Verification training

Imogen Catterall and Juliet Ermer

3 November, 2021
Agenda
• Intro
• Introduction to footprinting
• ISO 14064-3 training
• Introduction to verification
• Project process
• Worked examples
• Tool demonstration
• Project Process continued
• Previous project Reminder
• Questions
• Carbon Neutrality training – 4th November
A word of caution
• This presentation is a summary only

• It is your responsibility to:

• Understand the background (e.g. GHG Protocol, ISO 14064-3 standard)
• Read the guidance documents
• Familiarise yourself with the verification plan tool (excel file)

• You must apply your own professional judgement – but please consult with the KM lead or co-
ordinator if you are unsure

• Updated tools/protocols/guidance found here under quick links (second one down):
https://carbontrust.sharepoint.com/:u:/r/sites/Knowledge/Topics/CA/Organisational%20Assurance/Assessment%20
Documents%20v1.zip?csf=1&web=1
Specialism

• Always check the Resource Planner Topics tab for the most up to date version
 Carbon Trust Assurance Verification
These in particular involve assessing
pre-performed calculations of
Organisational Organisational Organisational carbon/water/waste consumption and
Carbon Footprint Water Waste ensuring it meets a relevant standard
Certification Certification Certification (e.g. previously GHG Protocol)

Organisational Organisational Organisational

Footprint Water Waste
Verification verification verification

Certification CTS being

These in particular involve phased out
calculation of the organisation’s – Route to
Net Zero
carbon/water/waste consumption coming in
and ensuring it meets the relevant January
standard (e.g. CTS)
Carbon Trust Assurance continued..

Supply Chain
Zero Waste to Landfill
Standard

CTS being
phased out
– Route to
Net Zero
coming in
January
Carbon Trust Assurance continued..

Product carbon Product carbon

PAS 2060 PAS 2060
ISO 14064-3 footprinting footprinting
organisational PCF
CO2 measured Reducing
Introduction to
footprinting
Scope 1: Direct emissions released in company assets
Scope 2: Indirect emissions from imported energy
Scope 3: All other indirect sources
Organisational and operational boundaries
• Either: equity or control (operational or financial) approach
• Equity – report equity share of emissions
• Control – report 100% of emissions over which it has control
• Define time period – Consecutive 12 months (calendar, financial)
• Define emissions boundary – scope 1 and 2, scope 3 is optional

Control approach
Operational Control Financial Control
If the company or subsidiary has full authority to The organisation has direct control over the financial and
introduce and implement its operating policies at the operating policies of the operation with a view to gain
operation economic benefits from the activities
• Currently adopted by companies that report on • For example, if the company has the right to the
emissions in sites they operate majority of benefits of the operation
Data quality hierarchy
1. Primary Data
Primary Data is activity data that directly reflects the amount of a resource consumed, e.g. the kWh of
electricity consumed at a site, or the litres of fuel consumed by the vehicle fleet. Primary Data should be
collected and provided wherever practically possible.

2. Estimates based on proxy data

Accuracy

Where primary data is not available, estimates should be made based on proxy data that reflects the actual
consumption as closely as possible, e.g. the cost of a fuel consumed at a site, or the number of miles travelled
by a vehicle.

3. Estimates based on similarities

Where no direct data is available estimates should be made based on best-available comparisons, e.g. by
using consumption figures from a comparable site, or using benchmark figures, e.g. for energy consumption
per square meter.
Key data collection challenges
• The data challenges below are things to be mindful of when collating footprinting data
1 2
Estimated v Actual
Utility bills can be estimated
data instead of actual
consumption values, which
skews analysis
4 5
Traceability
It is difficult to find and track
sources of raw data to
validate data entered
3
Human errors
Human errors can occur
through manual data entry
6
Context
Large changes in activity
between periods are not
explained, so managers do
not know why changes
occurred
Version control
Sending and updating
multiple spreadsheets can
cause version control
problems
Maintenance
Keeping spreadsheets error
free and updating emission
factors can cause issues
Sources of evidence for Scope 1 & 2

• Automatic Meter readings

Electricity &
• Invoices
Gas
• Manual Meter readings

Fuel • Invoices

• Fuel Cards
Fleet • Purchased fuel consumption records
• Expenses

Refrigerants • F-gas maintenance logs

Sources of evidence for Scope 3

• Fuel card reports

Business • Travel agent booking records
Travel • Car hire booking
• Expense claims

