Find answers to the most commonly asked questions

No, the RefuelEU Aviation Regulation requires fuel suppliers to ensure that the aviation fuel available at Union aiports has a minimum SAF share. Aircraft operators’ obligations are related to avoiding economic fuel tankering practices. However, as SAF will become more accessible, thanks to the mandate to suppliers, aircraft operators will eventually uplift aviation fuel which includes the minimum shares of SAF. 

Fuel tankering might occur to comply with fuel safety rules (in line with Commission Regulation (EU) No 965/2012). In such cases tankering is justified by safety reasons; however there are specific circumstances, for example: 

1. cases of fuel shortage 
2. fuel contamination at the destination airport confirmed by a Notice to Airmen or Notice to Air Missions (NOTAM) 
3. specific operational difficulties for some aircraft operators at some airports: in terms of disproportionate longer turnaround times for aircraft or reduced airport capacity at peak times. 

If the aircraft operator faces such cases, the aircraft operator should give an indication of the Union airports and flights impacted in the report to be submitted to the competent authority.  

There are no penalties for the 2024 reporting period, however, from 2025, if an aircraft operator does not meet the requirements set up in article 5 of the ReFuelEU Aviation Regulation (minimum uplift of 90% of the required fuel), penalties will apply. Member States will establish the penalties, these will be at least double the product of the yearly average aviation fuel price and total yearly non-tanked quantity. 

As stipulated in Article 8 of the ReFuelEU Aviation Regulation, each year and for the first time in 2025, aircraft operators must submit a verified report to the respective Competent Authority by 31st March Year N+1 annually. The report includes the following: 

Fuel reporting: 

• Total flight operated departing from a Union airport (in number of flights) 

• Total flight hours operated departing from a Union airport (in number of hours) 

• Yearly aviation fuel required (trip fuel and taxi fuel) at each Union airport (in tonnes) 

• Total actual aviation fuel uplifted at each Union airport (in tonnes). 

• Yearly non-tanked fuel quantity at each Union airport (reported as 0 if it’s negative or ≤ 10% of fuel requirements) 

• Yearly tanked fuel quantity for fuel safety rules at each Union airport (in tonnes). 

SAF purchase reporting: 

• Total Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) purchased from suppliers for regulated flights (in tonnes) 

• Details for each SAF purchase, including supplier name, batch number, quantity (tonnes), fuel category, feedstock, and lifecycle emissions. 

• Eligible SAF claimed under EU ETS, CH ETS, CORSIA and other Market Based Measures (in tonnes) 

• Eligible SAF not claimed. 

Declaration: 

A declaration that the aircraft operator has not claimed under more than one greenhouse gas scheme identical batches of SAF. 

Aircraft operators must ensure that the flights departing from Union airports are refuelled with the necessary fuel for the flight. Article 5 of the ReFuelEU Regulation requires that the yearly quantity of aviation fuel uplifted by a given aircraft operator at a given Union airport shall be at least 90% of the yearly aviation fuel required. 

The ReFuelEU Aviation is applicable to aircraft operators that operate flights from Union airports. The applicability threshold is based on the number of flights operated in the previous reporting period (1st January until 31st December). Obligations apply to operators that during the reporting period, have operated at least: 

• 500 commercial passenger air transport flights departing from Union airports or 

• 52 commercial all cargo air transport flights departing from Union airports. 

Deadweight means the difference in tonnes between the displacement of a ship in water of relative density of 1025 kg/m3 at the summer load draught and the lightweight of the ship. The summer load draught should be taken as the maximum summer draught as certified in the stability booklet approved by the Administration or any duly authorized organization.

No, Normec Verifavia’s clients are strictly forbidden from using the logos of national accreditation bodies such as COFRAC (France), UKAS (United Kingdom), and SAC (Singapore) when publishing their verified or validated environmental claims certified by Normec Verifavia. These national accreditation bodies (NABs) have assessed and accredited Normec Verifavia for its capability as an independent verifier. Consequently, Normec Verifavia’s clients cannot reuse these accreditations or their associated logos when they publish their verified or validated claims. This information is essential for ensuring compliance and is intended for public dissemination to clarify the accreditation limitations.

The validity of verification or validation—and thus the right to use the Normec Verifavia mark—is subject to the specific terms of our verification/validation statement. Generally, clients should anticipate renewing their verification or validation annually to reflect their latest environmental performance accurately. We encourage clients to consult with us well ahead of their renewal dates to ensure continuous compliance.

An effective compliance statement could be: “As part of our commitment to environmental integrity, our 2023 GHG (Green House Gases) emissions report has been independently verified by Normec Verifavia, confirming our adherence to international environmental standards and practices.” This statement clearly communicates compliance with verification findings and underscores the company’s dedication to environmental responsibility.

Normec Verifavia clients should adhere to the following refined guidelines when demonstrating compliance with verification and validation findings in public communications:

• Transparent Communication: Articulate the outcomes of verification and validation processes clearly and concisely, ensuring that stakeholders and the public can easily comprehend the results. Information should be presented in a manner that fosters transparency and enhances understanding.
• Accurate Attribution: Explicitly attribute the verification or validation to the responsible body by using phrases such as “Verified by Normec Verifavia” or “Validated by Normec Verifavia” This acknowledgment should be precise, indicating the specific entity that conducted the verification or validation.
• Compliance Statements: Incorporate explicit statements in all public disclosures that attest to the organization’s adherence to the findings and recommendations resulting from the verification or validation activities. These statements should highlight the organization’s dedication to upholding the standards of accuracy, reliability, and environmental integrity.
• Documentation Reference: Whenever possible, provide references to or copies of the verification or validation documentation that support the compliance claims. This could include links to detailed reports or summaries posted on the organization’s website, offering stakeholders direct access to the evidence of compliance.
• Continuous Commitment: Emphasize the ongoing commitment to maintaining and improving environmental performance in alignment with the latest verification or validation findings. This underscores the organization’s dedication to not just meeting current standards but also to continuous improvement.

As an independent and impartial validation and verification body, it is crucial for Normec Verifavia to ensure that its mark is used properly to reflect accurately the scope and validity of the environmental claims it has verified or validated. Misuse of their mark could undermine the trust stakeholders place in the services provided and in the environmental claims of the organizations using the mark.

Therefore, the potential consequences listed are appropriate measures to protect the integrity of Normec Verifavia’s services and comply with ISO 17029:

• Legal Action: This could involve litigation to enforce the terms of use associated with the mark, protect intellectual property rights, or address false claims made by misuse of the mark.
• Loss of Credibility: Misuse of the mark could damage the reputation of the client or organization, affecting stakeholder trust and potentially leading to a broader impact on business relationships and market perception.
• Financial Penalties: These could be imposed as part of legal action or contractual penalties agreed upon in the terms of use for the mark, serving as a deterrent against misuse.

No, Clients should not alter the design, color, shape, or any other aspect of the verification mark without permission.

Normec Verifavia ensures that the use of its mark in client communications accurately reflects the scope and validity of the environmental claims verified, maintains the credibility of the verification process, and upholds the integrity of the mark itself. The guidelines are as follows:

• Scope of Use: The Normec Verifavia mark can only be used in relation to claims that have been specifically verified or validated by Normec Verifavia. It must not be applied to imply a broader endorsement of the organization’s overall environmental performance or other unverified aspects.
• Clear Association: Any use of the Normec Verifavia mark must be clearly associated with the specific claim or statement that has been validated or verified, including a reference to the relevant validation/verification statement.
• No Misrepresentation: The use of the Normec Verifavia mark must not mislead stakeholders or the public about the nature and scope of the verification or validation performed. It should accurately reflect the findings and conclusions of the verification or validation process.
• Documentation and Approval: Clients wishing to use the Normec Verifavia mark must obtain explicit permission and follow any guidelines provided by Normec Verifavia. This may include submitting proposed uses for approval to ensure compliance with Normec Verifavia’s standards.
• Integrity of the Mark: The mark must be used in a manner that maintains its integrity, meaning it should not be altered, distorted, or used in a way that diminishes its value or the reputation of Normec Verifavia.
• Transparency: Guidelines for the use of the Normec Verifavia mark should encourage transparency, allowing stakeholders to understand the basis of the validation or verification and access relevant documentation or reports.
• Termination of Use: The guidelines should specify conditions under which the use of the Normec Verifavia mark must be discontinued, such as the expiration or revocation of the validation/verification statement.

Clients may use the Normec Verifavia mark_ the logo representing Normec Verifavia’s validation or verification services_ under strict conditions set by ISO 17029 and ISO 14065 standards.

Normec Verifavia has developed detailed guidelines for referencing its validation or verification activities and employing its mark. These guidelines aim to ensure transparency, accuracy, and credibility in the reporting process, enhancing stakeholder trust. They also ensure that any use of the  Normec Verifavia mark is clearly traceable to the specific validation/verification body and directly associated with the validation/verification statement issued. This careful approach helps maintain the integrity and reliability of environmental claims verified or validated by Normec Verifavia, allowing the mark to signify compliance with established environmental standards and Normec Verifavia’s endorsement of the specific claims verified.

Normec Verifavia is committed to maintaining the highest standards of service and integrity in its operations. In line with ISO 17029:2019, we have established a transparent and systematic process for managing, evaluating, taking necessary corrective actions, and making informed decisions on complaints and appeals. This ensures all concerns are addressed promptly and fairly, adhering to the principles of impartiality and confidentiality.
Our complaints and appeals process is designed to be accessible and straightforward, ensuring stakeholders can easily navigate through the necessary steps. Here is a brief overview:

• Submission: Stakeholders wishing to file a complaint and/or an appeal are encouraged to reach out to Normec Verifavia via our quality department (quality@verifavia.com) who will direct inquiries to relevant contact points for prompt attention.
• Acknowledgment: Upon receipt, each complaint and/or appeal is acknowledged and recorded in our system for further action.
• Evaluation: Each case (complaint and/or appeal) undergoes a thorough evaluation to ascertain its legitimacy and determine the extent of the investigation needed, adhering to the methodical approach prescribed by ISO 17029:2019.
• Investigation: An in-depth investigation is undertaken, incorporating all pertinent information and evidence to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the issue at hand.
• Decision Making: Decisions are made based on the insights gained from the investigation. Normec Verifavia then undertakes suitable corrective actions and communicates the resolution to the party involved. This decision is communicated to the complainant or appellant.
• Iteration: We engage in continuous dialogue with the complainant or appellant until a mutual resolution is reached, ensuring all parties are satisfied with the outcome.
• Closure: Following the decision and mutual agreement, the case is formally closed. We welcome feedback at this stage to foster ongoing improvement in our processes.

Contact us directly in case of questions or concerns. We are committed to ensuring that all complaints and appeals are handled in a manner that is fair, efficient, and in accordance with the best practices outlined in ISO 17029:2019.

Normec Verifavia performs all its verification and validation activities according to ISO 17029:2019 and ISO 14065:2021:

1. Pre-Engagement

• Initial Inquiry and Feasibility: Initially, discussing the client’s needs and the feasibility of the verification or validation, including an evaluation of any potential conflicts of interest to ensure impartiality and confidentiality.
• Conflict of Interest Check: Ensuring no conflicts of interest that might affect impartiality.

2. Engagement

• Formal Agreement: Establishing a contract that defines the scope, objectives, timeline, and responsibilities.
• Document Submission: Collecting necessary documentation from the client related to the subject matter to be verified or validated.

