Showing posts with label ISO 14001. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ISO 14001. Show all posts

Thursday, August 25, 2011

What Are The Differences Of ISO 9001 And ISO 14001?

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is a managing body that was founded to provide quality and environmental management systems to industries across the world. The ISO 14001 and ISO 9001 standards are accreditations that are issued to organizations that meet or exceed the criteria set by the ISO. The certifications, which differ in criteria, have been proven to increase profitability and commercial status for the holding parties.

Some of the core differences between ISO 14001 and ISO 9001 stem from the criteria covered by each standard. As a quality management certification, ISO 9001 is awarded based on set standards being met in key areas. These areas include quality management systems, management responsibility, resource management, and how quality performance is measured, analyzed, and improved.

The standard ISO 14001 is an environmental management certification that is designed to assist organizations as they develop in-house environmental management systems. This standard is based on a model of continual improvement, which differentiates it from the fixed criteria that must be met to be awarded ISO 9001 accreditation. For an organization to achieve the certification, it must develop an ISO 14001-compliant environmental management system through a process of planning objectives, implementing processes, measuring and monitoring the processes, and improving the system based on the results of the monitoring stage.

As a part of ISO 14001 accreditation, a continual improvement process (CIP) is required. This CIP is based on expanding the environmental management system across all sectors of the business, using the system to enrich other processes and improving over time by continual monitoring. Many organizations seek to be awarded both ISO 14001 and ISO 9001 certification as it demonstrates a high overall standard of quality and environmental management structures.

The scope of each standard is what defines the differences between ISO 14001 and ISO 9001. The routes to accreditation and methods of maintaining the systems once certification has been achieved are similar across both standards. Both ISO 14001 and ISO 9001 standards can be applied for once a compliant management system has been implemented following the ISOguidelines. An intensive external audit will be required for either standard with an additional internal audit required for ISO 9001.

Both ISO 14001 and ISO 9001 are measures of the processes used by an organization, not the end product. This means that a company that holds ISO 9001 accreditation can still produce a poor end product providing the correct paperwork is in place and the quality is consistent. Similarly, ISO 14001 certification simply means that there is a system in place to meet that organization’s specific environmental targets.

Read more on ISO 14001 Standards at http://www.iso14000store.com

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Implementing ISO 14001


ISO 14001 is an internationally recognised standard that provides a framework for a strategic approach to corporate environmental management. This standard gives organisations the means to identify and control their environmental impacts, improve performance and achieve their objectives and targets. The standard is independently audited, giving it great strength and integrity.

Due to its widespread adoption (e.g. Barclays, Credit Suisse and UBS in the financial sector), it now acts as a common reference for communication about environmental issues. ISO 14001 provides assurance to stakeholders on environmental claims and helps organisations meet requirements laid down by clients and investors.

Adoption of ISO 14001 is being driven by stakeholder concerns as well as the significant benefits on offer to adopters. Few companies are now exempt from government, client and investor demands for accountability and improved environmental performance. With brand and reputation on the line, it is a risky strategy to ignore these concerns.

However, choosing how to act is not a straightforward decision. Companies that rushed to announce their green credentials without independent verification and transparency fell foul of greenwash accusations and suffered perhaps more damage to their reputation than had they not acted in the first place. In response to this, many companies are now choosing to implement internationally recognised and independently audited environmental management systems such as ISO 14001.

The benefits of implementing ISO 14001 are extensive:

It immediately enhances corporate reputation and sends a clear signal of commitment to corporate responsibility. Accusations of greenwash are prevented by the transparent and robust approach of the standard.

Proactive environmental management increases attractiveness to investors, especially for Socially Responsible Investment (SRI), an area already accounting for £9 billion investment per year in the UK alone.

ISO 14001 accreditation may also bring financial benefits through increased market share. Firms can differentiate themselves from competitors as responsible companies as well as securing the rewards of first mover advantage in new markets. In addition, many buyers are now implementing sustainable procurement codes and stipulating conditions in Requests for Information (RFIs) where suppliers are required to have environmental credentials. Gaining ISO 14001 accreditation ensures access to environmentally demanding but high reward markets.

Financial benefits are not limited to increased investment and sales. Implementation of an EMS may produce significant cost savings that actually negate the initial outlay. With energy and waste prices rising sharply, environmental responsibility can produce a win:win opportunity.

Perhaps the most significant benefit for many will be the positive effect on attracting and retaining staff. With intense competition for the best staff, corporate responsibility is becoming a key criterion against which employers are judged.

Finally, responsible environmental management is quickly becoming a necessary condition for business, a socially accepted norm of behaviour. Those who fail to follow these norms risk damage to their reputation and the possibility of their social licence to operate being revoked.

A standard as thorough and robust as ISO 14001 has an equally thorough implementation process with extensive requirements for procedures and auditable document trails. Implementation follows the Plan-Do-Check-Review cycle and key required procedures are detailed in the diagram below. Implementation will entail the creation of at least 20 procedures and supporting documents. The procedures are all company-specific and must be tailored to suit individual operations. It is this level of detail that gives the standard such strength and integrity.

Implementing ISO 14001


ISO 14001 is an internationally recognised standard that provides a framework for a strategic approach to corporate environmental management. This standard gives organisations the means to identify and control their environmental impacts, improve performance and achieve their objectives and targets. The standard is independently audited, giving it great strength and integrity.

Due to its widespread adoption (e.g. Barclays, Credit Suisse and UBS in the financial sector), it now acts as a common reference for communication about environmental issues. ISO 14001 provides assurance to stakeholders on environmental claims and helps organisations meet requirements laid down by clients and investors.

Adoption of ISO 14001 is being driven by stakeholder concerns as well as the significant benefits on offer to adopters. Few companies are now exempt from government, client and investor demands for accountability and improved environmental performance. With brand and reputation on the line, it is a risky strategy to ignore these concerns.

However, choosing how to act is not a straightforward decision. Companies that rushed to announce their green credentials without independent verification and transparency fell foul of greenwash accusations and suffered perhaps more damage to their reputation than had they not acted in the first place. In response to this, many companies are now choosing to implement internationally recognised and independently audited environmental management systems such as ISO 14001.

The benefits of implementing ISO 14001 are extensive:

It immediately enhances corporate reputation and sends a clear signal of commitment to corporate responsibility. Accusations of greenwash are prevented by the transparent and robust approach of the standard.

Proactive environmental management increases attractiveness to investors, especially for Socially Responsible Investment (SRI), an area already accounting for £9 billion investment per year in the UK alone.

ISO 14001 accreditation may also bring financial benefits through increased market share. Firms can differentiate themselves from competitors as responsible companies as well as securing the rewards of first mover advantage in new markets. In addition, many buyers are now implementing sustainable procurement codes and stipulating conditions in Requests for Information (RFIs) where suppliers are required to have environmental credentials. Gaining ISO 14001 accreditation ensures access to environmentally demanding but high reward markets.

Financial benefits are not limited to increased investment and sales. Implementation of an EMS may produce significant cost savings that actually negate the initial outlay. With energy and waste prices rising sharply, environmental responsibility can produce a win:win opportunity.

Perhaps the most significant benefit for many will be the positive effect on attracting and retaining staff. With intense competition for the best staff, corporate responsibility is becoming a key criterion against which employers are judged.

Finally, responsible environmental management is quickly becoming a necessary condition for business, a socially accepted norm of behaviour. Those who fail to follow these norms risk damage to their reputation and the possibility of their social licence to operate being revoked.

A standard as thorough and robust as ISO 14001 has an equally thorough implementation process with extensive requirements for procedures and auditable document trails. Implementation follows the Plan-Do-Check-Review cycle and key required procedures are detailed in the diagram below. Implementation will entail the creation of at least 20 procedures and supporting documents. The procedures are all company-specific and must be tailored to suit individual operations. It is this level of detail that gives the standard such strength and integrity.

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Global Warming & ISO 14001 Standards

It is not difficult to become a believer in global warming. According to the U.S. National Climatic Data Center 2001 was the second warmest year on record and it was the 23rd consecutive year of above normal temperatures. Perhaps most troubling is the fact that the rate of temperature increase is accelerating. Add to this the data just released from insurer Munich Re stating that deaths from natural disasters were more than double in 2001 versus 2000 and insured losses were up more than 50%.UNEP estimates that the extra economic costs of disasters attributable to global warming are running at more than $300 billion annually.
Some 180 countries are proceeding toward an expected ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by the end of this year. Of the six gases it will control CO2 is by far the largest contributing nearly 90% of the global warming impact. The primary source of CO2 is the burning of fossil fuels. Therefore the focus on energy will continue to increase.
Throughout the world different methods are being used to encourage reduced energy use. Japan has enacted the Energy Conservation Law in 1999 mandating huge efficiency improvements by 2004 for nearly all air conditioning products. The U.S. has revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for buildings to raise the minimum COP level for centrifugal chillers from the current value of 5.2 to 6.1 effective in October 2001. DOE and Green Seal have revised their recommended efficiency levels to an even higher level of 6.27.
Some countries use laws. Others use codes and standards. An increasing number of countries are using environmental costing which increases the price of energy thereby increasing the financial attractiveness of high efficiency products. European countries have been using such “carbon taxes” for more than a decade. However a rapidly growing trend in developing countries is the reduction of subsidies to energy industries “so prices more accurately reflect environmental impacts” according to OECD’s Environmental Strategy for the First Decade of the 21st Century.
China has shown leadership by reducing subsidies to the coal industry from $24.5 billion in 1990 to $10 billion in 1996 resulting in 7% emissions reduction while seeing a solid economic growth of 36%! China is now moving aggressively into environmental costing with the just announced (1/13/2002) 5-year environmental plan that commits 700 billion yuan ($84 billion) to help protect the environment. The government will provide the fist 65 billion yuan to initiate the project but will apply the “polluter pays” principle for the rest. The “environmental protection authorities will collect funds from the pollution-producing companies”. The impact on the price of energy is not known at this time. However it is clear that the addition of environmental costing will increase energy prices. According to a European Research Commission Report of July 2001 “The cost of producing electricity from coal or oil would double if costs such as damage to the environment and health were taken into account”.
The global movement to high efficiency is accelerating just like the rate of temperature increase. But this is not all that is changing. This second environmental threat of global warming is making it clear that we need to give combined consideration to ozone depletion and global warming. But more important is the need to focus on the real issue which is the total environmental impact not address each individual environmental threat in isolation. This includes the concept of environmental risk exposure, which recognizes that there are other environmental threats that are less well understood today. However, there are “no regrets” decisions we can make today (such as minimum refrigerant charge, minimum atmospheric life refrigerants, etc.) to minimize these risks.
Combined consideration would place more emphasis on reducing the use of CFCs, which are still being produced in developing countries until 2010 in accordance with the Montreal Protocol. Little attention is being given the large contribution to global warming from CFCs. Actions which cause confusion and delay the phaseout of CFCs cause increased environmental damage rather than lessening the environmental impact.
The other rapidly changing factor in the HVAC industry is the shift to becoming a hermetic industry, where refrigerant is contained throughout the life of a chiller and recycled for further use when the chiller is replaced. This simple understanding that “if it doesn’t get into the environment it does no harm” is a powerful argument, which will lead to the continued use of the most efficient refrigerants in such closed hermetic applications as chillers. In just 15 years annual refrigerants emissions from chillers have been reduced from 25% to well below 1% today. This defines a whole different world than that which existed when the Montreal Protocol was crafted some 15 years ago.
But perhaps the most important change coming to our industry is the realization that there are no new or “perfect” refrigerants waiting to be discovered. There are eight elements that can be combined for use in a vapor compression cycle. All feasible combinations of these eight have been evaluated. The reality is “what we have now is all there is”.
This recognition is why we are now seeing a shift from the search for a perfect refrigerant to a search for the right refrigerant(s) for the right application. Said another way, the highest efficiency refrigerants for the lowest emissions applications. Many in our industry call this “Responsible Use”.

