Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2358

Contents

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/3012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 establishing a certification framework for permanent carbon removals, carbon farming and carbon storage in products^note, and in particular Article 9(5), Article 11(5), Article 12(3), third subparagraph, Article 13(4) and Article 14(2) thereof,Whereas:

(1)To establish whether carbon removals and soil emission reductions comply with the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012, the correct and harmonised functioning of certification schemes, certification bodies and audits is essential. Harmonised rules should therefore be established, bringing about the necessary legal certainty on rules applicable to certification schemes, certification bodies and audits.

(2)With a view to minimising the administrative burden for operators, the implementing rules set out in this Regulation should be proportionate and limited to what is required to ensure that compliance with the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2024/3012 is verified in an adequate and harmonised manner, and the risk of fraud is minimised to the greatest extent possible. The implementing rules should therefore not be considered exhaustive but rather minimum requirements that certification schemes may complement as appropriate.

(3)To promote comparable information, it is appropriate to set out standardised templates for the key certification documents, including the activity and monitoring plans, and the certification and re-certification audit reports.

(4)To ensure a robust and transparent certification process, it is necessary to set out high integrity standards as regards certification scheme’s governance, mandatory public consultation of relevant stakeholders, internal monitoring, handling of complaints, and documentation management, including manuals, internal policies or definition of responsibilities. Certification schemes should be required to have the necessary technical capacity to provide technical advice to operators on the implementation of the certification methodologies.

(5)Certification schemes should set up a system of internal monitoring to verify compliance of operators with the scheme’s rules and procedures and to ensure the robustness and credibility of the certification work carried out by certification bodies.

(6)It is appropriate to distinguish three categories of non-conformities: critical, major and minor. Each non-conformity should be treated in an adequate way with proportionate consequences, including remediation measures and sanctions, where relevant.

(7)Operators have the possibility to participate in a different certification scheme at any time. However, rules are needed to prevent the risk of ‘scheme hopping’ whereby an operator who has failed an audit under one scheme immediately applies for certification under another scheme. Such rules should also apply to situations where the operator changed legal personality but remains the same in substance, so that minor or purely formal modifications, namely changes in the governance structure or the scope of activities, do not exempt the operator with a new identity from such rules.

(8)To ensure full transparency of the certification process, key information on the governance and functioning of the certification schemes should be made publicly available on their websites and, when established, on the Union registry.

(9)To ensure robust certification, reasonable level of assurance should be required for certification bodies to conclude that the activity plan, the monitoring plan or the monitoring report are free from material errors and omissions or misstatements, following the verification of the data submitted by operators or groups of operators. Applications for certification of compliance should be thoroughly checked on a reasonable assurance basis before the activity can start. Re-certification audits should also be conducted at a reasonable assurance level.

(10)Carbon farming is typically carried out by small operators for which the administrative burden and costs associated to third-party verification requirements could be a major barrier to certification. With the view to simplify, while still ensuring overall robust verification, group auditing should be allowed for carbon farming operators according to a set of harmonised risk-based rules. These rules should be designed to be accessible and user-friendly for small operators, leveraging existing technologies, to simplify compliance control.

(11)Certification bodies are key actors in the certification process. Therefore, it is necessary for certification schemes to appoint (i.e. approve) only certification bodies accredited by a national accreditation body under relevant Union technical standards or recognised by a national competent authority on the basis of common minimum competence requirements, to ensure that the certification body’s auditors have all the necessary technical skills and auditing experience for carrying out auditing activities. It is also appropriate for Member States and the Commission to monitor, if needed, the activities of certification bodies and access all relevant certification information, including certification, re-certification and monitoring audits.

(12)Until the Union registry is established by 2028, certification schemes should ensure that their registries meet a set of minimum requirements, to avoid double counting and effectively handle cases of incorrect or fraudulent issuance of certified units. To facilitate the smooth transition towards the Union registry, the Commission may issue technical guidelines on the functioning of the certification registries and the linking with the Union registry.

(13)It is appropriate to lay out the procedure for the Commission’s recognition of certification schemes, which could apply for recognition against one or more certification methodologies. The recognition process should be based on a thorough assessment of the scheme’s compliance with the rules set out in the relevant certification methodologies and in this Regulation.

(14)The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Climate Change Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Defined terms · 6

Show every defined term

expired certificate
means a certificate that is no longer valid;
group auditing
means a process in which the approach to auditing activities can be defined at group level;
monitoring audit
means an audit carried out by a certification body during the monitoring period to verify the monitoring of the stored carbon and any reversal that may have occurred;
non-conformity
means a failure by an operator or a certification body to comply with the rules and procedures, established by the certification scheme, of which they are members or under which they operate.
terminated certificate
means a certificate that has been voluntarily cancelled while it is still valid;
withdrawn certificate
means a certificate that has been permanently cancelled by the certification body or the certification scheme;

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2358

Defined terms · 6

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections