iso14000-digest Monday, August 17 1998 Volume 02 : Number 039
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 07:31:43 PDT
From: "Paulo Dantas"
Subject: Re: ISO 14000 and Forest Stewardship Council
Robert,
regarding your request for informations related to the FSC versus ISO
approaches, I think that a good starting point would be the book 'The
Forest Certification Handbook' by Christopher Upton and Stephen Bass,
Earthscan, bearing in mind that it was writing having the FSC approach
as the focus.
In the following sites you can get some informations regarding forest
certification:
www.sfms.com
www.forestry.ubc.ca
www.efi.fi
www.nafi.com.au
www.efi.joesuu.fi
Best regards,
Paulo Dantas
>---------- Forwarded Message ----------
>
>From: Robert A. Bruce, 113243,3037
>TO: UK Forestry, INTERNET:ukforestry@visfor.globalnet.co.uk
>DATE: 05/07/98 23:11
>
>RE: Copy of: FSC v's ISO 14000
>
>I am currently researching on the following topics.
>
>Part one will focus on the comparative strengths and weaknesses,and/or
>benefits and problems of "signing on" to the ISO 14000 certification
>scheme as opposed to the FSC accreditation scheme. (Or vice versa)
>
>The second part of my dissertation is to quantify the resource
requirements
>and costs associated with implementing either of the two schemes in a
>small to medium sized company operating in the forestry or timber
industry.
>
>I would be most grateful to receive any suggestions or input on these
two
>areas, either personal comments, web sites to visit, people to approach
or
>publications and papers to consult.
>
>I can be contacted at Edinburgh University by e-mail
>
> or my personal e-mail
> <113243.3037@compuserve.com>
>
>Apologies in advance for any cross postings which may occur.
>
>Many thanks
>
>Robert A. Bruce
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 07:50:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bill Casti (System Admin)"
Subject: Non-member submission from [stephanie@iem.org.uk (Stephanie Harper, IEM)] (fwd)
Respond ONLY to the poster's address (below).
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 05:14:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: stephanie@iem.org.uk (Stephanie Harper, IEM)
To: iso14000@quality.org
Organization: IEM
Subject: Institute of Environmental Management
Response to Aleksander Mortensen's posting on an ISO Forum Listing:
It has been brought to my attention that a candidate undertaking the =
Institute of Environmental Management's Associate Assessment paper has =
approached the subscribers to this list for information relating to a =
number of areas of the assessment paper.
The assessment exersise is designed not only to "test" candidates =
knowledge and understanding of the subject but should also help to improve =
and expand it. This assessment paper is held in an "open - book" format, =
and candidates are encouraged to collect information from a wide variety =
of sources but NOT to directly solicit answers to specific assessment =
questions.
The Assessment is to be completed by the registered candidate alone.
Furthermore, it appears that the subscriber to this list has acted on =
behalf of a number of candidates. This acts against both the regulation =
of and ethos of the assessment and we will be raising this issue with the =
candidates concerned.
Should any of you have any queries regarding professional development =
within the Institute of Environmental Management, please do not hesitate =
to contact me at .
Yours, Stephanie Harper
Standards and Training
Institute of Environmental Management
63 Northumberland Street
Edinburgh EH3 6JQ
Internet: http://www.iem.org.uk
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 21:59:12 +0200
From: "Dawes, Simon"
Subject: Aspects, impacts and the law
To the group,
Recently, the interrelationships between aspects, impacts, significance
and legislative requirements was discussed for a short time. While the
discussion was interesting and informative, it was conducted in a
isolation from a possible situation, and so it was difficult to relate
the concepts of different individuals against a common base.
I would like to suggest that the brief scenario presented below is used
as the basis for continuing the discussion, if there are any subscribers
who still wish to do so.
The Scenario
Stage 1
The organisation concerned has a poor understanding of environmental
issues. It operates a process that results in the discharge of a large
volume of waste process water into a settling pond. The pond discharges
into a wetland area, and is monitored visually for clarity and odour.
Except in times of exceptionally high rainfall, it is regarded as clear
and free of odour. No pollution control licenses are held.
Stage 2
The organisation decides to implement an ISO14001 EMS. As part of the
PER the potential need for a licence for the discharge is identified.
Discussions with the relevant authority indicate that a licence is
required, and that the discharge must be between a pH of 6.5 and 6.9. It
is currently between 7.0 and 7.3.
Stage 3
The relevant licence is obtained and an automatic dosing plant installed
to control the pH of the discharge from the settling pond. This enables
pH before and after treatment, discharge volume and flow rates together
with chemical usage to be continually monitored as part of the
organisation's comprehensive Environmental Management Information
System.
Stage 4
Pollution prevention considerations lead the organisation to consider
the reuse of process water by treating its process water to a condition
suitable for reuse. Their increased knowledge of EMS results in the
organisation performing a full and detailed assessment of aspects and
impacts and resultant changes from the reuse of process water. They
discover that water balance in the wetland is such that without the
process water discharge the wetlands will largely dry up, and so the
wetland could be regarded as "artificial". As a further complication, a
species of migratory waterbird is noted roosting in the wetlands.
Some questions to consider include:
1. In each stage, what are relevant aspects and impacts?
2. What are relevant objectives and targets?
3. If the organisation has a policy commitment to minimise the use of
resources, how does this affect the objectives and targets and later
actions of the organisation?
4. How is the interrelationship between legislative compliance and
significant aspects to be managed?
Please note, this scenario is purely for discussion purposes, and does
not relate to any particular organisation.
Also, could you please let me know if you have any constructive
criticisms for modifying or improving the scenario.
Regards
Simon Dawes
MS Coordinator
DNV Certification
Ph +61 2 9900 9537
Fx +61 2 9929 8792
Mb +61 4 1820 0513
email
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 1998 22:06:21 +0200
From: "Dawes, Simon"
Subject: Aspects, impacts, significance and the law
To the group,
Recently, the interrelationships between aspects, impacts, significance
and legislative requirements was discussed for a short time. While the
discussion was interesting and informative, it was conducted in a
isolation from a possible situation, and so it was difficult to relate
the concepts of different individuals against a common base.
I would like to suggest that the brief scenario presented below is used
as the basis for continuing the discussion, if there are any subscribers
who still wish to do so.
The Scenario
Stage 1
The organisation concerned has a poor understanding of environmental
issues. It operates a process that results in the discharge of a large
volume of waste process water into a settling pond. The pond discharges
into a wetland area, and is monitored visually for clarity and odour.
Except in times of exceptionally high rainfall, it is regarded as clear
and free of odour. No pollution control licenses are held.
Stage 2
The organisation decides to implement an ISO14001 EMS. As part of the
PER the potential need for a licence for the discharge is identified.
Discussions with the relevant authority indicate that a licence is
required, and that the discharge must be between a pH of 6.5 and 6.9. It
is currently between 7.0 and 7.3.
Stage 3
The relevant licence is obtained and an automatic dosing plant installed
to control the pH of the discharge from the settling pond. This enables
pH before and after treatment, discharge volume and flow rates together
with chemical usage to be continually monitored as part of the
organisation's comprehensive Environmental Management Information
System.
Stage 4
Pollution prevention considerations lead the organisation to consider
the reuse of process water by treating its process water to a condition
suitable for reuse. Their increased knowledge of EMS results in the
organisation performing a full and detailed assessment of aspects and
impacts and resultant changes from the reuse of process water. They
discover that water balance in the wetland is such that without the
process water discharge the wetlands will largely dry up, and so the
wetland could be regarded as "artificial". As a further complication, a
species of migratory waterbird is noted roosting in the wetlands.
Some questions to consider include:
1. In each stage, what are relevant aspects and impacts?
2. What are relevant objectives and targets?
3. If the organisation has a policy commitment to minimise the use of
resources, how does this affect the objectives and targets and later
actions of the organisation?
4. How is the interrelationship between legislative compliance and
significant aspects to be managed?
Please note, this scenario is purely for discussion purposes, and does
not relate to any particular organisation.
Also, could you please let me know if you have any constructive
criticisms for modifying or improving the scenario.
