Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: 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 it verified the following parameters in accordance with the monitoring plan, methodology and applicable tool which require continuous measurement, as there were periods/gaps identified without measuring equipment in place as per the Appendices 2 and 3 of the monitoring report:
(a) MEk:
- For Temperature No.1, the equipment with SN 2010040006 was removed for calibration on 08/10/2014, however the equipment with SN 2010040007 was only installed on 10/10/2014.
- For CH4% No.1, clarify whether the calibration on 13/10/2014 was for equipment with SN 30556 or 30551, as the information in the appendix 3 does not match that of in appendix 2. There is also no information on equipment with SN 30551 in appendix 3.
- For V-cone No.1, the equipment was removed for calibration on 26/03/2014, however it was only installed back on 08/04/2014.
- For DP trans No.1, clarify whether the calibration on 13/10/2014 was for equipment with SN 5476628 or 5476629, as the information in the appendix 3 does not match that of in appendix 2. There is also no information on equipment with SN 5476629 in appendix 3.
- For Temperature No.2, the equipment with SN 2010040007 was removed for calibration on 08/10/2014, however the equipment with SN 2010040006 was only installed on 09/10/2014.
- For V-cone No.2, the equipment was removed for calibration on 26/03/2014, however it was only installed back on 05/04/2014.
- For DP trans No.2, clarify whether the calibration on 13/10/2014 was for equipment with SN 5476628 or 5476629, as the information in the appendix 3 does not match that of in appendix 2. There is also no information on equipment with SN 5476628 in appendix 3.
(b) MMFL/MDFL:
- For T gas No.1 flare, T gas No.2 flare, T gas No.3 flare and T gas No.4 flare, the equipment was removed for calibration on 08/10/2014, however it was only installed back on 10/10/2014.
- For V-cone No.1 flare, V-cone No.2 flare, V-cone No.3 flare and V-cone No.4 flare, the equipment was removed for calibration on 22/09/2014, however it was only installed back on 24/09/2014.
(c) Tflare: For No.1 Flare thermal couple, No.2 Flare thermal couple, No.3 Flare thermal couple and No.4 Flare thermal couple: (i) the H and M equipment was removed for calibration on 08/10/2014, however it was only installed back on 10/10/2014; (ii) the L equipment was removed for calibration on 10/10/2014, however it was only installed back on 07/11/2014.
(d) MMELEC: For V-cone No.1 engine, V-cone No.2 engine, V-cone No.3 engine and V-cone No.4 engine, the equipment was removed for calibration on 22/09/2014, however it was only installed back on 24/09/2014.
(e) PCH4: For Engine CH4% in No.2 pre-treatment, clarify whether the calibration on 13/10/2014 was for equipment with SN 29560 or 34003. There is also no information on equipment with SN 34003 in appendix 3.
(f) GENy/CONSELEC,y:
- In appendix 3, equipment with SN 10120505440001 is stated as No.2 power meter in tank area, whereas in appendix 2 as No.1. power meter in tank area. In appendix 3, equipment with SN 10120505440002 is stated as No.1 power meter in tank area, whereas in appendix 2 as No.2. power meter in tank area. Please clarify.
- The equipment with SN 10120505440001 was removed for calibration on 04/09/2014, however it was only installed back on 24/09/2014.
- The equipment with SN 10120505440002 was removed for calibration on 24/09/2014, however it was only installed back on 07/11/2014.
- For Plant-power meter, the equipment was removed for calibration on 04/09/2014, however it was only installed back on 24/09/2014.

2: Scope: The verification and certification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan and does not provide an statement on how the DOE verified the information flow for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports as per VVS version 09.0 paragraphs 393 and 409 (e).
Issue: The DOE is requested to explain how it has verified:
(a) the determination of default value for flare efficiency in the provided emission reductions spreadsheet, in particular how it has verified the correctness of the application for each default value. The monitoring report has provided the conditions to be fulfilled for each default value and the manufacturer's specification. However from the spreadsheet it is not clear what represent the flow, the flare temperature and the flaring time/duration in hour h;
(b) the parameter HEATy, in particular how it has verified the reading by crosschecking with aggregated monitoring data and the calibration records, as well as recalculating the reported value and confirming the involved meters are performed by qualified third party, considering the heat system has not yet been installed;
(c) the PCNMHC. The monitoring report and verification report state that the concentration is below 1%, however neither has reported how many samples have been taken for this monitoring period and the results of all the samples applicable in this monitoring period.

3: 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 appendix 4 of the MR lists the following special CDM data events: (i) From 08/06/2014 12:00:00 to 16/12/2014 2:00:00, the concentration of pump station pipe 1 was lower than 25% and the action taken was "Vented gas directly"; (ii) From 26/03/2014 7:00:00 to 08/04/2014 7:00:00, there was removal of pump station v-cones for calibration, and the action taken was "Take flare and engine gas destruction as baseline"; (iii) From 13/04/2015 06:00:00 to 24/04/2015 02:00:00, there was pump station data lost due to communication fault, and the action taken was "Take flare and engine gas destruction as baseline". The DOE is requested to explain how these events have been taken into account in calculating the emission reductions.

4: Scope: The verification and certification report does not provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued, nor/or if appropriate, an assessment of remaining issues from the previous verification period as per VVS version 09.0 paragraph 409 (g) (h).
Issue: In CAR01 the DOE identified typo error in the rated capacity of the generator. The DOE is requested to explain why no correction was made, or FAR raised to correct this in the future.