1

SERVICE REQUEST

– ANNEX –

Specific Terms of Reference for a study to support the

impact assessment for a revision of the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives

(Final)

1. Background

Clean air is essential to human health and sustaining the environment. Despite significant

reductions of harmful air pollutant emissions over the past three decades in the EU, the latest

estimates still point to around 400.000 premature deaths each year due to air pollution, and to

eutrophication limits being exceeded in almost two-thirds of ecosystem areas across the EU

territory. Air quality continues to be a major health and environmental concern to the citizens of

the EU: almost half of the respondents to a Eurobarometer survey in 2017 highlighted ‘air

pollution’ as one of the two most important environmental issues, next to climate change.

The Commission completed a Fitness Check of the Ambient Air Quality Directives

2004/107/EC and 2008/50/EC the results of which were published in the Commission staff

working document (SWD(2019) 427 final) in November 2019. It concluded that these

Directives have been partially effective in improving air quality and achieving air quality

standards, but also finds that they have not been fully effective, and not all their objectives have

been met to date. It concluded furthermore, that the remaining gap to achieve air quality

standards is too wide in certain cases.

Among its lessons learnt, the Fitness Check noted that EU air quality standards are less

ambitious than scientific advice. Subsequently, the European Green Deal (COM(2019) 640

final) announced in the framework of its zero pollution ambition for a toxic-free environment

that the Commission would draw on the lessons learnt from the Fitness Check and strengthen

provisions on monitoring, modelling and air quality plans to help local authorities achieve

cleaner air, as well as revise EU air quality standards to align them more closely with the World

Health Organization (WHO) recommendations.

The Commission has therefore launched a process that will improve ambient air quality by

taking into account the latest scientific evidence for the protection of human health and the

environment and by strengthening the basis for effective action for better air quality, including

via better air quality monitoring, modelling and air quality plans. This has been detailed in a

corresponding Inception Impact Assessment.1 Accordingly, the Commission initiative will

1 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12677-Revision-of-EU-Ambient-Air-

Quality-legislation

2

tackle three policy areas related to ambient air quality and the current Ambient Air Quality

Directives (2008/50/EC and 2004/107/EC), building on the findings of the Fitness Check:

Policy area 1: closer alignment of the EU air quality standards with scientific knowledge

including the latest recommendations of the World Health Organization;2

Policy area 2: improving the air quality legislative framework, including provisions on

penalties and public information, to enhance effectiveness, efficiency and coherence;

Policy area 3: strengthening of air quality monitoring, modelling and air quality plans.

Policy options will be developed to address the above three areas, with a view to enhancing the

effectiveness of EU air quality legislation, specifically the Ambient Air Quality Directives, and

to avoiding, preventing or reducing the harmful effects of air pollution on human health and the

environment, in line with the European Green Deal’s zero pollution ambition. To assess if future

legislative or non-legislative EU action is justified and how such action would best be designed

to achieve desired policy objectives, these policy options will be subjected to an impact

assessment to collect evidence (including results from evaluations).

An impact assessment report will accompany the initiative when submitted to the Commission

to take a policy decision. The impact assessment will address the following:

verify the existence of a problem, its scale, size and its underlying causes;

set objectives to be achieved by the initiative;

formulate policy options and instruments to achieve the objectives;

assess the economic, social and environmental impacts (including their costs and benefits

where possible) of the various policy options;

describe how the performance of the initiative will be monitored and evaluated in the future.

To support the impact assessment for a revision of the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives, this

external study will provide the necessary scenario analysis based on modelling of different

policy options related to the three policy areas listed above. Impacts will have to be assessed and

compared, including through cost-effectiveness and multi-criteria analysis. Furthermore, an

open public consultation and a targeted stakeholder consultation will have to be carried out

addressing all three policy areas.

A specific focus of this study should be put on the first of the above listed policy areas, namely

on policy options for closer alignment of the EU air quality standards with the (updated)

recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO). Note that a currently running

contract focusses on the strengthening of air quality monitoring, modelling and plans; the

2 EU air quality standards have been set in the Ambient Air Quality Directives for 13 air pollutants: sulphur

dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and nitrogen oxide, particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5), ozone, benzene, lead, carbon

monoxide, arsenic, cadmium, nickel, and benzo(a)pyrene. For several air pollutants, these are not as stringent as

recommended by the WHO ‘Air Quality Guidelines’. These Guidelines are currently under revision with an

expected publication date in the first half of 2021.

3

Commission may ask that findings of that separate contract be taken into account under this

contract (the Commission will provide the findings).

2. Scope of the service request

2.1 General objectives

The overall aim of this service request is to support the European Commission in the

preparation of the impact assessment for the initiative ‘Air Quality: Revision of EU Rules’3

(i.e. the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives). This will include the compiling, assessing and

synthesizing of evidence for the impact assessment as well as drafting (an) analytical support

document(s) to inform the impact assessment throughout the duration of the exercise.

Note that the Commission will draft a Staff Working Document for this impact assessment;

the analytical support documents (i.e. interim / final reports, stakeholder summary reports)

produced as part of this service contract will serve as background and input to this.

The analytical support document(s) prepared as part of this service contract shall present

evidence and assessment of different policy options for the following aspects:

projected changes to air quality, and to exposure of population groups to air pollution;

the monetary and non-monetary costs of (non-)implementation of the Directives;

the administrative burden of implementation;

the situation of, and implications for different Member States;

the implications for different (a) population groups, and (b) economic sectors;

the views of key stakeholder groups.

2.2 Specific objectives

More specifically, the objectives of the main tasks of this service request are to:

(1) conceptualise the context, and clarify the drivers, problems, and consequences to be

considered when assessing interventions in the three policy areas under assessment;

(2) review relevant information and evidence base, and establish a baseline scenario (as a

basis for comparison for the impact of any policy option);

(3) develop policy options and analyse their impacts – both in a qualitative and, where this is

possible, in a quantified form (for the latter, transparent modelling of the impact on air

quality, a corresponding cost-benefit analysis, and sensitivity analyses related to key

assumptions will be required);

3 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12677-Revision-of-EU-Ambient-Air-

Quality-legislation

4

(4) assess ambition packages (combinations of policy options), including the synergies or

lack of synergies that emerge when combining different policy options; and

(5) provide support for a stakeholder consultation covering all aspects of the Commission

impact assessment, in line with the initiative’s consultation strategy.4

2.3 Approaches to be applied

This service request for support to the impact assessment for a revision of the EU Ambient

Air Quality Directives shall take an evidence-based approach and cover environmental,

economic and social aspects in relation to the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives.

The work shall build, and expand on, information and evidence relevant to the impact

assessment, where this is available already, with a view to avoiding duplication of work. This

includes, in particular the evidence collated for the fitness check of the EU Ambient Air

Quality Directives completed in November 2019 and its underpinning analysis,5 the air

quality data as reported by Member States to the Air Quality Portal,6 as well as the analysis

carried out to underpin the Second Clean Air Outlook.7

This evidence base will need to be complemented by additional data collection and bespoke

modelling, especially in relation to the projected changes to air quality and exposure to air

pollution, the monetary and non-monetary costs of (non-)implementation, the social impacts

of air pollution and measures to reduce it, and the administrative burden of implementation.

