10:18 01 Sep 24
Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: The DOE is requested to provide information on the steps taken to validate the project starting date as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 104 (a) and the Glossary of the CDM.
In doing so, the DOE shall explain how it has validated evidences listed in the PDD page 13, in particular 1) the construction permit (18/05/2006) for Terra Santa SHPP and 2) the time (15/04/2006) when the construction of Pampeana SHPP started.
2: The DOE is requested to provide information on the steps taken to validate the actions taken to secure the CDM status between the project starting date and the start of validation as per EB 62 Annex 13 paragraph 6 (b), paragraph 7 and paragraph 8 (b) .
In doing so, the DOE shall assess whether there is any contract available as reliable evidence as per para.6 (b). The DOE shall also confirm the authenticity of the email provided to demonstrate the real and continuing actions and describe in detail how the cross-checking process has been conducted.
3: The DOE is requested to provide information on how it has validated the suitability of the benchmark as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 114 (b).
In doing so, the DOE shall explain 1) why data from chemical specific industries were considered in the calculation of beta value considering that the project activity is a hydro power generation project; 2) why relevered beta value based on USA market data was considered suitable considering the project activity was located in Brazil. In addition, the DOE shall also provide its validation opinion on inflation rate (1.81%).
4: The DOE is requested to report how it has validated the scope of the common practice analysis as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 121 (a).
In doing so, the DOE shall explain how projects with installed capacity less than 30 MW were seclected as similar projects given that the total installed capacity of the project activity is 55MW. In addition, the selection of similar projects shall cover +/-50% of the installed capacity of single power plant.
5: The DOE is requested to include a clear validation opinion on the adequacy of the local stakeholder consultation as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 130(b).
6: The DOE is requested to include a summary of the validation conclusions in the validation opinion as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 176 (c).
The page with DOE's validation opinion (page 56 in the validation report) is not clear.
1: The DOE is requested to provide information on the steps taken to validate the project starting date as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 104 (a) and the Glossary of the CDM.
In doing so, the DOE shall explain how it has validated evidences listed in the PDD page 13, in particular 1) the construction permit (18/05/2006) for Terra Santa SHPP and 2) the time (15/04/2006) when the construction of Pampeana SHPP started.
2: The DOE is requested to provide information on the steps taken to validate the actions taken to secure the CDM status between the project starting date and the start of validation as per EB 62 Annex 13 paragraph 6 (b), paragraph 7 and paragraph 8 (b) .
In doing so, the DOE shall assess whether there is any contract available as reliable evidence as per para.6 (b). The DOE shall also confirm the authenticity of the email provided to demonstrate the real and continuing actions and describe in detail how the cross-checking process has been conducted.
3: The DOE is requested to provide information on how it has validated the suitability of the benchmark as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 114 (b).
In doing so, the DOE shall explain 1) why data from chemical specific industries were considered in the calculation of beta value considering that the project activity is a hydro power generation project; 2) why relevered beta value based on USA market data was considered suitable considering the project activity was located in Brazil. In addition, the DOE shall also provide its validation opinion on inflation rate (1.81%).
4: The DOE is requested to report how it has validated the scope of the common practice analysis as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 121 (a).
In doing so, the DOE shall explain how projects with installed capacity less than 30 MW were seclected as similar projects given that the total installed capacity of the project activity is 55MW. In addition, the selection of similar projects shall cover +/-50% of the installed capacity of single power plant.
5: The DOE is requested to include a clear validation opinion on the adequacy of the local stakeholder consultation as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 130(b).
6: The DOE is requested to include a summary of the validation conclusions in the validation opinion as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 176 (c).
The page with DOE's validation opinion (page 56 in the validation report) is not clear.
Offset now: visit the United Nations Carbon Offset Platform
Connect with us: