GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Verification and certification report form for GS Voluntary Project Activity
Complete this form in accordance with the instructions attached at the end of this form.
BASIC INFORMATION
Title and GS reference number of the African Biogas Carbon Programme (ABC) – Tanzania – Voluntary Project Activity (VPA) CAMARTEC - VPA002 GS: 2751 (PoA: African Biogas Carbon Programme (ABC) (GS2747)) Project No: 19/037 – MY-PVerGS 19/05 Version number(s) of the VPA-DD to which this report applies 10.0
Version number of the verification and certification report 1.3
Completion date of the verification and certification report 17/10/2019
Monitoring period number and duration MP: 2 of this morning period VPA002: Duration: 01/01/2015 – 31/12/2018 both dates inclusive Number and version number of the Number: 1 monitoring report to which this report applies Version: 1.6
Coordinating/managing entity (CME) HIVOS Foundation
Host Parties Is this a host Party to a CPA Host Parties of the PoA covered in this report? (yes/no) Tanzania No Applied methodologies and standardized Technologies and Practices to Displace Decentralized baselines Thermal Energy Consumption (version 2.0)
Mandatory sectoral scopes linked to the Scope 1: Energy industries (renewable-/non-renewable applied methodologies sources) Scope 13: Waste handling and disposal1 Conditional sectoral scopes linked to the applied methodologies, if applicable N/A
Estimated amount of GHG emission reductions or GHG removals for this 463,196 tCO2e monitoring period in the included VPAs
1 VPA-DD refers to Scope 15 Agriculture whereas the related GS webpage https://www.goldstandard.org/resources/energy-requirements 1, 3 and 13 for this methodology. Scope 3 is not applicable due the nature of the project. Also as per UNFCCC accreditation standard ver 7.0 Manure (Animal waste management) belongs to Scope 13. Version 02.0 Page 1 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM covered in this report
Certified amount of GHG emission reductions or GHG removals for this monitoring period for the included VPAs 84,640 tCO2e covered in this report
Name of the GS-VVB TÜV NORD CERT GmbH
Name, position and signature of the Stefan Winter approver of the verification and certification report
Senior Assessor
Version 02.0 Page 2 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
SECTION A. Executive summary HIVOS Foundation has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program to carry out the 2nd periodic verification of the Voluntary Project Activity: “African Biogas Carbon Programme (ABC) – Tanzania – CAMARTEC - VPA002” The VPA was registered with GS on 07/01/2016, registration GS 2751 with a crediting period from 07/01/2014 – 06/01/2021 (including both dates) according to the GS registration review. The VPA aims to reduce GHG emissions to stimulate the use of biogas systems to replace traditional thermal energy generation methods by making biogas systems affordable and available to households. This verification report covers the monitoring period from 01/01/2015 to 31/12/2018 (including both days). Details of the VPA location in table A-1 below: Table A-1: Project Location
No. Project Location Host Country Tanzania Region: Arusha, Dar es Salam, Dodoma, Iringa, Kagera, Kaskazini Pemba, Kaskazini Unguja, Kilimanjaro, Kusini Pemba, Kusini Unguja, Manyara, Mara, Mbeya, Mjini Magharibi, Mjini Unguja, Morogoro, Mtwara, Mwanza, Njombe, Pwani, Rukwa, Ruvuma, Shinyanga, Simiyu, Singida, Songwe, Tanga Latitude: Approx: 1.212095 S to 11.40802 S Longitude: Approx: 31.17133 E to 37.55124 E
The technology implemented in this VPA are biodigesters of fixed dome type installed underground to treat animal waste anaerobically to generate biogas for use as cooking fuel and the bioslurry as organic fertilisers for farming. Table A-2: Technical data of the component project activity Maximum Maximum daily Maximum capacity of digester Size of digester m3 daily feed kg gas production m3 (kW) 4 30 1.2 1.00
6 45 1.8 1.47
9 60 2.4 2.21 13 90 3.6 3.34 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 registered PoA-DD and VPA-DD. • 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 monitoring system is in place and functional. The project has generated GHG emission reductions. As the result of the 2nd 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 VPA has achieved emission reductions in the above mentioned reporting period as follows:
Version 02.0 Page 3 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Emission reductions: 84,640 tCO2e
SECTION B. Verification team, technical reviewer and approver
B.1. Verification team members No. Role Last name First name Affiliation Involvement in
(e.g. name
of central or
other office of DOE or
findings
outsourced entity) (s)
site inspection
-
erification
Type of resource Desk review On Interview V 1. Team Leader EI Cheong Chun Yuen TN Malaysia x x x x (Robert)
B.2. Technical reviewer and approver of the verification and certification report No. Role Type of Last name First name Affiliation resource (e.g. name of central or other office of DOE or outsourced entity) 1. Technical reviewer EI Lubanga David - 2. Approver IR Winter Stefan TÜV NORD CERT GmbH
SECTION C. Means of verification
C.1. Desk/document 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 version of the PoA-DD including the monitoring plan/PoADD/; the registered version of the VPA-DD/VPADD/; the GS approved version of the VPA validation report/VAL/; previous monitoring report, verification report and GS issuance review report; GS non-conformity report; the monitoring report, including the claimed emission reductions for the VPA/MR/, the emission reduction calculation spreadsheet/ER/. Other supporting documents, such as any publicly available information and background information were reviewed.
Version 02.0 Page 4 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM C.2. On-site inspection* Duration of on-site inspection: 16/05/2019 to 20/05/2019 No. Activity performed on-site Site location Date Team member 1. Opening Meeting, Introduction and Arusha Cheong, Chun 16/05/2019 logistics arrangement for field visits Yuen (Robert) 2. Field visits to households Arusha 17/05/2019 to 19/05/2019 3. Site findings, findings reporting, timelines, Arusha 20/05/2019 closing meeting
Interviews /IM/ No. Interviewee Date Subject Team member Last name First Affiliation name 1. Otolo Natasha HIVOS (ABPP) / 16/05/2018 Opening Cheong, Chun Kalanda Programme Officer to meeting, field Yuen (Robert) /IM01/ 18/05/2019 visits, Review of Buysman Eric Consultant /IM02/ & MR ER and Michael James CAMARTEC / 20/05/2019 documentation, Biogas Program Telephone Manager /IM03/ interviews, Amon Nicholaus CAMARTEC / M&E Database, Officer /IM03/ Biogester Mosso Pastory CAMARTEC / Design, Survey Acting Director General /IM03/ 2 Otieno Jack Eco Frontier / 20/05/2019 Survey Director /IM04/
/LHH/ List of randomly selected households for onsite interview and telephone interviews.
No. MoI1 Household Householder Name Location Number Région District Village / Ward
1 V ARUS/2011/00080 Nakaji Kephas Kivuyo Arusha Arusha Ilkirowa
2 V ARUS/2011/00268 Israel Kisambu Mollel Arusha Arusha Ekenywa
3 V ARUS/2011/00267 Joel Kisambu Kirima Arusha Arusha Ekenywa
4 V ARUS/2011/00284 Simon Felix Mbise Arusha Arusha Ilkiushin
5 V ARUS/2011/00283 Philemon Samson Arusha Arumeru Nkoaranga Sarakikya
6 V ARUS/2012/00371 John Alfayo Moikan Arusha Arusha Olmotonyi
7 V ARUS/2013/00053 Joseph Paulo Arusha Arusha Ekenywa
8 V KILI/2013/00528 Joseph Shirima Arusha Moshi Rural Kifuni
9 V ARUS/2013/00192 The Orante of the Arusha Arusha Engutoto
Version 02.0 Page 5 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Assumption Sisters
10 V ARUS/2010/00168 Ndeoya Amos Mungure Arusha Meru Nshupu
11 V ARUS/2011/00244 Maiko S. Maravash Arusha Arusha Sinon Lemara
12 V ARUS/2011/00118 Betwel Petro Kivuyo Arusha Arusha Ikirowa
13 V ARUS/2011/00261 Richard Sanare Arusha Arusha Ilkiushin
14 V ARUS/2012/00051 Baraka Kaaya Arusha Arumeru Sakila
15 V ARUS/2012/00242 Pasian Loy Mollel Arusha Arusha Terati
16 V ARUS/2012/00054 Julias Somi Isanga Arusha Meru Sakila
17 V ARUS/2012/00064 Stephen Maina Arusha Arusha Ekenywa
18 V ARUS/2012/00081 John M. Sarakikya Arusha Arumeru Sakila
19 V ARUS/2012/00270 Emmanule Nginai Arusha Arusha Terati
20 V ARUS/2013/00075 Lameck Sifaeli Isan'gya Arusha Meru Sakila
21 V ARUS/2013/00110 Vumilia R.Chuwa Arusha Arusha Daraja 2
22 V ARUS/2013/00183 Emanueli Samweli Ayo Arusha Arumeru Olorien
23 V ARUS/2013/00196 Heri Japheti Urio Arusha Arumeru Sakila
24 V ARUS/2012/00176 Tdbp-Office Demo Plant Arusha Arusha Themi
25 V ARUS/2011/00130 Ndetomariswa Nderea Arusha Meru Singisi Kyungai
26 V ARUS/2010/00177 Titus Kandei Mungure Arusha Meru Nshupu
27 V ARUS/MERU/OMB Oscar Amos Mungure Arusha Arumeru Nshupu S/2010/05
28 V ARUS/2011/00112 Nderikwa M. Kitomari Arusha Meru Sing`isi
29 V ARS/MERU/OMBS Amani Robert Kitomari Arusha Meru Sing Isi /2010/08
30 T ARUS/2012/00273 Frank Majala Nyiti Arusha Arumeru Akheri
31 T KILI/2014/00004 Amalulu Lema Kilimanjaro Hai Bomangombe
Version 02.0 Page 6 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
32 T ARUS/2010/00227 Jaha HMlanzi Arusha Arusha Olorien
33 T DODO/2013/00002 David Tupa Dodoma Dodoma Msalato Mjini
34 T MBEY/REA/2016/0 Mazao Andambike/Daniel Mbeya Rungwe Syukula 0101 Mbogela
35 T KILI/2013/00207 Epaphras Laseri Mushi Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural OkaseniUru
36 T KILI/2013/01739 Jackson Ndanshau Kilimanjaro Hai Nshara
37 T ARUS/2011/00009 Asher Samson Muruve Arusha Arusha Ilkilorit
38 T ARUS/2012/00015 Daniel Kasaine Arusha Arusha Sokoni 1
39 T ARUS/2010/00159 Abraham Mika Arusha Arumeru Oldonyowasi
40 T ARUS/2011/00051 Godlisten Kessy Arusha Arumeru Imbasen
41 T KILI/2013/00266 Dausen FMunuo Kilimanjaro Siha Mae
42 T ARUS/2013/00330 Kajobi Lucas Mumbara Mara Serengeti Burunga
43 T KILI/2013/00831 Evangeline SKweka Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Soweto
44 T KILI/2014/00034 Gasper H Kilimanjaro Mwanga Lembeni Mgangao/Valence Mangara
45 T MBEY/2014/00216 Tisa Mision Mbeya Rungwe Mpuguso
46 T MWAN/2014/0000 Emanuel Korosso Mwanza Nyamagana Capri Point 3
47 T SING/2012/00022 Msafiri Seleman Singida Singida matumbo
48 T KILI/2010/00131 Samwel Meta Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Sango
49 T MANY/2014/00005 Sadikiel Makundi Manyara Babati Nakwa
50 T ARUS/2013/00208 Yusufu Juma Arusha Karatu Mbuga Nyekundu
51 T KILI/2013/01732 Editha Malya Kilimanjaro Hai Masama
52 T KILI/2013/00077 Amini E Mnzava Kilimanjaro Same Bangalala
53 T MANY/2011/00035 Christopher Namba Manyara Hanang Endasiwold
Version 02.0 Page 7 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Akonay
54 T KILI/2011/00065 Rogati Swai Kilimanjaro Hai Boma
55 T ARUS/2010/00022 Athuman Juma Arusha Arusha Moivo
56 T TANG/2012/00010 Alex Shekidele Tanga Lushoto Majulai
57 T MANY/2010/00046 Bathlemeo Madangi Manyara Mbulu Hydom
58 T NOPE/2012/00001 Mohamed Suleman Kaskazini Micheweni Kifundi Hassan Pemba
59 T MARA/2014/00030 Mfungo Sadoki Makunja Mara Serengeti Nyangasensa
60 T KILI/2012/00519 Peter G Mosha Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Kikarara/Klm
61 T KILI/2014/00130 Nipa Eliakim Mshana Kilimanjaro Mwanga Mbure
62 T ARUS/2010/00007 Godson Piniel Arusha Arusha Arusha
63 T MANY/2013/00089 Baraka Juma Dea Manyara Babati NHC
64 T MANY/2013/00120 Thomas Meshuki Mollel Manyara Babati Mrara
65 T KILI/2011/00314 Rudiaeli E Mmari Kilimanjaro Moshi Vijijini Lomakaa
66 T ARUS/2011/00066 Felix T Mollel Arusha Arusha Elerai
67 T KILI/2014/00309 Bakari Ibrahimu Swai Kilimanjaro Rombo Mbomai Juu
68 T KILI/2013/00723 Charles Kimaro Kilimanjaro Hai Misweeka
69 T ARUS/2013/00401 Joel SHamis Arusha Arusha Siwandeti
70 T ARUS/2012/00193 Samwel Ama Arusha Karatu Endamarariek
71 T ARUS/2012/00232 Faraji S Philipo Arusha Karatu Baray
72 T ARUS/2013/00303 Elizabeth Daniel Paulo Arusha Karatu Ayalabe
73 T ARUS/2010/00257 Mzee Kasala/Upendo Arusha Monduli Mlimani Mathew Kasala
74 T DARE/2013/00050 Theophil Joshua Kessy Dar Es Kinondoni Kibamba Salaam Hospital
Version 02.0 Page 8 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
75 T TANG/2013/00293 Jeremia Luiso Mahenge Tanga Pangani Mwembeni
76 T DODO/2012/00071 Kayumba Sudi Dodoma Dodoma Nghongona Manispaa
77 T KILI/2013/00679 Loth L Orio Kilimanjaro Siha Sanya Mjini
78 T ARUS/2010/00070 Ndole William Kachema Arusha Arusha Elerai
79 T ARUS/2010/00076 Shauri T. Amnaay Arusha Karatu Bashay
80 T SING/2010/00008 Timoth Magawa Singida Manyoni Mhalala
81 T ARUS/2010/00251 Joseph Erro Arusha Karatu Bashay
82 T ARUS/2011/00112 Ndekirwa M. Kitomari Arusha Meru Sing`isi
83 T ARUS/2010/00239 Julius Jacob Mbise Arusha Meru Ndoombo
84 T ARUS/2010/00245 Paulo Mighay Arusha Karatu Gongali
85 T KILI/2011/00027 Joseph Malya Kilimanjaro Moshi (V) Singa-Kibosho
86 T ARUS/2011/00052 Gabriel G Pallangyo Arusha Meru Nkoaranga
87 T ARUS/2011/00058 Ombeni A Nnko Arusha Meru Nkoaranga
88 T ARUS/2011/00075 Elibariki L. Pallangyo Arusha Arumeru Urisho
89 T KILI/2011/00057 Benedict Emilian Tarimo Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Kibosho
90 T ARUS/2011/00100 Loyshiye Mollel Arusha Arusha Olkokola District
91 T MBEY/2011/00029 Akimu Mwandima Mbeya Rungwe Itagata
92 T ARUS/2011/00182 Warra Nnko Arusha Karatu Tloma
93 T KILI/2011/00107 Sadikieli A.Mchau Kilimanjaro Moshi Vijijini Korini Kusini
94 T ARUS/2011/00258 Daniel Moses Mainoya Arusha Arusha Ilkiding'a
95 T MANY/2011/00030 Julius J. Bayo Dangat Manyara Babati seloto
96 T ARUS/2011/00094 Dismas Paul Masawe Arusha Meru Ngurdoto
Version 02.0 Page 9 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
97 T RUKW/2011/00005 Adamu Mtekele Morogoro Ifakara Mgeta
98 T ARUS/2011/00279 Joseph Sandilen Arusha Arusha Kkrevi
99 T KILI/2011/00461 Jastin Japhet Mushi Kilimanjaro Hai Foo
100 T KILI/2012/00670 Jonathan Shao Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Mwika
101 T ARUS/2012/00015 Daniel Kasaine Arusha Arusha Sokoni 1
102 T TANG/2012/00022 David Kagusa Tanga Korogwe Mnyuzi
103 T KILI/2012/00040 Getruda R.Mashayo Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Ashira
104 T DODO/2012/00004 Amosi Twalale Dodoma Chamwino Mvumi Mngano
105 T TANG/2012/00007 Adam Shaban Sembika Tanga Lushoto Lukozi
106 T ARUS/2011/00204 Humphrey Elipokea Arusha Arumeru Nguruma Kaaya
107 T ARUS/2012/00079 Apaikunda P. Maturo Arusha Arumeru Ndatu
108 T SORE/2012/00002 Suleiman Abdallah P3 Kusini Unguja Kati Machuwi
109 T KILI/2012/00145 Eliniachia H. Ngowi Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Meresini Himo
110 T KILI/2012/00208 Israel Michael Temu Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Mawenjeni
111 T ARUS/2012/00143 Sebastian Moshi Arusha Arumeru Lekitatu
112 T ARUS/2012/00388 Zachariah A. Nyiti Arusha Arumeru Akeri
113 T MANY/2012/00053 Moses Kimambo Shinyanga Kahama Mbulu
114 T DODO/2012/00082 Benard Nkondo Dodoma Dodoma Vyayula Mjini
115 T KILI/2012/00332 Japharson N. Moshi Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Msaranga/Klm
116 T MANY/2012/00074 Simon B. Genda Manyara Babati Sawe
117 T KILI/2012/00387 Nobert M. Msaki Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Kyala-Chini
118 T PWAN/2012/00008 Ismael Omari Msangi Pwani Bagamoyo Mapinga
Version 02.0 Page 10 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
119 T DODO/2012/00112 Richard Daniel Dodoma Dodoma Nzasa Municipal
120 T ARUS/2012/00302 Maria Laizer Arusha Arusha Nduruma
121 T ARUS/2010/00070 Juma Hussein Dodoma Chemba Elerai
122 T ARUS/2010/00076 Joseph Qamara Bajuta Arusha Karatu Bashay
123 T SING/2010/00008 Andrew Morogoro Kilombero Mhalala IbrahimMwaisumo
124 T ARUS/2010/00251 Julius Aligawesa Dodoma Dodoma Bashay Mjini
135 T ARUS/2011/00112 Pontian Benjamin Kagera Karagwe Sing`isi
126 T ARUS/2010/00239 Agustino Mushi Kilimanjaro Hai Ndoombo
127 T ARUS/2010/00245 Apolinary Kweka Dodoma Mpwapwa Gongali
128 T KILI/2011/00027 kumbuael I. Akyoo Arusha Meru Singa-Kibosho
129 T ARUS/2011/00052 Israel Mulaki Kagera Bukoba Nkoaranga
130 T ARUS/2011/00058 Izrael Urassa Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Nkoaranga
131 T ARUS/2011/00075 Ephamark Siolman Kilimanjaro Moshi Urisho Asenga
132 T KILI/2011/00057 Melita Singoi Lukumayi Arusha Arusha Kibosho
133 T ARUS/2011/00100 Eliakira Gabriel Pallangyo Arusha Arumeru Olkokola
134 T MBEY/2011/00029 Juliasi Jonas Laizer Arusha Arusha Itagata
135 T ARUS/2011/00182 Wales Lunyiliko Payovela Njombe Njombe Tloma
136 T KILI/2011/00107 Canon Mtengele Dodoma Dodoma Korini Kusini Manispaa
137 T ARUS/2011/00258 Livistowe Kipara Arusha Arumeru Ilkiding'a
138 T MANY/2011/00030 Lilian Gladson Kwayu Kilimanjaro Hai seloto
139 T ARUS/2011/00094 Erastos Mwilike Dar Es Kinondoni Ngurdoto Salaam
Version 02.0 Page 11 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
140 T RUKW/2011/00005 Emanuel Kongwa Simiyu Maswa Mgeta
141 T ARUS/2011/00279 Augustino Salakana Kilimanjaro Hai Kkrevi
142 T KILI/2011/00461 Central Buhongwa Mwanza Nyamagana Foo Secondary P2
143 T KILI/2012/00670 Philbert Kagene Kagera Bukoba Mwika
144 T ARUS/2012/00015 Amalulu Lema Kilimanjaro Hai Sokoni 1
145 T TANG/2012/00022 Frank Zackaria Mwanza Ilemela Mnyuzi
146 T KILI/2012/00040 Leonard S. Uchai Kilimanjaro Moshi Rural Ashira
147 T DODO/2012/00004 Kondelida Mashayo Tanga Handeni Mvumi Mngano Mushi
148 T TANG/2012/00007 Arufani S. Mshana Tanga Korogwe Lukozi
149 T ARUS/2011/00204 Nimpha Narcis Kilimanjaro Rombo Nguruma
150 T ARUS/2012/00079 Rev. Okully Jeftha Kilimanjaro Hai Ndatu Mwanga
151 T SORE/2012/00002 John E. Somi Kilimanjaro Hai Machuwi
152 T KILI/2012/00145 Nahumu Elisa Arusha Meru Meresini Himo
C.3. Sampling approach The verification team has applied the sampling plan based on 90/10 confidence level to ensure the households interviewed are representative to meet GS requirements. The number of installed units as at 31/12/2018 is 4,532 units Using the link http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html to calculate the sample size, 68 households will be sufficient to obtain a confidence level of 90 with 10% margin error. For conservative, the verification team has selected a sample size of 200 for households from the clusters in the different villages, different districts & different provinces for telephone interviews and 38 for field visits to obtain more information of the project implementation and monitoring of the SD indicators. Out of the 200 selected for telephone interview, 123 households were reached whilst 29 attended the field interviews out of the 38 invited. /LHH/ From the results from 152 interviewed households, it could be confirmed that: -: 1. Bio-slurry is applied for farming activities; 2. Living conditions have improved with savings using the biogas for cooking; 3. Reduced usage of firewood, charcoal and LPG has improved air quality and health conditions; 4. A proper system to treat the animal manure to improve the environment;
Version 02.0 Page 12 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Therefore, the sample size is representative based on the results obtained A summary of interview questions and feedback received are presented in the below table: Questions for households during Summary of feedback the site interviews What are the benefits brought to your Interview households informed they have clean and free-of- family from this biodigester program? charge gas for cooking. They can save time and money with the program with meals could be cook faster and efficient. This could be observed at the visited households. What is your baseline fuel? The interviewed households inform the baseline fuel is Are you using firewood and / or charcoal firewood. or LPG The interviewed households confirmed sufficient biogas for their daily cooking of 2 meals. They only use firewood when they need to cook food that require longer hours such as peanuts source, beans, continuous for boil water or large amount of food during family events or grill food. Interviewed households do not used charcoal. Some has LPG as standby. Do you have any technical problems with There are no technical problems so far except sometimes low the biodigester? gas supply due to insufficient feed of dung. Do you have any problems with the The masons could be contacted easily and respond within a masons and VPA implementer short time to provide answer to solve the minor issues such as removed water from the pipe or adjust the flame in the stove.. VPA implementer could be contact as and when required. Do you how to make a complaint The documents provided in the package has contact details for any complaint. So far no complaint. Are there are training provided by the After commissioning, training is provide in feeding dung to the masons? digester, wash the mixing unit and remove bioslurry for the discharge compartment. What do you do with the bio-slurry from The interviewed households said they are using bio-slurry for the biodigesters? the vegetable and food gardens. The households are happy that using the bio-slurry has increased crop yield and brings significant financial savings due to the reduction in use of chemical fertilizers. Some of the households apply the bio-slurry directly to the fields and some kept in the bio-slurry huts / pits before it is taken for application in the fields. Households expressed that the bio-slurry does not produce unpleasant odour as compared to fresh dung since it has been processed in the biodigesters. This could be observed from the onsite visited households.
C.4. Clarification requests, corrective action requests and forward action requests raised
Verification Topics No. of CAR No. of CL No. of FAR
Description of PoA (A) 4 0 0 General Description of PoA Corresponding generic component project activities (VPAs) VPAs included in the PoA Coordinating/managing entity
Implementation of PoA (B) 0 0 0 Description of implemented PoA
Version 02.0 Page 13 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Verification Topics No. of CAR No. of CL No. of FAR
Post-registration changes to PoA
Implementation of VPAs (C) 2 0 0 Description of implemented VPAs Location of VPAs Post-registration changes to VPAs
Description of monitoring system of VPAs (D) 0 0 0
Data and parameters (E) 14 1 0 Data and parameters fixed ex ante Data and parameters monitored GS social and environmental parameters Implementation of sampling plan
Emission reductions or net anthropogenic removals 3 0 1 (F) Baseline emissions or baseline net removals Project emissions or actual net removals Leakage emissions Emission reductions or net anthropogenic removals Comparison of emission reductions or net anthropogenic removals achieved with estimates Remarks on increase in achieved emission reductions
SUM 23 1 1
SECTION D. Verification findings
D.1. General
D.1.1. Remaining forward action requests from validation and/or previous verifications During the validation the validating DOE might have raised issues that could not be closed or resolved during the validation stage. For this purpose, FARs might have been raised. Likewise, FARs might have been raised in the course of previous verifications. In the course of this verification the latest version of the PoA-DD and VPA-DD and their respective validation reports have been checked in order to identify any remaining forward action requests. For the current monitoring period the following applies: (i) Open issues from validation:
There were no open issues which have been addressed in the latest version of the validation report. All open issues from the validation have been appropriately addressed in the context of previous verifications. All issues related to the validation have been appropriately addressed in the course of the current
monitoring period (for details please refer to appendix 4) The following issues related to the validation have not yet been appropriately addressed (for
details please refer to appendix 4): N/A
Version 02.0 Page 14 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM (ii) Open issues from previous verifications:
N/A – as this is the first monitoring period for this CDM project activity.