The contractor shall base itself on objective assessment criteria (and corresponding

indicators) that allow the analysis of the environmental, economic and social impacts of the

implementation of a different policy option compared to a baseline scenario. This shall also

include an assessment of synergies or lack of synergies with other EU policies. The

contractor will also have to consider in the analysis other relevant ongoing initiatives under

EU and international air quality policy, and related scientific research.

There will also be a need to consider the situation of implementation in different Member

States as well as to reflect the views of key stakeholder groups. An open public consultation

as well as targeted consultations shall be run within the framework of this specific contract to

give an opportunity to stakeholders to provide their views on the subject. Given the political

sensitivity of the issue (as illustrated in the public feedback to the inception impact

assessment)8 it will be important to ensure good communication with all stakeholders

throughout the process.

4 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/documents/AAQDs%20revision%20-%20consultation%20strategy%20-

%20final.pdf 5 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/quality/aqd_fitness_check_en.htm 6 https://aqportal.discomap.eea.europa.eu/ 7 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/clean_air/outlook.htm 8 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12677-Revision-of-EU-Ambient-Air-

Quality-legislation

5

The contractor shall organize two stakeholder meetings. A first stakeholder meeting prior to,

or during the public consultation shall assist in identifying and confirming the issues for the

impact assessment. A second stakeholder meeting shall take place before the finalisation of

the impact assessment with the aim of receiving feedback that would assist in its completion.

3. Description of tasks

3.1 Task 1: Developing a methodology, and drafting of a detailed work plan

Methodology and intervention logic

The contractor shall clearly indicate (and apply) a methodology9 to address the issues under

examination in a clear and coherent manner.

This methodology shall build on the draft intervention logic (see Figure 1, also reproduced in

better quality in the Annex) for the impact assessment (and where necessary expand it),

clearly indicating how priority elements of this impact assessment will be analyzed, and how

additional elements will be integrated into the analysis. This shall be presented in a detailed

work plan.

The analysis should be based both on quantitative and qualitative evidence and be conducted

according to the requirements of the Better Regulation Guidelines of the European

Commission10 and Toolbox11. If quantification of the below assessment criteria is not

possible, they should be assessed in a qualitative way, clearly indicating the type of most

important impacts and their likely magnitude. All limitations to quantification and their

reasons will need to be clearly detailed.

Note: Since the purpose is to support the Commission's impact assessment for a revision of the EU

Ambient Air Quality Directives, the contractor's methodology for the tasks detailed in this service

request should be based on both this service request and the inception impact assessment. The

proposed methodology should, however, allow for a degree of flexibility in terms of scope and

approach, in particular as regards the following issues:

The contractor should ensure that adaptations to the methodology are possible because public

feedback may result in some changes to the scope of the impact assessment.

The contractor should be aware that some issues or questions may only become apparent during

the service request itself.

Some pieces of relevant EU legislation may be modified in the course of the duration of this

contract.

9 The methodology should also ensure triangulation of data, i.e. not just from one source, and not just based on

consultation. 10 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-impact-assessment.pdf 11 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/planning-and-proposing-law/better-regulation-why-and-

how/better-regulation-guidelines-and-toolbox/better-regulation-toolbox_en

6

Figure 1 – (Draft) Intervention logic of the impact assessment, detailing the drivers,

problems and consequences this initiative and its three policy areas aim to address.

The methodology shall allow for a detailed assessment of the consequences of different

policy options, including via quantitative indicators (and where not possible, in qualitative

indicators) for the following key assessment criteria:12

1. Concentration levels of air pollutants,13 at (a) background locations, and (b) ‘hot-spot’

(incl. both traffic and industry-related) locations, and their development over time;

[possible indicator(s): mass-based concentration levels per air pollutant on a gridded

map, that allow estimates of average exposure as well as highest concentration levels;

depending on the pollutant. This shall include hourly, daily, seasonal and/or annual

levels]

2. Health impacts of air pollution, at a minimum the health impacts resulting from

exposure to particulate matter (PM2.5 and/or PM10), nitrogen dioxide and ozone;

[possible indicator(s): mortality expressed as ‘years of life lost’ or as ‘premature deaths’;

morbidity expressed as respiratory and cardiac hospital admissions]

12 These assessment criteria and related indicators should build, where possible, on comparable indicators

available in earlier policy documents and their underpinning analysis, including the Fitness Check of the

Ambient Air Quality Directives of 2019, the Review of the EU Clean Air Policy 2013 and the Impact

Assessment published in the context of the Clean Air for Europe Programme in 2013. 13 The analysis shall consider, as a minimum, 13 air pollutants: sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and nitrogen

oxide, particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5), ozone, benzene, lead, carbon monoxide, arsenic, cadmium, nickel, and

benzo(a)pyrene.

7

3. Ecosystem impacts of air pollution, including acidification, eutrophication, ozone

damage to vegetation and agricultural yields;

[possible indicator(s): area of terrestrial ecosystems where nitrogen deposits exceed the

critical loads for eutrophication or acidification; crop yield loss attributable to ozone]

4. Links between air pollution and climate change, including increased ozone levels due

to global warming, and co-benefits or trade-offs between climate and air pollution

abatement measures;

[possible indicator(s): reduction of short lived climate forcers due to air pollution

abatement measures; additional ozone reduction measures needed due to global

warming; cost reduction impact expressed in monetary units (€) of most recent climate

targets on air pollution abatement measures]

5. Cost to society due to air pollution, including health and healthcare impacts and costs,

lost working days, crop and animal value loss, losses to other assets and other costs

avoided by taking action to reduce air pollution;

[possible indicator(s): change in net benefits/costs of air pollution under various policy

options expressed in monetary units (€), both for direct and indirect benefits/costs]

6. Measures needed to meet EU air quality standards - and their costs, including costs

for key economic sectors, and regional differences across the EU of the costs and benefits

of the air pollution abatement measures ;

[possible indicator(s): costs of additional air pollution abatement measures under

various policy options expressed in monetary units (€), ideally per economic sector]

7. Positive and negative impacts on the EU’s international competitiveness, including

tapping into innovation potential for clean air technologies;

[possible indicator(s): price effects (€) and sectoral output change (taking into account

also productivity gains) attributable to additional air pollution control measures]

8. Effects of air pollution on sensitive population groups, including children, pregnant

women, elderly citizens and those suffering from pre-existing conditions;

[possible indicator(s): mortality and morbidity impacts for different sensitive population

groups]

9. Societal impacts of air pollution and societal impacts of air pollution abatement

measures, including resulting inequalities (i.e. who is most affected, who bears the costs);

[possible indicator(s): quantification of correlations between air pollution and (a) income

levels, (b) education levels, and (c) long-term unemployment]

10. Effects of measures to address air pollution on employment;

[possible indicator(s): employment changes and effects of health benefits on labour

productivity, ideally per economic sector]

8

11. Administrative burden of air quality management, in particular as relates to air quality

assessment regimes (including monitoring, modelling, and reporting of related data);

[possible indicator(s): cost (€) of air quality assessment per Member States]

12. Synergies with other goals of the (upcoming) EU Zero Pollution Action Plan on air,

water and soil, in particular the synergic role of indoor pollution (notably in terms of

exposure and health impacts) or co-benefits in reducing noise pollution;

[possible indicator(s): improvement of indoor air quality]

In addition, the assessment should allow for quantifying exceedance situation indicators (or

allow for a statistical analysis of the risk of non-attainment situations) – in particular of

the area, population and number of (or share of) air quality zones exposed to concentration

levels above (a) future EU air quality standards under consideration or (b) WHO

recommended guideline exposure levels, in the current situation (2020), mid-term (2030) and

the long-term (2050) per Member State.

