CDM project activity/programme of activities registration request review form (CDM-REGR-FORM) (Version 03.0)

Reference number of the proposed CDM project activity/programme of activities (PoA) submitted for registration	7684
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration	Construction and operation of the Hydraulic Power Plant Chicoasén II
Please indicate, in accordance with paragraphs 37 and 40 of the CDM modalities and procedures, which validation requirement(s) may require review. A list of requirements is provided below. Please provide reasons in support of the request for review. Including any supporting documentation.
The following are requirements derived from paragraph 37 of the CDM modalities and procedures:
The participation requirements as set out in paragraph 28 to 30 of the CDM modalities and procedures are satisfied; Comments by local stakeholders have been invited, a summary of the comments received has been provided, and a report to the designated operational entity (DOE) on how due account was taken of any comments has been received; Project Participants have submitted to the DOE documentation on the analysis of the environmental impacts of the project activity, including transboundary impacts and, if those impacts are considered significant by the project participants or the host Party, have undertaken an environmental impact assessment in accordance with procedures as required by the host Party; The project activity is expected to result in a reduction in anthropogenic emissions by sources of greenhouse gases that are additional to any that would occur in the absence of the proposed project activity, in accordance with paragraphs 43 to 52 of the CDM modalities and procedures; The baseline and monitoring methodologies comply with requirements pertaining to methodologies previously approved by the Executive Board; Provisions for monitoring, verification and reporting are in accordance with decision 17/CP.7, the CDM modalities and procedures and relevant decisions of the COP/MOP; The project activity conforms to all other requirements for CDM project activities in decision 17/CP.7, the CDM modalities and procedures and relevant decisions by the COP/MOP and the Executive Board.
The following are requirements derived from paragraph 40 of the CDM modalities and procedures:
The DOE shall, prior to the submission of the validation report to the Executive Board, have received from the project participants written approval of voluntary participation from the designated national authority of each Party involved, including confirmation by the host Party that the project activity assists it in achieving sustainable development; In accordance with provisions on confidentiality contained in paragraph 27(h) of the CDM modalities and procedures, the DOE shall make publicly available the project design document; The DOE shall receive, within 30 days, comments on the validation requirements from Parties, stakeholders and UNFCCC accredited non-governmental organizations and make them publicly available; After the deadline for receipt of comments, the DOE shall make a determination as to whether, on the basis of the information provided and taking into account the comments received, the project activity should be validated; The DOE shall inform project participants of its determination on the validation of the project activity. Notification to the project participants will include confirmation of validation and the date of submission of the validation report to the Executive Board; The DOE shall submit to the Executive Board, if it determines the proposed project activity to be valid, a request for registration in the form of a validation report including of the project design document, the written approval of the host Party and an explanation of how it has taken due account of comments received.
There are only minor issues which should be addressed by the DOE/project participants prior to the registration of the project.
Additional information
1) The DOE is requested to further substantiate how it has validated investment comparison analysis to be an appropriate investment analysis option to demonstrate additionality for the project activity, considering that: (a) the applied methodology ACM0002 page 4 specifies the grid as the baseline for the proposed project activity, (b) VVM version 1.2, paragraph 105 requires the PDD to identify credible alternatives only if the applied methodology does not prescribes the baseline scenario, hence, alternatives other than the grid need not be considered; and (c) Guidelines on the assessment of investment analysis version 5 paragraph 19 states "if the proposed baseline scenario leaves the project participant no other choice than to make an investment to supply the same products or services, a benchmark analysis is not appropriate and an investment comparison analysis shall be used." Please refer to VVM version 1.2 paragraph 105, and the Guidelines on the assessment of investment analysis version 5 paragraph 19.. 2) The DOE is requested to further substantiate the input values to the investment analysis, in particular to justify the source of the input values by confirming that all the values used were available at the time of the investment decision, and to provide thorough assessment of each key input value, describing in details the methods used to verify the suitability of the values and the source and the nature of the documents used. Please note that this applies to both the project activity and the alternative scenario(s).In addition, please clarify the inconsistency in the levelized cost of the project activity which is indicated as 108.57 $USD/MWh in the validation report while it is 131.17 $USD/MWh in the PDD. Please refer to VVM version 1.2 paragraphs 111 (a), (b), and (c) and the Guidelines on the assessment of investment analysis version 5 paragraph 6..
Date	18 Feb 13