Looking at the 92 SIZA members that have already completed their 3rd party audit, the following non-conformances per category dominated the non-compliances that were raised over the last three months:
Between 1 April – 30 June 2022, most non-conformances (78,45%) fell into three categories, namely:
- Measured and Efficient Use (36);
- Shifting to Alternatives (29); and
- Minimising Negative Impacts (26)
As a measurement in looking at the top three areas of non-conformances, the various audit outcomes under the three top categories can be explained as follows:
Measured and Efficient Use
In general, the most significant areas of non-conformances within this section lie with the following themes:
- No implementation of recycling or insufficient evidence pertaining to waste management and recycling
- Insufficient evidence pertaining to water-use allocations and efficiency calculations
- No proof of carbon footprint calculations
Shifting to Alternatives
The second largest area of non-conformances lies within shifting to alternatives, where results of production inputs and waste production should be used to implement reduction plans to improve efficiency and reduce risk to the environment. In general, the most significant areas of non-conformances within this section lie with the following themes:
- Implementing an energy/emission reduction plan based on the result of a carbon footprint calculation.
- Implementing a plan to shift from chemical products toward more environmentally friendly products
- Making use of accurate waste production records to track progress made towards waste reduction and increase in recycling.
Minimising Negative Impacts
As a high number of non-conformances are raised under this section, it is relevant to note that this section also covers the most questions and requirement areas during an audit, contributing to the number of non-conformances raised. In general, the largest areas of non-conformances within this section lie with the following themes:
- Training of relevant staff in the safe and appropriate IAP clearing methods.
- Chemical filling points are not being constructed according to SANS 10206.
- Management not in possession of an invasive alien plant (IAP) clearing plan
It is important to note that all non-conformances need to be corrected and signed off by the auditor before a supplier can get his/her audit confirmation letter. SIZA is focused on continuous improvement, and we would like to congratulate these suppliers on improving their practices.
