Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of Elsmar.com** with DuckDuckGo including content not in the forum - Search results with No ads.

How to Identify and Evaluate Environmental Aspects and Impacts

C

C Emmons

Ok - We seem to have come to a standstill regarding additional items for our Aspects/Impacts Hazards/Risks assessment for RC14001. I am sure we will add additional items to it during the ongoing review process but my initial concern is: Is this sufficient for my initial registration audit? I need to get the signifcance of each completed so I can get on with the process.

Suggestions? Input? ....
 

Attachments

Randy

Super Moderator
Most likely it will be....Remember the bit about continual improvement? Continual improvement applies here as well.

Think of the aspect and impact process as the branches or roots of a tree.....every year the tree grows (improves) and everything stretches out a bit more, either higher or deeper..
 
Last edited:
C

C Emmons

I had my "team" (mostly health and safety guys) on the phone for about 2 hours yesterday to enter the scoring information for our EHS&S Aspects/Impacts assessment. The highest possible score was 125 - decided initially that we would consider anything over a score of 50 as significant - however, we ended up with 16 items identied as significant. I understand that this incoporates health, safety, and security so I would expect the number to be a little higher - but does this seem too high to you guys? I am wondering if I should let my baseline at 75 and higher (only problem with that is it knocks a significant aspect for my corporate office off the list and I dont want to have "none" during the audit - your thoughts?
 

Attachments

V

Valeri

Ours seems to a similar ranking method to yours (possible high of 125) and we targeted 40 and above as significant.
 

Helmut Jilling

Auditor / Consultant
I had my "team" (mostly health and safety guys) on the phone for about 2 hours yesterday to enter the scoring information for our EHS&S Aspects/Impacts assessment. The highest possible score was 125 - decided initially that we would consider anything over a score of 50 as significant - however, we ended up with 16 items identied as significant. I understand that this incoporates health, safety, and security so I would expect the number to be a little higher - but does this seem too high to you guys? I am wondering if I should let my baseline at 75 and higher (only problem with that is it knocks a significant aspect for my corporate office off the list and I dont want to have "none" during the audit - your thoughts?

Each company will be different, depending on what they do, but 16 significant aspects is not a high number at. I would not adjust the "threshold" of 50, if the sole purpose is to reduce the number. Aspects are either significant or not, and playing with numbers does not change their true significance and impact. So if your analysis is accurate and suitable, the ones you identified as significant will in fact truly be significant. And those that are not significant, will seem appropriate as well. That is how you determine whether your scoring method is suitable.

Also, remember, just because an aspect has been determined to fall into the "significant" category does not mean you must take actions or make objectives. Managers still get to manage the process in a suitable manner.
 
V

Valeri

The count depends on which plant. Most of our die cast facilities identify 8-10; our steel products division average around 40, this includes our powder coating facility.
 
S

SaintStan

Beware of scoring thresholds !!
As an example: if you have a 'typical' FMEA style format, complete the exercise with scoring, then decide that anything over 100 (arbitrary for this example) is significant. What happens is that all the '101s' get actioned and focussed upon, whereas the '99s' get ignored.
Best approach is to sort the items in descending order of 'significance' and focus on the higher scoring ones as a priority with actions, targets, etc for reduction of the significance factor.
Just because something doesn't have a high (or above a particular level) significance factor, doesn't mean it cant be reduced further by implementing a simple action. The proverbial five-minute-fix.
One other option is to assign a responsibility against each entry in your list. Have each person with responsibility tot up their total score and assign a target for them to implement actions to reduce their total by (say) 5%.
 
O

Omeil

Hi All I need some information on a Risk Matrix for Legal requirements, its just a little confusing cause wouldn't you either comply or not comply with the regulation? Cause from the examples i have seen here they are rated from 1-5, its just not sure how you could rate an item on legal from 1-5. Could someone clarify this for me please thanks.

Omeil
 
Top Bottom