GOLD STANDARD VERIFICATION REPORT

(1)

TÜV NORD CERT GmbH JI/CDM Certification Program

Langemarckstraße, 20 45141 Essen, Germany Phone: +49-201-825-3329 Fax: +49-201-825-2139 www.tuev-nord.de

G

OLD

S

TANDARD

V

ERIFICATION

R

EPORT

-

3

RD

P

ERIODIC

–

M

/

S

B

AGEPALLI

C

OOLIE

S

ANGHA

(BCS)

B

IOGAS

CDM

P

ROJECT OF

B

AGEPALLI

C

OOLIE

S

ANGHA

G

OLD

S

TANDARD

R

EF

.

N

O

.

:

GS

768

Monitoring Period: 2013-01-01 to 2014-06-30

(incl. both days)

Report No: 8000445063 - 14/120GS

Date: 2015-06-16

(2)

Verification Report: Report No. Rev. No. Date of 1st issue: Date of this rev.

8000445063 - 14/120GS 0 2015-06-16 2015-06-16

Project: Title: UNFCCC No &

Registration Date Gold

Standard-No.:

Gold Standard Registration :

Biogas CDM Project of Bagepalli Coolie Sangha

2591

2009-08-28 GS 768 2011-06-10

Project Scale: GS Verification No.:

Large Scale Small Scale 3rd periodic verification

Project Participant(s): Client:

M/s Bagepalli Coolie Sangha (BCS) FairClimateFund (FCF)

Non Annex 1 country: Annex 1 country:

India Netherlands

PP from non Annex 1 country: PP from Annex 1 country:

M/s Bagepalli Coolie Sangha (BCS) FairClimateFund (FCF)

Applied

methodology/ies:

Title: No.: Scope(s) / TA(s)

Thermal energy for the user with or without electricity

Switch from Non-Renewable Biomass for Thermal Applications by the User

AMS-I.C. ver. 13,

AMS-I.E. Vers 01 I / 1.2

Monitoring period and monitoring report

Monitoring period (MP): Monitoring Report:

From: To: No. of days: Draft version: Final version:

2013-01-01 2014-06-30 546 2014-07-29 2015-02-17

Verification team / Technical Review and Final Approval:

Verification Team: Technical review: Final approval:

G Ezhilarasu TL/TE Indrapal Parmar TM

Pankaj Patel TM _{Stöhr, Christina} _{Stefan Winter}

Key dates of verification:

DVerR issued: On-site (from): On-site (to):

2014-11-24 2014-10-29 2014-10-30

Summary of

Verification opinion M/s Bagepalli Coolie Sangha (BCS) has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM

Certification Program to carry out the 3rd periodic verification of the project: “Biogas CDM Project of Bagepalli Coolie Sangha”, with regard to the relevant requirements for Gold Standard project activities.

As a result of this verification, the verifier confirms that:

all operations of the project are implemented and installed as planned and described in the validated project design document and Gold Standard additional Annexes to the project design document,

the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved CDM methodology the monitoring plan as set out in the validated project design document and the validated additional Annexes have been followed

the project contributes to sustainability development

the installed equipment essential for measuring parameters required for calculating emission reductions are calibrated appropriately,

the monitoring system is in place and functional. The project has generated GHG emission reductions, and

the GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements in a conservative and appropriate manner.

TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP herewith confirms that the project has achieved emission reductions in the above mentioned reporting period as listed below (verified amount).

(3)

Emission reductions: [t CO2e]

Total verified amount As per draft MR: As per GS PDD:

42,393

42,393 49,998 /a

ER achieved up to 2012-12-31 ER achieved from 2013-01-01

0 42,393

Document information:

Filename: No. of pages:

(4)

Abbreviations:

ADATS _{Agricultural Development and Training Society} BCS Bagepalli Coolie Sangha

CA _{Corrective Action / Clarification Action} CAR _{Corrective Action Request}

CBO Community Based organisation CDM Clean Development Mechanism CER Certified Emission Reduction CL Clarification Request

CO2 Carbon dioxide

CO2eq Carbon dioxide equivalent DVerR Draft Verification Report ER Emission Reduction FAR Forward Action Request GHG Greenhouse gas(es)

MP Monitoring Plan

MR Monitoring Report PA Project Activity

PDD Project Design Document PP Project Participant

QA/QC Quality Assurance / Quality Control

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

GS Gold Standard

TN CERT TÜV NORD Certification GmbH GST Gold Standard Toolkit (GSv2.1) GSP Gold Standard Passport

VT Verification Team

VVS Validation and Verification Standard

(5)

1. INTRODUCTION

M/s Bagepalli Coolie Sangha (BCS) has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program (CP) to carry out the 3rd periodic Gold Standard (GS) verification of the project

“Biogas CDM Project of Bagepalli Coolie Sangha”

with regard to the relevant requirements for Gold Standard project activities. The verifiers have reviewed the implementation of the monitoring plan (MP) in the registered Gold Standard project.

GHG data as well as sustainability aspects for the monitoring period was verified in detailed manner applying the set of requirements, audit practices and principles as required under the Validation and Verification Standard /VVS/ of the UNFCCC and additional Gold Standard requirements/GS/.

This report summarizes the findings and conclusions of this 3rd periodic verification of the above mentioned Gold Standard registered project activity.

1.1. Objective

The objective of the verification is the review and ex-post determination by an independent entity of the GHG emission reductions. It includes the verification of the:

- implementation and operation of the project activity as given in the and GS passport,

- compliance of the actual monitoring system and procedures with the provisions of the monitoring plan as a part of registered PDD, the GS monitoring matrix and the applied approved monitoring methodology,

- data given in the monitoring report by checking the monitoring records, the emissions reduction calculation and supporting evidence,

- accuracy of the monitoring equipment, - quality of evidence,

- significance of reporting risks and risks of material misstatements.

1.2. Scope

The verification of this registered project is based on the validated project design document /PDD/,/, the validated Gold Standard Passport/GSP/, Sustainable Development Indicators Report/SDI/, the monitoring report /MR/, emission reduction calculation spread sheet /XLS/, supporting documents made available to the verifier and information collected through performing interviews and during the on-site assessment. Furthermore publicly available information was considered as far as available and required.

