iso14000-digest Thursday, July 10 1997 Volume 02 : Number 007
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 07:21:00 -0400
From: Stan Carson
Subject: Re: BOUNCE iso14000@quality.org: Non-member submission from ["Chris E. Erker" ] (fwd)
Try this, Chris.
http://www.nortel.com/cool/environ/habitat.html
At 07:59 PM 24/06/1997 -0400, you wrote:
>
>NOTE: Respond *both* to the poster's address (see below the dotted line)
>and to the list's posting address, OR as directed in the posting, but
>definitely NOT to me.
>
>Thanks.
>Bill
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:28:47 -0400 (EDT)
>From: "Chris E. Erker"
>To: iso14000@quality.org
>Subject: environmental procedures manual
>
>
>I am sprearheading an iso 14000-based environmental management
>program for a medium/large construction company. I have drafted an
>environmental policy manual and am now in the process of drafting and
>integrating into our existing project procedures guide (iso 9000-based)
>an environmental procedures manual.
>
>Does anyone know where I can find examples/samples (not simply
>guidence) of other company's environmental procedures guides (i.e., the
>middle tier of ISO 14000 documents)?
>
>Thank you! Sincerely, CEE@GREENSFELDER.COM
>
>
Stan Carson
Program Manager - Environmental
and Pollution Prevention
Lake Erie MEP, a Division of EISC
1700 N. Westwood Ave.
Toledo, Ohio 43607-1207
stan.carson@eisc.org
Voice: 419-534-3705
Fax: 419-531-8465
http://www.eisc.org
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 07:19:33 -0400
From: Stan Carson
Subject: Re: BOUNCE iso14000@quality.org: Non-member submission from ["Chris E. Erker" ] (fwd)
Try here Chris.
At 07:59 PM 24/06/1997 -0400, you wrote:
>
>NOTE: Respond *both* to the poster's address (see below the dotted line)
>and to the list's posting address, OR as directed in the posting, but
>definitely NOT to me.
>
>Thanks.
>Bill
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:28:47 -0400 (EDT)
>From: "Chris E. Erker"
>To: iso14000@quality.org
>Subject: environmental procedures manual
>
>
>I am sprearheading an iso 14000-based environmental management
>program for a medium/large construction company. I have drafted an
>environmental policy manual and am now in the process of drafting and
>integrating into our existing project procedures guide (iso 9000-based)
>an environmental procedures manual.
>
>Does anyone know where I can find examples/samples (not simply
>guidence) of other company's environmental procedures guides (i.e., the
>middle tier of ISO 14000 documents)?
>
>Thank you! Sincerely, CEE@GREENSFELDER.COM
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 10:03:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)"
Subject: BOUNCE iso14000@quality.org: Non-member submission from ["Sinisa M. Djordjevic" ] (fwd)
NOTE: Respond *both* to the poster's address (see below the dotted line)
and to the list's posting address, OR as directed in the posting, but
definitely NOT to me.
Remember that you have to be a subscriber to this list FROM THE EMAIL
ADDRESS AT WHICH YOU'RE SENDING YOUR MESSAGE TO THE LIST in order to have
your posting accepted. The system has no way of identifying
"jblow@aol.com" as being the same person as "joe_blow@mywork.address.com".
Please be realistic and subscribe to the list at the email address you'll
most often be using for reading and posting.
Thanks.
Bill
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 15:28:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Chris E. Erker"
To: iso14000@quality.org
Subject: environmental procedures manual
I am sprearheading an iso 14000-based environmental management
program for a medium/large construction company. I have drafted an
environmental policy manual and am now in the process of drafting and
integrating into our existing project procedures guide (iso 9000-based)
an environmental procedures manual.
Does anyone know where I can find examples/samples (not simply
guidence) of other company's environmental procedures guides (i.e., the
middle tier of ISO 14000 documents)?
Thank you! Sincerely, CEE@GREENSFELDER.COM
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
The document "Environmental Management Systems: An Implementation Guide
for Small and Medium-Sized Organizations "
Written by:
Philip J. Stapleton, Principal
Glover-Stapleton Associates, Inc.
