Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: Scope: The verification report does not provide a summary of the verification process and/or the scope of verification. (VVM v.1.2 para 221 (a)).
Issue: The Verification Report page 4 mentions: "During the visit DNV was able to verify that the project has been implemented as planned and as mentioned in the registered PDD by visiting some of the households selected at random... ". However, the DOE is requested to explain how the verification process has been in accordance with the EB65 Annex 2 paragraphs 22-26.

2: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment that all physical features of the proposed CDM project activity proposed in the registered PDD are in place and/or that the project participant has implemented and operated the proposed CDM project activity as per the registered PDD or the approved revised PDD. (VVM v.1.2 para 196)
Issue: The Verification Report and Monitoring Report have not provided information and justification why the actual number of CFLs distributed (340,476) is lower than the number stated in the registered PDD (709,484).

3: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)
Issue: The verification report has not provided information on how the DOE has verified the result of the survey in accordance with the EB65 Annex 2 paragraphs 21.

4: Scope: The verification report does not provide a conclusion on the verified amount of emission reductions achieved and/or determine that calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions and leakage as appropriate have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology document. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (c) & 221 (h))
Issue: The DOE is required to further substantiate how it verified the apportioned value of LFRi,y applied in the 2nd year in line with applied methodology as index 'y' in the applied methodology refers to counter for year.