Verification Report for the Toronto District School Board Energy Efficiency Project

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Prepared for: Blue Source Canada ULC Suite 700, 717-7th Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2P 3R5

Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 400 – 655 Tyee Road Victoria, BC V9A 6X5

Project Number: 123220671 December 8, 2016 VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

December 8, 2016

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A summary of the verification of the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) Energy Efficiency Project (the Project) for the period of January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016 is provided in Table E.1.

Table E.1 Verification Summary Project Name Toronto District School Board (TDSB) Energy Efficiency Project Project Start Date January 1, 2002 Verification Period January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016 Type of Greenhosue Gas The Project is an energy efficiency improvement project involving a reduction in Emission Reduction or GHGs through reductions in fossil fuel and grid electricity use. Stantec is accredited Removal Project with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), a member of the International Accreditation Forum (IAF), in accordance with ISO 14065. Stantec has competency in GHG Emission Reductions from Fuel Combustion and from Industrial Processes. Expected Lifetime of the There is no specified end date for this project, which will be completed once all Project schools have been upgraded. Authorized Project Contact Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Blue Source Canada ULC Suite 700, 717-7th Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2)3R5 Phone: (403) 262-3026 Email: [email protected] Web: www.bluesourcecan.com Quantification Protocol Alberta’s Quantification Protocol For Energy Efficiency Projects (v1.0, September 2007) Ownership Each school or facililty included in the Project is owned and operated by the Toronto Disctrict School Board (TDSB). Project Registration The Project is being registered under the CSA Group CleanProjects Registry.

GHG Assertion The fundamental GHG Assertion verified is that the quantification of 46,114 t CO2e in GHG reductions for the period of January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016 resulting from retrofits of lighting, building automation systems, mechanical systems, and roofing at schools and buildings in the Toronto District has been completed in accordance with the verification criteria. Level of Assurance The verification was planned and executed to deliver a reasonable level of assurance. Verification Criteria • Alberta’s Quantification Protocol For Energy Efficiency Projects (v1.0, September 2007); • ISO 14064:2; and • CSA CleanProjects Registry requirements, specifically: − Data supporting the GHG calculations have sufficient controls be to considered fair and accurate and without material discrepancy;

E.1

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

December 8, 2016

Table E.1 Verification Summary − Calculations supporting the GHG assertion are sufficiently accurate to be considered fair and accurate and without material discrepancy; − There are no competing claims to the ownership of the GHG Project and the resulting emission reductions or removals.

Verification Objective The objective of the verification was to assess whether the Project Report. dated December 6, 2016. and the GHG Assertion satisfies the following requirements: • Alberta’s Quantification Protocol For Energy Efficiency Projects (v1.0, September 2007); • ISO 14064:2; and • CSA CleanProjects Registry requirements. Verification Standards The verification was conducted in accordance with ISO 14064:3 and ISO 14065. Verification Summary No unresolved material misstatements were identified in the Project Report and GHG Assertion, dated December 6, 2016, as submitted. The GHG Assertion for the Project is deemed to be fairly presented and substantiated by sufficient and appropriate evidence. A reasonable level assurance verification statement was issued. Verification Team Lead Verifier Daniel Hegg, M.Sc. Project Manager Daniel Hegg, M.Sc. Independent Peer Vicki Corning, P.Eng. Reviewer Quality Reviewer Daniel Hegg, M.Sc. Technical Expert Anthony Marshall, P.Eng., CEM, CDSM, CMVP Verifiers Christina Varner, P.Eng., Julie Reid, B.Sc.Eng. Verification Timeframe November 8, 2016 to December 8, 2016 Site Visit Date November 21 – 24, 2016 Report Date December 8, 2016 Verification Details Stantec confirms it is aware that this Verification Report will be publically posted on GHG CleanProjects. The verification was performed for the Toronto District School Board Energy Efficiency Project GHG Report and the related GHG Assertion dated December 6, 2016.

E.2

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Introduction December 8, 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... E. 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 INTENDED USER ...... 1 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 1 1.2.1 Location ...... 1 1.2.2 Processes and Activities...... 1 1.3 GHG ASSERTION ...... 3

2.0 VERIFICATION METHODOLOGY ...... 5 2.1 VERIFICATION OBJECTIVES ...... 5 2.2 LEVEL OF ASSURANCE ...... 5 2.3 VERIFICATION CRITERIA ...... 5 2.4 VERIFICATION STANDARDS ...... 5 2.5 VERIFICATION SCOPE ...... 5 2.6 MATERIALITY ...... 6 2.7 VERIFICATION PLAN ...... 6

3.0 VERIFICATION TEAM: QUALIFICATIONS, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ...... 7

4.0 VERIFICATION STRATEGY ...... 8 4.1 INHERENT RISK ...... 8 4.2 CONTROL RISK ...... 9 4.3 DETECTION RISK ...... 9 4.4 SITE VISIT ...... 10 4.5 VERIFICATION PROCEDURES ...... 11 4.6 FACTS DISCOVERED AFTER THE VERIFICATION ...... 12

5.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...... 13

6.0 CONCLUSION ...... 18 6.1 OPINION ...... 18 6.2 SUBMISSION DOCUMENTS ...... 18

7.0 CLOSURE ...... 19

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Introduction December 8, 2016

LIST OF TABLES

Table E.1 Verification Summary ...... E.1 Table 1.1 GHG Assertion ...... 4 Table 3.1 Verification Team ...... 7 Table 4.1 Schedule of Verification Activities ...... 10 Table 5.1 Verification and Sampling Plan ...... 13 Table 5.2 Identified Misstatements and Resolutions ...... 16

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Schools and Facilities by Vintage Year Appendix B Verification Plan Appendix C Submission Documents

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Introduction December 8, 2016

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was contracted by Blue Source Canada ULC (Blue Source) on behalf of the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) to conduct an independent third-party verification of the greenhouse gas (GHG) Report and GHG Assertion provided in the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) Energy Efficiency Project Version 3.0 Project Report dated December 6, 2016. The Toronto District School Board Energy Efficiency Project (the Project) consists of schools and facilities that have undergone retrofits for lighting, building automation systems, mechanical upgrades, and roofing replacements. The schools and facilities included in the Project are identified in Appendix A.

In this work, TDSB owns and operates the schools and facilities and thus is responsible for the collection of activity data used in the calculations and data management. Blue Source was responsible for the completion of the calculations, presentation of the information within the Project Report, and for the supporting technical documents.

Stantec was responsible for planning and executing the verification to deliver an opinion to a reasonable level of assurance as to whether the Project Report and GHG Assertion are presented fairly and in accordance with the verification criteria. Stantec is accredited with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), a member of the International Accreditation Forum (IAF), in accordance with ISO 14065 (Accreditation ID #0805 issued to Stantec Consulting Ltd. for greenhouse gas (GHG) verification and validation).

1.1 INTENDED USER

This report has been prepared for the CSA CleanProjects Registry for the express purpose of facilitating the creation of verified emission reductions/removals (VERRs) for registration on the Registry. The total GHG emissions and reductions are reported as equivalent tonnes of carbon dioxide (t CO2e) emissions.

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1.2.1 Location

The schools and facilities included in the Project are located in the Greater Toronto Area.

1.2.2 Processes and Activities

The Project, as defined in the Project Plan, dated December 6, 2016, involves the creation of emission reductions from the retrofit of TDSB-owned schools to increase energy efficiency. The schools included in each vintage year GHG Assertion are presented in Appendix A.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Introduction December 8, 2016

The TDSB has undertaken an energy efficiency retrofit of schools in the district. The retrofits include:

• Lighting replacements; • Building Automation Systems (BAS) and mechanical systems – installation of new systems or upgrading old systems; and, • Roofing retrofits.

The lighting retrofits involved replacing T12 lighting fixtures with newer, more efficient T8 lights that consume less electricity to provide the same level of lighting. Reductions in electricity use are only considered for lighting retrofits.

BAS are computerized, intelligent control units that control and monitor the mechanical electronics and lighting in a building and therefore can decrease the amount of electricity and natural gas being consumed for heating, lighting and ventilation purposes in the schools. The mechanical systems that could be installed or upgraded include:

• Heating plant (primary hot water heating and steam heating plant); • Air handling units; • Chilled water plant; • Exhaust fans; • Lighting controls; • Unit ventilator (with or without pneumatic control); • Domestic hot water (standard or with converter); • Outdoor air temperature/BAS alarm; and, • Urinal flush tank system.

Emission reductions due to to BAS and mechanical system retrofits are only considered based on natural gas emissions (i.e., electricity reductions are not considered).

The roofing retrofit is the replacement of roofing with more energy efficient materials with a higher insulation value of R20 compared to a previously negligible R value, thereby reducing natural gas consumption. Emission reductions due to to roofing retrofits are only considered for natural gas emissions (i.e., electricity reductions are not considered in roofing retrofits).

The baseline scenario is the existing operation of the schools prior to retrofits. The schools use grid-sourced electricity for lighting, powering mechanical systems, and heating. Natural gas is also used in some schools for heating. In the case of lighting retrofits, the baseline is the operation of T12 lighting except after January 1, 2013, when T12 lighting was phased out and T8 was the standard lighting choice. Because of this, schools with lighting retrofits after January 1, 2013 are not eligible for offsets due to lighting retrofits.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Introduction December 8, 2016

The retrofits began in November 2000 and continue to this day. This project was previously listed on the Green Power Action’s Greening Canada Fund and generated emission reductions for the 2002-2013 vintage years. The current reporting period is January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016, and the project is seeking to register with CSA CleanProjects Registry starting with this reporting period. The quantification of emission reductions was carried out in the same manner as in previous years, except for the following:

• T12 to T8 baseline adjustment (as discussed above) • Use of both on-peak and off-peak electricity emissions intensity factors: TSBD now has access to hour by hour electricity use in some schools. Blue Source used this information to develop a prorating scheme to determine the amount of electicity consumed during on-peak and off-peak hours. This was done because Ontario has phased out coal-based electricity use and the resulting variation between the on-peak and off-peak emissions intensity is less. Previously, Blue Source had used a single intensity factor that represented the marginal power, which is the difference between on-peak and baseload power generation.