There were no open issues which have been addressed in the previous verification report All issues related to the previous verification have been appropriately addressed in the course of
the current monitoring period (for details please refer to appendix 4) The following issues related to the previous verification have not yet been appropriately
addressed (for details please refer to appendix 4): N/A
D.1.2. VPAs considered for verification and covered in this report Confirmation that a request for Version number Reference number of the Is the specific- issuance including of the registered specific-case VPA case VPA the specific-case PoA-DD to which included in the PoA as of considered for VPA has been the specific-case the end of this monitoring this verification? published for the VPA complies period (yes/no) previous with monitoring period (Y/N) VPA002 Yes 10.0 Yes
D.2. Programme of activities
D.2.1. Compliance of the programme implementation with the registered programme design document Means of verification By means of an in-depth review of the GS registered PoA-DD provided by CME with checks carried out during desk review and on-site visit, an assessment has been carried out whether the project has been implemented and operated in line with GS approved version of the PoA-DD and whether all physical features of the project are in place. The implemented technology, project design as well as monitoring was reviewed. Further has been checked if relevant technical equipment of the project activity during the monitoring period and consistent notations of key equipment (biodigester type) in PoA-DD, VPA-DD, MR and calculation spreadsheet are applied. Interviews with households, VPA implementer personnel have been carried out, data records, survey records, biodigester specifications were checked in this context. The following sources of information have been used in this context: /PoADD/ /VPADD/ /MR/ /GSM/ /ER/ /IPCC/ /IM/ Findings The project has been implemented as described in the latest version of the VPA-DD as well as in section B.1 of the monitoring report. No deviations thereof have been identified in the course of this verification. The following deviations from the registered project design and or the project description in the MR have been identified in the course of this verification (for further details please refer to section C.3.2 and C.3.6):
In this context the following CARs, CLs have been raised:
Version 02.0 Page 15 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Conclusion No CARs / CLs have been raised in this context. No correction was required in the context. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. During the verification, on site visit was carried out. On the basis of the site visit and the reviewed project documentation to confirm w.r.t. the realized technology, the project design, as well as the monitoring and data collection. The VPA has been implemented and operated as described in the GS approved PoA-DD and VPA-DD. Via on-site inspection and review of operation logs, it is confirmed that there were no significant downtimes, or any special events or events / situations which can impact the applicability of methodology.
D.2.2. Implementation and operation of the management system Means of verification The verification team conducted a review of the PoA-DD and checked related information against observations found during onsite inspection and interviews conducted during the onsite visit to respective households. The following sources of information have been used in this context: /PoADD/ /LHHs/ Findings The project management system has been implemented as described in the latest version of the PoA-DD as well as in section B.1 of the
monitoring report. No deviations thereof have been identified in the course of this verification. The following deviations from the registered project design and or the project description in the MR have been identified in the course of this verification (for further details please refer to section E.4): N/A In this context the following CARs, CLs have been raised:
Conclusion No CARs / CLs have been raised in this context. No correction was required in the context. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. During the verification an onsite visit was carried out. 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 equipment, as well as the monitoring procedures, the PoA has been implemented and operated as described in the latest PoA-DD version The PoA is managed by HIVOS as the Coordinating/Managing Entity (CME). Based on onsite inspection and interviews VVB found that the system is in place, appropriate and effective.
D.2.3. Post-registration changes
D.2.3.1. Temporary deviations from the registered monitoring plan or applied methodology. It has been checked whether Temporary deviations from the registered monitoring plan (TDfrMP) or Temporary deviations from monitoring methodology or standardized baseline (TDfMM) have been applied during this monitoring period. The result is summarized in the table below.
No Temporary deviations from the registered monitoring plan (TDfrMP) or Temporary deviations from monitoring methodology or standardized baseline (TDfMM).have been submitted to the UNFCCC prior to the current monitoring period.
Version 02.0 Page 16 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM The following TDfrMP or TDfMM have been approved or are under approval by GS 1 Title Status under approval; approved (approval No.: ) Appr.date Ref. No. 2 Title Status under approval; approved (approval No.: ) Appr.date Ref.No. During the verification of the current MP no need for a TDfrMP or TDfMM has been identified. The monitoring plan is in accordance with the approved methodology applied by the PA An approval of the following TDfrMP or TDfMM is to be requested from GS for the current MP.
1 Issue:
2 Issue:
The following TDfrMP or TDfMM for which appendix 1 of the PS is applicable have been applied:
1 Issue:
2 Issue:
D.2.3.2. Corrections It has been checked whether any corrections to PoA-DD information or parameters fixed at validation have been approved during this monitoring period or submitted with this monitoring report. The result is summarized in the table below.
During the verification of the current MP no need for corrections has been identified.
The following corrections have been applied:
1. Issue:
2. Issue:
3. Issue:
PoA-DD has been revised accordingly: (New) version No.: Revision date: It is confirmed that the updated / corrected information is an accurate reflection of the actual project information and that the corrected parameters are in accordance with the applied methodology and the monitoring plan.
A related post registration change has been submitted to GS prior to the issuance request. A related post registration change is submitted along with this issuance request.
D.2.3.3. Inclusion of a monitoring plan
N/A - as this monitoring plan was part of the registered PoA-DD In line with PS § 182 the PP has forwarded a monitoring plan to the VVB for validation. No prior approval of the monitoring plan was required as the CME in line with PS § 182 wished to submit the monitoring plan together with the request for issuance for the first monitoring period.
Version 02.0 Page 17 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM In line with § 282 the CME submitted a monitoring plan prior to the submission of the request for issuance for validation to the VVB. A VVB has assessed the monitoring plan in line with related VVS requirements and submitted a related report for prior approval.
D.2.3.4. Permanent changes to the registered monitoring plan or permanent deviation of monitoring from the applied methodology, standardized baseline or other applied standards or tools It has been checked whether any permanent changes from the registered monitoring plan (PCfrMP) or applied methodologies (PCfMM) including standardized baselines (PCfSB) have been approved prior or during this monitoring period or submitted with this monitoring report. The result is summarized in the table below.
No PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB have been submitted to GS prior to the current monitoring period The following PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB have been approved or are under approval by GS 1 Title Status under approval; approved Appr.date Ref. No. During the verification of the current MP no need for a PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB has been identified. The monitoring plan is in accordance with the approved methodology applied by the PoA An approval of the following PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB is to be requested from GS for the current MP as appendix 1 of the project standard does not apply. 1 Issue:
2 Issue:
The following PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB for which appendix 1 of the PS is applicable have been applied: 1 Issue:
2 Issue:
D.2.3.5. Changes to the programme design It has been checked whether any changes to the PoA-DD design (CoPD) have been approved prior or during this monitoring period or submitted with this monitoring report. The result is summarized in the table below.
No CoPD has been submitted to GS prior to the current monitoring period The following CoPD have been approved or are under approval by GS. 1 Title Status under approval; approved Appr. date Ref. No. 2 Title Status under approval; approved Appr. date Ref. No. During the verification of the current MP no need for a CoPD has been identified. The monitoring
Version 02.0 Page 18 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM plan is in accordance with the approved methodology applied by the PoA An approval of the following CoPD.is to be requested from GS for the current MP as appendix 1 of the project standard does not apply. 1 Issue:
2 Issue:
The following CoPD for which appendix 1 of the PS is applicable have been applied:
1 Issue:
2 Issue:
D.2.3.6. Change of coordination/managing entity
N/A. The programme of activities is not changing the coordination/managing entity
D.3. Component project activities
D.3.1. Implementation of VPA Means of verification By means of an in-depth review of the VPA-DD provided by the CME the checks carried out during the on-site visit an assessment has been carried out whether the project has been implemented and operated in line with GS approved VPA-DD and whether all physical features of the project are in place. The following has been checked: implemented technology, project equipment as well as monitoring and metering equipment. Further is has been checked if relevant technical equipment of the project activity has been exchanged or modified during the monitoring period in VPA- DD, MR and calculation spreadsheet are applied. Interviews with VPA implementer, CME personnel have been carried out for database records, biogas digester specifications, usage survey and training records were checked in this context. During the last verification, the verifying DOE has raise a FAR in the context of verify that the QA/QC process regarding the fraud prevention and detection is in place and shall asses the effectiveness of the proposed measures. The CME and VPA implementer has establish additional measures in section 6.1 of MR describing data collection, quality control, linking and learning. In addition, the VPA implementer and CME has update the database based on GS recommendation those households with digester commission from 13/03/2015 and without GPS coordinates will be removed from the database. In addition, the CME and VPA implementer will continue to obtain GPS coordinates for those digester commissioned before 13/05/2015 as measure to improve the quality control. Section 5 of MR, stakeholder feedback grievance mechanism the contact details are include to receive any comments and feedback. The comments book was review during onsite where the comments are related to the biodigester and repair requests. The visited households could confirmed they are satisfy with the VPA implementer’s mason and respond on time. There are no legal disputes reported. There is no double counting in other REC schemes with the declaration dated 06/04/2018 made by the CME. 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 found in Markit Meta Registry listed under the Gold Standard platform. It could be concluded the project activity is not involved in RECs. The CME has a survey mechanism in place together with appropriate mitigation measures to prevent double-counting in case of another similar activity with some of the target area in common. There are no other biogas activities in Tanzania, and in addition, since all plants are visited and of all
Version 02.0 Page 19 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM plants unique information is available, (unique plant code, GSP, location and name details etc), double counting is avoided. In addition, the contracts between the households and CME / VPA implementer were review that states all GHG emissions are transferred to CME and VPA implementer. The CME has update the method of calculating the ERs after communication with GS is explain in Section 1.7 of MR. The revised method applied is deem appropriate since it adopt GS751 approach that has been accepted by GS for the past 6 verifications. The following sources of information have been used in this context: /VPADD/ /MR/ /CB/ /REC/ /CoH/ /GSM/ /ER/ /US/ /PFT/KPT/BFT/ /T/ /VERMR1/ /IPCC/ /IM/ Findings The project has been implemented as described in the latest version of the VPA-DD as well as in section B.1 of the monitoring report. No deviations thereof have been identified in the course of this verification. The following deviations from the registered project design and or the project description in the MR have been identified in the course of this verification (for further details please refer to section E.4): N/A In this context the following CARs, CLs have been raised: CL A-1, CL A-2, CL A-3, CAR A-4, CAR A-5, CAR A-6, CAR A-7 Conclusion No CARs / CLs have been raised in this context. No correction was required in the context. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. During the verification an onsite visit was carried out. On the basis of this site visit and reviewed of project documentation it can be confirmed that w.r.t. the realized technology, the project equipment, as well as the monitoring and survey, the project has been implemented and operated as described in the registered VPA-DD version after relevant corrections.
D.3.2. Post-registration changes By means of site visit, document check and interview it could be verified that the project is implemented and operated in line with the registered VPA-DD and the applied methodology. Post registration changes have been identified and are assessed in detail in the subsequent steps.
D.3.2.1. Temporary deviations from registered monitoring plan or applied methodology It has been checked whether Temporary deviations from the registered monitoring plan (TDfrMP) or Temporary deviations from monitoring methodology or standardized baseline (TDfMM) have been applied during this monitoring period. The result is summarized in the table below.
Version 02.0 Page 20 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM No Temporary deviations from the registered monitoring plan (TDfrMP) or Temporary deviations from monitoring methodology or standardized baseline (TDfMM).have been submitted to the GS prior to the current monitoring period. The following TDfrMP or TDfMM have been approved or are under approval by GS. 1 Title Status under approval; approved (approval No.: ) Appr.date Ref. No. 2 Title Status under approval; approved (approval No.: ) Appr.date Ref.No. During the verification of the current MP no need for a TDfrMP or TDfMM has been identified. The monitoring plan is in accordance with the approved methodology applied by the VPA An approval of the following TDfrMP or TDfMM is to be requested from GS for the current MP as
appendix 1 of the project standard does not apply. Please refer to the related PRC report submitted along with this issuance request for further details w.r.t. the assessment of the PRC. 1 Issue:
2 Issue:
The following TDfrMP or TDfMM for which appendix 1 of the PS is applicable have been applied:
1 Issue:
2 Issue:
D.3.2.2. Corrections It has been checked whether any corrections to VPA information or parameters fixed at validation have been approved during this monitoring period or submitted with this monitoring report. The result is summarized in the table below.
During the verification of the current MP no need for corrections has been identified.
The following corrections have been applied:
1. Issue:
2. Issue:
3. Issue:
4. Issue:
5. Issue:
The VPA-DD has been revised accordingly: (New) version No.: It is confirmed that the updated / corrected information is an accurate reflection of the actual project information and that the corrected parameters are in accordance with the applied methodology and the monitoring plan.
A related post registration change has been submitted prior to the issuance request. No related approval numbers and dates are mentioned on the corresponding subpages of the PoA submitted to GS. The related documentation is accessible via:
Version 02.0 Page 21 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM A related post registration change is submitted along with this issuance request. Please refer to the related PRC report submitted along with this issuance request for further details w.r.t. the assessment of the PRC.
D.3.2.3. Permanent changes to the registered monitoring plan or permanent deviation of monitoring from the applied methodology, standardized baseline, or other applied standards or tools It has been checked whether any permanent changes from the registered monitoring plan (PCfrMP) or applied methodologies (PCfMM) including standardized baselines (PCfSB) have been approved prior or during this monitoring period or submitted with this monitoring report. The result is summarized in the table below.
No PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB have been submitted to GS prior to the current monitoring period The following PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB have been approved or are under approval by GS 1 Title Status under approval; approved Appr.date Ref. No. During the verification of the current MP no need for a PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB has been identified. The monitoring plan is in accordance with the approved methodology applied by the PA An approval of the following PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB is to be requested from GS for the current MP as appendix 1 of the project standard does not apply. 1 Issue:
2 Issue:
The following PCfrMP, PCfMM or PCfSB for which appendix 1 of the PS is applicable have been applied: 1 Issue:
2 Issue:
D.3.2.4. Changes to the VPA design It has been checked whether any changes to the VPA design (CoPD) have been approved prior or during this monitoring period or submitted with this monitoring report. The result is summarized in the table below.
No CoPD has been submitted to the GS to the current monitoring period The following CoPD have been approved or are under approval by GS 1 Title Status under approval; approved Appr. Date Ref. No. 2 Title Status under approval; approved Appr. Date Ref. No. During the verification of the current MP no need for a CoPD has been identified. The monitoring plan is in accordance with the approved methodology applied by the PA
Version 02.0 Page 22 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM An approval of the following CoPD.is to be requested from the GS for the current MP as appendix 1 of the project standard does not apply. 1 Issue:
2 Issue:
The following CoPD for which appendix 1 of the PS is applicable have been applied:
1 Issue:
2 Issue:
D.3.3. Compliance of monitoring activities with the registered monitoring plan Means of verification By means of comparison of the MR with (i) the applied GS methodology (ii) all applicable GS Meth toolkits (iii) any standardized baseline the verification team has checked whether the MP is in compliance with the MP related requirements of the applied methodology/tools/SB. The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /VPADD/ /IPCC/ Findings The MP is completely in accordance with the approved methodology applied by the GS project (registered version of the VPA-DD) The breakdown of MP accordance of the referenced tools is as follows: 1 Title (of the tool) Version MP compliance full compliance findings have been raised N/A (for MP) 2 Title (of the tool) Version MP compliance full compliance findings have been raised N/A (for MP) The breakdown of MP accordance of the applicable SB is as follows: Title (of the SB)
Version MP compliance In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. The monitoring plan is in complies with the registered monitoring plan and the methodology. No standardised baseline is applied.
Version 02.0 Page 23 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM D.3.3.1. Data and parameters fixed ex ante or at renewal of crediting period Means of verification The verification team has checked the ex-ante parameters and data stated in Section E.1 of MR and compared with section B.6.2 of the registered VPA-DD whether all parameters fixed ex-ante for the crediting period have been applied correctly. The following parameters have been fixed at validation or at renewal of crediting period: No. Parameter Value Unit
1 fNRB,y 96.0 %
2 EFb, bio 112 tCO2/TJ
3 EFp, bio 112 tCO2/TJ
4 EFp, fuel Kerosene = 71.9 tCO2/TJ LPG = 63.1
5 EFb, fuel Kerosene = 71.9 tCO2/TJ LPG = 63.1
6 NCVbio 0.015 TJ/tonne
7 NCVfuel Kerosene = 0.0438 TJ/tonne LPG = 0.0473
8 VST kg/head/day Animal kg/head/day T Dairy 1.90 cow Goat 0.35 Market 0.30 swine Breeding 0.30 swine Sheep 0.32 Other 1.50 cattle Poultry 0.01
9 BoT m3 CH4/kgVS Animal T m3 CH4/kg Dairy cow 0.13 Goat 0.13 Market swine 0.29 Breeding 0.29 swine Sheep 0.13 Other cattle 0.10 Poultry 0.36 0.55 ηbiogas stove Fraction
MCFx,k 17.25 %
EFawms,T kg CH4 Animal T kg CH4 Dairy cow 1 Goat 0.17 Other cattle 1 Sheep 0.15 Market swine 1 Poultry 0.02 Breeding 1 swine
Version 02.0 Page 24 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM PL 10 %
BBb1,bio 2.53 t/y
BBb2,bio 16.01 t/y
BBb3,bio 9.004 t/y The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /PoADD/ /VPADD/ /IPCC/ /IM02/ Findings The MR and the ER calculation have considered the parameters fixed ex- ante for the crediting period correctly, no deviations have been observed. The following deviations from the parameters fixed ex-ante or at renewal
of crediting period have been identified in the course of this verification: In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
CAR C-4 Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. The data and parameters listed in the table 17of MR was crosschecked with the applied methodology, VPA-DD, ER and after relevant corrections are consistent.
D.3.3.2. Data and parameters monitored Means of verification During the verification all relevant monitoring parameters (as listed in chapter B.7.1 of the PoA-DD and esp. D.7.1 of VPA-DD) have been verified with regard to the (i) appropriateness of the applied measurement / determination method, (ii) the correctness and accuracy of the values applied for ER calculation, (iii) applied QA/QC measures. The results as well as the verification procedure are described parameter-wise in the project specific verification checklist (Appendix 5). The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /PoADD/ /VPADD/ /GSM/ /GSP/ /ER/ /US/ /PFT/ /KPT/ /BFT/ /IM/ Findings CAR C-2, CAR C-3, CAR C-5, CAR C-6 Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements.
Version 02.0 Page 25 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. During the verification all relevant monitoring parameters (as listed in chapter D.7.1 of the registered VPA-DD) 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 described parameter wise in the project specific verification checklist. After appropriate corrections carried out by the CME it could confirm that all monitoring parameters have been measured / determined without material misstatements and in line with applicable standard and relevant requirements.
D.3.3.3. Implementation of sampling plan Means of verification The verification team has been checked whether the PPs have applied a sampling approach to determine the monitored values. - The PP has taken the approach for the sampling plan by adopting EB69 Annex 5 which includes level of assurance. - The biogas usage survey has a design confidence precision level of at least 90/30 according to the GS requirement. The usage survey sample size 280 households, BUS 2018 with 147 households, KPT (PFT) 60 households for BFT B1 & B2, 66 households for BFT B3 visited and interviewed. 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 Further it has been checked whether the CME has correctly applied the implemented sampling plan including (i) description of the implemented sampling design (ii) collected data (iii) analysis of collected data (iv) demonstration on whether the required confidence/precision has been met. The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /ER/ /VPADD/ /GSM/ /US/ /PFT/ /KPT/ /BFT/ /DB/ Findings The CME has not applied sampling approaches for the survey The CME has applied sampling approaches for the survey. In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
CL B-1 Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. The CME has described the sampling method applied with appropriate corrections made.
Version 02.0 Page 26 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM D.3.3.4. Compliance with the calibration frequency requirements for measuring instruments Means of verification During the verification the relevant monitoring equipment has been checked whether the calibration requirements have been met; especially if the calibration frequency is in line with the requirements of the applicable calibration standards. The accuracy of equipment used for monitoring is controlled and calibrated in accordance with the monitoring plan and relevant national rules. The calibrations of the weigh scale instrument is verified as listed in table given in Appendix 6 to this report. The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /VPADD/ /IM03/ Findings Inconsistencies of the calibration information with calibration reports.
The weigh scale instrument reflects the actual situation and is in line with the registered VPA-DD. In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. It could be confirmed that weigh scale is reported appropriately by the CME and VPA Implementer in the MR.
D.3.4. Assessment of data and calculation of emission reductions or net removals
D.3.4.1. Calculation of baseline GHG emissions or baseline net GHG removals by sinks Means of During the verification the calculation of baseline GHG emissions has been verification checked. In detail the following has been verified: Transparency: It has been checked whether the calculation of baseline emissions is fully traceable and, where used, the Excel calculation provides all calculation formulae. Parameter consistency: It has been checked whether all internal and external parameters and data used for the calculation are applied consistently in the monitoring report and the calculation spreadsheet. Correctness: It has been checked whether the applied formulae and methods for calculating baseline emissions are in accordance with the monitoring plan and the approved methodology. Completeness: It has been checked whether all calculations are complete and without omissions. The baseline emissions have 2 components as follows: 1. Emissions from fuel switch; These emissions are the comparing of fuel consumption in a project scenario to the baseline scenario according to the registered VPA-DD. In the baseline scenario, LPG, kerosene, firewood, charcoal are non- renewable fuel. The equation applied:
∑ER,CO2,y = ∑b1,p1Npi,y * Up1y * ((fNRB,y * ERb1,p1,y,CO2 + ERb1,2,3,p1,y,nonCO2-) – LEp1,y The inputs for the fuel usage data are derive from usage, KPT, BFT and PFT
Version 02.0 Page 27 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM survey.
Baseline emission for this component is 8.331 tCO2e/yr/hh. 2. Emissions from manure handling. The equation applied:
The inputs are from the usage survey. Baseline emission for this component for this monitoring period is 1.586 tCO2e/yr/hh The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /ER/ /US/ /VPADD/ /GSM/ Findings The calculation of the baseline emissions was found to be fully compliant with the above stated principles. The calculations of baseline GHG emissions or baseline net GHG removals have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the registered monitoring plan, the applied methodology and, where applicable, the applied standardized baseline. Any assumptions used in emission or removal calculations have been justified. Appropriate emission factors, IPCC default values, GWPs and other reference values have been correctly applied. No errors, miscalculations, omissions, misstatements or incomplete information has been identified. The verification team has identified mistakes in the baseline emissions calculation or the underlying calculation approaches. In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
CAR C-7, CAR C-8, CAR C-9 Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. Appropriate actions have been taken by the CME, therefore the calculation of the baseline for the VPA during this monitoring period could be confirmed as correct and conservative.
D.3.4.2. Calculation of project GHG emissions or actual net GHG removals by sinks Means of verification During the verification the calculation of project GHG emissions has been checked. In detail the following has been verified: Transparency: It has been checked whether the calculation of project emissions is fully traceable and, where used, the Excel calculation provides all calculation formulae. Parameter consistency: It has been checked whether all internal and external parameters and data used for the calculation are applied consistently in the monitoring report and the calculation spreadsheet. Correctness: It has been checked whether the applied formulae and methods for calculating project emissions are in accordance with the monitoring plan and the approved methodology. Completeness: It has been checked whether all calculations are complete and without omissions.
Version 02.0 Page 28 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM The current monitoring period, the power density of respective CPAs are calculated as in below table: The project emissions are contributed from: 1. Emissions from manure handling:
PEp1,CH4,y = GWPCH4 * ∑ (NT,h,y * EFawms,T) * PLy + ∑ (NT,h,y * EFawms,T) * (1- η new stove) (1- PLy) The input for the type of animals and number of animals are from the usage survey. The default value of 10% applied for physical leakage of biodigester. The animal waste not treated in the bio-digester in the project scenario is consider as zero since the non-treated animals in the project scenario will have the same situation as they would have had in the baseline. Project emission from manure handling for this monitoring period is 0.331 tCO2e/yr/hh
2. Emissions from fuel switch:
PEp1,CO2y = ∑(BBp1,fuel * NCVfuel * EFp1,fuel) + (BBp1,bio * NCVbio * EFp1,bio) Project fuel usage data for the project scenario collected from KPT survey. As there is only one project scenario applicable to the project activity included under this PoA, only one PFT to be conducted on the VPA level to determine project emissions (scenario p1) Project emissions from fuel switch for tis monitoring period is 2.698 tCO2e/yr/hh
3. Emissions from bio-slurry: In the ER spreadsheet, the CME has demonstrated the steps for the calculating the emissions for bio-slurry. The data applied in the calculation are derived from:
1. 2006 IPCC default value for animal excretion amount, MCF and methane potential; 2. The average head count of animals type are based on the usage survey results; 3. The fraction of waste entering the digester efficiency
The calculated emission for bio-slurry is 0.070 tCO2e/yr/hh The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /VPADD/ /ER/ /GSM/ /US/ Findings The calculation of the project emissions was found to be fully compliant with the above stated principles. The calculations of project GHG emissions or actual net GHG removals have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the registered monitoring plan, the applied methodology and, where applicable, the applied standardized baseline. Any assumptions used in emission or removal calculations have been justified. Appropriate emission factors, IPCC default values, GWPs and other reference values have been correctly applied. No errors, miscalculations, omissions, misstatements or incomplete
Version 02.0 Page 29 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM information have been identified. The verification team has identified mistakes in the project emissions calculation or the underlying calculation approaches. In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
CAR C-8 Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. The information stated in the monitoring report has been crosschecked with reservoir surface area mapping reports by a qualified third entity and nameplates of generators to confirm the correctness and for plausibility check. After corrections, the calculations of project GHG emissions have been carried out in accordance with the equation and methods described in the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology.
D.3.4.3. Calculation of leakage GHG emissions Means of verification During the verification it has been checked whether leakage emissions have to be considered and, in cases where leakage emissions have to be calculated, the respective calculation of leakage GHG emissions has been checked. In such cases the same verification principles have been considered as for the baseline and project emissions calculation. There are no leakage emissions from fuel switch. The leakage emissions from manure handling is included in the project emissions. Therefore, leakage is zero. The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /ER/ /VPADD/ /GSM/ Findings No leakage emissions were to be considered (LE = 0).
The calculations of leakage GHG emissions have been carried out in accordance with the formulae and methods described in the registered monitoring plan, the applied methodology and, where applicable, the applied standardized baseline. Any assumptions used in leakage emissions calculations have been justified. Where applicable, appropriate emission factors, IPCC default values, GWPs and other reference values have been correctly applied. No errors, miscalculations, omissions, misstatements or incomplete information have been identified. The verification team has identified mistakes in the project emissions calculation or the underlying calculation approaches. In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. No leakage considered since the leakage survey found 6 stoves transferred to neighbours out of 134 users. Whilst 122 households did not report additional fuel use. Therefore, potential leakage is considered as negligible.
Version 02.0 Page 30 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM D.3.4.4. Summary of calculation of GHG emission reductions or net GHG removals by sinks Means of verification The verification team has checked if the MR includes a summary table of the emission reductions calculation specifying separately - Total baseline emissions, - Total project emissions, - Total leakage, - Total emission reductions. The CME has update the method of calculating the ERs after communication with GS is explain in Section 1.7 of MR. The revised method applied is deem appropriate since it adopt GS751 approach that has been accepted by GS for the past 6 verifications. It has been assessed whether the values are correct or need to be revised as a consequence of issues identified above. The emission reduction for one household is calculated for this monitoring period as follows: 1. Emission reductions from fuel switch.
ERCO2,y = BEb1,CO2,y – PEp1,CO2,y – LEp1,CO2,y = 8.331 – 2.698 – 0
= 5.633 tCO2e/yr/hh 2. Emission reductions from manure handling.
ERCH4,y = BEb1,CH4,y – PEp1,CH4,y – LEp1,CH4,y) = 1.586 – 0.401 – 0
= 1.184 tCO2e/y/hh Therefore, the cumulative emission reductions for this monitoring period are determined as below:
ERTotal = (ERCO2,y + ERCH4,y y) * Np,y * Up,y
= 84,640 tCO2e The vintage emissions for this monitoring period as below table:
Vintage cumulative units Cumulative ER (tCO2e) installed 2015 4,204 20,170 2016 4,532 20,850 2017 4,532 21,810 2018 4,532 21,810 Total 84,640 The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /ER/ Findings Section 3.1.5 of the MR includes in a summary table of the emission reductions calculation. The summary table specified the total baseline, project and leakage emissions as well as the total emission reductions separately. The values as specified in the ER summary table are correct; no issues have been identified during the verification which requires changes in the ER calculation. During the verification, issues with impact on the ER calculation have been identified. In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
CL A-2, CAR C-9 Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements.
Version 02.0 Page 31 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM The raised CARs / CLs / FARs haves been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. The summary table in section 3.1.5 of MR has been filled correctly and the values are in line with the related emissions reduction spreadsheet after corrections.
D.3.4.5. Comparison of actual GHG emission reductions or net GHG removals by sinks with estimates in included VPA Means of verification The verification team has checked if the MR includes a comparison of actual values of the monitoring period with the estimations in the registered VPA-DD. Section 3.1.6 of the MR includes a comparison of the calculated actual emission reductions with the ex-ante calculated values in the registered VPA- DD. The total emission reductions in this monitoring period are proportionally lower than the estimated ex-ante. The reasons are for lower ex-post ERs are justify by the CME in section 3.1.6 is deem comprehensible. The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /ER/ /VPADD/ Findings Case 1: The ex-ante estimated value was found to be proportionally higher than the ex-post determined value. No further action is deemed required. Case 2: The ex-ante estimated value fits very good to the actually monitored value. No further justification is deemed required. Case 3: The ex-ante estimated value was found to be proportionally lower than the ex-post determined value. In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. The ex-ante estimated value is proportionally higher than the ex-post determined value.
D.3.4.6. Remarks on difference from estimated value in included VPA Means of verification On the basis of the above comparison of actual values of the monitoring period with the estimations in the registered VPA-DD the verification team has checked whether (in case 3) an appropriate explanation is included in the MR. For this monitoring period, the actual emission reductions were found lower than the estimated emission reductions in the registered VPA-DDs. Findings No further justification or explanation is deemed required as actual emissions of this MP do not exceed significantly the ex-ante calculated emission reductions (applicable for case 1 and 2). For case 3: The PP has provided a related justification in the MR. The reasons for the increase are as follows: In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements.
Version 02.0 Page 32 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. The ex-post ERs are lower than ex-ante estimation therefore, no justification required.
D.3.5. Assessment of reported sustainable development During the verification all relevant SD parameters (as listed in chapter B.7.1 of the PoA-DD and esp. D.7.1 of VPA-DD) have been verified with regard to the (i) appropriateness of the applied determination method, (ii) the correctness and accuracy of the values applied The results are described parameter-wise in the project specific verification checklist (Appendix 5).
The following sources of information have been used in this context: /MR/ /PoADD /VPADD/ /IM01/ /IM02/ The VVB has assessed and confirms that: a) The monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the document for monitoring sustainable development parameters, if such document
was developed and published by GS; b) The reported monitoring results correspond to the sustainable development parameters of the VPA as observed by the VVB. In this context the following CARs, CLs, FARs have been raised:
CL D-1, CL D-2, CAR C-3, CAR D-4, CAR D-5 CAR D-6 Conclusion No CARs / CLs / FARs have been raised in this context. No correction
was required. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs / FARs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. N/A – as the PP has not monitored the sustainable development co-
benefits of the registered CDM project activity or not requested the DOE to verify them.
D.3.6. Project Participants Means of The verification team has checked the MR against the registered VPADD on the validation names of the project participants. Findings The names of the project participants as listed in the revised DD (sections A.4. and appendix 1 are consistent with those listed on the registered PoADD and VPADD.
The respective requirements have widely been complied with; however; the following issues needed to be addressed in this context: CAR G-1 Conclusion No CARs / CLs have been raised in this context. No correction was required in the context. The project is in line with the respective requirements. The raised CARs / CLs have been addressed appropriately. The PP has carried out the requested corrections. All respective findings could be closed out. For details please refer to Appendix 4. With relevant correction, the verification team could conclude the name of project participant is appropriate.
Version 02.0 Page 33 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM SECTION E. Internal quality control Before the submission of the final verification report a technical review of the whole verification procedure was carried out. The technical reviewers are competent GHG auditors being appointed for the scope this project falls under. The technical reviewers are 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 have been confirmed or revised. Furthermore, reporting improvements might have been achieved. After the successful technical review, an overall (esp. procedural) assessment of the complete verification has been carried out by a senior assessor located in the accredited premises of TÜV NORD CERT GmbH. After this step the submission for requesting for issuance is conducted.
SECTION F. Verification opinion HIVOS Foundation has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program to carry out the 2nd periodic verification of the VPA: “African Biogas Carbon Programme (ABC) – Tanzania – CAMARTEC – VPA002”, with regard to stimulate the use of biogas systems to replace traditional thermal energy generation methods by making biogas systems affordable and available to households. This verification covers the period from 01/01/2015 to 31/12/2018 (including both days). As a result of this verification, the verifier confirms that: all operations of the VPA are implemented and installed as planned and described in the validated VPA-DD. 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 monitoring system is in place, functional and have generated GHG emission reductions. As the result of this periodic verification, the verifier confirms that the GHG emission reductions have been 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: 84,640 tCO2e
SECTION G. Certification statement As a duly accredited DOE, TÜV NORD CERT confirms that the PoA “African Biogas Carbon Programme (ABC) – Tanzania – CAMARTEC – VPA002 registered under GS ID.: 2751 has achieved emission reductions in accordance with all applicable requirements for registered CDM project activities during the current monitoring period MP-No.: 2 from: 01/01/2015 to: 31/12/2018 (including both days) as follows:
Emission reductions: 84,640 tCO2e
Version 02.0 Page 34 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Puchong, 17/10/2019
Cheong, Chun Yuen (Robert) TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP Verification Team Leader
Version 02.0 Page 35 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Appendix 1. Abbreviations Abbreviations Full texts CAR Corrective Action Request
CL Clarification
VPA Voluntary Project Activity
VPA-DD Voluntary Project Activity Design Document
CME Coordinating Managing Entity
CO2eq Carbon dioxide equivalent
ER Emission Reduction
FAR Forward Action Request
GHG Greenhouse gas(es)
GS Gold Standard
IM Interview
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
MP Monitoring Plan
MR Monitoring Report
PoA Programme of Activities
PoA-DD Programme of Activities Design Document
PRC Post Registration Changes
PS CDM project standard for project activities
QA/QC Quality Assurance / Quality Control
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
VVS Validation and Verification Standard
Version 02.0 Page 36 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Appendix 2. Competence of team members and technical reviewers
Version 02.0 Page 37 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Appendix 3. Documents reviewed or referenced No. Author Reference Title References to the Provider document 1. GS /GSM/ Technologies and Practices to Other Displace Decentralized Thermal Energy Consumption (version 2.0) 2 UNFCCC /GT/ Glossary “CDM terms” (version https://cdm.unfccc.int/ Other 09.1) Reference/Guidclarif/g los_CDM.pdf 3 UNFCCC /KP/ Kyoto Protocol (1997) http://unfccc.int/kyoto_ Other protocol/items/2830.p hp 4 UNFCCC /MA/ Decision 3/CMP. 1 (Marrakesh – http://cdm.unfccc.int/R Other Accords) eference/COPMOP/in dex.html 5 UNFCCC /PCP/ CDM project cycle procedure for https://cdm.unfccc.int/ Other programmes of activities version Reference/Procedures 02.0 /index.html 6 UNFCCC /PS/ CDM project standard for https://cdm.unfccc.int/ Other programmes of activities version Reference/Standards/i 02.0 ndex.html 7 UNFCCC /SS/ “Guidelines for Sampling and https://cdm.unfccc.int/ Other Surveys for CDM Project Reference/Guidclarif/i Activities and Programme of ndex.html Activities” (Version 03.0) http://cdm.unfccc.int/R “Standard for Sampling and eference/Standards/in Surveys for CDM Project dex.html Activities and Programme of Activities” (version 4.1) 8 IPCC /IPCC/ 1. 1996 IPCC Guidelines for www.ipcc- Other National Greenhouse Gas nggip.iges.or.jp Inventories: work book
2. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: work book 9 DOE /CPM/ TÜV NORD JI / CDM CP Manual DOE (incl. CP procedures and forms)
10 CME /PoADD/ Registered PoA Design Document CME for GS PoA: “African Biogas Carbon Programme (ABC)” version 07, dated 29/10/2015 11 CME /VPADD/ Registered VPA-Design Document CME for VPA0002: “African Biogas Carbon Programme (ABC) – Tanzania – CAMARTEC – VPA002” version 10, dated 21/01/2016 12 CME /GSP/ GS Approved Passport African CME Biogas Carbon Programme (ABC) – Tanzania – CAMARTEC – VPA002 version 4.0 dated 21/01/2016 13 CME /VAL/ Validation Report for African Biogas CME Carbon Programme (ABC) – Tanzania – CAMARTEC – VPA002”
Version 02.0 Page 38 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM version 03 dated 03/02/2016 14 CME /VER/ Documents of previous verifications CME (Monitoring report, verification report, ER calculation sheet) 15 CME /MR/ Monitoring Report version 1.0 dated CME 03/05/2019 Monitoring Report version 1.1 dated 29/05/2019 Monitoring report version 1.2 dated 03/06/2019 Monitoring report version 1.3 dated 07/07/2019 Monitoring report version 1.4 dated 10/07/2019 Monitoring Report version 1.5 dated 21/08/2019 Monitoring Report version 1.6 dated 16/10/2019 16 CME /ER/ ER calculation spreadsheet version CME 1.0 dated 03/05/2019 ER calculation spreadsheet version 1.1 dated 03/06/2019 ER calculation spreadsheet version 1.2 dated 07/07/2019 ER calculation spreadsheet version 1.3 dated 10/07/2019 ER spreadsheet version 1.4 dated 21/08/2019 ER Spreadsheet version 1.5 dated 25/09/2019 ER Spreadsheet version 1.6 dated 16/10/2019 17 CME /CoH/ Certificates of households CME 18 CME /AR/ Annual Report year 2015 and 2016 CME 19 CME /BFT/ Baseline Fuel Test for Firewood & CME Charcoal 20 CME /CB/ Customer Book CME 21 CME /DB/ Database for Households CME 22 CME /PFT/ Project fuel test firewood & charcoal CME 23 CME /KPT/ Kitchen performance test for CME firewood and charcoal 24 CME /T/ Training for Mason, Usage CME Surveyors, KPT 25 CME /TD/ Technical Design of Digester CME 26 CME /US/ Usage Survey A & B versions 1.0, CME 1.1, 1.2 & 1.3 27 CME /MER/ Masons Employment Records CME 2015-2018
Version 02.0 Page 39 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
28 CME /VERMR1/ Verification Report version 04 dated CME 31/10/2018 for MR1 29 CME /REC/ Declaration of double counting CME dated 06/04/2018 Websites http://www.goldstandard.org/ 28 /gs/ Others http://cdm.unfccc.int 29 /unfccc/ Others http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize. 30 /rs/ Others html https://www.graphpad.com/quickcal 31 /gp/ Others cs/randomselect1/
Version 02.0 Page 40 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Appendix 4. Clarification requests, corrective action requests and forward action requests
Table 2. Remaining FARs from validation and/or previous verification FAR ID 01 Section no. 1.3 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of FAR For the next request for issuance, the verifier DOE shall verify that the QA/QC process regarding the fraud prevention and detection is in place and shall asses the effectiveness of the proposed measures This FAR shall be closed before the 2nd requesting issuance submission of the verifier DOE CME response Date: 05/06/2019 See section 6.1 of MR. Documentation provided by the project participant MR DOE assessment Date: 06/06/2019 MR version 1.1 Section 6.1: The CME has included additional measures for data collection, quality control, linking and learning to address the FAR raised. Those digester commissioned after 13/05/2015 without GPS coordinates will be removed from the database. In addition, FAR F-1 is raised to verify the implementation plan in the next verification. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The FAR is closed
