers .................................................................................................................................. 7
2.3.5.1. Normative framework............................................................................................................ 7
2.3.5.2. Advisory board of verifiers ..................................................................................................... 7
2.4. Links between the INIES program and the INIES database.................................................... 8
3. Documents of the INIES program .......................................................................................... 8
3.1. Environmental and Health Product Declarations (EHPD) ...................................................... 8
3.2. Configurators ......................................................................................................................... 9
3.3. Life cycle inventory (LCI) ........................................................................................................ 9
3.4. Acceptation of "Product Category Rules" PCR ....................................................................... 9
3.5. Compliance of the program with NF EN ISO 14025 standard .............................................. 10
4. Data confidentiality .............................................................................................................. 10
5. Technical questions, comments and claims ........................................................................ 11
5.1. General conditions ............................................................................................................... 11
5.2. Questions asked to the manager of the INIES verification program ................................... 11
5.3. Claims – Market monitoring ................................................................................................ 12
5.3.1. Warning ................................................................................................................................ 13
5.3.2. Archiving .............................................................................................................................. 13
5.3.3. Withdrawal .......................................................................................................................... 13
6. INIES verification program process ...................................................................................... 13
6.1. General information ............................................................................................................ 13
6.2. Verification: principles and required content ...................................................................... 14
6.3. Confidentiality, provision of information ............................................................................ 14
6.4. Verification points ................................................................................................................ 14
6.5. Conclusions of the verification ............................................................................................ 15
6.6. Claims and sanctions ............................................................................................................ 15
6.7. Program verification registration costs................................................................................ 15
6.8. Identification to the INIES verification program .................................................................. 15
6.9. Summary of the EHPD verification process ......................................................................... 16
6.10. Summary of the verification process of configurators ........................................................ 17
6.10.1. For all configurators ............................................................................................................. 17
6.10.2. For a configurator issuing collective EHPDs ......................................................................... 17
6.10.3. For a configurator issuing individual EHPDs ........................................................................ 18
6.11. Declaration updates (EHPD, LCI, …) ..................................................................................... 19
6.11.1. Minor update ....................................................................................................................... 19
6.11.2. Major update ....................................................................................................................... 19
6.11.3. Summary .............................................................................................................................. 20
7. Process for accreditation of verifiers ................................................................................... 20
7.1. Flowchart of the accreditation process ............................................................................... 21
7.2. Submission of application .................................................................................................... 22
7.2.1. Information about admissibility criteria for verifier initial accreditation and renewal ....... 22
7.2.1.1. Initial accreditation .............................................................................................................. 22
7.2.1.2. Renewal of accreditation ..................................................................................................... 23
7.3. Composition of the jury ....................................................................................................... 24
7.4. Keeping competencies ......................................................................................................... 24
7.5. Claims and sanctions ............................................................................................................ 24
8. European cooperation ......................................................................................................... 24
8.1. Referencing an EHPD on www.eco-platform.org ................................................................ 24
8.2. Mutual recognition .............................................................................................................. 25
ANNEX A – Application request to the INIES program .......................................................................... 26
ANNEX B – Pricing conditions (01/01/2019) ......................................................................................... 28
ANNEX C–Template of EHPD ................................................................................................................. 30
ANNEX D – Template of accompanying report ..................................................................................... 46
ANNEX E - EHPD verification report ...................................................................................................... 49
ANNEX F – EHPD verification checklist .................................................................................................. 51
ANNEX G – Template for a Certificate of verification ........................................................................... 71
ANNEX H – Usage rules for the "FDES vérifiée INIES" Mark .................................................................. 75
ANNEX I – Template for an accreditation letter .................................................................................... 79
ANNEX J – Audit grid ............................................................................................................................. 80
ANNEX K –Methodological details ........................................................................................................ 85
ANNEX L – Quality process .................................................................................................................... 86
1. Context
The environment represents a strong issue for the European Union and is systematically taken into account in all sectorial European policies. Environmental and health declarations, which are complementary to the technical characteristics of construction products defined in the Construction Product Regulation (CPR) 305/2011/CE (CE marking), are unmissible.
The whole chain of building professionals has also seized the environmental problematic and has implemented it in all its practices (e.g. HQE™approach).
Producing objective and precise environmental information, voluntarily made available by the industry for professional users then becomes of particular importance.
In the late 90's, the international standardization has already provided the first tools allowing producing data on a scientific, objective and reliable basis (NF EN ISO 14040: Life Cycle Assessment of products). It has also provided, in a generic way, the tools to organize and transmit this information (NF EN ISO 14020, and following) in particular in the form of "environmental declarations" (as defined in NF EN ISO 14025 standard).
In 2001, the French standardization, in particular on initiative of the "Association des Industries de Produits de Construction" (AIMCC) (Association of Construction Product Industries), has published an experimental standard with two parts, XP P01- 010, on the content of environmental and health information of construction products, applying the concepts of NF EN ISO 14040, NF EN ISO 14020 and NF EN ISO 140251 standards to construction products. The revision of this experimental standard into an approved standard NF P01-010 "Environmental quality of construction products - Environmental and health declaration of construction products" has been published in December 2004.
The normative context has evolved in 2006 and been amended in 2017, at the international level, by the publication of ISO 21930: Sustainability in buildings and civil engineering works — Core rules for environmental product declarations of construction products and services (adaptation of NF EN ISO 14025 standard to construction products), and at the European level, by publication of NF EN 15804 standard: Sustainability of construction works - Environmental product declarations — Core rules for the product category of construction products, replacing NF P01-010 standard.
It has always been important for the construction industry to make sure that these environmental declarations are properly established and verified by independent third party for publication and dissemination to professionals. Since 1 July 2017, data aimed at consumers shall be verified2. The INIES verification program has been set up since 2006 according to NF EN ISO 14025, NF EN 15804 and NF EN 15804/CN standards.
It is stated that drawing up the rules for construction products made up of NF EN 15804+ A1 s and NF EN 15804/CN standards has been validated by the members of the AFNOR P01E commission - Sustainability in buildings.
1 At this time, as working papers which precede the publication of NF EN ISO 14025 standard in July 2006.
2 Ministerial order of 23 December 2013 on environmental declaration of construction products and decorative products intended for use in building works and ministerial order of 31 August 2015 on verification by an independent third party of environmental declaration of construction products, decorative products and electric, electronic and HVAC equipment intended for use in building works.
2. INIES program characteristics
2.1. General information
NF EN ISO 14025 standard recalls that "The overall goal of environmental labels and declarations is to encourage the demand for, and supply of, those products that cause less stress on the environment, through communication of verifiable and accurate information that is not misleading, thereby stimulating the potential for market-driven continuous environmental improvement".
The objectives of Type III environmental declarations are as follows:
− to provide LCA-based information and additional information on the environmental aspects of products;
− to assist purchasers and users to make informed comparisons between products; these declarations are not comparative assertions;
− to encourage improvement of environmental performance;
− to provide information for assessing the environmental impacts of products over their life cycle.
Reminder: All environmental labelling, which include type III environmental declarations shall be in conformity with the general principles stated in NF EN ISO 14020: Environmental labels and declarations -- General principles.
2.2. Scope
The present program applies to construction products as defined in AFNOR standards NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN. Its objective is the verification and publication of an environmental and health declaration submitted by a requester (owner of the declaration, mostly an industrial or an industrial union) to the manager of the program, in accordance with the template in
ANNEX A – Application request to the INIES program.
2.3. Governance of the INIES program and relations with interested parties
Following figure shows the governance of the INIES program:
2.3.1. Steering Committee
The steering committee, to ensure proper functioning of the program, is in charge of the implication of interested parties, chaired by the representative of Alliance HQE-GBC.
The steering committee (COPIL) defines the general policy regarding the content of the INIES verification program,
− ensuring:
o ethics and deontology in operating the program,
Verifiers
Steering Committee (COPIL) State accredited program
INIES program
Verifiers
Accredited by the INIES program
Possibility for consulting peers and technical exchange
Owner: Alliance HQE-GBC Manager: AFNOR
Established member of ECO Platform
Chairmanship: Alliance HQE-GBC Secretariat: AFNOR
Defines the general policy of the verification program
Record the EHPDs, LCAs in the program Pay the contract to the verifier,
no matter of result
Requesters
Group of verifiers
6
o upholding of the conformity of the program in front of changes of regulations and standards concerning environmental and health declarations,
o development of required procedures for verification of all data which are useful for the assessment of environmental and health performance of buildings
o integration of the program in European or international networks.
− validating:
o communication actions
o every modification to the operation of the program with regard to these rules
− referring to the bodies of the INIES Database or public authorities as needed
In the COPIL, each participant is invited to express and argue his point of view. It shall be deemed that a decision is adopted when at least 80% of present participants express their approval, based on one vote for each entity.
The stakeholders participating in the COPIL are members of CSIB.
The representatives of DHUP are permanent guests. A representative of the group of verifiers may be invited on invitation. Each member of the COPIL appoints a full member and an alternate member to represent him. To become a member of the COPIL, it is necessary to be an actor of collective interests and to be co-opted by the COPIL.
The COPIL meets as much as needed, and at least three times a year.
The members of the COPIL are subject to confidentiality.
2.3.2. Requester
These are the emitters of environmental and health declarations of construction products (EHPD, EHPD or LCA configurators). They may be industrials, unions, federations, etc.
2.3.3. Operator
Alliance HQE-GBC mandated AFNOR by contract for the management of the verification program.
As operator, Alliance HQE-GBC ensures proper performance of the contract. It is also responsible for protection of the logo "FDES vérifiée INIES" and heads the COPIL of the INIES verification program.
2.3.4. Manager
AFNOR was mandated to ensure operational management of the verification program. This includes global management of the program (management of documentation, claims and sanctions…), registration of EHPDs, LCAs and configurators in the program (technical and administrative management…) as well as management of verifier accreditation program.
As manager, AFNOR ensures the implementation of requirements:
− set out in ministerial order of 31 August 2015 relating to independent third party verification of environmental declarations of construction products, decorative products and electric, electronic and HVAC equipment intended for use in building works.
− of good practice needed for the status as established Eco Platform program.
− of respect of INIES admission rules INIES and registration in the INIES database.
7
The manager ensures impartiality and independence of his ability recognition process, and also ensures confidentiality of gathered information, of no conflict of interests and of accurate claim management.
2.3.5. Verifiers
2.3.5.1. Normative framework
NF EN ISO 14025 standard defines the role and responsibility of the verifier. This role is completed by information contained in NF EN 15804 standard.
NOTE: the verification is a mandatory process of the EHPD program
− NF EN ISO 14025 : clauses 3.8 / 3.9 / 5.7 / 8 / 9.4
− NF EN 15804+A1 : clause 9
For the accreditation, the INIES verification program relies on an accreditation system based on the evaluation by an independent jury of the verifier's aptitude to verify an EHPD. A peer review is also planned for the renewal of accreditation. The conclusion of these reviews is brought to the jury as an element of assessment and registered by the COPIL.
For a good operation of the program, an up-to-date list of accredited verifiers is available on the INIES website (www.inies.fr).
2.3.5.2. Advisory board of verifiers
All EHPD program accredited verifiers are members of the advisory board of verifiers. The role of this board is to express an expert opinion on a specific subject. This subject may be about interpretation of normative documents or program rules, on revision of the program rules, its operation, etc…
The advisory board of verifiers derives its legitimacy foremost from the technical expertise of its members. Thus, opinion, comments and proposals issued by the board are mainly guided by a technical point of view of the requirements relating to the environmental assessment of construction products, not taking purely individual issues into account.
The opinion, comments and proposals expressed by the advisory board of verifiers only have a consultative value and do not replace regulations or program rules. They will be shared with the instances and the verifiers, and are not intended to be published as is, but may be used as basis for evolutions of the INIES program, after acceptation by the COPIL.
The advisory board of verifiers is one of the entry points for the instances of the program to consult the verifiers on specific subjects. The advisory board of verifiers may also spontaneously identify subjects to be handled.
To optimise the time of the voluntary members of the advisory board of verifiers, consulting will mainly be carried out by correspondence (use of electronic committee or others). However, according to specific needs, consultation meetings may be held at some instances of the program to handle subjects that need strong interaction between the members of the advisory board of verifiers. These meetings are requested by members of the advisory board of verifiers.
The advisory board of verifiers may appoint several verifiers among its members to fulfil the secretariat of the advisory board of verifiers and to be the link with the instances of the program.
The advisory board of verifiers will appoint one or several representatives to respond to the solicitations of the INIES instances on predefined subjects. This/these representative(s) will issue their opinion in the name of the advisory board of verifiers, after consulting the other accredited verifiers.
8
The already existing annual meeting of the verifiers will allow establishing the annual overview of the advisory board of verifiers. An annual summary may be issued on this occasion.
2.4. Links between the INIES program and the INIES database
Each requester of the INIES program shall register his declaration (EHPD or PEP) in the INIES database.
The manager of the Program is member of the Supervisory Board of the INIES database (CSIB), which allows establishing the link between the two instances.
