Process Management
Waste Management

3. Criteria for product-use performance

4. Criteria for product-disposal performance

5. Criteria for corporate environmental policy and management system

Corporate policy related to environment
Procurement policy and supply chain management
Status of corporate environmental management and environment management systems
Research and development
Health and Safety
Transparency

6. Criteria for community and regulatory perception and compliance status

Compliance with pollution control board regulations and perception of PCB officials
Perception of local community
Perception of local NGOs and media
Perception of CSE’s green inspector.

Weightages
The weightages are assigned to the various criteria based on their environmental impacts during the entire life cycle. Thus, though the broader criteria remain the same, the weightages vary substantially between sectors.

For example, in the case of the pulp and paper industry, the highest weightages were given to the raw material procurement and production phase.

However, In the case of automobile industry, the highest weightages has been assigned to the product use phase.

Thus, weightages are assigned on the basis of inherent characterises of the industrial sectors.

The scoring scale
The scoring scale follows the GRP’s aim to push companies to perform far better than what is currently required by the regulations.

Whenever a regulatory standard exists it will be taken as the lowest benchmark. In cases where no regulatory standard exists, the Indian average performance are estimated and taken as the lowest benchmark.

Comparative score:
In this case, the average of all companies is taken and given two marks. The company with the best performance gets 8 and below the average performance gets zero. Between 2 and 8, a linear scale is used.

The Global Best Practice is given 8 marks out of a maximum score of 10 marks because even the Global Best Practice is not the theoretical best. Thus, even the best companies in the world have still scope to go forward.

The theoretical best practice is given 10 marks, as we would like to drive technology to achieve better environmental performance.

Provision of supporting documents for substantiating the claims made by a company are evaluated as the multiplication factor for the question. Thus, for a company that has provided the supporting document, the score obtained under that question will be multiplied by a multiplication factor of one. If the company fails to do so, the multiplication factor used will be zero.

In questions where trends are being used as the performance indicator, the following scoring scale will be used:

Continuous or overall deterioration of environmental performance or consistently at very poor level of environment performance: 0
Consistently average level of environmental performance: 5
Overall improving trend in environmental performance: 7.5
Continuous improvement in environmental performance: 10
Consistently at high level of environment performance: 10

Dealing with data discrepancy
The rating scheme is vulnerable to data discrepancy in many ways. The data supplied by the company on certain parameters may not tally with the data supplied by external agencies. To overcome this weakness, a generic rating rule has been established.

1. If the information supplied by the company in the environment statement or consent application to PCB is different from information supplied to

CSE, then in this case:
This discrepancy will be disregarded as long as the company can justify the data it has given to CSE.
In case the company is not able to justify the data, a multiplication factor of 0.95 will be used against the entire rating and the data will be re-evaluated by the TAP and the theoretical values of that data will be used in the rating.

The project is using a discrepancy policy to penalise companies who provide wrong information.

2. If the company provides some data to the project, which is found or considered to be wrong by the technical panel and the company is not able to give adequate justification for the mistake(s), a multiplication factor of 0.95 will be used against the entire rating. If a company has shown signs of and/or admits carelessness during submission of the data, then too this multiplication factor will be used.

3. If the company has voluntarily disclosed data but has not answered a query, then in this case, 0 marks will be given to the company for the criteria to which the query relates.

4. If the data supplied by the company at the initial or feedback stage is incorrect, then in this case, a multiplication factor of 0.95 will be used against the entire rating.

The Green Leaves Award Centre for Science & Environment has instituted Green Leaves Award to recognise the good performers. Five leaves represents the best performing company. The criteria for the Green Leaves award are as follows: