Forest Certification Assessment Guide

Dr. Alexander Hinrichs Duffernbachstr. 11 79292 Pfaffenweiler, Germany Ref. 8F0016.02/Contract 0306

FOREST CERTIFICATION CREDIBILITYASSESSMENT IN INDONESIA

APPLYING THE

FOREST CERTIFICATION ASSESSMENT GUIDE ON NATIONAL LEVEL

Alexander Hinrichs & Agung Prasetyo January 2007

Forest certification credibility assessment in Indonesia: DRAFT for peer review

Table of Contents

1. Background ............................................................................................................... 3

2. General overview of the certification schemes operating in Indonesia................ 5

3. FCAG analysis of LEI and FSC and comparison of findings............................... 73.1 Compliance with international frameworks for certification, accreditation, and

standard setting (Criterion 1) .............................................................................. 7 3.2 Compatible with globally applicable principles that balance economic,

ecological, and equity dimensions of forest management and meet Global Forest Alliance requirements (Criterion 2) ......................................................... 8

3.3 Meaningful and equitable participation of all major stakeholder groups in governance and standard setting (Criterion 3) .................................................... 9

3.4 Avoidance of unnecessary obstacles to trade (Criterion 4) .............................. 11 3.5 Based on objective and measurable performance standards that are adapted to

local conditions (Criterion 5) ............................................................................ 11 3.6 Certification decisions free of conflicts of interest from parties with vested

interests (Criterion 6) ........................................................................................ 12 3.7 Transparency in decision making and public reporting (Criterion 7)............... 13 3.8 Reliable and independent assessment of forest management performance and

Chain of Custody (Criterion 8) ......................................................................... 14 3.9 Delivers continual improvement in forest management (Criterion 9) .............. 15 3.10 Accessible to and cost-effective for all parties (Criterion 10) .......................... 16 3.11 Voluntary participation (Criterion 11) .............................................................. 16

4. Comparison of the certification procedures applied by LEI and FSC .............. 17

5. Concluding remarks ............................................................................................... 23

6. References................................................................................................................ 246.1 List of LEI documents ...................................................................................... 24 6.2 Other references ................................................................................................ 27

AnnexesAnnex 1: List of persons interviewed Annex 2: Application of the Forest Certification Assessment Guide to the LEI certification scheme Annex 3: Application of the Forest Certification Assessment Guide to the FSC certification scheme on national level in Indonesia Annex 4: Generic application of the Forest Certification Assessment Guide to the FSC certification scheme (based on Walter, 2006)

1


Abbreviations

AHP : Analytical Hierarchical Process AMDAL : Environmental Impact Assessment APHI : Indonesian Forest Concessionaire Association BSN : National Standard Body/ Badan Standarisasi NasionalCB : Certification Body CBFM : Community Based Forest Management CBO : Constituent Based Organization CITES : Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species CoC : Chain of Custody DPS : Certification Review Council Depnaker : Ministry of Man Power EP : Expert Panel FCAG : Forest Certification Assessment Guide FMU : Forest Management Unit FSC : Forest Stewardship Council FKD : Regional Consultation Forum/ Forum Konsultasi DaerahIAF : International Accreditation Forum ILO : International Labour Organization IEC : International Electrotechnical Commission

ISEAL : The International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling Alliance

ISO : International Standard Organization ITTO : International Tropical Timber Organization IUCN : World Conservation Union JCP : Joint Certification Protocol KAN : National Committee Accreditation/ Komite Akreditasi NasionalLEI : Indonesian Ecolabelling Institute/ Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia LSP : Personal Registration Body MAL : PT. Mutu Agung Lestari MoF : Ministry of Forestry MPA : Representative Council Member /Majelis Perwalian Anggota PEFC : Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes

QUACC : Questionnaire for Assessing the Comprehensiveness of Certification Schemes / Systems

RKPH : 20 Year management Plan/ Rencana Karya 20 Tahunan RKT : Annual Plan/ Rencana Karya tahunanRKL : Environment Management Plan/ Rencana Kelola LingkunganSFM : Sustainable Forest Management SPFM : Sustainable Production Forest Management SPNFM : Sustainable Production Natural Forest Management UNCTAD : United Nations Conference on Trade and Development WTO : World Trade Organization WWF : World Wide Fund for Nature

2


1. Background

The WWF/World Bank Global Forest Alliance (hereafter called the Alliance) set in 1997 a target of achieving 200 million hectares of production forests under independently certified sustainable management. Since by today a large variety of forest certification systems exists, a systematic framework was needed to evaluate the different systems for their adherence to the principles and requirements of both organizations. With the ForestCertification Assessment Guide (hereafter called FCAG or the Guide) the Alliance has recently published such a framework.1

The FCAG builds on a survey type approach created for the same purpose in 2003, the so called Questionnaire for Assessing the Comprehensiveness of Certification Schemes / Systems (QACC)2. During the last three years, the QACC underwent field tests in a number of countries in Europe as well as broad consultation, both under the supervision of an independent review panel. Based on feedback and lessons learned through this process, the Alliance partners simplified and comprehensively redesigned the QACC, structuring it around existing international frameworks for accreditation and certification, as well as both organizations' criteria for Sustainable Forest Management (SFM). The created tool functions as an assessment guide and is structured into 11 criteria, analyzing forest certification schemes according to:

Compliance with international norms and standards; Standards and the standard-setting process; andConformity of the certification and accreditation procedures.

The application of the FCAG in Indonesia is the first utilization of the Guide on national level. The contracted consultants were asked to:

Assess the quality of forest certification schemes/standards operating in Indonesia; andIdentify components of these certification schemes that could be strengthened to more effectively drive improvements in forest management and to enhance recognition of the scheme in the market place and by other stakeholders.

Indonesia has a long tradition of implementing voluntary forest certification. Initial assessments were already conducted by the Rainforest Alliance before the founding of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) or the start of the Indonesian Eco-labelling Institute (LEI). Until today, more than 1.000.000 hectares of forest have been certified. The two schemes operating in Indonesia are:

The national scheme developed by the Indonesian Eco-labelling Institute; and

1 WWF/World Bank Global Forest Alliance (2006): Forest Certification Assessment Guide: A framework for assessing credible forest certification systems/schemes. See http://assets.panda.org/downloads/fcagfinal.pdf 2 WWF/World Bank Global Forest Alliance (2003)

3


A national application of the international certification framework developed by the Forest Stewardship Council, mainly implemented by the Rainforest Alliance (SmartWood Programme) and SGS Forestry (Qualifor Programme)3.

The consultants were asked to analyze these two schemes using the FCAG. Besides desk work, the consultants interviewed a number of parties, including LEI, FSC, all LEI and FSC accredited Certification Bodies (CBs) operating in Indonesia and a limited number of national certification experts (see Annex 1: List of persons interviewed).

The assessment builds on publicly available documents by both schemes and available international guidance. In a first step, the FCAG was applied to the LEI scheme (see Annex 2). Since LEI is not an affiliated member of ISEAL or IAF4, a conformity assessment to ISO/IEC Guide 65 and ISO Guide 14020 was additionally conducted (see Annex 2, Addendum 1 and 2).

In a second step, the FCAG was applied to the FSC scheme (see Annex 3). The analysis focused on Indonesia only (national level FCAG application) and refers in all matters generically regulated by FSC to the recently published application of the Guide to the FSC and PEFC schemes on international level5 (see Annex 4).

The main findings of each analysis and a comparison between the results of both FCAG applications are presented in Chapter 3. The analysis indicated that significant differences between the two schemes are a matter of variations in certification procedures, an aspect which is not sufficiently covered in the current version of the FCAG. Because of this, a comparing analysis of the certification procedures (from client application to suspension of certificates) was additionally conducted. Results are presented in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 contains some general conclusions.

The assessment did not address field implementation or performance aspects of the certification bodies operating in Indonesia, since this is not required in the FCAG. However, due to the fact that a limited number of interviews were conducted, some insights on implementation were gathered and are presented as “comments on implementation” in the related Chapters.

The analysis was conducted between July and October 2006 in Indonesia and Germany. Initial results were presented to WWF on October 9th in Bogor, Indonesia. The draft version of the report was sent to WWF, LEI and FSC for comment on October 31, 2006 (extended deadline for comments: January 10, 2007). The final version reflects the remarks received by all parties.

3 Another FSC accredited certification body, the Soil Association (Woodmark Programme) is due to start certification in Indonesia through its partnership with the Tropical Forest Trust (TFT). 4 The International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling (ISEAL) Alliance is a formal collaboration of leading international standard-setting and conformity assessment organizations focused on social and environmental issues. The International Accreditation Forum, Inc. (IAF) is the world association of Conformity Assessment Accreditation Bodies. 5 Walter (2006). The generic assessment investigated the PEFC and the FSC schemes on international level and indicates the necessary criteria for additional regional/national level assessments.

4


2. General overview of the certification schemes operating in Indonesia

Key elements of the two certification schemes are compiled in Table 1. LEI and FSC are both accreditation bodies and not-for-profit membership organizations, promoting the responsible management of forests on national and international level, respectively. Scope and size of operation, however, differs considerably.

FSC and LEI cooperate since 1998, which is expressed in several Memoranda of Understanding signed by the two organizations; and additionally, through three Joint Certification Protocols (JCPs) signed by their certification bodies6.

Table 1: Key elements of the FSC and LEI forest certification schemes Aspect Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Indonesian Eco-labelling Institute (LEI)

Scope International (currently working in 82 countries worldwide)

National (only working in Indonesia)

Founded 1994 Working group LEI in 1993 LEI foundation (Yayasan LEI) in 1998

Task International accreditation organization for Certification Bodies (CBs) operating the FSC scheme worldwide. System/standard developer (framework), using a standard refinement process for national and regional levels (FSC Accreditation process for National and Regional Forest Stewardship Standards)

National accreditation organization for CBs operating the LEI scheme in Indonesia. System/standard developer (geared to Indonesian situation) Served during system development phase as CB (until 1998) and between 1998 and 2000 as accreditation organization and national level CB.

Mission The Forest Stewardship Council A.C. shall promote environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests.

Developing a credible eco-label certification scheme and monitoring system of natural resource management. Promoting and supporting the policy of sustainable and fair natural resource management. Promoting and supporting natural resource management models and practices by constituents including indigenous people.

Type of organi-sation

FSC is an international not-for-profit organisation and a Constituent Based Organization (CBO) with 647 members, structured in three chambers.

LEI was created as an independent working group and developed into an independent national foundation. Since October 2004, LEI is a national CBO with 142 members, structured in four chambers.

6 Collaboration started in a meeting between LEI’s Board of Trustees and the FSC in Rome (LEI 1998). Since then, several cooperation agreements (Memorandum of Understanding) were signed, the latest in December 2005 (LEI/FSC 2005). LEI CBs and FSC CBs operating in Indonesia signed three Joint Certification Protocols, regulating joint procedures in natural production forest certifications (LEI/FSC 2000; LEI/FSC 2001 and LEI/FSC 2003). The JCP was concluded in December 2005.

5


Aspect Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Indonesian Eco-labelling Institute (LEI) Number of CBs

16 accredited CBs for Forest Management (FM) and/or Chain of Custody (CoC). 8 CBs currently in the accreditation process (for FM and/or CoC).

In 1997, four CBs received interim accreditation by LEI, but later SGS Indonesia resigned from LEI’s accreditation.The three remaining CBs (PT. Mutu Agung Lestari; PT. TÜV Rheinland and PT. Sucofindo) are currently in the process of receiving full accreditation for FM and CoC by LEI.

SFMCertifica-tion standards

General Principles and Criteria (P&C) of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM), to be refined by endorsed National Initiatives on national/regional level. CBs are allowed to temporarily work with interim standards (P&C and additional Indicators) until a national FSC standard is developed and endorsed.

Three separated SFM standards (Criteria, Indicators and Verifiers) for different types of forests/forest management:

o Natural Production Forest; o Plantations; and o Community based forest

management (CBFM).

Number of certified units by September 2006

854 Forest management certificates in 74 countries worldwide. 4945 CoC certificates in 73 countries worldwide.7

In Indonesia: o 5 FM (one CBFM area, applying

the SLIMF concept) o 31 CoC

Forest management: o 5 Natural Production Forest

areas (4 areas are also FSC FM/CoC certified)

o 1 Plantation area o 2 CBFM areas

1 CoC

7http://www.fsc.org/keepout/en/content_areas/92/1/files/ABU_REP_70_2006_09_29_FSC_COC_Certificates_by_Continents.pdf,http://www.fsc.org/keepout/en/content_areas/92/1/files/ABU_REP_70_2006_09_29_FSC_Forest_Management_Certificates_by_Continents.pdf.

6


3. FCAG analysis of LEI and FSC and comparison of findings

Annex 2, 3 and 4 contain the results of the FCAG assessment for the LEI and the FSC scheme, respectively. In the following, the main findings are highlighted on Criterion level, and a comparison of the findings for each scheme is given.

3.1 Compliance with international frameworks for certification, accreditation, and standard setting (Criterion 1)

Even though LEI is not a member of international accreditation alliances, its system makes sufficient reference to international schemes and standards, e.g. to the International Standard Organisation (ISO), the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the International Tropical Timber Organisation (ITTO), the FSC, and the Indonesian Standardization Body (BSN). BSN is an ISO member and has endorsed LEI’s standard for natural production forests. LEI’s accreditation programme, particularly the recently published Manual 11, refers to BSN Guide 3, which is based on ISO/IEC Guide 61. It also refers to ISO/IEC Guide 628.

LEI’s CBs are obliged to comply with LEI’s new accreditation manual (Manual 11) from January 2007 onwards in order to achieve full accreditation. Some current shortcomings, e.g. related to documentation, public transparency and internal reviews, should therefore not be maintained in the future.

The detailed analysis of the ISO/IEC Guide 65 on certification body’s structures and operations showed that almost all requirements are fulfilled by LEI. Only one shortcoming was found: LEI does not request that certified products are on hold in cases of major changes inside a certified unit or to the certification standard/scheme until a surveillance visit took place.

The generic analysis of the FSC scheme confirmed that the FSC is well embedded into internationally operating monitoring structures. For accreditation and standard setting, monitoring services are provided by the ISEAL Alliance according to the ISO/IEC 17011 standard and the ISEAL Alliance Code of Good Practice, respectively.

FSC’s accreditation programme recognises certification bodies according to ISO/IEC Guide 65 and additional requirements developed by FSC.

Comparison

LEI and FSC both operate accreditation schemes and standard setting procedures which accommodate international requirements. However, only FSC is embedded into

8 ISO has published a number of Guides to help with the development of certification schemes. They provide guidance on the development and use of standards (Guide 59), certification bodies and certification (Guides 62, 65, 66) and accreditation (Guide 17011, which recently replaced ISO/IEC Guide 58, Guide 61 and ISO/IEC/TR 17010).

7


international monitoring structures, since LEI’s accreditation programme is not affiliated with any international or even national accreditation body, even though LEI does fulfil almost all related requirements.

3.2 Compatible with globally applicable principles that balance economic, ecological, and equity dimensions of forest management and meet Global Forest Alliance requirements (Criterion 2)

All indicators of LEI’s standard 5000 were developed by considering the framework of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM), including the sustainability of the production, ecological and the social functions. In LEI’s ecological indicators, the fulfilment of requirements based on international treaties, such as CITES, is sufficiently considered, even though this is not explicitly mentioned. Under social aspect, LEI has incorporated crucial topics such as empowerment of the local community, respect to traditional rights, equal benefits and access to local/indigenous people and workers rights.

LEI fully complies with the WWF Policy on forest management outside protected areas. Its certification system applies a Forest Management Unit (FMU) approach and therefore does not consider required landscape protection of the Alliance term critical natural habitats for areas outside the FMU. Regarding the type of forests to be converted or the process of acquiring the conversion license no essentials are formulated in LEI’s plantation standard and consequently the related Alliance requirement is not fully met9.Inconsistencies in terminology between the terms used by the Alliance and LEI are frequent.

The international framework applied by FSC includes the majority of issues listed in Alliance Criterion 2. Inconsistencies in terminology could also be identified for elements dealing with protected forest areas. While the Alliance uses the terms critical forest areasand critical natural habitats, the FSC and WWF standard builds upon the concept of High Conservation Value Forests (HCVF). Critical natural habitats outside the forest under assessment are not explicitly covered under the FSC principle on HCVF. Accordingly, this aspect of the Alliance criterion was categorized as not fulfilled.

Comparison

Both schemes reflect most of the Alliance criteria regarding standard substance. They are both based on sufficient compliance with all relevant national and international laws and regulations. Divergence between FSC and LEI exists in standard differentiation (three

9 LEI considers that these aspects are the “domain of the government”, not of the FMU under assessment. It points out that the Indonesian law contains clear criteria for areas qualifying for conversion. Even though LEI seems very sensitive on this issue, the approach used in the plantation standard does not fulfil WWF-FFL’s Policy on Forest Conversion (February 2002), since various cases of disputable conversion decisions released by the Indonesian Government exist.

8


standards for different forest/management unit types constitute the LEI scheme while the FSC covers all forest types with one standard).

Major differences between the Alliance requirements and the analyzed standards are: o The concept of critical natural habitats is not fully reflected in both schemes o LEI does not fully meet the Alliance requirements regarding conversion of

forests, since it considers the initial conversion decision the “domain of the government”, exceeding the authority of the FMU and the effect of its standard

o Terms used by the Alliance, FSC and especially LEI do often not match

More guidance regarding interpretation of the used ecological concepts is required.10

Given the significant inconsistencies of the terminology between the Alliance require-ments and the LEI scheme, a comprehensive standard comparison would require a thorough analysis of standard interpretation during assessments, which could not be provided by this study.

3.3 Meaningful and equitable participation of all major stakeholder groups in governance and standard setting (Criterion 3)

The LEI scheme places high importance to meaningful participation. Already during LEI’s period as a working group, numerous workshops and meetings were conducted to openly discuss standard and system matters. Inputs by NGOs and indigenous peoples’ representatives (especially to social aspects), the private sector (particularly to a process instead of an inspection orientation of the assessment approach) and academics (particularly to production and social aspects) were incorporated. Participatory working approaches were very unusual at that time in Indonesia and LEI has to be given some credit for its work during that period.

Only two minor incompatibilities between the Alliance Criterion 3 and the LEI scheme were found: LEI is not requesting the presence of all major groups of its constituents for decision making but regulates in its statues that 2/3 of its members have to be present in order that the general assembly (kongres) becomes quorative. And LEI has not formulated detailed requirements for NGOs participating in standard setting and governance processes as required under guidance point b in great detail by the Alliance.11

Meaningful participation of major stakeholder groups and equitable participation in governance is embedded in all elements of the FSC scheme (accreditation, certification

10 A document elucidating the connection between HCVF and the World Bank’s terminology will be prepared in connection with the forthcoming World Bank Sourcebook on Forests (WWF/WB Alliance, 2006:10). In the meantime it is after a preliminary analysis concluded that critical forest areas are a sub-set of high conservation value forests. Consequently, their maintenance as required in Alliance Criterion 2, point g, can be assumed by the application of FSC’s Principle 9 (Walter, 2006). 11 LEI e.g. does not regulate that participating NGOs need to be accountable to their constituents, affected by the certification system or have a proven record in the subject matter. However, several of LEI’s constituents must be considered as fully accountable to their organizations, since they represent important networks like AMAN (e.g. Abdon Nababan) or FKKM (e.g. Muayat Ali).

9


and standard setting). Consequently, the FSC fulfils most of the Alliance requirements, with the exception of some aspects of the standard setting process on national level,12 the decision making procedure in the General Assembly (which is not oriented towards consensus but based on a voting system) and the detailed requirements of the Alliance regarding NGO participation in standard setting and governance processes.13

The most crucial matter is the standard setting process on national level: FSC has developed an international framework standard (FSC P&C), using a refinement process for the adaptation of its international framework to regional and national levels (addition of country specific indicators to the P&C). The process shall be carried out by endorsed National Initiatives (NI) and the developed standard needs accreditation by the FSC.14 In the absence of a national FSC standard, FSC CBs can use a locally adapted generic standard (also called “interim standard”) for certification, which is based on each CB’s generic standard (FSC P&C plus generic indicators) and available local information.15

This procedure was applied in Indonesia due to the absence of a FSC NI and has been maintained acknowledging the collaboration between FSC and LEI.

The assessment of the interim standard setting procedure of the FSC showed that although the process includes consultation, the decision making is not based upon consensus among stakeholders or a balanced voting system. Both aspects are required by the Alliance in all standard development processes. Judging on CB’s performance in Indonesia, the level of consultation on interim standards has not been different from other countries with certification prior to the elaboration of a FSC national standard.16 Inputs by stakeholders, however, were limited, partly due to the existence of the Joint Certification Protocol (JCP), which closely linked the Indonesian interim standards in natural production forests to the LEI standard, and party due to a lack of interest by many local stakeholders.17

12 Requirements for governance of national level operations are laid down in the FSC National Initiatives Manual. The provisions in this document are to some extent confusing, particularly with regard to voting rights and the distinction between the decision making procedures for standard setting committees (part 12) and for other tasks of these bodies. Assessment of the documentation therefore yielded fail results for various aspects. More ample and concrete information may be obtained during a national level analysis of these bodies (Walter, 2006).13 Although FSC fulfils some of the related guidance given by the Alliance, it does e.g. not regulate that the participating NGOs need to be affected by the certification system or have a broad membership base. 14 Standard procedures aim at an independent, participatory, balanced and consensus based standard setting processes. 15 Interim standards need accreditation by the FSC. Consultation is an essential requirement for the local adaptation of the generic standard (FSC-STD-20-003). 16 SmartWood so far developed three versions of its interim standard in Indonesia (SmartWood, 2003) and tried to accommodate recent interpretations on FSC certification, e.g. the Principle 2&3 study done in Indonesia (Colchester et al., 2003). 17 The JCP has been concluded in December 2005 and never covered plantation and CBFM certification. Neither SmartWood nor SGS received very concrete inputs to their interim standards during consultations. Usually, stakeholder comments came on broader issues regarding framework conditions for certification, such as legal gazettement, free and informed prior consent, indigenous rights, the legitimacy of concessions, etc. Or criticisms focused on specific certifications (PT. Diamond Raya, PT. XIP, Perum Perhutani).

10


Judging according to the strict requirements of the Alliance, the current status of certification standard development by the FSC in Indonesia was categorized as not sufficient.

Comparison

Meaningful participation in governance and standard setting of major stakeholder groups is a stronghold of both schemes, even though some requirements are currently not fully met by both schemes.

For the FSC, a need for a national level standard development in Indonesia exists, latest since the termination of the JCP between FSC CBs and LEI CBs. Whether this could be done under the on-going collaboration agreement between LEI and FSC should be considered.

3.4 Avoidance of unnecessary obstacles to trade (Criterion 4)

No requirement exceeding Criterion 1 is specified in the FCAG. As a result, Criterion 4 was not analysed.

3.5 Based on objective and measurable performance standards that are adapted to local conditions (Criterion 5)

LEI’s indicators and verifiers are performance orientated. LEI’s approach is very detailed, comprising of three different standards (with even more application options), and a typology framework in order to evaluate performance truly considering the local context. The typology affects indicator rating (in all standards) as well as system procedures (in the CBFM system).

The forest management standard is written in measurable terms and geared to the FMU level. Detailed guidance for assessment and grading is available (LEI Technical Doc. 01-06). Although a tool box approach for the use of verifiers is provided, the indicators and verifiers appear very detailed, which may cause inflexibility during assessment and grading (a matter that can only be evaluated via field assessments).

The official language of the LEI documents is Bahasa Indonesia. The used wording is precise, constituting the academic background of the system and standard developers. The English translations, however, contain numerous mistakes and inconsistent wording, particularly since several English documents are only available in draft versions. Some important documents, e.g. the accreditation manual and even the CBFM guidelines, are only available in Bahasa Indonesia. This surely hinders LEI’s international acceptance.

11


The system documentation is very detailed (see reference list in Chapter 6.1). Little guidance is provided on the relation between the various guidelines, manuals and technical documents.

FSC’s P&C are also greatly composed of performance criteria. The standard is written in measurable terms and oriented towards activities at the FMU level. Adaptation to local conditions is the task of endorsed National Initiatives. Until an accredited national standard is developed, CBs can certify based on interim standards (see above). The interim standards developed by SmartWood and SGS Qualifor in Indonesia are publicly available in English and in Bahasa Indonesia. The Soil Association has not yet published its interim standard for Indonesia.

Comparison

The standards of both schemes contain explicit performance requirements, including chain of custody. LEI’s scheme and standard complexity makes applying it somehow “scientific” and more difficult compared to the more straight forward approach of the FSC. Wording of the criteria & indicators (indicators & verifiers) in both schemes tries to prevent ambiguities and potentially inconsistent interpretations. Guidance to standard interpretation gets still elaborated, particularly by the FSC.

Adaptation to local conditions is a stronghold of the LEI scheme, reflected in its typology approach, particularly for CBFM areas. Local adaptation of its standard is also clearly regulated by the FSC. However, the FSC allows simplified and less consultative procedures (see above described non-compliances for the interim standards) in order to be able to offer its certification services globally.18

Understanding the LEI scheme is for non-Indonesian speakers relatively difficult due to a lack of (well) translated documents and its complexity in documentation. A translation of FSC or FSC CB documents into Bahasa Indonesia is not foreseen, with the exception of the interim standards.

3.6 Certification decisions free of conflicts of interest from parties with vested interests (Criterion 6)

LEI is an independent organization and has regulated the independence of each actor in its scheme in great detail (special guidelines were published on independence require-ments for CBs; Assessors; and Expert Panel members). LEI has placed such an emphasis on actor’s independence and defending Corruption, Collusion and Nepotism (KKN) from its scheme, that its procedures are more complex if compared to other (national) certification schemes. E.g., a rigid differentiation between the assessment and the evaluation procedure is applied. This, however, led to the circumstance that the personal involved in the decision making process have no actual field experience gathered through

18 In this way the FSC is complying with the Alliance requirement a. under Criterion 10, defined as “equity of access independent from location of the operation”.

12


the main assessment and that a large number of persons are required in each certification.19

The FSC fulfils all requirements stated by the Alliance under Criterion 6 by referring to the relevant ISO rules.

Comparison

Both schemes explicitly regulate the avoidance of conflicts of interest and vested interests.

LEI tried to accommodate the Indonesian difficulties of KKN by separating the roles of the involved actors and reducing the power of its CBs. This causes significant differences in procedures between the FSC and the LEI scheme, as outlined in Chapter 4.

3.7 Transparency in decision making and public reporting (Criterion 7)

LEI makes its documents publicly available on its website, specifying all its requirements related to accreditation, standard and certification, including chain of custody, logo policy and control of claims.

Public summary reports for field assessments are currently only available on the website of one CB, but can be requested from the other(s). Summaries still differ significantly in quality, some of them not fulfilling LEI’s own requirements (comment on implementation). Delays in publication are considerable at one CB (comment on implementation). Public summaries of surveillance visits, as required by the Alliance, are not produced. Summaries of the accreditation decision shall be made public in early 2007 (the accreditation process is still ongoing).

Accreditation procedures, however, are not sufficiently public (consultation, as required by the Alliance under Criterion 8, is not conducted) and corrective action requests issued during this process are not transparently voiced. All above matters constitute non-conformities between the LEI scheme and the requirements of the Alliance under Criterion 7.

FSC makes its documents publicly available on its website, including the proceedings of the General Assembly and policy papers. Public reports on forest management evaluation are available on the website of the responsible CB. Summaries for certification and surveillance contain all aspects required by the Alliance. However, some public summaries of finalized surveillance visits in Indonesia are not yet published (comment on implementation).

19 LEI, however, regulates that in the decision making Expert Panel a proportion of the members must originate from the vicinity of the unit under assessment in order to reflect local representation and experience.

13


Comparison

Compared to the FSC, which fully complies with the requirements of the Alliance under Criterion 7, LEI shows several deficiencies regarding transparency in accreditation and public reporting. The shortcomings are not fundamental, but significant.

3.8 Reliable and independent assessment of forest management performance and Chain of Custody (Criterion 8)

Field visits form the basis for certifications and surveillance of certified units in the LEI scheme. Surveillance of CBs is conducted through field and office visits. LEI’s CoC system is fully operational and control mechanisms exist to prevent application of logos on uncertified timber (however, LEI’s logo is not yet used). The entire lifecycle of a certified product is not controlled by the CoC system, an aspect leading to a minor non-compliance with ISO 14020.

LEI bases its accreditation decision on documents provided by the applicant. General information on the CB is known to LEI through its network sources, but no consultation takes place, as required by the Alliance (see Criterion 7).

Complain procedures and appeal mechanisms are sufficiently regulated by LEI, including the creation of an independent Certification Review Council (DPS). Complains against CBs are made public and are free of costs for the complainant. Complains against LEI are not made public (but answered by LEI in writing). This constitutes a minor non-conformity with the requirements of the Alliance under Criterion 8.

Stakeholders can participate in a number of ways in the certification process: through formal hearings at national, province and/or district level, through meetings with representatives of LEI’s 12 Regional Consultation Forums (FKD) and in writing to the CB. However, public consultation during surveillance visits, as required by the Alliance, is not foreseen in LEI’s scheme, but was so far conducted by LEI’s CBs following the rules of the JCP (comment on implementation).20

The FSC fulfils all requirements stated by the Alliance under Criterion 8, except for the minor matters of absence of cost implications for CBs appealing accreditation and the lack of controlling the entire lifecycle of a certified product, as required by the Alliance in accordance with ISO 14020.

Comparison

Independence, public transparency and consultation are general strongholds of the FSC scheme. At the beginning of certification in Indonesia, however, consultation in main

20 The meaningful involvement of the FKD and an open access policy are judged by LEI as sufficient means of consultation during surveillance.

14


assessments was strongly criticised by stakeholders and constituted a surveillance matter for the CBs of both schemes. The Joint Certification Protocol finally provided the opportunity to develop culturally sensitive stakeholder consultation procedures for the application of both schemes.

Although LEI has placed a lot of emphasis on consultation procedures and even has developed locally adapted consultation mechanisms (FKD), a few minor non-conformities regarding the requirements of the Alliance were found. The deficiencies are, however, not fundamental.

FSC does not fulfil the Alliance requirement regarding costs of claims related to accreditation. LEI and FSC do not control the entire lifecycle of a certified product, as this is generally not done by forest or agricultural certification schemes; an aspect that should be excluded from the Guide.

3.9 Delivers continual improvement in forest management (Criterion 9)

LEI follows a more rigid inspection approach then formulated by the Alliance. No certificate is issued under conditions; the certification decision is either “pass or fail”. Corrective action requests are not expressed and no deadline for compliance is set. However, the scheme still contributes to continual improvement on FMU level.

Surveillance intensity in the LEI scheme depends on the received certification grading and the type of forest management. LEI fulfils the related requirements of the Alliance with some exemptions.

The FSC fulfils all requirements defined by the Alliance under Criterion 9. Its scheme is promoting learning on all stages of its application. In accreditation, main assessment and surveillance, corrective action requests are expressed to allow the unit or CB under assessment to adjust operations.

Comparison

Although LEI follows a stricter inspection approach in certification than the FSC, it does fulfil the general thinking of the Alliance under Criterion 9. However, since corrective actions requests are not issued, requirements a and c are judged as not applicable.

Both systems conduct regular standard reviews, as required by the ISEAL Code of Good Practice for Setting Social and Environmental Standards.

15


3.10 Accessible to and cost-effective for all parties (Criterion 10)

LEI’s scheme is based on the principle of non-discrimination. LEI offers a range of locally adapted procedures to ensure a cost saving approach in qualified small units. In certain cases, certification can become very cost efficient (guarantor approach in CBFM certification), in other cases costs remain relatively high, even in CBFM certification.21

FSC’s scheme also builds on the principle of non-discrimination. FSC has developed a simplified and cost reduced procedure for the certification of Small and Low Intensity Managed Forest (SLIMF)22.

Comparison

Both schemes fulfil the given requirements, though using different concepts to allow for access of small parties. However, certification costs remain high for some small units under both schemes.

3.11 Voluntary participation (Criterion 11)

Criterion 11 is reflected in LEI’s CBFM scheme. The general concept is fulfilled, however, demanded contractual arrangements between the members of a community based forest management unit (kooperasi) and aspects of internal group organization are not sufficiently specified in LEI’s CBFM system. This caused two minor non-compliances, even though LEIs general understanding of these matters seems very similar to concept outlined in the FCAG. All requirements are adhered to by the FSC.

Comparison

FSC, by following ISO rules, has regulated its scheme in accordance to the requirements of the Alliance. LEI does not fully meet the requirements related to group certification, since it has not specified necessary organizational matters in such great detail in its CBFM system. However, in all three certifications in CBFM areas under LEI and FSC in Indonesia, the by the Alliance required “commitment to adhere to the standards set by the scheme” was signed by the participating forest owners before the assessment (comment on implementation).

21 This is mainly due to the involvement of a large number of persons in the LEI scheme: assessors, expert panel members, and CB personal. 22 FSC-POL-20-100 and FSC-POL-20-101 (2003).

16

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

4.

Co

mp

ari

so

n o

f th

e c

ert

ific

ati

on

pro

ce

du

res

ap

pli

ed

by L

EI

an

d F

SC

In a

dditi

on t

o th

e FC

AG

app

licat

ion,

an

over

view

tab

le d

ocum

entin

g th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

proc

edur

es i

n fo

rest

man

agem

ent

cert

ific

atio

n an

d (b

rief

ly)

also

in

CoC

was

dev

elop

ed,

unde

rlin

ing

sim

ilari

ties

and

diff

eren

ces

of t

he t

wo

sche

mes

reg

ardi

ng p

roce

dura

l as

pect

s.

The

Tab

le is

bas

ed o

n de

sk r

evie

w, i

nter

view

s an

d ea

rlie

r w

ork

done

dur

ing

an in

tern

al e

valu

atio

n of

the

Join

t Cer

tific

atio

n Pr

otoc

ol in

ye

ar 2

001.

23

Tab

le2:

Com

pari

son

of th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

proc

edur

es a

pplie

d by

LE

I an

d FS

C

FSC

Sch

eme

LE

I Sc

hem

eF

indi

ngs

App

lica-

tion

FSC

is

op

en

for

all

type

s of

fo

rest

m

anag

emen

t un

its

to

appl

y fo

r ce

rtif

icat

ion,

reg

ardl

ess

its s

ize,

loc

atio

n an

d ow

ners

hip.

A

pplic

atio

ns m

ust b

e su

bmitt

ed to

an

FSC

ac

cred

ited

Cer

tific

atio

n B

ody

(CB

).

All

type

s of

for

est m

anag

emen

t uni

ts a

re w

elco

med

by

LE

I.

App

licat

ion

mus

t be

sub

mitt

ed t

o a

LE

I ac

cred

ited

CB

. T

he C

B a

nd t

he a

pplic

ant

sign

a c

ontr

actu

al

agre

emen

t w

hich

als

o in

clud

es o

beyi

ng t

o L

EI’

s pr

oced

ures

.

App

licat

ion

proc

edur

es a

re s

imila

r in

bot

h sc

hem

es.

Sele

ctin

gA

sses

sors

FSC

CB

s ha

ve th

eir

own

requ

irem

ents

for

as

sess

or

qual

ific

atio

ns,

base

d on

es

sent

ials

for

mul

ated

by

the

FSC

(FS

C-

STD

-20-

004)

. Sp

ecia

l re

quir

emen

ts f

or

lead

as

sess

ors

exis

t. C

Bs

(can

) of

fer

trai

ning

to a

sses

sors

.

The

ass

esso

rs m

ust

mee

t th

e ba

sic

requ

irem

ents

st

ated

in

LE

I’s

guid

elin

es f

or e

ach

cert

ific

atio

n ty

pe

(nat

ural

pr

oduc

tion

fore

st,

plan

tatio

ns

and

CB

FM)

and

leve

l of

re

spon

sibi

lity

(lea

d as

sess

or/te

am m

embe

r).

CB

s ca

n on

ly u

se r

egis

tere

d as

sess

ors.

Reg

istr

atio

n is

req

uire

d at

LE

I’s

Pers

onal

Reg

istr

atio

n B

ody

unde

r th

e go

vern

men

t ag

ency

L

embag

a

Ilm

u

Pen

gta

huan I

ndones

ia (

LIP

I).

Cur

rent

ly,

LE

I is

re

spon

sibl

e fo

r al

l tr

aini

ngs

rela

ted

to

its

sche

me.

C

Bs

are

not

allo

wed

to

co

nduc

t tr

aini

ng

activ

ities

co

veri

ng

the

LE

I sc

hem

e.

FSC

C

Bs

are

free

r to

ch

oose

as

sess

ors

(acc

ordi

ng

to

clea

rly

defi

ned

qual

ific

atio

ns)

and

can

desi

gn t

heir

ow

n tr

aini

ng p

rogr

amm

es.

LE

I’s

form

atio

n of

an

in

depe

nden

t Pe

rson

al R

egis

trat

ion

Bod

y an

d cr

eatio

n of

a c

entr

al t

rain

ing

prog

ram

me

mus

t be

un

ders

tood

as

an a

ttem

pt t

o st

anda

rdiz

e as

sess

ors’

qua

lific

atio

ns a

nd t

o re

stri

ct t

he

infl

uenc

e of

its

CB

s. B

oth

mea

sure

s ar

e m

eant

to

mai

ntai

n hi

gh c

redi

bilit

y of

its

sy

stem

and

nee

d to

be

reco

gniz

ed u

nder

th

e In

done

sian

co

ntex

t of

co

rrup

tion,

co

llusi

on a

nd n

epot

ism

(K

KN

).

23 H

inri

chs

(200

1).

17

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Pre

-A

sses

s-m

ent

and

Doc

umen

t R

evie

w

Pre-

asse

ssm

ents

(a

lso

refe

rred

to

as

“s

copi

ngs”

) ar

e a

volu

ntar

y ac

tivity

in

the

FSC

sc

hem

e.

Scop

ings

sh

all

iden

tify

barr

iers

to c

ertif

icat

ion

and

help

pre

pari

ng

the

mai

n as

sess

men

t, es

p.

in

diff

icul

t ca

ses.

Ass

essm

ents

are

fle

xibl

e in

des

ign

and

do

not

have

to

incl

ude

fiel

d vi

sits

, exc

ept

for

larg

e sc

ale

units

an

d H

CV

F ar

eas,

re

spec

tivel

y.

Con

sulta

tion

is

usua

lly

optio

nal,

but

whe

n th

e sc

opin

g is

co

veri

ng a

n ar

ea o

f po

tent

ial

HC

VF,

a

lim

ited

am

ount

of

st

akeh

olde

r co

nsul

tatio

n is

req

uire

d.

Fiel

d vi

sits

wer

e co

nduc

ted

in a

ll FS

C

pre-

asse

ssm

ents

in

na

tura

l pr

oduc

tion

fore

st

conc

essi

ons

in

Indo

nesi

a,

part

ly

join

tly w

ith L

EI

(und

er th

e JC

P).

Pre-

asse

ssm

ent r

esul

ts c

an n

ot b

e us

ed f

or

publ

ic

adve

rtis

ing

and

do

not

prov

ide

scor

ing

of c

rite

ria.

The

fie

ld (

pre-

) as

sess

men

ts i

s ge

ared

to

incr

ease

th

e ef

fici

ency

of

the

eval

uatio

n pr

oces

s an

d to

ra

ise

the

unde

rsta

ndin

g re

gard

ing

the

read

ines

s of

an

ope

ratio

n fo

r ce

rtif

icat

ion.

Uni

ts w

hich

do

not

pass

th

e pr

e-as

sess

men

t ca

n no

t co

ntin

ue

the

cert

ific

atio

n pr

oces

s an

d sh

all

re-a

pply

for

a p

re-

asse

ssm

ent.

The

act

iviti

es w

ithin

a p

re-a

sses

smen

t con

sist

of:

a.

Scre

enin

g by

ad

ho

c E

xper

t Pan

el 1

(E

P1):

1.

Doc

umen

t eva

luat

ion

2.Fi

eld

scop

ing,

po

ssib

ly

allo

win

g fo

r co

nsul

tatio

ns

3.D

ecis

ion

mak

ing

&

subm

issi

on

of

reco

mm

enda

tion

to

succ

eed

to

mai

n as

sess

men

t, if

app

ropr

iate

b.

Aff

irm

atio

n of

dec

isio

n by

the

resp

onsi

ble

CB

The

EP

1 c

onsi

sts

of 3

inde

pend

ent,

LE

I re

gist

ered

ex

pert

s w

ith e

xper

tise

in

prod

uctio

n,

ecol

ogic

al

and

soci

al a

spec

ts.

Pre-

asse

ssm

ent

resu

lts c

an n

ot b

e us

ed f

or p

ublic

ad

vert

isin

g.

Whi

le

in

the

LE

I sc

hem

e th

e pr

e-as

sess

men

t is

a m

anda

tory

ste

p le

adin

g to

a

fina

l dec

isio

n re

gard

ing

the

poss

ibili

ty to

m

ove

to a

mai

n-as

sess

men

t (“

pass

/fai

l”),

th

e pr

oced

ure

in

the

FSC

sc

hem

e is

vo

lunt

ary,

gi

ving

re

com

men

datio

ns

to

proc

eed

only

. In

the

FSC

sch

eme,

the

tas

k is

sol

emnl

y im

plem

ente

d by

the

cont

ract

ed C

B.

In

the

LE

I sc

hem

e,

the

activ

ity

is

prim

arily

han

ded

over

to

an i

ndep

ende

nt

ad

ho

c E

xper

t Pa

nel,

com

pris

ing

of L

EI

regi

ster

ed c

erti

fica

tion

exp

erts

. B

oth

sche

mes

un

ders

tand

th

e pr

e-as

sess

men

t as

an

inte

rnal

pro

cess

of

the

appl

ying

man

agem

ent u

nit.

Res

ults

are

not

m

ade

publ

ic.

Eve

n th

ough

so

me

proc

edur

es

are

diff

eren

t, th

e co

ncep

t of

bot

h sc

hem

es i

s in

gen

eral

sim

ilar

.

Mai

n

Ass

ess-

men

t

The

tas

k of

the

mai

n-as

sess

men

t in

the

FS

C s

chem

e is

to

defi

ne t

he s

cope

of

the

asse

ssm

ent,

eval

uate

th

e ap

plic

ant’

s m

anag

emen

t sy

stem

, ve

rify

it

s im

plem

enta

tion

and

iden

tify

non-

conf

orm

ities

rel

ated

to th

e st

anda

rd u

sed.

E

ach

indi

cato

r is

rev

iew

ed f

or c

ompl

ianc

e an

d fi

nal

deci

sion

is

mad

e by

con

sens

us

betw

een

the

asse

ssor

team

mem

bers

. In

cas

es o

f m

ajor

non

-com

plia

nce

at t

he

leve

l of

the

ass

ocia

ted

FSC

cri

teri

on, p

re-

cond

ition

s, a

lso

calle

d m

ajor

Cor

rect

ive

Act

ion

Req

uest

s (m

ajor

CA

R),

are

iss

ued

and

need

to

be

cl

osed

ou

t be

fore

cert

ific

atio

n ca

n be

gra

nted

.

The

L

EI

asse

ssor

s us

e th

e re

com

men

datio

ns

form

ulat

ed

by

the

EP

1 as

ce

ntra

l in

put

for

desi

gnin

g th

eir

fiel

d w

ork.

T

ypol

ogy

of t

he u

nit

unde

r as

sess

men

t is

def

ined

ac

cord

ing

to i

ts d

egre

e of

bio

phys

ical

saf

ety

and

its s

ocia

l se

tting

. T

he t

ypol

ogy

has

an i

mpo

rtan

t im

pact

on

the

deci

sion

mak

ing

proc

ess,

sin

ce i

t de

term

ines

the

im

port

ance

of

each

man

agem

ent

func

tion

duri

ng t

he g

radi

ng p

roce

ss (

e.g.

if

a un

it un

der

asse

ssm

ent

cont

ains

num

erou

s se

ttlem

ents

or

end

ange

red

ecos

yste

ms,

the

soc

ial

and/

or t

he

ecol

ogic

al

func

tion

m

ight

be

w

eigh

ted

mor

e im

port

ant t

han

the

prod

uctio

n fu

nctio

n).

Eac

h in

dica

tor

mus

t be

ve

rifi

ed.

Mea

ns

of

veri

fica

tion

are

elab

orat

ed

in

thre

e te

chni

cal

Bot

h sc

hem

es

eval

uate

ea

ch

indi

cato

r du

ring

the

mai

n as

sess

men

t.

Cri

teri

a (F

SC)

or i

ndic

ator

(L

EI)

gra

ding

is

don

e di

ffer

ently

in

the

two

sche

mes

. W

hile

in

the

FSC

sch

eme

any

mat

ter

of

non-

com

plia

nce

is r

ated

acc

ordi

ng t

o its

de

gree

of

no

n-co

nfor

mit

y ba

sed

on

the

prof

essi

onal

judg

men

t of

the

asse

ssor

s, th

e L

EI

sche

me

requ

ests

th

at

the

asse

ssor

s gr

ade

each

in

dica

tor

acco

rdin

g to

pr

e-de

fine

d ra

ting

inte

nsiti

es

(5

clas

ses)

, w

ithou

t de

term

inin

g a

min

imum

pe

rfor

man

ce

leve

l fo

r ea

ch

indi

cato

r,

ther

efor

e no

t ju

dgin

g th

e de

gree

of

non-

conf

orm

ity.

18

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

In

case

s of

m

inor

no

n-co

mpl

ianc

e,

cond

ition

s or

min

or C

AR

s ar

e is

sued

, to

be

cl

osed

-out

w

ithin

a

defi

ned

peri

od

duri

ng th

e va

lidity

of

the

cert

ific

atio

n.

guid

elin

es,

refe

rrin

g to

doc

umen

t re

view

s, s

taff

in

terv

iew

s, f

ield

ass

essm

ents

and

con

sulta

tion.

B

ased

on

the

fiel

d fi

ndin

gs a

nd r

elev

ant

seco

ndar

y in

form

atio

n, a

sses

sors

jud

ge t

he p

erfo

rman

ce o

f ea

ch

indi

cato

r fo

llow

ing

pre-

defi

ned

ratin

g in

tens

ities

el

abor

ated

in

th

ree

othe

r te

chni

cal

guid

elin

es (

rang

ing

from

exc

elle

nt,

good

, fa

ir,

and

poor

to b

ad f

or e

ach

indi

cato

r).

The

typ

olog

y ap

proa

ch i

n th

e L

EI

syst

em

trie

s to

sc

ient

ific

ally

ac

com

mod

ate

land

scap

e as

pect

s,

ackn

owle

dgin

g th

at

each

uni

t un

der

asse

ssm

ent

oper

ates

und

er

a di

ffer

ent

soci

al

and

envi

ronm

enta

l se

tting

.

Rep

orti

ng

The

m

ain

asse

ssm

ent

repo

rt

mus

t be

w

ritte

n by

th

e as

sess

ors,

co

ntai

ning

ba

ckgr

ound

in

form

atio

n an

d a

just

ific

atio

n fo

r th

e ra

ting

of

each

cr

iteri

on.

The

rep

ortin

g fo

rmat

is

regu

late

d by

the

C

B,

foll

owin

g de

tail

ed F

SC r

equi

rem

ents

(F

SC-S

TD

-20-

008,

ref

erri

ng t

o IS

O/I

EC

65

).

The

dra

ft r

epor

t is

sub

mitt

ed t

o th

e un

it un

der

asse

ssm

ent f

or c

omm

ent.

The

fie

ld a

sses

smen

t re

port

mus

t be

wri

tten

by t

he

asse

ssor

s in

ord

er t

o as

sist

the

EP

II i

n co

nduc

ting

its p

erfo

rman

ce e

valu

atio

n an

d de

cisi

on m

akin

g.

Just

ific

atio

n fo

r th

e ra

ting

of e

ach

indi

cato

r m

ust

be g

iven

. T

he r

epor

ting

form

at is

pre

cise

ly r

egul

ated

by

LE

I.

The

rep

ort l

angu

age

is B

aha

sa I

ndo

nes

ia

Rep

ortin

g fo

rmat

s ar

e di

ffer

ent

in

both

sc

hem

es,

thou

gh

gene

rally

co

veri

ng

the

sam

e m

atte

rs.

In t

he F

SC s

chem

e, t

he a

sses

sors

pro

pose

a

cert

ific

atio

n de

cisi

on.

In

the

LE

I sc

hem

e,

the

asse

ssor

s on

ly

prop

ose

the

indi

cato

r ra

tings

, w

ithou

t de

scri

bing

po

ssib

le c

onse

quen

ces

for

the

cert

ific

atio

n de

cisi

on.

The

ass

esso

rs a

re e

xclu

ded

from

th

e de

cisi

on

mak

ing

proc

ess,

an

othe

r sa

fegu

ard

of

the

LE

I sy

stem

to

av

oid

KK

N.

Rev

iew

ing

The

as

sess

men

t re

port

is

su

bmitt

ed

to

inde

pend

ent

peer

re

view

(e

xcep

t fo

r si

ngle

sm

all

units

as

sess

ed

unde

r th

e SL

IMF

conc

ept)

. T

he r

evie

w f

ocus

es o

n th

e ad

equa

cy o

f re

port

w

ritin

g an

d th

e va

lidity

of

th

e pr

opos

ed c

ertif

icat

ion

deci

sion

.

Rev

iew

ing

of t

he f

ield

ass

essm

ent

repo

rt i

s do

ne

by th

e in

depe

nden

t ad

ho

c E

P II

. T

he E

P II

con

sist

s of

at

leas

t 6

pers

ons,

equ

ally

re

pres

entin

g pr

oduc

tion,

ec

olog

ical

an

d so

cial

as

pect

s. A

t lea

st o

ne m

embe

r sh

all b

e fa

mili

ar w

ith

the

loca

tion.

Bot

h sc

hem

es u

se i

ndep

ende

nt r

evie

w o

f th

e as

sess

men

t re

port

to

va

lidat

e its

fi

ndin

gs.

How

ever

, th

e re

view

pro

cess

in

the

LE

I sy

stem

exc

eeds

the

usu

al r

evie

w

task

, sin

ce th

e E

P II

, and

not

the

asse

ssor

s,

are

prop

osin

g th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

deci

sion

.

Dec

isio

nm

akin

gB

ased

on

the

fiel

d as

sess

men

t re

port

and

in

puts

by

th

e pe

er

revi

ewer

s,

the

resp

onsi

ble

CB

m

akes

th

e de

cisi

on

on

cert

ific

atio

n.

As

long

as

a

pre-

cond

ition

is

va

lidly

is

sued

, cer

tific

atio

n ca

n no

t be

gran

ted.

FS

C a

llow

s th

e un

it un

der

asse

ssm

ent

to

clos

e ou

t pr

e-co

nditi

ons

with

out

any

tim

e lim

it.

The

dec

isio

n-m

akin

g pr

oces

s in

the

LE

I sc

hem

e is

pe

rfor

med

by

the

EP

II.

The

st

eps

in

deci

sion

m

akin

g fo

r na

tura

l pr

oduc

tion

and

plan

tatio

n fo

rest

s ar

e as

fol

low

s:

1.E

xpos

e of

the

res

ults

of

the

fiel

d as

sess

men

t, in

clud

ing

rece

ived

sta

keho

lder

com

men

ts,

by

the

lead

ass

esso

r (o

nly

pres

ent

on t

he f

irst

w

ork

day

of th

e E

P II

)2.

Opp

ortu

nity

for

cla

rifi

catio

ns b

y m

anag

emen

t

The

app

lied

deci

sion

mak

ing

proc

edur

es

of th

e tw

o sc

hem

es a

re n

on-e

quiv

alen

t: o

Whi

le

in

the

FSC

sc

hem

e th

e ev

alua

tion

is g

ener

ally

bas

ed o

n th

e pr

ofes

sion

al

judg

emen

t of

th

e fi

eld

asse

ssor

s an

d co

mm

ents

re

ceiv

ed

thro

ugh

inde

pend

ent

peer

rev

iew

, th

e L

EI

sche

me

redu

ces

the

role

of

the

asse

ssor

s to

indi

cato

r gr

adin

g, le

avin

g th

e ov

eral

l sc

orin

g to

an

inde

pend

ent

19

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

unit

staf

f (o

nly

pres

ent

on t

he f

irst

wor

k da

y of

the

EP

II)

3.A

ppli

cati

on

of

the

deci

sion

m

akin

g m

etho

dolo

gy:

Ana

lytic

al

Hie

rarc

hy

Proc

ess

(AH

P) o

r an

othe

r qu

alif

ying

met

hod.

If

the

AH

P is

use

d: D

eter

min

atio

n of

the

deg

ree

of

impo

rtan

ce (

wei

ght)

of

each

for

est

func

tion

(pro

duct

ion,

eco

logy

, an

d so

cial

) ac

cord

ing

to

the

earl

ier

defi

ned

typo

logy

. 4.

Det

erm

inat

ion

of t

he d

egre

e of

im

port

ance

of

each

ind

icat

or a

ccor

ding

to

the

abov

e de

fine

d w

eigh

t of

each

fun

ctio

n.5.

Det

erm

inat

ion

of t

he m

inim

um s

core

for

eac

h in

dica

tor.

6.C

alcu

lati

on

of

the

thre

shol

d fo

r th

e m

anag

emen

t un

it in

ord

er t

o pa

ss c

ertif

icat

ion

(thr

esho

ld =

wei

ghte

d su

m o

f al

l m

inim

um

scor

es).

7.C

ompa

riso

n of

the

wei

ghte

d su

m o

f th

e ac

tual

sc

ores

of

all i

ndic

ator

s w

ith th

e th

resh

old.

8.

Rec

omm

enda

tion

on c

ertif

icat

ion.

T

he

fina

l ce

rtif

icat

ion

deci

sion

is

m

ade

by

the

resp

onsi

ble

CB

, m

erel

y en

dors

ing

the

reco

mm

enda

tion

of th

e E

P II

. If

a m

anag

emen

t un

it fa

ils t

o m

eet

the

thre

shol

d, i

t fa

ils

cert

ific

atio

n.

How

ever

, if

it

rais

es

its

perf

orm

ance

w

ithin

si

x m

onth

s ab

ove

the

thre

shol

d, it

can

re-

appl

y fo

r th

e m

ain

asse

ssm

ent.

Note

: th

e A

HP

w

as

use

d

in

all

ce

rtif

icati

on

dec

isio

ns

do

ne

by

LE

I so

fa

r.

expe

rt p

anel

(w

hich

, ho

wev

er,

mus

t in

clud

e at

leas

t one

loca

l exp

ert)

.

oT

he F

SC s

chem

e is

sues

in

case

s of

m

ajor

non

-con

form

ity p

reco

nditi

ons,

ha

lting

the

cer

tific

atio

n pr

oces

s un

til

com

plia

nce

can

be a

chie

ved.

o

The

L

EI

sche

me

plac

es

the

fiel

d re

sults

in

a

gene

ral

fram

ewor

k (t

ypol

ogy)

and

cal

cula

tes

a w

eigh

ted

thre

shol

d fo

r pa

ssin

g (i

f th

e A

HP

proc

ess

is

used

).

The

sc

hem

e th

eref

ore

usua

lly a

vera

ges

even

maj

or

non-

com

plia

nces

, e.

g.

a un

it w

ith

som

e in

dica

tors

sho

win

g po

or s

ocia

l pe

rfor

man

ce

but

with

a

stro

ng

exec

utio

n of

pro

duct

ion

mat

ters

cou

ld

still

pas

s, i

f th

e de

term

ined

typ

olog

y do

es n

ot r

ank

the

soci

al f

unct

ion

as

too

impo

rtan

t. C

onse

quen

tly,

the

appl

ied

deci

sion

m

akin

g pr

oced

ure

in

the

two

sche

mes

m

ight

not

rea

ch th

e sa

me

conc

lusi

on, e

ven

if t

he f

ield

ass

essm

ent

reve

als

equi

vale

nt

resu

lts.

Add

ition

ally

, th

e co

nseq

uenc

es

of

not

pass

ing

the

mai

n as

sess

men

t ar

e di

ffer

ent:

FSC

al

low

s th

e un

it to

cl

ose

out

pre-

cond

ition

s w

ithou

t a

time

limit,

whi

le i

n th

e L

EI

sche

me

the

unit

fails

th

e as

sess

men

t pro

cess

and

nee

ds to

re-

appl

y.

Issu

ing

of

Cer

tifi

cate

T

he

cert

ific

ate

is

issu

ed

by

the

resp

onsi

ble

CB

. T

he v

alid

ity o

f th

e ce

rtif

icat

e is

5 y

ears

(f

or F

M a

nd f

or C

oC).

The

cer

tific

ate

is is

sued

by

the

resp

onsi

ble

CB

. Fo

rest

m

anag

emen

t ce

rtif

icat

es

are

valid

fo

r 5

year

s in

nat

ural

and

pla

ntat

ion

fore

sts

and

for

10 to

15

yea

rs i

n C

BFM

are

as.

The

val

idity

for

CoC

ce

rtif

icat

es is

3 y

ears

. C

ertif

icat

es d

emon

stra

te t

he u

nit’

s ra

ting

(Gol

d,

Silv

er o

r B

ronz

e).

In b

oth

sche

mes

, the

CB

is

resp

onsi

ble

for

the

issu

ing

of th

e ce

rtif

icat

e.

The

val

idity

of

cert

ific

ates

is

the

sam

e in

na

tura

l and

pla

ntat

ion

fore

sts,

but

dif

fere

nt

in C

BFM

are

as a

nd C

oC.

No

cert

ific

ate

is is

sued

und

er c

ondi

tions

in

the

LE

I sc

hem

e.

20

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Pub

licSu

mm

ary

A

publ

ic

sum

mar

y is

pr

epar

ed

in

an

offi

cial

FS

C

lang

uage

(e

.g.

Eng

lish

or

Sp

anis

h) a

nd in

at

leas

t on

e of

the

off

icia

l la

ngua

ges

of th

e co

untr

y in

whi

ch th

e un

it un

der

asse

ssm

ent

is l

ocat

ed (

e.g.

Bah

asa

Indo

nesi

a).

A

publ

ic

sum

mar

y is

pr

epar

ed

in

Bah

asa

Indo

nesi

a.

Publ

ic s

umm

arie

s of

the

mai

n as

sess

men

t ar

e pr

oduc

ed in

bot

h sc

hem

es.

Surv

eil-

lanc

eSu

rvei

llanc

e vi

sits

are

car

ried

out

at

leas

t an

nual

ly in

FM

and

CoC

cer

tific

atio

ns.

Cor

rect

ive

actio

n re

ques

ts a

re i

ssue

d in

ca

ses

of id

entif

ied

con-

com

plia

nce.

Pu

blic

sum

mar

y re

port

s of

sur

veill

ance

vi

sits

are

pre

pare

d.

Surv

eilla

nce

is c

ondu

cted

at

leas

t tw

ice

with

in a

pe

riod

of

five

yea

rs f

or a

nat

ural

or

plan

tatio

n m

anag

emen

t un

it a

war

ded

Gol

d ra

ting

, at

lea

st

thre

e tim

es f

or S

ilver

rat

ing,

and

at l

east

fou

r tim

es

(= a

nnua

lly)

for

Bro

nze

ratin

g. I

n an

y ca

se,

the

firs

t su

rvei

llanc

e vi

sit

will

tak

e pl

ace

with

in t

he

firs

t yea

r af

ter

cert

ific

atio

n.

Surv

eilla

nce

in

CoC

is

co

nduc

ted

ever

y si

x m

onth

s.

Surv

eilla

nce

in

CB

FM

is

less

in

tens

ive

and

depe

nds

on t

he u

sed

sche

me

and

awar

ded

rati

ng.

In a

ll ca

ses

it is

not

ann

ually

(m

axim

al e

very

tw

o ye

ars)

.

Whi

le t

he c

once

pt o

f su

rvei

llanc

e is

the

sa

me,

the

fre

quen

cy i

s di

ffer

ent

in s

ome

inci

dent

s.

Publ

ic s

umm

arie

s of

sur

veill

ance

vis

its a

re

only

pre

pare

d in

the

FS

C s

chem

e.

Susp

ensi

on

and

wit

h-dr

awal

FSC

CB

s sh

all

susp

end

a ce

rtif

icat

e in

ca

ses

whe

re n

ewly

iss

ued

maj

or C

AR

s w

ere

not

met

by

th

e un

it un

der

surv

eilla

nce

in th

e gi

ven

time

peri

od.

Susp

ensi

ons

are

lim

ited

to o

ne y

ear

or th

e ex

pira

tion

date

of

th

e as

soci

ated

ce

rtif

icat

ion

agre

emen

t.

Aft

er

each

su

rvei

llanc

e vi

sit

all

indi

cato

rs

are

agai

n gr

aded

and

cal

cula

ted

by t

he A

HP

proc

ess

(for

ind

icat

ors

not

re-a

sses

sed

the

old

grad

ing

will

be

use

d).

If t

he u

nit

fails

to

mat

ch t

he m

inim

um t

hres

hold

fo

r br

onze

gr

adin

g,

the

CB

w

ill

with

draw

th

e ce

rtif

icat

e (s

uspe

nsio

n is

not

pos

sibl

e).

Whi

le

the

FSC

sc

hem

e al

low

s fo

r ad

just

men

ts

in

case

s of

m

ajor

no

n-co

mpl

ianc

e, t

he L

EI

sche

me

imm

edia

tely

w

ithdr

aws

the

cert

ific

ate

once

the

rat

ing

has

fall

en b

elow

the

min

imum

gra

de.

Dis

pute

s C

ompl

ains

re

gard

ing

a ce

rtif

icat

ion

deci

sion

ne

ed

to

be

addr

esse

d to

th

e re

spon

sibl

e C

B f

irst

. T

he C

B m

ight

tak

e th

e is

sue

up f

or i

ts n

ext

surv

eilla

nce

or a

ra

ndom

site

vis

it.

The

C

B

resp

onds

in

w

ritin

g an

d do

cum

ents

all

step

s.

The

CB

will

han

d-ov

er th

e co

mpl

ain

to a

n in

depe

nden

t pe

rson

w

ithin

its

or

gani

zati

on

(e.g

. IS

O

oper

atio

ns

Com

plai

ns r

egar

ding

a c

ertif

icat

ion

deci

sion

nee

d to

be

addr

esse

d to

the

resp

onsi

ble

CB

. T

he C

B r

espo

nds

in w

ritin

g an

d do

cum

ents

all

step

s.T

he C

B m

ight

tak

e th

e is

sue

up f

or i

ts n

ext

(or

an

addi

tiona

l) s

urve

illan

ce v

isit

or,

in m

ajor

cas

es,

calls

for

a m

eetin

g of

the

inde

pend

ent C

ertif

icat

ion

Rev

iew

Cou

ncil

(DP

S)

crea

ted

by L

EI.

