Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: Scope: The monitoring report does not contain a description of the monitoring systems, quality assurance and/or quality control system employed by the project activity, data collection procedures (information flow including data generation, aggregation, recording, calculation and reporting), organizational structure, roles and responsibilities of personnel, emergency procedures for the monitoring system, and/or line diagrams showing all relevant monitoring points).
Issue: The monitoring report does not provide illustration on monitoring points for relevant parameters and does not describe the information flow from data monitored to calculation of emission reductions (PS v.7 paragraph 250)

2: Scope: The verification report does not describe the implementation status of the project.
Issue 1: The verification report, on section 3.3., indicates that the turbine of 20.9 MW capacity was commissioned on 10 March 2012, verified by the DOE in commissioning certificate. On session 3.4, the verification report states that the electricity export to the grid started from 27 January 2012, which is earlier than the commissioning date. This difference was also noticed in the monitoring report version 1, which states that the project has been successfully commissioned on 27/01/2012 and outages records are dated since January 2012. The DOE is requested to clarify this discrepancy in start of operations and commissioning dates in its verification report and clarify if any project emissions occurred and should be accounted between the start of the monitoring period and the date from which emission reductions have been considered for this monitoring period (10 March 2012) (VVS v.7 paragraph 273)

3: Scope: The verification 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 (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) for these parameters including the values in the monitoring reports.
Issue: The DOE confirmed that no quantity of RDF was used outside the project boundary or sold during the verification period as could be confirmed from the sale and weigh bridge records. The DOE is requested to explain which figures supported its conclusion, considering records of RDF production, RDF consumption and available inventory shall be checked, as per monitoring plan (VVS v.7 paragraph 279)

4: 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
Issue: The verification report does not provide information on the calibration of load cells used to monitor quantity of RDF produced and it is not clear if assessment of calibration of load cells used to monitor RDF combusted provided also applies for load cells monitoring RDF produced (VVS v.7 paragraph 279)