ILT fines for F-gases: risks without a valid certificate

The Inspectie Leefomgeving en Transport (ILT) is the supervisory authority that checks in the Netherlands whether installers and companies comply with the European F-gas Regulation. Anyone who works without a valid personal certificate or company certificate risks not only a finding at the next audit — but also a formal enforcement process. What that means in concrete terms is explained in this article.

What is the legal basis for ILT enforcement?

In the EU, F-gases fall under Regulation (EU) 2024/573 (the successor to 517/2014). This regulation sets direct requirements for who is allowed to work with F-gases: personal certification for individual technicians (in the Netherlands regulated via BRL 200) and a company certificate for the business (in practice closely tied to the STEK quality mark).

In the Netherlands, enforcement of this regulation is assigned to the ILT, based on art. 9.2.2.1 of the Wet milieubeheer, worked out in the Besluit gefluoreerde broeikasgassen en ozonlaagafbrekende stoffen and the accompanying Regeling gefluoreerde broeikasgassen en ozonlaagafbrekende stoffen. Violations of F-gas obligations — such as working without a certificate or failing to keep a mandatory installation logbook — are classified as an economic offence within the meaning of the Wet op de economische delicten (WED). That means the violation is in principle open to criminal prosecution, although in practice the ILT first proceeds via the administrative-law route.

What enforcement instruments does the ILT have?

The ILT has a step-up model of instruments — from light-touch correction to severe sanction. For F-gas violations, the most commonly used are:

Warning and demand for compliance The lightest form. The ILT establishes that a violation has taken place, informs the violator in writing and sets a deadline for remedying it. This instrument is intended for cases where it is plausible that the violation is unintentional and can be remedied quickly.

Order subject to a penalty payment If the warning does not lead to compliance, the ILT can impose an order subject to a penalty payment. This means: remedy the violation by a specific date, or pay a fixed amount to the government per day (or per violation). The penalty payment is not a punishment after the fact — it is a financial incentive to comply after all. Its amount is not laid down in law as a national maximum; the ILT sets it case by case, in proportion to the economic advantage gained from the violation.

Administrative fine For certain violations the ILT can also impose an administrative fine — a one-off monetary fine that is separate from remediation. Under the Wet milieubeheer, fines for violations of the F-gas rules are possible; the precise amount of the fine depends on the nature and severity of the violation and the enforcement policy that is published periodically.

Criminal prosecution track via WED For the most severe cases — knowingly working without a certificate, systematic violation, or refusing to cooperate with an inspection — the ILT can transfer the case file to the Openbaar Ministerie (OM) under the WED. A WED violation can result in detention or a fine imposed by the court. WED cases are not common in the refrigeration sector, but the instrument exists and is used for flagrant, repeated violations.

What the ILT does NOT do: standard F-gas checks on every work order are not the working method. The ILT works risk-based: signals from the market, annual reports from STEK/Kiwa, and targeted inspection campaigns are the triggers. A report filed by a competitor, a notification from a client, or a deviation in the sector report can trigger an inspection visit.

When, specifically, are you at risk as an installer?

The most common situations in which the ILT can take enforcement action:

1. Working without a valid personal certificate (BRL 200) A technician who tops up, recovers or leak-searches refrigerant on an F-gas installation without a valid BRL 200 certificate directly violates the European regulation — regardless of the CO₂-equivalent size of the installation; the 5-tonne threshold determines only the leak-check frequency, not the certification obligation. Work orders signed by an uncertified technician are invalid — at an inspection this is a demonstrable violation.

2. Company does not have a valid company certificate Without a valid company certificate, an installation company is legally not permitted to install, maintain or decommission F-gas installations. This is a basic requirement from the regulation, not a quality mark. An expired certificate, or a company that has never applied for a certificate but works anyway — both are enforceable.

3. Missing or incomplete installation logbook For installations above the 5-tonne CO₂-eq threshold, a logbook obligation applies. The operator (usually the owner of the installation) is primarily responsible, but the installer who fails to draw up or complete the logbook can also come into the picture. Want to know whether a specific installation is subject to the logbook obligation? Do the logbook-obligation check.

4. Leak checks not carried out, or carried out too late Installations above the threshold values must be periodically checked for leaks: annually above 5 tonnes CO₂-eq, every six months above 50 tonnes CO₂-eq. Anyone who systematically skips this, and where a leak is subsequently established, risks enforcement action — both the operator and the service organisation that held the contract.

5. Refrigerant not recovered on decommissioning The regulation requires recovery of refrigerant when installations are disposed of, dismantled or decommissioned. Anyone who fails to do this and lets the refrigerant escape into the atmosphere commits an emission offence. This is one of the more seriously assessed violations.

Audit by Kiwa or STEK versus an ILT inspection: what's the difference?

This is a question that causes a lot of confusion in practice. They are not the same:

• A Kiwa/STEK audit is a certification check under a voluntary or semi-mandatory quality mark. A finding at Kiwa can lead to conditional certification or suspension of your quality mark — those are consequences under private law. You lose a quality mark, but you don't get a fine from the government.
• An ILT inspection is oversight of compliance with statutory obligations. The ILT has no interest in whether or not you keep your quality mark — they check whether you comply with the law. The consequences are under administrative law (penalty payment, fine) or even criminal law via the WED.

In practice the flow of information sometimes runs from the certifying body to the ILT: a STEK company that structurally reports excessive emissions, or that loses its company certificate, can be a trigger for a targeted ILT inspection.

Practical risk analysis: what is your exposure?

The likelihood of an ILT inspection is not high for the average installer — the ILT has limited capacity and works risk-based. But the consequences if things go wrong are out of proportion to the cost of compliance. A practical assessment per risk factor:

Expired personal certificates (BRL 200) This is the most common and, at the same time, the most avoidable risk. A technician whose certificate has expired can no longer sign off on any work order. If work is then carried out anyway — work orders signed incorrectly, or not signed at all — you build up a demonstrable trail of violations.

The risk is not just the ILT: your client can also hold you liable if it later emerges that work was carried out by an uncertified technician. Clients in the semi-public sector (hospitals, schools, housing associations) often have a contractual obligation to engage only certified parties.

No refrigerant balance that adds up A balance that doesn't add up is prime evidence that emissions have occurred without registration — one of the cardinal sins in F-gas regulation. At an ILT inspection this is visible in the annual figures. Make sure your refrigerant administration adds up: every change traceable to a work order, cylinder and installation.

Missing leak-check reports An audit trail of leak checks carried out is not just an internal requirement — it's also what a client can request as evidence of proper maintenance. If those reports are missing for an installation above the CO₂-eq threshold, you have both a certification problem and a legal one.

Four concrete steps to stay compliant

Step 1: List all certificates Create an overview of every personal certificate (BRL 200) in your company: certificate number, category, issuer, validity date. Set reminders for at least 90, 60 and 30 days before expiry — not on the expiry date itself, because scheduling a re-examination takes time. This is built into the users and roles module of Koldwerk; work orders cannot be signed off by a technician with an expired certificate.

Step 2: Check the company certificate Do you have a valid F-gas company certificate? And do you know when the next periodic audit is due? Plan it proactively, not reactively. If you are certified via STEK, also check when your annual report has to be submitted.

Step 3: Make your refrigerant administration add up An ID per cylinder, a work-order link per change, a current charge per installation — and those three must match each other at all times. Use the logbook-obligation check to know which installations in your portfolio are above the threshold. The refrigerant module keeps the balance up to date automatically.

Step 4: Build in leak-check reminders Know, per installation, when the next leak check needs to be scheduled, based on the CO₂-equivalent charge. Koldwerk calculates this automatically and sends a signal well ahead of the deadline — so a forgotten leak check becomes the exception rather than the pattern.

Conclusion

ILT enforcement of F-gases is not a hypothetical risk — it is a real oversight instrument with a clear track from warning to penalty payment to criminal prosecution. The likelihood that you'll be confronted with it rises as your administration is less in order: missing certificates, balances that don't add up, or missed leak checks are the signals that supervisory authorities and auditors pick up on.

The good news: compliance is largely an administrative task, not a technical challenge. Anyone who keeps track of their certificates, keeps their refrigerant balance adding up and carries out leak checks on time is, at the same time, building the audit trail that both the ILT and Kiwa/STEK want to see.

Want to see how Koldwerk automates this? Check out the software overview page or the pricing page for the subscription options.

Disclaimer: this article is a plain-language explanation based on Regulation (EU) 2024/573, art. 9.2.2.1 of the Wet milieubeheer together with the Besluit and the Regeling gefluoreerde broeikasgassen en ozonlaagafbrekende stoffen, and the Wet op de economische delicten. For legal advice in a specific situation, consult a specialised adviser or contact the ILT. Fine standards and enforcement policy can be revised periodically — consult ilent.nl (opent in nieuw tabblad) for the current policy documents.