Just came across a great plain language version of ISO 14001:2004, definitely our cup of tea.

For example, the plain language version of the two sections relevant to Nimonik (section 4.3.2 and 4.5.2) are clearer, though slightly longer, than the official version.

Nimonik has two partners who can help you get up to speed on ISO 14001 without all the paperwork. In Toronto, contact Shirley Segev (shirley@greenmark.ca) who works with Green Enterprise Toronto. Outside of Toronto, visit our friends at ISO 14000 store where they offer useful documents and tools to build your own EMS or go DOWNLOAD some free EMS documents to get you started.

Official ISO 14001 version:

4.3.2 Legal and other requirements

The organization shall establish, implement and maintain a procedure(s)

• to identify and have access to the applicable legal requirements and other requirements to which the organization subscribes related to its environmental aspects, and
• to determine how these requirements apply to its environmental aspects.

The organization shall ensure that these applicable legal requirements and other requirements to which the
organization subscribes are taken into account in establishing, implementing and maintaining its environmental
management system.

4.5.2 Evaluation of compliance

4.5.2.1 Consistent with its commitment to compliance, the organization shall establish, implement and maintain a procedure(s) for periodically evaluating compliance with applicable legal requirements.

The organization shall keep records of the results of the periodic evaluations.

4.5.2.2 The organization shall evaluate compliance with other requirements to which it subscribes. The organization may wish to combine this evaluation with the evaluation of legal compliance referred to in 4.5.2.1 or to establish a separate procedure(s).
The organization shall keep records of the results of the periodic evaluations.

Plain Language version:

4.3.2 Clarify legal and other requirements.

1. Establish procedures to identify and clarify the legal and other requirements that apply to your organization’s environmental aspects.

• Implement procedures to identify and clarify the legal and other requirements that apply to your environmental aspects.
• Maintain procedures to identify and clarify the legal and other requirements that apply to your environmental aspects.

4.5.2 Evaluate legal and other compliance.

4.5.2.1 Evaluate compliance with legal requirements.

1. Establish a procedure to periodically evaluate how well your organization complies with all relevant legal environmental requirements.

• Implement a procedure to periodically evaluate how well your organization complies with all relevant legal environmental requirements.
• Maintain a procedure to periodically evaluate how well your organization complies with all relevant legal environmental requirements.

1. Record the results of your organization’s legal environmental compliance evaluations.

4.5.2.2 Evaluate compliance with other requirements.

• Implement a procedure to periodically evaluate how well your organization complies with other environmental requirements.
• Maintain a procedure to periodically evaluate how well your organization complies with other environmental requirements.

1. Record the results of your organization’s other environmental compliance evaluations.

Establish a procedure to periodically evaluate how well your organization complies with other environmental requirements.

The minister of the environment (MOE) of Ontario, John Gerretsen, just spoke at an Ontario Environment Industries Association (ONEIA) event in Toronto. He discussed a number of things, but focused mainly on the Green Act and it’s implications for the Ontario economy. Clearly a forward thinking man, he insists the environment industry will play a large role in any economic recovery by offering practical solutions with quicker than expected payback periods.

Specifically, the Green Energy Act proposes to have a one (1) permit system to help projects cut through the red, or as the minister calls it, green tape. Right now, you need at least 4-6 permits from the MOE to get a project of the ground. While permitting procedures may be cumbersome, the minister maintains that Ontario has had it easy compared to the rest of the world. Low energy costs, vast resources and a small population have allowed wasteful practices to go unpunished. To help with the new, but simpler requirements, the MOE will offer facilitation services to businesses, though it is still unclear what this entails.

Ontario certainly has ambitious goals, the list includes a 6 month permit approval timeframe on their 1 permit system, the removal of coal plants from the Ontario grid by 2016 (coal currently accounts for 1/6 of electricity), 50 000 new green jobs this year, zero waste companies, rehabilitate Lake Simcoe and a strong solar power industry. As the minister said, society needs ambitious goals to hope to even achieve part of them.

