[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 189 (Friday, September 29, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50722-50735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-24284]
[[Page 50721]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IX
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
Guidance on Acquisition of Environmentally Preferable Products and
Services, Solicitation of Comments and Meeting; Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 189 / Friday, September 29, 1995 /
Notices
[[Page 50722]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[OPPTS-00149; FRL-4760-5]
Guidance on Acquisition of Environmentally Preferable Products
and Services; Solicitation of Comments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces a proposed general guidance designed
to assist Executive agencies in identification and acquisition of
environmentally preferable products. This document also solicits
comments from all interested parties on the proposed guidance. The
proposed guidance is in response to section 503 of the Executive Order
12873 on Federal Acquisition, Recycling and Waste Prevention.
DATES: All written comments must be received on or before November 28,
1995.
ADDRESSES: Written comments must be submitted in triplicate and
identified with docket number OPPTS--00149 to: OPPT Document Control
Officer (7407), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. E-G99, 401 M St., SW., Washington,
DC 20460.
Comments and data may also be submitted electronically by sending
electronic mail (e-mail) to:ncic@epamail.epa.gov. Electronic comments
must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special
characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data will also will
also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1 file format or ASCII
file format. All comments and data in electronic form must be
identified by the docket number OPPTS-00149. No Confidential Business
Information (CBI) should be submitted through e-mail. Electronic
comments on this proposed guidance may be filed online at many Federal
Depository Libraries. additional information on electronic submissions
can be found in Unit V. of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information: Danielle
Fuligni, telephone number: 202-260-4172, e-mail:
[email protected],epa.gov. For computer information: John
Shoaff, telephone number: 260-1831, e-mail:
shoaff.john@epamail.epa.gov. For green building information: Peter
Thompson, telephone number: 260-8612, e-mail:
thompson.peter@epamail.epa.gov. For General Services Administration/EPA
Cleaners Project information: Tom Murray, telephone number: 260-1876,
e-mail: murray.tom@epamail.epa.gov. Mailing address for all contact
persons except for Tom Murray: Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Pollution, Prevention, and Toxics (7409), 401 M St., SW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Mailing address for Tom Murray: Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Pollution, Prevention, and Toxics (7406),
401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
On October 20, 1993, President Clinton signed Executive Order 12873
entitled ``Federal Acquisition, Recycling and Waste Prevention.''
Section 503 of this Executive Order requires EPA to ``issue guidance
that recommends principles that Executive agencies should use in making
determinations for the preference and purchase of environmentally
preferable products.'' EPA plans to hold a public meeting in October
1995, in Washington, DC to solicit input from interested parties
concerning this proposed guidance. More detailed information about the
meeting will be published in the Federal Register at a later date.
II. Process
To implement section 503, EPA established a process to solicit
public input from all interested persons and organizations prior to
development of the proposed guidance. EPA developed a ``concept paper''
that outlined preliminary thoughts on how the guidance might be
structured and some guiding principles for implementation of section
503. The public was given an opportunity to comment on the concept
paper, and over 50 comments were received. EPA also held a public
meeting at which over 20 Executive agencies, companies, organizations,
and individuals presented testimony.
In addition, EPA held meetings with ``stakeholders'' to give
interested parties an additional opportunity to present their views on
how EPA should proceed in developing principles for Executive agencies
to use when making determinations for the preference and purchase of
environmentally preferable products (EPPs). Meetings were held with
over 20 stakeholders companies and organizations. EPA also consulted
with the major purchasing agencies. Use of this public process has
given EPA an appreciation for the diversity of views and complexity of
the issues involving the acquisition of environmentally preferable
products. EPA is open to alternate approaches and welcomes comments on
ways to encourage the acquisition of environmentally preferable
preferable products.
This proposed guidance is meant to serve as a framework for
interested parties to begin a dialogue on environmentally preferability
of products and services as it is applicable within the Federal
purchasing context. It is also EPA's first comprehensive articulation
of its policy on ``green'' products and as such, it will evolve over
time as scientific and technical understanding expands. What follows
should serve as a backdrop for comments.
This proposed guidance reflects many months of deliberations and
discussions with a wide variety of interested parties, including
companies, Executive agencies, academia, environmental organizations,
and others. During the process of developing this guidance, it became
apparent that different parties had very divergent views on how EPA
should go about implementing the Executive Order mandates. Given this,
EPA recognizes that the guidance cannot meet all of the needs of all of
the interested parties. Instead, the document attempts to capture these
many views within a single document while presenting a possible
approach that EPA believes will lead to effective implementation of the
Executive Order.
EPA's effort to define and apply environmental preferability is not
being done in a vacuum. Other initiatives are underway that will impact
the Federal government's policies on acquisition and environmental
management, most notably the National Performance Review (NPR, also
commonly referred to as the ``Reinventing Government'' initiative).
Another initiative is the interim rule amending the Federal Acquisition
Regulation (FAR) which will allow consideration of broad environmental
factors in acquisition decisions. \1\
\1\ ``Federal Acquisition Regulation: Environmentally Preferable
Products,'' Interim Rule, Federal Register (60 FR 28494, May 31,
1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the same time that the Environmentally Preferable Products
guidance is being developed, for example, efforts are being made to
streamline and simplify the Federal government's procurement process
under the NPR. The result will be to reduce the bureaucracy of Federal
procurement by delegating additional purchasing authority away from
procurement personnel and towards all government employees. To the
extent that the streamlining will result in increasing the overall
number of
[[Page 50723]]
government purchasers, this guidance will have to be broadly
distributed, easily understandable, and supplemented by education and
training for government purchases on the environmental implications of
their purchasers as well as tools to improve their purchasing
performance.
The proposed guidance is intended, like the NPR, to promote a
government that ``works better and costs less.'' It will work better by
reducing its negative impacts on the environment and ensuring
productive, sustainable natural systems. And it will cost less by
incorporating environmental considerations into its decisions (in this
case, purchasing decisions) and, from a fiscal as well as an
environmental standpoint, operating its facilities and programs more
efficiently. \2\
\2\ From ``Creating a Government That Works Better and Costs
Less: Reinventing Environmental Management,'' page 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To help Executive agencies move forward in acquiring
environmentally preferable products, and to help in the further
development of the tools and knowledge base to support this initiative,
EPA is recommending that voluntary pilot projects be undertaken by
Executive agencies. EPA believes that these pilot acquisitions will
serve as the ``laboratories'' for applying this proposed guidance,
helping to test the workability of the concepts presented and providing
valuable information that can be used to improve the guidance in the
future. The proposed guidance includes a more detailed discussion of
the pilots.
EPA believes that this proposed guidance provides the first step in
bringing forward the key issues surrounding the acquisition of
environmentally preferable products, allowing Executive agencies to
make the necessary choices more effectively. This proposed general
guidance, however, will not answer many of the questions which may
arise in acquisition of a particular product category or service, and
thus is not intended for use by individual procurement officials.
Instead, EPA envisions that the results of the pilot acquisitions will
more closely address the needs of the acquisition community. However,
EPA believes that this guidance will nonetheless, inform procurement
officials interested in making decisions involving environmental
preferability.
EPA intends this proposed guidance to serve as a broad framework
for acquisitions involving environmentally preferable products or
services. Following the issuance of this broad, umbrella guidance, EPA
intends to issue more specific guidance on certain product categories.
Product categories could include not just common supplies but also
services, facilities and/or systems. Which product categories will be
the subject of specific guidance will depend upon the plans of the
individual Executive agencies and on comments that are solicited from
the public. EPA plans to use a public process to develop the product
category-specific guidances, so as to draw on the extensive knowledge
from both within and outside of the government.
III. Request for Comment
EPA request comments on all aspects of this proposed guidance and
is interested in receiving comments as they relate to the following
sections in this unit.
A. General Framework
Will the framework suggested in the guidance be effective
in promoting federal purchase of environmentally preferable products
and expand public sector markets for these goods and services? How
might it be improved?
B. Guiding Principles
The proposed guidance presents seven guiding principles.
Combined, do these seven principles convey the multi-dimensional and
dynamic nature of environmental preferability? Are these the principles
that Executive agencies should follow? Are all of these principles
appropriate or of equal importance to Executive agencies? What are the
best ways to operationalize these principles so that they are easy for
procurement officials to use in identifying and giving preference to
environmentally preferable products and services?
In collaboration with other Executive agencies, EPA plans
to test out many of the concepts contained in the guiding principles
through pilot acquisitions focused on specific product categories. EPA
seeks comments on ways that can best facilitate operationalizing the
concepts in the guidance through pilot acquisitions and other
approaches and which will result in practical, user-friendly tools.
The proposed guidance promotes a life-cycle perspective to
determining environmental preferability. EPA seeks comments on the best
and least burdensome ways to encourage reporting of life-cycle
information and to embark on practical life-cycle approaches. Is it
possible to determine some minimum level of life-cycle information that
is necessary to reasonably evaluate environmental preferability of a
product or service? What is this minimum level? The government's need
for any information needs to be weighed against the burden on vendors
of providing, and consumers interpreting, that information.
The concept of multiple attributes has been presented as a
separate principle (Principle #2) from the concept of life-cycle
perspective (Principle #3). EPA seeks comments on whether some
combination of attributes can determine a product's overall
environmental performance or whether such a determination can only be
made after assessing the environmental effects during the product's
life-cycle. If the latter is more appropriate, EPA seeks comments on
whether these two principles should be merged into a single principle
so that attributes associated with products are always viewed in the
context of a life-cycle perspective.
C. Proposed Menu of Environmental Performance Characteristics
As part of the guidance, EPA proposes to offer a
preliminary list of attributes that can serve as a starting point for
presenting and comparing environmental information of products and
services. This menu of environmental performance characteristics is
attached to the guidance as Appendix B(1). Are these the right set of
attributes? What should be added or deleted? Should the list include
exposure factors associated with the materials, e.g., potential for
exposure (low/high likelihood), number of people exposed, duration of
exposure, magnitude of exposure, length of time until exposure, number
of acres exposed, number of species exposed, etc? If so, how should
these exposure factors be defined? How should the environmental
attributes be characterized, i.e., in terms of environmental releases
or effects, risks to human health and the environment, or some other
characterization? Who should be involved in narrowing down the list of
attributes to determine environmental preferability for a specific
product category?
D. Establishing Core Environmental Values
Deciding whether one product is more environmentally preferable
than another inevitably involves judgements that one environmental
impact or environmental stressor is more important than another. The
EPA believes that it is appropriate and important to establish a
possible framework for a discussion of environmental priorities, and
recognizes that there are various ways in which the government may
establish
[[Page 50724]]
environmental priorities. One possibility for establishing
environmental priorities is to use the matrix of ecological stressors
and the list of high risk human health stressors that were developed by
EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) and published in its 1990 report
``Reducing Risk: Setting Priorities and Strategies for Environmental
Protection.''
EPA believes that this report and its findings may offer an
appropriate baseline around which to frame the public discussion
regarding the establishment of environmental priorities in the context
of purchasing environmentally preferable products or services. It
should be noted that the rankings in the report are not perfect; they
may be incomplete and may emphasize global-scale impacts, at the
expense of local ones. EPA is presenting the following matrix of
ecological stressors and the list of stressors presenting high risk to
human health to begin the public debate, and is very interested in
receiving comments on whether this proposed approach should be used for
making decisions concerning the relative environmental priorities and
thereby assist in determining the preferability of products or
services.
EPA recognizes that determining which environmental impacts are
most important and setting environmental priorities involve certain
value judgements. Who should be responsible for making decisions
concerning the relative environmental priorities? EPA envisions
applying this decision matrix within the context of pilot acquisitions
in hopes of learning how Executive agencies should establish
environmental priorities for making decisions about environmental
preferability. EPA is interested in receiving comments about this
proposed approach. EPA proposes including this decision matrix and the
list of human health impacts in the guidance as Appendix E. Should this
approach be considered for inclusion as an Appendix to the guidance?
1. Ecological priority impacts matrix. The Decision Matrix for
ecological priority impacts, which is presented below, would provide
some guidance to Executive agencies on making trade-offs among various
environmental attributes.
According to EPA's Science Advisory Board, the ecological recovery
time affects the severity of the risk; the longer the recovery time
(the less reversible the damage), the higher the risk of that
ecological stressor. Thus, the matrix uses reversibility of the impact
as the horizontal axis for estimating the severity of the risk
associated with environmental attribute information provided by the
vendor. Stressors whose effects cause the ecosystem to take centuries
or an indefinite amount of time to recover are given a greater risk
ranking than those that take years or decades to recover. Non-renewable
resource consumption, for example, is considered a more significant
ecological stressor than the discharge to water of conventional
pollutants such as biochemical oxygen demand, loadings, from which an
ecosystem can recover in years.
The Science Advisory Board also considered significant the
geographic scale of the area subject to the stress and the importance
of the ecosystem that is actually affected within the stressed area.
Thus, ecological stressors that have impacts on a global or biosphere
basis are to be considered higher risk or more significant than
ecological stressors that have an impact only on a local or regional/
ecosystem basis. The Agency has, therefore, used geographic scale of
the stressor's impact as the vertical axis for its matrix.
Table 1.--Ecological Priority Impacts Matrix Geographic Scale/
Reversibility
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Centuries/
Years Decades indefinite
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local/Regional... Rapidly Renewable
Resource
Consumption.
Conventional
Pollutants.
National......... Hazardous Air Bioaccumulative
Pollutants. Pollutants.
Renewable
Resource
Consumption.
Chemical Releases
Global........... ................. ................ Non-renewable
Resource
Consumption.
Ecosystem
Impacts.
Ozone Depleting
Chemicals.
Global Warming
Gases.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. List of stressors presenting high risk to human health. The list
of stressors below have been identified by the Science Advisory Board
in its ``Reducing Risk'' report as presenting high risks to human
health. The stressors are not listed in any particular order of
importance:
Ambient air pollutants.
Hazardous air pollutants.
Indoor air pollution.
Occupational exposure to chemicals.
Bioaccumulative pollutants.\3\
\3\ The EPA has added bioaccumulative pollutants to the list of
stressors that pose high risks to human health. While not explicitly
identified in the SAB report as a high risk stressor, the report
does provide support for this addition. The Science Advisory Board
(SAB) did not consider bioaccumulative pollutants as a high risk
stressor in part because ``Unfinished Business'' (an earlier report
that provided the basis for ``Reducing Risk'') did not separately
break out this category; that report focused on pollutants based on
the Agency's organizational and regulatory structure. The SAB report
discusses bioaccumulative pollutants in several sections, however,
as posing potentially high risks. For example, the report states:
``It is also noteworthy that certain environmental toxicants--such
as heavy metals, PCBs, and long-lived radionuclides--tend to persist
indefinitely in the environment and may gradually become
concentrated in certain components of the human food chain.
Consequently, such toxicants may continue to pose a threat to human
health long after their release into the environment has halted.''
See Appendix B: The Report of Human Health Subcommittee of Reducing
Risk for a more complete discussion of the human health stressors
listed above and how the SAB determined that they presented a
significant risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA believes that this is one approach to making decisions
concerning the relative environmental preferability of products. EPA
seeks comments on the usefulness of the ecological impact matrix as
well as the list of high priority human health impacts. In addition,
readers are encouraged to provide their thoughts concerning the
placement of the impacts in the matrix, gaps in the matrix, and whether
or not the human health impacts can be prioritized in a similar manner.
Comments on other methods of prioritizing ecological and human health
impacts are also solicited.
[[Page 50725]]
E. Third Party Environmental Certification Programs
EPA recognizes that a number of public and private programs already
award ``seal-of-approval'' labels on consumer products for certain
environmental attributes. Some programs have developed a ``report
card'' approach whereby certain environmental information about a
product or groups of products is profiled. Yet others certify single
attribute claims made by manufacturers. More than 20 countries have
environmental labeling programs and a number of private companies and
non-profit programs claim to either identify environmentally preferable
products here in the United States or label products based on
environmental attributes. These third party environmental certification
programs can play the important role of helping consumers identify
which products are less environmentally damaging.\4\
\4\ The term, third party environmental certification program,
is used to capture the different types of programs, including those
which verify single environmental claims, compile report cards,
award seals, etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although these third party environmental certification programs
currently operate primarily in the consumer sector, their influence in
the Federal marketplace could become significant. For example, as
streamlining efforts allow more Federal employees to make direct
purchasing decisions, agency personnel, in their purchases of
commercially available or ``off-the-shelf'' items may come to equate
the ``seals'' or ``report cards'' of these programs as being
environmentally preferable.\5\ In addition, as Executive agencies begin
to implement Executive Order 12873, it is possible that Executive
agencies will look to these programs to assist in identifying
environmentally preferable products in specific procurement. However,
Executive agency decisions regarding federal procurement, including
those involving the environmental preferability of products, are
considered to be an inherent government function. As such, Executive
agencies need to ensure that an acquisition decision does not turn on
an unverified policy, or value judgment by a non-government entity.
\5\ This may not be warranted particularly if the seal or report
card does not provide sufficient information about the criteria used
to judge the product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, there are no widely accepted standards for how these
programs should operate. Although organizations such as the
International Standards Organization (ISO) have initiated efforts to
develop a ``code of conduct'' for eco-labeling programs, the resulting
standards will not be finalized for a number of years.\6\ Until
international standards or other practices are developed, EPA believes
that it is appropriate for Executive agencies to consider the following
questions if evaluating such programs for use in making decisions
regarding the environmental preferability of products. Does the program
have:
\6\ Work on eco-labeling is being done under the Technical
Committee on Environmental Management System (TC 207).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An open, public process that involves key stakeholders
(businesses, environmental and consumer groups, states etc.) in
developing its criteria or standards?
Award criteria, assumptions, methods and data used to
evaluate the product or product categories that are transparent (i.e.,
they are publicly available, easily accessed and understandable to the
lay person)?
A system of data verification and data quality?
A peer review process (with representation of all
stakeholders) for developing the standards or criteria?
Criteria which are developed based on a ``systems'' or
life-cycle approach (i.e., ``cradle to grave'')?
An outreach program to educate the consumer, which
includes clear communications to consumers that provide key information
concerning environmental impacts associated with the product?
An established goal of updating standards or criteria as
technology and scientific knowledge advance?
Authority to inspect the facility whose product is
certified to ensure compliance with the standards or criteria?
Testing protocols for the products that are certified
which ensure testing is conducted by a credible institution?
Access to obtaining the seal by small and medium sized
companies (e.g., the cost of the seal is not as high as to prevent
access by companies)?
Compliance with the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC)
Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims?
