rina verification of carbon footprint and · pdf filerina verification of carbon footprint and...

RINA VERIFICATION OF CARBON FOOTPRINT AND WATER FOOTPRINT ASSERTIONS

IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

1 of 17

1. SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE

This instruction defines the method of verification of voluntary assertions related to the carbon footprint of an organisation’s products or services, according to the PAS 2050:2011 Standard and/or GHG PROTOCOL – Product Standard and/or ISO 14067:2013 and to any GHG standards/programmes the organisation adheres to (cf. ISO 14040:2006 and ISO 14044:2006) and of verification of voluntary assertions related to the water footprint of an organisation’s products or services or the water footprint of the organization itself, according to the ISO 14046:2014 Standard.

2. FIELD OF APPLICATION

This instruction applies to all the Operational Units of RINA Services S.p.A. (RINA).

3. REFERENCES

• PAS 2050:2011 - Specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services

• GHG PROTOCOL – Product life cycle accounting and reporting standard • ISO/TS 14067 – Greenhouse gases — Carbon footprint of products — Requirements and guidelines

for quantification and ommunication • ISO 14046 – Environmental management – Water footprint – Principles, requirements and guidelines • IAF MD 6:2009 “Application of ISO 14065:2007” • RINA “Rules for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions” • RINA “Rules for the assessment of the water footprint” • RINA IS-QPT-CFP-01 – “Qualification and relative maintenance of the personnel involved in the

verification process of carbon footprint assertions related to an organisation’s products or services”. • RINA IS-QPT-WFP-01 – “Qualification and relative maintenance of the personnel involved in the

verification process of the water footprint of an organization’s products, services or the organisation itself

4. DEFINITIONS

CAR: Non Conformity or Corrective Action Request

CFP: Carbon Footprint

CL: Clarification Request

CPC: Central Product Classification

CWFP: Carbon Water Footprint

DM: Decision Maker. Person or group of people who decide(s) on certification

Reasonable assurance : a high but not absolute level of assurance, expressed positively in the verification opinion, as to whether the operator’s or aircraft operator’s report subject to verification is free from material misstatement (source: Regulation EU ETS 600/2012)

GHG: Greenhouse gas

GVI: Audit team

ITR: Independent Technical Review

ITRP: Independent Technical Review Personnel

Level of assurance: the degree of assurance the verifier provides on the verification report. There are two levels of assurance (reasonable and limited)

OPN: Operational Network


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

2 of 17

GHG Programme: voluntary or mandatory international, national or sub-national system or scheme that registers, accounts or manages GHG emissions, removals, emission reductions or removal enhancements outside the organisation

QI: Informative questionnaire, document filled in by the organisation, containing all the information necessary to prepare a quotation

QPT: Sustainability, Environment & Climate Change Sector

R: Recommendation

Scheme Manager (SM) : Responsible for managing the specific scheme

File Manager (RPC) : Responsible for the administrative-managerial aspects of the file (i.e. Application Reviewer (AR), Program Reviewer (PR), preparation of the carbon footprint or water footprint certification proposal) and qualified on the basis of the requirements established in instruction IS-QPT-CFP-01 and IS-QPT-WFP-01, respectively for the CFP and WFP scheme. (Note: During the start-up phase of the scheme, in the case of operational offices which don’t have a file manager, QPT as scheme manager or a delegated person will provide the necessary support)

Materiality : concept that individual or an aggregate of errors, omissions and misrepresentations could affect the final carbon footprint or water footprint data

WFP: Water Footprint.

CONTROL OBJECTIVE. The control objective is the reason for the existence of the control, expressed in simple words.

CONTROL AND RESPONSIBILITY. Control is the activity necessary to obtain, with reasonable confidence, the achievement of a goal.

