1
PUBLIC SUMMARY FIRST SURVEILLANCE AUDIT
AUDIT DATE : 28TH – 31ST MAY 2013
FELDA AGRICULTURAL SERVICES SDN BHD FELDA SEGAMAT SCHEME SMALLHOLDER CERTIFICATION UNIT
Prepared by:
SIRIM QAS INTERNATIONAL SDN. BHD. Building 4, SIRIM Complex, No. 1 ,Persiaran Dato’ Menteri, Section 2, P.O. Box 7035, 40911 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia. Website : www.sirim-qas.com.my
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Description of FELDA and its settlers scheme 1.2 Location of scheme 1.3 Description of FFB production 1.4 Approximate Tonnages Certified 1.5 Area statement and palm profile of each scheme 1.6 Other Certifications Held 1.7 Organisational Information/ Contact Person
2 ASSESSMENT PROCESS
2.1 Assessment Team 2.2 Assessment Methodology, Programme, Site Visits
3 ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
3.1 Summary of Findings 3.2 Chain of Custody 3.3 Stekeholder Consultation 3.4 Date of next surveillance audit 3.5 Assessment recomendation 3.6 Formal Sign-Off of Assessment Findings
List of Tables
Table 1 Locations of each scheme Table 2 FFB production Table 3 Approximate FFB tonnage claim Table 4a – 4m Palm profile
List of Attachments
Attachment 1 Location map of Certification Unit Attachment 2 Assessment Programme Attachment 3 Verification of Previous Audit Findings Attachment 4 Detail of Nonconformity and Corrective Action Taken
SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Description of FELDA and its settlers scheme
The certification unit (CU) being assessed was FELDA Segamat Scheme Smallholders (FSSS), one of the eleven regional complexes of FELDA smallholder schemes. This assessment was the Annual Surveillance Assessment no. 1 (ASA1) conducted by SIRIM QAS International Sdn. Bhd. (SIRIM QAS International) from 28th – 31st May 2013.
It was assessed for continuing certification against the RSPO Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Palm Oil Production, including smallholder, RSPO Standard For Group Certification: 26 August 2010 and Malaysia National Interpretation Working Group (RSPO MYNIWG: November 2010). The smallholder schemes are land owned by settlers in accordance with the Group Settlement Act (GSA) 1960. These eleven regional complex smallholder schemes throughout Malaysia are managed by the Federal Land Development Authority, in short FELDA, a government of Malaysia owned agency.
(Kindly note, the term smallholders and settlers are used interchangeably and they mean the same)
Due to organizational structural change, the responsibility to oversee that FSSS continued to be certified against RSPO P&C had been transferred to FELDA Global Ventures Plantations Malaysia Sdn Bhd, FGVP(M), Plantation Sustainability and Quality Management (PSQM) Unit from FELDA Agricultural Services Sdn Bhd. This was in alignment with changes from FELDA Holdings to FELDA Global Ventures Holdings due to it being listed on the Bursa Malaysia Securities Berhad. Another noteworthy change was the exclusion of FELDA Chempelak Timur Plantation from FSSS CU as it had been officially transferred and absorbed to FGVP(M) Maokil 6 effective 1st January 2013 resulting in FSSS CU having 14 land schemes under its jurisdiction.
Notification letter to changes had been sent to SIRIM QAS International Sdn Bhd. on 12th June 2013.
As a result of this alignment, there was a reduction of 957 ha. of planted oil palm hectarage to 9427 ha. Other than that there was no change in terms of land ownership, acreage own and operations of estate. Those land cultivated with oil palm are 2,777 ha. in Melaka and 6,650 ha. in Johor. The number of scheme participants is 1,666 covering a total hectarage of 1,496.5. In addition, Felda Paloh has been taken out from the Group Certification as the hectarage has exceeded the category of smallholder.
There was no issue reported during the assessment on acquisitions/disposals, emergence/re-emergence of land disputes and/or labour conflicts. Essentially, they remained the same. The scope of certification also remained the same, that is, Production of Oil Palm Fresh Fruit Bunches.
Since FSSS CU is a fully developed land scheme, Principle 7 of the RSPO Principles & Criteria is therefore not applicable.
1.2 Location of Scheme
This CU sent its produce to private Palm Oil Mills that are not RSPO Certified.
The location map of FSSS CU (now fourteen land schemes) is shown in Attachment while their coordinates are detailed in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Location of Land Schemes
Scheme District, State *Latitude *Longitude
FELDA Kemelah Segamat, Johor 2 31’ 26” N 102 57’ 58” E FELDA Tenang Labis, Johor 2 26’ 42” N 103 02’ 26” E FELDA Chemplak Barat Labis, Johor 2 23’ 29” N 102 56’ 00” E FELDA Chemplak Labis, Johor 2 22’ 45” N 102 55’ 48” E FELDA Medoi Segamat, Johor 2 31’ 40” N 102 52’ 55” E FELDA Pemanis 1 Segamat, Johor 2 36’ 13” N 102 53’ 13” E FELDA Pemanis 2 Segamat, Johor 2 35’ 33” N 102 54’ 13” E FELDA Sri Ledang Ledang, Johor 2 23’ 26” N 102 45’ 48” E FELDA Bukit Serampang Ledang, Johor 2 20’ 16” N 102 47’ 25” E FELDA Lenga Muar, Johor 2 14’ 28” N 102 51’ 03” E FELDA Tun Ghaffar Kemendore Jasin, Melaka 2 21’ 4” N 102 24’ 23” E FELDA Tun Ghaffar Macap / Menggong Alor Gajah, Melaka 2 24’ 43” N 102 18’ 06” E FELDA Tun Ghafar Bukit Senggeh Jasin, Melaka 2 23’ 26” N 102 27’ 51” E
* Coordinate readings were taken at the respective scheme administrative office
1.3 Description of FFB Production
All schemes had been producing FFBs and sold their produce to private mills. FELDA had entered into an agreement with the private mills to ensure fair FFB pricing for the settlers. The average annual FFB contribution from each scheme for year 2011 and 2012 and projected for 2013 are detailed in Table 2.
Table 2: Actual Annual Production (Jan 1st 2011 – 31st December 2012), Forecasted FFB Production (Jan 1st 2013 – 31st Dec 2013) and FFB Claim for RSPO Certification (1st Jan – 31st Dec 2013) by Each Scheme
FFB Claim for RSPO Actual FFB Production, in tonnes Certification GCS Scheme 1 Jan 2011 1 Jan 2012 1 Jan 2013 member 1 Jan 2012 – 31 – 31 Dec % % – 31 Dec – 31 Dec Dec 2012 2011 2012 2013 FELDA Kemelah 82 6196.76 132.49% 9,649.93 124.80% 9,649.93 0 FELDA Tenang 95 4255.39 88% 9,652.16 90.42% 9,652.16 9,998.50 FELDA 99 7652.43 82.16% 8,014.89 89.58% 8,014.89 8,259.90 Chemplak Barat FELDA 232 6376 80% 6,764.23 78% 232 232 Chemplak FELDA Medoi 19 2021.52 110% 1,831.38 99.70% 1,831.38 1,752.09 FELDA Pemanis 22 2526.7 83.06% 1881.31 51.03% 1180.6 585.34 1 FELDA Pemanis LOT 506.74 50% 169.75 18% 169.75 59.87 2 FELDA FELDA Sri 105 5417.34 75% 6,662.39 93% 6,662.39 7,014.90 Ledang FELDA Bukit 157 3689.66 60.79% 2,769.27 49.83% 2,769.27 2,387.45 Serampang FELDA Lenga 214 974.15 22.52% 897.1 17.40% 897.1 673.85 FELDA Tun Ghaffar 103 8594.9 100% 10,065.68 90% 10,065.68 14,050.70 Kemendore FELDA Tun Ghaffar Macap / 217 10,168.75 98% 9,029.96 101% 9,029.96 8,641.64 Menggong
FELDA Tun Ghafar Bukit 321 27,655.00 103% 35,969.34 130% 0 0 Senggeh Total 1,666 86,035.34 103,357.39 60,155.11 53,656.24
1.4 Approximate Tonnage Certified
The approximate tonnage of FFB produced per year, as well as the tonnage claimed for certification, are as shown in Table 2 above and Table 3 below respectively:
Table 3: Approximate FFB tonnage Claimed
FFB Tonnage Claimed for Certification (MT) Certification Unit 2012 2013 FELDA Segamat Scheme Smallholders 60,155.11 53,656.24
1.5 Area Statement and Palm Profile of Each Scheme
Table 4a to 4m show particulars of year of scheme establishment, their respective total land area and area planted with oil palm and Planting Cycle of palm (in each scheme).
Table 4a Name of Land Scheme : FELDA Tenang (GCS Member only)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Planted nd no. planted Total area Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area Generation) nd 01 1986 26.50 26.50 26.50 - 100 2 02 1984 247.42 247.42 247.42 - 100 2nd 03 1999 513.97 16.18 16.18 - 100 2nd 04 2000 398.15 398.15 398.15 - 100 2nd Total 1,186.04 688.25 688.25 - 100 -
Table 4b: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA Kemelah (GCS Member only)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) 04 2003 622.08 533.62 533.62 - 85.78 - 1st Total 533.62 - 85.78 - -
Table 4c: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA Chempelak Barat (GCS Member only)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) st 01 2002 210.16 210.26 210.26 - 100 - 1 113Z* 2002 69.89 69.89 69.89 - 100 - 1st 112W* 2002 38.43 38.43 38.43 - 100 - 1st 111V* 2006 3.83 3.83 3.83 - 100 - 1st 118Z* 2002 7.82 7.82 7.82 - 100 - 1st 113W* 2002 50.39 50.39 50.39 - 100 - 1st 113Y* 2005 3.75 3.75 3.75 - 100 - 1st Total 384.37 384.37 384.37 100 - * the alphabet V, W, Y and Z denotes “supplying of palms” within the same plot that were later decided by settlers who were not able to work on their farm due to resource constraints and thus surrender their land and let FLEDA to manage on their behalf.
Table 4d: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA Chempelak (GCS Member only)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) 01 1987 299.64 160 299.64 - 100 - 2nd 002 1988 335.41 147.02 335.41 - 100 - 2nd 003 1997 22.71 7.84 22.71 - 100 - 2nd 004 1997 159.03 119.48 159.03 - 100 - 2nd Total 794.08 434.34 794.08 - 100 -- -
Table 4e: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA Lenga (GCS Member only)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) 01 1986 427.88 427.88 427.88 - 100 - 2nd 02 1987 257.52 257.52 257.52 - 100 - 2nd 99f 1986 8.00 8.00 8.00 - 100 - 2nd 03 2003 166.55 166.55 166.55 - 100 - 2nd Total 859.95 859.95 859.95 - 100 - -
Table 4f: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA Bukit Serampang
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) 001 12/86 288.33 288.33 288.33 - 100 - 2nd 002 12/91 22.70 22.70 22.70 - 100 - 2nd 003 12/91 103.18 103.18 103.18 - 100 - 2nd 005 01/03 116.31 116.31 116.31 - 100 - 2nd Total 530.52 530.52 530.52 - 100 - -
Table 4g: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA Sri Ledang (GCS Member only)
Year Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting cycle (1st / Plot no. plante Total Planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2nd d area area Generation) 9054001 2000 37.47 31.93 31.93 - 100 % - 2nd 9054002 2000 7.77 5.30 5.30 - 100 % - 2nd 9054003 1994 138.26 127.12 127.12 - 100 % - 2nd 9054004 2000 270.36 259.00 259.00 - 100 % - 2nd 9054005 2000 3.19 3.20 3.20 - 100 % - 2nd 4054001 2008 22.82 18.00 - 18.00 - 100 % 2nd 4054002 2008 18.51 13.00 - 13.00 - 100 % 2nd
4054003 2008 1.82 1.50 - 1.50 - 100 % 2nd 4054005 2008 169.20 118.00 - 118.00 - 100 % 2nd Total 669.40 577.05 426.55 150.50 - - -
Table 4h: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA Pemanis 1 (GCS Member only)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2nd area area Generation) 002 1985 100.78 100.78 - 100.78 - 100 1st 082 1985 162.00 150.00 - 162.00 - 100 1st Total 262.78 250.78 - 250.78 - 100 - *replanting planned in 2013
Table 4i: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA TG Kemendore (GCS Member only)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) 001 85 110.20 110.20 110.20 - 100 - 2nd 002 86 186.00 186.00 186.00 - 100 - 2nd 003 87 9.27 9.27 9.27 - 100 - 2nd Total 305.47 305.47 305.47 - 100 - -
Table 4j: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA TG Macap / Menggong (GCS Member only)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) 001 85/86 243.79 243.79 243.79 - 100 - 2nd 82 85/86 28.41 28.41 28.41 - 100 - 2nd 001 85/86 87.39 87.39 87.39 - 100 - 2nd 002 85/86 106.50 106.50 106.50 - 100 - 2nd 83 85/86 62.63 62.63 62.63 - 100 - 2nd
Total 528.72 528.72 528.72 - 100 - -
Table 4 k: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA TG Bukit Senggeh (GCS Member only)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) 001 000 ------001 2000 1,253.49 1,253.49 1,253.49 - 100 - 2nd Total - - 1,253.49 - 100 - -
Table 4l: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA Medoi
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) 082 1962 189.00 189.00 189.00 - 100.00 - 1st Total 189.00 189.00 189.00 - 100.00 - -
*replanting planned in 2014
Table 4m: Name of Land Scheme: FELDA Pemanis 2 (Lot FELDA)
Oil Palm Area (ha) Oil Palm Area (%) Planting Plot Year cycle (1st / Total Planted nd no. planted Mature Immature Mature Immature 2 area area Generation) 83/84 1979 74.00 74.00 63.00 - 100.00 - 1st Total 74.00 74.00 63.00 - 100.00 -
*replanting planned in 2013
1.6 Other Certifications Held
The FSSS CU does not hold any other form of third-party certification to internationally recognized management systems.