It is not difficult to become a believer in global warming. According to the U.S. National Climatic Data Center 2001 was the second warmest year on record and it was the 23rd consecutive year of above normal temperatures. Perhaps most troubling is the fact that the rate of temperature increase is accelerating. Add to this the data just released from insurer Munich Re stating that deaths from natural disasters were more than double in 2001 versus 2000 and insured losses were up more than 50%.UNEP estimates that the extra economic costs of disasters attributable to global warming are running at more than $300 billion annually.
Some 180 countries are proceeding toward an expected ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by the end of this year. Of the six gases it will control CO2 is by far the largest contributing nearly 90% of the global warming impact. The primary source of CO2 is the burning of fossil fuels. Therefore the focus on energy will continue to increase.
Throughout the world different methods are being used to encourage reduced energy use. Japan has enacted the Energy Conservation Law in 1999 mandating huge efficiency improvements by 2004 for nearly all air conditioning products. The U.S. has revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 for buildings to raise the minimum COP level for centrifugal chillers from the current value of 5.2 to 6.1 effective in October 2001. DOE and Green Seal have revised their recommended efficiency levels to an even higher level of 6.27.
Some countries use laws. Others use codes and standards. An increasing number of countries are using environmental costing which increases the price of energy thereby increasing the financial attractiveness of high efficiency products. European countries have been using such “carbon taxes” for more than a decade. However a rapidly growing trend in developing countries is the reduction of subsidies to energy industries “so prices more accurately reflect environmental impacts” according to OECD’s Environmental Strategy for the First Decade of the 21st Century.
China has shown leadership by reducing subsidies to the coal industry from $24.5 billion in 1990 to $10 billion in 1996 resulting in 7% emissions reduction while seeing a solid economic growth of 36%! China is now moving aggressively into environmental costing with the just announced (1/13/2002) 5-year environmental plan that commits 700 billion yuan ($84 billion) to help protect the environment. The government will provide the fist 65 billion yuan to initiate the project but will apply the “polluter pays” principle for the rest. The “environmental protection authorities will collect funds from the pollution-producing companies”. The impact on the price of energy is not known at this time. However it is clear that the addition of environmental costing will increase energy prices. According to a European Research Commission Report of July 2001 “The cost of producing electricity from coal or oil would double if costs such as damage to the environment and health were taken into account”.
The global movement to high efficiency is accelerating just like the rate of temperature increase. But this is not all that is changing. This second environmental threat of global warming is making it clear that we need to give combined consideration to ozone depletion and global warming. But more important is the need to focus on the real issue which is the total environmental impact not address each individual environmental threat in isolation. This includes the concept of environmental risk exposure, which recognizes that there are other environmental threats that are less well understood today. However, there are “no regrets” decisions we can make today (such as minimum refrigerant charge, minimum atmospheric life refrigerants, etc.) to minimize these risks.
Combined consideration would place more emphasis on reducing the use of CFCs, which are still being produced in developing countries until 2010 in accordance with the Montreal Protocol. Little attention is being given the large contribution to global warming from CFCs. Actions which cause confusion and delay the phaseout of CFCs cause increased environmental damage rather than lessening the environmental impact.
The other rapidly changing factor in the HVAC industry is the shift to becoming a hermetic industry, where refrigerant is contained throughout the life of a chiller and recycled for further use when the chiller is replaced. This simple understanding that “if it doesn’t get into the environment it does no harm” is a powerful argument, which will lead to the continued use of the most efficient refrigerants in such closed hermetic applications as chillers. In just 15 years annual refrigerants emissions from chillers have been reduced from 25% to well below 1% today. This defines a whole different world than that which existed when the Montreal Protocol was crafted some 15 years ago.
But perhaps the most important change coming to our industry is the realization that there are no new or “perfect” refrigerants waiting to be discovered. There are eight elements that can be combined for use in a vapor compression cycle. All feasible combinations of these eight have been evaluated. The reality is “what we have now is all there is”.
This recognition is why we are now seeing a shift from the search for a perfect refrigerant to a search for the right refrigerant(s) for the right application. Said another way, the highest efficiency refrigerants for the lowest emissions applications. Many in our industry call this “Responsible Use”.