The ministry is also introducing new Hazardous Waste and Electronic Waste Management programs. On top of this, as chairman of the Council of Canadian Ministers of the Environment (CCME), Mr. Gerretsen is pushing national packaging standards forward. We all know there is too much bad packaging on our products. The ministry is also reaching out internationally, particularly to Europe and the Dutch to exchange technologies on brownfield rehabilitation and water contamination. The cherry on the top of the proverbial cake is a plan to introduce a carbon cap-and-trade plan in conjunction with the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) and Québec – which would then put pressure on Obama and Harper to quickly follow suit with a North American standard. Ontario can lead, but the rest of us have to follow.

At the same event on Thursday, Alex Gill from the ONEIA announced it will be surveying Ontario companies to better understand the environment industry, it’s priorities, challenges, and opportunities. This report is expected to be released April 29th, in conjunction with the Environment Industry Day.

All told, it looks like Ontario, Canada’s industrial giant, has woken up to the possibilities of a green(er) economy. Now, we will see if this giant can walk and talk at the same time.

Ontario’s new cosmetic pesticides ban takes effect April 22, 2009.

Changes to Ontario’s Pesticide Act come into force will prohibit the sale and use of pesticides for cosmetic purposes on lawns, gardens, parks and school yards, including many herbicides, fungicides and insecticides. Over 200 products and 80 pesticide ingredients are affected. Some exceptions apply to agriculture and forestry.

Details can be found here.

One thing about the Conservative government in Ottawa: they’re comfortable with the notion of law enforcement.

You might have heard that under a new federal Environmental Enforcement Act introduced this week, corporate polluters would risk multi-million dollar fines — as high as $6 million. Even smaller companies would be exposed, albeit to lesser fines ($25,000 to $4 million).

If passed the new law would also subject them to a public shaming by creating a registry for Canadians who want to check their environmental records.

Its adoption would amend nine existing laws, principally the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), to harmonize environmental penalties.

There’s an interesting debate forming around NAFTA and environmental protection laws.

Dow AgroSciences LLC, a subsidiary of U.S. chemical giant Dow Chemical is suing Canada for more than CAD $2 million in damages under NAFTA. Why? In a move well received by environmental groups, Quebec has prohibited the sale of 2,4-D, a widely used herbicide, in the province. Dow claims the ban lacks scientific support and amounts to an “expropriation” of its business in the province (many Dow products contain 2,4-D). Dow is not the first to use NAFTA’s dispute-settlement provisions to attack public health measures. In his column today, François Cardinal provides a good rundown of the issues.

One of the problems is that, while Quebec has banned 2,4-D under Quebec’s Pesticide Management Code (PMC-QC), the product is considered safe by Health Canada.

Pesticides used, sold or imported into Canada are governed by the Pest Control Products Act (Canada) (PCPA) and the Pest Control Products Regulations (PCPR). Only pesticides that are registered for use under the PCPA can be used in Canada. Think of the registration process as an oversight mechanism for the federal government. If it considers that a particular pesticide poses an unacceptable risk to human health and the environment, it can ban them from use by not allowing for their registration.

Provinces and territories also bar the use of pesticides that aren’t federally registered, because they adopt the PCPA. That said, they also have their own laws on the purchase, use, disposal and shipment of pesticides, as well as their containers. Often these laws can be more demanding than federal rules, though than cannot be less strict.

Quebec recognizes that there is a difference between the two jurisdictions but rejects Dow’s argument that the product is not harmful to human health. Canada’s position in all this? The province is entitled to make laws in the public interest. And as Cardinal reports, the City of Montreal, part of a larger coalition, is joining in Quebec’s defense as well.

Ironically, Canadian NAFTA observers have been worried that the new Obama administration is intent on reopening the trade agreement, which they fear could adversely affect Canada-U.S. trade relations. What gets lost is that Obama has talked about strengthening environmental protections under NAFTA and going so far as ending the right of foreign companies to sue governments for taking regulatory actions that protect citizens but interfere with their corporate profits.