EPA believes that Executive agencies should not make decisions
regarding the environmental preferability of products based on third
party environmental certification programs that do not generally meet
these basic characteristics. EPA is interested in receiving comments on
this proposed approach to dealing with the use of third party
environmental certification programs by Executive agencies in making
decisions regarding environmental preferability. Although EPA is not
proposing that these characteristics be used by individual Federal
procurement personnel and does not plan for them to serve as a model
for Federal approval of third party environmental certification
programs in the private marketplace, it does believe that these
characteristics may nonetheless be helpful to decisionmakers. EPA
proposes to include this discussion in the guidance as an Appendix F.
Should this be considered for inclusion as an Appendix to the guidance?
Does the existing FTC Guides help Executive agencies to evaluate third
party environmental certification programs?
F. Other Issues
In addition to these specific topics, EPA is also interested in
soliciting ideas from the public concerning tools (e.g., a computerized
software tool for evaluating products, etc.) that would be useful to
Executive agencies in identifying and purchasing ``green'' products.
Finally, EPA is requesting suggestions for product categories to target
for specific pilot acquisitions and additional guidance.
IV. The Proposed Guidance
For the convenience of the reader, the proposed guidance is
published below in its entirety.
Proposed Guidance on Acquisition of Environmentally Preferable
Products and Services
I. Introduction
Executive Order 12873. On October 20, 1993, President Clinton
signed Executive Order 12873, entitled ``Federal Acquisition,
Recycling and Waste Prevention.'' \1\ Section 503 of this Executive
Order requires EPA to ``issue guidance that recommends principles
that Executive agencies should use in making determinations for the
preference and purchase of environmentally preferable products.''
``Environmentally preferable'' is defined in the Executive Order to
mean ``products or services that have a lesser or reduced effect on
human health and the
[[Page 50726]]
environment when compared with competing products or services that
serve the same purpose.''
\1\ Executive Order 12873 is one in a series of executive orders
that President Clinton has signed since 1993 that emphasizes Federal
government purchasing practices to promote environmental goals.
Other executive orders include: Executive Order 12843, Procurement
Requirements and Policies for Executive Agencies for Ozone Depleting
Substances; Executive Order 12844, Federal Use of Alternative Fueled
Vehicles; Executive Order 12845, Federal Procurement of Energy
Efficient Computers; Executive Order 12856, Pollution Prevention and
Right-to-Know in the Government; Executive Order 12902, Energy
Efficiency and Water Conservation at Federal Facilities;
Presidential Memorandum on Environmentally and Economically
Beneficial Practices on Federal Landscaped Grounds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The guidance proposed below is designed to help Executive
agencies meet their obligations under this Executive Order to
identify and purchase environmentally preferable products and
services.\2\ It is intended to draw on the extensive procurement
experience of the Executive agencies and on the environmental
expertise of EPA and others both within and outside of the
government. EPA believes that this guidance provides the first step
in bringing forward the key issues surrounding the acquisition of
environmentally preferable products, allowing Executive agencies to
make the necessary choices more effectively. EPA recognizes that
this proposed general guidance, however, will not answer many of the
questions which may arise in acquisition of a particular product
category or service and thus is not intended, although it will be
informative, for use by individual procurement officials.
\2\ Section 401 of Executive Order 12873 requires Executive
agencies to consider the use of environmentally preferable products
in acquisition planning for all procurement and in the evaluation
and award of contracts, as appropriate. Section 501 of the Executive
Order requires Executive agencies to ``review and revise federal and
military specifications, product descriptions and standards to
enhance Federal procurement of products'' that are environmentally
preferable. Section 503(b) of the Executive Order requires Executive
agencies to use the guidance developed by EPA ``to the maximum
extent practicable'' in identifying and purchasing environmentally
preferable products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The guidance attempts to implement the goals of the National
Performance Review and procurement reform objectives of making
Federal purchasing a simpler and not a more complex process. This
guidance also recognizes that defining what is an environmentally
preferable product and service may require a complex balancing of
different environmental factors. In sum, the guidance does the
following:
Focuses on all types of acquisition, from supplies and
services to buildings and systems.
Establishes a general, umbrella guidance and requests
Executive agencies to select voluntary pilot acquisitions or
demonstration projects.
Establishes a framework for issuing more detailed
guidances on specific product categories that are related to current
or future pilot acquisitions.
Establishes a set of guiding principles.
Outlines a number of steps for Executive agencies'
short-run and medium-run implementation.
II. Broad Principles and Approach
A. Overall Approach
In implementing section 503 of the Executive Order, EPA proposes
an approach that has two components. The first is the publication of
this general, umbrella guidance. Following this, additional
guidances will be issued that will focus on specific product
categories. These will be linked to the pilot acquisitions selected
by Executive agencies. A more detailed discussion of how these pilot
acquisitions might work is included in Section III.B.
Although both components are meant to address multiple audiences
(e.g., acquisition community, companies, environmental
organizations, etc.), each has a slightly different target audience
in mind. The first component, which sets a broad policy framework,
is aimed primarily at policy makers and others, both in the public
as well as in the private sector, who may be interested in EPA's
first comprehensive statement on ``green'' products. The second
component, which will result in more detailed and practical guidance
on specific product categories, will be aimed at the procurement and
the acquisition personnel. By making clear its goals and directions,
both the general and product category specific guidances (PCSGs)
should also provide pragmatic direction for companies who desire to
produce more environmentally preferable products and services, and
who seek to sell those products and services to the Federal
government. The consideration of environmental factors in purchasing
needs to be put in the context of other important considerations
such as performance, health and safety issues and price.
Figure 1 illustrates the approach which is described above.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
[[Page 50727]]
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN29SE95.005
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
[[Page 50728]]
B. Guiding Principles
The following seven principles are recommended as a broad guide
to help Federal purchasers address environmental preferability in
Federal acquisitions.
Guiding Principle 1:
Consideration of environmental preferability should begin early
in the acquisition process and be rooted in the ethic of pollution
prevention which strives to eliminate or reduce, up front, potential
risks to human health and the environment.
It has been estimated that 70 percent or more of the costs of
product development, manufacture, and use are determined during the
initial design stages.\3\ Thus, customized purchases or projects
where program managers, architects, engineers, systems designers, or
others have influence over the design phase afford the agencies an
early opportunity to apply environmental preferability and offer a
unique point of leverage from which to address environmental
impacts.
\3\ From Office of Technology Assessment's ``Green Products by
Design,'' page 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental preferability does not involve just substituting
one ``green'' product for another, it also involves questioning
whether a function needs to be performed, and how it can best be
performed to minimize environmental impacts. For instance, in
degreasing operations, the question is often posed whether an
efficient cleaner using halogenated solvents is better or worse for
the environment than an aqueous based cleaner. A more appropriate
question may be whether the cleaning/degreasing step can be
eliminated without affecting the overall performance of the product
or system. This might be accomplished for example, by consolidating
cleaning/degreasing in a later stage of the manufacturing process or
changing the process itself.
Guiding Principle 2:
A product or service's environmental preferability is a function
of multiple attributes.
Environmental preferability is a function of many attributes
(e.g., energy efficiency, impacts on air, water, and land and
fragile ecosystems, etc.), not just one or two. Targeting a single
environmental performance characteristic for improvement, like
energy efficiency or recycled content, may be much easier, because
they are more easily defined (most of the time), measured and
understood. By focusing on one dimension of a product's performance,
however, one might overlook other environmental impacts associated
with the product that may cause equal or greater damage.
Furthermore, it is possible that improvements along one dimension
may result in other unintended negative environmental impacts along
another dimension.
The menu of environmental performance characteristics described
in Appendix B offers a preliminary list of product or service
attributes that can help to identify environmentally preferable
products.
Guiding Principle 3:
Environmental preferability should reflect life-cycle
considerations of products and services to the extent feasible.
Ideally, ``environmental preferability'' of a product or service
should be determined by comparing the severity of environmental
damage that the product or service causes to human health and
ecological health across its life-cycle with that caused by
competing products--from the point of a raw materials acquisition,
through product manufacturing, packaging, and transportation to use
and ultimate disposal.
The term ``life-cycle'' is often interpreted by different people
to mean very different things. To some, it connotes an exhaustive,
extremely time-consuming and very expensive analysis. To other life-
cycle is an abbreviated process whereby a long list of potential
environmental attributes and/or impacts is narrowed to just a few
which provide the basis for comparison across a particular product
category. This guidance promotes the latter interpretation and
encourages the use of tools which are currently available. For
starters, Executive agencies are directed to EPA's document
``Federal Facility Pollution Prevention Project Analysis: A Primer
for Applying Life Cycle and Total Cost Assessment Concepts.'' (EPA
300-B-95-008, July 1995)
A more detailed discussion of issues related to life-cycle
considerations is included in Appendix C.
Guiding Principle 4:
Environmental preferability should consider the scale (global
vs. local) and temporal reversibility) aspects of the impact.
Determination of environmental preferability may require
weighing the various environmental impacts among products. For
example, is the impact of increased energy requirements of one
product more tolerable than the water pollution associated with the
use of another product? While there is no clear hierarchy as to
which attributes or environmental impacts are most important, EPA
has articulated, in its Science Advisory Board's 1990 report
entitled Reducing Risk, a statement of policy on priority pollutants
affecting environmental and public health. In this report,
environmental stressors were judged to be significant based on two
primary criteria--the geographic scale and degree of reversibility
of the impact. Applying this principle suggests that products with
pollutants whose effects are local and rapidly reversible are to be
generally preferred over products that impose global and
irreversible environmental damages.
A matrix of priority ecological impacts that reflects the scale
and temporal consideration of impacts, and a list of priority human
health impacts is included in a discussion in proposed Appendix E.