3. Documents of the INIES program
3.1. Environmental and Health Product Declarations (EHPD)
There is no geographic restriction for this program. But EHPD of construction products shall meet the conditions of admission stating that the declarations shall respect the format of NF EN 15804 and NF EN 15804/CN standard, as well as French regulations:
• on environmental declarations (Decree No. 2013-1264 and ministerial order of 23 December 2013 relating to environmental declarations of construction products and decorative products intended for use in building works)
• on VOC emission declarations for the concerned products (Decree No. 2011-321 and et ministerial order of 19 April 2011 relating to labelling of construction products or floor and wall coverings or paints and varnishes about their emission of volatile pollutants and ministerial order of 20 February 2012 amending ministerial order of 19 Avril 2011).
• as well as verification by an independent third party (Ministerial order of 31 August 2015 relating to independent third party verification of environmental declaration of construction products, decorative products and electric, electronic and HVAC equipment intended for use in building works)
Requester may draw up individual or collective EHPD and LCA can be carried out internally or externally.
The EHPD, because it shall be readable by users on the French market, must be written in French.
By extension, the program applies the same rules for products distributed on BtoB basis.
Requesters
Industrialists, Manufacturers…
Accredited verifiers
Webservice Subscriber
Users Project owner,
prime contractor…
Owner: Alliance HQE-GBC Database manager: CSTB
www.inies.fr
INIES program Owner: Alliance HQE-GBC
Manager: AFNOR
PEP Ecopassport® program Owner and manager:
Association PEP
Verification programs Database
9
The template of the declaration provided in NF EN 15804/CN standard is the one chosen as part of this program (ANNEX C– template).
3.2. Configurators
A configurator is based on a mother EHPD, called "configurable", verified by a verifier. This template allows generating "daughter" EHPDs.
A configurable EHPD as well as "daughter" EHPDs are registered independently of each other in the program.
Typologies of configurators rely on two main characteristics: the type of EHPD issued by the configurator and the method of parameter settings.
Three types of configurators can be distinguished depending on the type of EHPD:
➢ collective EHPD
• Configurators mainly working by extrapolation of the product size based on collective EHPD of a "model product" (for example main extrapolation by mass of the product)
• Configurators allowing issuing of collective EHPD, but with parameter settings relating to sensitive parameters regarding elements of the process or the life cycle (product size, but also nature of material substrate like formulation of concrete, resin, specific surface treatment, colour …)
NOTE: Regarding INIES declarations of manufacturer names, factories, ranges, commercial references, we currently notice various typologies among collective EHPD:
1) declaration of a list of a manufacturer names, each manufacturer name being associated with the list of its commercial references.
2) mixed declarations of type 2) and type 3) : manufacturers without commercial references and manufacturers with commercial references leading to the same EHPD.
When a certificate of verification is issued, it is for a version of the EHPD(s) verified at a given time (day/month/year). Every subsequent modification makes this certificate and the "verified" status of the EHPD(s) obsolete.
➢ individual EHPD
• produced using a common base of collective and generic data and methodological assumptions: the responsible for placing the product on the market issues his individual declaration according to his own data restricted or not to sensitive parameters identified up-front. When issued, this "daughter" declaration must undergo a complementary verification to the one of the configurator (in particular on relevance of the chosen parameters and sensitive parameters.
3.3. Life cycle inventory (LCI)
The life cycle inventory tables summarize the balance of all incoming and outgoing flows of raw material and energy resources used to manufacture the material. They will constitute the input data for the software used for drawing-up the life cycle assessment of the construction product, often made of different materials.
3.4. Acceptation of "Product Category Rules" PCR
The "Product Category Rules" (PCR) are defined by Afnor NF EN 15804 and NF EN 15804/CN standards for all construction products, excluding functional units which depend on the products and their applications.
10
The normative nature of the NF EN 15804 and NF EN 15804/CN standards allows meeting the general requirements of NF EN ISO 14025 standard related to PCR procedures and development of PCR.
Note: See details on allocation in module D of ANNEX K –Methodological details
3.5. Compliance of the program with NF EN ISO 14025 standard
The INIES program, about construction products, relies on the general procedures stated in NF EN ISO 14025, NF EN 15804 and NF EN 15804/CN standards.
Besides, with respect to general specifications of NF EN ISO 14025 standard, it is stated that:
− the consultation of interested parties provided for in NF EN ISO 14025 standard on the development of rules about product categories [PCR] is deemed to be established because it has
been subject to public consultation meeting the requirements of 20093 decree on standardization.;
− the AFNOR/P01E standardization commission "Sustainability in building construction" is in charge of working on NF EN 15804 standards which regroups federations and trade unions, laboratories, technical centres, consumer organizations, administrations, manufacturers, etc. ;
− environmental and health declarations are currently addressed mainly to professionals as stated in NF EN 15804 and NF EN 15804/CN, which does not prevent the general public to get access to them;
− in case of a declaration addressed to the general public, NF EN ISO 14025 standard, clause 9.4 requires verification by a competent and independent third party. The independent verification implied by adhesion to this program is deemed meeting this requirement;
− this program has been subject to regular revision to integrate normative evolutions of NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN standards. In 2018, LCI and product configurators were incorporated in this document.
4. Data confidentiality
The information is provided on a voluntary basis by the requester who submits them, under his responsibility, to the acceptance procedure. This procedure, which is regularly updated by the governance of the INIES program, is the preferred method for improving the provided information quality and their adequacy to context ANNEX L – Quality process.
This information is property of the requester who provides it free of charge to the INIES database for environmental and health evaluation of buildings.
Doing that, he accepts that this information is subject to:
− be made available to third parties as part of free consultation on the INIES database website (http://www.inies.fr) ;
− be used in the context of chargeable functionalities like web services or equivalent services, aimed to third parties (for example software publishers) duly approved by the Supervisory board of the INIES database (CSIB). The revenue resulting from this chargeable access is exclusively allocated to operation and development of the INIES database.
Every other data commercialization project, other than the above ones, is subject to prior approval by the requester.
3 Decree No. 2009-697 of 16 June 2009 related to standardization
11
Usage conditions of information by users and monitoring modalities of data usage are defined by CSIB upon advice of the Technical Committee of the INIES database (CTIB).
The requester is also responsible for transmitting information updates to the administrator of the database.
If the requester decides removing provided information, he issues a request to the Database administrator as well as the Program manager. In this case, the concerned information is removed from the zone accessible to the general public. Thus, they are kept in the database for a period of time not exceeding 5 years, to ensure traceability of the database content. CSIB and CTIB have access to this non-public area.
5. Technical questions, comments and claims
5.1. General conditions
All bodies or persons may submit questions, comments or claims to the manager of the verification program about:
− the INIES verification program
− an EHPD
− a configurator
− a LCI
− the result of an accreditation session
− the result of a verification
− an abusive usage of the "FDES vérifiée INIES" logo
For that purpose, questions, comments and claims can be transmitted to the program verification manager:
− by email: [email protected]
− via the INIES website
− By letter: AFNOR normalisation, programme INIES 11 rue Francis de Pressensé 93571 La Plaine Saint Denis
5.2. Questions asked to the manager of the INIES verification program
When the manager of the program receives questions, he transmits them to the COPIL. The COPIL may, if needed, ask CTIB for advice or DHUP only if the question is related to regulations. The answers, acknowledged by the COPIL, are then transmitted to the persons concerned by the manager of the INIES verification program.
Following chart shows the process for handling received questions by the manager:
12
The manager receives the
questions and passes them around to the
members of the COPIL
COPIL
CTIB
DHUP
The manager addresses the
questions relating to
admission rules of the INIES
database, if needed
Opinion
Decision
The opinions are
transmitted to the COPIL
The decisions are
transmitted to the COPIL
However, to answer a possible litigation, resolve a question asked by an interested party or suggest harmonizing of verification procedures, the COPIL may ask the group of verifiers for advice or set up an ad hoc committee which in particular can draw on the competencies of bodies which are members of the Standardization Commission AFNOR/P01E. The decisions will be subject to management and official publication on the INIES website.
5.3. Claims – Market monitoring
The manager must register and process all received claims.
He may receive claims from any person about a verified EHPD or an accredited verifier. He must register and process them. He transmits them to the COPIL who evaluates their admissibility. According to the decision of the COPIL, the manager of the program transmits them to the requester and the verifier concerned. They must give a substantiated answer within 30 days. The COPIL takes a decision about the answers given, and if needed, may ask the requester for corrective measures. If the decisions of the steering committee are not applied or the expected answer is not satisfactory, the COPIL may decide applying a sanction: archiving or withdrawal of the EHPD; warning, suspension or withdrawal for the verifier.
Following chart shows the claim process:
13
5.3.1. Warning
In case of claims identifying small inadequacies, the manager informs the requester and the verifier about the deficiencies and asks for an update of the declaration.
5.3.2. Archiving
In case of claims identifying proved inadequacies, the manager informs the requester and the verifier about the deficiencies and asks for additional information. The declaration is suspended from the program waiting for a satisfactory answer and/or corrections to the declaration.
5.3.3. Withdrawal
Such decisions are taken by the steering committee if no correction or satisfactory corrective action does allow witnessing the effective resolution of observed discrepancies.
6. INIES verification program process
6.1. General information
NF EN ISO 14025 standard requires that the developer of the program for a type III environmental declaration establishes transparent procedures for independent verifications.
This paragraph proposes a procedure for the verification of environmental and health declarations themselves and supporting documents for these declarations, in particular life cycle assessments.
When chosen to verify an EHPD, a configurator or a LCI, the verifier may contract with the LCA practitioner who drew up the EHPD or with the EHPD owner. For this contract (or the quotation linked
Possible appeal at Board of Directors of Alliance HQE-GBC
Market monitoring
Claims about a verified EHPD or an accredited verifier can be issued by any person
T0 : Reception of a claim by the program manager
T1 ≤ T0+5j : the secretary of the COPIL sends a letter to the requester and the verifier specifying the claim as well as the withdrawal sanction of the EHPD within
30 days if no convincing element is provided
T2 ≤ T1+30j : Reception of the response of the requester and the verifier for investigation by the COPIL
ValidationRequesting additional
information
Request deemed eligible by COPIL
T3 +15j : Validation of the EHPD or possible
update of the declaration and bringing
back online with the modifications provided
by the requester
T3 : Archiving of the EHPD waiting for
additional information
T3 : - EHPD withdrawal- Warning, suspension or withdrawal of accreditation of the verifier
T3 : Decision of the COPIL
Not accepted
Request deemed non-eligible by COPIL
T1 ≤ T0+5j : the secretary of the COPIL sends a letter to the requester notifying the non-eligibility of the
request
14
to the service), the INIES program doesn’t provide any template but gives recommendations on the content.
To ensure independence of the verification process, the INIES program rules recommend that the contract contains:
− elements on the verification process duration and costs,
− elements on payment conditions, and specification that the verifier shall be paid even if the result of the verification process is negative.
This procedure is shown in form of a checklist, common to all Eco Platform members (see ANNEX F – EHPD verification checklist).
6.2. Verification: principles and required content
The verification shall allow reinforcing the credibility of the work the owner of the declaration has done. It is not intended to reproduce all the analyses nor be confused with a consultancy mission or a consultant advice. It is mainly of documentary nature: its goal is to verify that the provided information is substantiated in a relevant and appropriate way (see §8.1.4 of NF EN ISO 14025).
6.3. Confidentiality, provision of information
After a confidentiality agreement, the requester who draws up the declaration shall provide the accompanying report in French to the verifier, as stated in clause 8 of NF EN 15804 standard (see ANNEX E - EHPD verification report). On request of the verifier, he may be asked to provide other supporting documents.
6.4. Verification points
The general points the verifier has to verify are listed below:
− Verification of formal conformity to the requirements of the standards:
• inventory
• impact assessment
• health characteristics
− verification of technical and scientific validity,
− verification of communication aspects (see NF EN ISO14020 series requirements).
The "check-list" for EHPDs gives the minimum list of requirements to be checked by the verifier (ANNEX F – EHPD verification checklist). This list is not exhaustive but the verifier shall justify, in the verification report (ANNEX E - EHPD verification report), that all points of the check-list were controlled during the verification process.
It is up to the verifier to ask precise and factual questions, and to try to avoid attitudes leading to a stalemate in the exchange with the commissioner of the verification or the owner of the declaration.
The LCA practitioner and/or commissioner answer in written form to the questions raised by the verifier about:
− small errors or oversights,
− answers, which needed further investigation on data sources, substantiation of assumptions or calculations, etc.
Taking into account the context, these answers and comments can be deemed acceptable by the verifier, or lead him to ask written questions to the practitioner or commissioner.
15
6.5. Conclusions of the verification
The verifier regroups in his verification report (3 pages maximum):
− his conclusions about the provided answers to the asked questions,
− highlighting of sensitive points, which however are not of such nature to call into question a positive conclusion of the verification, but should be improved by the revision of the EHPD, the configurator or the LCI,
− his general conclusion of acceptance confirmed by a certificate of verification (the latter joined to the referred declaration).
6.6. Claims and sanctions
With the market monitoring, everyone can make claims. This section is detailed in 5.3 of these rules.
