Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
SERVICE REQUEST
– ANNEX –
Specific Terms of Reference for a study to support the
impact assessment for a revision of the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives
(Final)
1. Background
Clean air is essential to human health and sustaining the environment. Despite significant
reductions of harmful air pollutant emissions over the past three decades in the EU, the latest
estimates still point to around 400.000 premature deaths each year due to air pollution, and to
eutrophication limits being exceeded in almost two-thirds of ecosystem areas across the EU
territory. Air quality continues to be a major health and environmental concern to the citizens of
the EU: almost half of the respondents to a Eurobarometer survey in 2017 highlighted ‘air
pollution’ as one of the two most important environmental issues, next to climate change.
The Commission completed a Fitness Check of the Ambient Air Quality Directives
2004/107/EC and 2008/50/EC the results of which were published in the Commission staff
working document (SWD(2019) 427 final) in November 2019. It concluded that these
Directives have been partially effective in improving air quality and achieving air quality
standards, but also finds that they have not been fully effective, and not all their objectives have
been met to date. It concluded furthermore, that the remaining gap to achieve air quality
standards is too wide in certain cases.
Among its lessons learnt, the Fitness Check noted that EU air quality standards are less
ambitious than scientific advice. Subsequently, the European Green Deal (COM(2019) 640
final) announced in the framework of its zero pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment
that the Commission would draw on the lessons learnt from the Fitness Check and strengthen
provisions on monitoring, modelling and air quality plans to help local authorities achieve
cleaner air, as well as revise EU air quality standards to align them more closely with the World
Health Organization (WHO) recommendations.
The Commission has therefore launched a process that will improve ambient air quality by
taking into account the latest scientific evidence for the protection of human health and the
environment and by strengthening the basis for effective action for better air quality, including
via better air quality monitoring, modelling and air quality plans. This has been detailed in a
corresponding Inception Impact Assessment.1 Accordingly, the Commission initiative will
1 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12677-Revision-of-EU-Ambient-Air-
Quality-legislation
2
tackle three policy areas related to ambient air quality and the current Ambient Air Quality
Directives (2008/50/EC and 2004/107/EC), building on the findings of the Fitness Check:
Policy area 1: closer alignment of the EU air quality standards with scientific knowledge
including the latest recommendations of the World Health Organization;2
Policy area 2: improving the air quality legislative framework, including provisions on
penalties and public information, to enhance effectiveness, efficiency and coherence;
Policy area 3: strengthening of air quality monitoring, modelling and air quality plans.
Policy options will be developed to address the above three areas, with a view to enhancing the
effectiveness of EU air quality legislation, specifically the Ambient Air Quality Directives, and
to avoiding, preventing or reducing the harmful effects of air pollution on human health and the
environment, in line with the European Green Deal’s zero pollution ambition. To assess if future
legislative or non-legislative EU action is justified and how such action would best be designed
to achieve desired policy objectives, these policy options will be subjected to an impact
assessment to collect evidence (including results from evaluations).
An impact assessment report will accompany the initiative when submitted to the Commission
to take a policy decision. The impact assessment will address the following:
verify the existence of a problem, its scale, size and its underlying causes;
set objectives to be achieved by the initiative;
formulate policy options and instruments to achieve the objectives;
assess the economic, social and environmental impacts (including their costs and benefits
where possible) of the various policy options;
describe how the performance of the initiative will be monitored and evaluated in the future.
To support the impact assessment for a revision of the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives, this
external study will provide the necessary scenario analysis based on modelling of different
policy options related to the three policy areas listed above. Impacts will have to be assessed and
compared, including through cost-effectiveness and multi-criteria analysis. Furthermore, an
open public consultation and a targeted stakeholder consultation will have to be carried out
addressing all three policy areas.
A specific focus of this study should be put on the first of the above listed policy areas, namely
on policy options for closer alignment of the EU air quality standards with the (updated)
recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO). Note that a currently running
contract focusses on the strengthening of air quality monitoring, modelling and plans; the
2 EU air quality standards have been set in the Ambient Air Quality Directives for 13 air pollutants: sulphur
dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and nitrogen oxide, particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5), ozone, benzene, lead, carbon
monoxide, arsenic, cadmium, nickel, and benzo(a)pyrene. For several air pollutants, these are not as stringent as
recommended by the WHO ‘Air Quality Guidelines’. These Guidelines are currently under revision with an
expected publication date in the first half of 2021.
3
Commission may ask that findings of that separate contract be taken into account under this
contract (the Commission will provide the findings).
2. Scope of the service request
2.1 General objectives
The overall aim of this service request is to support the European Commission in the
preparation of the impact assessment for the initiative ‘Air Quality: Revision of EU Rules’3
(i.e. the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives). This will include the compiling, assessing and
synthesizing of evidence for the impact assessment as well as drafting (an) analytical support
document(s) to inform the impact assessment throughout the duration of the exercise.
Note that the Commission will draft a Staff Working Document for this impact assessment;
the analytical support documents (i.e. interim / final reports, stakeholder summary reports)
produced as part of this service contract will serve as background and input to this.
The analytical support document(s) prepared as part of this service contract shall present
evidence and assessment of different policy options for the following aspects:
projected changes to air quality, and to exposure of population groups to air pollution;
the monetary and non-monetary costs of (non-)implementation of the Directives;
the administrative burden of implementation;
the situation of, and implications for different Member States;
the implications for different (a) population groups, and (b) economic sectors;
the views of key stakeholder groups.
2.2 Specific objectives
More specifically, the objectives of the main tasks of this service request are to:
(1) conceptualise the context, and clarify the drivers, problems, and consequences to be
considered when assessing interventions in the three policy areas under assessment;
(2) review relevant information and evidence base, and establish a baseline scenario (as a
basis for comparison for the impact of any policy option);
(3) develop policy options and analyse their impacts – both in a qualitative and, where this is
possible, in a quantified form (for the latter, transparent modelling of the impact on air
quality, a corresponding cost-benefit analysis, and sensitivity analyses related to key
assumptions will be required);
3 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12677-Revision-of-EU-Ambient-Air-
Quality-legislation
4
(4) assess ambition packages (combinations of policy options), including the synergies or
lack of synergies that emerge when combining different policy options; and
(5) provide support for a stakeholder consultation covering all aspects of the Commission
impact assessment, in line with the initiative’s consultation strategy.4
2.3 Approaches to be applied
This service request for support to the impact assessment for a revision of the EU Ambient
Air Quality Directives shall take an evidence-based approach and cover environmental,
economic and social aspects in relation to the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives.
The work shall build, and expand on, information and evidence relevant to the impact
assessment, where this is available already, with a view to avoiding duplication of work. This
includes, in particular the evidence collated for the fitness check of the EU Ambient Air
Quality Directives completed in November 2019 and its underpinning analysis,5 the air
quality data as reported by Member States to the Air Quality Portal,6 as well as the analysis
carried out to underpin the Second Clean Air Outlook.7
This evidence base will need to be complemented by additional data collection and bespoke
modelling, especially in relation to the projected changes to air quality and exposure to air
pollution, the monetary and non-monetary costs of (non-)implementation, the social impacts
of air pollution and measures to reduce it, and the administrative burden of implementation.
