the teal-jones group · mr. john pichugin manager, engineering & forestry the teal-jones group...

www.pwc.com/ca/sustainability

The Teal-Jones Group

Re-Registration and Transition Assessment CSA Z809:2016

Continual Improvement Report

Report Distribution:

Client Office: Mr. John Pichugin Ms. Chris Harvey

PwC Certificate(s): PwC-CSAZ809-463

Confidentiality Statement and Disclaimer

This report is considered part of the Confidential Information described in the Engagement Letter signed by the Client. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) will not disclose this report to any third party without the Client’s prior written consent, and this report may not be released without the prior written consent of PwC. This report is intended for the use of management and the Board of Directors of the Client and is not to be referred to or distributed to any person who is not a member of management or the Board of Directors of the Client without our express written permission, in advance. We expressly disclaim any responsibility or accountability to any third parties who may gain access to this report, in whole or in part.

Responsibility for the implementation of action plans rests with the Client. PwC assumes no responsibility to update the report for events and circumstances occurring after the date of the report.

October 29, 2017

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP PwC Place, 250 Howe Street, Suite700, Vancouver, B.C., Canada V6C 3S7 T: +1 604 806 7000, F: +1 604 806 7806, www.pwc.com/ca

October 29, 2017

Private and Confidential

Mr. John Pichugin Manager, Engineering & Forestry The Teal-Jones Group 17897 Triggs Road Surrey, BC V4N 4M8

Dear Mr. Pichugin:

Subject: CSA Z809:2016 Re-registration and Transition Assessment

Enclosed please find a copy of our Continual Improvement Report which confirms that the Teal-Jones Group is operating in conformance with the Standard.

Shawn Ellsworth (604-806-7219) or I (604 806-7711) would be pleased to discuss any questions or comments, at your convenience.

Yours truly,

Mike Harris Partner

Enclosures

© 2017 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership. All rights reserved.

Contents

Assessment Plan and Activities ......................................................................................................... 1

Assessment Findings ......................................................................................................................... 2

Assessment Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 4

Appendix A – Assessment Schedule

Appendix B – Nonconformities

Appendix C – Opportunities for Improvement

Appendix D – Previous Opportunities for Improvement

Re-registration and Transition Assessment The Teal-Jones Group October 29, 2017

Forest Management Activities in the FV and HBO DFA’s 1 PwC

Assessment Plan and Activities The assessment scope, objectives, audit team members, and plan are described in the Planning Memo dated August 28, 2017 prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) and forwarded to The Teal-Jones Group (“the Client”) prior to initiation of the Assessment. A copy of the Assessment Schedule indicating the clauses and areas covered by the assessment is included as Appendix A. The Assessment Scope presented in the Planning Memo and its attachments and the Registration Scope statement on the certificate were re-confirmed upon the conclusion of the assessment. We determined that the assessment scope is appropriate.

There were no significant changes to the Client’s management system since the previous audit.

The Assessment Schedule and team members have not changed since the Planning Memo was issued.

Assessment Date The assessment was completed on September 6 - 8, 2017.

Assessment Activities The primary activities during the assessment were:

• Collecting assessment information; • Confirming that information and comparing it to the CSA Z809-16 (the “Standard”), the

Client’s documented processes, and PwC’s requirements (the “Requirements”); • Generating assessment findings; and • Preparing the Assessment report.

The audit was conducted on a sample basis using the information made available to us, we planned and performed our work in order to obtain limited assurance with respect to the information examined.

Assessment Limitations There were no limitations that impacted the completion of the Assessment or significant issues that impacted the audit programme. We have concluded that the audit objective has been met.



Assessment Findings

Nonconformities (Appendix B) The status of each finding is noted in the table below. The client response will be reviewed during the next assessment.

Audit Finding Status

463-RA-NC-01 OPEN

463-RA-NC-01 OPEN

Opportunities for Improvement (Appendix C)The status of each finding is noted in the table below and the client response will be reviewed during the next assessment.


