Arliss Pastorello

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: ProTerra V5.0 – Case study #25318
    Arliss Pastorello
    Participant

    1. Considering the ProTerra Certification protocol, suppliers must be grouped by geographic region. The division is not proportional. Thus:

    Amazon Biome: 148 supplier farms
    Sample = square root = 12.16
    Sample size = 13 suppliers.

    Caatinga Biome: 12 supplier farms.
    Sample = 20% = 2.4
    Sample size: 3 suppliers.

    Cerrado Biome: 731
    Sample = square root = 27.03
    Sample size: 28 suppliers.

    Total sample: 44 suppliers.

    2. Considering the 1-year certification cycle:

    Level III audit: Audit at the industrial plant in São Paulo.

    Level II audit: 1 audit at the most distant port
    + 1 audit at one of the closest ports
    (considering that there are two ports managed by the same operator and that operate under the same procedures, it would be necessary to audit only one of them in each cycle, alternating between cycles).

    Level I audit: 44 audits at supplier producers.

    Plan the logistics of trips to serve the 3 regions/biomes, within 60 days after the level III audit.

    The certification decision will only be made after all core supplier audits.

    3. Considerations:

    Check whether suppliers have implemented corrective actions, if applicable. If they have not, these must be left out of the next sample and cannot be used by the organization for certified material.

    Check whether the corrective action plan was followed for all levels I, II, and III.
    Check whether the operation remains the same as the previous cycle or whether there will be changes, such as number of main suppliers, use of logistics outlet (port), volume produced, etc.

    4. According to the Certification Protocol. A single certificate could be issued, containing the company name information, and all other information in the annual certificate format.
    The same certificate should include the names of the core suppliers that were verified as part of the certification audit.

    Arliss Pastorello
    Participant

    Inconsistency 1

    Production volume (MT): 21839.4
    Audited area production volume (MT): 24644.15
    Which of the production volumes is correct?

    Inconsistency 2

    Production analysis:
    lecithin 7393MT/0.9 = 8214.44 raw material required
    de-oiled lecithin 7400MT/0.9 = 8222.22 raw material required
    soy protein 7000MT/0.9 = 7777.78 raw material required
    Total raw material required = 24214.44MT

    Raw material available (raw soybeans):
    24644.15 – 6775.50 (sold) = 17868.65MT

    In other words, the amount of raw material available was less than that required for the reported production!

    Inconsistency 3

    Average production per hectare
    Brazil 3.32/ha
    USA 3.4/ha
    Europe 2.0/ha

    Taking the average productivity of Brazil as an example: (3.32MT/ha)
    Production: 24644.15MT
    Required area: 7422.94ha
    Reported production area: 2242.78ha

    In other words, the production area is much smaller than that required for the reported production.

    in reply to: ProTerra V5.0 Forum Day 3 – exercise on deforestation #25237
    Arliss Pastorello
    Participant

    As an auditor, I would analyze the following points to verify the organization’s compliance with Principle 4:
    4.1.1- Verify the time the organization has been operating in that location, and request satellite images that could demonstrate the vegetation cover from the cut-off date to the current date, identifying important areas such as HCVs, native forests, legal reserves, etc. Also obtain geolocation data.
    Some reports obtained by paid geolocation tools can already identify the important areas along with all the implications involved, such as legal issues, regularizations, etc.
    4.1.2- In the case of conversions that occurred after the cut-off date, request documentation of the legal compensatory measures that make the area eligible. For example, agreements with the local government/environmental agencies that establish the recovery of the areas and their compliance.
    4.2.1 to 4.2.3- Verify with the organization the actions taken to maintain areas of high biodiversity value or native wild species that may be impacted by its operations, or the compensatory measures already mentioned, and whether there is a management plan or some formalization for this. Depending on the type of cultivation/operation, the risk may be low.
    4.3.1 to 4.3.2- Verify the existence of documentation of the EISA assessment and the Management Plan and examples of its application in loco if necessary. Verify whether there was monitoring by external experts and publicity of this documentation.

    in reply to: ProTerra V5.0 – Introduction Forum #25117
    Arliss Pastorello
    Participant

    Greetings to all.

    My name is Arliss and I have over 20 years of experience with sustainability certification standards. I had already completed the Proterra Standard 4.0 training years ago and am now seeking to update to version 5.0. In order to be able to conduct GAP audits according to Proterra in our environmental consulting firm’s work.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)