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	3166
Title of the proposed CDM project activity/PoA submitted for registration	Wugang Gas-Steam Combined Cycle Power Plant (CCPP) Project
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. Further clarification is required on how the DOE has validated the suitability of ‘Cost of Materials’, considered in the investment analysis, in particular, the costs for Blast furnace gas (BFG), Coke-oven gas (COG) and Converter gas (LDG) as the baseline scenario represents ‘release of these waste gases to the atmosphere after incineration’, in line with the requirements of VVM, v1.1, para 111(c). 2. The DOE is requested to substantiate how it has validated the sensitivity analysis, in line with the requirements of VVM, v1.1. para 109(e), taking into account that the supplied IRR and sensitivity analysis spreadsheet does not contain all the formulas and there is no validation opinion on the sensitivity analysis. 3. The DOE is requested to clarify how it has validated the suitability of: (a) the technological barrier in line with the VVM (version 01.1) para. 115, and with the “Guidelines for Objective Demonstration and Assessment of Barriers” EB50, Annex 13, i.e., whether the training cost associated with the operation of the project plant could have a direct impact on the financial returns of the project activity and should therefore be assessed by investment analysis; and (b) the barriers due to the prevailing practice, in particular, whether there are industries with similar or comparable technologies to the project activity that have installed similar technologies in the country/region and how the application of the technology differs between the project activity and such industries. 4. The DOE is requested to substantiate how it has validated the waste gas use, electricity generation and, heat generation in the baseline scenario determination, taking into account that many of the scenarios are eliminated as economically unfeasible as per step 1 of ACM0012, while exclusion of baseline options at step 1 is prescribed either if the option does not comply with legal and regulatory requirements or if the option depend on fuels that are not available at the project site, and, exclusion of individual baselines options at step 3 of ACM0012 is required to be done either by barrier analysis or economical unattractiveness. 5. The DOE is requested to substantiate how it has validated the monitoring plan, taking into account that the variable NCV for each consumed fuel and/or WECM is not listed and, that the NCV figures used for each waste gas (BFG, COG and LDG) are not disclosed neither in the PDD nor in the validation report.
Date	18 Nov 10