1.7 Organisational Information/Contact Person
FELDA has a regional office in Segamat, Johor, which is responsible for overseeing the FSSS CU and other plantation management units in Johor. The correspondence address and contact person are as detailed below:
Address: Name : Muhamad Rizal Bin Abdul Rahim Designation : General Manager Address : Km 5, Jalan Genuang, 85000 Segamat, Johor Darul Takzim, Malaysia. Telephone : +07-943 2410 / 013-380 0112 Fax : +07-943 4182 e-mail : [email protected]
2 ASSESSMENT PROCESS
2.1 Assessment Team
Member of the Role/area of RSPO Qualifications Assessment Team requirements CIMAH Competent Person with Malaysian Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) since 1997. Occupational Safety and Health Trainer at INSTEP Petronas Successfully completed RSPO Lead Assessor Course – 2008. Lead Assessor / Successfully completed Lead Assessor Occupational Health Course for OHSAS 18001- 2000. Mahzan Munap and Safety, Successfully completed IRCA accredited Environment & Lead Assessor training for ISO 9001- related legal issues 2006 Successfully completed RABQSA accredited Lead Assessor training for ISO 14001- 2008 MBA, Ohio University. B.Sc. Petroleum Engineering, University of Missouri, USA.
Overall Team Leader working experience related to forest Assessor / ecology management, inventory, surveying, Khairul Najwan and environmental HCVF and logging operation. Ahmad Jahari issues/ HCV / Successfully completed accredited Lead Forestry Assessor training for ISO 14001: 2004,
ISO 9001:2008 and OHS 18001:2000 Successfully completed RSPO Lead Assessor Course – 2011. B. Sc of Forestry (Forest Management) Working experience in Oil Palm Plantation management Attended a training on RSPO P&C and certification requirements in November Assessor / Good 2009 and February 2011 Agricultural Practices Successfully completed IEMA accredited Valence Shem (GAP) and Lead Assessor training for ISO 14001: 2004 environmental issues B.Tech. (Hons) Industrial Technology Diploma In Science
2.2 Assessment Methodology (Program, Site Visits)
The ASA1 was conducted on 28th – 31st May 2013 by a 3-member assessment team led by Lead Assessor with many years of oil palm industry experience. Other team members include local experts knowledgeable in oil palm best management practices, environmental, HCV and social aspects.
The objectives of this surveillance audit were to (a) determine the continued compliance of FSSS CU against the requirements of the RSPO Including Smallholder RSPO Standard for Group Certification: 26 August 2010 and RSPO MYNI: November 2010, (b) verify the effectiveness of the corrective actions being implemented by FSSS CU to address the NCRs raised during the previous Stage 2 and (c) make appropriate recommendation on the continued certification of FSSS CU based on the findings of this surveillance audit.
The planning of this surveillance audit was guided by the RSPO Standard for Group Certification Final Approved July 2010 as each scheme has its own peculiar issues. The RSPO Standard for Group Certification categorized the sample size to be assessed as High Risk (0.8 √2372) x 1.4 = 55, as the assessed CU was geographically separated, has diverse sizes of plantation and bordering forest reserve. Some of the plantations are in the state of Melaka and the rest in the state of Johor with varied estate sizes from 74 ha. to 1583 ha.
The FELDA Settlers Scheme were managed by FELDA Holdings but assisted on operational support by FELDA Technoplant, an outsource company providing services to Group Settlement smallholders from seedlings to harvesting and plantation upkeep.
Also, there was a slight change to the Assessment Programme where initially FGVP(M) Chempelak Timur being run in an estate like manner was supposed to be audited. The Assessment Team was informed during the Opening Meeting that the Chempelak Timur Plantation had been removed from FSSS CU.
The on-site assessment consisted of a systematic examination of documentation and management practices relating to the entire range of operations carried out in the settlers scheme and plantation being verified. This was conducted by visiting the field including HCV habitats, labour lines, chemical and waste storage areas and other workplaces. Random interviews were held with management, employees, contractors and other relevant stakeholders. Visits were also made to local communities to verify compliance to social requirements of the RSPO P&C. Related records and other documentation were also inspected.
The details on the surveillance assessment programme are as in Attachment .
3 ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
3.1 Summary of Findings
During the previous Stage 2 and Supplementary Assessment the assessment team had raised four (4) Minor Non Conformity Reports (NCRs) against the requirements of the RSPO Standard for Group Certification and RSPO MYNI which the CU should make good to comply. The details of the NCR, the corrective actions taken by FSSS CU to address them and the remarks by the Assessment Team Leader on the verifications are as in Attachment 3. All NCRs had been satisfactorily closed.
The assessment findings were highlighted and discussed during the on-site assessment. This ASA1 had resulted in the issuance of two (2) major NCRs. The details on the NCR (including corrective actions taken) as shown in Attachment 4.
The findings of the ASA1 were reported based on the format stipulated in the RSPO Standard for Group Certification and RPSO MYNI are discussed below. The report layout was that all the elements of the RSPO Standard for Group Certification was discussed first under Section A followed by RSPO:MYNI under Section B. The detailed findings of this surveillance assessment on FSSS CU’s compliance to the requirements of the RSPO MY-NI are as follows:
Section A - RSPO Standard for Group Certification
1. Group Requirements
1.1. Group Elements 1.1.1 The group shall be managed by a central administration (i.e. The Group Manager), which is responsible for ensuring the group’s compliance with the applicable standards and manages the Group Management Documentation.
1.1.2 The group shall consist of group members who have formally joined the group.
1.1.3 The Group Management Documentation shall include the documenting and monitoring of all the individual group members for membership status, production process, and other relevant aspects to ensure compliance with the relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production and the RSPO Group Certification Requirements.
1.1.4 The Group Manager shall specify in the Group Management Documentation the maximum number of members that can be supported by the management system and the human resource and technical capacities of the Group Manager.
Findings:
FSSS CU continued meeting this criterion. As reported during the Stage 2 Assessment, the General Manager, Segamat Region was still responsible for managing the 13 schemes (14 in previous year) retaining the RSPO certification. He via the Scheme and Plantation Managers at the 13 schemes maintained the use of FELDA Group Management Documentation – Manual RSPO (Group Certification System - GCS), FELDA Operations Manual for Sustainable Palm Oil Production and Safety, Health and Environmental Manual.
FSSS currently consist of 2,914 settlers of whom 1,979 are with FELDA. The rest (935) tend their farm on their own. From the 1,979 settlers who are with (aligned) FELDA, 1,666 agreed to join as members of the GCS. The individual farmer had signed an agreement with the Group Manger via document ML-1B- Surat Perjanjian Peneroka Menyertai GCS as per the requirements of Manual Lestari (Group Certification Management System) Issue 1, January 2012. It included the elements of the Group Certification Standard.
Information on Group members (membership status, land titles, palms planted, age of palm, FFB sold and payment made, and other relevant aspects to ensure compliance to RSPO Group Certification and RSPO:MYNI requirements) were kept in the central database under the SAP software “Sistem Komputer Bersepadu” and can only be viewed/printed by assigned individuals with permitted level of access.
1.2 Compliance with standards
1.2.1 All group members that are formal members of the group seeking RSPO certification under group certification shall comply with the required relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production.
1.2.2 Group managers may run a programme to support prospective members in achieving compliance with RSPO requirements. Where such a programme is in place, there must be robust mechanisms in place to ensure that neither the prospective members nor the Group Manager makes any claim suggesting they are RSPO certified. Once the prospective member is in compliance with the RSPO standard they shall be formally included as a member of the certified group. Until RSPO compliance is achieved, the FFB production from prospective member sites will not count towards the total certified production of the group.
1.2.3 Formal members of the Group shall sign an agreement with the Group Manager committing to achieving compliance with the relevant RSPO standard for sustainable oil palm production. The Group Manager and each member shall keep copies of the agreement.
1.2.4 All the individual group members shall adhere to and show evidence that the internal requirements, as set out in the systems, programmes or policies adopted by the Group Manager are met.
1.2.5 The group manager shall comply with the requirements of the RSPO Standard for Group Certification.
1.2.6 There shall be evidence to show that formal group members, individually and collectively, continually strive to maintain their compliance with the relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production.
Findings:
Programs to induct new members were on-going. The subsequent RSPO Awareness Training to the new members and in particular the emphasis to compliance with standards had been conducted at the schemes assessed. There was also a robust mechanism in place to enlighten prospective members that they are not RSPO certified until a formal Evaluation/Internal Audit had been jointly conducted by the Agricultural Officer and the Sustainability Department Officer/Scheme Manager and subsequently approved by the Group Manager.
Contract/agreement between FELDA and settlers (participants) was available via the Surat Perjanjian Peneroka Menyertai GCS (Group Certification Scheme). Agreement is renewed once a year. The latest agreement at Chempelak Barat dated 23/5/2013 and valid for 1 year for 40 participants was presented during the assessment. FELDA Chempelak Barat has 99 setters under FELDA Technoplant but only 40 were committed to be in the Group Certification System. The remaining were not certified producers. The main terms and conditions stipulated in the agreement are: i) Participants to abide to all agriculture activities according to FELDA’s procedure. ii) To adhere at all times to all rules set by FELDA and RSPO Committee in accordance with the Group Certification Requirements. iii) To carry out corrective actions to all non-compliance issued arising from the internal audit.
Randomly selected members were interviewed. Good Agricultural Practices for those who tend their own farm were verified in field. The members understood the requirements of these standards and abide by the Group Management Documentation. They also were aware that if any non-conformity was spotted, they shall make good within three months from the issuance of the non-conformity. Otherwise, they can be subject to expulsion from being a member. It was evident that those members assessed continually strive to comply with the requirements of RSPO.
1.3. Group Manager The Group Manager of the Group shall demonstrate its capacity for managing group certification and performance assessment against the RSPO Standard for Group Certification.
1.3.1 The Group Manager shall be either a legal entity or an individual acting as a legal entity.
1.3.2 If the Group Manager is not an individual, there shall be a description of the general structure of the Group Manager detailing the positions and responsibilities of all personnel clearly identified.
1.3.3 The Group Manager and/or their personnel shall be able to communicate in a language understood by all group members (in both spoken and written form).
1.3.4 The Group Manager and/or their personnel shall be able to demonstrate knowledge of the requirements of oil palm production, the RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production, the RSPO Standard for Group Certification, and internal group procedures and policies.
1.3.5 The Group Manager and/or their personnel shall not have any conflict of interest likely to affect their capacity to meet the requirements for Group Managers and shall be able to provide evidence of this.
1.3.6 The Group Manager shall demonstrate sufficient resources – i.e. human, financial, physical and other relevant resources – to enable effective and impartial technical and administrative management of Group Certification.
1.3.7 The Group Manager shall have the capacity to control, monitor and evaluate all members pertaining to their compliance to the RSPO requirements including communicating with them and visiting them at the required frequencies.
1.3.8 The Group Manager shall have a documented system which sets out its mission and objectives, policies and procedures for operational management and decision making in order to demonstrate ability to manage the group in a systematic and effective manner.
1.3.9 There shall be clear policies and procedures for communication between the Group Manager and group members.
1.3.10 The group manager shall ensure all formal and prospective members understand the relevant RSPO Standards. This may include the development of a strategic plan on how group certification shall be achieved for prospective members, and the identification, definition and/or provision of training needs and/or communication strategies relevant to the implementation of the applicable RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production and the RSPO Standard for Group Certification. This can be provided directly by the Group Manager, an externally run training course or other means of provision of training or expertise.
1.3.11 The Group Manager shall ensure that if any group marketing system is developed and managed for the group,
this is mutually fair and transparent to enable the securing of raw materials or trading of the group members‟ collective produce, or setting-up of an equivalent arrangement. The group marketing system shall include; rules for purchasing and selling within the group, rules for claims of RSPO certified, dissemination of markets, and price information and related logistics (i.e. transportation to mill etc).
1.3.12 The Group Manager shall ensure that the total of all sales and claims of RSPO certified FFB production from group members does not exceed the total certified FFB production of the group in its entirety.
Findings:
FSSS CU maintained the same organization structure and practice as reported in the Main Assessment Report. The Group Manager had dedicated relevant resources to enable effective and impartial technical and administrative management of the FSSS Group Certification. He via the Agricultural Officer and the Scheme Manager had shown the capacity to control, monitor and evaluate all members pertaining to their compliance to the RSPO requirements. It included communication and visiting them at the required frequencies. It had been verified through interviews with Scheme Manager and Group Members that the Agricultural Officer had been sighted on the ground frequently making visits, giving advice and training.
Interviews with some group members revealed that to their knowledge, the Group Manager and/or their personnel did not have any conflict of interest in managing their schemes.
Manual, policies and procedures were made available to members to meet RSPO:MYNI and RSPO Group Standard Certification requirements. It included Safety and Health plan (C4.7), Plans and impact assessments relating to environmental and social impacts (C 5.1, 6.1), Pollution prevention plans (C 5.6), Details of complaints and grievances (C 6.3), Negotiation procedures (C 6.4), Continuous improvement plan (C 8.1)
The Group Manager maintained records of total production, records of sales of RSPO certified FFB and other RSPO pertinent data of each member in the database parked in the centralized FELDA headquarters SAP software “Sistem Komputer Bersepadu” namely in Modul Peneroka, Modul Pertanian and Modul ZRSTM 210. Sales of FFB that had not passed through the Group Manager had not been claimed as RSPO certified.
FSSS did not have any group marketing system for its FFB. Where FELDA Palm Oil Mill (POM) exists near to the smallholder’s scheme, their FFB were sold within the group to the FELDA owned mill. Examples were FELDA Chempelak and Chempelak Barat that continued to sell their produce to FELDA Palm Industries Sdn Bhd (FPISB) Maokil POM while FELDA Pemanis 1 and 2 sold their FFB to FPISB Selancar 2A POM.