Note: The tender should include suggested quantified indicators for each of the above assessment

criteria. Where quantification is not deemed possible, this shall be duly justified in the tender.

Detailed work plan and assessment matrix

A detailed work plan shall describe the approach and the tools to be used for collecting and

assessing the evidence (a) to establish a baseline and (b) to assess the implications of each

policy option as regards all elements of the draft intervention logic.

Specifically, this detailed work plan shall feature an assessment approach for each of the

drivers, problems and consequences indicated in the intervention logic, interpret them in an

operational way, and indicate the data sources, data collection methods and data analysis

approaches (e.g. desk research, consultation, statistics) that will be used in order to assess the

impacts of different policy options.

The detailed work plan shall include an assessment matrix, to specify clearly how each

driver, problem and consequence will be approached, and at least feature the following

columns: (a) assessment criteria; (b) indicators to be used to inform the assessment; (c) data

sources; (d) data collection / modelling methods; and (e) data analysis / modelling analysis to

be used.

The detailed work plan shall also include an indicative consultation plan (based on the

existing consultation strategy) outlining how/when different stakeholders will be consulted

(including i.e. proposed number of interviews/minimum number of responses expected,

Member State coverage and associated language regime to be applied, timing of

targeted/open consultations, etc.).

Note: The tender should include a draft detailed work plan, which should include a draft assessment

matrix for the each of the drivers, problems and consequences detailed in the draft intervention logic.

9

3.2 Task 2: Review relevant information, and establish a baseline for the assessment

Review the evidence base

The contractor shall review all relevant information including existing evaluations, impact

assessments, studies, reports, audits, information on infringements, complaints, court rulings,

information and recommendations from stakeholders. This will include evidence available at

EU and Member State levels from competent authorities, as well as scientific/technical

journals. Relevant international experience shall also be considered.

The contractor is expected to conduct part of this contract based on desk research of available

documents – and build on the extensive evidence base collated and analyzed as part of the

fitness check of the EU Ambient Air Quality Directives.

This review of the evidence shall also lead to the preliminary identification of key issues to

be discussed with stakeholders, and shall cover additional documents suggested by

stakeholders during interviews. The contractor is expected to make use of all available

documents/information and assess the extent to which such information is relevant and robust

to be used as evidence to underpin this impact assessment.

Given the amount of information available, the contractor is expected to develop a specific

methodology explaining how this information will be reviewed, used and exploited with a

view to drawing relevant conclusions. In particular, this review of relevant information shall

be organized in a way that allows for its presentation and assessment according to each of the

drivers, problems and consequences as identified in the intervention logic.

Establish a baseline

The contractor shall establish a baseline that allows a comparative assessment of the impact

of different policy options. This baseline shall be fully consistent with the baseline presented

in the Second Clean Air Outlook and the assumptions that underpin it.14

However, where substantial EU policy developments since the publication of the Second

Clean Air Outlook require this, the baseline scenario shall be further updated to reflect those

developments. This relates in particular to the air pollution impacts of (a) revised climate

targets, and (b) proposals for updated emission standards for vehicles. A description of how

these might be expected to impact an updated baseline scenario shall be outlined explicitly,

and will be agreed with the European Commission at the inception meeting.

Based on this baseline, the contractor shall detail in a quantitative (and where not possible, in

a qualitative) manner the projected developments for each of the indicators / assessment

criteria outlined above for several - as a minimum, for the years 2020, 2030 and 2050.

14 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/clean_air/outlook.htm

10

Note: The tender should already include an indication of the key features of the baseline, and which

updates are considered necessary for this assessment

3.3 Task 3: Develop detailed policy options

The policy options / scenarios logic15

The impact assessment will be based on the comparative assessment of a limited number of

policy options, which correspond to different ambition levels. This service contract shall

develop these policy options in detail. Each policy option will depict a combination of

assumptions for interventions taken under the policy area they seek to address (while

assuming that all other factors remain at baseline assumptions).

The proposed policy options shall include an analysis of subsidiarity and proportionality as

established by Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Protocol (No 2) on

the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.

The purpose of assessing the impacts of these assumptions on the problems and consequences

identified in the intervention logic, is to find out if they are suitable to address the underlying

drivers and shortcomings. This assessment shall then be based on understanding the evolution

of key indicators defined under the assessment criteria for each policy option.

A number of distinct policy options shall be developed for each of the three policy areas – in

each case at least three policy options corresponding to low, mid and high ambition levels as

defined by the underlying assumptions. Note that for policy area 1, related to the closer

alignment of EU air quality standards to WHO recommendations, at least five distinct

scenarios shall be quantified as policy options, see below.

Each of these policy options and scenarios (i.e. at least 11, see Figure 2), and their underlying

assumptions shall be fully developed in such a manner, that they can be assessed individually

and in combination with other policy options under tasks 4 and 5, and compared to the

baseline developed under task 2 – based on the methodology developed under task 1. All

assumptions made shall be clearly described, and quantified in a transparent manner.

Note: The tender should identify illustrative examples of how detailed policy options / scenarios

would look like for each policy area – and highlight which elements can be quantified. The tender

should also clearly spell out, who will be involved in the development of policy options, and how.

Policy options assessed in this contract will need to be agreed with the European Commission.

15 This service request refers to both policy options and scenarios. ‘Policy options’ is used to refer to different

assumptions about way the respective policy area they refer to may be altered. ‘Scenarios’ is used to describe a

coherent set of quantified assumptions (and their consequences) that define specific policy options.

11

Figure 2 – Policy options for each of the three policy areas to inform ambition levels. 16

For policy area 1: closer alignment of air quality standards with WHO recommendations

For this policy area, the basis for developing policy options shall be the upcoming revised

WHO Air Quality Guidelines, expected for the first half of 2021 (if the revised WHO Air

Quality Guidelines are not available by the end of September 2021, the Commission will

agree with the contractor alternative sources to guide the scenario analysis). Previous WHO

recommendations included both guideline exposure levels and less stringent interim targets

and it is expected that this will also be the case for the upcoming recommendations.

The ‘headline indicator’ of the extent of the alignment with the revised WHO Air Quality

Guidelines (and for expressing the level of ambition of different scenarios assessed) will be

the annual mean concentration of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), as this air pollutant at its

current levels is associated with the most harmful effects on human health.

