18:13 01 Sep 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: The PP/DOE is requested to substantiate how the sampling has been conducted in accordance with the sampling plan in the registered monitoring plan and the applied sampling requirements in accordance with paragraph 261 of PS for PA (ver 2.0) and paragraph 362 of VVS for PA (ver 2.0).
The PDD page 34 and the MR page 13 have the provision to apply “annual stratified sampling” to monitor the parameter “Confirmation that non-renewable biomass has been substituted”. Further the VR page 10 has the verification opinion that this parameter was monitored through stratified random sample survey. However, it is found that:
a. The MR page 15 utilized the formula to calculate the sample size which is for “simple random sampling (i.e. as per equation 1 of appendix 1 section 2.1.1 of the Guideline: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and PoAs (v4)) and which is not the formula for “stratified random sampling (i.e. as per equations (4) to (11) of appendix 1 section 2.1.3 of the Guideline: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and PoAs (v4))”. While addressing this issue, the PP/DOE is requested to clarify how the total number of households 2759 and 2821 for the respective periods 2017-18 and 2018-19 are calculated as indicated in the table of the MR page 15. It is noted that those numbers are different with the numbers as per the table in the MR page 3.
b. There is a lack of information in the PDD/MR to specify how the provision required for conducting stratified random sampling as per section 5.2 of the Guideline: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and PoAs (v4) has been fulfilled.
c. It is not clear how the CL ID 2 raised in the VR was closed as it concluded that this parameter is monitored using stratified sample survey, whereas the sample size calculation is based on simple random sampling.
The PP/DOE are requested to address this issue by providing additional clarification and revised documentations including the traceable spreadsheets (i.e. to show the formula inserted in the spreadsheets) to demonstrate how the sample sizes are calculated for all surveys reported.
2: The DOE is requested to substantiate how it has assessed the compliance of the sampling efforts and surveys with the validated sampling plan in accordance with the “Standard: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programme of activities” as per paragraph 362 of VVS for PA (Ver 2.0).
The VR page 11 has only the information that the sample size is calculated based on 90/10 confidence/precision level. However, there is no information in the VR to demonstrate how the required 90/10 confidence/precision level is achieved through all 3 surveys for the proportional parameter “Confirmation that non-renewable biomass has been substituted”. Furthermore, the MR page 17 under “Demonstration on whether the required confidence/precision has been met” states that “As the survey was to determine if non-renewal biomass has been substituted, there are no quantitative data to demonstrate confidence/precision levels”. The PP/DOE is requested to include the achieved precision of the surveys in the monitoring report and verification report. Please refer to section 5 of appendix 4 to the Guideline: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and PoAs (v4) for the method to calculate the achieved precision or reliability.
While addressing this issue, the PP/DOE are requested to provide the traceable spreadsheets (i.e. to show the formula inserted in the spreadsheets) to demonstrate how the actual confidence/precision level is achieved for all surveys reported.).
3: The PP/DOE is requested to address the inconsistencies and lack of information found as below as per the paragraphs 354, 338(c) and 372 of VVS for PA (ver.2):
a. The MR page 4 states 2813 units were operational, whereas the MR footnote 2 applies 2028 units to calculate the utilized biogas days.
b. VR page 6 indicates UQL 15% is applied whereas the VR page 11 applied UQL 20%.
c. The documents reference numbers referred in the VR page 10 for the sections of “confirmation that non-renewal biomass of By has been substituted” and “non-usage days of biogas plants” are not matched with the actual documents listed in the VR appendix 3.
1: The PP/DOE is requested to substantiate how the sampling has been conducted in accordance with the sampling plan in the registered monitoring plan and the applied sampling requirements in accordance with paragraph 261 of PS for PA (ver 2.0) and paragraph 362 of VVS for PA (ver 2.0).
The PDD page 34 and the MR page 13 have the provision to apply “annual stratified sampling” to monitor the parameter “Confirmation that non-renewable biomass has been substituted”. Further the VR page 10 has the verification opinion that this parameter was monitored through stratified random sample survey. However, it is found that:
a. The MR page 15 utilized the formula to calculate the sample size which is for “simple random sampling (i.e. as per equation 1 of appendix 1 section 2.1.1 of the Guideline: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and PoAs (v4)) and which is not the formula for “stratified random sampling (i.e. as per equations (4) to (11) of appendix 1 section 2.1.3 of the Guideline: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and PoAs (v4))”. While addressing this issue, the PP/DOE is requested to clarify how the total number of households 2759 and 2821 for the respective periods 2017-18 and 2018-19 are calculated as indicated in the table of the MR page 15. It is noted that those numbers are different with the numbers as per the table in the MR page 3.
b. There is a lack of information in the PDD/MR to specify how the provision required for conducting stratified random sampling as per section 5.2 of the Guideline: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and PoAs (v4) has been fulfilled.
c. It is not clear how the CL ID 2 raised in the VR was closed as it concluded that this parameter is monitored using stratified sample survey, whereas the sample size calculation is based on simple random sampling.
The PP/DOE are requested to address this issue by providing additional clarification and revised documentations including the traceable spreadsheets (i.e. to show the formula inserted in the spreadsheets) to demonstrate how the sample sizes are calculated for all surveys reported.
2: The DOE is requested to substantiate how it has assessed the compliance of the sampling efforts and surveys with the validated sampling plan in accordance with the “Standard: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programme of activities” as per paragraph 362 of VVS for PA (Ver 2.0).
The VR page 11 has only the information that the sample size is calculated based on 90/10 confidence/precision level. However, there is no information in the VR to demonstrate how the required 90/10 confidence/precision level is achieved through all 3 surveys for the proportional parameter “Confirmation that non-renewable biomass has been substituted”. Furthermore, the MR page 17 under “Demonstration on whether the required confidence/precision has been met” states that “As the survey was to determine if non-renewal biomass has been substituted, there are no quantitative data to demonstrate confidence/precision levels”. The PP/DOE is requested to include the achieved precision of the surveys in the monitoring report and verification report. Please refer to section 5 of appendix 4 to the Guideline: Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and PoAs (v4) for the method to calculate the achieved precision or reliability.
While addressing this issue, the PP/DOE are requested to provide the traceable spreadsheets (i.e. to show the formula inserted in the spreadsheets) to demonstrate how the actual confidence/precision level is achieved for all surveys reported.).
3: The PP/DOE is requested to address the inconsistencies and lack of information found as below as per the paragraphs 354, 338(c) and 372 of VVS for PA (ver.2):
a. The MR page 4 states 2813 units were operational, whereas the MR footnote 2 applies 2028 units to calculate the utilized biogas days.
b. VR page 6 indicates UQL 15% is applied whereas the VR page 11 applied UQL 20%.
c. The documents reference numbers referred in the VR page 10 for the sections of “confirmation that non-renewal biomass of By has been substituted” and “non-usage days of biogas plants” are not matched with the actual documents listed in the VR appendix 3.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: