Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain the values of the monitored parameters. (EB 54 Annex 34)
Issue: The monitoring report states in section D.2 that the final sludge will be used for soil application, however does not indicate if the same has been removed/applied during this monitoring period.

2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain information on calibration of monitoring instruments (frequency, relevant dates of calibration and/or validity) as specified by the monitoring methodology and the monitoring plan. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (iv) & EB 54 Annex 34)
Issue: The calibration date provided for the temperature meter to monitor the temperature of the flare (calibrated on 02/06/2009, next calibration due to 28/06/2010, as per Annex 2) do not cover the whole monitoring period (23/11/2009 - 30/11/2010).

3: Scope: The spreadsheet does not contain explanation with regard to application of formulae in the spreadsheet. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (b) (iii)).
Issue: In the excel sheet provided identified as "CER Calculation spreadsheet Olmeca", under "EBpower log", values are missing in between 1st and 5th of July 2010 where cell are highlighted however no explanations are provided or the information assessed in verification report.

4: 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: Under section 3.2 "Project Implementation", the verification report does not provide information on assessment of the flaring system. Additionally the report indicates that the methane combustion units consists of 2 GENSET units of each 1,050 kW installed capacity while the monitoring report indicates the installed capacity as 1,059 kW

5: Scope: The verification report does not state how the DOE verified the information flow for the listed parameters. (VVM v.1.2 para 206)
Issue: The verification report does not indicate how the DOE verified the information flow for each monitoring parameter, including what type of instrument has been used for monitoring purpose (missing from Table 3).

6: Scope: The verification report does not indicate that the information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked with other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records, laboratory analyses. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (a) and (b))
Issue: The verification report does not indicate how the DOE verified all COD external tests conducted in the monitoring period (including for COD untreated) and how it verified the manufacturer's specifications on proper operation of the flare which is used to determine the default values used for flare efficiency.

7: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology or EB guidance if applicable, and/or the monitoring plan? (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)
Issue: The verification report does not provide an assessment on whether the calibration of measuring equipments was conducted at a frequency specified in applied monitoring methodology, EB guidance, or the monitoring plan.

8: Scope: The verification report does not provide an assessment of the compliance with EB 52 Annex 60 'Guidelines for assessing compliance with the calibration frequency requirements' for the calibration delay. (VVM v.1.2 para 184 (a) (ii) & EB 52 Annex 60)
Issue: The last calibration date provided in the monitoring report for the temperature meter to monitor the temperature of the flare is on 02/06/2009 and this delay, if any, has not been assessed by the DOE.