Stage 1 audit
Stage 2 audit
Certification
recommended
Surveillance
Certification not
recommended
Reassessment
Figure 8 ISO14001 Assessment Process
BS8555 Certification
The BS8555 implementation process has been designed as a series of iterative cycles or phases. There are six phases in all with a number of step- by-step actions or “stages” within each phase. The first five phases relate to implementation of an environmental management system. At the end of each phase and prior to embarking on the next, organisations can consider an internal audit to satisfy themselves that the stages are complete, and that the associated guidance has been considered and, where appropriate, implemented. A sixth phase is included for those organisations that wish to achieve accredited certification to BS EN ISO 14001 and/or that decide to pursue external reporting on their environmental performance and/or registration under the EMAS scheme.
Green Dragon Certification (Arena Network)
The standard made up of five steps incorporates the key elements of Planning, Taking Action, Checking Progress and Reviewing Achievements to realise continual environmental improvement.
Some organisations progress through each of the steps until they reach Step 5, a certificate is issued at each of the 5 steps and upon achieving all 5 steps. Organisations are re-audited annually to ensure the standard is being maintained and those achieving Step 5 may also be successful in achieving ISO 14001 or EMAS.
Role of Assessors and auditors
An assessor conducts a visit as part of the initial certification process.
Subsequent periodic surveillance and re-assessment visits are made to verify the continuing conformity of the organisation’s EMS to the standard and that the EMS has been properly implemented and maintained and that continual improvement is evident. An assessor checks that the requirements of the ISO 14001:2004 or EMAS standard have been met. The assessment focuses on the resources committed to satisfying these requirements to ensure that they are being applied in a manner which benefits the environment, the organisation and the local community in which the organisation operates. This is accomplished through close examination of the factors that give rise to ongoing environmental performance improvement. It assists the organisation in meeting regulatory requirements and delivering reductions in its environmental impacts, thus improving environmental performance as a whole. Assessors play a key role in ensuring that certified EMS’s are delivering meaningful results. This requires them to meet comprehensive competence criteria.
Competence of assessors and auditors
The competence requirements for assessors are laid down in the accreditation criteria of CBs offering certification of EMS’s. In addition, minimum criteria are prescribed in ISO 19011 (ISO, 2002). The qualification criteria for EMS auditors cover:
personal attributes; •
the ability to apply knowledge and skills; •
audit principles, procedures and techniques; •
management systems knowledge; •
organisational situations such as organisational size and structure; •
applicable laws, regulations and other such requirements; •
environmental management methods and techniques; •
environmental science and technology; and •
technical and environmental aspects of operations. •
An assessor should have knowledge of environmental management systems, environmental terminology, pollution abatement and control techniques and the type of organisation being audited – this includes knowledge of the sector and issues such as the size and complexity of the organisation. In addition, an assessor should have a sufficiently detailed knowledge of environmental laws and regulations to know whether an organisation has correctly identified all its applicable legal requirements related to its environmental aspects. Inspectors involved in the IEMA Acorn Scheme require the same competencies as those already outlined, but with additional training given in order ensure consistency of interpretation when judging degrees of EMS development against the guidance in BS 8555.
Auditors may gain certification to the International Register of Certified Auditors (IRCA) or other recognised national schemes such as the IEMA Register of Auditors. These registers provide programmes of Continuing Professional Development and recognition for the competence of auditors across environment, quality and health and safety auditing roles.
In-Brief
Certification is the process by which an organisation’s system (e.g. its •
EMS) is assessed for its conformity to the requirement of a standard (e.g. ISO 14001:2004).
Certification to any environmental standard will require : •
- A detailed understanding of legal requirements and a commitment to comply
- Evidence of continual improvement in environmental issues Certification Bodies (CBs) may be accredited to perform such •
assessments where they meet the criteria in ISO/IEC Guide 66 (ISO, 2003) or ISO / IEC 17021:2006 (from September 2006) .
1st, 2nd and 3rd party audits will make up an organisations audit •
programme.
Third-party certification assessment provides an independent appraisal •
of a management system.
An assessor conducts a visit as part of the initial certification process. •
Subsequent periodic surveillance and re-assessment visits are made to verify the continuing conformity of the organisation’s EMS to the standard and that the EMS has been properly implemented and maintained. Continual improvement must be evident.
Validation for EMAS can only take place when there is evidence of full •
legal compliance.
The competence requirements for assessors are laid down in the •
accreditation criteria of CBs offering certification of EMS’s and auditors may be placed on international (IRCA) or national (IEMA) registers.