Otherwise, as in the case of the remaining nine settlers’ scheme, members of the GCS were permitted to sell their FFB to external FELDA registered and approved private mills. They are Golden Horse, Nam Bee and KOPMAJU. The content of the contract agreement between FELDA (on behalf of the scheme participants) and the mill was mutually fair and transparent. Tender document and contract administration relating to sales and purchase of FFB, basis and formula for determining the purchased price less FFB processing fee and transportation cost to mill had been managed by the Administration Department, FELDA Headquarters, Kuala Lumpur. There was no change to the on-going rules and the terms of the agreement were abided by the FELDA group members and the external mill collection center (for purchasing FFB on behalf of external mill). It was strictly based on FFB grading, OER for Crude Palm Oil and Crude Palm Kernel Oil as mandated by MPOB. Scheme Managers were jointly involved with the settlers in the negotiation with the private mill for a fair and transparent mechanism to determine the FFB pricing.
2. Group Management Documentation Requirements The Group Manager assesses compliance of the plantation practices and manages group members to ensure compliance with the RSPO Standard for Group Certification and the relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production. The Group Manager shall have a documented internal system that contains the elements necessary for assessing the performance of group members and their plantations.
Findings:
The 8-page document entitled “Pemantauan Pematuhan P&C RSPO Dalam Group Certification” continued to be used to assess the performance of group member’s plantation practices. . It contained 105 elements. They were randomly sampled and found effective.
2.1. Group Management Documentation structure and content The Group Manager shall have its operational structure, policies and procedures, and basic information on individual group members documented. The system verifies whether operations within the group comply with the RSPO Standard for Group Certification Requirement and the relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production.
2.1.1 The Group Manager shall have an operating structure that defines group management documentation (i.e. internal control systems), decision-making and responsibilities within the group.
2.1.2 All group records shall be retained for at least 5 years.
2.1.3 The Group Manager shall have documented membership requirements for the participation of individual members in the group. This shall include: 2.1.3.1 Requirements and procedures for joining the group. 2.1.3.2 Requirements and procedures for leaving the group. 2.1.3.3 Procedures for incorporating a remedial system for member non-compliance. 2.1.3.4 Procedures for expulsion from the group. 2.1.4 There shall be a group-level operation manual that includes the following:
2.1.4.1 Internal assessment protocols. 2.1.4.2 Policies and procedures for accepting / removing members. 2.1.4.3 Policies and procedures for applying corrective action requests (CARs) to group members for non- compliance with the relevant RSPO standards. 2.1.4.4 Procedures for communicating corrective action requests (CARs). 2.1.4.5 Clear description of the process to fulfill any correction action requests (CARs) issued internally by the Group Manager or by the certification body including timelines and the implications if any of the CARs are not complied with. 2.1.4.6 Policies and procedures for handling complaints, appeals, corrective action requests (CARs), and group member performance assessment. 2.1.4.7 Policies and procedures for group monitoring, including carrying out and updating group risk assessment and annual surveillance of group members.
2.1.5 The Group Manager shall develop and maintain a database of group members included within the Group Scheme. This includes the information below as a minimum for each member: 2.1.5.1 A copy of each group member‟s application form to the group with relevant information for each member that is updated regularly, i.e. name of producer, address, contact details, type of land ownership, size of plantation area, location, etc. 2.1.5.2 Total annual production and production per unit area (hectare) for previous years, from at least one year prior to joining the group, and the estimated production for the current year. 2.1.5.3 Results from the last internal and external assessments showing performance levels to the relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production, including dates these were carried out, any plans for implemented improvement and corrective action requests (CARs) raised and closed out for each group member. 2.1.5.4 The date of group membership acceptance and date of departure or expulsion from the group if relevant. 2.1.5.5 Maps of the plantation area for each group member. This can be in the form of individual maps
or a collective map covering all group members.
2.1.6 A summary of all the data on land use (in hectares) shall be kept and regularly updated covering the entire group that includes at least the following: 2.1.6.1 Total overall land area for each group member. 2.1.6.2 Total oil palm planted area for each group member. 2.1.6.3 Total RSPO certified production area for each group member. 2.1.6.4 Other crop production areas (i.e. non oil palm) for each group member if any. 2.1.6.5 Total undeveloped area or areas set aside for any particular reason (i.e. conservation, customary, identified HCV etc) for each group member, if any. 2.1.6.6 Total area with infrastructure for each group member, if any.
2.2. Internal assessment system 2.2.1 Prospective members intending to join the group to be included under group certification shall only be allowed to become formal members of the group after an initial compliance assessment for entry by the Group Manager. This initial assessment will determine that all group members who formally join the group with the intention of being included under group certification, are able fulfill the group membership requirements and are able to meet the relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production.
2.2.2 The Group Manager shall implement a regular and ongoing internal assessment programme for all current group members that includes at least the following: 2.2.2.1 Internal assessments shall be documented and these documents maintained for 5 years. 2.2.2.2 Regular (at least annual) internal assessment visits to a sample of group members to confirm continued compliance with all the requirements of the relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production and RSPO Standard for Group Certification. All members shall be monitored at least once during the period of validity of the group certificate (normally 5 years). 2.2.2.3 The Group Manager shall identify the relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production that is appropriate for each group member. It is the performance against this standard that is assessed at each internal assessment. 2.2.2.4 The sample size for internal assessments shall be based on a risk assessment of the group members, where a higher risk requires a higher sample size. 2.2.2.5 The sample size shall be determined by the formula (0.8√y) x (z), where z is the multiplier defined by the risk assessment. Low risk = multiplier of 1, medium risk = multiplier of 1.2, high risk = multiplier of 1.4 (see Table 1). 2.2.2.6 The group shall use a minimum sample to be visited annually for internal assessment of (0.8√y), where y is the number of group members, and where selection of group members is based on random selection techniques. 2.2.2.7 The Group Manager shall ensure that different group members are visited in each annual internal assessment to those that have been selected for assessment by the certification body, unless there are circumstances which require a revisit of the same members (e.g. pending corrective action requests (CARs), complaints received from stakeholders, risk factors etc). 2.2.2.8 Additional internal assessments shall be scheduled when potential problems arise or when the Group Manager receives information from stakeholders about alleged non-conformities of the relevant RSPO Standard for Sustainable Oil Palm Production by group members.
2.2.3 Non-conformities identified by the Group Manager shall be resolved internally according to a documented system of applying corrective action requests (CARs). See 2.1.4.3.
Findings:
The Internal Control System document continued to be used by FSSS CU Group Manager in ensuring conformance to RSPO Standard for Group Certification. The Internal Assessment Protocols used were appropriate and two years records of the internal audit conducted had been maintained.
A central database of group members in Modul Peneroka, Modul Tanah (including map and land title) and Modul Pertanian on information pertaining to the requirements of the RSPO Standard for Group Certification continued to be held in SAP “Sistem Komputer Bersepadu” at FELDA Head Office.
3. Chain of Custody The Group Manager shall have a system in place to enable the trading of RSPO certified Fresh Fruit Bunches (FFB) produced from the group.
3.1 The group manager shall document and implement a system for the tracking and tracing of FFB produced by the group members, and intended to be sold as RSPO certified FFB.
3.2 There shall be a collective group procedure for the sale of all certified FFB originating from the plantations of group members that is agreed by the group members and the Group Manager and is designed to ensure that non-certified FFB are not sold as RSPO certified FFB. This shall be contained in any group marketing system that is developed for the group, and shall follow one of the supply chain models as per the RSPO Supply Chain Certification Systemsii,i.e. Identity Preserved, Segregation or Mass Balance.
3.3 The group manager shall ensure that all invoices for sales of RSPO certified FFB originating from the group are issued with the required information as per the adopted supply chain model requirements within Annex 6 of the RSPO Supply Chain Certification Systems document – November 2009.
3.4 The physical transporting of RSPO certified FFB originating from the plantations of group members shall be done either directly by the group (i.e. through own transportation), or via sub-contracted intermediaries. For intermediaries the requirements as outlined in 3.7 shall also apply.
3.5 All sales of FFB originating from the plantations of group members shall be documented. This shall include: 3.5.1 Invoices and receipts (purchase and sale). 3.5.2 Information on transport. 3.5.3 The relevant group members‟ group identification number. 3.5.4 Description of the product sold (i.e. RSPO certified or not), product volume and destination.
3.6 The Group Manager shall maintain copies of all relevant documentation and records of group product transactions for a period of 5 years.
3.7 If an intermediary exists in the supply chain from the group to the mill that wants to be included within the group certification control rather than obtain their own supply chain certification, the intermediary shall be identified by the Group Manager. The Group Manager shall have a contract with the intermediary to fulfill the RSPO Standard for Group Certification and agree to be assessed on an annual basis by the Group Manager as well as in certification assessments. It is the responsibility of the Group Manager to ensure that the intermediary shall comply with the following conditions: 3.7.1 There shall be a contract between the intermediary and the Group Manager. 3.7.2 The intermediary shall have complete purchasing and selling records. 3.7.3 The intermediary shall have RSPO supply chain systems in place to separate certified from non- certified materials through any of the RSPO supply chain options (i.e. Identity Preserved, Segregation or Mass Balance).
Findings:
The assessment team had verified that FSSS CU had maintained the same practice as reported in year 2011, that is:
Tracing of FFB produced by the group members in the FFB production report. The detail of production report remained unchanged. Sales of certified FFB as stipulated in the agreed procedure where group member signed an agreement with FELDA for managing the sales of their FFB using the mass balance model of RSPO Supply Chain Certification System. Sales documentation which included invoices and receipt, information on transport, group identification number, description of the product sold, product volume and destination. Invoice including details as stipulated in the RSPO Supply Chain Certification Systems document.
All relevant documentation and records of group product transactions were sighted adequately maintained. The records of delivery notes, receipt notes and production report were presented to the Assessor during the assessment.
Despite the availability of FSSS Supply Chain procedure, it was noted that improvement in FFB transaction could be made as not all settlers have agreed to participate to implement the RSPO Group Certification System, that is, the absence of a methodology to handle FFB produced from group members and non-group members. Apart from that, the procedure was found to be covering more on CPO and PK production at mill.
Section B – RSPO MYNI:2008 Standard
PRINCIPLE 1: COMMITMENT TO TRANSPARENCY
Criterion 1.1 Oil palm growers and millers provide adequate information to other stakeholders on environmental, social and legal issues relevant to RSPO Criteria, in appropriate languages and forms to allow for effective participation in decision making
Findings:
FELDA offices at schemes visited maintained a list of stakeholders that are relevant to its site’s operation. The same list was made transparently available to the audit team and was used in the stakeholder consultation process. There exists a mechanism to ensure that documents were publicly available, as stipulated in the individual management plan.
Assessment of the implementation of the procedure showed that records of communication were maintained. Among the records sighted were correspondences with the stakeholders and minutes of meeting. They were:
1. Briefing and discussion with stakeholders held on 12th July 2012 as evidenced by the signed list of attendance. 2. A letter sent to Peneroka and Pemborong (settlers and suppliers) FELDA Chemplak Barat on 5th April 2013 informing them the need of compliance to policies and RSPO requirement. 3. Communication with Wildlife Department regarding the intrusion of monkeys in the Chempelak Barat settlement areas on 14th May 2013. 4. To improve the surrounding boundaries, communication with FELDA ProData and JUPEM was conducted on 5th February 2013. Records can be seen in the Visitor Log Book at FELDA Bukit Serampang.
There was evidence that the Scheme Managers had provided adequate information to GCS scheme participants in ensuring compliance to RSPO requirements by giving copies of contract between FELDA and them, up-to-date records of debts and repayments, charges and fees, training on the safe use of agrochemicals, information on integrated pest management, health and safety plans, social and environmental impact / aspect assessments and plans, pollution prevention programs, procedure for complaints and grievances.
Criterion 1.2 Management documents are publicly available, except where this is prevented by commercial confidentiality or where disclosure of information would result in negative environmental or social outcomes. This concerns management documents relating to environmental, social and legal issues that are relevant to compliance with RSPO Criteria. Documents that must be publicly available include, but are not necessarily limited to:-
1.2.1 Land titles / user rights (C 2.2) 1.2.2 Safety and health plan (C 4.7)
1.2.3 Plans and impact assessments relating to environmental and social impacts (C 5.1, 6.1, 7.1, 7.3) 1.2.4 Pollution prevention plans (C 5.6) 1.2.5 Details of complaints and grievances (C 6.3) 1.2.6 Negotiation procedures (C 6.4) 1.2.7 Continuous improvement plan (C 8.1)
Findings:
The existing mechanism to ensure smallholders comply with the requirement of this criterion was verified. Each scheme assessed had maintained record of requests made by stakeholders and this record was presented during the assessment.
Evidence of legal ownership of land and land-use rights was sighted. All settlers, except 912 in FSSS CU had already obtained their land titles. Cooperation to verify their land title and land-use right was given by smallholders at FELDA Chemplak Barat.
Information on SEIA document, management plan and organized social activities had been prepared and continued to be made available for the participants’ compliance.
PRINCIPLE 2: COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS
Criterion 2.1 There is compliance with all applicable local, national and ratified international laws and regulations
Indicators: 2.1.1 Evidence of compliance with legal requirements. Major compliance
2.1.2 A documented system, which includes written information on legal requirements. Minor compliance
2.1.3 A mechanism for ensuring that they are implemented. Minor compliance
2.1.4 A system for tracking any changes in the law. Minor compliance
Findings:
The list of all applicable laws and regulations had been sighted maintained at the assessed schemes. The identified applicable laws had been recorded in a legal register. They complied with all applicable local, national and ratified international laws and regulations, for example, 12 randomly sampled passport showed the foreign workers had valid Visit Pass (Temporary Employment) issued by Malaysia Immigration, agrochemicals used were those registered with the Pesticides Board and in accordance to the Pesticides Act 1974 and Regulations or those of WHO Type 1A and 1B or Stockholm & Rotterdam Conventions, Employment Act 1955, Workers’ Minimum Standards of Housing & Amenities Act 1990, Environmental Quality Act and Regulations, 1974.
Additionally, some of the legal requirements under Environmental Quality Act, Pesticides Act 1974 and KPDN – Peraturan Kawalan Bekalan 1974, had yet to be included in the legal register.
The Scheme Managers interviewed showed understanding on the applicable legal requirements and the records sighted had included the communication on awareness to their smallholders and the need of them to comply with relevant legal requirements.