Regards
Simon Dawes
MS Coordinator
DNV Certification
Ph +61 2 9900 9537
Fx +61 2 9929 8792
Mb +61 4 1820 0513
email
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 1998 16:30:07 -0400
From: Jean-Pierre Kiekens
Subject: Re: ISO 14000 and Forest Stewardship Council
This is an article from Environmental News Network on forest certification
called "Sustainable forest certification struggles":
http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/1998/07/073198/fsc27.asp
Three quotes from that article:
- - "The FSC is the only reputable, credible process out there.", by Matt
Freeman-Gleason, from the Environmental Home Center in Seattle, Washington.
- - "If one wants to use a certification tool, the Forest Stewardship Council
is the best program out there." by Bruce Cabarle, Director for Global
Forestry at WWF-US.
- - the FSC is a young, but a growing organization, "with a lot of experience
and perspective" by Stacy Brown, from the FSC Marketing Department in the
United States.
Wondering what the ISO marketing department has to say in reply...
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:35:37 +0200
From: Lennart Piper
Subject: ISO/DIS 14031 and Environmental Performance Assessment
Dear Colleagues,
I am interested in your views on Environmental Performance Assessment and the possibility to add
text to ISO/DIS 14031 clause 4.2.3. If you go to www.lennart.piper.net and click on
Environmental Performance Assessment you will find information about two alternatives.
I have received many positive reactions on E-mail in this matter from people participating in the ISO/TC 207/SC4-work. This is an important issue because of the upcoming vote to say yes or no (with or without comments) to the ISO/DIS 14031before August 19
th 1998.
Best Regards,
Lennart Piper
Swedish Industry Association
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 12:32:20 +0200
From: "Ross Campbell"
Subject: Using environmental economics in EM
Hi
I am researching the potential and existing use of environmental economics
techniques (the valuation of an environmental resource, or environmental
impact, for example) in environmental management inside an organization.
I am interested in making environmental management more understandable to
business people, at all levels in an organization. One way to do this is by
translating environmental impacts into money costs (or gains) to the
organization, perhaps within the context of an ISO 14001 system.
While environmental valuation techniques are quite widely known and
applied, in, for example environmental impact assessments for new projects,
I haven't heard of anyone using similar approaches inside an organisation
for day-to-day environmental management.
Does anyone on the list have any ideas or information about this, or
experience in applying this kind of approach in practice? Is there any
literature that addresses it?
Best wishes
Ross Campbell
Iscor Steel
South Africa
rossc@hq.iscorltd.co.za
ph: +27 12 307 7273
fax: +21 12 307 7116
Reqired Legal Disclaimer:
The views expressed above are not necessarily those of Iscor Ltd.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1998 10:02:18 -0400
From: Reinaldo Ramirez
Subject: Re: Using environmental economics in EM
Ross Campbell wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> I am researching the potential and existing use of environmental economics
> techniques (the valuation of an environmental resource, or environmental
> impact, for example) in environmental management inside an organization.
>
> I am interested in making environmental management more understandable to
> business people, at all levels in an organization. One way to do this is by
> translating environmental impacts into money costs (or gains) to the
> organization, perhaps within the context of an ISO 14001 system.
>
> While environmental valuation techniques are quite widely known and
> applied, in, for example environmental impact assessments for new projects,
> I haven't heard of anyone using similar approaches inside an organisation
> for day-to-day environmental management.
>
> Does anyone on the list have any ideas or information about this, or
> experience in applying this kind of approach in practice? Is there any
> literature that addresses it?
>
> Best wishes
>
> Ross Campbell
> Iscor Steel
> South Africa
>
> rossc@hq.iscorltd.co.za
> ph: +27 12 307 7273
> fax: +21 12 307 7116
> Reqired Legal Disclaimer:
> The views expressed above are not necessarily those of Iscor Ltd.
There are some EPA publications at http://www.epa.gov. specially:
Environmental Cost Accounting for Chemical and Oil Companies: A
benchmarking Study, and in the book: Implementing ISO 14000 by Tom
Tibor and Ira Feldman, Irwin Professional Publishing. The McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc; 199. Chapter 27: Environmental Cost Accounting: An
Ideal Management Tool.