Anita M. Cooney, Project Manager
NSF International
William M. Hix Jr., Intern
NSF International
can be downloaded from the following EPA page:
http://www.epa.gov/OWM/wm046200.htm
and contains the following items in Appendix D - Tool Kit (the relevant
pages are also indicated)
Sample Environmental Policies 92
Sample Process Flow Chart 96
Descriptions of Environmental Aspect Identification Techniques 98
Sample Procedure: Environmental Aspects Identification 100
Resources for Tracking Environmental Laws and Regulations 104
Sample Procedure: Tracking Environmental Laws and Regulations 106
Worksheet: Setting Objectives and Targets 109
Sample Procedure: Setting Objectives and Targets 113
Sample Tool: Environmental Management Program 116
Sample Schedule for EMS Action Plan 118
Responsibility Matrix 120
Environmental Training Log 123
Sample Procedure: Internal Communications 125
Sample Procedure: Communications with External Parties 128
Sample Document Index 131
Outline of Sample EMS Manual, Other Documents 133
Sample Procedure: Document Control 135
Sample Procedure: Corrective Action (Includes Tracking Log) 139
Environmental Records Organizer 144
Sample Procedure: EMS Audits 148
Sample Procedure: Management Review 154
Hope that helps and best wishes,
Sinisa M. Djordjevic
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 00:41:06 +1000
From: Ric Morgan
Subject: environmental procedures manual
We ahve been developing a manual for a construction company in
Australia. But since we are consultants we always want our price :-) .
Contact me priavtely if you want to discuss the matter further.
Ric Morgan
Noel Arnold & Associates Pty Ltd.
2 Gale Street, Mortlake, NSW, 2137, AUSTRALIA
Ph: + 61 2 9743 1261
Fax: + 61 2 9743 1241
NAA is a privately owned Health Safety & Environmental Consultancy based
in Australia and servicing Australia and the Asia Pacific.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 13:10:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Marymcd1@aol.com
Subject: ISO 14000 Course Accreditation
Dear Members,
I am writing to get a sense of people's awareness/bias for course
accreditation. I am in the process of developing a course for use worldwide;
the course is about 70% written and we are targeting it for review in
September. My question is this: I would like to get IRCA accreditation
since I have clients in the UK, Canada, South America, Australia, and New
Zealand as well as the US; however, to get both this and RAB certification is
cost prohibitive. I want to sell the course here in the US also. Do you
think that an IRCA course will have the same cachet as a RAB course? Each
course must be customized to take care of the legislative portions of the
countries where the course is being taught so to a certain extent it is
'country-specific'; however, I also have seen the bias for RAB certified
courses on the 9000 side and know that some of the people making the decision
don't even know what it stands for; it's simply something they want their
course to have. Does this pattern look like it will be repeated in the 14000
arena?
Sincerely,
Mary F. McDonald
President and Principal Consultant
Individual Solution Options/Quality Services (ISO/QS)
http://members.aol.com/Marymcd1
Marymcd1@aol.com
512/282-0181
512/280-7175 FAX
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 15:03:22 -0400
From: Russ DeVilbiss
Subject: RE: ISO 14000 Course Accreditation
Mary,
I can give you my two cents. My experience tells me that your U.S. market will want accreditation that is expected/accepted by their U.S. clients, i.e., RAB. Expect your U.S. market to shrink considerably if you are not RAB certified.
Perception means more than actuality. Good Luck
Russ DeVilbiss
ISO 14000/EMS Product Manager
ERAtech Environmental, Inc.
rdevilbiss@eratech.com
800.848.4990 x126
937.859.8998 x126
(f) 937.859.9132
- -----Original Message-----
From: Marymcd1@aol.com [SMTP:Marymcd1@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 1997 1:11 PM
To: iso14000@quality.org
Subject: ISO 14000 Course Accreditation
Dear Members,
I am writing to get a sense of people's awareness/bias for course
accreditation. I am in the process of developing a course for use worldwide;
the course is about 70% written and we are targeting it for review in
September. My question is this: I would like to get IRCA accreditation
since I have clients in the UK, Canada, South America, Australia, and New
Zealand as well as the US; however, to get both this and RAB certification is
cost prohibitive. I want to sell the course here in the US also. Do you
think that an IRCA course will have the same cachet as a RAB course? Each
course must be customized to take care of the legislative portions of the
countries where the course is being taught so to a certain extent it is
'country-specific'; however, I also have seen the bias for RAB certified
courses on the 9000 side and know that some of the people making the decision
don't even know what it stands for; it's simply something they want their
course to have. Does this pattern look like it will be repeated in the 14000
arena?