Site visits made to the workers’ housing had confirmed that the housing specifications had been in accordance with the Minimum Standards of Housing and Amenities Act 1990. It was also observed that the houses were provided with piped water, electricity, emergency assembly area and play ground.
Criterion 2.2 The right to use the land can be demonstrated, and is not legitimately contested by local communities with demonstrable rights.
Findings:
As mentioned under Criterion 1.2 the smallholders were able to show legal ownership and rights to use the land.
The legal ownership of land title for all estates had been verified at FELDA Chemplak Barat, FELDA Bukit Serampang, and FELDA Tun Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh. There was a total of 5 photocopy grants, whose original copy are kept at FELDA Headquarters Office, Jalan Gurney, Kuala Lumpur. Generally, the terms of land title was for Oil Palm except for those settlers who had converted their planting from rubber to oil palm and had yet to amend the permitted crops on their grant.
Boundary stones had been sighted maintained at FELDA Bukit Senggeh and FELDA Chempelak Barat. All schemes visited had maintained maps to indicate the locations of the boundary stonmes. The audit team noted that boundary stones along the perimeter adjacent to other reserves had also been identified and maintained by FSSS.
Criterion 2.3 Use of the land for oil palm does not diminish the legal rights, or customary rights, of other users, without their free, prior and informed consent.
Findings:
Based on the Stage 2 Report there was no land issue noted at FSSS CU to diminish the legal rights, or customary rights, of other users. Through Land (General Settlement Area) Act 1960, the schemes’ management had been given the legal right to the land for cultivation via the title provided by the State Department of Lands and Surveys.
Verification on site showed the smallholdings at FELDA Bukit Senggeh were established long time ago (in 1960s/70s). The nearest village inhabited by Orang Asli is at Kg Gapam Baru (located between FELDA Tun Ghafar Kemendore and FELDA Tun Ghafar Bukit Senggeh) where they were shifted from Kg. Gapam Lama, about 10 km away. This Orang Asli of Temuan community operates on Orang Asli reserved land and did not make any customary land claims within the smallholdings.
PRINCIPLE 3: COMMITMENT TO LONG-TERM ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL VIABILITY
Criterion 3.1 There is an implemented management plan that aims to achieve long-term economic and financial viability.
Findings:
Plantation management plan existed in the form of maps for each land scheme aimed to achieve long- term economic and financial viability. The maps indicate the boundary of the scheme as well as the blocks or the compartment and rivers and streams within the estates were marked together with the access road.
There was no budget established by those settlers who tend their own farm. However, Scheme Managers have a documented management plan (minimum 2 years) which was shared with them or their elected representatives mainly along the line of Corporate Social Responsibility. They include domestic waste collection, replanting allocation, upkeep of public amenities and recreational and sports event. The Jawatankuasa Kemajuan Kampong (JKKK) monthly meeting minutes showed that there was consultation on the budget including expenditures incurred with the smallholders, including GCS members.
On the other hand, the plantation budgets for financial year 2013 and 2014 were available for land schemes managed by FGVP(M) or FELDA Technoplant. Their budgets had generally included the allocation for operations, estimated expenses for harvesting, field upkeep, training, occupational safety, health and environmental upkeep, PPE for workers and welfare (maintenance of immigrant workers hostel) and social activities (celebrating Labour Day) for settlers. There was also allocation for road maintenance - silt pit construction, scupper drain construction, road grading & compacting and culvert maintenance.
In general, for each plantation scheme commitment to long term economic viability was demonstrated by the following: Crop production was monitored on a block by block basis in each scheme and a feedback mechanism was in place to analyze crop production trends supporting continuous improvement. Internal agronomic visits undertaken by FELDA Agricultural Services Sdn Bhd, a related research company of FGV on an annual basis to determine crop production efficiency. This visit demonstrated a firm commitment to long term economic and financial viability that focus on optimizing crop production through sustained methods. The agronomic assessment included analysis of yields, foliar nutrient, nutrient conservation, systematic soil survey and analysis, pest damage control, general health of the crops, etc. Site management had benefitted from improvement recommendations targeting at fertilizing application, pest management and general field maintenance. The agronomic recommendations also helped support the formulation of the annual budget to promote sustainability. Occupational safety and environmental risk assessment with associated planning and implementation of risk control measures was also a dimension to improve long term economic and financial viability.
A general indicator of FSSS CU’s commitment to long term economic and financial viability (sustainability) was the continuous yield increase in their mature areas. For example, at FELDA Chempelak Barat FFB yield/ha for 2013 was budgeted at 22mt/ha but at the time of audit it was reported achieving 5.3 mt/ha.
All visited schemes had been harvesting crops from the first generation planting. The replanting programme for FELDA Bukit Serampang had been sighted and planned to be carried out in 2015 for 90 settlers from Peringkat 2 (Stage 2) covering an area of 291.61 ha. Replanting programme for FELDA Chempelak Barat was not necessary as the oldest palm is 11 years of age. First replanting may be carried out in 14 years time.
PRINCIPLE 4: USE OF APPROPRIATE BEST PRACTICES BY GROWERS AND MILLERS
Criterion 4.1 Operating procedures are appropriately documented and consistently implemented and monitored.
Findings:
The assessed schemes continued to use as reference for plantation operations the FELDA Manual Operasi Ladang Sawit Lestari (FELDA Operations Manual for Sustainable Oil Palm Plantations) - regarded as its SOP - and Safety, Health and Environmental Manual. The manual and procedures were in place and available to all levels of Executives in the schemes.
The agriculture manual described the operational procedure from preparing oil palm nursery, oil palm replanting, ground cover maintenance, field upkeep and spraying, manuring, IPM to the final cycle of FFB harvesting and collection, in addition to road maintenance, construction of silt traps/pits. Through random interviews held with the staff and workers, the outcome revealed that they understood the requirements of the SOPs and their level of understanding on the contents of the SOP was found to be acceptable.
Relevant records of monitoring were available and maintained, for example, ‘Programme Sheets’ that captured activities of manuring and spraying programmes, agrochemicals used, rat census/treatment, application for and issuance of personnel protective equipment (PPE) and use of permit to work system that were evident in the cost books, store requisition and issue sheets and related files.
Due to unfavorable weather, spraying operation was cancelled. The assessor was thus unable to verify the procedure implementation. Nonetheless, fertilizer application was carried out at FELDA Chempelak Barat. Based on field visit and inspection of records, it was confirmed that the fertilizer application was in accordance to the established procedure which detailed the dosage, method, application equipment and PPE.
Criterion 4.2 Practices maintain soil fertility at, or where possible improve soil fertility to, a level that ensures optimal and sustained yield.
Findings:
All schemes assessed monitored their fertilizer inputs based on FASSB Laporan Lawatan Syor Pembajaan. At Chempelak Barat, the report produced on 9/11/2012 by the Lead Agronomist, who visited the field on 11/9/2012 was presented to the Assessor. The recommendation was a result of leaf and soil sampling and analysis which were carried out annually. The records on the movement of fertilizer sighted confirmed that they had been kept current.
The fertiliser recommended for 2013 include mix and straight fertiliser. The recommended dosage ranged from 11 to 12 kg/palm/year. Based on this recommendation, manuring program had been established by the estates. Stock issued out from the store was found to be accurate through inspection of checked Bin Card.
EFB recommendation was also given by the agronomist especially on lateritic soil and those areas prone to erosion. The assessor was told that application of EFB was not compulsory. FELDA Chempelak Barat normally obtained their EFB from FELDA Moakil Palm Oil Mill. There was no record kept for its application since 2012.
Criterion 4.3 Practices minimise and control erosion and degradation of soils.
Findings:
Soil maps and slope maps were available in the schemes. FSSS CU had implemented, in as practicable a manner as possible, the best practices for minimizing soil erosion and degradation as stipulated in their SOP. The practices that were evident included terracing, cover crops, L-shaped frond stacking and contour stacking of the pruned fronds .All techniques employed were targeted to prevent or slow down surface water run-off and the provision of water/moisture conservation pits.
The planting of cover crops at Chempelak Barat was sighted along bare slopes and along the roadside. Again, this showed that soil erosion control was in practice. Fronds stacking were closely monitored as it was also part of their fertilizer program in all schemes visited.
During the field inspection, it was observed that the schemes had maintained soft vegetations such as grasses and ferns to avoid bare soil in the matured fields. Inter-row vegetation was slashed annually to maintain the growth of soft grass. Weed spraying activities had also been carefully limited to the base of the palm to avoid over-spraying to other areas.
Road conditions were reasonably satisfactory and roads were accessible at the visited fields. No peat soil area in the FSSS CU was found during the field visits. Therefore, Indicator 4.3.4 is not applicable.
Criterion 4.4 Practices maintain the quality and availability of surface and ground water.
Findings:
There continued to be evidence of implementation on the practices to maintain the quality and availability of surface and ground waters in the visited schemes of FELDA Tun Ghafar Bukit Senggeh, and FELDA Bukit Serampang. FELDA followed the Drainage and Irrigation Department (DID) guidelines for maintenance of buffer zone, for example. There was no construction of bunds/weir/dams across the water ways. Erection of Buffer Zone signboard. Trees formerly planted on River Reserve had part of its trunk painted blue to indicate it had transgressed into the riparian zone. No spraying of agrochemical in the buffer zones below. Regeneration of soft vegetation to restore back to nature with minimal disturbances other than to harvest FFB.
*Note, there was no river present at FELDA Chemplak Barat. Sg Selai also known as Sg. Tawing.
Through records sighting, Scheme Managers had provided appropriate training for their participants on the importance of maintaining the quality and availability of surface and ground water. Interviews held with managers and smallholders at FELDA Bukit Serampang, and FELDA Bukit Senggeh showed that generally the level of their understanding on the subject of protection including maintaining and restoring appropriate riparian buffer zones along natural waterways needed improvement. A reminder letter to reinforce the maintenance of buffer zone sent to FELDA Bukit Serampang dated 6th February 2013 had been sighted by the auditor.
FELDA Chempelak Barat had been monitoring the rainfall data as well as their water consumption as required by RSPO criteria & indicator. Daily records of rainfall data for each visited estate were made available for inspection. The data was used in the water management for each scheme.
Scheme Managers had provided appropriate training for their participants on the importance of maintaining the quality and availability of surface and ground water. A water management plan had been established with improvement being made to include all sources of water.
The FSSS CU continued to monitor incoming and outgoing water quality in natural water courses in accordance to the 2006 Interim National River Water Quality Standard (INQWS) to determine the degree of pollution by sending the collected water samples to Jabatan Kimia Malaysia (Chemistry Department, Malaysia) for analysis. The results of the laboratory test sighted showed that the water quality were within the acceptable level, quality index Class III.
Stagnant ponds had been created for water conservation and catchment area. There was significant improvements made since sighted during the Stage 2 Assessment. The size of catchment pond had been increased with two-staged pond fitted with pre-filter and fine filter to trap debris. This trapping of stream water as intake source appeared a lot cleaner and had decrease the burden of loading treatment required at its Water Treatment Plant.
Criterion 4.5 Pests, diseases, weeds and invasive introduced species are effectively managed using appropriate Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques.
Findings:
The FSSS CU continued to use the well documented Standard Operating Procedure for Integrated Pest Management (IPM) contained in the Manual Operasi Ladang Sawit Lestari. The type of pest, its disease symptoms, census population, life cycle, threshold level for chemical treatment, control methods, etc. were enumerated in the manual. There was no prophylactic application of pesticides made in the scheme.
Monitoring the extent of IPM implementation for major pests had been established, for instance, rats infestation and bagworms. Field visit showed that there was no serious rat damage outbreak on FFB at FELDA Chempelak Barat. Their Scheme Managers had provided training to their employees and organized smallholders in IPM techniques and the appropriate assistance on agrochemical application. For example, there was rat baits campaign being carried out. IPM had been in placed with barn owl- boxes observed in the fields. Others include planting of beneficial plants, Antigonon ,Cassia cobanensis and Turnera subulata along the roadside for hosting of predator insects to improve its population against the pests of leaf eating nettle caterpillars and bagworms. Apart from that soft weeds such as Ageratum conyzides had also been left to grow naturally in the fields.
It was noted that there had been no outbreak of bagworm, occasionally the management had detected mild presence of the pest at some areas. That presence had initiated the management to carry out chemical trunk injection using metamidophos as preventive measure.
Usage of agrochemicals was justified and monitored. Information on the quantity of agrochemicals used and areas applied can be found in the Store Issue Records. The data was then compiled to monitor the relationship between amount of agrochemical consumed and the land area applied [active ingredient (ai) per hectare].
Criterion 4.6 Agrochemicals are used in a way that does not endanger health or the environment. There is no prophylactic use of pesticides, except in specific situations identified in national Best Practice guidelines. Where agrochemicals are used that are categorised as World Health Organisation Type 1A or 1B, or are listed by the Stockholm or Rotterdam Conventions, growers are actively seeking to identify alternatives, and this is documented.
Findings:
At FSSS agrochemicals were used in a way that does not endanger the health of employees or the environment. There was no prophylactic use of the agrochemicals. All FELDA schemes had provided written justifications for all agrochemicals it was using as found in the Agriculture Manual and SOP. These documentations included a chemical register list that indicated the purpose of chemical usage (intended target), hazards signs, trade and generic names. Safety and health precautions as recommended in the respective chemical Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) had been referred to.
All agrochemicals used were based on the ‘need-to-do basis’ to enhance field operations. .Its use and storage were in accordance with the Pesticides Act 1974 (Act 149) and the relevant provision (Section 53A), Occupational Safety & Health Act 1994 in particular its Classification, Packaging and Labelling of Hazardous Chemical Regulation 1997 and USECHH Regulations 2000. However, an NCR under Indicator 2.1.1 had been issued for ignorance to conduct Chemical Health Risk Assessment (CHRA) for contractor workers (extended employees) of Koperasi Wawasan Chempelak as required by the USECHH Regulations.
Chemicals used were mainly under Class III classification except for Paraquat.
