Would anyone have a cross walk, a matrix showing where the ANSI Z10 headings fit into the QM? ANSI/AIHA Z10 recivedfinal approval by ANSI and it will be issued in September.

As a Management System Standard, ANSI Z10 would have certain common requirements with ISO 9001, such as management reviews, corrective and preventive actions, internal audits, etc... but since Z10 is an Occupational Health & Safety Standard, it does not "fall under" the QM. You can definitely find ways to optimize and integrate Q with OH&S, but the two systems are aiming at two different aspects of your business.

Thanks for responding. Here is the crux of the matter: The qulaitry policy is specific to the issue that quality, risk and safety go hand in hand. Does that change your mind on the issue?

"Quality Policy
Chem One Ltd. wants to be our customers' preferred supplier for products we can safely handle. Chem One is committed to comply with the requirements of the ISO 9001:2000 standard and our customers' requirements. We strive to continually improve the effectiveness of our management systems within a framework of supportable structures designed to reduce commercial, regulatory, environmental, safety, health and security risks.

Quality Goal
Continuously improve our commercial performance within a framework of defensible systems designed to minimize litigation, commercial, regulatory, environmental, safety, health and security risks."

My thoughts are that I better be able to integrate Z 10 to demonstate that the quality policy has been implemented.

My thoughts are that I better be able to integrate Z 10 to demonstate that the quality policy has been implemented. Following that line of thought you would have to implement ISO 14001 (or something equivalent) because you mentioned the word environment. Ditto for the word security.

If you want to implement ANSI Z10, that is great. But just because you mentioned the word safety in the "Q policy", it does not mean that YOU HAVE to do it.
PS I had several comments about the policy statement and the goal, but I think it is better if we leave that alone.
PS2 If you were to implement Z10, you would probably be one of the first organizations in the World to do so. As you mentioned yourself, the document is scheduled for publication in the near future, after a looooong delay.:agree1:

Following that line of thought you would have to implement ISO 14001 (or something equivalent) because you mentioned the word environment. Ditto for the word security.

If you want to implement ANSI Z10, that is great. But just because you mentioned the word safety in the "Q policy", it does not mean that YOU HAVE to do it.
PS I had several comments about the policy statement and the goal, but I think it is better if we leave that alone.
PS2 If you were to implement Z10, you would probably be one of the first organizations in the World to do so. As you mentioned yourself, the document is scheduled for publication in the near future, after a looooong delay.:agree1:

I understand from our contractor's safety officer that OSHA will be pushing (if not requiring) Z10 for VPP facilities. The Department of Energy Strategic Petroleum Reserve may also be implementing Z10 soon -- particularly if OSHA aggressively pushes it. We have held off on implementing OHSAS 18001 because of Z10.

Following that line of thought you would have to implement ISO 14001 (or something equivalent) because you mentioned the word environment. Ditto for the word security.

If you want to implement ANSI Z10, that is great. But just because you mentioned the word safety in the "Q policy", it does not mean that YOU HAVE to do it.
PS I had several comments about the policy statement and the goal, but I think it is better if we leave that alone.
PS2 If you were to implement Z10, you would probably be one of the first organizations in the World to do so. As you mentioned yourself, the document is scheduled for publication in the near future, after a looooong delay.:agree1:
RE: "PS I had several comments about the policy statement and the goal, but I think it is better if we leave that alone": Please do make the comments, it would be very much appreciated. The rgistrar allowed the policy but he raised his eyebrows several times before he accepted it. Maybe you can shed some light on it.

I understand from our contractor's safety officer that OSHA will be pushing (if not requiring) Z10 for VPP facilities. The Department of Energy Strategic Petroleum Reserve may also be implementing Z10 soon -- particularly if OSHA aggressively pushes it. We have held off on implementing OHSAS 18001 because of Z10.


If you can show an advantage of Z10 over 18001 take it. Remember though, 18001 is internationally recognized (also supported and developed) and Z10 isn't. The big issue for folks that have to do an OHSMS because of business concerns is whether or not Z10 will be acceptable or not outside the US.

A question that comes up is:

Who is going to provide the 3rd party assessing services and how are they to be accredited? (or will just any jackleg safety guy/company be able to do it?)

Will Z 10 will set a standard for US companies to comply with due diligence requirements in tort cases?

It is a US standard and someone might use to make a claim that a firm was negligent if it fails to consider the elements it includes.

Who is going to provide the 3rd party assessing services and how are they to be accredited? (or will just any jackleg safety guy/company be able to do it?) Randy, ANAB will shortly start an accreditation scheme for the ANSI Z10 document. Read this here (http://www.anab.org/HTMLFiles/docs/Z10release.pdf). But, I am sure, you already new that, didn't you? http://www.flashplayer.com/forum/images/smilies/search.gif

Yeah, pretty much. The thing (Z10) costs $65 for non-members BTW. My copy is on the way.

Hang with me for a second please: 1) If Quality is the degree to which a set of inherent product, system or process fulfill requirements and 2) adherence to regulations is a condition in ISO 9001, don't we have to address safety and risk as they may determine the degree to which we fulfill quality requirements?

I believe FDA calls this "Quality Risk Management" which it defines as a systematic process for assessment, control, communication and review of risks to the quality of the product across its lifecycle.

Hang with me for a second please: 1) If Quality is the degree to which a set of inherent product, system or process fulfill requirements and 2) adherence to regulations is a condition in ISO 9001, don't we have to address safety and risk as they may determine the degree to which we fulfill quality requirements? Sorry, but I do not have the time to engage in this exchange now. There are several other threads that discuss the issue of bringing non-quality related topics into ISO 9001 based systems. I suggest you do a search. Be aware that there are dissenting positions on this topic, so you will be able to find people that support whatever position you think is wise because it matches the one you are inclined to accept. Below is a simple cut and paste from ISO 9001, albeit a paragraph that few people read. The bold font is my empahsis.


0.4 Compatibility with other management systems
This International Standard has been aligned with ISO 14001:1996 in order to enhance the compatibility of the two standards for the benefit of the user community. This International Standard does not include requirements specific to other management systems, such as those particular to environmental management, occupational health and safety management, financial management or risk management. However, this International Standard enables an organization to align or integrate its own quality management system with related management system requirements. It is possible for an organization to adapt its existing management system(s) in order to establish a quality management system that complies with the requirements of this International Standard.

If you can show an advantage of Z10 over 18001 take it. Remember though, 18001 is internationally recognized (also supported and developed) and Z10 isn't. The big issue for folks that have to do an OHSMS because of business concerns is whether or not Z10 will be acceptable or not outside the US.

A question that comes up is:

Who is going to provide the 3rd party assessing services and how are they to be accredited? (or will just any jackleg safety guy/company be able to do it?)

Randy,

I agree with everything you have said; in fact, if it were up to me, our contractor would have implemented OHSAS 18001 a long time ago and their current ISO 14001 registrar would have audited them to that standard.

The question now for them is whether or not Z10 is a better standard for them because of VPP membership. We will be watching for what OSHA does now. I could be wrong, but I suspect that the same registrars that audit for OHSAS 18001 will audit for Z10. How ANAB and RABQSA approach certifications for registrars, training providers, and individual auditors is another story.

As they say, "stay tuned!"

That paragraph was very helpful and I did miss its importance. I will look to integrate 9001 clauses into the other magament systems instead of the other way around.