Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: Scope: The validation report does not contain an assessment on when the changes occurred, reasons for those changes taking place, whether the changes would have been known prior to registration of the project activity, and how the changes would impact the overall operation/ability of the project activity to deliver emission reductions as stated in the PDD as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 326 (b).
Issue: The DOE has not reported the required information as per the paragraph 326 (b) of the VVS.

2: Scope: The validation opinion report does not provide an opinion on how the changes would impact: a) additionality; b) scale; c) applicability and application of the baseline methodology: d) compliance of the monitoring plan with the applied monitoring methodology; e) level of accuracy of the monitoring, as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 320 and 326 (c).
Issue: In regard to the change o the project design of WTG S75, the DOE is requested to explain:
(a) how the applied methodology is still applicable for the project, in the absence of the information of the baseline scenario of the identified consumer;
(b) how it validated the suitability of the applied revised tariff of 4.20 INR/kWh.

3: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points). as per PS version 09.0 paragraph 246.
Issue: The monitoring report has not provided the line diagrams (graphical schemes) showing all relevant monitoring points of all the meters.

4: Scope: The verification and certification report does not state that the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with registered or the revised monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 392.
Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how the monitoring has been carried out as per the proposed monitoring plan. The revised monitoring plan requires the parameters EGy and ECy be monitored by main and check meter. However for WTG S75, the monitoring report and verification report have only reported the main meter.

5: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified by the applied methodology, the standardized baseline and/or the monitoring plan as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 400.
Issue: (a) The validation report does not provide information how the DOE verified the following calibrations that are reported in the monitoring report: (i) WTG CK02, calibrations on 09/08/2012, 06/08/2013 and 17/06/2014 of check meter 4961776; (ii) WTG MK145, calibration on 17/01/2014 for main meter 09166172;
(b) In regard to replacement of main and check meters of WTG MK145, the monitoring report mentions the replacement being on 29/01/2015, however the verification reports states it being on 30/01/2015. The DOE is requested to clarify.

6: Scope: The verification and certification report does not contain an indication whether data were not available because activity levels or non-activity parameters were not monitored in accordance with the registered monitoring plan, or does not detail the actions taken by the DOE to ensure that the most conservative assumption theoretically possible has been made as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 403 (a).
Issue: The Monitoring Report has not provided the measured value of the monitored parameters for 31/12/2012, and DOE has not verified the measured data on the aforementioned date. Note that the amount of emission reductions certified shall be equal to amount of the emission reductions verified.