3. Planning

• Planning the Verification/Validation: Developing a detailed plan that outlines methodologies, tools, and resources needed for the assignment.
• Team Assignment: Selecting a competent team based on the necessary skills and knowledge for the task.

4. Execution

• Data Collection and Analysis: Collecting and reviewing evidence, conducting analyses, and performing site visits as required.
• Assessment: Evaluating compliance with the relevant standards and identifying any discrepancies or issues.

5. Review

• Internal Review: Conduct an internal review of the findings and assessments to ensure accuracy and completeness before finalizing the report.
• Client Feedback: Engage with the client to discuss the preliminary findings, providing an opportunity for any factual corrections or additional input.

6. Reporting

• Draft Report: Preparing a draft report that details findings and any non-conformities for internal review and client feedback.
• Final Report: Issuing the final verification or validation report, providing a comprehensive review of outcomes.

7. Records

• Maintaining Records: Keeping detailed records of all documentation and communication throughout the verification or validation process for 10 years. This is essential for transparency, accountability, and future audits or reviews or complaints or appeals.

8. Post-Verification/Validation Activities

• Facts Discovered After the Opinion Statement: Managing any significant information that comes to light after the verification or validation opinion has been issued. If such information could impact the verification or validation results, it may necessitate a reassessment or correction in the report.
• Follow-up: Engaging in any necessary follow-up actions to ensure that the client addresses identified non-conformities.
• Continual Improvement: Using feedback and insights gained from the process to enhance the body’s procedures and effectiveness.

9. Recertification/Renewal (if applicable)

• Periodic Review: Conducting periodic reviews and re-assessments as required, especially for ongoing commitments, to ensure ongoing compliance and to address any operational changes.

We, Normec Verifavia, are committed to upholding the utmost impartiality and independence in our services, recognizing these values as foundational to our reputation and the trustworthiness of our validations and verifications. In pursuit of this commitment, we have instituted a comprehensive Assurance Management System designed to:

• Rigorously identify, assess, and manage all risks related to the impartiality and independence of our services, including project-specific risks, ensuring no compromise on our ethical standards.
• Actively identify and resolve any potential conflicts of interest between Normec Verifavia, our personnel, and our clients, guaranteeing the integrity of our verification services.
• Deliver to our clients transparent and recognized validations/verification opinion statements, trusted across relevant regulatory and trading schemes, through our steadfast adherence to impartiality and professional diligence.
• Engage closely with our clients, fostering partnerships that cater to their unique needs and exceed their expectations, while maintaining our impartial stance.
• Implement a uniform and consistent approach across all our audit teams, ensuring the consistency and reliability of our service delivery.
• Commit to the ongoing improvement of our operations and management systems, responsive to the feedback of clients, regulators, and stakeholders, to elevate the quality and credibility of our offerings continuously.

Furthermore, we pledge to maintain open communication channels for stakeholders to voice concerns regarding impartiality, demonstrating our dedication to transparency and stakeholder engagement. Our team is regularly trained and made aware of its critical role in upholding these principles, reinforcing Normec Verifavia’s dedication to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and professionalism in line with ISO 17029 guidelines.

Normec Verifavia maintains its commitment to independence and impartiality by not providing consultancy services or direct technical assistance to operators. This policy ensures the credibility and objectivity of its verification and certification services.

Normec Verifavia is a global leader providing independent environmental verification, validation, certification, and auditing services. Initially focused on the aviation and maritime sectors, Normec Verifavia is expanding its services to include a wider range of industries and activities.

Environmental Verification, Validation, and Certification –

• Aviation Sector: Tailored services for airlines, business jets, and helicopters to ensure compliance with environmental standards.
• Maritime Transport: Includes verification and certification services for ports and ships, addressing environmental compliance.
• Airport Verification: Extending its expertise to include airports, Verifavia supports airport operations in achieving environmental and sustainability goals through rigorous verification processes.

Auditing Services – Comprehensive environmental audits across aviation, maritime, and now airport operations to assess and enhance compliance with environmental regulations.

Voluntary Environmental Programs – Participation in and verifying or validating voluntary environmental programs to help clients adopt and implement sustainable practices.

Inventory of Hazardous Material Services – Offers detailed inventory services for hazardous materials, crucial for safe and compliant operations in aviation, maritime, and airport sectors.

Sustainability Initiatives –

• F-Gas Verification: Offers verification services for managing and reducing fluorinated greenhouse gas emissions.
• 123 Carbon Projects: Involves specific initiatives focused on carbon footprint reduction, carbon trading, or carbon offset projects, enhancing the sustainability profiles of client operations.
• Reverse Projects: Engages in projects aimed at reversing environmental damage, such as reforestation, carbon capture, and biodiversity restoration.
• Platform Verification: Provides verification for digital platforms that track and manage environmental data, ensuring the accuracy and reliability of such platforms used in reporting sustainability metrics.
• CBAM (Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism): Prepares industries for compliance with the EU’s carbon pricing mechanism through expert verification services.
• Training Services: Provides generic regulatory training across all sectors it serves, equipping clients with the knowledge to comply with environmental regulations and standards effectively.

With these expansions and the broadening of its service offerings, Normec Verifavia continues to position itself as a key player in supporting various sectors to meet rigorous environmental standards and implement sustainable practices effectively.

Marking IHM Part 1 relevant items helps identify products that may contain hazardous materials, ensuring that these products are properly documented and compliant with maritime safety and environmental regulations. 

The Complete Project option provides an opportunity for suppliers to collaborate with Normec Verifavia on a comprehensive global partnership basis, significantly reducing their workload. In this arrangement, Normec Verifavia takes on the responsibility of liaising with sub-suppliers and manufacturers to gather the necessary declarations for supplied items. Subsequently, the finalized declarations, prepared and submitted on behalf of the suppliers, are made available to the end clients via the dashboard. This ensures that suppliers can achieve compliance with the relevant regulations and guidelines efficiently and effectively. 

Suppliers can choose between generating MDs & SDoCs through the dashboard services for efficient IHM maintenance or engaging in a complete project partnership for comprehensive compliance support. 

Yes, by offering a catalogue review service, Normec Verifavia can evaluate a supplier’s products and inventory for potential hazardous materials, minimizing the need for extensive sampling and testing while ensuring compliance. 

The Supplier Admin Dashboard simplifies the generation of MDs and SDoCs, helps in efficient IHM maintenance, reduces the administrative burden on suppliers, and assists in meeting compliance requirements seamlessly. 

Normec Verifavia offers a “Suppliers Admin Dashboard” to streamline the process of generating declarations, reduce workload, and ensure compliance with relevant regulations and guidelines for both clients and their sub-suppliers. 

Suppliers often face issues such as limited awareness of EU regulations, inefficient supply chains, mistakes in preparing correct documents, lack of resources or manpower, the extensive time required for preparation, proper filing and archiving challenges, and pressure from shipping companies to meet deadlines. 

Through rigorous review, understanding of production processes, use of the Suppliers Dashboard for streamlined data entry, experience in IHM domain and expertise in regulatory compliance, Normec Verifavia ensures that the material data provided in MDs and SDoCs is accurate, up-to-date, and in conformity with the latest regulations and guidelines. 

The primary purpose is to declare the presence or absence of hazardous materials above the respective threshold values, as listed in the Regulation EU 1257/2013 and MEPC.379(80), in the supplied products. This ensures the vessels’ Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM) is properly updated and maintained. 

To ensure a complete outline of materials supplied onboard, maritime suppliers may require the same documentation from downstream suppliers. This process ensures traceability and compliance throughout the supply chain. 

Yes. Our training courses are dedicated to aviation professionals; however, if your work is not related, you can still participate. Please contact us to let us know more about your current understanding and we can help you with the arrangements.  

In general, our EU ETS and UK ETS course takes place for one and a half days, however, if you have specific requirements, this can be adapted. Please fill in the open registration form (link to be added) if you require so.  

We are experienced and accredited EU ETS (COFRAC accredited) and UK ETS (UKAS accredited) verifiers, our role is a key pillar of the Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) process which is the backbone of CORSIA (Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation) compliance.  

After the training you will receive the resources package which will include training presentations, quizzes and answers used during the training, a resource document with official websites and documentation you can use. Additionally, our team remains available for your questions, so you can reach us directly.  

Yes, on-site training can be arranged at our premises in Chandigarh and Paris or at yours. For so, please fill in the open registration form above and tell us more about your requirements, including the number of people. We will prepare a quote for you.  

Please contact us for a customized quote based on your specific needs. 

Biofuels can play a significant role in emission reduction, especially if your organization aims to mitigate transportation-related emissions through biofuel usage. By acquiring knowledge about biofuels, you develop a deeper understanding of their impact on your organization’s emissions profile, enabling you to more precisely measure and report emissions linked to biofuel utilization. 

We combine interactive lectures, workshops, group discussions, and case studies to ensure a dynamic and engaging learning experience. 

Understanding sustainable biofuels helps individuals grasp their potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change. Biofuels produced from renewable sources, such as biomass, offer a cleaner alternative to fossil fuels, contributing to lower carbon footprints and improved air quality. 

Please contact us for a customized quote based on your specific needs. 

The course equips you with the knowledge and tools to navigate the accreditation process effectively. 

We combine interactive lectures, workshops, group discussions, and case studies to ensure a dynamic and engaging learning experience. 

Yes, the course is adaptable to various airport sizes and contexts. We provide case studies and exercises relevant to different scenarios. 

Benefits include reduced operating costs, improved environmental performance, enhanced brand reputation, and compliance with regulations. 

Yes. Our training courses are dedicated to aviation professionals; however, if your work is not related, you can still participate. Please contact us to let us know more about your current understanding and we can help you with the arrangements. 

In general, our CORSIA course takes place for 2 days, however, if you have specific requirements, this can be adapted. Please fill in the open registration form (link to be added) if you require so.

We are experienced and accredited CORSIA verifiers, our role is a key pillar of the Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) process which is the backbone of CORSIA compliance. 

After the training you will receive the resources package which will include training presentations, quizzes and answers used during the training, a resource document with official websites and documentation you can use. Additionally, our team remains available for your questions, so you can reach us directly.

Yes, on-site training can be arranged at our premises in Chandigarh and Paris at your convenience. For requests, please fill in the open registration form (link to be added) and share your requirements, including the number of people. We will prepare a quote for the same. 

Reporting declarants may face penalties ranging between 10€ and 50€ per tonne of unreported emissions. Reporting of embedded emissions in CBAM goods from 1 October 2023 is compulsory.  

1. In the case of missing, incorrect, or incomplete CBAM reports, the National Competent Authority (NCA) may initiate a correction procedure, granting reporting declarants the possibility to rectify potential errors.  
2. The NCA shall apply penalties apply where a) the reporting declarant has not taken the necessary steps to comply with the obligation to submit a CBAM report, or b) where the CBAM report is incorrect or incomplete, and the reporting declarant has not taken the necessary steps to correct the CBAM report after the competent authority initiated the correction procedure. 

Reports are submitted quarterly no later than one month after the end of the quarter and modifications can be made up to two months after the end of the relevant quarter.  

All companies importing the CBAM-covered goods mentioned above are concerned with the regulation. Importing from the EEA and Switzerland (not UK) gives exclusion rights.  

Upon successful verification, you will receive a comprehensive report and a verification certificate that you can use to communicate your carbon neutrality achievement to stakeholders. We can also support you in maintaining your carbon neutrality status through ongoing monitoring and verification services. 

The timeframe for verification can vary depending on the complexity of your organization and the availability of required information. However, it typically takes between 3-6 weeks to complete the process. 

The specific information required will vary depending on your organization’s size and complexity. However, it typically includes data on your: 

• Emissions sources: This includes direct and indirect emissions from your operations. 
• Reduction efforts: Details of your strategies and initiatives to reduce your carbon footprint. 
• Offsetting activities: Information on the types and sources of carbon offsets you are using. 

Normec Verifavia uses recognized international standards such as the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol) and ISO 14064, ISO 14065, and ISO 17029 for carbon neutrality verification. We also stay updated on evolving industry best practices to ensure our approach remains robust and reliable. 

Yes, you can access progress reports, news articles, and updates on the WPSP-website and social media channels. 

No prior expertise is required. The WPSP-offers resources and support to help ports at various stages of their sustainability journey.

The WPSP aims to: 

1. Encourage greater innovation and technology adoption for sustainable port development. 
2. Foster collaboration on green corridors and sustainable supply chains. 
3. Promote adaptation and resilience to climate change impacts on ports. 

Some key initiatives include: 

1. WPSP CO2 Calculator: Online tool for carbon footprint assessment. link 
2. WPCAp (World Ports Climate Action Program): Collaboration on specific climate mitigation projects. Link 
3. WPSP Awards: Recognizing outstanding port sustainability initiatives. link 

The WPSP provides a range of resources, including: 

1. Carbon foot printing tools like the WPSP CO2 Calculator. 
2. Reports, guides, and best practice documents. 
3. Working groups focused on specific sustainability areas.  

Participation in the WPSP is free of charge. However, specific initiatives like attending conferences or training workshops might have individual fees. 

The WPSP is open to all ports worldwide, regardless of size, location, or ownership. 

For F-gas reporting, both the EU and GB require annual submissions by March 31st for the preceding year’s activities. Specific verification documents vary for pre-charged equipment, a March 31st deadline ensures compliance with CO2 equivalent regulations, while a June 30th deadline applies to significant HFC market placements. This structured approach ensures thorough F-gas management and regulatory adherence across equipment importation and market activities.

Pre-charged F-gases are those contained within equipment like refrigeration units when they are imported or sold, requiring special reporting. Bulk F-gases are large quantities of F-gases, not contained within equipment, also subject to reporting requirements. 

Non-compliance with F-gas reporting requirements can result in legal penalties, including fines and restrictions on business operations. 

For example, in the EU, fines can reach up to €200,000 for serious breaches. In the UK, the Environmental Agency has the authority to impose civil sanctions, including fines that may vary based on the severity and duration of the non-compliance. It is crucial for entities to adhere to reporting deadlines to avoid these penalties. For detailed information on penalties, it is advisable to consult the relevant regulatory body’s official documentation or website. 

The verification process ensures that the reported data on F-gas activities is complete and free from material misstatements. It is a mandatory step to comply with EU and GB regulations and to confirm the accuracy of the data. 

Entities that produce, import, or export 1 metric tonne or 100 tonnes of CO2 equivalent or more of F-gases, as well as those who destroy, use as feedstock, or place on the market 500 tonnes of CO2 equivalent or more of F-gases contained in products or equipment, are required to report their activities. 

F-gas reporting involves documenting the production, import, and export of fluorinated greenhouse gases and gases listed in Annex II of the EU F-gas Regulation (EC) No 517/2014, including those contained in imported pre-charged equipment.

Contact us for tailored pricing based on your project specifics. 

On-site visits are optional and contingent upon the complexity of the project. 

We support various frameworks like Riverse standard, Climate Dividends protocol, and GLEC based registries.  

A collaborative and supportive process awaits you at Normec Verifavia. We will work closely with you to understand your operations and data, ensuring a thorough review and compliance with ISO 14083 and performance levels. Upon successful verification, you’ll receive recognized certification and ongoing support to maintain your leadership in sustainable transport and logistics.

By choosing the right partner like Normec Verifavia, you can navigate the SFC CAS process with confidence, unlock the true value of verification, and embark on a journey towards a greener future for your company and the planet.

Verifying your emissions reports isn’t just about checking boxes. It’s about building trust with investors, customers, and regulators, showcasing your commitment to sustainability. It also provides valuable data for benchmarking and tracking your progress, helping you stay ahead in a competitive and increasingly green transport landscape.

Partnering with a leading verifier like Normec Verifavia, with their pioneering expertise and deep understanding of the scheme, can make all the difference. Their global reach ensures seamless service wherever you operate, and their sector-specific knowledge guarantees accurate assessments. 

ISO 14083:2023_titled as Greenhouse gases Quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions arising from transport chain operations_ details how to quantify and report on GHG emissions arising from transport chain operations for passengers and freight. It provides requirements and guidance for the quantification, assignment, allocation, and reporting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for transport chains for passengers and freight. 

Look for fuel suppliers that demonstrate the sustainability of their products through credible certification schemes like ISCC and RSB 

While we do not directly develop programs, we can provide guidance and resources to help you design a program that aligns with industry best practices and meets verification requirements. 

You will receive a verification report detailing the verification process, findings, and conclusions. You can use this report to demonstrate the credibility of your program to stakeholders and support your sustainability communications. Additionally, you will receive verified certificates for each individual claim issued within the program. 

You will need to provide program documentation, data on fuel sources and emission reductions, information on your claim issuance procedures, and details of individual certificates issued. 

We use recognized standards and guidelines for GHG verification and program assurance, such as the ISO 14064 series and industry-specific guidance from organizations like IMO, in addition to the frameworks like SFC’s Market Based Measures Framework, GLEC Framework, and RED II 

Contact Normec Verifavia today! We’ll discuss project/program needs and guide through the process. Let’s embark on the journey towards sustainability and leadership.

Normec Verifavia’s verification process aligns with several key frameworks, including: 

1. CORSIA (Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation): This international agreement aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from aviation through carbon offsetting and reduction measures. Our verification ensures that reported carbon emissions comply with CORSIA requirements. 
2. ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization): ICAO sets environmental standards and recommendations for the aviation industry. Our verification helps to demonstrate adherence to these standards. 
3. EU ETS (European Union Emissions Trading System for Aviation): This scheme requires airlines operating within the EU to report and surrender allowances for their carbon emissions. Normec Verifavia helps to comply with EU ETS requirements. 
4. Industry Best Practices: We also consider established industry best practices and guidelines like IATA and ACI, for environmental performance reporting during the verification process. 
5. The Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol): A widely used accounting standard for greenhouse gas emissions. 

Additionally, Normec Verifavia adheres to international standards for verification and certification, such as ISO 14065 and ISO 17029, ensuring the impartiality and objectivity of our assessments. 

At Normec Verifavia, we have a team of highly qualified and experienced auditors specifically trained in greenhouse gas verification and aviation sustainability. They hold relevant certifications and qualifications required for conducting environmental KPI verification services. 

We maintain strict independence and adhere to ethical conduct guidelines to ensure impartiality and credibility in our verification process. This also means no Normec Verifavia employee can perform verification services for companies they have consulted for in the past year. 

The timeframe depends on the complexity of your operations and data availability. We work closely with you to ensure a smooth and efficient process. 

We assess key metrics like fuel efficiency, carbon emissions, water usage, waste management and other sustainability indicators aligning with industry standards and best practices. 

In today’s environmentally conscious world, passengers, investors, and regulators expect airlines to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability. Normec Verifavia‘s independent assessment provides transparent and reliable data, building trust and ensuring compliance with regulations. 

Normec Verifavia’s validation/verification statement may be included in your company’s sustainability report to demonstrate to your customers and stakeholders that the claims specifically verified or validated by Normec Verifavia meet the objectives of your company’s internal environmental policy. Note that it should not be used to imply verification or validation of any environmental claims beyond those explicitly verified or validated by Normec Verifavia. 

Normec Verifavia has an appeals and complaints procedure if you are dissatisfied with the statement. 

Normec Verifavia has over ten years’ experience in emissions verification. Our auditors are extensively trained and tested in emissions auditing.

While carbon dioxide (CO2) stands as the predominant greenhouse gas (GHG), there are others, like nitrous oxides and methane, emitted in smaller quantities but with significantly higher Global Warming Potentials (GWPs). CO2e considers these differences and standardizes them to have them in their equivalent value in CO2. 

Distinguishing between scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions is crucial because it delineates the varying degrees of influence an organization has over its emissions. While emissions reports often focus solely on scopes 1 and 2, it is essential to include all scopes to gain a comprehensive understanding of the organization’s carbon footprint. 

Third-party verification is essential because it provides an independent expert opinion, ensuring credibility and trust in your emissions calculation. 

Please contact us for a personalized quote based on your platform’s specific needs. 

Timelines vary depending on platform complexity and the verification iterative process between client and verifier.

We verify platforms related to environmental attributes, carbon credits, carbon reporting under regulatory schemes (EU ETS, CORSIA, UK ETS) and other sustainability-focused transactions. 

Once the application has been verified and submitted to ACA Online, the review process from ACA will be 15 calendar days excluding public holidays in total. This is subject to an application meeting the Programme requirements. If the requirements are not met, and further clarification or information is required, the application review may take longer.

All application data that are provided to Normec Verifavia for verification will remain confidential.

After verification and online submitting the Administrator from ACA will compile aggregated data for public annual reporting, but no part of this aggregated data can be dis-assembled and elements of it attributed to individual airports. At the specific request of the Advisory Board of the programme, some individual airport–specific data may be made available on a confidential basis to members of the Advisory Board for the purposes of ascertaining the overall veracity of the programme. The airport concerned will be informed of any such request. Finally, for the purpose of reporting on airport–specific best practice and case studies, the administrator or ACI will seek permission from the airport prior to data use and publication.

The aim of Airport Carbon Accreditation is to encourage and enable airports to implement best practices in carbon management and achieve emissions reductions. Accreditation provides the opportunity for airports to gain public recognition for their achievements, promotes efficiency improvements, encourages knowledge transfer, raises an airport’s profile & credibility, encourages standardisation, and increases awareness and specialisation. 

CCWG membership demonstrates proactive compliance with evolving regulations for emission reporting and reduction in the shipping industry. 
While not guaranteeing direct benefits, participation showcases commitment to transparency and responsible environmental practices, potentially influencing future regulatory decisions.

1. Data collection: Gather detailed information on fuel consumption, voyages, cargo, and operational parameters. 
2. Emission calculation: Apply standardized formulas to calculate CO2 and SOx emissions for individual voyages and the entire fleet. 
3. Independent verification: An accredited third-party auditor assesses data collection, calculation methods, and reporting against CCWG requirements. 
4. Public reporting: Verified emissions data are submitted to CCWG and published for transparency and benchmarking. 

CCWG verification is a process by which an independent third party verifies that a company’s GHG (Green House Gases) emissions data meets the CCWG’s standards. Verification helps to ensure that companies are accurately reporting their emissions and that they are making progress towards their GHG reduction goals. 

The Poseidon Principles have so far been aligned with the ambition set by the IMO in its Initial Strategy in 2018 with a target of at least 50% reduction of GHG emissions by 2050 on 2008 levels. At MEPC 80 in July 2023, a revised strategy was put in place introducing higher ambition as well as differences in the emission boundaries to be considered. 