• Waste contractor reports

Waste • Waste transfer notes

*This is an example, the organisation may opt to exclude scope 3 or include more scope 3 categories
Location v Market-based Approach
• In 2015, dual reporting was introduced into the GHG Protocol Scope 2 reporting guidelines
introduced (location-based and market-based)
• Enabled companies to see the benefit of renewable energy purchasing decisions

GHG Protocol Scope 2 guidance requires Scope 2 emissions to be reported in two ways (where data is
available):
1. Location-based
• Employs country specific grid-average electricity emissions factor
• Published in the UK by BEIS
2. Market-based
• Must be applied by all companies operating in the UK
• For UK, employ a supply-specific emission factor based on supplier’s fuel mix disclosure
• Applies to all electricity products, whether based on renewables or fossil fuels
• Scope 2 market-based hierarchy of emission factors to apply based on quality criteria
Further information
• GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance published 2015 available online
• It requires that companies complying with the corporate standard also comply with
Scope 2 Guidance
• This guidance aims to address developments in electricity markets to help stakeholders
gain an accurate picture of companies’ Scope 2 emissions, understand the associated
risks and identify opportunities to reduce impact
• Viewpoint by Guy Rickard available online
• Further info for corporates from Carbon Trust here
• Training slides of scope 2 reporting and biogas recording here.
Fugitive emissions accounting
• Common sources of fugitive gases can include from:
1. Air conditioning and refrigeration systems, etc. (refrigerant leaks – F Gases) from:
• Stationary sources: office HVAC, domestic fridges and freezers, walk-in fridges and freezers, heat
pumps, etc.
• Mobile sources: vehicle AC, refrigerated vans / lorries, etc.
2. Fire suppression systems, (F Gases) for example for:
• Commercial catering, food manufacture (oil fires)
• IT equipment (server rooms, data centres, etc.)
• Manufacturing (CNC machines cutting with oil)
• Flammable chemical handling and storage, etc.
• Other industry-specific process and fugitive emissions –e.g agriculture, waste, energy, metals and
semi-conductor

• For further training on fugitive emissions please check the recording

Fugitive gas accounting
• Air conditioning, refrigeration equipment, heat pumps, etc. can leak refrigerant leading to GHG
emissions. Even well-maintained equipment can leak from pipes, gaskets, valves, etc.
• Leaks can be slow and gradual, losing a small amount of refrigerant over a long period of time, or
catastrophic, resulting in a full loss of refrigerant in a few minutes.
• Accounting for F-Gas losses can be done via two methods*:
• Simplified Material Balance Method, or
• Screening Method
• Kyoto Protocol F-gas emissions reported under scope 1
• Non-Kyoto Protocol F-gas emissions (e.g. HCFCs) can be reported separately outside of scopes

* Full details contained in the UK Government Environmental reporting guidelines – https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/environmental-

reporting-guidelines-including-mandatory-greenhouse-gas-emissions-reporting-guidance
The concept of materiality
• “the concept that an individual or an aggregate of errors, omissions and
misrepresentation could affect the ‘greenhouse gas assertion’ and could influence the
‘intended users’ decision’.”

• Begin data checking and sampling based on:

• largest emission sources
• material sites
Exclusions from the footprint
• Footprint should include all emission sources
estimated to be more than 1% of the footprint

• At least 95% of the anticipated footprint must be

included

• Any exclusions and the reasons for the exclusion

should be noted

Reason for exclusion:

Practicality of data
collection NOT excluding
areas where emissions
have increased
ISO 14064-3
training
Introduction to verification
What is the ISO 14064-3 standard?
• ISO 14064-3 is a verification standard – used to verify
carbon footprints

• This footprint could be calculated following a number

of different types of reporting criteria e.g.:
• The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Corporate
Accounting and Reporting Standard and Value
Chain Standard
• ISO 14064-1: Specification with guidance at the
organization level for quantification and
reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and
removals
• UK Environmental Reporting Guidelines

• It is now the main standard that Carbon Trust uses to

verify organisational footprints
What is the ISO 14064-3 standard?
• This standard can technically verify any GHG statement (e.g. organisational footprint, product
footprint, value chain footprint)