Demographers now project that, in the near future, more people are going to live in cities than in rural areas, and this will be the first time in the history of the world that this has been the case. As a result, while there are many different levels of society and business where global warming needs to be dealt with, cities are going to take an ever expanding role. It’s easy for local governments to pass the buck to state, provincial, or national governments, but this isn’t a sustainable practice. If we’re going to successfully fend off the apocalyptic-scale global warming that many scientists now predict, cities are going to have to take the lead. As a start, here are some basic things that municipal governments can do.

Green roofs: If you fly over any major metropolitan area, you’ll likely see a few patches of green where there are parks or tree-lined streets, but for the most part you will see nothing but bare rooftops dominating the landscape. When you think about it, that’s a lot of space that is simply going to waste. In the city of the future, we’re going to increasingly put all this excess space to use for green purposes. There are a few things we can do up there, including:

Having solar and wind power stations on roof tops can help make buildings and cities in general cleaner and more energy efficient.

Rooftop gardens can help residents grow their own produce rather than having to buy from energy-inefficient sources.

Rooftop trees and greenhouses help balance out deforestation while cleansing smog-filled urban atmospheres.

Expanded public transit: When it comes to moving people around, the private automobile is the most energy-inefficient vehicle ever created. Things like buses and trains are not without emissions, but they have a much lower pollution-per-person ratio. Many cities throughout the developed world are decades behind in this respect and need to catch up fast in order to do their part. We need more rail-based transit systems, and many cities would do well to expand their bus networks.

Pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure: In many cities, it’s a sad state of affairs for pedestrians. If you want to travel on foot, you too often have to deal with landscapes that make walking very difficult, not to mention the culture of motorists who drive fast and aggressively and are not used to sharing the road. For a more sustainable future, we need more pedestrian-friendly landscapes, and it also doesn’t hurt to encourage people to take their bicycles.

Better recycling programs: We have come a long way in the realm of recycling, but too many cities are still stuck in the 90s with their recycling technology. We now have the ability to recycle a much broader spectrum of materials, including plastic bags and soiled containers, but many cities haven’t taken the steps necessary to implement these technologies. This investment, which is relatively small in the big picture, can have hugely positive effects in the long run.

Fuel-efficient fleets: Most cities rely on large fleets of vehicles to provide their basic services. From buses, to sanitary trucks, to road maintenance equipment, all of these vehicles can be made more efficient with new technology. Of course, it costs a lot of money to replace these vehicles, but all vehicles do need to be replaced with newer models sooner or later, and cities should use these opportunities to make their investments more efficient, rather than purchasing the same old polluting vehicles.

As individuals, each of us can contribute to the solution. As a start, we can choose to drive vehicles that are more fuel-efficient. We can plant more trees. We can recycle where practicable. We can take stock of our energy consumption practices and try to reduce them by some factor.

But, what steps can your organization take to help? The answers are varied, depending upon the size of the organization and the related environmental aspects and impacts. But no matter how simple or complex the business, each can benefit from the implementation of a management system based onISO 14001:2004. This international standard has as its focus the prevention of pollution, accomplished by a teamwork approach to identifying those aspects of the organization’s processes that have the potential for harming the environment and the development of ways to reduce or prevent this harm. In the process, many organizations have found ways to reduce costs by elimination of scrap, changes to their waste disposal processes or reduced use of natural resources. It is the application of the system approach that has proven to be successful. And, once the system is in place, it is logical and beneficial to have that system certified and registered. This provides added assurance that the management system remains effective and also provides public recognition to numerous stakeholders that your organization is committed to the prevention of pollution.

Go to http://www.iso9001store.com for more information on ISO 14001 Standards.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Third Party Certification of ISO 14001 Standards


A recognised international accredited EMS standard such as ISO 14001 is a positive message that can be easily conveyed and recognised by customers, suppliers, staff, investors, local authorities and other regulators.

However a company does not necessarily require third part certification for its EMS. A company EMS is a system designed to best meet the specific requirements of that particular company.

Third party certification does provide a useful support or framework within which to develop an EMS. By achieving an internationally recognised EMS standard, a company demonstrates an ongoing commitment to external stakeholders to manage its environmental impacts in a responsible manner. If a company decides not to develop an EMS that meets an accredited standard, the framework provided by these standards may still be useful as a starting point to developing an effective EMS tailored to the specific requirements of a company.

The International Standards Organisation (ISO) international accredited standard for environmental management, the ISO
14001, is the most widely used and accepted EMS standard. This standard is voluntary, certifiable and is accepted by
stakeholders across the world as the preferred model for environmental management.
The European Union recognises ISO 14001 which is considered a stepping stone for the EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). EMAS is a management tool for companies to evaluate, report and improve their environmental performance, incorporating the ISO14001 environmental management system. Participation in EMAS is voluntary.

Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Certification Of ISO 14001

Certification Of ISO 14001

International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is functioning from Geneva in Switzerland as a worldwide federation of national standards organizations. The mission of ISO is to promote the development of standardization and related activities in the world with a view to facilitating the international exchange of goods and services, and to developing corporation in the spheres of intellectual, scientific, technological and economic activity. ISO’s works result in international agreements which are published as international agreements which are published as international standards.

ISO 9000

Previous version of ISO 9000 (1994) emphasize on documents and document control. But as per new standard the extent of documentation can differ from company to company in a simplified manner.

ISO 9000 system requires records at relevant stages which provide data for continual improvement and can be used for legacy as a data bank.

ISO 14000

ISO 14000, the environmental management system family of standards, was formally published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) on September 2, 1996. ISO 14001 is the conformance standard within the ISO 14000 series. After extensive groundwork, the revised version of ISO 14001 was released on 15th of November 2004. ISO 14001:2004 will replace ISO 14001:1996 after a transition period of 18 months, ending on 14th May 2006, and will become the basis for the certification procedure for environmental management. All ISO 14001:1996 certificates will be rendered invalid on 15th May 2006

Since 1996 the ISO 14001 has formed the basis for structuring, implementation, review and further development of environmental management systems. It lays down the applicable demands for organizations of all kinds and sizes as well as for diverse geographical, cultural and social conditions. The overall objective is to promote environmental protection and the prevention of environmental stress in harmony with economic, social and political requirements.

OHSAS 18001 is an Occupation Health and Safety Assessment Series for health and safety management systems. It is intended to help an organizations to control occupational health and safety risks (OH&S). The importance of managing Occupational Health and Safety is recognized by all interested parties – employers, employees, customers, suppliers, insurers,shareholders, the community, contractors, and regulatory agencies. It enables an organization to control occupational health and safety risks risks and to improve performance.

Health, Safety, and ISO 14001

Organizations considering the implementation of ISO 14001 often ask if the standard is applicable to safety and health programs as well as environmental issues. We believe that the answer is unequivocally yes.
Not only is ISO 14001 applicable to health/safety programs, it can also provide the same benefits that it makes possible in the environmental area. These include:
Meeting and/or exceeding regulatory requirements, Placing greater attention on significant issues not driven by regulations (establishing a safety culture, raising employee morale), Establishing a commitment to improve and measure performance, and Improving communications between managers and hourly employees.
In addition, using ISO14001 to integrate environmental/safety/health programs into the business system produces other benefits. Measures that reduce environmental incidents can decrease or eliminate worker exposures to hazardous materials. Conversely, increasing awareness of safety practices can focus employees’ attention on environmental concerns. In fact, the success of health, safety, and environmental programs often hinges on worker understanding, attitude, and commitment. The corporate culture must change to make these matters a natural part of each employee’s approach to his or her work.
The ISO 14001 standard assumes that such cultural transformation occurs through employee involvement and responsibility from the bottom up, not via dictates from the top. That assumption, and other concepts present in ISO 14001, is applicable to health and safety. Therefore, it’s reasonable to consider the use of the standard in an integrated approach that can bring about change for all three. Some organizations have done so, and many others will eventually see the wisdom of employing ISO 14001 for that purpose.
How can ISO 14001 be useful for health and safety when it was intended to address the environmental aspects of organizations? These three areas are so linked that a management standard for one can have equal applicability to the others. The reason ISO 14001 was not specifically aimed at health and safety had more to do with professional parochialism and the politics of international standards writing than with any concern about the logic of doing so. In ISO 14001, the only acknowledgement that it could be useful for health and safety appears in the introduction, which recommends its use to those who may need to apply the standard to those areas. No other specific references appear in the document, because the standard’s developers felt that health and safety professionals would eventually develop their own version of ISO 14001. This new version has not emerged, and the likelihood of it happening anytime soon is rather low, because current stakeholders’ views militate against it.

