GS VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION REPORT
- 1ST PERIODIC –
SNV LAOS
IMPROVED COOKSTOVE PROGRAM IN LAO PDR
GS REF. NO. : GS 4233
Monitoring Period: 2014-02-01 to 2016-06-30 (incl. both days)
Report No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Date: 2016-12-27
TÜV NORD CERT GmbH JI/CDM Certification Program Langemarckstraße, 20 45141 Essen, Germany Phone: +49-201-825-3329 Fax: +49-201-825-2139 www.tuev-nord.de www.global-warming.de S01-VA050-F01 Rev.02 / 2014-07-08 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Verification Report: Report No. Rev. No. Date of 1st issue: Date of this rev. MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091 1.1 2016-11-17 2016-12-27 Project: Title: CDM Registration date: UNFCCC-No.: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao N/A N/A PDR GS Registration date: GS-ID.: 2016-01-19 GS 4233 Verification No.: 1st periodic verification Crediting period: From: To: Renewable (7y) Fixed (10y) 2014-02-01 2021-01-31 Project Scale: Large Scale Small Scale Project Participant(s): Client: SNV Laos Non Annex 1 country: Annex 1 country: Laos N/A PP from non-Annex 1 country: PP from Annex 1 country: SNV Laos N/A Association for Rural Mobilisation and Improvement (ARMI) Applied Title: No.: Scope(s) / TA(s) methodology/ies: Technologies and practices to displace decentralized Ver. 2.0 3 / 3.1 thermal energy consumption Monitoring period and Monitoring period (MP): Monitoring Report: monitoring report From: To: No. of days: Draft version: Final version: 2014-02-01 2016-06-30 881 2016-09-05 v 1.0 2016-12-26 v 2.0 Verification team / Verification Team: Technical review: Final approval: Technical Review and Cheong, Chun Yuen (Robert) (RC) – TL/TE Lubanga, David Winter, Stefan Final Approval: Winter, Stefan Key dates of Publication of the work plan: On-site (to): On-site (to): verification: 2016-09-16 2016-10-05 2016-10-06 Summary of SNV Laos has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program to carry out the 1st Verification opinion periodic verification of the project: “Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR”, with regard to the relevant requirements for CDM project activities. As a result of this verification, the verifier confirms that: all operations of the project are implemented and installed as planned and described in the validated project design document, the carbon monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved GS methodology, the Sustainable Development Indicators have been monitored in accordance with the registered GS Sustainability Monitoring Plan, the installed equipment essential for measuring parameters required for calculating emission reductions are calibrated appropriately, the monitoring system is in place and functional. The project has generated GHG emission reductions, and the GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements in a conservative and appropriate manner. TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP herewith confirms that the project has achieved emission reductions in the above mentioned reporting period as listed below (verified amount). Emission reductions: Total verified amount As per draft MR: As per GSPDD: [t CO2e] 43,160 38,447 /a 40,771 ER achieved up to 2012-12-31 ER achieved from for this MP NA 40,771 Document Filename: No. of pages: information: FVerR_.docx 103
Page 2 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Abbreviations:
ARMI Association for Rural Mobilisation and Improvement CA Corrective Action / Clarification Action CAR Corrective Action Request CDM Clean Development Mechanism CDM M&P Clean Development Mechanism Modalities and Procedures CER Certified Emission Reduction CI Confidence Interval
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CO2eq Carbon dioxide equivalent COP Conference of the Parties CP Crediting Period CL Clarification Request DOE Designated Operational Entity DVerR Draft Verification Report EB UNFCCC CDM Executive Board ER Emission Reduction FAR Forward Action Request GHG Greenhouse gas(es) GS Gold Standard MP Monitoring Plan MR Monitoring Report
PA Project Activity PRC Post Registration Changes PDD Project Design Document PP Project Participant QA/QC Quality Assurance / Quality Control RECs Renewable Energy Credits SD Sustainable Development UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change VVS Validation and Verification Standard XLS Emission Reduction Calculation Spread Sheet
Page 3 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Table of Contents Page
1. INTRODUCTION ...... 6 1.1. Objective 6 1.2. Scope 6
2. GHG PROJECT DESCRIPTION...... 8 2.1. Technical Project Description 8 2.2. Project Location 8 2.3. Project Verification History 9
3. METHODOLOGY AND VERIFICATION SEQUENCE ...... 10 3.1. Verification Steps 10 3.2. Contract review 10 3.3. Appointment of team members and technical reviewers 10 3.4. Publication of the Monitoring Report 11 3.5. Verification Planning 11 3.6. Desk review 13 3.7. On-site assessment 14 3.8. Draft verification reporting 15 3.9. Resolution of CARs, CLs and FARs 15 3.10. Final reporting 16 3.11. Technical review 16 3.12. Final approval 16
4. VERIFICATION FINDINGS ...... 17
5. SUMMARY OF VERIFICATION ASSESSMENTS ...... 27 5.1. Involved Parties and Project Participants 27 5.2. Implementation of the project 27 5.3. Project history 27 5.4. Post registration changes 28 5.5. Compliance with the monitoring plan 28 5.6. Compliance with the monitoring methodology 28 5.7. Monitoring parameters 28 5.8. Monitoring report 31 5.9. Sampling 32 5.9.1. Implementation of the sampling plan 32 5.9.2. Sampling approaches during verification 32 5.10. ER Calculation 32
Page 4 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
5.11. Quality Management 35 5.12. Actual emission reductions during the first commitment period and the period from 1 January 2013 onwards 35 5.13. Comparison with ex-ante estimated emission reductions 36 5.14. Overall Aspects of the Verification 40 5.15. Hints for next periodic Verification 41
6. VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT ...... 42
7. REFERENCES ...... 43
ANNEX 1: VERIFICATION PROTOCOL ...... 51
ANNEX 2: CALIBRATION DATES AND VALIDITY OF INSTALLED MONITORING EQUIPMENT ...... 102
ANNEX 3: STATEMENTS OF COMPETENCE OF INVOLVED PERSONNEL ...... 103
Page 5 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
1. INTRODUCTION
SNV Laos has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program (CP) to carry out the 1st periodic verification of the project “Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR” with regard to the relevant requirements for GS project activities. The verifiers have reviewed the implementation of the carbon monitoring plan (MP) and the Sustainability Monitoring Plan in the registered GS project activity. GHG data for the monitoring period was verified in detailed manner applying the set of requirements, audit practices and principles as required under the Validation and Verification Standard /VVS/ of the UNFCCC. Sustainable Development Indicators for the monitoring period was verified in detailed manner applying the set of requirements, audit practices and principles as required under the GS Validation and Verification Manual /GSVVM/ of the GS as well as relevant GS Annexes (GSv2.2) This report summarizes the findings and conclusions of this 1st periodic verification of the above mentioned GS registered project activity.
1.1. Objective
The objective of the verification is the review and ex-post determination by an independent entity of the GHG emission reductions and sustainable development attributable to the project activity. It includes the verification of the: - implementation and operation of the project activity as given in the GSPDD, - compliance with applied approved methodology and the provisions of the both the carbon and sustainability monitoring plans, - data given in the monitoring report by checking the monitoring records, the emissions reduction calculation and supporting evidence, - accuracy of the monitoring equipment, - quality of evidence, - significance of reporting risks and risks of material misstatements.
1.2. Scope
The verification of this registered project is based on the validated project design document /GSPDD/, the registered GS Passport/GSP/, the monitoring report /MR/, emission reduction calculation spread sheet /ER1/, GS Annexes and supporting documents made available to the verifier and information collected through performing interviews and during the on-site assessment. Furthermore, publicly available information was considered as far as available and required.
Page 6 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
The verification is carried out on the basis of the following requirements, applicable for this project activity: - Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol /KP/, - guidelines for the implementation of Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol as presented in the Marrakech Accords under decision 3/CMP.1 /MA/, and subsequent decisions made by the Executive Board and COP/MOP, - other relevant rules, including the host country legislation, /VVS/ - CDM Validation and Verification Standard , /GSVVM/ - GS Validation and Verification Manual , - monitoring plan as given in the registered GSPDD /GSPDD/, - sustainability monitoring plan as given in the registered GS Passport /GSP/, - approved GS Methodology(ies). - Gold Standard version 2.2
Page 7 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
2. GHG PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1. Technical Project Description
The project activity is aimed to develop the cook stove market by enhancing the performance of all the actors in the ‘ICS value chain’ (producers, retailers, and users). The project program will provide improved stove designs to stove producers, train them for the improved production techniques and business management in order to raise the quality and performance of stoves to meet new standards, improved the production capacity, efficiency and sustainability of the business. The project activity involves the distribution of improved cook stove that could save up to 29.9% of wood or charcoal fuel than the traditional Tao Dum stove. The average daily fuel consumption as per standard adult equivalent for the baseline stove is 5.23 MJ whilst the project stove is 4.06 MJ. This equates to an average fuel saving of 22.37%. The improved cook stove is made locally in Lao PDR using mud, clay, cement, rice ash (black and white), and metal sheeting will produce less smoke and thus improves the health of households The key parameters of the improved cook stoves are given in table below: Table 2-1: Technical data of the improved cook stoves Parameter Unit Value Project Fuel Savings % 29.9 Materials - Mud, clay, cement, rice ash and metal sheeting
Maximum Energy Output per Unit kWth 3.481
2.2. Project Location
For first Verification, the project location consists of 3 provinces which are Champasak, Savannakhet and Vientiane, Laos PDR as table below. The details of the project location are given in Table 2-2: Table 2-2: Project Location Description Project Location Host Country Lao PDR Province: Vientiane Savannakhet Champasak Latitude: 17o 57’ 00” N 16o 34’ 00” N 15o 04’ 00” N Longitude: 102o 45’ 00” E 104o 47’ 00” E 105o 53’ 00” E
Page 8 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
2.3. Project Verification History
Essential events since the registration of the project are presented in the following Table 2-3. Table 2-3: Status of previous Monitoring Periods
# Item Time Status 1 Date of GS registration 2016-01-19 Registered 2 Crediting period I (CPI) 2014-02-01 to 2021-01-31 Registered 3 Monitoring period 1 (CPI) 2014-02-01 to 2016-06-30 Issuance Request An overview of all Post Registration Changes is given in the following table. Table 2-4: Overview Post Registration Changes # Applicable MP Type of post Description Status2) / from – to / registration Date as of change 1) N/A
1) TDfrMP : Temporary deviation from registered monitoring plan TDfMM : Temporary deviation from the monitoring methodology CrPDD : Corrections to the registered GSPDD PCfrMP : Permanent changes from registered Monitoring Plan PCfMM : Permanent changes from Monitoring Methodology CoPD : Changes to the project design of a registered project activity 2) Approval (by EB) or Acceptance (by DOE)
Page 9 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
3. METHODOLOGY AND VERIFICATION SEQUENCE
3.1. Verification Steps
The verification consisted of the following steps: Contract review; Appointment of team members and technical reviewers; Publication of the monitoring report; A desk review of the Monitoring Report/MR/ submitted by the client and additional supporting documents with the use of customised verification protocol; Verification planning; On-Site assessment; Background investigation and follow-up interviews with personnel of the project developer and its contractors; Draft verification reporting; Resolution of corrective actions (if any); Final verification reporting; Technical review; Final approval of the verification.
3.2. Contract review
To assure that the project falls within the scopes for which accreditation is held; the necessary competences to carry out the verification can be provided; Impartiality issues are clear and in line with the CDM accreditation requirements; a contract review was carried out before the contract was signed.
3.3. Appointment of team members and technical reviewers
On the basis of a competence analysis and individual availabilities a verification team, consisting of one team leader was appointed. The list of involved personnel, the tasks assigned and the qualification status are summarized in the Table 3-1 below. Table 3-1: Involved Personnel
Page 10 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
3) 4) 5)
1)
2) Name Company
site visit
-
Scheme
Status
Technical
Function
Verification
On
Competence
Qualification
Host country
competence competence competence
Mr. Cheong, Chun TUV NORD 1.2, 3.1, TL SA Ms. Yuen (Robert) Malaysia 13.2
Mr. Lubanga, - 1.2, OR LA - Ms. David 3.1
Mr. Winter, Stefan TÜV NORD 1.2, 3.1, TR/FAB) SA - Ms. Cert GmbH 13.2
1) TL: Team Leader; TM: Team Member, TR: Technical review; OT: Observer-Team, OR: Observer-TR; FA: Final approval 2) GHG Auditor Status: A: Assessor; LA: Lead Assessor; SA: Senior Assessor; T: Trainee; TE: Technical Expert 3) GHG auditor status (at least Assessor) 4) As per S01-MU03 or S01-VA070-A2 (such as 1.1, 1.2, …) 5) In case of verification projects
A) Team Member: GHG auditor (at least Assessor status), Technical Expert (incl. Host Country Expert or Verification Expert), not ETE B) No team member The team member contributed to the review of documents, the assessment of the project activity and to the preparation of this report under the leadership of the team leader. Statements of competence for the above mentioned team member is enclosed in annex 2 of this report.
3.4. Publication of the Monitoring Report
The draft monitoring report, as received from the project participants by the DOE, prior to the verification activity commenced.
3.5. Verification Planning
In order to ensure a complete, transparent and timely execution of the verification task the team leader has planned the complete sequence of events necessary to arrive at a substantiated final verification opinion. Various tools have been established in order to ensure an effective verification planning. Risk analysis and detailed audit testing planning
Page 11 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
For the identification of potential reporting risks and the necessary detailed audit testing procedures for residual risk areas table A-1 is used. The structure and content of this table is given in Table 3-2 below. Table 3-2: Table A-1; Identification of verification risk areas Table A-1: GHG calculation procedures and management control testing / Detailed audit testing of residual risk areas and random testing Conclusions and Identification, Areas Requiring Identification assessment and Areas of Additional Improvement of potential testing of residual verification testing (including reporting risk management risks performed Forward Action controls Requests) The following The potential risks Despite the The additional Having investigated potential risks of raw data measures verification testing the residual risks, were identified generation have implemented performed is the conclusions and divided and been identified in in order to described. Testing should be noted structured the course of the reduce the may include: here. Errors and according to the monitoring system occurrence - Sample cross uncertainties are possible areas implementation. probability the checking of highlighted. of occurrence. The following following manual transfers of
measures were residual risks data taken in order to remain and - Recalculation minimize the have to be - Spreadsheet ‘walk corresponding addressed in throughs’ to check risks. the course of links and equations every - Inspection of The following verification. calibration and measures are maintenance implemented: records for key equipment - Check sampling analysis results Discussions with process engineers who have detailed knowledge of process uncertainty/error bands. The completed table A-1 is enclosed in Annex 1 (table A-1) to this report. Project specific periodic verification checklist In order to ensure transparency and consideration of all relevant assessment criteria, a project specific verification protocol has been developed. The protocol shows, in a transparent manner, criteria and requirements, means and results of the verification. The verification protocol serves the following purposes: - It organises, details and clarifies the requirements a GS project is expected to meet for verification
Page 12 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
- It ensures a transparent verification process where the verifying DOE documents how a particular requirement has been proved and the result of the verification. The basic structure of this project specific verification protocol for the periodic verification is described in Table 3-3. Table 3-3: Table A-2; Structure of the project specific periodic verification checklist Table A-2: Periodic verification checklist Checklist Item Reference Verification Team Draft Final Comments Conclusion Conclusion The checklist items in Gives The section is used to Assessment In case of a Table A-2 are linked to reference to elaborate and discuss the based on corrective the various require- the checklist item in detail. It evidence action or a ments the monitoring information includes the assessment provided if the clarification of the project should source on of the verification team criterion is the final meet. The checklist is which the and how the assessment fulfilled (OK), or assessment organised in various assessment was carried out. The a CAR, CL or at the final sections as per the is based on. reporting requirements of FAR (see verification requirements of the the VVS shall be covered below) is stage is topic and the individual in this section. raised. The given. project activity. It assessment further includes refers to the guidance for the draft verifi- verification team. cation stage. The periodic verification checklist (verification protocol) is the backbone of the complete verification starting from the desk review until final assessment. Detailed assessments and findings are discussed within this checklist and not necessarily repeated in the main text of this report. The completed verification protocol is enclosed in Annex 1 (table A-2) to this report.
