Review a verification task
Opening a Task
From the Verification Queue, click the task reference or product name to open the task detail page. Opening a task moves it from Pending to In Progress status. This change is visible to the operator and signals that you have begun the review.
What You See in a Task
The task detail page is divided into the following sections:
Product Identity
The top section shows the product being assessed:
| Field | Description |
|---|---|
| Product name | The battery product or model name |
| Product identifier | The operator's internal model or part number |
| Battery category | EU Battery Regulation category (EV, LMT, Industrial, SLI, Portable) |
| Manufacturer | The entity that manufactures the product |
| Operator | The operator who has authored the DPP and assigned this task |
Review this section first to confirm the task is within your area of competence. If you are not qualified to verify this battery category or this type of claim, contact the operator immediately via the message thread.
Claims Flagged for Verification
The core of the task: a list of the specific DPP fields or claims the operator has flagged for your review. Each claim entry shows:
- The field name and its value as declared in the DPP
- The unit of measurement (where applicable)
- The evidence the operator has attached in support of the claim
The operator may have flagged a single claim (e.g., just the carbon footprint value) or a set of related claims (e.g., the full responsible sourcing declaration for cobalt).
Attached Documents
All documents provided as evidence for the flagged claims are accessible here. Click any document to open it in the in-platform viewer, or click the download icon to save a copy to your device.
Documents are listed with:
- File name
- Document description (as entered by the operator or supplier)
- Upload date
Systematic Review Approach
A rigorous, consistent review methodology protects both you and the operators you work with. Follow these five steps for every claim you verify:
Step 1: Identify the claim being verified
Read the DPP field value precisely. Note the exact numeric value, unit, and any qualifying conditions (e.g., "Carbon footprint: 42.8 kg CO₂e/kWh, cradle-to-gate, based on LCA methodology compliant with EU Battery Regulation Annex II Part B").
Step 2: Identify the evidence provided
Review each attached document. Note the document type, the issuing body, the issue date, and the scope statement. Does each document appear to be relevant to the specific claim?
Step 3: Assess whether the evidence substantiates the claim
This is the substance of your review. For a quantitative claim, check whether the document explicitly states a value that matches or supports the declared DPP value. For a qualitative claim (e.g., "conflict-free sourcing"), check whether the document's scope covers the material and supply chain in question.
Common assessment questions:
- Does the document value match the DPP field value? (Check number, unit, and any applicable conditions)
- Does the document cover the specific product, model, or material being claimed? Or does its scope appear broader or different?
- Does the document reflect the time period applicable to the DPP? (A 2019 test report may not substantiate a claim for a 2025 product)
Step 4: Check document authenticity markers
You are not a forensic document examiner, but you are expected to perform a reasonable professional assessment of document authenticity:
- Is the issuing body credible and appropriate for this type of document? (A carbon footprint LCA should come from an accredited LCA practitioner; a UN 38.3 test should come from an accredited testing laboratory)
- Does the document carry a signature, stamp, or certification mark from the issuer?
- Is the issue date and, where applicable, validity period clearly shown?
- Does the document's formatting and detail level appear consistent with what you would expect from a professional issuer of this type?
Step 5: Cross-reference values against technical standards
Where applicable, verify that the claimed values are consistent with the technical standards cited in the DPP or in the evidence documents. For example:
- A carbon footprint calculation methodology should cite and be consistent with a recognised standard (ISO 14067, the EU Battery Regulation Annex II LCA methodology, or equivalent)
- A recycled content figure should be calculated in accordance with the EU Battery Regulation Annex XII methodology
- Safety ratings and test results should reference specific test standards (IEC 62133, UL 9540A, UN 38.3, etc.)
You are not expected to independently recalculate every value. You are expected to assess whether the stated methodology is appropriate and whether the evidence is consistent with the declared result.
Using the Task Notes Field
The task notes field is a private scratchpad for your working notes as you review the task. Use it to:
- Track your progress through each claim
- Note specific document references you are relying on
- Flag items you want to return to
- Draft the substance of your final comment before submitting
Notes are not visible to the operator until you submit your decision. Once submitted, your notes are included in the task record alongside your decision comment.
Requesting Additional Information
If your review identifies a gap in the evidence — a document that seems incomplete, a value that cannot be traced to any provided document, or a scope that does not clearly cover the claimed product — you can request additional information from the operator via the task message thread:
- Scroll to the Message Thread section of the task
- Type your question or request
- Click Send
The operator receives a notification and can upload additional documents or provide clarification within the task. You will be notified when the operator responds.
Note on timing: The task due date does not pause when you send a message. If a significant amount of information is missing and you expect the operator's response will take time, communicate this explicitly — include a statement in your message that you will need X additional days after receiving the information to complete the review. Most operators will respond quickly to verifier queries because the DPP timeline depends on your decision.
If Documents Appear Altered or Suspect
If you review a document and it appears to have been digitally altered, inconsistently formatted in a way suggesting manipulation, or contains values that are internally contradictory in a way suggesting human editing rather than authentic measurement output:
- Do not speculate in the task notes or message thread about intent
- Note specifically what you have observed — the visual inconsistency, the value discrepancy, the formatting anomaly — based solely on what is visible in the document
- Reject the task with a clear, factual rejection comment describing the specific issue
- Do not approve the claim while the document's integrity is in question
Your rejection comment will become part of the DPP audit trail. It should describe the observable problem without asserting motive (e.g., "The reported cycle life value in the test report appears to have been amended — the figure 1,500 is overlaid on what appears to be original text. Please provide an unmodified original or a new test report.").