EMS Certification: the ENDS Survey 2003 & 2006
In December 2003, the ENDS Report published the results of an opinion survey conducted jointly with the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment. It revealed widespread concern regarding the perceived integrity of certified EMS, with almost half of respondents believing that “certification bodies are not sufficiently competent” (ENDS, 2003), and 67% believing that “EMSs provide the basis for achieving significant environmental performance improvement that otherwise would not have been achieved”. Following this survey, and speaking at the EMS national Forum later that month, the UKAS external affairs Director, Roger Brockway, stated “we have let things slide and I think certification bodies have let things slide, and we have to take some responsibility for that” (ENDS, 2003).
Subsequently UKAS began a review to the system of accreditation in order to reassert the integrity of the certification process. In 2006, ENDS, along with IEMA, UKAS and the Environment Agency engaged in another survey to ascertain the opinions of professionals once again – with around 600 respondents, participation was almost twice that of 2003.
Interestingly, respondents views regarding the role of an EMS in enhancing environmental performance had changed relatively little, with 70% citing
EMS as the basis for driving performance improvements – a 3% gain on
2003, which while perhaps lower than one might expect, the report does suggest that few if any other voluntary tools could provide such assurance. With regards the question of legal compliance: over 90% believed that the
implementation of an EMS leads to better identification of legislative non- compliance.
Key findings are demonstrated below, and they demonstrate a belief among respondents that confidence in UKAS and certification bodies was growing, though it should be noted that organisations would be principally operating under the revised standard of ISO 14001:2004 at this point, and that to some extent this may have driven the confidence in the certification process also. The findings are outlined on the next page:
Over 95% of respondents were of the belief that an EMS can/ will reduce risk – 64% stating that performance between different organisations is variable.
85% of prospective purchasers said a supplier’s EMS would have some influence on their decision to buy but they would want additional evidence or product-specific criteria to be met.
Over 70% feel that verifiers and certifiers spend an appropriate amount of time on-site.
Greater than 80% believe certifiers and verifiers check at least for documentary evidence that a full internal evaluation of compliance has been carried out.
One-fifth felt that individual assessors within certifying/ verifying bodies do not provide consistent or comparable conclusions.
Three-quarters of respondents feel certifiers/verifiers spend an appropriate amount of time on assessments.
Source: Ends, 2006
Half of respondents feel that the credibility of accredited certified/verified EMSs has improved.
A small majority said their confidence in UKAS has not grown in the last 12 months
In Brief
An Accredited Certification Body is an organisation accredited by an •
authorising body such as UKAS (the United Kingdom Accreditation Service) to undertake third party assessment of management systems such as ISO14001 and to award and withdraw Certificates of registration to these standards.
Accredited certification means that organisations can demonstrate •
to shareholders, regulators and the public that their system has been audited, in the same way as are their financial accounts, by those with appropriate professional skills, and knowledge.
The British Government in its position statement believes accredited •
third party certification is important to realise many of the benefits of an EMS.
In most developed economies there is a body similar to the United •
Kingdom Accreditation Service.
In October 2006 a professional opinion survey involving more than •
600 environmental professionals revealed how effective they think environmental management systems (EMSs) really are. The survey was carried out jointly by ENDS, the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, the Environment Agency and UK Accreditation
Service and concluded that whilst confidence in UKAS had not grown significantly in the 3 no. years since the previous survey, many respondents had increased confidence in the credibility of certification bodies and 97% believed that an EMS will reduce environmental risk.
Since these surveys UKAS has undertaken an extensive review of its own accreditation processes based on stakeholder consultation. Greater attention was given to the assessment of auditor competence, the reporting of environmental performance and legal compliance and the role of the advisory committee within certification bodies. UKAS also increased its awareness campaign, promoting the benefits of UKAS-accredited certification to businesses across all industries. The most important acknowledgement of the benefits of accredited certification has been given through the work of the remas project. This three-year pan-European project provides evidence directly linking EMS with improved environmental performance, which in turn leads to improved regulatory performance. These findings effectively restored confidence in the integrity of UKAS-accredited EMS certification (see section 5.4 “remas”).
2.5 Management Systems and Legal Compliance
Continual management of environmental impacts requires a structured approach and EMS’s provide a way for an organisation to do this. Legal compliance (BS8555 – Phase 2 Stage 1-5; ISO 14001;2004 – 4.3.2 and 4.5.2) and good environmental performance are fundamental requirements of an EMS. A robust EMS should lead to improved environmental performance, including better and more consistent legal compliance. Regulators are supportive of accredited certification to ISO 14001:2004 as the basis for a systematic approach to managing environmental legal compliance (www.iema.net).
Figure 1 Key Elements of legal compliance in an EMS
Source: IEMA “Practioner” Vol 6, 2005