Reinaldo Ramirez
Caracas, Venezuela.
http://rrramirez.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 10:52:27 GMT-0300
From: "Macarena Ortega"
Subject: Re: Using environmental economics in EM
> From: "Ross Campbell"
> To: "iso14000 group"
> Subject: Using environmental economics in EM
> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 12:32:20 +0200
> Hi
>
> I am researching the potential and existing use of environmental economics
> techniques (the valuation of an environmental resource, or environmental
> impact, for example) in environmental management inside an organization.
>
> I am interested in making environmental management more understandable to
> business people, at all levels in an organization. One way to do this is by
> translating environmental impacts into money costs (or gains) to the
> organization, perhaps within the context of an ISO 14001 system.
>
> While environmental valuation techniques are quite widely known and
> applied, in, for example environmental impact assessments for new projects,
> I haven't heard of anyone using similar approaches inside an organisation
> for day-to-day environmental management.
>
> Does anyone on the list have any ideas or information about this, or
> experience in applying this kind of approach in practice? Is there any
> literature that addresses it?
>
> Best wishes
>
> Ross Campbell
> Iscor Steel
> South Africa
>
> rossc@hq.iscorltd.co.za
> ph: +27 12 307 7273
> fax: +21 12 307 7116
> Reqired Legal Disclaimer:
> The views expressed above are not necessarily those of Iscor Ltd.
>
Ross,
we are developing a system to implement EMS in aquaculture and we are
using a bioeconomic model to show to the companies the situation with
EMS and without EMS in terms of increasing the production in
kg/dollar. We thougth that to do environment in this country you must
start with a productive point of view, what can do for a company to
do environmental management for increase the production or to reduce
their cost.
I hope this helps to you
Macarena Ortega
**************************************************
Macarena Ortega
e-mail: mortega@fundch.cl
*************************************************
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 13:59:33 +0200
From: Lennart Piper
Subject: ISO/DIS 14031 and Environmental Performance Assessment
Dear Lennart
Thanks for your response, we do not seem to be too far apart. BPEO Best Practice Environmental Option is a UK Integrated Polution Control term that really relates to BATNEEC but is less stringent and a more common sense and practicable application of curr
ent thinking and technology. It provides a methodolgy for getting a practical response.
Try and get hold of a copy of a summary entitled "BPEO Assessments for IPC-Guidance for Operators of IPC Processes" published in 1996 by the then IPC now Environment Agency in the UK. Contact details are The Environment Agency Fax 44 1454 624409.
Hope this helps.
Regards
Stan Rodgers
Lennart Piper wrote:
> Dear Stan
>
> Thank you for your quick response. I think the situation to day has changed because of more experience how to handle environmental aspects. I have been involved in the TC 207 work and ISO/SAGE from the start and I remember the proposal in SC2. As you ma
y know ISO/DIS 14031 can be used by organisations having an EMS or not. This means that an Environmental Review can be made in accordance to ISO/DIS 14031. But in my opinion we do not have enough guidance (it is here but not agreed on an international bas
is) how to assess environmental performance information. I think your suggestion for an IER (environmental review?) guide for Korea is very close to what Sweden proposed to SC4 in San Francisco. It seems to be a lot of terms used that is very close to eac
h other that needs to get into the standardisation process. So what your are saying is in line with my thoughts but it is hard to find the appropriate SC. In my opinion SC4 is the one. SC1 can be an alternative because of the
> importance of how to handle environmental aspects. BPEO means what?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Lennart Piper
>
>
> Dear Lennart
>
> Some thoughts for your consideration. Firstly in my experience it is
> very difficult to gets any changes to a DIS and personally I would
> sooner have the document as it is than force it to go back through
> another CD process and be delayed any longer.
>
> Secondly I think the problem is larger than you think. I believe that
> there is a need for a document which provides guidance on the
> performance of an IER. I have seen some examples performed both here and
> in SE Asia where I operate as a consultant and generally they are very
> poor and certainly SMEs need such guidance. As one of the Australian
> delegates to 207/SC1(WG1&2) and SC2(WG1-3) between 1993-1996 we tried to
> get this up as a NWIP in about 1995/6 and meet with no success or
> support. If my memory is correct it came up as an SC2 item under related
> investigations. I do not see it as a SC4 matter if anything it should be
> an SC1 NWIP as they set the criteria for an IER.