Sources of Project GHG emissions include:

• Natural Gas Consumption (CO2, CH4, and N2O): Emissions that occurred from combustion of natural gas for heating at the Project facilities. • Project Grid Electricity Consumption (CO2e): Grid electricity consumed at the Project facilities.

Sources of baseline GHG emissions at the Project are:

Emission reductions are calculated as the difference between the baseline emissions and Project emissions.

The quantification protocol applied by Blue Source is the Alberta Quantification Protocol For Energy Efficiency Projects (v1.0, September 2007). As the Quantification Protocol speaks only to Alberta projects, certain criteria, such as the requirement that a Project occur in Alberta, does not apply.

1.3 GHG ASSERTION

The fundamental assertion verified is that the Project Report and GHG Assertion, dated December 6, 2016, meet the verification criteria for the verification period of January 1, 2014 – June 30, 2016.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Introduction December 8, 2016

The essential information contained within the Project Report and GHG Assertion verified by Stantec is presented in Table 1.1. A more detailed assertion is provided in the Statement of Verification (Appendix C).

Table 1.1 GHG Assertion

Baseline Project Emission Facility Year Emissions Emissions Reductions (t CO2e) (t CO2e) (t CO2e) TDSB Project Jan. 1 – Dec. 31, 2014 55,933 39,466 15,750 TDSB Project Jan. 1 – Dec. 31, 2015 61,892 43,695 17,600 TDSB Project Jan. 1 – June 30, 2016 47,595 34,510 12,764 Total 46,114 Notes: *Emission Reductions do not include contribution from schools that received funding from Toronto Hydo-Electric System Limited’s Conservation and Demand Side Management Program (THESL).

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Verification Methodology December 8, 2016

2.0 VERIFICATION METHODOLOGY

2.1 VERIFICATION OBJECTIVES

The objective of the verification was to assess whether the Project Report and GHG Assertion (as summarized in Table 2), dated December 6, 2016, satisfy the verification criteria identified in Section 2.3.

The verification was conducted in accordance with the verification standards identified in Section 2.4.

2.2 LEVEL OF ASSURANCE

Blue Source requested that the verification be conducted to deliver a reasonable level of assurance. The verification was planned and executed accordingly.

2.3 VERIFICATION CRITERIA

Stantec has conducted sufficient and appropriate procedures in order to express a reasonable level of assurance opinion as to whether the Project Report and GHG Assertion, dated December 6, 2016, satisfies the requirements of the:

• Alberta’s Quantification Protocol For Energy Efficiency Projects (v1.0, September 2007); • ISO 14064:2; and • CSA CleanProjects Registry requirements, specifically: o Data supporting the GHG calculations have sufficient controls to be considered fair and accurate and without material discrepancy; o Calculations supporting the GHG assertion are sufficiently accurate to be considered fair and accurate and without material discrepancy; o There are no competing claims to the ownership of the GHG Project and the resulting emission reductions or removals.

2.4 VERIFICATION STANDARDS

The verification was conducted in accordance with ISO 14064:3 and ISO 14065:2013.

2.5 VERIFICATION SCOPE

The verification is for the Project period of January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016.

The verification covers the gases carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs). The total GHG emissions and reductions are reported as equivalent tonnes of carbon dioxide (t CO2e)

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Verification Methodology December 8, 2016

emissions using the 2007 global warming potentials (GWP) published by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (e.g., CH4 GWP is 25, N2O GWP is 298).

2.6 MATERIALITY

The quantitative materiality threshold Is set at 5% of the total reported GHG emission reductions or removals asserted. Materiality of qualitative misstatements are at the discretion of the verification body.

2.7 VERIFICATION PLAN

A copy of the final verification plan is provided in Appendix B. The activities described therein were executed during the course of the verification. The sampling plan, a subset of the verification plan, is outlined along with the final results in Section 5.0 of this report.

Stantec has a complete understanding of the general project approach as well as the specifics of the quantification protocol utilized. Stantec is competent to access energy efficiency projects.

A completed conflict of interest form is provided in Appendix C.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Verification Team: Qualifications, Roles and Responsibilities December 8, 2016

3.0 VERIFICATION TEAM: QUALIFICATIONS, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The verification team is identified in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 Verification Team

Name Role Responsibilities Daniel Hegg, M.Sc. Lead Verifier/ Lead desktop review, sampling plan execution and working Quality paper completion, and prepare verification documentation. Reviewer/ Review verification deliverables technical soundness and Project compliance with Stantec’s internal processes and Manager CleanProjects criteria. Vicki Corning, P.Eng. Independent Independent review of verification activities and conclusions. Peer Reviewer The independent reviewer confirms the verification activities have been completed and that the activities provide the required level of assurance. Anthony Marshall, Technical Expert Lead site visits to TDSB facilities. P.Eng., CEM, CDSM, CMVP Christina Varner, Verifier Complete the desktop review, including sampling plan P.Eng. execution. Julie Reid, B.Eng. Verifier Assist with sampling plan execution.

Julie Reid was added to the verification team following the verification plan. Her cameo is provided below.

Julie graduated from Dalhousie University with a Bachelor in Environmental Engineering and is an Environmental Engineer-in-Training in Stantec’s Saint John, New Brunswick office. Julie works in the Environmental Management practice and has experience in ambient air quality monitoring, sound monitoring, regulatory reporting, greenhouse gas emission inventory development, indoor air quality monitoring and environmental assessment both in the private and public sector.

Julie completed the CSA ISO 14064 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Verification training program in 2015. Julie has experience in GHG verification projects under various reporting programs including The Climate Registry voluntary reporting program, and the provincial mandatory reporting programs in Ontario, Alberta, and British Colombia. Julie has been involved with GHG verification projects for clients in oil and gas industry, waste treatment, chemical manufacturing/production, and government.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Verification Strategy December 8, 2016

4.0 VERIFICATION STRATEGY

Details of the verification activities undertaken as part of the verification strategy are set out in Table 4 of the final Verification and Sampling Plan included in Appendix B and summarized in Section 5.0 of this report. Stantec’s detailed working papers (including planning and procedures) are confidential, but available to GHG CleanProjects Registry upon request.

The Verification and Sampling Plan for the Project was developed considering our initial assessment of the verification risk for the engagement. We assessed the initial verification risk as Medium1. Using the Verification and Sampling Plan, Stantec assessed the control procedures surrounding the GHG data and information. Important components included: processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting GHG data and information; systems and processes that ensure GHG data accuracy, documenting and monitoring processes; methods to identify errors and methods to identify and report deficiencies in the reporting information and management system. Stantec verified equations used for quantification and monitoring purposes. These procedures included site visits. Based on the results of the verification procedures undertaken, the final verification risk is deemed to be Medium. This final risk assessment is shown based on the assessment of inherent, control and detection risk as follows.

4.1 INHERENT RISK

Inherent risk is the risk of error that occurs as a result of the lack of capacity by staff; the size/complexity of the organization or GHG Project; the industrial sector; and/or, the technologies or processes being applied in the organization or GHG Project. We regard the final risk as Medium due to:

• Natural gas and electricity consumption data are available on a monthly basis from third party suppliers using custody transfer meters (low); • Heating degree day data are available from Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), which has requirements regarding instrument accuracy and has quality assurance and control practices (low risk); and • This is an aggregated Project and as such, the complexity of the Project (numerous locations and retrofit types) introduces additional inherent risk (medium risk).

1 Possible risk ratings are “high”, “medium” and “low”. These are based on inherent, control, and detection risks as evaluated by the Project team prior to engaging in verification activities.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Verification Strategy December 8, 2016

4.2 CONTROL RISK

Control risk is the risk that the proponent’s control system will not detect and rectify a misstatement. We regard the final risk as Medium due to:

• Stantec detected three material qualitative discrepancies during this verification that were subsequently corrected by Blue Source. The magnitude of the errors required that Stantec expand the sampling program as a result.

4.3 DETECTION RISK

Detection risk is the risk that Stantec will not identify a material misstatement. We regard this risk as Medium due to:

• Our Quality Management Procedures. We are committed to providing exceptional service to our clients in accordance with our ISO 9001 and ISO 14065 accreditations. We believe that quality is a basic principle and that quality management is an integral part of our work. We take a systematic approach to quality management to comply with requirements and to strive for continual improvement. The cornerstone of our quality management system is an entrenched process of quality and independent review where by our deliverables are vetted by senior and expert people in our firm (low risk). • Level of Assurance. The reasonable level of assurance applied in this verification mandates that Stantec perform increased sampling to meet the assurance requirements; however, the level of assurance still increases the risk to Stantec as the risk-based verification approach means that not all information can be reviewed. Stantec has designed the sampling plan to target potentially material items in the GHG information to minimize detection risk (medium risk). • Missing evidence. TDSB was not able to provide all requested records. Through documentation, interviews and site visits, lighting retrofits were confirmed to be installed after the baseline period; however, specific dates could not be determined for the sampled schools. Evidence for BAS retrofits could not be obtained for all requested schools, which caused Blue Source to remove 12 schools from the calculations. On this basis, Stantec expanded the sampling program to reduce overall audit risk to an acceptable level for reasonable assurance.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Verification Strategy December 8, 2016

During the verification, the verification team considered the level of audit risk noted above and incorporated necessary procedures to mitigate the audit risk. These procedures included:

• Assessing conformance with applicable verification criteria, including the principles and requirements of relevant standards or GHG programs within the scope of verification; • Evaluating the establishment, justification and documentation of the Project Report; • Assessing the GHG Project's quality assurance and controls; and • Assessing the information for consistency with our knowledge of the TDSB operations.

