05:18 24 Jun 25
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: The DOE shall report the actual operation of the registered CDM project activity. Please refer to VVS PA version 01.0 paragraph 359(b).
The page 5 of the monitoring report has indicated that the project activity has distribute the CFLs in two scenarios (described as component 1 and 2) and in 4 phases and further as per page 12 of monitoring report, only the component 2 is considered as QPJ,i for emission reduction calculation. The DOE is requested to report the actual operation status of each phases and each component, including but not limit to which phase and component are considered during this monitoring period, the reason of inclusion, etc.
2: The DOE shall state whether the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the registered monitoring plan. Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 366.
As per the page 16 of verification report and the ER spreadsheet "Implementation Data", the emission reductions are calculated for Phase 4 CFLs as per AMS.II.J version 7 and the sampling was conducted in September 2013 for phase 2 and phase 3 (e.g. page 17 of verification report, page 8 of monitoring report) as per AMS.II.J version 3. The DOE is requested to provide further information on how the sampling survey has been conducted as per the revised sampling plan and AMS.II.J version 7, considering that: 1) the sample survey done for phase 3 in Sep 2013 was directly used as Lamp failure rate of phase 4 CFLs; and 2) Page 15 of monitoring report has indicated that a deviation has been requested to use the monitoring requirements in the initially registered PDD for previous monitoring periods, whereas no deviation request has been observed and validated by the DOE.
3: The DOE shall list each parameter required by the registered monitoring plan and state how it verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring report. Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 367.
The DOE is requested to provide further information on how it has verified the parameter LFR as per page 15 of the revised PDD and AMS.II.J version 7 paragraph 30(c) considering that: 1) page 16 of the monitoring report and page 19 of verification report indicate that lamp failure rate (LFR) of 4th sampling survey conducted on Sep 2013 has been directly applied for the monitoring year 2014 and 2015, whereas the monitoring plan and methodology require that for subsequent years beginning from the year when ex post monitoring survey was conducted, a new value for Li shall be determined using equation (3) and newly calculated values of LFRi,y shall be used. The adjustment of Li and LFRi,y should be repeated every time when ex post monitoring surveys are conducted. Please also refer to footnote 11 of AMS.II.J version 7.
1: The DOE shall report the actual operation of the registered CDM project activity. Please refer to VVS PA version 01.0 paragraph 359(b).
The page 5 of the monitoring report has indicated that the project activity has distribute the CFLs in two scenarios (described as component 1 and 2) and in 4 phases and further as per page 12 of monitoring report, only the component 2 is considered as QPJ,i for emission reduction calculation. The DOE is requested to report the actual operation status of each phases and each component, including but not limit to which phase and component are considered during this monitoring period, the reason of inclusion, etc.
2: The DOE shall state whether the monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the registered monitoring plan. Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 366.
As per the page 16 of verification report and the ER spreadsheet "Implementation Data", the emission reductions are calculated for Phase 4 CFLs as per AMS.II.J version 7 and the sampling was conducted in September 2013 for phase 2 and phase 3 (e.g. page 17 of verification report, page 8 of monitoring report) as per AMS.II.J version 3. The DOE is requested to provide further information on how the sampling survey has been conducted as per the revised sampling plan and AMS.II.J version 7, considering that: 1) the sample survey done for phase 3 in Sep 2013 was directly used as Lamp failure rate of phase 4 CFLs; and 2) Page 15 of monitoring report has indicated that a deviation has been requested to use the monitoring requirements in the initially registered PDD for previous monitoring periods, whereas no deviation request has been observed and validated by the DOE.
3: The DOE shall list each parameter required by the registered monitoring plan and state how it verified the information flow (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring report. Please refer to VVS PA v1.0 paragraph 367.
The DOE is requested to provide further information on how it has verified the parameter LFR as per page 15 of the revised PDD and AMS.II.J version 7 paragraph 30(c) considering that: 1) page 16 of the monitoring report and page 19 of verification report indicate that lamp failure rate (LFR) of 4th sampling survey conducted on Sep 2013 has been directly applied for the monitoring year 2014 and 2015, whereas the monitoring plan and methodology require that for subsequent years beginning from the year when ex post monitoring survey was conducted, a new value for Li shall be determined using equation (3) and newly calculated values of LFRi,y shall be used. The adjustment of Li and LFRi,y should be repeated every time when ex post monitoring surveys are conducted. Please also refer to footnote 11 of AMS.II.J version 7.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: