EN 15804+A2, chapter 7.1, i), variability of results

[RobertSpang]

I raise this change request because...

• [ ] the ILCD+EPD format lacks compliance with regualtions.
• [X] the ILCD+EPD format lacks conformaty with standards.
• [ ] the ILCD+EPD format needs to be improved regarding existing format or master data elements.
• [ ] there is another problem or use case I´m trying to address.

Problem description

"in the case where an EPD is declared as an average environmental performance for a number of products a statement to that effect shall be included in the declaration together with a description of the range/ variability of the LCIA results if significant"

Solution description

Could be included in the following existing fields:

• A1.4 General comment on data set
• B2.2 Use advice for data set

Partly covered by B1.2 "subtype"

Relevance or added value

Medium relevance

[RobertSpang]

In the field "subtype" we already specify whether something is an average or not. However, the term "variability" is not defined --> maybe EN 15941 has a definition. We would prefer a machinereadable solution if feasable.

[okworx]

Suggestion: use the same systematic as defined in ISO 22057, ideally amalgamate the variants given there for EN15804 and ISO21930 in order to have a unified and universal approach.

We need an enum for describing the type on manufacturer level

• valid for one production site
• valid for a manufacturer with several production sites
• valid for several companies with several locations

as well as optionally a number for the variation (in %) if described.

And we need an enum for describing the type on product level

• valid for a single product
• valid for a range of products where variability is described

as well as optionally a number for the variation (in %) if described.

Add a freetext comment field (e.g. with explanations on the method how the variability has been calculated).

[okworx]

Let's consider a significant variation to be one that is larger than 10% (following ISO 14044). We're looking at multiple indicators and multiple modules, so there is no single variation per se. It would first need to be defined which variation exactly.