6.7. Program verification registration costs
Costs for INIES verification program consist of following items:
− a per unit charge for 5 years
− or an annual lump sum
− and optional fees (EHPD registration in Eco Platform)
This registration costs apply for the period of validity, which is 5 years after verification date. All information concerning verification program registration costs is available on ANNEX B – Pricing conditions (01/01/2019).
6.8. Identification to the INIES verification program
The owners of “EHPD verified by INIES” program are allowed to use the logo according to defined terms set out in "ANNEX H – Usage rules for the "FDES vérifiée INIES" Mark.
Recognition of conformity of an EHPD with ECO EPD rules means having the possibility to affix following logo by paying for the registration (see ANNEX B – Pricing conditions (01/01/2019).
16
6.9. Summary of the EHPD verification process
Step 1: Drawing up the environmental and health declaration according to NF
EN15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN
The client of the program is the owner of new or revised EHPDs (industrialist, union, federation, etc.).
- The EHPDs can be individual or collective.
- Each product configuration (different functional units) shall be subject to a distinct EHPD.
Annex C Template of EHPD
Step 2: Verification of the environmental and health declaration according to NF
EN15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN
- The owner choses an accredited INIES verifier
- The owner provides the accompanying report in French to the verifier as stated in article 8 of NF EN 15804+A1 standard and annex A. On request of the verifier, he may have to provide other supporting documents.
- The verifier reviews the provided elements and issues his report and, when appropriate, a certificate of verification.
List of accredited verifiers
Annex C Template of accompanying report
Annex F Checklist for the verification of an environmental and health declaration
Step 3: Registering the verified EHPD on INIES
The requester reviews all relevant documents in the "verification program" section on the website www.inies.fr.
The requester asks the manager of the program for his registration by filling in annex A (The price list is available otherwise).
The program manager sends a quotation.
Once the requester has accepted the quotation, the program manager sends him the registration numbers and the logo "FDES vérifiée" which the requester will put on his verified EHPDs.
The requester files on the INIES database: the EHPD, the report of the verifier, the certificate issued by the verifier. The report of the verifier is not accessible by the users of the INIES database.
Annex B Price list
Step 4: Publication of the verified EHPD on INIES
The program manager, after payment of the fees, validates the file and activates the
online publication of the EHPD(s) in the INIES database.
Annex E Verification report
Annex H Form for usage of the logo
Annex A Template of application request to the program
Annex A Template of application request to the program programme
Annex B Price list
Annex G Certificate of verification
Annex K Methodology
17
6.10. Summary of the verification process of configurators
Each calculated configuration is marked with a unique identifier and stored in a database of the configurator (User account, archive, history…).
The configurator allows editing:
− a Pdf document containing the identifier as well as the main parameters entered by the user, and the calculation generation date
− an XML exchange file
− and optionally a digital file of following type (cvs, xls or equivalent)
6.10.1. For all configurators
1) Initial verification of collective and/or individual EHPD(s): methodology and validity framework and EHPD template (NF EN15804/CN conformity, sore traceability point of parameter settings for collective EHPD, expression of FU, RSL…).
2) Tool conception consistency review: a. review of specifications, general architecture of the tool, existence of monitoring at
key steps of development b. identification of influential parameters corresponding to input data c. validation of calculation algorithm and applicability to all parameter setting
possibilities, validity of extrapolation rules used in the configurator d. framework validity checking against all parameter setting possibilities, and if needed,
validation of used extrapolation e. checking non environmental data and applicability to all parameter setting
possibilities: for example, validation of health aspects in edited EHPDs, taking into account the range of editable EHPDs by the configurator
3) Tool testing a. Compliance with methodological guide:
− Testing compliance with specifications, general architecture of the tool,
− Reviewing protocol of internal checking (data collection, updating, method) carried out at key steps of development. Technical checking related to software development of the tool is not part of the mission of the verifier.
b. Functional verification:
− Parameter blocking functions, controlling input data (numeric value, min-max framing)
− Traceability of input data and projects, versions
− Storage and archiving tool, traceability of EHPDs issued with a unique identifier.
c. Tests by sampling
− Use of testing protocol according to diversity of applications, variability of results
− Example of supplementary test: reconstitution of a calculation based on key indicators and for a range of products
− EHPD template: presence of required information (including non-LCI), locking of variable fields, traceability of product parameter settings (thickness, composition…) in suitable parts of the EHPD
6.10.2. For a configurator issuing collective EHPDs
Conclusions of the verification of the configurator tool, valid for all collective EHPDs provided by the tool and issuing a verification certificate for the tool.
18
6.10.3. For a configurator issuing individual EHPDs
Conclusions of the verification of the configurator tool, specifying the application range of individual EHPD coming from the configurator, verifiable by a simplified process and issuing of a verification certificate for the tool.
Furthermore, the user of the configurator will mandate a verifier for a specific verification of the individual EHPD, according to a simplified process:
a. review of means of data collections entered by the user, sampling, b. consistency with the production site, in particular technological representativeness.
Note 1: the verification scope of the individual EHPD issued must take into account the level of freedom of the user to enter data and the automated checking integrated in the tool.
Note 2: the case of a configurator issuing data, but without systematic issuing of a specific EHPD, is not taken into account. Since this case is meant to grow with process automatization of work evaluation, it could be covered by reference to a specific EHPD, monitoring all parameter setting fields.
Review of the methodological framework for drawing up collective and/or individual EHPDs
(refer to verification framework)
Review of the configurator of EHPD:
Consistency of the design in context of methodological framework, testing of the tool
Can the edited EHPD be
individual?
Conclusion:
Verification valid for all collective EHPDs that can be edited by the configurator
Conclusion:
Verification valid for all collective EHPDs that can be edited by the configurator
(if they exist)
Field of eligibility of individual EHPDs verifiable by a simplified process
Specific and simplified verification of eligible individual EHPDs
Additional option initiated by the user of the configurator
no
yes
19
6.11. Declaration updates (EHPD, LCI, …)
There are two types of data updates:
- minor update
- major update
6.11.1. Minor update
The program considers an update as minor update as long as neither the definition of the FU, nor any value of the table of results is modified. This applies mainly to editorial modifications (typing mistake, correction of spelling mistakes, postal address, illustrations, naming, etc.). The product does not change. The validity date of the EHPD does not change.
The deposit of the modified document at the INIES program is not subject to verification by a verifier accredited by the program. No accredited verifier being involved, the requester is fully responsible for the fact of being a minor update. In order to ensure traceability, the requester must provide and register a description of the modifications in the INIES database (in the "comment" area).
6.11.2. Major update
The verifier must be asked to validate the modifications. In case of major modification, the version of the EHPD is modified. A modification of an element that is clearly subject to a verification control point leads to a new verification. Such points are for example those of the checklist, or simply those of the summary of the verification report. An update is considered as a major update if one or several indicator values of the result table is/are modified.
There are two cases of major updates:
• Revision every 5 years which starts a new 5-year period (with verification including checking age of data taken into account for the update)
• Main update (which changes indicator values) during the validity period
− This update is made after verification, but without changing the date of validity of the EHPD, with a number tracing the update, thus without registration fee. The requester must register the EHPD again after the initial period, and update it as for a 5-year revision.
− If there is an update of all data, the requester must be able to choose between starting a new 5-year cycle by registering again his EHPD or continue with the initial period (which will be shorter) and at the end of this period, he is in the case of a 5-year revision.
Note: If it is the case of a new name of the product, it is a minor update. If the commercial reference refers to a new product, it is a new EHPD.
Any modification to an indicator ±10% is a major modification. The document is therefore considered as a "new" EHPD.
Any modification to the product (trade names, manufacturing site, etc.) must be verified again.
An EHPD update leading to a modification of its "vintage" must be substantiated according to requirements of NF EN 15804+A1 standard, and in particular concerning the age of data used and the validity of stated scenarios.
20
6.11.3. Summary
Type of update
Conditions Need verification
Registration number
Date of validity
minor Editorial modifications, covered products an sites remain unchanged, data and scenarios remain unchanged, indicators remain unchanged (example: product name change without production change, manufacturer or brand name change, address modification, changing photo, logo…)
No Unchanged Unchanged
Major incomplete
Adding a reference/range
or adding a production site
or adding a manufacturer for collective EHPDs, based on a finite number of members ?
or modification of data or methods resulting in a modification of LCI or indicators
or modification of declared product performance
+ the update is not big enough to justify a new 5-year period
Yes Modified (adding R1 for
example)
Unchanged
Major complete
Adding a reference/range
or adding a production site
or adding a manufacturer for collective EHPDs, based on a finite number of members?
or modification of data or methods resulting in a modification of LCI or indicators
or modification of declared product performance
+ update is big enough to justify a new 5-year period
Yes New New
7. Process for accreditation of verifiers
The role of the accredited verifiers is to verify, according to procedures foreseen by the INIES program, the conformity of EHPDs to NF EN 15804 standards and its national supplement, to the decree and various ministerial orders applying as well as to the rules of the verification program.
The verifier accreditation relies on recommendations of ISO 14025 standard and takes best professional practice into account. The goal of this procedure is to qualify required competencies to insure quality and independence of EHPD verifications submitted to the compliance process of the INIES program.
To carry out the environmental and health declaration verification operations, the verifiers shall be able to justify their competencies according to the dedicated accreditation system (public reference), deemed to be compliant, in its content, with the specifications of NF EN ISO 14025, NF EN 15804 and NF EN 15804/CN standards.
21
It shall be noted that the accreditation examination will be in French. The verifier accreditation of the INIES program is valid for a 3-year period.
7.1. Flowchart of the accreditation process
Reception of application file and contractual commitment form
Reviewing file and potential prerequisites
Assessment of competencies through oral interview
Examination successful?
File complete?
The program manager, upon advice of the examination jury, approves the accreditation for 3 years and enters the person on the list of accredited verifiers.
Renewal of the accreditation for 3 years by peer audit
Audit successful?
The program manager approves the accreditation for 3 years and renews the registration on the list of accredited verifiers
Request for clarification or additional
information or documents
Possible re-presentation at next session
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
22
7.2. Submission of application
Accreditation sessions for verifiers are organised according to an annual schedule, with at least one session per year.
They determine the dates for application, eligibility, and admission of candidates.
An application file is available for the candidates wishing to apply for an accreditation session. This file is composed of following documents:
− A general information notice.
− Application conditions and procedures.
− A registration form.
− A list of official texts to be mastered for an oral interview.
− A list of material and documents to supply for each accreditation (initial, renewal).
These documents are available on the INIES website.
The file will be examined by the jury to validate the necessary prerequisites for the candidate to pass the examination.
7.2.1. Information about admissibility criteria for verifier initial accreditation and renewal
7.2.1.1. Initial accreditation
language Mastering the French language
Initial education
(Cf. Note 1)
Bachelor degree or equivalent
Bachelor degree and more (University degree or
educational qualification)
Professional Experience
(Cf. Note 2)
5 years 4 years
Experience including practice of life cycle assessment in the field of construction products, and having drawn up at least 2 EHPDs for different product families in the last 2 years
Environmental field 2 professional experiences related to environment
Building
sector 2 years of experience in the building field and construction products.
Specific knowledge
- Knowledge about the standards on environmental declarations (NF EN ISO 14020, NF EN ISO 14021 and NF EN ISO 14025), standards on life cycle assessment (NF EN ISO 14040 and following) and principles of NF EN ISO 19011 standard, applying to an independent verification.
- Knowledge of NF EN 15804 standard and NF EN 15804/CN standard for construction products, the guide to drafting
23
health/comfort information and the INIES program rules is also mandatory.
Explanatory notes
(1) Including recognized diplomas and certificates of equivalent level according to the official nomenclature of educational levels.
(2) ICAE or ACAE certified verifiers demonstrating an experience in the field of construction and EHPDs will be considered as satisfying this prerequisite.
The examination is composed by an oral interview.
The oral interview comprises three distinct stages:
− one stage of preparation for the interview by the candidate on a topic (case study) proposed by the jury,
− one stage of restitution of his topic by the candidate in front of the jury,
− one stage of free discussion between the jury and the candidate as a question and answer session.
In case of failure, the candidate may repeat the application to further sessions as many times as he likes, provided that can attest:
− fulfilment of the requirements with regard to his eligibility,
− mastering of the sensitive issues identified by the previous examination.
7.2.1.2. Renewal of accreditation
The 3-year renewal of an accreditation is based on activity monitoring of the accredited person with regard to his functions as verifier and on an audit by his peers (see ANNEX J – Audit grid).
To insure the renewal of his accreditation, the accredited person has to prove that he has, throughout the 3 years of his accreditation, improved his skills and knowledge, in particular:
− with training,
− participating to seminars, congresses, colloquia on expertise,
− proving an actual activity in EHPD verifications, critical reviews according to NF EN ISO 14040 standard or LCA achievements.
− having done at least 1 EHPD/LCI
− A verification last 3 years.
The person has to provide means of proof to justify the actions he claims.
He has to formalize an activity report containing all these elements and to transmit it beforehand to AFNOR, (at least 2 months) before the session date.
Only verifiers having verified at least 1 EHPD in their accreditation period can participate to the audit by peers. If no verification has been within their validity period, the person must apply for the initial examination.