463-RA-OFI-01 OPEN

463-RA-OFI-02 OPEN

463-RA-OFI-03 OPEN

Previous Opportunities for Improvement (Appendix D)The status of each finding is noted in the table below.


463-A2-OFI-01 CLOSED






Observations/Good Management Practices

• In general Teal Jones did an excellent job of identifying and protecting karst features on the harvest units that were viewed during the 2017 Reregistration.

• All PAG members that were contacted during the assessment were very supportive of Teal Jones’ efforts to keep the PAG relevant and provide value for the stakeholders involved.

• On one road network a contractor was going beyond normal expectations with regard to fire hazard abatement. Efforts included watering landings.

• Efforts to keep PAG members informed and engaged include a guide book to help new members understand the CSA process and their duties with regard to the standard.



Assessment Conclusions

Reliance on Internal Audit PwC has reviewed the internal audit function of the Client’s facilities.

While not a Standard requirement of 2016 version Teal is electing to continue on with an internal audit function. Monitoring is ongoing and includes: on block inspections by Operations Supervisors, discrete file reviews at each operation to ensure planning processes are being followed and management reviews issues at a higher level including any compliance related issues. Teal Jones employs an investigation review process to detail non-compliance issues including Root Cause Analysis, analysis for changes to systems to address and follow up actions. Results of these efforts are to be reviewed at the next Management Review session.

Reliance on Management Review PwC has reviewed the Client’s system for collecting, reviewing, and reporting information to management regarding progress in achieving the performance objectives and the requirements of the Standard and conclude that this conforms to the Standards.

The MERC meeting minutes (Nov 3, 2016) included a review of the external SFM audit and discussed the external audit findings. Discussion around PAG membership and concerns occurred and were followed up on in the March 1, 2017 meeting. The March meeting further discussed incident investigations regarding soil disturbance and windthrow, as well as updates to the new CSA Z809 standard. Teal's April 19, 2017 MERC meeting reviewed and approved a number of updated planning SOP's including several related to SFM (FSP updates, Windthrow, Wildlife, and Invasive Plants). Several SFM related topics were discussed at the June 21, 2017 MERC Meeting which included planning the CSA external audit, PAG activity, and the SFMP Annual report.

Organizational Capability and Management System Effectiveness The PwC Assessment Team has assessed that the Client’s management system is effective in meeting its intended outcomes based on the elements of the Standard that were tested as shown in Appendix A.

Certification Mark PwC has reviewed the Client’s use of the Certification Mark and it is in conformance with the Standard.



Recommendation PwC’s Lead Assessor recommends recertification of the Client.

Next Maintenance Assessment The next assessment should be completed prior to October 2018. The registration expires October 28, 2021.



Appendix A – Assessment Schedule



Appendix B – Nonconformities



Assessment Finding InformationOrganization: The Teal-Jones Group Assessment Finding N°: 463-RA-NC-01

Minor Nonconformity Department/Branch: Surrey Head Office/Honeymoon Bay Operations

Date: September 13, 2017

Facility Representative: Chris Harvey Lead Assessor: Shawn Ellsworth

Assessment Team Member(s): James Lucas, Jeff Koch

Assessment Criteria Reference SectionStandard and Clause N°: CSA Z809 @ 4.2 – Required Activities

Clause Text (applicable section): CSA Z809 @ 4.2 requires that the organization shall meet the sustainable forest management (SFM) requirements of this Standard, which include a) compliance with legislation applicable to the defined forest area (DFA);

Assessment Finding and Description of Objective Evidence- Is this system wide or an isolated incident?During the 2017 Re-registration assessment there were a few instances where fire extinguishers were found to not be in compliance with legal requirements under The British Columbia Fire Code 2012. These instances included a danglehead processor on cutblock 5130 which had two fire extinguishers that had no evidence of being inspected and tagged in the last year. One fire extinguisher on a machine on cutblock 8444 was not charged and one fire extinguisher in a Northview vehicle had no evidence of its last inspection.

According to The British Columbia Fire Code 2012, 6.2.1. GENERAL 6.2.1.1. Inspection, Testing and Maintenance requires that “Portable extinguishers shall be inspected, tested and maintained in conformance with NFPA 10, “Portable Fire Extinguishers.”