Guiding Principle 5:
Environmental preferability should be tailored to local
conditions where appropriate.
The importance of environmental impacts may vary depending on
geographic location and other site-specific factors, such as the
variation in the availability of natural resources and pollutant
effects on a particularly sensitive ecosystem. For example, products
that conserve water usage may be valued more highly by those who
live in the southwest United States where water is scarce than by
resident of the northeast where water is abundant. Thus, purchasers
may wish to consider local environmental issues when evaluating
life-cycle environmental information provided by offerors. When
making purchasing decisions, these local issues would need to be
carefully weighed against other global and national environmental
problems, such as ozone depletion and global climate change.
Guiding Principle 6:
Environmental objectives of products or services should be a
factor or subfactor in competition among vendors, when appropriate.
An approach to selecting environmentally preferable products
that promotes competition on environmental grounds among vendors is
better than an approach which inhibits competitive forces. The
consideration of environmental factors in purchasing needs to be put
in the context of other important considerations such as
performance, health and safety issues and price. A crucial element
in fostering competition and encouraging a market-driven approach is
to have disclosure of information by vendors about their products
and services. Where appropriate, Federal personnel should seek
meaningful information about the environmental aspects of products
in order to judge whether one product or service is more of less
environmentally preferable than another. The accessibility of the
information to the public (both the Federal personnel and the
general public) will help ensure its accuracy and credibility (e.g.,
through ``the power of the spotlight'') as well as to stimulate
continuous improvement in the environmental performance of vendors'
products.
Guiding Principle 7:
Agencies need to examine carefully product attribute claims.
A number of sources of information about environmental
performance of products are currently available.\4\ Two general
categories of information sources can be distinguished. The first is
manufacturers who make claims about their products either on the
product label or in their advertisements. Second, some third party
environmental certification programs evaluate environmental aspects
of products and award ``seals-of-approval'' or compile ``report
cards'' of environmental information. Others verify specific claims
made by manufacturers (e.g., product contains X percent recycled
content). The extent to which information conveyed through claims
and seals can assist Executive agency personnel in identifying
environmentally preferable products may vary depending on the types
of product being
[[Page 50729]]
purchased and the legal requirements applicable for a particular
acquisition.
\4\ Information about environmental aspects of products are much
more abundant in the consumer marketplace. However, as the Federal
acquisition system becomes more decentralized and allows for more
direct purchasing of commercially available products, the line that
distinguishes the Federal marketplace from the consumer marketplace
will become increasingly blurred and the information flow between
the two marketplaces will increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This guidance includes two tools to assist Executive agency
personnel in evaluating attribute claims or ``eco-labels'' that
appear on products. First, a summary of the Federal Trade
Commission's (FTC) ``Guides for Use of Environmental Marketing
Terms,'' appears as Appendix D. Second, EPA proposes to include a
discussion of characteristics for third party environmental
certification programs in the guidance as Appendix F. Executive
agency decisions regarding federal procurement, including those
involving the environmental preferability of products, are
considered to be an inherent government function, therefore the EPA
believes that Executive agencies should not make decisions regarding
the environmental preferability of products based on third party
environmental certification programs that do not generally meet
certain characteristics. EPA has requested comment on this proposed
Appendix.
III. Executive Agency Implementation
This section recommends steps that each agency can take to
implement the environmentally preferable provisions of Executive
Order 12873.
A. Policy Directive and Affirmative Procurement Plans
Recognizing that effective implementation will require clear
direction and support from the top levels of the agency, it is
recommended that each Executive agency issue a Policy Directive that
promotes the purchase of environmentally preferable products and
services. Elements in the policy directive should include:
An overall statement of policy:
Agency personnel should seek to reduce the
environmental damages associated with their purchases by increasing
their purchase of environmentally preferable products and services
to the extent feasible, taking into account other considerations
such as performance, health and safety issues and price.
Environmental factors should be taken into account as
early as possible in the acquisition planning and decision-making
process.
A commitment to the following:
Increase the acquisition of environmentally preferable
products and services.\5\
\5\ This is pursuant to section 602. ``Goal for Increasing the
Procurement of Recycled and Other Environmentally Preferable
Products,'' which states ``Agencies shall strive to increase the
procurement of products that are environmentally preferable or that
are made with recovered materials and set annual goals to maximize
the number of recycled products purchased, relative to non-recycled
alternatives.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identification of voluntary pilot projects (see
discussion below).
Establishment of incentive and award programs to
recognize those people, teams, and interagency work groups who are
most successful at promoting the purchase of environmentally
preferable products.\6\ Collaboration among agencies to provide
education and training is highly encouraged.
\6\ This is pursuant to section 302(b)(2) of the Executive Order
that states that Agency Environmental Executives shall ``establish
incentives, provide guidance and coordinate appropriate educational
programs for agency employees.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to minimize the burden on Executive agencies, EPA
recommends that provisions of the Policy Directive to promote
environmentally preferable products be incorporated into individual
agency's Affirmative Procurement Plans.\7\ This can be done as
agencies revise their Plans.
\7\ Under section 6002 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act of 1976, procuring agencies are required to establish
affirmative procurement programs for purchasing EPA-designated
recycled products. EPA recommends that agencies expand the scope of
their affirmative procurement programs to include other
environmentally preferable products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Pilot Projects
The discussion in Section II.B. identified seven principles
which are key to promoting the purchase of environmentally
preferable products. To encourage Executive agencies to move forward
in acquiring environmentally preferable products and to further
develop the infrastructure and knowledge base to support this
initiative, EPA is recommending that voluntary pilot projects be
undertaken by Executive agencies.
The pilot acquisitions will be the ``laboratories'' for applying
the principles, will help test their workability, and through the
results of the pilots, provide actual ``lessons learned'' as well as
improved or more effective policy for future acquisitions. For each
of the pilots, a product category specific guidance (PCSG) or
``users guide'' aimed at the acquisition community will be
developed. EPA will seek involvement of established commodity
sources, such as the General Service Administration (GSA) and the
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA), who have experience and expertise
concerning their respective commodities in the pilot projects. EPA
plans to keep track of projects that are planned or already underway
and thereby serve as a focal point for information on government-
wide activities related to environmentally preferable products.
Information about different pilots will be disseminated among the
agencies to avoid any duplication of efforts and to ensure that
lessons learned in one pilot project can be shared to inform other
pilot projects.
The discussion below further describes how these pilots and
demonstration projects might work. Figure 2 illustrates this
process.
1. Selection of pilots. Selection of pilots acquisitions is at
the discretion of individual Executive agencies. Criteria that
agencies should consider in selecting pilots include:
Potential for a reduction in risk to human health and
the environment.
Feasibility/degree of flexibility in the acquisition.
Products or services that are representative or typical
of the procurement system; this maximizes the potential value of the
pilot acquisition in providing lessons as to the effectiveness of
the guidance as well as future acquisitions.
2. Short-term implementation. There are several demonstration
projects that are already in the planning or implementation stages
that illustrate how to promote the purchase of environmentally
preferable products. These include:
GSA/EPA Cleaning Products Pilot
In 1993 at the request of GSA, EPA began developing
environmental performance criteria that would help identify
``green'' cleaning products. Stakeholder meetings were held to
develop the criteria, and a study was undertaken to look at product
efficacy and the relationship between product performance and
environmental impact. Using the results of these efforts, GSA's
Federal Supply Service is developing a solicitation for a multiple
award schedule that will convey from vendors to federal consumers
information on attributes of cleaning products that can serve as
indicators of environmental impacts. This information will then be
available to purchasers for their examination when selecting
products. As part of this pilot, EPA will examine the information
provided on the ``environmentally preferable cleaning products''
schedule and will select cleaning products for EPA facilities.
GSA/EPA Computer Pilot
Computer hardware accounts for approximately $4.6 billion in
purchases by the Federal government annually. Currently, the Federal
government has been successful in purchasing energy efficient Energy
Star computers which have resulted in significant environmental
benefits and cost savings. Using its purchasing power, the Federal
government can and, in the case of Energy Star, has stimulated
product manufacturers to make environmental improvements. EPA and
GSA, in collaboration with computer manufacturers and others, are
seeking to expand the Energy Star model to identify additional
attributes that can be used in the acquisition of environmentally
preferable computers.
Current Sources for Products With Environmental Attributes
Executive agencies have the option of acquisition products
through various supply sources available from GSA and DLA. GSA's
Multiple Award schedules (MAS) are one such source of supply. With
recent modifications, these schedules offer to purchasers some
information on the environmental performance of products. GSA also
currently publishes an Environmental Products Guide which identifies
those products which vendors have associated with an environmental
claim and a New Item Introductory Schedule that often includes
information on the environmental performance of products.\8\ While
agencies should consider purchasing items from this Guide, they
should be aware that often the claims refer to a single
environmental attribute (e.g., recycled content) and are not
verified by GSA. GSA is planning to enlist EPA's assistance in
implementing a demonstration project that will involve expanding
these publications to include
[[Page 50730]]
more comprehensive information on the environmental performance of
products.
\8\ Other catalogs of supply include GSA's Supply Catalog and
DLA's Energy Efficient Lighting Catalog.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Medium term implementation. In addition to completing the
aforementioned pilots that have already been initiated, EPA requests
that Executive agencies select voluntary acquisitions that would
become the next wave of pilots and which would also benefit from
lessons learned from those case studies already underway or
completed. These voluntary pilots will be implemented in three
phases.
Phase I--Agencies will identify possible pilot projects. Based
on their selections, additional guidance targeting specific product
categories will be developed and published. EPA will support these
pilots, providing overall coordination and technical assistance, as
resources allow. The product category-specific guidances will
include the following:
A qualitative description of the most important
environmental performance characteristics for that product category;
this will involve a scoping process that will include technical
experts both inside and outside the government.
A description of standard methods by which those
characteristics can be measured.
Institutionalizing the purchase of environmentally preferable
products in the long run requires that the efforts on the part of
the Executive agencies not end when these pilots are completed. So
that agencies will continue to acquire ``green'' products, EPA will
coordinate an effort to develop additional guidance documents for
product categories that will become the subjects of future pilots.
These guidance documents, similar to the product category-specific
guidances described above, will describe environmental performance
characteristics and measurement methods, and will be developed
through a process involving technical experts both inside and
outside the government. The identity of the product categories to be
targeted for additional guidance will be determined at a future
date, and will be influenced by suggestions that are submitted
during the public comment period on this proposed guidance.
Phase II--Applying the product category-specific guidance to the
acquisition process, agencies will actually purchase environmentally
preferable products. While the acquisition strategy and method are
left to the discretion of the purchasing agency, Executive agencies
are asked to select the procurement strategy that:
Maximizes the number of environmentally preferable
product choices available to the purchasing Agency.
Promotes competition across products in terms of
environmental performance.
Stimulates product and process innovation and
continuous improvement.
Allows for the consideration of local environmental
conditions.
Promotes a definition of environmentally preferable
products that can improve over time.
Phase III--Upon completion of the pilot project, a compilation
and analysis of lessons learned in the acquisition process, data
gathered about product categories and results of the pilots will be
assembled. The results of these joint efforts will be shared with
other agencies through the Electronic Acquisition Network process.
EPA believes that the lessons learned from these efforts will help
to refine the concepts and principles contained in the general
guidance and thereby ensure the effective implementation of the
mandates in the Executive Order.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
[[Page 50731]]
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TN29SE95.006
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
[[Page 50732]]
4. Long-term success. The experience gained from the short- and
medium-term pilots will be key to determining the scope and nature
of EPA's long-term activities to advance Federal acquisition of
environmentally preferable products and services. The lessons
learned from these pilots as well as the partnerships formed during
the pilots will help to establish a broader infrastructure to
support this initiative. EPA may need to utilize existing or help
develop new mechanisms--guidance, networks, data bases, etc.--in
support of the Federal purchasing community to build this
infrastructure. The infrastructure can serve to bridge the gap
between the environmental and procurement expertise within the
Executive agencies.
All Federal personnel will have a role in creating a demand for
products and services that have fewer environmental burdens. Thus,
the infrastructure will also have to support the development of
tools that are easy and convenient for Federal personnel to use in
selecting and purchasing environmentally preferable products.
Furthermore, in light of the evolving acquisition landscape and
the dynamic nature of the marketplace, the infrastructure will have
to be flexible in order to meet the changing needs of the
acquisition community. Given the increased globalization of the
economy and the trend towards commercialization of the Federal
marketplace, another important consideration will be to coordinate
this initiative with new interntional trade and standardization
developments. Ultimately, the measure of success of this initiative
will be in terms of increased availability and purchase of products
and services that have fewer impacts on human health and the
environment.
Appendix
The set of appendices that follows should be viewed by procuring
officials and other government employees as separate but related
``tools boxes'' to be used in determining preferability. As with all
tasks, the type and complexity of the tools should be appropriate to
the magnitude and importance of the job. The EPA seeks comments on the
appendices that follow:
Appendix A. Glossary of Terms
Appendix B. Environmental Performance Characteristics
(1) Preliminary ``Menu'' of Environmental Performance
Characteristics
(2) Definitions for Terms in the Menu of Environmental Performance
Characteristics
Appendix C. Applying a Life-Cycle Perspective
Appendix D. Summary of FTC's ``Guides for Use of Environmental
Marketing Claims''
Appendix A. Glossary of Terms
Environmentally preferable. Products or services that have a
lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment when
compared with competing products or services that serve the same
purpose. The comparison may consider raw materials acquisition,
production, manufacturing, packaging, distribution, reuse,
operation, maintenance, or disposal of the product or service.
Life-cycle assessment. The life-cycle assessment is a process or
framework to evaluate the environmental burdens associated with a
product, process, or activity by identifying and quantifying energy
and material usage and environmental releases, to assess the impact
of those energy and material uses and releases on the environment,
and to evaluate and implement opportunities to effect environmental
improvements. The assessment includes the entire life-cycle of the
product, process, or activity, encompassing extracting and
processing raw materials; manufacturing, transportation and
distribution; use/re-use/maintenance; recycling; and final disposal.
Often the terms life-cycle assessment and life-cycle analysis
are used synonymously. The Executive Order uses the latter and
provides a slightly different definition as follows: ``Life-cycle
analysis is a comprehensive examination of a product's environmental
and economic effects throughout its lifetime including new material
extraction, transportation, manufacturing, use and disposal.
Life-cycle cost. For the purposes of this guidance document,
life-cycle cost is defined to mean all internal and external costs
associated with a product, process, or activity throughout its
entire life-cycle--from raw materials acquisition to manufacture to
recycling/final disposal of waste materials. The term life-cycle
cost has also been used by the Department of Defense to mean the
amortized annual cost of a product, including capital costs,
installation costs, operating costs, maintenance costs, and disposal
costs discounted over the lifetime of a product. However, this
second definition has traditionally not included environmental costs
associated with systems and thus, the first definition is used in
the guidance.
Multiple Award Schedule (MAS). MASs contain a number of product
listings for which several vendors are available for a particular
product. Purchasers obtain information from the vendors and
determine from which vendor they want to buy.
Pollution prevention. Pollution prevention means ``source
reduction,'' as defined under the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990,
and other practices that reduce or eliminate the creation of
pollutants through:
--Increased efficiency in the use of raw materials, energy, water, or
other resources, or
--Protection of natural resources by conservation.
The Pollution Prevention Act defines source reduction to mean
any practice which:
--Reduces the amount of any hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant entering any waste stream or otherwise released into the
environment (including fugitive emissions) prior to recycling,
treatment, or disposal; and
--Reduces the hazards to public health and the environment associated
with the release of such substances, pollutants, or contaminants.
The term includes: equipment or technology modifications,
process or procedure modifications, reformulation or redesign of
products, substitution of raw materials, and improvements in
housekeeping, maintenance, training or inventory control.
Third party certification programs. Within the context of this
guidance, this general term is used to include programs (either non-
profit or for-profit, government-run, government-related or
independent) that verify or certify single attribute claims made by
manufacturers or other programs that compile key environmental
information into ``report cards'' (e.g., those compiled by the
Scientific Certification Program). The term also encompasses a large
category of both international and to a lesser extent, domestic
programs that award ``seals-of-approval'' to those products that
meet a specific set of environmental award criteria. Award criteria
may reflect an analysis of environmental impacts, such as Canada's
Environmental Choice's standards for reduced-pollution paint, or
single categories, such as Japan's EcoMark seal awarded for the
recycled content of paper. A seal is given only if a product meets
the standards established by the program. Most of the major foreign
environmental certification programs use a seal of approval
approach. Active third party seal of approval programs include
Germany's Blue Angel, Canada's Environmental Choice, Japan's
EcoMark, Green Seal (U.S.), and the international Flipper Seal-of-
Approval, among others.
Participation by manufacturers or vendors in the various
programs is usually on a voluntary basis.
Appendix B. Environmental Performance Characteristics
The menu of environmental performance characteristics listed
below is designed to help identify the attributes that can be
targeted for improvement. This, together with the life cycle graphic
which appears in Appendix C, can be used by Federal purchasers to
help select that product or service that minimizes environmental
impact. It is a preliminary list of the major potential sources of
human health and environmental risk. Definitions for each of the
characteristics follow the menu.
This menu can be used by agency personnel in two ways: (a) to
provide a standard framework for focusing in on the most important
environmental attributes of products, systems, and facilities, and
determining which product is preferable based on those attributes,
or (b) as a check-list of environmental issues to be considered when
designing and acquiring systems or buildings. Not all of the
environemental performance characteristics will apply to each
product; indeed, in some cases, information on only a few key
environmental
[[Page 50733]]
attributes may be needed to determine environmental preferability.
The menu of environmental performance characteristics suggests
that two different approaches to soliciting information can be used.
The first includes consideration of releases of pollutants that
occur during the life-cycle of the product. In the research on
product life-cycle assessments that have been conducted over the
past several years, these releases are known as ``inventory'' items.
Alternatively, the risks (or risk surrogates) associated with
various life-cycle stages of a product can be identified. This
approach seeks to identify actual environmental impacts rather than
solely environmental releases. When calculating risks, general
population (both environmental and human) exposures and occupational
exposures need to be considered. Executive agencies may consider
using both risk and release data in their decisions to purchase
environmentally preferable products and services.
Additional guidance on how the menu may be used within the
context of a particular product category as well as how the
Ecological Priority Impacts Matrix and the List of Stressors
Presenting High Risk (discussed below in Appendix D) may be
applicable will be issued as part of specific guidances that will
follow based on voluntary pilot acquisitions.
If vendors/offerors use the menu as a basis for making
environmental marketing claims, they should conform to the Federal
Trade Commission's Guides for Use of Environmental Marketing Claims
(16 CFR 260.5). A summary of the FTC's Guides is included as
Appendix D. As explained in the FTC guides, claims concerning a
product's environmental performance need to be supported by
environmental data provided by offerors and offerors are encouraged
to have the information verified by a credible, independent third
party certifier to provide product users, acquisition officials and
program managers with the assurance that the information they are
evaluating is accurate and scientifically sound.
Appendix B(1). Preliminary Menu of Environmental Performance
Characteristics
A. Natural Resources Use
--Ecosystem impacts (endangered species, wetlands loss, fragile
ecosystem, erosion, animal welfare etc.)
--Energy consumption (including source, if known)
--Water consumption
--Non-renewable resource consumption (>200 years)
--Renewable resource consumption (<200 years)="" --rapidly="" renewable="" resource="" consumption=""><2 years)="" b.="" human="" health="" and="" ecological="" stressors="" --bioaccumulative="" pollutants="" --ozone="" depleting="" chemicals="" --global="" warming="" gases="" --chemical="" releases="" (toxics="" release="" inventory="" (tri)="" list="" chemicals="" or="" others)="" --ambient="" air="" releases="" (other="" than="" tri,="" including="" volatile="" organic="" compounds="" &="" particular="" matter)="" --indoor="" environmental="" releases="" (consumer="" and="" occupational)="" --conventional="" pollutants="" released="" to="" water="" --hazardous="" waste="" --non-hazardous="" solid="" waste="" (municipal="" solid="" waste,="" large="" volume="" waste,="" surface="" impoundments)="" --other="" stressors="" c.="" positive="" attributes="" --recycled="" content="" --recyclability="" --product="" disassembly="" potential="" --durability="" --reusability="" --other="" attributes="" d.="" hazard="" factors="" associated="" with="" materials="" --human="" health="" hazards="" acute="" toxicity="" carcinogenicity="" developmental/reproductive="" toxicity="" immunotoxicity="" irritancy="" neurotoxicity="" sensitization="" other="" chronic="" toxicity="" --ecological="" hazards="" aquatic="" toxicity="" avian="" toxicity="" terrestrial="" species="" toxicity="" --product="" safety="" attributes="" corrosivity="" flammability="" reactivity="" appendix="" b(2).="" definitions="" for="" terms="" in="" the="" menu="" of="" environmental="" performance="" characteristics="" a.="" natural="" resource="" use="" (1)="" ecosystem="" impacts:="" adverse="" impacts="" on="" the="" ecosystem,="" e.g.,="" endangered="" species,="" wetlands="" loss,="" fragile="" ecosystems,="" erosion.="" (2)="" energy="" consumption:="" the="" total="" amount="" of="" energy="" consumed.="" different="" sources="" of="" energy="" are="" associated="" with="" different="" environmental="" impacts="" (e.g.,="" petroleum="" consumption="" creates="" global="" warming="" gases="" while="" hydroelectric="" power="" may="" have="" localized="" site="" impacts="" on="" ecosystems="" and/or="" species="" diversity).="" (3)="" water="" consumption:="" refers="" to="" the="" water="" resources="" that="" are="" consumed="" or="" used.="" (4)="" non-renewable="" resource="" consumption:="" those="" resources="" consumed="" that="" are="" not="" renewable="" in="" 200="" years="" (e.g.,="" fossil="" fuels,="" minerals).="" (5)="" renewable="" resource="" consumption:="" those="" resources="" consumed="" that="" are="" renewable="" in="" 2="" to="" 200="" years="" (e.g.,="" timber-based="" products).="" (6)="" rapidly="" renewable="" resource="" consumption:="" those="" resources="" consumed="" that="" are="" renewable="" in="" less="" than="" 2="" years="" (e.g.,="" grain-based="" feed="" stocks).="" b.="" human="" health="" and="" ecological="" stressors="" (1)="" bioaccumulative="" pollutants:="" those="" chemicals="" that="" bioconcentrate="" in="" the="" environment="" as="" described="" in="" the="" significant="" new="" use="" rule="" for="" new="" chemicals.="" (see="" 40="" cfr="" 721.3)="" (2)="" ozone="" depleting="" chemicals:="" ozone="" depleting="" chemicals="" have="" been="" defined="" in="" the="" protection="" of="" stratospheric="" ozone="" final="" rule,="" (58="" fr="" 65018,="" december="" 10,="" 1993).="" (3)="" global="" warming="" gases:="" global="" warming="" gases="" are="" listed="" in="" climate="" change="" 1992,="" the="" scientific="" report="" on="" the="" ipcc="" scientific="" assessment,="" table="" a="" 2.1.="" (4)="" chemical="" releases:="" this="" refers="" to="" ambient="" releases="" of="" chemicals="" of="" concern="" such="" as="" those="" reported="" on="" the="" toxics="" release="" inventory="" (tri)="" of="" the="" emergency="" planning="" and="" community="" right-to-="" know="" act.="" the="" current="" list="" is="" reported="" in="" 40="" cfr="" 372.65.="" (5)="" ambient="" air="" pollutants:="" refers="" to="" pollutants="" for="" which="" ambient="" air="" quality="" standards="" have="" been="" developed="" (see="" 40="" cfr="" 50.4-="" 50.12).="" these="" include="" nitrogen="" dioxide,="" sulfur="" dioxide,="" ozone="" precursors,="" particulate="" matter,="" carbon="" monoxide="" and="" lead.="" (6)="" indoor="" environmental="" releases:="" this="" refers="" to="" releases="" to="" an="" indoor="" environment="" of="" chemicals="" of="" concern="" such="" as="" those="" reported="" on="" the="" tri="" in="" both="" occupational="" and="" consumer="" settings.="" (7)="" conventional="" pollutants:="" conventional="" pollutants="" are="" defined="" in="" 40="" cfr="" 401.16.="" these="" include="" biochemical="" oxygen="" demand,="" total="" suspended="" solids,="" fecal="" coliform,="" ph,="" and="" oil="" and="" grease.="" (8)="" hazardous="" waste:="" quality="" of="" resource="" conservation="" and="" recovery="" act="" (rcra)="" hazardous="" waste="" as="" defined="" in="" 40="" cfr="" 261.3.="" (9)="" non-hazardous="" waste:="" quantity="" of="" solid="" waste="" as="" defined="" in="" 40="" cfr="" 261.3.="" includes="" municipal="" solid="" waste,="" large="" volume="" (e.g.,="" oil="" and="" gas,="" mining,="" etc.)="" waste="" and="" solid="" disposed="" of="" in="" surface="" impoundments.="" (10)="" other="" stressors:="" any="" other="" stressors="" associated="" with="" the="" product="" or="" service="" but="" not="" captured="" elsewhere.="" c.="" positive="" attributes="" (1)="" recycled="" content:="" percentage="" of="" recovered="" material="" content="" (see="" federal="" trade="" commission="" guidelines="" mentioned="" above="" for="" more="" details).="" executive="" agencies="" are="" required="" to="" purchase="" epa-designated="" items="" with="" recycled="" content="" (40="" cfr="" part="" 247).="" purchasers="" may="" want="" to="" consider="" whether="" the="" material="" contains="" pre-consumer="" or="" post-="" consumer="" recycled="" content.="" post-consumer="" recycled="" content="" or="" material="" that="" would="" have="" otherwise="" been="" incinerated="" or="" landfilled="" is="" considered="" to="" be="" better="" for="" the="" environment="" than="" manufacturers'="" scrap="" material="" that="" would="" have,="" in="" any="" case,="" been="" incorporated="" into="" the="" product.="" refer="" to="" ftc's="" ``guides="" for="" the="" use="" of="" environmental="" marketing="" claims.''="" (2)="" recyclability:="" refers="" to="" products="" or="" materials="" that="" can="" be="" recovered="" from="" or="" otherwise="" diverted="" from="" the="" solid="" waste="" stream="" for="" the="" purpose="" of="" recycling.="" it="" should="" be="" noted,="" however,="" that="" although="" technically="" most="" materials="" may="" be="" recyclable--i.e.,="" processed="" and="" used--whether="" a="" product="" or="" a="" material="" is="" actually="" recycled="" depends="" to="" a="" large="" extent="" on="" the="" community="" availability="" of="" collection="" and="" use="" programs="" for="" the="" materials.="" refer="" to="" ftc's="" ``guides="" for="" the="" use="" of="" environmental="" marketing="" claims.''="" (3)="" product="" disassembly="" potential:="" refers="" to="" the="" ease="" with="" which="" a="" product="" can="" be="" disassembled="" for="" maintenance,="" parts="" replacement,="" or="" recycling.="" (4)="" durability:="" refers="" to="" the="" expected="" lifetime="" of="" the="" product.="" (5)="" reusability:="" refers="" to="" how="" many="" times="" a="" product="" may="" be="" reused.="" since="" reusable="" products,="" in="" general,="" may="" require="" more="" up="" [[page="" 50734]]="" front="" costs="" than="" disposable="" products="" they="" are="" often="" subjected="" to="" a="" cost/benefit="" analysis="" in="" order="" to="" determine="" the="" payback="" period.="" (6)="" other="" attributes:="" any="" other="" positive="" attributes="" that="" are="" associated="" with="" the="" product="" but="" are="" not="" listed="" here.="" d.="" hazard="" factors="" associated="" with="" materials="" human="" health="" hazards="" (1)="" acute="" toxicity:="" the="" potential="" to="" cause="" adverse="" health="" effects="" from="" short-term="" exposure="" to="" a="" chemical="" substance.="" (2)="" carcinogenicity:="" carcinogenicity="" is="" defined="" epa="" using="" a="" weight-of-evidence="" approach="" (51="" fr="" 33992,="" september="" 24,="" 1986).