1. Environmental Management System
To Certify or Not to Certify
Pros and Cons of
ISO Certification

2. What started it all and how was it developed
Qld Environmental Protection Act 1994
Environmental Management System
developed
ISO Certification
received EMS certification in November 1996
EMS Manual – St Lucia campus
University School and Centres may hold copies and/or access at website.

3. ü Period of Creation Oct 96 Certification EMS Started Jun 96
EMS Complete
Sep 96
Pre-Assessment Audit
19 Observations
10 Non-conform.
Jun 95
300+ Page Manual
Dec 96
Presentation
Jun 95: Recycling was working and EO started to document. Considered documenting further waste disposal procedures. Was decided to develop an entire EMS covering all risks of the University.
Jun 96. the manual documentation was finally finished. What was created, with the help of 3 students along the way was a 300+ page manual. Unfortunately planning for the system had been developed for the development of the system and finished in Jun 96.
Sep 96. The pre-assessment audit by NATA found 15 non-conformances. With no conditions the system was okay for certification.
Oct 96. The system was finally certified.
Dec 96. The offical presentation to the Uni of the certification and photo op for the Uni exec.
Perceived positives of certification over the period:
Consolidated approach to environmental management across the entire University
Awareness of the system across the entire uni and the procedures being followed.
Identification of high risk areas and minimisation of impacts (risk management)
Reality of certification:
The University had the ‘tick’
Promotional opportunity for the University which is still being used today – we are the first university in australia with joint certification.

4. Period of Creation  Perception of Certification
Jun 95 – Dec 96
 Perception of Certification
Consolidated approach to environmental management across the St Lucia campus.
The St Lucia campus would be aware of, and, following the procedures.
All ‘high risk’ environmental activities would have been identified and addressed.
 Reality of Certification
St Lucia campus had the ‘tick’.
Promotional opportunity for the University (which is still being used today).

5. Period of Chaos Apr 97 Feb 97 Jun 97 Dec 97 Jan 97 15 Mini-Manuals
External Audit
16 Observations
4 Non-conform. 1 Condition
Feb 97
Internal Audit
Jun 97
Dec 97
Internal Audit
Jan 97
Jan 97. The first year of certification we only had 15 manuals (11 departments) who had the manual and were aware of it.
Feb 97. Had the first internal audit.
Apr 97. First external audit – 1 condition. Had to rectify this to keep certification. Started to see that the manual was not really workable as it was as we tried to rectify this condition.
Jun 97. We began disassembling the manual and changing the was the documents went together to make it more user friendly (which also helped for maintaining certification by easing management).
Dec 97. Internal audit showed everything progressing well.
During the period only negatives were seen of certification.
Heaps of documentation. Section was swamped with documentation.
Lack of University executive support. (related to the non-conformance)
Found there was a large gap between documentation and knowledge. We had a lot to learn about the system.
Trying to rectify non-conformances was a priority over making the system workable (improving the system).
Positives of the system.
Forced to look at the system and pull it apart. Probably wouldn’t have happened if it wasn’t for the audit.
We began setting objectives by developing plans (which was a requirement of the certification). We began planning the implementation.
15 Mini-Manuals

6. Period of Chaos  Advantages  Disadvantages Began setting objectives.
Jan 97 – Dec 97
 Advantages
Began setting objectives.
Developed action plans to implement the system.
 Disadvantages
Heaps of documentation. The section was swamped in paper work.
Found a large gap between documentation and ‘in house’ knowledge.
Rectifying non-conformances a priority and taking resources away from improving the system
(1 Ext Audit, 2 Int Audits).

7. Period of Redevelopment
External Audit
21 Observations
5 Non-conform. 1 Condition
10 year development plan
Mar 98
Sub Committee
Feb 98
Dept Manual Holders
Apr 98
Jun 98
Internal Audit
Jul 98
Oct 98
40 Depart's
Jan 98
Jan 98. surveyed the departments to get an idea of awareness. There was none.
Feb 98. Asked all departments to nominate manual holders to later become environmental contacts. These contacts would also be used to develop a ‘hands on’ review party.
Mar 98. Set up the St Lucia sub committee. This group took a degree of responsibility for driving the system in the departments.
The external audit was undertaken during a state of great flux. They accepted the way the system was going.
Apr 98. The groups began looking at the individual procedures, using guidelines set up by us and writing the procedures so they met what the departments were doing and legislation was complied with. We were finally developing a workable manual.
Jun 98. The internal audit happened in the middle and saw it all going along nicely.
Oct 98. the completed manual was issued with training sessions and was now in 40 departments.
At the same time, we developed a 10 year plan to give direction to the system as a whole.
Everything was going along nicely and we were ready to show off the newly developed system to the external auditors.
All we could see were positives of certification during this period.
We had full stakeholder involvement to help make a useable manual.
Increasing awareness of the system (and therefore its use)
Increased ownership beyond P&F and to the whole uni as should be required.
We were able to make a useable system, not just one that complied with certification.
Had senior management involvement.
We couldn’t see any real negatives.
Survey