• However, in Carbon Trust it is mainly used to verify just organisational footprints (Scope 1, Scope 2 –
additional Scope 3 e.g. business travel)
• The tool that we will go through later, is set up to cope with this and would have to be heavily edited
to use for a product verification
• For Scope 3 emissions, many clients choose not to verify, due to the amount of estimation that is
often involved
• Training in Scope 3 Assurance is coming in December
How to access the standard
• Carbon Trust has a limited
number of licenses to view the
actual standard, which is held on
the British Standards Institutions'
online library
• A project process document has
been produced, which should
contain all of the information
summarised to complete the
majority of projects (coming
soon online)
• There are spare licenses to be
given out, so if you believe that
you should have one then reach
out to Juliet
Context of an ISO 14064-3 verification
• This verification may take place as:
• A stand alone project – using the clients footprint model

Carbon
Footprint ISO 14064-3
neutral
calculation verification
certification

Client produces Carbon Trust verify Optional carbon

GHG footprint the footprint neutral certification
Context of an ISO 14064-3 verification
• This verification may take place as:
• A stand alone project – using the clients footprint model
• After a Carbon Trust organisational footprint calculation

Carbon
Footprint ISO 14064-3
neutral
calculation verification
certification

Carbon Trust Carbon Trust verify Optional carbon

produces GHG the footprint neutral certification
footprint
Context of an ISO 14064-3 verification
• This verification may take place as:
• A stand alone project – using the clients footprint model
• After a Carbon Trust organisational footprint calculation
• Before a Carbon Neutral organisational certification to PAS 2060

Carbon
Footprint ISO 14064-3
neutral
calculation verification
certification
With or
without a Carbon neutral
Carbon Trust verify
CT footprint certification
the footprint
Verification and certification benefits

• Measure and benchmark • Understand best-practice

resource use • Improve management
• Identify cost hot-spots frameworks
• Confirm reduction opportunities • Motivate and engage staff

Measure Manage

Certify Reduce
• Impartiality and independently • Deliver reductions
quantify results
• Deliver improvements in
• Demonstrate credentials to hierarchy
customers, staff ad
stakeholders • Reduce costs
Understanding carbon footprinting
CASE STUDY: Freddie’s Flowers

Freddie’s Flowers worked with the Carbon Trust to achieve Carbon Neutral
Certification of their UK operations as a kick-start to it’s sustainability
journey.
Freddie’s Flowers brings passion for flowers to 50,000 happy
customers UK-wide, and although this is the primary mission,
Freddie’s Flowers also wants to become a sustainability leader
in the sector. The Carbon Trust has supported this ambition by:
• Verifying Freddie’s Flower’ first ever organisational Carbon
Footprint to ISO 14064-3.
• Supporting the development of Freddie’s Flowers’ carbon
management plan to ensure future carbon reductions are
met.
• Verifying the purchase of credible good quality carbon offsets
in order to meet the requirements of the PAS 2060 standard.

https://freddiesflowers.blog/sustainability/
Project process
Project process

Data Data Report

Scoping Proposal Kick-off Peer review
collection verification writing

Sales Technical process

Sales

Scoping Proposal

Sales scoping Number of countries included in verification

key questions:
Number of sites included in verification

Number of operations (e.g. offices, manufacturing, logistics)

Energy spend

Boundary (Scope 1, 2, and which parts of Scope 3)

Which methodology do they follow: ISO 14064-1 or GHG Protocol or UK Environmental Reporting
Guideline (or other)
Confirm the client has a fully built carbon footprint covering the agreed boundary – this has to include
usage and convert to kg or tonnes of CO2e
Sales

Scoping Proposal

Proposal The most up to date proposal template is stored here

pointers:

The client manager should always use the proposal template text for
consistency

The deliverables are always verification report and statement for ISO 14064-3
verification
Technical process

Data Data Report

Kick-off Peer review
collection verification writing

Review Preparation of
Kick-off call, Evaluation of
Interviews and findings and reports and
information GHG collection
document and close out statement,
request and processes and
data review* identified including peer
project plan controls
issues review

*The standard is to conduct a site visit – due to COVID this has not been possible
Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

• Template kick-off slides are here

• There is a project plan template in the Verification Plan tool which can be found here

Purpose of the kick-off call:

• Introduce yourself to the client
• Understand the data and footprint better
• Ensure the client agrees with the boundary agreed in the proposal
• Define the deliverables
• Agree timelines

Avoid:
• Scoping the project – the boundary should have been agreed in the sales scoping and be defined
in the proposal
Assurance site changing – links
may not work in the future
Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

