19:23 16 Aug 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: As per the CDM validation and verification standard for programmes of activities Version 02.0, paragraph 390 referring to paragraph 177, the DOE shall report the assessment findings.
1.1 In describing the validation process on page 2 of 29 of the Validation Report, the DOE states that "Once the project is made available for the global stakeholder consultation process, the members of the assessment team carried out: ...". However, as per the CDM project cycle procedure for programmes of activities (version 02.0), the renewal of PoA period is not subject to global stakeholder consultation process. Kindly please correct the description.
1.2 The Validation Report (page 3 of 29) states that "Applus+Certification performed interviews, telephone conferences, and physical site inspection with project stakeholders to confirm selected information and to resolve issues identified in the document review. However, page 6 of the Validation Report has clarified that no site visit was conducted. Kindly please correct the inconsistency.
2: As per the CDM validation and verification standard for programmes of activities Version 02.0, paragraph 390 referring to paragraph 177, the DOE shall report the assessment findings including the validation opinion.
2.1 The DOE in its Validation Opinion (on page 4 and 24 of the Validation Report) refers to the title of the PoA as “Wind Energy Project PoA”. However, the correct title of the PoA is "PoA on RE". Kindly please correct the title of the PoA in the Validtation Report.
2.2 At various places in the Validation Report, the DOE refers to the programme of activity and the design document as "the project" and "the project design documentation". To distinguish from stand alone CDM project activity, kindly please align the wording to "programme of activity" and "PoA-DD". In addition, the Validation Opinion appears to describe the emission reductions potential of a "project" instead of the the PoA. On page 4 of the Validation Report, the DOE refers to a value of 7125 tCO2e whereas on page 24, a value of 20,762 tCO2e is mentioned. Kindly please resolve the inconsistencies.
1: As per the CDM validation and verification standard for programmes of activities Version 02.0, paragraph 390 referring to paragraph 177, the DOE shall report the assessment findings.
1.1 In describing the validation process on page 2 of 29 of the Validation Report, the DOE states that "Once the project is made available for the global stakeholder consultation process, the members of the assessment team carried out: ...". However, as per the CDM project cycle procedure for programmes of activities (version 02.0), the renewal of PoA period is not subject to global stakeholder consultation process. Kindly please correct the description.
1.2 The Validation Report (page 3 of 29) states that "Applus+Certification performed interviews, telephone conferences, and physical site inspection with project stakeholders to confirm selected information and to resolve issues identified in the document review. However, page 6 of the Validation Report has clarified that no site visit was conducted. Kindly please correct the inconsistency.
2: As per the CDM validation and verification standard for programmes of activities Version 02.0, paragraph 390 referring to paragraph 177, the DOE shall report the assessment findings including the validation opinion.
2.1 The DOE in its Validation Opinion (on page 4 and 24 of the Validation Report) refers to the title of the PoA as “Wind Energy Project PoA”. However, the correct title of the PoA is "PoA on RE". Kindly please correct the title of the PoA in the Validtation Report.
2.2 At various places in the Validation Report, the DOE refers to the programme of activity and the design document as "the project" and "the project design documentation". To distinguish from stand alone CDM project activity, kindly please align the wording to "programme of activity" and "PoA-DD". In addition, the Validation Opinion appears to describe the emission reductions potential of a "project" instead of the the PoA. On page 4 of the Validation Report, the DOE refers to a value of 7125 tCO2e whereas on page 24, a value of 20,762 tCO2e is mentioned. Kindly please resolve the inconsistencies.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: