MOL GROUP Annual Report

6 Assurance statements6.1 Independent assurance statement to MOLErnst & Young Advisory Ltd was commissioned to provide limited assurance over sustainability performance data relatingto 2010 contained within the ‘Sustainability: Non-Financial Performance’ chapter of MOL Group’s Annual Report 2010 (theSustainability Report). The management of MOL Group (MOL) have prepared the Sustainability Report and are responsiblefor the collection and presentation of the information within it. Our responsibility in performing our work is to MOLmanagement only, in accordance with the scope of work agreed with them. We do not, therefore, accept or assume anyresponsibility for any other purpose or to any other person or organisation. Any reliance any such third party may place onthis independent assurance statement is entirely at its own risk.Limitations of our review– Our scope of work was limited to the sustainability performance data included in the Sustainability Report.– We did not undertake a comprehensive review of all sustainability data reported to corporate by each of the siteswe visited, but examined selected data sources and reviewed the processes for reporting data to corporate.– Our review of sustainability data processes at an operational level was limited to the four sites we visited.– We have not sought evidence to support the statements and claims presented within the Sustainability Report.We have not reviewed historical data, or trends described in the Sustainability Report that relate to sustainabilityperformance data.WHAT DID WE DO TO FORM OUR CONCLUSIONS?Our assurance engagement has been planned and performed in accordance with ISAE3000 . The sustainability performancedata have been evaluated against the criteria of the application of the Global Reporting Initiative G3 Sustainability ReportingGuidelines (the Guidelines) and against completeness, consistency and accuracy criteria agreed with the management ofMOL as follows:Completeness– Whether all material data sources have been included and that boundary definitions have been appropriatelyinterpreted and applied.Accuracy– Whether there is supporting information for the sustainability data reported by sites to corporate level.– Whether corporate level quality reviews have been completed and outstanding issues resolved or reported.– Whether data have been accurately transposed from corporate level systems to the Sustainability Report andassumptions and limitations to the data have been correctly reported.GRI– Whether the Sustainability Report meets the requirements of the A+ application level of the GRI G3 GuidelinesIn order to form our conclusions we undertook the steps outlined below:1. Interviewed specialists responsible for managing, collating, and reviewing sustainability data at corporate level.2. Reviewed a selection of management documentation and reporting tools including templates, guidance documents anddatabases.3. Undertook four visits to key locations to examine the systems and processes in place for collecting and reportingsustainability data against the reporting definitions and guidance prepared by MOL, and to test the accuracy of a sample ofreported data at a site level. The following sites were visited:– IES Mantova Refinery (Italy, Mantova)– INA Rijeka Refinery (Croatia, Rijeka)– TVK Petrochemical Plant (Hungary, Tiszaújváros)– E&P MOL Algyő (Hungary, Algyő)4. Reviewed and challenged the sustainability data validation and collation processes at corporate reporting level andtested the completeness of coverage of reporting units. Our procedures included following the sample of sustainability datacollected at each sites visited through to the Group reported performance data, and reviewing the processes applied by MOLmanagement for corporate level review and challenge of the sustainability data.5. Reviewed the Sustainability Report for the appropriate presentation of the data including the discussion of limitations andassumptions relating to the data presented.6. Reviewed whether MOL’s reporting has applied the GRI G3 Guidelines to a level consistent with the A+ application level.Level of assuranceOur evidence gathering procedures have been designed to obtain a sufficient level of evidence to provide a limited levelof assurance in accordance with ISAE3000. The extent of evidence gathering procedures performed is less than that of areasonable assurance engagement (such as a financial audit) and therefore a lower level of assurance is provided.OUR CONCLUSIONSBased on our review:– We are not aware of any material reporting units which have been excluded from the scope of the sustainabilitydata, with the exception of those reporting units disclosed within the Sustainability Report.– Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the sustainability data has not been properlycollated from the information reported by sites.– We are not aware of any errors that would materially affect the reported sustainability data.– Based on our review, including consideration of the Sustainability Report, MOL’s Sustainable Development Webcontent and elements of the MOL Annual Report 2010, nothing has come to our attention that causes us tobelieve that MOL management’s assertion that their sustainability reporting meets the requirements of the GRIA+ application level of the Guidelines is not fairly stated.OUR OBSERVATIONSAreas for potential improvement in the sustainability reporting process have been addressed in a separate report to MOLmanagement. Our observations do not affect our conclusions on the Sustainability Report set out above.OUR ASSURANCE TEAMOur assurance team has included members from our global Climate Change and Sustainability Services network, whichundertakes similar engagements to this with a number of significant multinational businesses.Ernst & Young Advisory LtdBudapest4 April 2011Sustainability208 MOL Group annual report 2010 209