Sincerely,
Mary F. McDonald
President and Principal Consultant
Individual Solution Options/Quality Services (ISO/QS)
http://members.aol.com/Marymcd1
Marymcd1@aol.com
512/282-0181
512/280-7175 FAX
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 01:30:53 +0100
From: "GlobalStand"
Subject: Re: Complimentary ISO 14000 Audits
A great opportunity to receive an almost-complimentaty gap analyses by
highly qualified ISO 14000 auditors.
In an attempt to achieve the required number of audit days for higher
levels of status with the RAB, a group of qualified auditors has come
forward offering their services "gratis". All expenses must be paid by the
companies requesting the almost-complimentary ISO 14000 PreAssessment
audits. These audits will be lead by competent, qualified Lead Auditors or
Lead Auditors to be. All members of the team will be screened by our
company for qualification requirements (The group took the Lead Auditor
Course together where they established a good working relationship.)
If interested please contact us directly to discuss logistics and details
(805) 967-9958.
Eliana (Ellie) Borges, QSLA, RAB# QO 4418
GlobalStand Corporation
Int'l Systems Implementation Experts
(English/Spanish/Portuguese)
http://www.GlobalStand.com
"Profit is the result and reward of
doing things right! And doing the right
things! Therein lies the balance."
(Randy Berger, Comdial Corporation)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:54:23 -0400
From: "MJ \"Mark\" Saarelainen"
Subject: EMS Manual
Dear Colleague
you can find one version of my EMS manual in the following web site:
http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/Park/1114/mjsus.htm
Best regards,
Mark
- --------------------------------------
M J 'Mark' Saarelainen
P.O.Box 1672, Roswell, GA 30077, USA
Tel: USA-(770)-998-7855
FAX: USA-(770)-232-1425
Email: mjsus@ix.netcom.com
To subscribe to the complimentary newsletters,
Quality Systems Behavior Newsletter and Global
Strategic Systems Newsletter, please, send your
e-mail to mjsus@ix.netcom.com and write in the
subject line: "Subscription to Newsletter(s)" .
Visit also the following web site:
http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/Park/1114/mjsus.htm
DISCLAIMER:
No thought written in this message is a statement
of any organization by which I am employed or for
which I work.
- -------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 11:21:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)"
Subject: Re: BOUNCE iso14000@quality.org: Non-member submission from ["Chris E. Erker"... (fwd)
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 06:49:35 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jmartis@aol.com
Subject: Re: BOUNCE iso14000@quality.org: Non-member submission from ["Chris E. Erker"...
ASQC offers a book "Implementing ISO14001" by Marilyn Block. I have found
this to be a great resource. ASQC Quality Press @ 800-248-1946
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 22:25:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)"
Subject: BOUNCE iso14000@quality.org: Non-member submission from [Jim Haklik ] (fwd)
NOTE: Respond *both* to the poster's address (see below the dotted line)
and to the list's posting address, OR as directed in the posting, but
definitely NOT to me.
Remember that you have to be a subscriber to this list FROM THE EMAIL
ADDRESS AT WHICH YOU'RE SENDING YOUR MESSAGE TO THE LIST in order to have
your posting accepted. The system has no way of identifying
"jblow@aol.com" as being the same person as "joe_blow@mywork.address.com".
Please be realistic and subscribe to the list at the email address you'll
most often be using for reading and posting.
Thanks.
Bill
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 19:46:15 -0400 (EDT)
To: iso14000@cyberq.quality.org
From: Jim Haklik
I have recently begun surveying CEOs of companies with reputations for their
environmental management systems to gain inforamtion for my web site
(www.trst.com). I am asking them about the benefits their companies have
received from environmental managment. Of those who have responded, Baxter
International has been the most complete. 3M and Xerox very little, and
Ford and Digital, nothing. My survey continues and I am hopeful that other
major companies will have better information. I am surprsed that companies
are not managing their costs and benefits from env. mgt. as they do other
investments. If any visitors to this list can share experiences I would
appreciate hearing from them.
I have reported my findings to-date on my site and hope to continue growing
this section as a reference. I am also preparing an article about my efforts
and results.
Jim Haklik
Transformation Strategies
haklik@trst.com
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 1997 10:16:19 +0930 (CST)
From: PAUL & LENE-MARIT
Subject: 14001 & public participation
Several of my contacts in govt. regulatory authorities and consultancy firms
have expressed the opinion that ISO 14001 could be improved through more
public accountability / participation (along the lines of EMAS or even EIA
procedures). Does anyone agree and does anyone know of any companies doing
this ?
Paul Reed
Mawson Centre for Environmental Studies
University of Adelaide
Australia
lenepaul@camtech.net.au
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 22:08:49 +1000
From: Ric Morgan
Subject: Re: 14001 & public participation
I'm not sure of whether the ISO 14000 stuff would be improved by more
public accountability. I think there is a role for greater
accountability with the EMAS stuff but that this is not necessarily
providing better environmental management just better public reporting.
Although public profile is sometimes a driver for those seeking to
manage in the manner of the iso 14000 system it is not the only driver
and not even always a driver. To my mind one of the benefits of the
14000 system is that it enable a styles of managing which must lead to
improving management of environmental issues, (or the system doesn't
really meet the 14000 requirements). Indeed we see that this style can
work for a range of issues and especially in OH&S.
The 14000 does not require the public consultation and participation but
the system that is adopted may require such consultation and in cases
where the significant impacts are on the public is some specific way
then this is likely to be important. As companies get more
sophisticated with their EMS's it is likely that some of this info and
consultant will become essential especially where the image is important
or where dealing with the impact requires dealing with the public.
Acceptance of a system for managing is very important if the system
requires that companies provide more info than they are comfortable or
requires the impute of an outraged or NIMBY public then the acceptance
may be less with the consequence of less good environmental management.
- --
Ric Morgan
Noel Arnold & Associates Pty Ltd
2 Gale Street, MORTLAKE NSW 2137, AUSTRALIA
Ph: + 61 2 9743 1261 Fax: + 61 2 9743 1241
Noel Arnold & Associates Pty Ltd (http://www.ozemail.com.au/~naanet/)are
a privately owned Occupational Health, Safety and Environmental
Consultancy. But the thoughts, words and errors are Ric Morgan's and
represents his opinions.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 09:44:29 +0930 (CST)
From: PAUL & LENE-MARIT
Subject: Re: 14001 & public participation
Ric,
I agree with your point that a greater degree of public consultation and
disclosure may in fact prove to be a disincentive to some organizations.
However it appears that several government authorities may be considering
using ISO 14001 as a regulatory tool and will expect greater disclosure and
participation than is currently required. As a result it could be that
increased regulatory flexibility (some degree of self regulation even)
offers significant benefits to ISO 14001 certified companies and thus proves
a big incentive for industry.
It is my understanding that ISO 14001 does loosely recommend public
consultation. The public would be included under the heading 'interested
parties' which can be any individual or group affected by the companies
activities, and their views should be considered when setting and reviewing
environmental objectives (ISO 14001 4.3.3).
Paul Reed
University of Adelaide
South Australia
lenepaul@camtech.net.au
At 10:08 PM 7/2/97 +1000, you wrote:
>I'm not sure of whether the ISO 14000 stuff would be improved by more
>public accountability. I think there is a role for greater
>accountability with the EMAS stuff but that this is not necessarily
>providing better environmental management just better public reporting.
>
>Although public profile is sometimes a driver for those seeking to
>manage in the manner of the iso 14000 system it is not the only driver
>and not even always a driver. To my mind one of the benefits of the
>14000 system is that it enable a styles of managing which must lead to
>improving management of environmental issues, (or the system doesn't
>really meet the 14000 requirements). Indeed we see that this style can
>work for a range of issues and especially in OH&S.
>
>The 14000 does not require the public consultation and participation but
>the system that is adopted may require such consultation and in cases
>where the significant impacts are on the public is some specific way
>then this is likely to be important. As companies get more
>sophisticated with their EMS's it is likely that some of this info and
>consultant will become essential especially where the image is important
>or where dealing with the impact requires dealing with the public.
>
>Acceptance of a system for managing is very important if the system
>requires that companies provide more info than they are comfortable or
>requires the impute of an outraged or NIMBY public then the acceptance
>may be less with the consequence of less good environmental management.
>
>--
>Ric Morgan
>Noel Arnold & Associates Pty Ltd
>2 Gale Street, MORTLAKE NSW 2137, AUSTRALIA
>Ph: + 61 2 9743 1261 Fax: + 61 2 9743 1241
>
>Noel Arnold & Associates Pty Ltd (http://www.ozemail.com.au/~naanet/)are
>a privately owned Occupational Health, Safety and Environmental
>Consultancy. But the thoughts, words and errors are Ric Morgan's and
>represents his opinions.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 16:08:46 +0930 (CST)
From: Paul Reed
Subject: Numbers of certified organisations
Does anyone know of any up to date figures regarding numbers of ISO
14001 certified companies in the USA and UK ? Are there national registers
which one can access ?
