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

Project title of the project activity or programme of activities (PoA) for which issuance is requested	Low Pressure Gas Recovery Project of Shandong Changyi Petrochemical Co., Ltd., China (3776)
DOE that requested for issuance and date of request	JQA (10 May 12)
Please indicate, in accordance with paragraphs 65 of the CDM modalities and procedures, for which reason(s) you request review
Incompetence
Please indicate reasons for the request for review
1) The monitoring methodology AM0055 ver 1.2 requires the monitoring of ηwg,PR  (Efficiency of the of representative element process using waste gas in the project scenario that replaces the other fossil fuels that were used in the baseline scenario) based on “Option 1” or “Option 2” .The registered PDD (Page 31) states that this parameter will be calculated based on Option 2 of the methodology-“Efficiency by actual measurement (Direct or Indirect Method) for Individual Equipment”. However this parameter is based on Chinese Industrial Standard (value of 86% is applied for both the registered PDD and the MR) which is not in accordance with the monitoring methodology.  The DOE is requested to clarify the following: i)how it verified that ηwg,PR  was calculated based on actual measurements for this monitoring period. ii)How did the DOE verify that the monitoring plan (for the monitoring of this parameter) is in line with the monitoring methodology and; if not; why has the DOE not submitted Post Registration Changes.   Please refer to paragraph 219 of the Project Standard (ver 1.0) and paragraph 263 of the VVS (ver 2.0).. 2) The DOE is requested to clarify how it determined the calculation of  Emission factor of process heating fuel determined ex post (EFphf_PR)  since the PDD and the MR is not in accordance with AM0055 ver 1.2. Please refer to equation 4 (page 9) of AM0055 ver 1.2. 3) The DOE is also requested to clarify why it did not apply Post Registration changes when it determined that the value of the parameter “Hst” was incorrectly determined at validation to be 2777.67 kJ/kg whereas the DOE has verified that  the correct value is 2943.2 kJ/kg. Please refer to paragraph 209 of the Project Standard (ver 1.0) and para 257 of the Validation and Verification Standard (ver 2).
Date	15 Jul 12