NFPA 10: Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers – See sections 7.1.4 (Tag or Labels) and 7.2.1 (Inspection frequency).

Working Paper/Protocol Reference: CSA Protocol 4.2Intent (documentation): Implementation: Effectiveness: XFacility Representative Accepting Assessment Finding:C. Harvey

Action Plan Due Date:November 12, 2017

Client Response (Client to enter or reference attachment)Describe immediate Correction:

1) Supervisor to replace uncharged fire extinguishers on machine in cutblock 8444 (September 20, 2017).

Provide causal analysis and results of further investigation:1) Machine Operators note that inspection tags typically fall off equipment due to exposure to normally working

conditions (e.g., weather, movement of equipment, mobilization of equipment, etc.) 2) Contractor method of documentation of inspection is not consistent with BC Fire Code. Supervisor clearly

understood the BC Fire Code requirements around fire extinguisher inspections, however documentation for the inspections was located in the office (not labelled on the fire extinguishers as per BC Fire Code sections 6.2.4.4 Labels and 6.2.4.5 Tags).

3) Teal representative did not document missing fire extinguisher tags during any recent CMS inspections. 4) Emergency response equipment requirements are outlined in the Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan and

other CMS documents. Due to the magnitude, complexity and scope of CMS documents key information most relevant to the contractors in daily operations may not be stated as clearly as it could be.



5) Contractor training and annual start up includes review of emergency response equipment requirements as outlined in the Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan and other CMS documents; however due to the magnitude, complexity and scope of the CMS documents that the Contractors must understand and follow some of the key information may not be stated as clearly as it could be.

Provide Corrective action response (based on causal analysis and investigation, determine if corrective action is needed for systemic issues or not if this is an isolated incident):

1) Internal Communications with Teal personnel will include a reminder of legal requirements around BC Fire Code fire extinguisher inspection requirements (September 22, 2017)

2) Teal representatives to provide all contractors reminders of legal requirements around BC Fire Code fire extinguisher inspection requirements (September 22, 2017)

3) HBO Contractors to provide evidence of fire extinguisher inspections for all equipment to Teal representative (September 29, 2017.

4) Contractors to ensure fire extinguishers are properly labeled and tagged after next inspection and where possible work with inspector to provide a label/ tag that is weather resistant (August 30, 2018).

5) MERC to review current information provided in Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan and other CMS documents regarding fire extinguishers and determine if current method of communication is effective or requires improvement (March 31, 2018)

6) Teal representatives to review Emergency Preparedness and Response equipment requirements in detail with Prime Contractors (May 31, 2018)

Facility Representative Responsible for Proposed Action:C. Harvey

Date Action Plan Received by PwC:September 20, 2017

PwC Internal UsePwC comment(s): The corrective action developed is acceptable. PwC will review the implementation of the corrective action at the next Maintenance Assessment (A1). The status of this assessment finding is OPEN.

Lead Assessor or Registrar Approval: S Ellsworth

Date:September 20, 2017

Certificate Number: PwC-CSAZ809-463



Assessment Finding InformationOrganization: The Teal-Jones Group Assessment Finding N°: 463-RA-NC-02

Minor Nonconformity Department/Branch: Surrey Head Office/Honeymoon Bay Operations

Date: September 13, 2017

Facility Representative: Chris Harvey Lead Assessor: Shawn Ellsworth

Assessment Team Member(s): James Lucas, Jeff KochAssessment Criteria Reference SectionStandard and Clause N°: CSA Z809 @ 7.4.6 Operational procedures and control

Clause Text (applicable section): CSA Z809 @ 7.4.6.b requires that the organization communicate relevant procedures, controls and requirements to employees, suppliers and contractors working on behalf of the organization.

