ISO 14017:2022 環境管理—水に関する声明の検証と妥当性確認のためのガイダンスを伴う要件 | ページ 6

3.1.1

水情報

水に関する記述 (3.3.3) を裏付けるものであり、水資源へのアクセス、水の使用、 取水 (3.1.4) 、水の劣化、水質、水の利用可能性など、対象となるユーザーにとって重要な水の特性に関する情報。そして水不足

3.1.2

事業

水プロジェクト

ベースライン（3.3.1） の条件を変更し、水の特性を変化させる活動。

3.1.3

水レポート

水プログラム（3.2.5） または合意された手順（3.5.8）の 要件（3.5.16） を満たすために作成された 水情報（3.1.1） を含むレポート

3.1.4

水の回収

水域（3.1.6） または 流域（3.1.5） からの人為的、永久的または一時的な水の除去

注記1: 「水の抽象化」という用語は、この概念に使用されることがあります。

[出典:ISO 14046:2014, 3.2.2]

注記 2:取水量は、通常、地表水または地下水源から取水される水の総量を表します。この取り出された水の測定は、家庭用、産業用、および農業用ユーザーからの需要を評価するのに役立ちます。

3.1.5

排水枡

降水による直接的な地表流出物が重力によって小川または他の 水域（3.1.6） に流出する領域。

注記1: 「流域」、「流域」、「流域」、「流域」または「河川流域」という用語は、「流域」の概念に使用されることがあります。

注記2:地下水排水渠は、地表排水渠の面積と必ずしも一致しない。

[出典:ISO 14046:2014, 3.1.8]

注記3検証/検証の範囲内の排水区域および関連する境界は、通常、検証者/検証者と依頼者の間の契約で定義され、法的要件または水プログラム要件で指定される場合があります。

3.1.6

水域

所与の地理的領域において明確な水文学的、水文地形学的、物理的、化学的および生物学的特徴を持つ水の実体

[SOURCE:ISO 14046:2014, 3.1.7 modified - note 1 to entryを削除]

注記 1:検証/検証の範囲内の水域および関連する境界は、通常、検証者/検証者とクライアントの間の契約で定義され、法的要件または水プログラム要件で指定される場合があります。

3.2.1

organization

person or group of people that has its own functions with responsibilities, authorities and relationships to achieve its objectives

[SOURCE:ISO 14001:2015, 3.1.4]

3.2.2

responsible party

person or persons responsible for the provision of the water statement (3.3.3) and the supporting water information (3.1.1)

Note 1 to entry: The responsible party can be either individuals or representatives of an organization (3.2.1) , water project (3.1.2) or product, and can be the party who engages the verifier (3.5.25) orvalidator (3.4.24 ).

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.2.3 – modified to replace the term “GHG” with “water”]

3.2.3

intended user

individual or organization (3.2.1) identified by those reporting water information (3.1.1) as being the one who relies on that information to make decisions

Note 1 to entry: The intended user can be the client (3.2.4) , the responsible party (3.2.2) , water programme (3.2.5) administrators, regulators, investors, green bond providers, or other interested parties, such as local communities, government departments or non-governmental organizations.

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.2.4 – modified to replace “GHG” with “water”]

3.2.4

client

organization (3.2.1) or person requesting verification (3.5.1) or validation (3.5.2)

Note 1 to entry: The client could be the responsible party (3.2.2) , water programme (3.2.5) administrator or other interested party.

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.2.5, modified - Note 1 to entry has been slightly modified]

3.2.5

water programme

voluntary or mandatory system or scheme that develops requirements (3.5.16) for managing and reporting water information (3.1.1) , and providing a water statement (3.3.3)

Note 1 to entry: A water programme can be at the international, national or subnational level.

Note 2 to entry: In some cases, an organization may develop its own internal water programme.

3.3.1

baseline

situation resulting in quantitative and/or qualitative water characteristics that would have occurred in the absence of a water project (3.1.2) and which provides the baseline scenario (3.3.2) for comparison with project water characteristics

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.4.6 - modified]

3.3.2

baseline scenario

hypothetical reference case that best represents the conditions most likely to occur in the absence of a proposed water project (3.1.2)

Note 1 to entry: The baseline scenario concurs with the water project timeline.

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.4.7, modified]

3.3.3

water statement

factual and objective declaration regarding water characteristics and supported by water information (3.1.1) that provides the subject matter for the verification (3.5.1) or validation (3.5.2)

Note 1 to entry: The water statement could be presented at a point in time or could cover a period of time.