The relevant current EU limit value is 25 µg/m3, whereas the current WHO recommendations

refer to an interim target of 15 µg/m3 and a guideline exposure level of 10 µg/m3. Note that

with the revised WHO Air Quality Guidelines expected for the first half of 2021, based on

scientific consensus, the WHO recommendations may change.

The contractor shall develop and assess at least seven scenarios for revised EU air quality

standards, based on the level of alignment with WHO recommendations (i.e. partial or full

alignment with WHO interim targets or guideline exposure levels). Scenarios to consider may

include the following (each scenario is based on assumptions of different PM2.5 levels as a

16 This figure refers to current WHO recommendations of 2000 / 2005 (i.e. ‘WHO interim targets’ and ‘WHO

guideline exposure levels’), except where explicit reference to the updated WHO recommendations, which are

expected to be published, in 2021 is made.

12

headline indicator, but should also include assumptions for each pollutant covered by the

current Ambient Air Quality Directives – see Table 1):17

Scenario 1 – augmented baseline scenario (no change) for most pollutants, based on a

mid-term (2030) level of ambition of PM2.5 limit values at 20 µg/m3 (this corresponds to

the current indicative limit value already set in the current Directives);

Scenario 2 – a scenario assuming long-term (2050) alignment with current WHO interim

targets, likely based on a level of ambition equivalent to PM2.5 limit values at 15 µg/m3

(this may change in the updated WHO Air Quality Guidelines);

Scenario 3 – a scenario assuming mid-term (2030) alignment with current WHO interim

targets, likely based on a level of ambition equivalent to PM2.5 limit values at 15 µg/m3

(this may change in the updated WHO Air Quality Guidelines);

Scenario 4 – a scenario assuming long-term (2050) alignment with current WHO

guideline exposure levels, likely based on a level of ambition equivalent to PM2.5 limit

values at 10 µg/m3 (this may change in the updated WHO Air Quality Guidelines);

Scenario 5 – a scenario assuming mid-term (2030) alignment with current WHO

guideline exposure levels, likely based on a level of ambition equivalent to PM2.5 limit

values at 10 µg/m3 (this may change in the updated WHO Air Quality Guidelines);

Scenario 6 – a scenario assuming long-term (2050) levels of ambition of potentially more

stringent, updated WHO guideline exposure levels (i.e. with a level of ambition

equivalent to PM2.5 limit values at significantly below 10 µg/m3);

Scenario 7 – a scenario assuming mid-term (2030) levels of ambition of potentially more

stringent, updated WHO guideline exposure levels (i.e. with a level of ambition

equivalent to PM2.5 limit values at significantly below 10 µg/m3).

The final set of scenarios will be agreed with the Commission based on the revised WHO Air

Quality Guidelines, once these are available.

Note: The tender should indicate for at least two scenarios already in detail how they translate into

key assumptions for all air pollutants addressed, and how they will be quantified.

17 The revised WHO Air Quality Guidelines are expected to include recommendations for particulate matter,

nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, ozone and carbon monoxide. For all other pollutants covered by the Ambient

Air Quality Directives scenario assumptions will need to be derived from other sources – or, if well justified by

current air quality concentrations, remain at current levels. The Commission will agree with the contractor

alternative sources to guide the scenario analysis where needed.

13

Pollutants Averaging

period

Range

reported

in 2019

Current EU

air quality

standards

Permitted

exceedances

per year

WHO Interim

Target(s) as

published in

WHO (2005)

WHO

Guideline

Exposure

levels (2005)

WHO

Guideline

Exposure

levels (2021)

PM10 (µg/m3) Annual 3.7 to 50 40 - 70 / 50 / 30 20 tbd

24 hours 17 to 399 50 [35 days] 150 / 100 / 75 50 [3 days] tbd

PM2.5

(µg/m3)

Annual 1.8 to 31 25 - 35 / 25 / 15 10 tbd

24 hours 11 to 281 - - 75 / 50 / 37.5 25 [3 days] tbd

NO2

(µg/m3)

Annual 0 to 73 40 - - 40 tbd

24 hours 1 to 149 - - - - ?

1 hour 1 to 359 200 18 hours - 200 tbd

SO2

(µg/m3)

Annual 0 to 28 - - - - ?

24 hours 0 to 260 125 3 hours 125 / 50 20 tbd

1 hour 1 to 1616 350 - - - ?

10 minutes - - - - 500 tbd

Ozone

(µg/m3)

6 months 17 to 113 - - - - ?

8 hours 14 to 198 120 - 160 100 tbd

CO

(mg/m3)

24 hours - - - - - ?

8 hours - 10 75 days / 3 yrs - - ?

1 hour 0.4 to 324 - - - 30 tbd

Pollutants Period Range

reported

in 2019

Current EU

air quality

standards

Permitted

exceedances

per year

WHO

Guideline

levels (2000)18

Arsenic

(ng/m3)

Annual 0.0 to 41 6 - 6.6 19

Cadmium

(ng/m3)

Annual 0.0 to 5.7 5 - 5

Nickel

(µg/m3)

Annual 0.1 to 78 20 - 25 20

Lead

(µg/m3)

Annual 0.0 to 14 0.5 - 0.5

Benzene

(µg/m3)

Annual 0.0 to 585 5 - 1.7 21

Benzo(a)pyrene

(ng/m3)

Annual 0.5 to 18 1 - 0.12 22

NOx

(ng/m3)

Annual 0.1 to 1147 30 - 30

SOx

(ng/m3)

Annual, and

winter season

to be checked 20 - 30

Ozone

(AOT 40)

6 months to be checked 6000

(µg/m3 x h)

- 10

(ppm / hour)

Table 1 – INDICATIVE Range of air pollutant concentrations as reported in the EU for 2019 (max and

min levels), current EU Air Quality Standards, WHO Guideline Exposure Levels based on Air Quality

Guidelines, and WHO Interim Targets (where available) – note that the WHO Air Quality Guideline

Exposure Levels and Interim Targets may be revised as part of their announced update in 2021.

18 WHO air quality guidelines for Europe (2000), with chapters inter alia on Benzene, Arsenic, Cadmium,

Nickel, Lead and Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (incl. Benzo(a)Pyrene), as well as NOx, SOx and Ozone. 19 Formulated at the level of excess lifetime risk level at 1:100 000. 20 Formulated at the level of excess lifetime risk level at 1:100 000. 21 Formulated at the level of excess lifetime risk level at 1:100 000. 22 Formulated at the level of excess lifetime cancer risk level at 1:100 000.

14

For policy area 2: improving the air quality legislative framework

The contractor shall assess at least three policy options related to changes to the legislative

framework, in particular policy options for amended provisions on sanctions and penalties to

be established in national systems for non-fulfilment of relevant obligations deriving from the

Directives. It will also consider measures for a stronger harmonisation of public information,

including criteria on how and what kind of information is made available to the public.