Paul Reed
University of Adelaide
South Australia
preed@arts.adelaide.edu.au
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 12:46:59 -0400
From: Rona Fried
Subject: July SBN Journal is On-Line
Greetings!
The July issue of the Sustainable Business Network Journal is on-line at
http://www.envirolink.org/sbn
"We have undertaken a quest to become first sustainable, then restorative."
Ray Anderson, CEO, Interface.
To encourage networking and growth in the sustainable business community,
we'll soon be offering two new sections: Jobs and Business Opportunities.
Jobs:
For now, we'll be posting Job Listings, not resumes.
By posting your jobs on the SBN you will be attracting candidates with
knowledge and interest specifically in sustainable business. I invite you to
email your job listings to me.
Business Opportunities:
- -- Capital Needed
- -- Distributors and Agents
- -- Partnerships, Joint Ventures, Subcontracting Opportunities
- -- Marketing/promo collaboration
If you have a business opportunity that falls in these categories, please
email me the details.
And now, here's a selection from the July issue of the SBN Journal:
Briefs (selections)
<> Just What IS Sustainable Business?
<> We Knew We Couldn't Expect Much From Earth Summit II
<> Ray Anderson Appointed Co-Chair, President's Council
<> Renewable Energy Growing in the House
<> C&D Recycling Gets Boost From Old Army Buildings
<> Edmonton, Canada Gets Largest CoComposting Project
<> Bringing The Message of Certified Wood To Market
Features
<> Affordable by Design: Building an Eco-House on a Tight Budget is No
Longer an Impossible Dream
FROM E Magazine
<> Working Assets' Green Energy Program Feels the Heat
FROM Business Ethics
<> New Life For Old Carpets
FROM Environmental Building News
<> Natural Food Merchandiser's Annual Market Overview
FROM Natural Foods Merchandiser
Also:
Business Activism
Social Investing
In The Spotlight
New Resources
Events
Unsubscribe info: You received this message because you visited the SBN
site and asked for notification/announcements or you have been referred to
us as an "interested party". If you don't want to receive these messages
please reply to this message, putting the word "unsubscribe" in the message.
Rona Fried, Ph.D.
Executive Editor, Sustainable Business Network Journal
http://www.envirolink.org/sbn
516-423-3277
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 13:50:49 -0400
From: Russ DeVilbiss
Subject: Compliance review and records
Clause 4.5.1 of ISO 14001 states, "The organization shall establish and maintain a documented procedure for periodically evaluating compliance with relevant environmental legislation and regulations."
As understood, organizations are concerned with disclosure isses with performing compliance audits. A common response I have heard is that the clause states the requirement of a documented procedure, but the review/audit itself does not have to be docume
nted.
However, reading through the standard for the umpteenth time, I noticed clause 4.5.3 in a new light. It states, "The organization shall establish and maintain procedures for the identification, maintenance and disposition of environmental records. These
records shall include training records and the results of _audits and reviews_" (emphasis mine).
My question is, How do registrars view the compliance evaluation in 4.5.1 with the record keeping requirement in 4.5.3. Should auditors be "writing up" organizations that are unwilling to show records of compliance audits?
As a bonus question, what is the connotative meaning of "disposition" used in clause 4.5.3 para. 1? Distribution? Disposal? Both?
Thanks for input.
Russ DeVilbiss
ISO 14000/EMS Product Manager
ERAtech Environmental, Inc.
rdevilbiss@eratech.com
800.848.4990 x126
937.859.8998 x126
(f) 937.859.9132
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 13:56:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)"
Subject: BOUNCE iso14000@quality.org: Non-member submission from ["heather weir" ] (fwd)
NOTE: Respond *both* to the poster's address (see below the dotted line)
and to the list's posting address, OR as directed in the posting, but
definitely NOT to me.
Remember that you have to be a subscriber to this list FROM THE EMAIL
ADDRESS AT WHICH YOU'RE SENDING YOUR MESSAGE TO THE LIST in order to have
your posting accepted. The system has no way of identifying
"jblow@aol.com" as being the same person as "joe_blow@mywork.address.com".
Please be realistic and subscribe to the list at the email address you'll
most often be using for reading and posting.
Thanks.
Bill
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 10:38:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: "heather weir"
To: iso14000@cyberq.quality.org
Subject: Computer companies gaining certification
Hi,
I read in a recent ISO14000 article about Apple computers acheiving
certification to ISO14000.
Does anyone know of any other computer companies who are certified or going for
certification at the moment?