The schedule for the verification activities is presented in Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Schedule of Verification Activities

Verification Activity Responsible Party Date of Completion Kick-Off Meeting With Blue Source Stantec / Blue Source November 8, 2016 Receive Blue Source Documentation Blue Source November 3, 2016 Initial Desktop Review Stantec November 3-10, 2016 Provide Verification Plan To Blue Source Stantec November 10, 2016 Stantec / Blue Source / Site Visits November 14-17, 2016 TDSB Receive Additional Information Blue Source November 28, 2016 Draft Verification Report Stantec December 8, 2016 Address Follow-Up Items Stantec / Blue Source December 8, 2016 Finalize Verification Report And Statement Of Stantec December 8, 2016 Verification

4.4 SITE VISIT

Stantec Technical Expert, Anthony Marshall, conducted a site visit of 20 facilities from November 21 – November 24, 2016. During the site visits, the following personnel were interviewed:

• Tooraj Moulai (Senior Engineer, Carbon Services, Blue Source Canada); • Iftikhar Uddin, Energy Project Coordinator, Toronto District School Board; and • Caretakers of the following schools: o A.Y. Jackson Secondary School o Central Etobicoke High School o Cherokee Public School o Dallington Public School o David & Mary Thomson CI o East York Collegiate Institute o Grey Owl Public School

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Verification Strategy December 8, 2016

o Heritage Park Public School o John G. Althouse MS o Newtonbrook Secondary School o Sir John A. Macdonald CI o West Education Office o West Hill Collegiate Institute o Riverdale Collegiate Institute o Danforth C. & Tech. Institute o Central Technical School o Silverthorn CI o Westview Centennial SS o Northern Secondary School o Scarborough Academy for Technological, Environmental and Computer Education @ W.A. Porter CI

The site visits involved a review of data collection, tracking, and retention and transfer procedures. Activities associated with operations, record keeping, data management and emissions sources were also reviewed to better understand the quantification calculations, data treatment and data management. Through interviews, and by attending the site visits, the selected schools were evaluated by the verifier to confirm their existence, the presence, installation timing and operation of energy reduction retrofits, and the continued operation of the schools (functional equivalence). Stantec also confirmed emission sources, sinks and reservoirs and evaluated the potential for additional sources that were excluded. The Technical Expert recorded details on the retrofits that were completed, as well as whether the BAS were operating correctly.

Solar panels were noted on the rooftops of several schools. Blue Source demonstrated with sufficient evidence that the electricity generated by the solar panel systems were not being used directly by the schools.

4.5 VERIFICATION PROCEDURES

The verification team developed initial verification procedures and sampling plan during the initial desktop review, based on a review of the Project Report and available documentation and in consideration of the verification risk. The procedures were designed based on the Alberta Verification Guidance (e.g., tracing and recalculation). Over the course of the verification, the verification team considered whether additional verification procedures or samples were required to achieve a reasonable level of assurance.

Stantec’s final sampling plan included reviewing and sampling evidence of retrofits being completed, project and baseline electricity and natural gas consumption, and student counts to confirm level of service, as well as recalculating baseline and Project emission factors and emissions for each of the schools and facilities. This included recalculating the GHG Assertion and assessing consistency with the

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Verification Strategy December 8, 2016

Protocol, and CleanProjects requirements. The final verification procedures are provided in the final verification plan (Appendix A) and summarized in Table 5.1.

4.6 FACTS DISCOVERED AFTER THE VERIFICATION

As part of Stantec’s accredited GHG validation and verification system, Stantec reserves the right to reassess the conclusions in this report and potentially reissue the report if any facts about the Project are discovered after the verification.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Summary of Findings December 8, 2016

5.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

A summary of the key findings from this verification is provided in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1 Verification and Sampling Plan

Parameter Procedures Sample Size Result GHG Assertion Reviewed the Project Final Project Report Immaterial qualitative discrepancy. The Report for conformance Project Report contains the information with the GHG Report required by the Registry, except that it Template for CSA did not separately identify baseline Standards GHG emissions. For more information, see CleanProjects Registry. Table 5.2.

Conducted a site tour to All on-site GHG Satisfactory. All sites visited had installed compare emissions sources, visited 20 retrofits. Electricity and natural gas inventory to on-site schools. metering was confirmed. BAS equipment, sources. mechanical equipment, and lighting was found to be functioning appropriately. No additional GHG sources were found. Ownership Reviewed the Project Sufficient and Satisfactory. Blue Source has been Report for a statement appropriate evidence authorized by TDSB to act on their behalf regarding credit to support that Blue to quantify and serialize the emission ownership. Source is authorized to reductions. TDSB owns and operates the serialize the offset buildings where the emission reductions credits on behalf of occur. Reviewed ownership TDSB. evidence. Project Reviewed the Project Not applicable. Satisfactory. The Project activities are not Additionality Report and supporting required by legislation. For the BAS and documentation to assess roofing retrofits, there are also financial whether the Project and operational barriers. In consideration Developer is meeting the that T8 lighting became the standard additionality criteria in lighting in 2013, Blue Source has removed the Protocol and the lighting retrofitted schools from the Project continues to be Project that are no longer considered additional to regulations. additional (i.e., were retrofitted at a time where the T12 baseline would not be reasonable).

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Summary of Findings December 8, 2016

Table 5.1 Verification and Sampling Plan

Parameter Procedures Sample Size Result Immaterial qualitative discrepancies (2). Overall, the transparency of the Project Report is sufficient. However, Stantec detected areas of ambiguity with respect to the quantification approach. Assessed the Project Not applicable. In addition, two potential emissions Report for transparency. sources were excluded (Testing of Equipment and Site Decommissioning); however they were not specified in the Report to be excluded. For more information, see Table 5.2. Satisfactory. The Project Report was Consistency Assessed the Project found to be accurate with respect to Not applicable. with ISO 14064-2 Report for accuracy. Project description, GHG Assertion, and other information provided. Immaterial qualitative discrepancy. The Project Report was found to present Assessed the Project relevant information; however, the Not applicable. Report for relevance. Report did not disclose the baseline emissions. See Table 5.2 for more information. Satisfactory. The Project Report clearly Assessed the Project identified where the Project has Not applicable. Report for consistency. changed from previous reporting periods. Immaterial quantitative discrepancies (3). Stantec detected material All methodologies quantitative discrepancies related to the Assessed the Project for (emission factors, calculations. These were subsequently inconsistent electricity prorating resolved by Blue Source by correcting quantification factors, calculations of the errors. Three immaterial quantitative methodologies. baseline and project discrepancies remain in the assertion. For emissions). more information on the discrepancies, see Table 5.2. Satisfactory. Stantec determined that a Quantification Assessed for inclusion of number of schools were not eligible to be and Monitoring schools without sufficient included in the reporting period. Blue data, ineligible retrofits, All vintage years. Source resolved these discrepancies by and those not belonging removing the schools from the Project. to TDSB. For more information, see Table 5.2. Traced electricity Immaterial qualitative discrepancy. consumption records to Stantec compared calendar-normalized Sample is identified in the quantification utility data from the TDSB’s eBill system to verification plan spreadsheet. the electricity and natural gas (Appendix B). Traced natural gas consumption used in the emissions consumption records to calculators. Stantec detected potential

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Summary of Findings December 8, 2016

Table 5.1 Verification and Sampling Plan

Parameter Procedures Sample Size Result the quantification errors in the emissions calculators for six of spreadsheet. the schools sampled. The errors were of an immaterial nature and are unlikely to contribute to a material quantitative discrepancy. For more information, see Table 5.2. Recalculated baseline Satisfactory. Emissions were successfully 2014 vintage year emissions. recalculated. Recalculated Project Satisfactory. Emissions were successfully 2014 vintage year emissions. recalculated. All factors: Satisfactory. The emission factors used for • electricity natural gas were found to be supported consumption factor and appropriate for the Project. Blue (CO2e); and Source developed its own marginal electricity and off-peak emission factors • natural gas based on electricity generation combustion factors Assessed whether information from Ontario’s Independent (CO2, CH4, N2O) emission factors were Electric System Operator for the vintage appropriate and agree • factors to support years. The fuel-specific emission factors with the source. the electricity for wind and nuclear power used to consumption factor develop the marginal and off-peak (CO2e) emission factors were not found to be appropriate. See Table 5.2 for more information on this resolved discrepancy. The corrected electricity emission factors are reasonable and appropriate. Immaterial qualitative discrepancy. Stantec reviewed the TDSB and Blue Source GHG data management systems through verification procedures designed to identify discrepancies. The TDSB data management system retains up to 2 Overall system for years of soft copy invoices. Utility invoices completeness, are processed by a third party software Assessed whether the GHG Data accuracy, validity, called eBill and the consumption Project’s GHG data Management and restricted access, information is extracted into a database. management systems, and Quality through interviews, Stantec witnessed the system and including quality control, Control Project confirmed that it operates as expected. are adequate. documentation, and The database is accessible by site visits. login/password by TDSB staff. Stantec detected four material quantitative discrepancies during this verification that were not detected by Blue Source. Each were subsequently resolved by Blue Source. More information is provided in Table 5.2.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Summary of Findings December 8, 2016

Table 5.1 Verification and Sampling Plan

Parameter Procedures Sample Size Result Satisfactory. During the site visits, Stantec found that Project-specific information, including retrofit completion information, was not present at all schools. TDSB confirmed that there is no central respository for retrofit information. Although retrofitted lighting was Assessed whether there observed in the visited schools, GHG Data is sufficient document Not applicable. documentation to support when the Retention storage and retention. lighting was replaced was not available. In addition, as noted above, soft copies of invoices are not kept indefinitely; however, a record of the consumption data is retained in a database managed by TDSB. Blue Source’s data retention practice is sufficient for this Project. More information is provided in Table 5.2.

Misstatements identified during the verification are provided in Table 5.2.

Table 5.2 Identified Misstatements and Resolutions

Identified Misstatement Type Resolution Consistency with ISO-14064:2 (Relevance) Immaterial qualitative Not resolved. • The baseline emissions have not been identified discrepancy. separately in the Report. Consistency with ISO-140064:2 (Transparency) Immaterial qualitative Not resolved. • The presentation of the on-peak and off-peak discrepancies (2) emission factors in the offset report causes confusion as to whether the marginal intensity or the on-peak intensity is used with the on-peak electricity use. The report also does not fully disclose how the electricity proration fractions and emission factors are calculated. The calculations of these parameters were confirmed to be reasonable. • The baseline and project sources related to Testing of Equipment and Site Decommissioning were excluded; however they were not specified in the Report to be excluded. Quantification and Monitoring Material quantitative Resolved material • Two discrepancies were detected in the emission discrepancies (3) discrepancies (4) reductions removed due to THESL funding. The total Material qualitative Unresolved immaterial discrepancy is 172 t CO2e or 0.4% of the emission discrepancies (1) discrepancies (3). reductions. Immaterial quantitative Resolved immaterial discrepancies (3) discrepancy (1).

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Summary of Findings December 8, 2016

Table 5.2 Identified Misstatements and Resolutions

Identified Misstatement Type Resolution • The baseline natural gas emissions were correctly Immaterial qualitative calculated, except for one school. Four months of discrepancy baseline data are missing, which causes the adjusted baseline natural gas use to be Absolute error: 254 t CO2e misrepresented. The magnitude of the discrepancy or 0.6% of assertion is approximately 82 t CO2e (over-reported emissions reductions), which is immaterial to the assertion Net error: -90 t CO2e or (approximately 0.18%). 0.2% of assertion (under- reported emission • The calculation of electricity prorating factors reductions). contains errors. The nature of the errors is such that Stantec cannot provide assurance over the fractions. The prorating factors was subsequently corrected by Blue Source. • The electricity emission factors were developed using sources that were not appropriate. The nature of the errors is such that Stantec cannot provide assurance for the emission factors. The emission factors were subsequently corrected by Blue Source. • Stantec found that 38 schools included in the lighting retrofit group had retrofits completed before the project started (pre-2001). In addition, one school did not have a retrofit completion date, but based on the coding could have a non- additional (T8) baseline. The emission reductions associated with the 39 schools is approximately 1,096 t CO2e for 2014, which is 2.3% of the assertion. The contribution for 2014 and 2015 are 996 t CO2e and 341 t CO2e. Combined, this is a discrepancy of approximately 2,434 t CO2e or 5% of the assertion. This is also considered to be a material qualitative discrepancy as the schools are not eligible to be included in the Project. Blue Source corrected this discrepancy by removing the schools from the Project. • The baseline electricity for lighting retrofits included seven schools that are not eligible for reductions. Total magnitude of the baseline electricity discrepancy is 2,209 t CO2e or 4.32% of emission reductions. Blue Source subsequently removed these schools from the Project. • The results of the tracing indicate that electricity and natural gas anomalies occurred when the data was normalized by TDSB for the calendar year. The magnitude of the discrepancy cannot be precisely determined; however, it is Stantec’s opinion that the anomalies would not contribute to a material discrepancy.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Conclusion December 8, 2016

Table 5.2 Identified Misstatements and Resolutions

Identified Misstatement Type Resolution

6.0 CONCLUSION

6.1 OPINION

Based on the procedures undertaken and described in this report, the Project Report and GHG Assertion for the Toronto District School Board Energy Efficiency Project, dated December 6, 2016, satisfies the requirements of the:

• Alberta’s Quantification Protocol For Energy Efficiency Projects (v1.0, September 2007); • ISO 14064:2; and • CSA CleanProjects Registry, specifically: o Data supporting the GHG calculations have sufficient controls be to considered fair and accurate and without material discrepancy; o Calculations supporting the GHG assertion are sufficiently accurate to be considered fair and accurate and without material discrepancy; o There are no competing claims to the ownership of the GHG Project and the resulting emission reductions or removals.

6.2 SUBMISSION DOCUMENTS

The verification documents for submission are in Appendix C and include: Statement of Verification and a Conflict of Interest Checklist.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Closure December 8, 2016

7.0 CLOSURE

Stantec has undertaken all assignments in its role as an environmental engineering consulting firm using professional effort consistent with the ISO 14064:3 standard. Stantec has assessed the Project Report submitted by Blue Source for the Toronto District School Board Energy Efficiency Project using reasonably ascertainable information, as defined by ISO 14064-3, obtained from a review of operational records and available literature and documents. The assessment represents the conditions in the subject area at the time of the assessment. Stantec did not conduct direct monitoring or measurement or other physical sampling and analysis in conjunction with this verification report. Stantec disclaims liability for use by any other party and for any other purpose.

Stantec will retain all Project documents for a minimum of seven (7) years.

This report entitled, “Verification Report For the Toronto District School Board Energy Efficiency Project” was produced by Christina Varner (Verifier). This report was peer reviewed by Vicki Corning and quality reviewed by Daniel Hegg (Lead Verifier).

Respectfully Submitted,

STANTEC CONSULTING LTD.

Daniel Hegg, M.Sc. Vicki Corning, P.Eng. Lead Verifier, Environmental Services Independent Peer Reviewer, Tel: (250) 217-9729 Environmental Services Tel: (506) 452-7000

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

December 8, 2016

Appendix A Schools and Facilities by Vintage Year

2014 List of Included Schools 2015 List of Included Schools 2016 List of Included Schools A.Y. Jackson Secondary School A.Y. Jackson Secondary School A.Y. Jackson Secondary School Alexmuir Junior Public School Adam Beck Junior Public School Adam Beck Junior Public School Avondale Secondary Alternative Alexmuir Junior Public School Agincourt CI School Banting & Best Public School Agnes Macphail PS Banting & Best Public School Bennington Heights ES Alexmuir Junior Public School Beaumonde Heights Junior MS Beverley R PS Ancaster Public School Bessborough Drive ES Blacksmith Public School Anson Park Public School Beverley R PS Bloordale MS Banting & Best Public School Blacksmith Public School Bloorlea Middle School Bendale Bus & Tech Institute Bloordale MS Braeburn Junior School Bennington Heights ES Bloorlea Middle School Brian Public School Beverley R PS Blythwood Junior Public School Briarcrest Junior School Birch Cliff Public School Braeburn Junior School Brimwood Boulevard Jr. PS Blacksmith Public School Brian Public School Broadacres Junior School Bloordale MS Briarcrest Junior School Broadlands Public School Bloorlea Middle School Broadacres Junior School Brookview Middle School Bowmore Road Jr & Sr PS Brock Public School Cameron Public School Braeburn Junior School Brookhaven Public School Cedarbrook Public School Brian Public School Brookview Middle School Centennial Road Jr. PS Brimwood Boulevard Jr. PS Cameron Public School Central Etobicoke High School Broadacres Junior School Centennial Road Jr. PS Charles H Best MS Broadlands Public School Central Etobicoke High School Charlottetown Jr. PS Brookview Middle School Central Technical School Chartland Jr PS / Delphi C.W. Jefferys CI Charles G Fraser Jr PS (West End Secondary Alt S Cameron Public School Creche) Cherokee Public School Cedarbrae Collegiate Institute Charles H Best MS Chester Elementary School Cedarbrook Public School Charlottetown Jr. PS Chief Dan George Public School Centennial Road Jr. PS Chartland Jr PS / Delphi Chine Drive Public School Central Etobicoke High School Secondary Alt S Church Street Jr PS/Native Charles H Best MS Cherokee Public School Learning Ctr Charlottetown Jr. PS Chester Elementary School Claireville Junior School Chartland Jr PS / Delphi Chief Dan George Public School Clairlea Public School Secondary Alt S Chine Drive Public School Cornell Jr. Public School Cherokee Public School Church Street Jr PS/Native Dallington Public School Chester Elementary School Learning Ctr Danforth Gardens Public School Chief Dan George Public School Claireville Junior School David & Mary Thomson CI Chine Drive Public School Contact Alternative School David Hornell Junior School Claireville Junior School Cresthaven Public School David Lewis Public School Clairlea Public School Dallington Public School Denlow Public School Cornell Jr. Public School David & Mary Thomson CI Derrydown Public School Dallington Public School David Hornell Junior School Dixon Grove Junior MS Danforth Gardens Public School David Lewis Public School Donview Middle Health & David & Mary Thomson CI Derrydown Public School Wellness Acad.

