Corporate Water Footprinting: Why is it important? (Part 2) 2

Water scarcity represents an ever growing risk to businesses in all sectors across the globe.  Business related water risk can be categorized into three areas: Physical, Regulatory, and Reputational. 

Physical risk refers to the direct limitation of business activities, supply of raw materials, and product use. Declines or disruptions in water supply can affect production, irrigation, material processing, cooling, and cleaning. Reputational Risk deals with competition for water supply (especially in water-strained areas), and can lead to community or local unrest regarding water withdrawal.

Regulatory Risk is directly caused by a combination of water scarcity and concern in local communities, and often forces local authorities to take action by allocating water, increasing prices, setting permitting standards, and developing rigorous wastewater quality standards.

The CDP Water Disclosure Global Report 2011 highlights some key statistics regarding water and the Global 500:

  • 59% of respondents cited water as a substantial risk to the company, while water-related risk has already impacted  1/3 of the reporting businesses. 
  • 63% of respondents identified opportunities including cost reductions and increased water efficiency, revenue from new water-related products or services, and improved brand value.
  • Less than 50% of respondents identified water policy as a board level issue, indicating that water is receiving less attention than climate change and energy conservation.  

Large companies throughout the world are aware of various water related risks, and recognize that there is opportunity for improvement, but water scarcity is still not receiving the attention it deserves. Corporate water footprinting can be an appropriate step in identifying these risks and opportunities to mitigate potential problems surrounding this limited resource.  

Please visit  our blog next week as we discuss corporate water footprinting and sustainability.

MassDEP News – Important Time Sensitive Notice/TUR Regulations Reply

Dear Facility Manager or Toxics Use Reduction Planner:

I am writing to remind you that 2012 is a planning year under the Toxics Use Reduction Act (TURA) and that facilities covered by TURA are required to complete their TURA plan (or in some cases an Environmental Management System or Resource Conservation plan) for this planning cycle by July 1, 2012

Employee Notification
Please note the TUR regulations1 require that notice to employees regarding the upcoming planning process must be completed by January 1, 2012.  If a facility is unsure of which type of plan it will develop, it should notify its employees that the facility will be developing either a Toxics Use Reduction (TUR), Resource Conservation (RC) or Environmental Management Systems (EMS) Plan.

For further information:  http://www.mass.gov/dep/toxics/tura/planning.htm .  Because there have been no changes to the planning requirements, the guidance on the web is still valid.  However an updated version containing minor changes to the reporting form will be posted in the coming months.

[1] [310 CMR 50.42(5) and 310 CMR 50.92(6), respectively]

Paul Walsh
MassDEP, BWP, Business Reporting and Fiscal Operations
One Winter Street
Boston Ma 02108
Office 617-556-1011

 

 

ISO 50001 Standard Published Reply

You can now manage your energy conservation program or lower your greenhouse gas emissions by using a new international standard, ISO 50001.  This new ISO Management System Standard for Energy has all of the same “plan-do-check-act” provisions of the ISO 14001 Environmental Management System. 

To save on the cost required to implement and certify a new management system, some companies are choosing to instead integrate the key energy management features of the ISO 50001 standard into their existing ISO 14001 or ISO 9001 management systems. Also, if a customer is not requiring certification to this standard, companies can use the integration option to achieve certification to ISO 14001 while seeking “verification” of the use of the energy management components.  It is also possible to self-certify to the ISO 50001 standard through this integration option. 

Should you choose to implement or integrate the new ISO 50001 Energy Management System Standard, CAPACCIO can help you make decisions on the options you have regarding the use of this new international energy management standard and guide you through the process.

For more information, contact Wayne Bates at 508.970-0033 ext. 121 or wbates@capaccio.com.

Management Review 1

I have recently seen a lot organizations struggling with defining the frequency for management reviews.  ISO 14001:2004, section 4.6 “Management Review,” represents a top management review that’s conducted at defined intervals, as determined by each organization.  The ISO 14001:2004 requires management review be conducted at planned intervals.  The ISO requirements and implementation guidance documents do not define “frequency.”

The intent of management review is to provide a communication path to top management on how the EMS is performing (results of internal audits and corrective preventative actions), the organization’s compliance status (legal requirements and other requirements, external interested parties), the organization’s continual improvement projects (objectives targets and programs) and other potential impacts to the organization (changing circumstances).

It is recommended that the frequency of the management review be aligned with the organization’s current structure.  At most organizations, an operational management review or quality management review is conducted.   Best practice would be to align the EMS management review with these meetings and actually integrate EMS into them, as environmental is actually a branch of the organization’s operations anyway.   To ease the process of management review, streamline the meetings by integrating the EMS management review into the organization’s existing structure and follow the frequency already defined.