The contractor shall base itself on objective assessment criteria (and corresponding
indicators) that allow the analysis of the environmental, economic and social impacts of the
implementation of a different policy option compared to a baseline scenario. This shall also
include an assessment of synergies or lack of synergies with other EU policies. The
contractor will also have to consider in the analysis other relevant ongoing initiatives under
EU and international air quality policy, and related scientific research.
There will also be a need to consider the situation of implementation in different Member
States as well as to reflect the views of key stakeholder groups. An open public consultation
as well as targeted consultations shall be run within the framework of this specific contract to
give an opportunity to stakeholders to provide their views on the subject. Given the political
sensitivity of the issue (as illustrated in the public feedback to the inception impact
assessment)8 it will be important to ensure good communication with all stakeholders
throughout the process.
4 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/documents/AAQDs%20revision%20-%20consultation%20strategy%20-
%20final.pdf 5 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/quality/aqd_fitness_check_en.htm 6 https://aqportal.discomap.eea.europa.eu/ 7 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/clean_air/outlook.htm 8 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12677-Revision-of-EU-Ambient-Air-
Quality-legislation
5
The contractor shall organize two stakeholder meetings. A first stakeholder meeting prior to,
or during the public consultation shall assist in identifying and confirming the issues for the
impact assessment. A second stakeholder meeting shall take place before the finalisation of
the impact assessment with the aim of receiving feedback that would assist in its completion.
3. Description of tasks
3.1 Task 1: Developing a methodology, and drafting of a detailed work plan
Methodology and intervention logic
The contractor shall clearly indicate (and apply) a methodology9 to address the issues under
examination in a clear and coherent manner.
This methodology shall build on the draft intervention logic (see Figure 1, also reproduced in
better quality in the Annex) for the impact assessment (and where necessary expand it),
clearly indicating how priority elements of this impact assessment will be analyzed, and how
additional elements will be integrated into the analysis. This shall be presented in a detailed
work plan.
The analysis should be based both on quantitative and qualitative evidence and be conducted
according to the requirements of the Better Regulation Guidelines of the European
Commission10 and Toolbox11. If quantification of the below assessment criteria is not
possible, they should be assessed in a qualitative way, clearly indicating the type of most
important impacts and their likely magnitude. All limitations to quantification and their
reasons will need to be clearly detailed.
Note: Since the purpose is to support the Commission's impact assessment for a revision of the EU
Ambient Air Quality Directives, the contractor's methodology for the tasks detailed in this service
request should be based on both this service request and the inception impact assessment. The
proposed methodology should, however, allow for a degree of flexibility in terms of scope and
approach, in particular as regards the following issues:
The contractor should ensure that adaptations to the methodology are possible because public
feedback may result in some changes to the scope of the impact assessment.
The contractor should be aware that some issues or questions may only become apparent during
the service request itself.
Some pieces of relevant EU legislation may be modified in the course of the duration of this
contract.
9 The methodology should also ensure triangulation of data, i.e. not just from one source, and not just based on
consultation. 10 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-impact-assessment.pdf 11 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/planning-and-proposing-law/better-regulation-why-and-
how/better-regulation-guidelines-and-toolbox/better-regulation-toolbox_en
6
Figure 1 – (Draft) Intervention logic of the impact assessment, detailing the drivers,
problems and consequences this initiative and its three policy areas aim to address.
The methodology shall allow for a detailed assessment of the consequences of different
policy options, including via quantitative indicators (and where not possible, in qualitative
indicators) for the following key assessment criteria:12
1. Concentration levels of air pollutants,13 at (a) background locations, and (b) ‘hot-spot’
(incl. both traffic and industry-related) locations, and their development over time;
[possible indicator(s): mass-based concentration levels per air pollutant on a gridded
map, that allow estimates of average exposure as well as highest concentration levels;
depending on the pollutant. This shall include hourly, daily, seasonal and/or annual
levels]
2. Health impacts of air pollution, at a minimum the health impacts resulting from
exposure to particulate matter (PM2.5 and/or PM10), nitrogen dioxide and ozone;
[possible indicator(s): mortality expressed as ‘years of life lost’ or as ‘premature deaths’;
morbidity expressed as respiratory and cardiac hospital admissions]
12 These assessment criteria and related indicators should build, where possible, on comparable indicators
available in earlier policy documents and their underpinning analysis, including the Fitness Check of the
Ambient Air Quality Directives of 2019, the Review of the EU Clean Air Policy 2013 and the Impact
Assessment published in the context of the Clean Air for Europe Programme in 2013. 13 The analysis shall consider, as a minimum, 13 air pollutants: sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and nitrogen
oxide, particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5), ozone, benzene, lead, carbon monoxide, arsenic, cadmium, nickel, and
benzo(a)pyrene.
7
3. Ecosystem impacts of air pollution, including acidification, eutrophication, ozone
damage to vegetation and agricultural yields;
[possible indicator(s): area of terrestrial ecosystems where nitrogen deposits exceed the
critical loads for eutrophication or acidification; crop yield loss attributable to ozone]
4. Links between air pollution and climate change, including increased ozone levels due
to global warming, and co-benefits or trade-offs between climate and air pollution
abatement measures;
[possible indicator(s): reduction of short lived climate forcers due to air pollution
abatement measures; additional ozone reduction measures needed due to global
warming; cost reduction impact expressed in monetary units (€) of most recent climate
targets on air pollution abatement measures]
5. Cost to society due to air pollution, including health and healthcare impacts and costs,
lost working days, crop and animal value loss, losses to other assets and other costs
avoided by taking action to reduce air pollution;
[possible indicator(s): change in net benefits/costs of air pollution under various policy
options expressed in monetary units (€), both for direct and indirect benefits/costs]
6. Measures needed to meet EU air quality standards - and their costs, including costs
for key economic sectors, and regional differences across the EU of the costs and benefits
of the air pollution abatement measures ;
[possible indicator(s): costs of additional air pollution abatement measures under
various policy options expressed in monetary units (€), ideally per economic sector]
7. Positive and negative impacts on the EU’s international competitiveness, including
tapping into innovation potential for clean air technologies;
[possible indicator(s): price effects (€) and sectoral output change (taking into account
also productivity gains) attributable to additional air pollution control measures]
8. Effects of air pollution on sensitive population groups, including children, pregnant
women, elderly citizens and those suffering from pre-existing conditions;
[possible indicator(s): mortality and morbidity impacts for different sensitive population
groups]
9. Societal impacts of air pollution and societal impacts of air pollution abatement
measures, including resulting inequalities (i.e. who is most affected, who bears the costs);
[possible indicator(s): quantification of correlations between air pollution and (a) income
levels, (b) education levels, and (c) long-term unemployment]
10. Effects of measures to address air pollution on employment;
[possible indicator(s): employment changes and effects of health benefits on labour
productivity, ideally per economic sector]
8
11. Administrative burden of air quality management, in particular as relates to air quality
assessment regimes (including monitoring, modelling, and reporting of related data);
[possible indicator(s): cost (€) of air quality assessment per Member States]
12. Synergies with other goals of the (upcoming) EU Zero Pollution Action Plan on air,
water and soil, in particular the synergic role of indoor pollution (notably in terms of
exposure and health impacts) or co-benefits in reducing noise pollution;
[possible indicator(s): improvement of indoor air quality]
In addition, the assessment should allow for quantifying exceedance situation indicators (or
allow for a statistical analysis of the risk of non-attainment situations) – in particular of
the area, population and number of (or share of) air quality zones exposed to concentration
levels above (a) future EU air quality standards under consideration or (b) WHO
recommended guideline exposure levels, in the current situation (2020), mid-term (2030) and
the long-term (2050) per Member State.
