What are advantages and disadvantages of full integration of 14001 with 9001? Please coment on extent of documentation required including QA Manual? Cost? What happens when "the auditor(s) come? Anyting else?

Organizations I have sampled seem to prefer separate systems and separate audits?

Help!

What are the "A's" or "D's" of integration?

Lets see.......
A - You don't need seperate internal audit, corrective & preventive action, document control, management review, & records control, and other stuff like that. You may be able to get by with fewer internal audits and auditors because of the integration. People won't need to learn 2 different systems.

D - You may not be able to justify some jobs because of redundency. One system may seem to trample on the other at times. The system may have the tendency to become over documented.

ISO 14001 requires less documentation than 9001, but combining the systems may actually cause a reduction in the overall level.

The auditor's (Registrar type) won't care. They will get paid the same. Many times the auditors will be qualified to audit both systems, so check with your Registrar.

I always recommend (just like with my present client) to integrate as much as possible. Integration of the 2 systems helps reduce confusion.:bigwave:

Randy, thanks for the prompt feedback.

I'm in the middle of the same thing. See ISO 14001 in Transportation (Truck) - Small to Medium Transportation (http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=3737)

I talked to our Registrar and seems few of their clients have gone to total integration even though they offer discounts (days and $)

Have talked to some other organizations who considered it. Two common comments, either they have separate management structures for QMS/EMS or the QMS is much more mature than EMS and they don't want to "nuts around with change".

We are still evaluating.

Do please keep us informed.

The QMS is more mature than the EMS? I keep hearing that, and my answer is BS. Organizations have been managing environmental issues, communicating, training, making corrections and all that crap for quite some time. What we have now is a codification of of an official style of "Management System".

During implementation take the approach of using everything that was in place, bring it line with the required 17 elements of 14K and clean up existing procedures. Top it off with an internal audit system with a review (at least one annual) by "Top Management", and TA-DAAA you'll have what is needed.

It works for me..:bigwave:

Randy, based on your last comments that's what we did and
TA-DAAAA we were just 5 minutes ago recommended for successful Registration. (Eleven action items Step 1 and zero Step 2)

It really isn't "rocket science'; mostly common sense. Randy is right on, most organizations management the environmental issues. It seems when you add "ISO" all the sudden it gets complicated.

Am I good or what??;)

Please recommend me to others Goose ol' Boy. The approach I gave you is the one I recommend as a consultant. If it's done right $$$ can be saved during implementation.

Congradulations on your success. :bigwave:

Randy, unfortunately we could not afford you high $ consultants; however, if I get the opportunity I will recommend you!!

Does anyone have a high level flow chart for an EMS system?

I'm pulling together the 9001 and 14001 systems - integrating them - but one thing I have never had is an example flow of an EMS for a small company. One from a big company would be fine - just looking for something to get some ideas from.

I've got a good flow chart....I just can't find it.

I'll get back to you:biglaugh:

I have one from a training class...but its not electronic...
Can you send me an address - or a FAX #...it's 11 pages.

There is 1 guaranteed EMS flowchart attached as promised.:bigwave:

Thanks, Randy! But... :( I'm looking for an example of an actual 'procedure' where aspects ar identified and such. Or - do you not need a documented procedure on your EMS. Maybe I'm reading something into this. I'll have to think about this for a few minutes...

Let me dig through the ol' Randy archives....:eek:

I am checking with our Env Mgr to see if she has a 'high level flow chart' that she uses for this. I know we have a 'procedure' but it is text based not flow based. I've left her a voicemail and will post anything she provides (if willing to share) in another post. I know we have an audit on Feb 7 & 8 for certification.

The last I heard, she took the approach not to 'integrate' the two systems - and I haven't been told anything otherwise. This manager is very much a 'silo' type, I've been kept completely out of the implementation loop for the 14001 regardless of my request to be included from the begining and many offeres of information and help (much to my chagrin).

Here is a procedure I have... I can dig up another in a bit.