Note 2 to entry: The water statement provided by the responsible party (3.2.2) should be clearly identifiable, capable of consistent evaluation or measurement against suitable criteria (3.5.17) by a verifier (3.5.28) or validator (3.5.29) .

Note 3 to entry: The water statement could be provided in a water report (3.1.3) , water project (3.1.2) plan or water footprint assessment as defined in ISO 14046.

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.4.3, modified – Notes 1 through 3 were re-worded remove reference to “GHG” and replace with “water”.]

3.4.1

water information system

policies, processes and procedures to establish, manage, maintain and record water information (3.1.1)

Note 1 to entry: A water information system can include measurements, spreadsheets, samples, calibration instructions, etc.

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.5.1, modified]

3.5.1

verification

process for evaluating a water statement of historical data and information to determine if the water statement is materially correct and conforms to criteria (3.5.17)

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.2, modified]

3.5.2

validation

process for evaluating the reasonableness of the assumptions, limitations and methods that support a water statement about the outcome of future activities

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.3, modified]

3.5.3

verification/validation team

person or persons conducting verification (3.5.1) / validation (3.5.2) activities

Note 1 to entry: One person of the verification/validation team is appointed as the team leader (3.5.4).

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.2.8]

3.5.4

team leader

person who manages the verification team or validation team

[SOURCE:ISO 14066:2011, 3.1.2]

3.5.5

independent reviewer

competent person, who is not a member of the verification/validation team (3.5.3) , who reviews the verification (3.5.1) or validation (3.5.2) activities and conclusions

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.2.9]

Note 1 to entry: The independent reviewer may be an employee of the organization which employs the verification/validation team.

3.5.6

data trail

complete record by which water information (3.1.1) can be traced to the primary data

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.5.2, modified]

3.5.7

retracing

test (3.5.26) that uncovers errors in water information (3.1.1) by following data trails back to primary data

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.2.10, modified]

3.5.8

tracing

test (3.5.26) that is designed to uncover errors in water information (3.1.1) by following primary data to water information (3.1.1)

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.2.11, modified]

3.5.9

engagement

arrangement between two parties, with the terms usually specified in a contract, to perform services

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.1]

3.5.10

agreed-upon procedures

AUP

engagement (3.5.9) that reports on the results of verification (3.5.1) or validation (3.5.2) activities and does not provide an opinion (3.5.24)

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.4, modified by adding validation (3.5.2)]

3.5.11

level of assurance

degree of confidence in the water statement (3.3.3)

Note 1 to entry: Assurance is provided on historical information.

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.5, modified]

3.5.12

reasonable assurance

level of assurance (3.5.11) where the nature and extent of the verification (3.5.1) activities have been designed to provide a high but not absolute level of assurance (3.5.11) on historical data and information

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.6]

3.5.13

limited assurance

level of assurance (3.5.11) where the nature and extent of the verification (3.5.1) activities have been designed to provide a reduced level of assurance (3.5.11) on historical data and information

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.7]

3.5.14

material

information capable of influencing the decisions of intended users (3.2.3)

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.8]

3.5.15

materiality

concept that individual misstatements (3.5.21) or the aggregation of misstatements (3.5.21) could influence the intended users’ (3.2.3) decisions

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.9]

3.5.16

requirement

need or expectation that is stated, generally implied or obligatory

[SOURCE:14050:2020, 3.1.15]

3.5.17

criteria

policy, procedure or other requirements (3.5.16) used as a reference to which the water statement (3.3.3) is compared

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.10, modified]

3.5.18

controls

responsible party’s (3.2.2) policies and procedures that help ensure that the water statement (3.3.3) is free from material misstatements (3.5.23) and conforms to the criteria (3.5.17)

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.11, modified]

3.5.19

site

location where an organization (3.2.1) carries out work or a service

Note 1 to entry: A site can include one or several facilities (3.6.14 ).

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.13]

3.5.20

facility

single installation, set of installations or production processes (stationary or mobile), which can be defined within a single geographical boundary, organizational unit or production process

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.14]

3.5.21

misstatement

errors, omissions, misreporting or misrepresentations in the water statement (3.3.3)

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.15, modified]

3.5.22

uncertainty

parameter associated with the result of quantification that characterizes the dispersion of the values that could be reasonably attributed to the quantified amount

Note 1 to entry: Uncertainty information typically specifies quantitative estimates of the likely dispersion of values and a qualitative description of the likely causes of the dispersion.