Data collection: The client must already have a carbon footprint model that they own,
to verify

This must be sent to the Carbon Trust for the verification to begin

The client must provide the carbon footprint model, and any
supporting excel files/primary evidence to complete verification
Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

Data verification: Sampling plan

Primary evidence request

Verify all evidence against consumption figures

Verify emission factors

Queries

Site visit/Interview

Close out queries

Technical process: Data verification Kick-off
Data
collection
Data
verification
Report
writing
Peer review

Sampling plan The sampling plan should demonstrate which sources of

emissions will be investigated further, what % of the footprint
they contribute to and the type of evidence will be requested.
Primary evidence request

Requirements of an effective sampling plan:

Verify all evidence against
consumption figures Limited level assurance Reasonable level
assurance

Verify emission factors • Should cover at least 95% of emissions • Could look at the
sources square root of sites
• Always include a review of refrigerants at
Queries each site
• The sources should be chosen based on
a mix of high consuming areas, medium
Site visit/Interview consuming and low consuming – will
ensure across the sites there are no
material errors in the data quality
Close out queries
Technical process: Data verification Kick-off
Data
collection
Data
verification
Report
writing
Peer review

Sampling plan
Limited vs Reasonable assurance levels:
Primary evidence request

Verify all evidence against

consumption figures
Currently the
majority of
Verify emission factors our projects

Queries

Site visit/Interview

Close out queries

Technical process: Data verification Kick-off
Data
collection
Data
verification
Report
writing
Peer review

Sampling plan • The primary evidence requests should cover a % of high

consuming areas, medium consuming and low consuming
Primary evidence request
• It is important to not request every piece of evidence in the
95%, but a sample across the 95% which is representative of
Verify all evidence against the organisation. If the organisation has 10 sites – request 6
consumption figures
months’ worth of invoices from 4 etc
• It is your responsibility to apply your best judgement
Verify emission factors
• Primary evidence should be requested through the log in the
evaluation report as per explained in the next section.
Queries

Site visit/Interview

Close out queries

Technical process: Data verification Kick-off
Data
collection
Data
verification
Report
writing
Peer review

Sampling plan
Primary evidence request
Verify all evidence against
consumption figures
• The primary evidence should be checked against the reported
figures in the footprint model
• The assessor should log checks of evidence figures and
compared against the reported figures (in a separate Excel
file or as an additional sheet in the Verification Plan) to
ensure this is traceable for the peer reviewer

Verify emission factors • Correct figures should be up to date in the Company

Overview sheet – these will be the final numbers
Queries

Site visit/Interview

Close out queries

Technical process: Data verification Kick-off
Data
collection
Data
verification
Report
writing
Peer review

Sampling plan • The emission factors in the client’s footprint model should be
checked against the relevant source (mainly BEIS) for the
relevant year
Primary evidence request

• The emissions factors should match exactly to the source

Verify all evidence against and the source should be referenced in the model.
consumption figures

• Correct emission factors should be up to date in the

Verify emission factors Company Overview sheet – these will be the final numbers
Market-based:
Queries • The market-based emission factors should be supported by REGOs,
supplier specific tariff weblinks and invoices or contracts to confirm
the client is on the relevant tariff.
Site visit/Interview
• If the tariff is unknown they should use the relevant country residual
mix. UK & US can be found here, and Europe found here. All other
Close out queries countries use country specific grid factors from IEA here.
Technical process: Data verification Kick-off
Data
collection
Data
verification
Report
writing
Peer review

Sampling plan
Primary evidence request
• All queries should be documented in the ‘issues log’ using the
specified definitions – split by CAR (corrective action
requests), CL (clarifications) or OFI (opportunities for
improvement).

Verify all evidence against • The queries should be exported from the evaluation report
consumption figures
and provided to the client so they can action and respond.

Verify emission factors

Queries

Site visit/Interview

Close out queries

Technical process: Data verification Kick-off
Data
collection
Data
verification
Report
writing
Peer review

Sampling plan • The site visit can take place at any point during the
verification.
Primary evidence request
• The purpose of the site visit is to ensure all relevant
emissions sources are accounted for, the assessor fully
Verify all evidence against understands the monitoring, management and accounting
consumption figures
processes of the organisation and can provide meaningful
recommendations or opportunities for improvement.
Verify emission factors
• Under ISO 14064-3 a site visit is required for all new
verifications or where an assessor is unfamiliar with an
Queries
organisation, unless reasonable explanation.

