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	9438
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration	Golden Sugar 30MW High Energy Efficient Combined Heat and Power (CHP) System in Apapa, Lagos, Nigeria
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 shall further validate the suitability of input values used in the investment comparison analysis, in particular, a) The revenue gained from electricity and steam supplied by the project activity to the Greenfield industrial customer.  In doing so, the DOE shall justify the price claimed for the electricity and steam given that the owner of the project activity (Golden Sugar) is also the owner of the Greenfield industrial customer as confirmed in the applicability conditions of the methodology; b) The electricity purchasing price paid by the project customer (22Naira/KWh) given that i) the data source (power purchase agreement, 01/08/2011) was not available at the time of the project start date (12/07/2011); ii) the DOE has not justified the ownership relation between the project owner (Golden Sugar) and the project customer (Flour Mills Nigeria) and whether or not the price should be considered as an internal price; c) The capital cost assumed for the project activity considering it is not clear what the source of capital cost for items other than the turbine generator sets is, and how the remaining capital investment has been crosschecked; d) All other input values used to calculate the IRR of the reference plant given that it is not clear when the data source were available and how the input values were crosschecked. Please refer to VVS version 2.0 paragraph 120.
Date	03 Aug 13