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 4. The chain of custody (utilizes requirements of PEFC Annex 4) and logo use (utilizes requirements of PEFC Annex 5) arrangements for the UFCS conform to PEFC requirements (refer to Sections 6 and 7). 5. For certification and accreditation arrangements used by the UFCS: a. Competencies required for certification bodies conform to PEFCC requirements. (Refer to Section 8.1.1) b. Competencies required of auditors conform to PEFCC requirements (Refer to Section 8.1.2). c. Accreditation arrangements do not conform to PEFCC requirements. Currently there is no explicit requirement for the accreditation symbol of OUA, the Uruguayan organisation with authority to accredit certification bodies in the UFCS, to appear on accredited certificates from certification bodies (refer to Section 8.3). d. PEFC notification of certification bodies do not conform to PEFCC requirements. Current UFCS documentation does not include all notification requirements of PEFCC. (Refer to Section 8.4) www.itsglobal.net Page 8
Evaluation and assessment of Uruguayan Forest Certification scheme against the requirements of the PEFC Council 1. Introduction In a letter dated 8 January 2010, the President and Vice President of PEFC Uruguay submitted an application to PEFCC (Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification Council) for the conformity assessment of the Uruguayan Forest Certification Scheme (UFCS). On 14 April 2010 the PEFCC appointed ITS Global to undertake an independent conformity assessment of the UFCS against the requirements of PEFCC. Scope of Assessment The conformity assessment of the UFCS was undertaken consistent with PEFCC minimum requirements for national and sub-national schemes as detailed in PEFCC Technical Document, Annex 7. Following a summary of the development and evolution of the UFCS (Chapter 2) the report assesses the conformity of UFCS against the framework relevant to: • Standard setting process (Chapter 3); • Implementation levels and organisation arrangement of the certification scheme (Chapter 4); • Forest management standard (Chapter 5); • Chain of custody standard (Chapter 6); • Implementation of the PEFC logo usage rights (Chapter 7); • Certification and accreditation arrangements (Chapter 8). The report also includes: • Evaluation of the comments received from stakeholders resulting from the public consultation period (Annex 1); • Intelligence and insight gained from a Field Visit and meeting with stakeholders who have been involved in the development and/or use of the UFCS (Annex 2); • PEFCC Minimum Requirements Checklist (Annex 3); and • Evaluation of the comments from the Panel of Experts (which are provided in Annex 4 of the • report) Assessment Process and Methodology for Report Evidence and assessments detailed in the report are generated by benchmarking PEFCC’s requirements against the standards, processes and accountabilities detailed in the UFCS’s application documentation together with documentation and records reviewed during Field Visit. The following conformance definitions were applied in assessing the conformity of the UFCS with requirements of PEFCC: • Conforms – the criteria and requirements of the UFCS are assessed as equivalent to PEFCC requirements; • Partly conforms – the criteria and requirement of the UFCS are assessed as being, in principle, equivalent to PEFCC requirements but with minor inconsistencies or gaps when compared to PEFCC requirements; • Does not conform – the criteria and requirement in the UFCS are assessed as having substantial differences to the PEFCC requirements; • Not applicable (NA). www.itsglobal.net Page 9
- 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: 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 and 16: Evaluation and assessment of Urugua
- Page 17 and 18: 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
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 />
1. Introduction<br />
In a letter dated 8 January <strong>2010</strong>, the President and Vice President <strong>of</strong> <strong>PEFC</strong> Uruguay submitted<br />
an application to <strong>PEFC</strong>C (Programme for the Endorsement <strong>of</strong> Forest Certification Council) for<br />
the conformity <strong>assessment</strong> <strong>of</strong> the Uruguayan Forest Certification Scheme (<strong>UFCS</strong>).<br />
On 14 April <strong>2010</strong> the <strong>PEFC</strong>C appointed <strong>ITS</strong> <strong>Global</strong> to undertake an independent conformity<br />
<strong>assessment</strong> <strong>of</strong> the <strong>UFCS</strong> <strong>against</strong> the requirements <strong>of</strong> <strong>PEFC</strong>C.<br />
Scope <strong>of</strong> Assessment<br />
The conformity <strong>assessment</strong> <strong>of</strong> the <strong>UFCS</strong> was undertaken consistent with <strong>PEFC</strong>C minimum<br />
requirements for national and sub-national schemes as detailed in <strong>PEFC</strong>C Technical Document,<br />
Annex 7.<br />
Following a summary <strong>of</strong> the development and evolution <strong>of</strong> the <strong>UFCS</strong> (Chapter 2) the report<br />
assesses the conformity <strong>of</strong> <strong>UFCS</strong> <strong>against</strong> the framework relevant to:<br />
• Standard setting process (Chapter 3);<br />
• Implementation levels and organisation arrangement <strong>of</strong> the certification scheme (Chapter<br />
4);<br />
• Forest management standard (Chapter 5);<br />
• Chain <strong>of</strong> custody standard (Chapter 6);<br />
• Implementation <strong>of</strong> the <strong>PEFC</strong> logo usage rights (Chapter 7);<br />
• Certification and accreditation arrangements (Chapter 8).<br />
The report also includes:<br />
• Evaluation <strong>of</strong> the comments received from stakeholders resulting from the public<br />
consultation period (Annex 1);<br />
• Intelligence and insight gained from a Field Visit and meeting with stakeholders who have<br />
been involved in the development and/or use <strong>of</strong> the <strong>UFCS</strong> (Annex 2);<br />
• <strong>PEFC</strong>C Minimum Requirements Checklist (Annex 3); and<br />
• Evaluation <strong>of</strong> the comments from the Panel <strong>of</strong> Experts (which are provided in Annex 4 <strong>of</strong> the<br />
• report)<br />
Assessment Process and Methodology for Report<br />
Evidence and <strong>assessment</strong>s detailed in the report are generated by benchmarking <strong>PEFC</strong>C’s<br />
requirements <strong>against</strong> the standards, processes and accountabilities detailed in the <strong>UFCS</strong>’s<br />
application documentation together with documentation and records reviewed during Field<br />
Visit.<br />
The following conformance definitions were applied in assessing the conformity <strong>of</strong> the <strong>UFCS</strong><br />
with requirements <strong>of</strong> <strong>PEFC</strong>C:<br />
• Conforms – the criteria and requirements <strong>of</strong> the <strong>UFCS</strong> are assessed as equivalent to <strong>PEFC</strong>C<br />
requirements;<br />
• Partly conforms – the criteria and requirement <strong>of</strong> the <strong>UFCS</strong> are assessed as being, in<br />
principle, equivalent to <strong>PEFC</strong>C requirements but with minor inconsistencies or gaps when<br />
compared to <strong>PEFC</strong>C requirements;<br />
• Does not conform – the criteria and requirement in the <strong>UFCS</strong> are assessed as having<br />
substantial differences to the <strong>PEFC</strong>C requirements;<br />
• Not applicable (NA).<br />
www.itsglobal.net Page 9