Assessment Finding and Description of Objective Evidence- Is this system wide or an isolated incident?Teal Jones has made a commitment to its PAG’s to report both spills that are greater than provincial thresholds, and those that are “environmentally significant.” As such, Teal Jones contractors have been instructed to report all spills which occur during operations regardless of size. During the 2017 Re-Assessment it was found that one “environmentally significant” spill (~35L, occurring within the calendar year) was not reported to Teal Jones, and that operators and harvesting supervisors were unclear about the expectations to report all spills to Teal Jones.

Working Paper/Protocol Reference: 5.5

Intent (documentation): Implementation: Effectiveness: XFacility Representative Accepting Assessment Finding:C. Harvey

Action Plan Due Date:November 12, 2017

Client Response (Client to enter or reference attachment)Describe immediate Correction:

1) Teal representative to request a copy of the contractor’s spill report and update the SFMP in the next version (June 30, 2018)

Provide causal analysis and results of further investigation:1) Spill reporting requirements are outlined in the Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan and other CMS

documents, however the procedures to report environmentally significant spills that are under the provincial threshold for reporting, is not clearly stated. Due to the magnitude, complexity and scope of CMS documents key information most relevant to the contractors in daily operations may not be stated as clearly as it could be.

2) Contractor training and annual start up includes review of spill reporting as outlined in the Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan and other CMS documents; however due to the magnitude, complexity and scope of the CMS documents that the Contractors must understand and follow some of the key information may not be sufficiently emphasized.

Provide Corrective action response (based on causal analysis and investigation, determine if corrective action is needed for systemic issues or not if this is an isolated incident):

1) MERC to review current information provided in Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan and other CMS documents regarding spill reports and determine if current method of communication is effective or requires improvement (March 31, 2018)

2) Teal representatives to review Emergency Preparedness and Response reporting requirements in detail with Prime Contractors (May 31, 2018)

Facility Representative Responsible for Proposed Action:C. Harvey

Date Action Plan Received by PwC:September 20, 2017



PwC Internal UsePwC comment(s): The corrective action developed is acceptable. PwC will review the implementation of the corrective action at the next Maintenance Assessment (A1). The status of this assessment finding is OPEN.

Lead Assessor or Registrar Approval: S Ellsworth

Date:September 20, 2017




Appendix C – Opportunities for Improvement



Assessment InformationOrganization: The Teal-Jones Group Date: September 13, 2017

Department/Branch: Surrey HeadOffice/Honeymoon Bay Operations


Facility Representative: Chris Harvey Lead Assessor: Shawn EllsworthAssessment Team Member(s): Jeff Koch, James Lucas

Assessment Finding N° Audit Criteria Reference Section463-RA-OFI-01 Standard and Clause N°: CSA Z809 @ 6.3.4.3 Element 4.1

— Carbon uptake and storage

Teal Jones has developed an indicator for carbon sequestration (4.1.1) for the Fraser Valley and Honeymoon Bay DFA’s which reports on the area of road rehabilitated and planted annually. Teal Jones may wish to consider developing further indicators which address the guidance document found in the new CSA z809-16 standard (see A.6.3.4.3 guidance).

Working Paper/Protocol Evidence: CSA Z809 Protocol 6.3.4.3Client Response

1. MERC to review CSA Z809-16 standard guidance A6.3.4.3 and existing indicator on carbon sequestration (indicator 4.1.1). Examples from other companies will be compared to current indicator (October 31, 2017).

2. PAGs will be notified of the results of the audit and provided with the conclusions of the MERC review (December 31, 2017).

3. Revision of the existing indicator on carbon sequestration (indicator 4.1.1) will be considered with the PAGs (December 31, 2017).

PwC Lead Assessor ResponseThe client response to this opportunity for improvement is reasonable. The status of this finding will be followed up on at the next assessment. The status is OPEN.

S Ellsworth, Sept 20, 2017




Department/Branch: Surrey Head Office/Honeymoon Bay Operations


Facility Representative: Chris Harvey Lead Assessor: Shawn EllsworthAssessment Team Member(s): Jeff Koch, James Lucas

Assessment Finding N° Audit Criteria Reference Section463-RA-OFI-02 Standard and Clause N°: General Observation

Block housekeeping was generally not an issue across harvest units that were visited during the assessment. However, regular housekeeping could have been improved on harvest unit 5715. Issues on this block included evidence of multiple small oil stains (approximately 1m2 or less) on roads across the block, as well as waste cable and garbage. However, this block had not been closed out completely due to an abrupt shut down of operations given an extreme fire danger rating. On block 5130 a loader had a steady drip of oil from the undercarriage and was in clear need of maintenance. While this spill had been reported to the site contract supervisor, action had yet to be taken to correct the issue, including notifying Teal. Teal Jones may wish to consider reviewing housekeeping expectations, equipment condition and timelines for addressing issues with its contractors.

Working Paper/Protocol Evidence: N/A Client Response

1. Teal representative to review results of the audit with contractors and reviewing housekeeping expectations, equipment condition and timelines for addressing issues (September 20, 2017).

2. Teal representative to ensure garbage and small oil stains are cleaned up during final inspection of block 5715 (September 30, 2017).

3. Teal representative to note any ongoing issues with housekeeping or equipment maintenance during harvesting and road building inspections (ongoing).






Department/Branch: Surrey Head Office/Honeymoon Bay Operations


Facility Representative: Chris Harvey

Lead Assessor: Shawn EllsworthAssessment Team Member(s): Jeff Koch, James Lucas

Assessment Finding N° Audit Criteria Reference Section463-RA-OFI-03 Standard and Clause N°: CSA Z809 @ 4.2 requires that the

organization shall meet the sustainable forest management (SFM) requirements of this Standard, which include a) compliance with legislation applicable to the defined forest area (DFA);

A number of bridges were observed in the Tuck Lake area and some were missing a complete set bridge delineators. Teal Jones may wish to review the bridge maintenance program to ensure bridges consistently meet provincial requirements in the Forest Road Regulation.

Working Paper/Protocol Evidence: Field Protocols for Tuck LakeClient Response

1. Maintenance of bridge delineators has been an ongoing problem in the HBOs as they are commonly used for target practice. Teal has developed an innovative approach that may reduce the impact of vandalism; delineators are being designed to have a cable tie to the back in order that they will ‘bounce back’ up when they are pushed (or shot) backwards (December 31, 2017).

2. MERC to review the effectiveness of these new delineators (August 30, 2018).





Appendix D – Previous Opportunities for Improvement




Department/Branch: Fraser Valley DFA / Fraser Valley Operations


Facility Representative: Chris Harvey Audit Team Leader: Shawn EllsworthLead Assessor-in-Training: Jeff Koch

Assessment Finding N° Audit Criteria Reference Section463-A2-OFI-01 Standard and Clause N°: CSA Z809 @ 5.2

Teal-Jones has a large set of SFM Indicators that they track and report on annually. It was observed that one SFM Indicator (5.2.1 – Level of Investment in Initiatives that Contribute to Community Stability) includes a figure that is based on an estimate (PAG meeting costs) and Teal may wish to note that on their SFM Indicator report. Working Paper/Protocol Evidence: Records for SFM Indicator 5.2.1 – Level of Investment in Initiatives that Contribute to Community Stability)Client ResponseThe figure reported for PAG Meeting Costs for SFM Indicator 5.2.1 – Level of Investment in Initiatives that Contribute Community Stability will be identified in the 2017 Annual Report as being an estimate. The method of estimation will be clarified in this document as well. Due: August 31, 2017.K. Campbell, November 15, 2016 PwC Lead Assessor ResponseThe corrective action plan is acceptable and will be reviewed at the 2017 Re-registration assessment. The status of this finding is OPEN. S. Ellsworth, November 17, 2016

2017 Update: The estimate was reviewed during the assessment. A note on page 117 of the SFM Appendix 1 was added and it was stated that the figure was for six days of consultant and staff time four times per year. This is a reasonable estimate of the time and annual costs of the PAG process. This finding is CLOSED. James Lucas, October 5, 2017







Assessment Finding N° Audit Criteria Reference Section463-A2-OFI-02 Standard and Clause N°: CSA Z809 @ 7.4.6

