Conformity assessment of UFCS against PEFC (2010).pdf - ITS Global
Conformity assessment of UFCS against PEFC (2010).pdf - ITS Global Conformity assessment of UFCS against PEFC (2010).pdf - ITS Global
Evaluation and assessment of Uruguayan Forest Certification scheme against the requirements of the PEFC Council Notwithstanding the diverse range of institutions and individuals requested to participate, the documentation presented by PEFC Uruguay and UNIT does not demonstrate that environmental non-government organisations (ENGOs) were asked to formally participate in the work of STC- SFM. Does not Conform Practice In establishing the STC-SFM, UNIT formally invited 36 organisations and individuals - representing social, economic and environmental interests in Uruguay - to participate in standard setting process. The list of institutions and individuals invited to participate in STC- SFM is maintained by UNIT, and was sighted by the consultants during Field Visit. However, as noted above, from the information presented by UNIT and PEFC Uruguay there is no evidence to support a conclusion that environmental non-government organisations (ENGOs) were invited to participate in work of STC-SFM. Does not Conform 7) Do consensus-building procedures of the Forum provide for balanced representation of interest categories? (Annex 2; 3.4.1) Documentation The STC-SFM, as required by UNIT’s processes, seeks to achieve consensus amongst the participants and interest groups consistent with the framework specified by ISO Guide 2 (refer to GD05 and SD08). Conforms Practice The minutes of STC-SFM meetings between 2006 and 2009 (maintained by UNIT) provide evidence that STC-SFM operated by consensus. Conforms 8) Have the views of all relevant parties been documented and considered in an open and transparent way? (Annex 2, 3.4.1) Documentation Procedures for operation of STC-SFM require the views of all members to be documented and considered in an open and transparent manner (refer to SD08). Conforms Practice A review of STC-SFM minutes of meetings (maintained by UNIT) during Field Visit and discussion with participants in STC-SFM indicates the views of all members were documented and considered in open and transparent manner. (Refer to Annex 2, Section 3) Conforms 9) Has the formal approval of standards been based on evidence of consensus? (Annex 2, 3.4.1) Documentation UNIT operating procedures, which are consistent with requirements of ISO/IEC Directive Part 1, require the STC-SFM to formally recommend forest management standards based on consensus outcomes for UNIT’s formal approval (refer to GD09 and SD08). Conforms www.itsglobal.net Page 16
Evaluation and assessment of Uruguayan Forest Certification scheme against the requirements of the PEFC Council Practice PEFC Uruguay on 18 December 2009 formally adopted without change the forest management standards approved by UNIT’s Norms General Committee 14 December 2009 (GD02 and GD13, Section 4). Conforms 10) Does the implementation of the consensus based approach comply with Guideline GL 5/2006? Documentation The STC-SFM, consistent with UNIT’s standard setting processes (refer to www.iso.org for standard development processes and procedures implemented by UNIT), is required to make decisions by consensus consistent with intent of ISO Guide 2 and Guideline GL 5/2006. Conforms Practice The minutes of meetings of STC-SFM between 2006 and 2009 (retained electronically by UNIT and reviewed on Field Visit) provide evidence that STC-SFM made decisions based on consensus (consistent with intent of Guideline GL 5/2006) during the development and approval of sustainable forest management standards. Conforms 11) Has the Forum defined its own written procedures which have been made available to interested parties on request? (Annex 2, 3.4.1) Documentation The procedures of STC-SFM (the Forum) are documented by UNIT. Procedures are available to interested parties on UNIT’s website www.unit.org.uy (refer GD03). Conforms Practice The STC-SFM followed the documented procedures specified by UNIT in developing and approving forest management standards. Conforms 12) Do the written procedures for standard setting contain an appeal mechanism for impartial handling of any substantive and procedural complaints? (Annex 2, 3.4.1) Documentation UNIT statutes (Estatutos, 1945) detail appeal procedures for the impartial handling of complaints submitted in relation to STC-SFM’s standard setting procedures. Conforms Practice If UNIT or STC-SFM had received complaints regarding the standard setting issues, the process specified by UNIT statutes would have been implemented. Conforms 13) Has the start of the standard setting process been communicated to the public? (Annex 2, 3.4.2) Documentation www.itsglobal.net Page 17
- Page 1 and 2: Conformity assessment of the Urugua
- Page 3 and 4: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 5 and 6: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 7 and 8: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 9 and 10: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 11 and 12: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 13 and 14: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 15: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 19 and 20: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 21 and 22: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 23 and 24: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 25 and 26: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 27 and 28: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 29 and 30: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 31 and 32: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 33 and 34: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 35 and 36: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 37 and 38: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 39 and 40: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 41 and 42: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 43 and 44: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 45 and 46: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 47 and 48: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 49 and 50: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 51 and 52: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 53 and 54: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 55 and 56: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 57 and 58: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 59 and 60: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 61 and 62: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 63 and 64: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 65 and 66: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
Evaluation and <strong>assessment</strong> <strong>of</strong> Uruguayan Forest Certification scheme <strong>against</strong> the requirements <strong>of</strong> the <strong>PEFC</strong> Council<br />
Practice<br />
<strong>PEFC</strong> Uruguay on 18 December 2009 formally adopted without change the forest management<br />
standards approved by UNIT’s Norms General Committee 14 December 2009 (GD02 and GD13,<br />
Section 4).<br />
Conforms<br />
10) Does the implementation <strong>of</strong> the consensus based approach comply with Guideline GL<br />
5/2006?<br />
Documentation<br />
The STC-SFM, consistent with UNIT’s standard setting processes (refer to www.iso.org for<br />
standard development processes and procedures implemented by UNIT), is required to make<br />
decisions by consensus consistent with intent <strong>of</strong> ISO Guide 2 and Guideline GL 5/2006.<br />
Conforms<br />
Practice<br />
The minutes <strong>of</strong> meetings <strong>of</strong> STC-SFM between 2006 and 2009 (retained electronically by UNIT<br />
and reviewed on Field Visit) provide evidence that STC-SFM made decisions based on consensus<br />
(consistent with intent <strong>of</strong> Guideline GL 5/2006) during the development and approval <strong>of</strong><br />
sustainable forest management standards.<br />
Conforms<br />
11) Has the Forum defined its own written procedures which have been made available to<br />
interested parties on request? (Annex 2, 3.4.1)<br />
Documentation<br />
The procedures <strong>of</strong> STC-SFM (the Forum) are documented by UNIT. Procedures are available to<br />
interested parties on UNIT’s website www.unit.org.uy (refer GD03).<br />
Conforms<br />
Practice<br />
The STC-SFM followed the documented procedures specified by UNIT in developing and<br />
approving forest management standards.<br />
Conforms<br />
12) Do the written procedures for standard setting contain an appeal mechanism for<br />
impartial handling <strong>of</strong> any substantive and procedural complaints? (Annex 2, 3.4.1)<br />
Documentation<br />
UNIT statutes (Estatutos, 1945) detail appeal procedures for the impartial handling <strong>of</strong><br />
complaints submitted in relation to STC-SFM’s standard setting procedures.<br />
Conforms<br />
Practice<br />
If UNIT or STC-SFM had received complaints regarding the standard setting issues, the process<br />
specified by UNIT statutes would have been implemented.<br />
Conforms<br />
13) Has the start <strong>of</strong> the standard setting process been communicated to the public? (Annex<br />
2, 3.4.2)<br />
Documentation<br />
www.itsglobal.net Page 17
Change language