PCRs for Wooden Flooring, Explained

PCRs in plain English

A PCR is the rulebook of Monopoly. Ignore it and the game falls apart. It sets the boundaries for your LCA, what data to report, and how to calculate and disclose impacts so your wood flooring EPD is apples‑to‑apples with competitors.

The three PCR families you’ll see for wood floors

1. EN 16485 wood and wood‑based products. Often chosen for parquet, engineered, and solid wood flooring when the story centers on timber sourcing, processing, and biogenic carbon under EN 15804.
2. EN 16810 floor coverings. Common when your portfolio spans multiple coverings and you want one family across resilient, textile, laminate, and sometimes wood products.
3. North American ISO 21930‑based “Flooring: carpet, resilient, laminate, ceramic, wood.” Used by several US program operators to house all flooring under a single PCR family. All three can be valid for wooden flooring. The “right” one is the one your market and specifiers already trust and your competitors most often use.

Quick decision grid manufacturers use

• Where will the EPD sell product? If Europe, EN 15804+A2 alignment is expected. If North America, ISO 21930 format is familiar to reviewers.
• What do competitors cite? Matching the prevailing PCR avoids off‑grid comparisons in bids.
• What will the EPD cover? One SKU, a flooring system, or a platform with many species and finishes. Pick the PCR whose scope comfortably fits the variants.
• Who will operate it? Smart EPD and UL are common in the US, IBU and EPD International are frequent in Europe. Operator choice and PCR often travel together.

Data you’ll need for a wood flooring PCR

• One full reference year of site data for A1–A3 materials and manufacturing, or best available with a prospective approach if allowed by your operator.
• Bill of materials by layer and species, adhesive and resin recipes, coatings, average moisture content, and yield.
• Energy for drying, pressing, machining, and finishing by fuel and electricity mix, plus on‑site emissions controls.
• Inbound and outbound transport distances and modes, packaging, and scrap streams with destinations.
• If declaring B‑stage performance, cleaning cycles and finish maintenance assumptions, and end‑of‑life pathways for C. Most operators expect EPD validity of 5 years, and at least 12 months of production data for a standard declaration (EPD International General Programme Instructions, 2024) (UL Solutions Part A, 2024).

Biogenic carbon and EN 15804+A2

Wood stores carbon. Under EN 15804+A2, you disclose biogenic flows and report GWP‑biogenic alongside total GWP. That makes kiln‑drying energy, yield losses, and coating chemistry show up clearly. If a competitor’s EPD looks lower, check whether system boundaries and biogenic reporting are aligned before assuming a gap.

Common snags that slow wood flooring EPDs

• Species mix drift. Lock your annual species mix and sourcing regions early so data requests don’t boomerang.
• Adhesive and coating SDS gaps. Suppliers sometimes redact content. Get non‑disclosure agreements in place up front to access exact formulations.
• Factory‑finished vs site‑finished. If customers site‑finish, declare a reasonable scenario for B‑stage cleaning and refinishing so models don’t under or over‑credit you.
• End‑of‑life myths. Many floors are landfilled or incinerated, not recycled at scale. Model real flows for your markets rather than best‑case marketing.

“PCR expired” does not mean your EPD is invalid

PCRs are updated periodically, typically on multi‑year cycles. If the PCR that underpinned your EPD expires, the EPD usually stays valid until its own expiry date. On renewal, you’ll update to the latest PCR version. This is normal and acceptable to specifiers and programs that check validity windows first (EPD International General Programme Instructions, 2024).

Timelines and what speeds them up

A smooth run to publication comes from ruthless data collection and clear scoping. Decide the PCR and operator by week one, freeze SKUs and finishes by week two, and confirm whether modules beyond A1–A3 will be declared. Waiting to pick a PCR until after modelling invites rework. It’s definately worth front‑loading decisions.

LEED v5 context and why the PCR choice matters

Project teams tracking LEED v5 drafts still look for product‑specific, third‑party verified EPDs that follow recognized rules. If your wood floor lacks an EPD, they often must apply conservative defaults that make substitution more likely. Aligning to the dominant PCR for your market removes that friction and keeps conversations focused on performance, not paperwork.

If no perfect PCR fits

You can still publish. Use the closest fit among the flooring PCR or the wood products PCR while documenting scope and any exclusions. Large manufacturers sometimes sponsor a PCR update, but most teams select the prevailing option and move forward. The commercial cost of waiting is usually higher than the modelling cost of getting to market now.

Our take

Pick the rulebook your customers already use, lock data early, and publish cleanly. Wood flooring can shine on carbon when biogenic accounting, yield, and finishing are modelled transparently. The right PCR makes that story comparable, defensible, and specification‑ready.