Four depths of engagement, from an orientation reading to a link-by-link forensic examination of the evidence chain. The level decides how far a review goes into a file. It never decides what the review finds.
The references below separate what the law requires from how WEETRA structures evidentiary review and from controls that WEETRA adds for robustness. Deeper review does not dilute a blocking finding. it gives the organisation a more complete account of why the finding exists and what, if anything, can remediate it.
WEETRA Review Levels define different depths of examination. They are not regulatory verification categories.
Official sourceRegulation (EU) 2023/956 · Art. 8 · Annex VI · Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2546 · Arts. 5-6 and Annex
Where actual emissions are used, the CBAM framework requires verification by an accredited verifier. Implementing Regulation 2025/2546 specifies materiality levels and minimum verification-report information.
WEETRA reviews and structures the documentary basis before regulated verification. The accredited verifier then performs its own procedures and reaches an independent conclusion.
WEETRA Review Levels define different depths of examination. They are not regulatory verification categories.
Official sourceWEETRA internal governance boundary · not a statutory CBAM function
The CBAM legal framework does not prescribe a function called a “WEETRA Determination”. Regulatory verification, declaration responsibilities and authority decisions remain separate statutory functions.
WEETRA uses controlled Professional Review and locking to state what the reviewed evidence supports, blocks or leaves unresolved within the mandate.
Status taxonomy, Evidence Map, Contradiction Register, Remediation Register, locked states and integrity references are WEETRA governance mechanisms.
Primary legal texts prevail. Commission guidance is explanatory and is identified separately from binding law.
On this page
On this pageThe four levelsCBAM Evidence CheckLevel ILevel IILevel IIIWhat changes with depthHow a level endsReport and packageOne file, four depthsChoosing a levelDepth, not resultThe client chooses the depth of the engagement. That choice determines the perimeter examined, the documentary checklist, the extent of the controls and the form of the deliverable. It is agreed at the outset, taking account of the complexity of the file and the organisation's needs.
The client buys a depth of review, never a favourable outcome. A Level III engagement can identify a blocking condition just as a Level I engagement can, while a Level I review can conclude cleanly within its narrower perimeter. What changes with depth is the amount of evidence reconstructed, the extent of reconciliation and remediation, and the supporting material preserved behind the final report. The conclusion remains tied to the file actually reviewed.
The same file may reveal different types of information depending on how deeply its evidence, facts, contradictions, provenance and claim dependencies are examined. What a review can see is a function of how far into the structure it goes.
A deeper review does not make the underlying evidence better. It allows more of the evidentiary structure to be examined, reconstructed and challenged.
Each level is built around a different question. The question, not a grade, is what distinguishes them.
Initial documentary triage. No WEETRA Determination is issued at this stage.
Initial structured documentary review and a bounded Determination according to mandate.
Deeper consistency, defensibility and structured evidentiary reconstruction.
CBAM Forensic Evidence Review.
The CBAM Evidence Check identifies where a file appears to require further examination before a full review option is selected. It is a focused documentary triage, not a full WEETRA review.
Depending on what is supplied, it may identify
It is designed to answer three practical questions. Where does the documentary exposure sit? What should be examined next? Which depth of review is proportionate?
Potential outputs may include a triage note, a document inventory at triage depth, the visible gaps and issues observed, an orientation toward further review, and priority information requests where within scope.
No WEETRA Determination is issued at CBAM Evidence Check stage. The examination is intentionally limited, so it does not support the same conclusion as a Level I, II or III review.
Level I asks what the current documentary record actually supports. It examines the existing corpus at a bounded documentary depth, and seeks to distinguish
According to scope, the areas examined may illustratively include goods, supplier, installation, period, quantities, emissions documentation, verification documentation where relevant, and carbon-price evidence where relevant.
Outputs may include a Determination Report, an Evidence Map, identified findings, source limitations, priority remediation actions, and a controlled report with integrity references according to the applicable process.
Level I does not automatically include a full client-facing Determination Package or a complete Evidence Manifest, and supplier-remediation cycles are not always included. Level I answers what the current reviewed record can support, without performing the deeper reconstruction associated with Levels II and III.
Level I asks what the current file supports. Level II goes further and examines how the evidentiary elements relate across sources. Where the mandate allows it, the review also considers how identified weaknesses can be clarified or remediated.
Depending on scope, Level II may include
This matters because a file can contain every expected document category and still fail to reconcile as a coherent evidentiary state. The categories being present is not the same as the relationships between them holding. Level II is designed to examine that structure.
Level III is not simply more controls. It changes the depth of reasoning applied to the file.
Depending on the mandate, it may include
The governing idea is simple but demanding in practice. A claim can only stand if the necessary evidentiary relationships behind it also stand. Level III examines those relationships one at a time.
What follows describes depth states, not quality grades. A deeper state means more of the file is examined and reconstructed. It does not mean the conclusion is more favourable.
CBAM Evidence Check. The engagement itself. Levels I, II and III are included within the review.
CBAM Evidence Check. None issued. Levels I, II and III issue a Determination where applicable.
Every Level I, II or III review ends in a defined Determination status, not a score. The status reflects the observed state of the evidence. That includes, where it applies, a review blocked by a critical contradiction, by missing critical evidence, or by a review suspension.
The status is the only form a conclusion takes. The full set is described in the Determination Framework.
The Determination Report communicates the reviewed conclusion.
The Determination Package preserves the evidentiary state behind it, according to Review Level and mandate.
Levels II and III make the package progressively richer, because more of the underlying relationships, registers, remediation states and provenance are reconstructed in the first place. Level I is not automatically accompanied by the same package.
Explore Documented Evidentiary Due Diligence →
The following is illustrative and fictional. Consider a file containing
may identify that installation linkage and precursor evidence require deeper review.
may determine what the current documents establish, and identify the relationships that remain unsupported.
may reconcile the relevant evidence across sources, record the contradictions and follow the remediation.
may reconstruct the material claim chain source by source, and test how the position would respond to adversarial challenge.
The appropriate level depends on the file, the mandate and the intended use. What follows is orientation, not an automatic recommendation.
Useful when the organisation first needs to understand whether the documentary corpus presents visible weaknesses, and what depth of review appears proportionate.
Useful when the principal question concerns what the existing documentary record currently supports.
Useful when multiple sources, installations, periods, suppliers or contradictions require structured reconciliation and potential remediation.
Useful where the evidentiary chain is complex, disputed, high-consequence, or expected to face deeper scrutiny.
CBAM Review Options are not quality grades.
Level III is not a better score than Level I.
A Level III review can conclude that a position remains unsupported. A Level I review can conclude that its bounded reviewed scope is sufficiently established. The two statements are not in competition, because they answer different questions at different depths.
What the level sets is how much of the evidentiary structure is examined. What the review finds remains a function of the evidence itself.
WEETRA’s Determination complements these roles by documenting what the reviewed evidence supports within the agreed mandate. Accredited verification, where required, remains the independent statutory function of the verifier. Mandate & Boundaries →
