The world’s first standard for environmental management systems (EMS) – BS 7750 – wasdeveloped and published by the British Standards Institution (BSI) in 1992. This standard was the model for the ISO 14000 Series developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ISO 14001, which establishes the requirements for an EMS, was finalized in 1996. BS 7750 was also the basis for the European Union’s Eco-Management and Audit scheme, known as EMAS.
ISO is an international standard and therefore must incorporate the different interests ofmany countries. This standard clearly has the weakest requirements. By contrast, EMAS is the most stringent and detailed standard reflecting the high environmental standards of German interests and companies which played a key role developing it.
Because ISO 14001 and EMAS are both based on BS 7750, all three standards arequite similar in their approach. If your organization complies with BS 7750 today, little effort will be needed to fullfill the requirements of ISO 14001 or EMAS. Be aware however, that EMAS emphasizes public environmental reporting.
Today there are two major areas in the evaluation of environmental management practice.One area focuses on organizational issues, and the other on products, services and processes.
1. Organization Evaluation
a. Environmental Management Systems (ISO 14001, 14004)
b. Environmental Performance Evaluation (ISO 14014, 14015, 14031)
c. Environmental Auditing (ISO 14010, 14011, 14012, 14013, 14014)
2. Products, Services and Processes
a. Life Cycle Assessment (ISO 14040, 14041, 14042, 14043)
b. Environmental Labeling (ISO 14020, 14021, 14022, 14023, 1402X)
c. Environmental Aspects in Product Standards (ISO 14060)
Friday, October 9, 2009
Conducting An Initial Environmental Review For EMS
Conducting An Initial Environmental Review in ISO 14001 EMSAn initial environmental review covers all the aspects of an EMS. As a result of this review the organization knows its strengths and weaknesses, risks and opportunities regarding the current status of its EMS. The gap between the requirements of the EMS standard and the actual status of the organization shows which aspects the organization should focus its efforts on to improve the system. This leads directly to the development of an environmental management program that should fill the gaps.The Environmental review should focus on three key areas:- Examination of existing environmental management practices and procedures- Identification of significant environmental impacts and their priority- Identification of legal and regulatory requirements1. Examination of Existing Environmental Management Practices andProceduresThe methodology for assessing existing environmental management practices and procedures is proposed here using a questionnaire. The review team fills out this questionnaire by interviewing appropriate people, by analyzing existing documents and procedures dealing with environmental issues and by collecting information about environmental aspects of the organization’s operations, products and services.By conducting the initial environmental review, an organization-specific profile of strengths and weaknesses can be drawn up. Because the score in each EMS area shows the effort needed in terms of financial and human resources,the organization knows where to focus its efforts when building up an EMS and where the largest effort is needed.
2. Identification of Significant Environmental Aspects and their PriorityAn environmental policy requires top management to set priorities regarding environmental aspects. An initial review clearly shows where to set priorities regarding the EMS itself. But, it does not help to set priorities among different environmental problems. Many top managers feel pressure to do something for the environment and thus embark on some form of ?Eenvironmental activism?E often containing many isolated activities, but no clear direction. One way to solve this problem is to develop a so called ?Environmental exposure portfolio?EThe first step of this portfolio analysis is to assess the exposure and therefore the importance of different environmental aspects for an organization’s overall performance.The appropriate perspective and priorities of the environmental policy will differ depending on this preliminary analysis. The analysis should be conducted from the perspective of the stakeholders of the organization, their needs and their importance for the success of the organization. The degree of exposure to different environmental aspects should guide the involvement and perspective of an organization when implementing an EMS. Evaluating exposure to environmental aspects is important, because this exposure is likely to influence the organization’s success sooner or later, either through new legislation, public or consumer perception and behavior or otherwise.The analysis of the expected exposure of an organization to different environmental problems and the weight given to these aspects by various stakeholders enables management to focus on environmental issues that are a high priority to the organization. This is represented in the quadrant in the upper right corner of the environmental exposure portfolio. However, the two quadrants on the left must also be observed, although less vigorously. Issues with low public priority, to which the firm contributes heavily become a problem as soon as the perception of the stakeholders and the public environmental policy changes (the quadrant in the upper left corner of the portfolio). That this can happen very rapidly is obvious, for example from Shell`s ?Brent Spar?Edumping case (detailed information about this case is available from Shell or Greenpeace at their respective WWW-sites). Investments in new production technology, products and services can increase the environmental impact of the organization when not anticipated early enough. In this case, a problem ranked in the lower right corner of the portfolio would shift to the field with the highest priority. Problems ranked in the lower left corner are of no priority. No measures should be taken here.