2014 List of Included Schools 2015 List of Included Schools 2016 List of Included Schools Dewson Street Junior PS Downsview Public School David Hornell Junior School Dixon Grove Junior MS Earl Haig Public School David Lewis Public School Donview Middle Health & East York Alternative SS Denlow Public School Wellness Acad. East York Collegiate Institute Derrydown Public School Downsview Public School Eastern Ave Centre Dixon Grove Junior MS Downtown Alternative Sch. Jr. Eatonville Junior School Don Mills Collegiate Institute Dr Marion Hilliard Sr PS Elia Middle School Donview Middle Health & Dr. Norman Bethune CI Elkhorn Public School Wellness Acad. East York Alternative SS Ellesmere-Statton PS Donwood Park Jr. Public S. East York Collegiate Institute Elmbank JR-MS Academy Downsview Public School Eastern Ave Centre Elmlea Junior School Drewry SS Elia Middle School Emily Carr Public School Earl Haig Public School Elkhorn Public School Ernest Public School Earl Haig Secondary School Ellesmere-Statton PS Étienne Brûlé Junior School East York Alternative SS Elmbank JR-MS Academy Etobicoke Collegiate Institute East York Collegiate Institute Elmlea Junior School Fairglen Jr. Public School Eastern Ave Centre Emily Carr Public School Fairmount Public School Eastview Public School Ernest Public School Fenside Public School Eatonville Junior School Essex Jr. & Sr. PS Finch Public School Elia Middle School Étienne Brûlé Junior School Fleming Public School Elizabeth Simcoe Jr. PS Etobicoke Collegiate Institute Forest Manor Public School Elkhorn Public School Fairglen Jr. Public School Garden Avenue Junior PS Ellesmere-Statton PS Fairmeadow Centre Gateway Public School Elmbank JR-MS Academy Fenside Public School George B. Little Public School Elmlea Junior School Finch Public School George Peck Public School Emily Carr Public School Fleming Public School George S. Henry Academy Étienne Brûlé Junior School Forest Manor Public School George Syme Community Etobicoke Collegiate Institute Forest Valley Outdoor Ed. Ctr School Etobicoke School of the Arts George S. Henry Academy George Webster ES Fairglen Jr. Public School George Webster ES Gordon A. Brown Middle School Fairmount Public School Glamorgan Public School Gracedale Public School Fenside Public School Glen Ames Sr PS Greenwood Secondary School Fern Avenue Jr. & Sr. PS Gracedale Public School Grey Owl Public School Finch Public School Greenwood Secondary School Harbord Collegiate Institute Firgrove Public School Grey Owl Public School Harrison Public School Fisherville Sr PS//NW Year Round Harbord Collegiate Institute Heather Heights JPS/Ben Alt Ctr Harrison Public School HeppnerVMAcademy Fleming Public School Heather Heights JPS/Ben Henry Hudson Sr. Public School Forest Manor Public School HeppnerVMAcademy Heritage Park Public School Frank Oke Secondary School Henry Hudson Sr. Public School Heydon Park SS (New) Garden Avenue Junior PS Heritage Park Public School Highbrook Learning Centre Gateway Public School Heydon Park SS (New) Highcastle Public School General Crerar Public School Highbrook Learning Centre Highland Creek Public School George B. Little Public School

2014 List of Included Schools 2015 List of Included Schools 2016 List of Included Schools Highfield Junior School Highland Heights Jr. PS George Peck Public School Highland Heights Jr. PS Highland Middle School George S. Henry Academy Highland Middle School Hillcrest Jr. PS George Syme Community Highview Public School Hillmount Public School School Hillcrest Jr. PS Hollywood Public School George Webster ES Hodgson Sr. PS Humber Summit Middle School Gordon A. Brown Middle School Hollywood Public School Humbercrest Public School Gracedale Public School Humber Summit Middle School Hunter's Glen Jr. Public S. Greenholme JR-MS Huron Street Junior PS Indian Road Crescent Jr. PS Greenland Public School Indian Road Crescent Jr. PS Inglenook Community HS Greenwood Secondary School Inglenook Community HS Inglewood Heights Jr PS Grenoble Public School Inglewood Heights Jr PS Jack Miner Sr. Public School Grey Owl Public School J.B. Tyrrell Sr. Public School John D. Parker Junior School Guildwood Jr PS Jack Miner Sr. Public School John McCrae Public School H A Halbert Jr PS Jackman Avenue Junior PS Joseph Howe Senior PS Harbord Collegiate Institute John D. Parker Junior School Kennedy Public School Harrison Public School John English JMS Kingsview Village JS Heather Heights JPS/Ben HeppnerVMAcademy John G. Althouse MS Lanor Junior Middle School Henry Hudson Sr. Public School John Wanless Junior PS Ledbury Park E & MS Henry Kelsey Sr. Public School Joseph Howe Senior PS Lescon Public School Heritage Park Public School Kennedy Public School Lester B. Pearson PS Heydon Park SS (New) Kenton Public School Lord Dufferin Jr. & Sr. PS Highbrook Learning Centre Kingsview Village JS Lord Roberts Junior PS Highcastle Public School Lamberton Public School Lynngate Junior Public School Highland Creek Public School Lambton Kingsway JR MS Lynnwood Heights Junior PS Highland Heights Jr. PS Ledbury Park E & MS Malvern Junior Public School Highland Middle School Lester B. Pearson CI Maple Leaf Public School Highview Public School Lester B. Pearson PS Maplewood High School Hillcrest Jr. PS Lord Dufferin Jr. & Sr. PS Martingrove CI Hollywood Public School Lynngate Junior Public School Mary Shadd Public School Humber Summit Middle School Lynnwood Heights Junior PS Mason Road Junior PS Humbercrest Public School Malvern Junior Public School Maurice Cody Jr. Public School Humewood Community School Maple Leaf Public School McGriskin Centre Hunter's Glen Jr. Public S. Maplewood High School McKee Public School Indian Road Crescent Jr. PS Market Lane Jr. & Sr. PS Meadowvale Public School Inglenook Community HS Martingrove CI Milliken Public School Inglewood Heights Jr PS Mason Road Junior PS Millwood Junior School Jack Miner Sr. Public School Maurice Cody Jr. Public School Mimico Adult Centre Jackman Avenue Junior PS McCulloch Centre Muirhead Public School John D. Parker Junior School McGriskin Centre Nelson A. Boylen CI John English JMS Meadowvale Public School Newtonbrook Secondary School John McCrae Public School Milliken Public School Norman Cook Junior PS Joseph Howe Senior PS

2014 List of Included Schools 2015 List of Included Schools 2016 List of Included Schools Millwood Junior School Norseman Junior Middle School Joyce Public School Mimico Adult Centre Oak Park Kennedy Public School Montrose Junior Public School Oakburn Centre Kingsview Village JS Morse Junior Public School Oakdale Park Middle School Knob Hill Public School Muirhead Public School Oakwood Collegiate Institute Lakeshore Collegiate Institute Nelson A. Boylen CI Ogden Junior Public School Lamberton Public School Newtonbrook Secondary School Oriole Park Junior PS L'Amoreaux CI Norman Cook Junior PS Park Lawn Junior MS Lanor Junior Middle School Norseman Junior Middle School Parkfield Junior School Leaside High School Oak Park Parkside Elementary School Ledbury Park E & MS Oakburn Centre Pineway Public School Lescon Public School Oakdale Park Middle School Poplar Road Junior PS Lester B. Pearson PS Ogden Junior Public School Port Royal PS Lord Dufferin Jr. & Sr. PS Old Orchard Jr. PS Princess Margaret Junior PS Lord Roberts Junior PS Oriole Park Junior PS R.H. King Academy Lucy Maud Montgomery PS Ossington/Old Orchard Jr. PS R.J. Lang Elementary E. & M.S. Lynngate Junior Public School Owen Public School Rene Gordon Health & Wellness Lynnwood Heights Junior PS Park Lawn Junior MS Academy Malvern Junior Public School Parkfield Junior School Richview Collegiate Institute Maple Leaf Public School Parkside Elementary School Rivercrest Junior School Maplewood High School Pelmo Park Public School Riverdale Collegiate Institute Martingrove CI Pierre Laporte Middle School Rouge Valley Public School Mary Shadd Public School Pineway Public School Roywood Public School Maryvale Public School Port Royal PS Runnymede Collegiate Institute Mason Road Junior PS Princess Margaret Junior PS Samuel Hearne Middle School McGriskin Centre R.J. Lang Elementary E. & M.S. SATEC @ W.A. Porter CI McKee Public School Regal Road Junior PS Scarlett Heights Entr. Acad. Meadowvale Public School Rene Gordon Health & Wellness School of Experiential Ed. Milliken Public School Academy Second Street Junior MS Millwood Junior School Richview Collegiate Institute Selwyn ES Mimico Adult Centre Rivercrest Junior School Seneca School Morrish Public School Riverdale Collegiate Institute Shirley Street Jr. PS Morse Junior Public School Rose Avenue Jr. Public School Shoreham Public Sports & Muirhead Public School Wellness Acad. Rosethorn Junior School Nelson A. Boylen CI Silver Springs Public School Rouge Valley Public School Newtonbrook Secondary School Silverthorn CI Roywood Public School Norman Cook Junior PS Silverthorn CS Runnymede Jr. & Sr. PS Norseman Junior Middle School Sir Ernest Macmillan Sr. PS Samuel Hearne Middle School North Agincourt Junior PS Sir John A. Macdonald CI Scarlett Heights Entr. Acad. Northern Secondary School Sir Samuel B. Steele Jr. PS School of Experiential Ed. Northview Heights SS Sir William Osler High School Second Street Junior MS Oak Park Sprucecourt Public School Secord Elementary School Oakburn Centre Stanley Public School