The verification is carried out on the basis of the following requirements, applicable for this project activity:

(8)

- Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol /KP/,

- guidelines for the implementation of Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol as presented in the Marrakech Accords under decision 3/CMP.1 /MA/, and subsequent decisions made by the Executive Board and COP/MOP,

- other relevant rules, including the host country legislation, - CDM Validation and Verification Standard /VVS/,

- monitoring plan as given in the registered GSPDD /PDD/,

-Approved CDM Methodology.

-Gold Standard Version 2.2/gs/ - Gold Standard Passport/GSP/.

(9)

2. GHG PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1. Technical Project Description

The project activity involves the installation of 18 000 biogas digesters of 2 m3 capacity each, in the five taluks (Bagepalli, Chintamani, Sidlaghatta, Gudibanda and Chickballapur ) of Chickballarpur district in the state of Karnataka, India.

The biogas digester equipment consists of a digester of 2 m3 capacity with a fixed, non-movable gas space. Gas is produced through anaerobic digestion of cow dung and stored in the upper part of the digester before being piped to the biogas stove in the kitchen. The gas pressure displaces the digested slurry into the compensating tank, which then can be used as manure. The technology used in the project activity is indigenously available in India and is based on the Deenbandhu digester model approved by the Ministry of Non- Conventional Energy Sources (MNES).

The key parameters of the project are given in Table 2-1:

Table 2-1: Technical data of the project activity

Parameter Unit Value

Volume of the digester m3 2

No of biogas digester 18,000

Model Fixed dome, Deenbandhu

2.2. Project Location

The details of the project location are given in Table 2-2:

Table 2-2: Project Location

No. Project Location

Host Country India

Region: Karnataka

Project location address: 5 taluks of Chickballarpur district ( Bagepalli, Chintamani, Sidlaghatta, Gudibanda and Chickballapur )

Latitude:Bagepalli 13° 47' 5" North

Longitude:Bagepalli _{77° 47' 35" East}

Latitude:Chikkaballapur _{13° 26' 3" North} Longitude:Chikkaballapur _{77° 43' 27" East} Latitude: Chintamani 13° 24' 0" North

(10)

No. Project Location

Longitude: Chintamani 78° 4' 0" East

Latitude: Gudibanda 13° 40' 10" North

Longitude: Gudibanda 77° 41' 54" East

Latitude: Sidlaghatta 13° 23' 17" North

Longitude: Sidlaghatta 77° 51' 46" East

The above co-ordinates refer to the taluk headquarters.

2.3. Project Verification History

Essential events since the registration of the project are presented in the following Table 2-3.

Table 2-3: Status of previous Monitoring Periods

# Item Time Status

1 1st Monitoring period 2010-01-01 to 2011-09-30 Issued

2 2nd Monitoring period 2011-10-01 to 2012-12-31 Issued

3 3rd Monitoring period 2013-01-01 to 2014-06-30 Issuance Requested

An overview of all Post Registration Changes is given in the following table.

Table 2-4: Overview Post Registration Changes

# Applicable from – to / as of MP Type of post registration change 1) Description Status2) / Date 1 NA TDfrMP NA 2 NA TDfMM NA 3 NA CrPDD NA 4 NA PCfrMP NA 5 NA PCfMM NA 6 2011-10-01 to life time

2nd CoPD The proposed change in the

design of the project activity is in

regard to the inclusion of

additional villages for biogas units installation in addition to the proposed ones in the registered PDD. As per the registered PDD, version 6 dated 27 August 2009, the project activity involves the installation of 18 000 biogas Approved by EB on 2013-09-091 1 http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/DB/DNV-CUK1242729511.7/view

(11)

# Applicable from – to / as of MP Type of post registration change 1) Description Status2) / Date

digesters of 2 m3 capacity each in 533 villages in the five taluks of Chickballapur district of Karnataka. The registered PDD also mentions that the proposed villages for this activity will be different from the villages of the other registered project activity in the same area by different Project participants

(Bagepalli CDM Biogas

Programme by Velcan Energy Pvt. Ltd. ;Project No. 0121 of 5,500 biogas units).

1)

TDfrMP : Temporary deviation from registered monitoring plan

TDfMM : Temporary deviation from the monitoring methodology

CrPDD : Corrections to the registered PDD

PCfrMP : Permanent changes from registered Monitoring Plan

PCfMM : Permanent changes from Monitoring Methodology

CoPD : Changes to the project design of a registered project activity

(12)

3. METHODOLOGY AND VERIFICATION SEQUENCE

3.1. Verification Steps

The verification consisted of the following steps:

 Contract review

 Appointment of team members and technical reviewers

 Upload of Work Plan

 A desk review of the Monitoring Report/MR/ submitted by the client and additional supporting documents with the use of customised verification protocol /CPM/ according to the Validation and Verification Standard /VVS/, and additional Gold Standard requirements.

 Verification planning,

 On-Site assessment,

 Background investigation and follow-up interviews with personnel of the project developer and its contractors,

 Draft verification reporting

 Resolution of corrective actions (if any)

 Final verification reporting

 Technical review

 Final approval of the verification.

3.2. Contract review

To assure that

 the project falls within the scopes for which accreditation is held,

 the necessary competences to carry out the verification can be provided,

 Impartiality issues are clear and in line with the CDM and GS accreditation requirements

(13)

3.3. Appointment of team members and technical reviewers

On the basis of a competence analysis and individual availabilities a verification team, consisting of one team leader and 2 additional team members, was appointed. The list of involved personnel, the tasks assigned and the qualification status are summarized in the Table 3-1 below.

Table 3-1: Involved Personnel

Name Company F u n ctio n 1) Q u ali fica tion S tatu s 2) S chem e com p eten ce 3) T ec h n ica l com p eten ce 4) V er if ica tion com p eten ce 5) Ho st co u n tr y Co mp eten ce On -site vi sit Mr. Ms. G Ezhilarasu TUV India Private Limited TL SA 1.2 Mr. Ms. Pankaj Patel TUV India Private Limited TM A) LA Mr. Ms. Indrapal Parmar TUV India Private Limited TM A) A 1.2 Mr. Ms. Stöhr, Christina TN Cert TR B) A 1.2 - Mr.

Ms. Winter; Stefan TN Cert FA

B)

SA 1.2 -

1)

TL: Team Leader; TM: Team Member, TR: Technical review; OT: Observer-Team, OR: Observer-TR; FA: Final approval 2)

GHG Auditor Status: A: Assessor; LA: Lead Assessor; SA: Senior Assessor; T: Trainee; TE: Technical Expert 3)

GHG auditor status (at least Assessor) 4)

As per S01-MU03 or S01-VA070-A2 (such as 1.1, 1.2, …) 5)

In case of verification projects A)

Team Member: GHG auditor (at least Assessor status), Technical Expert (incl. Host Country Expert or Verification Expert), not ETE

B)

No team member

All team members contributed to the review of documents, the assessment of the project activity and to the preparation of this report under the leadership of the team leader.

Technical experts contributed to the assessment of special aspects of the project activity, e.g. technical or host country aspects.

In order to qualify further personnel the project team was accompanied by observers and/or trainees as indicated in the table above. They are usually not considered as team members. Statements of competence for the above mentioned team members are enclosed in annex 3 of this report.

(14)

3.4. Verification Planning

In order to ensure a complete, transparent and timely execution of the verification task the team leader has planned the complete sequence of events necessary to arrive at a substantiated final verification opinion.

Various tools have been established in order to ensure an effective verification planning.

Risk analysis and detailed audit testing planning

For the identification of potential reporting risks and the necessary detailed audit testing procedures for residual risk areas table A-1 is used. The structure and content of this table is given in Table 3-2 below.

Table 3-2: Table A-1; Identification of verification risk areas

Table A-1: GHG calculation procedures and management control testing / Detailed audit testing of residual risk areas and random testing

Identification of potential reporting risk Identification, assessment and testing of management controls Areas of residual risks Additional verification testing performed Conclusions and Areas Requiring Improvement (including Forward Action Requests) The following potential risks were identified and divided and structured according to the possible areas of occurance.

The potential risks of raw data generation have been identified in the course of the monitoring system implementation. The following measures were taken in order to minimize the corresponding risks. The following measures are implemented: Despite the measures implemented in order to reduce the occurrence probability the following residual risks remain and have to be addressed in the course of every verification. The additional verification testing performed is described. Testing may include: - Sample cross checking of manual transfers of data - Recalculation - Spreadsheet ‘walk throughs’ to check links and equations

- Inspection of calibration and maintenance records for key equipment

- Check sampling analysis results Discussions with process engineers who have detailed knowledge of process

uncertainty/error bands.

Having investigated the residual risks, the conclusions should be noted here. Errors and uncertainties are highlighted.

(15)

Project specific periodic verification checklist

In order to ensure transparency and consideration of all relevant assessment criteria, a project specific GS verification protocol has been developed. The protocol shows, in a transparent manner, criteria and requirements, means and results of the verification. The verification protocol serves the following purposes:

- It organises, details and clarifies the requirements a GS project is expected to meet for verification

- It ensures a transparent verification process where the verifying DOE documents how a particular requirement has been proved and the result of the verification. The basic structure of this project specific verification protocol for the periodic verification is described in Table 3-3.

Table 3-3: Table A-2; Structure of the project specific periodic verification checklist

Table A-2: Periodic verification checklist

Checklist Item Reference Verification Team Comments

Draft Conclusion

Final Conclusion

The checklist items in Table A-2 are linked to the various require-ments the monitoring of the project should meet. The checklist is organised in various sections as per the requirements of the topic and the individual project activity. It further includes guidance for the verification team. Gives reference to the information source on which the assessment is based on.

The section is used to elaborate and discuss the checklist item in detail. It includes the assessment of the verification team and how the assessment was carried out. The reporting requirements of the VVS shall be covered in this section. Assessment based on evidence provided if the criterion is fulfilled (OK), or a CAR, CL or FAR (see below)is raised. The assessment refers to the draft verifi-cation stage. In case of a corrective action or a clarification the final assessment at the final verification stage is given.

The GS periodic verification checklist (verification protocol) is the backbone of the complete verification starting from the desk review until final assessment. Detailed assessments and findings are discussed within this checklist and not necessarily repeated in the main text of this report.

The completed verification protocol is enclosed in Annex 1 (table A-2) to this report.

3.5. Desk review

During the desk review all documents initially provided by the client and publicly available documents relevant for the verification were reviewed. The main documents are listed below:

 the last revision of the PDD, additional Annexes and further attached documents including the monitoring plan/PDD/,

 the last revision of the GS validation report/VAL/,

(16)

 the monitoring report, including the claimed emission reductions for the project/MR/ and Sustainability Development Indicators report/SDI/

 the emission reduction calculation spreadsheet/XLS/.

Other supporting documents, such as publicly available information on the Gold Standard Website and UNFCCC website and background information were also reviewed.

3.6. On-site assessment

As most essential part of the verification exercise it is indispensable to carry out an inspection on site in order to verify that the project is implemented in accordance with the applicable criteria. Furthermore the on-site assessment is necessary to check the monitoring data with respect to accuracy to ensure the calculation of emission reductions. Changes to the key sustainable development indicators and the achievement and implementation of mitigation / compensation measures are other integral parts of the on-site assessment. The main tasks covered during the site visit include, but are not limited to:

 The monitoring data were checked completely.

 An assessment of the implementation and operation of the registered project activity as per the registered PDD and GS passport or any approved revised PDD;

 A review of information flows for generating, aggregating and reporting the monitoring parameters;

 Interviews with relevant personnel to determine whether the operational and data collection procedures are implemented in accordance with the monitoring plan in the PDD and GS passport;

 A cross check between information provided in the monitoring report and data from other sources such as plant logbooks, inventories, purchase records or similar data sources;

 A check of the monitoring equipment and observations of monitoring practices against the requirements of the PDD, GS passport and the selected methodology and corresponding tool(s), where applicable;

 A review of calculations and assumptions made in determining the GHG data and emission reductions;

 An identification of quality control and quality assurance procedures in place to prevent or identify and correct any errors or omissions in the reported monitoring parameters.

Before and during the on-site visit the verification team performed interviews with the project participants to confirm selected information and to resolve issues identified in the document review.

Representatives of M/s Bagepalli Coolie Sangha (BCS) and Fair Climate Network (project consultant) including the operational staff of the plant were interviewed. The main topics of the interviews are summarised in Table 3-4.

(17)

Table 3-4: Interviewed persons and interview topics Interviewed Persons /

Entities

Interview topics

1. Projects & Operations Personnel

2. Consultant

- General aspects of the project

- Technical equipment and operation

- Changes since validation / previous verification

- Monitoring and measurement equipment

- Remaining issues from validation/ previous

verification

- Calibration procedures

- Quality management system

- Involved personnel and responsibilities

- Training and practice of the operational personnel

- Implementation of the monitoring plan

- Monitoring data management

- Data uncertainty and residual risks

- GHG emission reduction calculation

- Procedural aspects of the verification

- Maintenance

- Environmental aspects

- Gold Standard Requirements

- GS monitoring parameters

The list of interviewees is included in chapter 7.4.

3.7. Draft verification reporting

On the basis of the desk review, the on-site visit, follow-up interviews and further background investigation the verification protocol is completed. This protocol together with a general project and procedural description of the verification and a detailed list of the verification findings form the draft verification report. This report is sent to the client for resolution of raised CARs, CLs and FARs.

3.8. Resolution of CARs, CLs and FARs

Nonconformities raised during the verification can either be seen as a non-fulfilment of criteria ensuring the proper implementation of a project or where a risk to deliver high quality emission reductions is identified.

Corrective Action Requests (CARs) are issued, if:

 Non-conformities with the monitoring plan or methodology are found in monitoring and reporting, or if the evidence provided to prove conformity is insufficient;

(18)

 Mistakes have been made in applying assumptions, data or calculations of emission reductions which will impair the estimate of emission reductions;

 Issues identified in a FAR during validation or previous verifications requiring actions by the project participants to be verified during verification have not been resolved.

The verification team uses the term Clarification Request (CL), which is be issued if:

 information is insufficient or not clear enough to determine whether the applicable CDM requirements have been met.

Forward Action Requests (FAR) indicate essential risks for further periodic verifications. Forward Action Requests are issued, if:

 the monitoring and reporting require attention and / or adjustment for the next verification period.

For a detailed list of all CARs, CLs and FARs raised in the course of the verification pl. refer to chapter 4.

3.9. Final reporting

Upon successful closure of all raised CARs and CLs the final verification report including a positive verification opinion can be issued. In case not all essential issues could finally be resolved, a final report including a negative verification opinion is issued.

The final report summarizes the final assessments w.r.t. all applicable criteria.

3.10. Technical review

Before submission of the final verification report a technical review of the whole verification procedure is carried out. The technical reviewer is a competent GHG auditor being appointed for the scope this project falls under. The technical reviewer is not considered to be part of the verification team and thus not involved in the decision making process up to the technical review.

As a result of the technical review process the verification opinion and the topic specific assessments as prepared by the verification team leader may be confirmed or revised. Furthermore reporting improvements might be achieved.

3.11. Final approval

After successful technical review an overall (esp. procedural) assessment of the complete verification will be carried out by a senior assessor located in the accredited premises of TÜV NORD.

After this step the verification team will submit the verification report including the verification opinion to the client via e-mail and to Gold Standard via the GS registry.

(19)

4. VERIFICATION FINDINGS

In the following paragraphs the findings from the desk review of the monitoring report/MR/, the calculation spreadsheet/XLS/, GS PDD/PDD/, the GS Validation Report/VAL/ and other supporting documents, as well as from the on-site assessment and the interviews are summarised.

The summary of CAR, CL and FAR issued are shown in Table 4-1:

Table 4-1: Summary of CAR, CL and FAR

Verification topic No. of CAR

No. of CL No. of FAR

A – Description of project activity 0 1 0

B – Implementation of project activity 0 1 0

C – Description of monitoring system 0 0 0

D – Data and parameters 1 0 0

E - Calculation of Emission Reductions 0 0 0

SUM 1 2 0

The following tables include all raised CARs, CLs and FARs and the assessments of the same by the verification team. For an in depth evaluation of all verification items it should be referred to the verification protocols (see Annex).

Finding A1

Classification CAR CL FAR

Description of finding

Describe the finding in unam-biguous style; address the context (e.g. section)

In section A.3 of the MR, the project proponent name is not identical with name in the project page of UNFCCC website. Kindly Clarify.

Corrective Action #1

This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the cor-rective action taken in details. In case the MR is changed as part of the CA, the PP is requested to indicate the revised sections as well as the new version No.

The project proponent is Bagepalli Coolie Sangha as mentioned in the PDD and the Host Country Approval. As mentioned in the UNFCCC website, M/s Bagepalli Coolie Sangha (BCS) and FairClimateFund (FCF) is the project proponent mentioned in the revised Monitoring report.

Changes in MR Section(s): first page, A.3 New version No.:2 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: DOE Assessment #1

The assessment shall

(20)

Finding A1

pass all open issues in annex A-1. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and DOE assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added.

and in line with the project proponent name as appearing in the UNFCCC project page hence CL is closed.

Conclusion

Tick the appropriate checkbox

To be checked during the next periodic verification Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed

Finding B1

Classification CAR CL FAR

Description of finding

Section B.1 of the MR is not filled as per guideline and the implementation schedule is not in line with the information provided in the Excel sheets.

Corrective Action #1

The section B.1 of Monitoring Report has been revised to include the information provided in excel sheets for the implementation schedule. The section has been modified to include the implementation status for the monitoring period, the breakdown details and the future implementation plan.

Changes in MR Section(s):B.1 New version No.:2 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: DOE Assessment #1

The assessment shall encom-pass all open issues in annex A-1. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and DOE assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added.

The Implementation status and the further schedule are incorporated in the section B.1 of the revised MR, which is in line with the information given in ER sheets and as per the MR filling guidelines hence CL B1 is closed.

Conclusion

Finding D1

Classification _CAR _CL _FAR

Description of finding

The monitoring frequency of “other Pollutants” is not in line with the registered Gold standard passport. The last laboratory analysis was conducted more than 2 years ago.

Corrective Action #1

The latest test report conducted on 20-06-2013 was submitted to DOE. The report details and test values are updated in the SDI report and the test reports are attached in the annex 2.

Changes in MR Section(s): first page, A.3 New version No.:2 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: DOE Assessment #1

The assessment shall encom-pass all open issues in annex

The test report for microbial content in the slurry and cow dung was conducted on 20-06-2013. The SDI report has been updated. The corresponding values are also updated and thus the monitoring of

(21)

Finding D1

A-1. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and DOE assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added.

the parameter is every 2 years as per the registered gold standard passport. Hence CAR is closed.