5. RULES

The activities related to the verification process of assertions of carbon footprint or water footprint are shown in the flow chart in point 6.1 below and in the table in point 6.2. Surveillance activities are not foreseen. If a client wishes to update the carbon footprint or water footprint, a new verification will be carried out according to the methods described in the following paragraphs. However it’s possible to insert inside the offer the costs for any subsequent verification of CFP and/or WFP updating.

6. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCESS AND ACTIVITIES

6.1 FLOW CHART OF VERIFICATION OF VOLUNTARY ASSERTI ONS RELATED TO CARBON FOOTPRINT AND WATER FOOTPRINT

PHASES

Moving from one stage to another

Decisions are represented by rhombuses. The rhombus divides the original flow into 2 flows; the main one focuses on achieving the final result while the secondary one comprises one or more phases that must be completed before returning to the main flow.

Sequential stages


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

3 of 17

The column headings indicate the operational responsibilities of the phases shown in each column. Each phase is placed in the right column in relation to the responsibility assigned.

The flow chart is to be read in conjunction with Table 6.2.

Each phase or decision shown in the flow chart is numbered so as to relate the flow chart to table 6.2; the latter gives a detailed description of each phase, defining responsibility, input, output, critical factors and records.


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

4 of 17

MAIN PHASES OF THE VERIFICATION PROCESS OF THE VOLUTARY ASSERTIONS RELATED TO CARBON FOOTPRINT AND WATER FOOTPRINT OF PRODUCTS AND/OR SERVICES

DMITRP (COORDINATED

BY SM)AUDIT TEAMSM/RPC

CLIENT/

ORGANIZATION

NO

END

12

FINAL DECISION

END

10

INDEPENDENT

TECHNICAL REVIEW

4

TEAM

DEFINITION

YES

7

ON SITE VISIT*

OFFER

ACCEPTED?

1

OFFER

PREPARATION

9

REPORT

PREPARATION

2

OFFER

ISSUE

11

STATEMENT

PREPARATION

IQ SENDING

13

SEND OF

DOCUMENTS –

CLOSE PROCESS

3

CONTRACT

STIPULATION

6

VERIFICATION

PLAN

PREPARATION

8

DRAFT REPORT

PREPARATION

5

DOCUMENT

REVIEW

ITR OK?

DOCUMENTS

OK?

YES

NO

SEND

DOCUMENTS

3

ORDER

ACCEPTED

YES

NO

* The on-site audit may be avoided in particular cases as per the following paragraphs of this instruction.

RINA VERIFICATION OF CARBON FOOTPRINT AND WATER FOOTPRIN T ASSERTIONS

IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

5 of 17

6.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE MAIN PHASES OF THE PROCESS OF VERIFICATION OF VOLUNTARY ASSERTIONS RELEVANT TO THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF PRODUCTS OR SERVICES AND WATER FOOTPRINT OF PRODUCTS OR SERVICES OR ORGANIZATIONS

PHASES RESPONSIBILITY INPUT 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTIVITIES OUTPUT OBJECTIVE 2

CRITICAL FACTORS RECORDS

1 PREPARATION OF OFFER

RPC or SM QI filled in by the client

The scheme manager or one of his/her delegates or the RPC performs the following activities: - analyses the data in the QI needed to draw up the offer -checks availability of resources and competences to carry out the verifications in the right time -calculates the cost of the verification, taking into account the actual verification time in man/days (according to the table in par. 7) -draws up the offer.

-Offer drawn up

-The information needed to draw up the offer is to be clearly defined in the informative questionnaire

-Recording of potential client’s data in ANACLI, CAI-C -GHG_IQ form filled in by the client for the carbon footprint -WFP_IQ form filled in by the client for the water footprint -Form: GHG_OFFERTA_RINA or WFP_OFFERTA_RINA filled in by RINA CONTRACT REVIEW form (form: CFP_CR, for the carbon footprint or WFP_CR, for the water footprint)

2 ISSUE OF OFFER

RPC or SM Offer drawn up The QPT person responsible or the RPC checks and signs the offer. SM or the OPN office sends the offer to the client.