The audit by peers consists of an examination (by two accredited verifiers) of an EHPD verified by the verifier to renew. The goal of this exercise is validating the professional competencies to carry out verification, helping the audited verifier to improve his abilities, to adopt optimal practices and comply
24
with laid down standards and principles. It is an exchange of point of views between two parties considered on equal footing. The review results in drafting two audit reports. If at least one audit report is negative, the verifier must pass again the initial examination in front of the jury. The decision on accreditation renewal is taken by the steering committee on proposal of the jury.
7.3. Composition of the jury
The jury is composed of three examiners representing:
− a manufacturer,
− an EHPD user,
− a third party expert.
This list is established beforehand and validated by the steering committee. The jury recommends its decision of admission to initial accreditation or renewal. The decisions are confirmed by the COPIL.
7.4. Keeping competencies
To contribute keeping competencies of the verifier, meetings with all accredited verifiers are organized to distribute information and exchange on:
− update of standards,
− update of regulations,
− modification of program rules,
− harmonization of verification processes.
These meetings are organized as often as needed on a minimal basis of one per year.
Verifiers are also asked to provide a summary of all verification activity carried out each year.
7.5. Claims and sanctions
In case of claims revealing proved insufficiencies or non-compliance to provisions set out, the INIES verification program will take gradual and proportionate measures up to suspension or withdrawal of the verifiers INIES accreditation, in particular in case of:
• insufficient knowledge or competencies
• unsatisfactory verifications
• non-compliance to mandatory update of competencies.
The same process as for market monitoring explained in section 1.4 of the rules will be applied.
8. European cooperation
The INIES program is a program established by ECO– PLATFORM.
ECO-PLAFORM does not operate the program but is a European association whose goal is federating all European programs in order to facilitate recognition of EN 15804 of environmental declarations throughout Europe.
8.1. Referencing an EHPD on www.eco-platform.org
If the EHPD owner organization wants to reference its declaration on the European Eco-Platform, a supplementary fee must be paid (see ANNEX B – Pricing conditions (01/01/2019)).
25
8.2. Mutual recognition
Being member of Eco Platform allows the INIES program to have a common verification list for all established programs. Therefore, this allows organizing mutual recognition between two programs.
As part of this mutual recognition, an environmental declaration of another Eco-Platform program wishing to enter the INIES program must fulfil the requirements of the INIES program.
Concerning part A1-A3 which has already been recognized by another established program, the accredited verifier of the INIES program does not need to verify this production part again, if the functional unit is compliant with the requirements of the INIES program. The verifier is therefore not responsible for this stage. On his certificate, he will mention the perimeter covered by the verification he carried out.
To be admitted to the INIES program, the EPD has to be established for a given functional unit (mentioning application and performance) of a product sold on the French market. Only EPD on a complete life cycle are accepted by INIES. Furthermore, health information is required by the INIES program.
Therefore, it has to be verified that the A1-A3 data correspond to the functional unit and that end-of-life and transportation are suitable for use of the product on the French market. These points, as well as the health aspects will be subject to additional verification by an accredited INIES verifier.
The INIES verifier cannot be held responsible for errors of the part verified by an accredited verifier of an Eco-Platform member program.
In order to facilitate registration in INIES and other programs, specific documents may be drawn up.
A document, available on the INIES website, lays down the additional requirements for EPD coming from the IBU program (German program) in order to comply to NF EN 15804/CN and to French legal requirements on environmental product declarations. Other mutual recognitions may be done with established Eco Platform operators.
A template of a specific certificate for mutual recognition if available in ANNEX G – Template for a Certificate of verification.
26
ANNEX A – Application request to the INIES program
Requester
Manufacturer
Trade union or professional organization
Other:
Company name:
Address:
Type: EHPD collective individual
Configurators
LCIA
Precise title of the declaration(s):
Requester:
Name, forename:
Function:
Address (if different):
Telephone: Fax:
Email:
indicates to be aware of the verification program, its requirements and pricing conditions.
27
acknowledges being familiar with and accepting the rules for usage of the brand "FDES vérifiée INIES" detailed in Annex G of the program rules.
requests registration of the EHPD at ECO PLATFORM (optional).
Information and documents to provide: Title of EHPD in English, NACE code and EHPD as pdf format in English
deposit of the declaration in the digital interface and transmission after the verification of:
⎯ verified declaration(s) and their verification certificate(s)
⎯ verification report(s)
⎯ certificate(s)
Date and Signature
28
ANNEX B – Pricing conditions (01/01/2019)
B.1 Registration per unit
For the period of validity of the EHPD, configurable EHPD or LCI (which means a period of 5 years maximum, starting from the date of verification).
Fees Price (EUR before tax ; VAT 20 %)
F1
From 1 to 10 declarations: 200 EUR / EHPD or LCI
From 11 à 50 declarations: 175 EUR / EHPD or LCI
From 51 à 100 declarations: 150 EUR / EHPD or LCI
More than 100 declarations: 125 EUR / EHPD or LCI
F2
1 000 EUR per configurable EHPD. NB : after that, free of charge for all "daughter" EHPD of the configurable EHPD registered in the INIES program
Conditions of price degressivity of F1 fee: The requester shall inform the manager of the verification program on the number of EHPD or LCI foreseen per calendar year. All declarations shall be submitted to validation before 31 December of the billing year. No deferral or refund is foreseen.
B.2 Registration lump-sum
For an unlimited number of declarations (EHPD, configurable EHPDs, LCA) with a 5-year commitment, extendable each year.
Fees Price (EUR before tax ; VAT 20 %)
F3 3 000 EUR / year
B.3 Eco-Platform additional registration (optional)
Fees Price (EUR before tax ; VAT 20 %)
F4
Optional - according to current Eco-Platform fees and management fees (20 EUR / EHPD)*
29
* For information, on 1 January 2016 (Extract from Eco-Platform website)
The quantity assigned for each ECO Platform EPD will depend on the number of ECO Platform EPDs issued to the same organisation by the same program operator according to the following table:
ECO Platform EPD 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th onwards
Annual fee (€) 100 100 100 100 100 50 50 50 50 50 5
In case of Eco-Platform rate increase during the period of validity of the declaration, a additional invoice may be addressed.
30
ANNEX C–Template of EHPD
ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH PRODUCT DECLARATION
Name of the product
Complying with NF EN 15804+A1 standard and its national supplement NF EN 15804/CN
Picture of product
31
Warning
The information contained in this declaration is provided under responsibility of XXXXX (owner of the EHPD) according to NF EN 15804+A1, and national supplement NF EN 15804/CN.
Any full or partial usage of the information provided in this document has at least to be accompanied by the complete reference to the original EHPD, as well as to its owner, who can provide a complete copy.
Reading guide
Notes allowing better reading of the declaration or data included into the declaration…
Examples:
Notes on the displaying format of data, etc.
Displaying rules
Used abbreviations
Etc.
Caution for using the EHPD to compare products
Construction product EHPDs may not be comparable, if they are not complying with NF EN 15804+A1 standard.
NF EN 15804+A1 standard defines in § 5.3 Comparability of EPDs* for construction products, in which conditions construction products may be compared based on the information provided by the EHPD:
"Comparison of the environmental performance of construction products using the EPD information shall be based on the product’s use in and its impacts on the building, and shall consider the complete life cycle (all information modules)."
* Note 1 of the foreword of the national supplement defines « literal translation in French of EPD (Environmental Product Declaration) is DEP (Declaration Environnementale de Produit). However, in France, we commonly use the term FDES / EHPD (Fiche de Declaration Environnementale et Sanitaire) which combines both the Environmental Product Declaration and health information for the product being the subject of this EHPD. An EHPD is therefore a "EPD" with supplemental health information."
32
• General information
1. Name and address of manufacturers 2. The site(s), manufacturer or group of manufacturers or those representing them for whom the
EHPD is representative 3. Type of EHPD: "cradle to grave" 4. Type of EHPD: Collective or individual (if collective specify rules for use) 5. Name of verifier of the verified declaration 6. Date of verification 7. Date de publication 8. Name of the verification program (e.g. INIES program) used, name and address of program
operator, logo and website 9. Commercial reference(s)/identification of the product by its name 10. Optional: production site (France (region), Europe, outside Europe) 11. Distribution channel : BtoB / BtoC
• Description of functional unit (or declared unit) and of the product
1. Description of functional unit (or declared unit) 2. Description of product 3. Description of product use (field of application) 4. Main performance of functional unit 5. Other technical characteristics not included in the functional unit 6. Description of main components and/or materials of the product 7. Specify if the product contains substances of the REACH candidate list (if over 1% by mass) 8. Description of reference service life (if relevant and according to 7.2.2 of NF EN 15804+A1)
Parameter Value
Reference service life Years
Declared product properties (at the gate) and finishes,
etc.
Units/or statements as appropriate
design application parameters (if instructed by the
manufacturer), including references to any appropriate practices
Units/or statements as appropriate
An assumed quality of work, when installed in
accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions
Units/or statements as appropriate
Outdoor environment, (for outdoor applications), e.g. weathering, pollutants, UV and wind exposure,
building orientation, shading, temperature
Units/or statements as appropriate
Indoor environment (for indoor applications), e.g.
temperature, moisture, chemical exposure
Units/or statements as appropriate
33
Usage conditions, e.g. frequency of use, mechanical
exposure
Units/or statements as appropriate
Maintenance, e.g. required frequency, type and
quality and replacement of replaceable components
Units/or statements as appropriate
• Life cycle stages
Include life cycle diagram (if relevant)
• Production stage, A1-A3 Description of:
▪ the stage ▪ the stages and/or inputs and/or outputs not taken into account
• Construction stage, A4-A5 Description of:
▪ the stage ▪ the stages and/or inputs and/or outputs not taken into account
Transport to the building site (if relevant):
Parameter Value
Fuel type and consumption of vehicle or vehicle type used for transport e.g. long distance truck, boat etc.
Liter of fuel (type) per distance or vehicle (type), Commission Directive 2007/37/EC (European Emission Standard)
Distance to the building site km
Capacity utilization (including empty returns) %
Bulk density of transported products kg/m3
Volume capacity utilization factor (factor: =1 or <1 or ≥ 1 for compressed or nested packaged products
Installation in the building (if relevant):
Parameter Value
34
• Use stage (exclusion of potential economies), B1-B7 Description of:
▪ the stage ▪ the stages and/or inputs and/or outputs not taken into account
Maintenance (if relevant):
Parameter Value/description
Maintenance process Description or source where description can be found
Maintenance cycle Number per RSL or year
Ancillary materials for maintenance, (e.g. cleaning agent, specify materials)
kg/cycle
Waste produced during maintenance (specify materials)
kg
Net fresh water consumption during maintenance m3
Energy input during maintenance (e.g. vacuum cleaning), energy carrier type e.g. electricity, and amount, if applicable and relevant
kWh
Repair (if relevant):
Parameter Value/description
Ancillary materials for installation (specified by material)
kg or other units as appropriate
Water use m3
Other resource use kg
Quantitative description of energy type (regional mix) and consumption during the installation process
kWh or MJ
Waste produced on the building site before waste processing, generated by the product’s installation (specified by type)
kg
Output materials (specified by type) as result of waste processing at the building site e.g. of collection for recycling, for energy recovery, disposal (specified by route)
kg
Direct emissions to ambient air, soil and water kg
35
Repair process Description or source where description can be found
Inspection process Description or source where description can be found
Repair cycle Number per RSL or year
Ancillary materials, (e.g. lubricant, specify materials) kg or kg/cycle
Waste produced during repair, (specify materials) kg
Net fresh water consumption during repair m3
Energy input during maintenance (e.g. crane activity), energy carrier type e.g. electricity, and amount
kWh/RSL, kWh/cycle
Replacement (if relevant):
Parameter Value/description
Replacement cycle Number per RSL or year
Energy input during replacement (e.g. crane activity), energy carrier type, (e.g. electricity) and amount if applicable and relevant
kWh
Exchange of worn parts during the product’s life cycle, specify materials
Kg
Refurbishment (if relevant):
Parameter Value/description
Refurbishment process Description or source where
description can be found
Refurbishment cycle Number per RSL or year
material input for refurbishment (e.g. bricks), including ancillary materials for the refurbishment process, (e.g. lubricant, specify materials)
kg or kg/cycle
Waste produced during refurbishment, (specify
materials) kg
energy input during refurbishment (e.g. crane activity), energy carrier type e.g. electricity, and
kWh
36
amount if applicable and relevant
Further assumptions for scenario development, (e.g. frequency and time period of use, number of
occupants)
Units as appropriate
Use of energy and use of water (if relevant):
Parameter Value/description
Ancillary materials specified by material kg or units as appropriate
Net fresh water consumption m3
Type of energy carrier, (e.g. electricity, natural gas, district heating)
kWh
Power output of equipment kWh
Characteristic performance (e.g. energy efficiency, emissions, variation of performance with capacity utilization etc.)