Conclusion

(22)

5. SUMMARY OF VERIFICATION ASSESSMENTS

The following paragraphs include the summary of the final verification assessments after all CARs and CLs are closed out. For details of the assessments pl. refer to the discussion of the verification findings in chapter 4 and the verification protocol (Annex 1).

5.1. Involved Parties and Project Participants

The following parties to the Kyoto Protocol and project participants are involved in this project activity.

Table 5-1: Project Parties and project participants

Characteristic Party Project Participant

Non-Annex 1 India M/s Bagepalli Coolie Sangha (BCS)

Annex 1 Netherlands FairClimateFund (FCF)

5.2. Implementation of the project

During the GS verification a site visit was carried out. On the basis of this site visit and the reviewed project documentation it can be confirmed that w.r.t. the realized technology, the project equipment, as well as the monitoring. The project has been implemented and operated as described in the registered GS PDD and GS Passport. The project activity involves the installation and operation of 18 000 digesters in phases, at individual households and use of biogas produced in biogas stoves for cooking purpose and heating of hot water, replacing the commonly used inefficient wood fired mud stoves technology, thus avoiding the use of non-renewable biomass like the fuel wood from forests and the use of kerosene in the baseline scenario. In accordance with the chosen methodology, AMS-I.E. version 01 and AMS - I.C. version 13, in the absence of the project activity, the baseline scenario would be the use of fuelwood and fossil fuels (kerosene) for meeting similar thermal energy needs. As for this monitoring period only 11,633 digesters of 2 m3 capacity have been installed. This is as per the database and as verified from the invoice for the supplies made as well as from the end user agreements (between BCS and End users). These 11,633 biogas units have been considered in the calculation of emission reductions during this monitoring period. Also for the new digesters installed during this monitoring period the emission reduction is apportioned accordingly for the number of days they were in operation (from the date of installation to the last day of the monitoring period).

(23)

Also the 11,633 digester as part of the project activity were implemented in villages of 5 taluks of Chickballapur District in Karnataka. The first unit was commisioned on 1st february in 2010.

5.3. Project history

During the validation the validating DOE has not raised any issues that could not be closed or resolved during the validation stage. For this purpose no FARs is raised. No such issues were identified for this project. This was confirmed from table 4-1 of the validation report/VAL/

During the on-site visit and the desk review process, the audit team reviewed different information from the operational system of the project, logbooks, surveys reports, communications and other internal reports and records in order to identify changes or incidents during the operation of the project.

No events or situations occurred in the monitoring period that impacted the applicability of the methodology and monitoring plan.

Furthermore in the second periodic verification also no issues were raised by the verifying DOE as referred from the verification report page 34

5.4. Post registration changes

During the registration of the project activity it was mentioned that the project will be implemented in other villages than covered under the project activity “Bagepalli CDM Biogas Programme” (UNFCCC ref No 121). In that project only 17% of the eligible households were included. So PP decided to include the left out eligible households in those villages as part of this project and the biogas-digesters commissioned after 01-02-2010 are only included in this project as evident from the supply invoices thus avoiding double counting. The de-bundling criteria is not applicable for this project activity and the Executive Board of UNFCCC already approved this proposed change from 2013-09-092

5.5. Compliance with the GS monitoring plan

The monitoring system and all applied procedures are completely in compliance to the registered GS carbon and sustainability monitoring plan. Regarding the compliance with the monitoring plan, the verification team reviewed if:

 The monitoring of reductions in GHG emissions resulting from the proposed CDM Project activity were implemented in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered PDD.

 The monitoring plan and the applied methodologies had been properly implemented and followed by the project participants.

2

(24)

 All parameters stated in the monitoring plan, the applied methodologies and relevant CDM EB decisions had been sufficiently monitored and updated.

 The responsibilities and authorities for monitoring and reporting were in accordance with the responsibilities and authorities stated in the monitoring plan.

The monitoring system and all applied procedures are in compliance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered PDD, and the applied methodology AMS-I.E. ver.01, based on the information included in the final monitoring report.

Thus, it is concluded by verification team that the monitoring plan as stipulated in section B.7.2 of the registered PDD, and is observed to be followed in the project and the description of the monitoring system provided under section C of the Carbon Monitoring Report/MR/ is verified during onsite observation, verification of plant records/REC/, /TRG/ and interview with the involved personnel in operation and maintenance of the bio-digesters are found to be appropriate by verification team.

5.6. Compliance with the sustainability monitoring plan

The SD indicators as per the validated monitoring plan/GPP/ are monitored and reported appropriately and cross-verified by means of desk review of supporting documents, interviews with the PP, and with the involved personnel in operation and maintenance of the biogas digesters. The monitoring system and all applied procedures are in compliance to the registered monitoring plan and the Gold Standard conservativeness principle.

5.7. Compliance with the monitoring methodology

The monitoring system is in compliance with the applied monitoring methodology AMS-I.E. ver.01 i.e. “Switch from Non-Renewable Biomass for thermal applications by the user” and AMS-I.C version 13 i.e. “Thermal energy for the user with or without electricity”

The verification team reviewed whether the registered monitoring plan was in accordance with the applied methodology and if any other monitoring aspect of the project activity that is not specified in the methodology was identified.

 The verification team confirmed that the monitoring plan of the validated CDM Project acitivity is in accordance with the applied approved methodologies based on the following reasons:

 During the desk review monitoring parameters included in the applied methodology were compared with the ones included in the monitoring plan of the registered PDD and they were found consistent.

 During this verification process no need was identified for revision of the monitoring plan.

(25)

 No other relevant aspects for monitoring not included in the methodology were identified.

 No deviations from the monitoring methodology were identified during the verification process.

Thus, it is concluded by verification team that the monitoring report and emissions reduction calculations are in line with the requirements of the validated monitoring plan as well as with the applied methodology. Thus, the reporting procedures correctly reflect the requirements of the monitoring plan

5.8. Monitoring parameters

During the verification all relevant monitoring parameters (as listed in chapter B.7.1 of the PDD) have been verified with regard to the appropriateness of the applied measurement / determination method, the correctness of the values applied for ER calculation, the accuracy, and applied QA/QC measures. The results as well as the verification procedure are described parameter-wise in the project specific verification checklist.

The following data and parameters fixed ex ante were checked by the verification team to be in line with the registered PDD.