-Offer signed by authorised personnel -Offer sent to the organisation

Only authorised personnel can sign the offer.

- Offer signed by authorised personnel (head of the operational office or QPT person responsible)

1 Input: Initial event of a phase 2 Output/Objective: Result of the phase, reason why the phase was performed


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

6 of 17



3 CONTRACT STIPULATION

SM or RPC -Verification request on RINA form or organisation’s order

The scheme manager (SM) or his/her delegate examines the request/order to check it is in line with the offer sent. If it is not, he/she contacts the organisation for clarification. The OPN secretariat or SM or his/her delegate records acceptance of the offer in CAI-C.

SM or his/her delegate or RPC checks and signs the “Confirmation of acceptance”.

The OPN secretariat or SM or his/her delegate sends the “Confirmation of acceptance” to the client containing the contract number and the request for the documents needed to verify the carbon footprint or water footprint. - carbon footprint or water footprint report - calculation sheets.

The calculation sheets can also be examined on site at the discretion of RINA.

-Request/Order complete and in line with the offer -Contract stipulated between RINA and the organisation -Request for documents related to the carbon footprint or water footprint

- Request/Order complete and in line with the offer

-Contract opened in CAI-C -Verification request filled in and signed by the organisation or order -“Confirmation of acceptance” form


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

7 of 17



4 DEFINITION OF TEAM

SM or RPC RINA-organisation contract

SM or his/her delegate or RPC selects one or more technicians for the verification and informs the organisation of the name(s) which may object to them. The technical personnel must be qualified according to instruction IS-QPT-CFP-01 and/or IS-QPT-WFP-01, they must be independent of the verification activities and at least one member of the team must be qualified as team leader. The team, whether one or more people, must have at least one team leader qualified according to IS-QPT-CFP-01 and/or IS-QPT-WFP-01. At least one member of the team must be qualified for the CPC code (2 digits) of the product/service to be verified. In the absence of personnel qualified for the CFP or WFP with qualification in the pertinent CPC code (2 digits), suitable personnel may be included to cover the pertinent macro sector, as established in paragraph 11 of this instruction. The communication of the personnel in charge for the documental review (CFP_CDA or WFP_CDA) is sent by the scheme manager or by file manager. The communication of the audit date and audit team for the on site visit (CFP_CDT or WFP-CDT) is communicated together with the audit plan by the Team Leader to the client.

-Verification team defined and communicated to the client

-Independence and qualification of the verification team. -The technical expert is not to undertake verification activities without the presence of a Team Leader.

Communication of team to the organisation. (CFP_CDA, and/or WFP_CDA)


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

8 of 17



5 DOCUMENT REVIEW

-Verification team Documents relevant to CFP or WFP report sent by the organisation: a) CFP or WFP report b) calculation sheets (optional, verifiable on site)

The team examines the documents to ensure they meet the verification criteria of the carbon footprint of the standard the organisation adheres to or of the water footprint. Any findings arising from the document review are to be reported in the draft verification report so the organisation can make the necessary amendments to the documentation. When the number and seriousness of the findings arising from the review are such that they could invalidate the successful outcome of subsequent phases and the team believes that it is necessary that the organisation makes the amendments before the verification can continue, the outcome of the document review is communicated to the organisation during this phase. The Team Leader can avoid the on-site verification provided that: - all evidence needed for the assessment has been sent by the organisation to the verification team (calculation sheet, windows of the software used for the LCA analysis, characterisation factors used and their allocation in the software, sufficient number of informative questionnaires and/or documents of evidence for the source of the primary data collected by the company or at its suppliers). The on-site verification cannot be avoided if the GHG emissions or the water footprint related to the production process is higher than those derived from the other phases analysed (upstream and downstream processes).