Site visit/Interview • The interview questions should be asked to the client

regardless of whether a site visit takes place
Close out queries
Technical process: Data verification Kick-off
Data
collection
Data
verification
Report
writing
Peer review

Sampling plan • Due to COVID-19 site visits have been suspended

• In place of the site visit a 1-2 hour interview should be held

Primary evidence request

• The interview should review data queries and suggested

Verify all evidence against interview questions as per the Verification Plan
consumption figures

• If the assessor needs any further support/help on the

Verify emission factors interview/site visit please contact one of the key contacts on
slide 3
Queries

Site visit/Interview

Close out queries

Technical process: Data verification Kick-off
Data
collection
Data
verification
Report
writing
Peer review

Sampling plan
Primary evidence request
Verify all evidence against
consumption figures
• The client should respond in a timely manner and be able to
close out all CAR and CL before the verification is finalised.
• Once all CAR and CL are closed the assessor can complete
all tabs in the evaluation report, build the report & statement
and submit to peer review.

Verify emission factors

Queries

Site visit/Interview

Close out queries

Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

Reporting writing:

We will resume
after the worked
examples
Worked examples
Worked exercise
• Open the files and start looking for errors – check everything!
• Footprint model = 2020 Organisational Footprint.xlsx
• Evidence data is in the back of the excel file and is pulled into the analysis sheets
• 5 errors to spot!

• Pointers on where to start:

• Check the right data is being selected by formulas 15
• Check that primary data is interpreted correctly minutes
• Check units
• Check emission factors against the BEIS ones provided
• Conversion_Factors_2020_-_Full_set__for_advanced_users.xlsx
Error 1

Electricity data outside of the reporting period is being selected

400
• Meter readings outside of the period
350
should not be included
300

250 • For readings that overlap with the

reporting period, days outside of the
tCO2e

200
period and usage per day should be
150
used to estimate the emissions
100 within the period
50

0
• Leads to a 10% increase in Electricity
2020 2020+extra emissions
Error 1

Electricity data outside of the reporting period is being selected

Error 2

The Bristol electricity data is missing the data from nights in March

350

300

250

200
tCO2e

150

100

50 • Leads to a 1% decrease in Electricity

emissions
0
With nights Without nights
Error 3

Natural gas data is in m3, but the kWh EF is being used

14
12
10 • Leads to a 45% decrease in Natural
tCO2e

8 Gas emissions
6
4
2
0
m3 EF kwh EF
Error 4

Van fuels data being treated as km when it is actually miles – wrong

unit and EF

20

15
tCO2e

10

5
• Leads to a 36% decrease in van fuel
0 emissions
miles EF km EF
Error 5

R410a refrigerant data at London sites is using the system gas

charge, rather than how much has leaked (0kg)

300.00 • System gas charge

is the capacity of
250.00
the unit, but none is
200.00 shown to have
leaked and none
tCO2e

150.00
has been added to
100.00 replace
50.00
• Leads to a 10%
- increase refrigerant
Without R410a With R410a emissions
Tool demonstration
 Tool demonstration

• The Verification Plan

tool can be found here

• Download and “Extract

all” to un-zip the file

• Every sheet must be

filled in

• (Details on next slides

on what each sheet is
for)
Overview of the Verification Plan Tool’s sheets
Taken from Project Process Document

These sheets exist in the tool:

• Verification Summary
• Provide background information on the project
• Reporting criteria is important to be accurate with correct data grouping between scopes or direct/indirect
• The ‘Generate tool’ button should also be clicked when making changes
• Verification Plan
• Project planning Gantt chart
• Define project plan, and update dependent on project changes
• Sampling Plan
• High level analysis to assist in deciding which primary data needs to be sampled
• The sampling plan should aim to include ~95% of total emissions
• Detail what data is available, and what specific verification activities will be conducted e.g. review XYZ raw data,
check emissions factors, check calculations
Overview of the Verification Plan Tool’s sheets
Taken from Project Process Document