(1) Net calorific value of the non-renewable biomass that is substituted;

NCVbiomass = 0.015 TJ/t and NCVkerosene = 0.0438TJ/t

(2) Emission factor for the projected fossil fuel consumption in the baseline;

EFprojected_fossil fuel = 71.5 tCO2 / TJ for kerosene

(3) Fraction of biomass used in the absence of the project activity in year y that can be established as non renewable biomass using nationally approved methods;

fNRB,y = 80%

(4) The rating of the biogas digesters 1.84 kW/digester.

(5) Quantity of woody biomass that is substituted or displaced per year and appliance; By= 3.0733 tonnes/family/year.

The Ex-post monitoring parameters required to be monitored are

(1) number of biogas units constructed which is 11,633 based on the data base and supply invoices.

(2) number of biogas plants operating which is 11,633 based on maintenance records

(3) Confirmation that non-renewable biomass of By has been substituted. – as per the sample survey.

(4) Non-usage of biogas plants – total 224,101 days as per the maintenance records. (5) Diversion of renewable biomass saved under the project activity by

(26)

(6) Annual hours of operation of an average system which is 3.48 hours per day per family- as per the sample surveys.

Verification team checked the data base (invoice records), maintenance records as well as the survey records to confirm that the values of the monitored parameters are correct and therefore the emission reduction calculation is also correct.

After appropriate corrections were carried out by the project participant it can be confirmed that all monitoring parameters have been measured / determined without material misstatements and in line with all applicable standards and relevant requirements

5.9. Monitoring report

A draft monitoring report was submitted to the verification team by the project participants. The team has made this report publicly available prior to the start of the verification activities. No comments were received.

During the verification, mistakes and needs for clarification were identified. The PP has carried out the requested corrections so that it can be confirmed that the Monitoring report is complete and transparent and in accordance with the registered PDD and other relevant requirements.

5.10. Sampling

5.10.1. Implementation of the sampling plan

The sampling was required to determine the following monitored parameters. (i) Confirmation that non-renewable biomass of By has been substituted. (ii) Annual hours of operation of the system

(iii) Diversion of renewable biomass saved under the project activity by non-project households.

The PP took the target population as 11,633 to confirm that non-renewable biomass of By has been substituted and to estimate the annual hours of operation. Based on the previous survey the mean and standard deviation is taken. The sample size estimated through stratified sampling survey to obtain 90/10 confidence/precision levels with 80% response rate is 30 households. However the PP took 115 samples hence the sample size taken is adequate as the PP used the formula as per EB 67 annex 6. As per the survey records it was confirmed, the extent of replacement of non-renewable fuelwood is complete and the average working hours as 3.48 hours/day/stove and since the achieved precision is 3.33% the same is accepted.

(27)

Secondly the PP used the Bill Godden equation3 for the sample size estimation to determine the diversion of non-renewable biomass saved under the project activity by non-project households as the target population is infinite (> 50,000) and considering 90/10 confidence/precision levels the estimated sample size is 68. However the PP took the 282 samples for the same.

The sample estimated (for both cases) are apportioned accordingly to the number of biogas digesters implemented in each mandal and accordingly the villages and households are selected.

The analysis of the sample survey indicates that leakage is zero for this project. However the PP considered 5% leakage for the project as per the latest version 5 of the applied methodology.

The above determined parameter is not directly concerned with the estimation of the baseline emissions and is required for the leakage emissions only. Since PP considered 5% leakage which is conservative, VT has the opinion that the sampling plan is correct and appropriately applied for the monitoring period.

5.10.2. Sampling approaches during verification

For the calculation of Baseline emissions all parameters are monitored by PP. But for the estimation of the parameters for leakage in the above section the PP used Sample survey.

VT verified the installation and non - operational days of all 11,633 digesters from the data base and other records provided by the PP. However, for the physical location of the digesters the VT combined the PP samples for leakage estimation and Non – renewable biomass substitution to arrive at the number of digesters to be visited. Accordingly the VT decided to verify 20% of the samples taken by PP. The VT visited 24 sampled households from 115 samples and furthermore 10 non sample households. Also VT interviewed 15 households who are not the part of the project activity from both the sampled villages and non - sampled villages.

The VT prepared a questionnaire for the same and recorded observed details and cross checked for correctness for all those households visited with the data information provided in the data base as well as in the survey records and found correct.

Thus the sample size taken by VT is 24 out of the 115. Thus around 20% of the PP samples are covered which is deemed adequate. Also the non- sampled households are also visited to ensure the usage of non- renewable biomass.

3

(28)

5.11. ER Calculation

During the verification no mistakes in the ER calculation were identified after thoroughly checking the ER calculations prepared by the PP. Thus it is confirmed that the ER calculation is overall correct.

The formulae and factors used in the calculations of removals are in accordance to the applied methodologies/METH/. All aspects related to the GHG reductions have been addressed and calculations are presented in a transparent manner and in line with the applied methodologies, tools and the revised approved PDD/PDD/.

All assumptions, default values etc. are in accordance with AMS-I.E and AMS-I.C. and have been appropriately applied. The sources of project specific original data were cross–checked and found to be correct based on the evidence provided by the PP. The same is listed in table 7-1 of this report.

As per methodology AMS-I.E. version 1 the following formula is used to calculate the Emission reductions due to the displacement of non-renewable biomass.

ERy = By * fNRB,y * NCVBiomass * EFprojected_fossilfuel

Where:

ERy = Emission reductions during the year y

By = Quantity of biomass that is substituted or displaced in

t/family/yr

fNRB,y = Fraction of biomass used in the absence of the project activity

in year y that can be established as non-renewable biomass using survey methods

NCVBiomass = Net calorific value of the non-renewable biomass that is

substituted (IPCC default for wood fuel, 0.015 TJ/tonne)

EFprojected_fossilfuel = Emission factor for the projected fossil fuel consumption in the

baseline

For By the PP considered non-operational days (224,101 days for all stoves ) and accordingly calculated By = 48,962 tonnes.

ERy = 48,962 t* 80%* 0.015 * 71.5 tCO2e/TJ

=42,009 tCO2e

As per methodology AMS-I.C version 13, the displacement of kerosene due to the usage of the Biogas digester is calculated as follows

ERy = 970,550 l*0.7782kg/l/1000*0.0438 TJ/t *71.5 tCO2e/TJ = 2,484 tCO2e

Reduction in kerosene is estimated as 970,550 liters considering 60.92 l/family/ year for the installed 11633 biogas digester stoves (PP excluded the non –operation days in the estimation)

(29)

Thus the total Emission reductions

ERy =42,009 tCO2e + 2,484 tCO2e

= 44,493 tCO2e.