3.6. Desk review
During the desk review all documents initially provided by the client and publicly available documents relevant for the verification were reviewed. The main documents are listed below: the registered GSPDD & GS Passport including the monitoring plan/GSPDD/GSP/, the GS validation report/GSVAL/, the monitoring report, including the claimed emission reductions and achieved sustainable development for the project/MR/, the emission reduction calculation spreadsheet/ER1/. Other supporting documents, such as publicly available information on the GS website(s) and background information were also reviewed.
Page 13 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
3.7. On-site assessment
As most essential part of the verification exercise, it is indispensable to carry out an inspection on site in order to verify that the project is implemented in accordance with the applicable criteria. Furthermore the on-site assessment is necessary to check the monitoring data with respect to accuracy to ensure the calculation of emission reductions. The main tasks covered during the site visit include, but are not limited to: The monitoring data were checked completely. An assessment of the implementation and operation of the registered project activity as per the registered GSPDD; A review of information flows for generating, aggregating and reporting the monitoring parameters; Interviews with relevant personnel to determine whether the operational and data collection procedures are implemented in accordance with the monitoring plan in the GSPDD; A cross check between information provided in the monitoring report and data from other sources such as plant logbooks, inventories, purchase records, sales database, or similar data sources; A check of the monitoring equipment including calibration performance and observations of monitoring practices against the requirements of the GSPDD and the selected methodology and corresponding tool(s), where applicable; A review of calculations and assumptions made in determining the GHG data and emission reductions; Possibility of leakage was also checked. Investigating whether all relevant GS SD aspects as reported in the monitoring report are achieved. An identification of quality control and quality assurance procedures in place to prevent or identify and correct any errors or omissions in the reported monitoring parameters. Before and during the on-site visit the verification team performed interviews with the project participants to confirm selected information and to resolve issues identified in the document review. Representatives of SNV Laos, Association for Rural Mobilisation and Improvement (ARMI) and Nexus Carbon were interviewed. The main topics of the interviews are summarised in Table 3-4. Table 3-4: Interviewed persons and interview topics
Page 14 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Interviewed Persons / Interview topics Entities
Project Participants, Operations - GSPDD Personnel & Consultants - GS Passport - SNV Laos - General aspects of the project - ARMI - Project operation - Nexus Carbon - Changes since validation - Monitoring and measurement equipment - Remaining issues from validation - Calibration procedures - Quality management system - Involved personnel and responsibilities - Training and practice of the operational personnel - Implementation of the monitoring plan - Monitoring data management - Data uncertainty and residual risks - GHG emission reduction calculation - Procedural aspects of the verification - Environmental aspects - Sustainability indicators - Mitigation/compensation measures of any project impacts - GS Registration Review Report
The list of interviewees is included in chapter 7.4.
3.8. Draft verification reporting
On the basis of the desk review, the on-site visit, follow-up interviews and further background investigation the verification protocol is completed. This protocol together with a general project and procedural description of the verification and a detailed list of the verification findings form the draft verification report. This report is sent to the client for resolution of raised CARs, CLs and FARs.
3.9. Resolution of CARs, CLs and FARs
Nonconformities raised during the verification can either be seen as a non-fulfilment of criteria ensuring the proper implementation of a project or where a risk to deliver high quality emission reductions is identified. Corrective Action Requests (CARs) are issued, if: Non-conformities with the monitoring plan or methodology are found in monitoring and reporting, or if the evidence provided to prove conformity is insufficient;
Page 15 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Mistakes have been made in applying assumptions, data or calculations of emission reductions which will impair the estimate of emission reductions; Issues identified in a FAR during validation or previous verifications requiring actions by the project participants to be verified during verification have not been resolved. The verification team uses the term Clarification Request (CL), which is be issued if: information is insufficient or not clear enough to determine whether the applicable GS requirements have been met. Forward Action Requests (FAR) indicate essential risks for further periodic verifications. Forward Action Requests are issued, if: the monitoring and reporting require attention and / or adjustment for the next verification period. For a detailed list of all CARs, CLs and FARs raised in the course of the verification pl. refer to chapter 4.
3.10. Final reporting
Upon successful closure of all raised CARs and CLs the final verification report including a positive verification opinion can be issued. In case not all essential issues could finally be resolved, a final report including a negative verification opinion is issued. The final report summarizes the final assessments w.r.t. all applicable criteria.
3.11. Technical review
Before submission of the final verification report a technical review of the whole verification procedure is carried out. The technical reviewer is a competent GHG auditor being appointed for the scope this project falls under. The technical reviewer is not considered to be part of the verification team and thus not involved in the decision making process up to the technical review. As a result of the technical review process the verification opinion and the topic specific assessments as prepared by the verification team leader may be confirmed or revised. Furthermore reporting improvements might be achieved.
3.12. Final approval
After successful technical review an overall (esp. procedural) assessment of the complete verification will be carried out by a senior assessor located in the accredited premises of TÜV NORD. After this step the request for issuance can be started.
Page 16 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
4. VERIFICATION FINDINGS
In the following paragraphs the findings from the desk review of the monitoring report/MR/, the ER spreadsheet/ER1/, GSPDD/GSPDD/, GS Validation Report/GSVAL/ and other supporting documents, as well as from the on-site assessment and the interviews are summarised. The summary of CAR, CL and FAR issued are shown in Table 4-1: Table 4-1: Summary of CAR, CL and FAR
Verification topic No. of CAR No. of CL No. of FAR
A – Description of project activity 3 1 0
B – Implementation of project activity 0 2 0
C – Description of Monitoring System 0 0 0
D – Carbon Data and Parameters 3 2 0
E - Calculation of Emission Reductions 0 1 0
F – Sustainability Monitoring Parameters 0 4 0
SUM 6 10 0
The following tables include all raised CARs, CLs and FARs and the assessments of the same by the verification team. For an in depth evaluation of all verification items it should be referred to the verification protocols (see Annex).
Carbon (GHG) Monitoring
Finding A1 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Describe the finding in unam- MR version 1.0, All Sections: The subscript representation for tCO2e is biguous style; address the incorrect. context (e.g. section) Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the The text has been updated in all sections of the MR, in particular the part PP. It shall address the cor- “2e” was changed to sub-script as “2e” rective action taken in details.
Page 17 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Finding A1 Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, All Sections: The subscript representation for tCO2e is The assessment shall encom- corrected for all sections of the revised MR. pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding A2 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding MR version 1.0, Section A.1: In the table at monitoring report summary Describe the finding in unam- biguous style; address the page, it states actual GHG emissions whilst the sentence below the table context (e.g. section) states expected. Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the The description of actual emission reduction in MP1 in Section A.1, page 7 PP. It shall address the cor- of the MR has been updated. rective action taken in details. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section A.1:.the description in the sentence below the table The assessment shall encom- is corrected as actual emissions reduction in MP 1. pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding A3 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Describe the finding in unam- MR version 1.0 Section A.2: Clarification request for “At time of the first biguous style; address the Verification” refers to which monitoring period? context (e.g. section) Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the cor- The description has been updated and referred to the MP1. rective action taken in details. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section A.2: The description is updated that refers to The assessment shall encom- pass all open issues in annex A- MP1. 1. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added.
Page 18 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Finding A3 Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding A4 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Describe the finding in unam- MR version 1.0, Section A.5: It is unclear the crediting period refers to which biguous style; address the period? context (e.g. section) Corrective Action #1 Section A.5 of the MR has been updated and referred to the period of 7 This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the cor- years of the first crediting period. rective action taken in details. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section A.5: The crediting period is corrected that refers The assessment shall encom- to the 1st CP of the project activity. pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding B1 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding MR version 1.0, Section B.1: The PP is requested to clarify Quick Scan Describe the finding in unam- codes are now on the label, to allow better monitoring of the stoves biguous style; address the context (e.g. section) observed in the shops by means of details of the stoves could be found by a simple smartphone application that link to which parameter? Corrective Action #1 Quick Scan codes are currently printed on the ICS label. The Quick Scan This section shall be filled by the codes and related software are not part of the registered monitoring system PP. It shall address the cor- rective action taken in details. which was proposed in the registered PDD. The intended purpose of the Quick Scan code on the ICS label is that in future implementation of the project, information regarding a stove can be easily retrieved from the system by scanning the barcode. For example, information regarding the ICS producer, produced month, month sold to retailer, retailer ID, date sold to customer and customer details are displayed when the barcode is scanned. At the moment of MP1, due to budget constraints (as it is required budget to set up the system and mobile phone application), it has not been in fully operation yet except the allocation of unique barcode to each stove label. The future application of Quick Scan code system, including mobile phone apps and equipment in the monitoring
Page 19 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Finding B1 activity will be submitted to GS for approval as it is not included in the current registered monitoring plan. To avoid misunderstanding, the description about the Quick Scan codes in section B.1 has been updated more details. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1 Section B.1: The PP explain the Quick Scan is not part of The assessment shall encom- registered monitoring plan and would considered for future application pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, since the label placed at the ICS has a barcode printed on that all relevant additional corrective action and information as explained above will be capture for better monitoring. VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. The MR is updated with appropriate information explain the Quick Scan approached for future use. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding B2 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding MR version 1.0 section B.3: According to FAR 1 raised during validation Describe the finding in unam- registration by GS, the PP shall provide a single usage parameter that is biguous style; address the context (e.g. section) weighted based on drop off rates that are representative of the age distribution for project technologies in the total sale record. However, there are 3 age groups for period July 2015 to June 2016 and 2 age groups for Feb 2013 to June 2015. The PP is requested to clarify whether the 2 weighted average is representative and address GS FAR. Corrective Action #1 The MP1 includes 2 Vintages of emission reduction credits. The first This section shall be filled by the Vintage is from Feb 2014 to Jun 2015 (Vintage 1) and second Vintage is PP. It shall address the cor- rective action taken in details. from Jul 2015-Jun 2016 (Vintage 2). A vintage means the year that the project generates the emission reduction. At time of registration review, the PP had conducted the usage survey in Jun 2015 (US-2015) for the Vintage 1, there were 2 Age groups available which are Age 0-1 and Age 1-2. • Age 0-1: usage rate 91% • Age 1-2: usage rate 85% The single weighted average usage rate for Vintage is 88.8%. In Aug 2016, the PP conducted the next Usage survey (US-2016) for the Vintage 2. In this vintage there are 3 Age groups: • Age 0-1: usage rate 88.4% • Age 1-2: usage rate 69.0% • Age 2-3: usage rate 37.5% The single weighted average usage rate for Vintage 2 is 73.8%. These 2 weighted average usage rate are representative for 2 different Vintage as it was conducted at the end of each Vintage. However, follow
Page 20 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Finding B2 GS FAR and for conservative, the single usage parameter from US-2016 result which is 73.8% has been applied for the whole monitoring period MP1. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1 section B.3: The PP has applied a single usage rate of The assessment shall encom- 73.8% in accordance to FAR raised by GS. The usage rate is the weighted pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, average derived from 2 vintage periods covering the three age groups in additional corrective action and line with the applied GS methodology. This is deemed to be appropriate. VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding D1 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding MR version 1.0 Section D.2, Parameter Up,y: The PP is requested to clarify Describe the finding in unam- biguous style; address the which usage rate is applied for both baseline and project emissions context (e.g. section) calculation. Corrective Action #1 Please refer further to the response in finding B2 above. Follow GS FAR This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the cor- and for conservative, the single usage parameter from US 2016 result which rective action taken in details. is 73.8% has been applied for the whole monitoring period MP1. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1 Section D.2, Parameter Up,y: Following GS FAR, the PP The assessment shall encom- has applied a single usage rate of 73.8% applied for the whole monitoring pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, period MP1. Therefore, is correct. additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) The ER spreadsheet is updated accordingly. shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding D2 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Describe the finding in unam- MR version 1.0, Section D.2, Parameter Np,y: The PP is requested to provide biguous style; address the sales database as evidence for the value stated. context (e.g. section) Corrective Action #1 Sales database has been extracted to excel spreadsheet /MPI_01/ and This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the cor- submitted herewith. The screenshot of online database is also attached. rective action taken in details. /MPI_03/
Page 21 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Finding D2 Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section D.2, Parameter Np,y: The PP has submitted the The assessment shall encom- sales database that indicate the sales records for the monitoring period that pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, is derived from the individual sales distributors. additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) The data applied in ER is correct. shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding D3 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding MR version 1.0, Section D.2, Parameter Number of advertising/promotion Describe the finding in unam- biguous style; address the campaigns: The PP is requested to provide evidence in support of the value context (e.g. section) stated. Corrective Action #1 The list of advertising/promotion campaigns /MPI_02/ is submitted herewith. This section shall be filled by the The photos examples are also submitted. PP. It shall address the cor- rective action taken in details. Please note that the number of events for year 2013 was excluded as the MP1 started from 01/02/2014. The number for year 2015 were corrected according to the latest update list. In particular, it changed from 64 to 63 for year 2015. Assessment #1 MR Version 1.1, Section D.2, Parameter Number of advertising/promotion The assessment shall encom- campaigns: The number of advertisement / promotional campaigns pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, through sales promotion at markets and festive seasons conducted during additional corrective action and the monitoring period was verified and could be considered as VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) appropriately. /O5/ shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding D4 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding MR version 1.0, Section D.3.1 Usage Survey: The usage survey weighted Describe the finding in unam- biguous style; address the average result for year 2015 is inconsistent with the data in table at section context (e.g. section) D.2. Corrective Action #1 The weighted average usage result for year 2015 has been updated in Part This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the cor- A, page 35, Section D.3.1. The value was corrected from 89% to 88.8% and rective action taken in details. consistent to the information in Section D.2.
Page 22 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Finding D4
Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section D.3.1 Usage Survey: The usage survey weighted The assessment shall encom- average result for year 2015 is corrected and consistent with the data in pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, table at section D.2. additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding D5 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Describe the finding in unam- MR version 1.0, Section D.3.2: The PP is requested to provide evidence in biguous style; address the support of data in tables 8 & 9. context (e.g. section) Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the The evidence /LICS43/ is attached herewith. Please find the information for PP. It shall address the cor- table 8 in tab “Multistage” and for table 9 in tab “ListVillages” rective action taken in details. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section D.3.2: The data in tables 8 & 9 are derived from The assessment shall encom- the spreadsheet /LICS43/ in tab Multistage” and tab “ListVillages” pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, respectively. additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding E1 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding MR version 1.0, Section ER1 spreadsheet, Baseline raw data and project Describe the finding in unam- biguous style; address the raw data: The data in column N, P, Q & R are key-in data. The source of context (e.g. section) data is not stated. Corrective Action #1 The source of all raw data (from column D to column AR including column This section shall be filled by the N, P, Q & R) in tab “Baseline Raw Data” and “Project Raw Data”, /ER1/ PP. It shall address the cor- rective action taken in details. were extracted from the Akvo online data server that stores the result of the Kitchen performance test (KPT) which was conducted in Feb 2016. This source has been updated in the comment balloon in cell A1 of each tab. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section ER1 spreadsheet, Baseline raw data and project The assessment shall encom- raw data: The data in column N, P, Q & R were verified during onsite by pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, means for checking the Akvo online data server whereby the data was additional corrective action and stored. VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Therefore the data are correct.
