Delivering solutions The Dual Regulatory Track New Answers in a New Age Presented to the 2006 CUPA Conference Burlingame, CA Winter 2006.

delivering solutions

The Dual Regulatory TrackNew Answers in a New Age

Presented to the 2006 CUPA ConferenceBurlingame, CA

Winter 2006


Discussion Goals

The Idea of the Dual Track

EMS – Facts & Fiction

Review the Experience of other States

Opportunities in California


The Idea of the Dual Track


Premise

The law and legal compliance is just the beginning of good environmental stewardship


Environmental Duty Levels

Compliance Performance Protection Restoration Stewardship


How do we go “beyond compliance” What does that

mean?

How do we get there?

How do we maintain compliance in a BC world?


What are your current views on EMS? What do you know?

On what is this based?

A reading of the Standard?

An understanding of the Standard?

Viewing application of the Standard?


EMS Design and Construction - Overview


How far can the law take us?


What can take us further

Does the law harness the best of the organization and its people?• Creativity?• Passion?• Inspiration?• Responsibility?


EMS Fundamentals

Catalogue ALL of an organization’s environmental risks and impacts

Prioritize those risks and impacts Plan for and implement programs to

exert maximum control over those risks and impacts deemed important, with the goal of minimizing them to the greatest extent practicable


Management Systems

Review & revise as

necessary

Establish PolicyCarry out analysis of

current positionEstablish goals &

objectives

Design & implement management system to achieve above

Audit performance of management system -

is it achieving your goals and objectives

PLANPLAN

DODO

CHECKCHECK

ACTACT

WAITWAIT

IDENTIFYIDENTIFY

REACTREACT

CURECURE

Typical reactive approach Vs. EMS proactive approach


Overview of Environmental Management Systems An environmental management system is a formal approach

to managing the aspects of an organisation’s activities, processes, products and services that have, or could have, an impact on the environment.

EF

FE

CT

IVE

NE

SS

EF

FE

CT

IVE

NE

SS

A pro-active approach to assessing environmental impacts in the long-term business planning and decision-making process (sustainability).

A tool for delivering environmental performance improvement.

A mechanism for understanding the environmental effects associated with business operations and complying with legal requirements.

Foster a sense of responsibility for the environment amongst all employees


What is the right percentage of employees . . . To be involved in compliance? To be aware of legal

requirements? To be thinking about

environmental issues?


Overview of EMS

EMS logic Obtain senior management commitment Develop an environmental policy Identify all environmental aspects and associated impacts Prioritise the impacts and manage all significant aspects Set objectives & targets for improvement in priority areas Develop & implement environmental improvement programmes to

achieve the goals and objectives Monitor progress towards objectives and targets - is it achieving your

aims Perform internal audits and management reviews - review and revise

your system as necessary External communication to stake-holders - Environmental Report


Recognizing EMS Design Alternatives

Model 1:• 14001 Conformity

Model 2:• 14001 Conformity and Compliance Assurance

Model 3:• 14001 Conformity, Compliance Assurance, and

Environmental Performance (including the product)

Model 4:• 14001 Conformity, Compliance Assurance,

Environmental Performance, and Sustainability (including the product)


EMS Design Model 1 Basic 14001 Conformity Design Criteria

• framework of ISO 14001:1996(E) Advantages

• Informs upper management, trains some employees, meets acknowledged international standard

• Shares a minimal level of environmental responsibility, begins progress beyond compliance minimums, some cost savings

Examples• Gladfelter Corp., General Motors, Delphi Group, Sony

Limitations• no assurance of legal compliance, leaves resources and

money on the table; misses alignment with essential stakeholder interests, no metrics


EMS Design Model 2 - Conformity and Compliance Assurance Design Criteria

• 14001 requirements, provision for compliance, integrated compliance auditing, examination of unregulated aspects, employee education, supplier involvement, community involvement

Advantages• expands management involvement, extends reach of

improvement opportunities, begins basis for alignment with regulators and customers

Examples• Ford Motor Company, Caterpillar, IBM Storage Division,

Nellcor Puritan Bennett, Monsanto Limitations

• regulatory benefits, customer and community alignment, supplier leveraging still left untapped, investment returns stranded, no metrics


EMS Design Model 3 - Adding Environmental Performance Design Criteria

• pollution prevention hierarchy, waste minimization audits, supplier involvement, employee education, distributed responsibility, communication programmes; some “other” requirements

Advantages• aligns with customer priorities, leverages activities of all

employees, suppliers, and community awareness• creates basis for eco-efficiency through metrics and diagnostic

tools, regulatory innovation, core business performance contributions

Examples• Allergan, Inc., Toyota Motor Company, Intel Corp., Toshiba,

Matsushita Heavy Industries, Panasonic Group, Quantum Corporation, Mercedes-Benz U.S. International, Inc.

Limitations• Not a leadership position; does not advance sustainability, limits

use of available potential, continues to strand resources


EMS Design Model 4 - Pursuing Sustainable Business Practices Design Criteria

• elements of EMAS, Agenda 21, ICC Charter, environmental product design, EH&S building design

Advantages• takes full advantage of regulatory innovation and customer

alignment opportunities, metrics in place, maximizes supplier and employee involvement, stakes out clear leadership position

• creates nimble, future-ready, learning organization Examples

• BMW Group, Volvo Cars Group, Siemens AG, Siemens Nixdorf, Canon, Interface, IKEA, Coors, SGS Thomson

Limitations• more up-front investment, increases visibility of

organization, elevates stakeholder expectations, stretches core business goals


Achieving The Environmental Management Plan Targets

track progress milestones get the goods who dunnit

rigor metrics

Policy Significant

Aspects

Objectives Targets Acti-

vities

Resources

required

Documentation

/Operational

Controls

Resp’ty Metric

/Meas-

ures

Time-

scale


The role of interested parties in objective setting View of stakeholders

• Certain aspects may be either high or low priority for different stakeholders

• Risk assessment by the organisation may not always be the same as the perception by interested parties

• Use feedback from stakeholders to prioritise objectives with a high impact on stakeholder groups

P7.4


Types of Resources in a Beyond Compliance World Time Human capital Money Management support New equipment Engagement with stakeholders,

regulators, customers, suppliers Etc. . . .


