--- title: "EU Taxonomy Technical Screening Criteria: Documentation, Evidence Packs, and Audit Trail" canonical_url: "https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/screening-criteria-and-documentation" source_url: "https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/screening-criteria-and-documentation" author: "Sorena AI" description: "How to document EU Taxonomy alignment against technical screening criteria: build a criteria-by-criteria mapping." published_at: "2026-02-21" updated_at: "2026-02-21" keywords: - "EU Taxonomy technical screening criteria documentation" - "taxonomy evidence pack" - "taxonomy criteria mapping template" - "substantial contribution DNSH evidence" - "minimum safeguards evidence pack" - "EU Taxonomy alignment documentation" - "Article 8 taxonomy evidence" - "Technical screening criteria" - "Evidence packs" - "DNSH" - "Minimum safeguards" - "Assurance readiness" --- **[SORENA](https://www.sorena.io/)** - AI-Powered GRC Platform [Home](https://www.sorena.io/) | [Solutions](https://www.sorena.io/solutions) | [Artifacts](https://www.sorena.io/artifacts) | [About Us](https://www.sorena.io/about-us) | [Contact](https://www.sorena.io/contact) | [Portal](https://app.sorena.io) --- # EU Taxonomy Technical Screening Criteria: Documentation, Evidence Packs, and Audit Trail How to document EU Taxonomy alignment against technical screening criteria: build a criteria-by-criteria mapping. *EU Taxonomy* *Evidence* ## EU Taxonomy Screening criteria and documentation Alignment is a documentation problem before it's a math problem. Build a criteria-by-criteria evidence pack that ties directly to KPI numerators. Technical screening criteria (TSC) are the operational core of EU Taxonomy alignment. If you cannot show criterion-by-criterion evidence - including DNSH and minimum safeguards - you don't have an alignment claim you can defend. This page describes an evidence model that is structured, versioned, and reproducible. ## Start with the activity boundary (or your evidence will not match your claim) Before reading criteria, define the activity boundary: what assets/sites/projects are covered, and how that maps to revenue/CapEx/OpEx lines. Most assurance issues start here: evidence exists, but it covers a different boundary than the disclosed activity. - Activity definition: map your activity to the delegated act definition with a written rationale - Boundary statement: what's included/excluded (sites, assets, subsidiaries, time period) - Data sources: which systems produce the metrics that will support criteria checks - Owner: who is accountable for maintaining the activity evidence pack *Recommended next step* *Placement: after the template, evidence, or documentation block* ## Use EU Taxonomy Screening criteria and documentation as a cited research workflow Research Copilot can take EU Taxonomy Screening criteria and documentation from reusing this material inside a governed evidence system to a reusable workflow inside Sorena. Teams working on EU Taxonomy can keep owners, evidence, and next steps aligned without copying this guide into separate documents. - [Open Research Copilot for EU Taxonomy Screening criteria and documentation](/solutions/research-copilot.md): Start from EU Taxonomy Screening criteria and documentation and answer scope, timing, and interpretation questions with cited outputs. - [Talk through EU Taxonomy](/contact.md): Review your current process, evidence gaps, and next steps for EU Taxonomy Screening criteria and documentation. ## Build a criteria mapping file (the single source of truth) For each eligible activity, create a criteria mapping file: every criterion has a pass/fail, the metric/value, and an evidence pointer. This file is the bridge between operations and disclosure: it explains why a KPI numerator component is aligned. - Substantial contribution: criterion-by-criterion checks and evidence - DNSH: criterion-by-criterion checks across other objectives (as defined for the activity) - Minimum safeguards: due diligence evidence baseline and coverage statement - Evidence pointers: direct links/paths to documents (assessments, permits, monitoring, policies) - Versioning: delegated act version and reporting year recorded on the mapping file ## Evidence pack structure (what to store per activity) Store evidence in a stable structure so you can answer questions fast. Avoid ad-hoc attachments - use an evidence vault with an index. Evidence should be attributable (owner + timestamp), complete (covers the boundary), and durable (can be retrieved later). - Activity summary: boundary, rationale, and criteria version used - Metrics: source system extracts and calculation notes - Assessments and permits: technical reports, compliance permits, independent reviews where relevant - Monitoring: ongoing performance data for criteria that require continuous compliance - Safeguards: due diligence process docs, grievance mechanisms, remediation tracking ## Link evidence to KPIs (so Article 8 reporting stays defensible) The evidence model should connect directly to KPI workbook inputs: aligned numerator components must be traceable to aligned activities and their evidence packs. Build the link explicitly: KPI line items should reference activity IDs and evidence pack locations. - KPI workbook references activity IDs (not informal names) - Each numerator component has a criteria mapping reference and evidence pack pointer - Reconciliations: denominators tie to audited numbers and consolidation rules - Methodology notes: estimates/proxies policy and limitation disclosures stay consistent ## Primary sources - [Climate Delegated Act - Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 (EUR-Lex)](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2021/2139/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Technical screening criteria for climate objectives (substantial contribution + DNSH criteria). - [Environmental Delegated Act - Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2486 (EUR-Lex)](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/2486/oj/eng?ref=sorena.io) - Technical screening criteria for non-climate objectives (substantial contribution + DNSH criteria). - [Regulation (EU) 2020/852 (EU Taxonomy Regulation) (EUR-Lex)](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/852/oj?ref=sorena.io) - Core alignment conditions including DNSH and minimum safeguards. - [Commission Notice on EU Taxonomy interpretation and implementation (CELEX:52023XC0616(01)) (EUR-Lex)](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52023XC0616(01)&ref=sorena.io) - Commission guidance to support consistent interpretation and implementation. ## Related Topic Guides - [EU Taxonomy Applicability Test (Article 8): In-Scope Entities, Activities, and Disclosures](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/applicability-test.md): A practical EU Taxonomy applicability test for Regulation (EU) 2020/852 and Article 8 disclosures: determine whether your entity must disclose. - [EU Taxonomy Checklist (Article 8): Audit-Ready Eligibility, Alignment, KPIs, Evidence Packs](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/checklist.md): An audit-ready EU Taxonomy checklist for Regulation (EU) 2020/852 and Article 8 disclosures: scope/perimeter, activity mapping. - [EU Taxonomy Compliance Program (Article 8): Implementation Playbook for KPIs and Evidence](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/compliance.md): A practical EU Taxonomy compliance program playbook for Regulation (EU) 2020/852: set governance, build an activity mapping register. - [EU Taxonomy Deadlines and Disclosure Calendar: Article 8 Reporting Dates, 2026 Simplification, GAR](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/deadlines-and-compliance-calendar.md): A practical EU Taxonomy calendar covering Regulation (EU) 2020/852, the Article 8 disclosure timetable, the 2023 and 2024 reporting phases. - [EU Taxonomy Delegated Acts Tracker: 2021/2139, 2021/2178, 2022/1214, 2023/2485, 2023/2486, 2026/73](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/delegated-acts-tracker.md): Track the full EU Taxonomy delegated-act stack, including the climate, environmental, disclosure, and 2026 simplification acts. - [EU Taxonomy DNSH and Minimum Safeguards: Evidence, OECD, UNGP, ILO, SFDR Link](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/dnsh-and-minimum-safeguards.md): A practical guide to EU Taxonomy DNSH and minimum safeguards. - [EU Taxonomy Enforcement, Measures, Penalties and Fines (Articles 5-7)](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/penalties-and-fines.md): How EU Taxonomy enforcement works in practice: competent authorities monitor compliance for disclosures under Articles 5 to 7. - [EU Taxonomy FAQ: Article 8, Eligibility vs Alignment, GAR, Minimum Safeguards, 2026 Simplification](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/faq.md): A grounded EU Taxonomy FAQ covering Article 8 scope, eligibility vs alignment, turnover CapEx OpEx KPIs, GAR, minimum safeguards, the 2025 Commission Notice. - [EU Taxonomy KPIs and Disclosure Workflow: Turnover, CapEx, OpEx, GAR, Article 8](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/kpis-and-disclosure-workflow.md): Build an EU Taxonomy disclosure workflow that can survive review. - [EU Taxonomy Requirements (2020/852): Eligibility, Alignment, DNSH, Minimum Safeguards, Article 8 KPIs](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/requirements.md): A practical requirements breakdown for Regulation (EU) 2020/852 (EU Taxonomy): what environmentally sustainable means. - [EU Taxonomy Scope and Reporting Entities: Who Must Disclose Under Article 8](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/scope-and-reporting-entities.md): Understand EU Taxonomy scope and reporting entities under Article 8. - [EU Taxonomy Templates (Activity Register, KPI Workbook, Evidence Pack Index, DNSH, Safeguards)](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/templates.md): Practical EU Taxonomy templates you can copy/paste: activity mapping register, eligibility/alignment register, criteria mapping template, DNSH register. - [EU Taxonomy vs CSRD: How Article 8 Taxonomy Disclosures Fit Into CSRD Reporting](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/taxonomy-vs-csrd.md): Compare EU Taxonomy and CSRD the practical way. Learn how Article 8 Taxonomy disclosures fit inside the broader CSRD reporting system. - [EU Taxonomy vs SFDR: How Taxonomy Data Flows Into GAR, Product Disclosures, and Investor Requests](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/taxonomy-vs-sfdr.md): Understand the practical relationship between EU Taxonomy and SFDR. - [Taxonomy Eligibility vs Alignment (EU Taxonomy): What You Can Claim, What You Must Prove](/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/taxonomy-eligibility-vs-alignment-explained.md): A high-signal explainer of EU Taxonomy eligibility vs alignment: eligibility means the activity is covered/listed. --- [Privacy Policy](https://www.sorena.io/privacy) | [Terms of Use](https://www.sorena.io/terms-of-use) | [DMCA](https://www.sorena.io/dmca) | [About Us](https://www.sorena.io/about-us) (c) 2026 Sorena AB (559573-7338). All rights reserved. Source: https://www.sorena.io/artifacts/eu/taxonomy-regulation/screening-criteria-and-documentation