The respective policy options shall include specific measures for the following elements:

adding an explicit mechanism for adjusting EU air quality standards to the evolving

technical and scientific progress, including for air pollutants that are at present not

covered (cf. Directive 2008/50, Article 32; Directive 2004/107, Article 8);

further defining the different types of air quality standards (especially average exposure

indicators) and the actions their exceedances would trigger (cf. Directive 2008/50,

Articles 2, 12 to 16 and Annexes VII, XI to XIV; Directive 2004/107, Articles 2, 3 and

Annex I);

expanding the requirements for action required in case of exceedances, including the

role of air quality plans and short-term action plans (cf. Directive 2008/50 Articles 17, 18,

19, 23 and 24; Directive 2004/107, Article 3);

specifying provisions to guide the development of air quality plans, including on who

to involve and on vertical and horizontal coordination between levels of governance in

their implementation (cf. Directive 2008/50, Article 23 and Annex XV);

expanding the provision on sanctions and penalties, and adding additional provisions on

access to justice and compensations, that exceedances of air quality standards could lead

to (cf. Directive 2008/50 Article 30; Directive 2004/107, Article 9);

expanding the requirements on the provision of information, especially related to

information on health impacts, harmonisation of air quality indices and reporting

deadlines (cf. Directive 2008/50, Articles 26, 27 and Annex XVI; and Directive

2004/107, Articles 7).

The final set of policy options will be agreed with the Commission.

Note: The tender should indicate for at least one policy option already in detail how they translate

into key assumptions for each of the above elements, and how they may be assessed.

For policy area 3: strengthening of air quality monitoring, modelling and plans

The contractor shall assess at least three policy options related to revised technical

requirements for air quality monitoring, modelling and plans, including estimates of related

administrative burden and expected improvements.

15

The respective policy options shall include specific measures for the following elements:

augmenting the rules on the establishment of assessment regimes, and on the scope to

combine monitoring, modelling and other assessment methods (cf. Directive 2008/50

Chapter II; and Directive 2004/107 Article 4).

changing requirements for the number and type of sampling points required for

measuring air pollution concentrations (cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex II, Annex V, Annex

IX; and Directive 2004/107 Annex II);

expanding requirements for the continuity of measurements in the same location, in

particular in case of elevated air pollution levels – and adding requirements for the

discontinuation or relocation of sampling points (cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex V);

changing and clarifying requirements for micro- and macro-scale siting of sampling

points for measuring air pollutant concentrations (cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex III, Annex

IV, Annex VIII; and Directive 2004/107 Annex III);

consolidating requirements for data quality objectives (and for modelling quality

objectives) for assessments and reference measurement methods (cf. Directive 2008/50

Annex I, Annex VI; and Directive 2004/107 Annex IV, Annex V);

expanding requirements for which air pollutants to monitor and how to measure these

(cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex VI, Annex X; and Directive 2004/107 Annex V), and

adding requirements to monitor additional air pollutants such ultrafine particles;

altering approaches to assess the contributions from natural sources, the exceedances

attributable to winter-sanding or -salting of roads, or the transboundary contributions to

exceedances (cf. Directive 2008/50 Article 20 and 21);

adding requirements on the minimum elements required for air quality plans, and the

methods used to estimate the impact of measures, for example as regard the use of

modelling and/or cost benefit assessment (cf. Directive 2008/50 Annex XV).

The policy options developed shall be discussed with the stakeholders responsible for the

monitoring and modelling of air quality, including the competent authorities in Member States,

the network of National Reference Laboratories (AQUILA) and the forum for air quality

modelling in Europe (FAIRMODE). The final set of policy options will be agreed with the

Commission.

Please note that a separate contract focusses on the strengthening of air quality monitoring,

modelling and plans: the Commission may ask that certain findings of that separate contract be

taken into account under this contract in the definition of the policy options.

Note: The tender should indicate for at least one policy option already in detail how they translate

into key assumptions for each of the above elements, and how they may be assessed.

16

3.4 Task 4: Analyse the policy options and assess their impacts

The Contractor shall assess the different policy options that correspond to different levels of

ambition both individually, and in combination. This assessment shall address all assessment

criteria as indicated under task 1. For this assessment of different policy options, and in

particular for the scenarios developed for policy area 1, the contractor will have to make use

of modelling frameworks and techniques identified under task 1.

For each of the proposed policy options the Contractor has to assess the expected economic,

social and environmental impacts in line with the Commission Better Regulation Guidelines

and Toolbox including a quantification of costs and benefits where possible, against the

reference of the baseline established under task 2.

The basis for the analysis of the policy options, and for assessment of their respective

impacts, shall be the assumptions developed and detailed for each of the policy options under

task 3. The analysis will be based on the assessment criteria identified under task 1, and

assess how each policy option impacts each of these assessment criteria both in a short-term

(2025), mid-term (2030), and long-term (2050) perspective.

This analysis shall be done, where possible, based on quantified parameters - and where this

is not possible, be assessed in a transparent, qualitative manner. In addition, the analysis will

also have to describe for each policy option who will be affected and how, with a particular

emphasis on health impacts and their costs. The study will also assess whether any proposed

change is likely to impose a disproportionate administrative burden.

This analysis shall build on cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis, and be

quantified to the degree possible – especially the assessment of policy options and/or

scenarios for policy area 1. This shall be based on the Standard Cost Model.

For all policy options analysed, detailed and comprehensive a detailed SWOT analysis shall

be developed. This SWOT analysis shall compare the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities

and threats in relation to each policy option as compared to the baseline scenario (as

developed under task 2). This shall address each assessment criteria (as referred to under task

1), and be based both on quantitative and qualitative evidence and be conducted according to

the requirements of the Better Regulation Guidelines of the European Commission23 and

Toolbox24.

If quantification of the assessment criteria is not possible, they should be assessed in a

qualitative way, clearly indicating the type of most important impacts and their likely

magnitude. All limitations to quantification and their reasons will need to be clearly spelled

out.

23 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-impact-assessment.pdf 24 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/planning-and-proposing-law/better-regulation-why-and-

how/better-regulation-guidelines-and-toolbox/better-regulation-toolbox_en

17

The analysis of policy options shall be complemented with a statistical analysis of the risk of

non-attainment situations and a sensitivity analysis of the results obtained – as well as

identify for each policy option, which are the most sensitive assumptions made. These

sensitivity analyses will be important to facilitate the understanding of the robustness of the

policy options.

3.5 Task 5: Assess ambition packages (combinations of policy options and/or scenarios)

The Contractor shall assess the different policy options combined into different ‘ambition

packages’. These combinations are to be agreed with the Commission.

This analysis shall build on a multi-criteria analysis that includes the cost-benefit analysis and

cost-effectiveness analysis of the policy options (as assessed in task 4).

For each ‘ambition package’ analysed, a detailed and comprehensive SWOT analysis shall be

developed. This SWOT analysis shall compare the strengths, weakness, opportunities and

threats in relation to each ambition package’ as compared to the baseline scenario (as

developed under task 2).

This shall address each assessment criteria for each ‘ambition package’ – and spell out the

likely synergies or lack of synergies (and identify any possible contradictions) that arise when

policy options are combined.

3.6 Task 6: Consult with stakeholders, and assess stakeholder feedback

The contractor is expected to support the Commission in the implementation of the

consultation strategy provided by the Commission.25 The stakeholder consultation will gather

stakeholders’ responses on all three policy areas under assessment as defined above.

