Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: Assessment opinion Post Registration Changes - Revised PDD
The DOE is requested to clarify on the changes to the registered monitoring plan considering that the revised PDD (Appendix 7, page 96) establishes that the changes are two: type of sampling framework (from systematic to random sampling) and monitoring all trees instead of the ones with diameters higher than 2.5 cm. While the assessment opinion, monitoring report and verification report documents refer to three changes due to sampling framework as permanent change; stratification factors (tree age and plantation density) as temporary deviation and total planted area as changes to the project design.
The PP/DOE are requested to refer to the same changes in all the documents related to this request for issuance.

2: Monitoring report
Section E.2 of the Monitoring Report describes the application of the formulae to calculate carbon stocks. However, it is not clear how bTREE,j,p,i (tree biomass j in sample plot p of stratum i) is being calculated as the equation shown in page 27 [bTREE,j,p,i=13.619*ln(DBH)+17.891] of the monitoring report is not fully justified. The same equation is applied in the calculation spreadsheet.

Please further justify the equations applied to calculate bTREE,j,p,i; DBH, R2 (coefficient of determination) and ni explaining why and how these are applicable to the current A/R project activity.
Please note that all the corresponding documents shall be consistent and reflect any additional information presented.
In doing so refer to the latest versions of the Tool “Demonstrating appropriateness of allometric equations for estimation of aboveground tree biomass in A/R CDM project activities” paragraph 6; Tool “Calculation of the number of sample plots for measurements within A/R CDM project activities” and CDM Project Standard, paragraph 265.

3: The spreadsheet (NASPP_ARACM0003v1.xls) is divided into 6 sheets:

1) stands, lists 143 stands ids as per 8 stratums. For each stand a total area was input.

2) tress data, lists plots ids as per stratum. For each plot circumspherence was input. Total tree biomass, tree CO2, and CO2/ha have been calculated. Equations are not shown and units are not clearly stated. Tree biomass equation is not shown.

3) calc, calculation of CO2/ha as per each plot is shown. Formula is not presented. It is not clear why this value is not the same as the one calculated in trees data.

4) references, lists references for plot area, carbon fraction of 0.5, root shoot of 0.27 (its source is missing?), allometric model equation (THiam 2014) for Senegal but the PA is in Niger.

5) error, compares the actual number of plots sampled against a calculation of plots needed. However, the calculations do not show formulae.

6) plots id, shows ids of plots as per stand and stratums.
The PP is requested to:
a) present the formulae and source applied in the spreadsheet (NASPP_ARACM0003v1.xls) calculation for trees data, calc and error sheets. In particular for total tree biomass, CO2 per hectare and mean biomass respectively.
b) include the full units for all parameters calculated of the spreadsheet. E.g.: cells D5 and H5 in Calc sheet; cell L3 in Error sheet; column I in Trees_data sheet; etc.


4: Verification report
The DOE is requested to provide a validation opinion on how the allometric equation applies to the project activity considering details of the application of paragraph 6 of the A/R tool “Demonstrating appropriateness of allometric equations for estimation of aboveground tree biomass in A/R CDM project activity” to the cited reference, Thiam (2014) as it refers to Senegal while the project activity is located in Niger.

The PP/DOE shall revise the spreadsheet calculation file (NASPP_ARACM0003V1 calculation tool V2) as: a) the sheet called 'Ratio_DB-DHP.xlsx' (mentioned in the Verification Report, page 25) is not part of the spreadsheet calculation file for this request; and b)

In doing so refer to the latest versions of the Tool “Demonstrating appropriateness of allometric equations for estimation of aboveground tree biomass in A/R CDM project activities” paragraph 6; Tool “Calculation of the number of sample plots for measurements within A/R CDM project activities” and VVS paragraphs 367, 398 (e).

5: Verification report
The DOE provided validation opinions on whether the calculations, formulae, data, etc. were applied as per the A/R CDM tools and methodologies. However, verification details of how the calculations for the change in the carbon stocks in the selected carbon pools (change CP,t) were carried out are not fully validaded. In particular for the bTREE,p,i (tree biomass per hectare in plot p of stratum i) and ni, number of sample plots.
In doing this, particular attention may be paid to the following considerations:
a) range of DBH from which allometric equations were derived by the authors of the publication cited and the range of diameters to which these equations are applied by the PPs, are compatible or not;
b) range of diameter-at-20-cm-height from which the “DBH vs. D20” regression was derived and the range to which this regression was applied are compatible or not;
c) measured values of (D20, DBH) pairs used for regression were seen by the DOE or not, the actual measurement of these values were verified or not.

The DOE should also justify how is it possible that, as shown in the sheet “tree data”, the biomass of trees with a circumference of 20 cm and trees with a circumference of 2 cm (and even 1.4 cm) are nearly the same. AR-TOOL14 Methodological tool: Estimation of carbon stocks and change in carbon stocks of trees and shrubs in A/R CDM project activities is said to have been applied for monitoring. Appendix 1, paragraph3, Note, of this tool specifies a method for estimation of biomass of saplings (i.e. the seedlings that could not grow into trees). The DOE and the PPs should justify why this method could not be used in their case.