Methodology for planning environmental management systems by drawing upon the Industrial Emissions Directive: A case study at a Spanish metal surface treatment company Alicia P  erez-Torres a , Rosario Vidal b, * , Jos  e Tena c a AIDIMME, Metal-Processing, Furniture, Wood and Packaging Technology Institute, Av. Leonardo Da Vinci, 38, 46980, Paterna, Spain b Department of Mechanical Engineering and Construction, GID, Universitat Jaume I, Av. Sos Baynat s/n, 12006, Castell on, Spain c IMEDMAR, Universidad Cat olica de Valencia “San Vicente M artir”, Valencia, Spain article info Article history: Received 22 February 2018 Received in revised form 10 January 2019 Accepted 12 January 2019 Available online 14 January 2019 Keywords: Integrated pollution prevention and control permit Environmental management system Environmental performance indicators Environmental aspects Resource efficient and cleaner production abstract Companies with an IPPC Permit have a high commitment to environmental improvement and are at a good starting point for the implementation of an Environmental Management System (EMS). The results of a survey of companies with IPPC Permits indicate that 45% do not have an EMS, although 44% of them have considered the possibility of implementing one. The "PLANGESMA 00 methodology allows companies that have an IPPC permit to plan an EMS based on the ISO 14001: 2015 Standard, facilitating the iden- tification of environmental aspects and legal requirements based on the terms of the IPPC permit, and the development of an environmental improvement plan. The identification and assessment of envi- ronmental aspects is made with a combination of risk assessment-based and criterion-based methods. This new methodology is validated with the Validation Square framework and applied as a case study at a Spanish company in the metal surface treatment sector. The results highlight the possibility of pro- moting Resource Efficient and Cleaner Production with a relatively small effort. © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The European Union (EU) has expressed great concern with pollution prevention. To implement this prevention in the indus- trial sphere a series of strategies have been developed for cleaner production, both mandatory and voluntary. Among the former we can highlight the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control permit (IPPC permit) included in the Industrial Emissions Directive, or IED (EC, 2010). The IPPC permit must take into account the plant's entire environmental performance, covering everything from emissions to air, water and land, waste generation, the use of raw materials, energy efficiency, noise, the prevention of accidents, and the restoration of the site upon closure. The permit conditions, including emission limit values, must be based on the Best Avail- able Techniques (BAT). Permits and the results of the monitoring of releases are public. Among the voluntary strategies, we can highlight the Environ- mental Management System (EMS), based on international standards, the ISO 14001:2015 Standard (ISO, 2015), and the EMAS Regulation (EC, 2009), whose objective is enhanced environmental development through continuous improvement. The trends in European environmental policies transcend the prevention of pollution, spurring companies towards eco- efficiency. Companies must be increasingly eco-efficient to ach- ieve compliance with the objectives outlined by environmental policies. Companies with an IPPC permit, as they are subject to the application of the IED, are under increasing pressure to implement Best Available Techniques (BAT) and stricter Emission Limit Values (ELV) (Schoenberger, 2009). There are studies on the influence of the IPPC permit on the environmental improvement of companies, as relates to compli- ance with the requirements laid down for said permit (Conti et al., 2015; Daddi et al., 2016; Mirasgedis et al., 2008; Silvo et al., 2002; Styles et al., 2009a, 2009b; Testa et al., 2012; Vajda, 2016). Likewise, the benefits of the application of an EMS are widely described in the literature (p.e.: Comoglio and Botta, 2012; De Oliveira et al., 2016; Fonseca et al., 2017; Hillary, 2004; Inoue et al., 2013; Iraldo et al., 2013; Murmura et al., 2018; Tarí et al., 2012; Zorpas, 2010). Tarí et al. (2012) concluded that the benefits most analysed are environmental performance (ensured legal * Corresponding author. E-mail address: vidal@uji.es (R. Vidal). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Cleaner Production journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.131 0959-6526/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Journal of Cleaner Production 215 (2019) 992e1004