Except for herbicides self-work scheme smallholders were given the liberty to buy them on their own for use in their field. All other agrochemicals were purchased by FELDA. At schemes supported by FTP, the purchase of all agrochemicals were centrally arranged by HQ.
A chemical store, well ventilated and with locked door had been sighted at all visited FELDA schemes. Only authorized personnel (storekeeper) was allowed to enter the chemical store and issue out the chemicals. Respective chemical MSDS was made available and kept in the store. The storekeeper interviewed had shown understanding of the hazards involved and the required control measures.
It was noted that medical surveillance for sprayers had been conducted by panel clinic (Klinik Rengam) at Kluang. These sprayers were all male workers. The medical reports showed that the workers were fit to carry out their job.
Aerial spray was not a practice in FELDA oil palm plantation and this was also confirmed by the Scheme Managers. .
Criterion 4.7 An occupational health and safety plan is documented, effectively communicated and implemented
Findings:
The FSSS CU had adopted the FGV Occupational Safety and Health policy replacing FASSB OSH Policy due to organisational restructure following FGV listing on Bursa Malaysia. An updated OSH management plan and programs for implementation had been developed by each scheme. The new policy, plan and programs had been communicated to all employees through briefings. Likewise, the OSH policy, OSH management plan and programs had been disseminated to Scheme Block Leaders for onwards sharing of information with their members.
The OSH management at schemes visited had addressed OSH matters as listed from item b to i under Indicator 4.7.1 above.
All identified operations sampled at Chempelak Barat and Bukit Serampang had been risk assessed, risk rated, mitigating measures listed and logged in a Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Risk Control Register. Among the activities identified were FFB evacuation in the estates and transportation to mill, chemical mixing and spraying, chemical storage, harvesting and potential occurrence of fire. The register was reviewed as and when there are changes, the last at FELDA Bukit Serampang and Chempelak Barat on 13/04/2010 and 10/3/2010 respectively. Relevant administrative procedures including SOPs were made available to control the identified hazards. Appropriate PPE had been provided free of charge to employees and contractors.
Chemical Health Risk Assessment (CHRA) had been undertaken at FELDA Chempelak Barat (not Koperasi Wawasan Chempelak) on 22/10/2010 and 15/11/2010 respectively. Recommendations by the Assessor had been followed although some were still outstanding. Through records sighting the means of communication to the employees on safe use of chemical were done during training and morning briefing session. It included explanation of information via MSDS, safe chemical handling procedures and the correct use of PPE. During the site assessment, it was observed that signage to remind workers to wear appropriate PPE was posted at notice boards.
A gang of Chemical Sprayers were observed to wear long sleeve shirt, long pants and appropriate PPE (rubber gloves, boots, apron, respirators and goggles) when spraying chemical for weeding. Harvesters too were provided their set of PPE that comprised of helmet, boots and sickle cover. Records of PPE issued to workers had been maintained by the respective Scheme Office. Workers interviewed were found aware of the procedure when to change the PPE, that is, upon sighting of wear and tear.
There was periodic briefing by Field Conductors (Supervisors) during the Muster Call prior to commencing work whereby workers were reminded of OSH requirements and their PPE checked.
Training records showed that the scheme workers and/or contractor employees had been adequately trained in safe working practices, all precautions attached to products were made known to them for compliance including the need to wear when working, care and maintenance of PPE supplied to them. Training had also included First Aid, Basic Fire Fighting and Emergency Response.
First Aid boxes were provided to Field Supervisors to be carried along and kept handy when making rounds in the field. The boxes were also made available at the Scheme Office. Fire extinguishers too were made available. Workers had been informed of the accident and emergency procedures, flowcharts, instructions and emergency contact number .They too were displayed at offices and Muster ground.
Each scheme assessed had identified a person in charge of safety and given the designation as Safety Secretary. There was also a Safety and Health Committee that comprised of five (5) employer and five (5) workers representatives. Improvement could be made to the composition of the Committee. The Assessor verified that they met quarterly to discuss any OSH issues pertaining to workers’ safety and health at work place and review their OSH performance versus the established OSH objectives, targets and programs.
Accident reporting and investigation procedure was in place, as stipulated in the individual management plans for estates. There was no accident case reported at all schemes assessed. Safety Performance Scoreboard at Chempelak Barat and Bukit Senggeh were sighted located in front of their Main Office. Annual mandatory JKKP 8 Form had been sighted to have been submitted to Department of Occupational Safety and Health, Putrajaya on 22/1/2013.
For workplace accident insurance, local workers and staff were covered under SOCSO Act 1969. Foreign workers on the other hand were covered under the Foreign Worker Compensation insurance as
per the Workmen Compensation Act 1952, which includes repatriation expenses and personal accident coverage (accidental death, permanent total disablement, temporary disablement and medical expenses).
In spite of the OSH management plan established, its implementation however, could be improved as highlighted below:
1. Confusion in filling hazard and risk column exist and revisiting the HIRADC Register to make good is in order. (All sites) 2. A one-year look ahead annual OSH plan that include items (a-I) under element 4.7.1 be established prior to the start of a new year. (All sites) 3. Recommendations by the CHRA Assessor (FELDA Technoplant Chempelak Barat) needs revisit and discuss with the Assessor for in-depth understanding prior to implementation. 4. Composition of OSH Committee to gain credibility should include Manager of respective FELDA Scheme and relevant contractors (FTP Chempelak Barat). 5. Considerations for Safety and Health to be included in the contract document signed between FELDA and contractor. (All sites) 6. Contents of the First Aid Box to be updated as some items were found missing. (All sites)
Criteria 4.8 All staff, workers, smallholders and contractors are appropriately trained.
Findings:
The FSSS CU management had trained their staff, workers and smallholders. Although training was given limited training records were kept. Sighting them revealed that key training courses at the assessed schemes such as Environmental Aspect/Impact, Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Risk Control, RSPO Awareness, Social Impact Assessment, etc. had not been conducted. Thus, a Major NCR had been issued.
Reviewing training records on Safety and Health, Chemical Hazards, Harvesting Technique of those staff, smallholders and workers (such as the storekeepers, sprayers and fertilizer applicators) and randomly interviewing them had shown that they understood the hazards of the chemicals and the need to follow the safety procedures and the PPE to be used. The trade and generic names of the chemicals were made known to the workers through the MSDS training.
PRINCIPLE 5: ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY AND CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND BIODIVERSITY
Criterion 5.1 Aspects of plantation and mill management, including replanting, that have environmental impacts are identified, and plans to mitigate the negative impacts and promote the positive ones are made, implemented and monitored, to demonstrate continuous improvement.
Findings:
The FSSS CU had conducted and continued to conduct environmental aspect and impact risk assessment for each of its scheme. The assessors had sighted the document on the Identification of Environmental Aspects and Evaluation of Impacts for FELDA Chempelak Barat, last reviewed on
15/2/2013. Records on environmental impact and mitigation measures relating to the operations of the scheme and waste generation were also presented. The risk assessment would be reviewed annually.
Environmental improvement plans to mitigate the identified negative impacts had been implemented. Among the improvement plans set include bunding of diesel storage tank, identifying buffer zones, no open burning and littering, oil spill control and emergency preparedness and segregation of recyclable waste,
Criterion 5.2 The status of rare, threatened or endangered species (ERTs) and high conservation value habitats, if any, that exists in the plantation or that could be affected by plantation or mill management, shall be identified and their conservation taken into account in management plans and operations.
Findings:
The HCV Assessment Report, completed in February 2011, was updated on 4th May 2011 by the Sustainability Department, FELDA Agricultural Services Sdn Bhd. (FASSB). It had covered all the High Conservation Value (HCV) within and adjacent to their estates. The assessment had identified the endangered, rare and threatened species (ERTs) for FELDA Bukit Tun Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh, FELDA Bukit Serampang,and FELDA Chemplak Barat. The FASSB assessment team had inspected the sites and consulted smallholders and workers.
A management plan and action plan were subsequently developed also in consultation with related stakeholders based on the assessment findings. The action plan presented information in tabular format with general description of HCV, action steps and monitoring activities. The recommendation of the action plan was to continue communication with relevant stakeholder once every 3 months to monitor any illegal activities within the areas.
No sites classified as HCV 1, 2, 3 & 5 were recorded within above named settlers/plantation schemes in the FSSS CU. However, endangered and vulnerable species were documented to have their distribution range in the estates. The report had also listed endemic mammals and birds whose range had overlapped within the oil palm estates in the FSSS.
External HCV sites classified as HCV 1 were recorded at FELDA Bukit Senggeh. The site maps demarcating the external HCV sites had also been prepared. FELDA Bukit Senggeh is located next to Bukit Senggeh Forest Reserve.
A summary of HCV Monitoring Management Action Plan had been written for each scheme. They were examined during the assessment. There was no HCV area at FELDA Chemplak Barat. However, monitoring of wildlife was conducted on 21st March 2013 but unfortunately no wildlife was sighted.
The HCV identified at FELDA Bukit Serampang were of the following types: religious significance, community and infrastructure needs. They had been identified as HCV6 for mosque and grave yard and HCV4 for buffer zone conservation along Sg. Penyalai and Sungai Kluang. The wildlife monitoring dated 26th February 2013 showed “ayam hutan” (Gallus gallus) was sighted. Gallus gallus is listed as Protected in Wildlife Act 2010 and Lease Concern (LC) species under IUCN Red List.
Overall, FSSS had been observed conducting the wildlife monitoring quarterly. However, the wildlife monitoring record at FELDA Tun Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh needed improvement.
During the field assessment, it was sighted that signage had been erected at each scheme to ban hunting. The signage had been erected at every road entrance to warn that no activity such as hunting was permitted in these areas.
Criterion 5.3
Waste is reduced, recycled, re-used and disposed off in an environmentally and socially responsible manner.
Findings:
The assessed schemes continued to maintain the established waste management system for identification of wastes and plans to reduce and dispose them in an environmentally and socially responsible manner.
There was a program to encourage recycling of solid wastes with waste bins provided in determined areas at offices. However, such bins were absent at settlers’ housing area although the bins had been given to extend the program to encourage reduce, recycle and re-use and disposed off waste in an environmentally and socially responsible manner. The awareness among the employees for recycling, nonetheless, needed further enhancement. So far, there had been no records of waste that had been sent to recycling contractor.
Domestic wastes from all estates and housing activities were collected regularly by contractor and disposed off at dedicated landfill areas. Landfill areas Bukit Serampang were located far from housing area in non-swamp and flood prone area. Each area consists of many pits that were active for around one month. The garbage collector-contractor at Bukit Serampang was interviewed and together with the assessor visited the dump site. The site was posted with signboard of “No Intrusion” allowed and fenced up. Only one pit was open at a time for use. Others had been covered with layers of soil to prevent bad odour, rodents, breeding of flies and mosquitoes. Each pit was labelled with dates it was opened and closed.
Human wastes were collected in septic tank. Condition of septic tank had been monitored occasionally. However, cleaning of septic tank were not scheduled.
The scheduled wastes containers were not properly labeled and covered. The housekeeping of the scheduled wastes store could be improved. In term of recording, the notification and inventory was not recorded accordingly. There was also no training record for the scheduled waste person in-charge.
Criterion 5.4 Efficiency of energy use and use of renewable energy is maximized.
Findings:
There was no palm oil mill operated in the FSSS CU. Therefore, there was no issue on this criterion.
Criterion 5.5 Use of fire for waste disposal and for preparing land for replanting is avoided except in specific situations, as identified in the ASEAN Guidance or other regional best practice.
Findings:
Through site visits, interviews and records sightings It was verified that no open burning had been carried out in line with the CU’s policy on zero burning. The Scheme Managers had carried out training and provide extension support to their participants to avoid open burning. Signboards of “No Open Burning” allowed were sighted erected at strategic locations near offices and housing areas. Further, there was evident that at the line site garbage collection contractors came regularly to collect the household refuse.
In the fields assessed there were adequate warning signs not permitting open burning and littering.
There was no replanting program being scheduled other than Chempelak Barat as most schemes had been established with immature and grown-up palms prior to this assessment.
Criterion 5.6 Plans to reduce pollution and emissions, including greenhouse gases, are developed, implemented and monitored.
Findings:
FSSS CU had documented plans to mitigate all the identified pollution and emission. The assessor had verified the plans. It was noted in the schemes smapled, riparian buffer zone were left to restoration, thus there was minimum application of chemicals to old palms near to waterways. Others include construction of oil trap and bunded and covered diesel storage tank. The plans will be reviewed annually by the respective Scheme Manager.
There was no palm oil mill nor peat soil area in the FSSS CU. Therefore, Indicator 5.6.3 is not applicable.
PRINCIPLE 6: RESPONSIBLE CONSIDERATION OF EMPLOYEES AND OF INDIVIDUALS AND COMMUNITIES AFFECTED BY GROWERS AND MILLS
Criterion 6.1 Aspects of plantation and mill management, including replanting, that have social impacts are identified in a participatory way, and plans to mitigate the negative impacts and promote the positive ones are made, implemented and monitored, to demonstrate continuous improvement.
Findings:
FELDA had prepared standard questionnaires for SIA study. It was carried out with stakeholders’ participation at the regional level (external stakeholders) and scheme level (internal stakeholders). Meetings, interviews and consultation conducted with stakeholders to identify potential social impacts and plan for mitigation measures to be taken to control the negative impacts were verified.
A Major NCR had been issued to this CU for the following lapses: 1. At FELDA Chemplak Barat, it was found that the SIA report was partially completed. It was noted that only two survey forms filled up at FELDA Tun Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh.
2. The time bound plan to mitigate the negative impacts with responsibilities assigned and time to review the plans were not drawn up and implemented.
Various programmes continued to be implemented in all schemes assessed involving the participation of all settlers. The emphasis as had been reported in the Stage 2 report was on education, health,
spirituality and the strengthening of the family institution with the prime objective to uplift their socio economic well-being.
On education, the emphasis continued focused on implementation of the Family Literacy Centre (PLK) for children between three and five years old, FELDA Community Rehabilitation Centre (PDK), Regional Tuition Centre, FELDA Tuition Scheme (STF) and New Generation Skills. The STF was carried out with the co-operation of the Ministry of Education, Malaysia. The New Generation Skills Programme carried on training youths in various skills at certificate and diploma levels.
At the same time, different types of loans and assistance were made available for the benefit of settlers and their children. These facilities were helpful in improving educational achievement and quality of life of the FELDA community. For the young generation, there was continuous emphasis on human capital development through leadership activities, trainings, spiritual programs, sports and culture, and participation in voluntary bodies, organized by FELDA or jointly with government agencies. Through participation in the programs, success had been achieved in strengthening youths' personality and strength of character and in avoidance of social delinquency.
Criterion 6.2 There are open and transparent methods for communication and consultation between growers and/or millers, local communities and other affected or interested parties.
Findings:
There were many documented communication and consultation forums between FELDA scheme management and settlers, private millers, local communities and other affected or interested parties. Issues among settlers were discussed at Block Meeting (consisting of 24 settlers’ house per block), Gabungan Pembangunan Wanita (GPW) meeting, Youth Association (Persatuan Belia 4B) meeting and then brought to the attention of Jawatankuasa Kemajuan dan Keselamatan Rancangan (JKKR) meeting who in turn discussed them with Scheme Manager. Matters related to the quality and pricing of FFB were discussed at the Joint Consultative Meeting (JCC) chaired by the private mills with membership from Scheme Manager and settlers’ representative. Settlers had also been noted communicating with the scheme’s Social Development Authority (SDA), a FELDA staff member.
Other forms of Management communication with, to or from staff and settlers and interested parties included the following: Assembly Suggestion boxes Internal circulars/memos Daily informal communication Notice board and posters Through Staff/workers representative Environmental and social campaigns Through written complaint form Management by walk-about Brief information dissemination at Friday prayers
The language of communications had been Malay or English where appropriate.
During the site visit at FELDA Bukit Serampang, the latest GPW minutes of meeting was sighted conducted on 4th March 2013 and JKKK Meeting on 28th March 2013. These activities showed the FSSS CU had maintained the implementation of open and transparent methods for communication and consultation between growers and/or millers, local communities and other affected or interested parties.
Consultations were held with Community leaders and settlers, randomly selected workers’ representatives and suppliers to verify their awareness and understanding of RSPO (planet, people and profit), the impact it had on them as well as to confirm the implementation of Principle 6 by the scheme management. Community leaders, settlers as well as workers’ representatives and suppliers whom were
met during the assessment had confirmed that communication and consultation between scheme management and them were open and transparent. On the whole they were happy. Their scheme management was approachable. Meetings and discussions held were often easygoing and issues raised were resolved amicably.
At schemes assessed, the local scheme management had maintained to use the established procedures to address communication and consultation with all stakeholders. The Scheme Manager, being the senior most person of FELDA management at the scheme level continued to be responsible for these issues.
Criterion 6.3 There is a mutually agreed and documented system for dealing with complaints and grievances, which is implemented and accepted by all parties.
Findings:
To address the requirements of this criterion, the assessed scheme management continued to use:
The mutually agreed and documented system of recording complaints and grievances, both within the scheme as well as with mill purchasing the FFB (refers C6.2). The established procedure to handle the inheritance of land within a settler’s family and land ownership that had been transferred to third party (arising from default payment of loan mortgage). Existing complaint form for any interested parties to register complaints. Existing procedure for resolving disputes, and Suggestion boxes provided at the scheme’s offices.
The Scheme Managers also gathered information from the field from various stakeholders on a regular basis through meetings as sighted in meeting minutes.
The records of complaints made by stakeholders (particularly settlers) kept at FELDA Bukit Serampang, Tun Ghafar Bukit Senggeh and FELDA Chemplak Barat were assessed. The complaints and their outcomes were appropriately recorded in the complaints book. Assessment of records in all the schemes showed that complaints were resolved timely and in an appropriate manner. Overall, no serious issues were observed.
However, the root cause of the complaint was not highlighted in the complaints book.
Criterion 6.4 Any negotiations concerning compensation for loss of legal or customary rights are dealt with through a documented system that enables indigenous peoples, local communities and other stakeholders to express their views through their own representative institutions.
Findings:
There had been no history of legal or customary right claim by indigenous people, including the Orang Asli community in Kg. Gapam Baru, located between FELDA Tun Ghafar Kemendore and FELDA Tun Ghafar Bukit Senggeh, local community or other stakeholders. The FELDA schemes were established about 50 years ago while the Orang Asli only shifted to the current location in 2004.
There had yet to be a documented system that enables local communities to express their views even though the Orang Asli communities were consulted from time to time. The Scheme Managers at FELDA Tun Ghafar Bukit Senggeh maintained close rapport with the Orang Asli leaders and considered issues raised by them and took appropriate action. During this surveillance audit, there was no case reported concerning compensation for loss of legal or customary rights.
Criterion 6.5 Pay and conditions for employees and for employees of contractors always meet at least legal or industry minimum standards and are sufficient to provide decent living wages.
Findings:
As had been reported in the Main Assessment there was no change to the pay and conditions of employment for FELDA staff sighted. The pay and conditions were documented in the FELDA Scale of Payment and its implementation continued to be status quo. This was sighted at FELDA Bukit Serampang, FELDA Chemplak Barat and FELDA Tun Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh. Their salary, wages and benefits scheme closely followed that of the Government of Malaysia rules and regulations.
The assessors were shown the terms of reference or signed contracts in Bahasa Malaysia between employers and employees stipulating the position, working hours, type of work, location of work, workers’ responsibility, wages, allowances, holidays, rest days, annual leave, fringe benefits, levy deductions (for foreign workers), dismissal, etc. For foreign workers their terms of employment were explained to them by FELDA Management. In the case of Bangladeshi workers they were given a copy of the same contract in Bengali language for information prior to their arrival in Malaysia. The Indonesian workers on the other hand were given an induction booklet by the Indonesian Embassy (Panduan Bagi Tenaga Kerja Indonesia) prepared by BPKTI/Mataram prior to their arrival.
The payment for contract workers was based on piece rate. The rate of payment was made known to all workers. Interview with a number of workers during the assessment showed that workers were generally happy with the salaries given which was above average.
At FELDA Bukit Serampang, FELDA Chemplak Barat and FELDA Tun Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh, payment to harvesters was made through the local scheme Koperasi FELDA (Cooperative Society), the contract holder who employed the foreign workers and their pay sheet could not be verified.
The FELDA staff (local), Bangladeshi, Nepalese and Indonesian workers continued to be provided decent houses with free piped water and electricity supply. The early settlers of FELDA Chempelak Barat, Bukit Serampang and Bukit Senggeh however were given two bed rooms wooden houses (built by FELDA but deducted monthly against FFB sold as per agreement signed at time of joining FELDA over an agreed period) and other facilities meeting the Workers’ Minimum Standard of Housing and Amenities Act 1990. But today,the houses in the settlements are those similar to those found in the urban city living . This was a consequence of hard work and also made possible with the assistance of Housing Loan Fund set-up by FELDA and given to those qualified.
In fact, FELDA settlement established 20 years ago once categorised as remote settlement now has all the amenities (water supplies, medical, educational institutions, shop lots, bus and taxi terminal, IT centre, multi-purpose halls, market and many more) of a modern town. In stages, FELDA settlement in this CU assessed had transformed into growth centres.
In providing awareness to healthy living condition, FELDA organised ‘the most beautiful house’ and the most beautiful FELDA Scheme contest on annual basis with first prize of RM1 million given away to the best FELDA Scheme.
Interviews with workers and their dependant revealed that generally they were happy with the living condition and they were aware that any issues relating to the housing and its facilities can be resolved through the available channel (cross refer to C6.3).
Clearly, the above examples were attestation that FELDA had demonstrated its welfare commitment to the settlers, staff and contract employees by uplifting their living standards since its beginning but in stages.
Criterion 6.6 The employer respects the right of all personnel to form and join trade unions of their choice and to bargain collectively. Where the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining are restricted under law, the employer facilitates parallel means of independent and free association and bargaining for all such personnel.
Findings:
FELDA maintained advocacy of the freedom and rights of the settlers, employees and contractors to form associations and to bargain collectively for the benefits of the settlers and employees. At the scheme level the Scheme Managers of FSSS CU respected the right of participants to form and represent themselves through their own representative associations and / or trade unions and accepted them as parties to participatory processes, consultations, communications and negotiations in the management of the scheme. Such associations included Koperasi Permodalan FELDA (for settlers and their family members to join and invest), Belia 4B (Youth Association), GPW, for the female employee, Persatuan Ibu Tunggal Daerah Segamat (Single Women Association, Segamat District).and many others.
The workers whom were consulted had confirmed that they were aware of their rights to join a union.
On the other hand, foreign workers were subjected to Immigration Department’s terms and conditions of employment which restrict them from having association.
All FELDA schemes visited during this ASA1 maintained the policy stating freedom of settlers and workers to participate in voluntary organization entitled “Polisi Kebebasan Menganggotai Khidmat Sukarela”. The policy was seen displayed on the notice board of scheme offices.
Criterion 6.7 Children are not employed or exploited. Work by children is acceptable on family farms, under adult supervision, and when not interfering with education programmes. Children are not exposed to hazardous working conditions.
Findings:
FELDA continued to uphold the established written policy statement entitled Polisi Pekerja-Pekerja Kanak-Kanak (Child Labour Policy) prohibiting the employment of children below 17 years of age and it was visibly seen displayed at the scheme offices.
The policy had been well implemented. Records sighted showed no person under the age of seventeen was employed by the company nor was there any employed by FELDA Technoplant who managed land holdings belonging to settlers of FELDA Chempelak, Bukit Serampang and Bukit Senggeh. This was verified through examination of the employment cards and copies of passports of foreign workers and further confirmed by interviewing randomly selected workers.
During field visits, there were no children sighted working in the oil palm smallholder area. This perhaps can be attributed to two factors. Firstly, as mentioned in Criterion 6.1 the emphasis was on provision of good education for each scheme participant’s children to secure a brighter future (to uplift their socio- economic well being), thus at every FELDA scheme there exist a good set up of kindergarten and schools. Secondly, the fact that FELDA Technoplant Sdn Bhd and its contractors’ sensitivity to adhere to FELDA Child Labour Policy yielded in hiring sufficient foreign workers to work for settlers.
In the case of participants who used family labour to work their lot/land, child labour was not used. This was confirmed through interviews with the participants as well as the Scheme Manager.
Criterion 6.8 Any form of discrimination based on race, caste, national origin, religion, disability, gender, sexual orientation, union membership, political affiliation, or age, is prohibited.
Findings:
The existing policy of equal opportunities, ”Polisi Kesetaraan Peluang”, persist being displayed at scheme offices. The policy stated clearly the equal rights of all employees irrespective of their race, caste, nationality, religion, gender, union member, political affiliation and disability.
There was no record of abuse reported in the schemes assessed. There was evidence the FSSS CU and their contractors had abided by the said policy and did not engage or support discrimination. The absence of discrimination was confirmed in discussions with settlers, workers and FELDA staff at Chempelak Barat, Bukit Serampang and Bukit Senggeh.
All workers (local or migrant) continued to be covered by the same payments and conditions of employment associated with the jobs they were hired for. This was confirmed by checking on the letter of offer of employment to the employees and through consultations held with the workers from Malaysia, Nepal, Indonesia and Bangladesh.
Criterion 6.9 A policy to prevent sexual harassment and all other forms of violence against women and to protect their reproductive rights is developed and applied.
Findings:
The FELDA schemes visited had preserved its well displayed and clear policy on sexual harassment and violence entitled “Polisi Gangguan Seksual” Seksyen 22, kod etika dan tatalaku petugas. The policy in Bahasa Malaysia was made available and explained to all female employees. The sexual harassment and violence policy had been implemented.
The established specific grievance mechanism to handle issues related to sexual harassment and violence continued to be used. The existing Jawatankuasa Wanita (Gender Committee) whose responsibility among others was to look into gender issues (especially matters related to sexual harassment) continued to function and remained relevant. The existence of this policy and its implementation (through the establishment of the sexual harassment grievance mechanism and the Gender Committee) was confirmed by female employees interviewed. They too understood the meaning of sexual harassment and the appropriate complaint procedure.
The scheme participants were also aware of this policy and the associated grievance mechanism. This was confirmed through interviews of randomly selected participants. Overall, the requirements of this criterion had been met.
The absence of sexual harassment was confirmed in discussions with female settlers and female FELDA staffs in Tun Ghafar Bukit Senggeh, Chemplak Barat and Bukit Serampang.
Criterion 6.10 Growers and mills deal fairly and transparently with smallholders and other local businesses.
Findings:
Relevant files were sighted at the schemes audited. In reference to 6.10.1 and 6.10.2, documented FFB pricing mechanisms and inputs/service were sighted; and current and past prices paid for FFB were posted for public perusal, thus making it freely available to the scheme participants as well as the general public. It was also seen in the settler’s payment slip they received.
Matters related to the quality and pricing of FFB were sighted discussed in the meeting minutes of the Joint Consultative Committee (JCC) chaired by the private Mill Manager. Members of this Committee from FELDA had included the Scheme Manager and settlers’ representative. Interview with settlers showed the Managers were responsible, fair and transparent in dealing with them.
Consultations with contractors and suppliers as well as scheme participants of FELDA Tun Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh and FELDA Bukit Serampang pertaining to 6.10.3 and 6.10.4, showed that they understood the contractual agreements they entered into, and that contracts were fair, legal and transparent and that all payments were made in a timely manner. Monthly income statement including details of debt repayment from FELDA was fully transparent.
Renegotiations over second plantings or extension had commenced with adequate lead in time at FELDA Bukit Serampang in preparation for 2015 replantiing.
Criterion 6.11 Growers and millers contribute to local sustainable development wherever appropriate.
