Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: The DOE is required to determine whether there are permanent changes to the registered monitoring plan and the changes to the registered monitoring plan described in the revised PDD are in compliance with the applied methodologies, standardized baselines and other applied standards or tools, and do not reduce the level of accuracy of the monitoring compared with the requirements contained in the registered monitoring plan as per para 296-7 of VVS for PA..
1) The validation opinion (p 16) states that “the CEA notification 2006, which confirms that “all interface meters shall be tested at least once in five years. These meters shall also be tested whenever the energy and other quantities recorded by the meter are abnormal or inconsistent with electrically adjacent meters”.” However, the revised PDD (p 27) states that “The panel meters are maintained and owned by the equipment suppliers”. Therefore, the DOE is required to provide further information on how it validated the changes in the calibration frequency as the CEA notification only refers to “interface meters”.
2)The DOE did not provide its validation opinion on 1) the change of the name of the grid from and accuracy of the name of the grid from Tami Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) to Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO) and 2) the change of accuracy of the main meter from 0.5 to 0.2

2: The DOE is required to determine whether the monitoring of parameters related to GHG emission reductions or net anthropogenic GHG removals in the registered PDD has been implemented in accordance with the registered monitoring plan as per the paragraph 363 of VVA of PA.
The DOE verified (p 10) in the verification report that the total electricity exported to the grid for the period of 20/09/2013 - 31/12/2013 is 2,569.87 MWh which is lower than the net electricity generation for 2013 (3,975.21 MWh) indicated in the verification report.

3: The DOE is required to apply the conservative approach if it identifies the delayed calibration as per the paragraph 369-370 of VVS of PA.
The DOE states that "The PP has applied the maximum permissible error of the energy meter changed for the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of change of new energy meter. The error factor is applied and subtracted in energy exported, consistent with VVS." However, it is not clear how it applied the maximum error as per the VVS para 369 (a) which states that “Applying the maximum permissible error of the instrument to the measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration, if the results of the delayed calibration do not show any errors in the measuring equipment, or if the error is smaller than the maximum permissible error.”