Dis

pute

mec

hani

sms

are

fully

dev

elop

ed

in b

oth

sche

mes

. In

depe

nden

t di

sput

e re

solu

tion

pro

cedu

res

are

guar

ante

ed,

if

the

conc

erns

of

an

ag

grie

ved

part

y co

uld

not

be s

uffi

cien

tly

answ

ered

by

the

resp

onsi

ble

CB

. 21

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

man

ager

), if

req

uire

d.

The

agg

riev

ed p

arty

can

als

o in

itiat

e an

FS

C c

ompl

ain

or a

ppea

l pr

oces

s, i

n ca

ses

of c

ontin

uous

con

cern

s.

Oth

er

unit

sun

der

the

sam

eco

mpa

ny

Acc

ordi

ng

to

“FSC

G

uide

lines

fo

r C

erti

fica

tion

B

odie

s”

(par

t 2,

2.

13),

ev

alua

tion

of

Cri

teri

on 1

.6 o

f FS

C’s

P&

C

(“lo

ng-t

erm

com

mitm

ent

to F

SC P

&C

”)

may

re

quir

e as

sess

ing

activ

ities

ta

king

pl

ace

in

units

ot

her

than

th

e on

e su

bmitt

ed f

or c

ertif

icat

ion,

if

thes

e un

its

fall

unde

r th

e di

rect

res

pons

ibili

ty o

f th

e ap

plic

ant (

Part

ial c

ertif

icat

ion)

.

Onl

y th

e un

it un

der

asse

ssm

ent i

s ev

alua

ted.

FS

C

requ

ires

in

so

me

case

s th

at

othe

r un

its

unde

r th

e re

spon

sibi

lity

of

the

appl

ican

t ne

ed

to

dem

onst

rate

th

eir

com

mitm

ent

to s

triv

e fo

r SF

M,

e.g.

by

deve

lopi

ng a

rel

ated

act

ion

plan

. T

his

can

cons

ider

ably

de

lay

or

even

hi

nder

ce

rtif

icat

ion

of th

e un

it un

der

asse

ssm

ent.

LE

I ha

s no

equ

ival

ent p

olic

y.

CoC

FS

C r

equi

res

in a

lmos

t al

l ca

ses

on-s

ite

visi

ts

in

CoC

ce

rtif

icat

ion.

A

si

mila

r pr

oced

ure

as in

FM

cer

tific

atio

n is

use

d.

CoC

cer

tific

atio

n an

alys

es t

he p

roce

dure

s fo

r ha

ndli

ng

and

trac

king

of

fo

rest

pr

oduc

ts,

the

iden

tific

atio

n of

the

fin

al

poin

t of

re

liabl

e pr

oduc

t id

entif

icat

ion,

an

d th

e de

scri

ptio

n an

d do

cum

enta

tion

of

all s

ourc

es a

nd c

reat

ed p

rodu

cts.

FS

C

allo

ws

for

a m

inim

um

perc

ent

cont

ent

of c

ertif

ied

mat

eria

l in

a c

ertif

ied

prod

uct

for

a va

riet

y of

pro

duct

gro

ups

(per

cent

age

base

d cl

aim

s or

pr

oduc

ts),

e.

g. a

t lea

st 7

0 %

by

volu

me

of th

e tim

ber

used

in

m

anuf

actu

ring

FS

C

cert

ifie

d pl

ywoo

d m

ust

com

e fr

om a

FSC

-cer

tifie

d so

urce

. The

rem

aini

ng p

erce

ntag

e ca

n no

t co

me

from

: o

illeg

al h

arve

sts;

o

gene

tical

ly m

odif

ied

tree

s;

oar

eas

whe

re t

radi

tiona

l or

civ

il ri

ghts

are

vio

late

d; a

nd

oun

-cer

tifie

d H

CV

Fs.

LE

I us

es a

sim

ilar

proc

edur

e in

CoC

cer

tific

atio

n as

in

FM

ce

rtif

icat

ion,

in

clud

ing

Pre-

Fiel

d A

sses

smen

t, Fi

eld

Ass

essm

ent a

nd S

urve

illan

ce.

For

deci

sion

m

akin

g pr

oces

ses,

L

EI

agai

n es

tabl

ishe

s tw

o E

xper

t Pan

els.

T

wo

type

s of

CoC

cer

tific

atio

n ar

e po

ssib

le:

(a)

excl

usiv

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

(for

an

indu

stry

whi

ch r

aw

mat

eria

ls e

ntir

ely

stem

s fr

om c

ertif

ied

sour

ces)

, an

d (b

) no

n-ex

clus

ive

(ind

ustr

y w

ith

mix

ed r

aw

mat

eria

l so

urce

s).

In c

ase

b, s

epar

atio

n be

twee

n ce

rtif

ied

and

non-

cert

ifie

d ra

w

mat

eria

ls

and

prod

ucts

is r

equi

red.

C

oC c

ertif

icat

e ho

lder

s ar

e re

quir

ed t

o ex

clud

e ti

mbe

r fr

om i

lleg

al s

ourc

es (

LE

I G

uide

line

88-2

4,

artic

le 5

, pa

ra 4

): “

The

reli

abil

ity

of

succ

essf

ul

Co

C i

mp

lem

enta

tio

n i

s in

dic

ate

d b

y: P

ure

nes

s o

f so

urc

e, t

imber

fro

m i

lleg

al

sourc

e is

not

pre

sent”

.L

EI

allo

ws

that

30%

of

the

raw

mat

eria

ls u

sed

in

man

ufac

turi

ng

LE

I ce

rtif

ied

prod

ucts

ca

n co

me

from

a n

on-c

ertif

ied,

but

lega

l sou

rce.

Bot

h sc

hem

es s

uffi

cien

tly v

erif

y th

e fl

ow

of

cert

ifie

d fo

rest

pr

oduc

ts

thro

ugh

the

supp

ly c

hain

, fr

om t

he f

ores

t to

the

poi

nt

of s

ale.

B

oth

allo

w f

or n

on-e

xclu

sive

cer

tific

atio

ns

and

perc

enta

ge

base

d pr

oduc

t cl

aim

s.

How

ever

, FS

C

hand

les

appr

oved

no

n-ce

rtif

ied

raw

mat

eria

l sou

rces

mor

e st

rict

.

22


5. Concluding remarks

The LEI scheme fulfils to a great extend the requirements of the WWF/World Bank Global Forest Alliance expressed in the Forest Certification Assessment Guide. The identified non-conformities, particularly regarding Criterion 2, 7 and 8, are not fundamental, but in a few cases significant (conversion policy, transparency of the accreditation process, and public reporting). Linking LEIs accreditation and certification scheme to internationally accepted monitoring concepts (e.g. ISEAL) as well as building closer links to national accreditation bodies operating under ISO rule (KAN, BSN) would promote independent oversight of LEI’s system and standards. This could enhance stakeholders’ recognition and boost LEI’s credibility. Related adjustments to the LEI scheme are judged as reasonable, since most of the requirements are already fulfilled.

Translation of the LEI documents into English and other means to promote the obvious strengths of its scheme (e.g. independence, adaptation to local conditions and compliance with international standards) should be pursued by LEI in order to better inform the international community regarding the content of its scheme. Improving the public visibility of LEI’s accreditation process, as required by the Alliance, could immediately start, since full accreditation is currently performed by LEI for the first time.

All of the proposed matters would allow LEI to better promote its system in the market place, e.g. in order to qualify for evaluation under public procurement policies or to become a credible scheme under WWF’s Global Forest & Trade Network.

Except the use of interim standards and a few minor matters, the FSC scheme fully complies with the requirements of the Alliance on generic and national level in Indonesia. This underlines the high credibility of the FSC scheme and its strong foundation on internationally accepted monitoring structures. In the conformity assessment of the certification and accreditation procedures (Criterion 6 until 11), the FSC scheme even exceeded some rules set by the International Standardisation Organisation (ISO), complying with the requirements listed by the Alliance.

However, a need for a national FSC standard development process in Indonesia exists, latest since the termination of the Joint Certification Protocol between LEI and FSC CBs. Since FSC and LEI already have a long tradition in collaboration, the possibility of LEI playing a supporting/facilitating role in FSC’s national standard development process should be assessed.

Significant differences in the decision making procedure between FSC and LEI prevail, which might lead to inconsistent certification decisions even in cases where similar field assessment results are reported. This aspect has not yet been considered in the requirements listed by the Alliance and needs further discussions. It constitutes a fundamental difference between the two schemes and limits comparability of results. Other differences in procedures, e.g. related to surveillance, partial certification and percentage based claims under CoC are also significant, but judged as less fundamental.

23


6. References

6.1 List of LEI documents

Topic Document Number TitleA. Standard LEI Standard 5000 Framework for Sustainable Production Forest Management

System LEI Standard 5000-1 Sustainable Production Natural Forest Management

System LEI Standard 5000-2 Sustainable Plantation Forest Management System

LEI Standard 5000-3 Sustainable Community Based Forest Management

LEI Standard 5000-4 Sustainable Non-Timber Forest Management System

LEI Standard 5001 Chain of Custody

LEI Standard 5002 Environmental Friendly Certification/Forest Product Labelling

LEI Standard 5005 Terminology and Meanings related Forest Certification

B. ManualsLEI Manual 11 General Accreditation Manual Indonesian Ecolabel

Institute LEI Manual 22 – 01 Logo Policy/Brand of Indonesia Ecolabel Institute LEI Manual 22 – 02 Logo Manual of Indonesia Ecolabel Institute

C. Guideline [55]LEI Guideline 55 Guidelines of Dispute Resolution for Certification

DecisionD. Guidelines [88]

LEI Guidelines 88 Certification system for Chain of Custody

LEI Guideline 88-00 series

Guidelines of Requirements and Working Procedure of Chain of Custody Certification

LEI Guideline 88-01 General requirement for Chain of Custody Certification Body

LEI Guideline 88-02 General requirement for Field Assessors Chain of Custody

LEI Guideline 88-03 General requirement for Expert Panels in Chain of Custody


Guidelines of Requirement and Training Procedure of Chain of Custody Certification Programs

LEI Guideline 88-11 Training Guidelines for Field Assessors of Chain of Custody

LEI Guideline 88-12 Training Guidelines for Expert Panels of Chain of Custody

LEI Guideline 88-13 Training Guidelines for Trainers of Chain of Custody


Guidelines for Program Execution of Chain of Custody Certification

LEI Guideline 88-21 Guidelines for Field Assessment of Chain of Custody Certification

LEI Guideline 88-22 Guidelines for Writing Report of Field Assessment results of Chain of Custody Certification

LEI Guideline 88-23 Guidelines for Screening Process of Chain of Custody Certification

LEI Guideline 88-24 Guideline for Decision Making in Chain of Custody Certification

LEI Guideline 88-25 Guidelines for Drawing Recommendations on in Chain of Custody Certification

LEI Guideline 88-26 Guidelines for Surveillance of in Chain of Custody

24


Certification E. Guidelines [99]

LEI Guidelines 99 Certification System of Sustainable Production Forest Management (SPFM)


Guidelines for Requirements and Working Procedures of SPFM Certification

LEI Guideline 99-01 General Requirements of SPFM Certification Body

LEI Guideline 99-02 General Requirements for Field Assessors of SPFM Certification

LEI Guideline 99-03 General Requirement for Expert Panels of SFPM Certification


Guidelines for Requirements and Training Procedures of SPFM Certification Program


Training Guidelines for Field Assessors of SFPM Certification


Training Guidelines for Expert Panels of SFPM Certification


Training Guidelines for Trainers of SFPM Certification


General Criteria for SPFM Certification Training Institute


General Criteria for Personnel of Certification Body for SFPM Certification


Guidelines for Certification Program Execution and of Sustainable Production Natural Forest Management (SPNFM)

LEI Guideline 99-21 Guidelines for Field Assessment of SPNFM Certification

LEI Guideline 99-22 Guidelines for Report Writing of Field Assessment of SPNFM Certification

LEI Guideline 99-23 Guidelines for Screening Process of SPNFM Certification

LEI Guideline 99-24 Guidelines for Decision Making in SPNFM Certification

LEI Guideline 99-25 Guidelines for Drawing Recommendations in SPNFM Certification

LEI Guideline 99-26 Guidelines for Surveillance in SPNFM Certification


Guidelines for Certification Execution of Sustainable Plantation Forest Management

LEI Guideline 99-31 Guidelines for Field Assessment of Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification

LEI Guideline 99-32 Guidelines for Report Writing of Field Assessment of Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification

LEI Guideline 99-33 Guidelines for Screening Process of Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Certification

LEI Guideline 99-34 Guidelines for Decision Making in Sustainable Plantation Forest Management

LEI Guideline 99-35 Guidelines for Recommendations Arrangement in Sustainable Plantation Forest Management

LEI Guideline 99-36 Guidelines for Surveillance in Sustainable Plantation Forest Management


Guidelines for Certification Execution of Sustainable Community Based Forest Management

LEI Guideline 99-41 Guidelines for Field Assessment of Sustainable Community Based Forest Management Certification

LEI Guideline 99-42 Guidelines for Report Writing of Field Assessment of Sustainable Community Based Forest Management

25


Certification LEI Guideline 99-43 Guidelines for Screening Process of Sustainable

Community Based Forest Management Certification LEI Guideline 99-44 Guidelines for Decision Making in Sustainable

Community Based Forest Management Certification LEI Guideline 99-45 Guidelines for Recommendations Arrangement in

Sustainable Community Based Forest ManagementCertification

LEI Guideline 99-46 Guidelines for Surveillance in Sustainable Community Based Forest Management Certification

LEI Guideline99-43.3 Guidelines for Submission of CBFM Certification

F. Technical DocumentsLEI Technical Document -01

Verifier Toolbox and Its Verification for Assessment Criteria and Indicators in Sustainable Production Natural Forest Management System

LEI Technical Document -02

Intensity Scale of Sustainable Production Natural Forest Management Indicators.


Verifier Toolbox and Its Verification for Assessment Criteria and Indicators in Sustainable Plantation Forest Management System


Intensity Scale of Sustainable Plantation Forest Management Indicators.


Verifier Toolbox and Its Verification for Assessment Criteria and Indicators in Sustainable Community Based Forest Management System


Intensity Scale of Sustainable Community Based Forest Management System Indicators.

G. Academic DocumentsAcademic Paper LEI-01 Academic Paper of Sustainable Production Natural Forest

Management Certification System Academic Paper LEI-02 Academic Paper of Sustainable Plantation Forest

Management Certification System Academic Paper LEI-03 Academic Paper of Sustainable Community Based Forest

Management Certification System H. Policy Statements

Circulation Letter No: 64/LEI/DE/XII/00

Policy on Conversion timber from certified FMUs

26


6.2 Other references

Agung, P. and Hinrichs, A. (2000): Self-scoping Handbook for Sustainable Natural Forest Man-agement Certification in Indonesia. SFMP Project (MoF-GTZ). Document 6/2000.

Colchester, M.; Sirait, M.; and Wijardjo, B. (2003): The Application of FSC Principles No. 2 and 3 in Indonesia: Obstacles and Possibilities. WALHI, AMAN, and The Rainforest Foundation.

Dwi, M. and Agung, P. (2006): Forest certification in Indonesia, in Confronting Sustainability: in Cashore, B.; Gale, F.; Meidinger, E.; Newsom, D. (Eds): Forest Certification in Developing and Transitioning Countries. Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies

Elliot, C. (2000): Forest Certification: A Policy Perspective. Bogor, Indonesia. CIFOR Evison, I.J. (1998): FSC National Initiative Manual. FSC-ABU-GUI-10-111 (2004): FSC Accreditation process for applicant certification bodies FSC-ABU-INF-2004-11-24 (2002): FSC Accreditation Cost Estimates FSC-ADV-20-001 (2002): Public availability of generic standards FSC-ADV-30-602 (2004): Conversion of plantation to non-forest land FSC-POL-20-002 (2000): Partial certification FSC-POL-20-100 (2003): SLIMF Eligibility Criteria FSC-POL-20-101 (2003): SLIMF Streamlined Certification Procedures: summary FSC-MCU-ADV-40-003 (2003): Status of products after withdrawal FSC-STD-01-001 (2004): FSC Principles and Criteria for Forest Stewardship FSC-STD-20-001 (2004): General requirements for FSC certification bodies (Version 2-1) FSC-STD-20-003 (2004): Local adaptation of certification body generic Forest Stewardship

Standards (Version 2-1) FSC-STD-20-004 (2005): Qualifications for FSC certification body auditors (Version 2.2) FSC-STD-20-006 (2004): Stakeholder consultation for forest evaluation (Version 2-1) FSC-STD-20-008 (2000): Forest certification reports (Version 1-0) FSC-STD-20-009 (2004): Forest certification public summary reports Hinrichs, A. (2001): JCP Evaluation. Input Paper to the 3. JCP Meeting in Bogor. August 2001. Hinrichs, A. (2005): Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia - Introduction and implementation of forest

certification in Indonesia. In: Burger, D.; Hess, J.; Lang, B. (Eds.): Forest Certification: An innovative instrument in the service of sustainable development? GTZ Programme Office for Social and Ecological Standards.

ISEAL (2004): ISEAL Code of Good Practice for Setting Social and Environmental Standards, Bonn.

ISO/IEC Guide 59 (1994): Code of Good Practice for Standardization, Geneva. ISO/IEC Guide 61 (1996): General requirements for assessment and accreditation of

certification/registration bodies. Withdrawn in 2004. ISO/IEC Guide 62 (1996): General Requirements for Bodies Operating Assessment and

Certification/Registration of Quality Systems, Geneva. ISO/IEC Guide 65 (1996): General Requirements for Bodies Operating Product Certification

Systems, Geneva. ISO/IEC Guide 66 (1996): General Requirements for Bodies Operating Assessment and

Certification/Registration of Environmental Management Systems, Geneva. ISO/IEC 17011:2004, Conformity Assessment — General Requirements for Accreditation Bodies

Accrediting Conformity Assessment Bodies, Geneva. LEI/FSC (2000): Joint Certification Protocol (JCP) between LEI-accredited Certification Bodies

and FSC-accredited Certification Bodies, September 2000

27


LEI/FSC (2001): Joint Certification Protocol (JCP) between LEI-accredited Certification Bodies and FSC-accredited Certification Bodies, October 2001

LEI/FSC (2003): Joint Certification Protocol (JCP) between LEI-accredited Certification Bodies and FSC-accredited Certification Bodies, March 2003

LEI/FSC (2005): Collaboration Agreement between the Lembaga Ekolabel Indonesia (LEI) and the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC)

LEI (1998): Minutes of meeting between YLEI Board of Trustees and FSC, Rome, March 1998 LEI (2004): Memoar satu Dekade Pergulatan Sertifikasi di Indoensia. LEI. Salim, E., Djanlins, U. and Suntana, A. (1997): Forest Product Trade and Certification: An

Indonesian Scheme. Presentation at the World Forestry Congress in Antalya, Turkey. SmartWood (2003): SmartWood Interim Guidelines for assessing forest management in

Indonesia. 3. Draft. SGS (2005): SGS QUALIFOR Forest management standard for Indonesia Walter, M. (2006): Forest Certification Assessment Guide (FCAG): Generic Analysis of the FSC

and PEFCC International Systems. Draft for peer review. WWF international. World Bank OP 4.04 (2005): The World Bank Operational Manual, Operational Policies on

Natural Habitats, June 2005. World Bank OP 4.36 (2002): The World Bank Operational Policy on Forests. WWF/World Bank Global Forest Alliance (2003): Questionnaire for Assessing the

Comprehensiveness of Certification Schemes/Systems. WWF/World Bank Global Forest Alliance (2006): Forest Certification Assessment Guide: A

framework for assessing credible forest certification systems / schemes. July 2006.

28


ANNEX 1

Persons interviewed

Name Organization Position 1. Taufik Alimi LEI Executive Director 2. Alan Purbawiyatna LEI Certification and Accreditation

Manager3. Aditya Bayunanda LEI Project Management Manager 4. Marion Karman FSC international Regional Offices and National

Initiatives Liaison Manager 5. Tony Arfiarchman PT. Mutu Agung Lestari Operation Director 6. Taufik Margani PT. Mutu Agung Lestari Operation Manager 7. Fourry Meilano PT. Mutu Agung Lestari Operation Officer 8. Artamur PT. Mutu Agung Lestari Lead Assessor 9. M Haris Witjaksono PT. Sucofindo Manager 10. Cecep Saepullah PT TÜV Manager11. Abdul Qohar PT. TÜV Quality Management

Representative 12. Nawa Irianto Tropical Forest Trust Sulawesi Coordinator and

Lead Assessor 13. Loy Jones Smartwood Asia Pacific Regional Manager 14. Jeff Haywood (by Email) Smartwood Verification Services Manager 15. Salahuddin (by Email) SGS Operation Manager 16. Dwi M. CIFOR Consultant to CIFOR (LPF

Project) and Lead Assessor

29

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Ann

ex 2

A

SSE

SSM

EN

T R

ESU

LT

S: A

pplic

atio

n of

the

For

est

Cer

tifi

cati

on A

sses

smen

t G

uide

to

the

LE

I ce

rtif

icat

ion

sche

me

N

ote

: Is

sues

of

no

n-c

om

pli

ance

are

wri

tten

in

bo

ld t

ype

in t

he

rem

ark

s co

lum

n a

nd j

udged

as

fulf

ille

d,

not

or

part

ly f

ulf

ille

d d

epen

din

g o

n t

he

magnit

ude

of

fail

ure

.

PA

RT

1:

Com

plia

nce

wit

h in

tern

atio

nal n

orm

s an

d st

anda

rds

FC

AG

Cri

teri

a

FC

AG

Req

uire

men

ts

Mai

n R

efer

ence

s F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

C

rite

rion

1

Com

pli

an

ce

wit

hin

tern

ati

on

al

fra

mew

ork

s fo

r ce

rtif

icati

on

, acc

redit

ati

on

, a

nd

st

an

da

rd

sett

ing

Sub-

Cri

teri

a

1.1

Cer

tifi

cati

on

an

d

acc

red

ita

tio

n

1.2

Sta

ndard

-se

ttin

g

pro

cedu

res

a.

The

acc

redi

tatio

n bo

dy is

af

filia

ted

with

an

inte

rnat

iona

l ac

cred

itatio

n or

gani

zatio

n (a

llian

ce/f

orum

) su

ch a

s th

e In

tern

atio

nal A

ccre

dita

tion

Foru

m

(IA

F) o

r th

e In

tern

atio

nal S

ocia

l an

d E

nvir

onm

enta

l Acc

redi

tatio

n an

d L

abel

ling

Alli

ance

(IS

EA

L).

b.

Mon

itori

ng a

nd s

urve

illan

ce

carr

ied

out b

y th

e or

gani

zatio

ns

unde

r po

int a

cov

er th

e ac

tivi

ties

of

acc

redi

tatio

n in

the

fiel

d of

fo

rest

man

agem

ent.

Gui

danc

e po

int d

par

ticul

arly

app

lies:

A

ltern

ativ

ely ,

a c

ertif

icat

ion

syst

em c

an p

rovi

de e

vide

nce

of

com

plia

nce

with

the

abov

e re

fere

nced

doc

umen

ts (

ISO

17

011;

ISO

Gui

de 6

2, 6

5, a

nd 6

6;

and

ISE

AL

Cod

e of

Goo

d Pr

actic

e) th

roug

h ot

her

mea

ns. I

n th

is c

ase

the

elem

ents

of

the

cert

ific

atio

n sy

stem

hav

e to

be

asse

ssed

aga

inst

the

requ

irem

ents

sp

ecif

ied

ther

ein.

LE

I St

anda

rd

5000

(F

ram

ewor

k fo

r SF

M

in

Prod

uctio

n Fo

rest

) L

EI

Stan

dard

50

00-1

(N

atur

al

Prod

uctio

n Fo

rest

)L

EI

Man

ual

11

(Acc

redi

tatio

n m

anua

l)

LE

I, 2

004

LE

I/FS

C, 2

005

ISO

/IE

C 6

5 an

d 66

MA

L C

ode

of P

ract

ice

See

amen

dmen

t 1L

EI

is n

ot a

n af

filia

ted

mem

ber

of I

SEA

L

or I

AF.

The

refo

re,

requ

irem

ents

a,

b an

d e

cann

ot b

e di

rect

ly e

valu

ated

. C

onse

quen

tly,

guid

ance

no

te

d w

as

chec

ked

(see

am

endm

ent

1: I

SO/I

EC

65

anal

ysis

and

the

re

mar

ks

conc

erni

ng

requ

irem

ent

d on

IS

O/I

EC

170

11).

O

nly

inte

rnat

iona

l bo

dies

can

bec

ome

full

or a

ssoc

iate

d m

embe

rs o

f IS

EA

L. S

ince

LE

I is

a n

atio

nal

accr

edita

tion

body

, it

wou

ld

need

to

re

gist

er

outs

ide

of

Indo

nesi

a or

af

filia

te w

ith a

n in

tern

atio

nal

accr

edita

tion

body

. L

EI

curr

ently

con

side

rs t

hese

ste

ps

(see

bel

ow).

A

lrea

dy i

n 19

98,

LE

I an

d FS

C s

igne

d a

mem

oran

dum

on

de

velo

ping

a

Mut

ual

Rec

ogni

tion

Agr

eem

ent

betw

een

the

two

orga

niza

tions

. Fo

llow

ing

this

, L

EI

and

FSC

ag

reed

to

pr

omot

e a

Join

t C

ertif

icat

ion

Prot

ocol

(JC

P) b

etw

een

thei

r C

Bs

oper

atin

g in

In

done

sia,

w

hich

w

as

impl

emen

ted

betw

een

1999

and

200

5. I

n D

ecem

ber

2005

, FS

C

and

LE

I si

gned

a

colla

bora

tion

agre

emen

t, es

peci

ally

fo

cuss

ing

on

coop

erat

ion

of th

eir

accr

edita

tion

syst

ems.

In

done

sia’

s na

tiona

l ac

cred

itatio

n co

mm

ittee

K

AN

(K

om

ite

Akr

edit

asi

Nati

onal)

re

pres

ents

In

done

sia

in

IAF.

H

owev

er,

KA

N h

as n

o pr

otoc

ol t

o ac

cred

it L

EI

sinc

e it

only

ac

cred

its

Cer

tific

atio

n 30

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

FC

AG

Cri

teri

a

FC

AG

Req

uire

men

ts

Mai

n R

efer

ence

s F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

B

odie

s (C

Bs)

. L

EI

itse

lf d

id n

ot c

onsi

der

beco

min

g an

ass

ocia

te m

embe

r of

IA

F, a

s e.

g. th

e PE

FC is

. L

EI’

s C

ertif

icat

ion

Bod

ies

(CB

s),

Mut

u A

gung

L

esta

ri

(PT

. M

AL

, op

erat

ing

the

Sylv

aCe-

Prog

ram

me)

, PT

. T

ÜV

Rhe

inla

nd

and

the

gove

rnm

ent

agen

cy P

T.

Suco

find

o ar

e ac

cred

ited

for

thei

r w

ork

in

ISO

90

00/1

4000

cer

tific

atio

n by

KA

N.

PT.

MA

L i

s ac

cred

ited

by U

KA

S (U

nite

d K

ingd

om

Acc

redi

tatio

n Se

rvic

e)

for

its

wor

k in

fo

rest

ry.

Thi

s O

rgan

izat

ion

is

regi

ster

ed a

s a

mem

ber

of I

AF.

c.

All

cert

ific

atio

n bo

dies

are

ac

cred

ited

for

thei

r ac

tiviti

es

carr

ied

out f

or th

e fo

rest

m

anag

emen

t cer

tific

atio

n sc

hem

e un

der

asse

ssm

ent.

LE

I M

anua

l 11

Ful

fille

dL

EI

beca

me

an a

ccre

dita

tion

body

in

year

19

98,

usin

g an

in

teri

m

accr

edita

tion

proc

edur

e fo

r its

C

Bs.

A

co

mpr

ehen

sive

ac

cred

itatio

n m

anua

l w

as f

inal

ized

in

2004

. L

EI’

s C

Bs

are

oblig

ed t

o co

mpl

y w

ith t

his

man

ual

until

31.

12.2

006.

The

tre

e in

teri

m

accr

edite

d C

Bs

have

sub

mitt

ed t

he r

equi

red

docu

men

ts to

LE

I.d.

Acc

redi

tatio

n re

quir

es c

ompl

ianc

e w

ith I

SO G

uide

62,

65,

or

66

BS

N G

uide

No.

3

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

ch

apte

r 1.

7, a

rtic

le 1

, par

a 2.

1.4;

2.1

.5)

See

amen

dmen

t 1L

EI’

s ac

cred

itatio

n m

anua

l m

akes

ref

eren

ce

to

the

Gui

delin

e N

o.

3 of

In

done

sia’

s N

atio

nal S

tand

ardi

zatio

n B

ody

BSN

(B

adan

Sta

nda

rdis

asi

N

ati

ona

l).

Gui

de

No.

3

(199

9) r

egul

ates

gen

eral

req

uire

men

ts f

or

asse

ssm

ent

and

accr

edit

atio

n of

C

Bs,

fo

llow

ing

ISO

/IE

C

Gui

de

61,

whi

ch,

in

com

bina

tion

with

ISO

/IE

C G

uide

58

and

ISO

/IE

C/T

R 1

7010

, w

as r

ecen

tly r

epla

ced

by I

SO/I

EC

170

11:2

004.

T

he

man

ual

mak

es

also

re

fere

nce

to

ISO

/IE

C G

uide

62.

B

SN h

as e

ndor

sed

LE

I st

anda

rd 5

000-

1.

ISO

Gui

de 6

5 an

d 66

are

not

men

tione

d in

31

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

FC

AG

Cri

teri

a

FC

AG

Req

uire

men

ts

Mai

n R

efer

ence

s F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

L

EIs

ac

cred

itatio

n m

anua

l. W

e th

eref

ore

anal

ysed

ISO

/IE

C

Gui

de

65

as

the

mos

t re

leva

nt I

SO d

ocum

ent (

see

amen

dmen

t 1).

e.

Stan

dard

set

ting

bodi

es a

re

affi

liate

d w

ith I

SEA

L A

llian

ce.

M

AL

web

site

N

ot f

ulfi

lled

See

rem

arks

ass

ocia

ted

with

req

uire

men

t a

and

b.

PA

RT

2:

Stan

dard

s an

d th

e St

anda

rd-S

etti

ng P

roce

ss

a. C

ompl

ianc

e w

ith a

ll re

leva

nt la

ws.

T

he s

chem

e/sy

stem

req

uire

s th

at f

ores

t m

anag

emen

t res

pect

all

appl

icab

le la

ws

in th

e co

untr

y in

whi

ch o

pera

tions

oc

cur

and

inte

rnat

iona

l tre

atie

s an

d ag

reem

ents

to w

hich

the

coun

try

is

sign

ator

y.

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000-

1

LE

I G

uide

line

99-

21

(SFM

cer

tific

atio

n fo

r na

tura

l pro

duct

ion

fore

st)

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-01

, fo

r na

tura

l for

est

(ind

icat

or E

1.4

; E1.

5;

E1.

6) L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

3,

for

plan

tatio

n fo

rest

(i

ndic

ator

E 1

.1; E

1.8)

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

5,

for

CB

FM (

indi

cato

r E

1.

2)

Ful

fille

dL

EI’

s st

anda

rds

wer

e de

velo

ped

fully

bas

ed

on

the

rele

vant

In

done

sian

la

ws

and

regu

lati

ons

for

fore

st m

anag

emen

t, w

hich

in

clud

e ob

ligat

ions

re

sulti

ng

from

in

tern

atio

nal

trea

ties

and

agre

emen

ts.