Page 23 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Finding E1 Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding E2 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding ER spreadsheet version 1.0: The PP is requested to clarify the exchange Describe the finding in unam- biguous style; address the rate applied for conversion of Kip to USD applied in the wood and charcoal context (e.g. section) price. Corrective Action #1 The exchange rate of Kip to USD was taken from the website www.xe.com. This section shall be filled by the The exchange rate applied in the previous version was 8,089.31 Laos Kip PP. It shall address the cor- rective action taken in details. (LAK) per USD which is the recent exchange rate (15/09/2016). However, it was corrected by applying the exchange rate at time of conducting the survey which was 8,140.01 Laos Kip per USD on 08/02/2016. The screen short of website has been added into the /ER7/. The SD indicator ID2, “Saved household expenditure on wood and/or charcoal” was changed accordingly from 1,779,845 USD to 1,767,211 USD. Assessment #1 ER spreadsheet version 1.1: The exchange rate for Kip to USD was cross- The assessment shall encom- checked with the weblink provided. The rate for the conversion is applied pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, correctly in the calculation. additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
SD Monitoring
Finding F1 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding MR version 1.0, Section F.2. ID 1: Refer SD1 & SD 4 sheet, cell c17, the Describe the finding in unam- biguous style; address the PP is requested to clarify what the number 6 applied in the equation context (e.g. section) represents. Corrective Action #1 The number 6 (tons wood/ton charcoal) in cell C17, tab “SD1 and SD4”, This section shall be filled by the /ER1/ is the charcoal production to wood ratio from the AMS II.G "Energy PP. It shall address the cor- rective action taken in details. efficiency measures in thermal applications of non-renewable biomass", Version 06.0. It means that it is needed 6 tons of wood to produce one ton of charcoal. This number has been replaced by a traceable link to the source.
Page 24 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Finding F1
Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section F.2. ID 1: Refer SD1 & SD 4 sheet, cell c17, the The assessment shall encom- PP has clarify the number 6 represents charcoal production to wood ratio in pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, accordance to AMS II.G "Energy efficiency measures in thermal additional corrective action and applications of non-renewable biomass", Version 06.0. VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding F2 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding MR version 1.0, Section F.2. ID 2, SD2 sheet: Describe the finding in unam- biguous style; address the 1. The source of data for cells C5 to C7 context (e.g. section) 2. The data for cells C8 & C9 are inconsistent with the data in Section D.2 Corrective Action #1 1. The source of data for cells C5 to C7, tab “SD2”, /ER1/ has been This section shall be filled by the updated with reference to the Customer Feedback which was PP. It shall address the cor- rective action taken in details. conducted together with the KPT test in Feb 2016. See cell C23, C26 and C27, tab Analysis, /ER7/ 2. As explained in finding B2, the usage rate for year 2015 in cell C8 tab “SD2”, /ER1/ is no longer used, so the data in cell C8 was deleted to avoid confusion. The format of values in cell C9, tab “SD2”, /ER1/ has been adjusted to have the decimal number and be consistent with the section D.2 of the MR. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section F.2. ID 2, SD2 sheet: The assessment shall encom- pass all open issues in annex A- 1. The source of data for cells C5 to C7 is updated and linked to KPT 1. In case of non-closure, test conducted in Feb 2016. additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) 2. The data for cells C8 id no longer applicable, therefore is deleted. shall be added. C9 data is corrected and consistent with the data in MR. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding F3 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Describe the finding in unam- biguous style; address the MR version 1.0, Section F.2. ID 3: Refer finding D2 above. context (e.g. section) Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the cor- Please find the response in finding D2 above. rective action taken in details.
Page 25 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Finding F3
Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section F.2. ID 3: With finding D2 is closed with the data The assessment shall encom- corrected. The data is updated appropriately. pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Finding F4 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Describe the finding in unam- MR version 1.0, Section F.2. ID 4: The data applied to determine the biguous style; address the situation as at 30/06/2016 is linked to finding F1. context (e.g. section) Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the cor- Please find the response in finding F1 above. rective action taken in details. Assessment #1 MR version 1.1, Section F.2. ID 4: The data in corrected and consistent The assessment shall encom- with the data in ID 1. pass all open issues in annex A- 1. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion To be checked during the next verification Tick the appropriate checkbox Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed
Page 26 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
5. SUMMARY OF VERIFICATION ASSESSMENTS
The following paragraphs include the summary of the final verification assessments after all CARs and CLs are closed out. For details of the assessments pl. refer to the discussion of the verification findings in chapter 4 and the verification protocol (Annex 1).
5.1. Involved Parties and Project Participants
The following parties are the project participants involved in this project activity. Table 5-1: Project Parties and project participants
Characteristic Party Project Participant
Non-Annex 1 Lao PDR SNV Laos Association for Rural Mobilisation and Improvement (ARMI)
Annex 1 N/A N/A
The PPs have submitted a declaration that the VERs issued for this project will not be traded under the Environmental Benefits on double counting in the context of RECs. /O1/ The verification team has cross checked at the Voluntary Carbon Standard registry, California Carbon Registry, RECS International registry and could not trace the project name is in these trading platforms. The project is only found in Markit Meta Registry listed under the Gold Standard registry. It could be concluded the project activity is not involved in RECs. Refer CAR A1, CAR A2, CL A3 and CAR A4 raised and closed out.
5.2. Implementation of the project
During the verification, a site visit was carried out from 2015-06-22 to 2015-06-24 in conjunction with the validation and an addition onsite was conducted on 2016-10-05 to 2016-10-06 to cross-check on the project implementation. On the basis of this site visit and the reviewed project documentation it can be confirmed that w.r.t. the realized technology, the project monitoring, implemented and operated as described in the registered GSPDD version 3.4 and GS Passport version 3.2. Refer CL B1 and CL B2 raised and closed out.
5.3. Project history
During the validation, GS has raised issue that need to be addressed during 1st verification. For this purpose the below FAR was raised.
Page 27 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
FAR#1: During verification, the PP shall provide a single usage parameter that is weighted based on drop off rates that are representative of the age distribution for project technologies in the total sale record. PP respond: The PP has responded to the FAR raised in table 4 to explain the single parameter of weighted average usage rate and drop off rate for 2 surveys conducted. The usage rate and drop off rate from the 2nd survey conducted in August 2016 was applied since it is more conservative. DOE Assessment: The has cross-checked on the usage rate and drop off rate applied is according to data from the 2nd survey conducted on August 2016 which is 73.8% which considered conservative. Refer finding CL D1 raised and closed out.
5.4. Post registration changes
There is no post registration changes observed for this 1st monitoring period.
5.5. Compliance with the monitoring plan
The monitoring system and all applied procedures are in compliance to monitoring plan of the registered GSPDD for both carbon and SD monitoring plans. Evidence was available to the verification team to check the compliance of the monitoring plan. The reporting procedures reflect the requirements of the monitoring plan for the carbon monitoring and sustainable development criteria. All relevant data is stored during the whole monitoring period and traceable to the computer server at the PP office.
5.6. Compliance with the monitoring methodology
The monitoring system is in compliance with the applied monitoring methodology “Technologies and practices to displace decentralized thermal energy consumption”, version 2.0.
5.7. Monitoring parameters
During the verification all relevant monitoring parameters as listed in the revised GSPDD version 3.4 have been verified with regard to the appropriateness of the applied measurement / determination method, the correctness of the values applied for ER calculation, the accuracy and applied QA/QC measures. The results as well as the verification procedure are described parameter-wise in the project specific verification checklist.
Page 28 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Data and parameters monitored:
Parameter Value Source of data
Pb1,charcoal,y: Quantity of 1.135 kg/household-day Kitchen performance test (KPT) result in Feb charcoal that is 2016 consumed in baseline Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section scenario 1 D.2.
Pp1.1,charcoal,y: Quantity 0.870 kg/household-day Kitchen performance test (KPT) result in Feb of charcoal that is 2016. consumed in project Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section scenario 1.1 during D.2. year y
Pp1.2,charcoal,y: Quantity 0.741 kg/household-day Kitchen performance test (KPT) result in Feb of charcoal that is 2016. consumed in project Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section scenario 1.2 during D.2. year y
Pp1.2,wood,y: Quantity of 0.518 kg/household-day Kitchen performance test (KPT) result in Feb wood that is 2016 consumed in project scenario 1
Pb2,charcoal,y: Quantity of 0.806 kg/household-day Kitchen performance test (KPT) result in Feb charcoal that is 2016. consumed in baseline Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section scenario 2 D.2.
Pb2,wood,y: Quantity of 1.185 kg/household-day Kitchen performance test (KPT) result in Feb wood that is 2016. consumed in baseline Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section scenario 2 D.2.
Up,y: Usage rate in 73.8% Usage survey in Aug 2016 project scenario p Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section during year y D.2.
Np,y: Technologies in 100,604 units Sales database the project database Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section for project scenario p D.2. through year y
Page 29 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Parameter Value Source of data
Project fuel type Fuel type % per total Result from the rapid survey which was share: Share of each conducted in Jan-Feb 2016. fuel pattern in project Wood only 6% Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section scenario PS1 Mix 44% D.2. Charcoal only 44% Others fuel (electricity, LPG, etc.) 6%
Number of Year Number of Project activity reports for the cumulative advertising/promotion advertising/ number of advertising/promotion activities campaigns: promotion Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section Cumulative number of campaigns. D.2. advertising / promotion campaigns. 2014 46 2015 63 2016 (6 9 months) Total 118
LEp,y: Leakage in 0 tCO2e Baseline and monitoring surveys project scenario p Further assessment refer to Table A-2 Section during year y D.2.
The following parameters are not monitored during this monitoring period since no ICS under PS2 was distributed:
Pp2,charcoal,y; Pp2,wood,y; Pp3,charcoal,y and Pp3,wood,y.
Data and parameters not monitored:
Parameter Value Data source
EFb,wood,CO2 / 8.692 ((CH4 = 0.3*GWP 25) http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/ EFp,wood,CO2: Non- + (N2O = 0.004*GWP 298)) wg1/en/ch2s2-10-2.html CO2 emission factor tCO2e/TJ arising from use of fuels in baseline/project scenario
0.015 TJ/ton IPCC (2006) "IPCC Guidelines for National NCVb,wood / Greenhouse Gas Inventories", Volume 2, NCVp,wood: Net
Page 30 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Parameter Value Data source
calorific value of the Energy, Chapter 1, Introduction, Table 1.2, p fuels used in 1.19 baseline / project scenario
fNRB,b,y: Fraction of 0.80 FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment woody biomass 2000 used in the absence of the project activity FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment in year y that can be 2010 established as non- 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National renewable Greenhouse Gas Inventories National Report on Protected Areas and Development, 2003 Protected area and wildlife project, World Bank report, 2014
Charcoal production 6 AMS II.G "Energy efficiency measures in to wood ratio: thermal applications of non-renewable biomass" Conversion ratio of Version 07.0 wood material into charcoal
Baseline fuel type Fuel type % per total Rapid survey is the first step of the kitchen share: Share of performance test in Laos to determine the fuel each fuel pattern in Wood only 6% patterns as well as the willingness of household baseline scenario Mix 44% to involve in the KPT Charcoal only 44% Others fuel (electricity, LPG, etc.) 6%
After appropriate corrections were carried out by the project participant it can be confirmed that all monitoring parameters have been measured / determined without material misstatements and in line with all applicable standards and relevant requirements. Refer CL D1, CAR D2, CAR D3, CAR D4 and CL D5 raised and closed out.
5.8. Monitoring report
A Gold Standard Monitoring Report along with relevant supporting documents was submitted to the verification team by the project participants. These documents form the basis for the verification opinion of TÜV NORD.
Page 31 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
During the verification, mistakes and needs for clarification were identified. The PP has carried out the requested corrections so that it can be confirmed that the Monitoring report is complete and transparent and accordance with the revised GSPDD version 3.4, GS Passport version 3.2 and relevant GS requirements.
5.9. Sampling
5.9.1. Implementation of the sampling plan
The PP has taken the approach for the sampling plan by adopting Guidelines for sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programme of activities”, Version 4.0. /SSS/ The total sample size for PFT is 180 based on 9 clusters and 20 households for each cluster. The verification team has checked on the sampling plan and considered appropriate since an addition of 10% has been included to ensure the level of assurance and the number of households is representative. Refer CAR D4 and CL D5 raised and closed out.
5.9.2. Sampling approaches during verification
The verification team did not apply a sampling plan for this 1st verification for the additional onsite conducted on 2016-10-05 to 2016-10-06. This additional onsite was to gather information on the project implementation after registration. The initial onsite was conducted on 2015-06-22 to 2015-06-24 at the time of validation whereby the project is already implemented and 60 households were visited and 32 households were interviewed by telephone. During the additional onsite 9 households were interviewed, 12 households were interviewed by telephone, 1 producer and 3 retailers were interviewed. The verification team considered the additional households, retailers and producer interviewed is sufficient to demonstrate the project implementation and cross-checked on the usage survey results conducted by the PP..
5.10. ER Calculation
During the verification mistakes in the ER calculation were identified. Corresponding findings CAR E1 was raised and closed out. A revised ER calculation was prepared by the PP and presented to the verification team. All raised issues were addressed appropriately so that the corresponding CAR could be closed out. Thus it is confirmed that the ER calculation is overall correct.
Page 32 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Baseline Emissions: The baseline emissions are derived from the KPT results using the below equation.
BEb,y = ∑b (Np,y * Up,y * Pb,y * NCVb,fuel * (fNRBy * EFb,fuel,CO2 + EFb.fuel,non CO2)) Where:
BEb,y Emissions for baseline scenario b during the year y in tCO2e
Pb,y Quantity of fuel consumed in baseline scenario b during year y, in tons, as per by-default factors
ʄNRB,y Fraction of biomass used during year y for the considered scenario that can be established as non-renewable biomass
NCVb,fuel Net calorific value of the fuel that is substituted or reduced (IPCC default for wood fuel, 0.015TJ/ton)
EFb,fuel,CO2 CO2 emissions factor of the fuel that it substituted or reduced (112 tCO2/TJ for Wood/Wood waste, or the IPCC default value of the relevant fuel)
EFb,fuel,nonCO2 Non-CO2 emissions factor of the fuel that is substituted or reduced
Up,y Cumulative usage rate for technologies in project scenario p during year y, based on cumulative installation rate and drop off rate
Np,y Project technology-days in the project database for project scenario p through year y Baseline emission BS1: According to the registered GSPDD version 3.4, BS1 are users who continue using charcoal with baseline stoves.
Using the above equation, BE1 = 3.66 tCO2e/y The detail calculation presented in the ER calculation spreadsheet was verified as appropriate and correct. Baseline emission BS2: According to the registered GSPDD version 3.4, BS2 are users who continue using mixed fuel (wood and charcoal) with baseline stoves.
Using the above equation, BE2 = 3.00 tCO2e/y The detail calculation presented in the ER spreadsheet was verified as appropriate and correct. Baseline emission BE: From the determination of the usage of charcoal and mixed fuel in the baseline stoves, the percentage of BS1 is 44% and BS2 is 44%, therefore the weighted baseline emission is:
BEy = (BE1 + BE2) / 2 = 3.66 + 3.00 / 2 = 3.33 tCO2e/y
Page 33 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Therefore, the baseline emissions for this monitoring period = 230,790 tCO2e Further details calculations presented in the ER spreadsheet were verified and considered as correct. Project Emissions: The project emissions are derived from KPT test results and calculated suing below equation.
PEp,y = p (Np,y * Up,y * Pp,y * NCVb, fuel* (fNRBy* EF fuel,CO2 + EF fuel,non CO2)) Where:
PEb,y Emissions for project scenario p during the year y in tCO2e
Pp,y Quantity of fuel consumed in project scenario p during year y, in tons, as per by-default factors
ʄNRB,y Fraction of biomass used during year y for the considered scenario that can be established as non-renewable biomass
NCVp,fuel Net calorific value of the fuel that is substituted or reduced (IPCC default for wood fuel, 0.015TJ/ton)
EFp,fuel,CO2 CO2 emissions factor of the fuel that it substituted or reduced (112 tCO2/TJ for Wood/Wood waste, or the IPCC default value of the relevant fuel)
EFp,fuel,nonCO2 Non-CO2 emissions factor of the fuel that is substituted or reduced
Up,y Cumulative usage rate 6for technologies in project scenario p during year y, based on cumulative installation rate and drop off rate
Np,y Project technology-days in the project database for project scenario p through year y Project emissions for PS1.1: According to the registered GSPDD version 3.4, PS1.1 are the household using charcoal ICS and use charcoal as the only fuel.
Using the above equation, PS1.1 = 2.81 tCO2e/y The detail calculation presented in the ER spreadsheet was verified as appropriate and correct. Project emission for PS1.2: According to the registered GSPDD version 3.4, PS1.2 are the household using charcoal ICS and use mix of fuel (wood and charcoal).
Using the above equation, PS1.2 = 2.67 tCO2e/y The detail calculation presented in the ER spreadsheet was verified as appropriate and correct.
Page 34 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Project emission PE: From the determination of the usage of charcoal and mixed fuel in the baseline stoves, the percentage of PS1.1 is 44% and PS1.2 is 44%, therefore the weighted project emission is:
PEy = (PE1.1 + PE1.2) / 2 = 2.81 + 2.67 / 2 = 2.74 tCO2e/y
Therefore, the project emissions for this monitoring period = 190,019 tCO2e Further details calculations presented in the ER spreadsheet were verified and considered as correct Project emission for PS2 and PS3: During the monitoring report, the wood and gasification ICS were still under testing and not distributed yet. Therefore, there is no emission from wood and gasification ICS for PS2 and PS3. Leakage: Based on the registered GSPDD, leakage is considered very low and will not cause an impact to the project activity. Therefore, could be ignored. Thus LEy is 0 for this monitoring period. Emissions Reductions: From the above calculations,
ERy = BEy – PEy - LEy = 230,790 – 190,019 – 0
= 40,771 tCO2e Therefore, the emission reductions achieved for this monitoring period are 40,771 tCO2e. Refer CL E1 raised and closed out.
5.11. Quality Management
Quality Management procedures for measurements, collection and compilation of data, data storage and archiving, calibration, maintenance and training of personnel in the framework of this GS project activity have been defined. The procedures defined can be assessed as appropriate for the purpose. No significant deviations thereof have been observed during the verification.
5.12. Actual emission reductions during the first commitment period and the period from 1 January 2013 onwards
The MR includes actual ER values achieved during the period from 2013-01-01 onwards as follows:
Page 35 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Table 5-2: Emission reductions after 2013
During the period up to Achieved during the period 2012-12-31 from 2013-01-01 onwards
Emission reductions [tCO2e] NA 40,771
5.13. Comparison with ex-ante estimated emission reductions
The MR includes a comparison of the calculated actual emission reductions with the ex-ante calculated values in the registered GSPDD for the MPII.
Ex-Ante ERs: 50,663 tCO2e
Ex-Post ERs: 40,771 tCO2e
Difference: 9.892 tCO2e The ex-ante calculated value was found to be higher than the ex-post determined value. Therefore, no further justification is required. The verification team has cross-checked the data and could consider as comprehendible and correct.
5.14. Contribution to Sustainable Development
The SD indicators as per the GS matrix are monitored and reported appropriately and cross-verified by means of desk review of supporting documents, interviews with the PP and relevant stakeholders. The monitoring system and all applied procedures are in compliance to the sustainability monitoring plan in the registered GS Passport version 3.2 and Gold Standard principle. During the additional site visit, the verification team has randomly selected 19 households to conduct interviews by means of personal visits and telephone calls in 3 provinces of Laos. In addition, 3 retailers and 1 producer was visited and interviewed. The questions asked were basically based on requirements of the Annex I, Rules and Toolkit to the Gold Standard version 2.2. /GSAI/ A summary of interview questions and feedback received are presented in the below table:
Interviewed of households Summary of feedback during the site visits or telephone 1. What is your opinion of the The households responded the ICS is good, ICS? reduced charcoal usage, cook faster and less
Page 36 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Interviewed of households Summary of feedback during the site visits or telephone smoke. The heat produced can warm the boiled water longer as compared to other type of stoves. 2. How long have you been Some of the interviewed households said they using ICS? having using ICS since 2014. There are no problems so far and the house is cleaner with less smoke. 3. How much do you pay for Most households said they pay between 20,000 to the charcoal? 35,000 Kip per bag with the weight of 7 to 10 kgs. 4. Do you use LPG or electric Most of the households interviewed do not used stove? LPG or electric stoves. 5. How many times you Most of the households said they cooked twice a cooked daily? day breakfast and dinner. 6. Do you used other type of Some of the households has other type of stoves of stoves? bigger size. It is only used when need to cook more food during family gathering or festive seasons.
Interviewed of retailers Summary of feedback 1. What is your opinion of the The ICS is good as compared to other types. We ICS? hope the producer could produce big size. 2. How much is the selling PTT3 50,000 Kip and PTT4 35,000 Kip. price for stove? 3. How much the producer PTT3 35,000 Kip and PTT4 25,000 Kip. charged you? 4. How much is per bag of 20,000 Kip for small bag of 7 kgs and 35,000 Kip charcoal of 7 to 10kg. for 10kgs. 5. How much is 1 bag of 15,000 Kip per bag of 7kgs. wood? 6. Any problems with stove No problems and more people are buying now because it saved fuel. Sometimes the producer delivery is slow.
Interviewed of producers Summary of feedback 1. How long you have been Since the start of the program in 2013. I am happy producing ICS? to be selected for the program and have received training from SNV and ARMI.
Page 37 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Interviewed of producers Summary of feedback Producing ICS stove has improved my skills and income. My workers skills are also improved. 2. How many ICS you can 500 to 600 stoves of PTT3 and PPT4. produced a month? 3. How much do you sell for PTT3 35,000 Kip and PTT4 25,000Kip. each stove? Sustainable Development Indicators: The SD indicators are as follows: 1. Air quality 2. Livelihood of the poor 3. Access to affordable and clean energy services 4. Biodiversity During this monitoring period, the PP has revised the chosen parameters and approved by GS the revised GS Passport version 2.1 on 2015-10-19. Table 5-1: Assessment of monitored SD Indicators Indicator Parameter Value Verification Opinion
Air Quality Amount of fuel (wood 115,498 tons of The amount of charcoal saved equivalent) saving wood equivalent converted to be wood equivalent by the households in using the ICS. The result is derived from the usage survey conducted during the period in August 2016. During the onsite visits for validation and verification, the visited households visited confirmed less charcoal is used for the ICS. Further details refer to Table A-2 section D.3 Parameters monitored for Sustainability
Percentage of stove 97.6% The reported number of households the users who notice ICS generates less smoke as “less smoke” from compared to other stoves. using the ICS The result is based on the usage survey compared to their conducted during the period in August baseline stoves. 2016. During the onsite visits for validation and verification, the visited households
Page 38 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Indicator Parameter Value Verification Opinion visited confirmed the ICS generates less smoke and make the kitchen area cleaner. Further details refer to Table A-2 section D.3 Parameters monitored for Sustainability
Livelihood of Saved time spent for 1,046,855 hours The number of hours spend by the the poor collecting and/or time households to collect or time to buy for buying wood and wood or charcoal. charcoal The result is derived from the amount of stoves sold multiple with the time spend each month in collecting or buying wood & charcoal and usage rate derived from the usage survey. During the onsite visits for validation and verification, the visited households visited confirmed they spend less time to buy wood & charcoal or collect wood since the ICS consumes less fuel as compared to the other stoves. Further details refer to Table A-2 section D.3 Parameters monitored for Sustainability
Saved household $ 1,417,054 The amount of expenditure saved by expenditure on wood the households on wood or charcoal. and/or charcoal The result is derived from the amount of stoves sold multiple with the time spend each month in collecting or buying wood, charcoal and usage rate derived from the usage survey, amount of wood or charcoal saved per month and the cost of wood or charcoal. During the onsite visits for validation and verification, the visited households visited confirmed they spend less money to buy wood & charcoal since the ICS consumes less fuel as compared to the other stoves. Further details refer to Table A-2 section D.3 Parameters monitored for Sustainability
Access to Number of stoves 100,604 ICS The number of ICS sold. affordable and sold under the The data is derived from the records of clean energy project activity. the producers for the number of units services sold.
Page 39 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Indicator Parameter Value Verification Opinion
During the onsite visits for validation and verification, the visited producers sales records were reviewed. The data in the PP server were verified on the number of ICS units sold during the monitoring period. Further details refer to Table A-2 section D.3 Parameters monitored for Sustainability
Biodiversity Amount of living 115,498 tons of The amount of charcoal saved biomass saving wood equivalent converted to be wood equivalent by the households in using the ICS. The result is derived from the usage survey conducted during the period in August 2016. During the onsite visits for validation and verification, the visited households visited confirmed less charcoal is used for the ICS. Further details refer to Table A-2 section D.3 Parameters monitored for Sustainability The verification team could confirm that the project has achieved the mitigation / compensation measures as per the revised monitoring plan. For further details concerning the sustainability indicators please refer to Annex 2. Refer CL F1, CL F2 and CL F3 raised and closed out.
5.15. Overall Aspects of the Verification
All necessary and requested documentation was provided by the project participants so that a complete verification of all relevant issues could be carried out. Access was granted to all installations of the plant which are relevant for the project performance and the monitoring activities. No issues have been identified indicating that the implementation of the project activity and the steps to claim emission reductions are compliant with the GS and relevant guidance provided by the COP/CMP and the CDM EB (clarifications and/or guidance).
5.16. Grievances
ARMI has established a grievance complaint form and several complaints received from retailers and resolved by ICS team leaders. There were positive comments received from the users. The verification team has checked the summary of the
Page 40 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
complaints and comments log book and could observed the ICS team from ARMI has resolved all the issues raised by the retailers. /O7/
5.17. Hints for next periodic Verification
No FAR raised for consideration in the next verificaiton.
Page 41 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
6. VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION STATEMENT SNV Laos has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program to carry out the 1st periodic verification of the project: “Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR ”, with regard to the relevant requirements for GS project activities. The project reduces GHG emissions by distributing high efficiency cook stoves to reduce the usage of charcoal and wood. This verification covers the period from 2014-02-01 to 2016-06- 30 (including both days). In the course of the verification, 6 Corrective Action Requests (CAR) and 10 Clarification Requests (CL) were raised and successfully closed. No FAR is raised for consideration for the next verification. The verification is based on the draft monitoring report, revised monitoring report, the monitoring plan as set out in the registered GSPDD, GS Passport, validation report, emission reduction calculation spreadsheet and supporting documents made available to the TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP by the project participant. As a result of this verification, the verifier confirms that: all operations of the project are implemented and installed as planned and described in the validated project design document. the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved GS methodology, i.e., Technologies and practices to displace decentralized thermal energy consumption, version 2.0 the installed equipment essential for measuring parameters required for calculating emission reductions are calibrated appropriately. the monitoring system is in place and functional. The project has generated GHG emission reductions. the project contributes to sustainable development As the result of the 1st periodic verification, the verifier confirms that the GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements in a conservative and appropriate manner. TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP herewith confirms that the project has achieved emission reductions in the above mentioned reporting period as follows:
Emission reductions: 40,771 tCO2e
Subang Jaya, 2016-12-27 Essen, 2016-12-27
Cheong, Chun Yuen (Robert) Winter, Stefan TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program Program Verification Team Leader Final Approval
Page 42 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
7. REFERENCES Table 7-1: Documents provided by the project participant(s)
Reference Document
Monitoring Report
/MR/ Monitoring Report version 1.0 dated 2016-09-05 Monitoring Report version 1.1 dated 2016-10-22 Monitoring Report version 1.2 dated 2016-11-16 Monitoring Report version 2.0 dated 2016-12-26
ER spreadsheet
/ER1/ ER database spreadsheet version 1.0 dated 2016-09-05 ER database spreadsheet version 1.1 dated 2016-10-22 ER database spreadsheet version 1.2 dated 2016-11-16
/ER4/ Usage Survey 2015 result Version 1 date 2015-06-04
/ER6/ Usage Survey 2016 result Version 1 dated 2016-08-25
/ER7/ Customer Feedback Raw Data dated 2016-02-08
SD Indicators
/SD1/ MPI_04, MPI_05, MPI_06 KPT form results MPI_01 ICS Production Database
/SD2/ Customer Feedback Raw Data_20160208 ICS Production Database
/SD3/ MPI_03 ICS Production online screenshot ICS Production Database
/SD4/ MPI_04, MPI_05, MPI_06 KPT form results ICS Production Database
Project Operations
/PO1/ Improved Cook Stove Programme Organisational Chart Version 1 dated 2015-06-03
Quality Monitoring Manual
/QM1/ ICS Laos Monitoring manual Version 2 dated 2015-06-01
/QM2/ Improved cook stove programme monitoring database guideline Version 1 dated 2014
Page 43 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Reference Document
Quality Management System Procedures Manual Version 1 dated 2014-05-04
Training
/T1/ Carbon project development and monitoring training attendance List Version 1 dated 2012-10-26
Others
/O1/ MPI_10 Declaration on units not sold under Environmental Benefits dated 2015-08-24
/O2/ LICS43 Primary KPT Fuel Datasheets V1 Sampling plan for Charcoal ICS Updated
/O3/ LICS44 Rapid Survey Raw Data dated 2016-02-14
/O4/ MPI_08 Scale calibration procedure KPT ICS V2 Scale Calibration MPI_09 Calibration record KPT ICS Dec 2015 Weight Scales
/O5/ Sample Promotions brochures MPI_02 ICS promotion and events year dated 2016-09-11
/O6/ Selling Bills from 3 producers
/O7/ Grievance input (translated)
/O8/ MPI_07 Half year report 2016 ICS Program Lao PDR
Table 7-2: Background investigation and assessment documents
Reference Document
/AT/ Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality, version 07.0
/CPM/ TÜV NORD JI / CDM CP Manual (incl. CP procedures and forms)
/FAO/ FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment year 2000 and year 2010
/GSAI/ Annex I, Rules and Toolkit to the Gold Standard version 2.2
