Reviewed File & History is the record created during deeper Weetra reviews. It shows what was examined, what changed and why the conclusion was reached; it is not a separate software product.
Weetra examines the available documents, the relationships they are meant to establish, the gaps or contradictions they reveal, and any corrections or additional evidence produced during the mandate.
The reviewed record can show what was received, which versions were examined, what conflicted, what was corrected, what could not be fully confirmed, which analyst decisions mattered and why the final conclusion was reached.
Years later, the organisation should still be able to understand the file without recreating the engagement from memory. That history can support later review by internal teams, advisers, verifiers or authorities.
The approach supports documentary understanding and review. It does not replace source evidence, legal or customs advice, or accredited verification.
Reviewed File & History asks a practical question: can a reported figure or statement be traced back to the documents and facts that support it?
A number in a spreadsheet is not self-proving. The review asks what source supports it, which period and installation it belongs to, and whether another reviewer could reach the same understanding from the available record.
An invoice may establish a sale without proving which installation manufactured the goods. A seller, producer, installation operator and exporter can be different legal or operational actors.
Goods, producer, installation, reporting period, quantities, emissions, precursors and supporting documents all need to stay connected. If one link breaks, an otherwise plausible value can become difficult to support.
Monitoring Plan v3.1 and v3.2 are not interchangeable if the calculation relies on v3.2. The review therefore asks which version applied, when it changed and which calculations or statements depended on that version.
Two documents can each look valid and still conflict. Differences in quantity, identity, period or version need to be identified and either reconciled or left clearly unresolved.
A clean final file can hide important changes. Keeping the history of questions and corrections helps a later reviewer see what was wrong, what new documents arrived, what was corrected and whether the correction changed the conclusion.
CBAM retention and later-review requirements mean the file may need to be understood years after the original work. The reviewed record should preserve enough context to explain how the final conclusion was reached.
The Evidence Check identifies visible weaknesses. Level I states what the current file supports. Level II compares and reconciles documents and figures across sources. Level III traces important figures and statements back to source and tests complex or disputed points more closely. The Determination records the conclusion issued under professional responsibility, and the Determination Package preserves the review history.
Reviewed File & History does not replace accredited verification, legal advice, original source records or an authority decision.
A deeper Weetra review can record what was received, what conflicted, what changed, what was corrected, what was ultimately relied on and why the conclusion was reached. That history can later support internal review, professional advice, accredited verification or authority scrutiny.