• Evidence Request
• Area to request and keep track of additional evidence needed from the client, selected via the sampling plan
• This sheet can be copied into a separate workbook to share with the client
• Company Overview
• Where all of the consumption values and emission factors should be added
• This is free formed as every organisation is so different
• Feel free to colour and separate groups of emissions sources / sites in the best way to improve easier
identification (though columns should not be added or deleted)
• Graphs
• The graphs pre-populate based on company overview ready to enter into the report
• Press ‘refresh’ on data tab if graphs are not populating
• Strategic Review
• Highlights the most material emissions sources to assist in understanding and site visit direction
• This tab is populated based on data in the company overview tab
Overview of the Verification Plan Tool’s sheets
Taken from Project Process Document

• Interview/site visit
• Suggested questions, with space for responses
• Please feel free to add additional specific questions to the footprint, and any other relevant questions
• The normal process is to conduct a site visit (unless reasonable justification to not)
• If a site visit is not completed – always complete an interview Q&A
• The Q&A is to ensure all emissions sources are includes, to understand the data management and provide
meaningful recommendations, to understand monitoring processes.
• Risk Assessment
• Internal table for assessing the risk of misstating each emission source
• <1% = low
• 1%<5% = medium
• >5% = high
• Risk Assessment Report Table
• External table to be added to the report, pulling from the internal one
Overview of the Verification Plan Tool’s sheets
Taken from Project Process Document

• Data Quality Analysis Table

• Table to be added to the report
• Complete the cells which are not auto-filled
• Issues Classification
• Definitions of the different types of issues
• Issues Log
• Where project queries should be added
• Sheet can be copied into a separate workbook to share with the client
• Analysis Summary
• Overview of data issues and other comments
• May need to update the link
Project process continued
Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

Report (and Mail Merge

statement) 1
writing: Go to the 1 Mailings tab, click 2 ‘Select
2 Recipients’ and then 3 ‘Use an Existing

Link’ and 4 select the tool excel file

3

4
Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

Report (and Mail Merge

statement)
• The ‘Preview Results’ button can then be
writing: clicked, also in the Mailings tab
• Segments of the report that were between
<<…>> should now be filled in with data from
the tool
• Read through the report and all comments,
making sure that everything makes sense and
amending things manually when instructed
• If things change in the tool that must be
reflected in the mail merges, this can be
refreshed by going to the Mailings tab > Edit
Recipients List > Click on the file > Refresh
Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

Report writing: Graphs

• In the ‘Graphs’ sheet of the tool, follow the

instructions within the sheet to make sure that
the graphs are all refreshed and showing what
they are said to in the title
• Copy and paste each relevant graph into the
report (e.g. don’t input Scope 2 graph if it is just
100% electricity), accompanying the figure titles
already in the report – amend the wording and
numbers of these as necessary
Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

Report (and Finishing

statement)
writing:
• To finish the report properly and finalise
the mail merge, go to the 1 Mailings tab,
click 2 ‘Finish & Merge and then 3 ‘Edit
individual documents’
• Make sure ‘Current record’ is selected
and 4 click ‘OK’ and then 5 ‘OK’ again

• 6 Save file in the appropriate folder

Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

Peer Assessments will be sent to

review: assessments@carbontrust.com Current process:
The moderation lead will then assign a moderator • 5 employees are chosen to
based on availability be moderators per quarter,
every 3 months the
Files will typically be on a sharepoint site moderation team will
change
• Please take in the following
All files will need to be downloaded and saved on the
information as you may be
Box
chosen to moderate ISO
Moderators have 10 days to turn around a moderation 14064-3 verifications
unless told otherwise
Technical process

Kick-off Data collection Data verification Report writing Peer review

Peer review: Use the peer review checklist tool – this is saved on box

Check the emission factors, inputs, evidence and checks made by the assessor

Ensure the calculations are complete and correct

Review the verification plan, report and statement to ensure consistency and completeness

Queries and updates should be directed to the Assessor carrying out the verification

Once the peer review is complete – PDF and send deliverables to client manager
Previous project reminder
CASE STUDY: BUPA
• Recent verification with BUPA faced a number of problems:
• Data not of sufficient quality
• Data regularly changing
• Client expecting verification team to help compile the footprint
• Client expecting us to liaise with all of their global sites
• Significant number of open queries incl. major errors

• What could we do?

 Failure* is
always an
option
• It is not our role to ensure or
guarantee that a client passes an
assurance engagement
• It is up to the client to earn a pass
• Passing clients who do not meet
the standard or whose data is not
of sufficient quality does not
deliver the CT mission.

* Feel free to phrase it as ‘deferred success’ to

the client though
Q&A

Thanks for
listening