>
> May I suggest that if you wish to proceed that you seek support for a
> NWIP at the Korean meeting for a IER guide with special emphasis on
> SME's. The text would be applicable to anybody and not only deal with
> assessing significant aspects but also BPEO with respect to setting
> objectives and targets.
>
> Good luck
>
> Stan Rodgers
> Principal Consultant
> AVTEQ Consulting Services
> P.O. Box 1718
> Geelong VIC 3220 Australia
> Ph. 61 3 52 61 4687
> Fax. 61 3 52 61 3578
> mail@avteq.com.au
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 12:25:04 -0400
From: Jean-Pierre Kiekens
Subject: Re: ISO 14000 and Forest Stewardship Council
This article "FSC certifies 10 million hectares of forests -- so what?"
http://www.enn.com/features/1998/08/080598/kiekens05rev.asp
was published today over the Environmental News Network, as a follow up to
their recent story "Sustainable forest certification struggles".
I would welcome comments on the article.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 08:12:15
From: "Jup van 't Veld"
Subject: Re: Using environmental economics in EM
Hi Ross,
A university institute in Amsterdam (NL), the "Wetenschappelijk instituut
voor milieumanagement WIMM" (scientific institute for environmental
management) had done quite some work in this field. They can probably give
you more information and references.
wimm@james.fee.uva.nl
good luck!
jup van 't veld
amsterdam (nl)
At 12:32 PM 8/4/98 +0200, Ross Campbell wrote:
>Hi
>
>I am researching the potential and existing use of environmental economics
>techniques (the valuation of an environmental resource, or environmental
>impact, for example) in environmental management inside an organization.
[..]
>Does anyone on the list have any ideas or information about this, or
>experience in applying this kind of approach in practice? Is there any
>literature that addresses it?
>[..]
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 13:36:33 PDT
From: "Paulo Dantas"
Subject: Aspects, impacts, significance and the law
Simon,
As in your fictitious organisation the scenario is constantly evolving,
in order to better express my view- point, I will consider each stage as
a "distinct" organisation. Lets pretend that, as a consultant, you went
to four different organisations and were faced with four different
situations:
Organisation 1 - they have an activity within their process (operation
x) which has an aspect (discharge of wastewater) which by its turn has
an associated impact (alteration of water's chemical and physical
characteristics). Lets again pretend that they aren't aware of any legal
requirement (inadmissible, but...) regarding this issue. If this aspect
is significant or not, it depends of their methodology to determine
aspect's significance. Will it be an objective and target? Depends on
the ranking of the impact's significance index (if applicable, i.e., if
the aspect was first considered significant).
Organisation 2 - same situation, however they are aware of legal
requirements. The aspect goes straight to have its impact evaluated,
i.e., its significance's level determined. Objective and targets?
Probably yes, depends of the ranking of the impact among the others
which the company certainly has. One objective could be to control the
pH of its waste, and a target could be to install an automatic dosing
planting within 12 months.
Organisation 3 - they are also aware of legal requirements, thus the
aspect has to have its associated impact evaluated. Depending on their
methodology, the impact's significance index will probably be placed
down in the ranking, not entailing an objective and target, as the
situation is under control.
Organisation 4 - the situation is now different, as they have a
different aspect to consider: water consumption, which has three
associated impacts:
Impact 1 - compromise of the level of a renewable natural resource
(water);
Impact 2 - compromise of an ecosystem's flora (wetland drying up); and
Impact 3 - compromise of an ecosystem's fauna (migratory waterbird)
The situation now entails a much more detailed analysis, taking into
account a wide range of considerations (legal requirements, permits,
interested parties views, organisation's strategy and environmental
policy, existence of technological alternatives, cost and benefits
analysis, etc) what, I believe, is out of the scope of this discussion.
However, the procedure is the same: as a regulated aspects, it has to
have its associated impacts evaluated, placed in a ranking, and
depending of its position, be prioritised and have actions upon it
considered as an objective and target.
I hope I haven't made things worse and added some more confusion to an
already blurred scenario.
Paulo Dantas
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 09:14:01 +-200
From: Paul Reed
Subject: Hospitals
Anyone aware of good quality published info on ISO 14001 or EMAS in hospitals ?