E.g

. C

ITE

S is

re

flec

ted

the

Env

iron

men

tal

Impa

ct

Ass

essm

ent

proc

edur

e (A

MD

AL

)an

d su

bseq

uent

env

iron

men

tal

man

agem

ent

plan

s (R

KL

).

Cri

teri

on 2

Com

pati

ble

w

ith

glo

ball

y appli

cable

pri

nci

ple

s th

at

ba

lan

ce

econ

om

ic,

ecolo

gic

al,

an

d

equ

ity

dim

ensi

on

s o

f fo

rest

m

an

ag

emen

t a

nd

mee

t G

lobal

Fo

rest

A

llia

nce

re

qu

irem

ents

b.

Res

pect

for

tenu

re a

nd u

se r

ight

s.

The

sch

eme/

syst

em r

equi

res

resp

ect f

or

any

lega

lly d

ocum

ente

d or

cus

tom

ary

land

tenu

re a

nd u

se r

ight

s.

LE

I St

anda

rd

5000

-1

(SFM

ce

rtif

icat

ion

for

natu

ral

prod

uctio

n fo

rest

po

int 4

.9)

L

EI

Stan

dard

50

00-2

(S

FM

cert

ific

atio

n fo

r pl

anta

tion

prod

uctio

n fo

rest

; ind

icat

or S

.1.2

) L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

1 fo

r na

tura

l pro

duct

ion

fore

st;

indi

cato

rs S

1.1;

S1.

2;

S1.3

; S1.

4)

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-03,

Ful

fille

dSe

e be

low

. In

dica

tor

1.2

of

the

soci

al

func

tion

of

Nat

ural

Pro

duct

ion

Fore

st M

anag

emen

t is

ph

rase

d “F

ull

inte

rgen

era

tional

com

munit

y a

cces

s a

nd

co

ntr

ol

ove

r tr

adit

ional

fore

st

are

as

is g

ua

ran

teed

.”

32

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

for

plan

tatio

n fo

rest

(i

ndic

ator

S1.

1;S1

.2)

c. R

espe

ct f

or in

dige

nous

peo

ples

’ ri

ghts

. The

sch

eme/

syst

em e

xplic

itly

requ

ires

res

pect

for

the

lega

l and

cu

stom

ary

righ

ts o

f in

dige

nous

peo

ple

to o

wn,

use

, and

/or

man

age

thei

r la

nds,

te

rrito

ries

, and

res

ourc

es.

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000-

1

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-01,

fo

r na

tura

l for

est

(ind

icat

or S

1.2;

S1.

3)

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-03

, fo

r pl

anta

tion

fore

st

(ind

icat

or S

1.1;

S1.2

)

Ful

fille

dT

he e

xpla

natio

n of

the

soc

ial

indi

cato

r S1

.2

in L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

1 re

ads

as f

ollo

ws:

“L

on

g

bef

ore

th

e ex

iste

nce

o

f th

e m

ana

gem

ent

un

it

and

its

ho

ldin

g

com

panie

s, t

radit

ional

com

munit

ies

had f

ull

acc

ess

and c

ontr

ol

ove

r it

s are

a,

incl

usi

ve

of

all

th

e fo

rest

s w

ith

in.

The

pre

sence

of

managem

ent

unit

s th

eref

ore

sh

ould

n

atu

rall

y h

on

or

tho

se

inte

r-g

ener

ati

on

al

rights

(r

ights

of

ori

gin

).

No

tradit

ional

com

mu

nit

y sh

ou

ld b

e d

epri

ved

of

its

lan

d,

an

d

its

wea

lth

d

eple

ted

w

ith

ou

t th

eir

conse

nt.

T

he

reco

gnit

ion

of

thes

e ri

ghts

(r

igh

ts o

f o

rig

in)

by

the

ma

na

gem

ent

un

it’s

pre

sence

is

fu

lfil

led

wit

h

the

consc

ious

ag

reem

ent

(in

form

ed

con

sen

t)

of

the

com

munit

y aff

ecte

d b

y th

e pre

sence

of

the

mana

gem

ent

un

it.”

d. R

espe

ct f

or c

omm

unity

rel

atio

ns.

The

sch

eme/

syst

em e

xplic

itly

requ

ires

re

cogn

ition

and

res

pect

for

the

righ

ts o

f co

mm

uniti

es a

s w

ell a

s th

e m

aint

enan

ce a

nd e

nhan

cem

ent o

f th

e lo

ng-t

erm

soc

ial a

nd e

cono

mic

wel

l-be

ing

of f

ores

t com

mun

ities

.

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000-

1

LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc-0

1,

for

natu

ral

fore

st

(ind

icat

ors

S1.1

;S1.

2;S1

.3

S1.4

and

S 2

.1)

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al

Doc

-03,

fo

r pl

anta

tion

fore

st

(ind

icat

or, S

1.2;

S1.

3)

Ful

fille

dD

efin

ition

4.2

1 in

LE

I’s

stan

dard

500

0-1

spec

ifie

s th

at

“So

cia

l M

an

ag

emen

t is

a

se

ries

of

managem

ent

act

ivit

ies

to i

ncr

ease

th

e ben

efit

s and to

m

inim

ize

the

neg

ati

ve

impact

s of

fore

st

explo

itati

ons,

in

cludin

g

the

impact

s re

late

d

to

the

pre

sence

of

ma

na

gem

ent

un

its,

to

wa

rds

the

live

lih

oo

d o

f lo

cal

com

munit

ies

acr

oss

gen

erati

ons”

.e.

Res

pect

for

wor

kers

’ ri

ghts

. The

sc

hem

e/sy

stem

exp

licitl

y re

quir

es

reco

gniti

on a

nd r

espe

ct f

or th

e ri

ghts

of

wor

kers

.

LE

I St

anda

rd

5000

-1

(art

icle

4.1

3)

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

1 fo

r na

tura

l fo

rest

(i

ndic

ator

S

.2.5

; S3.

1; S

3.3

, S.5

.1)

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-03

for

plan

tatio

n fo

rest

(i

ndic

ator

S3

.1;

S 3.

2,

Ful

fille

dL

EI

fulf

ils t

he r

equi

rem

ents

pos

tula

ted

in

the

ILO

D

ecla

ratio

n on

Fu

ndam

enta

l Pr

inci

ples

an

d R

ight

s at

W

ork

eith

er

dire

ctly

in

its

st

anda

rd

or

indi

rect

ly

by

refe

rrin

g to

reg

ulat

ions

of

the

Min

istr

y of

M

anpo

wer

(D

EP

NA

KE

R).

L

EI

addi

tiona

lly r

eque

sts

that

the

wor

king

re

latio

nshi

p be

twee

n a

unit

unde

r as

sess

men

t an

d its

sta

ff i

s re

gula

ted

in a

33

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

S.3.

3)

mut

ual

wor

k co

ntra

ct

and

that

a

fair

pa

ymen

t st

ruct

ure,

co

nsid

erin

g re

gion

al

min

imum

wag

e le

vels

, is

esta

blis

hed.

f.

Del

iver

y of

mul

tiple

ben

efits

fro

m

the

fore

st. T

he s

chem

e/sy

stem

ex

plic

itly

requ

ires

man

agem

ent

syst

ems

that

enc

oura

ge th

e ef

fici

ent u

se

of th

e m

ultip

le p

rodu

cts

and

serv

ices

of

the

fore

st to

enh

ance

eco

nom

ic

viab

ility

and

fos

ter

a w

ide

rang

e of

en

viro

nmen

tal a

nd s

ocia

l ser

vice

s.

LE

I St

anda

rd

5000

-1

(art

icle

4.1

0)

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-01

for

natu

ral

fore

st

(ind

icat

or

P2.4

; S1.

3; S

2.1)

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

3 fo

r pl

anta

tion

fore

st

(ind

icat

or

P1.4

; P3

.2;

P3.6

; S 1

.2)

Ful

fille

d

g. A

sses

smen

t and

miti

gatio

n of

en

viro

nmen

tal i

mpa

cts.

The

sc

hem

e/sy

stem

exp

licitl

y re

quir

es th

at

man

agem

ent s

yste

ms

asse

ss a

nd

man

age

envi

ronm

enta

l im

pact

s (i

nclu

ding

issu

es a

ddre

ssed

in e

ither

W

orld

Ban

k or

WW

F po

licie

s) to

co

nser

ve b

iolo

gica

l div

ersi

ty a

nd it

s as

soci

ated

val

ues,

wat

er r

esou

rces

,so

ils, a

nd u

niqu

e an

d fr

agile

ec

osys

tem

s an

d la

ndsc

apes

.

LE

I St

anda

rd

5000

-1

(art

icle

4.2

0)

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-01

for

natu

ral f

ores

t. L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

3 fo

r pl

anta

tion

fore

st.

Wor

ld

Ban

k O

pera

tiona

l Po

licy

(OP)

4.0

4 W

orld

Ban

k O

P 4.

36

WW

F po

licie

s

Ful

fille

dE

nvir

onm

enta

l Im

pact

A

sses

smen

t (A

MD

AL

) an

d re

sult

s of

en

viro

nmen

tal

mon

itor

ing

are

requ

ired

in

se

vera

l ec

olog

ical

ind

icat

ors

for

natu

ral

prod

uctio

n an

d pl

anta

tion

fore

sts

in th

e L

EI

syst

em.

Cro

ss-r

efer

enci

ng

th

e A

llian

ce

requ

irem

ents

to

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-01

and

Doc

-03

is e

ntir

ely

poss

ible

, sh

owin

g th

at

thei

r su

bsta

nce

is s

uffi

cien

tly c

over

ed:

oB

iolo

gica

l di

vers

ity:

(LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc-0

1 in

dica

tor:

E

1.1;

E

1.5;

E

2.1;

E

2.5;

E

2.6)

; (L

EI

Tec

hnic

al

Doc

-03

indi

cato

r:

P2.7

; E

21;

E2.

2;

E2.

3;

E.2

.5);

o

Wat

er r

esou

rces

: (L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-

01

indi

cato

r:

E1.

7;

E1.

10);

(LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc-0

3 in

dica

tor

E1.

9;

E1.

11; E

1.13

) o

Soils

(L

EI

Tec

hnic

al

Doc

-01

indi

cato

r: E

1.6;

E1.

9) L

EI

Tec

hnic

al

docu

men

t-03

: E1.

7;E

1.11

)

oU

niqu

e an

d fr

agile

ec

osys

tem

s an

d la

ndsc

apes

(L

EI

Tec

hnic

al

Doc

-01

indi

cato

r E

2.1;

E2.

2);

(LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc-0

3 in

dica

tor:

E2.

1; E

2.3,

E2.

4)

34

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Miti

gatin

g en

viro

nmen

tal

impa

ct i

s lin

ked

to t

he e

colo

gica

l as

pect

s st

ated

in

Stan

dard

50

00-1

. h.

Mai

nten

ance

of

criti

cal f

ores

t are

as

and

rela

ted

natu

ral c

ritic

al h

abita

ts. T

he

sche

me/

syst

em e

xplic

itly

requ

ires

that

fo

rest

ope

ratio

ns m

aint

ain

criti

cal f

ores

t ar

eas

and

othe

r cr

itica

l nat

ural

hab

itats

affe

cted

by

the

oper

atio

n.

Cri

tica

l natu

ral

habit

ats

are

def

ined

in

OP

4.04

as

follo

ws:

(i)

Exi

stin

g pr

otec

ted

area

s an

d ar

eas

offi

cial

ly p

ropo

sed

by g

over

nmen

ts a

s pr

otec

ted

area

s (e

.g.,

rese

rves

that

mee

t th

e cr

iteri

a of

the

Wor

ld C

onse

rvat

ion

Uni

on [

IUC

N]

clas

sifi

catio

ns),

are

as

initi

ally

rec

ogni

zed

as p

rote

cted

by

trad

ition

al lo

cal c

omm

uniti

es (

e.g.

, sa

cred

gro

ves)

, and

site

s th

at m

aint

ain

cond

ition

s vi

tal f

or th

e vi

abili

ty o

f th

ese

prot

ecte

d ar

eas

(as

dete

rmin

ed b

y th

e en

viro

nmen

tal a

sses

smen

t pro

cess

);

or

(ii)

Site

s id

entif

ied

on s

uppl

emen

tary

lis

ts p

repa

red

by th

e B

ank

or a

n au

thor

itativ

e so

urce

det

erm

ined

by

the

Reg

iona

l Env

iron

men

t Div

isio

n. S

uch

site

s m

ay in

clud

e ar

eas

reco

gniz

ed b

y tr

aditi

onal

loca

l com

mun

ities

(e.

g.,

sacr

ed g

rove

s); a

reas

with

kno

wn

high

su

itabi

lity

for

biod

iver

sity

co

nser

vatio

n; a

nd s

ites

that

are

cri

tical

fo

r ra

re, v

ulne

rabl

e, m

igra

tory

, or

enda

nger

ed s

peci

es.

LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc-0

1,

for

natu

ral f

ores

t. L

EI

Tec

hnic

al

Doc

-03,

fo

r pl

anta

tion.

W

orld

Ban

k O

P 4.

04

Wor

ld B

ank

OP

4.36

Par

tly

fulf

illed

C

ross

-ref

eren

cing

the

Wor

ld B

ank

OP

4.0

4 to

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-01

and

LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc-0

3 r

evea

ls:

oFo

r as

pect

(i)

in

the

defi

niti

on o

f cr

itica

l na

tura

l ha

bita

ts,

cont

ent

mat

ter

“exi

stin

g an

d pr

opos

ed b

y th

e go

vern

men

t”:

refe

r to

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

1 (i

ndic

ator

: E

1.1;

E

.1.2

; E

1.3)

. L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-

03 (

indi

cato

r : E

1.1)

o

For

aspe

ct (

i) i

n th

e de

fini

tion

of

criti

cal

natu

ral

habi

tats

, co

nten

t m

atte

r “t

radi

tiona

l lo

cal

com

mun

ities

”:

refe

r to

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

1, (

indi

cato

r: S

2.1;

S1

.4;

S3.2

; S1

.1;

and

S2.2

). L

EI

Tec

hnic

al

Doc

-03,

(i

ndic

ator

: S

1.1)

o

For

aspe

cts

(i)

in t

he d

efin

ition

of

criti

cal

natu

ral

habi

tats

, co

nten

t m

atte

r “s

ites

that

m

aint

ain

cond

ition

s vi

tal

for

the

viab

ility

of

prot

ecte

d ar

eas”

: no

ref

eren

ce i

s po

ssib

le.

LE

I ce

rtif

icat

ion

appl

ies

an

FM

U

appr

oach

an

d do

es

not

cons

ider

th

e re

quir

ed

land

scap

e pr

otec

tion

as

pect

s ou

tsid

e of

the

FM

U i

n th

e W

orld

Ban

k’s

defi

niti

on o

f cr

itic

al n

atur

al h

abit

ats.

For

aspe

ct (

ii)

see

requ

irem

ent 2

.g.

35

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

i. S

peci

fic

prov

isio

ns f

or p

lant

atio

ns.

The

sch

eme/

syst

em h

as a

dequ

ate

and

expl

icit

requ

irem

ents

to e

nsur

e th

at th

e es

tabl

ishm

ent o

f pl

anta

tion

s do

es n

ot

lead

to th

e co

nver

sion

of

criti

cal n

atur

al

habi

tats

.

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000-

2 (P

lant

atio

n fo

rest

)

LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc-0

3,

for

plan

tatio

n fo

rest

. (i

ndic

ator

P1.

1;P1

.7)

LE

I Po

licy

Stat

emen

t, 20

00

Par

tly

fulf

illed

L

EI

regu

late

s in

Tec

hnic

al D

oc-0

3 un

der

Indi

cato

r P1

.1 t

hat

any

conv

ersi

on a

ctiv

ity

mus

t be

don

e la

wfu

lly,

base

d on

a v

alid

la

nd

use

plan

(l

egal

ity

assu

ranc

e).

LE

I ad

ditio

nally

req

uire

s a

defi

ned

qual

ity o

f th

e op

erat

ion

(Ind

icat

or P

1.7

).

Reg

ardi

ng

the

type

of

fo

rest

s to

be

co

nver

ted

or t

he p

roce

ss o

f ac

quir

ing

the

conv

ersi

on l

icen

ce n

o re

quir

emen

ts a

re

form

ulat

ed

in

the

LE

I st

anda

rd.

LE

I co

nsid

ers

this

th

e “d

omai

n of

th

e go

vern

men

t”

and

poin

ts

out

that

th

e In

done

sian

law

con

tain

s cl

ear

crit

eria

for

ar

eas

qual

ifyi

ng f

or c

onve

rsio

n.

Add

ition

ally

, L

EI

regu

late

s th

at c

onve

rsio

n tim

ber

shal

l no

t be

m

ixed

w

ith

cert

ifie

d tim

ber

with

in a

cer

tifie

d FM

U.

Con

vers

ion

tim

ber

is

cons

ider

ed

lega

l bu

t un

- su

stai

nabl

e (L

EI

polic

y st

atem

ent,

2000

).

j. I

mpl

emen

tati

on o

f m

anag

emen

t pl

an. T

he s

chem

e/sy

stem

req

uire

s ef

fect

ive

fore

st m

anag

emen

t pla

nnin

g th

roug

h th

e m

aint

enan

ce o

f a

com

preh

ensi

ve a

nd u

p-to

-dat

e m

anag

emen

t pla

n ap

prop

riat

e to

the

scal

e an

d in

tens

ity o

f th

e op

erat

ion

conc

erne

d. T

he s

chem

e/sy

stem

ex

plic

itly

requ

ires

thes

e m

anag

emen

t pl

ans

to h

ave

clea

rly

artic

ulat

ed g

oals

fo

r co

ntin

ual i

mpr

ovem

ent a

nd

desc

ript

ions

of

the

mea

ns f

or a

chie

ving

th

ese

goal

s.

LE

I G

uide

line

99

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-01

for

natu

ral

fore

st (

indi

cato

r P

1.2;

P 2

.1)

LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc-0

3,

for

plan

tatio

n fo

rest

(i

ndic

ator

P1.

3; P

1.5)

L

EI

Stan

dard

50

00-3

(C

BFM

)

Ful

fille

dL

EI

requ

ires

up-

to-d

ate

fore

st m

anag

emen

t pl

ans

(20

year

pla

n/R

KPH

, 5 y

ear

plan

/RK

L

and

annu

al p

lan/

RK

T)

for

appl

icat

ion

and

veri

fica

tion

in c

ertif

icat

ion.

L

EI

does

not

spe

cify

any

det

ails

reg

ardi

ng

thes

e pl

ans

(dom

ain

of th

e go

vern

men

t), b

ut

gove

rnm

ent

regu

latio

ns

are

cons

ider

ed

suff

icie

nt to

ful

fil r

equi

rem

ent 2

j. In

dica

tor

P3.4

in

te

chni

cal

doc-

01

for

natu

ral

prod

uctio

n fo

rest

s fo

cuse

s on

th

e av

aila

bilit

y of

pr

ofes

sion

al

staf

f fo

r pl

anni

ng a

nd o

ther

tas

ks i

n th

e un

it un

der

asse

ssm

ent.

k. E

ffec

tive

mon

itori

ng a

nd

asse

ssm

ent.

The

sch

eme/

syst

em

expl

icitl

y re

quir

es th

e us

e of

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000-

1

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000-

2 L

EI

Stan

dard

50

00-3

Ful

fille

dL

EI

requ

ires

th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

a

com

preh

ensi

ve

man

agem

ent

info

rmat

ion

syst

em (

MIS

) to

mon

itor

prod

uctio

n as

pect

s 36

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

mon

itor

ing

syst

ems

appr

opri

ate

to th

e sc

ale

and

inte

nsity

of

the

oper

atio

n to

as

sess

the

cond

ition

of

the

fore

st, y

ield

s of

for

est p

rodu

cts,

cha

in o

f cu

stod

y (w

here

rel

evan

t), m

anag

emen

t ac

tiviti

es, a

nd s

ocia

l and

env

iron

men

tal

impa

cts.

(CB

FM)

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-01

for

natu

ral

fore

st.

(ind

icat

or

P2.2

; P3.

3;E

1.3;

E1.

5)

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

-03

for

plan

tatio

n fo

rest

. (i

ndic

ator

P1

.5;

P2.3

; P2

.6)

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

ocum

ent-

05

for

CB

FM

(ind

icat

or

P2.2

; P2.

3; P

3.3)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 88

-21

(Gui

delin

es

for

Fiel

d A

sses

smen

t of

C

hain

of

C

usto

dy

Cer

tific

atio

n)

para

8.1

(e.g

. fo

r na

tura

l pr

oduc

tion

fore

st

man

agem

ent

in i

ndic

ator

P2.

2 on

yie

ld;

in

P2.8

on

lo

ggin

g im

pact

);

envi

ronm

enta

l as

pect

s (e

.g.

for

natu

ral

prod

uctio

n fo

rest

m

anag

emen

t in

E1.

3 un

til E

1.9)

; an

d so

cial

as

pect

s (e

.g.

for

natu

ral

prod

uctio

n fo

rest

m

anag

emen

t in

S4

.1

on

the

impa

ct

on

com

mun

ity h

ealth

).

Sim

ple

mon

itori

ng

syst

ems

are

also

re

quir

ed i

n C

BFM

are

as (

e.g.

P.2

.2, 2

.3 a

nd

3.3)

.

Cri

teri

on 3

Mea

nin

gfu

l a

nd

eq

uit

ab

le

part

icip

ati

on

of

all

ma

jor

sta

keh

old

er

gro

ups

in

go

vern

an

ce a

nd

st

an

dard

set

tin

g

Sub-

Cri

teri

a

3.1

Eff

ecti

ve

sta

keh

old

er

invo

lvem

ent

3.2

Ba

lan

ced

dec

isio

n-

makin

g

Req

uire

men

ts r

elat

ed to

sub

-cri

teri

on

3.1:

a.

Rel

evan

t sta

keho

lder

gro

ups

have

be

en o

ffic

ially

invi

ted

to

part

icip

ate

Elli

ot, 2

000

Agu

ng a

nd H

inri

chs,

200

0L

EI,

200

4 H

inri

chs,

200

5 D

wi a

nd A

gung

, 200

6

Ful

fille

d:In

19

93,

MoF

as

ked

the

min

iste

r of

en

viro

nmen

t (D

r. E

mil

Salim

) to

ini

tiate

an

inde

pend

ent

wor

king

gr

oup

on

fore

st

cert

ific

atio

n.

The

gr

oup

was

na

med

K

elom

pok

Ker

jaS

erti

fika

si

Lem

baga

Eko

lab

el

Ind

on

esia

/

LE

I (C

ertif

icat

ion

Wor

king

Gro

up o

f In

done

sia)

. T

he g

roup

dra

fted

the

LE

I sy

stem

and

the

st

anda

rd

for

natu

ral

prod

uctio

n fo

rest

m

anag

emen

t be

fore

be

com

ing

the

Indo

nesi

an E

co-l

abel

ling

Inst

itute

. T

he w

orki

ng g

roup

, m

ainl

y co

mpr

isin

g of

ac

adem

ics,

con

duct

ed n

umer

ous

wor

ksho

ps

and

mee

ting

s to

di

scus

s st

anda

rd

and

syst

em

mat

ters

. In

puts

by

so

cial

an

d en

viro

nmen

tal

NG

Os,

re

pres

enta

tive

s of

in

dige

nous

pe

ople

(A

MA

N),

th

e pr

ivat

e se

ctor

(r

eque

stin

g a

stro

nger

pr

oces

s or

ient

atio

n in

th

e as

sess

men

t ap

proa

ch

inst

ead

of a

mer

e ou

tput

ins

pect

ion)

, an

d ac

adem

ics

wer

e in

corp

orat

ed.

Part

icip

ator

y 37

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

wor

king

app

roac

hes

wer

e ve

ry u

nusu

al a

t th

at t

ime

in I

ndon

esia

and

LE

I ha

s to

be

give

n so

me

cred

it f

or i

ts w

ork

duri

ng t

hat

time.

In

199

7, a

con

sens

us w

as n

egot

iate

d by

LE

I be

twee

n M

inis

try

of

Fore

stry

, th

e In

done

sian

C

once

ssio

nair

e A

ssoc

iatio

n (A

PHI)

and

the

Ind

ones

ian

Stan

dard

izat

ion

Bod

y (B

SN),

mak

ing

the

LE

I sy

stem

and

its

stan

dard

for

nat

ural

pro

duct

ion

fore

st t

he

natio

nal c

ertif

icat

ion

stan

dard

for

Ind

ones

ia.

Part

icip

atio

n w

as a

nd s

till

is c

onsi

dere

d as

su

ffic

ient

by

st

akeh

olde

rs

in

Indo

nesi

a.

Cri

tics

thes

e da

ys

focu

s on

sy

stem

im

plem

enta

tion,

sy

stem

m

atte

rs

(e.g

. de

cisi

on m

akin

g pr

oces

s) a

nd t

he v

alue

of

fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

as s

uch.

pro

cedu

res

b.R

elev

ant s

take

hold

er g

roup

s pa

rtic

ipat

ed m

eani

ngfu

lly.

Rel

evan

t sta

keho

lder

gro

ups

are

defi

ned

in g

uida

nce

poin

t a.:

oFo

rest

ow

ners

, inc

ludi

ng

gove

rnm

ents

, and

/or

repr

esen

tativ

es o

f th

eir

asso

ciat

ions

oPr

oduc

t man

ufac

ture

rs,

dist

ribu

tors

, ret

aile

rs

oSc

ient

ists

/sci

entif

ic b

odie

s o

Env

iron

men

tal N

GO

s, S

ocia

l N

GO

s/or

gani

zatio

ns (

e.g.

, w

orke

r un

ions

and

con

sum

er

asso

ciat

ions

)o

Rep

rese

ntat

ives

of

indi

geno

us

peop

les

And

in g

uida

nce

poin

t b.:

NG

Os

See

abov

e P

artl

y fu

lfill

ed

All

rele

vant

sta

keho

lder

gro

ups

part

icip

ated

m

eani

ngfu

lly (

see

rem

arks

on

requ

irem

ent

a. a

nd c

.).

The

el

emen

ts

of

guid

ance

po

int

b,

high

light

ing

requ

irem

ents

fo

r pa

rtic

ipat

ing

NG

Os,

are

not

reg

ulat

ed i

n th

e L

EI

syst

em.

38

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

part

icip

atin

g in

sta

ndar

d se

tting

and

go

vern

ance

sho

uld:

o

Leg

itim

atel

y re

pres

ent t

he

resp

ectiv

e in

tere

sts

oE

nsur

e th

at r

epre

sent

ativ

es a

re

acco

unta

ble

to th

eir

cons

titue

ncie

s

oH

ave

a pr

oven

rec

ord

in th

e su

bjec

t mat

ter

oB

e in

tere

sted

and

aff

ecte

d by

th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

syst

em

oH

ave

a br

oad

mem

bers

hip

base

c.A

pro

cedu

re is

in p

lace

to in

volv

e st

akeh

olde

rs in

cas

e of

fai

lure

to

achi

eve

mea

ning

ful p

artic

ipat

ion

of r

elev

ant m

ajor

sta

keho

lder

gr

oups

.

LE

I C

BO

Sta

tute

s (a

rtic

le

39:

deci

sion

m

echa

nism

in

con

gres

s)

LE

I G

uide

line

99

Ful

fille

dO

n O

ctob

er 1

9-23

, 200

4, L

EI

was

set

-up

as

a C

onst

ituen

t Bas

ed O

rgan

izat

ion

(CB

O)

thro

ugh

a na

tiona

l mee

ting.

142

mem

bers

, or

gani

zed

in f

our

cham

bers

, now

con

stitu

te

LE

I. T

hey

refl

ect a

ll re

leva

nt n

on-

gove

rnm

enta

l sta

keho

lder

gro

ups

in

Indo

nesi

a: N

GO

s, p

riva

te s

ecto

r re

pres

enta

tives

, and

indi

geno

us

com

mun

ities

. T

he g

over

nmen

t and

pol

itica

l par

ties

can

not b

ecom

e fu

ll m

embe

rs o

f L

EI,

but

can

ac

hiev

e “a

ssoc

iate

mem

bers

hip

stat

us”

with

out v

otin

g ri

ghts

. L

EI

crea

ted

a ce

rtif

icat

ion

netw

ork,

co

nsis

ting

of 1

3 R

egio

nal C

onsu

ltatio

n Fo

rum

s (F

oru

m K

om

unik

asi

Dara

h/F

KD

),co

mpr

isin

g of

LE

I’s

cons

titue

nts

and

othe

r re

leva

nt p

artie

s. T

he F

KD

’s r

ole

is to

be

com

e a

part

ner

to L

EI’

s C

Bs

on p

rovi

nce

and

dist

rict

leve

l in

cert

ific

atio

n ac

tiviti

es

and

in a

ddre

ssin

g is

sues

bey

ond

the

capa

city

of

the

unit

unde

r as

sess

men

t. N

ot

all F

KD

s ar

e fu

lly o

pera

ting

yet.

d.

Wri

tten

docu

men

ts a

re a

vaila

ble

on

LE

I M

anua

l 11

sub

Ful

fille

dD

ocum

enta

tion

of

co

nsul

tati

ons

was

39

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

wha

t eff

orts

hav

e be

en ta

ken

to

incl

ude

stak

ehol

ders

as

wel

l as

on

how

issu

es r

aise

d by

sta

keho

lder

s ha

ve b

een

addr

esse

d.

chap

ter

3.2,

art

icle

2, p

ara

2.3.

10. (

abou

t sys

tem

do

cum

ent r

ecor

ding

)

prod

uced

. L

EI

stat

ed

that

th

e do

cum

ents

ar

e st

ill

avai

labl

e in

old

er f

iles,

a m

atte

r th

at c

ould

no

t be

asse

ssed

by

the

cons

ulta

nts.

R

equi

rem

ents

rel

ated

to s

ub-c

rite

rion

3.

2:

e.T

he d

ecis

ion-

mak

ing

proc

ess

is

stri

ving

for

con

sens

us a

mon

g re

leva

nt s

take

hold

er g

roup

s.

LE

I C

BO

sta

tute

s (a

rtic

le 3

9 pa

ra 3

)

Ful

fille

dM

usy

aw

ara

h is

giv

en p

rior

ity o

ver

votin

g.

f.Pr

oced

ures

are

in p

lace

to a

chie

ve

bala

nced

dec

isio

n m

akin

g in

the

abse

nce

of c

onse

nsus

. The

se

proc

edur

es d

o th

e fo

llow

ing:

E

nsur

e th

at n

o m

ajor

inte

rest

gr

oup

can

dom

inat

e no

r be

do

min

ated

in th

e de

cisi

on-

mak

ing

proc

ess.

Sp

ecif

y a

votin

g sy

stem

that

pr

even

ts m

ajor

en

viro

nmen

tal,

soci

al, o

r ec

onom

ic in

tere

sts

from

be

ing

over

rule

d C

onta

in a

mec

hani

sm th

at

prev

ents

dec

isio

n m

akin

g in

th

e ab

senc

e of

any

re

pres

enta

tive

of o

ne o

f th

e m

ajor

inte

rest

gro

ups.

LE

I C

BO

st

atut

es:

Mem

bers

hip

cate

gori

zatio

n (a

rtic

le 1

4,

para

2);

M

embe

rshi

p ch

arac

teri

stic

s (a

rtic

le

15, p

ara

1);

Dec

isio

n m

akin

g pr

oces

s (a

rtic

le 1

6, p

ara

4-6;

ar

ticle

28,

par

a 3)

; art

icle

38

, art

icle

39;

art

icle

40

until

42)

.