Note: The tender should include suggested quantified indicators for each of the above assessment
criteria. Where quantification is not deemed possible, this shall be duly justified in the tender.
Detailed work plan and assessment matrix
A detailed work plan shall describe the approach and the tools to be used for collecting and
assessing the evidence (a) to establish a baseline and (b) to assess the implications of each
policy option as regards all elements of the draft intervention logic.
Specifically, this detailed work plan shall feature an assessment approach for each of the
drivers, problems and consequences indicated in the intervention logic, interpret them in an
operational way, and indicate the data sources, data collection methods and data analysis
approaches (e.g. desk research, consultation, statistics) that will be used in order to assess the
impacts of different policy options.
The detailed work plan shall include an assessment matrix, to specify clearly how each
driver, problem and consequence will be approached, and at least feature the following
columns: (a) assessment criteria; (b) indicators to be used to inform the assessment; (c) data
sources; (d) data collection / modelling methods; and (e) data analysis / modelling analysis to
be used.
The detailed work plan shall also include an indicative consultation plan (based on the
existing consultation strategy) outlining how/when different stakeholders will be consulted
(including i.e. proposed number of interviews/minimum number of responses expected,
Member State coverage and associated language regime to be applied, timing of
targeted/open consultations, etc.).
Note: The tender should include a draft detailed work plan, which should include a draft assessment
matrix for the each of the drivers, problems and consequences detailed in the draft intervention logic.
9
3.2 Task 2: Review relevant information, and establish a baseline for the assessment
Review the evidence base
The contractor shall review all relevant information including existing evaluations, impact
assessments, studies, reports, audits, information on infringements, complaints, court rulings,
information and recommendations from stakeholders. This will include evidence available at
EU and Member State levels from competent authorities, as well as scientific/technical
journals. Relevant international experience shall also be considered.
The contractor is expected to conduct part of this contract based on desk research of available
documents – and build on the extensive evidence base collated and analyzed as part of the
fitness check of the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives.
This review of the evidence shall also lead to the preliminary identification of key issues to
be discussed with stakeholders, and shall cover additional documents suggested by
stakeholders during interviews. The contractor is expected to make use of all available
documents/information and assess the extent to which such information is relevant and robust
to be used as evidence to underpin this impact assessment.
Given the amount of information available, the contractor is expected to develop a specific
methodology explaining how this information will be reviewed, used and exploited with a
view to drawing relevant conclusions. In particular, this review of relevant information shall
be organized in a way that allows for its presentation and assessment according to each of the
drivers, problems and consequences as identified in the intervention logic.
Establish a baseline
The contractor shall establish a baseline that allows a comparative assessment of the impact
of different policy options. This baseline shall be fully consistent with the baseline presented
in the Second Clean Air Outlook and the assumptions that underpin it.14
However, where substantial EU policy developments since the publication of the Second
Clean Air Outlook require this, the baseline scenario shall be further updated to reflect those
developments. This relates in particular to the air pollution impacts of (a) revised climate
targets, and (b) proposals for updated emission standards for vehicles. A description of how
these might be expected to impact an updated baseline scenario shall be outlined explicitly,
and will be agreed with the European Commission at the inception meeting.
Based on this baseline, the contractor shall detail in a quantitative (and where not possible, in
a qualitative) manner the projected developments for each of the indicators / assessment
criteria outlined above for several - as a minimum, for the years 2020, 2030 and 2050.
14 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/clean_air/outlook.htm
10
Note: The tender should already include an indication of the key features of the baseline, and which
updates are considered necessary for this assessment
3.3 Task 3: Develop detailed policy options
The policy options / scenarios logic15
The impact assessment will be based on the comparative assessment of a limited number of
policy options, which correspond to different ambition levels. This service contract shall
develop these policy options in detail. Each policy option will depict a combination of
assumptions for interventions taken under the policy area they seek to address (while
assuming that all other factors remain at baseline assumptions).
The proposed policy options shall include an analysis of subsidiarity and proportionality as
established by Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Protocol (No 2) on
the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
The purpose of assessing the impacts of these assumptions on the problems and consequences
identified in the intervention logic, is to find out if they are suitable to address the underlying
drivers and shortcomings. This assessment shall then be based on understanding the evolution
of key indicators defined under the assessment criteria for each policy option.
A number of distinct policy options shall be developed for each of the three policy areas – in
each case at least three policy options corresponding to low, mid and high ambition levels as
defined by the underlying assumptions. Note that for policy area 1, related to the closer
alignment of EU air quality standards to WHO recommendations, at least five distinct
scenarios shall be quantified as policy options, see below.
Each of these policy options and scenarios (i.e. at least 11, see Figure 2), and their underlying
assumptions shall be fully developed in such a manner, that they can be assessed individually
and in combination with other policy options under tasks 4 and 5, and compared to the
baseline developed under task 2 – based on the methodology developed under task 1. All
assumptions made shall be clearly described, and quantified in a transparent manner.
Note: The tender should identify illustrative examples of how detailed policy options / scenarios
would look like for each policy area – and highlight which elements can be quantified. The tender
should also clearly spell out, who will be involved in the development of policy options, and how.
Policy options assessed in this contract will need to be agreed with the European Commission.
15 This service request refers to both policy options and scenarios. ‘Policy options’ is used to refer to different
assumptions about way the respective policy area they refer to may be altered. ‘Scenarios’ is used to describe a
coherent set of quantified assumptions (and their consequences) that define specific policy options.
11
Figure 2 – Policy options for each of the three policy areas to inform ambition levels. 16
For policy area 1: closer alignment of air quality standards with WHO recommendations
For this policy area, the basis for developing policy options shall be the upcoming revised
WHO Air Quality Guidelines, expected for the first half of 2021 (if the revised WHO Air
Quality Guidelines are not available by the end of September 2021, the Commission will
agree with the contractor alternative sources to guide the scenario analysis). Previous WHO
recommendations included both guideline exposure levels and less stringent interim targets
and it is expected that this will also be the case for the upcoming recommendations.
The ‘headline indicator’ of the extent of the alignment with the revised WHO Air Quality
Guidelines (and for expressing the level of ambition of different scenarios assessed) will be
the annual mean concentration of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), as this air pollutant at its
current levels is associated with the most harmful effects on human health.