Thanks
heather weir
- --
Heather Weir - Quality Manager
Silicon Graphics Mfg SA, Ch. des Rochettes 2, CH-2016, Cortaillod
Phone: 41-32 -843-3643 Fax: 843-3900 Voicemail: 3643
"Mediocrity is Habit Forming, Perfection Unattainable - Strive for Excellence!"
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 18:19:16 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Bill Casti, CQA (System Administrator)"
Subject: BOUNCE iso14000@quality.org: Non-member submission from [Francis Martin ] (fwd)
NOTE: Respond *both* to the poster's address (see below the dotted line)
and to the list's posting address, OR as directed in the posting, but
definitely NOT to me.
Thanks.
Bill
- ---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 15:20:13 -0400 (EDT)
To: iso14000@quality.org
From: Francis Martin
Subject: Free Environmental Glossary CD
FYI, I thought y'all might find this forwarded note of interest. Please
excuse any cross-postings. Fran
>An Environmental Glossary CD-ROM ($17 value) containing thousands of
chemical, environmental, energy and regulatory terms, acronyms, definitions
and trade names, is FREE as a special 5-year anniversary offer when you
purchase the newly updated "All 50 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations" on CD
from SOLUTIONS Software Corp.
>
>Only SOLUTIONS offers *complete text, tables and graphics* for all 50 CFR
Titles on CD-ROM for $62.50. An annual subscription (4 issues) costs $190.
The two-CD set is fully cross-indexed with Adobe(R) Acrobat(R), preferred
over Folio-based products, for instant search/retrieval. It also features
the CFR Index (CFR Title 0), including the Parallel Table of Authorities.
>
>Visit http://www.env-sol.com or call (407) 321-7912 for more
information. Please mention this offer.
>
>Founded in 1992, SOLUTIONS Software Corp. is a women-owned small business
corporation (CAGE Code 032G2).
>
>Anne Wemhoff
>SOLUTIONS Software Corporation
>1795 Turtle Hill Road
>Enterprise, FL 32725
>Telephone: (407) 321-7912
>Fax: (407) 321-3098
>E-Mail: solution@env-sol.com
>Web: http://www.env-sol.com
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 10:19:38 +0930 (CST)
From: PAUL & LENE-MARIT
Subject: Re: Compliance review and records
Russ,
Although I am not a 'registrar' I thought I would chip in my point of view
regarding the issues you raise. I think ISO 14004 adds some degree of
clarity to your questions although not much.
1.) My interpretation is the standard is describing of two different
processes here. One is what you term the compliance 'audit' which in ISO
14001 4.5.1 is not actually termed an audit but a 'documented procedure'
for the evaluation of compliance issues. Now as you mention ISO 14001 4.5.3
refers to the 'results of audits and reviews'. This could interpreted as
meaning the compliance evaluation procedure (as you have done) or the
actual EMS audit (4.5.4) and the management review (4.6).
Having said that it is my opinion that YES registrars should be 'writing up'
(as you call it) companies who are unwilling to show records of compliance
audits. Compliance evaluations are as you say mandatory under measuring and
monitoring section 4.5.1 and should be documented. The guidlines in ISO
14004 4.4.3 state that the 'findings and conclusions' of measuring and
monitoring should be documented.
This issue may have implications for regulatory authorities wishing to use
ISO 14001 as a regulatory tool. Without documented results of compliance
evaluation procedures the system will have little compliance assurance.
2.) Re: 4.5.3 "disposition". Oxford English dictionary defines disposition
as "setting in order; arrangement". Neither distribution nor disposal.
Regards,
Paul Reed
Mawson Graduate Centre for Environmental Studies
University of Adelaide
South Australia
At 01:50 PM 7/9/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Clause 4.5.1 of ISO 14001 states, "The organization shall establish and
maintain a documented procedure for periodically evaluating compliance with
relevant environmental legislation and regulations."
>
>As understood, organizations are concerned with disclosure isses with
performing compliance audits. A common response I have heard is that the
clause states the requirement of a documented procedure, but the
review/audit itself does not have to be documented.
>
>However, reading through the standard for the umpteenth time, I noticed
clause 4.5.3 in a new light. It states, "The organization shall establish
and maintain procedures for the identification, maintenance and disposition
of environmental records. These records shall include training records and
the results of _audits and reviews_" (emphasis mine).
>
>My question is, How do registrars view the compliance evaluation in 4.5.1
with the record keeping requirement in 4.5.3. Should auditors be "writing
up" organizations that are unwilling to show records of compliance audits?