Table 3. CLs from this verification CL ID A-1 Section no: 1.3 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CL MR version 1.2, Section 1.3: 1. Clarification request on the end date VPA-002. 2. Clarification request for the number of digesters per year is based on contract sign date or construction start date. Project participant response Date: 05/06/2019 1. The CP start data is 07/01/2014 and therefore the end data is 06/01/2021 2. It is based on commissioning date Documentation provided by project participant Changes in the MR Section(s): 1.3 New version No.: 1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 06/06/2019 MR version 1.2, Section 1.3: 1. The CME clarify the end date VPA-002 is 06/01/2021 according to the GS registration. 2. The CME clarify the number of digesters per year is based on commissioning date. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CL ID A-2 Section no. 1.3 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CL MR version 1.1, Section 1.3: CME is request to justify for the increases of HHs from 4347 to 4532 Project participant response Date: 05/06/2019
Version 02.0 Page 41 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM The database used initially was not the final version. The number of units has increased from the initial database which was not the most up to date extract from the digital database (salesforce). Additional GPS coordinates were entered rending more units eligible for this MP. Evidences of this have been shared with the DOE (salesforce screenshots) The number of units changed with database updated and subsequently documents updated. Additional information added on page 7 of the MR to explain the difference. Documentation provided by project participant Section(s): multiple, page Changes in the MR New version No.:1.2 7 Changes in XLS VPA database Worksheet(s): New version No.: 1.1 Other: Salesforce screenshots. DOE assessment Date: 06/06/2019 MR version 1.2, Section 1.3: CME explain the increases of HHs from 4,347 to 4,532 due to the initial database submitted was not updated with those HHs with GPS coordinates. The provided screenshots from salesforce were reviewed to crosscheck on those HHs with GPS taken added into the database. Thus, the increase is appropriate. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CL ID A-3 Section no. 1.5 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CL MR version 1.0, Section 1.5: Clarification for the total ERs per year. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 The ERs per year are updated as per GS communication on the modified ER approach. The ERs are revised accordingly. In section 1.6 this approach is explained. Documentation provided by project participant Changes in the MR Section(s): 1.5 and 1.6 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 06/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 1.5: The total ERs per year were updated and re-calculated according to clarification with GS using the approach as GS751. The verification team consider the revised calculation method is appropriate since GS751 issuance have been approved for the last 6 verifications. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CL ID B-1 Section no. 2.5.2 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CL MR version 1.0, Section 2.5.2., table 10: Clarification on the total number of units for age group 2 to 8 and age group 1 to 2 exceeds the number of units in the DB. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019
Version 02.0 Page 42 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM The survey was sampled from the database including units without a GPS code. It was hoped that by time of the verification all plants would have GPS codes, but they did not and as a result units had to be excluded. This was the reason why there is a difference. Also, units included in the survey without a GPS code were excluded. Compared to the initial submission of the first package to the DOE the number of units have increased. This is after careful crosschecking of the database with salesforce and it appeared that some GPS were not copied into the excel extract. These have now been added Text has been added to section 2.3: The sampling frame of the BUS 2018 and PFT was sampled from the database which includes units without GSP coordinates (n=4712). During the development of this MP, all units without GPS code past 13/03/20152 were removed from the database, leaving only 4532 units. The VPA database as a result contains less units. It was hoped the numbers would be the same as new GPS data was coming in between the PFT execution and the final database used for this MR. This did not happen for all units, and as a result a discrepancy remained. The following action was undertaken: All households without GPS coordinate from the survey were deemed invalid (as these units are not formally eligible to be included in the VPA) and were removed from the survey results (0 from the PFT 2 from survey A and 13 from survey B) Underneath table 12 (table 10 in the old version), this sentence has been added: See section 2.3 on the discrepancy between the units sampled for the PFT and the actual number of units included in the database. Documentation provided by project participant Changes in the MR Section(s): 1.5, 2.3, 25.2 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: VPA02 MPII database – sheet analysis DOE assessment Date: 06/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 2.5.2., table 10 (now table 12): The CME has include clarification in section 2.3 explaining the discrepancies in the database due to units without GPS should not be consider in and removed. With the exercise to remove those units without GPS, the number of units in the database has reduced. With the removal of those without GPS, the number of units affected in the survey for PFT is 0 whilst survey A is 3 and survey B is 13. However, the removal of these units do not impact in the survey results since the number of units for the survey are still above the minimum required. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CL ID D-1 Section no. 4.2.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CL MR version 1.0, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-07: Clarification request on the increased in expenditure by 1 household. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 According to the survey implementer: The main reason is based on the increased cost of fuel. The respondent is a dairy farmer and he mentioned that the cost of fuel has gone up, mainly LPG. Most fuel is used for cooking food in addition to boiling milk and water. When the digester was working well it reduced him the cost of using LPG, the situation has since changed due to low gas production. So compared to baseline scenario it is just the cost of fuel that has increased. Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s): 4.2.1 New version No.: 1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 06/06/2019 MR version 1.0, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-07: CME explain the increased in expenditure by 1 household used more LPG due to low gas production from the biodigester. The increased is generally the fuel cost.
2 Only from the 13/03/2015 it is required that biogas plants have GPS coordinates (GS email exchange evidence is available at request) Version 02.0 Page 43 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CL ID D-2 Section no. 4.2.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-12: According to the chosen parameter, the number of constructors trained and users attending the operation and maintenance training will be monitored. Clarification request on the reporting does not include the users. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 It was never the intention to include the users, this was a mistake during the design of the project. In MPI therefore, the number of users trained were not included. Nevertheless, however, all users are trained by default. Information has been added however and the evidences are included in the response packages (see folder GS12) Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):4.21 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-12: The number of users trained has been updated. The number of users trained have been crosschecked with the annual report for correctness. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
Table 4. CARs from this verification CAR ID A-4 Section no. 1.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section A.1, Table 1: 1. The GS ID for the CPA at the footnote is incorrect. 2. The crediting period should be 07/01/2014 to 31/12/2020 3. The registration should be CPA 4. The MP date should be dd/mm/yyyy and throughout the MR. 5. The locations and number of digesters of the VPA is not listed. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. Updated 2. The CP is 7 years and therefore the CP end date is correct 3. Updated 4. Updated 5. Updated see section 1.3 Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):1.1 and 1.3 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section A.1, Table 1: 1. The GS ID for the CPA at the footnote is update and corrected. 2. The crediting period is 7 years therefore the CP date 07/01/2014 to 06/01/2021according to GS inclusion review. 3. The registration is corrected as the CPA 4. The MP date is corrected as dd/mm/yyyy throughout the MR. 5. The locations and number of digesters of the VPA is updated in table 2 and according to the database.
Version 02.0 Page 44 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID A-5 Section no. 1.3 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 1.3 & Database: The dates in the analysis sheet does not reflect the number of units commissioned in each month. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 Presumably this refers to section 1.3 – the units and dates are now matching. Note that the dates are in reversed order Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):1.3 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: Database Analysis sheet. DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 1.3 & Database: The dates in the analysis sheet are corrected to reflect the number of units commissioned in each month. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID A-6 Section no. 1.3 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 1.3: 1. The date 1/1/2017 should be dd/mm/yyyy. 2. The date stated in figure 2 is incorrect. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. updated 2. updated Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):1.3 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 1.3: 1. The dates are updated as dd/mm/yyyy. 2. The date stated in figure 2 is corrected. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID A-7 Section no. 1.4 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 1.4, FAR MPI: Chapter 3 did not describe how the FAR raised by the DOE has been addressed. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 The text is updated in section 1.4 and now refers to the section in which the FAR is addressed Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):2.5.3 and 1.4 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 1.4: The FAR in MPI raised by DOE during MR1 is updated and describe in section 6.1 the relevant measures to avoid future discrepancies.
Version 02.0 Page 45 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID C-1 Section no. 3.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 3.1: 1. Table 12: The format of the date to be in dd/mm/yyyy. 2. Table 12: The VPA end date is 31/12/2016. 2017 units shall be excluded. 3. Table 13: The number of units do not correspond with the database 4. Operational days: The number of days in TDBP MPII Survey A_B results sheet ‘Analysis A cell G6 shall be corrected. 5. Operation rate: the average number of days should be corrected. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. Updated 2. Removed 3. The units are now matching 4. This is updated, see B analysis cell C49 for 1461 days in the MP, the average operational days is 1355.61. See sheet B analysis C44. The MR is consistent. 5. This is corrected, see survey A and B sheet B Analysis row 34 to 47 for the calculation and cell C39 for the number of operation days. The operation rate is shown in cell C45. Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):3.1 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): survey B New version No.: 1.1 Other: DOE assessment Date: 06/06/2019 MR version 1.0, Section 3.1: 1. Table 12: The format of the date is updated as d/mm/yyyy. 2. Table 12: 2017 units are excluded since not include in this VPA02. 3. Table 13: The number of units corrected and correspond with the database 4. Operational days: The number of days for the MP is updated in B Analysis cell C49 as 1461 days. The average operation days is updated as 1,355.61. 5. Operation rate: The number of days is corrected as 1,189 with the operation rate updated as 92.79%. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID C-2 Section no. 3.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 3.1, Usage rate: According to the email from GS dated 30/09/2016, digesters commission after 13/03/2015 must have GPS coordinates besides the plant code number. However, reviewing the survey A and survey B spreadsheet, there are several plants commissioned after 13/03/2015 do not have GPS coordinates. 1. The database to be update accordingly. 2. The households commissioned after 13/03/2015 in the survey without GPS coordinates be treated? 3. The alternative to ensure the sampling size meets the requirements if those households without GPS are removed. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019
Version 02.0 Page 46 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM 1. The DB is updated accordingly 2. These have been removed, see sheet N0 GPS >13|03|2015 in the file VPA02 database 3. The PP has reviewed the sales force database and was able to update the database with more GPS coordinates. The PP has reviewed the survey data, and removed those without GPS code (2 from Survey A and 13 from Survey B, see TDBP MPII Survey A and B sheet B analysis and sheet ‘disqualified row 8 and 9 for survey A units and row 14 to 26 of Survey B units from column B onwards for both cases). The sample size is for survey A still larger than the minimum of 100 required, it is 145 (the DOE can check this by going to sheet Analysis A and count the number of samples), and in the case of survey B, the DOE can check sheet B Analysis Cell E 3 to cell E 9, all the age groups are 30 units or larger and thus meeting the requirements. Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s): New version No.: Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: VPA02 MPII database sheet VPA02 MPII DB Other: TDBP MPII Survey A and B sheet B analysis and sheet Survey A DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 3.1, Usage rate: 1. The database updated to include GPS for all units according to GS requirements. 2. The households commissioned after 13/03/2015 in the survey without GPS coordinates are removed from the database and listed in a separate sheet as NO GPS sheet. 3. The CME explain the sampling size meets the requirements with those households without GPS are removed. The survey A_B Analysis A and B Analysis sheet are crosscheck on the sample size meets the requirements. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID C-3 Section no. 3.1.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0 Section 3.1.1, Table 14;
1. The applied value for Np1,y should be number and not percentage. 2. The value in cell C11 of Analysis A sheet is not traceable.
3. The applied value for Nop1,y is inconsistent with database.
4. The applied value for Op1,y to be corrected in correspondence to the number of days of the monitoring period.
5. The source for BBb1,bio and BBb2,bio should be linked to the KPT results. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. Updated 2. These calculations are moved to sheet B Analysis, all values there are linked and traceable, see row 34 to 47. C11 was the number of project technology days, and is now cell C40 in B Analysis and is traceable 3. The database only contains data related to the number of units constructed, not the number of operational digesters. The number of technologies is depicted in cell C47 and is consistent with the database. Cell C46 calculates the average number in operation and is a calculation using a the number of technologies from the database times the operational rate. 4. Updated accordingly. This calculation is corrected using the number of days in the MP. See the calculation in the cells C41 to D42 and in particular the value used in D41 of 1461 which is the corrected number of days in the MP. The outcome is presented in cell C44 5. Updated and it is now linked Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):3.1.1 table 16 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): B analysis New version No.:1.1 Other:
Version 02.0 Page 47 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1 Section 3.1.1, Table 14 (now table 16);
1. The applied value for Np1,y is corrected as number. 2. The value in cell C11 of Analysis A sheet is moved to B analysis sheet cell C40.