3. Identification of Legal and Regulatory RequirementsThe identification of legal and regulatory requirements assesses two levels of an organization:- production-related environmental regulations- product- and service-related environmental regulationsThe former addresses the production department while the latter addresses the marketingand R&D departments. Basically, three questions must be answered:- Which are the relevant environmental regulations? (= target)- Is the current situation in the organization known? (= actual)- Does the organization comply with relevant regulations? (=gap)The methodology used here is a questionnaire. To obtain information about environmental regulations the following information sources can be used:- governmental authorities- industry associations- daily newspaper- university publications (law departments)
2. Identification of Significant Environmental Aspects and their PriorityAn environmental policy requires top management to set priorities regarding environmental aspects. An initial review clearly shows where to set priorities regarding the EMS itself. But, it does not help to set priorities among different environmental problems. Many top managers feel pressure to do something for the environment and thus embark on some form of ?Eenvironmental activism?E often containing many isolated activities, but no clear direction. One way to solve this problem is to develop a so called ?Environmental exposure portfolio?EThe first step of this portfolio analysis is to assess the exposure and therefore the importance of different environmental aspects for an organization’s overall performance.The appropriate perspective and priorities of the environmental policy will differ depending on this preliminary analysis. The analysis should be conducted from the perspective of the stakeholders of the organization, their needs and their importance for the success of the organization. The degree of exposure to different environmental aspects should guide the involvement and perspective of an organization when implementing an EMS. Evaluating exposure to environmental aspects is important, because this exposure is likely to influence the organization’s success sooner or later, either through new legislation, public or consumer perception and behavior or otherwise.The analysis of the expected exposure of an organization to different environmental problems and the weight given to these aspects by various stakeholders enables management to focus on environmental issues that are a high priority to the organization. This is represented in the quadrant in the upper right corner of the environmental exposure portfolio. However, the two quadrants on the left must also be observed, although less vigorously. Issues with low public priority, to which the firm contributes heavily become a problem as soon as the perception of the stakeholders and the public environmental policy changes (the quadrant in the upper left corner of the portfolio). That this can happen very rapidly is obvious, for example from Shell`s ?Brent Spar?Edumping case (detailed information about this case is available from Shell or Greenpeace at their respective WWW-sites). Investments in new production technology, products and services can increase the environmental impact of the organization when not anticipated early enough. In this case, a problem ranked in the lower right corner of the portfolio would shift to the field with the highest priority. Problems ranked in the lower left corner are of no priority. No measures should be taken here.
3. Identification of Legal and Regulatory RequirementsThe identification of legal and regulatory requirements assesses two levels of an organization:- production-related environmental regulations- product- and service-related environmental regulationsThe former addresses the production department while the latter addresses the marketingand R&D departments. Basically, three questions must be answered:- Which are the relevant environmental regulations? (= target)- Is the current situation in the organization known? (= actual)- Does the organization comply with relevant regulations? (=gap)The methodology used here is a questionnaire. To obtain information about environmental regulations the following information sources can be used:- governmental authorities- industry associations- daily newspaper- university publications (law departments)
Emergency Preparedness and Response In ISO 14001
Emergency Preparedness and Response In ISO 14001
Under the Emergency Preparedness and Response requirement of ISO 14001:2004 (§4.4.7), the organization is required to establish procedures for identifying the potential for and responding to emergency situations and accidents that can have an impact on the environment.
Identification of Potential Emergency and Accident Situations – Experience indicates that organizations infrequently have a preexisting procedure for identifying potential emergency and accident situations.The norm is to establish emergency and accident responses for a variety of emergency and accident situations irrespective of the potential for their occurrence. But ISO 14001 is specific about requiring a procedure to identify the potential for emergency situations and accidents. Adhering to the requirement of the procedure is a valuable exercise that helps organizations identify weaknesses in their own emergency planning and to plan for that which is most likely to occur.Because many environmental impacts of an emergency or accident situation are secondary in nature, it appears that all potential emergency or accident situations need to be identified before a determination of environmental impacts can be made. An organization that attempts to identify potential emergency or accident situations based on a review of its environmental aspects would likely miss the environmental impact potential of, say, an automobile accident.
