EMS AUDITING CONCEPTS AND ISO 14000

The Environmental Management System (EMS) audit is based on the generic concept of auditing. Simply put, an audit, any audit, is the comparison of actual conditions to expected conditions, and a determination as to whether one is in conformance or not in conformance. This is the same philosophy used to perform financial, quality, regulatory compliance, and systems audits. It is prudent to first review what the common elements are in order to better understand why audits are different.

There are several definitions of audit components that are common to any type of audit. ISO 14001defines these terms for EMS audits, but they apply in other cases also. As a matter of fact, the ISO committee decided not to create auditing standards for other types of audits, such as compliance audits, although it was originally considered. The main reason for deleting the work items was because the concepts and processes defined in 14011, originally intended for EMS audits, were generic enough to be applied “as is” to other types of audits.

An audit is fundamentally a comparison of audit evidence to audit criteria to determine findings. The evidence is the objective information collected through interviews, visual reconnaissance, and documentation review. The audit criteria are the expectations or “rules” of how conditions should be. It is the criteria that distinguish one audit from the next. For example, in compliance auditing, the criteria are the regulations. With an EMS audit, the criteria would be the description of the expected system elements. In this case, the EMS criteria would be that described in ISO 14001, the specification standard.

When evidence is compared to criteria, one can determine whether the audited entity does or does not conform. This determination is a finding, and a finding can either be one of conformance, or non-conformance. Therefore, an audit will always produce findings, even if what is being audited is in full conformance with criteria.

Other key definitions to be aware of with auditing are: objectives, scope, auditee, client, and auditor. The audit objective(s) is simply why you are conducting an audit; usually the reason is to demonstrate conformance to stated criteria. The audit scope is what entity is being audited, and can be a company, a site, or unit within a site or company.

In the ISO 14000 realm, there is a clear distinction between the auditee and client. The auditee is the entity being audited. The client is the party commissioning the audit. For example, a client can be the customer, and the auditee a supplier to that customer. In ISO 14000, this distinction is important because the client sets the scope, objectives, and plan for an audit, not the auditee, although it is expected the auditee will be involved and cooperate.

The auditor is the one actually collecting evidence and determining findings. The auditor can be comprised of several individuals on a team. There are requirements in ISO 14001 that state that those performing functions within the EMS, such as the auditors, be qualified in their tasks. This means the auditors must have received training in EMS auditing. However, there may be audit team members who do not have the training, but are on the team bec

The Difference Between Compliance Auditing and Systems Auditing In ISO 14001

Often however, there is confusion between regulatory compliance auditing and EMS auditing. This is because there are many elements of regulatory compliance that overlap with the EMS. Recall that the criteria in a compliance audit are the applicable regulations, whereas the criteria in an EMS audit would be ISO 14001. But does not ISO 14001 address compliance? The answer is yes, but from a system standpoint, not performance.

In other words, the standard requires that certain procedures exist regarding identification of legal and other requirements, that periodic compliance assessments be performed, that legal requirements be considered in setting objectives and targets, and that there be a commitment to compliance. However, actually being in compliance is a performance issue, and out of the purview of ISO 14001.

Of course, a system that is constantly out of compliance or does not identify and initiate action to correct noncompliances, will eventually fail due to system failure. The subtle, yet important point is that during an EMS audit, identified regulatory noncompliances are relevant only to the extent that they reflect a potential system problem. The finding therefore is not that the site is out of compliance with a given regulation, but that the noncompliance means some EMS element is not conformed to. For example, a regulatory noncompliance can be related to a problem with training, recordkeeping, or monitoring and measurement.

The EMS auditor is not to do a compliance audit as part of the EMS audit. If, as part of the statistical sampling to verify EMS element requirements, the auditor identifies a regulatory noncompliance, he or she treats it as any other evidence.

This point has been difficult to accept, especially in U.S. industry because of our long history of regulatory enforcement. The EMS auditor needs to constantly remember that compliance auditing is being done separately as part of the EMS requirements itself (4.5.1, paragraph 3) and to stay focused on the criteria at hand – ISO 14001 and the site’s EMS. There may be legal requirements regarding noncompliances encountered during the EMS audit, but this should be decided and addressed in the audit plan.

In summary, the goal of the compliance audit is to verify compliance with regulations, whereas the EMS audit’s goal is to verify that the EMS conforms to planned arrangements, including ISO 14001.

Effects of ISO 9001 Implementation

Overall we can say that a company sought certification primarily to meet internal needs rather than as a response to external market forces. However the first action to be certified seems as a proactive response, we could not see a clear effort in the company to evaluate the actual results of this process.

Despite all, it has been stated that the certification has enabled them to achieve higher quality, productivity thus product reliability and increase in customer satisfaction. From the aspect of cost dimension it was declared that ISO 9001 implementations had moderately positive impacts on cost reductions by the increase in productivity and decreases in spoilage, rework and scrap. A factor affecting the occurrence of previous impacts is careful selection of the appropriate supplier.

Overall the most important impact of certification was stated to be the improvements in the brand image of the company from the viewpoint of their customers. This will also be very advantageous in the retention of existing customers and attraction of new ones. As a result of the synergy between the stated improvements company achieved a significant competitive advantage compared to competitors that are not certified.

Company has neither any application nor any action regarding TQM and quality costs.