Par

tly

fulf

illed

L

EI’

s m

embe

r co

mpr

ise

of c

omm

unity

re

pres

enta

tives

; bus

ines

s se

ctor

re

pres

enta

tives

, obs

erve

rs a

nd e

min

ent o

r re

spec

ted

pers

ons

(all

Indo

nesi

an c

itize

ns)

The

dec

isio

n m

akin

g pr

oces

s an

d vo

ting

syst

em a

re c

lear

ly s

peci

fied

. H

owev

er, L

EI

is n

ot r

eque

stin

g th

e pr

esen

ce o

f al

l maj

or in

tere

st g

roup

but

re

gula

tes

in it

s st

atue

s th

at t

he g

ener

al

asse

mbl

y (k

on

gre

s) r

equi

res

that

2/3

of

the

CB

O m

embe

rs h

ave

to b

e pr

esen

t in

or

der

to b

e ab

le t

o m

ake

deci

sion

s (r

elat

ed t

o th

e la

st b

ulle

t po

int)

.

Cri

teri

on 4

Avo

idan

ce o

f u

nn

eces

sary

o

bst

acl

es t

o

tra

de

No

requ

irem

ents

spe

cifi

ed

LE

I, 2

004

(pag

e 8)

F

ulfi

lled

Tra

de

barr

ier

rela

ted

issu

es

(WT

O/U

NC

TA

D)

wer

e co

nsid

ered

dur

ing

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f th

e L

EI

stan

dard

. Se

e C

rite

rion

1.

Cri

teri

on 5

Base

d o

n

a.T

he s

tand

ard

cont

ains

exp

licit

perf

orm

ance

req

uire

men

ts,

incl

udin

g ch

ain

of c

usto

dy, i

f re

leva

nt.

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000

(Fra

mew

ork

for

Sust

aina

ble

Prod

uctio

n Fo

rest

Man

agem

ent

Ful

fille

dL

EI

spec

ifie

s a

“typ

olog

y”

for

the

unit

unde

r as

sess

men

t in

ord

er t

o ev

alua

te i

ts

perf

orm

ance

re

gard

ing

its

spec

ific

lo

cal

cont

ext.

40

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Sys

tem

) L

EI

Stan

dard

500

0-1

(nat

ural

for

est)

; 500

0-2

(pla

ntat

ion

fore

st)

and

5000

-3 (

CB

FM)

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

001

(CoC

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 88

(C

oC)

LE

I G

uide

line

99(C

ertif

icat

ion

Syst

em

of

Sust

aina

ble

Prod

uctio

n Fo

rest

Man

agem

ent

(SP

FM

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-21

(Typ

olog

y)

(see

det

ail i

n T

able

Lis

t of

LE

I st

anda

rds

and

Gui

delin

es)

A C

oC s

yste

m is

dev

elop

ed.

b.T

he s

tand

ard

is w

ritte

n in

m

easu

rabl

e te

rms,

with

gui

danc

e on

inte

rpre

tatio

n if

fle

xibi

lity

is

requ

ired

.

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

. 01,

in

dica

tor

for

natu

ral f

ores

t L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc. 0

2,

ratin

g sc

ale

inte

nsity

of

indi

cato

r fo

r na

tura

l fo

rest

).

LE

I T

echn

ical

Doc

. 03,

in

dica

tor

for

plan

tatio

n fo

rest

. L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc. 0

4,

ratin

g sc

ale

inte

nsity

of

indi

cato

r fo

r pl

anta

tion

fore

st).

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc. 0

5,

indi

cato

r fo

r C

BFM

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al D

oc. 0

6,

ratin

g sc

ale

inte

nsity

of

indi

cato

r fo

r C

BFM

).

Ful

fille

dT

echn

ical

doc

umen

ts s

peci

fy t

he s

tand

ard,

its

ve

rifi

ers

and

the

veri

fica

tion

met

hodo

logy

. T

he t

echn

ical

doc

umen

ts c

onta

in s

uffi

cien

t ba

ckgr

ound

inf

orm

atio

n (a

nd d

efin

ition

s) t

o ju

dge

on th

e m

eani

ng o

f ea

ch in

dica

tor.

A

ltho

ugh

a to

ol b

ox a

ppro

ach

to t

he u

se o

f ve

rifi

ers

is

prov

ided

, th

e in

dica

tors

an

d ve

rifi

ers

appe

ar v

ery

deta

iled

, w

hich

mig

htca

use

a ce

rtai

n am

ount

of

infl

exib

ility

(a

com

preh

ensi

ve

judg

emen

t w

ould

re

quir

e fi

eld

eval

uatio

n).

ob

ject

ive

an

d

mea

sura

ble

per

form

an

ce

stan

dard

s th

at

are

adapte

d t

o

loca

l co

nd

itio

ns

c.In

tern

atio

nal p

rinc

iple

s an

d cr

iteri

a L

EI

Stan

dard

500

0 F

ulfi

lled

LE

I gi

ves

refe

renc

e to

in

tern

atio

nal 41

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

used

as

the

basi

s fo

r de

velo

pmen

t of

nat

iona

l sta

ndar

ds in

clud

e pr

ovis

ions

for

the

oper

atio

nal l

evel

(f

ores

t man

agem

ent u

nit)

.

(Fra

mew

ork

for

Sust

aina

ble

Prod

uctio

n Fo

rest

Man

agem

ent

Sys

tem

)

stan

dard

s fo

r th

e FM

U l

evel

, e.g

. IT

TO

and

FS

C.

In c

ase

of in

tern

atio

nally

ope

ratin

g sy

stem

s:

d.M

echa

nism

s an

d pr

oces

ses

are

in

plac

e to

fac

ilita

te th

e ha

rmon

izat

ion/

equi

vale

nce

of

natio

nal s

tand

ards

or

natio

nal

sche

mes

with

in th

e in

tern

atio

nal

syst

em.

Not

app

licab

le

LE

I w

ants

to

op

erat

e in

In

done

sia

only

. H

owev

er, t

his

is n

ot s

tate

d in

any

doc

umen

t (b

ut in

here

nt in

its

nam

e).

e.Pr

oces

ses

exis

t by

whi

ch

cons

iste

ncy

betw

een

natio

nal

stan

dard

s ca

n be

sou

ght

Not

app

licab

le

See

abov

e

f.N

atio

nal s

tand

ards

are

end

orse

d by

th

e in

tern

atio

nal s

yste

m

Not

app

licab

le

See

abov

e

PA

RT

3:

Con

form

ity

Ass

essm

ent,

Cer

tifi

cati

on, a

nd A

ccre

dita

tion

C

rite

rion

6

Cer

tifi

cati

on

d

ecis

ion

s fr

ee

of

con

flic

ts o

f in

tere

st f

rom

part

ies

wit

h

vest

ed i

nte

rest

s

No

requ

irem

ents

fo

rmul

ated

in

th

e FC

AG

but

ref

eren

ce g

iven

to

rele

vant

IS

O r

ules

.

See

adde

ndum

1

Ful

fille

dSe

e ad

dend

um 1

Cri

teri

on 7

Tra

nsp

are

ncy

in

dec

isio

n

makin

g a

nd

pu

bli

c re

port

ing

Sub-

crit

eria

The

FC

AG

gui

de li

sts

10 s

peci

fica

tions

ba

sed

on I

SO r

ules

and

the

ISE

AL

co

de. A

dditi

onal

ly, t

he f

ollo

win

g re

quir

emen

t is

form

ulat

ed:

a.In

add

ition

to th

e ab

ove,

the

cert

ific

atio

n sc

hem

e/sy

stem

mak

es

its d

ocum

ents

pub

licly

ava

ilabl

e,

spec

ifyi

ng a

ll its

req

uire

men

ts

rela

ted

to a

ccre

dita

tion,

ww

w.L

EI.

co.id

(LE

I’s

web

site

) F

ulfi

lled

LE

I’s

web

site

cont

ains

: o

Des

crip

tion

of it

s ce

rtif

icat

ion

and

accr

edita

tion

syst

em/p

roce

ss in

clud

ing

draf

t ver

sion

s;

oPr

oced

ures

for

han

dlin

g ap

peal

s,

com

plai

ns a

nd d

ispu

tes;

o

Lis

t of

cert

ific

ate

hold

ers;

and

o

Lis

t of

accr

edite

d ce

rtif

icat

ion

bodi

es.

Doc

umen

ts

are

plac

ed

in

Indo

nesi

an

and 42

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

7.1

Pu

bli

c ava

ilabil

ity

of

sch

eme

requ

irem

ents

stan

dard

izat

ion,

and

cer

tific

atio

n,

incl

udin

g ch

ain

of c

usto

dy a

nd

cont

rol o

f cl

aim

s, w

here

ap

plic

able

.

part

ly in

Eng

lish

(oft

en d

raft

ver

sion

s on

ly).

L

EI‘

s w

ebsi

te i

s ad

equa

tely

mai

ntai

ned

and

upda

ted.

L

EI

also

man

ages

an

elec

tron

ic m

ailin

g lis

t (e

cola

belin

g@ya

hoog

roup

s.co

m)

LE

I’s

web

site

doe

s no

t co

ntai

n in

form

atio

n ab

out

fees

for

acc

redi

tatio

n se

rvic

es (

this

is

regu

late

d in

the

accr

edita

tion

cont

ract

).

LE

I do

es n

ot m

ake

publ

ic i

ts a

nnua

l w

ork

plan

, but

dis

trib

utes

it to

its

cons

titut

ions

. a.

Publ

ic r

epor

ts o

n fo

rest

m

anag

emen

t eva

luat

ion

and

surv

eilla

nce

prov

ide

the

ratio

nale

fo

r th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

deci

sion

or

the

mai

nten

ance

of

cert

ific

atio

n,

resp

ectiv

ely.

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

1 (p

ara

5.9.

1)

LE

I M

anua

l 11(

Sub-

ch

apte

r 3.

2 ar

ticle

2 p

ara

2.3.

12: a

bout

pub

lica

tion

) M

AL

web

site

Par

tly

fulf

illed

A

ccor

ding

to

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-01,

L

EI

plac

es

the

task

of

in

form

ing

the

publ

ic

rega

rdin

g fi

eld

eval

uatio

ns o

n its

CB

s (p

ara

5.9.

1):

“The

cert

ific

ati

on b

ody

should

have

a

p

oli

cy

an

d

pro

ced

ure

to

p

ub

lici

ze

info

rmati

on

rela

ted

to

the

sust

ain

able

pro

duct

ion

fore

st

managem

ent

cert

ific

ati

on

”.C

onte

nt a

spec

ts o

f pu

blic

sum

mar

y re

port

s ar

e no

t re

gula

ted

in

deta

il by

L

EI

(onl

y m

entio

ned

that

pr

oces

s,

resu

lts

and

back

grou

nd s

hall

be o

utlin

ed).

Pu

blic

su

mm

ary

repo

rts

for

fiel

d as

sess

men

ts a

re c

urre

ntly

onl

y av

aila

ble

on

PT.

Mut

u A

gung

Les

tari

’s (

MA

L)

web

site

(P

T.

TÜ

V t

o fo

llow

unt

il th

e en

d of

thi

s ye

ar).

L

EI

requ

ires

tha

t its

ful

ly a

ccre

dite

d C

Bs

uplo

ad

thei

r pu

blic

su

mm

arie

s on

th

eir

web

site

s. A

s of

tod

ay, i

nter

este

d pa

rtie

s ca

n re

ques

t to

re

ceiv

e a

copy

of

th

e pu

blic

su

mm

ary

repo

rts

from

LE

I’s

CB

s.

Pub

lic

sum

mar

ies

of

surv

eilla

nce

visi

ts

are

not

prod

uced

by

LE

I’s

CB

s.

7.2

Pu

bli

c ava

ilabil

ity

of

cert

ific

ati

on

a

nd

acc

redit

ati

on

re

port

s

b.Pu

blic

rep

orts

on

fore

st

man

agem

ent e

valu

atio

n ju

stif

y th

e L

EI

Man

ual 1

1 (s

ub-

chap

ter

3.2,

art

icle

2, p

ara

Ful

fille

dC

omm

ent

on i

mpl

emen

tati

on:

Alt

houg

h cl

earl

y re

gula

ted

by

LE

I,

publ

ic 43

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

cert

ific

atio

n de

cisi

on b

y pr

ovid

ing

key

find

ings

wit

h re

spec

t to

com

plia

nce

with

the

stan

dard

.

2.3.

12)

sum

mar

ies

of t

he C

Bs

curr

entl

y w

idel

y di

ffer

in

qual

ity.

The

pub

lic s

umm

ary

of

PT

. Int

raca

woo

d e.

g. d

oes

not

suff

icie

ntly

ju

stif

y th

e E

xper

t P

anel

(E

P)

II

eval

uati

on.

c.Pu

blic

rep

orts

on

fore

st

man

agem

ent e

valu

atio

n an

d su

rvei

llanc

e in

clud

e th

e co

rrec

tive

actio

n re

ques

ts r

aise

d in

reg

ard

to

the

perf

orm

ance

of

the

oper

atio

n be

ing

eval

uate

d.

LE

I G

uide

line

99 (

para

4.

6.6)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-25

(dra

ftin

g of

re

com

men

datio

ns f

or

natu

ral p

rodu

ctio

n fo

rest

s)

Not

ful

fille

d T

he E

P I

I do

es n

ot f

orm

ulat

e co

rrec

tive

ac

tion

req

uest

s.H

owev

er,

it di

sclo

ses

its r

atin

g on

eve

ry

indi

cato

r (s

ee c

rite

rion

9;

AH

P pr

oces

s) a

nd

prov

ides

ge

nera

l re

com

men

datio

ns

for

impr

ovem

ent

if

a un

it ha

s pa

ssed

th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

thre

shol

d. T

his

info

rmat

ion

is

mad

e pu

blic

ly a

vaila

ble

(see

abo

ve).

If

a

man

agem

ent

unit

fails

to

m

eet

the

thre

shol

d, it

fai

ls th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

proc

ess.

If

it co

nsid

erab

ly r

aise

s its

per

form

ance

with

in

six

mon

ths,

it

does

not

hav

e to

pas

s th

roug

h th

e en

tire

cert

ific

atio

n pr

oces

s ag

ain

(“on

ly”

a ne

w f

ull f

ield

ass

essm

ent i

s re

quir

ed).

P

ublic

su

mm

arie

s of

su

rvei

llanc

e vi

sits

ar

e no

t pr

oduc

ed.

d.Pu

blic

rep

orts

on

accr

edita

tion

prov

ide

the

ratio

nale

for

the

accr

edita

tion

deci

sion

.

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 2.

3, a

rtic

le 1

, par

a 1.

13./1

.10)

Not

ful

fille

d (b

ut li

kely

to b

e fu

lfill

ed in

ear

ly

2007

)

LE

I ha

s th

e ob

ligat

ion

to i

nfor

m t

o pu

blic

re

gula

rly

abou

t its

acc

redi

tatio

n sy

stem

. L

EI

is c

urre

ntly

re-

asse

ssin

g th

e in

teri

m

accr

edit

atio

n of

its

CB

s (u

ntil

the

end

of

2006

) an

d pl

ans

to

mak

e th

e ac

cred

itat

ion

deci

sion

pub

licly

ava

ilabl

e in

ear

ly 2

007.

e.

Publ

ic r

epor

ts o

n ac

cred

itatio

n pr

ovid

e th

e co

rrec

tive

actio

n re

ques

ts r

aise

d in

reg

ard

to th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f th

e ev

alua

ted

cert

ific

atio

n bo

dy.

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 3.

4, a

rtic

le .4

, pa

ra 4

.4. a

nd 4

.7)

Not

ful

fille

d If

maj

or a

ctio

ns a

re r

equi

red

in o

rder

to p

ass

the

accr

edita

tion,

LE

I w

ill d

irec

tly c

onta

ct

the

CB

and

ask

for

am

endm

ents

. If

the

CB

fa

ils t

o im

prov

e its

doc

umen

ts,

it w

ill h

ave

to r

eapp

ly.

Res

ults

of

this

pro

cess

will

not

be

mad

e pu

blic

by

LE

I no

r by

its

CB

s.f.

Publ

ic r

epor

ts a

re r

eadi

ly a

vaila

ble.

C

B’s

Qua

lity

Ass

uran

ce

Not

ful

fille

d Fo

r as

sess

men

t an

d su

rvei

llanc

e re

port

s no

t 44

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Syst

ems

(but

like

ly to

be

regu

late

d by

the

CB

s fo

r m

ain

asse

ssm

ent

repo

rts

until

200

7)

regu

late

d by

LE

I.

PT.

MA

L’s

qua

lity

assu

ranc

e sy

stem

sta

tes

on p

ubli

cati

ons

unde

r pa

ra 6

.22

that

wit

hin

30 d

ays

afte

r th

e gr

antin

g of

the

cer

tific

ate

the

CB

will

pla

ce th

e pu

blic

sum

mar

y of

the

asse

ssm

ent

repo

rt o

n its

web

site

and

sen

d it

to L

EI

(acc

ordi

ng t

o M

AL

’s c

ertif

icat

ion

man

ager

).

PT.

TÜ

V

curr

ently

do

es

not

spec

ify

a de

adlin

e (a

ccor

ding

to

TÜ

V’s

cer

tific

atio

n m

anag

er).

C

omm

ent

on

impl

emen

tati

on:

seve

ral

publ

ic r

epor

ts h

ave

not

been

pro

duce

d ye

t, in

clud

ing

mai

n as

sess

men

t re

port

s.

Cri

teri

on 8

Rel

iable

an

d

ind

epen

den

t ass

essm

ent

of

fore

st

ma

na

gem

ent

per

form

an

ce

an

d c

ha

in o

f cu

stody

8.1

Ind

epen

den

ce

of

ass

essm

ents

No

requ

irem

ent s

peci

fied

. Sa

lim e

t al.

, 199

7

LE

I G

uide

line

99

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

1 (G

ener

al r

equi

rem

ents

fo

r Su

stai

nabl

e Pr

oduc

tion

Fore

st

Man

agem

ent C

ertif

icat

ion

Bod

y)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

2 (G

ener

al r

equi

rem

ents

fo

r Su

stai

nabl

e Pr

oduc

tion

Fore

st

Man

agem

ent f

or F

ield

A

sses

sors

)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

3 (G

ener

al r

equi

rem

ents

fo

r Su

stai

nabl

e Pr

oduc

tion

Fore

st

Man

agem

ent f

or E

xper

t Pa

nel)

Ful

fille

dL

EI

is

an

inde

pend

ent

orga

nisa

tion.

T

he

task

s of

th

e L

EI

wor

king

gr

oup

wer

e fo

rmul

ated

in

1995

as

follo

ws

(Sal

im e

t al

., 19

97):

o

“fo

rmula

ting c

rite

ria a

nd i

ndic

ato

rs f

or

the

managem

ent

of

Indones

ian f

ore

sts

capable

of

att

ract

ing a

conse

nsu

s,

odev

elopin

g a

tra

nsp

are

nt

veri

fica

tion

pro

cess

rel

ati

vely

invu

lner

able

to

corr

up

tio

n, a

nd

a

od

ecis

ion

pro

cess

alo

ng

th

e sa

me

lin

es,

and

o

pre

pa

rin

g f

or

the

crea

tio

n o

f a

n

ind

epen

den

t nati

onal

cert

ific

ati

on

org

anis

ati

on”

As

stat

ed i

n L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-01,

art

icle

3:

“The

SP

FM

ce

rtif

icati

on

syst

em

is

a

tra

nsp

are

nt,

in

dep

end

ent,

p

art

icip

ati

ve,

non-d

iscr

imin

ati

ve

and

acc

ounta

ble

vo

lun

tary

-ba

sed

sys

tem

”.

Gui

delin

e 99

-01/

02/0

3 re

gula

tes

the

inde

pend

ence

of

each

act

or (

CB

; A

sses

sor;

45

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

EP

mem

ber)

in th

e as

sess

men

t pro

cess

. a.

Acc

redi

tatio

n pr

oced

ures

for

the

initi

al e

valu

atio

n an

d su

rvei

llanc

e of

cer

tific

atio

n bo

dies

for

esee

fie

ld

visi

ts to

cer

tifie

d fo

rest

m

anag

emen

t uni

ts.

LE

I M

anua

l 11:

(ch

apte

r-3:

Acc

redi

tatio

n Pr

oced

ure)

Ful

fille

dL

EI

cont

rols

CB

per

form

ance

by

rand

om

fiel

d vi

sits

to

cert

ifie

d un

its (

acco

rdin

g to

L

EIs

ac

cred

itatio

n m

anag

er

appr

ox.

one

fiel

d vi

sit

with

in t

he 5

-yea

r ac

cred

itatio

n pe

riod

) an

d an

nual

(bu

t m

erel

y in

form

al)

offi

ce v

isits

. L

EI

requ

ests

tha

t C

Bs

mon

thly

inf

orm

LE

I re

gard

ing

prog

ress

in

ce

rtif

icat

ion.

A

dditi

onal

ly, e

ach

maj

or r

epor

t (E

P 1,

EP

2 re

port

, pu

blic

sum

mar

ies,

etc

.) n

eed

to b

e se

nd to

LE

I.

LE

I se

rved

as

an o

bser

ver

and

faci

litat

or i

n se

vera

l ass

essm

ent p

roce

sses

und

er th

e JC

P,

over

seei

ng th

e w

ork

of a

ll of

its

CB

s.

b.A

ccre

dita

tion

requ

irem

ents

spe

cify

ev

alua

tion

and

surv

eilla

nce

inte

nsity

to b

e ap

plie

d by

ce

rtif

icat

ion

bodi

es.

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(Sub

-ch

apte

r 3.

2, a

rtic

le 2

par

a 2.

3.16

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-26

(Sur

veill

ance

, esp

. art

icle

5

para

b a

nd c

)

Ful

fille

dSu

rvei

llanc

e is

con

duct

ed b

y L

EI

CB

s ac

cord

ing

to a

def

ined

inte

nsity

(se

e re

quir

emen

t 9.b

)

8.2

Fie

ld

evalu

ati

on

of

fore

st

ma

na

gem

ent

an

d

cert

ific

ati

on

b

od

y p

erfo

rma

nce

c.C

ertif

icat

ion

proc

edur

es r

equi

re

fiel

d vi

sits

to a

pplic

ant f

ores

t m

anag

emen

t uni

ts b

efor

e a

cert

ific

ate

can

be is

sued

.

LE

I G

uide

line

99-2

1 (G

uide

lines

for

Fie

ld

Ass

essm

ent o

f SP

NFM

C

ertif

icat

ion

LE

I G

uide

lines

99-

31

(Gui

delin

es f

or F

ield

A

sses

smen

t of

Sust

aina

ble

Plan

tatio

n Fo

rest

Man

agem

ent

Cer

tific

atio

n)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-4

1 (G

uide

lines

for

Fie

ld

Ass

essm

ent o

f Su

stai

nabl

e C

omm

unity

B

ased

For

est

Ful

fille

dA

fi

eld

visi

t by

th

e E

P I

duri

ng

the

scre

enin

g pr

oces

s (p

re-a

sses

smen

t)

is

optio

nal.

A

fie

ld v

isit

of t

he a

sses

smen

t te

am d

urin

g th

e m

ain

or f

ield

ass

essm

ent i

s ob

ligat

ory.

46

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Man

agem

ent

Cer

tific

atio

n)

a.T

he s

chem

e ha

s a

stan

dard

for

the

cont

rol o

f ch

ain

of c

usto

dy th

at

cove

rs p

rodu

ctio

n an

d tr

ade

from

th

e fo

rest

of

orig

in to

the

fina

l pr

oduc

t.

LE

I G

uide

line

88 (

CoC

) L

EI

Gui

deli

ne 8

8-01

(C

B-

CoC

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 88

-02

(Fie

ld a

sses

sor-

CoC

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 88

-03

(Exp

ert p

anel

-CoC

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 88

-21

(Man

ual

CoC

fo

r fi

eld

asse

ssm

ent)

Ful

fille

dFu

lly r

egul

ated

.

b.St

anda

rds

and

cont

rol m

echa

nism

s ex

ist t

o pr

even

t app

licat

ion

of

logo

s on

unc

ertif

ied

timbe

r.

LE

I G

uide

line

88-0

1,

(art

icle

6)

LE

I G

uide

line

22-0

1 (L

ogo

regu

latio

ns)

LE

I M

anua

l 22

-02

(Log

o us

e)

Ful

fille

dFu

lly r

egul

ated

.

c.C

hain

-of-

cust

ody

cert

ific

ate

hold

ers

are

requ

ired

to e

xclu

de

tim

ber

from

ille

gal s

ourc

es a

nd

from

con

vers

ion

of f

ores

ts.

LE

I G

uide

line

88-2

4 (a

rtic

le 5

, par

a 4)

L

EI

Polic

y St

atem

ent,

2000

Ful

fille

dC

oC

cert

ific

ate

hold

ers

are

requ

ired

to

ex

clud

e tim

ber

from

ille

gal

sour

ces

(LE

I G

uide

line

88-2

4, a

rtic

le 5

, pa

ra 4

): “

Th

e re

liabil

ity

of

succ

essf

ul

CoC

im

ple

men

tati

on

is

ind

ica

ted

by:

Pu

ren

ess

of

sourc

e,

tim

ber

fr

om

il

legal

sourc

e is

not

pre

sen

t”.

LE

I re

gula

tes

that

con

vers

ion

timbe

r sh

all

not

be m

ixed

wit

h ce

rtif

ied

timbe

r w

ithi

n a

cert

ifie

d FM

U (

LE

I po

licy

stat

emen

t, 20

00).

8.3

Ch

ain

-of-

cust

ody

requ

irem

ents

d.Pr

oced

ures

for

use

of

clai

ms

com

ply

with

ISO

sta

ndar

ds 1

4020

an

d 14

021.

LE

I G

uide

line

22-0

1 (L

ogo

regu

lati

ons,

es

p.

chap

ter

2,

sub-

chap

ter

2.1.

) Se

e ad

dend

um 2

See

adde

ndum

2

See

adde

ndum

2

LE

I de

velo

ped

its

logo

po

licy

base

d on

FS

C’s

re

leva

nt

polic

ies

and

docu

men

ts

(acc

ordi

ng t

o L

EI’

s ac

cred

itati

on m

anag

er

and

to L

EI’

s sy

stem

dev

elop

er).

N

ote

on

proc

edur

e:

Sinc

e co

mpa

ring

th

e as

sess

men

t re

sults

fo

r L

EI

and

FSC

re

gard

ing

ISO

140

20 s

how

ed v

ery

sim

ilar

47

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

resu

lts,

it w

as

not

deem

ed

nece

ssar

y to

ap

prai

se I

SO 1

4021

.a.

Acc

redi

tatio

n bo

dies

und

erta

ke

proa

ctiv

e an

d cu

ltura

lly

appr

opri

ate

exte

rnal

con

sulta

tion

as p

art o

f in

itial

ass

essm

ent a

nd

surv

eilla

nce

of c

ertif

icat

ion

bodi

es.

LE

I M

anua

l 11

Not

ful

fille

d L

EI

base

s its

ac

cred

itatio

n de

cisi

on

on

docu

men

ts

prov

ided

by

th

e ap

plic

ant.

Gen

eral

inf

orm

atio

n on

the

CB

is

know

n to

L

EI

thro

ugh

its

netw

ork

sour

ces,

bu

t no

cons

ulta

tion

tak

es p

lace

.

b.C

ertif

icat

ion

bodi

es u

nder

take

pr

oact

ive

and

cultu

rally

ap

prop

riat

e ex

tern

al c

onsu

ltatio

n as

par

t of

initi

al a

sses

smen

t and

su

rvei

llanc

e of

cer

tific

ate

hold

ers.

LE

I G

uide

line

99

(par

a 3.

2)

Ful

fille

dSt

akeh

olde

r ca

n pa

rtic

ipat

e in

a n

umbe

r of

w

ays

in t

he c

ertif

icat

ion

proc

ess:

thr

ough

fo

rmal

hea

ring

s at

nat

iona

l, pr

ovin

ce a

nd/o

r di

stri

ct

leve

l, th

roug

h m

eetin

gs

with

re

pres

enta

tives

of

the

FKD

s an

d in

wri

ting

to th

e C

B.

The

FK

D w

as d

esig

ned

as “

a pa

rtne

r” to

the

CB

s in

ord

er to

obt

ain

bala

nced

info

rmat

ion

rela

ted

to a

uni

t und

er a

sses

smen

t.

A p

ublic

ann

ounc

emen

t is

req

uire

d pr

ior

to

the

fiel

d as

sess

men

t Fo

rmal

hea

ring

s du

ring

sur

veill

ance

vis

its

are

not

fore

seen

. T

he

mea

ning

ful

invo

lvem

ent o

f th

e FK

D a

nd a

n op

en a

cces

s po

licy

are

judg

ed

as

suff

icie

nt

mea

ns

of

cons

ulta

tion.

8.4

Sta

keh

old

er

con

sult

ati

on

in

th

e ce

rtif

icati

on

a

nd

acc

redit

ati

on

pro

cess

c.A

ppro

pria

te p

roce

dure

s ex

ist t

o ta

ke s

take

hold

ers’

com

men

ts in

to

acco

unt i

n th

e de

cisi

on-m

akin

g pr

oces

s fo

r ce

rtif

icat

ion

and

accr

edita

tion.

LE

I G

uide

line

99

(par

a 4.

2.2)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-24

for

natu

ral

fore

st

(Dec

isio

n m

akin

g, a

rtic

le 2

par

a 1;

ar

ticle

6 p

ara

6.1)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-34

for

plan

tatio

n fo

rest

(ar

ticle

2

poin

t b; a

rtic

le 7

par

a 7.

1)

Par

tly

fulf

illed

Form

al s

take

hold

er c

onsu

ltat

ions

(m

eeti

ngs)

ta

ke p

lace

pri

or f

ield

vis

its a

nd p

rovi

de

inpu

ts to

the

asse

ssor

s’ w

ork

plan

. The

as

sess

ors

repo

rt m

atte

rs r

aise

d by

st

akeh

olde

rs to

the

EP

II

in w

ritin

g. T

he E

P II

is o

blig

ed to

take

thes

e in

puts

into

co

nsid

erat

ion.

A p

roce

dure

to

incl

ude

stak

ehol

der

com

men

ts in

to t

he a

ccre

dita

tion

pro

cess

is

lack

ing.

8.

5 C

om

pla

ints

a

nd

app

eals

m

ech

an

ism

s

Com

plai

nts

and

appe

als

mec

hani

sms

of

accr

edita

tion,

cer

tific

atio

n, a

nd

stan

dard

-set

ting

bodi

es a

re:

LE

I G

uide

line

55

(Res

olut

ion

Gui

delin

e to

A

ppea

l aga

inst

the

Par

tly

fulf

illed

Com

plai

n pr

oced

ures

and

app

eal

mec

hani

sms

are

fully

reg

ulat

ed in

LE

I an

d m

ade

publ

ic o

n its

web

site

.

48

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

a) a

cces

sibl

e to

any

inte

rest

ed p

arty

, b)

pub

licly

ava

ilabl

e, a

nd

c) f

ree

of c

ost i

mpl

icat

ions

for

the

com

plai

nant

.

Cer

tific

atio

n D

ecis

ion)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-24,

for

na

tura

l fo

rest

on

deci

sion

m

akin

g L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-34,

for

pl

anta

tion

fore

st

on

deci

sion

mak

ing

LE

I G

uide

line

99-4

4, f

or

CB

FM

on

deci

sion

m

akin

g L

EI

CB

O s

tatu

tes

(art

icle

22

poi

nt 6

)

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(p

ara

2.3.

1.4)

L

EI

man

ual

11

(sub

ch

apte

r 2.