There are five steps implied by the emergency preparedness and response requirement:
1) Identify the potential for emergency situations and accidents of all kinds;2) Paying particular attention to the potential environmental impacts of accidents and emergency situations, identify how the organization can prevent and mitigate associated adverse environmental impacts;3) Determine how the organization and its employees should respond to emergency situations and accidents;4) Periodically simulate emergency situations to test response capabilities; and,5) Review and revise procedures based on experience derived from actual and simulated emergency situations and accidents.
Accident and Emergency Situation Identification – In order to identify potential for and responding to emergency situations and accidents, the organization should develop a procedure for systematically identifying accident and emergency situations, evaluating their probability of occurrence, their likely consequences, and their severity.Organizations often engage risk management specialists to assist in the identification of potential emergency or accident situations that could lead to human injury, environmental damage, or economic loss. While many checklists are available to facilitate this kind of evaluation, there is virtually no substitute for physical evaluation of facilities by knowledgeable personnel, whether employees or outside professionals.
Emergency Response Procedures – The organization is required to develop procedures for responding to emergency situations and accidents when they occur. Typically, response procedures include identifying public emergency response agencies and their capabilities, identifying individuals within the organization who are trained and able to provide assistance in emergencies, establishing an emergency communications network, and providing emergency lighting, signage, and equipment. Because Emergency Response Procedures are based on identified potential emergency situations and accidents specific to the organization, the emergency response plan will be unique for each organization.
Periodic Testing – The value of conducting emergency response exercises lies not only with simulating situations that could occur but also in identifying flaws in the response plan. Practice drills can be the most effective test of the system to give employees, emergency response personnel, and management the opportunity to walk through the plan and gain familiarity with its procedures. While a full-dress response exercise is valuable, testing of procedures can be effectively done on much smaller scales and still provide the benefits of testing. Above all, the organization should not let the impracticality of a full-dress exercise keep it from testing sub elements of the emergency response plan.
Review and Revise – ISO 14001 calls for continual improvement of the EMS. Periodically reviewing and revising emergency response plans based on the experience gained from the occurrence of emergency situations or accidents or in testing response plans is an example of continual improvement.
Written Response Plans – Many written emergency response plans are too cumbersome to be of value in an emergency situation – their value depends entirely upon previous training of persons who will be called upon to execute them. Yet, many organizations fail to provide the emergency response training necessary to make the plans functional.Keeping in mind that even the simplest, most direct emergency response plan requires training for effective implementation, an alternative for organizations to consider is establishment of abbreviated, readily available Immediate Response Directions established for each kind of potential emergency situation or accident. Such an emergency response plan might consist of a laminated card prepared for each potential emergency situation or accident and providing specific responsibilities and associated actions for employees and visitors, supervisors, emergency coordinators, and emergency directors.
Under the Emergency Preparedness and Response requirement of ISO 14001:2004 (§4.4.7), the organization is required to establish procedures for identifying the potential for and responding to emergency situations and accidents that can have an impact on the environment.
Identification of Potential Emergency and Accident Situations – Experience indicates that organizations infrequently have a preexisting procedure for identifying potential emergency and accident situations.The norm is to establish emergency and accident responses for a variety of emergency and accident situations irrespective of the potential for their occurrence. But ISO 14001 is specific about requiring a procedure to identify the potential for emergency situations and accidents. Adhering to the requirement of the procedure is a valuable exercise that helps organizations identify weaknesses in their own emergency planning and to plan for that which is most likely to occur.Because many environmental impacts of an emergency or accident situation are secondary in nature, it appears that all potential emergency or accident situations need to be identified before a determination of environmental impacts can be made. An organization that attempts to identify potential emergency or accident situations based on a review of its environmental aspects would likely miss the environmental impact potential of, say, an automobile accident.
There are five steps implied by the emergency preparedness and response requirement:
1) Identify the potential for emergency situations and accidents of all kinds;2) Paying particular attention to the potential environmental impacts of accidents and emergency situations, identify how the organization can prevent and mitigate associated adverse environmental impacts;3) Determine how the organization and its employees should respond to emergency situations and accidents;4) Periodically simulate emergency situations to test response capabilities; and,5) Review and revise procedures based on experience derived from actual and simulated emergency situations and accidents.
