[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:[email protected]. 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: 
fuligni.danielle@epamail,epa.gov. For computer information: John 
Shoaff, telephone number: 260-1831, e-mail: 
[email protected]. For green building information: Peter 
Thompson, telephone number: 260-8612, e-mail: 
[email protected]. For General Services Administration/EPA 
Cleaners Project information: Tom Murray, telephone number: 260-1876, 
e-mail: [email protected]. 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:
[email protected]
    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