There are four main elements that changed with the adoption of the new trajectory: 

1. Addition of minimum interim targets of 20% GHG reduction in 2030 and 70% GHG reduction in 2040 relative to 2008 
2. Addition of striving for interim targets of 30% GHG reduction in 2030 and 80% GHG reduction in 2040 relative to 2008 (voluntary) 
3. A net-zero GHG target in 2050 
4. GHG reduction targets are to be on a well-to-wake CO2e perspective 

The Poseidon Principles for Marine Insurance were developed later (December 2021) and were strongly inspired by the Poseidon Principles. The four core Principles are the same for both the Poseidon Principles and the Poseidon Principles for Marine Insurance and both initiatives also use the same metric – AER (Annual Efficiency Ratio). The Poseidon Principles for Marine Insurance, however, have also chosen to take steps toward alignment with the Paris Agreement by providing two trajectories: a 50% CO₂ reduction trajectory in alignment with the 2018 IMO GHG Strategy and a 100% CO₂ reduction trajectory. They have also committed to updating current trajectories in 2024 to align with the 2023 IMO GHG Strategy.  

Another initiative similar to the Poseidon Principles is the Sea Cargo Charter – a framework for responsible chartering. The ambition to develop the Sea Cargo Charter finds its source is the early stages of the Poseidon Principles. The four core Principles are the same for both the Poseidon Principles and the Sea Cargo Charter, but the two frameworks rely on different metrics. The Poseidon Principles uses AER and can therefore rely on the IMO DCS to collect data, while the Sea Cargo Charter uses EEOI and thus have a different approach to source data.

Shipowners of varying sizes and geographies have been engaged and consulted throughout the process of developing the Poseidon Principles. 

A first draft was presented and discussed at a session held in conjunction with the Global Maritime Forum’s Annual Summit in Hong Kong in October 2018. Participants there welcomed the principles with great enthusiasm. 

The Poseidon Principles were launched on 18 June 2019. 

Climate alignment is currently the only environmental factor considered by the Poseidon Principles. This scope will be reviewed and may be expanded by signatories on a timeline that is at their discretion. 

The Poseidon Principles are applicable to lenders, relevant lessors, and financial guarantors including export credit agencies. The Poseidon Principles must be applied by signatories in all business activities that are: 

that are credit products (including bilateral loans, syndicated loans, club deals, and guarantees) secured by vessel mortgages or finance leases secured by title over vessel or unmortgaged ECA loans tied to a vessel; and 

where a vessel or vessels fall under the purview of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) (e.g. vessels 5,000 gross tonnage and above which have an established Poseidon Principles trajectory whereby the carbon intensity can be measured with IMO Data Collection System (DCS) data). 

Principle 1 – Assessment 

This principle provides step-by-step guidance for measuring the climate alignment of signatories’ activities with the agreed climate target. It establishes a common methodology for calculating the emission intensity and total GHG emissions, and thus also provides the input needed to track the decarbonisation trajectories used to assess signatories’ alignment. 

Principle 2 – Accountability 

To ensure that the information provided under the principles is practical, unbiased, and accurate, it is crucial that signatories only use reliable data types, sources, and service providers. 

Principle 3 – Enforcement 

This principle provides the mechanism for meeting the requirement of the Poseidon Principles. It also includes a covenant clause to ensure data collection. 

Principle 4 – Transparency 

The intent of the transparency principle is to ensure both the awareness of the Poseidon Principles and that accurate information can be published by the Secretariat in a timely manner. Furthermore, transparency is key in driving behavioural change. 

The objective is to gather a group of committed financial institutions to take ownership of a set of principles to integrate climate considerations into lending decisions in ship finance, consistent with the climate-related goals of the IMO. 

The principles aim to be voluntary, practical to implement, verifiable, fact-based, and effective. Signatories commit to implementing the principles in their internal policies, procedures, and standards. 

The principles are intended to evolve following a regular review process to ensure that the principles are practical and effective, are linked to and supportive of the IMO’s GHG measures as they develop over time, and that further environmental factors are identified for inclusion. 

The Poseidon Principles are a framework for assessing and disclosing the climate alignment of ship finance portfolios. The Poseidon Principles create common global baselines that are consistent with and supportive of society’s goals to better enable financial institutions to align their portfolios with responsible environmental impacts. 

The four Principles are: 

1. Assessment 
2. Accountability 
3. Enforcement 
4. Transparency 

Contact Normec Verifavia today to navigate the requirements, ensure accurate data collection and analysis, and contribute to a more sustainable maritime future with confidence. 

Currently, there are no direct penalties for non-compliance. However, consequences include reputational risks and exclusion from certain chartering opportunities.  

The Charter adheres to strict data privacy and security protocols. Data is anonymized and aggregated before reporting, and only authorized individuals have access to sensitive information.  

The Sea Cargo Charter website provides comprehensive resources, including FAQs, guidance documents, and webinars. Normec Verifavia also offers expert guidance and support throughout the implementation process.  

The voyage alignment score compares the carbon intensity of your voyage (grams of CO2 per tonne-mile) with the required intensity based on the decarbonization trajectory for that vessel type and size at the specific time. The annual activity alignment is a weighted average of all your voyages within a category, considering the transport work each voyage performed.  

Costs vary depending on the scope of the trial, vessel type, sea trial location and desired level of detail. We provide transparent pricing and customized solutions to suit your budget. 

While CFD offers valuable insights, it is not applicable to ships with Low Friction Hull Coatings retrofit. Speed power curves obtained from Sea trials are the only valid solution. 

External factors like weather and sea state can influence data collection. Normec Verifavia’s expertise mitigates these limitations through meticulous planning and data analysis. 

Lead times vary depending on vessel availability, weather conditions, and complexity of the trial plan. We collaborate closely with you to ensure timely execution. 

Ships that possess an ice-class notation such as IA, IA Super, IB, IC, or their equivalent could seek an exemption from the additional energy consumption related to navigating in ice conditions. 

Penalties are calculated based on the regulation’s formula and increase for repeated offenses. Severe violations may lead to expulsion orders.  

Banking, borrowing, and pooling allow companies to manage compliance across their fleet and over time. Normec Verifavia can explain these options in detail.  

1. 2025: Monitoring and reporting of GHG intensity begin. 
2. 2030: Shore-side power requirement for container and passenger ships in EU ports. 
3. 2034: Potential 2% sub-target for RFNBOs (Renewable fuel of Nonbiological Origin) implemented if their proportion falls below 1% in 2031. 

Normec Verifavia can conduct a detailed analysis based on your fleet profile and fuel types. Contact us for a personalized assessment.  

The two services offered by Normec Verifavia, though related to Overridable Power Limiters (EPL/ShaPoLi) for EEXI compliance, serve different but complementary purposes within the maritime sustainability framework. Here’s a summary of their distinctions: 

OPL Supply and Installation Service: 

This service focuses on the physical aspects of achieving EEXI compliance through the provision and fitting of EPL/ShaPoLi systems onboard ships. It involves: 

• Technical Assistance: Selection, procurement, and installation of either Mechanical EPL or ShaPoLi systems, tailored to the ship’s specific needs. 
• End-to-End Support: Covers the entire process from EPL/ShaPoLi system selection to crew training, emphasizing seamless project execution. 
• Custom Solutions: Assessments are made to recommend the most suitable EPL/ShaPoLi system based on the vessel’s operational profile. 
• Mechanical vs. ShaPoLi: Offers insights into the advantages and drawbacks of mechanical and electronic EPL/ShaPoLi systems, aiding in the decision-making process. 

Onboard Management Manual (OMM) for OPL: 

This service provides documentation for EPL/ShaPoLi systems installed onboard by other entities, focusing on operational and regulatory compliance aspects. It includes: 

• Compliance Framework: An auditable plan that outlines the comprehensive framework for the compliant operation of EPL/ShaPoLi systems. 
• Safety and Process Optimization: Procedures for the safe activation, deactivation, and emergency handling of EPL/ShaPoLi, alongside guidance for efficient record-keeping and reporting. 
• Regulatory Alignment: The manual is meticulously aligned with IMO Resolution MEPC.335(76), ensuring that EPL/ShaPoLi operation meets stringent international standards. 

Both systems only require routine maintenance as per manufacturer guidelines. This can be easily done by the ship’s Crew. ShaPoLi may require additional periodic maintenance/ part replacements after some number of years. This varies system to system and is to be as per manufacturer’s recommendations.  

By leveraging Normec Verifavia’s expertise and comprehensive EPL/ShaPoLi services, you can confidently navigate EEXI compliance and achieve operational efficiency.

Yes, we offer comprehensive crew training programs tailored to the specific EPL/ShaPoLi system installed, ensuring safe and efficient operation. 

Mechanical EPL installation typically takes 2-3 weeks, while ShaPoLi requires 5-8 weeks due to its electronic nature and additional cabling needs. 

Consider time constraints, budget, long-term vision, and operational profile. Mechanical EPL is ideal for immediate compliance and cost-effectiveness, while ShaPoLi offers long-term benefits in adaptability, efficiency, and potential digitalization. 

Contact Normec Verifavia today. We can discuss your specific needs and provide a customized solution to help you achieve EEXI compliance efficiently and cost-effectively. 

1. Faster and more cost-effective: Provides results quicker and at a lower cost than sea trials or model tests. 
2. Greater flexibility: Allows for analyzing various scenarios and design modifications virtually. 
3. Improved accuracy: Can potentially achieve a more accurate Vref estimation compared to the formula. 

Yes! CFD simulations can predict the impact of specific ESDs on your ship’s performance, helping you: 

1. Compare the effectiveness of different ESDs in improving your EEXI rating. 
2. Choose the most cost-effective ESD solutions based on their predicted impact. 

1. Data collection: We gather structural and hull shape data of your ship. 
2. 3D model generation: A digital model of your ship’s hull is created. 
3. CFD analysis: The model is meshed and analyzed using advanced software to simulate water flow around the hull. 
4. Results and reporting: Analysis results are compiled into a comprehensive report. 

CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) uses computer simulations to analyze fluid flow around objects like ships. For EEXI, we use CFD to estimate a ship’s reference speed (vref) accurately, which is crucial for calculating EEXI. This approach offers better EEXI results by avoiding potential overestimation of OPL due to the usage of approximation formulas in the regulations. 

An effective OMM should be adaptable to various EPL/ShaPoLi systems and vessel configurations through: 

1. Modular design: Allowing for customization of procedures and forms specific to the installed EPL/ShaPoLi system. 
2. Risk-based approach: Tailoring procedures and training based on the specific risks associated with the vessel type and operational profile. 
3. Regular review and update: Ensuring the OMM remains relevant and effective through continuous evaluation and adaptation to changing regulations or operational needs. 

The OMM should: 

1. Utilize standardized forms for recording EPL/ShaPoLi operating data, including timestamps, power limitations, and override events. 
2. Implement a clear record-keeping system for easy access, retrieval, and verification by crew and regulatory authorities. 
3. Establish protocols for data security and integrity to ensure accurate reporting. 

An effective OMM for EPL/ShaPoLi  should encompass: 

1. Detailed procedures: Covering EPL/ShaPoLi activation, deactivation, response time, record-keeping, and reporting, aligned with relevant regulations like IMO MEPC.335(76). 
2. Standardized forms: Facilitating consistent and accurate documentation of EPL/ShaPoLi usage, power limitations, and overrides. 
3. Comprehensive checklists: Ensuring adherence to all procedures and capturing critical data points for regulatory compliance. 

Yes, we offer expertise in various compliance strategies, including alternative fuels, technical upgrades, and operational optimization techniques. 

Yes, we provide ongoing support to ensure sustained compliance, optimize performance, and adapt to evolving regulations. 

Our experts will analyze your needs and recommend the most suitable approach, considering technical, economic, and operational factors. 

The timeframe varies depending on your situation and chosen strategy. We prioritize efficiency and minimize disruption to your operations. 

Costs depend on your fleet size and complexity. We offer personalized quotes based on your specific needs. 

Verification entails providing information from a 25-question survey regarding the vessel’s emissions (CO2, NOx, SOx, PM), chemical usage, and water and waste management. Additionally, the company must have the EEOI calculated and available for the vessels under audit, adhering to IMO requirements outlined in MEPC.1/Circ.684. Data from the preceding 12-month period is assessed. 

Practically all cargo-carrying vessel types, including general cargo, reefer, bulk, tanker, gas carrier, container, RoRo, RoPax, and car carrier. 

Scores are allocated based on the implementation of eco-friendly solutions, with additional points awarded for measures exceeding current IMO regulations on SOx, PM, and NOx. The weighting depends on the environmental data provided in the survey. 

For a vessel to undergo CSI verification, a comprehensive 25-question survey needs to be completed. This survey covers key areas such as emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), and particulate matter (PM), alongside chemical usage, and water and waste management practices. Additionally, the vessel’s Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI) must be calculated in accordance with the IMO’s guidelines as per MEPC.1/Circ.684. Verification assesses data from the last 12 months to ensure compliance and environmental performance. 

CSI verification is open to a wide range of cargo-carrying vessels. Eligible types include, but are not limited to, general cargo ships, refrigerated cargo ships (reefers), bulk carriers, tankers, gas carriers, container ships, roll-on/roll-off (RoRo) vessels, roll-on/roll-off passenger ships (RoPax), and car carriers. This inclusivity ensures a broad segment of the maritime industry can participate in the CSI program. 

The CSI score is determined by evaluating the adoption of environmentally friendly technologies and practices onboard. Points are awarded not only for compliance with current International Maritime Organization (IMO) standards for sulfur oxides (SOx), particulate matter (PM), and nitrogen oxides (NOx) but also for implementing measures that surpass these standards. The score’s final weight is influenced by the detailed environmental data submitted through the CSI survey. 

We certify a wide range of IT systems across various platforms and functionalities, covering data collection, reporting, monitoring, and optimization modules for EU MRV, IMO DCS, and UK MRV regulations. 

While our certification ensures your system meets regulatory requirements, the verification process itself remains independent. However, a certified system demonstrates your proactive approach and provides accurate and readily accessible data, potentially simplifying verification. 

The cost of certification depends on numerous factors, such as system size, complexity, and scope. We offer customized quotes based on your specific needs. 

The timeframe can vary depending on the complexity of your system and the scope of certification. However, we typically complete the process within 3-6 months. 

For ships operating continuously for three years at Level “D” or for one year at level “E”, a Corrective action plan will have to be included in SEEMP III and implemented, which outlines improvement to the vessel’s efficiency to a moderate level rating “C” or above. The ship should apply for SEEMP III approval before they can get the SOC for above cases. 

The Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) is determined through distinct methods. Two examples of such CIIs, utilizing different metrics, are the Annual Efficiency Ratio (AER) and capacity gross ton distance (cgDist). AER, measured as emissions per deadweight-ton mile, is applied for cargo weight, while cgDist, calculated as emissions per gross ton-mile, is utilized for cargo types emphasizing volume 

The first annual CII rating will be assigned in 2024, based on verified data from the 2023 calendar year. 

There are three acceptable fuel consumption monitoring methodologies: 

1. Method 1: bunker delivery notes (BDN) 
2. Method 2: Flow meters 
3. Method 3: Bunker fuel tank monitoring on-board 

By 31 May, each year ship should have Statement of compliance (SoC) for the fuel oil consumption report on board issued by a Verifier. 

At the time of management/flag change (or close to that date) it is required to prepare the fuel oil consumption data and submit to the administration/flag state for the time under a flag state or Management Company. 

Normec Verifavia offers a streamlined combined verification service for ships operating in European waters. 

Penalties can include fines, detention from port state Authorities, and reputational damage. 

All ships of 5000 GT or above performing international voyages regardless of Flag or country of ownership. Ships engaged on domestic voyages, ships not propelled by mechanical means and platforms, including FPSOs, FSUs and drilling rigs, are excluded. 

The digital platform to report the UK MRV data will be ready in 2025. Till then, the operators are recommended to get their data verified every year. 

While similar, some key differences exist between EU and UK regulations. We recommend an assessment for complete UK MRV compliance, even if you have an EU plan.

Reports are due by April 30th each year for the preceding year’s data.  

Voyages between two Crown Dependencies or Overseas Territories – such as between Jersey and Guernsey – should not be included. Likewise, a journey from a port in an overseas territory or Crown dependency to a non-UK port should not be included. 

Release of the greenhouse gases covered by the emissions of 

1. Carbon dioxide (CO2) 
2. [NEW] emissions released from 2024 onwards, methane (CH4) 
3. [NEW] emissions released from 2024 onwards, nitrous oxide (N2O) 

Companies are required to assess and quantify the quantities of each greenhouse gas individually, and then aggregate these amounts into CO2-equivalents. 

In the context of ETS and MRV, the entity responsible for compliance in respect of the emissions of a given ship can be either the shipowner (i.e., the registered owner) or the ISM Company of that ship. 

Companies involved in maritime transport activities must account for the types and quantities of fuel consumed during the period when the ship was under their responsibility. The THETIS MRV has been updated to incorporate the new functionalities of possible multiple verifications limited to the period the operator had ship under its fleet. 

From 2024: cargo and passenger ships of or above 5000 gross tonnage (GT) 
From 2027: offshore ships of or above 5000 GT 

Non-compliance with EU ETS regulations can result in penalties, including fines and potential exclusion from trading allowances. Therefore, having a verified and compliant monitoring plan is crucial. 

The October 2023 Implementing Acts introduce stricter data quality control measures, require specific verification procedures for fuel oil mass flow meters, and mandate detailed documentation of calibration activities.  

Based on the monitoring plan assessed in accordance with Article 13, for each ship arriving in or departing from, and for each voyage to or from, a port under a Member State’s jurisdiction, companies shall monitor in accordance with Part A of Annex I and Part A of Annex II the following parameters: 

• port of departure and port of arrival including the date and hour of departure and arrival; 
• amount and emission factor for each type of fuel consumed in total; 
• CO2 emitted; 
• distance travelled; 
• time spent at sea; 
• cargo carried; 
• transport work. 
• Companies may also monitor information relating to the ship’s ice class and to navigation through ice, where applicable. 

The most imminent deadline associated to the EU MRV is the 31 August 2017: ship operators must by then submit the Monitoring Plan of every individual ship they operate to an independent accredited verifier for assessment. 

The EU MRV Regulation applies to all ships above 5,000 GT regardless of flag on all voyages to, from and between EU ports (including ports located in the EU outermost regions). The EU MRV also applies to voyages between Norway / Iceland and third countries. 

Yes, non-compliance can lead to significant consequences, including: 

1. Fines: Monetary penalties imposed by Flag States or port authorities. 
2. Detention: Your vessel may be detained, causing costly delays and disruptions. 
3. Reputational Damage: Non-compliance can damage your company’s reputation and stakeholder trust. 

1. SEEMP Part II: Ensure your Fuel Oil Record Book (FORM) is complete and up to date, along with any supporting documentation related to fuel oil consumption. 
2. SEEMP Part III: Have your SEEMP Part III document readily available, along with relevant fuel oil consumption data and documentation supporting your carbon intensity reduction strategy. 

1. SEEMP Part II: Verification is required for ships over 5,000 GT before their first annual report after January 1, 2019. 
2. SEEMP Part III: Verification is required for ships over 5,000 GT by December 31, 2022, with the first CoC valid for three years. However, early verification is encouraged to ensure smooth compliance and avoid last-minute challenges. 

Yes, just as in EU MRV, only emissions from cargo-related voyages need to be reported under UK MRV. 

The digital platform to report the UK MRV data will be ready in 2025. Till then, the operators are recommended to get their data verified till 2024. 

While similar, some key differences exist between EU and UK regulations. We recommend an assessment for complete UK MRV compliance, even if you have an EU plan. 

Voyages between two Crown Dependencies or Overseas Territories – such as between Jersey and Guernsey – should not be included. Likewise, a journey from a port in an overseas territory or Crown dependency to a non-UK port should not be included. 

The UK MRV regulation applies to all ship voyages involving UK ports, including those arriving, departing, or traveling between them. However, to avoid duplicate reporting and simplify procedures, data on voyages between the UK and European Economic Area (EEA) countries is not required under UK MRV. This may change in the future, but for now, the focus is on: 

• Voyages between two UK ports. 
• Voyages between a UK port and a non-EEA port. 
• Emissions generated within a UK port for any of the above voyages, including those on route between the UK and EEA.  

The verifier has three main roles: 

• Independent assessment of the ship’s Monitoring Plan against the requirements of the Regulation 
• Independent verification of Emissions Reports against the assessed Monitoring Plan and the EU MRV Regulation 
• Issuance of the Document of Compliance (DoC) that each ship exceeding 5000 GT visiting EU ports must carry on-board starting from June 2019 

Monitoring Plans need to be created on THETIS and evaluated by a chosen or selected Verifier, such as Normec Verifavia. After this evaluation, a report is shared on THETIS. Following this step, the Monitoring Plans are sent to the relevant Administering Authority. It is the Administering Authority that provides the final approval for the Monitoring Plans. 

The revised template includes new requirements for reporting on: Carbon Capture Technology expanded Emission Factors (including CH4 and N2O), procedures for Biofuels and RFNBOs (Renewable fuel of Nonbiological Origin), specifics on LNG-powered ships, and more detailed Shipping Company information, process flow, and risk assessment.  

The deadline for submitting the Monitoring Plan is March 31, 2024.  

All ships must meet D2 standards by 8th September 2024.  

Accredited laboratories or authorized personnel perform VGP testing. Their expertise ensures accurate results and adherence to regulatory standards.  

Non-compliance may result in penalties, fines, or restrictions on vessel operations. Corrective actions are necessary to meet VGP requirements.  

VGP requirements apply to most commercial vessels operating in U.S. waters.  

The VGP requires water testing to assess the environmental impact of discharges from vessels, such as ballast water, bilgewater, and graywater. Testing ensures compliance with water quality standards.   

At Normec Verifavia, we conducted a thorough audit of recycling yards and have carefully selected only a few yards that surpass regulatory standards. Even after proposing one of these shortlisted yards, we can serve as independent monitors on behalf of ship owners. Our team will remain stationed at the recycling yard until the recycling process is completed, ensuring strict compliance with international and local regulations as well as the proposed standards. 

Non-compliance with EU SRR or HKC regulations can result in fines, port detentions, and reputational damage.   

Normec Verifavia can help you identify facilities that meet EU SRR and HKC standards based on your specific needs and ship’s characteristics.   

Only qualified companies with expertise in specific regulations can develop IHMs. Normec Verifavia is an approved IHM service provider for both EU SRR and HKC requirements.   

If your ship undergoes recycling at an EU facility or calls at an EU port before recycling, you need to be IHM compliant with EU SRR regulations. The HKC, once in force, will require an IHM for all ships globally. 