Paul Reed
RCC
Norway
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 1998 23:25:16 -0400
From: Diana Baldi
Subject: airline environmental policies
Request to group,
I am working with a client that serves the airline industry and they are
interested in reading the environmental policies of their customers. In
searching the web under the names of airlines, I find only information
about traveling on their planes. Does anyone have access or leads to help
me locate policies of airlines for them?
I've tried several web sites that link to environmental information but
located only British Airlines.
Any help is appreciated.
Diana Baldi
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 1998 13:13:26 +0100
From: "Peter Matthews"
Subject: business considerations and significant impacts
Dear Subscribers,
I recently attended an Institute of Environmental Management
(www.iem.org.uk) workshop on the implementation of ISO 14001 here in
Edinburgh (Scotland).
Part of the discussion related to business considerations and environmental
aspects. A representative of LRQA (an accredited certifier of ISO 14001)
suggested that a business consderation such as cost could affect the
*priority* given to a significant environmental impact. For example, it may
be possible to postpone the purchase of abatement equipment (to deal with a
significant impact) in certain circumstances, on grounds of cost, until some
time in the future. This approach seems perfectly reasonable to me.
After the workshop I re-read the ISO 14004 guidance document. This seems to
state that business considerations such as cost can be used to *evaluate*
the significance of an environmental impact (rather than just affecting the
priority given to previously identified significant impacts). This seems
less logical to me.
Does anyone have any views on this? (if it makes sense!)
Regards, Pete Matthews (Consultant and postgrad student at Aberystwyth
University) E-mail: pete@p-matthews.prestel.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Aug 1998 15:54:39 +0200
From: Lennart Piper
Subject: New discussion group on Environmental Performance Assessment and ISO/DIS 14031
Dear Colleagues,
If you are interested in Environmental Performance Assessment and ISO/DIS 14031
you can participate in our new discussion group. To subscribe click or send,
mailto:iso14031epa-reguest@md.gen.com
and write the word subscribe in the body text, not on the subject line.
For more information about Environmental Performance Assessment
and ISO/DIS 14031 go to the web page http://iso14031.net/epa/epa.htm
(This free administrative service is provided by GEN because E-mail sponsors support it.
Every message that is sent to the list may contain a short sponsor message.
To unsubscribe you have to send a new E-mail and write the word unsubscribe in the body text.)
Kind Regards,
Lennart Piper
Swedish Industry Association
http://www.lennart.piper.net/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 01:08:14 +0200
From: Lennart Piper
Subject: New discussion group on Environmental Performance Assessment and ISO/DIS 14031
Dear Colleagues,
Previous mail had an error in the address, (g instead of q).
If you are interested in Environmental Performance Assessment and ISO/DIS 14031
you can participate in our new discussion group. To subscribe click or send,
mailto:iso14031epa-request@md.gen.com
and write the word subscribe in the body text, not on the subject line.
For more information about Environmental Performance Assessment
and ISO/DIS 14031 go to the web page http://iso14031.net/epa/epa.htm
(This free administrative service is provided by GEN because E-mail sponsors support it.
Every message that is sent to the list may contain a short sponsor message.
To unsubscribe you have to send a new E-mail and write the word unsubscribe in the body text.)
Kind Regards,
Lennart Piper
Swedish Industry Association
http://www.lennart.piper.net/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 21:57:24 +0200
From: "Pepper, John"
Subject: RE: business considerations and significant impacts
Dear Peter
In brief, I would agree with LRQA. However, economic factors could
play a role in certain, limited cases.
When it comes to certification, the certification bodies are basically
looking to see how the significant aspects are managed by the
organisation. This will be through a combination of
objectives/targets, investigation and ongoing operational control.
What you do about a significant aspect is up to the implementing
organisation. In this case, I would agree with LRQA - the fact that
the aspect is going to cost a fortune to fix is not something that
should be used to decide whether its significant or not, but it would
have an important role in deciding your objectives.
I agree with you that the 14004 comments on the "difficulty of
changing the impact" and the "cost of changing the impact" as possible
criteria are, in my opinion, not logical at all. These criteria surely
have nothing to do with the scale and nature of the impact. At DNVQA
we have not seen economic criteria used in such a manner in any
certification to date.