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.16]

3.5.23

material misstatement

individual misstatement (3.5.21) or the aggregate of actual misstatements (3.5.21) in the water statement (3.3.3) that could affect the decisions of the intended users (3.2.3)

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.17, modified]

3.5.24

opinion

formal written declaration provided by the verifier (3.5.28) or validator (3.5.29) to the intended user (3.2.3) that provides confidence on the water statement (3.3.3) in the responsible party’s (3.2.2) water report ( 3.1.4) and confirms conformity with the criteria (3.5.17)

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.18, modified]

3.5.25

nonconformity

non-fulfilment of a requirement (3.5.16)

[SOURCE:14050:2020, 3.1.17]

3.5.26.0

analytical procedure

evaluation of water information (3.1.1) made by an analysis of plausible relationships between water information (3.1.1) and non-water data

Note 1 to entry: Analytical procedures evaluate relationships between water information (3.1.1) and other data to identify inconsistencies.

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.20, modified. Added Note 1 to entry.]

3.5.26

test

technique used to assess a characteristic of items in a sampled population of water information (3.1.1) against verification (3.5.1) or validation (3.5.2) criteria (3.5.17)

[SOURCE:14064-3:2019, 3.6.21, modified]

3.5.28

verifier

competent and impartial person with responsibility for performing and reporting on a verification (3.5.1)

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.2.6]

3.5.29

validator

competent and impartial person with responsibility for performing and reporting on a validation (3.5.2)

[SOURCE:ISO 14064-3:2019, 3.2.7]

3.5.30

inherent risk

the susceptibility of an assertion to a material misstatement (3.5.23) assuming that there are no related controls (3.5.18)

Note 1 to entry: Inherent risk would be higher where an assertion is based on complex calculations, and lower where an assertion is based on simple calculations. Similarly, inherent risk would be higher where an assertion is based on estimates and lower where an assertion is based on factual data.

3.5.31

control risk

likelihood that the controls (3.5.18) of the organization (3.2.1) will not prevent or detect a material (3.5.14) discrepancy

Note 1 to entry: This risk is a function of the effectiveness of the design and operation of internal controls relating to water information.

Note 2 to entry: Control risk would be high where data providing the basis for an assertion is manually transcribed, and low where data is automatically obtained from measuring equipment and input into a computer database electronically. Note that some control risk will always exist because of inherent limitations on internal controls (3.5.18) .

3.5.32

detection risk

the likelihood that the verifier (3.5.28) will not detect a material (3.5.14) discrepancy that exists that has not been corrected by the controls (3.5.18) of the organization (3.2.1)

Note 1 to entry: Detection risk is a function of the effectiveness of the evidence gathering procedure and its application by the verifier (3.5.28) .

Note 2 to entry: Detection risk cannot be reduced to zero because the verifier (3.5.28) usually does not examine all water information (3.1.1) in an area and because of other factors such as the possibility that the verifier (3.5.28) might select an inappropriate evidence gathering procedure, misapply an appropriate evidence gathering method, or misinterpret the evidence gathering results. These other factors may be addressed through adequate planning, proper assignment of competent personnel, application of professional skepticism, and adequate supervision and review of the work performed. Detection risk relates to the nature, timing and extent of evidence gathering procedures that are determined by the verifier (3.5.28) to reduce the risk that material misstatements (3.5.23) are not detected to an acceptably low level.

Note 3 to entry: For a given level of verification risk the acceptable level of detection risk has an inverse relationship to the assessment of the risk of material misstatements (3.5.23) . The higher the risk of material misstatement (3.5.23) , the lower the level of detection risk that can be accepted.

Note 4 to entry: As well as the risk of the verifier (3.5.28) drawing a positive conclusion when nonconformities exist, there is also a risk of the verifier (3.5.28) drawing a negative conclusion where no nonconformities exist.

3.5.33

professional scepticism

attitude that includes a questioning mind and a critical assessment of evidence

[SOURCE:ISO 14066:2011, 3.1.3 modified - note has been deleted.]

3.5.34

competence

ability to apply knowledge and skills to achieve intended results

Note 1 to entry: Ability implies exhibiting appropriate personal behaviour when conducting the verification or validation.

[SOURCE:ISO 14066:2011, 3.1.4, modified]

3.5.35

technical expert

person who provides specific knowledge or expertise to the verification team or validation team

Note 1 to entry: Specific knowledge or expertise is that which relates to the organization, the project to be verified or validated, or language or culture.

Note 2 to entry: A technical expert does not act as a verifier or validator in the verification team or validation team.

[SOURCE:ISO 14066:2011, 3.3.6. with addition of NOTE 1 and 2]

3.5.36

sensitivity

likelihood that the outcome of a study will significantly change based on changes to input variables and methodologies used in the study