units as appropriate
Further assumptions for scenario development, (e.g. frequency and time period of use, number of occupants)
units as appropriate
• End of life stage C1-C4 Description of:
▪ the stage ▪ the stages and/or inputs and/or outputs not taken into account
End of life (if relevant):
Parameter Value/description
Collection process specified by type kg collected separately kg collected with mixed construction waste
Recovery system specified by type kg for re-use kg for recycling kg for energy recovery
Disposal specified by type kg product or material for final disposal
Assumptions for scenario development, (e.g. transportation)
units as appropriate
37
• Potential of recycling /re-use/ recovery Description of:
▪ the stage ▪ the stages and/or inputs and/or outputs not taken into account
• Information for life cycle assessment calculation
PCR used Description
System boundaries Description
Allocations Description
Geographical and temporal representativeness of primary data
Description: detail in particular primary data (collected) in the declaration, and secondary data (from the database e.g. ECOINVENT, GABI) in the report
Write down in a generic way the secondary databases and the software used
Variability of the results Description
38
• Results of the life cycle assessment
Environmental impacts
Production stage Construction process stage
Use stage End of life stage
Tota
l lif
e c
ycle
D B
en
efi
ts a
nd
load
s b
eyo
nd
syst
em
bo
un
dar
ies
A1
Raw
mat
eria
l su
pp
ly
A2
Tra
nsp
ort
A3
Fab
rica
tio
n
Tota
l A1
-A3
A4
Tra
nsp
ort
A5
Inst
alla
tio
n
Tota
l A4
-A5
B1
Usa
ge
B2
Mai
nte
nan
ce
B3
Rep
air
B4
Rep
lace
men
t
B5
Re
furb
ish
men
t
B6
Use
of
ener
gy
B7
Use
of
wat
er
Tota
l B1
-B7
C1
Dec
on
stru
ctio
n/
dem
olit
ion
C2
Tra
nsp
ort
C3
Was
te p
roce
ssin
g
C4
Dis
po
sal
Tota
l C1
-C4
Global warming kg CO2 eq/UF
Ozone depletion kg CFC 11 eq/UF
Acidification of land and water kg SO2 eq/UF
Eutrophication kg (PO4)3- eq/UF
39
Environmental impacts
Production stage Construction process stage
Use stage End of life stage
Tota
l lif
e c
ycle
D B
en
efi
ts a
nd
load
s b
eyo
nd
syst
em
bo
un
dar
ies
A1
Raw
mat
eria
l su
pp
ly
A2
Tra
nsp
ort
A3
Fab
rica
tio
n
Tota
l A1
-A3
A4
Tra
nsp
ort
A5
Inst
alla
tio
n
Tota
l A4
-A5
B1
Usa
ge
B2
Mai
nte
nan
ce
B3
Rep
air
B4
Rep
lace
men
t
B5
Re
furb
ish
men
t
B6
Use
of
ener
gy
B7
Use
of
wat
er
Tota
l B1
-B7
C1
Dec
on
stru
ctio
n/
dem
olit
ion
C2
Tra
nsp
ort
C3
Was
te p
roce
ssin
g
C4
Dis
po
sal
Tota
l C1
-C4
Photochemical ozone creation Ethene eq/FU
Depletion of abiotic resources (elements) kg Sb eq/FU
Depletion of abiotic resources (fossil fuels) MJ/FU
Water pollution
m3/FU
Air pollution
m3/FU
40
Resource use
Production stage Construction process stage
Use stage End of life stage
Tota
l lif
e c
ycle
D B
en
efi
ts a
nd
load
s b
eyo
nd
syst
em
bo
un
dar
ies
A1
Raw
mat
eria
l
sup
ply
A2
Tra
nsp
ort
A3
Fab
rica
tio
n
Tota
l A1
-A3
A4
Tra
nsp
ort
A5
Inst
alla
tio
n
Tota
l A4
-A5
B1
Usa
ge
B2
Mai
nte
nan
ce
B3
Rep
air
B4
Rep
lace
men
t
B5
Re
furb
ish
men
t
B6
Use
of
ener
gy
B7
Use
of
wat
er
Tota
l B1
-B7
C1
Dec
on
stru
ctio
n/
dem
olit
ion
C2
Tra
nsp
ort
C3
Was
te p
roce
ssin
g
C4
Dis
po
sal
Tota
l C1
-C4
Use of renewable primary energy excluding renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials MJ/FU
Use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials
MJ/FU
Total use of renewable primary energy resources (primary energy and primary energy resources used as raw materials)
MJ/FU
Use of non-renewable primary energy resources (excluding primary energy and primary energy
41
Resource use
Production stage Construction process stage
Use stage End of life stage
Tota
l lif
e c
ycle
D B
en
efi
ts a
nd
load
s b
eyo
nd
syst
em
bo
un
dar
ies
A1
Raw
mat
eria
l
sup
ply
A2
Tra
nsp
ort
A3
Fab
rica
tio
n
Tota
l A1
-A3
A4
Tra
nsp
ort
A5
Inst
alla
tio
n
Tota
l A4
-A5
B1
Usa
ge
B2
Mai
nte
nan
ce
B3
Rep
air
B4
Rep
lace
men
t
B5
Re
furb
ish
men
t
B6
Use
of
ener
gy
B7
Use
of
wat
er
Tota
l B1
-B7
C1
Dec
on
stru
ctio
n/
dem
olit
ion
C2
Tra
nsp
ort
C3
Was
te p
roce
ssin
g
C4
Dis
po
sal
Tota
l C1
-C4
resources used as raw materials)
MJ/FU
Use of renewable primary energy resources used as raw materials
MJ/FU
Total use of non-renewable primary energy resources (primary energy and primary energy resources used as raw materials)
MJ/FU
Use of renewable secondary fuels
MJ/FU
Use of non-renewable secondary fuels
42
Resource use
Production stage Construction process stage
Use stage End of life stage
Tota
l lif
e c
ycle
D B
en
efi
ts a
nd
load
s b
eyo
nd
syst
em
bo
un
dar
ies
A1
Raw
mat
eria
l
sup
ply
A2
Tra
nsp
ort
A3
Fab
rica
tio
n
Tota
l A1
-A3
A4
Tra
nsp
ort
A5
Inst
alla
tio
n
Tota
l A4
-A5
B1
Usa
ge
B2
Mai
nte
nan
ce
B3
Rep
air
B4
Rep
lace
men
t
B5
Re
furb
ish
men
t
B6
Use
of
ener
gy
B7
Use
of
wat
er
Tota
l B1
-B7
C1
Dec
on
stru
ctio
n/
dem
olit
ion
C2
Tra
nsp
ort
C3
Was
te p
roce
ssin
g
C4
Dis
po
sal
Tota
l C1
-C4
MJ/FU
Use of net fresh water
m3/FU
43
Waste category
Production stage Construction process stage
Use stage End of life stage
Tota
l lif
e c
ycle
D B
en
efi
ts a
nd
load
s b
eyo
nd
syst
em
bo
un
dar
ies
A1
Raw
mat
eria
l
sup
ply
A2
Tra
nsp
ort
A3
Fab
rica
tio
n
Tota
l A1
-A3
A4
Tra
nsp
ort
A5
Inst
alla
tio
n
Tota
l A4
-A5
B1
Usa
ge
B2
Mai
nte
nan
ce
B3
Rep
air
B4
Rep
lace
men
t
B5
Re
furb
ish
men
t
B6
Use
of
ener
gy
B7
Use
of
wat
er
Tota
l B1
-B7
C1
Dec
on
stru
ctio
n/
dem
olit
ion
C2
Tra
nsp
ort
C3
Was
te p
roce
ssin
g
C4
Dis
po
sal
Tota
l C1
-C4
Hazardous waste disposed kg/FU
Non-hazardous waste disposed kg/FU
Radioactive waste disposed kg/FU
44
Output flows Production stage Construction process stage
Use stage End of life stage
Tota
l lif
e c
ycle
D B
en
efi
ts a
nd
load
s b
eyo
nd
syst
em
bo
un
dar
ies
A1
Raw
mat
eria
l su
pp
ly
A2
Tra
nsp
ort
A3
Fab
rica
tio
n
Tota
l A1
-A3
A4
Tra
nsp
ort
A5
Inst
alla
tio
n
Tota
l A4
-A5
B1
Usa
ge
B2
Mai
nte
nan
ce
B3
Rep
air
B4
Rep
lace
men
t
B5
Re
furb
ish
men
t
B6
Use
of
ener
gy
B7
Use
of
wat
er
Tota
l B1
-B7
C1
Dec
on
stru
ctio
n/
dem
olit
ion
C2
Tra
nsp
ort
C3
Was
te p
roce
ssin
g
C4
Dis
po
sal
Tota
l C1
-C4
Components for re-use kg/FU
Materials for recycling kg/FU
Materials for energy recovery
kg/FU
Exp
ort
ed
en
erg
y (b
y en
erg
y
carr
ier)
J/F
U
Electricity
Vapour
Gas
45
• Additional information on release of dangerous substances into indoor air, soil and water during the use stage
Indoor air
Soil and water
• Contribution of the product to quality of life inside buildings
Product characteristics participating to the creation of hygrothermic comfort conditions in the building
Product characteristics participating to the creation of acoustic comfort conditions in the building
Product characteristics participating to the creation of visual comfort conditions in the building
Product characteristics participating to the creation of olfactory comfort conditions in the building
• Positive environmental contribution
E.g. give details about recycling chain or energy avoidance calculation
46
ANNEX D – Template of accompanying report
D.1 Environmental characteristics
1. GENERAL ASPECTS
• Commissioner of the LCA study, internal or external practitioner of the LCA
• Date of report
• Statement that the study has been conducted according to the requirements of NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN standards
• List of industrialists if collective EHPD or if the report is a common methodological report intended for drawing up an individual EHPD for each industrialist.
2. GOAL OF THE STUDY
Reasons for conducting the study and its application and intended audience; e.g. providing information and data for an EHPD or business-to-business and/or business-to-consumer communication.
The life cycle assessment has been conducted for drawing up an Environmental and Health Product Declaration according to NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN standards.
3. SCOPE OF THE STUDY
• declared/functional unit, including:
i. definition, including relevant technical specification(s);
ii. calculation rules for averaging data, e.g. when the declared/functional unit is defined for:
1) a group of similar products produced by different suppliers or
2) the same product produced in different production sites
NOTE: In case of collective EHPDs or of a common methodological report intended for drawing up an individual EHPD for each industrialist, it is required to precisely write down the products taken into account for each industrialist taking part in the EHPD.
• System boundary according to the modular approach as outlined in Figure 1 of NF EN 15804+A1, including
47
i. omission of some life cycle stages, processes or data needed;
ii. quantification of inputs and outputs of energy and material, taking into account how plant-level data is allocated to the declared product;
iii. assumptions about electricity production and other relevant background data.
• Cut-off criteria for initial inclusion of inputs and outputs, including:
i. description of the application of cut-off criteria and assumptions;
ii. list of excluded processes.
4. LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY
• Qualitative/quantitative description of unit processes necessary for modelling the life cycle stages of the declared unit, taking into account the provisions of NF EN ISO 14025 regarding data confidentiality
• Sources of generic data or literature used to conduct the LCA
• Validation of data, including:
i. data quality assessment;
ii. treatment of missing data
• Allocation principles and procedures, including:
i. documentation and justification of allocation procedures;
ii. uniform application of allocation procedures
5. LIFE CYCLE IMPACT ASSESMENT
• The LCIA Procedures, calculation and results of the study
• The relationship of the LCIA results to the LCA results
• Reference to all characterization models, characterization factors and methods used, as defined in this European Standard
• A statement that the LCIA results are relative expressions and do not predict impacts on category endpoints, the exceeding of thresholds, safety margins or risks
6. LIFE CYCLE INTERPRETATION
• Results
• Assumptions and limitations associated with the interpretation of results as declared in the EHPD, both methodology and data related
48
• The variance of the means of LCIA results, if generic data are declared from several sources or for a range of similar products.
• Data quality assessment
• Full transparency in terms of choice of values, justifications and expert judgments
D.2 Health characteristics
INFORMATION ON NON LCI SECTIONS
• Tests conducted on the product (standard used and results of the analysis).
• Documentation.
• Detail + comments on § of the sections included in the EHPD.
D.3 Third party verification
• Name and affiliation of the actor(s) of the verification.
• Verification report.
• Answers to the questions of the verifier.
D.4 Annexes
The annexes shall regroup all necessary documents for the verification of the LCA:
• Waste document for the product.
• Questionnaires sent to suppliers.
• Summary document for the questionnaires.
• Method used for the aggregation of data.
• Convention on energy avoidance, CO2 avoidance.
• In case of subcontracting of the calculation, report of the consultants.
• Etc.
49
ANNEX E - EHPD verification report
The verification report shall contain following items
1. Title, commissioner of the EHPD
2. Name of the practitioner
3. Referential (standards, PCR, version of INIES program)
4. Documents reviewed and versions
5. Description of the verification process
- Date of Start/End of the verification.
- Is this a new EHPD or an update?
- Has the verification been carried out in parallel to the study, or after the study?
- Did the verifier have access to the calculation tool?
