Use of the ReFuelEU Aviation Flexibility Mechanism – Guidance for Aircraft Operators

Background

Aircraft operators (AOs) have raised questions on how this flexibility mechanism affects the eligibility to submit a zero-rating claim under the EU ETS and, where applicable, apply for FEETS support.

This guidance provides clarification on how aircraft operators should handle documentation and claims when their fuel supplier applies the RFEUA flexibility mechanism.

Key principle: ReFuelEU Aviation and EU ETS are independent

ReFuelEU Aviation and the EU ETS operate under separate legal frameworks:

• The RFEUA flexibility mechanism applies only to fuel suppliers’ compliance with SAF blending obligations
• It does not modify or extend the rules for aircraft operators under EU ETS or the FEETS support regulation
• Under EU ETS, only eligible aviation fuel (SAF) may be claimed that has been physically delivered at an aerodrome from which the aircraft operator performs ETS-covered flights

Physical delivery requirement under EU ETS

For the purpose of EU ETS zero-rating and FEETS claims:

• SAF must be physically delivered at the Union airport where the aircraft operator uplifts fuel and operates ETS-covered flights
• A claim cannot be made solely on the basis of having paid a SAF surcharge elsewhere
• Situations where SAF is charged at one airport but physically delivered at another must be assessed strictly against this physical delivery requirement

Proof of sustainability (PoS / PoC)

• Proofs of Sustainability / Proofs of Compliance (PoS/PoC) must:
  • Be issued only for Union airports where SAF was physically delivered
  • Comply with RED mass-balance requirements
• Issuing a PoS/PoC for an airport where no physical SAF delivery occurred would constitute book-and-claim, which is not permitted under RED, RFEUA or EU ETS
• Aircraft operators may rely on PoS/PoC as evidence that the aviation fuel meets the RED sustainability and greenhouse gas reduction criteria

Invoices and supporting documentation

Due to the flexibility mechanism invoices may not always clearly align with the airport stated on the PoS/PoC, particularly where suppliers use standardized SAF surcharges or compliance fees. In such cases:

• Aircraft operators should verify that the PoS/PoC refers to the airport where SAF was physically delivered
• Where the invoice references a different airport, the operator may request:
  • A supplier declaration confirming that the SAF volume paid corresponds to the SAF physically delivered at the airport stated on the PoS/PoC, or
  • Provide alternative evidence of physical delivery, such as:
    • Fuel delivery notes
    • Product Transfer Document (PTD)
    • Other operational delivery documentation

There is no general requirement to request additional declarations from the fuel supplier on double counting, as this risk is already mitigated through RED mass-balance rules, certification schemes and audits.

Operational limitation for claims under the EU ETS

Aircraft operators may only submit a zero-rating- or FEETS support claims:

• At airports where physical SAF delivery took place, and:
• Where the operator performed ETS-covered flights from that airport

If SAF is physically delivered at an airport where the aircraft operator does not operate ETS-covered flights, no claim may be made, even if the operator was charged SAF elsewhere.