8. Period of Redevelopment
Jan 98 – Oct 98
 Advantages
Increased stakeholder involvement.
Increased awareness of the system in key departments.
Increased ownership (beyond P&F).
Had senior and middle management involvement.
Note
Developed a useable system not just one that complied with certification.
 Disadvantages
Rectifying non-conformances still a priority but more time available to focus on the system
(1 Ext Audit, 1 Int Audit).

9. The Big Bang Feb 99 Nov 98 Report developed for managers.
External Audit
13 Observations
15 Non-conform. 1 Condition
Report developed for managers.
Feb 99
Nov 98. It was the first internal audit after the major revamp of the system.
The system was completely ripped apart and the results of the audit had us in a worse condition than before the system was initially certified.
This led to a long debate of what was the use of the certification when it seemed to be negating our idea of a useable system.
We began developing a report for the managers as to where we saw the system going and what were our options given the way the audits were going.
The negative of the certification.
What did certification actually mean? Was it just a document we had to comply with or could it be usable as well.
The bad audit results destroyed all enthusiasm for the system, not just the certification.
Confused messages fromt eh auditors. What was acceptable last time was no longer acceptable. They kept changing their objectives for us and not looking at what we required of our system.
However we got serious management involvement.
Nov 98

10. The Big Bang  Advantages  Disadvantages
Nov 98 – Feb 99
 Advantages
Proactive management involvement.
Considered options of where the University was heading with certification.
 Disadvantages
Auditors focussed on the requirements of the standard and did not recognise the implementation process that was in place.
Poor audit killed enthusiasm for the system (not just the certification).
Getting mixed messages from the auditors.

11. Options for discussion
Keep running with the system as it is, but obtain more resources to support it.
Reduce the scope of the certification from the entire St Lucia campus to Property and Facilities only.
Increase the scope of the certification from St Lucia campus to Gatton and Ipswich also, but with a corresponding increase in resources to support it.
Continue with the roll out of EMS’s for ‘high risk’ sites, without increase in resources and maintain current management system within P&Fs ISO 9000 system.

12. EMS 10 Year Development Plan 1999-2008
St Lucia Campus EMS
Certified to ISO 14001
1996 – present
(reconfirmed in 1999)
High-risk sites
Medical sites
Research stations
Experimental Mine
Farms
2000 – present
(progressively)
Ipswich
Campus
To be developed in 2002
Gatton
Campus EMS
present

13. EMS Reporting Structure
Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor
Environmental Management Committee
Environmental Sub Committees
Utilities Management Committee
Unigreen Working Party
Property and Facilities

14. Advantages/Disadvantages ISO 14001 Certification
Gives the tick – EMS logo
Framework / disciplined approach for everyone
Certification requires risk management approach
Data / documentation
University staff trained as EMS Internal Auditors. Audits accepted by departments.
Regular management reviews
Continual improvement
External Auditors pass on knowledge of other systems.
 Disadvantages
Extremely difficult to manage with a diverse range of activities
Time/resource intensive
Requires a large amount of documentation
External Auditors – lack of understanding of Uni system

15. EMS Certification – some extra thoughts
Good tool to develop/implement an EMS
System should be trialed and implemented prior to certification
The ‘tick’ should only be incidental, not the reason for EMS certification
Certification does not necessarily produce a user-friendly EMS
Staff/student lack of interest is still an issue, but certification regularly checks compliance
Needs management support to work well

16. Certification and Sustainability -where we think we’re heading
Identify key areas where sustainability concepts can be included in an EMS
Air quality
Construction / Maintenance
Energy management
Water management
Incorporate ‘practical/workable’ areas into system