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	6093
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration	Gansu Dunhuang Energy saving modification Project from surplus heat utilization of sodium sulfide furnace of Xiyu mining chemical industry
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 clarify whether there are any savings in the unit cost of the production (originating from raw material savings per tonne of production due to the process modification implemented as a part of the project activity) and if applicable; whether such savings has been included in the investment analysis. Please refer to refer to para 111 (a) of the VVM (ver 1.2). 2) CL-29 of the Validation Report states that the original design capacity of the facility is 21,300 tonnes sodium sulphide per year.  Page 33 of the Validation report and Page 5 of the PDD states that with the implementation of the project activity, the production of the sodium sulphide facility increases to 26,500 t per year which  is above its original design capacity.  The DOE is requested to clarify how it validated that the project activity is an “existing facility”. Please refer to footnote 1 of AMS III Q ver 4.. 3) SSC Clarification on AMS III-Q  states that “It is to be noted that the basic assumption of AMS-III.Q is the operation of the equipment where the waste energy carrying medium (WECM) is generated is not affected as a result of the project activity,” The DOE is requested to clarify how it validated that the methodology is applicable to the project given that the energy content of the hot gases (WECM) from the roasters in the project activity are affected by the process modification (installation of the Raymond Mill) carried out for the project implementation.   Please refer to Page 4 of SSC Clarification (CL_359), SSC WG 23 .. 4) The DOE is requested to further clarify how it validated that the “increase” in  heat of the rosters due to the process modification as a part of the project implementation can be categorized as “waste heat” in accordance with A.M.S III-Q ver 4 since the same was absent in the baseline scenario.   Please refer to footnote 1 of A.M.S III-Q ver 4.. 5) The DOE shall clarify how it has validated the value of fwcm to be 1 when the entire component of the heat generated in the roasters and utilised by the project activity includes additional heat in the roasters due to the addition of Raymond Mill? Please refer to definition of fwcm (page 8/15 of A.M.S-III-Q ver 4)..
Date	16 Jul 12