13.06.2015 Views

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!