Accident and Emergency Situation Identification – In order to identify potential for and responding to emergency situations and accidents, the organization should develop a procedure for systematically identifying accident and emergency situations, evaluating their probability of occurrence, their likely consequences, and their severity.Organizations often engage risk management specialists to assist in the identification of potential emergency or accident situations that could lead to human injury, environmental damage, or economic loss. While many checklists are available to facilitate this kind of evaluation, there is virtually no substitute for physical evaluation of facilities by knowledgeable personnel, whether employees or outside professionals.
Emergency Response Procedures – The organization is required to develop procedures for responding to emergency situations and accidents when they occur. Typically, response procedures include identifying public emergency response agencies and their capabilities, identifying individuals within the organization who are trained and able to provide assistance in emergencies, establishing an emergency communications network, and providing emergency lighting, signage, and equipment. Because Emergency Response Procedures are based on identified potential emergency situations and accidents specific to the organization, the emergency response plan will be unique for each organization.
Periodic Testing – The value of conducting emergency response exercises lies not only with simulating situations that could occur but also in identifying flaws in the response plan. Practice drills can be the most effective test of the system to give employees, emergency response personnel, and management the opportunity to walk through the plan and gain familiarity with its procedures. While a full-dress response exercise is valuable, testing of procedures can be effectively done on much smaller scales and still provide the benefits of testing. Above all, the organization should not let the impracticality of a full-dress exercise keep it from testing sub elements of the emergency response plan.
Review and Revise – ISO 14001 calls for continual improvement of the EMS. Periodically reviewing and revising emergency response plans based on the experience gained from the occurrence of emergency situations or accidents or in testing response plans is an example of continual improvement.
Written Response Plans – Many written emergency response plans are too cumbersome to be of value in an emergency situation – their value depends entirely upon previous training of persons who will be called upon to execute them. Yet, many organizations fail to provide the emergency response training necessary to make the plans functional.Keeping in mind that even the simplest, most direct emergency response plan requires training for effective implementation, an alternative for organizations to consider is establishment of abbreviated, readily available Immediate Response Directions established for each kind of potential emergency situation or accident. Such an emergency response plan might consist of a laminated card prepared for each potential emergency situation or accident and providing specific responsibilities and associated actions for employees and visitors, supervisors, emergency coordinators, and emergency directors.
Migration to ISO 9001:2008
Migration To ISO 9001:2008The International Accreditation Forum (IAF) and the International Organization forStandardization (ISO) have agreed on an implementation plan to ensure a smooth transition ofaccredited certification to ISO 9001:2008, the latest version of the world’s most widely usedstandard for quality management systems (QMS). The details of the plan are given in the jointcommuniqué by the two organizations which appears below.Like all of ISO’s more than 17 000 standards, ISO 9001 is periodically reviewed to ensure that itis maintained at the state of the art and a decision taken to confirm, withdraw or revise thedocument.ISO 9001:2008, which is due to be published before the end of the year, will replace the year2000 version of the standard which is implemented by both business and public sectororganizations in 170 countries. Although certification is not a requirement of the standard, theQMS of about one million organizations have been audited and certified by independentcertification bodies (also known in some countries as registration bodies) to ISO 9001:2000.ISO 9001 certification is frequently used in both private and public sectors to increaseconfidence in the products and services provided by certified organizations, between partnersin business-to-business relations, in the selection of suppliers in supply chains and in the rightto tender for procurement contracts.ISO is the developer and publisher of ISO 9001, but does not itself carry out auditing andcertification. These services are performed independently of ISO by certification bodies. ISOdoes not control such bodies, but does develop voluntary International Standards toencourage good practice in their activities on a worldwide basis. For example, ISO/IEC17021:2006 specifies the requirements for bodies providing auditing and certification ofmanagement systems.Certification bodies that wish to provide further confidence in their services may apply to be“accredited” as competent by an IAF recognized national accreditation body. ISO/IEC17011:2004 specifies the requirements for carrying out such accreditation. IAF is aninternational association whose membership includes the national accreditation bodies of 49economies.ISO technical committee ISO/TC 176, Quality management and quality assurance, which isresponsible for the ISO 9000 family of standards, is preparing a number of support documentsexplaining what the differences are between ISO 9001:2008 and the year 2000 version, whyand what they mean for users. Once approved, these documents will be posted on the ISOWeb site – probably in October 2008.
ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and the IAF (International AccreditationForum) have agreed an implementation plan to ensure a smooth migration of accreditedcertification to ISO 9001:2008, after consultation with international groupings representingquality system or auditor certification bodies, and industry users of ISO 9001 certificationservices.ISO 9001:2008 does not contain any new requirementsThey have recognized that ISO 9001:2008 introduces no new requirements. ISO 9001:2008only introduces clarifications to the existing requirements of ISO 9001:2000 based on eightyears of experience of implementing the standard world wide with about one millioncertificates issued in 170 countries to date. It also introduces changes intended to improveconsistency with ISO14001:2004The agreed implementation plan in relation to accredited certification is therefore thefollowing:Accredited certification to the ISO 9001:2008 shall not be granted until the publication of ISO9001:2008 as an International Standard.Certification of conformity to ISO 9001:2008 and/or national equivalents shall only be issuedafter official publication of ISO 9001:2008 (which should take place before the end of 2008)and after a routine surveillance or recertification audit against ISO 9001:2008.Validity of certifications to ISO 9001:2000One year after publication of ISO 9001:2008 all accredited certifications issued (newcertifications or recertifications) shall be to ISO 9001:2008.Twenty four months after publication by ISO of ISO 9001:2008, any existing certification issuedto ISO 9001:2000 shall not be valid.
ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and the IAF (International AccreditationForum) have agreed an implementation plan to ensure a smooth migration of accreditedcertification to ISO 9001:2008, after consultation with international groupings representingquality system or auditor certification bodies, and industry users of ISO 9001 certificationservices.ISO 9001:2008 does not contain any new requirementsThey have recognized that ISO 9001:2008 introduces no new requirements. ISO 9001:2008only introduces clarifications to the existing requirements of ISO 9001:2000 based on eightyears of experience of implementing the standard world wide with about one millioncertificates issued in 170 countries to date. It also introduces changes intended to improveconsistency with ISO14001:2004The agreed implementation plan in relation to accredited certification is therefore thefollowing:Accredited certification to the ISO 9001:2008 shall not be granted until the publication of ISO9001:2008 as an International Standard.Certification of conformity to ISO 9001:2008 and/or national equivalents shall only be issuedafter official publication of ISO 9001:2008 (which should take place before the end of 2008)and after a routine surveillance or recertification audit against ISO 9001:2008.Validity of certifications to ISO 9001:2000One year after publication of ISO 9001:2008 all accredited certifications issued (newcertifications or recertifications) shall be to ISO 9001:2008.Twenty four months after publication by ISO of ISO 9001:2008, any existing certification issuedto ISO 9001:2000 shall not be valid.
Nonconformity, Corrective Action and Preventive Action in ISO 14001 EMS
The intent of §4.5.3 is that the organization put in place procedures for 1) identifying actual and potential nonconformities to EMS requirements, 2) taking appropriate corrective or preventive action, and 3) reviewing the effectiveness of corrective or preventive actions taken.The nonconformity requirement of ISO 14001:1996 was a passive requirement in that it was only triggered when a nonconformity came to the attention of the organization through one of the other EMS procedures, such as the EMS audit or management review. ISO 14001:2004, however, requires that the organization establish and maintain procedures to identify actual or potential nonconformities, determine their causes, take action to avoid recurrence or occurrence, record results, and review effectiveness of corrective or preventive actions.
How the organization goes about identifying actual or potential nonconformities is up to it to determine. From the standpoint of registration auditors, it would seem that they would want to see a specific procedure requiring members of the organization to conduct some kind of periodic checklist driven, walk-through inspection for nonconformities. In addition, the procedure should allow for submission of nonconformities by any member of the organization. Actual nonconformities are usually fairly evident and relatively easy to investigate because there is a tangible occurrence with which to deal. The organization should also want to evaluate minor instances of nonconformity that, while not significant in and of themselves, if they occurred under different circumstances, could lead to a significant deviation from the EMS. Such “near misses” could be identified by the occurrence of a sudden, unexpected event, a failure to achieve an objective or target, or a deviation from the Environmental Policy.Potential nonconformities are more difficult to identify and correct. Here, application of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis would be appropriate for organizations having that capability.