Only authorized disposal facilities that comply with environmental regulations.  

Only certified asbestos removal companies with the necessary expertise and equipment.  

Yes, if asbestos is detected onboard your vessel, an AMP is required.  

Through rigorous review, understanding of production processes, use of the Suppliers Dashboard for streamlined data entry, experience in the IHM domain, and expertise in regulatory compliance, Normec Verifavia ensures that the material data provided in MDs and SDoCs is accurate, up-to-date, and in conformity with the latest regulations and guidelines. 

Yes, by offering a catalogue review service, Normec Verifavia can evaluate a supplier’s products and inventory for potentially hazardous materials, minimizing the need for extensive sampling and testing while ensuring compliance. 

To ensure a complete outline of materials supplied onboard, maritime suppliers may require the same documentation from downstream suppliers. This process ensures traceability and compliance throughout the supply chain. 

The primary purpose is to declare the presence or absence of hazardous materials above the respective threshold values, as listed in the Regulation EU 1257/2013 and MEPC.379(80), in the supplied products. This ensures the vessels’ Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM) is properly updated and maintained. 

1. No/ little awareness of the EU regulation.  
2. An inefficient supply chain leads to difficulty in collecting the required material data from sub-suppliers or manufacturers.  
3. Mistakes in preparing the correct MDs and SDoCs in conformity with the regulations and guidelines.  
4. Lack of resources/ manpower in preparing the declarations.  
5. A lot of time is required to prepare the declarations per order – per item basis.  
6. Proper filing & archiving of the created declarations.  
7. Pressure & deadlines from shipping companies to submit the correctly filled declarations per order – per item 

You risk port detentions, fines, and reputational damage. Maintaining your IHM is crucial for compliance and responsible ship recycling. 

We recommend monthly updates or as and when changes occur. Our dashboard provides automated updates and reminders.  

Costs vary depending on your vessel size and complexity. We offer transparent pricing and competitive rates. 

No, our IHM Maintenance Dashboard can integrate with your existing IHM data, regardless of who conducted the survey. 

IHM Part II and III are specifically required when the decision has been made to send the ship for recycling. So, IHM Part II (for operationally generated waste) and IHM Part III (for stores) are developed and verified during the end-of-life phase of the vessel.

The duration for preparing the Inventory of Hazardous Material (IHM) varies based on factors such as your vessel’s complexity and the specific trade route. Typically, it can range from 3 to 4 weeks under normal conditions.  

As of December 2023, the HKC applies to ships over 500 gross tonnage that embark on international voyages. The EU SRR is currently undergoing revisions, which may affect IHM requirements in the future. In 2023, revised guidelines were issued by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to provide further clarity on additional hazmat being listed and best practices. 

Regulations such as the Hong Kong Convention (HKC) and EU Ship Recycling Regulation (EU SRR) require ships to comply with the Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM). 

IHM stands for Inventory of Hazardous Materials. It is a mandatory document required as per EU SRR and HKC. The document provides a detailed inventory of hazardous materials onboard, including their location, quantity, and associated risks. The purpose of IHM is to ensure safety for personnel, and the environment. 

Penalty fees amounting to 100 EUR may be applicable if an operator does not comply with this scheme. 

We connect you with verified projects that meet international standards and contribute to real carbon reduction. 

Justifications demonstrating unavailable compliant EU credits below €40/tCO2 and required volume (commercial prospects, documented communication with offset providers) are required. 

No, double counting is prohibited. 

Renewable energy, energy efficiency, forestry, carbon capture and storage, and more, are subject to eligibility criteria. 

Yes, we provide a range of additional services to support your SAF program journey, including: 

• Sustainability strategy development: Our trainings deliver the key aspects and updates in SAF program management. These sessions can help you develop your understanding on SAF thus allowing you to define your own sustainability goals and design a tailored SAF program roadmap.  
• Supply chain due diligence: We can assess your SAF suppliers’ compliance with sustainability standards. 
• Communication and engagement support: We can share reference communication materials to engage stakeholders about your SAF program. 

The timeframe for the SPA audit process varies depending on the size and complexity of your program. Typically, the initial program audit takes 4-6 weeks, with individual certificate verification conducted continuously throughout the year. We strive to ensure a timely and efficient process without compromising thoroughness. 

At Normec Verifavia, we work collaboratively with you to identify any discrepancies and recommend corrective actions. Our goal is not to penalize but to guide you towards achieving compliance and program improvement. We offer tailored action plans and ongoing support to help you address any issues. 

We leverage Keeex blockchain technology to enhance the audit process in the following ways: 

• Securely store and transfer audit data: Our blockchain technology ensures tamper-proof transparency and reduces the risk of fraud. 
• Automate certificate issuance and verification: This streamlines the process and improves efficiency. 
• Provide real-time data access: Stakeholders can instantly verify the authenticity and validity of your SAF certificates, increasing trust. 

In addition to the core benefits of enhanced credibility and risk mitigation, an SPA (Sustainable Aviation Fuel program audit) conducted by Normec Verifavia can offer several advantages to your airline. These include: 

• Reduced audit fatigue: Our team can perform a single audit that covers multiple sustainability schemes, which streamlines the process and saves you time and resources. 
• Competitive advantage in tenders and partnerships: Verified SAF (Sustainable Aviation Fuel) programs showcase your commitment to sustainability, which can attract eco-conscious clients and partners, giving you a competitive edge in tenders and partnerships. 
• Enhanced investor confidence: Demonstrating responsible practices can improve investor relations and access to green financing. 

The European Commission has now issued an updated version of the EU ETS Annual emissions report (AER) template that facilitates Swiss ETS reporting together with EU ETS reporting. The new template is essentially the old template that has been expanded with Swiss ETS sections. Click “read more” for further information about the reporting and to access the new template,

Swiss authorities have based the allocation of free allowances based on 2018 TKM data. 

The allocation has now been completed, and FOEN has communicated the allocation of Swiss free allowances to all operators who were due one. 

No, as of January 1, 2020, the Swiss ETS is linked to the EU ETS. 

Due to the linking, all flights between the EEA and Switzerland (both directions) subject to reporting and surrendering must be entered exclusively in the form “Carbon dioxide emissions in EU-ETS by aerodrome pair” from the reporting year 2020 onwards. Flights between Switzerland and non-EEA countries can still be reported voluntarily in the form “Carbon dioxide emissions under article 2 del. Regulation (EU 2019/1603) by aerodrome pair”. 

Yes, both EU ETS and Swiss ETS aviation allowances can be used for meeting surrendering obligations of both programs through the “one-stop-shop.” This includes free allowances issued by either of the programs. 

Aircraft operators will have only one aircraft operator holding account in relation to their obligations under the EU as well as and the Swiss ETS. For an aircraft operator administered by an EEA member state, such an account will be in the Union Registry. For an aircraft operator administered by Switzerland, such an account will be in the Swiss registry. 

Swiss domestic flights and flights from Switzerland to the EEA will be accounted for in the Swiss ETS. 

Note Due to linking of the Swiss ETS and the EU ETS, the scope of EU ETS was expanded to include flights from EEA to Switzerland, so the EU ETS will now cover intra-EEA flights and EEA-Switzerland flights. Click “read more” to see an overview of reportable flights under Swiss ETS and the EU ETS. 

Since Swiss ETS will be administered through the “one-stop-shop,” the deadline will be the same as for the EU ETS (typically March 31). 

Operators based in Switzerland have had their Competent Authority (CA) change to the Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA). Competent Authorities remain unchanged for other operators. 

With the goal of minimizing administrative burden for aircraft operators and noting the linking of the Swiss ETS and the EU ETS, compliance with Swiss ETS will be reached together with compliance for EU ETS, through a “one-stop-shop” approach. All compliance processes and procedures will be handled via a single Competent authority (CA). 

Yes. If a verification body has issued a recommendation, non-compliance and/or non-conformity in their verification report, the aircraft operator must submit an improvement report by 30 June (n+1 year). 

From January 1st, 2023, flights from Great Britain (England, Wales, and Scotland) to Switzerland will fall within the scope of the UK ETS. Conversely, flights from Switzerland to the UK (Great Britain and Northern Ireland) will be reported under CH ETS. 

The UK ETS compliance deadlines would be aligned with EU ETS requirements. 

The Authority have decided to reset the UK ETS cap for 2021-2030 to make the UK ETS consistent with UK’s trajectory towards Net Zero by 2050. 

Starting in 2024, the regulatory body has made the decision to set a cap on aircraft operators’ free allocation entitlement. The maximum entitlement will be restricted to 100% verified emissions. Any surplus-free allowances allocated to operators beyond this cap will be returned to the regulatory authority. 

Only Phase 1 of the UK ETS has been announced as of now and it is slated to run from 2021 to 2030, with two full system reviews. 

Key Dates: 

1. Brexit: 31st December 2020 
2. First UK ETS Monitoring Period: 2021 
3. EU ETS 2020 Compliance for UK Operators: 31st March 2021 
4. UK ETS 2021 Deadline: 31st March 2022 
5. First UK ETS Review: 2023-2026 
6. Second UK ETS Review: 2028-2031 
7. End of UK ETS Phase 1: 2030 

If an aircraft operator aims to use sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) / biofuels in the near future, the operator must update their Emissions Monitoring Plan (EMP) to describe the procedures for implementing and monitoring SAF use. 

To make a successful emission reduction claim the operators is required to follow the below mentioned criteria: 

1. In UK ETS, SAF / biofuels can be claimed if they meet the sustainability criteria in the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO) order. 
2. The fuel purchase needs to take place in scheme year or in the three months prior to the start of the scheme year. 
3. The SAF is delivered to the aircraft in the specific monitoring period. 
4. No double counting of the eligible SAF 
5. The aircraft operator is required to present the following key documents to their independent verifier: 
   1. Evidence of sustainability 
      1. Proof of Sustainability (POS) documents 
      2. Details of RTFO certificate claims  
   2. SAF purchase and delivery 
      1. Product Transfer Document (PTD) 
      2. Invoices 
      3. Fuel supplier report.
   3. SAF Mandate: The fuel supplier letter along with the information about the sustainability batch certificate number to back tract the source of the SAF needs to be mentioned in the letter.
   4. Declaration  
      1. A signed declaration confirming that the SAF specified in the ERC is not sold to another person or used elsewhere to claim emissions reduction or financial benefits. 
      2. The ERCs must be included as a part of the Annual Emissions Report (AER) for the required monitoring period by 31st March (n+1 year). 

Commercial and non-commercial aircraft operators would not be subject to any obligations if they meet some criteria.  

Commercial aircraft operators will not have any obligations if they meet any of the following criteria:

• Operate fewer than 243 flights per period for three consecutive four-month periods, based on full-scope activity. The four-month periods are January to April, May to August, and September to December. 
• Operate flights with total annual emissions below 10,000 tonnes of CO2 per year, based on full-scope activity. 

Non-commercial aircraft operators will not have any obligations if they operate flights with total annual emissions below 1,000 tonnes of CO2 per year, based on full-scope activity.

Yes, the UK ETS registry is used to record the below information under UK ETS only: 

• Free allowance allocations 
• Annual verified aviation emissions 
• Allowance transfers 

Allowance surrenders 
The registry administrator will open an Aircraft Operator Holding Account (AOHA) in the UK ETS registry after the UK ETS regulator has issued and confirmed the Emissions Monitoring Plan (EMP). The administrator will contact the aircraft operator accordingly. This is the aircraft operator’s responsibility to maintain the AOHA and nominate two authorized representatives for the AOHA. 