Legal and Other Requirements and Programme Development


Purposes of the ISO requirement Legal obligations are relevant to

environmental issues For many organizations, the legal

requirements fully drive their EMS The notion of a compliance-

focused EMS – Level 2 of our Model


Notions of Legal Compliance

Compliance – It’s better than jail Compliance – We need to be

confident Compliance – Is Performance

Possible? How do we measure compliance?


Other Requirements

Key to a good EMS Indication of sound EMS if other

requirements are understood and included


And what are “Other requirements?” Whadr they? What do you subscribe to? Corporate Requirements? International protocols? Industry codes/standards?


Elements of Conformity to the Requirement Catalogue Procedure

• How we get the info• How we stay current• Who’s gotta do the deeds• How we translate• How we deal with change


How we get the info

Tracking and cataloguing


How we stay current

Services, research, collaboration


Who’s gotta do the deeds

Compliance managers


How we translate

Work instructions and other plain speaking stuff


How we deal with change

MOC – See discussion below in Operational Controls


Be Brave


Creating the Register

Rules Text Citation Responsibility Status Tracking (Person & Method) Change Management


Sound EMS Attributes

Meaningful Metrics exist for each element of the System

Bad metrics• EMS Training - # of Es trained, sign in sheets• EMS Objectives – only trailing metrics of

performance• Management Review – we do it• Auditing – minimal non-conformities


Good Metrics

EMS Training – continually improving understanding (how do we measure this?)

EMS Objectives – trailing metrics blended with leading metrics, output metrics, and outcome metrics

Management Review – Management is increasingly involved, and the EMS is an increasingly important business tool (how do we measure this?)

Auditing – we do it more, longer, and our auditees and auditors consider it one of the most enjoyable and valued tasks they perform


EMS Diagnostics – Key Questions & Tools


Evaluating the Quality of EMS Policy statement Objectives and Targets Program (distribution of responsibility) Auditing Approach (including NCPA) Metrics Continuous Improvement Management Commitment and

Involvement


EMS Diagnostics at Desk Level


Policy statement Indicators of Strength

• Practical and usable• Can be used to audit the system• Makes short term and long term commitments• Nature of business is clear

Indicators of Weakness• Generic (what kind of business is it?)• Vague – no principles of action• Products missing• Actions beyond the fenceline missing

– Stakeholders, community, suppliers, contractors


Key Diagnostic Questions Does the scope of the EMS include:

• the organization’s products?• the organization’s manufacturing

processes? Does the EMS Policy Statement include:

• a statement of action regarding supplier and contractor management?

• clear commitments to informative public disclosure of EMS information beyond the policy statement itself?

• a statement of action to go beyond compliance minimums?


Objectives and Targets

Indicators of Strength• Os refer to business activities• All Ts are quantified and time-bound• Require action across the business • Balance of maintain, improve, study

Indicators of Weakness• Os are generic• Timelines and quantities/performance missing• Can all be done by Env. Dept.


Key Diagnostic Questions

How many were involved in developing?

What is the budget for Os&Ts? How was stakeholder involvement

obtained? How do these relate to core

business performance goals/targets?


EMS Plan or Program (distribution of responsibility) Indicators of Strength

• At least 30% of plant population involved• Timelines balance short and long term• Capital investment is called for

Indicators of Weakness• Too few actors named• Not broken down into practical actions• Metrics missing• Not aligned with key business goals


Key Diagnostic Questions Does the EMS Plan or Program

-List a wide array (i.e. more than 10) persons as responsible for carrying out actions or activities to support targets?

-Contain commitments by persons in all operating areas of the organization to contributing actions to support targets?

-Call for inclusion of performance against EMS goals and tasks within the employee evaluation and management performance review processes?


Auditing Approach Indicators of Strength

• Written protocol that changes annually• Open ended questions• Team is large and multi-functional• Continuing Education• Audit reports are used as management tools

Indicators of Weakness• Team is all EHS people• Yes/no questions; no evolution of protocol• Clear teaching on distinction of corrective and

preventive action is missing


Key Diagnostic Questions Does the EMS call for:

-Disciplinary consequences for failure to timely complete nonconformances?

-A good balance among corrective and preventive actions?

-A requirement that nonconformances and other corrective and preventive actions must be propagated across the organization as best practices?


Experience of Other States

Wisconsin – Green Tier• www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/caer/cea/environmental

Texas – Clean Texas• www.cleantexas.org/

New Jersey – New Jersey Performance Track• www.state.nj.us/dep/dsr/bscit.htm

Colorado – Environmental Partnership • www.cdphe.state.co.us/el/elp/elphom.asp


Edward L. QuevedoWSP Environmental

261 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 425 Palo Alto, CA 94301

Mobile: +001.415.806.0355 Email: [email protected]

Tel: (00)1 650 326 7440 Fax:(00) 1 650 326 7467

405 Fremont St.

San Francisco, California 94103Tel: (00) 1 415 402 2207 Fax: (00) 1 415 433 6730

And Offices Worldwide

Delivering solutions The Dual Regulatory Track New Answers in a New Age Presented to the 2006 CUPA Conference Burlingame, CA Winter 2006.

Documents

environmental compliance

california slide

solutions ems design

environmental impacts

dual track slide

ems proactive approach

solutions discussion

construction overview