ISO 14001 Environmental Aspects and Impacts - The Chicken Bone Thread

Environmental Aspects

This is probably too long winded for this forum and not timely but here goes…

I have worked with two types of aspect identification procedures (those that try to numerically rank an aspect and those that use a yes/no (thumbs up/ thumbs down) significance determination. I prefer the thumbs up/ thumbs down approach, as I believe in simplicity. I am unsure about the added value of a numeric evaluation and arbitrary significance cutoff value. I believe that a numeric system imparts the appearance of objectivity that is not deserved.
As an ISO 14001 auditor I have observed significance procedures that used a FMEA type approach that I think missed the mark. This approach has a tendency to elevate only emergency type environmental aspects to significance.

I think the ISO 14001 standard expects an organization to identify, as significant, those aspects that they control (already have or should have operational controls) or can influence (improve performance). The best way I have found to do this is as follows:

1. Identify the relevant functions of the organization (department, manufacturing processes lines etc.) and prepare process flow diagrams listing the input (raw materials) and outputs (air emission, wastewater, other wastes) of each process.

2. In a table/matrix format list all the aspects of the process that you can possibly think of. Just list them. Don’t think about significance yet.

3. The table/matrix should have columns (like a spreadsheet) for each of the criteria you will evaluate the aspect for to determine significance. I like the following criteria (Regulatory Requirement, Unplanned Release, Cost/Economic Consideration, Other Interested Parties, and Significant Environmental Load). If you want I will elaborate on each of these criteria in another post.

4. Look at each of the aspects on the list and determine if it meets any of the significance criteria. Put an x in the criteria column if the aspect meets one of the criteria. If an aspect gets an x in any column it is significant. Those that do not get an x in a column are not significant.

I have found this approach to be simple, fast and effective in identifying those aspects of an organization that should be on its environmental radar screen. A key to making this aspect identification procedure work is to involve the right people in the process. If the quality department tries to do it in a vacuum it will fail. Involve representatives from the department (relevant function) when developing the process flow diagrams, aspect listing and significance determination. They know the process and will bring much valuable information to the procedure. Also, include an environmental professional on the team when you do this. They understand environmental aspects, regulations etc. and must be part of the aspect identification team.

The aspect identification work is critical to implementation of an effective EMS. If you don’t get this part right the rest of the EMS will suffer. You will be feeding the system the wrong environmental stuff. The result … garbage in…garbage out. Hire a competent consultant to help you with aspect identification. It should take them no more than a couple of day’s onsite to coach you through the process. The result will be well worth the investment.

[Randy]

Or......you can write each aspect on a chicken bone, toss all the bones into the air,, and the ones that land face up you can call your significant ones.

Prove me wrong....

All that is required is a method and that the method be followed.

Oh yeah, you don't even have to do anything with the ones that you determine to be significant. The choice is yours.

[kalehner]

Why would you want to do the chicken bone thing and then do nothing about the significant aspects? The reason we do this work is to try to improve our environmental performance, not just pass an audit. Also, I believe that a registrar could safely make a finding that the organization was not meeting its commitment to continual improvement and/or its commitment to prevention of pollution if the organization had identified significant aspects and then chose to do nothing about them.

[Randy]

4.3.1 States ".....The organization shall ensure that the aspects related to these significant impacts are considered in setting its environmental objectives."

"Shall consider" does not mean that it is mandatory to use them in setting objectives. It means to look at them and if you want use them fine, if not that's fine too. They just need to be taken into account.

The real reason behind doing this work is to manage our business in a more profitable manner by taking into consideration our environmental performance and improving upon it. By doing so our emphasis is placed on placing environmental considerations at the design and front end of process's where it is less expensive than at the waste end, ensuring that our business is as environmentally consious as possible by integrating protection of the environment into the full scope of what we do, and continuously striving to improve upon our activities.

This will tend to make us more profitable, and give everyone a nice warm fuzzy by protecting stupid owls, turtles, knatcatchers and creepy crawly's.

As far as I'm concerned, continual improvement is system wide and not just related to aspects, O&T's.

Re-acquaint yourself with the phrase 4.3.1 "....over which it can be expected to have an influence.."

Toodles

[db]

Marc asked:
__________________________________________
Would you consider sharing the formula (or preferably an example of your spreadsheet as an attachment in this thread) you use?
__________________________________________

Sorry about taking so long to respond. I really can’t give provide the example for propriety reasons, but reading the guest’s comments (please register, we need your thinking) is pretty close to what we do. The key is to get the aspects down in writing so you can analyze it. I also looked at both Marc and Sam’s attachments and they both appear to be workable.

I’ve known others to base aspects off process maps. We all know that they are required by ISO 9000 (Oh sorry, wrong topic and wrong soapbox).

Dave B (the other Dave)

[Randy]

Here is an excerpt of an Aspect/Impact evaluation tool used by an organization I have been assisting. Explanatory info is in a table at the bottom.

[Marc]

Thanks!

[kalehner]

Here is a link to a site where you can download a procedure that covers 4.3.1, 4.3.3 and 4.3.4 and all the supporting forms.

http://envcompsys.com - Link was: /products/aspect_download.htm