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 does not contain information on Regulatory Requirements to be checked annually as per PDD.

2: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain calculations of baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage (if any), and/or emission reductions, including reference to formulae and methods used. (EB48 - Annex 68 paragraph 10 (a) (vii))
Issue: The monitoring report does not provide calculations related to PEflare.

3: Scope: The verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project. (For project activities that consist of more than one site, the report shall clearly describe the status of implementation and starting date of operation for each site. For CDM project activities with phased implementation, the report shall state the progress of the proposed CDM project activity achieved in each phase under verification). (VVM v.1.2 para 198 (a)).
Issue: The DOE does not provide an assessment on the status of La Carrilera section of La Pradera landfill, as it has provided for La Musica and Altair sections, in the 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: The DOE has not provided an assessment on all events occurred in the monitoring period related to the project activity operation such as limitations of the flaring system shut-downs and other unusual occurrences as reported in the monitoring report, and how the same has been verified for each one of the periods affected.

5: Scope: The verification report does not list each parameter required by the monitoring plan (VVM v.1.2 para 206)
Issue: The DOE does not provide an assessment on the parameter TDLy listed in the monitoring plan.

6: 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 information flow of the listed parameters is not clearly assessed by the DOE in its verification report. In response of an incomplete submission, the flare manufacture’s operational range for the flare temperature reported has been changed, and some of the listed parameters' monthly values reported (such as LFGflared - including increase, nFlare, PEFlare,y - not affected while other parameters are affected reported in "CER spreadsheet" for La Pradera II) have also changed. Hence the DOE is requested to clearly assess the information flow of the associated parameters and calculations. Additionally, the DOE is requested to assess the relation of this operational range of flare temperature to the default values used for flare efficiency (0%, 50% and 90% if applicable) and its impact on the emission reduction calculation during the monitoring period.

7: Scope: The verification report does not determine if the assumptions used in emission calculations have been justified and/or emission factors, default values and other reference values have been correctly applied. (VVM v.1.2 para 208 (d) & (e))
Issue: The PDD indicates for the default value of emission factor applied that "The validity of the value applied will checked annually from the applied tool" while this check is not assessed by the DOE in its verification report. Additionally the DOE has not provided an assessment on Regulatory Requirements, to be annually checked as per PDD.

8: Scope: The verification report does not contain information on all CARs, CLs and FARs and/or provide an assessment and close out of any CARs, CLs or FARs issued. (VVM v.1.2 para 192, 194)
Issue: CAR 1 refers to the information stated in the monitoring report as "no emission reductions were claimed during the relevant twelve (12) days period" however after closing CAR 1, the monitoring report has not been corrected.