The contractor shall consult stakeholders in order to:

confirm the scope of the impact assessment and gather factual information, data and

knowledge to underpin the assessment of impacts of different policy options, as well as

gather stakeholder views on the assessment criteria and their relevance;

gather views of stakeholders on the different policy options and scenarios and the

feasibility of their implementation, with a view to providing a qualitative analysis of the

views of stakeholder groups for each policy option as defined under task 3.

The contractor’s support will comprise conducting the consultation work, analysis and

producing a synopsis of the consultation results and feedback, including:

the preparation and running of an open public consultation using EU Survey;

25 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/documents/AAQDs%20revision%20-%20consultation%20strategy%20-

%20final.pdf

18

preparation and implementation of a targeted stakeholder consultation based on

questionnaires and interviews;

organisation and/or participation in workshops;

analysis of the consultation feedback;

providing factual summary reports shortly after each consultation activity;

drafting of the consultation synopsis report summarising the results of all the consultation

activities.

The contractor will analyse, evaluate and explain the outcome of the public and targeted

stakeholder consultation in a self-standing stakeholder consultation synopsis report (see

below).

Tasks linked to the consultation of stakeholders must respect the Commission's Better

Regulation Guidelines on Stakeholder Consultation26 and relevant parts of the Better

Regulation Toolbox.This comprises a quality control of the consultation process, including an

internal quality assessment of the consultation process and an assessment of the effectiveness

of the consultation strategy. The tender should propose a methodology to underpin the

analysis of the stakeholder consultation. The choice of means and tools should be detailed in

the offer. Note also that the stakeholder consultation process will have to allow for questions

and feedback in any of the 24 official languages of the European Union.

The consultation documents (e.g. presentations, surveys or questionnaires) should be tested

prior to the consultation with a focus group of persons who were not involved in the drafting.

Such a focus group should resemble the actual target audience of the consultation or sub-

groups of this target-audience (and the membership of the focus group is to be agreed with

the Commission) . The purpose of this testing is to find out whether the target group will find

the consultation documents easy to understand and practical to use.

Relevant stakeholders include the following categories as defined in the consultation strategy:

Public authorities, including those with responsibility in enforcing the provisions in the

Member States, at different governance levels (national, regional, local), other national,

regional and local institutions, EEA countries, environment agencies and other relevant

public bodies, international organisations (such as WHO, UNEP, UNECE, OECD);

Private economic sector operators and their trade organisation representatives

Civil society representatives, research community, academia, medical professionals, and

patient organisations;

Citizens.

26 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-stakeholder-consultation.pdf

19

Open public consultation

The stakeholder consultation will include an internet-based open public consultation of

minimum 12 weeks that will need to be made available through the Commission's open

public consultation portal (EU Survey), in all 24 official working languages of the European

Union.27 This consultation should be planned for the third quarter of 2021.

The contractor will be required to prepare, in line with the Guidelines from the Commission

on Stakeholder Consultation28, a structured public questionnaire in consultation with the

Commission, organize the necessary materials for the public consultation and evaluate the

results in accordance with the normal procedures applying to public consultation exercises

undertaken by the Commission. There are mandatory templates to be used for the

questionnaire in the EU Survey tool.

The open public consultation will comprise two separate sets of questions: one, more general,

addressed to the general public, and another one, with more specialised questions, for

authorities in the Member States, enforcement bodies, regional and local authorities, business

and trade organisations' representatives and civil society organisations, academia, medical

professionals, patient organisations, relevant international organisations, etc. The

questionnaire shall be structured in a manner which allows for easy mapping of the questions

in relation to the policy options for the purposes of completing the assessment under task 4.

The questionnaire should not exceed 15 000 characters without spaces.

The contractor will prepare a factual summary report of the open public consultation within

three weeks of the end date of the open public consultation. This summary of the open public

consultation will have to include an aggregate and neutral manner a description of who

contributed, aspects addressed, and views expressed.

Targeted stakeholder consultation

The contractor is expected to plan for and apply the most suitable means and tools to conduct

a targeted stakeholder consultation such as electronic surveys, in-depth interviews (face-to-

face, telephone or web-based interviews), and the organization of focus groups, with the

participation of a minimum of 150 to 200 stakeholders. The contractor will prepare, in

consultation with the Commission, questionnaires for identified stakeholders via EU Survey.

The methodology in the tender should foresee a proactive approach to get feedback from a

sample of stakeholders, which will include the Member States’ competent authorities at all

relevant levels (i.e. national, regional and local), civil society and non-governmental

organizations, organizations representing industry and trade, researchers and scientific

community, as well as international organizations. In addition, the targeted consultation

27 Translations will be provided by the Commission. 28 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines-stakeholder-consultation.pdf

and the relevant part of the Better Regulation Toolbox.

20

questionnaires will be disseminated through stakeholder specific websites, such as the Health

Policy Platform, a tool of DG SANTE having more than 6.000 users, mainly NGOs.

The contractor should aim to ensure for each Member State that at least the competent

authorities responsible for EU air quality legislation, another sectoral public authority, a

relevant NGO and private body are consulted. They must also cover different territorial

levels, from national to regional to local and, in this context have special regard to areas that

are facing air quality problems to assess the challenges and opportunities that have been

present in these regions.

The contractor will prepare a factual summary report of the targeted consultation within

three weeks of the end date of the last targeted consultation activity. This summary of the

targeted consultation will have to include an aggregate and neutral manner a description of

who contributed, aspects addressed, and views expressed.

Stakeholder workshops

The contractor shall organise in cooperation with the Commission two stakeholder

workshops, namely:

(1) A first stakeholder meeting prior to, or during the public consultation will assist in

identifying and confirming the issues for the impact assessment, in particular the

assessment criteria. The possibility of including the workshop in the EU Green Week

2021 will be explored with the Commission.

(2) A second stakeholder meeting will take place before the finalisation of tasks 4 and 5 to

receive feedback that would assist in their completion. The workshop will aim to cross-

check the analysis of scenarios and their impacts with stakeholders, and to ensure that

important findings are not overlooked and that adequate regard is given to the different

inputs and the evidence that supports different results.

The contractor will organize the above meetings as one-day workshops either in Brussels or

online, or as a hybrid meeting. In case the workshops would involve physical presence, the

meeting rooms for these workshop (as well as the coffee breaks) will be provided by the

Commission; beyond this the contractor will have responsibility, and will bear the costs, for

all preparations for the meetings (administrative, logistical and organizational). This will

include:

preparing, and having approved by the Commission, meeting documents at least two

weeks in advance of the respective meetings (also to inform interpretation at the meetings,

organized by the Commission), as well as a summary report for each meeting;

preparing, and having approved by the Commission, presentations or summary documents

for dissemination to other groups which inform about the outcome of the workshops and

meetings undertaken in the context of this contract;

21

covering all administrative and organizational aspects for a meeting (e.g. registration,

name badges, attendance lists, etc.) – closely coordinating this with the Commission and

following necessary procedures;

Up to 250 participants should be foreseen to ensure representation of the most relevant parties

in each workshop. The contractor should manage the invitations and registrations, produce a

draft agenda and papers, assist with the discussions, and record the minutes of each

workshop. The contractor will provide a factual summary of the stakeholder workshops

within two weeks of the event.