When investigating nonconformities, organizations should focus on identifying underlying root causes, not just the immediate manifestation of the problem. If a chemical storage drum leaks, the organization should take action, first, to mitigate the damage and, then, to determine why the leak occurred; e.g., improper or negligent handling, mechanical failure, or lack of a leak detection system. Corrective or preventive actions should then focus on eliminating the cause through training, communication of procedures, use of leak-resistant drums, or installation of a leak detection system.
Other ISO 14001 sections, principally Emergency Preparedness and Response, Internal Audit, and Management Review, are tools that the organization implements in order to help identify instances of actual or potential nonconformity. The underlying principle of these sections is that the identification of nonconformities should be made by the organization through diligent application of these tools, not from the occurrence of an environmental event, a customer or community complaint, or investigation by a regulatory authority. While §4.5.3 does not specifically mention disciplinary action, in many cases disciplinary action or the threat of disciplinary action is appropriate to prevention of future nonconformities. Many organizations have written codes of conduct that give employees notice that deviations from the codes will not be tolerated and that prescribed penalties can result for infractions. These codes can be expanded to include penalties for deviations from the EMS. If so, penalties should be commensurate with the violation itself and should acknowledge the nature of the environmental damage, the degree of negligence, prior conduct, and the forthrightness of the employee being disciplined. Any such code and its remedies should be administered fairly and consistently and should have as its objective correction and prevention of EMS nonconformities, not punishment of employees.Finally, identification, investigation, and correction of nonconformities leads to the need to revise documented procedures.
How the organization goes about identifying actual or potential nonconformities is up to it to determine. From the standpoint of registration auditors, it would seem that they would want to see a specific procedure requiring members of the organization to conduct some kind of periodic checklist driven, walk-through inspection for nonconformities. In addition, the procedure should allow for submission of nonconformities by any member of the organization. Actual nonconformities are usually fairly evident and relatively easy to investigate because there is a tangible occurrence with which to deal. The organization should also want to evaluate minor instances of nonconformity that, while not significant in and of themselves, if they occurred under different circumstances, could lead to a significant deviation from the EMS. Such “near misses” could be identified by the occurrence of a sudden, unexpected event, a failure to achieve an objective or target, or a deviation from the Environmental Policy.Potential nonconformities are more difficult to identify and correct. Here, application of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis would be appropriate for organizations having that capability.
When investigating nonconformities, organizations should focus on identifying underlying root causes, not just the immediate manifestation of the problem. If a chemical storage drum leaks, the organization should take action, first, to mitigate the damage and, then, to determine why the leak occurred; e.g., improper or negligent handling, mechanical failure, or lack of a leak detection system. Corrective or preventive actions should then focus on eliminating the cause through training, communication of procedures, use of leak-resistant drums, or installation of a leak detection system.
Other ISO 14001 sections, principally Emergency Preparedness and Response, Internal Audit, and Management Review, are tools that the organization implements in order to help identify instances of actual or potential nonconformity. The underlying principle of these sections is that the identification of nonconformities should be made by the organization through diligent application of these tools, not from the occurrence of an environmental event, a customer or community complaint, or investigation by a regulatory authority. While §4.5.3 does not specifically mention disciplinary action, in many cases disciplinary action or the threat of disciplinary action is appropriate to prevention of future nonconformities. Many organizations have written codes of conduct that give employees notice that deviations from the codes will not be tolerated and that prescribed penalties can result for infractions. These codes can be expanded to include penalties for deviations from the EMS. If so, penalties should be commensurate with the violation itself and should acknowledge the nature of the environmental damage, the degree of negligence, prior conduct, and the forthrightness of the employee being disciplined. Any such code and its remedies should be administered fairly and consistently and should have as its objective correction and prevention of EMS nonconformities, not punishment of employees.Finally, identification, investigation, and correction of nonconformities leads to the need to revise documented procedures.
Evaluation Of Compliance Of ISO 14001 EMS
The requirement to establish a procedure for periodically evaluating compliance with applicable legal and other requirements falls short of specifically requiring regulatory compliance audits but, in fact, a system of regular regulatory compliance audits may be the most practical means for meeting this requirement of the standard. In the U.S., determination of whether to conduct a compliance audit will be governed in part by the particular jurisdiction’s approach to allowing a legal privilege for the self-assessment audit.
