The best environmental choice in seafood

1. Disclaimer If any interpretive issues arise in relation to the issues covered in these presentations, the text of the MSC Scheme Documents will prevail in all instances. The MSC is not responsible for any issues arising to any parties as a result of consulting these presentations. If you are unsure of any details on any of the subjects covered, please consult the relevant MSC scheme documents or contact the MSC at standards@msc.org. October 2010 MSC Executive The best environmental choice in seafood

2. Scheme Document Review CAB training October 4th 2010

3. Project summary Requirements: Fishery & CoC Guidance: Fishery & CoC Methodologies FAM TAB Directives Policy Advisories Other stuff

4. Today’s objectives • The Project Goals • Our Proposed Documents • The Project Plan • Your Input on a few Key Issues • Your Ongoing feedback • Corridor conversations – This Week • Formal and informal – Throughout the Project

5. Example: just after accepting a fishery application . . . . This brain is a mess – they must have been reading the MSC Scheme documents. . • Section 1 -3 of the FCM; • Policy Advisory 11 • Policy Advisory 16 v1 • TAB D-010 v2 • TAB D-017 v2 • TAB D-028 • TAB D-029 • Accreditation Manual • ISO Guide 65 • IAF Guidance to ISO Guide 65

6. Project objectives 1) Reduce the number of documents 2) Same document format and structure to improve consistency 3) Eliminate duplication 4) Make requirements and guidance easy to tell apart 5) Improve accessibility by improving readability 6) Use the same vocabulary in all documents 7) Improve audit-ability by clearly presenting requirements 8) Simplify future changes to make amendments easy

7. Hierarchy of Requirements

8. Which documents apply to which CABs • all CABs • ISO Guide 65 • IAF Guidance to ISO Guide 65 • General Certification Requirements (GCR) • CoC Certification Requirements (CCR) • some CABs • Fishery Certification requirements (FCR)

9. ONE main document proposed • General Certification Requirements (GCR) • All CABs conform • Accreditation Manual part 1; Directives and Advisories common to CoC and Fishery • CoC Certification Requirements (CCR) • All CABs conform • Accreditation Manual part 3 ; CoCCM; Directives and Advisories related to CoC • Fisheries Certification Requirements (FCR) • Fishery CABs conform • Accreditation Manual part 2; FCM; FAM; Directives and Advisories related to fishery

10. new support documents proposed • Guidance to General Certification Requirements (GCR) • All CABs use • Accreditation Manual part 1; Directives and Advisories common to CoC and Fishery • Guidance to CoC Certification Requirements (CCR) • All CABs use • Accreditation Manual part 3 ; CoCCM; Directives and Advisories related to CoC • Guidance to Fisheries Certification Requirements (FCR) • Fishery CABs use • Accreditation Manual part 2; FCM; FAM; Directives and Advisories related to fishery

11. Requirements vs. Guidance Requirement Mandatory Shall be followed Guidance No instructions – intent, examples, interpretations May be used

12. Drafting “rules” • Say it once – one clause, one idea • If ISO Guide 65 or IAF Guidance say it, MSC doesn’t say it again • Everything on the same topic is in the same place (e.g. setting scope) • A requirement (shall or should) is stated once in the highest level document it can go • Requirements presented in the order that they happen • No instructions to other readers (e.g. instructions to the MSC, certificate holders, stakeholders and ASI) • All explanations, intent and examples are guidance • Document format and numbering is standardised • Written in plain international English using small words and short sentences. Written for readers in Grade 12 or less

14. Project Management and contributors MSC: Manager Daniel Suddaby Contributors All the S&L team Contractor: Manager James Sullivan Contributor Richard Bradley

15. Message for CABs • We are not changing requirements. • If we find areas where change is needed (e.g. opposing instructions, different definitions, missing steps) we will make recommendations to MSC to fix things. • We will have a consultation round with you January / February / March 2011. • We will do our best for you. • While we can’t slow the pace of change, we can make it simpler to follow.

16. Questions on the project

17. CAB Input We would like your input – on three key areas: • The Amendment Process • Consultation & Testing • Implementation Procedures & Timelines

18. Future amendments • Changes will be made by amending requirements, not by publishing standalone documents. • This gives consolidated text maintained by MSC with changes marked, effective dates and derogations shown in footnotes. • Advice on reasons for change will be found in Guidance or in supplementary papers. • Periodically, MSC will re-issue revised versions of all MSC scheme documents to provide a new ‘clean’ version.

19. Consultation & Testing • Consultation with CABs is crucial. We have 10 weeks planned how can we best use this time and engage CABs in the process? • There are no plans for pilot testing since the SDR Project is not creating any new requirements – is this reasonable?

20. Implementation • What instructions should the TAB issue to transition from the old scheme documents to the new ones? • What timelines should the TAB set for the transition?

21. Request for continued feedback • Tell us what you think we should do – after all, the documents are written for you to follow • We are around all week – feel free to approach us • Corridors • Dinners and drinks • Changes to content are out of scope