Where economic factors could play a role are, I believe, with
resource-use based aspects. For example "We spend only 2% of our
procurement budget on substance X" or "Less than 5% of our energy
budget is spent on gas". In this case, cost could be a sensible way of
eliminating "trivial" issues. I have to add that I have never seen
this in the real world either.
Strangely, this topic also came up at a recent workshop I gave at the
ERP Eco Management and Auditing Conference held in Sheffield in July.
Some consultants in the audience were clear that economic grounds
could be used in evaluation, but had no actual examples to demonstrate
a logical approach. If anybody in the group has such examples, from a
14001 certified organisation, I would be very interested to learn of
them.
John Pepper
Lead EMS Auditor
Det Norske Veritas Quality Assurance Ltd
Palace House
3 Cathedral Street
London SE1 9DE
United Kingdom
Tel + 44 (0) 171 357 6080 (Main Switchboard)
(E-mail) john.pepper@dnv.com
- -----Original Message-----
From: Peter Matthews [SMTP:pete@p-matthews.prestel.co.uk]
Sent: Sunday, August 09, 1998 1:13 PM
To: iso14000@quality.org
Subject: business considerations and significant impacts
Dear Subscribers,
I recently attended an Institute of Environmental Management
(www.iem.org.uk) workshop on the implementation of ISO 14001 here in
Edinburgh (Scotland).
Part of the discussion related to business considerations and
environmental
aspects. A representative of LRQA (an accredited certifier of ISO
14001)
suggested that a business consderation such as cost could affect the
*priority* given to a significant environmental impact. For example,
it may
be possible to postpone the purchase of abatement equipment (to deal
with a
significant impact) in certain circumstances, on grounds of cost,
until some
time in the future. This approach seems perfectly reasonable to me.
After the workshop I re-read the ISO 14004 guidance document. This
seems to
state that business considerations such as cost can be used to
*evaluate*
the significance of an environmental impact (rather than just
affecting the
priority given to previously identified significant impacts). This
seems
less logical to me.
Does anyone have any views on this? (if it makes sense!)
Regards, Pete Matthews (Consultant and postgrad student at
Aberystwyth
University) E-mail: pete@p-matthews.prestel.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1998 18:57:34 -0500 (CDT)
From: Prachi Mehta
Subject: Effectiveness of ISO 14000 Implementation?
Hi,
I am a graduate student at the School of Public Health at the University
of Illinois at Chicago. I am doing a research project on the ISO 14000
standard and am trying to learn more about what the impact of standard
implementation has been on industry (i.e. economic, environmental, market
driven, etc.) From what I understand the Multi state Working Group Pilot
Projects are still in the priliminary stages of data collection. I was
wondering if any evaluations have been already done on ISO 14000 e.g.
maybe a pre-post study documenting the benifits of implementation.
What have industries learnt after implementing the ISO 14000 standard? How
does the standard actually translate into implementation? .....these are
some of the questions I am trying to answer.
Any tips/leads would really be appreciated.
Thanks,
Prachi Mehta
Department of Health Policy and Management
University of Illinois at Chicago
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 12:31:00 +0200
From: "Jup van 't Veld"
Subject: Re: Effectiveness of ISO 14000 Implementation?
At 18:57 14-08-1998 -0500, Prachi Mehta wrote:
[..] am trying to learn more about what the impact of standard
>implementation has been on industry [..] I was
>wondering if any evaluations have been already done on ISO 14000 e.g.
>maybe a pre-post study documenting the benifits of implementation.
>
Hi Prachi,
At the moment my organisation, a trade union, is working on a study on the
value of ISO14001 and EMAS from a workers' perspective. We are trying to
assess the effects of certification on the quality of environmental
management, the position of personnel and their reps (particularly works
councils and HSE-committees). I expect results somewhere this autumn. I'm
afraid the report will be in Dutch, but if it turns out to be interesting
I'm thinking about producing an english summary. In that case I will post
it to the list.