>
>As a bonus question, what is the connotative meaning of "disposition" used
in clause 4.5.3 para. 1? Distribution? Disposal? Both?
>
>Thanks for input.
>
>Russ DeVilbiss
>ISO 14000/EMS Product Manager
>ERAtech Environmental, Inc.
>
>rdevilbiss@eratech.com
>
>800.848.4990 x126
>937.859.8998 x126
>(f) 937.859.9132
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 08:33:08 -0400
From: Russ DeVilbiss
Subject: RE: Compliance review and records
Paul,
I appreciate your response. I am not familiar with Australia's regulatory climate. However, in the U.S., this could be a major sticking point for organizations pursuing ISO 14001; due to our command and control/enforcement approach to environmental mana
gement (and if that is the best approach is the subject for a debate) management personnel are extremely sensative to disclosing any results from compliance reviews/audits. It shall be interesting to get the perspective of a registrar (Rick, you listenin
g?)
The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition, defines disposition: 3) Arrangement or distribution; 5) An act of disposing of. (And no wise cracks about us Yanks not speaking English)
- -----Original Message-----
From: PAUL & LENE-MARIT [SMTP:lenepaul@camtech.net.au]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 1997 8:50 PM
To: Russ DeVilbiss
Cc: iso14000@quality.org
Subject: Re: Compliance review and records
Russ,
Although I am not a 'registrar' I thought I would chip in my point of view
regarding the issues you raise. I think ISO 14004 adds some degree of
clarity to your questions although not much.
1.) My interpretation is the standard is describing of two different
processes here. One is what you term the compliance 'audit' which in ISO
14001 4.5.1 is not actually termed an audit but a 'documented procedure'
for the evaluation of compliance issues. Now as you mention ISO 14001 4.5.3
refers to the 'results of audits and reviews'. This could interpreted as
meaning the compliance evaluation procedure (as you have done) or the
actual EMS audit (4.5.4) and the management review (4.6).
Having said that it is my opinion that YES registrars should be 'writing up'
(as you call it) companies who are unwilling to show records of compliance
audits. Compliance evaluations are as you say mandatory under measuring and
monitoring section 4.5.1 and should be documented. The guidlines in ISO
14004 4.4.3 state that the 'findings and conclusions' of measuring and
monitoring should be documented.
This issue may have implications for regulatory authorities wishing to use
ISO 14001 as a regulatory tool. Without documented results of compliance
evaluation procedures the system will have little compliance assurance.
2.) Re: 4.5.3 "disposition". Oxford English dictionary defines disposition
as "setting in order; arrangement". Neither distribution nor disposal.
Regards,
Paul Reed
Mawson Graduate Centre for Environmental Studies
University of Adelaide
South Australia
At 01:50 PM 7/9/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Clause 4.5.1 of ISO 14001 states, "The organization shall establish and
maintain a documented procedure for periodically evaluating compliance with
relevant environmental legislation and regulations."
>
>As understood, organizations are concerned with disclosure isses with
performing compliance audits. A common response I have heard is that the
clause states the requirement of a documented procedure, but the
review/audit itself does not have to be documented.
>
>However, reading through the standard for the umpteenth time, I noticed
clause 4.5.3 in a new light. It states, "The organization shall establish
and maintain procedures for the identification, maintenance and disposition
of environmental records. These records shall include training records and
the results of _audits and reviews_" (emphasis mine).
>
>My question is, How do registrars view the compliance evaluation in 4.5.1
with the record keeping requirement in 4.5.3. Should auditors be "writing
up" organizations that are unwilling to show records of compliance audits?
>
>As a bonus question, what is the connotative meaning of "disposition" used
in clause 4.5.3 para. 1? Distribution? Disposal? Both?
>
>Thanks for input.
>
>Russ DeVilbiss
>ISO 14000/EMS Product Manager
>ERAtech Environmental, Inc.
>
>rdevilbiss@eratech.com
>
>800.848.4990 x126
>937.859.8998 x126
>(f) 937.859.9132
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 09:42:29 -0400
From: "DuPlessis, Tom"
Subject: FW: Compliance review and records
I am being intentionally facetious, but what's the fuss all about? So a
registrar reviews an audit report and reads it to make sure it isn't
actually a recipe for chocolate chip cookies. They may then verify that
any items identified were addressed in the organization's checking and
corrective action system. The organization developed a procedure,
implemented it, and proved it. Done.
