Info Report Check
Submission incomplete:
1: The PP/DOE are requested to complete all the PDD sections for the description of the project activity as per EB 48 Annex 60 paragraph 10 (a).
PDD lacks information on the technical specifications of the main equipments of the project.

2: The DOE is requested to confirm the accuracy of the financial calculations carried out for the investment analysis as per VVM v 1.2 paragraph 114 (c).
in particular , 1) how the DOE has validated the chemical product cost, and operative personnel cost of the project scenario provided by the PP in the CLARIFICATIONS ON STEAM PRODUCTION COST 2)there is no validation opinion on PetCoke fuel (Use Factor) per tonne of steam 3)The DOE is requested to further clarify how it has validated the availability of the waste gas (decreasing trend)as per the requirement of VVM, paragraph 111(b) .4)The DOE is requested to provide the information on the relationship of VITRO and the PP, and to further cross check the other fees used in the investment analysis.5)The DOE is requested to explain why the steam demand in the project scenario is 16t/h given that the steam produced by the natural gas boiler in March 2008 was 8607(11.95t/h)

3: The DOE is requested to include information on how it has validated sensitivity analysis of the investment analysis as per VVM v1.2 paragraph 111 (e).
1)The DOE is requested to explain why the fuel cost of alternative 3 (petcoke) is not included in the sensitivity analysis
2)The sensitivity analysis has been conducted for the steam demand. However, the unit cost of steam is sensitive to the steam demand of the recipient facility. In case if the steam demand is below 13.57TPH, the total steam requirement can be met by the WHR boilers and no natural gas would be required, which would impact the unit cost of the steam.The DOE is requested to clarify how it has considered this scenario in the sensitivity analysis.