The relevant current EU limit value is 25 µg/m3, whereas the current WHO recommendations
refer to an interim target of 15 µg/m3 and a guideline exposure level of 10 µg/m3. Note that
with the revised WHO Air Quality Guidelines expected for the first half of 2021, based on
scientific consensus, the WHO recommendations may change.
The contractor shall develop and assess at least seven scenarios for revised EU air quality
standards, based on the level of alignment with WHO recommendations (i.e. partial or full
alignment with WHO interim targets or guideline exposure levels). Scenarios to consider may
include the following (each scenario is based on assumptions of different PM2.5 levels as a
16 This figure refers to current WHO recommendations of 2000 / 2005 (i.e. ‘WHO interim targets’ and ‘WHO
guideline exposure levels’), except where explicit reference to the updated WHO recommendations, which are
expected to be published, in 2021 is made.
12
headline indicator, but should also include assumptions for each pollutant covered by the
current Ambient Air Quality Directives – see Table 1):17
Scenario 1 – augmented baseline scenario (no change) for most pollutants, based on a
mid-term (2030) level of ambition of PM2.5 limit values at 20 µg/m3 (this corresponds to
the current indicative limit value already set in the current Directives);
Scenario 2 – a scenario assuming long-term (2050) alignment with current WHO interim
targets, likely based on a level of ambition equivalent to PM2.5 limit values at 15 µg/m3
(this may change in the updated WHO Air Quality Guidelines);
Scenario 3 – a scenario assuming mid-term (2030) alignment with current WHO interim
targets, likely based on a level of ambition equivalent to PM2.5 limit values at 15 µg/m3
(this may change in the updated WHO Air Quality Guidelines);
Scenario 4 – a scenario assuming long-term (2050) alignment with current WHO
guideline exposure levels, likely based on a level of ambition equivalent to PM2.5 limit
values at 10 µg/m3 (this may change in the updated WHO Air Quality Guidelines);
Scenario 5 – a scenario assuming mid-term (2030) alignment with current WHO
guideline exposure levels, likely based on a level of ambition equivalent to PM2.5 limit
values at 10 µg/m3 (this may change in the updated WHO Air Quality Guidelines);
Scenario 6 – a scenario assuming long-term (2050) levels of ambition of potentially more
stringent, updated WHO guideline exposure levels (i.e. with a level of ambition
equivalent to PM2.5 limit values at significantly below 10 µg/m3);
Scenario 7 – a scenario assuming mid-term (2030) levels of ambition of potentially more
stringent, updated WHO guideline exposure levels (i.e. with a level of ambition
equivalent to PM2.5 limit values at significantly below 10 µg/m3).
The final set of scenarios will be agreed with the Commission based on the revised WHO Air
Quality Guidelines, once these are available.
Note: The tender should indicate for at least two scenarios already in detail how they translate into
key assumptions for all air pollutants addressed, and how they will be quantified.
17 The revised WHO Air Quality Guidelines are expected to include recommendations for particulate matter,
nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, ozone and carbon monoxide. For all other pollutants covered by the Ambient
Air Quality Directives scenario assumptions will need to be derived from other sources – or, if well justified by
current air quality concentrations, remain at current levels. The Commission will agree with the contractor
alternative sources to guide the scenario analysis where needed.
13
Pollutants Averaging
period
Range
reported
in 2019
Current EU
air quality
standards
Permitted
exceedances
per year
WHO Interim
Target(s) as
published in
WHO (2005)
WHO
Guideline
Exposure
levels (2005)
WHO
Guideline
Exposure
levels (2021)
PM10 (µg/m3) Annual 3.7 to 50 40 - 70 / 50 / 30 20 tbd
24 hours 17 to 399 50 [35 days] 150 / 100 / 75 50 [3 days] tbd
PM2.5
(µg/m3)
Annual 1.8 to 31 25 - 35 / 25 / 15 10 tbd
24 hours 11 to 281 - - 75 / 50 / 37.5 25 [3 days] tbd
NO2
(µg/m3)
Annual 0 to 73 40 - - 40 tbd
24 hours 1 to 149 - - - - ?
1 hour 1 to 359 200 18 hours - 200 tbd
SO2
(µg/m3)
Annual 0 to 28 - - - - ?
24 hours 0 to 260 125 3 hours 125 / 50 20 tbd
1 hour 1 to 1616 350 - - - ?
10 minutes - - - - 500 tbd
Ozone
(µg/m3)
6 months 17 to 113 - - - - ?
8 hours 14 to 198 120 - 160 100 tbd
CO
(mg/m3)
24 hours - - - - - ?
8 hours - 10 75 days / 3 yrs - - ?
1 hour 0.4 to 324 - - - 30 tbd
Pollutants Period Range
reported
in 2019
Current EU
air quality
standards
Permitted
exceedances
per year
WHO
Guideline
levels (2000)18
Arsenic
(ng/m3)
Annual 0.0 to 41 6 - 6.6 19
Cadmium
(ng/m3)
Annual 0.0 to 5.7 5 - 5
Nickel
(µg/m3)
Annual 0.1 to 78 20 - 25 20
Lead
(µg/m3)
Annual 0.0 to 14 0.5 - 0.5
Benzene
(µg/m3)
Annual 0.0 to 585 5 - 1.7 21
Benzo(a)pyrene
(ng/m3)
Annual 0.5 to 18 1 - 0.12 22
NOx
(ng/m3)
Annual 0.1 to 1147 30 - 30
SOx
(ng/m3)
Annual, and
winter season
to be checked 20 - 30
Ozone
(AOT 40)
6 months to be checked 6000
(µg/m3 x h)
- 10
(ppm / hour)
Table 1 – INDICATIVE Range of air pollutant concentrations as reported in the EU for 2019 (max and
min levels), current EU Air Quality Standards, WHO Guideline Exposure Levels based on Air Quality
Guidelines, and WHO Interim Targets (where available) – note that the WHO Air Quality Guideline
Exposure Levels and Interim Targets may be revised as part of their announced update in 2021.
18 WHO air quality guidelines for Europe (2000), with chapters inter alia on Benzene, Arsenic, Cadmium,
Nickel, Lead and Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (incl. Benzo(a)Pyrene), as well as NOx, SOx and Ozone. 19 Formulated at the level of excess lifetime risk level at 1:100 000. 20 Formulated at the level of excess lifetime risk level at 1:100 000. 21 Formulated at the level of excess lifetime risk level at 1:100 000. 22 Formulated at the level of excess lifetime cancer risk level at 1:100 000.
14
For policy area 2: improving the air quality legislative framework
The contractor shall assess at least three policy options related to changes to the legislative
framework, in particular policy options for amended provisions on sanctions and penalties to
be established in national systems for non-fulfilment of relevant obligations deriving from the
Directives. It will also consider measures for a stronger harmonisation of public information,
including criteria on how and what kind of information is made available to the public.