Findings:
The following were typical examples of FELDA’s contribution to local sustainable development and settler’s well-being at FELDA schemes assessed. Job opportunity was given within the settler’s community for transporting the FFB to the private mill collection center, weeding, agrochemicals spraying and harvesting. The contract for weeding, spraying of herbicides and harvesting at FELDA Chempelak Barat was awarded to Koperasi Wawasan FELDA Chempelak Barat (FELDA Chempelak Barat Wawasan Cooperative Society). The open tender for road maintenance at FELDA Chempelak Barat was won by Koperasi FELDA Tenggaroh Timur. The open tender for rubbish and domestic waste collection, general cleaning of public facilties and landscape beautification/maintenance project at FELDA Bukit Serampang was won by its settler’s children who in turn provided jobs to local folks.
The management of IT centre at each scheme by settler’s children (2nd generation FELDA settlers) Many shop lots were constructed and many scheme participants’ children carried out small business there. Appointment of settlers as Local Council Members in every scheme to help manage and improve amenities as well as the well being of their scheme. Financial assistance was given by FELDA Chemplak Barat scheme management to enable its GPW members to contribute100 flower seedlings to the settlers.
PRINCIPLE 7: RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW PLANTINGS
The assessment team had verified that Principle 7 was not applicable to FSSS CU as there was no new land clearing and/or new planting reported.
PRINCIPLE 8: COMMITMENT TO CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT IN KEY AREAS OF ACTIVITY
Criterion 8.1 Growers and millers regularly monitor and review their activities and develop and implement action plans that allow demonstrable continuous improvement in key operations.
MY NIWG commits to demonstrate progressive improvement to the following but not limited to:
Findings:
Generally, FSSS CU had established a system to regularly monitor and review their key activities at the estates, and then initiate action plans for continuous improvement.
Evidence sighted included the commitment to monitor the wildlife in the estate based on the HCV Management Plan, minimize the use of certain pesticides by implementing IPM, EFB mulching in fields (applicable to those scheme near to FPISB POM only), commitment to zero burning waste, heightened the awareness of workers on 3R’s initiatives (i.e. reduce, reuse, recycle) as part of their work and living culture and creating more jobs opportunities to children of settlers via contract awarded to local FELDA Cooperative Society.
A mechanism to capture the performance and expenditure was well established. It was not limited to social and environmental aspects only but it was extended to Occupational Safety & Health matters.
3.2 Chain of custody
Chain of Custody The Group Manager shall have a system in place to enable the trading of RSPO certified Fresh Fruit Bunches (FFB) produced from the group.
3.1 The group manager shall document and implement a system for the tracking and tracing of FFB produced by the group members, and intended to be sold as RSPO certified FFB.
3.2 There shall be a collective group procedure for the sale of all certified FFB originating from the plantations of group members that is agreed by the group members and the Group Manager and is designed to ensure that non-certified FFB are not sold as RSPO certified FFB. This shall be contained in any group marketing system
that is developed for the group, and shall follow one of the supply chain models as per the RSPO Supply Chain Certification Systems, i.e. Identity Preserved, Segregation or Mass Balance.
3.3 The group manager shall ensure that all invoices for sales of RSPO certified FFB originating from the group are issued with the required information as per the adopted supply chain model requirements within Annex 6 of the RSPO Supply Chain Certification Systems document – November 2009.
3.4 The physical transporting of RSPO certified FFB originating from the plantations of group members shall be done either directly by the group (i.e. through own transportation), or via sub-contracted intermediaries. For intermediaries the requirements as outlined in 3.7 shall also apply.
3.5 All sales of FFB originating from the plantations of group members shall be documented. This shall include: 3.5.1 Invoices and receipts (purchase and sale). 3.5.2 Information on transport. 3.5.3 The relevant group members‟ group identification number. 3.5.4 Description of the product sold (i.e. RSPO certified or not), product volume and destination.
3.6 The Group Manager shall maintain copies of all relevant documentation and records of group product transactions for a period of 5 years.
3.7 If an intermediary exists in the supply chain from the group to the mill that wants to be included within the group certification control rather than obtain their own supply chain certification, the intermediary shall be identified by the Group Manager. The Group Manager shall have a contract with the intermediary to fulfill the RSPO Standard for Group Certification and agree to be assessed on an annual basis by the Group Manager as well as in certification assessments. It is the responsibility of the Group Manager to ensure that the intermediary shall comply with the following conditions 3.7.1 There shall be a contract between the intermediary and the Group Manager. 3.7.2 The intermediary shall have complete purchasing and selling records. 3.7.3 The intermediary shall have RSPO supply chain systems in place to separate certified from non certified materials through any of the RSPO supply chain options (i.e. Identity Preserved, Segregation or Mass Balance).
3.3 Stakeholder Consultation
Whenever necessary, meetings with the relevant stakeholders were arranged during the on-site assessment. Please see Principle 6.
The method of consultation with the employees, settlers and FFB contractors, FELDA staff, harvesters, general workers, sprayers and transporters from the estate/schemes involved were through random sampling. The consultations which were conducted at the CU’s office had included solicitation of comments on issues relevant to RSPO Standard for Group Certification and principles 4, 5 and 6 of the RPSO MYNI.
The consultations with the local communities were held at offices of FELDA Chempelak Barat, Bukit Serampang and Bukit Senggeh during the times that were convenient to them. The intention was to (a) understand whether they claim any customary land within the CU, (b) solicit their views on the impact of the FSSS CU’s operations on their economics and socio-cultural lives and (c) their understanding on RSPO and why the need for them to be aware, cooperate and comply.
During the consultations, no management representatives from the CU were present. As such, the stakeholders had been able to present their views in a frank and open manner.
3.4 Date of Next Surveillance audit
The next surveillance audit will be conducted between nine to twelve months from this audit
3.5 Assessment Recomendation
Based on the evidence gathered during the on-site visits it can be concluded that FELDA Segamat Smallholders Scheme Certification Unit had continued conformed to the requirements of the RSPO Standard For Group Certification: 26th August 2010 and RSPO Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Palm Oil Production, including smallholder, Malaysia National Interpretation Working Group (MYNIWG) November 2010.
Therefore, the assessment team recommends FELDA Segamat Smallholders Scheme Certification Unit to continue certification against the RSPO Standard For Group Certification: 26th August 2010 and RSPO Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Palm Oil Production, including smallholder, Malaysia National Interpretation Working Group (MYNIWG) November 2010.
3.6 Formal Sign-off of Assessment Findings
Attachment 1
LOCATION MAP FOR FELDA SEGAMAT SMALLHOLDER SCHEME IN NEIGHBOURING CONTEXT
NOTES
PM1 : Felda Pemanis 1 PM2 : Felda Pemanis 2 MDI : Felda Medoi KMLH: Felda Kemelah TNG : Felda Tenang SLDG : Felda Sri Ledang CMLK : Felda Chemplak CMLKT: Felda Chemplak Timur CMLKB: Felda Chemplak Barat BSMP : Felda Bukit Serampang MCP/MG : Felda Machap Menggong BSGH : Felda Bukit Senggeh KMD : Felda Kemendor LNG : Felda Lenga
Attachment 2
SURVEILLANCE ASSESSMENT PLAN
1. Objectives The objectives of the assessment are as follows: (i) To determine FELDA Segamat Smallholder Scheme conformance against the RSPO Principles & Criteria Malaysian National Interpretation (MYNI): Nov 2010, RSPO Standard for Group Certification and RSPO Supply Chain Certification System. (ii) To verify the effective implementation of corrective actions arising from the findings of last assessment. (iii) To make appropriate recommendations based on the assessment findings
2. Date of assessment : 28th May 2013 to 31st May 2013
3. Site of assessment : FELDA Segamat Smallholder Scheme Km 5, Jalan Genuang, 89000 Segamat Johor Darul Takzim FELDA Segamat Smallholder Certification Unit . FELDA Chempelak Barat, 85300 Labis, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Tenang, 85300 Labis, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Chempelak, 85300 Labis, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Kemelah, 85040 Segamat, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Pemanis 1, 85009 Segamat, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Pemanis 2, 85009 Segamat, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Medoi, 85050 Segamat, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Sri Ledang, 85220 Jementah, Segamat, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Bukit Serampang, 85210 Jementah, Segamat, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Lenga, 84040 Muar, Johor Darul Takzim . FELDA Tun Ghafar Machap / Menggong,78000 Alor Gajah, Melaka . FELDA Tun Ghafar Kemendore,77000 Jasin, Melaka . FELDA Tun Ghafar Bukit Senggeh, Nyalas,77100 Asahan, Melaka
4. Scope of certification : Production of Oil Palm Fresh Fruit Bunches
5. Reference Standard RSPO Standard Group Certification July 2010, RSPO P&C MYNI (including Smallholders) Nov 2010 and RSPO Supply Chain Certification System November 2011 Company’s audit criteria including Company’s Manual/Procedures
6. Assessment Team a. Lead Assessor : Hj Mahzan Munap b. Assessor : Valence Shem Khairul Najwan B Ahmad Jahari : Mohd. Razman Salim (Trainee Assessor)
If there is any objection to the proposed audit team, the organization is required to inform the Lead Assessor/RSPO Section Manager.
7. Audit Method Site audits including observation of practices, interviews with interested parties (employees, nearby population, etc.), documentation evaluation and evaluation of records.
8. Confidentiality Requirements SIRIM QAS International shall not disclose any information concerning the company regarding all matters arising or coming to its attention with the conduct of the programme, which is of confidential in nature other than information, which is in the public domain.
In the event that there be any legal requirements for disclosing any information concerning the organization, SIRIM QAS International shall inform the organization of the information to be disclosed.
8. Working Language : English and Bahasa Malaysia
9. Reporting a) Language : English b) Format : Verbal and written c) Expected date of issue : Thirty days after the date of assessment d) Distribution list : client file
10. Facilities Required Room for discussion Relevant document and record Personnel protective equipment if required Photocopy facilities A guide for each assessor
11. Assessment Programme Details : As shown below
Day 1: 28th May 2013 (Tuesday)
Time Activities / areas to be visited Auditee Opening Meeting –Dewan FELDA Chempelak Barat, Labis, Johor 8.15 am- Audit team introduction and briefing on assessment objectives, scope, methodology, criteria and programmes by SIRIM QAS Audit Team 8.30 am Leader.
8.30 am – Briefing on the organization background and implementation of RSPO at all schemes (i.e. changes on organization activities, if any, time Management bound plan and corrective actions taken to address Stage 2 assessment findings) by FELDA Management Representative. Representative 9.05 am - 9.35 am Overview of today’s activities including on-going community programmes at FELDA Chempelak Barat by Scheme Manager. Scheme Manager 9.35 am- Logistics discussion to the sites to be visited. Each assessor to be provided with a FELDA transportation and Guide(s) at each named site Management 9.40 am as each of the assessor will go separate ways. Representative Mahzan B Munap Valence Shem Khairul Najwan Coverage of assessment at FELDA Coverage of assessment at FELDA Coverage of assessment at FELDA Bukit Guide(s) for each Chempelak Timur: Chempelak Barat:: Serampang: assessor
Documentation and records review Documentation and records review Discussion with relevant management (including Internal Control System, (including verification on action taken to relating to local community and indigenous verification on action taken to address address Stage 2 assessment findings). peoples issues such as EIA, SIA, Stage 2 assessment findings). Documented and implemented operating assessment and management plans (CSR, Documented and implemented operating procedures community affairs), FELDA settlers and procedures Management document made publicly stakeholders (Forest Rangers, Workers, Records of request and responses with available Union, Contractors, Suppliers, etc.) stakeholders Compliance with legal requirements Management document made publicly Commitment to long-term economic and Documentation and records review available financial viability (including verification on action taken to Compliance with all legal requirements Environmental Aspects/impacts address Stage 2 assessment findings). Commitment to long-term economic and documentation Documented and implemented operating financial viability Replanting practices procedures Safety & Health practice – witness Good Agricultural Practice- witness Contracts between scheme managers and activities at site activities at site (weeding/ spraying/ other participants Occupational safety and health plan maintenance activities/ harvesting) and Commitments to transparency Chemical management Nursery, if any. Records of request and responses with Chemical store/fertilizer Soil fertility, control of erosion and stakeholders Storage, use and medical surveillance degradation Management document made publicly associated with agrochemicals Quality and availability of surface and available Facilities at workplace (water treatment ground water Compliance with all legal requirements plant, clinic & etc) Facilities at workplace (water treatment Legal ownership of land, history of land Training and skill development plant, generator set, etc.) use and boundary stones. programmes Handling of wastes and pollutants. Commitment to long-term economic and
Waste management including disposal site Peat Soil financial viability Energy and renewable energy used Chemical store/fertilizer / triple rinsing List of stakeholders, community, Recycling activities Controlled/open burning workforce, HCV acreage including map, Pollution mitigating plans Plantation on hilly/swampy area etc. Local sustainable development Records of Training - IPM Training and Replanting on sloping land must be in Interview with stakeholders( Group River system and Water bodies compliance with MSGAP Part 2: OP Manager, 15 Settlers, Workers, Pollution mitigating plans (4.4.2.2) Contractors, Suppliers, etc.) Land titles user rights Inspection of protected sites with HCV Facilities at workplace (rest area, etc) Implementation and safe use of agro- attributes Settlers’ housing / line site chemicals. Forested area Contracts between scheme managers and Open burning Riparian zone participants Energy and renewable energy used Peat Soil, open burning Continuous improvement Management and disposal of waste River system and Water bodies including pesticides containers Source of water supply Interview with workers stakeholders, Facilities provided at settlers’ housing Other area identified during the assessment Workers, Contractors, etc. area (i.e. mosque, surau, community center, provision shop & etc) Supply Chain Assessment Continuous improvement Records of training Assessment on P1, P2, P3, P4 (C4.1, I4.4.3, I4.6.3-I4.6.4, I4.6.5, C4.7, C4.8), P5 (C5.1, Other area identified during the assessment C5.3, C5.4), P6 (C6.11), P8 Other area identified during the assessment
Assessment on P1, P2, P3, P4 (C4.1, C4.3, C4.4, C4.8), P5 (C5.1, C5.2,), P6 (C6.1 – Assessment on P1, P2 (C2.1, C2.2), P3, P4 C6.11), P8 (C4.1, C4.2. C4.3, C4.4, C4.5, C4.6, C4.8), P5 (C5.1, C5.3, C5.4, C5.6, P8, SCCS (P5)
1.00 pm LUNCH BREAK All 2.00 pm - Guide(s) for each 5.30 pm Continue assessment at office. assessor
5.30 pm End of Assessment. . 7.15 pm
8.00 pm– DINNER 9.00 pm
9.00 pm Assessment team discussion and verification on any outstanding issues.