There are no project emissions in the project activity.

As per the survey methods the following parameters are estimated as zero: (i) Confirmation that non-renewable biomass of By has been substituted.

(ii) Diversion of renewable biomass saved under the project activity by non-project households

However PP considered 5% leakage as per the latest version 5 of the applied methodology to account for leakage.

LEy = 5% * 42,099 tCO2e = 2,100 tCO2e. Therefore

ERy = BEy - PEy - LEy

= 44,493 tCO2e - 0 – 2,100 tCO2e = 42,393 tCO2e.

Thus total emission reductions achieved during this monitoring period are

42,393 tCO2e.

5.12. Quality Management

Quality Management procedures for measurements, collection and compilation of data, data storage and archiving, calibration, maintenance and training of personnel in the framework of this CDM project activity have been defined. The procedures defined can be assessed as appropriate for the purpose. No significant deviations thereof have been observed during the verification

BCS is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the project and data collection. BCS has sufficiently established management procedures and has implemented them effectively to ensure that the process is consistent and the same has been verified to be in place by VT during site audit. The procedure for data collection methods and storage is evidenced during the onsite visits on interviewing the responsible persons for the same. The training records indicate that proper training was given to the field level persons.

The procedures cover management responsibilities, data monitoring procedures, training procedures, management reviews and corrective actions in case of any deviations. VT confirms from the discussions that were held during the site visit that the responsibilities and authorities in the management and operational system for monitoring and reporting are in accordance with the responsibilities and authorities as detailed in the PDD and complies with the monitoring plan as per the PDD..

(30)

5.13. Monitoring of Sustainable Development Indicators

The Sustainable development parameters are monitored as indiated in the below table.

Indicator Parameter Value DOE Assessment

Air quality Reduction in 1. Indoor Smoke 2. Suspended Air

particles in air

100% 100%

The survey results/SUR/ (conducted by the PP) indicate that due the implementation of the project activity the indoor smoke and suspended air particles are completely eliminated in the installed households due to the complete combustion of biogas. During the on-site visit the VT randomly selected some of the households (both surveyed and non-surveyed) and enquired about the air quality and concluded that the project completely reduced the smoke and suspended air particles after the implementation of the biogas plant

when compared with traditional

cooking.

The sampling plan for the indicator is annual by recording the experiences via questionnaire sheets and the collected information is used to substantiate the actual scenario. Other pollutants Total Bacterial Count (X 105 CFU/g) Dung – 54 Slurry- 25 Reduction -53.7%

Accredited Lab test was conducted once in two years (report/TEST/ dated 2013-06-20) and the same is checked to ascertain the same. Thus it is confirmed that the project reduces the organic pathogens in the project area. Quality of

employment

Training given to staff to develop skills

250 in total The implementation of the project has given employment to masons and

biogas workers for effective

monitoring and maintenance. The

wage records and the balance sheets are checked to confirm the same. The trainings records/TRG/ are checked and interviews with the masons and Biogas workers confirmed that the project improved the quality of employment.

Also the wage records of those persons were checked to confirm the

(31)

Indicator Parameter Value DOE Assessment same. Direct employment increase in other activities One labour replacement

Before the start of the project the women folk and/children in the project households are entrusted with the job collecting fuel wood. This is clearly established before the start of the

project through the baseline

establishment at the time of

registration. Due to the project the time spent on fuel wood collection has been massively reduced and women are able to go for other agricultural activities and thus in turn their employment has increased. This is inference through the sustainable development indicator survey records and also during the on –site visits.. Other activities Dairy related During the onsite visit the interview

one of the milk procurement society it

was confirmed that the milk

procurement has increased in the project area (increase in cattle heads as well as high yielding cattle).

Thus the project improves the

employment generation. Livelihood of

the poor

Decrease in cooking hour and fuel wood collection. 5 hours to 3 hours Fuel wood collection eradicated

The sustainable development

indicator survey/SUR/ conducted

indicates that there is a daily reduction in cooking time of about 3.45 hours at an average. This relives the women of the household from drudgery work. During the on-site visit all those women folks interviewed happily indicated the same.

Also the project completely

eradicated the fuel wood collection time.

Thus the project improves the

livelihood of the poor. Access to

affordable and clean energy services

Click of Knob - The composition of biogas is mainly

methane and carbon dioxide. The operation of the stoves itself similar to the LPG stoves, click of the knob they start the cooking.

During site visit the beneficiaries indicated that during rainy reason it is

(32)

Indicator Parameter Value DOE Assessment

difficult for them to litter the fire woods.

Thus due to this project they are having good access to the clean energy. Human and institutional capacity Children going to school in time Attending unexpected guests 74% - said Yes 54% - Said Yes

Due to the less time in cooking and no time spent on collecting fire woods, the children of the beneficiary households are able to attend the

school in time. The same is

evidenced through the sustainable development indicator surveys and cross checked during the on-site visits.

During the onsite visit interview the women folks are happy to prepare Tea/ coffee at short notice.

Also some women folk indicated that they cook variety of item and able to

attend the unexpected guests

properly.

Thus the project improves the human and institutional capacity of the people. Quantitative employment and income generation Dairy Income Painting Walls INR 980/month INR 448/year

The average income due to dairy activities has increased by INR

980/month. The sustainable

development indicators survey is taken and the average dairy income is derived based on the survey. Also the during on site interview with the

personnel from the local milk

procurement kiosks indicated the arrival of milk from the collie sangha

members have increased

proportionally and the end users indicated that their earning potential increased

The wall painting is not required to be

done as the black smoke is

completely eradicated. Balance of payments and investment Funding INR 157 Million

The project brought INR 157 Million as forward funding through sale of CERS. Thus due to this project the investment is made. The same is

(33)

Indicator Parameter Value DOE Assessment

balance sheets/REC/.

5.14. Actual emission reductions during the first commitment

period and the period from 1 January 2013 onwards

The MR includes actual ER values achieved up to 31 December 2012 and actual values achieved from 1 January 2013 onwards as follows:

Table 5-2: Emission reductions before and after the end of 2012

until 2012-12-31 1)

from 2013-01-01 1)

Sum

Emission reductions [tCO2e] NA 42,393 42,393

1)

Both days included

5.15. Comparison with ex-ante estimated emission reductions

The MR includes a comparison of the calculated actual emission reductions with the ex-ante calculated values in the registered PDD.