Evaluation vs. Audit – The difference between an evaluation and audit can only be determined by looking outside of ISO 14001. Consulting a dictionary reveals that an evaluation involves a determination of value or worth and that an audit is an examination of accounts done by persons appointed for the purpose. A better definition `is the more specific ISO 19011:2002, Guidelines for Quality and/or Environmental Management Systems Auditing, which defines an audit as a “systematic, independent, and documented process for obtaining audit evidence and evaluating it objectively to determine the extent to which the audit criteria are fulfilled.” Many organizations do not have a system for evaluating regulatory compliance other than their own records and the inspections of regulatory officials. This lack of a verification system can be a risky way to operate. Reports of enforcement actions and consent agreements show that many organizations are blindsided by rogue employees who violate rules and falsify documents to cover up environmental misdeeds. Although ISO 14001 does not prescribe a specific approach to evaluation of regulatory compliance, organizations should consider methods for going beyond verification of records by collecting and evaluating physical evidence.
Evaluation vs. Audit – The difference between an evaluation and audit can only be determined by looking outside of ISO 14001. Consulting a dictionary reveals that an evaluation involves a determination of value or worth and that an audit is an examination of accounts done by persons appointed for the purpose. A better definition `is the more specific ISO 19011:2002, Guidelines for Quality and/or Environmental Management Systems Auditing, which defines an audit as a “systematic, independent, and documented process for obtaining audit evidence and evaluating it objectively to determine the extent to which the audit criteria are fulfilled.” Many organizations do not have a system for evaluating regulatory compliance other than their own records and the inspections of regulatory officials. This lack of a verification system can be a risky way to operate. Reports of enforcement actions and consent agreements show that many organizations are blindsided by rogue employees who violate rules and falsify documents to cover up environmental misdeeds. Although ISO 14001 does not prescribe a specific approach to evaluation of regulatory compliance, organizations should consider methods for going beyond verification of records by collecting and evaluating physical evidence.
ISO 9001 – Compatibility with other management systems
ISO 9001 – Compatibility with other management systems
ISO 9001 and ISO 9004 are quality management system standards which have been designed to complement each other, but can also be used independently.ISO 9001 specifies requirements for a quality management system that can be used for internal application by organizations, for certification, or for contractual purposes. It focuses on the effectiveness of the qualitymanagement system in meeting customer requirements.ISO 9004 gives guidance on a wider range of objectives of a quality management system than does ISO 9001, particularly for the continual improvement of an organizations overall performance and efficiency, as well as its effectiveness. ISO 9004 is recommended as a guide for organizations whose top management wishes to move beyond the requirements of ISO 9001, in pursuit of continual improvement of performance. However, it is not intended for certification or for contractual purposes.
During the development of this International Standard, due consideration was given to the provisions of ISO 14001:2004 to enhance the compatibility of the two standards for the benefit of the user community.This International Standard does not include requirements specific to other management systems, such as those particular to environmental management, occupational health and safety management, financialmanagement or risk management. However, this International Standard enables an organization to align or integrate its own quality management system with related management system requirements. It is possible foran organization to adapt its existing management system(s) in order to establish a quality management system that complies with the requirements of this International Standard.
ISO 9001 and ISO 9004 are quality management system standards which have been designed to complement each other, but can also be used independently.ISO 9001 specifies requirements for a quality management system that can be used for internal application by organizations, for certification, or for contractual purposes. It focuses on the effectiveness of the qualitymanagement system in meeting customer requirements.ISO 9004 gives guidance on a wider range of objectives of a quality management system than does ISO 9001, particularly for the continual improvement of an organizations overall performance and efficiency, as well as its effectiveness. ISO 9004 is recommended as a guide for organizations whose top management wishes to move beyond the requirements of ISO 9001, in pursuit of continual improvement of performance. However, it is not intended for certification or for contractual purposes.
During the development of this International Standard, due consideration was given to the provisions of ISO 14001:2004 to enhance the compatibility of the two standards for the benefit of the user community.This International Standard does not include requirements specific to other management systems, such as those particular to environmental management, occupational health and safety management, financialmanagement or risk management. However, this International Standard enables an organization to align or integrate its own quality management system with related management system requirements. It is possible foran organization to adapt its existing management system(s) in order to establish a quality management system that complies with the requirements of this International Standard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)