Thanks! That will do it! I sure appreciate it! I'll throw this puppy into flow chart form and I have what I need!

Marc, Here is another one for your list.

Issued By:

Approved By:

Environmental Aspects, Objectives and Targets,
and Management Programs

I PURPOSE

1.1 This procedure defines the mechanism for the identification and significance evaluation of the environmental aspects of Covercraft Industries, Inc. in order to determine those aspects which have actual or potential significant impacts upon the environment. It also defines the framework within which Covercraft shall establish and maintain environmental objectives and targets and environmental management programs.

II RESPONSIBILITY

1.1 The Quality/Environmental Systems Team (QuEST) includes representation from all appropriate functional areas and departments.

1.2 The QuEST will identify environmental aspects of operations that can be controlled or influenced.

1.3 The environmental aspects and significant aspects associated with the operations of semi-
permanent on-site contractors are covered by this procedure.

III DEFINITIONS

1.1 Environmental Aspect: element of an organization's activities, products or services that can interact with the environment.

1.2 Environmental Objective: overall environmental goal, arising from the environmental policy, that an organization sets itself to achieve, and which is quantified where practicable.

1.3 Environmental Target: detailed performance requirement, quantified where practicable, applicable to the organization or parts thereof, that arises from the environmental objectives and that needs to be set and met in order to achieve those objectives.

1.4 Environmental Management Program: the means, time frames and personnel responsible for
achieving an objective and target.

1.5 Interested Parties: include employees and the community. Their input is obtained through the
implementation of NOP-01-05 Environmental Training and Awareness and NOP-01-06 Environmental Communication.

IV PROCEDURES

1 Identification of Environmental Aspects

1.1 Using pertinent plant information (e.g., process flow diagrams, plant layout maps, etc.), the QuEST documents all relevant activities, processes and services in which to identify aspects.

1.2 The environmental aspects are to be identified and documented on form NOF-01-01 Environmental Aspect Identification.

1.3 The QuEST will identify the specific environmental aspects using General Aspect Categories. General Aspect Categories shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:

Air Emissions
Wastewater Discharges
Liquid & Solid Wastes
Energy Usage
Stormwater Discharges
Water Usage
Storage Tanks
Material Usage
Noise
Odor
Natural Environment
Land Condition

1.4 Lists of the aspects identified are maintained and reviewed by the QuEST at least every six months to identify any new aspects that should be added and any old aspects that should be deleted. Aspects identified through implementation of NOP-01-03 Environmental Review of Projects are incorporated into the lists of aspects.

2. Determination of Significant Aspects

2.1 The QuEST reviews and evaluates the aspects identified and determines their significance using the criteria in 2.2 below. Where a new aspect is incorporated into the lists of aspects (see 1.4 above), it will be reviewed and evaluated by the QuEST to determine significance.

2.2 The environmental aspects may be considered by the QuEST to be "significant" where the aspect:
Is subject to relevant legislation, regulation, permit requirements, and/or other requirements.
This will include aspects associated with processes and activities if:

Environmental regulations or other requirements specify controls
and conditions, information must be provided to outside authorities, and/or, there are or may be periodic inspections or enforcements by these authorities.
This will also include aspects that are addressed in the facility business plan or other applicable documents.

Is subject to a potential accidental release (liquid or gas only) that is regulated or that could be of sufficient quantity to cause environmental concern. These aspects are managed and controlled through implementation of environmental procedure NOP-01-07 Emergency Preparedness and Response.

Pertains to energy usage.

Is subject to high environmental loading, due to one or more of the following
criteria:

Toxicity (compositional characterization of materials and wastes)
Amounts (volumes and masses of releases)
Amounts (consumption of renewable and non-renewable resources)
Frequencies of episodes
Severity of actual or potential impacts

2.3 The rationale for significance and insignificance will be documented on NOF-01-01 Environmental Aspects Identification.

3. Establishing and Maintaining Objectives and Targets

3.1 The QuEST establishes and maintains environmental objectives and targets for all significant aspects. Objectives and targets are consistent with the environmental policy and are one of three types: control, improve, or investigate.