The calculated value was found to be proportionally lower than the ex-post determined value due to the lesser number of installations than the anticipated one, thus no further justification was required.

5.16. Overall Aspects of the Verification

All necessary and requested documentation was provided by the project participants so that a complete verification of all relevant issues could be carried out.

Access was granted to all installations of the plant which are relevant for the project performance and the monitoring activities.

No issues have been identified indicating that the implementation of the project activity and the steps to claim emission reductions are not compliant with GS requirements or any other scheme the monitoring is referring to.

5.17. Hints for next periodic Verification

(34)

6. VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT

M/s Bagepalli Coolie Sangha (BCS) has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program to carry out the 3rd periodic verification of the project: “Biogas CDM Project of Bagepalli Coolie Sangha”, with regard to the relevant requirements for GS project activities. The project reduces GHG emissions due to the implementation of the biogas digesters to replace non-renewable biomass and kerosene for thermal energy requirements for households. This verification covers the period from 2013-01-01 to 2014-06-30(including both days).

In the course of the verification 0 Corrective Action Requests (CAR) and 2 Clarification Requests (CL) were raised and successfully closed. Furthermore no FARs are raised to improve the monitoring system in the future. The verification is based on the draft monitoring report, revised monitoring report, the monitoring plan as set out in the registered GS PDD, the validation report, emission reduction calculation spreadsheet and supporting documents made available to the TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP by the project participant.

As a result of this verification, the verifier confirms that:

 all operations of the project are implemented and installed as planned and described in the validated project design document.

 the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved CDM methodology, i.e., AMS-I.C. ver. 13, AMS-I.E. Vers 01

 the installed equipment essential for measuring parameters required for calculating emission reductions are calibrated appropriately.

 the monitoring system is in place and functional. The project has generated GHG emission reductions.

As the result of the 3rd periodic verification, the verifier confirms that the GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements in a conservative and appropriate manner. The emission reductions are calculated in compliance with the monitoring plan and Gold Standard conservativeness principle. Furthermore all parameters listed in the Sustainability monitoring plan are duly monitored and verified. TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP herewith confirms that the project has achieved emission reductions in the above mentioned reporting period as follows:

Emission reductions: 42,393 t CO2e Coimbatore , 2015-06-16 Essen, 2015-06-16 G Ezhilarasu. TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program Verification Team Leader

Stefan Winter TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program Final Approval

(35)

7. REFERENCES

Table 7-1: Documents provided by the project participant(s) Reference Document

/MR/ Carbon Monitoring report for the tilted project activity

dated 29/07/2014 Version 1 for the mentioned monitoring period dated 0412/2014 Version 2 for the mentioned monitoring period dated 17/02/2015 Version 3 for the mentioned monitoring period

/XLS/ Emission reduction calculation spreadsheet corresponding to monitoring report

/Rec/ Monitoring solution database at BCS head office in Bagepalli for installed biogas units monitoring details

Biogas CDM project-Break down log book for monitoring of biogas units maintained by village level volunteers for details of individual biogas units regarding break down, operational and non operational hours

Database at ADATS head office in Bagepalli maintaining information on the construction, operation & breakdown /repairs of biogas digesters

Consolidated receipts & payments statement for the period 1st April 2009 – 31 March 2014 for the bio gas project.

/PO/ End user agreements between BCS and biogas unit users

Store register maintained which has details of biogas stove issued by BCS Purchase order and specification for biogas stoves issued by BCS

/TEST/ Test report issued to BCS biogas project by Bangalore Test House with reference number 9382 and 9383 dated 20-06-2013 for the microbial testing of cow dung.

/TRG/ Training records for stove repair and maintenance to field level works dated 10-08-2013, conducted at ADATS campus.

/SUR/ Survey records of studying diversion of non-renewable biomass saved under the project activity;

Survey records of survey of the usage of non-renewable biomass and kerosene usage

Survey records for the Sustainable development indicators conducted by the PP

/SDI/ Sustainability development Indicators report dated 29 August 2014, version 1 Sustainability development Indicators report dated 12 June 2015, version 2

(36)

Table 7-2: Background investigation and assessment documents Reference Document

/meth/ AMS-I.C. ver. 13, AMS-I.E. Vers 01,

“Thermal energy for the user with or without electricity

Switch from Non-Renewable Biomass for Thermal Applications by the User”

/CPM/ TÜV NORD JI / CDM CP Manual (incl. CP procedures and forms) <

GOLD STANDARD VERIFICATION REPORT

TANDARD

Verification Report: Report No. Rev. No. Date of 1st issue: Date of this rev.

Non Annex 1 country: Annex 1 country:

Monitoring period and monitoring report

DVerR issued: On-site (from): On-site (to):

Emission reductions: [t CO2e]

CO2 Carbon dioxide

GS Gold Standard

Table of Contents

2. GHG PROJECT DESCRIPTION... 9

4. VERIFICATION FINDINGS ... 19

6. VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT ... 34

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Objective

1.2. Scope

2. GHG PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.2. Project Location

2.3. Project Verification History

3. METHODOLOGY AND VERIFICATION SEQUENCE

3.2. Contract review

3.4. Verification Planning

Table A-1: GHG calculation procedures and management control testing / Detailed audit testing of residual risk areas and random testing

Table A-2: Periodic verification checklist

3.5. Desk review

3.6. On-site assessment

Entities

3.7. Draft verification reporting

3.9. Final reporting

3.11. Final approval

Verification topic No. of CAR

Description of finding

Conclusion

Corrective Action #1

Conclusion

Corrective Action #1

Conclusion

5. SUMMARY OF VERIFICATION ASSESSMENTS

5.2. Implementation of the project

5.4. Post registration changes

5.6. Compliance with the sustainability monitoring plan

5.8. Monitoring parameters

fNRB,y = 80%

5.9. Monitoring report

5.10.2. Sampling approaches during verification

5.11. ER Calculation

5.12. Quality Management

Indicator Parameter Value DOE Assessment

Indicator Parameter Value DOE Assessment

Indicator Parameter Value DOE Assessment

5.14. Actual emission reductions during the first commitment

5.15. Comparison with ex-ante estimated emission reductions

5.17. Hints for next periodic Verification

7. REFERENCES