1. Military flights 
2. Flights performed exclusively for the transport, on an official mission, of a reigning Monarch and their immediate family, Heads of State, Heads of Government, and Government Ministers, of a country other than the United Kingdom 
3. Customs and police flights performed by both civil registered and military aircraft 
4. Search and rescue flights 
5. Firefighting flights 
6. Humanitarian flights 
7. Emergency medical service flights 
8. Flights performed exclusively under the visual flight rules set out in Annex 2 to the Chicago Convention 
9. Flights terminating at the aerodrome from which the aircraft has taken off and during which no intermediate landing has been made. 
10. Training flights performed exclusively for the purpose of obtaining a license, or a rating in the case of cockpit flight crew, provided that the flights do not serve for the transport of passengers or cargo. 
11. Flights performed exclusively for the purpose of scientific research partially or totally performed in-flight 
12. Flights performed exclusively for the purpose of checking, testing or certifying aircraft or equipment whether airborne or ground based. 

Flights performed by aircraft with a certified maximum take-off mass of less than 5,700 kilograms. 

Note: Public Sector Obligation flights are not part of UK ETS aviation activity. 

Surrendering obligations under UK ETS will apply to the following routes 

1. UK domestic flights 
2. Flights departing from the UK to aerodromes within EEA states. 
3. Flights between the UK and Gibraltar. 
4. Flights departing from Great Britain and arriving in Switzerland. (Note: Great Britain comprises England, Wales, and Scotland). 
5. Flight departing from the UK to territories of EEA member states, including Ceuta and Melilla (Spain), the Åland Islands (Finland), and Jan Mayen (Norway). 
6. Additionally, flights to offshore installations will be included in the UK ETS.

Note: Flights departing from the crown dependencies Isle of Man, Jersey, and Guernsey are not included in the reportable scopes of UK ETS 

Lack of territorial access to the sea, remoteness and isolation from world markets and high transit costs continue to impose serious constraints on the overall socio-economic development of landlocked developing countries. Their sea-borne trade unavoidably depends on transit through other countries. Additional border crossings and long distances from the market substantially increase the total expenses for transport services. 

The economic performance of landlocked developing countries reflects the direct and indirect impact of the geographical situation on key-economic variables. Landlocked developing countries are generally among the poorest of the developing countries, with the weakest growth rates, and are typically heavily dependent on a very limited number of commodities for their export earnings. Moreover, of the 32 landlocked developing countries, 17 are classified as least developed. 

The remoteness from major world markets is the principal reason why many landlocked developing countries have not been very successful in mitigating consequences caused by their geographical handicap as compared to landlocked countries in Europe. Landlocked developed countries of Europe are surrounded by major developed markets and their seaborne trade accounts for a relatively small part of their external trade. Their export is mainly high-value-added products and their distance from the seaport is relatively short. 

Small Island Developing States (SIDS) are low-lying coastal countries that tend to share similar sustainable development challenges, including small but growing populations, limited resources, remoteness, susceptibility to natural disasters, vulnerability to external shocks, excessive dependence on international trade, and fragile environments. Their growth and development are also held back by high communication, energy and transportation costs, irregular international transport volumes, disproportionately expensive public administration, and infrastructure due to their small size, and little to no opportunity to create economies of scale. 

The SIDS were first recognized as a distinct group of developing countries at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in June 1992. 

The Least Developed Countries (LDCs) is a list of the countries that, according to the United Nations, exhibit the lowest indicators of socioeconomic development, with the lowest Human Development Index ratings of all countries in the world. A country is classified among the Least Developed Countries if it meets three criteria: 

• Poverty: adjustable criterion based on Gross National Income (GNI) per capita averaged over three years. As of 2015 a country must have GNI per capita less than US $1,035 to be included on the list, and over $1,242 to graduate from it. 
• Human resource weakness: based on indicators of nutrition, health, education, and adult literacy. 
• Economic vulnerability: based on instability of agricultural production, instability of exports of goods and services, economic importance of non-traditional activities, merchandise export concentration, handicap of economic smallness, and the percentage of population displaced by natural disasters. 

Accredited CORSIA verifiers adhere to global standards, providing assurance of competence and reliability. Accreditation signifies expertise, experience, and a commitment to following established procedures, ensuring thorough and credible verification of emissions data for the aviation industry.

CORSIA verification benefits airlines by ensuring adherence to environmental regulations, avoiding penalties, and fostering a positive industry reputation. It enhances emissions management systems, aligning with global standards and emphasizing transparency and accountability. 

CORSIA verification ensures compliance with international aviation emissions regulations. It involves independent assessment to verify emissions data accuracy and adherence to CORSIA standards, contributing to global efforts in offsetting and reducing carbon emissions. 

Following COVID 19, ICAO revised its baseline calculation and announced only the emissions from the year 2019 will be considered for baseline. 

For the pilot phase (2021-2023): the total CO2 emissions covered by CORSIA in 2019; and 

For the first and second phases (2024-2035): 85% of the total CO2 emissions covered by CORSIA in 2019.

CORSIA’s MRV (Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification) system comprises three main components: 

Monitoring of CO2 Emissions: 

CO2 emissions monitoring can be conducted either through the Fuel Use Monitoring Method or by utilizing the ICAO CORSIA CERT. In the former method, each operator must gather precise data on fuel usage per flight and compute CO2 emissions by multiplying the fuel consumption by a conversion factor representing the CO2 produced per tonne of fuel used. Aeroplane operators are obligated to outline their approach to CO2 emissions monitoring in an Emissions Monitoring Plan, which is then submitted for approval by the respective State. 

Reporting of CO2 Emissions: 

Following the monitoring and calculation of CO2 emissions, aeroplane operators are required to report pertinent information to their State Authority, which in turn transmits the data to ICAO using standardized templates and procedures. ICAO aggregates the CO2 emissions data, computes the annual Sectoral Growth Factor, and communicates this factor to the States. 

Verification of CO2 Emissions Information: 

The verification process ensures the accuracy and integrity of the data collected. Essentially, a third party verifies that all procedures have been carried out correctly, akin to the auditing practices commonly employed in financial contexts. 

The Environmental Technical Manual (ETM) adheres to the traditional ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) framework, where SARPs are supported by guidance material for implementation. SARPs delineate the required actions for States or operators to execute CORSIA, defining the “what” and “when” aspects. In contrast, Volume IV of the ETM provides guidance on the procedural aspects (“how”) of implementing CORSIA, offering a comprehensive framework for effective implementation. 

Paragraph 10 of Assembly Resolution A41-22 delineates the scope of CORSIA offsetting, focusing on routes between States to mitigate market disparities among aircraft operators along the same routes. The principle is to ensure equitable treatment of all aircraft operators on a specific route. 

Here are the specifics: 

• A route falls under CORSIA offsetting if both connecting States participate in the scheme. 
• A route is excluded from CORSIA offsetting if one or both connecting States do not participate. 

When calculating CO2 emissions covered by CORSIA offsetting within a given year, aircraft operators must consider emissions from operations on all routes covered by the scheme, as outlined in paragraph 10 of the Assembly Resolution. 

It is important to note that the applicability of CORSIA offsetting requirements and CORSIA monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) requirements differs. Even if an international flight is not subject to offsetting requirements, it remains subject to MRV requirements. 

Learn more here. 

Aircraft CO2 emissions are an exact multiple of fuel consumption. 

To calculate fuel consumption there are two different approaches for aviation (Method A and Method B). 

CO2 emissions are then calculated by multiplying the mass of fuel by the emission factor: 

EMISSIONS = Fuel Consumption (in tonnes) × Emission Factor (in CO2 kilograms per tonne of fuel)  

Type of Fuel & Emission Factor (tCO2/tFuel)

1. Aviation Gasoline (AvGas) – 3.10
2. Jet gasoline (Jet B) – 3.10
3. Jet kerosene (Jet A1 or Jet A) – 3.15

Registry – Open & Operate 

Aircraft operators must have an account open with the Union Registry in order to be able to comply with the EU ETS.  

The Union Registry is an online database hosted and managed by the European Commission. It operates in a similar way to an internet bank account, and records allowance allocations for aircraft operators, annual verified emissions, transaction history of allowance transfers and surrenders of allowances. 

Click here for more information about the Union registry

Registry – Propose 

If you report to Austria, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Romania, and Sweden, it is your responsibility to enter (to ‘propose’) your emissions in the Union Registry. In order to do so, you need to appoint Verifavia as your verifier. As soon as you have proposed your emissions, please send me an email so that I can validate your entry through the Union Registry account of Verifavia. 

Click here to go to the Registry website 

Click here to access the user guide 

If you report to any other Member State, it is either you or the national registry administrator who enters your emissions. Verifavia is not involved in this process. Please contact your Competent Authority if you have any doubts about what you have to do. 

Registry – Surrender carbon allowances 

By 30 April, you must log on to your account and surrender the number of allowances that correspond to your verified and validated annual emissions figure. 1 tonne of CO2 emissions corresponds to 1 allowance.  

You must do this through your Union Registry account before 30 April N+1. Please note that this deadline is a ‘hard’ deadline, meaning that access to the Union Registry is expected to be blocked starting from 1 May. 

Geographical scope of Annex 1 flights 

EU ETS full scope:
All flights to/from EEA Member Countries (including all flights to/from territories of EEA Member Countries and all flights to/from EEA outermost regions). 

EEA Member States:  

Austria (AT), Belgium (BE), Bulgaria (BG), Croatia (HR), Cyprus (CY), Czechia (CZ), Denmark (DK), Estonia (EE), Finland (FI), France (FR), Germany (DE), Greece (EL), Hungary (HU), Ireland (IE), Italy (IT), Latvia (LV), Lithuania (LT), Luxembourg (LU), Malta (MT), Netherlands (NL), Poland (PL), Portugal (PT), Romania (RO), Slovakia (SK), Slovenia (SI), Spain (ES), Sweden (SE), Norway (NO), Iceland (IS), Liechtenstein (LI). 

Territories of EEA Member Countries:  

Melilla (ES), Ceuta (ES), Åland Islands (FI), Jan Mayen (NO). 

Outermost regions of the EEA Member Countries:  

Canary Islands (ES), French Guiana (FR), Guadeloupe (FR), Martinique (FR), Mayotte (FR), Reunion (FR), Saint Martin (FR), Azores (PT), Madeira (PT). 

Geographical scope of ‘intra-European’ Annex 1 flights 

EU ETS reduced scope: 

1. all flights between EEA Member Countries (and territories of EEA Member Countries), 
2. all flights within the same outermost region, 
3. all flights between EEA Member Countries and offshore installations of EEA Member Countries that are outside territorial waters (e.g., oil and gas production or exploration platforms), 
4. all flights from EEA Member Countries to Switzerland, and (5) all flights from EEA Member Countries to the United Kingdom. 

The Operators emitting less than 25,000 tCO2 per year or operating fewer than 243 flights per period for three consecutive 4-month periods are considered small emitters. Most business jet operators and corporate flight operators are small emitters. 

Small emitters can use either the normal procedure to monitor fuel consumption (method A or B) or the simplified procedure (the small emitters tool or the ETS Support Facility from Eurocontrol). 

Verifavia developed a highly simplified verification approach for small emitters using the simplified procedure which is conducted remotely by email. Verifavia’s verification service includes full guidance and compliance support. 

