prEN 17672

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
oSIST prEN 17672:2021
01-september-2021

Trajnostnost gradbenih objektov - Okoljske deklaracije za proizvode - Horizontalna

Sustainability of construction works - Environmental product declarations - Horizontal

Nachhaltigkeit von Bauwerken - Umweltproduktdeklarationen - Horizontale Regeln für

Contribution des ouvrages de construction au développement durable - Déclarations

environnementales sur les produits - Règles horizontales régissant la communication de

2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

This draft European Standard is submitted to CEN members for enquiry. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee

If this draft becomes a European Standard, CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations

which stipulate the conditions for giving this European Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration.

This draft European Standard was established by CEN in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other

language made by translation under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the CEN-CENELEC

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,

Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway,

Poland, Portugal, Republic of North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and

Recipients of this draft are invited to submit, with their comments, notification of any relevant patent rights of which they are

Warning : This document is not a European Standard. It is distributed for review and comments. It is subject to change without

© 2021 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. prEN 17672:2021 E

European foreword ............................................................................................................................................ 4

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 5

1 Scope .......................................................................................................................................................... 6

2 Normative references .......................................................................................................................... 6

3 Terms and definitions ......................................................................................................................... 6

4 Symbols and abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 9

5 General principles ................................................................................................................................ 9

5.1 Approach .................................................................................................................................................. 9

5.2 Information gaps ................................................................................................................................... 9

5.2.1 Missing indicators ................................................................................................................................. 9

5.2.2 Information not applicable to the building context ................................................................. 9

5.3 Comparability ....................................................................................................................................... 10

5.4 Types of B2C communication and requirements .................................................................... 10

5.5 Benchmarking options ...................................................................................................................... 11

6 Definition of the product group ..................................................................................................... 12

6.1 Product group definition and declaration ................................................................................. 12

6.2 Name and code ..................................................................................................................................... 12

6.3 Description of the product group .................................................................................................. 12

6.4 Functional unit ..................................................................................................................................... 12

6.5 Technical performance ..................................................................................................................... 13

6.6 Exclusions .............................................................................................................................................. 13

7 Definition of the functional equivalence .................................................................................... 13

8 Life cycle stages to be included ...................................................................................................... 14

9 Assessment of the representativeness of the scenarios ....................................................... 14

10 Calculation of the environmental impact per functional unit ............................................ 14

11 Selection of indicators ....................................................................................................................... 15

12 Normalization ...................................................................................................................................... 16

12.1 General.................................................................................................................................................... 16

12.2 Benchmarking systems ..................................................................................................................... 16

12.3 B2C communication without comparative assertion ............................................................ 16

13 Weighting ............................................................................................................................................... 16

13.1 General.................................................................................................................................................... 16

13.2 Recommended approach to benchmarking .............................................................................. 16

13.3 Basic and alternative approach to benchmarking .................................................................. 16

13.4 B2C communication without comparative assertion ............................................................ 17

14 Score ........................................................................................................................................................ 17

15 Benchmark ............................................................................................................................................ 17

16 Performance classes .......................................................................................................................... 19

16.1 General.................................................................................................................................................... 19

16.2 Relative difference compared to the benchmark ................................................................... 20

16.3 Statistical information ...................................................................................................................... 20

16.4 Worst and/or best practices ........................................................................................................... 21

17 Communication ................................................................................................................................... 22

18 Transparency ....................................................................................................................................... 24

19 Benchmarking system administrator ......................................................................................... 24

Annex A (informative) Example of definition of product groups (SFB system) ........................ 25

Bibliography ....................................................................................................................................................... 27

This document (prEN 17672:2021) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 350

“Sustainability of construction works”, the secretariat of which is held by AFNOR.

This document has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN by the European Commission and the

European Free Trade Association, and supports essential requirements of EU Directive(s).

This document supports the use of Product Category Rules (EN 15804) for construction products.

Together they are used as the means for arriving Environmental Product Declarations (EPD).

This document provides horizontal rules for business-to-consumer communication including

benchmarking systems using environmental product declarations (EPD’s) according to EN 15804 to

provide easy to understand information to consumers to make informed comparisons on the

Aggregation of results: ln addition to the detailed communication rules in EN 15804 and EN 15942 allow

the option of aggregating results from modules A1-C4 into a total sum of impacts or respective LCA

indicators for communication of cradle to grave EPD for Business to Consumer purposes.

Benchmarks: Develop the rules for benchmarking and rules for the definition of representative products

based on default scenarios to be used in defining the respective Functional Unit and taking into account

findings from the PEF pilot phase. Provide guidance to allow product TCs to develop their own

representative product(s) and classes for indicator results for B2C communication, where relevant.

This document provides horizontal rules for business-to-consumer communication including

benchmarking systems that aim to inform consumers about the environmental performance of

This document is aimed at organizations providing business-to-consumer communication and

benchmarking systems and provides guidance on how to develop business-to-consumer communication

and common rules for benchmarking methodologies using EPD according to EN 15804 and following the

Business-to-consumer communication and benchmarking methodology described in this document is

The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content

constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For

undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.