Preliminary results are mostly positive. To give an example: where we
exected many complaints about a growing bureaucratic circus (a common
criticism on ISO9000), in fact in several companies the certification had
led to a stream-lining of working and administrative procedures. Also, it
seems that many works councils' members are positive both on the
environmental results as on the opportunities offered to get involved in
the decision making process. Unfortunately we also found some possible
cases of window dressing practices.
Good luck with your research.
Jup van 't Veld
TU HSE officer
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 09:43:37 +0100
From: Matthias Gelber
Subject: Re: Effectiveness of ISO 14000 Implementation?
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------D8A0B2D2DECCF84915D8E846
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear Prachi
You might be interested in the results of a EU wide study which was
commissioned and funded by the European Commission and
co-funded by government administrations in Austria, Denmark, The
Netherlands, Sweden and the UK. The overall project aim was to
investigate current EMAS implementation practice across the EU and to
highlighting difference as a means of assisting the European Commission
in its current revision of the EMAS Regulation.
Although the study has an EMAS focuss, 47% of the sites interviewed were as
well certified to ISO 14001.
The study: "An Assessment of the
Implementation Status of Council Regulation (No 1836/93) Eco-management
and Audit Scheme (EMAS) in the European Union Member States (AIMS-EMAS)"
was managed and co-ordinated by Dr Ruth Hillary for Imperial College of
Science, Technology and Medicine's Centre for Environmental Technology
(ICCET), London in association with Vittorio Biondi, Institute for Energy
Sources, Environment
and Technology Economics (IEFE), Universita' Bocconi, Milan and myself. We
interviewed sites, EMAS verifyers, Accreditation bodies and the so called
competent bodies. You can download the results on the WEB site of the EMAS
help desk: http://www.emas.lu
Hope this is of interest,
Matthias Gelber
mgelber@ibm.net
Prachi Mehta wrote:
> Hi,
> I am a graduate student at the School of Public Health at the University
> of Illinois at Chicago. I am doing a research project on the ISO 14000
> standard and am trying to learn more about what the impact of standard
> implementation has been on industry (i.e. economic, environmental, market
> driven, etc.) From what I understand the Multi state Working Group Pilot
> Projects are still in the priliminary stages of data collection. I was
> wondering if any evaluations have been already done on ISO 14000 e.g.
> maybe a pre-post study documenting the benifits of implementation.
>
> What have industries learnt after implementing the ISO 14000 standard? How
> does the standard actually translate into implementation? .....these are
> some of the questions I am trying to answer.
>
> Any tips/leads would really be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Prachi Mehta
> Department of Health Policy and Management
> University of Illinois at Chicago
- --------------D8A0B2D2DECCF84915D8E846
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Matthias Gelber
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
begin: vcard
fn: Matthias Gelber
n: ;Matthias Gelber
org: 14000 & ONE Solutions
email;internet: mgelber@ibm.net
tel;work: +44(0)70000 14000
tel;fax: +44(0)70000 14001
x-mozilla-cpt: ;0
x-mozilla-html: FALSE
version: 2.1
end: vcard
- --------------D8A0B2D2DECCF84915D8E846--
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 16:43:14 +0200
From: Folkert.vanderMolen@MI.dhv.nl
Subject: Corporate Environmental Reporting and Accounting
Dear list members,
Everyone who is interested in corporate environmental reporting (one of the
requirements of ISO14000) please have a look at The International Corporate
Environmental Reporting Site: http://home.wxs.nl/~folmolen/mjv.htm
The site does also cover items as environmental performance evaluation,
benchmarking and accounting.
You find news, a full webdirectory to all relevant articles, guidelines,
research papers, a Gallery of Awards and more. Subscribe to the mailing list
on the site will keep you informed about new additions to the site.
Hope to welcome you on the site,
Folkert T. van der Molen
DHV Environment & Infrastructure BV
PO Box 1076
3800 BB AMERSFOORT
the Netherlands
http://www.dhv.com
Tel. +31 33 4682744
Fax. +31 33 4682801
E-mail: folkert.vanderMolen@mi.dhv.nl
Please visit the central point on Internet for Corporate Environmental
Reporting: http://home.wxs.nl/~folmolen/mjv.htm
------------------------------
End of iso14000-digest V2 #39
*****************************