The respective policy options shall include specific measures for the following elements:
adding an explicit mechanism for adjusting EU air quality standards to the evolving
technical and scientific progress, including for air pollutants that are at present not
covered (cf. Directive 2008/50, Article 32; Directive 2004/107, Article 8);
further defining the different types of air quality standards (especially average exposure
indicators) and the actions their exceedances would trigger (cf. Directive 2008/50,
Articles 2, 12 to 16 and Annexes VII, XI to XIV; Directive 2004/107, Articles 2, 3 and
Annex I);
expanding the requirements for action required in case of exceedances, including the
role of air quality plans and short-term action plans (cf. Directive 2008/50 Articles 17, 18,
19, 23 and 24; Directive 2004/107, Article 3);
specifying provisions to guide the development of air quality plans, including on who
to involve and on vertical and horizontal coordination between levels of governance in
their implementation (cf. Directive 2008/50, Article 23 and Annex XV);
expanding the provision on sanctions and penalties, and adding additional provisions on
access to justice and compensations, that exceedances of air quality standards could lead
to (cf. Directive 2008/50 Article 30; Directive 2004/107, Article 9);
expanding the requirements on the provision of information, especially related to
information on health impacts, harmonisation of air quality indices and reporting
deadlines (cf. Directive 2008/50, Articles 26, 27 and Annex XVI; and Directive
2004/107, Articles 7).
The final set of policy options will be agreed with the Commission.
Note: The tender should indicate for at least one policy option already in detail how they translate
into key assumptions for each of the above elements, and how they may be assessed.
For policy area 3: strengthening of air quality monitoring, modelling and plans
The contractor shall assess at least three policy options related to revised technical
requirements for air quality monitoring, modelling and plans, including estimates of related
administrative burden and expected improvements.
15
The respective policy options shall include specific measures for the following elements:
augmenting the rules on the establishment of assessment regimes, and on the scope to
combine monitoring, modelling and other assessment methods (cf. Directive 2008/50
Chapter II; and Directive 2004/107 Article 4).
changing requirements for the number and type of sampling points required for
measuring air pollution concentrations (cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex II, Annex V, Annex
IX; and Directive 2004/107 Annex II);
expanding requirements for the continuity of measurements in the same location, in
particular in case of elevated air pollution levels – and adding requirements for the
discontinuation or relocation of sampling points (cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex V);
changing and clarifying requirements for micro- and macro-scale siting of sampling
points for measuring air pollutant concentrations (cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex III, Annex
IV, Annex VIII; and Directive 2004/107 Annex III);
consolidating requirements for data quality objectives (and for modelling quality
objectives) for assessments and reference measurement methods (cf. Directive 2008/50
Annex I, Annex VI; and Directive 2004/107 Annex IV, Annex V);
expanding requirements for which air pollutants to monitor and how to measure these
(cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex VI, Annex X; and Directive 2004/107 Annex V), and
adding requirements to monitor additional air pollutants such ultrafine particles;
altering approaches to assess the contributions from natural sources, the exceedances
attributable to winter-sanding or -salting of roads, or the transboundary contributions to
exceedances (cf. Directive 2008/50 Article 20 and 21);
adding requirements on the minimum elements required for air quality plans, and the
methods used to estimate the impact of measures, for example as regard the use of
modelling and/or cost benefit assessment (cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex XV).
The policy options developed shall be discussed with the stakeholders responsible for the
monitoring and modelling of air quality, including the competent authorities in Member States,
the network of National Reference Laboratories (AQUILA) and the forum for air quality
modelling in Europe (FAIRMODE). The final set of policy options will be agreed with the
Commission.
Please note that a separate contract focusses on the strengthening of air quality monitoring,
modelling and plans: the Commission may ask that certain findings of that separate contract be
taken into account under this contract in the definition of the policy options.
Note: The tender should indicate for at least one policy option already in detail how they translate
into key assumptions for each of the above elements, and how they may be assessed.
16
3.4 Task 4: Analyse the policy options and assess their impacts
The Contractor shall assess the different policy options that correspond to different levels of
ambition both individually, and in combination. This assessment shall address all assessment
criteria as indicated under task 1. For this assessment of different policy options, and in
particular for the scenarios developed for policy area 1, the contractor will have to make use
of modelling frameworks and techniques identified under task 1.
For each of the proposed policy options the Contractor has to assess the expected economic,
social and environmental impacts in line with the Commission Better Regulation Guidelines
and Toolbox including a quantification of costs and benefits where possible, against the
reference of the baseline established under task 2.
The basis for the analysis of the policy options, and for assessment of their respective
impacts, shall be the assumptions developed and detailed for each of the policy options under
task 3. The analysis will be based on the assessment criteria identified under task 1, and
assess how each policy option impacts each of these assessment criteria both in a short-term
(2025), mid-term (2030), and long-term (2050) perspective.
This analysis shall be done, where possible, based on quantified parameters - and where this
is not possible, be assessed in a transparent, qualitative manner. In addition, the analysis will
also have to describe for each policy option who will be affected and how, with a particular
emphasis on health impacts and their costs. The study will also assess whether any proposed
change is likely to impose a disproportionate administrative burden.
This analysis shall build on cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis, and be
quantified to the degree possible – especially the assessment of policy options and/or
scenarios for policy area 1. This shall be based on the Standard Cost Model.
For all policy options analysed, detailed and comprehensive a detailed SWOT analysis shall
be developed. This SWOT analysis shall compare the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats in relation to each policy option as compared to the baseline scenario (as
developed under task 2). This shall address each assessment criteria (as referred to under task
1), and be based both on quantitative and qualitative evidence and be conducted according to
the requirements of the Better Regulation Guidelines of the European Commission23 and
Toolbox24.
If quantification of the assessment criteria is not possible, they should be assessed in a
qualitative way, clearly indicating the type of most important impacts and their likely
magnitude. All limitations to quantification and their reasons will need to be clearly spelled
out.
23 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-impact-assessment.pdf 24 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/planning-and-proposing-law/better-regulation-why-and-
how/better-regulation-guidelines-and-toolbox/better-regulation-toolbox_en
17
The analysis of policy options shall be complemented with a statistical analysis of the risk of
non-attainment situations and a sensitivity analysis of the results obtained – as well as
identify for each policy option, which are the most sensitive assumptions made. These
sensitivity analyses will be important to facilitate the understanding of the robustness of the
policy options.
3.5 Task 5: Assess ambition packages (combinations of policy options and/or scenarios)
The Contractor shall assess the different policy options combined into different ‘ambition
packages’. These combinations are to be agreed with the Commission.
This analysis shall build on a multi-criteria analysis that includes the cost-benefit analysis and
cost-effectiveness analysis of the policy options (as assessed in task 4).
For each ‘ambition package’ analysed, a detailed and comprehensive SWOT analysis shall be
developed. This SWOT analysis shall compare the strengths, weakness, opportunities and
threats in relation to each ambition package’ as compared to the baseline scenario (as
developed under task 2).
This shall address each assessment criteria for each ‘ambition package’ – and spell out the
likely synergies or lack of synergies (and identify any possible contradictions) that arise when
policy options are combined.
3.6 Task 6: Consult with stakeholders, and assess stakeholder feedback
The contractor is expected to support the Commission in the implementation of the
consultation strategy provided by the Commission.25 The stakeholder consultation will gather
stakeholders’ responses on all three policy areas under assessment as defined above.
The contractor shall consult stakeholders in order to:
confirm the scope of the impact assessment and gather factual information, data and
knowledge to underpin the assessment of impacts of different policy options, as well as
gather stakeholder views on the assessment criteria and their relevance;
gather views of stakeholders on the different policy options and scenarios and the
feasibility of their implementation, with a view to providing a qualitative analysis of the
views of stakeholder groups for each policy option as defined under task 3.
The contractor’s support will comprise conducting the consultation work, analysis and
producing a synopsis of the consultation results and feedback, including:
the preparation and running of an open public consultation using EU Survey;
25 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/documents/AAQDs%20revision%20-%20consultation%20strategy%20-
%20final.pdf
18
preparation and implementation of a targeted stakeholder consultation based on
questionnaires and interviews;
organisation and/or participation in workshops;
analysis of the consultation feedback;
providing factual summary reports shortly after each consultation activity;
drafting of the consultation synopsis report summarising the results of all the consultation
activities.
The contractor will analyse, evaluate and explain the outcome of the public and targeted
stakeholder consultation in a self-standing stakeholder consultation synopsis report (see
below).
Tasks linked to the consultation of stakeholders must respect the Commission's Better
Regulation Guidelines on Stakeholder Consultation26 and relevant parts of the Better
Regulation Toolbox.This comprises a quality control of the consultation process, including an
internal quality assessment of the consultation process and an assessment of the effectiveness
of the consultation strategy. The tender should propose a methodology to underpin the
analysis of the stakeholder consultation. The choice of means and tools should be detailed in
the offer. Note also that the stakeholder consultation process will have to allow for questions
and feedback in any of the 24 official languages of the European Union.
The consultation documents (e.g. presentations, surveys or questionnaires) should be tested
prior to the consultation with a focus group of persons who were not involved in the drafting.
Such a focus group should resemble the actual target audience of the consultation or sub-
groups of this target-audience (and the membership of the focus group is to be agreed with
the Commission) . The purpose of this testing is to find out whether the target group will find
the consultation documents easy to understand and practical to use.
Relevant stakeholders include the following categories as defined in the consultation strategy:
Public authorities, including those with responsibility in enforcing the provisions in the
Member States, at different governance levels (national, regional, local), other national,
regional and local institutions, EEA countries, environment agencies and other relevant
public bodies, international organisations (such as WHO, UNEP, UNECE, OECD);
Private economic sector operators and their trade organisation representatives
Civil society representatives, research community, academia, medical professionals, and
patient organisations;
Citizens.
26 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-stakeholder-consultation.pdf
19
Open public consultation
The stakeholder consultation will include an internet-based open public consultation of
minimum 12 weeks that will need to be made available through the Commission's open
public consultation portal (EU Survey), in all 24 official working languages of the European
Union.27 This consultation should be planned for the third quarter of 2021.
The contractor will be required to prepare, in line with the Guidelines from the Commission
on Stakeholder Consultation28, a structured public questionnaire in consultation with the
Commission, organize the necessary materials for the public consultation and evaluate the
results in accordance with the normal procedures applying to public consultation exercises
undertaken by the Commission. There are mandatory templates to be used for the
questionnaire in the EU Survey tool.
The open public consultation will comprise two separate sets of questions: one, more general,
addressed to the general public, and another one, with more specialised questions, for
authorities in the Member States, enforcement bodies, regional and local authorities, business
and trade organisations' representatives and civil society organisations, academia, medical
professionals, patient organisations, relevant international organisations, etc. The
questionnaire shall be structured in a manner which allows for easy mapping of the questions
in relation to the policy options for the purposes of completing the assessment under task 4.
The questionnaire should not exceed 15 000 characters without spaces.
The contractor will prepare a factual summary report of the open public consultation within
three weeks of the end date of the open public consultation. This summary of the open public
consultation will have to include an aggregate and neutral manner a description of who
contributed, aspects addressed, and views expressed.
Targeted stakeholder consultation
The contractor is expected to plan for and apply the most suitable means and tools to conduct
a targeted stakeholder consultation such as electronic surveys, in-depth interviews (face-to-
face, telephone or web-based interviews), and the organization of focus groups, with the
participation of a minimum of 150 to 200 stakeholders. The contractor will prepare, in
consultation with the Commission, questionnaires for identified stakeholders via EU Survey.
The methodology in the tender should foresee a proactive approach to get feedback from a
sample of stakeholders, which will include the Member States’ competent authorities at all
relevant levels (i.e. national, regional and local), civil society and non-governmental
organizations, organizations representing industry and trade, researchers and scientific
community, as well as international organizations. In addition, the targeted consultation
27 Translations will be provided by the Commission. 28 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-stakeholder-consultation.pdf
and the relevant part of the Better Regulation Toolbox.
20
questionnaires will be disseminated through stakeholder specific websites, such as the Health
Policy Platform, a tool of DG SANTE having more than 6.000 users, mainly NGOs.
The contractor should aim to ensure for each Member State that at least the competent
authorities responsible for EU air quality legislation, another sectoral public authority, a
relevant NGO and private body are consulted. They must also cover different territorial
levels, from national to regional to local and, in this context have special regard to areas that
are facing air quality problems to assess the challenges and opportunities that have been
present in these regions.
The contractor will prepare a factual summary report of the targeted consultation within
three weeks of the end date of the last targeted consultation activity. This summary of the
targeted consultation will have to include an aggregate and neutral manner a description of
who contributed, aspects addressed, and views expressed.
Stakeholder workshops
The contractor shall organise in cooperation with the Commission two stakeholder
workshops, namely:
(1) A first stakeholder meeting prior to, or during the public consultation will assist in
identifying and confirming the issues for the impact assessment, in particular the
assessment criteria. The possibility of including the workshop in the EU Green Week
2021 will be explored with the Commission.
(2) A second stakeholder meeting will take place before the finalisation of tasks 4 and 5 to
receive feedback that would assist in their completion. The workshop will aim to cross-
check the analysis of scenarios and their impacts with stakeholders, and to ensure that
important findings are not overlooked and that adequate regard is given to the different
inputs and the evidence that supports different results.
The contractor will organize the above meetings as one-day workshops either in Brussels or
online, or as a hybrid meeting. In case the workshops would involve physical presence, the
meeting rooms for these workshop (as well as the coffee breaks) will be provided by the
Commission; beyond this the contractor will have responsibility, and will bear the costs, for
all preparations for the meetings (administrative, logistical and organizational). This will
include:
preparing, and having approved by the Commission, meeting documents at least two
weeks in advance of the respective meetings (also to inform interpretation at the meetings,
organized by the Commission), as well as a summary report for each meeting;
preparing, and having approved by the Commission, presentations or summary documents
for dissemination to other groups which inform about the outcome of the workshops and
meetings undertaken in the context of this contract;
21
covering all administrative and organizational aspects for a meeting (e.g. registration,
name badges, attendance lists, etc.) – closely coordinating this with the Commission and
following necessary procedures;
Up to 250 participants should be foreseen to ensure representation of the most relevant parties
in each workshop. The contractor should manage the invitations and registrations, produce a
draft agenda and papers, assist with the discussions, and record the minutes of each
workshop. The contractor will provide a factual summary of the stakeholder workshops
within two weeks of the event.
Stakeholder consultation report and synopsis
The contractor will prepare both a full stakeholder consultation report, and a self-standing
stakeholder consultation synopsis report in a publishable and translatable format (i.e. max
15 000 characters) presenting the outcome of all the consultation activities, and giving a
qualitative analytical overview of these results.
The full stakeholder consultation report shall provide all details of how the consultation was
conducted, who was consulted and on what, and explain how it was ensured that all relevant
stakeholders had an opportunity to provide inputs. This shall include a detailed overview of
all feedback received during the open public consultation, during the targeted stakeholder
consultation, during the stakeholder workshops, and throughout the process. The view of the
stakeholders should be presented in relation to the policy options as defined under task 3. The
report shall provide both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis of stakeholder views, and
how stakeholder views differ by type of stakeholder, in relation to each policy option (and in
particular of the replies to the open public consultation).
The shorter stakeholder consultation synopsis report shall provide details of how the
consultations was conducted, who was consulted and on what, and explain how it was
ensured that all relevant stakeholders had an opportunity to provide inputs, and present the
view of stakeholders in relation to policy options as defined under task 3 in a consolidated
manner. This shall clearly present the views of different groups of stakeholder on the
different issues they were consulted on29.
The stakeholder consultation synopsis report shall adhere to the requirements of Tool #55 of
the Better Regulation Toolbox30. In particular, the contractor will ensure that the length of the
stakeholder consultation synopsis does not exceed 15 000 characters without spaces.
A draft stakeholder consultation synopsis report shall be delivered together with the draft
final report at the latest.
29 See, for example, Boxes A2.1 to A2.5 presented in Annex II of the Fitness Check of the Ambient Air Quality
Directives: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/pdf/SWD_2019_427_F1_AAQ%20Fitness%20Check.pdf 30 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/file_import/better-regulation-toolbox-55_en_0.pdf
22
4. Deliverables
1. An inception report that provides the framework and work methodology showing how
the objectives of this study will be achieved. This shall, inter alia, include an agreed
assessment matrix which includes detailed entries both for the drivers, problems and
consequences detailed in the draft intervention logic. The inception report will be
submitted no later than 4 weeks after the signature of the contract by both parties. It shall
be transmitted to the Commission in electronic format only. A draft will be discussed at
the inception meeting with the Commission. This inception report shall present the
detailed operational organization and methods to be applied to tasks 1 to 5.
2. Draft Questionnaires to be used for public and targeted stakeholder consultations,
3. First interim report: A draft first interim report is to be submitted no later than 6 months
after the signature of the contract. This first interim report shall at least provide the ‘in
depth background information’, presentation and analysis of the stakeholders
consultations inputs, analysis of other relevant materials (received directly or presented
by the Commission) and results for each of the identified options.
4. Factual summary report of the open public consultation, factual summary report of the
targeted consultation, and factual summary report for each stakeholder workshop,
corresponding to requirements referred to under task 6.
5. Second interim report: A draft second interim report is to be submitted not later than
12 months after the signature of the contract. It summarizes the outcomes of the
assessment of the impacts of the different policy options (packages) and their comparison.
6. A full stakeholder consultation report and a self-standing stakeholder consultation
synopsis report presenting the outcome of all the consultation activities, and giving a
qualitative analytical overview of these results. A draft version of both the full
stakeholder consultation report and the self-standing stakeholder consultation synopsis
report shall be delivered together with the draft final report at the latest. The final version
of both documents shall be delivered together with the final version of the final report.
7. A final report that provides all elements requested under the present contract. The final
report shall be delivered as a draft no later than 15 months after the start date of the
contract (and as a final version 18 months after the start of the contract), and will take on
board the comments received from the Commission.
The final report will explain the validity of the findings, assessments and conclusions and
must be written in a clear, unambiguous and comprehensive style. It will summarize
outcomes of all tasks carried out under this contract. It should build on the outcomes as
presented in the two interim reports.
All deliverables shall be transmitted to the Commission in electronic format. In addition, the
final report and the consultation synopsis report shall be transmitted to the Commission in
23
two hard copies each. The electronic format should include a version compatible with
MS Word 2016 as well as a PDF file. All deliverables shall include hyperlinks which enable
the reader to navigate easily within the document, and be suitable for posting on the Internet.
5. Meetings
The contractor will maintain close contact with the Commission, including regular monthly
video/audio conference calls to report on progress on the contract and to discuss any issues or
problems encountered.
An inception meeting for this contract will take place at the Commission premises in
Brussels (or if not possible due to COVID-19 related travel restrictions, via video conference)
no later than 4 weeks after the signature of the contract by both parties.
Two interim meetings will take place at the Commission premises in Brussels (or if not
possible due to COVID-19 related travel restrictions, via video conference), at which the
contractor will present the draft summary of the open public consultation (2 weeks after the
open public consultation has been finalized) and the second interim report (12 months after
signature of the contract by both parties).
A final meeting, at which the contractor will present the support study, will take place at the
Commission premises in Brussels, or if not possible due to COVID-19 related travel
restrictions, via video conference (12 months after signature of the contract by both parties).
The contractor is also expected to attend (up to) four Inter Service Steering Group
meetings at the Commission premises in Brussels (or if not possible due to COVID-19
related travel restrictions, via video conference). Note that the dates of these meetings will
ideally coincide with the dates of the above-mentioned inception, interim and final meetings.
The contractor is also required to travel to Brussels for the purposes of the two stakeholder
meetings should these be organized as including physical presence in Brussels.
All of the above meetings shall be minuted by the contractor, and draft minutes shall be sent
electronically to the Commission for approval within 5 working days of the respective
meeting.
In addition, the contractor is required to attend the meetings of three Ambient Air Quality
Expert Group (i.e. one day each) as part of the information collection in Brussels (or if not
possible due to COVID-19 related travel restrictions, via video conference).
6. Duration of the tasks
The tasks should be completed within 18 months from the signature of the contract. The
execution of the tasks may not start before the contract has been signed.
24
7. Estimated timetable
MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT
Months - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 -
Project context
Indicative: RSB meetings, a) first draft proposal, b) adoption
RSB a RSB b
Expected : c) Zero Pollution Action Plan, WHO Guidelines
c WHO
Project management
Inception, interim & final meetings
ISG meetings
AAQ Expert Group meetings & workshops
Key input from separate Mon-Mod-Plan contract
Reports
a) inception report, b) & c) interim reports, d) final report
a b c d --->---> d
e) & f) stakeholder summary reports, g) synopsis report
e f g --->---> g
Task 1 - Develop a methodology, and draft a detailed work plan (*)
Methodology ---> --->
Assessment matrix ---> --->
Task 2 - Review relevant information, and establish a baseline for the assessment (*)
Literature and evidence review ---> ---> ---> --->
Baseline scenario ---> ---> ---> --->
Task 3 - Develop detailed policy options
Development of draft options ---> ---> --->
Quantification of draft options ---> ---> --->
Development of final options ---> ---> --->
Quantification of draft options ---> ---> --->
Task 4 - Analyse the policy options and assess their impacts
First draft analysis of options and impacts
---> ---> ---> --->
Second draft analysis of options and impacts
---> ---> ---> --->
Final analysis of options and impacts
--->--->--->
Task 5 - Assess ambition packages (combinations of policy option and/or scenarios)
Conceptual assessment of ambition packages
--->
Draft assessment of ambition packages
--->
Final assessment of ambition packages
--->
Task 6 - Consult with stakeholders, and assess stakeholder feedback
Preparation of questionnaires ---> --->
Open public consultation ---> --->
Targeted consultations ---> ---> ---> ---> --->
Two stakeholder workshops
(*) For Task 1 and Task 2 draft versions of the work plan, methodology, assessment matrix, literature review and baseline scenario are to be included already in the inception report. The timing depicted here reflects this.