7, a

rtic

le 5

; co

st

for

accr

edita

tion

appe

alin

g pr

oces

s)

LE

I G

uide

line

88

(par

a 6.

4.5)

M

PA

decr

ee

No.

003/

MPA

-L

EI/

IV/2

005

Com

plai

ns r

egar

ding

a c

ertif

icat

ion

deci

sion

ne

ed to

be

addr

esse

d to

the

rele

vant

CB

. T

he C

B m

ight

take

the

issu

e up

for

its

next

su

rvei

llanc

e vi

sit o

r, in

maj

or c

ases

, cal

ls

for

a m

eetin

g of

the

Cer

tific

atio

n R

evie

w

Cou

ncil

(DP

S).

L

EI’

s C

oC s

yste

m is

invi

ting

“all

st

ake

ho

lder

s to

ap

pea

l any

gri

evance

upon

a c

erti

fica

tion d

ecis

ion a

nd a

ffir

mati

on“

(LE

I G

uide

line

88).

C

ompl

ains

reg

ardi

ng s

tand

ard,

sys

tem

and

ac

cred

itatio

n m

atte

rs n

eed

to b

e ad

dres

sed

to L

EI

and

are

hand

led

by a

spe

cial

co

mm

issi

on u

nder

the

MPA

(M

aje

lis

Per

wa

lia

n A

ng

go

ta).

Bas

ed o

n th

e L

EIs

in

tern

al r

egul

atio

n (A

ngga

ran R

um

ah

T

angga-A

RT

) ar

ticle

17,

adm

inis

trat

ive

mat

ters

of

clai

ms

are

hand

led

by L

EI’

s E

xecu

tive

Boa

rd.

Com

plai

ns a

gain

st L

EI

are

not

mad

e pu

blic

, but

ans

wer

ed in

wri

ting

by

LE

I.

No

cost

s oc

cur

for

the

com

plai

nant

.

Cri

teri

on 9

Del

iver

sco

nti

nu

al

imp

rove

men

t in

fo

rest

m

an

ag

emen

t

a.T

he s

chem

e se

ts d

eadl

ines

for

ful

l co

mpl

ianc

e if

cer

tific

ates

are

is

sued

und

er th

e co

nditi

on o

f fu

lfilm

ent o

f ou

tsta

ndin

g no

n co

mpl

ianc

es.

LE

I G

uide

line

99

LE

I G

uide

line

99-2

1 (F

ield

ass

essm

ent)

L

EI

Gui

delin

es 9

9-31

(G

uide

lines

for

Fie

ld

Ass

essm

ent o

f Su

stai

nabl

e Pl

anta

tion

Fore

st M

anag

emen

tC

ertif

icat

ion)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-41

(Gui

delin

es f

or F

ield

A

sses

smen

t of

Sust

aina

ble

Com

mun

ity

Not

app

licab

le

No

cert

ific

ate

is is

sued

und

er c

ondi

tions

. A

ccor

ding

to L

EI

Gui

deli

ne 9

9, p

ara

4.6.

1,

asse

ssm

ent r

esul

ts a

re c

alcu

late

d ei

ther

ap

plyi

ng th

e A

naly

tical

Hie

rarc

hica

l Pr

oces

s (A

HP)

or

usin

g an

othe

r su

itabl

e m

etho

d. T

his

com

plex

sco

ring

sys

tem

tr

ansl

ates

com

plia

nce

with

the

indi

cato

rs

into

an

over

all a

vera

ged

ratin

g, w

hich

cl

assi

fies

the

resu

lt in

to tw

o ca

tego

ries

: “p

ass

and

fail”

. “P

ass”

is g

rade

d ac

cord

ing

to p

erfo

rman

ce in

to G

old,

Silv

er, a

nd

Bro

nze.

The

leve

l is

men

tion

ed o

n th

e ce

rtif

icat

e.

49

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Bas

ed F

ores

t M

anag

emen

tC

ertif

icat

ion)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-24

(Dec

isio

n m

akin

g pr

oces

s in

nat

ural

pro

duct

ion

fore

st)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-3

4 (D

ecis

ion

mak

ing

proc

ess

in p

lant

atio

n pr

oduc

tion

fore

st)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-4

4 (D

ecis

ion

mak

ing

proc

ess

in C

BFM

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-25

(rec

omm

enda

tion

for

Nat

ural

Pro

duct

ion

Fore

st),

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-35

(Rec

omm

enda

tion

for

Pl

anta

tion

Fore

st),

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-45

(Rec

omm

enda

tion

for

C

BFM

)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-2

5 de

scri

bes

the

oblig

atio

n of

the

EP

II to

def

ine

step

s to

im

prov

e pe

rfor

man

ce f

or c

ertif

ied

units

(r

ecom

men

datio

ns o

n ho

w to

rai

se th

e pe

rfor

man

ce le

vel t

o si

lver

or

gold

). T

he

time

peri

ods

for

impr

ovem

ent a

re d

efin

ed

acco

rdin

g to

the

degr

ee o

f im

prov

emen

t, st

artin

g fr

om 1

unt

il 5

year

s.

The

pro

cedu

re is

impl

emen

ted

in a

sim

ilar

way

in C

BFM

are

as.

b.Su

rvei

llanc

e vi

sits

fro

m

cert

ific

atio

n bo

dies

and

ac

cred

itatio

n bo

dies

are

car

ried

out

at

leas

t ann

ually

.

LE

I G

uide

line

99-2

4

LE

I G

uide

line

99-2

6 fo

r na

tura

l for

est (

chap

ter

5)

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(s

ub

chap

ter

3.7)

par

a 11

.2

LE

I G

uide

line

99-3

6 fo

r pl

anta

tion

(cha

pter

6)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-4

6 fo

r C

BFM

(ch

apte

r 5

and

6)

LE

I G

uide

line

88-2

6 (c

hapt

er 4

)

Par

tly

fulf

illed

Fo

rest

man

agem

ent c

ertif

icat

es a

re v

alid

for

5

year

s in

nat

ural

and

pla

ntat

ion

fore

sts,

10

to 1

5 ye

ars

in C

BFM

are

as a

nd 3

yea

rs f

or

CoC

. Su

rvei

llanc

e is

con

duct

ed a

t lea

st tw

ice

with

in a

per

iod

of f

ive

year

s fo

r a

natu

ral o

r pl

anta

tion

man

agem

ent u

nit a

war

ded

Gol

d ra

ting,

at l

east

thre

e tim

es f

or S

ilver

rat

ing,

an

d at

leas

t fou

r tim

es (

= a

nnua

lly)

for

Bro

nze

ratin

g. I

n an

y ca

se, t

he f

irst

su

rvei

llanc

e vi

sit w

ill ta

ke p

lace

with

in th

e fi

rst y

ear

afte

r ce

rtif

icat

ion.

50

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Surv

eilla

nce

visi

ts m

ay b

e co

nduc

ted

mor

e of

ten,

if r

equi

red.

Su

rvei

llanc

e in

CoC

is c

ondu

cted

eve

ry s

ix

mon

ths.

Su

rvei

llanc

e in

CB

FM

is le

ss in

tens

ive

and

depe

nds

on t

he u

sed

sche

me

and

awar

ded

rati

ng. I

n al

l cas

es it

is n

ot

annu

ally

(m

axim

al e

very

tw

o ye

ars)

.G

uide

line

99-4

6 ad

ditio

nally

reg

ulat

es th

at

the

firs

t vis

it sh

all t

ake

plac

e w

ithin

the

firs

t fi

ve y

ears

. Su

rvei

llanc

e of

CB

s sh

all b

e co

nduc

ted

once

a y

ear

by L

EI

(off

ice

visi

ts),

aft

er C

Bs

have

rea

ched

ful

l acc

redi

tatio

n. S

ee

requ

irem

ent 8

.2a.

c.

Cle

ar

dead

lines

ex

ist

for

com

plia

nce,

with

cor

rect

ive

actio

n re

ques

ts

issu

ed

as

a re

sult

of

surv

eilla

nce

LE

I G

uide

line

99-2

4 L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-26

Not

app

licab

le

Aft

er e

ach

surv

eilla

nce

visi

t al

l in

dica

tors

ar

e ag

ain

grad

ed t

houg

h th

e A

HP

proc

ess

(for

in

dica

tors

no

t re

-ass

esse

d th

e ol

d gr

adin

g w

ill b

e us

ed).

If

the

unit

fails

to

mat

ch t

he m

inim

um t

hres

hold

for

bro

nze

grad

ing,

th

e C

B

will

w

ithdr

aw

the

cert

ific

ate.

Cor

rect

ive

acti

ons

requ

ests

ar

e no

t fo

rmul

ated

an

d no

de

adlin

e se

t fo

r co

mpl

ianc

e.C

omm

ent

on

impl

emen

tati

on:

whe

ther

th

e C

B w

ill c

all

for

an a

ddit

iona

l E

P I

I m

eeti

ng t

o re

view

its

resu

lts

or w

heth

er it

w

ill

allo

w

the

unit

so

me

tim

e fo

r im

prov

emen

ts i

s no

t pr

ecis

ely

regu

late

d by

L

EI.

T

he

thre

e in

terv

iew

ed

CB

s pr

opos

ed d

iffe

rent

pro

cedu

res.

C

rite

rion

10

Acc

essi

ble

to

an

d c

ost

-

a.M

echa

nism

s ex

ist t

hat a

llow

equ

ity

of a

cces

s to

all

part

icip

ants

, re

gard

less

of

the

size

, loc

atio

n, o

r fo

rest

type

und

er th

e op

erat

ion’

s

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000

L

EI

Stan

dard

50

00-1

(N

atur

al

Prod

uctio

n Fo

rest

)

Ful

fille

dL

EI’

s sy

stem

is

base

d on

the

pri

ncip

le o

f no

n-di

scri

min

atio

n.

All

type

s of

for

est

man

agem

ent

are

elig

ible

to

app

ly.

51

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

man

agem

ent.

LE

I St

anda

rd

5000

-2

(Pla

ntat

ion

Fore

st)

LE

I St

anda

rd

5000

-3

(CB

FM,

artic

le 3

and

4)

LE

I ha

s de

velo

ped

sepa

rate

d st

anda

rds

in

orde

r to

acc

omm

odat

e fo

r al

l ty

pes

of f

ores

t m

anag

emen

t and

ow

ners

hip.

effe

ctiv

e fo

r all

p

art

ies

b.T

he a

bove

mec

hani

sms

prov

ide

acce

ss to

for

est c

ertif

icat

ion

at a

co

st th

at d

oes

not e

xclu

de s

mal

l fo

rest

ow

ners

, com

mun

ities

, and

ot

her

grou

ps th

at m

ay h

ave

limite

d ac

cess

.

LE

I St

anda

rd 5

000-

3

LE

I G

uide

line

99.4

3.3

(sub

mis

sion

of

C

BFM

ce

rtif

icat

ion)

Ful

fille

dL

EI

allo

ws

that

pro

mot

ers

of s

mal

l sca

le

fore

st u

nits

(N

GO

s, d

onor

s, r

elat

ed

indu

stri

es)

can

fund

cer

tific

atio

n ac

tiviti

es

in s

mal

l for

est u

nits

, esp

ecia

lly in

CB

FM

area

s (a

rtic

le 4

poi

nt a

).

As

a co

st s

avin

g ap

proa

ch f

or q

ualif

ied

smal

l uni

ts, L

EI

allo

ws

that

a w

ell r

espe

cted

pe

rson

(e.

g. r

esea

rche

r) f

unct

ions

as

a gu

aran

tor.

In

this

cas

e, th

e ce

rtif

icat

e ca

n be

gr

ante

d un

der

“rec

ogni

tion

over

cla

im”,

al

low

ing

for

redu

ced

cert

ific

atio

n an

d su

rvei

llanc

e w

ork

(art

icle

4 p

oint

b).

C

rite

rion

11

Volu

nta

rypart

icip

ati

on

a.In

cas

es o

f gr

oup

cert

ific

atio

n, a

se

t of

cont

ract

ual a

rran

gem

ents

ex

ists

bet

wee

n th

e ow

ners

or

thei

r de

sign

ated

inte

rmed

iary

and

the

entit

y th

at h

olds

the

grou

p ce

rtif

icat

e fo

r th

e re

quir

emen

ts o

f ce

rtif

icat

ion.

LE

I St

anda

rd

5000

-3

(art

icle

3 a

nd 4

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

.43.

3 (A

pplic

atio

n in

C

BFM

ce

rtif

icat

ion,

art

icle

4 a

nd

artic

le 5

.2)

LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc.

05

(Ind

icat

or

S1.1

; S1

.5;

S3.1

)

Ful

fille

dL

EI’

s de

fini

tion

on

CB

FM:

all

type

s of

fo

rest

th

at

are

trad

ition

ally

m

anag

ed

by

com

mun

ities

, co

-ope

ratio

ns,

or i

ndiv

idua

ls,

if t

he s

ize

of t

he u

nit

is s

mal

l to

med

ium

. (L

EI

Stan

dard

50

00-3

A

rtic

le

3;

no

max

imum

siz

e is

def

ined

).

CB

FM

Cer

tific

atio

n fo

llow

s se

vera

l di

ffer

ent

appr

oach

es,

acco

rdin

g to

the

typ

e of

C

BFM

ar

ea,

spec

ifie

d as

“T

ypol

ogy”

(L

EI

Stan

dard

500

0-3

Art

icle

4).

The

EP

I de

cide

s fo

llow

ing

its d

ocum

ent

revi

ew o

n th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

appr

oach

to b

e us

ed.

In

gr

oup

cert

ific

atio

n,

cont

ract

ual

arra

ngem

ents

ar

e re

quir

ed

betw

een

indi

vidu

al

land

-man

ager

s w

ho

wan

t to

be

com

e ce

rtif

ied

prio

r to

app

licat

ion.

The

se

agre

emen

ts

have

to

in

clud

e m

anag

emen

t go

als,

pot

entia

l of

the

res

ourc

es a

nd l

inke

d bu

sine

sses

, an

d a

desc

ript

ion

of t

he c

urre

nt

man

agem

ent

syst

em (

para

5.2

poi

nt a

of 52

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

LE

I G

uide

line

- 9

9.43

.3).

D

urin

g ce

rtif

icat

ion,

the

ass

esso

rs e

valu

ate

the

cont

ent

of

exis

ting

coop

erat

ion

agre

emen

ts

(LE

I te

chni

cal

Doc

. 05

, in

dica

tor

S1.

1; S

1.5;

S1.

5; S

3.1)

. b.

Mec

hani

sm e

xist

s to

ens

ure

that

ea

ch m

embe

r of

the

grou

p m

ust

mee

t the

sta

ndar

d or

will

hav

e to

le

ave

the

grou

p.

LE

I T

echn

ical

D

oc.

05

(Ind

icat

or: S

3.2)

P

artl

y fu

lfill

edPa

rtic

ipat

ion

mus

t be

vo

lunt

ary

(cri

teri

on

10, L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

.43)

.T

he m

echa

nism

for

the

int

erna

l gr

oup

orga

niza

tion

is o

nly

gene

rally

out

lined

by

LE

I in

in

dica

tor

S.3.

2.

How

ever

, L

EIs

ge

nera

l un

ders

tand

ing

of

this

m

atte

r se

ems

equi

vale

nt t

o th

e F

CA

G r

equi

re-

men

t.c.

Enf

orce

men

t mec

hani

sms

exis

t in

case

of

brea

ch o

f th

e gr

oup’

s ru

les.

L

EI

Tec

hnic

al

Doc

. 05

(I

ndic

ator

: S3.

2)

Ful

fille

dIn

dica

tor

S3.2

ver

ifie

r 2

chec

ks w

heth

er a

sa

nctio

n m

echa

nism

is

esta

blis

hed

for

thos

e w

ho b

reak

the

agre

emen

t. d.

All

part

icip

atin

g fo

rest

ow

ners

ha

ve s

igne

d a

com

mitm

ent t

o ad

here

to th

e st

anda

rds

set b

y th

e sc

hem

e.

LE

I G

uide

line

99.4

3.3

(App

licat

ion

in

CB

FM

cert

ific

atio

n, a

rtic

le 4

and

ar

ticle

5.2

) C

B a

pplic

atio

n fo

rms

MA

L C

ode

of P

ract

ice

Par

tly

fulf

illed

LE

I’s

CB

s re

quir

e th

e ap

plic

ant (

Ko

op

era

si)

to

gene

rally

st

ate

this

in

th

e ap

plic

atio

n co

ntra

ct.

The

by

L

EI

defi

ned

cont

ent

of

the

cont

ract

ual

arra

ngem

ents

be

twee

n th

e in

divi

dual

la

nd

owne

rs

wit

hin

a K

oop

era

si

does

no

t sp

ecif

y th

e co

mm

itm

ent

to a

dher

e to

the

sta

ndar

d. 53

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

AD

DE

ND

UM

1:

Ass

essm

ent

of t

he L

EI

sche

me

agai

nst

ISO

/IE

C G

uide

65/

1996

(E

) fo

r bo

dies

ope

rati

ng p

rodu

ct c

erti

fica

tion

sys

tem

s N

ote

: in

the

LE

I sy

stem

, m

any

ISO

/IE

C G

uid

e 65 r

elate

d m

att

ers

are

reg

ula

ted b

y L

EI

as

the

acc

redit

ati

on b

ody)

. In

case

s w

her

e L

EI

has

suff

icie

ntl

y re

gula

ted t

he

requ

irem

ent

as

bin

din

g f

or

its

CB

s, w

e ju

dg

ed t

he

rele

van

t re

quir

emen

t as

bei

ng f

ulf

ille

d. I

n o

rder

to i

ncr

ease

th

e re

adabil

ity

of

the

table

and t

o i

llust

rate

the

requir

emen

ts o

f th

e G

uid

e, a

sel

ecti

on

of

guid

ing q

ues

tions

wer

e fo

rmula

ted o

n t

he

leve

l of

each

su

b-c

lause

. A

ll r

equir

emen

ts u

nder

each

sub-c

lause

wer

e ass

esse

d, ev

enif

not

guid

ing q

ues

tion w

as

form

ula

ted.

Issu

es o

f non-c

om

pli

ance

are

wri

tten

in b

old

typ

e in

the

rem

ark

s co

lum

n a

nd j

udged

as

fulf

ille

d, not

or

part

ly f

ulf

ille

d d

epen

din

g

on t

he

magnit

ud

e of

fail

ure

.

ISO

/IE

C 6

5/19

96 R

equi

rem

ents

and

Gui

ding

Que

stio

ns

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

4.

Cer

tifi

cati

on b

ody

4.1

Gen

eral

Pro

visi

ons

Gui

ding

asp

ects

of

4.1.

1- 4

.1.4

.: no

n-di

scri

min

ator

y pr

oced

ures

; ac

cess

ible

for

all

appl

ican

ts in

depe

nden

ce o

f si

ze;

requ

irem

ents

con

fine

d to

sco

pe o

f th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion.

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(c

hapt

er

3,

sub-

chap

ter

3.1,

art

icle

1);

(s

ub-c

hapt

er

3.2

artic

le 2

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-01

(art

icle

5)

Ful

fille

dA

ll ge

nera

l pr

ovis

ions

are

reg

ulat

ed b

y L

EI

and

bind

ing

for

its C

ertif

icat

ion

Bod

ies

(CB

s).

LE

I C

Bs

curr

entl

y pr

oduc

e do

cum

ents

rel

ated

to

Cod

e of

Pr

actic

e (A

tura

n

Pel

aks

anaan

) an

d Q

ualit

y A

ssur

ance

in

or

der

to

beco

me

fully

ac

cred

ited

by L

EI.

T

he t

ask

to d

evel

op a

nd a

men

d th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

syst

em f

ully

bel

ongs

to

LE

I, w

hich

has

reg

ulat

ed

the

wor

k of

the

CB

s in

gre

at d

etai

l (e

.g.

repo

rtin

g st

anda

rds,

as

sess

men

t pr

oced

ures

, tr

aini

ng

requ

irem

ents

, etc

.).

The

ro

le

of

LE

I C

Bs

is

cons

eque

ntly

m

ore

rest

rict

ed t

han

desc

ribe

d in

the

ISO

/IE

C G

uide

65

/66.

4.

2 O

rgan

izat

ion

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns:

Doe

s th

e st

ruct

ure

of th

e C

ertif

icat

ion

Bod

y’s

(CB

’s)

orga

niza

tion

allo

w it

to m

ake

impa

rtia

l eva

luat

ions

and

ce

rtif

icat

ion

deci

sion

s?

Is th

e C

B r

espo

nsib

le f

or m

akin

g de

cisi

ons

rela

ting

to

mai

ntai

ning

, ext

endi

ng, s

uspe

ndin

g an

d w

ithdr

awin

g of

ce

rtif

icat

es?

Is th

e de

cisi

on o

n ce

rtif

icat

ion

diff

eren

t tha

n th

at p

erso

n w

ho c

ondu

cted

the

eval

uatio

n?

Doe

s th

e C

B p

rovi

de a

ny o

ther

pro

duct

s or

ser

vice

s th

at

coul

d co

mpr

omis

e th

e co

nfid

entia

lity,

obj

ectiv

ity o

r im

part

ialit

y of

its

cert

ific

atio

n pr

oces

s or

dec

isio

ns?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(c

hapt

er 3

: ar

ticle

1,

para

1.

1.2;

su

b-ch

apte

r 3.

3, p

ara

1)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

1 (a

rtic

le 5

, pa

ra 5

.1.2

; 5.

1.5)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-03

(art

icle

7, p

ara

7.1.

3

Ful

fille

dL

EI

regu

late

s th

at C

Bs

mus

t be

inde

pend

ent a

nd

free

of

conf

licts

of

inte

rest

s.

LE

I do

es n

ot a

llow

its

CB

s to

hav

e bu

sine

ss

affi

liatio

ns to

uni

ts u

nder

ass

essm

ents

. CB

s ar

e no

t al

low

ed to

wor

k as

con

sulta

nts

or tr

aini

ng

inst

itutio

ns in

for

est c

ertif

icat

ion

(Gui

delin

e 99

-01:

ar

ticl

e 5,

par

a 5.

1.2)

. T

he f

ield

ass

esso

rs a

re n

ot a

llow

ed to

pro

pose

a

cert

ific

atio

n de

cisi

on. T

he f

ield

ass

esso

rs r

epor

t th

e fi

eld

find

ings

to th

e E

P II

, whi

ch

inde

pend

ently

exp

ress

es th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

deci

sion

ba

sed

on th

e fi

ndin

gs o

f th

e E

P I

(scr

eeni

ng

proc

ess)

, the

fie

ld a

sses

smen

t rep

ort a

nd th

e as

sess

ors’

rep

ort o

n pu

blic

con

sulta

tion.

The

CB

54

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ISO

/IE

C 6

5/19

96 R

equi

rem

ents

and

Gui

ding

Que

stio

ns

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

D

oes

the

CB

hav

e po

licie

s an

d pr

oced

ures

for

the

reso

lutio

n of

com

plai

nts,

app

eals

and

dis

pute

s re

ceiv

ed

from

sup

plie

rs o

r ot

her

part

ies

abou

t the

han

dlin

g of

ce

rtif

icat

ion

or a

ny o

ther

rel

ated

mat

ters

? D

oes

the

CB

em

ploy

a s

uffi

cien

t num

ber

of tr

aine

d pe

rson

al?

fully

rel

ies

on th

e ju

dgm

ent o

f th

e in

depe

nden

t EP

II (

Gui

delin

e 99

-01:

art

icle

5, p

ara

5.1.

5. “

The

SP

FM

cer

tifi

cati

on

bo

dy

aff

irm

s th

e ce

rtif

icati

on

dec

isio

n m

ad

e b

y th

e E

xper

t P

an

el I

I a

nd

take

s re

sponsi

bil

ity

tow

ard

s th

e dec

isio

n”.

CB

s of

ten

oper

ate

with

fre

e-la

ncin

g, r

egis

tere

d as

sess

ors.

How

ever

, the

y ha

ve to

hav

e on

e le

ad-

asse

ssor

as

a pe

rman

ent s

taff

mem

ber.

A

sses

sors

hav

e to

sig

n a

stat

emen

t ens

urin

g th

at

they

are

fre

e of

con

flic

ts o

f in

tere

sts

rega

rdin

g th

e un

it u

nder

ass

essm

ent.

4.

3 O

pera

tion

s

Gui

ding

que

stio

n:

Doe

s th

e C

B ta

ke a

ll st

eps

nece

ssar

y to

eva

luat

e co

nfor

man

ce w

ith th

e re

leva

nt p

rodu

ct c

ertif

icat

ion

syst

em?

Doe

s th

e C

B o

bser

ve th

e co

mpe

tenc

e of

the

pers

onal

im

plem

entin

g ce

rtif

icat

ion?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

1 (p

ara

5.1.

4)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-1

5 se

ries

(G

ener

al

Cri

teri

a fo

r Pe

rson

nel

of C

ertif

icat

ion

Bod

y fo

r SF

PM

Cer

tific

atio

n)

Ful

fille

d“T

he

SP

FM

cer

tifi

cati

on b

ody

imple

men

ts t

he

cert

ific

ati

on s

yste

m i

n a

ccord

ance

to L

EI

99 S

erie

s G

uid

elin

e a

nd

LE

I 5

5 G

uid

elin

e” (

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

1 pa

ra 5

.1.4

). T

he s

teps

are

reg

ulat

ed b

y L

EI

and

deem

ed s

uffi

cien

t. PT

. MA

L’s

and

PT

. TÜ

V’s

Qua

lity

Ass

uran

ce

Dep

artm

ent w

ill c

ondu

ct a

nnua

l int

erna

l rev

iew

s of

all

cert

ific

atio

n op

erat

ions

sta

rtin

g 20

06.

All

ass

esso

rs a

nd E

P m

embe

rs n

eed

to b

e tr

aine

d an

d re

gist

ered

by

LE

I’s

Pers

onal

Reg

istr

atio

n B

ody

LSP

(M

anua

l 11;

sub

-cha

pter

2.3

, art

icle

2,

para

2.1

.4).

L

EI

Gui

delin

es 9

9-15

ref

er to

ISO

62/

1996

. 4.

4 Su

b-co

ntra

ctin

g N

ot

appl

icab

le

Sub-

cont

ract

ing

is n

ot a

llow

ed in

the

LE

I sy

stem

(t

opic

is n

ot m

entio

ned

in L

EI’

s do

cum

ents

).4.

5 Q

ualit

y Sy

stem

Gui

ding

que

stio

n 4.

5.1.

- 4

.5.3

: D

oes

the

CB

def

ine

and

docu

men

t its

pol

icy

on q

ualit

y an

d en

sure

its

impl

emen

tatio

n at

all

leve

ls o

f th

e or

gani

zatio

n?

Is a

des

crip

tion

of th

e C

B's

org

aniz

atio

n, in

cl. i

ts li

nes

of

auth

ority

giv

en?

Are

nam

es, q

ualif

icat

ions

, and

term

s of

ref

eren

ce o

f se

nior

ex

ecut

ives

and

oth

er p

erso

nnel

list

ed?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 3.

2, a

rtic

le 2

: Im

plem

enta

tion

of

qual

ity a

ssur

ance

sy

stem

)

Ful

fille

dL

EI

requ

ires

its

CB

s to

dev

elop

a q

ualit

y as

sura

nce

syst

em (

qual

ity m

anua

l),

docu

men

t it

and

ensu

re

its i

mpl

emen

tatio

n on

all

leve

ls.

All

requ

irem

ents

sp

ecif

ied

in

4.5

are

addr

esse

d in

L

EI’

s ac

cred

itatio

n m

anua

l.

Inte

rnal

qua

lity

cont

rol

mec

hani

sms

exis

ts,

base

d on

IS

O

requ

irem

ents

(s

ee

abov

e an

d 4.

7).

How

ever

, IS

O

1001

1-1

is

not

expl

icitl

y m

entio

ned.

55

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ISO

/IE

C 6

5/19

96 R

equi

rem

ents

and

Gui

ding

Que

stio

ns

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

A

re p

roce

dure

s fo

r m

anag

emen

t rev

iew

s ou

tline

d?

Are

pro

cedu

res

for

docu

men

t con

trol

out

lined

? A

re th

ere

proc

edur

es f

or th

e re

crui

tmen

t, se

lect

ion

and

trai

ning

and

mon

itori

ng o

f ce

rtif

icat

ion

body

per

sonn

el?

Are

pro

cedu

res

for

hand

ling

non

-con

form

ities

des

crib

ed?

Are

wri

tten

crite

ria

for

issu

e, r

eten

tion

and

with

draw

al o

f ce

rtif

icat

ion

docu

men

ts d

escr

ibed

? A

re p

olic

ies

for

deal

ing

with

app

eals

, com

plai

nts

and

disp

utes

des

crib

ed?

Are

pro

cedu

res

for

cond

uctin

g in

tern

al a

udits

bas

ed o

n th

e pr

ovis

ions

of

ISO

100

11-1

for

mul

ated

? 4.

6 C

ondi

tion

s an

d pr

oced

ures

for

gra

ntin

g, m

aint

aini

ng,

exte

ndin

g, s

uspe

ndin

g an

d w

ithd

raw

ing

cert

ific

atio

n

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns 4

.6.1

/4.6

.2:

Are

proc

edur

es f

or g

rant

ing,

mai

ntai

ning

, with

draw

ing,

an

d su

spen

ding

of

cert

ific

ates

dev

elop

ed?

Are

pro

cedu

res

to r

e-ev

alua

te th

e pr

ogra

mm

e in

the

even

t of

sig

nifi

cant

cha

nges

in p

rogr

amm

e co

nten

t (st

anda

rd),

or

in f

ield

man

agem

ent q

ualit

y (F

MU

or

Indu

stry

leve

l)

deve

lope

d?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 2.

3, a

rtic

le 2

, pa

ra 2

.1.5

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

(a

rtic

le 4

, par

a 4.

6)

LE

I St

atut

es (

artic

le

2, p

ara

6)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

1 L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-24

LE

I G

uide

line

99-3

4 L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-44

LE

I G

uide

lines

88-

24

(CoC

; art

icle

9).

Ful

fille

dD

etai

led

proc

edur

es f

or g

rant

ing,

mai

ntai

ning

, and

w

ithdr

awin

g of

cer

tific

atio

n ar

e de

term

ined

by

LE

I in

Gui

deli

nes

99-2

4 (n

atur

al p

rodu

ctio

n fo

rest

),

99-3

4 (p

lant

atio

ns),

99

-44

(CB

FM),

an

d 88

-24

(Dec

isio

n m

akin

g on

Cha

in o

f C

usto

dy).

T

he

gene

ral

asse

mbl

y (c

alle

d ko

ngre

s)

has

the

pow

er t

o ca

ll fo

r a

revi

ew o

f L

EI’

s sy

stem

(L

EI

stat

utes

, ar

ticle

22,

par

a 6)

. A

dditi

onal

ly,

wor

king

gr

oups

(k

om

isi)

ca

n w

ork

on

syst

em

revi

ews.

C

onsu

ltat

ions

ar

e re

quir

ed

and

resu

lts

need

en

dors

emen

t by

th

e ko

ngre

s,

but

can

be

impl

emen

ted

tem

pora

rily

bef

ore

endo

rsem

ent.

Fo

r ro

le o

f C

B s

ee c

laus

e 6.

4.7

Inte

rnal

aud

its

and

man

agem

ent

revi

ews

Gui

ding

que

stio

n 4.

7.1/

4.7.

2:

Do

inte

rnal

aud

its ta

ke p

lace

reg

ular

ly a

nd a

re th

ere

reco

rds

of s

uch

man

agem

ent r

evie

ws?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

- ch

apte

r 3.