3.2 When establishing objectives and targets, consideration is given to:

Significant aspects
Environmental, legal and other requirements
Technological options
Financial, operational and business requirements
Views of interested parties

3.3 Performance against objectives and targets is reviewed at least every six months by the QuEST and reported at the management review meeting. Refer to NOP-01-13 Environmental Management System Management Review.

4. Establishing and Maintaining Environmental Management Programs

4.1 The QuEST establishes and maintains an environmental management program for achieving objectives and targets. These programs are reviewed at six (6) month intervals and updated as required.

4.2 Environmental management programs identify the means, time frames and those responsible for achieving associated objectives and targets. Responsibility is identified at each relevant function and level of the organization.

V FORMS

Environmental Aspects Identification - NOF-01-01
Environmental Aspects Objectives and Targets - NOF-01-02
Environmental Management Program - NOF-01-03

VI RECORDS

Records are maintained in accordance with procedure NOP-01-11 Environmental Records.

VII ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS

Environmental Management System Management Review - NOP-01-13
Emergency Preparedness and Response - NOP-01-08
Environmental Regulations and Other Requirements - NOP-01-02
Environmental Review of Projects - NOP-01-03
Environmental Communication - NOP-01-06
Environmental Training and Awareness - NOP-01-05
Monitoring and Measurement - NOP-01-09
Environmental Records - NOP-01-11

Thanks, Sam. Between your procedure and Randy's attachement (env016 aspect and impact.doc) I have what I needed. Your help is appreciated! :thedeal:

One of our divisions is pushing "integration" really hard, but one issue I've already run into is that our registrar (who we cannot change, it is dictated by corporate contract) does not have any auditors trained to audit to BOTH QS/ISO AND ISO14. So no matter what we're looking at totally separate audit days, separate audits, etc. Sure, they might get to that point in some years, but in the meantime, I'm not advocating integration here at all.

One thing to watch for - registrars may not be prepared to do a combined audit. We tried a combined audit for 9001: 2000 and 14001. The registrar did not have a unified checklist, so they had to fill out both, swap pages between auditors, etc. Kind of confusing.

It did seem redundant on another that we did QS/TE one week, and three weeks later 14001. Doc control, corrective action, etc. were audited twice within a month. We were going to try to combine the audits, but could not get the auditors schedules to work out.

Hopefully the registrars will put in systems (checklists, agendas, etc.) to have a combined audit flow more smoothly.

Oh, it's not easy to find auditors who are capable of doing both QMS and EMS ! It was part of my job when I worked for the registrar. I handled the assessor training and qualifications for the EMS assessors and cross-training them into quality was a pet project of mine because some clients were asking for combined audits.

The EMS guys confessed that quality was not something that came easy to them, and a couple of the (rare) QMS guys who had potential that we attempted to train into EMS flat out quit because they said that there were simply too many regulations and potential hazards to learn without years of experience and training.

The time reduction for a combined audit was almost non-existant. Both standards may be looking somewhat at the same things in the overlap (mgt. review, doc control, etc.) but the particulars of what they're looking at are different so the time is practically the same.

We generated two separate reports that addressed the specifics of each standard that was being audited. Remember that although the audits for both may be "coincidentally" at the same time, they are two separate certifications and we maintained independent filing records for them.

The benefits to the client in having a combined audit were a slight reduction in expenses (one airfare vs. two- but the visit is longer so hotel and meal expenses are the same as if two auditors ), and as Tom pointed out, less interruption into the same departments.

However, some clients insisted to keep them separate because they wanted the "professionals" of each specialty rather than someone who was mostly one thing but capable of the other. (and I don't mean any offense to anyone who is one of these hybrids! )

To each his own. As the number of 900X registered companies registering to 14001 continues to grow, the demand for combined audits will grow and the registrars will adapt their auditing staff and auditing tools.

That was me up there. Sometimes I get booted out of here with no warning until the post "posts".