/GSM/ Technologies and practices to displace decentralized thermal energy consumption, version 2.0 (TPDDTEC)
Page 44 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Reference Document
/GSPDD/ Registered GS PDD “Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR” Version 3.4 dated 2016-07-27
/GSP/ GS Passport “Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR” Version 3.2 dated 2016-07- 27
/GSR/ Gold Standard Requirements (GSv2.2)
/GSRR/ Gold Standard Registration Review last round feedback dated 2016-08-03
/GST/ Gold Standard Toolkit (GSv2.2)
/GSVAL/ GS Validation Report by TUV NORD CERT, Version 1.4 dated 2016-07-29
/IPCC/ IPCC (2006) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Volume 2, Energy, Chapter 2, Stationary Combustion, Table 2.5 Volume 2, Energy, Chapter 1, Introduction, Table 1.2
/NR/ National Report on Protected Areas and Development, 2003
/SSS/ Standard for Sampling and Surveys for CDM Project Activities and Programme of Activities, EB 74, Annex 06, version 04.0
/SZ/ http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html
/VVS/ CDM Validation and Verification Standard (Version 09.0)
/WB/ Protected area and wildlife project, World Bank report year 2014
Table 7-3: Websites used
Reference Link Organisation
/gs/ http://www.goldstandard.org/ Gold Standard
/unfccc/ http://cdm.unfccc.int UNFCCC
/ipcc/ www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp IPCC publications
Page 45 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Table 7-4: List of interviewed persons
Reference MoI1 Name Organisation / Function
/IM01/ V Mr. Bastiaan Teune SNV Laos / Sector Leader Ms
Mr. Santi Inthavong SNV Laos / RE Advisor Ms
/IM02/ V Mr. Amphone Association for Rural Mobilisation and Ms Souvannalath Improvement (ARMI) / Director
Mr. Inthone Sophabmixay Association for Rural Mobilisation and Ms Improvement (ARMI) / Technical Officer / Team Leader
Mr. Khamleth Association for Rural Mobilisation and Ms Improvement (ARMI) / Promotion Manager
Mr. Bown Pone Association for Rural Mobilisation and Ms Improvement (ARMI) /
/IM03/ V Mr. Hoang Thanh Ha Nexus / Technical Manager Ms
/IM04/ V Mr. Bounthiem ICS Producer Dansang Village, Xaythainy Ms District, Vientiane Capital Province
V Mr. Buontieng ICS Producer Chanhsauue Village, Ms Sikhottabong District, Vientiane Capital Province
V Mr. Retailer ICS Retailer Dongmakai Market Village, Mrs Xaythainy District, Vientiane Capital Province
V Mr. Chanpheng ICS Retailer Nongbouathong neua Village, Mrs Sikhotabong District, Vientiane Capital Province
V Mr. Aoupon ICS Retailer Ba Savang Village, Chanthabouly Mrs District, Vientiane Capital Province
V Mr. Vadana ICS Retailer Sybountheng Village, Saysetha Mrs District, Vientiane Capital Province
T Mr. Luang Boudsakan ICS Producer Phintai Village, Outhoumphone Ms District, Savannakhat Province
Page 46 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Reference MoI1 Name Organisation / Function
T Mr. Chitsana ICS Producer Nonsavanh Village, Mrs Sanasomboun District, Champasak Province
List of randomly selected 60 visited and 60 for telephone interviewed and managed to interviewed 32 /LHH/ during the site visit on 2015-06-22 to 2015-06-24. Details are in below table. Household No. Mol1 Stove ID Village District Province Name 1 V 0600424 Chanthachon Khamngoi Saysettha Vientniane Capital 2 V 0601618 Phonephet Nonsarat Saythany Vientniane Capital 3 V 0000001 Hong Thong Nonsarat Saythany Vientniane Capital 4 V 0403959 Boun Nonsarat Saythany Vientniane Capital 5 V 0401413 Lamphone Si sa vard Chanthabouly Vientniane Capital 6 V 0400049 Pheang Nongmienw Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 7 V 0400717 Phonevilay Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 8 V 1200666 Phin Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 9 V 0400706 Phekxingxay Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 10 V 0601010 Somsanguan Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 11 V 0000003 Keovixay Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 12 V 0402600 Aon Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 13 V 1200673 Air Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 14 V 1801612 Monesee Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 15 V 1801617 May Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 16 V 1801379 Kongkham Phonkham Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 17 V 0800285 Viengkeo Phontongchammany Chanthabary Vientniane Capital 18 V 1800102 Meexai Phonthong Chanthabuly Vientniane Capital 19 V 0800265 Dom Chamthabuly Phongtong Vientniane Capital 20 V 0601293 Buavan Chamthabuly Nongthatai Vientniane Capital 21 V 0601725 Vienggkham Thongtm Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 22 V 0402154 Yo Thongtm Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 23 V 0000005 Ha Thongtm Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 24 V 0403413 Nalee Xienghuagn Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 25 V 0400321 Chankham Dongpalap Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 26 V 0404136 Tanaon Dongpalap Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 27 V 0400053 Vansy Dongpalap Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 28 V 1800180 Phoungun Dongpalap Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 29 V 0400328 Ounkeo Dongpalap Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 30 V 1200213 Noy Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 31 V 0402170 Villayphon Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 32 V 0402316 Lak Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 33 V 0402159 Khammy Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 34 V 0400154 Sinnasay Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 35 V 0800711 Sack Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 36 V 0401768 Buathong Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 37 V 0000006 Dieng Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 38 V 0401232 Vanhphone Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 39 V 0800457 Bounmy Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 40 V 0401878 Ampho Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 41 V 0402308 Vilayphon Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 42 V 0800268 Sikhot Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 43 V 0402446 Lang Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 44 V 0404632 Soy Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 45 V 0403042 Kuy Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital 46 V 0800687 Khemphon Sisavad Chamthabuly Vientniane Capital
Page 47 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
47 V 0601254 Somedeth Khamhoung Sikholtaboy Vientniane Capital 48 V 0600758 Pathumvan Dongdok Saythany Vientniane Capital 49 V 1600410 Mai Dongdok Saythany Vientniane Capital 50 V 0601075 Lye Dongdok Saythany Vientniane Capital 51 V 0000008 Barakeo Thad Luong Tai Saysetha Vientniane Capital 52 V 0601360 Some Nueng Thad Luong Tai Saysetha Vientniane Capital 53 V 1200798 On Phan Thad Luong Tai Saysetha Vientniane Capital 54 V 0403128 Lioy Thad Luong Tai Saysetha Vientniane Capital 55 V 0000009 Thong Van Thad Luong Tai Saysetha Vientniane Capital 56 V 0601620 Onchan Nonsvanh Saysettha Vientniane Capital 0601174 57 V Phouang Hong Kean Saysetha Vientniane Capital /0601011 58 V 0601375 Boun Vant Hong Kean Saythany Vientniane Capital 59 V 0403703 Than Hong Kean Saythany Vientniane Capital 60 V 0404580 Bounkong Hongkea Saysettha Vientniane Capital 61 T 1900073 Kinnaly Dong hen Atsaphangthong Savannakhet 62 T 0201341 Toui Salakham Songkhone Savannakhet Kaysone 63 T 1100581 Vanna Phonsavangtai Savannakhet Phomvihane Kaysone 64 T 0202821 Lea Phoxai Savannakhet Phomvihane 65 T 1900082 Phan Narlye Thaphalanxay Savannakhet 66 T 1900079 Phet Dong Gi Lo Atsaphangthong Savannakhet 67 T 0201872 Kham Na Kham Xayphoothong Savannakhet 68 T 0201356 Hongsa Nakamnon Songkhone Savannakhet 69 T 0201368 San Thongsymeung Songkhone Savannakhet 70 T 0201369 Toui Paksong Songkhone Savannakhet 71 T 0201786 Nang Sayamongkhon Outhoomphone Savannakhet 72 T 0202194 Toun Chaelamong Atsaphangthong Savannakhet 73 T 0202299 Kon Pak Song Songkhone Savannakhet 74 T 21399 Kon Kangpoon Champhone Savannakhet 75 T 20814 Pem Kengkok Champhone Savannakhet 76 T 0300797 Buavan Boungoudom Pakse Champasak 77 T 0301167 Noi Soukhouma Soukoumar Champasak 78 T 0301207 Khamkorn Nonsavang Pakse Champasak 79 T 0902329 Tai Vernkhenh Moonlapamok Champasak 80 T 0900958 Veng Mouang Sanasomboon Champasak Seng / 81 T 0900762 Pakse Pakse Champasak Tharvilay 82 T 0900706 Phantee Paksxong Paksxong Champasak 83 T 0900614 Somphit Sokamnouay Pakse Champasak 84 T 0900599 Khamphen Pakse Pakse Champasak 84 T 0301278 Buala Sanarmxay Pakse Champasak 86 T 0301329 Phonphit Sokamnouay Pakse Champasak 87 T 0302106 Bua Phoumoung Pakse Champasak 88 T 0900499 Kongmee Phaling Phongthong Champasak 89 T 0300023 Syphachan Phonxay Pakse Champasak 90 T 0300046 Yai Kaengpho Sanasomboun Champasak 91 T 0300296 Seemueng Thasemai Pakse Champasak 92 T 0300315 Vilaythong Sangnummanh Pakse Champasak
List of randomly selected 9 visited and 12 for telephone interviewed during the site visit on 2016-10-05 /LHH/ to 2016-10-06. Details are in below table. Household No. Mol1 Stove ID Village District Province Name 1 V 0400238 Saart Nongbouathong neua Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 2 V 1201133; Thongdum Nongbouathong neua Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital
Page 48 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
1803350; 1201129 3 V 1201232 Tousy Nongbouathong neua Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 4 V 1808187 Phoukham Nongbouathong neua Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 5 V 0600866; Khamfang Nongbouathong neua Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 0501845 6 V 0400175 Khampheuy Nongbouathong neua Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 7 V 1201043; Banya Nongbouathong neua Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 1200670 8 V 1807810; Mea. Lend Nongbouathong neua Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 1801393 9 V 0802361 Khamla Nongbouathong neua Sikhotabong Vientniane Capital 10 T 0310102 Pin Donethalad Champasak Champasak 11 T 0905898 Toun Heuayset lak10 Bachieng Champasak 12 T 0313372 Kheck Phoxay Champhasack Champasak 13 T 0317661 Bounmy Heuayyangkham Pakse Champasak 14 T 0317680 Choy Chatsan Pakse Champasak 15 T 0317714 Noy Lakmeuang Pakse Champasak 16 T 1100422 Bouaban Phonsavangtai Kaisone Savannakhet 17 T 1104618 Khamta Nalao Kaisone Savannakhet 18 T 1100896 Khounkeo Thamueang Kaisone Savannakhet 19 T 1100894 Phoo Thamueang Kaisone Savannakhet 20 T 1100629 Sonenaly Oudomvilai Kaisone Savannakhet 21 T 1100874 Sidthisac Saphannuea Kaisone Savannakhet 1) Means of Interview: (Telephone, E-Mail, Visit)
Page 49 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
ANNEX
A1: Verification Protocol A2: Calibration dates and validity of installed monitoring equipment A3: Statements of Competence of involved Personnel
Page 50 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
ANNEX 1: VERIFICATION PROTOCOL Table A-1: GHG calculation procedures and management control testing / detailed audit testing of residual risk areas and random testing Conclusions and Identification, Areas Requiring Identification of Additional verification assessment and testing Areas of residual risks Improvement potential reporting risk testing of management controls (including Forward Action Requests) Raw data generation Installation of Installation of modern Inadequate installation / Site – visit See Table A-2 measuring equipment and state of the art operation of the monitoring Check of equipment equipment equipment Dysfunction of Check of technical data installed equipment Process control Inadequate exchange of sheets automation equipment Maloperation by Check of suppliers operational personnel Internal data review Change of personnel information / guarantees Downtimes of Regular visual inspect- Undetected measurement Check of calibration equipment ions of installed equip- errors records, if applicable ment Exchange of Inappropriateness of Check of maintenance equipment Only skilled and trained Management system records personnel operates the procedures w.r.t. monitoring Change of Counter-check of raw measurement relevant equipment plan requirements (e.g. substitute value strategies) data and commercial equipment Daily raw data checks data characteristic Non-application of Immediate exchange of Check of CDM Insufficient accuracy dysfunctional equipment management system procedures management system Change of Stand-by duty is Insufficient accuracy Check of CDM related technology organized procedures
Page 51 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Conclusions and Identification, Areas Requiring Identification of Additional verification assessment and testing Areas of residual risks Improvement potential reporting risk testing of management controls (including Forward Action Requests) Accuracy of values Training Inappropriate QA/QC Application of CDM supplied by Third Internal audit measures of Third Parties management system Parties procedures procedures Internal check of QA/QC Check of trainings measures of involved Check of responsibilities Third Parties Check of QA/QC documentation / eviden- ces of involved Third Parties Raw data collection and data aggregation Wrong data transfer Cross-check of data Unintended usage of old Check of data See Table A-2 from raw data to daily Plausibility checks of data that has been revised aggregation steps and monthly various parameters. Incomplete documentation Counter-calculation aggregated reporting forms Appropriate archiving Ex-post corrections of Data integrity checks by system records means of graphical data IT Systems Clear allocation of Ambiguous sources of analysis and calculation Spread sheet responsibilities information of specific performance programming figures Application of CDM Non-application of Manual data Management system management system Check of management transmission procedures procedures system certification Data protection Manual data transfer Check of data archiving Responsibilities mistakes system
Page 52 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Conclusions and Identification, Areas Requiring Identification of Additional verification assessment and testing Areas of residual risks Improvement potential reporting risk testing of management controls (including Forward Action Requests) Usage of standard Unintended change of Check of application of software solutions spread sheet programming Management system (Spreadsheets) or data base entries procedures Limited access to IT Problems caused by systems updating/upgrading or Data protection change of applied software procedures Other calculation parameters Emission factors, The values and data Unintended or intended Update-check of See Table A-2 oxidation factors, sources applied are Modification of calculation regulatory framework coefficients defined in the PDD and parameters Countercheck of the monitoring plan Wrong application of values applied MP in the MR Misinterpretations of the against the methodology applied methodology and/ or and the PDD the PDD Missing update of applicable regulatory framework (e.g. IPCC values) Calculation Methods
Page 53 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Conclusions and Identification, Areas Requiring Identification of Additional verification assessment and testing Areas of residual risks Improvement potential reporting risk testing of management controls (including Forward Action Requests) Applied formulae Advanced calculation The danger of miscal- Countercheck on the See Table A-2 Miscalculation and reporting tools culation can only be basis of own calculation. minimized. Mistakes in spread- A CDM coordinator is in Spread sheet walk- sheet calculation charge of the CDM trough. related calculations Plausibility checks Usage of tested / Check of plots counterchecked Excel spreadsheets Involvement of external consultants Monitoring reporting Data transfer to the An experienced CDM The danger of data transfer Counter check with See Table A-2 author of the consultant is mistakes can only be evidences provided. monitoring report responsible for minimized Audit of procedure Data transfer to the monitoring reporting. Inappropriate application of application monitoring report CDM QMS procedures QMS procedures Unintended use of are defined outdated versions
Page 54 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Table A-2: (Project specific) Periodic Verification Checklist
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
A. Description of the project activity A.1. Purpose and general description of the /MR/ The verification team has checked the MR and confirms that CAR A1 OK the information provided is complete and correct with regards project activity CAR A2 OK to the following: Check if the MR includes the following: Purpose of the PA and the measures taken to reduce - Purpose of the PA and the measures taken to GHG emissions reduce GHG emissions Brief description of the installed technology and - Brief description of the installed technology equipment and equipment Relevant dates for the project activity (e.g. construction, - Relevant dates for the project activity (e.g. commissioning, continued operation periods etc construction, commissioning, continued operation periods etc.) Total emission reductions achieved in this monitoring period - Total emission reductions achieved in this monitoring period In this context refer CAR A1 and CAR A2 raised.
A.2. Location of project activity /MR/ The verification team has checked the MR and confirms by OK OK means of comparison with the information given in the revised /GSPDD/ Check if the MR reflects correctly the following: GSPDD version 2.1 and information gathered during the site - Host Party(ies) /IM01/ visit that the information provided is complete and correct with regards to the following: - Region / State / Province etc. Host Party(ies) - City / Town / Community etc. Region / State / Province - Physical / geographical location (e.g. Latitude and Longitude) City / Town / Community Physical / Geographical location
Page 55 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
In this context no findings have been identified. A.3. Parties and Project Participants /MR/ The verification team has checked the MR as well as the GS OK OK website and confirms that: Check if the MR includes all PPs: /GSPDD/ all PPs as displayed on the project related GS website /GSDDR/ - All PPs as displayed on the GS website are correctly listed In this context no findings have been identified A.4. Reference of applied methodology /MR/ The verification team has checked the MR and confirms by OK OK means of comparison with the information given in the revised /GSPDD/ Check if the MR correctly describes / includes the GSPDD and displayed on the GS website that the information following: /gs/ provided is complete and correct with regards to the following: - Reference to the applicable version of the Number, title and version of the applicable GSF methodology Methodology - Reference to the applicable version(s) of Name and version of applicable GSF methodological relevant methodological tools tools In this context no findings have been identified. A.5. Crediting period of project activity /MR/ The verification team has checked the MR and confirms by CAR A4 OK means of comparison with the information displayed on the GS /gs/ Check if the MR correctly includes the following: website that the information provided is complete and correct - Start date of the crediting period. with regards to the following: - Length and type of the crediting period Start date of the crediting period. Type and length of the crediting period In this context refer to CAR A4 raised
Page 56 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
A.6. Publication of the Verification Work Plan /gs/ The verification work plan has been submitted to the GS on OK OK and monitoring report 2016-09-10
B. Implementation of project activity B.1. Description of implemented registered /MR/ The verification team has checked the MR and confirms by CAR B1 OK means of comparison with the information given in the revised project activity /GSPDD/ GSPDD and revised GS Passport, the project standard and Check if the MR correctly describes / includes the /GSP/ information gathered during the site visit that: following: /IM01/ the description of the implementation status of the PA is - Implementation status of the PA in line with the applicable provisions of the Gold Standard - Detailed description of installed Requirements and Toolkit technology(ies) / technical processes and an appropriate description of the installed equipment applied technology(ies), technical process and equipment has been included In this context the following findings have been identified: Refer finding CAR B1 raised B.1.1. Initial project implementation /MR/ The verification team has checked the implemented project OK OK activity and the MR and confirms by means of comparison with /GSPDD/ Assess whether the project has been implemented and the information given in the GSPDD, the applicable Gold operated as per the registered GSPDD and are all /GSP/ Standard Requirements and Toolkit and information gathered physical features of the project in place? during the site visit that: /GSM/ Further focus on the potential phase wise the project has been implemented and operated as per /IM01/ implementation and check the reporting on the the revised GSPDD and revised GS Passport and all corresponding status and starting dates accordingly. physical features of the project are in place the project has been implemented phase wise and corresponding evidence has been provided
Page 57 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Check if the project is still in compliance with the the project is in compliance with the applied methodology applicability conditions of the methodology. In this context no findings have been identified. B.1.2. Technical equipment changes /MR/ The verification team has checked the implemented project OK OK activity and the MR and confirms by means of comparison with /GSPDD/ Check if relevant technical equipment of the project the information given in the revised GSPDD, the applicable activity has been exchanged or modified during the /ER1/ Gold Standard Requirements and Toolkit and information monitoring period. Further ensure that consistent gathered during the site visit and interviews that: notations of key equipment (meters etc.) in GSPDD, /IM01/ MR and calculation spreadsheet are applied. no technical equipment has been exchanged or modified during the monitoring period Consider e.g. interviews with operational personnel, QMS records, maintenance records, instrument the notations of key equipment are consistently applied specifications. in the project documentation In case of changes, check whether the project is still in In this context no findings have been identified. line with the registered GSPDD and assure that these changes have been considered in the monitoring report and the emission reduction calculation.
B.1.3. Operation of the project activity /MR/ The verification team has checked the implemented project OK OK activity and the MR and confirms by means of comparison with /IM01/ Check if relevant operation modes of the project the information given in the revised GSPDD, the applicable activity have been exchanged or modified during the /GSPDD/ Gold Standard Requirements and Toolkit and information monitoring period. gathered during the site visit and interviews that: Consider e.g. interviews with operational personnel, no relevant operation modes of the project activity have operation log sheets, data management system been exchanged or modified during the monitoring period records. the following changes have been adopted during the In case of changes, check whether the project is still in monitoring period, however the project is still in line with line with the registered GSPDD and assure that these the registered GSPDD:
Page 58 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
changes have been considered in the monitoring report and the emission reduction calculation.
B.1.4. Incidents /IM01/ The verification team has checked the implemented project OK OK activity and the MR and confirms by means of comparison with /onsite/ Identify if there have been any significant incidents, the information given in the GSPDD, the applicable Gold deviant operation modes and / or downtimes of the Standard Requirements and Toolkit and information gathered equipment? during the site visit and interviews that: Consider e.g. interviews with operational personnel, no significant incidents, deviant operation modes and / or operational log sheets, analysis of performance data. downtimes of the equipment happened during the monitoring period the following incidents, deviant operation modes and / or downtimes of the equipment happened during the monitoring period: B.1.5. Legislation /MR/ The verification team has checked the host country legislation OK OK and confirms by means of comparison with the implemented Find out – esp. in the context of methodological /ER1/ requirements - whether relevant legislation with effect project that: /IM01/ on the project activity in the host country has been no relevant legislation with effect on the project activity in changed. the host country has been changed Assess, in case of changes, whether consequences In this context no findings have been identified. for the PA with regard to relevant GS requirements have been accounted for. In case of changes data sources shall be referenced.
B.1.6. Open issues from GS validation /GSVAL/ There were no open issues addressed in the validation CAR B2 OK report
Page 59 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Check (esp. in case of 1st periodic verification) whether All open issues from the validation have been there are any open issues indicated in the validation appropriately addressed. report (e.g. FAR)? The following issues related to the validation have not yet been appropriately addressed: In this context refer CAR B2 raised B.1.7. Open issues from previous /VER/ This is the first periodic verification OK OK verification There were no open issues addressed in the previous Check in case of further periodic verifications whether verification report there are any open issues indicated in previous All open issues from the previous verification have been verification reports (FAR). appropriately addressed. The following issues related to the previous verification have not yet been appropriately addressed:
C. Description of monitoring system C.1. Monitoring Plan – GSPDD and GS /MR/ By means of comparison of the MR with the revised GSPDD (or CAR A3 OK any revisions thereof) the verification team has checked Passport Compliance /GSPDD/ whether the MP is in compliance with the revised GSPDD and Check if the monitoring plan is in accordance with the /GSP/ revised GS Passport. The outcome is as follows: monitoring plan contained in the registered GS GSPDD (or any accepted revised MP). The MP is completely in accordance with the last registered/approved version of the GSPDD / MP / GS Please check esp. if Passport. - all parameters stated in the MP of the In this context refer CAR A3 raised. registered GSPDD have been monitored and updated as applicable
Page 60 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
- the monitoring equipment has been controlled and calibrated as per the MP - the monitoring results are consistently recorded as per the approved frequency - QA/QC procedures have been applied in accordance with the MP
C.2. Monitoring Plan – Meth Compliance /MR/ By means of comparison of the MR with the applied Gold OK OK Standard methodology and related tools the verification team /GSPDD/ Check if the monitoring plan is in accordance with the has checked whether the MP is in compliance with the MP applied methodology. /GST/ related requirements of the applied methodology. The outcome is as follows: In case the methodology references applicable tools it /AT/ has to be ensured that the MP is also compliant with The MP is completely in accordance with the applied /PLEAD/ those tools. methodology by the GS project (last registered/approved Also please specify if monitoring aspects have been version of the GSPDD) identified that are not specified in the methodology but The MP is completely in accordance with the applied may encance the level of accuracy and completeness tools which the methodology references. A breakdown of of the monitoring plan – this esp. applies for SSC PAs. the referenced tools is as follows:
1 Title (of the tool) Gold Standard Toolkit Version 2.2 MP compliance full compliance findings have been raised N/A (for MP)
Page 61 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
2 Title (of the tool) Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality Version 07.0 MP compliance full compliance findings have been raised N/A (for MP) 3 Title (of the tool) Version MP compliance full compliance findings have been raised N/A (for MP) In this context no findings have been identified. C.3. Management System /MR/ Description: OK OK Check if the GHG data monitoring system can be /GSP/ The project activity has a project database managed at the SNV Laos and ARMI office in Vientiane and Savannakhet to monitor assessed as appropriate. /GSPDD/ the carbon parameters and Gold Standard sustainability In case reference is made to a (certified) company /ER1/ indicators quality management system, check if all GHG related monitoring procedures have been fully integrated in /PO1/ Verifier´s action: the project participant’s quality management system. The project database, survey procedures and forms have been reviewed by the verification team. Conclusion:
Page 62 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
In case of a stand-alone system, check how the GHG The management system was set up as a stand-alone system management system has been implemented and and exclusively for the project. The system has been effectiveness is ensured. implemented effectively. C.4. Roles and Responsibilities /MR/ Description: OK OK Check if all roles and positions of each person in the /GSP/ The project activity has a project database managed at the SNV GHG data management process are clearly defined Laos and ARMI in Vientiane and Savannakhet. /ER1/ and implemented as stated in the monitoring plan. The organization chart for the monitoring activities includes the Please consider the complete data trail from raw data respective personnel from both SNV and ARMI for data generation to submission of the final data. collection, survey and QC. In case of changes, assure that the implemented The team is supported by the carbon consultant, Nexus. monitoring procedures have not been affected. Verifier´s action: The project database, survey procedures and forms have been reviewed by the verification team. Conclusion: All the survey procedures and forms have been checked and data records verified. C.5. Emergency procedures for the monitor- /MR/ Description: OK OK ing system /IM01/ The computer server in the office has the primary back-up data stored and an external back-up kept by the project coordinator Check, as appropriate, whether relevant emergency procedures for the monitoring system have been that will be used in the event of an emergency. included in the MR and assess whether these Verifier´s action: procedures have been implemented, when required During the on-site visit, the verification team has checked the server to confirm the primary data and records stored are the data for this MPI.
Page 63 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
The stored data are password protected and only authorized person could access. The database manager was interviewed to confirm how the data is applied in emergency case. Conclusion: By means of onsite assessment and checking the stored data, it can be concluded emergency respond plan is in place. C.6. Data archive and data protection /MR/ Description: OK OK Check whether all records of monitoring parameters /GSPDD/ Section C of the monitoring report described how the data is archived and backed up. are archived according to the monitoring plan. /IM01/ Assess further whether appropriate measures have Hard copies of monitoring data are kept at SNV office and soft been taken in order to avoid unintended or intended copies are stored in the internet cloud services which are manipulation or loss of the measured data. shared between project participants. The total ICS production record are stored online with Smartsheet online application and updated every month Verifier´s action: During the on-site visit, the verification team has conducted interview and reviewed the records archiving method and procedures for the monitored parameters stated in MR and registered GSPDD. The data stored online is password protected and only authorized personnel can access. Conclusion:
Page 64 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
By means of onsite assessment and checking the stored data, it can be concluded data archiving and protection is in place and has been properly implemented.
D. Data and parameters
D.1. Data and Parameters fixed ex ante and ex post D.1.1. Compliance with registered GSPDD and /MR/ By means of comparison of the MR with the revised GSPDD (or OK OK any revisions thereof) the verification team confirms that: the applied methodology (ex ante) /GSPDD/ Check whether the value applied is in compliance all ex ante data and parameters are in compliance with /GSM/ with the registered GSPDD and the applied the revised GSPDD and the applied methodology or any methodology or any other tool. other tool. In this context no findings have been identified. D.1.2. Compliance with registered GSPDD and /MR/ By means of comparison of the MR with the registered GSPDD OK OK the verification team confirms that: the applied methodology (ex post) /GSPDD/ Check whether the value applied is in compliance all ex post and parameters are in compliance with the /GSM/ with the registered GSPDD and the applied revised GSPDD and the applied methodology or any methodology or any other tool. other tool. In this context no findings have been identified.
D.2. Data and Parameters monitored for ER Quantity of charcoal that is consumed in baseline D.2.1. P b1,charcoal,y scenario 1 a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK /ER1/
Page 65 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ According to the registered GSPDD and applied methodology, measured / determined. this parameter data is monitored once at the start of crediting /GSM/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and period. if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard The data is from the most recent KPT survey conducted in equipment other measurement / determination February 2016 and applied for this monitoring period. methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of measurements as per the requirements. The data is used to calculate the baseline emission from fuel use in the baseline scenario. Assess whether the measurement / determination method is in line with the registered monitoring plan Verifier´s action: and the applied methodology. The data is the average per household quantity of charcoal in wood equivalent. The data stated in the MR and ER spreadsheet was cross- checked with the KPT results and are consistent. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored accordance to the registered GSPDD. b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD The data applied was based on the KPT survey results whether the accuracy of equipment used for conducted in February 2016. /ER1/ monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies /QM1/ occur; in this case, make sure that the most The data applied was cross-checked with survey results /QM2/ conservative assumptions theoretically possible have conducted and found to be consistent. been made for calculating ERs. /O4/ The calibration of the scale used for the KPT test was verified. Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures are met. Assess further if the calibration of the
Page 66 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
monitoring equipment has been carried out by QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented competent personnel. appropriately. Conclusion: It can be concluded, the data applied is consistent. c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description: /ER1/ conservative manner. The data applied as based on the KPT survey conducted in Feb In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the 2016 monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment Verifier´s action: of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given. The data applied was cross-checked against the database KPT results conducted in Feb 2016 and found consistent. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion: The data applied is consistent with the surveyed results. Quantity of charcoal that is consumed in project scenario D.2.2. P p1.1,charcoal,y 1.1 during year y a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ According to the registered GSPDD and applied methodology, measured / determined. this parameter data is monitored biennial /ER1/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and The data is from the most recent KPT survey conducted in /IM02/ if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard February 2016 and applied for this monitoring period. equipment other measurement / determination /NRB/ The data is used to calculate the project emission from charcoal
used in the project scenario.
Page 67 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the Verifier´s action: frequency of measurements as per the requirements. The data stated in the MR was cross-checked with the KPT Assess whether the measurement / determination surveyed results and the value applied is consistent. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan and the applied methodology. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored accordance to the registered GSPDD. b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ The data applied was based on the KPT survey results whether the accuracy of equipment used for conducted in February 2016 and no equipment was involved in /ER1/ monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance monitoring. with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies /QM1/ Verifier´s action: occur; in this case, make sure that the most /QM2/ conservative assumptions theoretically possible have The data applied was cross-checked with survey results been made for calculating ERs. /O4/ conducted and found to be consistent. Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures The calibration of the scale used for the KPT test was verified are met. Assess further if the calibration of the QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented monitoring equipment has been carried out by competent personnel. appropriately. Conclusion: It can be concluded, the data applied is consistent. c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description: /ER1/ conservative manner. The data applied is based on the KPT survey results conducted in Feb 2016
Page 68 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the Verifier´s action: monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment of the conservativeness of the approach used should The data applied was cross-checked against the KPT survey be given. results conducted on Feb 2016 and are consistent. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and Conclusion: descriptions of the CARs raised. The data applied is consistent with the surveyed results. Quantity of charcoal that is consumed in project scenario D.2.3. Pp1.2,charcoal,y 1.2 during year y a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ According to the registered GSPDD and applied methodology, measured / determined. this parameter data is monitored biennial /ER1/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and The data is from the KPT survey conducted in February 2016
if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard and applied for this monitoring period. equipment other measurement / determination The data was used in calculating the project emission from methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the charcoal used in the project scenario. frequency of measurements as per the requirements. Verifier´s action: Assess whether the measurement / determination method is in line with the registered monitoring plan The data stated in the MR and ER spreadsheet was cross- and the applied methodology. checked with the surveyed results and are consistent Conclusion: The parameter is monitored accordance to the registered GSPDD. b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ whether the accuracy of equipment used for
Page 69 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance /ER1/ The data applied was based on the KPT results conducted with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies during February 2016 and no equipment was involved in occur; in this case, make sure that the most /QM1/ monitoring. conservative assumptions theoretically possible have /QM2/ been made for calculating ERs. Verifier´s action: /O4/ Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures The data applied was cross-checked with KPT results
are met. Assess further if the calibration of the conducted and found to be consistent. monitoring equipment has been carried out by competent personnel. The calibration of the scale used for the KPT test was verified QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented appropriately. Conclusion: It can be concluded, the data applied is consistent.. c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description: /ER1/ conservative manner. The data applied as based on the KPT survey results In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the conducted in Feb 2016 monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment Verifier´s action: of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given. The data applied was cross-checked against the KPT results conducted on Feb 2016 and found consistent. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion: The data applied is consistent with the surveyed results.
D.2.4. Pp1.2,wood,y Quantity of wood that is consumed in project scenario 1
Page 70 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ According to the registered GSPDD and applied methodology, measured / determined. this parameter data is monitored biennial /ER1/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and The data is based on the KPT survey conducted in February if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard 2016 and applied for this monitoring period. equipment other measurement / determination The data was used in calculating the project emission from methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the wood use in the project scenario. frequency of measurements as per the requirements. Verifier´s action: Assess whether the measurement / determination method is in line with the registered monitoring plan The data stated in the MR was cross-checked with the KPT and the applied methodology. surveyed results and are consistent. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored accordance to the registered GSPDD. b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ The data applied was based on the KPT survey results OK OK conducted in February 2016 and no equipment involved in the In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ monitoring. whether the accuracy of equipment used for /ER1/ monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies /OM1/ The data applied was cross-checked with KPT survey results occur; in this case, make sure that the most conducted and found to be consistent. conservative assumptions theoretically possible have /OM2/ been made for calculating ERs. /O4/ The calibration of the scale used for the KPT test was verified
Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented are met. Assess further if the calibration of the appropriately. monitoring equipment has been carried out by competent personnel. Conclusion:
Page 71 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
It can be concluded, the data applied is consistent. c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description: /ER1/ conservative manner. The data applied as based on the KPT survey results In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the conducted in Feb 2016 monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment Verifier´s action: of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given. The data applied was cross-checked against the KPT results conducted in Feb 2016 and found to be consistent. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion: The data applied is consistent with the surveyed results. Quantity of charcoal that is consumed in baseline scenario D.2.5. P b2,charcoal,y 2 a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ According to the registered GSPDD and applied methodology, measured / determined. this parameter data is monitored once at the beginning of the /ER1/ crediting period. Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and
if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard The data is from the most recent KPT survey conducted in equipment other measurement / determination February 2016 and applied for this monitoring period. methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the The data is used to calculate the baseline emission from frequency of measurements as per the requirements. charcoal use in the baseline scenario 2. Verifier´s action:
Page 72 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Assess whether the measurement / determination The data stated in the MR and ER spreadsheet was cross- method is in line with the registered monitoring plan checked with the KPT results and the value applied is and the applied methodology. consistent. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored accordance to the registered GSPDD. b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ The data applied was based on the KPT survey results whether the accuracy of equipment used for conducted in February 2016 and no equipment was involved in /ER1/ monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance monitoring. with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies /QM1/ Verifier´s action: occur; in this case, make sure that the most /QM2/ conservative assumptions theoretically possible have The data applied was cross-checked with KPT results been made for calculating ERs. /O4/ conducted and found to be consistent. Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures The calibration of the scale used for the KPT test was verified are met. Assess further if the calibration of the monitoring equipment has been carried out by QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented competent personnel. appropriately. Conclusion: It can be concluded, the data applied is consistent. c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description: /ER1/ conservative manner. The data applied as based on the KPT survey conducted in Feb
2016
Page 73 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the Verifier´s action: monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment of the conservativeness of the approach used should The data applied was cross-checked against the database KPT be given. results conducted in Feb 2016 and found consistent. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and Conclusion: descriptions of the CARs raised. The data applied is consistent with the surveyed results.
D.2.6. Pb2,wood,y Quantity of wood that is consumed in baseline scenario 2 a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ According to the registered GSPDD and applied methodology, measured / determined. this parameter data is monitored once at the beginning of the /ER1/ crediting period. Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard The data is derived from the KPT survey conducted in February equipment other measurement / determination 2016 and applied for this monitoring period. methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the The data is used to calculate the baseline emission for quantity frequency of measurements as per the requirements. of wood use in the baseline scenario 2. Assess whether the measurement / determination Verifier´s action: method is in line with the registered monitoring plan and the applied methodology. The data stated in the MR and ER spreadsheet was cross- checked with the KPT results and are consistent. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored accordance to the registered GSPDD. b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ The data applied was based on the KPT results conducted in whether the accuracy of equipment used for February 2016 and no equipment was involved in monitoring.
Page 74 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance /ER1/ Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies occur; in this case, make sure that the most /QM1/ The data applied was cross-checked with survey results conservative assumptions theoretically possible have conducted and found to be consistent. been made for calculating ERs. /QM2/ The calibration of the scale used for the KPT test was verified Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures /O4/ are met. Assess further if the calibration of the QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented monitoring equipment has been carried out by appropriately. competent personnel. Conclusion: It can be concluded, the data applied is consistent. c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description: /ER1/ conservative manner. The data applied as based on the KPT results conducted on In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the Feb 2016 monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment Verifier´s action: of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given. The data applied was cross-checked against the KPT results conducted in Feb 2016 and found to be consistent. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion: The data applied is consistent with the KPT results. Quantity of charcoal that is consumed in project scenario D.2.7. P p2,charcoal,y 2 during year y a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK /GSPDD/
Page 75 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Describe how the monitoring parameter was /ER6/ There are no units distributed during this monitoring period. measured / determined. Therefore, no surveyed results. /ER1/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and Verifier´s action: if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment other measurement / determination The KPT data were reviewed and cross-checked with the ER methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the spreadsheet and not such ICS distributed during this monitoring frequency of measurements as per the requirements. period. Assess whether the measurement / determination Conclusion: method is in line with the registered monitoring plan and the applied methodology. The parameter is in accordance with the registered GSPDD.
b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ There are no units distributed for this ICS during this monitoring whether the accuracy of equipment used for period. Therefore, no surveyed results. monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies occur; in this case, make sure that the most .Refer above. conservative assumptions theoretically possible have Conclusion: been made for calculating ERs. Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures No data available since no distribution of stoves. are met. Assess further if the calibration of the monitoring equipment has been carried out by competent personnel.
c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description:
conservative manner.
Page 76 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the There are no surveyed data for this parameter since no monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment distribution yet. of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given. Verifier´s action: In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and No data available for cross-checking since the ICS is not descriptions of the CARs raised. distributed yet. Conclusion: The parameter is in accordance to registered GSPDD.
D.2.8. Pp2,wood,y Quantity of wood that is consumed in project scenario 2 a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ There are no units distributed for this type of ICS during this measured / determined. monitoring period. Therefore, no usage results. Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and Verifier´s action: if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard The survey data were reviewed and there were no such ICS equipment other measurement / determination distributed during this monitoring period. methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of measurements as per the requirements. Conclusion: Assess whether the measurement / determination The parameter is in accordance with the registered GSPDD. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan and the applied methodology.
b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ There are no units distributed for this type of ICS during this whether the accuracy of equipment used for monitoring period. Therefore, no surveyed results. monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies
Page 77 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
occur; in this case, make sure that the most No data available for cross-checking. conservative assumptions theoretically possible have been made for calculating ERs. QA/QC procedures not implemented yet for this parameter. Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures Conclusion: are met. Assess further if the calibration of the monitoring equipment has been carried out by No data available since no distribution of stoves. competent personnel.
c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description:
conservative manner. There are no surveyed data for this parameter since not In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the distribution yet. monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment Verifier´s action: of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given. No data available for cross-checking since the ICS is not distributed yet. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion: The parameter is in accordance to registered GSPDD. Quantity of charcoal that is consumed in project scenario D.2.9. P p3,charcoal,y 3 during year y a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ There are no units distributed for this type of ICS during this measured / determined. monitoring period. Therefore, no usage results.
Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and Verifier´s action: if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard
Page 78 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
equipment other measurement / determination The survey data were reviewed and there were no such ICS methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the distributed during this monitoring period. frequency of measurements as per the requirements. Conclusion: Assess whether the measurement / determination method is in line with the registered monitoring plan The parameter is in accordance with the registered GSPDD. and the applied methodology.
b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ There are no units distributed for this ICS during this monitoring whether the accuracy of equipment used for period. Therefore, no surveyed results. monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies occur; in this case, make sure that the most No data available for cross-checking. conservative assumptions theoretically possible have been made for calculating ERs. QA/QC procedures not implemented yet for this parameter. Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures Conclusion: are met. Assess further if the calibration of the No data available since no distribution of stoves. monitoring equipment has been carried out by competent personnel.
c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description:
conservative manner. There are no surveyed data for this parameter since no In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the distribution yet. monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment Verifier´s action: of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given.
Page 79 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and No data available for cross-checking since the ICS is not descriptions of the CARs raised. distributed yet. Conclusion: The parameter is in accordance to registered GSPDD.
D.2.10. Pp3,wood,y Quantity of wood that is consumed in project scenario 3 a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ There are no units distributed for this type of ICS during this measured / determined. monitoring period. Therefore, no usage results.
Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and Verifier´s action: if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard The survey data were reviewed and there were no such ICS equipment other measurement / determination distributed during this monitoring period. methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of measurements as per the requirements. Conclusion: Assess whether the measurement / determination The parameter is in accordance with the registered GSPDD. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan and the applied methodology.
b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ There are no units distributed for this ICS during this monitoring whether the accuracy of equipment used for period. Therefore, no surveyed results. monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies occur; in this case, make sure that the most No data available for cross-checking. conservative assumptions theoretically possible have been made for calculating ERs. QA/QC procedures not implemented yet for this parameter. Conclusion:
Page 80 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures No data available since no distribution of stoves. are met. Assess further if the calibration of the monitoring equipment has been carried out by competent personnel.
c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description:
conservative manner. There are no surveyed data for this parameter since no In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the distribution yet. monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment Verifier´s action: of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given. No data available for cross-checking since the ICS is not distributed yet. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion: The parameter is in accordance to registered GSPDD.
D.2.11. Up,y Usage rate in project scenario p during year y a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CL D1 OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ The parameter data is based on the annual usage survey measured / determined. conducted in August 2016. /ER1/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and Verifier´s action: /ER6/ if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard The verification team has cross-checked the usage survey data equipment other measurement / determination and found the data applied is unclear and which is applicable. methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of measurements as per the requirements. Conclusion:
Page 81 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Assess whether the measurement / determination The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered method is in line with the registered monitoring plan GSPDD. and the applied methodology. Refer CL D1 raised b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: CL D1 OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /ER1/ The data applied was based on the annual usage survey and whether the accuracy of equipment used for no equipment was involved in monitoring. /ER6/ monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies /GSPDD/ occur; in this case, make sure that the most The data applied was cross-checked with usage survey for /QM1/ conservative assumptions theoretically possible have consistency and unclear which value is applicable. been made for calculating ERs. /QM2/ QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures appropriately. are met. Assess further if the calibration of the monitoring equipment has been carried out by Conclusion: competent personnel. The parameter is monitored according to the registered GSPDD. Refer CL D1 raised c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial CL D1 OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description: /ER1/ conservative manner. The data applied was based on the annual usage survey. /ER6/ In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the Verifier´s action: monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment of the conservativeness of the approach used should The data was cross-checked against the survey records for be given. consistency.
Page 82 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and Conclusion: descriptions of the CARs raised. The value applied at draft MR assessment is deemed to be incorrect. Refer CL D1 raised. Technologies in the project database for project scenario D.2.12. N p,y p through year y a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CL D2 OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ The parameter monitors the total number of ICS distributed measured / determined. during this monitoring period. /SD2/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and According to the production records, the number of ICS /ER1/ if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard distributed during this monitoring period is 100,604 units. equipment other measurement / determination /O6/ Verifier´s action: methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the
frequency of measurements as per the requirements. The verification team has cross-checked the data in the ER and MR with the sales records. Assess whether the measurement / determination method is in line with the registered monitoring plan The number of ICS distributed is based on reported data from and the applied methodology. the producers and keyed into the database at the central ARMI office. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored in accordance to the registered GSPDD. Refer to CL D2 raised. b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK /SD2/
Page 83 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /ER1/ The data was based on the production records obtained from whether the accuracy of equipment used for the producers records and no equipment was involved in monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance /QM1/ monitoring. with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies /QM2/ occur; in this case, make sure that the most Verifier´s action: conservative assumptions theoretically possible have been made for calculating ERs. The verification team had checked the quality control procedures of the programme. Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures are met. Assess further if the calibration of the QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented monitoring equipment has been carried out by appropriately. competent personnel. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored according to the registered GSPDD. c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description: /ER1/ conservative manner. The data is based on the sales records from the producers. /SD2/ In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the Verifier´s action: monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment /O6/ of the conservativeness of the approach used should The data has been checked against the survey forms records
be given. to confirm that the data is correctly consolidated. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and Conclusion: descriptions of the CARs raised. The data applied in the MR is correct. D.2.13. Project fuel type share Share of each fuel pattern in project scenario PS1 a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK
Page 84 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ According to the registered GSPDD and applied methodology, measured / determined. this parameter data is monitored biennial /ER1/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and The data is derived from rapid survey conducted in February if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard /O3/ 2016 and applied for this monitoring period. equipment other measurement / determination methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the Verifier´s action: frequency of measurements as per the requirements. The data stated in the MR was cross-checked with the surveyed Assess whether the measurement / determination results and the value applied is consistent. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan Conclusion: and the applied methodology. The parameter is monitored accordance to the registered GSPDD. b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ The data is based on the survey conducted in Feb 2016 and no whether the accuracy of equipment used for equipment was involved in monitoring. /ER1/ monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies /O3/ occur; in this case, make sure that the most The data was cross-checked with the survey data for /QM1/ conservative assumptions theoretically possible have correctness. been made for calculating ERs. /QM2/ QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures appropriately. are met. Assess further if the calibration of the monitoring equipment has been carried out by Conclusion: competent personnel. The parameter is monitored according to the registered GSPDD. c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) /GSPDD/
Page 85 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /ER1/ Description: monitoring report is correct or determined in a conservative manner. /O3/ The data is derived from the survey conducted in Feb 2016. In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the Verifier´s action: monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment of the conservativeness of the approach used should The data has been checked against the survey records to be given. confirm that the data for correctness. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and Conclusion: descriptions of the CARs raised. The data applied in the MR is correct.
D.2.14. Number of advertising/promotion Cumulative number of advertising/promotion campaigns campaigns a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CAR D3 OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSPDD/ The parameter monitors the number of advertising / promotion measured / determined. campaign carried out for the monitoring period. /O5/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and Verifier´s action:
if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard The information for the number of advertising campaign equipment other measurement / determination conducted was not made available for cross-checking. methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of measurements as per the requirements. Conclusion: Assess whether the measurement / determination The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered method is in line with the registered monitoring plan GSPDD. and the applied methodology. Refer CAR D3 raised b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: CAR D3 OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ The data is based on the number of campaign carried out and whether the accuracy of equipment used for no equipment was involved in monitoring.
Page 86 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance /O5/ Verifier´s action: with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies occur; in this case, make sure that the most /QM1/ The information for the number of campaign carried out was not conservative assumptions theoretically possible have available for cross-checking. been made for calculating ERs. /QM2/ QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented
Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures appropriately. are met. Assess further if the calibration of the monitoring equipment has been carried out by Conclusion: competent personnel. The parameter is monitored according to the registered GSPDD. Refer CAR D3 raised c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial CAR D3 OK assessment) Determine whether the value given in the sustainability /GSPDD/ monitoring report is correct or determined in a Description: /O5. conservative manner. The data is based on the number of advertising / promotion In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the campaign conducted. monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment Verifier´s action: of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given. The information for the number of campaign carried out was not available for cross-checking the correctness. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion: Refer CAR D3 raised.
D.2.15. LEp,y Leakage in project scenario p during year y a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK /GSPDD/
Page 87 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Describe how the monitoring parameter was According to the registered GSPDD, leakage was conducted in measured / determined. Feb 2016 and was considered low based on the assessment Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and by the PP demonstrated in table 12 of MR. if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard Verifier´s action: equipment other measurement / determination methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the Table 12 in MR was verified and cross-checked with table 22 of frequency of measurements as per the requirements. registered GSPDD. Assess whether the measurement / determination Conclusion: method is in line with the registered monitoring plan and the applied methodology. The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered GSPDD. b) Accuracy and QA/QC Procedure /MR/ Description: OK OK In case of measured (or estimated) values, check /GSPDD/ The monitoring of the parameter is in accordance with the whether the accuracy of equipment used for registered GSPDD and no instrument used in the /QM1/ monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance measurement. with the monitoring plan or if significant inaccuracies /QM2/ Verifier´s action: occur; in this case, make sure that the most
conservative assumptions theoretically possible have The verification team had cross-checked the MR with the been made for calculating ERs. registered GSPDD for consistency. Describe whether all applicable QA/QC procedures QA/QC procedures are in place and implemented are met. Assess further if the calibration of the appropriately. monitoring equipment has been carried out by competent personnel. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored according to the registered GSPDD. c) Correctness /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) /GSPDD/
Page 88 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Determine whether the value given in the sustainability Description: monitoring report is correct or determined in a conservative manner. Leakage was conducted in Feb 2016 and was considered low based on the assessment by the PP demonstrated in table 12 In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the of MR. monitoring as per registered MP detailed assessment of the conservativeness of the approach used should Verifier´s action: be given. Table 12 in MR was verified and cross-checked with table 20 of In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and registered GSPDD. descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered GSPDD.
D.3. Parameters monitored for Sustainability D.3.1. ID 1: Air quality Parameter 1: Amount of fuel (wood equivalent) saving a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CL F1 OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was measure /GSP/ The amount of fuel saving is derived usage survey conducted in Feb. 2016. Refer Section 5.4 above.d / determined. /onsite/ The data monitors the amount of fuel combusted is reduced. Assess whether the measurement / determination /ER1/ Thus increased air quality in the homes. method is in line with the registered passport, applied /SD1/ toolkit and GSPDD. . Verifier´s action: /LHH/ The survey database was verified and the calculations on the savings in reduced combustion of biomass was verified The households were interviewed and could confirmed using the ICS improved air quality. Conclusion:
Page 89 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
The monitoring of this parameter is in accordance to the registered GSP. Refer CL F1 raised. b) Correctness and Scoring /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial CL G1 OK assessment) Determine whether the monitoring method/value given /ER1/ in the sustainability monitoring report is correct or Description: /GSP/ determined in a conservative manner. The data in the monitoring report was incorrect determined. /SD1/ In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the Verifier´s action: monitoring as per registered passport detailed assessment of the conservativeness of the approach The survey database was verified and the calculations on the used should be given. savings in reduced combustion of biomass was verified. Score in accordance to Toolkit Annex I Conclusion: In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and Refer CL F1 raised descriptions of the CARs raised. Score: In the baseline scenario, there was zero saving. During ttis monitoring period the saving is 115,498 tons of wwod equivalent, therefore, the score is positive (+). Parameter 2: Percentage of stove users who notice “less ID 1: Air quality smoke” from using the ICS compared to their baseline stoves a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CL F1 OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was measure /GSP/ The parameter monitored the percentage of used who notice the reduction in smoke is derived the usage survey conducted Refer Section 5.4 above.d / determined. /onsite/ in Feb. 2016.
Page 90 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Assess whether the measurement / determination /ER6/ The data monitors the amount of fuel combusted is reduced. method is in line with the registered passport, applied Thus increased air quality in the homes. toolkit and GSPDD. . /LHH/ Verifier´s action: The survey database was verified and the calculations on the reduced in smoke using the ICS. The households were interviewed and could confirmed the ICS generates less smoke as compared to tradition stove. Conclusion: The monitoring of this parameter is in accordance to the registered GSP. Refer CL F1 raised. b) Correctness and Scoring /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial CL F1 OK assessment) Determine whether the monitoring method/value given /ER1/ in the sustainability monitoring report is correct or Description: /GSP/ determined in a conservative manner. The data in the monitoring report was incorrect determined. In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the Verifier´s action: monitoring as per registered passport detailed assessment of the conservativeness of the approach The survey database was verified and the calculations on the used should be given. reduced in smoke using the ICS was verified for correctness. Score in accordance to Toolkit Annex I Conclusion: In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and Refer CL F1 raised descriptions of the CARs raised. Score:
Page 91 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
In the baseline scenario, the baseline stoves emit higher smoke and combust more fuel. During this monitoring period 97.6% of the households reported less smoke emitted and less fuel combusted using ICS. Therefore, the score is positive (+). Parameter 1: Saved time spent for collecting and/or time D.3.2. ID 2: Livelihood of the poor for buying wood and charcoal a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CL F2 OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSP/ The saved time spent for collecting wood and / or time for measured / determined. buying wood and charcoal is derived from the usage survey /ER1/ conducted in Feb 2016. Assess whether the measurement / determination /O3/ method is in line with the registered passport, applied Verifier´s action: toolkit and GSPDD. . /LHH/ The usage survey database was reviewed during the onsite assessment The database management officer was interviewed. The verification team has interviewed the visited households during the onsite that they spend less time for collecting or buying the fuel. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored according to the registered GSP. Refer to CLF2 raised. . b) Correctness and Scoring /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial CL F2 OK assessment) /GSP/ Description: /ER1/
Page 92 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Determine whether the monitoring method/value given /O3/ The saving is derived by the usage survey conducted in Feb in the sustainability monitoring report is correct or 2016 and applied in the calculation. determined in a conservative manner. /SD1/ Verifier´s action: In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the monitoring as per registered passport detailed The usage survey database was reviewed during the onsite assessment of the conservativeness of the approach assessment used should be given. The data applied in the calculation is incorrect. Score in accordance to Toolkit Annex I Conclusion: In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Refer CL F2 raised. Score In the baseline scenario, the saved expenditure is zero. The saved time during this monitoring period is 1,046,855 hours, therefore, the score is positive (+). Parameter 2: Saved household expenditure on wood and / ID 2: Livelihood of the poor or charcoal a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CL F2 OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSP/ The saved household expenditures on wood and / or charcoal measured / determined. is derived from the usage survey conducted in Feb 2016. /ER1/ Assess whether the measurement / determination Verifier´s action: /O3/ method is in line with the registered passport, applied The usage survey database was reviewed during the onsite toolkit and GSPDD. . /SD2/ assessment /LHH/ The database management officer was interviewed.
Page 93 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
The verification team has interviewed the visited households during the onsite that their expenditure have been reduced using the ICS. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored according to the registered GSP. Refer to CLF2 raised. . b) Correctness and Scoring /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial Cl F2 OK assessment) Determine whether the monitoring method/value given /GSP/ in the sustainability monitoring report is correct or Description: /ER1/ determined in a conservative manner. The saving is derived by the usage survey conducted in Feb /O3/ In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the 2016 and applied in the calculation. monitoring as per registered passport detailed /SD2/ Verifier´s action: assessment of the conservativeness of the approach
used should be given. The usage survey database was reviewed during the onsite assessment Score in accordance to Toolkit Annex I The data applied in the calculation is incorrect. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion: Refer CL F2 raised. Score In the baseline scenario, the saved expenditure is zero. The save expenditure during this monitoring period is USD1,417,054, therefore, the score is positive (+).
D.3.3. ID 3: Access to affordable and clean Number of stoves sold under the project activity energy services
Page 94 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CL F3 OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSP/ The number of ICS sold is based on the producers’ receipts of measured / determined. sales and updated in the database on a monthly basis. /onsite/ Assess whether the measurement / determination Verifier´s action: /ER1/ method is in line with the registered passport, applied The database was verified on the number of ICS sold by the toolkit and GSPDD. . /LHH/ producers.
Samples of sales receipts were reviewed during interviews of producers. Conclusion: The monitoring of this parameter is in accordance to the registered GSP. Refer CL F3 raised. b) Correctness and Scoring /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial CL F3 OK assessment) Determine whether the monitoring method/value given /ER1/ in the sustainability monitoring report is correct or Description: /GSP/ determined in a conservative manner. The data in the monitoring report was incorrect. /SD2/ In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the Verifier´s action: monitoring as per registered passport detailed assessment of the conservativeness of the approach The sales recorded in the database was reviewed during onsite used should be given. visit. Score in accordance to Toolkit Annex I Samples of sales receipts were reviewed during interviews of producers. In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and descriptions of the CARs raised. Conclusion:
Page 95 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Refer CL F3 raised Score: In the baseline scenario, there ae zero ICS sold. During tis monitoring period, 100,604 ICS were sold, therefore, the score is positive (+).
D.3.4. ID 4: Biodiversity Amount of living biomass saving a) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK Describe how the monitoring parameter was /GSP/ The report cumulative amount of wood equivalent savings for measured / determined. this monitoring period was 115,498 tons. /ER1/ Assess whether the measurement / determination The data is based on: /SD4/ method is in line with the registered passport, applied a) Number of cook-stoves sold and operating from usage toolkit and GSPDD. . /ER6/ survey /LHH/ b) Saved fuel (wood equivalent) from KPT test Verifier´s action:
The method of calculating the accumulative savings for amount of living biomass saving is assessed as correct and in accordance with the GS Passport. The input data was derived from the usage survey and KPT conducted has been verified during onsite assessment. Conclusion: The method of determining the accumulative savings of amount of living biomass saving for the current monitoring period could be assessed as correct.
Page 96 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
b) Correctness and Scoring /MR/ Correct Not correct (initial OK OK assessment) Determine whether the monitoring method/value given /GSP/ in the sustainability monitoring report is correct or Description: /ER1/ determined in a conservative manner. The value in the monitoring report was calculated based on /SD4/ In case of conservative approaches used in lieu of the data from the Usage and KPT Survey. monitoring as per registered passport detailed Verifier´s action: assessment of the conservativeness of the approach used should be given. The database and procedures have been reviewed by the verification team. Score in accordance to Toolkit Annex I All the interviewed households advice using ICS has reduced In case of mistakes / deviations pl. provide details and the usage of charcoal since cooking is faster and boil water descriptions of the CARs raised. faster as compared to the traditional stove. Conclusion: The data of the survey is considered as correct. Score: In the baseline scenario, there is zero saving. For this monitoring the savings are equivalent to 115,498 tons of wood equivalent. Therefore, the score for the current monitoring period is positive (+).
D.4. Sampling a) Implementation of sampling plan /MR/ A sampling approach has been taken by the PP due to CAR D4 OK the large number of sales /ER1/ Cl D5 Description: /GSP/
Page 97 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Check whether the PP has applied a sampling /GSPDD/ The sampling as described in the MR is based on GS and EB approach to determine the monitored values (as per guidelines for: section D.2 above). /SSS/ 1. Kitchen Performance Test If this is the case, please provide an assessment /GSS/ whether the PPs have correctly and sufficiently 2. Usage Survey described the implemented sampling plan including Verifier´s action: - Description of the implemented sampling design The verification team has checked on the sampling plan and considered appropriate. - Collected data The data collected were reviewed and cross checked during the - Analysis of collected data onsite field inspection on the selected households to confirm the correctness. - Demonstration on whether the required confidence/precision has been met. Conclusion: The sampling plan applied by the PP is in compliance to GS recommendation and guidelines of UNFCCC. Refer CAR D4 and CL D5 raised. b) Sampling during verification /MR/ A sampling approach has been applied by the VT for OK OK selected the household for the field inspection and In case the VT has applied a sampling approach in /GSPDD/ interview. the course of the verification the approach shall be /GSVAL/ described for each parameter. Description: The verification team did not apply a sampling plan for this 1st verification for the additional onsite conducted on 2016-10-05 to 2016-10-06. This additional onsite was to gather information on the project implementation after registration. The initial onsite was conducted on 2015-06-22 to 2015-06-24 at the time of validation whereby the project is already implemented and
Page 98 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
60 households were visited and 32 households were interviewed by telephone. During the additional onsite 9 households were interviewed, 12 households were interviewed by telephone, 1 producer and 3 retailers were interviewed. The verification team considered the additional households, retailers and producer interviewed is sufficient to demonstrate the project implementation and cross-checked on the usage survey results conducted by the PP. Conclusion: Refer above approach taken by VT.
E. Calculation of Emission reductions E.1. Traceability /MR/ The verification team has checked the emission reduction CAR E1 OK calculation and confirms that: Assess if the calculation is fully traceable. In case of /ER1/ complex calculations an Excel calculation spreadsheet the calculation is fully traceable shall be used. All applied formulae must be visible. all applied formulae are visible In this context the following finding has been identified: Refer CL E1 raised. E.2. Parameter consistency /MR/ The verification team has checked the emission reduction OK OK calculation and the MR and confirms that: Assess whether all internal and external parameters /ER1/ and data used for calculation are applied consistently all parameter notations are consistent in the project in the monitoring report and the calculation documentation spreadsheet? all internal and external parameters and data used for calculation are consistently applied
Page 99 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Consider only the correct data exchange between the In this context no findings have been identified. monitoring report and the calculation spreadsheet (if any). Further ensure the consistency of notations for all parameters in the GSPDD, MR and calculation spreadsheet.
E.3. Correctness of calculation /MR/ The verification team has checked the emission reduction CAR D1 OK calculation and the MR and confirms that: Check if the applied formulae and methods for /GSPDD/ CAR D4 OK all applied formulae for calculating baseline emissions, calculating baseline emissions, project emissions and /ER1/ leakage are in accordance with the monitoring plan project emissions and leakage are in accordance with the and / or the approved methodology. monitoring plan Assess whether the provided calculations are the provided calculations are complete complete and reflect all requirements of the monitoring In this context the following findings have been identified: plan. Refer CAR D1 and CAR D4 Check especially that no standard or old values have been used for calculation where calculations based on up-to-date data is required.
E.4. Emission reductions table /MR/ The MR includes a summary table of the emission CAR D1 OK reductions calculation. /ER1/ CAR E1 OK Check if the MR includes a summary table of the The summary table specified the total baseline, project emission reductions calculation specifying separately and leakage emissions as well as the total emission - Total baseline emissions reductions separately. - Total project emissions: The values as specified in the ER summary table are correct; no issues have been identified during the - Total leakage verification which require changes in the ER calculation. - Total emission reductions. During the verification issues with impact on the ER calculation have been identified. Thus subject to the
Page 100 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Assess whether the values are correct or need to be closure of above listed findings the summary needs to be revised as a consequence of issues identified above. revised. In this context the following findings have been identified: Refer CAR D1 and CAR E1 raised E.5. Comparison with ex-ante determined /MR/ The verification team has checked the MR and confirms that: OK OK emission reductions /ER1/ the MR includes a comparison of actual emission reductions with the estimations of the registered GSPDD Check if the MR includes a comparison of actual /GSPDD/ values of the monitoring period with the estimations in the difference has been appropriately explained the registered GSPDD. Check further whether in case of an increase an In this context no findings have been identified appropriate explanation is included in the MR. Assess in case of a significant increase whether this is due to technical or organisational changes within or outside the control of the PP which might require a notification / approval of changes.
Page 101 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
ANNEX 2: CALIBRATION DATES AND VALIDITY OF INSTALLED MONITORING EQUIPMENT
Monitoring Related Serial Type Accuracy Previous Calibration Validity of Delay in Period of equipment monitoring number or accuracy calibration date(s): calibration(s) calibration: delayed parameter as per class (last yes/no calibration applicable calibration registered before start of monitoring plan this monitoring period)
daily in the Weight morning of the test No From: KPT Several NA ±5% NA day 1 year Scale Yes To: Nov 2015
Page 102 of 103 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Improved Cookstove Program in Lao PDR
TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program
R-No: MY-PVerGS 15/11 - 15/091
ANNEX 3: STATEMENTS OF COMPETENCE OF INVOLVED PERSONNEL
Page 103 of 103