FM Audit report template

Jon Jickling

Informations

• Publié par: Opsue
• Nombre de lectures: 74
• Langue: English

Extrait

Certified by:




Forest Management

SmartWood Headquarters 2008 Annual Audit 65 Millet St. Suite 201
Richmond, VT 05477 USA
Tel: [phone] Report for:
Fax: [phone]
www.smartwood.org
Contact person: Jon Jickling
[e-mail]


Alberta-Pacific Forest Industries
Inc.

in
Audit Managed by:

Canada Regional Office
Alberta, Canada
P.O. Box 1771
Chelsea, Qc, J9B 1A1 (North of Lac La Biche and Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Contact person: Alexandre Boursier Athabasca)
Email: [e-mail]



Certificate code: SW-FM/CoC-001626
Brenda Hopkin Auditors:
Tawney Lem
Chris Wedeles
October 6 -7, 2008 Audit Dates:
January 26, 2009 Report Finalized:


ACCREDITED
FSC-ACC-004 Shawn Lindballe Operation Contact:

© 1996 Forest Stewardship Council A.C. Box 8000 Address:

Boyle, Alberta, Canada

T0A 0M0


FM-06 April 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS


1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 3
2. AUDIT FINDINGS AND RESULTS ........ 3
2.1. AUDIT CONCLUSION ...... 3
2.2. CHANGES IN THE FOREST MANAGEMENT OF THE FME ............................................................................... 3
2.3. STAKEHOLDER ISSUES ................................................................. 4
2.4. CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUESTS .......................... 4
2.5. NEW CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ISSUED AS A RESULT OF THIS AUDIT ............................................................. 17
3. AUDIT PROCESS ................................................................................................19
3.1. AUDITORS AND QUALIFICATIONS: ............................................... 19
3.2. AUDIT SCHEDULE ........ 19
3.3. SAMPLING METHODOLOGY: ........................................................................................ 20
3.4. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS .................................................................. 21
3.5. CHANGES TO CERTIFICATION STANDARDS 21
APPENDIX I: List of visited sites (confidential) ...........................................................22
APPENDIX II: List of stakeholders consulted (confidential) ........................................24
APPENDIX III: Forest management standard conformance (confidential) .................25
APPENDIX IV: FSC Annual Audit Reporting Form: ....................................................................................29
APPENDIX V: SmartWood Database Update Form ...................32


SmartWood Forest Management Annual Audit Report Page 2 of 32 1. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this report is to document annual audit conformance of Alberta Pacific Forest
Industries Inc (Al-Pac), hereafter referred to as Forest Management Enterprise (FME). The
report presents the findings of SmartWood auditors who have evaluated company systems and
performance against FSC forest management standards and policies. Section 2 of this report
provides the audit conclusions and any necessary follow-up actions by the company through
corrective action requests.

SmartWood audit reports include information which will become public information. Sections 1-3
will be posted on SmartWood’s website according to FSC requirements. All appendices will
remain confidential.

Dispute resolution: If SmartWood clients encounter organizations or individuals having concerns
or comments about Rainforest Alliance / SmartWood and our services, these parties are strongly
encouraged to contact SmartWood regional or Headquarters offices directly (see contact
information on report cover). Formal complaints or concerns should be sent in writing.
2. AUDIT FINDINGS AND RESULTS
2.1. Audit conclusion

Based on Company’s conformance with FSC and SmartWood requirements, the audit
team makes the following recommendation:
Certification requirements met, certificate maintenance recommended

Upon acceptance of CAR(s) issued below
Certification requirements not met:

Conformance with Major CAR(s) required
Additional comments:
Issues identified as None
controversial or hard to
evaluate.
2.2. Changes in the forest management of the FME

There are no changes to the land area under Al-Pac’s control within the Forest Management
Area (FMA). Al-Pac’s practices in the field remain the same as at the time of the assessment.

As with last year’s audit, the team is conscious of the impact due to the rapid development of
the oil industry in the Fort McMurray area. The company continues to work in collaboration
with the oil industry in attempting to ensure that land being used by the industry receives
appropriate and opportunistic management of the forest there. The company’s representative
was receiving an “Award of Excellence” from for his role as one of the Stream leads for the
Industry responsible for ensure participation from all industrial sectors (forestry, oil & gas, and
transmission companies). A comprehensive review of Al-Pac’s monitoring program, results
and adaptive management during the 2009 Annual Audit will provide further information on this
matter.
The third annual audit of the Al-Pac Forest was completed in the fall of 2008. This audit
identified three new CARs, all of them related to HCVF requirements.


2.3. Stakeholder issues

As in 2007 the consultation with Environmental stakeholders during the 2008 Annual Audit
focused on efforts related to furthering candidate protected area identification on the Forest.
See CAR 03/07 for a detailed description of the developments.

A comprehensive stakeholder outreach will be conducted during the 2009 Annual Audit.


2.4. Conformance with applicable corrective action requests

The section below describes the activities of the certificate holder to address each applicable
corrective action issued during previous evaluations. For each CAR a finding is presented
along with a description of its current status using the following categories. Failure to meet
CARs will result in nonconformances being upgraded from minor to major status with
conformance required within 3 months with risk of suspension or termination of the
SmartWood certificate if Major CARs are not met. The following classification is used to
indicate the status of the CAR:

CAR Status Explanation Categories
Certified operation has successfully met the
Closed CAR and addressed the underlying
nonconformance.
Certified operation has not met the CAR;
underlying nonconformance is still present. Open CAR becomes a Major CAR with a 3 month
deadline for conformance


Condition 2.1a Reference to Standard: (Criteria and indicator)
Nonconformance
Major Minor X
Corrective Action Request:
By the end of Year 3 of certification, Al-Pac shall have completed assessments of the
opportunities for restoration of oil and gas developments (including roads, well sites, seismic
lines and abandoned camp sites), identified restoration priorities, and begun to implement a
long-term plan to implement any identified measures that will reduce cumulative impacts.
Timeline for conformance: By the end of Year 3 of certification
Evidence to close CAR: Al-Pac has led the implementation of a very successful and
innovative Integrated Land Management Program on the
FMA. The program is intended to find opportunities for
minimization of cumulative impacts and development of
synergistic operations at all stages of oil and gas
SmartWood Forest Management Annual Audit Report Page 4 of 32 industrialization - from exploration, through site development,
to site restoration/reclamation.

Several of Al-Pac’s initiatives have been adopted considerably
beyond the boundaries of the FMA, to the betterment of
integrated resource management across the province.

Some of the key initiatives brought about by Al-Pac include:
The use of narrow (2.5 m wide) seismic lines rather
than the much wider (8 m) previous standard.
Given the density of seismic lines across the
forested part of the province, this initiative has
spared many tens of thousands of ha from being
cleared. As the wood from seismic lines was not
utilized, the resource was essentially lost. Not only
is this a savings in wood volume, but it is likely also
ecologically significant, as it lessens the human
footprint on the forest.
Reducing the impact of SAGD (Steam Assisted
Gravity Drainage) developments by initiating joint
efforts with the oil and gas industry to avoid
“stranding” merchantable timber due the layout and
timing of their developments.
Initiating a partnership with the University of Alberta
which ultimately led to a process to minimize the
impact of oil exploration pads on the Forest. Every
year about 3,000 – 5,000 pads are drilled on the
forest. The pads are approximately 50 X 50 m in
dimensio