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
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
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 />
training.<br />
39 10)<br />
… (refer to SD04) …<br />
Incorrect reference<br />
… (refer to SD03, 5 p) …<br />
39 11) Comment: As the <strong>UFCS</strong> uses Annex 4, it is not a scheme<br />
specific CoC Standard and the response only needs to<br />
address the FM Standard<br />
8.2 /<br />
p.40<br />
8.2 /<br />
p.40<br />
Question 12:<br />
“…with requirements <strong>of</strong> ISO<br />
Guide 65 adjusted to the<br />
type, range and volume <strong>of</strong><br />
work”<br />
Question 18:<br />
“…make available, at<br />
request, “summaries <strong>of</strong> the<br />
certification””.<br />
40 12)<br />
… (refer to SD03, Section<br />
5(n)) …<br />
40 15)<br />
… (refer to SD03, Section<br />
5(x)) …<br />
40 18)<br />
… (refer to SD03, Section 9)<br />
…<br />
What in detail is meant with “adjusted to the type, range<br />
and volume <strong>of</strong> work”? And is this enough for conformity?<br />
Is “at request” enough to satisfy the requirements?<br />
Applicable reference<br />
… (refer to SD03, Section 3 & 5(n)) …<br />
Correct reference: check on 9e!<br />
… (refer to SD03, Section 9(g)) …<br />
41 19) Comment: I would adjudge these as Partial <strong>Conformity</strong><br />
based on matching the documented evidence <strong>against</strong> the<br />
requirement.<br />
Comment noted. Reference amended.<br />
Comment noted. Additional explanatory text<br />
added.<br />
Comment noted. The wording is assessed by<br />
the Consultants as being consistent with<br />
requirement <strong>of</strong> ISO Guide 65.<br />
Comments noted and text clarified. Response<br />
is assessed by Consultant as satisfying <strong>PEFC</strong>C’s<br />
requirements.<br />
Comments were noted. Report has been<br />
amended accordingly.<br />
Comments were noted. Report has been<br />
amended accordingly.<br />
Comments were noted. Report has been<br />
amended accordingly.<br />
Comment noted. Clarifying text added to<br />
support <strong>assessment</strong>.<br />
41 21) Not referenced so lacks consistency – should be SD03, 3a! Comments were noted. Report has been<br />
amended accordingly.<br />
41 23)<br />
… (refer to SD03, Section 3)<br />
…<br />
… (refer to SD03, Section 3(a))<br />
Comments were noted. Report has been<br />
amended accordingly.<br />
42 26) This is a non-conformity as there is no <strong>PEFC</strong> Notification<br />
document in the SD series. GZD2 doesn’t have ‘notified’ or<br />
‘notification’ in the whole document. Maybe the reference<br />
is SD03, 3e?<br />
Comments were noted. Text clarified to<br />
support conformity <strong>assessment</strong>.<br />
www.itsglobal.net Page 84
Change language