Stakeholder consultation report and synopsis

The contractor will prepare both a full stakeholder consultation report, and a self-standing

stakeholder consultation synopsis report in a publishable and translatable format (i.e. max

15 000 characters) presenting the outcome of all the consultation activities, and giving a

qualitative analytical overview of these results.

The full stakeholder consultation report shall provide all details of how the consultation was

conducted, who was consulted and on what, and explain how it was ensured that all relevant

stakeholders had an opportunity to provide inputs. This shall include a detailed overview of

all feedback received during the open public consultation, during the targeted stakeholder

consultation, during the stakeholder workshops, and throughout the process. The view of the

stakeholders should be presented in relation to the policy options as defined under task 3. The

report shall provide both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis of stakeholder views, and

how stakeholder views differ by type of stakeholder, in relation to each policy option (and in

particular of the replies to the open public consultation).

The shorter stakeholder consultation synopsis report shall provide details of how the

consultations was conducted, who was consulted and on what, and explain how it was

ensured that all relevant stakeholders had an opportunity to provide inputs, and present the

view of stakeholders in relation to policy options as defined under task 3 in a consolidated

manner. This shall clearly present the views of different groups of stakeholder on the

different issues they were consulted on29.

The stakeholder consultation synopsis report shall adhere to the requirements of Tool #55 of

the Better Regulation Toolbox30. In particular, the contractor will ensure that the length of the

stakeholder consultation synopsis does not exceed 15 000 characters without spaces.

A draft stakeholder consultation synopsis report shall be delivered together with the draft

final report at the latest.

29 See, for example, Boxes A2.1 to A2.5 presented in Annex II of the Fitness Check of the Ambient Air Quality

Directives: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/pdf/SWD_2019_427_F1_AAQ%20Fitness%20Check.pdf 30 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/file_import/better-regulation-toolbox-55_en_0.pdf

22

4. Deliverables

1. An inception report that provides the framework and work methodology showing how

the objectives of this study will be achieved. This shall, inter alia, include an agreed

assessment matrix which includes detailed entries both for the drivers, problems and

consequences detailed in the draft intervention logic. The inception report will be

submitted no later than 4 weeks after the signature of the contract by both parties. It shall

be transmitted to the Commission in electronic format only. A draft will be discussed at

the inception meeting with the Commission. This inception report shall present the

detailed operational organization and methods to be applied to tasks 1 to 5.

2. Draft Questionnaires to be used for public and targeted stakeholder consultations,

3. First interim report: A draft first interim report is to be submitted no later than 6 months

after the signature of the contract. This first interim report shall at least provide the ‘in

depth background information’, presentation and analysis of the stakeholders

consultations inputs, analysis of other relevant materials (received directly or presented

by the Commission) and results for each of the identified options.

4. Factual summary report of the open public consultation, factual summary report of the

targeted consultation, and factual summary report for each stakeholder workshop,

corresponding to requirements referred to under task 6.

5. Second interim report: A draft second interim report is to be submitted not later than

12 months after the signature of the contract. It summarizes the outcomes of the

assessment of the impacts of the different policy options (packages) and their comparison.

6. A full stakeholder consultation report and a self-standing stakeholder consultation

synopsis report presenting the outcome of all the consultation activities, and giving a

qualitative analytical overview of these results. A draft version of both the full

stakeholder consultation report and the self-standing stakeholder consultation synopsis

report shall be delivered together with the draft final report at the latest. The final version

of both documents shall be delivered together with the final version of the final report.

7. A final report that provides all elements requested under the present contract. The final

report shall be delivered as a draft no later than 15 months after the start date of the

contract (and as a final version 18 months after the start of the contract), and will take on

board the comments received from the Commission.

The final report will explain the validity of the findings, assessments and conclusions and

must be written in a clear, unambiguous and comprehensive style. It will summarize

outcomes of all tasks carried out under this contract. It should build on the outcomes as

presented in the two interim reports.

All deliverables shall be transmitted to the Commission in electronic format. In addition, the

final report and the consultation synopsis report shall be transmitted to the Commission in

23

two hard copies each. The electronic format should include a version compatible with

MS Word 2016 as well as a PDF file. All deliverables shall include hyperlinks which enable

the reader to navigate easily within the document, and be suitable for posting on the Internet.

5. Meetings

The contractor will maintain close contact with the Commission, including regular monthly

video/audio conference calls to report on progress on the contract and to discuss any issues or

problems encountered.

An inception meeting for this contract will take place at the Commission premises in

Brussels (or if not possible due to COVID-19 related travel restrictions, via video conference)

no later than 4 weeks after the signature of the contract by both parties.

Two interim meetings will take place at the Commission premises in Brussels (or if not

possible due to COVID-19 related travel restrictions, via video conference), at which the

contractor will present the draft summary of the open public consultation (2 weeks after the

open public consultation has been finalized) and the second interim report (12 months after

signature of the contract by both parties).

A final meeting, at which the contractor will present the support study, will take place at the

Commission premises in Brussels, or if not possible due to COVID-19 related travel

restrictions, via video conference (12 months after signature of the contract by both parties).

The contractor is also expected to attend (up to) four Inter Service Steering Group

meetings at the Commission premises in Brussels (or if not possible due to COVID-19

related travel restrictions, via video conference). Note that the dates of these meetings will

ideally coincide with the dates of the above-mentioned inception, interim and final meetings.

The contractor is also required to travel to Brussels for the purposes of the two stakeholder

meetings should these be organized as including physical presence in Brussels.

All of the above meetings shall be minuted by the contractor, and draft minutes shall be sent

electronically to the Commission for approval within 5 working days of the respective

meeting.

In addition, the contractor is required to attend the meetings of three Ambient Air Quality

Expert Group (i.e. one day each) as part of the information collection in Brussels (or if not

possible due to COVID-19 related travel restrictions, via video conference).

6. Duration of the tasks

The tasks should be completed within 18 months from the signature of the contract. The

execution of the tasks may not start before the contract has been signed.

24

7. Estimated timetable

MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT

Months - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 -

Project context

Indicative: RSB meetings, a) first draft proposal, b) adoption

RSB a RSB b

Expected : c) Zero Pollution Action Plan, WHO Guidelines

c WHO

Project management

Inception, interim & final meetings

ISG meetings

AAQ Expert Group meetings & workshops

Key input from separate Mon-Mod-Plan contract

Reports

a) inception report, b) & c) interim reports, d) final report

a b c d --->---> d

e) & f) stakeholder summary reports, g) synopsis report

e f g --->---> g

Task 1 - Develop a methodology, and draft a detailed work plan (*)

Methodology ---> --->

Assessment matrix ---> --->

Task 2 - Review relevant information, and establish a baseline for the assessment (*)

Literature and evidence review ---> ---> ---> --->

Baseline scenario ---> ---> ---> --->

Task 3 - Develop detailed policy options

Development of draft options ---> ---> --->

Quantification of draft options ---> ---> --->

Development of final options ---> ---> --->

Quantification of draft options ---> ---> --->

Task 4 - Analyse the policy options and assess their impacts

First draft analysis of options and impacts

---> ---> ---> --->

Second draft analysis of options and impacts

---> ---> ---> --->

Final analysis of options and impacts

--->--->--->

Task 5 - Assess ambition packages (combinations of policy option and/or scenarios)

Conceptual assessment of ambition packages

--->

Draft assessment of ambition packages

--->

Final assessment of ambition packages

--->

Task 6 - Consult with stakeholders, and assess stakeholder feedback

Preparation of questionnaires ---> --->

Open public consultation ---> --->

Targeted consultations ---> ---> ---> ---> --->

Two stakeholder workshops

(*) For Task 1 and Task 2 draft versions of the work plan, methodology, assessment matrix, literature review and baseline scenario are to be included already in the inception report. The timing depicted here reflects this.

