an apparent problem w/a mac certifier's statements ?

[Anonymous]

one of the certification companies listed on the mac website is a group called TAVEL

here is a quote from Tavel's site regarding their certification criteria:


Chain of Custody Assessments

If your organization purchases fish or wishes to purchase fish products from a fishery that has been certified as being “a well managed and sustainable fishery” under the MSC Sustainable Fisheries programme, your company may be eligible to benefit from the application of the MSC Logo to the certified product. The prescribed Chain of Custody Certification conducted by TAVEL Certification verifies that the product originated in the certified fishery and has moved through the supply chain in a manner that ensures that it has not been adulterate with other non-certified product.
In the Chain of Custody Certification, a TAVEL Certification Assessor will verify the documentation and recording systems employed by your company to ensure that certified product is requested and received and that there is no opportunity for improper labeling of other non-certified product.

Much of the Chain of Custody requirements of the MSC are covered through such industry standards as HACCP and FDA Process Licensing requirements. Two key areas that are typically not considered in other quality assurance plans are

Proof that product is not co-mingled with other fish at any point in the chain; and


Proof that labels placed on product at any point along the chain are properly affixed on only certified product


given that mac certified facilities can hold (and possibly mix, even if by accident) both net, and cyanide caught, animals, i wonder if anyone has thoughts as to how Tavel would be able to assure compliance of mac standards w/tavel's certification standards?

 

[MaryHM]

Well, vitz! Don't you know the answer to this??? The certifier knows these things to be true because the certified facility writes it down on a little piece of paper. And we all know that everything that is written down is the truth.

 

[Anonymous]

heh

mebbe i should narrow down the question abit :wink:

how could tavel have even agreed to certify any operation known in advance to carry mixed product given their publicly stated standards to begin with?

doesn't this shed some serious doubt as to tavel's credibility?

 

[clarionreef]

Vitz,
'DUH".
Sincerely, Steve

 

[Anonymous]

i realize the questions are rhetorical :wink:

this one isn't, though...

does there exist any organization that holds certification agencies accountable to standards?

kind of like the bar for lawyers?

or is certification an absolutely meaningless thing, regardless of who does it?

it would be nice if jameso would offer his opinion here, as he's very familiar w/ iso certification procedures, etc.

what would happen to ensure that the iso itself , if found to be violating there own standards of measurement/policy, gets their ability to certify revoked?

is it solely by demand of the consumer to remove/correct themselves? or is there some other mechanism to provide the proper 'check and balance'?

 

[hdtran]

I'm not Jamesw, but I'm familiar with ISO 900x registration (having had to go thru it) and ABET and other processes (mostly ditto).

For ISO 900x, you establish procedures and document them. Then, you choose an auditor to come and audit your procedures and documentation. You may choose to establish procedures which are utter crap, for example, "we will do a crash test of 1 of 100,000 cars. Then, we will not show the results to the engineers." But if you go ahead and follow the procedures, and can document that you are doing so, you pass the audit.

When a big 5 (or now, big 4 or 3) accounting firm (Arthur Andersen, snicker) descends upon you to check your books in the required quarterly audit for the SEC, they basically just check the books for internal consistency. They don't verify that the WIP you're carrying on the books is actually on the floor (actually WIP is bad, so they don't check that the stuff on the floor is on the books), etc.

You'd be surprised how much of the stuff 'out there' is just self-policed by the businessperson. We do it right because it's right to do it right. (And in the long term, it's our reputation and good name on the line).

Hy

 

[Anonymous]

hdtran

so what happens when an 'auditor'/(certifier?) is blatantly ok-ing a faulty (by their own publicly stated) sop from the get go?

are the checks and balances strictly on the honor system? or is there some independent body that can revoke an auditors ability to audit, or issue certification?

 

[hdtran]

Vitz,

Let me amplify on my above post: ISO does not audit. There are a whole ton of third party companies which certify that a facility meets ISO criteria.

So, from reading the "Aquarium Council" site (aka MAC), MAC does not itself audit. But a number of third party businesses are accredited to certify, including Tavel. The question then is, does Tavel certify to its own standards, or to MAC's?

Regards,

Hy

 

[hdtran]

Cross-posting at the speed of light!

In the ISO example, you have the auditing agency (call it "WeCertify" and the company (call it the "Nogo Car Company"). Usually, WeCertify revokes Nogo's certification for improper documentation. But if WeCertify is fraudulently providing certification to Nogo, then hypothetically, ISO (which is a NGO) revokes WeCertify's right to audit.

It's all (mostly) voluntary.

Regards,

Hy

 

[Anonymous]

Vitz,

Let me amplify on my above post: ISO does not audit. There are a whole ton of third party companies which certify that a facility meets ISO criteria.

So, from reading the "Aquarium Council" site (aka MAC), MAC does not itself audit. But a number of third party businesses are accredited to certify, including Tavel. The question then is, does Tavel certify to its own standards, or to MAC's?
Regards,

Hy

well, that's where i'm getting to...

tavel's own publicly stated standards don't seem to jive w/macs allowed practices

if they are certifying to a standard lower than their own 'guaranteed level', aren't they being abit foolish, at the least, via compromising their own sop?

and if they are compromising their own sop, is there some other entity that can revoke their ability to claim their higher standard is the one they follow, or revoke there ability to certify at all?

 

[hdtran]

All hypotheticals here.

Suppose you were Arthur Andersen, and called to audit a company in Freedonia.

Do you audit them to US 'generally accepted accounting standards,' or to the Freedonia accounting standards?

 

[Anonymous]

All hypotheticals here.

Suppose you were Arthur Andersen, and called to audit a company in Freedonia.

Do you audit them to US 'generally accepted accounting standards,' or to the Freedonia accounting standards?

hy,

did you read my 1st post in the thread? :?

what's hypothetical?

The prescribed Chain of Custody Certification conducted by TAVEL Certification verifies that the product originated in the certified fishery and has moved through the supply chain in a manner that ensures that it has not been adulterate with other non-certified product.

and that there is no opportunity for improper labeling of other non-certified product.

Proof that product is not co-mingled with other fish at any point in the chain; and


Proof that labels placed on product at any point along the chain are properly affixed on only certified product

these criteria are patently impossible to be met, under mac's standards, and yet they are certifying mac product

i'm not sure you understand the gist of what i'm saying, or asking :?

 

[hdtran]

Your post says MSC. Is MSC MAC?

Hy

 

[Anonymous]

Your post says MSC. Is MSC MAC?

Hy

no

tavel is however, listed on the MAC site as being one of their certification entities

MSC is the marine stewardship council

http://www.tavelcertify.com/home.html

 

[hdtran]

Then, Tavel would certify to whichever standard it is certifying to (Freedonia if it's contracted to certify in Freedonia).

Hy

 

[mkirda]

given that mac certified facilities can hold (and possibly mix, even if by accident) both net, and cyanide caught, animals, i wonder if anyone has thoughts as to how Tavel would be able to assure compliance of mac standards w/tavel's certification standards?

Vitz,

Given my reading of what you have quoted and my many times reading the MAC certification standards:

IN MY OPINION-

Tavel and MACs standards are wholly incompatible.

Fish certified according to what Tavel writes could never be in an facility with any non-Tavel certified fish whatsoever.
MAC standards allow fish from non-MAC sources to be held in the same facility. My reading of Tavel's writings is that they cannot.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[hdtran]

Mike & Vitz,

Vitz quoted Tavel's procedure for MSC certification, not for MAC certification.

I have not read MAC's standards (nor MSC's either). But if MSC is different from MAC, then, there's no contradiction here. Tavel certifies not to their own standard, but to the standard defined by the organization (MSC or MAC).

Off topic, Vitz, can you translate your signature for me? My Hebrew (I assume it's Hebrew and not Yiddish) is as good as my Tagalog.

Hy

 

[Anonymous]

'you don't give nuts to those who have no teeth'
:mrgreen:

 

[Anonymous]

given that mac certified facilities can hold (and possibly mix, even if by accident) both net, and cyanide caught, animals, i wonder if anyone has thoughts as to how Tavel would be able to assure compliance of mac standards w/tavel's certification standards?

Vitz,

Given my reading of what you have quoted and my many times reading the MAC certification standards:

IN MY OPINION-

Tavel and MACs standards are wholly incompatible.

Fish certified according to what Tavel writes could never be in an facility with any non-Tavel certified fish whatsoever.
MAC standards allow fish from non-MAC sources to be held in the same facility. My reading of Tavel's writings is that they cannot.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

ding ding ding!!!



mike-that is exactly the same conclusion i arrived at immediately upon checking out tavel's site, after looking at the list of certifiers mac has posted on their site

raises some very disturbing questions, does it not?

 

[PeterIMA]

Let's keep in mind that both the MAC and MSC were created by WWF. Any certificatio organization that will not divulge how they carry out the certification process or what standards they apply is suspect. RDO has already exposed much of the MAC certification process (it is voluntary) and those being certified set the standard rather than the certifier or their standards organization. Does this make sense?

Peter