In most states (Massachusetts being an exception?), wouldn't a
confidentiality agreement with the registrar suffice? Isn't that what
we companies do when we hire the consultants that actually find and
report the compliance issues to us in the first place? Would it help if
the registrar were hired by an attorney representing the company?
Thanks in advance for any enlightenment!
Tom DuPlessis
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
> ----------
> From: Russ DeVilbiss[SMTP:rdevilbiss@eratech.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 1997 8:33 AM
> To: 'PAUL & LENE-MARIT'
> Cc: iso14000@quality.org
> Subject: RE: Compliance review and records
>
> Paul,
>
> I appreciate your response. I am not familiar with Australia's
> regulatory climate. However, in the U.S., this could be a major
> sticking point for organizations pursuing ISO 14001; due to our
> command and control/enforcement approach to environmental management
> (and if that is the best approach is the subject for a debate)
> management personnel are extremely sensative to disclosing any results
> from compliance reviews/audits. It shall be interesting to get the
> perspective of a registrar (Rick, you listening?)
>
> The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition, defines
> disposition: 3) Arrangement or distribution; 5) An act of disposing
> of. (And no wise cracks about us Yanks not speaking English)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: PAUL & LENE-MARIT [SMTP:lenepaul@camtech.net.au]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 1997 8:50 PM
> To: Russ DeVilbiss
> Cc: iso14000@quality.org
> Subject: Re: Compliance review and records
>
> Russ,
> Although I am not a 'registrar' I thought I would chip in my point of
> view
> regarding the issues you raise. I think ISO 14004 adds some degree of
> clarity to your questions although not much.
>
> 1.) My interpretation is the standard is describing of two different
> processes here. One is what you term the compliance 'audit' which in
> ISO
> 14001 4.5.1 is not actually termed an audit but a 'documented
> procedure'
> for the evaluation of compliance issues. Now as you mention ISO 14001
> 4.5.3
> refers to the 'results of audits and reviews'. This could interpreted
> as
> meaning the compliance evaluation procedure (as you have done) or the
> actual EMS audit (4.5.4) and the management review (4.6).
>
> Having said that it is my opinion that YES registrars should be
> 'writing up'
> (as you call it) companies who are unwilling to show records of
> compliance
> audits. Compliance evaluations are as you say mandatory under
> measuring and
> monitoring section 4.5.1 and should be documented. The guidlines in
> ISO
> 14004 4.4.3 state that the 'findings and conclusions' of measuring and
> monitoring should be documented.
>
> This issue may have implications for regulatory authorities wishing to
> use
> ISO 14001 as a regulatory tool. Without documented results of
> compliance
> evaluation procedures the system will have little compliance
> assurance.
>
> 2.) Re: 4.5.3 "disposition". Oxford English dictionary defines
> disposition
> as "setting in order; arrangement". Neither distribution nor disposal.
>
> Regards,
>
> Paul Reed
> Mawson Graduate Centre for Environmental Studies
> University of Adelaide
> South Australia
>
>
> At 01:50 PM 7/9/97 -0400, you wrote:
> >Clause 4.5.1 of ISO 14001 states, "The organization shall establish
> and
> maintain a documented procedure for periodically evaluating compliance
> with
> relevant environmental legislation and regulations."
> >
> >As understood, organizations are concerned with disclosure isses with
> performing compliance audits. A common response I have heard is that
> the
> clause states the requirement of a documented procedure, but the
> review/audit itself does not have to be documented.
> >
> >However, reading through the standard for the umpteenth time, I
> noticed
> clause 4.5.3 in a new light. It states, "The organization shall
> establish
> and maintain procedures for the identification, maintenance and
> disposition
> of environmental records. These records shall include training
> records and
> the results of _audits and reviews_" (emphasis mine).
> >
> >My question is, How do registrars view the compliance evaluation in
> 4.5.1
> with the record keeping requirement in 4.5.3. Should auditors be
> "writing
> up" organizations that are unwilling to show records of compliance
> audits?
> >
> >As a bonus question, what is the connotative meaning of "disposition"
> used
> in clause 4.5.3 para. 1? Distribution? Disposal? Both?
> >
> >Thanks for input.
> >
> >Russ DeVilbiss
> >ISO 14000/EMS Product Manager
> >ERAtech Environmental, Inc.
> >
> >rdevilbiss@eratech.com
> >
> >800.848.4990 x126
> >937.859.8998 x126
> >(f) 937.859.9132
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------
End of iso14000-digest V2 #7
****************************