-Document review outcome communicated to the organisation (at the team’s discretion) -Documentation examined -Findings from document review

-The document review can be performed offsite or on site (it is necessary to specify whether it’s performed on or off site). -The organisation may be asked to provide other documents and additional information or, if necessary, to make corrections or changes to the documents provided before verification activities continue. The water footprint can only be defined such if the organisation has assessed all the indicators for the product or service subject to analysis. If the analysis focuses on only one indicator, it will only be possible to talk about water footprint with reference to the specific indicator of the analysis (i.e. water scarcity footprint; water availability footprint, water eutrophication footprint). The verifier is required to point out this aspect in the verification report so as to have the proper wording in the verification statement.

- Document review outcome communicated to the organisation (at the team’s discretion) (dispatch of CFP_DR_REP or of WFP_DR_REP)

6 PREPARATION OF

- Verification team Document review carried out

At least 1 week before the verification date, the team leader:

Verification plan sent to the organisation

-Form: CFP_PLAN or WFP_PLAN filled in by the verification team


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

9 of 17



VERIFICATION PLAN

-prepares the verification plan which clearly describes the activities to be carried out at the organisation and the people to be interviewed; -agrees on the verification date with the client; -sends the verification plan to the client.

-Communication of the date and audit team (CFP_CDT, WFP_CDT)

7 ON-SITE VERIFICATION

- Verification team - Verification plan sent to the organisation

The team verifies on site: - system boundaries, inclusions, exclusions, cut-off; - functional unit; - data collection and assessment of data quality; - input/output; - supply of raw materials; - transport; - allocation; - characterisation factors used; -sensitivity analysis, uncertainty, interpretation of results (if required by the standard); - use phase and use profile, in the case of from the cradle to the door; - end of life in the case of from the cradle to the grave; -that the data and information related to CFP or WFP are reliable and that there is evidence to support the emissions calculated and included in the CFP or WFP report (informative questionnaires, bills of materials, databases used, data quality and source, invoices, documental evidence, etc...); - that the final CFP or WFP datum is correct and suitably expressed according to the reference standard chosen for assessment (cf. method of communicating the CFP or WFP).

-Useful evidence of on-site verification to draw up the report. -List of interviewees.

-It’s necessary to trace the data to find omissions or errors of transcription and recalculate the emissions and formulas on the calculation sheets to confirm the calculations. -Take note of the allocation method used and of double counting.

-Check that all processes and corresponding input and output have been included and that the exclusions are justified and acceptable.

Information to be included in the report (useful evidence of the on-site verification to draw up the report, list of interviewees, etc.)

8 PREPARATION OF DRAFT REPORT (off-site)

- Verification team - Subsequent control action taken - On-site verification performed

The team draws up the draft verification report summarising the findings which are to be resolved by the organisation before completion

Draft verification report

- Non conformities or Corrective Action Requests (CAR): non-compliance with one or more requirements of the reference standard, with other requirements related to the

Form: CFP_REP or WFP_REP filled in by the Team Leader without final conclusion on compliance with the verification requirements.


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

10 of 17



of the verification activities. The findings are categorised as non-conformities, also called Corrective Action Requests (CAR). The report can also contain Requests for Clarification (CL) or suggestions for improvement in the form of Recommendations (R). The table 2 of the verification report is provided to the organisation for further clarification or to enable the organisation to make the necessary amendments to the documents related to the CFP or WFP report.

CFP/WFP assertion or missing documentation of data and information related to the CFP or WFP. -The report can be relevant to more than one product/service, or, in case of WFP of the organization, can be relavant to more than one site.

9 PREPARATION OF REPORT (offsite)

-Organisation/ Verification team/ local OPN/QPT office

- Organisation’s documents amended and replies sent to verification team

The organisation sends RINA its replies to the findings and the amended documentation following the findings. On receipt of the replies and amended documents, the team revises the draft verification report, including the organisation’s replies and the team’s comments in relation to each finding.

If all the findings have been satisfactorily resolved in the team’s opinion, the team includes in the report the final conclusion on compliance with the verification requirements. Otherwise, the team re-sends the draft verification report to the organisation having updated the status of the findings. If the findings are not satisfactorily resolved and accepted by RINA: - after 3 months from the issue of the first draft verification report, or - there are more than 3 revisions, QPT has the right to terminate the contract or to proceed with the issue of the final report and a negative verification statement.

Final verification report prior to the independent technical review

- The findings are to be concluded clearly in the report -A statement (positive outcome) means that the statement of emissions does not contain material errors, whereas a negative verification statement indicates that the information is not in compliance with the specific requirements.

Form: CFP_REP “Verification Report” - final draft report WFP_REP “Verification Report” – final draft report CFP_CP and WFP_CP filled in and signed by the file manager.


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

11 of 17



The Team Leader sends the report to the Scheme Manager. The file manager prepares the certification proposal of the verified CFP or WFP.

10 INDEPENDENT TECHNICAL REVIEW

Team Leader/Scheme Manager/ITRP

-QI -Contract review, -Client’s request, -Verification plan, - Verification report – final draft report - CFP or WFP report which describes CFP/WFP - Any other document required by the Standard as method of external communication, according to the option chosen by the organisation (i.e. external communication report)

- CFP or WFP certification proposal -Calculation sheets (if present, in the case of

The Scheme Manager or his/her delegate sends all the documents to the technical personnel authorised to perform the independent technical review (IS-QPT -CFP-01 or IS-QPT-WFP-01).

The ITRP checks the following aspects: - verification of verification team competency; - decision on acceptance of task and time required (contract review); -verification plan; -verification outcome proposal; - adequacy of documentation for internal assessment; - elements highlighted by the verification team if they led to a negative assessment; - any incorrect information and any errors corrected during the verification; - clarification requests, recommendations or corrective action requests (CAR) clearly resolved in the report and their correct classification. The ITRP fills in the independent technical review form (CFP-ITR or WFP-ITR), adds any comments and signs it. If comments have been made, depending on their type and competency, either the TL or Scheme Manager replies in the appropriate space. The ITRP comments are to be transposed by the team. Following the positive outcome of the independent technical review, ITRP sends the final verification report, together with the CFP-ITR or WFP-ITR and the certification proposal,

“Verification report” with comments from the ITRP dealt with by the verification team sent to the Scheme Manager

Competency and independence of the personnel who perform the independent technical review

CFP-ITR or WFP-ITR filled in, dated and signed by ITRP. Final CFP_REP after ITR or final WFP_REP after ITR


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

12 of 17



assessment during document review)

both signed with final approval date, to the Scheme Manager. The DM countersigns the certification proposal.

11 PREPARATION OF STATEMENT

Scheme Manager -Final report after ITR

The Scheme Manager or his/her delegate checks that all the documentation is present, the outcome of the independent technical review is positive and the certification proposal is countersigned by the DM then prepares a verification statement which contains the following information: - name, address and other important information about the organisation; -references to the products/services or to the organization itself and its installations; -reference to the CFP or WFP assertion(date and revision number); -quantification of GHG emissions or of the water footprint; -compliance with the verification criteria/requirements of the Standard used for the verification; -any limitations; -the date of the verification statement; -authorised signature (QPT Sector Manager).

Verification statement

Progressive numbering of the statements

Verification statement

12 FINAL DECISION

QPT Sector Manager (DM)

-Final verification report -Verification statement

The DM is the QPT Sector Manager. The Scheme Manager or his/her delegate submits the final verification report and the statement to the QPT Sector Manager for signature. The QPT Sector Manager approves and signs the statement and the final verification report and sends them to the Scheme Manager.

-Final report approved and signed by the DM -Verification statement approved and signed by the DM

- Final report approved and signed by the DM - Verification statement approved and signed by the DM

13 SEND DOCUMENTS

Scheme Manager Final verification report

-Final report approved and signed by the DM is


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

13 of 17



CLOSE PROCESS

- Statement of compliance signed by the MD

The Scheme Manager or his/her delegate sends the approved final verification report and the statement to the organisation. The Scheme Manager or his/her delegate files a copy of the statement.

sent to the organisation - Verification statement approved and signed by the DM is sent to the organisation


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

14 of 17

7. CALCULATION OF MAN/DAYS

The total time, in man/days, is shown in the table below. However, the values given in the table are purely for reference and may be reduced or increased, justifying the reasons in the contract review form.