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

About ISO 14001:2004 Standards

The ISO 14001 aims to reduce the environmental carbon footprints that many businesses leave behind today because of not taking the right steps to be environmental sustainable. This standard promotes the decrease in the waste of necessary business resources and also reduces the pollution that can sometimes be a by product of a business.

About ISO 14001

The most updated version of the ISO 14001 was released in the year 2004 by the International Organisation of Standardization (ISO), which was attended by members from all the committees from around the world. In order for a company to be awarded the ISO 14001 standard certificate, an external auditor has to audit the company by an audit body that has been accredited by an accreditation body. The certification auditors are required to be accredited by the International Registrar of Certification Auditor and the certification body has to be accredited by the Registrar Accreditation Board in the USA or by the National Accreditation Board in Ireland.

The structure of ISO 14001 is very much like the ISO 9000, which is management standard, so these two standards can be implemented side by side to achieve the best results. As a part of the ISO 14000 family, which deals with different aspects of environmental issues, ISO 14001:2004 and ISO 14002 deal with environmental management system (EMS). ISO 14001 gives the requirements for the

EMS and ISO 14002 gives the basic guidelines for EMS.

Environmental Management System with ISO 14001:2004

The EMS, as per the requirements of the ISO 14001, enables the company, may it be of any size, location and income to:

  • It helps the company improve its environmental strategy and this positively affects their environmental performance.
  • It helps in identifying and controlling the environmental impact that the activities, services or products of the company might have.
  • And it helps in carrying out a systematic approach to set environmental targets and objectives, to achieve these and also to demonstrate that they have been achieved.

How does it work?

ISO 14001 does not specify or chalk out a definite level that each business has to reach. If the performance was determined, then it would have to be done for every specific business. But that is not how it works and has a very different approach, like:

  • The ISO has various standards dealing with environmental issues. ISO 14001 deals with a framework provided for a strategic and holistic approach to the businesses environmental policy, actions and plans.
  • It gives the general requirements for the EMS.
  • This also states the reference to the communication requirements for the communication of the environmental management issues between the company, stakeholders, the public and the regulators.
  • As these standards are not company specific, any and every business can undertake them as long as they are dedicated to the continued and improved environmental performance and they have a commitment to comply with the set norms.

Thursday, November 26, 2009

ISO 14001 Standards Audit

ISO 14001:2004 emphasizes the continuous improvement of an environmental management system (EMS). The standard specifies requirements for an environmental management system to enable an organization to develop and implement a policy and objectives which take into account legal requirements and information about significant environmental aspects. The certification process ensures the conformance of your EMS against the international standard, as well as any organizational specific requirements that have been identified.
The ISO 14001 Standards audit consist of 2 stage registration audit process followed by surveillanceaudits, and ultimately a recertification audit. ISO 14001 Audits include on-site assessments of documents, data, records, activity and personnel. Process audit trails are followed by interviews of personnel responsible for the tasks and reviewing associated activity and records of occurrence. The audit trail will follow interactions between processes as well as the details of the process itself. Following are the stages of the audit process.

Pre-assessmentRegistration Audit – Stage 2Audit Findings• A review of action taken on nonconformities identified during the previous auditA review of the continued effectiveness of the management system in its entiretyThe continued applicability to the scope of registration

The pre-assessment audit is an optional activity, outside of the registration process, it is highly encourages that any organization to undertake to evaluate the readiness to undergo the two stage registration process. That would optimally occur prior to the stage 1 and 2 audits.

Unlike the Stage 1 and Stage 2 activities you have full discretion as to which areas the preassessment should focus on and for the length of the pre-assessment. This activity allows your organization to become familiar with the audit process and helps prepare your employees for the registration assessment.

The auditor conducting the pre-assessment will typically return to the organization for the assessment. Similar to a ‘true’ audit, the end result of the pre-assessment will be a documented report identifying findings observed during the audit and a closing meeting to discuss the issues.