10.00 pm Note : Assessor to inform auditee on the required document / records.
Day 2: 29th May 2013 (Wednesday)
Time Activities / areas to be visited Auditee
3 FELDA vehicles pick-up the SIRIM QAS Assessors at Koptown Hotel. Respective 7.30 am- 1 vehicle to FELDA Chempelak Timur, 1 vehicle to Chempelak Barat and 1 vehicle to Bukit Serampang FELDA Scheme 8.30 am Manager
8.30 am – Scheme Overview of today’s activities including on-going community programmes at the respective FELDA scheme visited by its Scheme Manager. 9.00 am - Manager
Mahzan B Munap Valence Shem Khairul Najwan Coverage of assessment at FELDA Bukit Coverage of assessment at FELDA Coverage of assessment at FELDA Guide(s) for each Serampang: Chempelak Tmur:: Chempelak Barat and Chempelak Timur: assessor
Documentation and records review Documentation and records review Discussion with relevant management (including Internal Control System, (including verification on action taken to relating to local community and indigenous verification on action taken to address address Stage 2 assessment findings). peoples issues such as EIA, SIA, Stage 2 assessment findings). Documented and implemented operating assessment and management plans (CSR, Documented and implemented operating procedures community affairs), FELDA settlers and procedures Management document made publicly stakeholders (Forest Rangers, Workers, Records of request and responses with available Union, Contractors, Suppliers, etc.) stakeholders Compliance with legal requirements Management document made publicly Commitment to long-term economic and Documentation and records review available financial viability (including verification on action taken to Compliance with all legal requirements Environmental Aspects/impacts address Stage 2 assessment findings). Commitment to long-term economic and documentation Documented and implemented operating financial viability Replanting practices procedures Safety & Health practice – witness Good Agricultural Practice- witness Contracts between scheme managers and activities at site activities at site (weeding/ spraying/ other participants Occupational safety and health plan maintenance activities/ harvesting) and Commitments to transparency Chemical management Nursery, if any. Records of request and responses with Chemical store/fertilizer Soil fertility, control of erosion and stakeholders Storage, use and medical surveillance degradation Management document made publicly associated with agrochemicals Quality and availability of surface and available Facilities at workplace (water treatment ground water Compliance with all legal requirements plant, clinic & etc) Facilities at workplace (water treatment Legal ownership of land, history of land Training and skill development plant, generator set, etc.) use and boundary stones. programmes Handling of wastes and pollutants. Commitment to long-term economic and Waste management including disposal site Peat Soil financial viability Energy and renewable energy used Chemical store/fertilizer / triple rinsing List of stakeholders, community, Recycling activities Controlled/open burning workforce, HCV acreage including map, Pollution mitigating plans Plantation on hilly/swampy area etc. Local sustainable development Records of Training - IPM Training and Replanting on sloping land must be in
Interview with stakeholders( Group River system and Water bodies compliance with MSGAP Part 2: OP Manager, 15 Settlers, Workers, Pollution mitigating plans (4.4.2.2) Contractors, Suppliers, etc.) Land titles user rights Inspection of protected sites with HCV Facilities at workplace (rest area, etc) Implementation and safe use of agro- attributes Settlers’ housing / line site chemicals. Forested area Contracts between scheme managers and Open burning Riparian zone participants Energy and renewable energy used Peat Soil, open burning Continuous improvement Management and disposal of waste River system and Water bodies including pesticides containers Source of water supply Interview with workers stakeholders, Facilities provided at settlers’ housing Other area identified during the assessment Workers, Contractors, etc. area (i.e. mosque, surau, community
center, provision shop & etc) Supply Chain Audit Assessment on P1, P2, P3, P4 (C4.1, I4.4.3, Continuous improvement Records of training I4.6.3-I4.6.4, I4.6.5, C4.7, C4.8), P5 (C5.1, C5.3, C5.4), P6 (C6.11), P8 Other area identified during the assessment Other area identified during the assessment
Assessment on P1, P2, P3, P4 (C4.1, C4.3, C4.4, C4.8), P5 (C5.1, C5.2,), P6 (C6.1 – Assessment on P1, P2 (C2.1, C2.2), P3, P4 C6.11), P8 (C4.1, C4.2. C4.3, C4.4, C4.5, C4.6, C4.8), P5 (C5.1, C5.3, C5.4, C5.6, P8, SCCS (P5) 1.00 pm LUNCH BREAK All 2.00 pm - Guide(s) for each 5.30 pm Continue assessment at office. assessor
5.30 pm End of Assessment. . 7.15 pm
Day 3: 30th May 2013
Time Activities / areas to be visited Auditee
7.30 am- All SIRIM Auditors drive their own vehicle following FELDA Coordinator to respective FELDA Scheme (Bukit Senggeh, Chempelak Barat and Respective 8.30 am Bukit Serampang). FELDA Scheme Manager
8.30 am – Overview of today’s activities including on-going community programmes at the respective FELDA scheme visited by its Scheme Manager. Scheme 9.00 am - Manager Mahzan B Munap Valence Shem Khairul Najwan Coverage of assessment at FELDA Coverage of assessment at FELDA Bukit Coverage of assessment at FELDA Bukit Guide(s) for each Chempelak Barat and Bukit Sengggeh: Serampang and Bukti Senggeh: Senggeh : assessor
Documentation and records review Documentation and records review Discussion with relevant management
(including Internal Control System, (including verification on action taken to relating to local community and indigenous verification on action taken to address address Stage 2 assessment findings). peoples issues such as EIA, SIA, Stage 2 assessment findings). Documented and implemented operating assessment and management plans (CSR, Documented and implemented operating procedures community affairs), FELDA settlers and procedures Management document made publicly stakeholders (Forest Rangers, Workers, Records of request and responses with available Union, Contractors, Suppliers, etc.) stakeholders Compliance with legal requirements Management document made publicly Commitment to long-term economic and Documentation and records review available financial viability (including verification on action taken to Compliance with all legal requirements Environmental Aspects/impacts address Stage 2 assessment findings). Commitment to long-term economic and documentation Documented and implemented operating financial viability Replanting practices procedures Safety & Health practice – witness Good Agricultural Practice- witness Contracts between scheme managers and activities at site activities at site (weeding/ spraying/ other participants Occupational safety and health plan maintenance activities/ harvesting) and Commitments to transparency Chemical management Nursery, if any. Records of request and responses with Chemical store/fertilizer Soil fertility, control of erosion and stakeholders Storage, use and medical surveillance degradation Management document made publicly associated with agrochemicals Quality and availability of surface and available Facilities at workplace (water treatment ground water Compliance with all legal requirements plant, clinic & etc) Facilities at workplace (water treatment Legal ownership of land, history of land Training and skill development plant, generator set, etc.) use and boundary stones. programmes Handling of wastes and pollutants. Commitment to long-term economic and Waste management including disposal site Peat Soil financial viability Energy and renewable energy used Chemical store/fertilizer / triple rinsing List of stakeholders, community, Recycling activities Controlled/open burning workforce, HCV acreage including map, Pollution mitigating plans Plantation on hilly/swampy area etc. Local sustainable development Records of Training - IPM Training and Replanting on sloping land must be in Interview with stakeholders( Group River system and Water bodies compliance with MSGAP Part 2: OP Manager, 15 Settlers, Workers, Pollution mitigating plans (4.4.2.2) Contractors, Suppliers, etc.) Land titles user rights Inspection of protected sites with HCV Facilities at workplace (rest area, etc) Implementation and safe use of agro- attributes Settlers’ housing / line site chemicals. Forested area Contracts between scheme managers and Open burning Riparian zone participants Energy and renewable energy used Peat Soil, open burning Continuous improvement Management and disposal of waste River system and Water bodies Source of water supply including pesticides containers Interview with workers stakeholders, Facilities provided at settlers’ housing Other area identified during the assessment Workers, Contractors, etc. area (i.e. mosque, surau, community
Supply Chain Audit center, provision shop & etc)
Continuous improvement Records of training Assessment on P1, P2, P3, P4 (C4.1, I4.4.3, I4.6.3-I4.6.4, I4.6.5, C4.7, C4.8), P5 (C5.1, Other area identified during the assessment C5.3, C5.4), P6 (C6.11), P8 Other area identified during the assessment
Assessment on P1, P2 (C2.1, C2.2), P3, P4 Assessment on P1, P2, P3, P4 (C4.1, C4.3, (C4.1, C4.2. C4.3, C4.4, C4.5, C4.6, C4.8), C4.4, C4.8), P5 (C5.1, C5.2,), P6 (C6.1 – P5 (C5.1, C5.3, C5.4, C5.6, P8, SCCS (P5) C6.11), P8
1.00 pm LUNCH BREAK All 2.00 pm - Guide(s) for each 5.30 pm Continue assessment at office. assessor
5.30 pm End of Assessment. .Check –in at Hotel near Bukit Senggeh. 7.15 pm
Day four: 31st May 2013 (Friday)
Time Activities / areas to be visited Auditee 7.30 am- Mahzan B Munap Valence Shem Khairul Najwan 8.15 am FELDA Tun Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh office
8.15 am – Continue with assessment at FELDA Tun Continue with assessment at FELDA Tun Continue with assessment at FELDA Tun Guide(s) for each 9.45 am Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh office Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh office Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh office assessor
9.45am – BREAK 10.00am 10.00 am- Assessment team discussion and verification on any outstanding issues. SIRIM Auditors 11.30 am Note : Assessor to inform auditee on the required document / records. End of Assessment. 11.30 am – Closing meeting and ASA1 Presentation 12.30 pm
Attachment 3
VERIFICATION OF PREVIOUS AUDIT FINDINGS
P & C Specification Detail Non- Corrective Action Taken Verification by Assessor Indicator Major/Minor conformances
Criterion MM1 Person responsible for A system for tracking Sighted the following 2.1 Minor monitoring changes in the changes in laws including evidences: Indicator laws and for identifying person 1. Appointment letter 2.1.4 communicating such responsible for it has been 2. Procedure for changes down the line prepared and notified at tracking changes in has yet to be identified. the FELDA Segamat law and Regional Office. communicating same to relevant parties.
NC Closed out.
Criterion MM2 FELDA Tun Ghaffar FELDA Tun Ghaffar A copy of the replanting 3.1 Minor Macap/Menggong has not Macap will prepare its program that was Indicator shown commitment to replanting programme forwarded to auditor was 3.1.2 long term economic and found acceptable. financial viability planning by ensuring replanting NC Closed out. program is in place.
Criterion MM3 FELDA Paloh could not Remind employees to log Form to control and track 4.3 Minor readily produced SOP, in when document borrowed and Indicator more specifically on road borrowed/removed return sighted and found 4.3.3 maintenance program document from central acceptable as a means to although road “library”. All Block trace its whereabouts. maintenance budget was Leaders are reminded to Person responsible for sighted has been refer to the SOP in document control had allocated. Manual Sawit Lestari/ been appointed. Manual Pengurusan FELDA before awarding Road maintenance any work to contractors (at program had been block level) in JKKR developed and sighted meetings. Effective March reasonable. 2012, a clerk has been appointed in every NC Closed out. scheme to monitor the borrowing/return of the manuals, upon reference by the Block Leaders.
Criterion MM4 Oil palm trees were grown 1. To allow area planted Sighted the following and 2.1 Major encroaching into riparian before 2004/05 to found acceptable: Indicator zone return to nature 1. Letter to exclude the 2.1.3 (natural regeneration) three settlers’ area through the following: from RSPO a) To intensify Information certification. dissemination / 2. Signage prohibiting communication intrusion to buffer regarding relevant zone erected at legal requirements of relevant areas. RSPO P&C and Group 3. Training given to all Certification Standard members. to the participants; and b) Conduct training. NC Closed out.
2. To expel the three non- conforming out of four hundred and thirty one members from the Group Certification System.
Attachment 4
DETAIL OF NON-CONFORMITY AND CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN
P & C Specification Detail Non-conformances Corrective Action Taken Verification by Indicator Major/Minor Assessor Indicator Major Some key training courses Each Scheme The prepared training 4.8.1 had not been conducted, Management will monitor plan and program for example, Aspect/Impact, the Training Plan and Aspect/Impact, Hazard NCR #: Area/Location: Hazard Identification, Risk Training Program Identification, Risk MM-2 FELDA Tun Assessment, Risk Control, prepared. Records of Assessment, Risk Ghaffar Bukit RSPO Awareness, Social training conducted Control, RSPO Senggeh, Impact Assessment. etc including attendance Awareness, Social Impact FELDA sheet, training evaluation Assessment. had been Chempelak There was no such training and competency sighted. It is an on-going Barat, and record available at FELDA assessment will be kept training by batch to cover FELDA Bukit Tun Ghaffar Bukit in RSPO File 4.8 and all scheme participants Serampang. Senggeh, FELDA monitored periodically. and contractors. Auditor Chempelak Barat, and will verify records of FELDA Bukit Serampang. training and coverage of participants during next ASA.
Status: NCR Closed. Indicator Major The records on SIA 6.1.1 conducted were not A SIA study has been Area/Location: sufficient. A time bound carried and submitted NCR #: FELDA Tun mitigation plan with to SIRIM QAS KN-1 Ghaffar Bukit responsibilities was not International on Senggeh drawn and implemented. FELDA Tun Ghaffar The SIA study is Bukit Senggeh – acceptable but could be It was observed that there improved was SIA conducted, however the records was not adequate at;
1. FELDA Tun Ghaffar Bukit Senggeh (only Status: NCR Closed. two survey forms filled)
A time bound mitigation plan with responsibilities also not available