CARBON FOOTPRINT

FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE COMPLEXITY

COMPLEXITY

LOW=1, 4 MAN/DAYS

MEDIUM=5, 8 MAN/DAYS

HIGH > 8 MAN/DAYS

Number of products/ services involved in CFP

1 product >1 and <5 >5

Product/service complexity

Simple product (few materials, very low number of components) Service with few activities

Product quite complex (fair number of materials and components) Service with fair number of activities concerned whose GHG emissions are reported

Complex product (high number of materials and components) Service with high number of activities concerned whose GHG emissions are reported

Differences among products/services verified

- Products/Services similar eachother

Products/Services different eachother

Type of standard in relation to which verification is requested

PAS 2050, ISO 14040, ISO 14044

GHG Protocol – Product Standard ISO/TS 14067

GHG Protocol – Product Standard ISO/TS 14067

System boundary From cradle to gate From cradle to grave

From cradle to grave

Verification of communication method of GHG assertion

Not present as not required by the standard

Present, but simple control (i.e. CFP label, EPD)

Present, complex control (i.e. external communication report)

Precision of the procedures for data collection, filing and management

There is a certified management system

There is a management system

There is no management system

WATER FOOTPRINT

FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE COMPLEXITY

COMPLEXITY

LOW=1, 4 MAN/DAYS

MEDIUM=5, 8 MAN/DAYS

HIGH > 8 MAN/DAYS

Number of products/ services involved in WFP

1 product >1 and <5 >5

Product/service/organizationcomplexity Simple product (few materials, very low number of components)

Product quite complex (fair number of materials and components)

Complex product (high number of materials and components) Service with high


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

15 of 17

Service with few activities Organization with few activities

Service with fair number of activities concerned whose water consumption is reported Organization with discrete number of activities involved of which are accounted the water consumption

number of activities concerned whose water consumption is reported Organization with high number of activities involved of which are accounted the water consumption

Differences among products/services verified

- Products/Services similar eachother

Products/Services different eachother

System boundary From cradle to gate



Type of water footprint Water footprint only related to specific qualifiers

Comprehensive water footprint

Comprehensive water footprint

WFP available to interested third parties (Third-Party-Report)

No Yes Yes

Precision of the procedures for data collection, filing and management

There is a certified management system

There is a management system

There is no management system

Water footprint calculation The qualifiers are presented in disaggregated form (water footprint profile)

The qualifiers are aggregated into a single parameter through weighting (aggregation)

The qualifiers are aggregated into a single parameter through weighting (aggregation)

Number of installations (just in case of water footprint of the organization)

Organization with a unique site

Organization with discrete number of sites

Organization with a high number of sites

The intermediate situations (i.e. elements which come under different complexity classes) will be managed according to an intermediate number of man/days among the complexities. Discounts up to a maximum of 60% for CFP verification and up to a maximum of 50% for WFP verification can be taken into consideration in case of audits combined with the EPD scheme. In the case of CFP and/or WFP verifications of products/services already verified in the past (in previous years), it is possible to avoid the on-site verification and to consider a discount in terms of man/days also as concerns document assessment activities. The on-site verification, in the case of multisite organisations, is performed where final assembly of the product is carried out. In the case of CFP or WFP service verifications, the on-site verification will be performed at one of the sites where the service subject to verification is provided.

8. CARRYING OUT VERIFICATION ACTIVITIES

The team is required to assess the data, in terms of collection method, source, quality, representativeness and the calculations made to reach the final carbon footprint or water footprint value declared for the product/service subject to analysis and the assertion communication part, where relevant, and the contents of the reporting. The team will have to confirm or not, based on the verifications made, the final carbon footprint or water footprint datum calculated by the organisation for the product/service analysed.