- Check-list use
6. Summary of main exchanges, summarized and placed in the same order than the checklist content
N.B.: editorial, style observations or reading errors are excluded from the verification report.
7. Verification of the report of the project (in compliance with content of checklist below)
- general information related to the requester and to the environmental declaration;
- functional unit and lifespan of the product;
- description of the product;
- perimeters in this life cycle assessment (system boundaries, initial cut-off criteria delineating the flows taken into account in the life cycle analysis and evaluation how this criteria is fulfilled in the final edition);
- data source
- collecting specific data, average calculation method and selection of generic data for the life cycle inventory;
- geographic, technological and temporal representativeness of environmental data concerning the product placed on the French market;
- development of scenarios for different stages of the life cycle of the product; assumptions for missing data;
- flow allocation and material processed by the requester in the environmental declaration
- Life cycle modelling of the product; short description of successive stages;
- parameters of inventory (detail number of flows? list of flows?) and enumerate environmental aspects of the life cycle to calculate the indicators (We don’t need to assess them, because they are imposed by the standard);
50
- presentation and interpretation of the life cycle assesment results; material and carbon balance consistency
- documentation of additional environmental and health information;
- in case of a collective declaration, validity framework
8. Verification of the EHPD(s)
- format of declaration;
- information about the product (description, application, specifications, intended usage…);
- LCA rules;
- scenarios and additional technical information;
- results;
- justification of test results and certificates;
- references
9. General conclusion
10. Name of verifier and independence declaration of the verifier (see below)
I, the undersigned, NAME FORENAME OF VERIFIER, DATE OF END OF VALIDITY OF ACCREDITATION, declare:
- not being employed nor on full-time nor on part-time basis by the commissioner or the practitioner of the EHPD;
- not being implied in defining the scope of the study nor executing any task related to the execution of the concerned LCA study, i.e. not having been part of the project staff of the commissioner or the practitioner;
- not having any personal, financial, politic or other interest related to the results of the study.
I declare that the information above is truthful and complete.
Date:
Name (written in full):
Signature:
51
ANNEX F – EHPD verification checklist
Environmental and Health Product Declaration (EHPD) in the format of NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN standards
Note: based of ECO Platform WGII Verification, Version 1.0 May 24, 2014. ECO Guidance Paper Verification
Part A: Calculation rules for life cycle assessment and requirements for the project report
The following issues must be checked. The check consists of verifying if the issue is described in the LCA project report and if it is in line with the requirements and guidelines of the applicable references (NF EN 15804+A1, other standards or a PCR). Most issues/points/elements are mandatory to check. If the LCA is already critically reviewed according to NF EN ISO 14044 before the verification, it is not necessary to check these already checked issues/points/elements again. Some issues/points/elements can be optional. Any deviations from the requirements should be reported by the verifier. If the issue/point/element is in line with the requirements and/or accepted by the verifier, the box "done" can be ticked.
1 General information - availability
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
1.1 Commissioner of LCA study, LCA practitioner M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
1.2 Date of issue of LCA report M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
1.3 Statement that the LCA has been performed in accordance with the requirements of EN 15804 and applicable PCR(s)
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.8.2 +
applicable PCR
1.4 Is there any other independent verification of the data given in the LCI/LCA documentation?
O
2 Study goal – availability of information
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
52
2.1 Reasons for performing the Life Cycle Assessment
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
2.2
Intended application – (e.g. for EPD, database publication etc.)
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
Is the LCA designed in such a way that it allows B2B communication for environmental performance assessment of buildings?
2.3 Target group (B2B, B2C) M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
3 Functional unit / Declared unit – availability of information
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
3.1 Functional/Declared unit, including relevant technical specification
M
NF EN 15804+A1
ch.6.3.1/6.3.2 and/or
applicable PCR or additional
specific requirements
for certain product groups
53
3.2
In case of product groups or range(similar products from one manufacturer and/or from different production plants), is the declaration established as an average:
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
Methodology and calculation rules for averaging
Representativeness of averages
4 Product description – availability of information
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
4.1 Composition of the product M ISO 14025
It should be settled before the verification how confidential information is dealt with (acc. to provisions NF EN ISO 14025)
4.2 Description of technical and functional characteristics of the product and area(s) of intended application(s) in the building
M PCR applicable
4.3 Flow diagram of main production processes and (graphic) visualization of system boundaries taken into account
M ISO 14025
It should be settled before the verification how confidential information is dealt with (acc. to provisions NF EN ISO 14025)
54
5 System boundaries in accordance with the modular approach of the NF EN 15804
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
5.1 Comprehensive declaration of modules A1 to A3 as a minimum requirement, if necessary as an aggregated module A1-A3
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch. 6.3.4
5.2
A1 to A3: System boundary M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.3.4.2 and applicable PCR
Clear description of what the modules cover
Description of chosen LCA system boundary to natural environment (e.g. forest in the production of products)
Optional CO2
certificates
Use of secondary materials and secondary fuels and waste produced (check end-of-waste state)
If applicable: reference to the certificate of CO2 offsetting
55
5.3
A1 to A3: Allocation of co-products
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.4.3.2 + annex B.1
Specification of the "end-of- waste" state
Selection of the allocation factors used for co-product allocation
Justification of specific allocation processes (e.g. if data are not available for allocation according to the NF EN 15804 rules)
Description of the energy and material flows as a result of "non-compliant" allocation processes
No declaration of loads and/or benefits in Module D for co-products or process allocation in A1-A3
5.4 A4 à A5 (optional module): Clear description and content of modules
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.3.4.3 and applicable PCR
5.5 Accounting losses in the modules in which they arise (e.g. A4, transport to construction site)
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch. 6.3.4.1
56
5.6 B1 to B5 (optional module): Delineation/boundaries and content of modules
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.3.4.4 and applicable PCR
5.9
C3 (optional module): Justification of the "end-of-waste" state
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.3.4.5 + annex B.1 and
applicable PCR
Existing need
Existing market demand
Compliance with technical requirements and legal guidelines
Fulfils limit values for Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC)
5.10 C4 (optional module): Carefully check the correct usage and allocation method
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.3.4.5 and ch.6.3.4.6
5.11 D (optional module): System boundary and
justification of module content M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.3.4.6
5.12 D (optional module): Check if the net flow calculation is done correctly taking into consideration relevant factors, e.g.:
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.3.4.6 and 6.4.3.3
57
Processing losses (loss rate)
Inputs in modules A1 to A3 (and A4 to A5 if necessary)
5.13 D (optional module): No benefits or loads of regarded allocated co-products
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.6.4.3.3
6 Power mix (e.g. electricity)
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
6.1 Selection of the power mix in accordance with the location of the production site(s)
M CEN TR15941 and applicable PCR
6.2 If applicable: validity of the certificates for renewable/green power
O Applicable PCR
7 CO2 certificates
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
7.1 If applicable: selecting allowable certificates in
accordance with the PCR O Applicable PCR
7.2 If applicable: offsetting in accordance with the requirements from the individual program operators
O Applicable PCR
8 Description of the system boundaries
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
8.1 Transparent description of the system boundaries M NF EN ISO
14040
58
Representativeness (temporal, geographical, technological)
Assessment period for each module considered in the Life Cycle Assessment (e.g. one-year average, etc.)
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
8.2
Omissions of life cycle stages, processes and data requests
Assumptions with regard to energy model and electricity production incl. year of reference. It should also be transparent which electricity/energy model is applied for avoided products if energy recovery is included in the optional Module D.
Assumptions concerning other relevant background data, where relevant for the system boundary
9 Criteria for excluding inputs and outputs
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
9.1 Selection of the cut-off criteria, description of application of the criteria and assumptions used
M
NF EN 15804+A1
ch.6.3.5 and ch. 8.2 and
applicable PCR
9.2 List of excluded processes NF EN
15804+A1 ch. 8.2
10 Data collection
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
10.1 Data collection, including data quality evaluation, according to LCA rules and practices
M
NF EN ISO 14044:2006, section 4.3.2;
Documentation
59
NF EN ISO 14040
NF EN 15804+A1 6.3.6
11 Development of scenarios at product level in modules A4-A5-B-C-D
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
11.1
Statements that the scenarios included are currently in use and are representative for most other practices. Check the PCR / program rules if average scenarios are allowed. (preferably no average scenarios in case of various practices)
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.3.8
applicable PCR
11.2
Documentation of relevant technical
information, e.g. recycling or reuse rates, with
reference to the literature source
M
12 Selecting data / background data
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
12.1
Selection and use of generic data and background data. Justification and validity demonstration
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.6.3.6
If verified EHPDs to the same PCR are available, where applicable, they should be used instead of generic data from background databases
Commonly used and publicly available databases in Europe are: GaBi database, EcoInvent, Okobau.dat, ILCD.
NF EN 15941 and applicable
PCR
12.2 < 10 years for background data M NF EN
15804+A1 ch. 6.3.7
60
< 5 years for manufacturer's data EN15941and
applicable PCR
Manufacturer data based on 1-year average
Time period of 100 years in case of a landfill scenario, longer if relevant
Technical background data in line with the physical reality
Integrity of generic data recorded, validity demonstrated for system limit and cut-off criteria for generic data records
12.3
Documentation on data / background data:
M NF EN15941
and applicable PCR
Name of the (background) recorded data, its source (data base, literature source etc.), year of data collection and its representativeness
Missing data processing
Assessment of data quality
12.4
Manufacturing data should be reproducible, e.g. available data management systems random checks could be carried out, or based on LCA determinants; some data could be checked in the verification.
O
13 Allocations
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
13.1
General allocation principles applied (avoidance of allocation, no double counting / omissions, uniform application of the allocation rules etc.)
M NF EN
ISO14044 : 2006 4.3.4
61
13.2 Presentation and justification of allocations in case of using secondary materials or secondary fuels as raw materials
M
NF EN 15804+A1
ch.6.4.3 and 8.2 and applicable
PCR
13.3
Presentation and justification of allocations
made in the plant (delineation from other
products in a plant)
M
13.4 If applicable: presentation and justification of allocation of multi- input processes (e.g. landfilling or incineration)
M
13.5 Co-product allocation correctly applied, see also § 5.3
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch. 6.4.3.2
13.6 Documentation of allocation factors used and
their (integrity/independence) sources M
13.7
Allocation of process for reuse, recycling and material recovery, check specifically:
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.6.4.3.3 and applicable PCR
Consistency with other scenarios of waste management
Conventional average technologies and common practices
Specification and justification of end-of-waste state where applicable
If applicable (module D): selecting substituted processes in accordance with the applicable PCR or (if no PCR available) current representative processes
If applicable (substitution in Module D): Calculation rules of net flows
Conservative approach, e.g. choice of those scenarios and calculation rules that reflect the highest environmental impacts in comparison to other choices
62
13.8
Is there any presentation or expert guess of
data sets which do not comply with the
allocation principles and description of
consequences for the LCA results?
M Applicable PCR
14 Life cycle modelling information
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
14.1
Transparent presentation of LCA model (for example by tables, screenshots
from LCA software used etc.)
M NF EN 15804
ch.8.4
14.2 Clear description how company data are used in the data records of Life Cycle Assessment software
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.4
14.3 Assignment of process data to the Life Cycle Assessment modules
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.4
14.4 For several locations/products: presentation of modelling of all locations and products as well as weighting thereof
M
14.5
Plausibility and consistency of data (mass balance, energy balance)
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.4
Balances on company level and in the life cycle
e.g. Mass balance between reference flow and waste for cradle to grave data / Mass of non- energetic resources used coherent with the reference flow / CO and CO2 emissions coherent with the mass of fossil energetic resources / check of the sum of non-renewable and renewable parts and between feedstock and fuel parts / Are the energy indicators coherent with the energetic resources used?
63
15 Parameters of the Life Cycle Inventory and Life Cycle Impact Assessment
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
15.1
Presentation of the parameters in tabular form for all modules A1 to D
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch..7.2.2
Marking "unassessed modules" as "MNA" (= module not assessed)
NF EN15978
ch.12.5
15.2
Presentation of the parameters describing environmental impact (7 parameters), the parameters for describing the use of resources (10 parameters), parameters for describing the waste categories (3 parameters) and parameters concerning output material flows (4 parameters)
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.
6.5, 7.2.3 – 7.2.5
15.3
Selection of correct characterization factors and exclusion of long-term emissions (> 100 years)
M
NF EN 15804+A1 ch.8.2 and
annex (amendement) and applicable
PCR
15.4
Justification of characterization factors applied in case of input/output flows that are not on the list of characterization factors of the NF EN 15804+A1and applicable PCR
M
15.5
Information on the environmental impacts in the project report:
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
Reference to characterization models and factors
Statement that the LCIA results are only relative statements which do not indicate the end points of the impact categories, exceeding threshold values, safety margins
16 Interpretation
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
64
16.1
Interpretation of the results based on a
dominance/contribution analysis of selected
indicators
O
16.2
Relationship between the results of the Life
Cycle Inventory Assessment and the results of
the Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA)
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
16.3 Assumptions and restrictions as regards the interpretation of results in the EPD, in terms of both methods and data
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
16.4
Variance from the means of LCIA results must be presented if generic data is provided from several sources or [the results] refer to a number of similar products.