At the beginning of the EUETS between 2010 and 2013, Verifavia conducted EU ETS verification of around 700 small emitters from 60 countries and reporting to 24 different EU competent authorities. 65% of these small emitters are corporate flight departments of large US firms. 

Also, the latest version of the small emitter tool is to be used for reporting emissions of flights every year, which is released at the end of the given year. The Small Emitters Tool is available free of charge online for small emitters and for any operator with data gaps.

The Union Registry is an online database hosted and managed by the European Commission. It operates in a similar way to an internet bank account, and records allowance allocations for aircraft operators, annual verified emissions, transaction history of allowance transfers and surrenders of allowances. 

» Go to European Commission ETS Registry web site 

» Go to European Commission ETS Registry FAQ 

The Union Registry is an online database hosted and managed by the European Commission. It operates in a similar same way to an internet bank account, and records allowance allocations for aircraft operators, annual verified emissions, transaction history of allowance transfers and surrenders of allowances. 

All aircraft operators must open a registry account with the Union Registry in order to comply with the EU ETS as the allowances that correspond to the annual emissions must be surrendered every year through the Registry by 30 April of the following year.

As EU-ETS is a ‘Cap and Trade’ scheme the first allocations were made in the year 2012. The European Commission published the benchmark values used to allocate greenhouse gas emission allowances free of charge to more than 900 aircraft operators.  

Publication of the benchmark values enables operators to calculate their free allocation of allowances up to 2020. There were two benchmarks set initially, one benchmark has been calculated for the 2012 trading period and another for the 2013-2020 trading period. In the 4th Phase of EUETS from 2021 Linear Reduction Factor is applied at 2.1%. Free allowances will be systematically phased out from 2024 to 2026. 

» Go to the EC (European Commission) web site 

• What should be covered in the Monitoring Plan? 

The Monitoring Plan should document monitoring procedures for aircraft, flights, CO2 emissions, risk assessment, data flows, and control activities.

•  Do the procedures in the Monitoring Plan need to be implemented? 

Yes, all procedures outlined in the Monitoring Plan must be both compliant with the MRR requirements and effectively implemented by the operator.

• Can the Monitoring Plan be modified? 

Yes, any changes to the Monitoring Plan need to be communicated to and approved by the Competent Authority (CA).

• Are standardized or simplified monitoring plans allowed? 

Member States have the authority to permit aviation operators to use standardized or simplified monitoring plans based on their discretion.

• In what situations should the Monitoring Plan be revised? 

The Monitoring Plan should be updated when: 

1. New emissions occur due to new activities or fuels. 
2. Data availability changes due to new measuring instruments. 
3. Data from previous methods is inaccurate. 
4. Modifications improve reported data accuracy. 
5. The plan does not conform to MRR requirements. 
6. Suggestions from verification reports are addressed.  

• Are there templates available for creating Monitoring Plans? 

Yes, the European Commission provides templates for Monitoring Plans.
Additionally, some Member States might offer customized versions or electronic reporting systems. 

• Does the updated monitoring plan need to be verified? 

No, the updated Monitoring plan does NOT need to be verified. It must be submitted to the Competent Authority for approval. It is better to send any question you may have about this new requirement directly to the Competent Authority. 

Operators are required to have their reported emissions data and Annual Emissions Report (AER) verified by an independent third party called a verifier or a verification body. 

Verification bodies of greenhouse gas emissions under the EU ETS Directive must be accredited according to the ISO 17029 standard and a legal entity accredited by a National Accreditation Body (NAB) according to the requirements of the AVR. 

Verifiers review the accuracy of emissions data, calculations, and AER to ensure compliance with EU ETS regulations. The opinion statement provided by the verifier is submitted to the Competent Authority (CA), enhancing transparency and reliability in emissions reporting.
The aim of the verification is to reach a verification opinion with reasonable assurance whether: 

• The data submitted in the annual emissions, or tonne-kilometer reports are fairly stated, i.e. free from material misstatements, 
• The existing procedures conform with the approved monitoring plans, the MRR and the national legislation of the administering Member State. 

The verification process comprises of a strategic analysis, a risk analysis, a verification plan, the verification of process and data (done on-site if required), an internal verification report that must be reviewed by a technical reviewer and a final verification report that includes the verification opinion. The whole verification process must follow the verifier’s approved procedures. 

Uncertainty assessment is an integral part of the monitoring and reporting guidelines. 

Airlines are required to monitor tonne-kilometer data and fuel consumption over an annual reporting period to a maximum level of uncertainty of 2.5% for Tier 2 or 5% for Tier 1 operators. 

Airlines must understand and identify possible causes of uncertainty of monitoring. 

Airlines must take all necessary action to prevent missing data from occurring by implementing suitable quality control activities. 

* Calibration certificates of on-board systems, National laws, Fuel suppliers’ accuracy standards, Clauses in customer contracts, Routine checks 

Airlines have a choice between two methodologies for monitoring fuel use. 

Airlines must monitor fuel use for each flight including fuel consumed by the APU. 

Method A includes APU fuel after the flight whereas Method B includes APU fuel before the flight. 

A methodology must be selected and consistently applied for each aircraft type.  

Fuel consumed in Flight N:   C – F + E (Method A) or   A + B – D (Method B) 

Possible sources for fuel uplift and fuel in tanks: 

1. On-board measurement system  
2. Fuel supplier  
3. Mass & Balance  
4. Aircraft technical log 

Possible sources for fuel density  

1. On-board measurement systems  
2. Fuel supplier information 
3. Density-temperature table  
4. Standard 0.8 kg/liter 

The new EU ETS regulation restricts EU ETS to intra-European flights for the period 2013-2030 and exempts small emitters below 1,000 tCO2 for the period 2013-2030. 

This means that only flights operated between airports located in the European Economic Area (EEA) must be reported. Extra-European flights (flights between the EEA and third countries, and vice-versa) do not have to be reported. 

List of EEA Member States 

Austria (AT), Belgium (BE), Bulgaria (BG), Croatia (HR), Cyprus (CY), Czechia (CZ), Denmark (DK), Estonia (EE), Finland (FI), France (FR), Germany (DE), Greece (EL), Hungary (HU), Ireland (IE), Italy (IT), Latvia (LV), Lithuania (LT), Luxembourg (LU), Malta (MT), Netherlands (NL), Poland (PL), Portugal (PT), Romania (RO), Slovakia (SK), Slovenia (SI), Spain (ES), Sweden (SE), Norway (NO), Iceland (IS), Liechtenstein (LI). 

List of European territories also included in the EEA: Melilla (ES), Ceuta (ES), Åland Islands (FI), Jan Mayen (NO).  

Flights between any aerodromes located in the EEA and offshore installations located outside territorial waters, such as oil and gas production or exploration platforms, also remain fully covered under the EU ETS.

Note that Basle-Mulhouse (LFSB) is considered to be in France. 

EEA outermost regions 

Although they are part of the EEA, flights between the EEA outermost regions and any other EEA area or third countries are fully excluded from the scheme. 

The EEA outermost regions are Canary Islands (ES), French Guiana (FR), Guadeloupe (FR), Martinique (FR), Mayotte (FR), Reunion (FR), Saint Martin (FR), Azores (PT), Madeira (PT).  

Important note: Flights operated within the same EEA outermost region must still be reported.  

Indicative list of airports in the EEA outermost regions: 

• Azores: LPAZ, LPCR, LPFL, LPGR, LPHR, LPPD, LPPI, LPPO, LPSC, LPSJ 
• Canary Islands: GCCC, GCFV, GCGC, GCGM, GCHI, GCLA, GCLB, GCLP, GCMP, GCRR, GCTS, GCXO 
• French Guiana: SOCA, SOGS, SOOO 
• Guadeloupe: TFFR 
• Madeira: LPMA, LPPS 
• Martinique: TFFF 
• Reunion: FMEE, FMEP 
• Saint-Martin: TFFG 

European territories not included in the scope 

The following European territories are not considered to be part of the EEA: Greenland, Faroe Islands, Svalbard, Guernsey, Jersey, Isle of Man, Akrotiri and Dhekelia. 

Consequently, flights between the EEA and these territories must not be reported. 

Operators subject to the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) have each assigned a Competent Authority (CA), to which they must report. These operators have specific obligations: 

• Registry Account: Operators are required to open a registry account for matters related to EU Allowances. 
• Emissions Monitoring and Reporting: Operators must monitor and report their annual CO2 emissions. This involves collecting emissions data and preparing an Annual Emissions Report (AER). 
• Verification Process: Operators need to engage with a verifier, an independent party, to confirm the accuracy of their emissions data and AER. 
• Reporting Deadline: The AER and the verifier’s opinion must be submitted to the Competent Authority by the 31st of March of the year following the monitoring period (N+1). 
• Allowance Surrender Deadline: Operators must surrender their emissions allowances by the 30th of April in the year following the monitoring period (N+1). 

In 2012, the EU-wide cap on aviation emissions is set at 97% of the average annual emissions for the years 2004-2006. In 2013-2023, the cap was lowered to 95%. 

The first trading period is the year 2012, and the second is the 2013-2020 period (initially but now extended until 2023).
85% of the emissions cap is given to airlines free of charge based on reported payload for 2010. 

15% of the emissions cap is available through auctioning while additional allowances to cover growth must be purchased from other sectors (open trading). 

See more info here: EU ETS Aviation – Baseline and Trading Periods

Aviation ETS concerns all aircraft operators of all origins operating flights to, from and within EEA. 

Commercial operators that are below the threshold (“De Minimis” rule) are excluded from ETS. This concerns commercial operators operating: 

• Fewer than 243 flights per three consecutive four-month periods (i.e. fewer than an average of one round-trip flight to/from the EU per day), 
• Or flights with total annual emissions lower than 10,000 tCO2 per year. 

Non-commercial operators with total annual emissions lower than 1 000 tonnes per year (“De Minimis” rule) are excluded from ETS. 

Simplified procedures 

Non-commercial and commercial operators that emit below 25,000 tCO2 (full scope) per year are also considered small emitters and can use simplified monitoring procedures. 

Non-commercial operators with flights fewer than 243 flights per period for 3 consecutive 4-month periods (full scope) and Commercial operators that emit below 3,000 tCO2 (reduced scope) can use simplified monitoring procedures. 

Exemptions 

Some flights are excluded from the scheme: 

• Flights operated by aircraft of less than 5.7 tonnes Maximum take-off weight (MTOW) 
• Flights carrying non-EU Heads of State, Monarchs, Government Ministers 
• Military flights 
• Search and rescue, firefighting flights, humanitarian flights, and emergency medical service flights 
• Visual flight rules (VFR) flights 
• Circular flights 
• Training flights 
• Flights performed exclusively for scientific research 
• Flights for the purpose of checking, testing, or certifying aircraft or equipment 
• Public Service Obligations (PSO) routes within outermost regions, or on PSO routes where the capacity offered does not exceed 30,000 seats per year. 

Note that: 

• Flights to/from and within Norway, Liechtenstein, and Iceland are included in the scheme. 
• Flights from EEA to Switzerland are included for the time being. 
• Flights from EEA to the United Kingdom 
• Each operator is assigned to an administering Member State. 

Market-based measures (MBM) refer to the financial settlement related to aviation CO2 emissions. Types of MBM include: emissions trading, emission related levies and emissions offsetting; all of which aim to contribute to the achievement of specific environmental goals, at a lower cost, and in a more flexible manner, than traditional command and control regulatory measures.