2 ar

ticle

2,

para

2.3

.8.1

)

Ful

fille

dA

ll C

Bs

cond

uct a

nnua

l int

erna

l rev

iew

s of

ce

rtif

icat

ion

oper

atio

ns a

nd in

tern

ally

doc

umen

ts

the

resu

lts.

LE

I re

quir

es th

at C

Bs

deve

lop

thei

r ow

n in

tern

al

audi

t pro

cedu

res.

Res

ults

sho

uld

be m

ade

acce

ssib

le to

LE

I du

ring

sur

veill

ance

vis

its.

4.8

Doc

umen

tati

on

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns 4

.8.1

/4.8

.2.:

Is a

doc

umen

ted

stat

emen

t ava

ilabl

e by

the

CB

on

its

cert

ific

atio

n sy

stem

, rul

es, a

nd p

roce

dure

s fo

r gr

antin

g,

LE

I w

ebsi

te

MA

L C

ode

of

Prac

tice

TÜ

V a

pplic

atio

n fo

rm

Ful

fille

dT

he p

roce

dure

s fo

r gr

antin

g, m

aint

aini

ng,

exte

ndin

g, a

nd w

ithdr

awin

g ce

rtif

icat

ion

and

for

hand

ling

disp

utes

are

ful

ly r

egul

ated

in th

e L

EI

syst

em a

nd a

vail

able

on

LE

I’s

web

site

. CB

s br

iefl

y ou

tline

thes

e pr

oced

ures

in th

eir

code

of

56

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ISO

/IE

C 6

5/19

96 R

equi

rem

ents

and

Gui

ding

Que

stio

ns

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

m

aint

aini

ng, e

xten

ding

, sus

pend

ing

and

with

draw

ing

cert

ific

atio

n?

Is a

des

crip

tion

of th

e m

eans

of

fina

ncia

l sup

port

and

in

form

atio

n on

fee

s ch

arge

d to

app

lican

ts a

vaila

ble?

Is

a d

escr

iptio

n of

the

righ

ts a

nd d

utie

s of

app

lican

ts

rega

rdin

g th

e us

e of

the

body

's lo

go a

nd w

ays

to r

efer

ring

to

cer

tifie

d st

atus

def

ined

? Is

info

rmat

ion

abou

t pro

cedu

res

for

hand

ling

com

plai

nts,

ap

peal

s, a

nd d

ispu

tes

avai

labl

e?

Are

pro

cedu

res

to c

ontr

ol d

ocum

ents

and

dat

a es

tabl

ishe

d by

the

CB

? Is

a d

irec

tory

of

cert

ifie

d pr

oduc

ts a

nd th

eir

supp

liers

gi

ven?

LE

I G

uide

lines

99-

24

for

natu

ral f

ores

t (D

ecis

ion

mak

ing)

L

EI

Gui

delin

es 9

9-34

fo

r pl

anta

tion

fore

st

(Dec

isio

n m

akin

g)

LE

I G

uide

lines

99-

44

for

CB

FM (

Dec

isio

n m

akin

g)

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 2.

5)

(Inf

orm

atio

n ab

out

usin

g L

EI’

s L

ogo)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 22

-01

(Log

o)

LE

I G

uide

line

55

(app

eal/d

ispu

te)

CB

s do

cum

enta

tion

prac

tice

(to

be

sign

ed b

y th

e ap

plic

ant)

or

the

appl

icat

ion/

cont

ract

for

m.

A d

escr

ipti

on o

n fe

es c

harg

ed is

giv

en in

the

quot

atio

n to

the

appl

ican

t. T

his

info

rmat

ion

is n

ot

publ

icly

ava

ilabl

e.

CB

s do

cum

ent c

ontr

ol p

roce

dure

s re

fer

to I

SO

9000

. L

EI

rece

ntly

upl

oade

d a

dire

ctor

y of

cer

tifie

d pr

oduc

ts a

nd th

eir

supp

liers

on

its w

ebsi

te.

4.9

Rec

ords

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns:

Doe

s th

e re

cord

sys

tem

mee

t its

par

ticul

ar n

eeds

and

co

mpl

y w

ith e

xist

ing

regu

latio

ns?

Are

rec

ords

mai

ntai

ned

for

at le

ast o

ne f

ull c

ertif

icat

ion

cycl

e or

as

requ

ired

by

law

?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(cha

pter

3, s

ub-

chap

ter

3.2,

art

icle

2,

para

2.3

.10:

re

cord

ing)

M

AL

and

TÜ

V

inte

rnal

rec

ord

syst

em

Ful

fille

dL

EI

requ

ests

its

CB

s to

est

ablis

h a

reco

rdin

g sy

stem

that

ens

ures

the

docu

men

tatio

n of

all

rele

vant

act

iviti

es a

nd r

esul

ts. C

Bs

shal

l dec

ide

upon

the

mai

nten

ance

of

the

reco

rds

acco

rdin

g to

re

leva

nt la

ws.

In

PT

. MA

L’s

rec

ordi

ng s

yste

m, c

ertif

icat

ion

docu

men

ts a

re k

ept f

or u

p to

fou

r ye

ars,

one

yea

r le

ss th

an a

ful

l cer

tific

atio

n cy

cle.

PT

. TÜ

V’s

rec

ordi

ng s

yste

m f

or f

ores

t ce

rtif

icat

ion

follo

ws

ISO

req

uire

men

ts.

PT. S

ucof

indo

has

not

yet

don

e on

e as

sess

men

t un

der

LE

I.

4.10

Con

fide

ntia

lity

Gui

ding

que

stio

n:

Are

ade

quat

e ar

rang

emen

ts to

saf

egua

rd c

onfi

dent

ialit

y of

th

e in

form

atio

n ob

tain

ed in

the

cour

se o

f ce

rtif

icat

ion

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(cha

pter

3, s

ub

chap

ter

3.2,

art

icle

2,

para

2.3

.11:

co

nfid

entia

lity)

Ful

fille

dL

EI

requ

ests

its

CB

s to

dev

elop

a p

olic

y on

co

nfid

entia

lity

on e

very

leve

l of

thei

r or

gani

zati

ons.

57

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ISO

/IE

C 6

5/19

96 R

equi

rem

ents

and

Gui

ding

Que

stio

ns

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

ac

tiviti

es m

ade?

5

Cer

tifi

cati

on b

ody

pers

onne

l5.

1 G

ener

al

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns e

.g.:

Are

per

sonn

el o

f th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

body

com

pete

nt f

or

tech

nica

l jud

gmen

ts, f

ram

ing

polic

ies

and

impl

emen

ting

them

? D

o cl

earl

y do

cum

ente

d in

stru

ctio

ns e

xist

?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 3.

2, a

rtic

le 2

, pa

ra 2

.3.1

3 on

CB

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-02

(Fie

ld a

sses

sor)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-03

(Exp

ert P

anel

) L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-01

(art

icle

5, p

ara

5.1.

2)

Ful

fille

dL

EI

has

regu

late

d th

e re

quir

emen

ts f

or a

ll p

erso

nal

(CB

, ass

esso

r, E

P m

embe

r) in

volv

ed in

ce

rtif

icat

ion.

L

EI

crea

ted

a Pe

rson

al R

egis

trat

ion

Bod

y (L

SP

) in

ch

arge

for

reg

istr

atio

n of

all

pers

onal

con

duct

ing

LE

I ce

rtif

icat

ions

. The

LS

P w

as r

ecen

tly p

lace

d un

der

the

Gov

ernm

ent R

esea

rch

Age

ncy

LIP

I(L

embaga I

lmu P

eng

tahuan I

ndones

ia).

LE

I is

res

pons

ible

for

rel

ated

trai

ning

s. L

EI

does

no

t allo

w it

s C

Bs

to im

plem

ent t

heir

ow

n tr

aini

ng

prog

ram

mes

in L

EI

fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

(see

abo

ve).

5.

2 Q

ualif

icat

ion

crit

eria

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns e

.g.:

Doe

s th

e C

B d

efin

e a

min

imum

rel

evan

t cri

teri

on f

or th

e co

mpe

tenc

e of

the

pers

onne

l?

Doe

s th

e C

B r

equi

re it

s pe

rson

nel t

o si

gn a

n ag

reem

ent i

n w

hich

they

dec

lare

any

pri

or a

nd/o

r pr

esen

t ass

ocia

tion

with

a s

uppl

ier

or d

esig

ner

of p

rodu

cts

for

any

eval

uatio

n or

cer

tific

atio

n to

whi

ch th

ey a

re to

be

assi

gned

? D

oes

the

CB

mai

ntai

n tr

aini

ng r

ecor

ds?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 3.

2, a

rtic

le 2

, pa

ra 2

.3.1

3.4)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-02

(Fie

ld a

sses

sor)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-03

(Exp

ert P

anel

) C

B in

tern

al

docu

men

tati

on

Ful

fille

dSe

e ab

ove.

W

ritte

n st

atem

ents

on

conf

licts

of

inte

rest

s ha

ve to

be

sig

ned

by a

sses

sors

and

EP

mem

bers

. D

ocum

ents

on

staf

f qu

alif

icat

ion,

trai

ning

pro

file

an

d st

aff

eval

uatio

n ar

e av

aila

ble

in L

EI’

s C

Bs

(acc

ordi

ng to

info

rmat

ion

rece

ived

dur

ing

inte

rvie

ws

with

the

oper

atio

n m

anag

ers

of th

e C

Bs)

.

6. C

hang

es in

the

cer

tifi

cati

on r

equi

rem

ents

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns e

.g.:

Doe

s th

e C

B g

ive

due

notic

e w

hen

mak

ing

chan

ges

in it

s re

quir

emen

ts?

Doe

s th

e C

B ta

ke in

to a

ccou

nt th

e vi

ews

expr

esse

d by

in

tere

sted

par

ties

befo

re d

ecid

ing

on th

e pr

ecis

e fo

rm a

nd

effe

ctiv

e da

te o

f ch

ange

s?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 3.

2, a

rtic

le 2

, pa

ra 2

.3.1

2.3)

L

EI

Stat

utes

Ful

fille

dL

EI

requ

ests

that

the

CB

nee

ds to

info

rm to

pub

lic

in r

elat

ion

to c

hang

es o

n st

anda

rd, p

roce

dure

, and

re

quir

emen

ts (

Para

2.3

.12.

3).

Cha

nges

sha

ll b

e ba

sed

on v

iew

s ex

pres

sed

by

inte

rest

ed p

artie

s, u

sual

ly m

entio

ned

to L

EI

in

wor

ksho

ps.

7. A

ppea

ls, c

ompl

aint

s, a

nd d

ispu

tes

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns:

Are

app

eals

, com

plai

nts

and

disp

utes

bro

ught

bef

ore

the

CB

by

supp

liers

(e.

g. F

MU

s, F

ores

t Ind

ustr

ies)

or

othe

r

LE

I G

uide

line5

5 (G

uide

line

for

so

lvin

g pr

oble

ms

follo

win

g a

cert

ific

atio

n de

cisi

on)

Ful

fille

dT

he u

nit u

nder

ass

essm

ent h

as th

e ri

ght t

o pr

esen

t th

eir

view

of

the

fiel

d as

sess

men

t res

ults

on

the

firs

t wor

king

day

of

the

EP

II

mee

ting.

L

EI

regu

late

s th

at c

ompl

ains

reg

ardi

ng a

ce

rtif

icat

ion

deci

sion

are

to b

e ad

dres

sed

to th

e

58

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ISO

/IE

C 6

5/19

96 R

equi

rem

ents

and

Gui

ding

Que

stio

ns

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

pa

rtie

s su

bjec

t to

the

proc

edur

es o

f th

e C

B?

Are

ther

e re

cord

s of

sub

sequ

ent a

ctio

n?

LE

I M

anue

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 3.

2, a

rtic

le 2

, pa

ra 2

.3.1

0.2h

, par

a 2.

3.10

.2.d

)

LE

I G

uide

line

99

LE

I G

uide

line

88

rele

vant

CB

. The

CB

mig

ht ta

ke th

e is

sue

up in

its

next

sur

veill

ance

vis

it or

, in

maj

or c

ases

, cal

ls f

or

a m

eeti

ng o

f th

e in

depe

nden

t Cer

tific

atio

n R

evie

w

Cou

ncil

(DP

S).

L

EI’

s C

oC s

yste

m is

invi

ting

“all

sta

keh

old

ers

to

ap

pea

l a

ny

gri

eva

nce

upon a

cer

tifi

cati

on d

ecis

ion

and a

ffir

mati

on

“(L

EI

Gui

delin

e 88

).

LE

I re

ques

ts th

at it

s C

Bs

mon

itor

the

use

of lo

go

and

clai

ms.

In

the

cont

ract

bet

wee

n L

EI

and

its C

B

the

com

mun

icat

ions

bet

wee

n th

e tw

o or

gani

sati

ons

is r

egul

ated

. R

ecor

ds r

egar

ding

com

plai

nts

and

disp

utes

(no

n-co

nfor

mity

rep

orts

) an

d su

bseq

uent

act

ions

are

ke

pt b

y C

Bs

and

prov

ided

to th

e D

PS, i

f re

quir

ed.

PT. T

ÜV

wan

ts to

est

ablis

h an

ope

n-ac

cess

“c

usto

mer

’s v

oice

dat

abas

e” f

or c

ompl

ains

unt

il th

e en

d of

this

yea

r.

8. A

pplic

atio

n8.

1 In

form

atio

n on

the

pro

cedu

re

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns:

Doe

s th

e C

B p

rovi

de d

etai

led

info

rmat

ion

rela

ting

to a

nd

desc

ript

ions

of

the

eval

uatio

n an

d ce

rtif

icat

ion

proc

edur

es?

Doe

s th

e C

B r

equi

re th

at th

e ap

plic

ant s

uppl

ier,

upo

n su

spen

sion

or

canc

ella

tion

of c

ertif

icat

ion,

dis

cont

inue

its

use

of a

ny a

dver

tisin

g m

atte

r th

at c

onta

ins

any

refe

renc

e th

ere

to a

nd r

etur

ns a

ny c

ertif

icat

ion

docu

men

ts a

s re

quir

ed b

y th

e C

B?

Doe

s th

e C

B r

eque

st a

sta

tem

ent t

hat t

he a

pplic

ant s

uppl

ies

any

info

rmat

ion

need

ed f

or a

n ev

alua

tion

of p

rodu

cts

to b

e ce

rtif

ied?

LE

I G

uide

line

99

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(Acc

redi

tatio

n)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-

43.3

(A

pplic

atio

n fo

r C

BFM

)M

AL

Cod

e of

Pr

actic

eM

AL

App

licat

ion

form

Ful

fille

dL

EI’

s C

Bs

regu

late

th

at

appl

ican

ts

for

natu

ral

prod

uctio

n fo

rest

and

pla

ntat

ion

cert

ific

atio

n ne

ed

to

subm

it va

riou

s do

cum

ents

, in

clud

ing

a co

oper

ate

com

pany

sta

tem

ent

and

valid

pla

nnin

g re

port

s.

App

licat

ion

form

s ar

e de

velo

ped

by th

e C

B.

PT.

MA

L’s

Cod

e of

Pra

ctic

e ha

s to

be

sign

ed b

y an

ap

plic

ant

befo

re

the

cert

ific

atio

n w

ork

com

men

ces.

It

conf

irm

s in

form

atio

n ac

cess

, lo

go

use

and

othe

r ce

rtif

icat

ion

requ

irem

ents

. PT

. T

ÜV

re

gula

tes

thes

e is

sues

in

th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

cont

ract

/app

licat

ion

form

. In

form

atio

n on

lab

el u

ses

is p

rovi

ded

by L

EI

in

Gui

delin

e 22

-01

and

22-0

2.

8. 2

The

app

licat

ion

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns:

Doe

s th

e C

B r

eque

st a

sta

tem

ent t

hat t

he a

pplic

ant a

gree

s

LE

I M

anua

l 11

MA

L/T

ÜV

appl

icat

ion

form

Ful

fille

dSe

e ab

ove.

59

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ISO

/IE

C 6

5/19

96 R

equi

rem

ents

and

Gui

ding

Que

stio

ns

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

to

com

ply

with

the

requ

irem

ents

for

cer

tific

atio

n?

Doe

s th

e C

B r

equi

re in

its

appl

icat

ion

form

that

the

scop

e of

ass

essm

ent,

and

key

com

pany

dat

a, in

clud

ing

prod

ucts

to

be

cert

ifie

d, is

giv

en?

9. P

repa

rati

on f

or e

valu

atio

n

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns 9

.1 –

9.4

.: B

efor

e pr

ocee

ding

with

eva

luat

ions

, doe

s th

e C

B c

ondu

ct

an e

valu

atio

n, a

nd m

aint

ain

reco

rds,

of

a re

view

of

the

appl

icat

ion

to e

nsur

e th

e re

quir

emen

ts a

re c

lear

ly d

efin

ed,

docu

men

ted,

and

und

erst

ood?

D

oes

the

CB

pre

pare

a p

lan

for

its e

valu

atio

n ac

tiviti

es to

al

low

for

the

nece

ssar

y ar

rang

emen

ts to

be

mad

e?

Doe

s th

e C

B a

ssig

n qu

alif

ied

pers

onal

?

LE

I G

uide

line

99

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

2 (f

ield

ass

esso

r)

LE

I G

uide

line

99-0

3 (e

xper

t pan

el)

Ful

fille

dT

he E

P I

give

s, b

ased

on

its

docu

men

t rev

iew

and

an

opt

iona

l fie

ld v

isit,

rec

omm

enda

tions

for

the

fiel

d as

sess

men

t reg

ardi

ng m

ost c

ruci

al in

dica

tors

. It

als

o pr

ovid

es in

sigh

ts to

the

audi

t tea

m

com

posi

tion

. A

n as

sess

men

t pla

n is

mad

e by

the

asse

ssor

s be

fore

fie

ld w

ork.

The

ass

essm

ent p

lan

is

disc

usse

d w

ith th

e un

it un

der

asse

ssm

ent t

o al

low

fo

r lo

gist

ical

pre

para

tions

. A

sses

sors

’ qu

alif

icat

ions

are

reg

ulat

ed b

y L

EI.

10

. Eva

luat

ion

Gui

ding

que

stio

n e.

g.:

Doe

s th

e C

B e

valu

ate

the

prod

ucts

of

the

appl

ican

t aga

inst

th

e st

anda

rd?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 2.

3, a

rtic

le 2

, pa

ra 2

.1.1

)

Ful

fille

dN

ote

on p

roce

dure

: ISO

use

s th

e w

ord

prod

uct i

n th

e w

ides

t sen

se, i

nclu

ding

pro

cess

es a

nd s

ervi

ces.

11. E

valu

atio

n re

port

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns e

.g.:

Doe

s th

e as

sess

men

t rep

ort p

rovi

de th

e C

B w

ith f

indi

ngs

as to

con

form

ity w

ith a

ll re

quir

emen

ts o

f ce

rtif

icat

ions

? D

o pr

oced

ures

ens

ure

that

the

outc

ome

of th

e ev

alua

tion

is

prom

ptly

bro

ught

to th

e ap

plic

ants

not

ice

by th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

body

? D

o th

e pr

oced

ures

ens

ure

that

the

repo

rt id

entif

y an

y no

ncon

form

ity th

at w

ill h

ave

to b

e di

scha

rged

in o

rder

to

com

ply

with

the

cert

ific

atio

n re

quir

emen

ts?

Do

the

proc

edur

es e

nsur

e th

at th

e re

port

s cl

earl

y st

ate

the

exte

nt o

f fu

rthe

r ev

alua

tion

or te

stin

g re

quir

ed?

LE

I G

uide

line

99

LE

I G

uide

line

99-2

2 (R

epor

ting)

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

-24

(dec

isio

n m

akin

g pr

oces

s)

Ful

fille

dFu

lly r

egul

ated

in L

EI’

s re

port

ing

guid

elin

e.

Not

e re

late

d to

the

last

bul

let p

oint

: LE

I’s

deci

sion

m

akin

g sy

stem

doe

s no

t all

ow f

or f

urth

er

eval

uatio

n. T

he d

ecis

ion

is e

ither

“pa

ss”

or “

fail”

.

12. D

ecis

ion

on c

erti

fica

tion

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns e

.g.:

LE

I G

uide

line

99-2

4 (d

ecis

ion

mak

ing)

E

xam

ples

of

CB

Ful

fille

dPr

oces

s is

ful

ly r

egul

ated

in L

EIs

dec

isio

n m

akin

g gu

idel

ine.

A

lthou

gh th

e E

P II

em

ploy

s th

e de

cisi

on m

akin

g

60

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ISO

/IE

C 6

5/19

96 R

equi

rem

ents

and

Gui

ding

Que

stio

ns

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

A

re d

ecis

ions

mad

e by

the

cert

ific

atio

n bo

dy b

ased

on

info

rmat

ion

gath

ered

dur

ing

the

eval

uatio

n pr

oces

s an

d ot

her

rele

vant

info

rmat

ion?

D

oes

the

cert

ific

atio

n bo

dy d

eleg

ate

auth

ority

for

gra

ntin

g,

mai

ntai

ning

, ext

endi

ng, s

uspe

ndin

g, o

r w

ithdr

awin

g ce

rtif

icat

ion

to a

n ou

tsid

e pe

rson

or

body

? D

oes

the

cert

ific

ate

show

the

scop

e of

the

cert

ific

atio

n,

incl

udin

g pr

oduc

ts c

ertif

ied

by ty

pe a

nd r

ange

, the

pro

duct

st

anda

rds

or o

ther

nor

mat

ive

docu

men

ts, t

he a

pplic

able

ce

rtif

icat

ion

syst

em a

nd e

ffec

tive

date

of

the

cert

ific

atio

n?

regi

stra

tion

cert

ific

ates

proc

ess

in th

e L

EI

syst

em, t

he a

utho

rity

for

gr

antin

g ce

rtif

icat

ion

rem

ains

with

the

CB

. N

ote

on p

roce

dure

: to

ensu

re th

at c

laus

e 12

is m

et

we

exam

ined

the

so f

ar e

xist

ing

cert

ific

ates

issu

ed

by L

EI’

s C

Bs.

13. S

urve

illan

ce

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns e

.g.:

Doe

s th

e C

B h

ave

wri

tten

surv

eilla

nce

proc

edur

es?

Doe

s th

e C

B r

equi

re th

e su

pplie

r to

info

rm th

e C

B in

cas

es

of m

ajor

cha

nges

? D

oes

the

CB

req

uire

wit

hhol

ding

of

prod

ucts

pro

duce

d un

der

the

chan

ged

proc

edur

es p

endi

ng r

evie

w b

y th

e C

B?

Doe

s th

e C

B d

ocum

ent i

ts s

urve

illan

ce r

epor

t?

Doe

s th

e C

B p

erio

dica

lly e

valu

ate

mar

ked

prod

ucts

?

LE

I gu

idel

ine

99-2

6

LE

I G

uide

line

99-4

6

MA

L C

ode

of

Prac

tice

Par

tly

fulf

illed

Surv

eilla

nce

proc

edur

es a

nd r

epor

ting

are

regu

late

d by

LE

I.

CB

s ar

e re

ques

ted

to in

form

thei

r ce

rtif

ied

units

th

at th

ey n

eed

to c

onta

ct th

e C

B if

maj

or

chan

ges/

prob

lem

s oc

cur.

If

cha

nges

to

stan

dard

s or

pro

cedu

res

occu

rred

, up

com

ing

asse

ssm

ents

hav

e to

be

base

d on

the

ne

w a

ppro

ach.

Cer

tifie

d un

its m

ust

com

ply

with

th

e ne

w s

tand

ard

no l

ater

tha

n 12

mon

ths

afte

r th

e ch

ange

took

pla

ce (

LE

I G

uide

line

99, a

rtic

le 5

).

The

LE

I sy

stem

doe

s no

t re

quir

e th

at p

rodu

cts

are

on h

old

if m

ajor

cha

nges

wit

hin

the

cert

ifie

d un

it o

r ch

ange

s in

pro

cedu

res

occu

rred

unt

il th

e C

B c

ondu

cts

its

next

su

rvei

llanc

e vi

sit.

14

. Use

of

licen

ses,

cer

tifi

cate

s, a

nd m

arks

of

conf

orm

ity

Gui

ding

que

stio

ns e

.g.:

Doe

s th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

body

exe

rcis

e pr

oper

con

trol

ove

r ow

ners

hip,

use

and

dis

play

of

licen

ses,

cer

tific

ates

and

m

arks

of

conf

orm

ity?

A

re in

corr

ect r

efer

ence

s or

mis

lead

ing

rem

arks

rel

ated

to

the

cert

ific

atio

n sy

stem

dea

lt w

ith b

y su

itabl

e ac

tion?

LE

I M

anua

l 11

(sub

-ch

apte

r 2.

5;

Info

rmat

ion

abou

t us

ing

LE

I’s

Log

o)

LE

I G

uide

line

22-0

1 (s

ub-c

hapt

er 2

.8, p

ara

2.3.

5)

Ful

fille

dC

Bs

have

to a

ssig

n a

spec

ial p

erso

n w

ho is

re

spon

sibl

e fo

r lo

go c

ontr

ol.

Sign

ific

ant m

alpr

actic

e in

logo

and

cer

tific

ate

use

will

be

refe

rred

to b

y L

EI

to th

e le

gal s

yste

m.

Not

e: n

o ce

rtif

ied

com

pany

yet

use

s th

e L

EI

logo

on

pro

duct

s.

15. C

ompl

aint

s to

sup

plie

rsL

EI

Man

ual 1

1 (s

ub-

chap

ter

3.2,

art

icle

2,

Ful

fille

dSh

all b

e re

gula

ted

in th

e qu

ality

ass

uran

ce s

yste

m

of th

e C

B.

61

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ISO

/IE

C 6

5/19

96 R

equi

rem

ents

and

Gui

ding

Que

stio

ns

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

G

uidi

ng q

uest

ions

e.g

.: D

oes

the

CB

req

uire

sup

plie

rs to

kee

p a

reco

rd o

f co

mpl

aint

s to

the

supp

lier

rela

ting

to p

rodu

ct c

ompl

ianc

e an

d m

ake

thos

e re

cord

s av

aila

ble

to th

e C

B u

pon

requ

est?

D

oes

the

CB

req

uire

take

app

ropr

iate

act

ion

with

res

pect

to

such

com

plai

nts

and

any

defi

cien

cies

fou

nd in

pro

duct

s or

se

rvic

es th

at a

ffec

t com

plia

nce

with

the

requ

irem

ents

for

ce

rtif

icat

ion

and

docu

men

t act

ions

take

n?

para

2.3

.2, 2

.3.1

0.5)

L

EI

CB

s re

quir

e fr

om th

eir

clie

nts

to k

eep

reco

rds

of c

ompl

aint

s re

late

d to

pro

duct

com

plia

nce

and

docu

men

t the

ir c

orre

spon

ding

act

ions

.

62

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

AD

DE

ND

UM

2:

Ass

essm

ent

of t

he L

EI

syst

em a

gain

st I

SO G

uide

140

20 (

2000

): E

nvir

onm

enta

l lab

els

and

decl

arat

ions

—

G

ener

al p

rinc

iple

s N

ote

: Is

sues

of

no

n-c

om

pli

ance

are

wri

tten

in

bo

ld t

ype

in t

he

rem

ark

s co

lum

n a

nd j

udged

as

fulf

ille

d,

not

or

part

ly f

ulf

ille

d d

epen

din

g o

n t

he

magnit

ude

of

fail

ure

. IS

O 1

4020

Req

uire

men

ts

Mai

n R

efer

ence

F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

4 G

ener

al p

rinc

iple

s

4.2

Pri

ncip

le 1

E

nvir

onm

enta

l lab

els

and

decl

arat

ions

sha

ll be

acc

urat

e,

veri

fiab

le, r

elev

ant a

nd n

ot m

isle

adin

g.

LE

I M

anua

l 22

-01

(Log

o Po

licy)

L

EI

Man

ual

22-0

2 (L

ogo

Use

Gui

delin

e)

LE

I St

atut

es

(art

icle

22

, par

a 6

on r

evie

w)

Ful

fille

dL

EI’

s lo

go s

hall

conv

ey t

hat

the

prod

uct

mee

ts t

he

prin

cipl

e of

SFM

(ch

apte

r on

e, M

anua

l 22

-01)

. It

us

es g

reen

col

our,

a c

ircl

e in

dica

ting

the

eart

h, a

sy

mbo

l fo

r hu

man

bei

ngs,

etc

. (s

ub-c

hapt

er 1

.1,

Man

ual 2

2-02

).

LE

I an

d its

CB

s ar

e ob

liged

to

mon

itor

the

use

of

the

logo

(ch

apte

r tw

o, M

anua

l 22-

01)

LE

I’s

syst

em is

con

fine

d to

per

iodi

cal r

evie

w (

LE

I st

atut

es).

ISO

14

020

Prin

cipl

e 1

also

co

nsid

ers

that

“

En

viro

nm

enta

l la

bel

s a

nd

dec

lara

tio

ns

sha

ll b

e u

nd

erst

an

da

ble

a

nd

n

ot

like

ly

to

mis

lea

d

the

inte

nd

ed

pu

rch

ase

r o

f th

e p

rod

uct

o

r se

rvic

e (4

.2.2

)”.

Thi

s as

pect

is

diff

icul

t to

jud

ge a

nd a

m

atte

r of

logo

des

ign

(see

abo

ve)

and

prom

otio

n.

4.3

Pri

ncip

le 2

Pr

oced

ures

and

req

uire

men

ts f

or e

nvir

onm

enta

l lab

els

and

decl

arat

ions

sha

ll no

t be

prep

ared

, ado

pted

, or

appl

ied

with

a

view

to, o

r w

ith th

e ef

fect

of,

cre

atin

g un

nece

ssar

y ob

stac

les

to

inte

rnat

iona

l tra

de.

LE

I M

anua

l 22

-01

(Log

o Po

licy)

F

ulfi

lled

4.4

Pri

ncip

le 3

E

nvir

onm

enta

l lab

els

and

decl

arat

ions

sha

ll be

bas

ed o

n sc

ient

ific

met

hodo

logy

that

is s

uffi

cien

tly th

orou

gh a

nd

com

preh

ensi

ve to

sup

port

the

clai

m a

nd th

at p

rodu

ces

resu

lts

that

are

acc

urat

e an

d re

prod

ucib

le.

LE

I G

uide

line

5000

L

EI

Gui

delin

e 99

(C

ertif

icat

ion

Syst

em

of S

usta

inab

le

Prod

uctio

n Fo

rest

M

anag

emen

t)

Ful

fille

dT

he l

ogo

is b

ased

on

LE

I’s

cert

ific

atio

n st

anda

rd

and

accr

edita

tion

prog

ram

me.

B

oth

refl

ect

scie

ntif

ic e

xper

ienc

es.

4.5

Pri

ncip

le 4

In

form

atio

n co

ncer

ning

the

proc

edur

e, m

etho

dolo

gy, a

nd a

ny

crite

ria

used

to s

uppo

rt e

nvir

onm

enta

l lab

els

and

decl

arat

ions

sh

all b

e av

aila

ble

and

prov

ided

upo

n re

ques

t to

all i

nter

este

d pa

rtie

s.

LE

I w

ebsi

te

LE

I M

anua

l 22

-01

(Log

o Po

licy)

L

EI

Man

ual

22-0

2 (L

ogo

Use

)

Ful

fille

d

63

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ISO

140

20 R

equi

rem

ents

M

ain

Ref

eren

ce

Fin

ding

s R

emar

ks4.

