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	9238
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration	Installation of energy efficient ventilation fans at South Deep and Beatrix Gold Mines in South Africa
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 explain how it has validated additionality of the project activity, in particular the first-of-its-kind in line with the Guidelines on additionality of first-of-its-kind projects (version 2.0): (a) there are two similar projects (9236 & 9237) with same type of technology and with the start date earlier than the project activity and with the existence of similar projects with similar technology how the first-of-its-kind argument for the project activity can be considered conclusive to prove the additionality; (b) why it only considers application in mining operations considering the output being ventilation air, in line with paragraph 5a of the Guidelines; (c) whether it has checked the existence of other projects aiming for the energy efficiency; (c) why project implemented in 2010 by Anglo Platinum (VR pages 24-25) is not considered as switch of technology for supplying the ventilation air, and furthermore how it can be considered as different technology in line with the paragraph 4 of the Guidelines (i.e. Energy source/fuel, feed stock, or size). 2. The DOE is requested to further explain how the applicability conditions of the methodology has been met, in particular: (a) the annual energy savings being 22.7 GWhe, as it is unclear: (i) if the power of the baseline fans of 38.044 kW is based on all existing fans that are replaced, and also considering the replacement will be rolled out over several months (PDD page 3); (ii) if the power of the project fans of 27.26 kW has been the representative of all the fans that will be installed under the project activity, in light of the specification and the flow of air; (b) the rated capacity or output or level of service of the project fans not being lower than 10% of the baseline fans, considering the graph in section A.4.2 of the PDD and VR page 11 shows that the volume flow of the project fans is lower than that of the baseline fans. 3. The DOE is requested to further explain: (a) how it confirms the monitoring plan is in compliance with the methodology paragraph 15, in particular the fans are considered having constant current (ampere) characteristics (VR page A-44), considering: (i) the graph in page 11 of the VR shows the power changes with the change of volume flow; (ii) page A-45 of the VR states that the power consumption over month is within +/- 10% of the mean power consumption; (b) how the implementation of simple random sampling to determine the parameters the number of fans on which run time meters will be installed, the power of the project ventilation fans, and the power of the baseline ventilation fans will be appropriate in line with the EB65 Annex 2 paragraph 20b, as the samples have been determined to be the every 10th fan installed.
Date	02 Jul 13