="" when="" quantification="" is="" possible,="" slope="" factors="" can="" also="" be="" used="" to="" express="" carcinogenic="" potency.="" (3)="" development/reproductive="" toxicity:="" epa="" defines="" developmental="" toxicity="" as="" adverse="" effects="" on="" the="" developing="" organism="" that="" result="" from="" exposure="" prior="" to="" conception="" (either="" parent),="" during="" prenatal="" development,="" or="" postnatally="" to="" the="" time="" of="" sexual="" maturation="" (56="" fr="" 63798,="" december="" 5,="" 1991).="" reproductive="" toxicity="" is="" any="" adverse="" effect="" on="" an="" organism's="" ability="" to="" reproduce.="" (4)="" immunotoxicity:="" any="" adverse="" effect="" on="" an="" organism's="" immune="" system="" that="" results="" from="" exposure="" to="" a="" chemical="" substance.="" (5)="" irritancy:="" irritancy="" can="" be="" reported="" according="" to="" the="" occupational="" safety="" and="" health="" administration="" (osha)="" hazard="" communication="" standard="" (29="" cfr="" part="" 1910.1200)="" or="" using="" the="" draize="" scale.="" (6)="" neurotoxicity:="" any="" adverse="" change="" in="" the="" development,="" structure,="" or="" function="" of="" the="" central="" and="" peripheral="" nervous="" system="" following="" exposure="" to="" a="" chemical="" agent="" (59="" fr="" 42272,="" august="" 17,="" 1994).="" (7)="" sensitization:="" sensitization="" is="" an="" immunologically="" mediated="" cutaneous="" reaction="" to="" a="" substance.="" epa="" test="" methods="" for="" evaluating="" sensitization="" potential="" are="" found="" in="" 40="" cfr="" part="" 798.4100.="" (8)="" other="" chronic="" toxicity:="" the="" potential="" to="" cause="" an="" adverse="" effect="" on="" any="" organ="" or="" system="" following="" absorption="" and="" distribution="" to="" a="" site="" distant="" from="" the="" toxicants="" entry="" point.="" ecological="" hazards="" (1)="" aquatic="" toxicity:="" the="" potential="" of="" a="" substance="" to="" have="" an="" adverse="" effect="" on="" aquatic="" species.="" measurement="" methods="" for="" aquatic="" toxicity="" can="" be="" found="" in="" 40="" cfr="" part="" 797,="" subpart="" b.="" (2)="" avian="" toxicity:="" the="" potential="" of="" a="" substance="" to="" have="" an="" adverse="" effect="" on="" avian="" species.="" (3)="" terrestrial="" species="" toxicity:="" the="" potential="" of="" a="" substance="" to="" have="" an="" adverse="" effect="" on="" terrestrial="" species="" other="" than="" man.="" product="" safety="" attributes="" (1)="" corrosivity:="" epa="" defines="" dermal="" corrosion="" as="" the="" production="" of="" irreversible="" tissue="" damage="" in="" the="" skin="" following="" application="" of="" a="" test="" substance.="" test="" methods="" for="" evaluating="" dermal="" corrosion="" can="" be="" found="" in="" 40="" cfr="" 798.4470.="" (2)="" flammability:="" flammability="" is="" defined="" by="" the="" osha="" hazard="" communication="" standard="" (29="" cfr="" 1910.1200)="" and="" ignitability="" is="" defined="" in="" 40="" cfr="" part="" 261.21.="" (3)="" reactivity:="" as="" defined="" in="" 40="" cfr="" 261.23.="" appendix="" c.="" applying="" a="" life-cycle="" perspective="" \9\="" the="" life-cycle="" stages="" are="" represented="" in="" the="" graphic="" below.="" the="" ``design''="" heading="" below="" the="" life-cycle="" stages="" is="" meant="" to="" reinforce="" the="" fact="" that="" the="" most="" critical="" and="" effective="" time="" to="" address="" the="" environmental="" impacts="" of="" a="" product="" is="" in="" the="" design="" stage.="" note="" that="" the="" pre-manufacturing="" stages="" should="" reflect="" environmental="" effects="" associated="" with="" raw="" materials,="" acquisition,="" intermediate="" processing,="" and="" all="" activities="" prior="" to="" manufacturing.="" \9\="" it="" is="" recognized="" that="" it="" may="" be="" initially="" difficult="" to="" apply="" a="" full="" life-cycle="" perspective="" in="" determining="" and="" purchasing="" environmentally="" preferable="" products.="" however,="" despite="" the="" challenges="" presented="" by="" applying="" the="" life-cycle="" concepts,="" epa="" strongly="" believes="" that="" the="" life-cycle="" framework="" offers="" the="" holistic="" and="" comprehensive="" perspective="" needed="" to="" address="" adequately="" the="" issue="" of="" environmental="" preferability.="" as="" efforts="" are="" made="" to="" apply="" the="" concepts="" more="" broadly,="" both="" in="" the="" private="" and="" public="" sector="" and="" as="" the="" work="" of="" those="" developing="" the="" methodology="" for="" establishing="" standards="" for="" life-cycle="" assessment="" continue,="" tools="" will="" evolve="" over="" time="" that="" can="" facilitate="" application="" of="" a="" life-cycle="" perspective="" to="" environmentally="" preferable="" purchasing.="" until="" then,="" users="" of="" this="" guidance="" are="" encouraged="" to="" apply="" as="" much="" of="" a="" life-cycle="" perspective="" to="" their="" purchases="" of="" environmentally="" preferable="" products="" and="" services="" as="" possible.="" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------="" to="" ensure="" reduction="" of="" environmental="" impacts="" in="" as="" many="" of="" the="" life-cycle="" stages="" as="" possible,="" the="" following="" information="" is="" desirable:="" (1)="" a="" description="" of="" the="" environmental="" impacts="" at="" each="" life-cycle="" stage,="" and="" (2)="" an="" indication="" of="" at="" which="" stage(s)="" the="" greatest="" environmental="" impacts="" occur.="" strategies="" can="" then="" be="" developed="" to="" reduce="" environmental="" impacts="" at="" that="" stage.="" for="" example,="" if="" the="" greatest="" impact="" occurs="" in="" the="" use="" stage,="" executive="" agencies="" could="" develop="" strategies="" for="" proper="" maintenance="" or="" training.="" while="" the="" federal="" consumer="" may="" be="" tempted="" to="" focus="" on="" the="" last="" 2="" stages,="" it="" is="" possible="" for="" environmental="" impacts="" to="" be="" greater="" in="" the="" first="" three="" stages.="" figure="" c-1.--life-cycle="" stages="" design="" -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------="" pre-manufacture......="" manufacture..........="" distribution/="" use,="" reuse,="" &="" waste="" management.="" packaging.="" maintenance.="" appendix="" d.="" summary="" of="" federal="" trade="" commission="" guides="" for="" use="" of="" environmental="" marketing="" claims="" \10\="" background="" the="" federal="" trade="" commission's="" guides="" for="" the="" use="" of="" environmental="" marketing="" claims="" are="" based="" on="" a="" review="" of="" data="" obtained="" during="" ftc="" law-enforcement="" investigations,="" from="" two="" days="" of="" hearings="" the="" ftc="" held="" in="" july="" 1991,="" and="" from="" more="" than="" 100="" written="" comments="" received="" from="" the="" public.="" like="" all="" ftc="" guides,="" they="" are="" administrative="" interpretations="" of="" laws="" administered="" by="" the="" ftc.="" thus,="" while="" they="" are="" not="" themselves="" legally="" enforceable,="" they="" provide="" guidance="" to="" marketers="" in="" conforming="" with="" legal="" requirements.="" the="" guides="" apply="" to="" advertising,="" labeling="" and="" other="" forms="" of="" marketing="" to="" consumers.="" they="" do="" not="" preempt="" state="" or="" local="" laws="" or="" regulations.="" \10\="" excerpted="" from="" ftc="" press="" release="" announcing="" guidelines="" for="" environmental="" marketing="" claims.="" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------="" this="" commission="" will="" seek="" public="" comment="" on="" whether="" to="" modify="" the="" guides="" after="" 3="" years.="" in="" the="" meantime,="" interested="" parties="" may="" petition="" the="" commission="" to="" amend="" the="" guides.="" basically,="" the="" guides="" describe="" various="" claims,="" note="" those="" that="" should="" be="" avoided="" because="" they="" are="" likely="" to="" be="" misleading,="" and="" illustrate="" the="" kinds="" of="" qualifying="" statements="" that="" may="" have="" to="" be="" added="" to="" other="" claims="" to="" avoid="" consumer="" deception.="" the="" claims="" are="" followed="" by="" examples="" that="" illustrate="" the="" points.="" the="" guides="" outline="" principles="" that="" apply="" to="" all="" environmental="" claims,="" and="" address="" the="" use="" of="" eight="" commonly-used="" environmental="" marketing="" claims.="" general="" concern="" as="" for="" any="" advertising="" claims,="" the="" ftc="" guides="" specify="" that="" any="" time="" marketers="" make="" objective="" environmental="" claims--whether="" explicit="" or="" implied--they="" must="" be="" substantiated="" by="" competent="" and="" reliable="" evidence.="" in="" the="" case="" of="" environmental="" claims,="" that="" evidence="" often="" will="" have="" to="" be="" competent="" and="" reliable="" scientific="" evidence.="" the="" guides="" outline="" four="" other="" general="" concerns="" that="" apply="" to="" all="" environmental="" claims.="" there="" are:="" (1)="" qualifications="" and="" disclosures="" should="" be="" sufficiently="" clear="" and="" prominent="" to="" prevent="" deception.