2014 List of Included Schools 2015 List of Included Schools 2016 List of Included Schools Selwyn ES Stilecroft Public School Oakdale Park Middle School Seneca School Summit Heights PS Oakwood Collegiate Institute Shirley Street Jr. PS Sunny View Jr. & Sr. PS Ogden Junior Public School Shoreham Public Sports & Sunnylea Junior School Oriole Park Junior PS Wellness Acad. Swansea Jr. & Sr. PS Park Lane Public School Silver Springs Public School Tam O'Shanter Junior PS Park Lawn Junior MS Silverthorn CI Terry Fox Public School Parkfield Junior School Silverthorn CS The Elms Junior Middle School Parkside Elementary School Sir Ernest Macmillan Sr. PS Thistletown CI Pineway Public School Sir John A. Macdonald CI Tippett Road Poplar Road Junior PS Sir Samuel B. Steele Jr. PS Topcliff Public School Port Royal PS Sir William Osler High School Valleyfield Junior School Princess Margaret Junior PS Smithfield Middle School Victoria Park Collegiate Institute R.H. King Academy Sprucecourt Public School Victoria Park Elementary S. R.J. Lang Elementary E. & M.S. Stanley Public School Wedgewood Junior School Rene Gordon Health & Wellness Stilecroft Public School West Education Office Academy Sunny View Jr. & Sr. PS West Glen Junior School Richview Collegiate Institute Sunnylea Junior School West Hill Collegiate Institute Rivercrest Junior School Swansea Jr. & Sr. PS West Humber Junior MS Riverdale Collegiate Institute Tam O'Shanter Junior PS West Rouge Junior PS Roden PS / Equinox Holistic Alt School Terry Fox Public School Westmount Junior School Rose Avenue Jr. Public School The Elms Junior Middle School Weston Collegiate Institute Rouge Valley Public School Tippett Road Westview Centennial SS Roywood Public School Tom Longboat Junior PS Westway Junior School Runnymede Collegiate Institute Topcliff Public School William Burgess ES Runnymede Jr. & Sr. PS Valleyfield Junior School William G Davis Jr PS Samuel Hearne Middle School Victoria Park Elementary S. William Lyon Mackenzie CI SATEC @ W.A. Porter CI Wedgewood Junior School William Tredway Junior PS Scarlett Heights Entr. Acad. Wellesworth Junior School Willowdale Middle School School of Experiential Ed. West Education Office Wilmington Elementary School Second Street Junior MS West Glen Junior School Woburn Collegiate Institute Selwyn ES West Hill Collegiate Institute Woburn Junior Public School Seneca School West Humber Junior MS York Humber High School Shirley Street Jr. PS West Rouge Junior PS Yorkdale Secondary School Shoreham Public Sports & Weston Collegiate Institute Yorkview Public School Wellness Acad. Westway Junior School Zion Heights Middle School Silver Springs Public School Wilkinson Junior PS Avondale Secondary Alternative Silverthorn CI William Burgess ES School Silverthorn CS William G Davis Jr PS Beaumonde Heights Junior MS Sir Ernest Macmillan Sr. PS William Lyon Mackenzie CI Blythwood Junior Public School Sir John A. Macdonald CI Williamson Road Junior PS Brock Public School Sir Oliver Mowat CI Willowdale Middle School Brookhaven Public School Sir Robert L. Borden BTI

2014 List of Included Schools 2015 List of Included Schools 2016 List of Included Schools Wilmington Elementary School Central Technical School Sir Samuel B. Steele Jr. PS Woburn Collegiate Institute Charles G Fraser Jr PS (West End Sir Wilfrid Laurier CI York Humber High School Creche) Sir William Osler High School Yorkdale Secondary School Dewson Street Junior PS Smithfield Middle School Yorkview Public School Downtown Alternative Sch. Jr. St. Andrew's JHS Zion Heights Middle School Dr Marion Hilliard Sr PS St. Margaret's Public School Dr. Norman Bethune CI Stanley Public School Essex Jr. & Sr. PS Stilecroft Public School Fairmeadow Centre Sunny View Jr. & Sr. PS Forest Valley Outdoor Ed. Ctr Sunnylea Junior School Glamorgan Public School Swansea Jr. & Sr. PS Glen Ames Sr PS Tam O'Shanter Junior PS Highview Public School Terry Fox Public School Hodgson Sr. PS The Elms Junior Middle School Huron Street Junior PS Thistletown CI J.B. Tyrrell Sr. Public School Tippett Road Jackman Avenue Junior PS Topcliff Public School John English JMS Valleyfield Junior School John G. Althouse MS Victoria Park Collegiate Institute John Wanless Junior PS Victoria Park Elementary S. Kenton Public School Victoria Village Public School Lamberton Public School Warden Avenue PS Lambton Kingsway JR MS Wedgewood Junior School Lester B. Pearson CI Wellesworth Junior School Market Lane Jr. & Sr. PS West Education Office McCulloch Centre West Glen Junior School Morse Junior Public School West Hill Collegiate Institute Old Orchard Jr. PS West Humber Junior MS Ossington/Old Orchard Jr. PS West Rouge Junior PS Pelmo Park Public School Westmount Junior School Pierre Laporte Middle School Weston Collegiate Institute Regal Road Junior PS Weston Memorial Jr PS Rose Avenue Jr. Public School Westview Centennial SS Rosethorn Junior School Westway Junior School Runnymede Jr. & Sr. PS Wexford Collegiate School for Secord Elementary School the Arts Smithfield Middle School William G Davis Jr PS Tom Longboat Junior PS William Lyon Mackenzie CI Wellesworth Junior School Willow Park Junior PS Wilkinson Junior PS Willowdale Middle School Williamson Road Junior PS Wilmington Elementary School Woburn Collegiate Institute

2014 List of Included Schools 2015 List of Included Schools 2016 List of Included Schools Woburn Junior Public School York Humber High School York Mills CI Yorkdale Secondary School Zion Heights Middle School

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

December 8, 2016

Appendix B Verification Plan

Stantec Consulting Ltd. 400 - 655 Tyee Road Victoria BC V9A 6X5 Tel: (250) 388-9161 Fax: (250) 382-0514

Template version 2.0 July 2016

VIA EMAIL

December 8, 2016 File: 123220671

Attention: Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Suite 700 717-7th Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2P 0Z3

Dear Mr. Moulai,

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN – CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

INTRODUCTION

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) provides this final verification plan for the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) Energy Efficiency Project (the Project).

The verification was completed under the Canada Standards Association (CSA) CleanProjects® Registry. The verification plan outlines the terms of the engagement and the planned verification procedures. The verification plan also contains a list of data and documentation required to complete the planned procedures.

The TDSB owns and operates the schools and thus was responsible for the collection of activity data used in the calculations and data management for facility specific data. For the Project, Blue Source Canada ULC (Blue Source) was responsible for the completion of the calculations, presentation of the information within the GHG Assertion, Project Report, and for the supporting technical documents.

This is Stantec’s first verification of the Project.

VERIFICATION CRITERIA & SCOPE

The verification was undertaken to form an opinion as to whether the GHG Assertion and information in the Project Report are presented fairly and are in accordance with the requirements of the following criteria in all material aspects:

• Alberta’s Quantification Protocol for Energy Efficiency Projects (V 1.0, September 2007); • ISO 14064:2; and • CSA CleanProjects Registry.

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 2 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

VERIFICATION STANDARDS

The verification was conducted in accordance with:

• ISO 14064 Part 3 – Greenhouse Gases: Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions; and, • ISO 14065 – Greenhouse Gases: Requirements for greenhouse gas validation and verification bodies for use in accreditation and other forms of recognition.

VERIFICATION SCOPE

Stantec understands the Project is described in the following manner.

The TDSB has undertaken energy efficiency retrofits of schools in the district. The retrofits include:

• Lighting replacements; • Building Automation Systems (BAS) and mechanical systems – installation of new systems or upgrading old systems; and, • Roofing retrofits.

Emission reductions due to BAS and mechanical system retrofits are only considered based on natural gas emissions (i.e., electricity reductions are not considered).

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 3 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

The baseline scenario is the existing operation of the schools. The schools use grid-sourced electricity for lighting, powering mechanical systems, and heating. Natural gas is also used in some schools for heating in the baseline. In the case of lighting retrofits, the baseline is the operation of T12 lighting except after January 1, 2013, when T12 lighting was phased out and T8 was the standard lighting choice. Because of this, schools with lighting retrofits after January 1, 2013 are not eligible for offsets due to lighting retrofits.

The retrofits began in November 2000 and continue to this day. This project was previously listed on the Green Power Action’s Greening Canada Fund and generated offset credits for the 2002-2013 vintage years. The current reporting period is January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016; and the project is seeking to register with CSA CleanProjects Registry starting with this reporting period. The quantification of emission reductions will be carried out in the same manner as in previous years, except for the following:

• T12 to T8 baseline adjustment (as discussed above) • Use of both on-peak and off-peak electricity emissions intensity factors: TSBD now has access to hour by hour electricity use in at least some schools. Blue Source used this information to develop a prorating scheme to determine the amount of electicity consumed during on-peak and off-peak hours. This was done because Ontario has phased out coal-based electricity use and resulting variation between the on-peak and off-peak power is less. Previously, Blue Source had used a single intensity factor that represented the marginal power, which is the difference between on-peak and baseload power generation.

The following GHGs were included within the scope of the verification:

• Carbon dioxide (CO2); • Methane (CH4); • Nitrous oxide (N2O); • Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); • Perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and, • Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).

The total equivalent GHG emissions are reported as tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (t CO2e).

Sources of baseline and project GHG emissions included:

• Natural gas combustion for heating (CO2, CH4, and N2O): direct emissions from combustion at schools. • Grid electricity consumption for lighting and electrical loads (CO2, CH4, and N2O): indirect emissions from electricity use. Emissions occur at generating stations that are not under the control of the TDSB.

Negligible sources of GHGs have not been identified in the Project Report. Stantec did not identify negligible sources of GHGs during the site visit.

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 4 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

ASSERTION

The fundamental GHG Assertion to be verified for the Project is that it meets the verification criteria for the Project reporting period January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016. The initial GHG Assertion (i.e., reductions being claimed) to be verified for the Project is 46,114 t CO2e.

LEVEL OF ASSURANCE

Sufficient procedures are being conducted in order to express a reasonable level of assurance opinion as required by AEP.

MATERIALITY

The quantitative materiality threshold has been set to 5% of the asserted emission reductions and removals for this verification. The materiality will be assessed on the absolute values of discrepancies. The identification of material qualitative discrepancies is at the discretion of the verification body. Stantec will execute the verification accordingly.

VERIFICATION SCHEDULE

Table 1 presents the verification schedule.

Table 1 Planned Verification Schedule Verification Activity Responsible Party Date of Completion Kick-Off Meeting Blue Source Stantec / Blue Source November 8, 2016 Receive Blue Source Documentation Blue Source November 3, 2016 Initial Desktop Review Stantec November 3-10, 2016 Provide Verification Plan To Blue Source Stantec November 10, 2016 Site Visits Stantec / Blue Source / TDSB November 14-17, 2016 Receive Additional Information Blue Source November 28, 2016 Draft Verification Report Stantec December 8, 2016 Address Follow-Up Items Stantec / Blue Source December 8, 2016 Finalize Verification Report And Statement Of Stantec December 8, 2016 Verification

VERIFICATION TEAM: QUALIFICATIONS, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

As part of Stantec’s GHG Standard Operating Procedures (SOP), the competence and selection of the team is completed following ISO 14066 - Greenhouse Gases – Competence requirements for greenhouse gas validation teams and verification teams.

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 5 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 2 presents the verification team.

Table 2 Verification Team Name Role Responsibilities Lead desktop review, sampling plan execution and Lead Verifier / working paper completion, complete site visits and Daniel Hegg, M.Sc., CEM, Quality Reviewer prepare verification documentation. ENV-SP / Project Review verification deliverables technical soundness and Manager compliance with Stantec’s internal processes and CSA CleanRegistry criteria. Manage the project financially. Independent review of verification activities and Independent conclusions. The independent reviewer confirms the Vicki Corning, P.Eng. Peer Reviewer verification activities have been completed and that the activities provide the required level of assurance. Christina Varner, P.Eng. Verifier Assist with the completion of the desktop review. Anthony Marshall, P.Eng., Lead site visits to schools and assist with sampling plan Technical Expert CEM, CDSM, CMVP completion.

TEAM PROFILE

Lead Verifier/Quality Reviewer – Daniel Hegg, M.Sc., CEM, ENV-SP

Daniel Hegg is a Senior Sustainability Specialist and Western Canada/United States Discipline Lead for Stantec Consulting Ltd.’s Climate Change Service Line.

To help public and private sector clients successfully address their toughest sustainability challenges, Daniel has invested over a decade of time and effort to develop a knowledge base that offers unique perspectives and insights on integrated carbon, energy, and water management and strategy, triple bottom line business case development, and climate change risk assessment and planning. Daniel‘s approach is multi-faceted and dynamic; it is predicated on an ownership transition model in which the sense of responsibility and understanding evolves from his team to the client. This allows for the development of strategic sustainability plans that are focused, workable, and address all aspects of sustainability associated with business operations and product portfolios.

Daniel has developed and verified over 50 organizational and facility GHG inventories and offset projects for clients in a wide range of sectors. Daniel has also provided GHG consulting on strategy, policy advice, and the preparation of guidance documents and climate change plans for public and private sector organizations. He has directed pioneering projects in community and corporate visioning, as well as policy and strategic planning for sustainability. Daniel has consulted for, amongst others, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), the Union of British Columbia Municipalities, the British Columbia Climate Action Secretariat, the Pacific Carbon Trust, Bell Alliant, TransAlta, Capital Power Corporation, Total E&P Canada, Teck, Connacher Oil and Gas, BC Transit, and Phillips 66.

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 6 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Independent Peer Reviewer – Vicki Corning, P.Eng.

Vicki has a degree in chemical engineering and 11 years of technical and management expertise in the field of atmospheric emissions and environmental permitting. She is a technical discipline leader for air quality and was formerly in the same role for GHG & Climate Services at Stantec. Technical leaders have the responsibility for growth and continuous improvement of the service lines. She has been involved in over 120 verifications for organizational inventories and GHG offset projects in western Canada, Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic Canada and the United States. Vicki developed Stantec’s internal GHG program competency training process and has delivered course material on GHG verification, inventory, and data management through a contract with the Canadian Standards Association.

Vicki also regularly leads air, noise, and climate components of environmental assessments for a range of industrial clients. These environmental assessments involve monitoring existing conditions using analytical techniques, establishing emissions inventories for new facilities, and evaluating expected environmental effects using modeling. Vicki has worked with clients in a variety of different industries in Canada and the United States, including: upstream and downstream oil and gas (gas processing plants, oil refineries, steam assisted gravity drainage facilities, pipeline operations), electrical generating stations (coal, gas, co-generation, biomass), manufacturing plants, chemical processing facilities, mining, construction projects, and pulp and paper. She has managed the preparation of several policy reports on renewable energy for the New Brunswick Department of Energy, and authored technical content on carbon capture systems for coal facilities as part of an environmental report for Carbon Capture Nova Scotia.

Technical Expert – Anthony Marshall, P.Eng., CEM, CDSM, CMVP

Anthony Marshall is a licensed Professional Engineer, Certified Energy Manager, Certified Measurement and Verification Professional and is a Senior Engineer with Stantec’s Energy Management team in the GTA and SW Ontario. Anthony is a graduate of the University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada and has achieved a Bachelor of Applied Science in Engineering (Chemical and Energy Systems) (B.A.Sc.) and a Bachelor of Science in Chemistry (Environmental and Analytical Chemistry) (B.Sc.). Mr. Marshall has experience in energy analysis, energy conservation measures, energy management plans and renewable energy systems for a wide variety of industrial, commercial, health care, municipal and educational facilities. Prior to joining Stantec, Mr. Marshall worked with automation and controls companies and focused on developing energy conservation projects for industrial, education and commercial facilities. In addition, Mr. Marshall has consulting experpierence with reviewing the feasibility of new technologies deployed to improve the sustainable operation of facilities. In these roles, Mr. Marshall developed a solid background and knowledge of site assessments, sustainable technologies and energy systems.

Verifier – Christina Varner, P.Eng.

Christina has practiced environmental engineering, specializing in atmospheric environment, for seven years. She is a lead GHG verifier at Stantec, having completed over 70 GHG validation and verification projects for clients in oil and gas, chemical manufacture, electricity generation, commercial operations, and municipal governments. Christina has completed desktop reviews, reporting, and site visits for facility and project GHG inventories under Alberta’s SGER, British

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 7 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Columbia’s Emissions Offset Regulation and Reporting Regulation, The Climate Registry, Verified Carbon Standard, Ontario’s Environmental Protection Act 452/09, and Massachusetts’ Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Regulation.

Christina has been involved in air quality studies such as dispersion modelling, noise monitoring, source emissions testing, and ambient air quality monitoring. Her clients include pulp and paper mills, petroleum refineries, electricity generating stations, and asphalt plants. She has performed data collection and analysis for environmental assessments. Christina has created emissions inventories to address regulatory requirements and permitting, including National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) and Environment Canada Greenhouse Gas program reporting.

RISK ASSESSMENT

Stantec has done a preliminary assessment of the potential risk associated with this verification assignment. The risk assessment is an internal procedure used to assess inherent, control, and detection risk which uses the following equation:

Audit Risk = Inherent Risk x Control Risk x Detection Risk

Detection risk is the risk that Stantec will not uncover a material discrepancy (e.g., the misstatement was present in the assertion and was not identified during the verification). The assessment of detection risk impacts the nature, timing and extent of the verification procedures that are to be performed by Stantec. Inherent Risk is the risk of a material misstatement that arises due to error or omission as a result of factors that are outside of the failure of controls. Inherent risk is generally considered to be higher where a high degree of judgment and estimation is involved or where GHG emissions data collection and processing are highly complex and involved processes. Organizations must have adequate internal controls in place to prevent and detect instances of error, misstatements, and omissions. Control Risk is the risk of a material misstatement arising due to absence or failure in the operation of relevant GHG system controls. Control risk is considered to be high where the Project does not have adequate internal controls to prevent and detect misstatements in the assertion.

There is an inverse relationship between the inherent and control risks, and the detection risk. If the inherent and control risks are high, Stantec will perform verification and sampling procedures that reduce detection risk so that the final verification risk is maintained at a low level. Higher control and inherent risk equates to more rigorous investigation and sampling. It typically results in additional detailed on and off-site sampling, additional information requests and staff interviews. Detection risk is lowered by more rigorous sampling; however sampling is always done as per the verification criteria and standards.

Based on the risk assessment in each of these categories, the Stantec team assigns an overall risk to the verification. The preliminary overall risk for this verification has been assessed as Medium. A summary of the risk assessment is provided in Table 3. Details of the final assessment are provided in the verification report.

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 8 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 3 Risk Summary Risk Area Preliminary Assessment Final Assessment Inherent Risk Medium Medium Control Risk Medium Medium Detection Risk Medium Medium Overall Risk Medium Medium

We considered the initial inherent risk to be Medium based on the following:

• Natural gas and electricity consumption data are available on a monthly basis from third party suppliers using custody transfer meters (low risk); • Heating degree day data are available from Environment and Climate Change Canada, which has requirements regarding instrument accuracy and has quality assurance and control practices (low risk); and, • There are 412 schools in the district that have undergone retrofits and that are potentially included in the project (medium risk).

We considered the initial control risk to be Medium based on the following:

• At this stage of the verification, Stantec has not assessed the TDSB or Blue Source data management systems (medium risk); and, • There is risk that electricity or natural gas may have been incorrectly entered by the TDSB utility data clerks. This risk is offset by the TDSB energy data analysts auditing the data (low risk).

Detection risk is the risk that Stantec will not identify a material discrepancy. We regarded this risk as Medium due to:

VERIFICATION PLAN

The verification and sampling plan is intended to facilitate the assessment of completeness, conservativeness, consistency, accuracy, and transparency of the responsible party’s GHG information and confirm the GHG Assertion as identified in the Project Report. The verification team has established and will modify the sampling plan to verify that sufficient and appropriate

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 9 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

evidence is available to support the Project Report and GHG Assertion presented. Identified discrepancies that contribute to the GHG Assertion were assessed and documented in the verification report.

With regards to the magnitude of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations, the natural gas consumption data and electricity consumption data represent the greatest risk of material error to the GHG Assertion. Thus, verification procedures focused on the evidence and controls related to these parameters.

Table 4 shows the verification procedures.

