Environmental Management System To Certify or Not to Certify Pros and Cons of ISO 14001 Certification

What started it all and how was it developed Qld Environmental Protection Act 1994 Environmental Management System developed 1995-1996 ISO 14001 Certification received EMS certification in November 1996 EMS Manual – St Lucia campus University School and Centres may hold copies and/or access at website.

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.

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).

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

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).

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

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).

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

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.

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.

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 2000 - present

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

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

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

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