3. The applied value for Nop1,y is updated and consistent with revised database.
4. The applied value for Op1,y is corrected in correspondence to the number of days of the monitoring period.
5. The source for BBb1,bio and BBb2,bio is now linked to the respective KPT results spreadsheets. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID C-4 Section no. 3.1.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 3.1.1 table 15:
1. The representation for EFb1,bio and EFp1,bio is not consistent with registered VPA-DD 2. The following parameters are not listed:
BBb1,bio, BBb2,bio, BBb3,bio, EFb,fuel, EFp,fuel, NCVfuel, Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. The EFs while referring to the same fuel have now been separate and each have their own row
2. BBb1,bio, BBb2,bio, BBb3,bio, are added
EFb,fuel, EFp,fuel, NCVfuel are added Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):3.1.1 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/20/9 MR version 1.0, Section 3.1.1 table 15:
1. The representation for EFb1,bio and EFp1,bio are updated and consistent with registered VPA-DD 2. The following parameters are updated:
BBb1,bio, BBb2,bio, BBb3,bio, EFb,fuel, EFp,fuel, NCVfuel Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID C-5 Section no. 3.1.2 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 3.1.2, table 16: The year stated in the title of the table is incorrect. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 Updated Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):3.1.2 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 3.1.2, table 16: The year stated in the title of the table is updated and correct. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID C-6 Section no. 3.1.2 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR
Version 02.0 Page 48 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM MR version 1.0, Section 3.1.2 table 15: 1. The table numbering should be update.
2. The source for BBb1,bio and BBb2,bio should be the KPT survey. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. The number is correct, the previous table was incorrect 2. Updated Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):3.1.2 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 3.1.2 table 17: 1. The table numbering is updated accordingly.
2. The source for BBb1,bio and BBb2,bio updated and refer to KPT survey. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID C-7 Section no. 3.1.3 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR
MR version 1.0, Section 3.1.3, Total emissions reductions from manure handling (ERCH4,y): 1. The values applied in the equation is not traceable 2. The data in table 35 are inconsistent with ER spreadsheet, cumulative sheet. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. This is now traceable, see section 3..1.4 and please refer to sheet Cumulative VER C101 of the ER calculation sheet v1.1 2. This is now updated Documentation provided by project participant Section(s): 3.1.3 and Changes in MR New version No.:1.1 3.1.4 Worksheet(s): Cumulative New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS VER Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019
MR version 1.1, Section 3.1.3, Total emissions reductions from manure handling (ERCH4,y): 1. The values applied in the equation is traceable to ER spreadsheet, cumulative sheet cells C101 2. The data in table 35 are corrected and consistent with ER spreadsheet, cumulative sheet Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID C-8 Section no. 3.1.5 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 3.1.5: 1. The ex-ante ERs for each year from 2015 to 2018 are inconsistent with the VPA-DD table 17.
2. The last sentence should be corrected to baseline scenario B3 ex-ante value of 28.256 tCO2 per year/hh. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. Updated and now consistent, see section 3.16 of MR v1.1 2. Updated and corrected, , see section 3.16 of MR v1.1 Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s): 3.1.6 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Version 02.0 Page 49 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 3.1.5 change to 3.1.6: 1. The ex-ante ERs for each year from 2015 to 2018 are corrected and consistent with the VPA-DD table 17.
2. The last sentence is updated as baseline scenario B3 ex-ante value of 28.256 tCO2 per year/hh. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID C-9 Section no. ER spreadsheet Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR ER spreadsheet version 1.0: 1. Cumulative sheet: Cells B4 and B5 should be updated. 2. Cumulative sheet: Cells B37 and K36 do not reflect the current monitoring period. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. Updated to GS calculation approach, see cumulative sheet B4. Given that the calculation approach is changed, the usage rate is removed. 2. Updated to the correct MP, see B34 and K33 Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s): New version No.: Worksheet(s): cumulative New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS VER Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 ER spreadsheet version 1.1: 1. Cumulative sheet: Cells B4 updated according to the approach submitted to GS according as GS751 calculation where usage rate is not used. 2. Cumulative sheet: Cells B37 change to B34 and K36 and K33 to reflect the current monitoring period. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID D-4 Section no. 4.2.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 4.2.1: The situation for GS-01, GS-03, GS-06, GS-07 and GS-12 should 31/12/2018. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 This is updated Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):4.2.1 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 4.2.1: The situation for GS-01, GS-03, GS-06, GS-07 and GS-12 updated as at 31/12/2018. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID D-5 Section no. 4.2.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR
Version 02.0 Page 50 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM MR version 1.0, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-01: 1. The data link in the survey spreadsheet is incorrect 2. The data in the table to be updated Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 1. Corrected 2. Updated Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s): 4.2.1 New version No.: 1.1 Worksheet(s): survey A New version No.: 1.1 Changes in XLS and B results sheet Analysis A Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-01: 1. The data link in the survey spreadsheet is updated 2. The data in the table is updated Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID D-6 Section no. 4.2.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-10: The chosen parameter is “The number of jobs generated by within the ABC PoA as well as the number of constructors employed will be monitored” However, the situation as at 31/12/2018 include fulltime staff and CAMARTEC is incorrect. Project participant response Date: 14/06/2019 The column CAMARTEC and fulltime staff is removed from the MR Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-10. The results now only show the number of masons and BCE active. Note that MS Words does not allow the removal of a column with track change from a table. The removal therefore is NOT shown in track change but simply disappeared. Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):4.2.1 New version No.:1.2 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 14/05/2019 MR version 1.2, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-10: The situation as at 31/12/2019 is updated to reflect the number of jobs generated by within the VPA that include the number of constructors employed. Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID D-7 Section no. 4.2.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR Mr version 1.0, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-12: The year for the temporarily suspension of the program shall be 2017. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 updated Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):4.2.1 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: Mr version 1.1, Section 4.2.1, Parameter GS-12: The year for the temporarily suspension of the program is corrected to 2017
Version 02.0 Page 51 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
CAR ID G-1 Section no. Annex 1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of CAR MR version 1.0, Annex 1: The project participants are not consistent with the registered PoA-DD Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 updated Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s):annex I New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other: DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 MR version 1.1, Annex 1: The project participants is updated and according to PoA-DD Conclusion Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) Tick the appropriate checkbox The finding is closed
Table 5. FARs from this verification FAR ID F-1 Section No. 6.1 Date: 20/05/2019 Description of FAR MR version 1.0, Section 6.1: According to the MR, additional quality control and check will be implement in the near future. The implementation plan and checks will review in the next verification. Project participant response Date: 03/06/2019 The Client Service Center will conduct another Quality check on a random selection of biogas plants in the database to update the status of these plants before end of the next MP Documentation provided by project participant Changes in MR Section(s): 6.1 New version No.:1.1 Changes in XLS Worksheet(s): New version No.: Other:
DOE assessment Date: 04/06/2019 The verifying DOE will review in the next MP verification.
Version 02.0 Page 52 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Appendix 5. Monitored Parameters
Table A-5: Periodic Verification Checklist – Monitored Parameters
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Description: Cumulative usage rate for technologies in project
1. Up1,y scenario p1 in year y, based on cumulative adoption rate and drop off rate (fraction)
Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CAR C-2 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ The cumulative usage rate of bio-digesters for the monitoring Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / period is 70.59%. determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /ER/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation The data is consolidated from the biogas usage survey results, /VPADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). conducted by an independent consultant. Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment The data is applied to calculate the emission reductions per unit other measurement / determination methods have been per month. used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of Verifier´s action: measurements as per the requirements. Assess whether the measurement / determination The data applied is crosscheck against the survey report records method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of and found inconsistent. the PDD and the applied methodology. The data applied in the ER spreadsheet was reviewed Conclusion: The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology. In this context the following findings have been raised:
CAR C-2
2. Np1,y Description: Cumulative number of project technology-days
Version 02.0 Page 53 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl. included in the project database for project scenario p1 against baseline scenario b1 in year y Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CAR C-3 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ The number of bio-digesters in operation during the monitoring Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / period is 4,205 adjusted by usage rate and operation rate. determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /ER/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation The data is calculated based on the survey results conducted trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). /VPADD/ Verifier´s action: Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment The survey results are reviewed on the data applied in the /IM other measurement / determination methods have been calculation and crosschecked the value applied in the ER used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of spreadsheet for correctness. measurements as per the requirements. Assess whether the measurement / determination method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of Conclusion: the PDD and the applied methodology. The parameter is monitored in according to the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology. In this context the following findings have been raised:
CAR C-3
3. NOp1,y Description: Cumulative number of project technologies included in the project database for project scenario p1 in year y 0) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CAR C-3 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /DB/ The number of units installed as at 31/12/2018 is 4,532 CL A-2 Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /ER/ The data is derived from the database based on commissioning (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation reports collated by VPA implementer from the BCEs and masons. trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). /PoADD/ Verifier´s action: Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /VPADD/ in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment The project database is review and crosschecked with the selected /LH/ other measurement / determination methods have been households for the onsite visits and telephone interviews to confirm
Version 02.0 Page 54 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl. used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of the data in the database are correct. /GSM/ measurements as per the requirements. VPA Implementer, CME and 3rd party surveyor interviewed. Assess whether the measurement / determination /IM01/ method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of Conclusion: the PDD and the applied methodology. /IM03/ The parameter is monitored in accordance to the registered VPADD and applied methodology. In this context the following findings have been raised:
CAR C-3
CL A-2
4. Op1,y Description: The average technology-days during which the bio digesters are operational for project scenario p1 against baseline scenario b1 in year y 1) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CAR C-3 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ The data is calculated using the number of days with the expected Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / number of household digesters not in operation derive from the 3rd determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /ER/ party usage survey report. (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation /VPADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). For this monitoring period, the calculated number of days for the Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ total number of installed digesters in operation is 1,355.61 days. in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment other measurement / determination methods have been /IM01/ Verifier´s action: used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /IM03/ The survey results are review to crosscheck on the number of units measurements as per the requirements. not functioning are replaced for correct calculation. Assess whether the measurement / determination /LHH/ The ER spreadsheet is review to crosscheck on the operation days method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of /GSM/ the PDD and the applied methodology. applied.
The households visited were interview on operation of the units. The 3rd party surveyor is interview on the survey results. VPA implementer and CME interview on data processing. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored according to the registered VPADD Version 02.0 Page 55 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl. and applied methodology.
In this context the following findings have been raised:
CAR C-3
5. LEp1,y Description: Leakage in project scenario p1 during year y Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ According to the registered VPA-DDs, the parameter will be Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / monitored once every two years using survey methods to meet the determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /VPADD/ requirements of the applied methodology. (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation /PoADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). A survey was conducted between 20/03/2019 to 01/04/2019 by the Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /GSM/ 3rd party consultant to obtain the leakage for usage of biomass in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment generally firewood and charcoal. other measurement / determination methods have been /IM03/ The leakage assessment is for the use of non-renewable biomass used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /IM04/ measurements as per the requirements. in the project scenario generally firewood and charcoal as fuel Assess whether the measurement / determination /IM02/ substitution in the monitoring period. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of For this monitoring period, leakage is considered zero. the PDD and the applied methodology. Verifier´s action: The survey report is reviewed to crosscheck the results and calculations that indicates the leakage is zero. The reported value in the MR and ER spreadsheet was crosscheck for consistency. The VPA implementer and 3rd party surveyor is interview on the data processing. Conclusion: The parameter has been monitored according to the registered VPA-DDs and applied methodology.
Version 02.0 Page 56 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
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 the following findings have been raised:
6. N,T,h Description: Number of animals of livestock category T in premise Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /ER/ The data for the number of animals for each category is derived Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / from the usage survey report. determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /US/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation For this monitoring period, the average number of animals per /VPADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). household as below: Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment dairy cattle 3.32 other measurement / determination methods have been /GSM/ other cattle 1.46 pigs (for market) 2.03 used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /IM03/ measurements as per the requirements. pigs (for breeding) 0.43 Assess whether the measurement / determination /IM02/ poultry 30.61 method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of sheep 0.83 goat 2.30 the PDD and the applied methodology.
Verifier´s action: The data applied in the ER spreadsheet was crosscheck with the data from the survey report Conclusion: The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology. In this context the following findings have been raised:
Version 02.0 Page 57 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
7. BBb ratio Description: Baseline scenario ratios Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /ER/ The baseline scenarios are the type of fuel used prior to biogas. Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /US/ B1 (Firewood): 65.2% (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation B2 (Charcoal): 15.7% trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). /VPADD/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ B3 (Firewood & Charcoal): 10.1% in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment B4 (LPG): 9.0% other measurement / determination methods have been /IM01/ rd used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /IM04/ The data is derived from the usage survey conducted by 3 party. measurements as per the requirements. Verifier´s action: Assess whether the measurement / determination /LHH/ method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of The data in the ER was crosscheck with the results from the usage the PDD and the applied methodology. survey calculation for consistency. During the onsite inspection, it could be confirmed firewood, charcoal and LPG are the baseline fuel used by the households prior to the installation of the biogas digester. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered VPADD and applied methodology In this context the following findings have been raised:
8.