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
16.5 Data quality assessment M
NF EN 15804+A1
ch.8.2
NF EN ISO
14040
CEN TR15941
applicable PCR
16.6 Comprehensive transparency regarding expert evaluations, justifications and opinions.
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.2
17 Documentation of additional information
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
17.1
Where relevant to check following documentation:
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.8.3
Laboratory results/measurements listed in the content declaration
65
Laboratory results/measurements listed in the functional/technical performance
Documentation on the declared technical information on individual life cycle stages not taken into account in the construction product's Life Cycle Assessment and applied for the evaluation of the building (e.g. transport routes, energy consumption during the use stage, cleaning cycles etc.)
Laboratory results/measurements concerning declared emissions in indoor air, soil or water during the use stage
18 Documentation for calculating the reference service life (RSL)
Mandatory = M
Optional = O
Reference Deviations
from requirements
Done
18.1
Necessary if the entire life cycle A1-
C4 is declared: documentation for calculating
the reference service life (RSL), should be
representative for the declared product
M NF EN
15804+A1 ch.6.3.3
Part B: Requirements on the EHPD
This whole section is mandatory to verify. The rules for the EHPD format can be found in EN 15804ch.7 and EN15942 standards. Everything that is included in the master ITM (information transfer matrix), should somewhere be documented in the EHPD.
1 Formal EPD requirements Reference Deviations from
requirements Done
1.1
General information the EHPD shall include
NF EN15804 ch. 7.1
Text: "Environmental Product Declaration in accordance with NF EN ISO 14025 and NF EN 15804+A1"
66
Note: Environmental Product Declarations of construction products may not be comparable if they do not comply with NF EN 15804+A1 standard
• Publisher of the EHPD / program operator, name, address
• Name of the declared product
• Declaration owner / Name and address of manufacturer / association representative of geographical area
• Representativeness with regard to which manufacturer(s)
• Program logo and website
• Date of issue and validity (5 years)
• Variability for average declaration
• Product composition (reference flows)
• Life cycle assessment stages omitted, if not full LCA
1.2
PCR name applicable
PCR
PCR version (month/year)
1.3 Demonstration of verification: external independent verification, name of third party verifier
NF EN15804 ch.7.1 Table
2
1.4 Information on the validity of the EHPD are in line with the specifications in the project report
2. Product Reference Deviations from
requirements Done
67
2.1
The product description is in line with the project report and the studied product, and clear enough described in the EHPD to understand what product is covered by the EHPD
2.2 If applicable, explanations on calculations of averages within an EHPD of a product group
NF EN 15804 ch.
7.1
2.3 Specification / identification (picture, name, model)
NF EN 15804 ch.7.1
2.4 Indication of the intended use NF EN 15804 ch.7.1
2.5 If applicable, relevant technical data (additional information is possible) including reference service life
2.6 The test standards to which the technical data are referred to
2.7
A description of the main product components and or materials is provided in accordance with the specifications of the PCR (if available) and LCA project report. NF EN
15804 ch.7.1
As a minimum, substances that are listed in the latest "Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern for authorisation" if their content exceeds the limits for registration
2.8 Description of the manufacturing process / all manufacturing processes if several locations are involved
NF EN
15804 ch. 7.1
3 LCA rules Reference Deviations from
requirements Done
68
3.1 Information on the declared / functional unit are consistent with the specifications of the PCR (if available)
Applicable PCR
3.2 Indication of the EPD type (cradle-to- gate, cradle-to-gate with options, cradle- to-grave)
NF EN
15804 ch. 7.2.2
3.3
Does the EHPD contain a (simple) flow diagram in accordance with the modular approach (perimeter of life cycle stages)?
NF EN 15804 ch.
7.2.1
3.4
Description of the system boundary (can be simplified, as a picture or in wording)
Presentation of allocation of the analysed processes to the different life cycle modules
3.5 Indication of the main assumptions and estimates for interpretation which are not described elsewhere in the EHPD
3.6 Presentation of the application (demonstration) of cut-off criteria in accordance with the project report
3.7 Source of background data used
3.8 Indication of the age of background data used
3.9 Information on the data collection period and resulting averages
3.10 Presentation of the relevant allocations for the calculation in accordance with the minimum requirements of the PCR
4 LCA: Scenarios and additional technical information
Reference Deviations from
requirements Done
69
4.1
Mandatory declaration of all modules > A3: Presentation of the assumptions pertaining to the scenarios of the declared modules in accordance with the project report
NF EN 15804 ch.
7.3
Information on undeclared optional modules
4.2
If a reference service life is declared in the EHPD, presentation of the scenario on which the RSL is based, in accordance with the project report
NF EN 15804
ch.7.3.3.2
5 LCA: Results Reference Deviations from
requirements Done
5.1 Description of the declared / functional unit
5.2
Identification of the declared/undeclared modules
MNA = module not assessed
5.3
Full declaration of all indicators required according to the modular approach (stage perimeter)
NF EN 15804
ch.7.2.3, 7.2.4, 7.2.5 and ch.7.5
INA = indicator not assessed
5.4 Compliance of the declared values with the information in the project report
5.5 In case of product averages: description of the range / variability of the LCIA results
NF EN 15804 ch.7
5.6 Deletion of module columns which are not declared (permissible for the Results part) if program allows
Program operator
rules
5.7
Formatting the table and parameters taken into account in accordance with the specifications of the PCR or the Program Operator rules
70
6 Justification of test results and certificates
Reference Deviations from
requirements Done
6.1 If applicable, additional information is provided on emissions in indoor air or soil/water,
NF EN 15804 ch.7.4
6.2 Declaration of the relevant evidence (-e.g.: test reports). Information where to find this evidence
NF EN 15804
ch.7.2 and applicable
PCR, existing program
rules
7 References Reference Deviations from
requirements Done
B7.1
Full indication of all referenced sources (excluding standards already quoted in full and standards concerning test reports and evidence)
71
ANNEX G – Template for a Certificate of verification
ANNEX G1 – Template for a Certificate of verification of an EHPD
INIES verification program
Certificate of verification of the
Environmental and Health Product Declaration
(EHPD)
As part of the verification of the EHPD
Full title of the EHPD:
Year of verification:
Registration number of INIES program:
Version:
Date of issue of the certificate of verification:
Validity end date:
Distributed by: [name (manufacturer, union, etc.), address]
NAME, verifier, holder of the accreditation delivered on month/year, valid until month/year, certifies that my mission has been conducted with strict independency and, without prejudice to the enforcement powers of the French Government in supervising the compliance to mandatory regulations:
− have not identified any significant deviation from the provisions of the EHPD Program and the NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN standards, possible non-significant deviations are listed in the verification report;
− that health and environmental data and information contained in the above mentioned EHPD are plausible for the product covered by the EHPD, the owner of the declaration remains responsible for its integrity.
The verifier
Date and signature
Contact details of the verifier: Address – tel – mail
72
ANNEX G2 – Template for a Certificate of verification in case of mutual recognition
INIES verification program
Certificate of verification of the Environmental and Health Product Declaration (EHPD) as part of mutual recognition
As part of the verification of the EHPD
Full title of the EHPD:
Year of verification:
Original program registration number
Registration number of INIES program:
Version:
Date of issue of the certificate of verification:
Validity end date:
Distributed by: [name (manufacturer, union, etc.), address]
NAME, verifier, holder of the accreditation delivered on month/year, valid until month/year, certifies that my mission has been conducted with strict independency and, without prejudice to the enforcement powers of the French Government in supervising the compliance to mandatory regulations:
− concerning part A1-A3 Concerning part A1-A3 which has already been recognized by another established Eco-Platform member program, the verifier certifies that he has not identified any significant deviation from the provisions of the INIES Program and the NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN standards concerning pollution and air pollution indicators. In case of conversion of a declared unit into a functional unit, the verifier certifies that the conversion has been done for the whole life cycle including previously verified part A1-A3.
− have not identified any significant deviation from the provisions of the INIES Program and the NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN standards, possible non-significant deviations are listed in the verification report;
− that health and environmental data and information contained in the above mentioned EHPD are plausible for the product covered by the EHPD, the owner of the declaration remains responsible for its integrity.
The verifier
Date and signature
Contact details of the verifier: Address – tel – mail
73
ANNEX G3 – Template for a Certificate of critical review of a configurator
INIES verification program
Certificate of verification of critical review of the configurator for issuing "FDES vérifiées INIES" in cases defined by the verification
program rules
As part of the verification of the configurator
Full title of configurator:
Year of verification:
Registration number of INIES program (ID):
Version:
Date of issue of the certificate of critical review:
Validity end date:
Registration number of INIES program of the configurable mother EHPD:
Distributed by: [name (manufacturer, union, etc.), address]
NAME, verifier, holder of the accreditation delivered on month/year, valid until month/year, certifies that my mission has been conducted with strict independency and, without prejudice to the enforcement powers of the French Government in supervising the compliance to mandatory regulations:
- have not identified any significant deviation from the provisions of the EHPD Program and the NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN standards, possible non-significant deviations are listed in the critical review;
- that health and environmental data and information contained in the above mentioned configurator are plausible for the product covered by the configurator, the owner of the declaration remains responsible for its integrity.
The verifier
Date and signature
Contact details of the verifier: Address – tel – mail
74
ANNEX G4 – Template for a Certificate of verification of a configurable EHPD
INIES verification program
Certificate of verification of the
Configurable Environmental and Health Product Declaration (EHPD)
As part of the verification of the configurable EHPD
Full title of the EHPD:
Year of verification:
Registration number of INIES program:
Version:
Date of issue of the certificate of verification:
Validity end date:
Full name of configurator:
Distributed by: [name (manufacturer, union, etc.), address]
NAME, verifier, holder of the accreditation delivered on month/year, valid until month/year, certifies that my mission has been conducted with strict independency and, without prejudice to the enforcement powers of the French Government in supervising the compliance to mandatory regulations:
− have not identified any significant deviation from the provisions of the EHPD Program and the NF EN 15804+A1 and NF EN 15804/CN standards, possible non-significant deviations are listed in the verification report;
− that health and environmental data and information contained in the above mentioned EHPD are plausible for the product covered by the EHPD, the owner of the declaration remains responsible for its integrity.
The verifier
Date and signature
Contact details of the verifier: Address – tel – mail
75
ANNEX H – Usage rules for the "FDES vérifiée INIES" Mark
01 01 2017
Foreword
Association HQE is the owner and manager of the INIES database since 2011.
Available on the www.inies.fr website, INIES is a database which centralises Environmental and Health Product Declarations (EHPD) of construction products, Product Environmental Profiles (PEP) of equipment, service data (energy, water…), and life cycle inventories of material…
In order to facilitate visual identification of conformity and registration of an Environmental and
Health Product Declaration in the INIES verification program, the names and pictures
and were registered by Association HQE as simple collective marks, on 8 December 2015, at the "Institut National de la Propriété Industrielle".
I. Purpose
The purpose of these rules is to define operation and usage conditions of the simple collective
marks and (afterwards as Mark or together Marks).
The Marks are exclusive property of Association HQE.
Thus, these rules details how the requester of compliant EHPD registered in the INIES verification program may use the Marks.
These usage rules are drawn up in the context of the Intellectual Property Code which defines the status and regime of collective marks (Clauses L 715-1, L 715-2 et L 715-3 of the Intellectual Property Code).
II. Definitions
Usage rules: this document constitutes the usage rules.
Marks: Marks mean simple collective marks registered at INPI with No. 15/4 233 239,
on 11 December 2015, for Association HQE and the simple collective mark registered at INPI with No. 15/4 233 235, on 11 December 2015, both of the class 1, 2, 6, 9, 11, 16, 17 19, 20, 27, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 and 45;
The mark registered with No. 15/4 233 239 is a circular shape logo with an inner edge, blue green gradient, and strait white typeface; the Mark registered with No.° 15/4 233 235 is a circular shape black and white logo with an inner edge, and strait white typeface.
76
INIES verification program: voluntary program aimed at developing and using environmental and health declarations, based on a set of operating rules. Afterwards "the Program".
FDES vérifiée INIES: refers to a compliant Environmental and Health Declaration of a product registered in the Program.
Requester of the "FDES vérifiée INIES": identifies any type of economic operator involved in putting construction and decorative products on the market for selling and use (manufacturers, representatives or importers) which draw up a complying EHPD registered in the Program. This "FDES vérifiée INIES" can be individual or collective. Afterwards "the requester".
Operators of Marks: refers to requesters of the "FDES vérifiée INIES" who are allowed to use the Marks.
Products: define construction products (products defined at No. 1 of clause 2 of the regulation (EU) No. 305/2011 of European Parliament and Council of 9 March 2011) and decorative products (products used for wall, floor and ceiling covering).
INIES Verifier: refers to a physical person whose knowledge and competencies on the environmental declaration were subject to aptitude recognition according to foreseen procedures of the Program.
The procedure for accreditation of INIES Verifier is detailed on the website in section "program verification".