="" (2)="" environmental="" claims="" should="" make="" clear="" whether="" they="" apply="" to="" the="" product,="" the="" package,="" or="" a="" component="" of="" either.="" claims="" need="" not="" be="" qualified="" with="" regard="" to="" minor,="" [[page="" 50735]]="" incidental="" components="" of="" the="" product="" or="" package.="" (3)="" environmental="" claims="" should="" not="" overstate="" the="" environmental="" attribute="" or="" benefit.="" marketers="" should="" avoid="" implying="" a="" significant="" environmental="" benefit="" where="" the="" benefit="" is,="" in="" fact,="" negligible.="" (4)="" a="" claim="" comparing="" the="" environmental="" attributes="" of="" one="" product="" with="" those="" of="" another="" product="" should="" make="" the="" basis="" for="" the="" comparison="" sufficiently="" clear="" and="" should="" be="" substantiated.="" (summary="" of="" ftc="" environmental="" marketing="" guidelines)="" the="" guides="" then="" discuss="" particular="" environmental="" marketing="" claims.="" in="" most="" cases,="" each="" discussion="" is="" followed="" in="" the="" guides="" by="" a="" series="" of="" examples="" to="" illustrate="" how="" the="" principles="" apply="" to="" specific="" claims.="" general="" environmental="" benefit="" claims.="" in="" general,="" unqualified="" general="" environmental="" claims="" are="" difficult="" to="" interpret="" and="" may="" have="" a="" wide="" range="" of="" meanings="" to="" consumers.="" every="" express="" and="" material="" implied="" claim="" conveyed="" to="" consumers="" about="" an="" objective="" quality="" should="" be="" substantiated.="" unless="" they="" can="" be="" substantiated,="" broad="" environmental="" claims="" should="" be="" avoided="" or="" qualified.="" degradable,="" biodegradable,="" and="" photodegradable.="" in="" general,="" unqualified="" degradability="" claims="" should="" be="" substantiated="" by="" evidence="" that="" the="" product="" will="" completely="" break="" down="" and="" return="" to="" nature,="" that="" is,="" decompose="" into="" elements="" found="" in="" nature="" within="" a="" reasonably="" short="" period="" of="" time="" after="" consumers="" dispose="" of="" it="" in="" the="" customary="" way.="" such="" claims="" should="" be="" qualified="" to="" the="" extent="" necessary="" to="" avoid="" consumer="" deception="" about:="" (a)="" the="" product="" or="" package's="" ability="" to="" degrade="" in="" the="" environment="" where="" it="" is="" customarily="" disposed;="" and="" (b)="" the="" extent="" and="" rate="" of="" degradation.="" compostable.="" in="" general,="" unqualified="" compostable="" claims="" should="" be="" substantiated="" by="" evidence="" that="" all="" the="" materials="" in="" the="" product="" or="" package="" will="" break="" down="" into,="" or="" otherwise="" become="" part="" of,="" usable="" compost="" (e.g.,="" soil-conditioning="" material,="" mulch)="" in="" a="" safe="" and="" timely="" manner="" in="" an="" appropriate="" composting="" program="" or="" facility,="" or="" in="" a="" home="" compost="" pile="" or="" device.="" compostable="" claims="" should="" be="" qualified="" to="" the="" extent="" necessary="" to="" avoid="" consumer="" deception.="" (1)="" if="" municipal="" composting="" facilities="" are="" not="" available="" to="" a="" substantial="" majority="" of="" consumer="" or="" communities="" where="" the="" product="" is="" sold;="" (2)="" if="" the="" claim="" misleads="" consumers="" about="" the="" environmental="" benefit="" provided="" when="" the="" product="" is="" disposed="" of="" in="" a="" landfill;="" or="" (3)="" if="" consumers="" misunderstand="" the="" claims="" to="" mean="" that="" the="" package="" can="" be="" safely="" composted="" in="" their="" home="" compost="" pile="" or="" device,="" when="" in="" fact="" it="" cannot.="" recyclable.="" in="" general,="" a="" product="" or="" package="" should="" not="" be="" marketed="" as="" recyclable="" unless="" it="" can="" be="" collected,="" separated,="" or="" otherwise="" recovered="" from="" the="" solid="" waste="" stream="" for="" use="" in="" the="" form="" of="" raw="" materials="" in="" the="" manufacturer="" or="" assembly="" of="" a="" new="" product="" or="" package.="" unqualified="" recyclable="" claims="" may="" be="" made="" if="" the="" entire="" product="" or="" package,="" excluding="" incidental="" components,="" is="" recyclable.="" claims="" about="" products="" with="" both="" recyclable="" and="" non-recyclable="" components="" should="" be="" adequately="" qualified.="" if="" incidental="" components="" significantly="" limit="" the="" ability="" to="" recycle="" a="" product,="" the="" claim="" would="" be="" deceptive.="" if,="" because="" of="" its="" size="" or="" shape,="" a="" product="" is="" not="" accepted="" in="" recycling="" programs,="" it="" should="" not="" be="" marketed="" as="" recyclable.="" qualifications="" may="" be="" necessary="" to="" avoid="" consumer="" deception="" about="" the="" limited="" availability="" of="" recycling="" programs="" and="" collection="" sites="" if="" recycling="" collection="" sites="" are="" not="" available="" to="" a="" substantial="" majority="" of="" consumers="" or="" communities.="" recycled="" content.="" in="" general,="" claims="" of="" recycled="" content="" should="" only="" be="" made="" for="" materials="" that="" have="" been="" recovered="" or="" diverted="" from="" the="" solid="" waste="" stream,="" either="" during="" the="" manufacturing="" process="" (pre-consumer)="" or="" after="" consumer="" waste="" (post-consumer).="" an="" advertiser="" should="" be="" able="" to="" substantiate="" that="" pre-consumer="" content="" would="" otherwise="" have="" entered="" the="" solid="" waste="" stream.="" distinctions="" made="" between="" pre-="" and="" post-consumer="" content="" should="" be="" substantiated.="" unqualified="" claims="" may="" be="" made="" if="" the="" entire="" product="" or="" package,="" excluding="" minor,="" incidental="" components,="" is="" made="" from="" recycled="" material.="" products="" or="" packages="" only="" partially="" made="" of="" recycled="" material="" should="" be="" qualified="" to="" indicate="" the="" amount,="" by="" weight,="" in="" the="" finished="" product="" or="" package.="" source="" reduction.="" in="" general,="" claims="" that="" a="" product="" or="" package="" has="" been="" reduced="" or="" is="" lower="" in="" weight,="" volume,="" or="" toxicity="" should="" be="" qualified="" to="" the="" extent="" necessary="" to="" avoid="" consumer="" deception="" about="" the="" amount="" of="" reduction="" and="" the="" basis="" for="" any="" comparison="" asserted.="" refillable.="" in="" general,="" an="" unqualified="" refillable="" claim="" should="" not="" be="" asserted="" unless="" a="" system="" is="" provided="" for:="" (1)="" the="" collection="" and="" return="" of="" the="" package="" for="" refill;="" or="" (2)="" the="" later="" refill="" of="" the="" package="" by="" consumers="" with="" product="" subsequently="" sold="" in="" another="" package.="" the="" claim="" should="" not="" be="" made="" if="" it="" is="" up="" to="" consumers="" to="" find="" ways="" to="" refill="" the="" package.="" ozone="" safe="" and="" ozone="" friendly.="" in="" general,="" a="" product="" should="" not="" be="" advertised="" as="" ``ozone="" safe,''="" ``ozone="" friendly,''="" or="" as="" not="" containing="" cfcs="" if="" the="" product="" contains="" any="" ozone-depleting="" chemical.="" claims="" about="" the="" reduction="" of="" a="" product's="" ozone-depletion="" potential="" may="" be="" made="" if="" adequately="" substantiated.="" appendix="" e--establishing="" core="" environmental="" values="" [reserved]="" appendix="" f--establishing="" third="" party="" environmental="" certification="" programs="" [reserved]="" v.="" public="" record="" a="" record="" has="" been="" established="" for="" this="" document="" under="" docket="" number="" ``oppts-00149''="" (including="" comments="" and="" data="" submitted="" electronically="" as="" described="" below).="" a="" public="" version="" of="" this="" record,="" including="" printed,="" paper="" versions="" of="" electronic="" comments,="" which="" does="" not="" include="" any="" information="" claimed="" as="" cbi,="" is="" available="" for="" inspection="" from="" noon="" to="" 4="" p.m.,="" monday="" through="" friday,="" excluding="" legal="" holidays.="" the="" public="" record="" is="" located="" in="" the="" tsca="" nonconfidential="" information="" center,="" rm.="" ne-b607,="" 401="" m="" st.,="" sw.,="" washington,="" dc="" 20460.="" electronic="" comments="" can="" be="" sent="" directly="" to="" epa="" at:="">ncic@epamail.epa.gov
Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the
use of special characters and any form of encryption.
The official record for this document, as well as the public
version, as described above will be kept in paper form. Accordingly,
EPA will transfer all comments received electronically into printed,
paper form as they are received and will place the paper copies in the
official record which will also include all comments submitted directly
in writing. The official record is the paper record maintained at the
address in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this document.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection.
Dated: September 25, 1995.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-24284 Filed 9-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