Note that this indicative timeline may need to be adapted in agreement with the Commission depending on the start date of the contract.
However as the tasks are critical input to external processes, this should not result in a delay in meetings and/or deliverables.
25
8. Estimated expertise requirement
Based on the selection criteria defined in this framework contract, the contractor should
propose a suitable team to support this impact assessment and to compile, process and handle
technical information in the field of ambient air quality, in particular regarding
environmental, economic, and social analyses in this field, including linked economic and
legal aspects. The contractor shall have available methods and approaches, including
modelling tools, that allow the quantitative analysis of different policy options and scenarios
against the assessment criteria set out under task 1 of these terms of reference.
The composition of the team, including the seniority of the members, should reflect the
nature of the tasks to be carried-out. The contractor should clearly assign a contact
person/project manager with overall responsibility for the delivery of the contract.
9. Place of performance
The place of performance of the tasks shall be the contractor’s premises or any other place
indicated in the tender, with the exception of the Commission’s premises
10. Budget
The total available budget is limited to a maximum of € 400.000. The payment schedule is as
stipulated in Article I.6 of the Framework contract and includes one interim payment based
on the approval of the Second Interim Report.
11. Content, Structure and graphic requirements of the final deliverables
All studies produced for the European Commission and Executive Agencies shall conform to
the corporate visual identity of the European Commission by applying the graphic rules set
out in the European Commission's Visual Identity Manual, including its logo31.
The Commission is committed to making online information as accessible as possible to the
largest possible number of users including those with visual, auditory, cognitive or physical
disabilities, and those not having the latest technologies. The Commission supports the Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 of the W3C.
For full details on Commission policy on accessibility for information providers, see:
http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/standards/accessibility/index_en.htm
Pdf versions of studies destined for online publication should respect W3C guidelines for
accessible pdf documents. See http://www.w3.org/WAI/
31 The Visual Identity Manual of the European Commission is available upon request. Requests should be made
to the following e-mail address: [email protected]
26
Final study report
The final study report shall include:
- an abstract of no more than 200 words and an executive summary of maximum 6 pages,
both in English and French;
- the following standard disclaimer:
“The information and views set out in this [report/study/article/publication…] are those of the author(s) and do
not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy
of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf
may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.”
- specific identifiers which shall be incorporated on the cover page provided by the
Contracting Authority.
Publishable executive summary
The publishable executive summary shall be provided in both English and French and shall
include:
- the following standard disclaimer:
“The information and views set out in this [report/study/article/publication…] are those of the author(s) and do
not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy
of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf
may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.”
- specific identifiers which shall be incorporated on the cover page. These will be provided
by the Contracting Authority after the signature of the contract.
Graphic requirements
The contractor must deliver the study and all publishable deliverables in full compliance with
the corporate visual identity of the European Commission, by applying the graphic rules set
out in the European Commission's Visual Identity Manual, including its logo.
The graphic rules, the Manual and further information are available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/communication/services/visual_identity/index_en.htm
A simple Word template will be provided to the contractor after contract signature. The
contractor must fill in the cover page in accordance with the instructions provided in the
template.
12. Award criteria
A maximum of 50 points will be attributed to criterion 1, a maximum of 30 points will be
attributed to criterion 2, and a maximum of 20 points will be attributed to criterion 3. In
addition a minimum threshold will be set up under this system of points:
27
- Technical sufficiency levels: Selected companies will have to score a minimum of 25, 15
and 10 points under criteria 1, 2 and 3 respectively, with a minimum total of 60 points.
Tenders scoring less than 60 in the overall points total or less than 50% in the points awarded
for a single criterion will be excluded from the rest of the assessment procedure. Assessment
of the tenders will focus on the quality of the proposed services; therefore, tenderers should
elaborate on all points addressed by these specifications in order to score as many points as
possible. The mere repetition of mandatory requirements set out in the specifications, without
going into details or without giving any added value, will only result in a very low score. In
addition, if certain essential points of the specifications are not expressly covered by the
tender, the Commission may decide to give a zero mark for the relevant qualitative award
criteria.
1. Quality of the proposed methodology (50 points – minimum threshold 50%)
This criterion assesses the suitability and strength of the proposal as measured against the
requirements of the tasks in terms of the technical content, completeness, originality of ideas
(where appropriate) and proposed effort. The degree to which the methodology shows the
capacity to resolve the questions underlying in the service request in a realistic and well-
structured way, as well as whether the methods proposed are suited to the needs set out by the
Commission.
2. Organisation of the work (30 points – minimum threshold 50%)
This criterion will assess the quality of the project planning and how the roles and
responsibilities of the proposed team and of the economic operators (in case of joint tenders,
including subcontractors if applicable) are distributed for each task. It also assesses the global
allocation of time and resources to the project and to each task or deliverable, and whether
this allocation is adequate for the work. The tender should provide details on the allocation of
time and resources and the rationale behind the choice of this allocation. The management
and coordination of the project, in particular efficient involvement of all members of the
project team, will be assessed.
3. Quality control measures (20 points – minimum threshold 50%)
This criterion will assess the quality control system applied to the service foreseen in these
tasks concerning the quality of the deliverables, the language quality check, and continuity of
the service in case of absence of a member of the team. The quality system should be detailed
in the tender and specific to the tasks at hand; a generic quality control system will result in a
low score.
The bid offering the best value for money according to the 'best price-quality ratio' award
method will be chosen, provided that the minimum number of points cited above is achieved.
'Best price-quality ratio' will be calculated as follows:
28
All bids that do not reach the stated technical sufficiency levels for each individual award
criteria will not be considered for contract award.
All bids that have passed the individual levels and score 60 or higher are deemed to be
technically sufficient.
Then the following formula will be applied to obtain the price-quality ratio, and the award
of the contract will be made in accordance with the highest ratio obtained:
𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑋
= 𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑝𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒
𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑋 × 100 × 30% (𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔)
+ 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 (𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑜𝑓 100) 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑎𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑋
× 70% (𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔)
The Commission reserves the right not to select any tender if the amounts tendered exceed
the budget envisaged for the particular piece of work or to reject any offers that do not
comply with the pre-agreed maximum rates in the framework contract.
29
ANNEX: Draft intervention logic of the impact assessment