EN 15804:2012+A2:2019, Sustainability of construction works — Environmental product declarations —

EN 15942, Sustainability of construction works — Environmental product declarations — Communication

EN 15978, Sustainability of construction works — Assessment of environmental performance of

EN ISO 14025, Environmental labels and declarations — Type III environmental declarations — Principles

EN ISO 14026, Environmental labels and declarations — Principles, requirements and guidelines for

For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in EN 15804 and EN 15978 and the

process of collecting, analyzing and relating performance data of comparable construction products,

Note 1 to entry: Benchmarking is typically used for evaluating and comparing performance between or within

established classification system based on clearly defined goals, processes and procedures

describing or involving the passage of information between different businesses, rather than between

describing or involving the passage of information between businesses and the general public and

business-to-consumer communication delivering information that cannot be used for comparison

environmental claim regarding the superiority or equivalence of one product vs. a competing product

individual member of the general public purchasing or using goods, property or services for private

product group specific or horizontal PCR, which provide additional compliant and non-contradictory

quantified functional requirements-and/or technical requirements for a building or an assembled system

calculating the magnitude of category indicator results relative to reference information

every collection of construction products, assembled systems or construction elements created for its

aggregation of the normalised and weighted values of the relevant LCIA indicators

converting and possibly aggregating indicator results across impact categories using numerical factors

Construction products assembled systems and construction elements can be compared according to the

contribution they make to the environmental performance of the building as long as they are functionally

B2C communication and benchmarking methodology shall be derived from the calculation and results

developed for the EPD according to EN 15804 and presented in the B2B communication according to

When the benchmarking approach requires the results of indicators not available in the EPD, this product

When information available in the scenarios used in the EPD is missing or is not applicable to the building

context under assessment (any modules except for modules A1-A3), calculation of the indicators for the

alternative scenarios is allowed based on scenarios and conditions that are appropriate for the building

Benchmarking systems shall fulfil all following conditions, in accordance with Clause 5.3 of EN 15804, to

allow the comparison of construction products, assembled systems or construction elements:

— the environmental performance and technical performance of any assembled systems, components,

— the influence of the product systems on the operational aspects and impacts of the building

— the elementary flows related to material inherent properties, such as biogenic carbon content, the

potential to carbonate or the net calorific value of a material, are considered completely and

In case the previous conditions are not fulfilled B2C communication is possible, but it should not include

B2C communication can be carried out without comparative assertion (no benchmarking) or according

to a benchmarking system. The requirements for the development of B2C communication differ

— Recommended approach: single score method using all LCIA indicators (core and additional

environmental impact indicators in EN 15804), aggregation of modules A1 to C4 with module D

separated, normalization according to PEF guidance rules and weighting according to PEF guidance

— Basic approach: single score method using core LCIA indicators only, aggregation of modules A1 to

C4 with module D separated, normalization according to PEF guidance rules and weighting keeping

— Alternative approach: any approach deviating from the recommended and the basic approach but

NOTE In case the alternative approach includes normalization and weighting, the rules are provided in

B2C communication and benchmarking systems require the use of product groups to classify the

Product groups can be defined using a new or an existing classification system but shall allow the unique

and proper identification of the construction product, assembled system or construction element.

Product groups shall be clearly defined including, but not limited to, information on the following aspects

The name and code defined by the classification system shall be used including subdivisions. Both the

name and the code shall be unique in order to prevent the use of the same code and number for two

NOTE 1 EN ISO 12006-2 provides rules to define an object-oriented classification system but other alternatives

NOTE 2 Examples of used classification system for buildings are SfB, Uniclass, Omniclass, ETIM, CoClass and

Description of the product group shall be consistent with the classification system and shall include the

details about the construction product, assembled system or construction element explained in a

descriptive language. In case the classification is restricted to a type of construction or building, it shall

EXAMPLE Components, type of product, finishing, etc. is descriptive information to be delivered.

Benchmarking systems require the definition of the functional unit for comparison within the product

group according to a measurable way including the unit of comparison and its performance

— Consistency with the references and constraints (installation, maintenance, repair, replacement and

— Use the same Reference Study Period for all the products included in the product group.

Functional unit is not required for B2C communication without comparative assertion.

The performance delivered by the construction product, assembled system or construction element shall

Technical performance include default application, key functionalities and expected influence on the

Product standards and other relevant documents may contain relevant information to properly define

Benchmarking systems require consistency between technical performance and functional unit for the

relevant product group, but a product can provide additional technical performance to those included in

the product group and in the functional unit. Any additional functions provided by an individual

construction product, assembled system or construction element that are not included in the technical

Materials, processes, etc. excluded from the B2C communication without comparative assertion or

benchmarking system for a justified reason shall be reported. They shall be the same for all the products,

EXAMPLE Benchmarking system including a product group for internal walls excluding paint.

Benchmarking systems require the development of functional equivalents to allow the comparison. For

B2C communication without comparative assertion the development of functional equivalents is not

The functional equivalent is a representation of the required technical characteristics and functionalities

of the building or assembled system (part of works). It is the means by which the characteristics of the

building are rationalised into a minimum description of the object of assessment and it is the basis for

Functional requirement shall be described together with intended use and the relevant specific technical

requirements for the comparison of construction products, assembled systems or construction elements.

The functional equivalent shall include, but is not limited to, information on the following aspects:

— inclusion of necessary maintenance, repair, replacement and refurbishment during service life.

Functional equivalent shall be consistent with the product group defined in Clause 6 including the defined

EPD data or combination of EPD data and/or additional LCA data for all life cycle stages is required for

benchmarking systems. This information comprises all modules defined in an EPD cradle to grave and

In case information related to any module is missing and is not completed using other sources

benchmarking systems cannot be applied and only B2C communication without comparative assertion is

Information available in modules A1 to A3 according to EN 15804 is independent from scenarios so its

Scenarios for the other modules declared in EPD according to EN 15804 should be considered the default

source of information and in case the information related to them is not used it should be properly

— Scenario used for the declaration in the EPD is not compatible with the functional unit applicable to

— Scenario used for the declaration in the EPD is not compatible with the technical performances

— Scenario used for the declaration in the EPD is not applicable to the constraints defined in the

EXAMPLE 2 Scenario in the EPD for installation is not compatible with the installation defined in the

EXAMPLE 3 Scenario for transport is not in accordance with the benchmarking system.