One unlabeled 55 gallon barrel, which was assumed to contain gasoline, was observed at the Pitt Lake fueling area by the lake. Teal-Jones may wish to review the labeling of vessels with hazardous materials. Working Paper/Protocol Evidence: General observation during Pitt Lake field reviewClient ResponseBarrel was removed immediately to shop and labelled. Complete.Teal reminded Charge Hand of HazMat SOP requirements for labelling. Complete.Teal will also emphasize HazMat SOP in spring training session. Due May 30, 2017.K. Campbell, November 15, 2016 PwC Lead Assessor ResponseThe corrective action plan is acceptable and will be reviewed at the 2017 Re-registration assessment. The status of this OPEN. S. Ellsworth, November 17, 2016

2017 Update: The actions were carried out as discussed and this was verified during the 2017 Re-registration Assessment. This included a PPT presentation on managing hazardous materials during the Spring CMS training. This finding is CLOSED. James Lucas, October 5, 2017







Assessment Finding N° Audit Criteria Reference Section463-A2-OFI-03 Standard and Clause N°: CSA Z809 @ 7.4.6

Teal-Jones performs annual site inspections of the Pitt camp and dryland sort. During the tour of the Pitt Lake fuel tank area a couple of deficiencies were observed, including: a) Vegetation in close proximity to the fuel tanks and fuel pump. b) The fuel tank secondary containment area has a sump pump and hose set up to remove water from the containment area. The hose was observed to not be directed into the oil water separator sump outside of the containment area. Teal-Jones may wish review their inspection process to ensure it is adequate to prompt for these types of undesired conditions and if the frequency of inspections is adequate. Working Paper/Protocol Evidence: General observation during Pitt Lake field reviewClient ResponseRedirected hose into oil-water separator immediately and brushed out vegetation in close proximity to fuel tanks and pump at Pitt Lake Camp. Complete.Review the frequency of the requirement to perform complete inspections of Pitt Lake Camp fuel facilities and consider combining inspection requirements from CMS and SMS to improve efficiency. During training emphasize continuous monitoring of facilities as part of normal day to day operations. Due May 30, 2017. K. Campbell, November 15, 2016 PwC Lead Assessor ResponseThe corrective action plan is acceptable and will be reviewed at the 2017 Re-registration assessment. The status of this finding is OPEN. S. Ellsworth, November 17, 2016

2017 Update: The actions were carried out as discussed and this was verified during the 2017 Re-registration Assessment. It was decided to keep the forms as is but additional training on when and how to use forms was provided during Spring CMS training. This finding is CLOSED. James Lucas, October 5, 2017







Assessment Finding N° Audit Criteria Reference Section463-A2-OFI-04 Standard and Clause N°: CSA Z809 @ 7.6

The Teal-Jones Group conducts formal reviews via annual Management Environmental Review Committee (MERC) meetings. Since multiple management reviews are performed over the course of the year, Teal-Jones may wish to consider revising CMS Manual Section 15 (Environmental Review Committees) to account for multiple reviews instead of a single, annual review to cover required MERC meeting agenda items. Working Paper/Protocol Evidence: The Teal-Jones Group Corporate Management System (CMS) Section 15.0 ‘Environment Review Committees’ – dated March 2016Client ResponseCMS Manual Section 15 (Environmental Review Committees) will be reviewed and revised during next CMS updates in early 2017 to account for multiple reviews instead of a single, annual review to cover required MERC meeting agenda items. Due: April 30, 2017.K. Campbell, November 15, 2016 PwC Lead Assessor ResponseThe corrective action plan is acceptable and will be reviewed at the 2017 Re-registration assessment. The stats of this finding is OPEN. S. Ellsworth, November 17, 2016

2017 Update: The actions were carried out as discussed and this was verified during the 2017 Re-registration Assessment. The wording was changed in the CMS Manual Section 15.0 Environmental Review Committees – pg. 61. This finding is CLOSED. James Lucas, October 5, 2017

the teal-jones group · mr. john pichugin manager, engineering & forestry the teal-jones group...

Documents