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

16 of 17

A negative verification statement indicates that the information does not comply with the specific requirements.

9. DATA SAMPLING

On the basis of the information obtained and documentation received, the Team Leader will establish the data sample to be verified, consisting of a 25% random sample of the data to be sampled and the remaining part (60%) will be defined in relation to:

- Errors and/or the need for further investigation/clarification identified during the document assessment;

Phase with the greatest impact (i.e. upstream, core or downstream processes) and consequent processes which determine the most emissions (responsible for 90% of the GHG emissions) in the case of CFP or the highest values within the WFP qualifiers;

- Data collection (i.e. where there is a good data collection system which makes it possible to have reasonably correct primary data, the sampling need be less extensive than in situations where the data collection system is based on approximation and without “control points” during data collection).

The sampling method adopted by the TL, based on the above elements, is to be reported and described in an ad hoc paragraph in the verification report.

10. MATERIALITY

Following the checks made, the verification team is to have reasonable assurance that individual or an aggregate of errors, omissions and misrepresentations will not significantly affect the final carbon footprint or water footprint data.

11. COMPOSITION OF THE VERIFICATION TEAM The verification team is to consist of the following personnel:

- One person qualified as Team Leader for the CFP or WFP (depending on the standard according to which the verification is carried out) in accordance respectively with the requirements of instruction IS-QPT-CFP-01 or IS-QPT-WFP-01;

- One person who knows the local language and in which the documentation to be verified is written; - One person competent in the CPC code of the product/service to be verified.

The verification team may consist of only one person provided he/she fulfils all the above requirements. As an alternative to the above, the following combinations for CFP verifications may also be applied:

- An ISO 14001, EMAS, EU ETS, CDM, VCS, GS or ISO 14064-1 team leader with CPC code of the company and a technical expert or CFP co-teamer;

- An ISO 14001, EMAS, EU ETS, CDM, VCS, GS or ISO 14064-1 team leader and a technical expert or a CFP co-teamer with CPC code of the company;

- A CFP team leader with an ISO 14001, EMAS, EU ETS, CDM, VCS, GS or ISO 14064-1 co-teamer with CPC code of the company.

As an alternative to the above, the following combinations for WFP verifications may also be applied:

- An ISO 14001, EMAS, EU ETS, CDM, VCS, GS or ISO 14064-1 team leader with CPC code of the company and a technical expert or WFP co-teamer;

- An ISO 14001, EMAS, EU ETS, CDM, VCS, GS or ISO 14064-1 team leader and a technical expert or a WFP co-teamer with CPC code of the company;

- A WFP team leader with an ISO 14001, EMAS, EU ETS, CDM, VCS, GS or ISO 14064-1 co-teamer with CPC code of the company.


IS–QPT-CWFP-00

Rev. 2

17 of 17

It is necessary for the above combinations to include an interpreter if the local language is not known. Where on-site verification time is only one man/day and RINA does not have a person available to cover all the above requirements, the additional person included to cover one or more of the above-mentioned requirements will be at the expense of RINA and will not be included in the man/days charged to the client.

12. WATER FOOTPRINT OF THE ORGANIZATION – MULTISITE ORGANIZATIONS In case of multisite organization and not for all sites the on-site visit is carried out, the audit team shall give appropriate justification in the verification/validation report. The on-site visit not carried out could be justifies as: - All the sites have the same activity and the organization has a data management system which includes the data of all sites under the organizational boundary. In this case one or more sites that contribute at least of 90% of GHG emission they will be visited; - Health and safety risks; - Conflict areas; - Complex logistic; - Geographic distribution; - Geographic areas of the sites. In case of sites located in geographical areas with lee shores, critical politic and/or economic situation, the audit Team can excluded for the on-site visit and just document review will be carried out.