Version 02.0 Page 58 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
9. BBb2,bio Description: Amount of woody biomass used in the baseline scenario b2 Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CAR C-3 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /ER/ The charcoal is one of the woody biomass in the baseline scenario. Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /KPT/ The amount of charcoal used by the households in the baseline (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation scenario is based on the KPT conducted in January 2015. trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). /VPADD/ Verifier´s action: Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment The data in the ER is crosschecked with the results from the KPT /IM01/ other measurement / determination methods have been primary data and analysis for consistency. used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /IM04/ measurements as per the requirements. During the onsite inspection, it could be confirmed charcoal is one Assess whether the measurement / determination /LHH/ of the woody biomass used prior to the bio-digester is installed. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of Conclusion: the PDD and the applied methodology. The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology In this context the following findings have been raised:
CAR C-3
10.
Version 02.0 Page 59 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
11. BBp1, bio Description: Quantity of biomass consumed in project scenario p1 during year y Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /ER/ The quantity of biomass used by the households in the project Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / scenario is measured by means of PFT conducted once in every 2 determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /PFT/ years. (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation /VPADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). The biomass consumed in the project scenario is firewood, and Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ charcoal in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment other measurement / determination methods have been /IM01/ Verifier´s action: used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /IM04/ The data in the ER is crosscheck with the results from the PFT measurements as per the requirements. survey results for consistency. Assess whether the measurement / determination /LHH/ During the onsite inspection, it could confirmed firewood and method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of the PDD and the applied methodology. charcoal used by households for cooking food that require long hours and with large family members. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology. In this context the following findings have been raised:
12. BBp1,fuel Description: Quantity of fossil fuel consumed in project
Version 02.0 Page 60 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl. scenario p1 Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /ER/ The quantity of fossil fuel used by the households in the project Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / scenario is based on the PFT survey conducted once in every 2 determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /BFT/ years. (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation /VPADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). The fossil fuel in the project scenario is LPG. Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment Verifier´s action: /IM01/ other measurement / determination methods have been The data in the ER is crosscheck with the results from the PFT used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /IM04/ survey results for consistency. measurements as per the requirements. Assess whether the measurement / determination /LHH/ During the onsite inspection, it was found LPG is used by some households as supplementary fuel. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of the PDD and the applied methodology. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored in accordance with the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology. In this context the following findings have been raised:
13. MST,S,k Description: Fraction of livestock category T's manure fed into the bio-digester, S in climate region k Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ The fraction of manure fed in the bio-digesters for respective Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / animal category as follows: determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /ER/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation dairy cattle 66.9% /VPADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). other cattle 64.4% Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ pigs (for market) 10.7% in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment /IM03/ pigs (for breeding) 11.1% other measurement / determination methods have been poultry 6.6% used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /IM02/ sheep 9.1%
Version 02.0 Page 61 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
measurements as per the requirements. goat 7.7% /IM04/ Assess whether the measurement / determination method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of /LHH/ The data is derive from the usage survey conducted by an the PDD and the applied methodology. independent consultant. Verifier´s action: The usage survey results are review and crosschecked with the date applied in the ER spreadsheet for consistency. During the onsite inspection, it could confirm animal waste of cattle fed into the digester. There only a few households feed pigs waste. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored according to the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology. In this context the following findings have been raised:
14. MSP,S,K Description: Fraction of livestock category T's manure not fed into the bio-digester, in climate region k Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ The fraction of manure not treated in the biodigesters for respective Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / animal category as follows: determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /VPADD/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation dairy cattle 33.1% /PoADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). other cattle 35.6% Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /IM04/ pigs (for market) 89.3% in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment /IM02/ pigs (for breeding) 88.9% other measurement / determination methods have been poultry 93.4% used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /LHH/ sheep 90.9% measurements as per the requirements. goat 92.3% Assess whether the measurement / determination The data is derive from the usage survey conducted by an
Version 02.0 Page 62 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of independent consultant. the PDD and the applied methodology. Verifier´s action: The usage survey results are review and crosschecked with the date applied in the ER spreadsheet for consistency. During the onsite inspection, it could confirm animal waste of pigs, poultry, sheep and goat are not fed into the digester. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored according to the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology. In this context the following findings have been raised:
15. GWPCH4 Description: Global Warming Potential of methane Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /ER The GWP is the methane content applicable during the monitoring Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / period is 25 for emissions generated as from 01/01/2013. determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /VPADD/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation Verifier´s action: trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). /PoADD/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if The GWP data applied in the MR and ER spread-sheet were in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment verified with 2006 IPCC for consistency other measurement / determination methods have been Conclusion: used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of measurements as per the requirements. The parameter is monitored in accordance to the registered VPA- Assess whether the measurement / determination DD and applied methodology. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of In this context the following findings have been raised: the PDD and the applied methodology.
Version 02.0 Page 63 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
16. Bio Description: Use of bio-slurry Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ The bio-slurry used by households for farming and vegetables Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / gardening activities. determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /ER/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation Daily spread 72.28% trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). /VPADD/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if /PoADD/ Slurry 19.02% in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment Uncovered lagoon 8.70% other measurement / determination methods have been /IM02/ The data is derive from the usage survey conducted by the 3rd used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of /IM04/ measurements as per the requirements. party independent consultant. Assess whether the measurement / determination The CME had calculated the emission from the use of bio-slurry method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of per household per year. the PDD and the applied methodology. The emissions are deducted from the emissions reduction. Verifier´s action: The survey result was reviewed to crosscheck on the percentage of households apply bio-slurry for farming activities. From the onsite inspection and telephone interviews of households,100% households apply bio-slurry for farming or gardening activities. The data applied in the ER spreadsheet is verify that the project emissions calculation for bio-slurry and could conclude included in the ER calculations. Conclusion: The parameter is monitored according to the registered VPA-DD and applied methodology In this context the following findings have been raised:
Version 02.0 Page 64 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
17. GS-01 Air quality Description: Perceived improvement in health by the user. (incidence of eye problems and respiratory illness) Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CAR D-3 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ The chosen parameter monitors users report a perceived CAR D-4 Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / improvement in health through reduced smoke inhalation through determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /VPADD/ an annual usage survey conducted by a 3rd party. (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation /PoADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). The situation as at 31/12/2018 as below: Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if Reduced 78.3% in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment other measurement / determination methods have been No changed 21.7% used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of Increased 0.0% measurements as per the requirements. Assess whether the measurement / determination Verifier´s action: method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of The usage survey results are review and crosscheck during the the VPADD and the applied methodology. visits and telephone interviews of households reported that using biogas does not give cause eyes problem and respiratory health issues of the family as compared to using firewood. Conclusion: The monitoring of the indicator is consistent with the GS Passport. Score: In the baseline scenario, no biogas available for used. Therefore, the score is positive with the usage of biogas for cooking in the project scenario. In this context the following findings have been raised:
CAR D-3
CAR D-4
18. GS-03 Soil condition Description: Percentage of biogas users who use slurry as a fertilizer
Version 02.0 Page 65 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ The number of households used bio-slurry for farming activities Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / reported 100% usage. determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /VPADD/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation The data was derived from the annual Biogas Usage Survey /PoADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). conducted by a 3rd party. Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment Verifier´s action: other measurement / determination methods have been The usage survey results are review and crosscheck during the used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of visits and telephone interviews of households that all of them apply measurements as per the requirements. the bio-slurry for farming and vegetable gardening Assess whether the measurement / determination method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of Conclusion: the VPADD and the applied methodology. The monitoring of the indicator is consistent with the GS Passport. Score: In the baseline scenario, there is no usage of bio-slurry. Therefore, the score is positive in the project scenario. In this context the following findings have been raised:
19. GS-06 Quality of employment Description: Number of masons attending training programmes Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CAR D-3 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /T/ The number of trainings conducted during this monitoring period Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / was 162. determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /VPADD/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation The monitoring of such number of training conducted was by VPA /PoADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). implementer CAMARTEC and captured in the project database. Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment Verifier´s action: other measurement / determination methods have been The training records in the project database were verify and used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of confirmed through interviews with the CAMARTEC personnel and measurements as per the requirements. BCEs during the site visit.
Version 02.0 Page 66 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
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 Conclusion: method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of the VPADD and the applied methodology. The monitoring of the indicator is consistent with the GS Passport. Score: In the baseline scenario, no training conducted as compared to project scenario. Therefore, the score is positive. In this context the following findings have been raised:
CAR D-3
20. GS-07 Livelihood of the poor Description: Percentage of users reporting changes in expenditure on fuel for cooking Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CL D-1 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /US/ The data is derive from the annual Biogas Usage Survey Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / conducted by a 3rd party. determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /VPADD/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation During this monitoring period, the reported data as below: trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). /PoADD/ Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if Decreased 94.6% in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment Stayed the same 0.0% Increased 1.1% other measurement / determination methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of Verifier´s action: measurements as per the requirements. Assess whether the measurement / determination The usage survey report and results are verified. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of During the onsite visits and telephone interviews, households the VPADD and the applied methodology. reported the decrease in expenditure in using biogas since it is free and sufficient. Conclusion: The monitoring of the indicator is consistent with the GS Passport. Score: In the baseline scenario, no biogas available as compared to project scenario. Therefore, the score is positive. In this context the following findings have been raised:
Version 02.0 Page 67 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
CL D-1
21. GS-08 Access to affordable and clean energy Description: Number of biogas units commissioned services Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: OK OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /DB/ The number of bio-digesters implemented as at 31/12/2018 is Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / 4,532 units determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /VPADD/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation The data is derived from the project database with the number of /PoADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). digesters implemented where the data is processed and captured Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if in the project database by CAMARTEC the VPA Implementer office in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment other measurement / determination methods have been Verifier´s action: used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of The project database is review and the data handling process is measurements as per the requirements. confirm through interviews with CAMARTEC and CME personnel Assess whether the measurement / determination during the site visit. method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of the VPADD and the applied methodology. Conclusion: The monitoring of the indicator is consistent with the GS Passport. Score: In the baseline scenario, no biogas units available as compared to project scenario. Therefore, the score is positive In this context the following findings have been raised:
22. GS-10 Quantitative employment and income Description: The number of jobs generated by within the VPA generation as well as the number of constructors employed will be monitored. Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CAR D-5 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /MER/ The number of jobs generated during the monitoring period is 375.
Version 02.0 Page 68 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
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 measured / /VPADD/ The data is derive from the VPA implementer monitoring records. determined. Focus primarily on the original data level (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation /PoADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). Verifier´s action: Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if The records are verify and the data handling process confirmed in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment through interviews with VPA implementer CAMARTEC. other measurement / determination methods have been used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of Conclusion: measurements as per the requirements. The monitoring of the indicator is consistent with the GS Passport. Assess whether the measurement / determination method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of Score: In the baseline scenario no jobs created as compared to the VPADD and the applied methodology. project scenario. Therefore, the score is positive. In this context the following findings have been raised:
CAR D-5
23. GS-12 Technology transfer and technological self- Description: The number of constructors trained and users reliance attending the operation and maintenance training will be monitored. Measurement / Determination method /MR/ Description: CL D-2 OK (VVS, §§ 363-367) /T/ The number of constructors and users attending training during CAR D-6 Describe how the monitoring parameter was measured / the monitoring period as follows: determined. Focus primarily on the original data level /VPADD/ (ODL) but also describe the applied data aggregation Year Mason user /PoADD/ trails (from ODL to data aggregation level zero (DAL0)). 2015 105 6,160 Check if relevant equipment has been exchanged and if 2016 158 2,512 in cases of failures / downtimes of standard equipment 2017 0 0 other measurement / determination methods have been 2018 0 0 used. Furthermore, verify the frequency of measurements as per the requirements. The data is derive from the VPA implementer monitoring records. Assess whether the measurement / determination Verifier´s action: method is in line with the registered monitoring plan of the VPADD and the applied methodology. The training records are verify and the data handling process confirmed through interviews with VPA implementer CAMARTEC.
Version 02.0 Page 69 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM
Checklist Item Refe- Verification Team Comments Draft Final (incl. guidance for the verification team) rence (Means and results of assessment) Concl. Concl.
Conclusion: The monitoring of the indicator is consistent with the GS Passport. Score: In the baseline scenario no training for masons and users as compared to project scenario. Therefore, the score is positive. In this context the following findings have been raised:
CL D-2
CAR D-6
Version 02.0 Page 70 of 71 GS-VPA-VCR-FORM Table A-6: Periodic Verification Checklist – Calibration details
Monitoring Related Serial Type Accuracy Previous Current Validity of Delay in Period of equipment monitoring number or calibration Calibration calibration calibration: delayed parameter accuracy date date(s) yes/no calibration as per class applicable registered monitoring plan Electronic N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 04/10/2016 N/A No N/A Scale Yes
Version 02.0 Page 71 of 71