Note that this indicative timeline may need to be adapted in agreement with the Commission depending on the start date of the contract.

However as the tasks are critical input to external processes, this should not result in a delay in meetings and/or deliverables.

25

8. Estimated expertise requirement

Based on the selection criteria defined in this framework contract, the contractor should

propose a suitable team to support this impact assessment and to compile, process and handle

technical information in the field of ambient air quality, in particular regarding

environmental, economic, and social analyses in this field, including linked economic and

legal aspects. The contractor shall have available methods and approaches, including

modelling tools, that allow the quantitative analysis of different policy options and scenarios

against the assessment criteria set out under task 1 of these terms of reference.

The composition of the team, including the seniority of the members, should reflect the

nature of the tasks to be carried-out. The contractor should clearly assign a contact

person/project manager with overall responsibility for the delivery of the contract.

9. Place of performance

The place of performance of the tasks shall be the contractor’s premises or any other place

indicated in the tender, with the exception of the Commission’s premises

10. Budget

The total available budget is limited to a maximum of € 400.000. The payment schedule is as

stipulated in Article I.6 of the Framework contract and includes one interim payment based

on the approval of the Second Interim Report.

11. Content, Structure and graphic requirements of the final deliverables

All studies produced for the European Commission and Executive Agencies shall conform to

the corporate visual identity of the European Commission by applying the graphic rules set

out in the European Commission's Visual Identity Manual, including its logo31.

The Commission is committed to making online information as accessible as possible to the

largest possible number of users including those with visual, auditory, cognitive or physical

disabilities, and those not having the latest technologies. The Commission supports the Web

Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 of the W3C.

For full details on Commission policy on accessibility for information providers, see:

http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/standards/accessibility/index_en.htm

Pdf versions of studies destined for online publication should respect W3C guidelines for

accessible pdf documents. See http://www.w3.org/WAI/

31 The Visual Identity Manual of the European Commission is available upon request. Requests should be made

to the following e-mail address: comm-visual-identity@ec.europa.eu

26

Final study report

The final study report shall include:

- an abstract of no more than 200 words and an executive summary of maximum 6 pages,

both in English and French;

- the following standard disclaimer:

“The information and views set out in this [report/study/article/publication…] are those of the author(s) and do

not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy

of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf

may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.”

- specific identifiers which shall be incorporated on the cover page provided by the

Contracting Authority.

Publishable executive summary

The publishable executive summary shall be provided in both English and French and shall

include:

- the following standard disclaimer:

“The information and views set out in this [report/study/article/publication…] are those of the author(s) and do

not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy

of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf

may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein.”

- specific identifiers which shall be incorporated on the cover page. These will be provided

by the Contracting Authority after the signature of the contract.

Graphic requirements

The contractor must deliver the study and all publishable deliverables in full compliance with

the corporate visual identity of the European Commission, by applying the graphic rules set

out in the European Commission's Visual Identity Manual, including its logo.

The graphic rules, the Manual and further information are available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/communication/services/visual_identity/index_en.htm

A simple Word template will be provided to the contractor after contract signature. The

contractor must fill in the cover page in accordance with the instructions provided in the

template.

12. Award criteria

A maximum of 50 points will be attributed to criterion 1, a maximum of 30 points will be

attributed to criterion 2, and a maximum of 20 points will be attributed to criterion 3. In

addition a minimum threshold will be set up under this system of points:

27

- Technical sufficiency levels: Selected companies will have to score a minimum of 25, 15

and 10 points under criteria 1, 2 and 3 respectively, with a minimum total of 60 points.

Tenders scoring less than 60 in the overall points total or less than 50% in the points awarded

for a single criterion will be excluded from the rest of the assessment procedure. Assessment

of the tenders will focus on the quality of the proposed services; therefore, tenderers should

elaborate on all points addressed by these specifications in order to score as many points as

possible. The mere repetition of mandatory requirements set out in the specifications, without

going into details or without giving any added value, will only result in a very low score. In

addition, if certain essential points of the specifications are not expressly covered by the

tender, the Commission may decide to give a zero mark for the relevant qualitative award

criteria.

1. Quality of the proposed methodology (50 points – minimum threshold 50%)

This criterion assesses the suitability and strength of the proposal as measured against the

requirements of the tasks in terms of the technical content, completeness, originality of ideas

(where appropriate) and proposed effort. The degree to which the methodology shows the

capacity to resolve the questions underlying in the service request in a realistic and well-

structured way, as well as whether the methods proposed are suited to the needs set out by the

Commission.

2. Organisation of the work (30 points – minimum threshold 50%)

This criterion will assess the quality of the project planning and how the roles and

responsibilities of the proposed team and of the economic operators (in case of joint tenders,

including subcontractors if applicable) are distributed for each task. It also assesses the global

allocation of time and resources to the project and to each task or deliverable, and whether

this allocation is adequate for the work. The tender should provide details on the allocation of

time and resources and the rationale behind the choice of this allocation. The management

and coordination of the project, in particular efficient involvement of all members of the

project team, will be assessed.

3. Quality control measures (20 points – minimum threshold 50%)

This criterion will assess the quality control system applied to the service foreseen in these

tasks concerning the quality of the deliverables, the language quality check, and continuity of

the service in case of absence of a member of the team. The quality system should be detailed

in the tender and specific to the tasks at hand; a generic quality control system will result in a

low score.

The bid offering the best value for money according to the 'best price-quality ratio' award

method will be chosen, provided that the minimum number of points cited above is achieved.

'Best price-quality ratio' will be calculated as follows:

28

All bids that do not reach the stated technical sufficiency levels for each individual award

criteria will not be considered for contract award.

All bids that have passed the individual levels and score 60 or higher are deemed to be

technically sufficient.

Then the following formula will be applied to obtain the price-quality ratio, and the award

of the contract will be made in accordance with the highest ratio obtained:

𝑆𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑋

= 𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑝𝑒𝑠𝑡 𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒

𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑋 × 100 × 30% (𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔)

+ 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 (𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑜𝑓 100) 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑎𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑋

× 70% (𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔)

The Commission reserves the right not to select any tender if the amounts tendered exceed

the budget envisaged for the particular piece of work or to reject any offers that do not

comply with the pre-agreed maximum rates in the framework contract.

29

ANNEX: Draft intervention logic of the impact assessment