III. Operating conditions for the Marks by operators
a. Admissibility conditions for operators of the Marks
Usage of the Marks is restricted to requesters of "FDES vérifiée INIES".
b. Procedure of application for operating the Marks
After validation of the application request to the Program, including acceptation of usage conditions (see annex A), the program manager sends the logos to the EHPD requester. After reception of his payment, the requester becomes an operator of the Marks, and holds the usage rights defined below.
c. Usage rights of the Marks, as operator of the Marks
As user of the Marks, the operator possesses the right to use the Marks for the period mentioned at III e) of these rules.
In accordance with this usage right, the operator can use and affix the Marks on his product, on the product itself, on the packaging, on the EHPD, on any technical or commercial document, as well as on any physical or online advertising or institutional communication medium. Furthermore, the product must be explicitly designated in section "Name of commercial references covered by the manufacturer" on the verified and published EHPD.
The right to use the Marks is strictly personal to the operator holder of the Marks usage rights, and cannot be granted to a third party, given as security or seized without written permission of Association HQE.
d. Commitment of the operator of Marks
The right to use Marks is granted to the operator for the sole products referred by the "FDES vérifiée INIES" and published in the INIES database.
Use of the Marks on any technical or commercial document, written, audio-visual or online communication media (including websites) of the operator must allow to unambiguously and unmistakably identify the concerned products.
77
To achieve this, the operator of the Marks commits to avoid any risk of confusion between the concerned products by the Marks and those which are not, for example using and affixing clear marking on any technical or commercial document, written, audio-visual or online HQE communication media (including websites).
Finally, he notifies Association HQE of the existence and progress of any initiated procedure against him by one of his clients, concerning one of his products whose communication media refers to the Marks, provided that this dispute call into question the compliance of the operator with the usage rules.
e. Usage right period
The usage right for Marks remains valid until the end of the "FDES vérifiée INIES" validity, which means five years maximum.
f. Extinction of usage right
The usage right for Marks stops once the operator does not comply with the conditions and provisions stated in the usage rules.
IV. Control of Marks operation
a. Control modalities of Marks usage
Usage control of the Marks can be done by any accredited representative of Association HQE.
The operator of the Marks will have to provide, upon request of Association HQE, all supporting documents of actual usage of MARKS, like EHPD, products, packaging, technical and commercial documents, written, audio-visual or online communication media (including websites), …
Any operator of Marks shall immediately notify Association HQE about anything he is aware that adversely affects the Mark.
Association HQE will take all appropriate measures in order to control the usage of the Marks.
b. Sanctions for non-compliant usage of Marks
For each non-compliant usage of Marks, Association HQE will apply following sanctions to the operator of Marks who does not comply with these usage rules or legal provisions:
- warning; - temporary suspension of usage right; - delisting from the list of operators; - definitive withdrawal of usage right.
Last three sanctions above may be published on the INIES website.
Before each decision, the INIES supervisory board will hear the concerned operator.
The operator sanctioned by losing, temporarily of definitively, the usage of the Marks shall, at
reception of the notification of the sanction, immediately stop, temporarily of definitively, any
use of the Marks on any media, and in particular:
- not/ not anymore affix the Marks on his EHPD, his products and their packaging, his technical or commercial documents, written, audio-visual or online communication media (including websites) or on any publication, if appropriate,
- remove any mention about the Marks on his EHPD, his products and their packaging, his technical or commercial documents, written, audio-visual or online communication media (including websites) or on any publication, if appropriate.
78
On failure, the operator having lost his usage right will be regarded as infringer according to clause L 713-2 and following of the Intellectual Property Code.
Association HQE may bring any legal action deemed appropriate in case of abusive or non-compliant usage of the Marks.
Extinction of Marks usage involves immediate commitment for the operator to remove any reference to the Marks on communication media and general terms and conditions from the concerned offer.
Exceptionally and upon reasoned request of the operator, Association HQE may, on advice of the supervisory board of the INIES database, grant him additional time to make his offer compliant with the usage rules and recover his usage right of the Marks.
The reasoned request of additional time for compliance must be sent to Association HQE by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt. The additional time, if granted, may not exceed two months and will be notified in written form.
V. Modification of the usage rules
These usage rules may be updates without notice.
Association HQE notifies all operators of Marks about the decided modifications by:
- publication of the new conditions on the website of the Program www.inies.fr; - sending a letter to each listed operator of the Program (ANNEX I – Template for an accreditation .
Operators are invited to modify their usage accordingly and then inform Association HQE. If an additional time is needed for compliance, the operators notify their difficulties to Association HQE by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt. Association HQE may grant additional time for compliance that will not exceed two months. Once the offer has been made compliant, the operator shall prove that it is compliant with the rules.
On failure, the operators lose their usage right for the concerned product.
VII. Competence of the court in case of dispute
In case of oncoming dispute between the holder of the rights and an operator about usage of the Marks, the competent court will be the "Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris", according to clause L 716-3 of the Intellectual Property Code and clause 46 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
It can only be modified by means of a written amendment.
79
ANNEX I – Template for an accreditation letter
Steering Committee of INIES Base
Secretary : Benjamin LAURENT
Telephone line: +33 (0)1 41 62 87 64
Secretary : Aurélie IDIER
Telephone line: +33 (0)1 41 62 83 64
Admission
Accreditation of verifiers of Environmental and Health Declarations for construction products
"Verifier of Environmental and Health Declarations"
Initial accreditation session / accreditation session for renewal
of XXX
The steering Committee of the INIES program, on proposal of the examination jury of the accreditation of the verifiers, declares admitted:
XXX
for the period: July XXX – October XXX
Done at Plaine Saint-Denis,
on XXX
80
ANNEX J – Audit grid
1. Principle of the audit
The goal of the accreditation renewal procedure is to insure that the verifier’s practices comply with the requirements that guide them.
Two voluntary verifiers, called "peers" contribute to the renewal as auditors.
The audit by peers, initially based on three documents, is as factual as possible. The goal of this audit is to describe the practices and attitudes of the verifier and to record possible deviations from the requirements of the INIES program and from standards linked to the verification. The audit does not make any judgement. Only the steering committee of the INIES program (in agreement with decisions of the jury) is empowered to make judgements and to take the decision, partly based on the results of the audit and information provided by the audited verifier.
The auditee shall be heard during the renewal audit. He has the right to explain himself.
The auditor is strongly invited to talk to the requester and the verifier, in particular if it is necessary to clarify some situations (in case of answers "no", see below).
2. Perimeter of the audit: - The audit shall cover at minimum two verifications, one of which is proposed by the verifier.
- The auditor shall have access to:
o verification reports and certificates;
o EHPD ;
o any other document describing exchanges and main corrections asked for during the
verification, if they are not explained in the verification reports.
The auditor shall not demand any information that is subject to a confidentiality contract.
3. Proposal of checklist for the audit
1. References, identification
Auditor Name
Audited verifier Name
Audited verification reports Titles, dates
Audited certificates Titles, dates
2. Grid to be filled out by each peer auditor:
The grid is filled out as a set of three documents: a verification report, an EHPD and a certificate, submitted to the auditor.
Four answers are possible: Yes / Partial / No / Not applicable.
81
The grid has two parts: reading the verification report and certificate / reading the EHPD.
2.1 Reading the verification report and certificate
Control point Criteria Answer Comment
Verification report
Is the report drawn up in compliance with confidentiality? e.g. without revealing the formulation of a mixture?
Does it include information required by the INIES verification program rules?
Or does it use the template for the report provided by the INIES verification program rules?
Verification certificate
Does it include information required by annex E of the INIES verification program rules?
OR does it use the template for the certificate provided by the INIES verification program rules?
Nature of the verification
Is the verification mainly on a documentary basis? (its goal is not to make the study again)
Was the verifier honest, pedagogical? (did he ask precise questions, avoid dead-ends…)
Has the verifier used the checklist as exchange media or has he ensured that all relevant points have been verified?
82
Independence of the verifier
Is a declaration of independence of the verifier, dated and signed, included in the report?
Verification points which shall be mentioned in the report as being verified
Compliance with NF EN 15804 + A1, NF EN 15804/CN and INIES program?
General information about the requester and the environmental declaration (manufacturer, brands…)?
Functional unit and product service life?
Description of the product?
Life cycle analysis perimeter (boundaries, cut-off)?
Collection method of specific data and selection of generic data (quality) for the life cycle inventory?
Scenario development at various stages of the product’s life cycle, missing data?
Flow and material allocation by the requester?
Modelling of product’s life cycle, description of successive stages?
Inventory parameters (number and classification of flows) reminder that environmental aspects are provided by the standard?
Presentation and interpretation of the results of the life cycle assessment?
83
Documentation of additional health information (health, comfort, test results…)?
Geographical, technical and temporal representativeness of environmental data related to the product?
In case of collective declaration, validity framework?
2.2 Reading the EHPD
Control point Criteria Answer Comment
Obvious non-compliance
The verified EHPD does not show any obvious non-compliance after careful reading of the EHPD.
The verified EHPD does not show any editorial non-compliance. It takes over the elements of Annex G of NF EN 15804/CN standard.
The verified EHPD does not show any identifiable quantitative non-compliance using simple tests, e.g.: "reasonable" order of magnitude of FU, material balance or carbon balance related indicators…
2.3 Summary of reading grid
The summary of the reading grid is purely descriptive with emission of an advisory opinion, it is then up to the INIES steering committee to take decisions accordingly.
Number item
Number of answers "not applicable"
Number of actual answers
of which Number of answers "no"
List of items tagged "no"
84
-a)
-b)
-c)
Number of answers "partial"
List of items tagged "to improve":
-
-
-
Number of answers "yes"
No comment
2.4 Additional questions
If the auditor has spoken to the verifier and/or the practitioner to clarify items tagged "no", he draws up a summary of the collected answers and explanations:
-a)
-b)
-c)
If appropriate, same approach on items tagged "to improve".
End of the audit by peers part of the renewal
85
ANNEX K –Methodological details
• Allocation Module D
FD CEN/TR 16970 "Sustainability of construction works - Guidance for the implementation of EN 15804" mentions at §5.2.2 that "contributions to module D can only come from modules A4-C4". Thus, provision of NF EN 15804 standard "There will be no module D declaration of benefits and loads associated with A1-A3" should always be applied.
The verifier can accept derogating to the "general rules", ensuring that this tolerance concerns an issue limited to a few percent of the FU mass, and that this assumption is actually conservative (that means that its effect is a slight increase on the impacts of the EHPD).
86
ANNEX L – Quality process
Possible appeal at Board of
Directors of Alliance HQE-GBC
State accredited program
Quality of the verifiers Market monitoringQuality of verified EHPD
Internal quality system External quality system
Claims about a verified EHPD or an accredited verifier can be issued by any person
Compliance with the requirements of the agreement
Annual activity report
Jury3 experts: 1 manufacturer, 1 user; 1 third party expert
Admission pre-requisites• Having already done 2
EHPDs (for 2 different product families in 2 the last years)
• 2 environment related professional experiences
• 2 years in the construction sector
Renewal:Review by peers• Being active by carrying out a
minimum of 1 EHPD verification over 3 years
• Attend training courses, workshops, conferences in this field
1 audit of a verified EHPD done by 2 auditors
Process for accreditation of verifiers
Annual activity report of the verifiers
Asked by the manager
Allows drawing up the annual activity report
for the State
Information meetings
Made by the program manager (normative news, evolution of the program rules, ..)
Group of verifiers
Possibility to consult their peers, clarify interpretation of some points for harmonization of practices
Process of continuous improvement
Internal check
T0 : Reception of a claim by the program manager
T1 ≤ T0+5j : the manager of the program sends a letter to the requester and the verifier specifying the claim as well as the withdrawal sanction of his EHPD within
30 days if no convincing element is provided
T2 ≤ T1+30j : Reception of the response of the requester and the verifier for investigation by the COPIL
ValidationRequest for additional
information
Request deemed eligibleby the COPIL
Accreditation for 3 tears, delivered by the COPIL
T3 +15j : Validation of the EHPD or possible
Update of the declaration and
bringing back online with the modifications
provided by the requester
T3 : Archiving the EHPD waiting for
additional information
T3 : - EHPD withdrawal- Warning, suspension or withdrawal of accreditation of the verifier
Independence and homogeneity
Oral interview based on an EHPD case study
Approval of the two audits, or switching to mandatory
oral examination
•Done by the program manager•Checking the Certificate of verification•Program registration number
Administrative check at entry
•Note for the requester about:•Sum of indicators•Potential zeros•Value lower or above thresholds (MDEGD)
Robotized technical check at entry
•Done by the database manager•Checking modifications which not approved by the
requester at entry
Human technical check at entry
•Done by the database manager•Primary selection criteria:
•First EHPD of a manufacturer•First EHPD for a product family•Collective declarations
Human random check of a minimum of 15 EHPDs
•Normative framework : EN 15804 and its national supplement
•INIES program verification rules
Requester compliance with the rules
•By a program accredited verifier
•Verification checklist: FU, system boundaries, scenarios, cut-off rules, health characteristics…
•Certificate of verification with commitment to independence of the verifier (according to ISO 14025 standard)
Verification of EHPDs
T3 : Decision of COPIL
Not-accepted
If no