6 P

rinc

iple

5

The

dev

elop

men

t of

envi

ronm

enta

l lab

els

and

decl

arat

ions

sh

all t

ake

into

con

side

ratio

n al

l rel

evan

t asp

ects

of

the

life

cycl

e of

the

prod

uct.

Not

ful

fille

d

How

ever

, al

l SF

M c

ertif

icat

ion

conc

epts

do

not

cont

rol t

he e

ntir

e lif

ecyc

le o

f a

cert

ifie

d pr

oduc

t.

4.7

Pri

ncip

le 6

E

nvir

onm

enta

l lab

els

and

decl

arat

ions

sha

ll no

t inh

ibit

inno

vatio

n w

hich

mai

ntai

ns o

r ha

s th

e po

tent

ial t

o im

prov

e en

viro

nmen

tal p

erfo

rman

ce.

LE

I M

anua

l 22

-01

(sub

-cha

pter

5.

3,

2.3.

1 an

d 2.

3.2)

L

EI

Man

ual

22-0

2 (c

hapt

er 3

)

Ful

fille

dL

EI

allo

ws

for

flex

ibili

ty

in

prod

uct

mar

king

re

gard

ing

logo

mat

eria

l.

LE

I is

op

en

if

tech

nica

l pr

oble

ms

duri

ng

logo

ap

plic

atio

n oc

cur.

4.8

Pri

ncip

le 7

A

ny a

dmin

istr

ativ

e re

quir

emen

ts o

r in

form

atio

n de

man

ds

rela

ted

to e

nvir

onm

enta

l lab

els

and

decl

arat

ions

sha

ll be

lim

ited

to th

ose

nece

ssar

y to

est

ablis

h co

nfor

man

ce w

ith a

pplic

able

cr

iteri

a an

d st

anda

rds

of th

e la

bels

and

dec

lara

tions

.

LE

I M

anua

l 22

-01

(Log

o Po

licy)

L

EI

Man

ual

22-0

2 (L

ogo

Use

)

Ful

fille

dL

EI’

s lo

go p

olic

y is

sim

ple

and

stra

ight

for

war

d.

LE

I’s

logo

is p

aten

ted.

4.9

Pri

ncip

le 8

T

he p

roce

ss o

f de

velo

ping

env

iron

men

tal l

abel

s an

d de

clar

atio

ns s

houl

d in

clud

e an

ope

n, p

artic

ipat

ory

cons

ulta

tion

with

inte

rest

ed p

artie

s. R

easo

nabl

e ef

fort

s sh

ould

be

mad

e to

ac

hiev

e a

cons

ensu

s th

roug

hout

the

proc

ess.

LE

I M

anua

l 22

-02

(Log

o U

se)

Ful

fille

dL

EI’

s ce

rtif

icat

ion

and

accr

edita

tion

stan

dard

de

velo

pmen

t pr

oces

s ha

s be

en

open

to

al

l in

tere

sted

par

ties.

L

EI’

s lo

go p

olic

y de

velo

pmen

t st

arte

d w

ith o

ne

stak

ehol

der

cons

ulta

tion

(the

fin

al l

ogo

stan

dard

w

as d

evel

oped

inte

rnal

ly).

L

EI’

s lo

go is

app

rehe

nded

by

its m

embe

rs.

4.10

Pri

ncip

le 9

In

form

atio

n on

the

envi

ronm

enta

l asp

ects

of

prod

ucts

and

se

rvic

es r

elev

ant t

o an

env

iron

men

tal l

abel

or

decl

arat

ion

shal

l be

ava

ilabl

e to

pur

chas

ers

and

pote

ntia

l pur

chas

ers

from

the

part

y m

akin

g th

e en

viro

nmen

tal l

abel

or

decl

arat

ion.

LE

I M

anua

l 22

-01

(Log

o Po

licie

s)

LE

I M

anua

l 22

-02

(Log

o U

se)

Ful

fille

dR

elev

ant

info

rmat

ion

on l

ogo

use

is p

rint

ed i

n a

book

let a

nd a

lso

avai

labl

e on

LE

I’s

web

site

.

64

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Ann

ex 3

ASS

ESS

ME

NT

RE

SUL

TS:

App

licat

ion

of t

he F

ores

t C

erti

fica

tion

Ass

essm

ent

Gui

de t

o th

e F

SC s

chem

e on

nat

iona

l lev

el in

I

ndon

esia

No

te:

Th

e a

na

lysi

s fo

cuse

s o

n s

ub

-cri

teri

a p

rop

ose

d f

or

na

tio

na

l le

vel

ass

essm

ent

in t

he

gen

eric

app

lica

tio

n o

f th

e F

CA

G t

o F

SC

’s i

nte

rnati

onal

syst

em (

see

Annex

4).

Is

sues

of

non

-co

mp

lian

ce a

re w

ritt

en i

n b

old

typ

e in

th

e re

mark

s co

lum

n a

nd j

udged

as

fulf

ille

d, not

or

part

ly f

ulf

ille

d d

epen

din

g o

n t

he

magn

itude

of

fail

ure

.

PA

RT

2:

Stan

dard

s an

d th

e St

anda

rd-S

etti

ng P

roce

ssC

rite

ria

FC

AG

Req

uire

men

ts

Mai

n R

efer

ence

s F

indi

ngs

Rem

arks

C

rite

rion

3

Mea

nin

gfu

l a

nd

eq

uit

ab

le

part

icip

ati

on

of

all

ma

jor

sta

keh

old

er

gro

ups

in

go

vern

an

ce a

nd

st

an

dard

set

tin

g

Sub-

Cri

teri

a

3.1

Eff

ecti

ve

sta

keh

old

er

invo

lvem

ent

Req

uire

men

ts r

elat

ed to

sub

-cri

teri

on

3.1:

a.

Rel

evan

t sta

keho

lder

gro

ups

have

be

en o

ffic

ially

invi

ted

to

part

icip

ate

FSC

Sta

ndar

d 20

-003

, 3.1

FS

C N

ews:

ht

tp://

ww

w.f

sc.o

rg/e

n/w

hat

s_ne

w/n

ews/

new

s_no

tes

/30

SGS

QU

AL

IFO

R F

ores

t m

anag

emen

t sta

ndar

d fo

r In

done

sia,

200

5

Smar

tWoo

d In

teri

m

Gui

delin

es f

or A

sses

sing

Fo

rest

Man

agem

ent i

n In

done

sia,

200

3 Jo

int C

ertif

icat

ion

Pro

toco

l, S

ept.

2000

Ful

fille

dN

ote:

Cri

teri

a 3.

1 is

onl

y an

alys

ed r

egar

ding

th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

in

teri

m

cert

ific

atio

n st

anda

rds

by F

SC C

Bs

in I

ndon

esia

due

to

the

abse

nce

of a

Nat

iona

l FSC

Ini

tiativ

e. A

ll ot

her

aspe

cts

unde

r C

rite

rion

3 w

ere

alre

ady

anal

ysed

in

the

gene

ric

asse

ssm

ent

of t

he

inte

rnat

iona

l FS

C

fram

ewor

k (s

ee

Ann

ex

4).

FSC

is c

urre

ntly

inst

igat

ing

appr

opri

ate

way

s to

“phase

out

cert

ific

ati

ons

usi

ng

cert

ifie

rs' i

nte

rim

sta

ndard

s w

ithin

fiv

e ye

ars

” (A

ctio

n on

gen

eral

ass

embl

y m

otio

n 48

, FSC

New

s, 2

006)

.FS

C r

egul

ates

, th

at C

Bs

shal

l se

ek b

road

st

akeh

olde

r co

mm

ents

on

the

adap

tatio

n of

th

eir

gene

ric

stan

dard

s.

The

in

teri

m

stan

dard

nee

d to

be

publ

ishe

d at

lea

st o

ne

mon

th

prio

r to

th

e st

art

of

the

mai

n as

sess

men

t in

HC

VF

area

s.

A c

ompr

ehen

sive

lis

t of

sta

keho

lder

s to

be

cont

acte

d is

giv

en i

n FS

C S

tand

ard

20-0

03,

3.1.

3 (i

t do

es n

ot in

clud

e sc

ient

ific

bod

ies,

as

req

uire

d in

FC

AG

gui

danc

e po

int

a).

In I

ndon

esia

, thr

ough

the

Joi

nt C

ertif

icat

ion

Prot

ocol

(JC

P) b

etw

een

FSC

and

LE

I C

Bs,

al

l pa

rtie

s ag

reed

th

at

for

natu

ral

fore

st

man

agem

ent c

erti

fica

tion

“under

the

JCP

… 65

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Cri

teri

aF

CA

G R

equi

rem

ents

M

ain

Ref

eren

ces

Fin

ding

sR

emar

ks

crit

eria

and i

ndic

ato

rs o

f L

EI

wil

l be

use

d

by

all

C

Bs

oper

ati

ng

in

Indones

ia.

This

m

eans

that

FSC

-CB

’s w

ill

use

all

LE

I C

&I,

in

clu

din

g t

ho

se e

xcee

din

g t

he

req

uir

emen

ts

of

the

FSC

, as

wel

l as

any

addit

ional

FSC

re

quir

emen

ts, not

incl

uded

in t

he

LE

I C

&I”

. T

he J

CP

was

con

clud

ed i

n D

ecem

ber

2005

an

d ne

ver

cove

red

plan

tati

on a

nd C

BFM

ce

rtif

icat

ion.

In

dev

elop

ing

the

inte

rim

sta

ndar

ds, S

GS

and

Smar

tWoo

d in

corp

orat

ed th

e L

EI

C&

I in

to th

eir

gene

ric

stan

dard

s by

add

ing

cros

s re

fere

nces

to L

EI’

s st

anda

rd a

nd in

vite

d st

akeh

olde

rs to

com

men

t. SG

S ci

rcul

ated

its

draf

t to

key

stak

ehol

ders

in

Ind

ones

ia, b

ut d

id n

ot r

ecei

ve a

ny

resp

ond.

The

inte

rim

sta

ndar

d ad

apta

tion

was

cri

ticis

ed b

y FS

C w

hen

cond

uctin

g a

rand

om a

udit

of S

GS

in P

T. D

RT

: “S

GS

Q

uali

for

shall

ensu

re t

hat

the

SG

S Q

uali

for

gen

eric

sta

ndard

is

loca

lly

adapte

d f

or

Ind

on

esia

, th

rou

gh

an

ap

pro

pri

ate

st

ake

ho

lder

co

nsu

lta

tio

n p

roce

ss”

. SG

Sw

as a

sked

to c

lose

-out

this

CA

R b

y Ju

ne

2004

. The

late

st v

ersi

on o

f th

e in

teri

m

stan

dard

(M

arch

200

5) d

oes

not o

utlin

e th

e am

ount

of

cons

ulta

tion

con

duct

ed.

Smar

tWoo

d so

far

dev

elop

ed th

ree

vers

ions

of

its

inte

rim

sta

ndar

d in

Ind

ones

ia

(Sm

artW

ood,

200

3) a

nd tr

ied

to

acco

mm

odat

e st

akeh

olde

r in

puts

, LE

I co

mm

ents

, and

rec

ent i

nter

pret

atio

ns o

n FS

C c

ertif

icat

ion,

e.g

. the

Pri

ncip

le 2

&3

stud

y do

ne in

Ind

ones

ia (

Col

ches

ter

et a

l.,

2003

). S

mar

tWoo

d st

ated

that

it “

pla

ns

to

be

pro

act

ive

an

d t

o e

ng

ag

e w

ith

LE

I a

nd

66

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Cri

teri

aF

CA

G R

equi

rem

ents

M

ain

Ref

eren

ces

Fin

ding

sR

emar

ks

oth

er s

take

ho

lder

s in

ord

er t

o e

xch

an

ge

exp

erie

nce

ba

sed

on

an

y a

sses

smen

ts

conduct

ed u

sing t

he

inte

rim

sta

ndard

”(S

mar

tWoo

d 20

03).

Sm

artW

ood

curr

entl

y re

vise

s its

3.d

raft

thro

ugh

an in

tern

al

proc

ess.

Pub

lic c

onsu

ltatio

n is

for

esee

n, b

ut

has

not s

tart

ed (

pers

onal

com

mun

icat

ion

with

Sm

artW

ood)

. T

he

stan

dard

ad

apta

tion

proc

ess

to

be

impl

emen

ted

by

Woo

dmar

k fo

r its

up

com

ing

cert

ific

atio

n as

sess

men

ts i

n PT

. Pe

rum

Per

huta

ni h

as n

ot y

et s

tart

ed.

b.R

elev

ant s

take

hold

er g

roup

s pa

rtic

ipat

ed m

eani

ngfu

lly.

Rel

evan

t sta

keho

lder

gro

ups

are

defi

ned

in g

uida

nce

poin

t a)

as:

oFo

rest

ow

ners

, inc

ludi

ng

gove

rnm

ents

, and

/or

repr

esen

tativ

es o

f th

eir

asso

ciat

ions

oPr

oduc

t man

ufac

ture

rs,

dist

ribu

tors

, ret

aile

rs

oSc

ient

ists

/sci

entif

ic b

odie

s o

Env

iron

men

tal N

GO

s,

oSo

cial

NG

Os/

orga

niza

tions

(e

.g.,

wor

ker

unio

ns a

nd

cons

umer

ass

ocia

tions

) o

Rep

rese

ntat

ives

of

indi

geno

us

peop

les

And

in g

uida

nce

poin

t b):

NG

Os

part

icip

atin

g in

sta

ndar

d se

tting

and

go

vern

ance

sho

uld

oL

egiti

mat

ely

repr

esen

t the

re

spec

tive

inte

rest

s

FSC

Sta

ndar

d 20

-003

, 4.5

P

artl

y fu

lfill

ed

FSC

re

gula

tes

that

th

e C

B

shal

l m

ake

mea

ning

ful

acco

mm

odat

ion

of s

take

hold

er

conc

erns

. H

owev

er,

som

e el

emen

ts

of

guid

ance

po

int

b)

on

NG

Os

part

icip

atin

g in

st

anda

rd s

etti

ng a

nd g

over

nanc

e ar

e no

t m

et

by

the

FSC

, e.

g.

the

need

th

at

part

icip

atin

g N

GO

s ar

e ac

coun

tabl

e to

th

eir

cons

titu

ent

or h

ave

a pr

oven

rec

ord

in t

he s

ubje

ct m

atte

r (s

ee A

nnex

4).

It

is

assu

med

tha

t FS

C C

Bs

have

by

toda

y co

nduc

ted

suff

icie

nt

mea

ning

ful

cons

ulta

tion

by w

orki

ng j

oint

ly w

ith L

EI

CB

s,

cros

s-re

fere

ncin

g th

eir

gene

ric

stan

dard

to

th

e L

EI

stan

dard

in

na

tura

l pr

oduc

tion

fore

sts,

in

viti

ng

stak

ehol

der

com

men

ts

on

num

erou

s oc

casi

ons

and

disc

ussi

ng

stan

dard

m

atte

rs

with

lo

cal

cert

ific

atio

n ex

pert

s (e

.g.

in t

he I

ndon

esia

n Pr

actit

ione

rs

Wor

kgro

up

on

Fore

st

Cer

tific

atio

n (K

lom

pok

Pra

ktis

i Ser

tifi

kasi

K

PS

), a

nd in

JC

P m

eetin

gs).

W

heth

er

the

achi

eved

ad

apta

tion

of

the

gene

ric

CB

sta

ndar

d in

Ind

ones

ia c

an b

e 67

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Cri

teri

aF

CA

G R

equi

rem

ents

M

ain

Ref

eren

ces

Fin

ding

sR

emar

ks

oE

nsur

e th

at r

epre

sent

ativ

es a

re

acco

unta

ble

to th

eir

cons

titue

ncie

s

oH

ave

a pr

oven

rec

ord

in th

e su

bjec

t mat

ter

oB

e in

tere

sted

and

aff

ecte

d by

th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

syst

em

oH

ave

a br

oad

mem

bers

hip

base

cons

ider

ed a

ppro

pria

te w

ill b

e a

mat

ter

of

furt

her

inve

stig

atio

ns o

f ea

ch s

tand

ard

on

fiel

d le

vel.

c.A

pro

cedu

re is

in p

lace

to in

volv

e st

akeh

olde

rs in

cas

e of

fai

lure

to

achi

eve

mea

ning

ful p

artic

ipat

ion

of r

elev

ant m

ajor

sta

keho

lder

gr

oups

.

FSC

St

anda

rd

20-0

03,

3.14

N

ot f

ulfi

lled

T

he F

SC p

roce

dure

des

crib

es th

e ne

cess

ary

activ

ities

for

con

tact

ing

stak

ehol

ders

. It

does

not

con

side

r ad

ditio

nal m

easu

res

in

case

s of

insu

ffic

ient

inpu

t.

d.W

ritte

n do

cum

ents

are

ava

ilabl

e on

w

hat e

ffor

ts h

ave

been

take

n to

in

clud

e st

akeh

olde

rs a

s w

ell a

s on

ho

w is

sues

rai

sed

by s

take

hold

ers

have

bee

n ad

dres

sed.

FSC

Sta

ndar

d 20

-003

, 4.4

an

d 5.

1)

FSC

Sta

ndar

d 20

-006

, 6.1

an

d 7.

3

Ful

fille

dT

he F

SC r

egul

ates

rec

ord

keep

ing

by C

Bs

for

the

deve

lopm

ent o

f ge

neri

c st

anda

rds:

a)

lis

ts o

f in

divi

dual

s/or

gani

satio

ns i

nvite

d to

com

men

t on

the

gene

ric

stan

dard

; b)

co

pies

of

al

l co

rres

pond

ence

an

d/or

co

mm

ents

rec

eive

d w

ith r

espe

ct t

o po

tent

ial

mod

ific

atio

ns o

f th

e ge

neri

c st

anda

rd;

c)

copi

es

of

all

natio

nal

stan

dard

s,

draf

t st

anda

rds

or o

ther

sou

rces

of

info

rmat

ion

take

n in

to a

ccou

nt i

n or

der

to m

odif

y th

e ge

neri

c st

anda

rd.

e.T

he d

ecis

ion-

mak

ing

proc

ess

is

stri

ving

for

con

sens

us a

mon

g re

leva

nt s

take

hold

er g

roup

s.

FSC

Sta

ndar

d 20

-003

, 4.5

N

ot f

ulfi

lled

The

cer

tific

atio

n bo

dy is

not

req

uire

d to

se

ek o

r de

velo

p a

cons

ensu

s w

ith

rega

rd to

m

odif

icat

ion

of it

s ge

neri

c st

anda

rd. T

he

cert

ific

atio

n bo

dy s

hall

only

mak

e m

eani

ngfu

l acc

omm

odat

ion

of s

take

hold

er

conc

erns

.

3.2

Ba

lan

ced

dec

isio

n-

makin

gpro

cedu

res

f.Pr

oced

ures

are

in p

lace

to a

chie

ve

bala

nced

dec

isio

n m

akin

g in

the

abse

nce

of c

onse

nsus

. The

se

proc

edur

es d

o th

e fo

llow

ing:

E

nsur

e th

at n

o m

ajor

inte

rest

FSC

Sta

ndar

d 20

-003

, 4.5

N

ot f

ulfi

lled

Not

req

uire

d by

FSC

for

inte

rim

sta

ndar

ds 68

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Cri

teri

aF

CA

G R

equi

rem

ents

M

ain

Ref

eren

ces

Fin

ding

sR

emar

ks

grou

p ca

n do

min

ate

nor

be

dom

inat

ed in

the

deci

sion

-m

akin

g pr

oces

s.

Spec

ify

a vo

ting

syst

em th

at

prev

ents

maj

or

envi

ronm

enta

l, so

cial

, or

econ

omic

inte

rest

s fr

om

bein

g ov

erru

led

Con

tain

a m

echa

nism

that

pr

even

ts d

ecis

ion

mak

ing

in

the

abse

nce

of a

ny

repr

esen

tativ

e of

one

of

the

maj

or in

tere

st g

roup

s.

PA

RT

3:

Con

form

ity

Ass

essm

ent,

Cer

tifi

cati

on, a

nd A

ccre

dita

tion

C

rite

rion

7

Tra

nsp

are

ncy

in

dec

isio

n

makin

g a

nd

pu

bli

c re

port

ing

Sub-

crit

eria

7.1

Pu

bli

c ava

ilabil

ity

of

sch

eme

requ

irem

ents

The

FC

AG

gui

de li

sts

10 s

peci

fica

tions

ba

sed

on I

SO r

ules

and

the

ISE

AL

co

de. A

dditi

onal

ly, t

he f

ollo

win

g re

quir

emen

t is

form

ulat

ed:

b.In

add

ition

to th

e ab

ove,

the

cert

ific

atio

n sc

hem

e/sy

stem

mak

es

its d

ocum

ents

pub

licly

ava

ilabl

e,

spec

ifyi

ng a

ll its

req

uire

men

ts

rela

ted

to a

ccre

dita

tion,

st

anda

rdiz

atio

n, a

nd c

ertif

icat

ion,

in

clud

ing

chai

n of

cus

tody

and

co

ntro

l of

clai

ms,

whe

re

appl

icab

le.

FSC

web

sit

e

SW a

nd S

GS

web

site

s F

ulfi

lled

All

rele

vant

doc

umen

ts a

re a

vaila

ble

on t

he

FSC

web

site

G

ener

ic a

nd i

nter

im s

tand

ards

are

ava

ilabl

e on

the

web

site

s of

the

FSC

acc

redi

ted

CB

s cu

rren

tly o

pera

ting

in I

ndon

esia

.

7.2

Pu

bli

c ava

ilabil

ity

of

cert

ific

ati

on

a

nd

acc

redit

ati

on

re

port

s

g.Pu

blic

rep

orts

on

fore

st

man

agem

ent e

valu

atio

n an

d su

rvei

llanc

e pr

ovid

e th

e ra

tiona

le

for

the

cert

ific

atio

n de

cisi

on o

r th

e m

aint

enan

ce o

f ce

rtif

icat

ion,

re

spec

tivel

y.

Mai

n as

sess

men

t: FS

C-

Std

20-0

09, 5

Su

rvei

llanc

e: F

SC-S

td 2

0-00

9, 7

.2

SW a

nd S

GS

web

site

s

Ful

fille

dPu

blic

re

port

s on

m

ain

asse

ssm

ent

and

surv

eilla

nce

are

avai

labl

e on

the

web

site

s of

th

e FS

C

accr

edite

d C

Bs

oper

atin

g in

In

done

sia.

C

omm

ent

on

impl

emen

tati

on:

Whi

le

Smar

tWoo

d m

akes

re

port

s al

so

in 69

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

Indo

nesi

an

lang

uage

av

aila

ble,

SG

S on

ly

pres

ents

in

Eng

lish,

whi

ch d

oes

not

fulf

il FS

C’s

ow

n re

quir

emen

t in

Stan

dard

20-

009,

1.

h.Pu

blic

rep

orts

on

fore

st

man

agem

ent e

valu

atio

n ju

stif

y th

e ce

rtif

icat

ion

deci

sion

by

prov

idin

g ke

y fi

ndin

gs w

ith

resp

ect t

o co

mpl

ianc

e w

ith th

e st

anda

rd.

FSC

-Std

20-

009,

4

Publ

ic r

epor

ts o

f FS

C

cert

ifie

d un

its in

In

done

sia

(SW

/SG

S w

ebsi

tes)

Ful

fille

dFu

lly r

egul

ated

and

fol

low

ed b

y C

Bs

i.Pu

blic

rep

orts

on

fore

st

man

agem

ent e

valu

atio

n an

d su

rvei

llanc

e in

clud

e th

e co

rrec

tive

actio

n re

ques

ts r

aise

d in

reg

ard

to

the

perf

orm

ance

of

the

oper

atio

n be

ing

eval

uate

d.

Mai

n as

sess

men

t: FS

C-

Std

20-

009,

4.1

.3, 5

.2

Surv

eilla

nce:

FSC

-Std

20-

009,

7.2

, f

Publ

ic r

epor

ts o

f FS

C

cert

ifie

d un

its in

In

done

sia

(SW

/SG

S w

ebsi

tes)

Ful

fille

dFu

lly r

egul

ated

and

fol

low

ed b

y C

Bs

j.Pu

blic

rep

orts

on

accr

edita

tion

prov

ide

the

ratio

nale

for

the

accr

edita

tion

deci

sion

.

AS

I-P

RO

10-

173,

5.1

A

BU

_GU

I_10

_111

, 5.7

.4

Ful

fille

dFo

llow

ing

the

accr

edita

tion

deci

sion

, th

e FS

C

prep

ares

a

publ

ic

sum

mar

y of

th

e ac

cred

itatio

n re

port

. T

he

docu

men

t is

pu

blic

ly a

vaila

ble

to a

nybo

dy o

n re

ques

t. k.

Publ

ic r

epor

ts o

n ac

cred

itatio

n pr

ovid

e th

e co

rrec

tive

actio

n re

ques

ts r

aise

d in

reg

ard

to th

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f th

e ev

alua

ted

cert

ific

atio

n bo

dy.

AS

I-P

RO

10-

173,

5.1

.1.6

e,

5.1

.73

c F

ulfi

lled

l.Pu

blic

rep

orts

are

rea

dily

ava

ilabl

e.

Cer

tific

atio

n: F

SC-S

td 2

0-00

9, 2

A

ccre

dita

tion:

ASI

-PR

O

10-1

73, 5

.1.8

SW

inte

rnal

doc

umen

ts

Ful

fille

dPu

blic

sum

mar

ies

shal

l be

pub

lishe

d on

the

is

suin

g C

B’s

web

site

no

late

r th

an 3

0 da

ys

afte

r th

e ce

rtif

icat

e ha

s be

en is

sued

. C

omm

ent

on

impl

emen

tatio

n:

SGS

has

publ

ishe

d its

lat

est

surv

eilla

nce

repo

rt o

n PT

. DR

T in

Jan

uary

200

4 on

its

hom

epag

e C

rite

rion

8

Rel

iable

an

d

ind

epen

den

t

For

requ

irem

ent 8

.1 –

8.3

see

Ann

ex 4

F

ulfi

lled

70

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

ass

essm

ent

of

fore

st

ma

na

gem

ent

per

form

an

ce

an

d c

ha

in o

f cu

stody

a.A

ccre

dita

tion

bodi

es u

nder

take

pr

oact

ive

and

cultu

rally

ap

prop

riat

e ex

tern

al c

onsu

ltatio

n as

par

t of

initi

al a

sses

smen

t and

su

rvei

llanc

e of

cer

tific

atio

n bo

dies

.

AS

I-P

RO

20-

112;

5.5

.3.3

Fo

r su

rvei

llanc

e:

ASI

-PR

O 2

0-11

3, 5

.4.7

FS

C w

ebsi

te

Ful

fille

dA

pub

lic s

umm

ary

of t

he r

esul

ts o

f FS

C’s

ra

ndom

aud

it of

SG

S in

PT

. Dia

mon

d R

aya

Tim

ber

is

avai

labl

e (“

FSC

A

ccre

dita

tion

Info

rmat

ion

Not

e”),

as

w

ell

as

a sp

ecia

l “S

take

hold

er

Res

pons

e R

epor

t R

egar

ding

th

e C

ertif

icat

ion

by S

GS

Qua

lifor

of

PT

Dia

mon

d R

aya

Tim

ber”

on

FSC

’s w

ebpa

ge.

b.C

ertif

icat

ion

bodi

es u

nder

take

pr

oact

ive

and

cultu

rally

ap

prop

riat

e ex

tern

al c

onsu

ltatio

n as

par

t of

initi

al a

sses

smen

t and

su

rvei

llanc

e of

cer

tific

ate

hold

ers.

FSC

Sta

ndar

d 20

-006

F

ulfi

lled

In I

ndon

esia

, Sm

artW

ood

and

SGS

orga

nize

d pu

blic

sta

keho

lder

mee

ting

s on

di

ffer

ent l

evel

s du

ring

ass

essm

ents

. Pr

oced

ures

impr

oved

with

exp

erie

nce

gath

ered

. L

ocal

exp

erts

wer

e al

way

s pa

rtic

ipat

ing

in

mai

n as

sess

men

t as

wel

l as

in s

urve

illan

ce

visi

ts.

Obs

erve

rs w

ere

allo

wed

to jo

in th

e as

sess

men

t if

agre

eabl

e to

the

clie

nt.

8.4

Sta

keh

old

er

con

sult

ati

on

in

th

e ce

rtif

icati

on

a

nd

acc

redit

ati

on

pro

cess

c.A

ppro

pria

te p

roce

dure

s ex

ist t

o ta

ke s

take

hold

ers’

com

men

ts in

to

acco

unt i

n th

e de

cisi

on-m

akin

g pr

oces

s fo

r ce

rtif

icat

ion

and

accr

edita

tion.

For

cert

ific

atio

n:

FSC

St

anda

rd 2

0-00

6 Fo

r ac

cred

itatio

n:

AB

U_G

UI_

10_1

11, 5

.5

Ful

fille

dSm

artW

ood

and

SGS

did

resp

ond

to

iden

tifie

d co

ncer

ns b

y st

akeh

olde

rs in

the

publ

ic s

umm

arie

s of

thei

r as

sess

men

t re

port

s.

8.5

Co

mp

lain

ts

an

d a

pp

eals

m

ech

an

ism

s

Com

plai

nts

and

appe

als

mec

hani

sms

of

accr

edita

tion,

cer

tific

atio

n, a

nd

stan

dard

-set

ting

bodi

es a

re:

a) a

cces

sibl

e to

any

inte

rest

ed p

arty

, b)

pub

licly

ava

ilabl

e, a

nd

c) f

ree

of c

ost i

mpl

icat

ions

for

the

com

plai

nant

.

FSC

N

atio

nal

Initi

ativ

es

Man

ual,

5.4

and

12.3

.1

SGS

web

si

te

(pub

lic

sum

mar

y PT

. D

RT

, su

rvei

llanc

e vi

sit 6

) A

BU

_IN

F_20

04_1

1_24

(A

ccre

dita

tion

Cos

t E

stim

ates

)

Par

tly

fulf

illed

Com

plai

nts

(for

mal

/non

-for

mal

) ar

e m

ade

avai

labl

e by

the

rele

vant

CB

fre

e of

cha

rge.

So

far

, one

for

mal

com

plai

nt h

as b

een

rais

ed in

Ind

ones

ia b

y B

UN

D, G

reen

peac

e In

tern

atio

nal,

Pro

Reg

enw

ald,

and

Rai

n Fo

rest

Act

ion

Net

wor

k, o

n 7

Apr

il 20

04

agai

nst S

GS

QU

AL

IFO

R a

nd P

T D

iam

ond

Ray

a. S

GS

follo

wed

up

the

clai

m th

roug

h a 71

Fore

st c

ertif

icat

ion

cred

ibili

ty a

sses

smen

t in

Indo

nesi

a: D

RA

FT f

or p

eer

revi

ew

surv

eilla

nce

visi

t and

pub

lishe

d its

re

spon

se.

SGS

incl

uded

loca

l aud

itors

in th

eir

surv

eilla

nce

mis

sion

s as

a r

eact

ion

to c

laim

s th

at th

e SG

S au

dito

rs a

re n

ot f

amili

ar w

ith

Indo

nesi

a’s

soci

al is

sues

(ac

cord

ing

to S

GS

cert

ific

atio

n st

aff)

. C

ompl

aint

s du

ring

acc

redi

tati

on v

oice

d by

the

app

lican

t ar

e no

t fr

ee o

f co

st

impl

icat

ions

in t

he F

SC s

chem

e.

72

Forest Certification Assessment Guide

Documents

Transcript of Forest Certification Assessment Guide