The pre-assessment activity allows you to correct any issues prior to beginning the registration process.

Assessment

New requirements for certification bodies have changed the registration process. Registration is now conducted in two distinct visits- Stage One and Stage Two- each of which has defined requirements that are outlined below.

Registration Audit – Stage 1

The stage 1 audit, conducted at your facility, is primarily performed for planning and determining the readiness of an organization to undergo a stage 2 registration audit. It also facilitates communicating any needs and expectations to the organization. Activities performed at a stage 1 audit include:

• Conducting a documentation review – This review determines if the organization’s EMS documentation adequately covers all the requirements of the ISO standard

• A review of the aspects and impacts and their significance and an evaluation of the facility(s) site specific conditions

• A review of your organizations non-conformance, preventive and corrective action system • An overview of applicable regulations

• Interviewing your organization’s personnel to assess their general readiness to undertake a stage 2 audit

• Confirming the applicability of the scope of the organization’s EMS

• Obtaining evidence that internal audits and management reviews are being planned and performed

• Providing focus for the planning of the stage 2 audit

If during the stage 1 audit any nonconformities are identified, the auditor will request a corrective action response (see Corrective Action Response).
The objective of the Stage 2 on-site audit is to assess your organizations’ adherence to your own policies, objectives, and procedures and to ascertain conformance to the requirements of the ISO 14001 standard. To accomplish this, the audit will address the implementation of all the elements of the standard. Review of documentation and records to support the implementation is an expected part of the assessment process. If non-conformances or opportunities for improvement are identified they will be documented in a report which will be presented to the organization during the closing meeting. The report will include the auditor’s recommendation regarding registration.
Any deviation from procedures or requirements of the standard will be identified as an audit finding, which will be documented in the audit report. The auditor will draw your attention to non-conformities as they arise so there will be no “surprises” at the closing meeting. Findings are categorized into three categories defined as follows:

• A major non-conformity relates to the absence or total breakdown of a required process or a number of minor non-conformities listed against similar areas. A major non-conformity at the Registration Audit – Stage 2 would defer recommendation for registration until that major has been closed.

• A minor non-conformity is an observed lapse in your systems ability to meet the requirements of the standard or your internal systems, while the overall process remains in tact.

• An observation or opportunity for improvement relates to a matter about which the Auditor is concerned but which cannot be clearly stated as a non-conformity. Observations also indicate trends which may result in a future non-conformity.

Corrective Action Response

ISO 14001 Standards requires corrective action responses from all Registration Audits. Once certification is achieved, dependant upon the extent and nature of the findings, your organization may be required to submit a corrective action plan, detailing your intent to correct the non conformity.

The auditor may also recommend that your organization submit objective evidence to support the to verify closure may be required.

It is recommended that all non-conformities are addressed within your internal corrective action system. Typically, opportunities for improvement would be addressed as preventive actions by your organization.
closure of the finding. In certain circumstances such as a major non conformity an on site activity
Surveillance Audits
Company shall conduct Surveillance Audits on an annual or semi-annual basis. The purpose of the Surveillance Audit is to ensure that the EMS continues to conform to both the organizations’ and the ISO 14001 requirements. Certain processes will be reviewed at each surveillance including:
• Internal audits and management review

• Customer and interested parties communications

• Effectiveness of the management system in achieving defined objectives

• The progress of planned continual improvement activities

• Continuing operational control

• A review of any changes made by the organization which may have impact on the registration

• Use of accreditation and certification body logos provided to the organization upon registration

• objectives, targets and programs

• evaluation of compliance

Re-assessment Audits

The accreditation body requires that a recertification audit be carried out every three years. The purpose of the recertification audit is to confirm the continued conformity and effectiveness of the management system as a whole, and its continued relevance and applicability for the scope of activity.

Recertification audits review the performance of the EMS over the registration period, and include a review of previous surveillance audit records. The recertification audit includes the following:

The continued relevancy of the organization’s policy and objectives

The continued effective interaction between the processes of the management system

A review of internal audits, management reviews, document changes during this certification period