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 10 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 4 Verification Procedures Verification Line Item Risk Identified Type of Procedure Description of Procedure Objective Conduct a site tour of the Facilities to determine sources and compare with inventory. Examine the offset calculators and raw data to Greenhouse Gas Incompleteness of Completeness Test of detail – inspection. determine whether the correct schools have been Assertion inventory. included in the assertion. Obtain evidence to support that retrofits were undertaken in the schools. Greenhouse Gas Information not Inspect Project Report for correct reporting of Accuracy Test of detail – inspection. Assertion appropriately disclosed. emissions and related information. Greenhouse Gas Incompleteness of Inspect Project Report for missing material Completeness Test of detail – inspection. Assertion Project Report. information. Greenhouse Gas Accuracy GHG Assertion is Test of detail – inspection Check emission factors, quantification Assertion Conservativeness incorrect. and reconciliation. methodologies, and recalculate GHG Assertion. Document storage and Greenhouse Gas Inquire of the location and retention period of data Occurrence retention practices may Test of detail – inquiry. Assertion used for GHG Assertion. not be sufficient. Incorrect recording of Compare raw data records, invoices against data Electricity Completeness Test of detail – inspection, data resulting in an in GHG calculator for consistency and Consumption Accuracy reconciliation, tracing. incorrect GHG Assertion. completeness. Inconsistent Electricity Assess whether quantification methodologies have Consistency quantification Test of detail – inspection. Consumption been consistently applied for all schools. methodologies. Electricity Anomaly in consumption Test of detail – inquiry. Run profile tests for monthly data for a sample of Accuracy Consumption of electricity. Analytical test – profile. schools. Incorrect recording of Compare raw data records, invoices against data Natural Gas Completeness Test of detail – inspection, data resulting in an in GHG calculator for consistency and Consumption Accuracy reconciliation, tracing. incorrect GHG Assertion. completeness. Inconsistent Natural Gas Assess whether quantification methodologies have Consistency quantification Test of detail – inspection. Consumption been consistently applied for all schools. methodologies.

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 11 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT Table 4 Verification Procedures Verification Line Item Risk Identified Type of Procedure Description of Procedure Objective Natural Gas Anomaly in consumption Test of detail – inquiry. Run profile tests for monthly data for a sample of Accuracy Consumption of electricity. Analytical test – profile. schools. Inappropriate weather Compare data used in offset calculators to Heating Degree Completeness data used to normalize Test of detail – inspection Environment Canada records. Inspect linear Days (HDD) Accuracy natural gas regression calculation. consumption.

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 12 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

SITE VISIT

Stantec’s Anthony Marshall conducted site visits to a sample of schools that the verification team identified.

During the site visits, the technical expert performed procedures to identify Project boundaries, confirm GHG sources, look for additional sources, and visually confirm the presence of lighting replacements, building automation systems, and roofing retrofits.

The schools visited are identified in Table 5, with information on which vintage years are applicable, the retrofit(s) applied, the check that caused the site visit, and any additional notes.

Table 5 Site Visit Samples School Vintage year Retrofit(s) Reason for visit Notes Date of visit A.Y. Jackson Secondary 2014, 2015, High electricity use, Lighting, BAS Nov. 15 School 2016 high natural gas use Central Etobicoke High 2014, 2015, High natural gas Lighting, BAS Nov. 17 School 2016 use 2014, 2015, High electricity Cherokee Public School Lighting, BAS Nov. 15 2016 reductions 2014, 2015, High natural gas Dallington Public School Lighting, BAS Nov. 15 2016 reductions 2014, 2015, High natural gas David & Mary Thomson CI Lighting, BAS Nov. 14 2016 use East York Collegiate 2014, 2015, Lighting, BAS High electricity use Nov. 16 Institute 2016 2014, 2015, High electricity Grey Owl Public School Lighting, BAS Nov. 14 2016 reductions Heritage Park Public 2014, 2015, High natural gas Lighting, BAS Nov. 14 School 2016 reductions High electricity John G. Althouse MS 2014, 2016 Lighting Nov. 17 reductions Newtonbrook Secondary High electricity use, 2016 Lighting, BAS Nov. 15 School high natural gas use 2014, 2015, High natural gas Sir John A. Macdonald CI BAS Nov. 15 2016 use High electricity use, 2014, 2015, West Education Office Lighting, BAS high natural gas Nov. 17 2016 reductions West Hill Collegiate 2014, 2015, High electricity and Lighting, BAS Nov. 14 Institute 2016 natural gas use High electricity use Riverdale Collegiate 2014, 2015, Lighting, BAS and electricity Nov. 16 Institute 2016 reductions Danforth C. & Tech. 2014, 2015, Lighting High electricity use Nov. 16 Institute 2016

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 13 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

School Vintage year Retrofit(s) Reason for visit Notes Date of visit 2014, 2015, Central Technical School Lighting, BAS High electricity use Nov. 16 2016 2014, 2015, Silverthorn CI Lighting, BAS High electricity use Nov. 17 2016 High natural gas Westview Centennial SS 2015, 2016 BAS, Roofing Nov. 17 use Northern Secondary High natural gas 2016 BAS, Roofing Nov. 16 School use High natural gas SATEC @ W.A. Porter CI 2015, 2016 BAS, Roofing Nov. 14 use

In general, each site visit involved a tour of the school to look at the retrofits and an interview with personnel familiar with the operation of the school to discuss:

• School operations, including number of students served, primary heating method, locations of natural gas and electrical meters, building arrangements • Pre-retrofit equipment (e.g., T12 lamps) • When retrofits were completed • Normal operations of the school, including use in the evening and weekends • Whether the retrofits are providing the same level of service (e.g., same light levels, same level of heating and cooling for BAS)

Please note that documents such as purchase orders will not be collected during the site visits in order to streamline each visit (unless time permits). Such documents are requested below.

INFORMATION REQUEST

Table 6 contains a list of documentation and data requested by Stantec to complete the proposed procedures and the outcome of the requests. This table will be updated as needed through the verification process to track requests.

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On Offset Project Report (final, signed version) Nov. 10, 2016 Evidence of retrofit work (including start and complete dates) for the November 29, following schools: 2016 • Adam Beck Junior Public School • A.Y. Jackson Secondary School Schools in red • Alexmuir Junior Public School were removed Nov. 10, 2016 • Alliance Centre from the project • Banting & Best Public School due to a lack of • Bayview MS/Avondale PS/Avondale Elem Alt evidence for BAS • Birchmount Park CI or mechanical • Blacksmith Public School retrofit.

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 14 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On • Brian Public School • Briarcrest Junior School • Brock Public School • Chester Elementary School • David Hornell Junior School • Daystrom Public School • Derrydown Public School • Dr. Norman Bethune CI • Emily Carr Public School • Forest Valley Outdoor Ed. Ctr • Galloway Road Public School • George S. Henry Academy • Harbord Collegiate Institute • Heritage Park Public School • Inglenook Community HS • J.B. Tyrrell Sr. Public School • J.G. Workman Public School • John D. Parker Junior School • John Ross Robertson Jr. PS • Ledbury Park E & MS • Lester B. Pearson PS • Lillian Public School • Lord Dufferin Jr. & Sr. PS • Lynngate Junior Public School • Maple Leaf Public School • Maurice Cody Jr. Public School • Nelson A. Boylen CI • Norman Cook Junior PS • Oak Park • Oakdale Park Middle School • Port Royal PS • Princess Margaret Junior PS • Second Street Junior MS • Selwyn ES • Shirley Street Jr. PS • Shoreham Public Sports & Wellness Acad. • Silverthorn CI • Sir William Osler High School • Sprucecourt Public School • Tam O'Shanter Junior PS • Timberbank Junior PS • Tumpane Public School • Victoria Park Elementary S. • Wedgewood Junior School • West Education Office • West Hill Collegiate Institute

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 15 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On • Weston Collegiate Institute • Westview Centennial SS • Westway Junior School • William G Davis Jr PS • Woburn Collegiate Institute • Yorkdale Secondary School These 60 samples (representing 20% of the 2015 and 2016 list of retrofitted schools) were selected randomly. Note that acceptable evidence includes purchase orders and “as- built” final reports that specifically reference the school that was retrofitted. Annual natural gas consumption data for the following schools and vintage years. Appropriate evidence are exports directly from the TDSB database. Where a school is in bold, we are also requesting the monthly invoices (12) as PDFs that support the annual total. 2014 (27 schools) • West Hill Collegiate Institute • A.Y. Jackson Secondary School • George S. Henry Academy • David & Mary Thomson CI • Central Etobicoke High School • Newtonbrook Secondary School • Sir John A. Macdonald CI • Woburn Collegiate Institute • Dr. Norman Bethune CI • Etobicoke Collegiate Institute • Silverthorn CI Nov. 10, 2016 Nov. 25, 2016 • Yorkdale Secondary School • Riverdale Collegiate Institute • Richview Collegiate Institute • William Lyon Mackenzie CI • Maplewood High School • Sunny View Jr. & Sr. PS • Elmbank JR-MS Academy • Martingrove CI • Scarlett Heights Entr. Acad. • Beverley R PS • Harbord Collegiate Institute • Dixon Grove Junior MS • Swansea Jr. & Sr. PS • Brookview Middle School

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 16 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On • East York Collegiate Institute • Weston Collegiate Institute 2015 (30 schools) • Westview Centennial SS • Victoria Park Collegiate Institute • West Hill Collegiate Institute • SATEC @ W.A. Porter CI • R.H. King Academy • A.Y. Jackson Secondary School • Central Etobicoke High School • George S. Henry Academy • Newtonbrook Secondary School • David & Mary Thomson CI • Thistletown CI • Woburn Collegiate Institute • Etobicoke Collegiate Institute • Runnymede Collegiate Institute • Dr. Norman Bethune CI • Sir John A. Macdonald CI • Oakwood Collegiate Institute • Silverthorn CI • Yorkdale Secondary School • Riverdale Collegiate Institute • Richview Collegiate Institute • William Lyon Mackenzie CI • Maplewood High School • Sunny View Jr. & Sr. PS • Brookview Middle School • Weston Collegiate Institute • Harbord Collegiate Institute • Bloordale MS • Martingrove CI • East York Collegiate Institute Additional samples: West Education Office, McGriskin Centre, Humber Summit Middle School, Nelson A. Boylen CI 2016 (32 schools) • Westview Centennial SS • Northern Secondary School • Bendale Bus & Tech Institute

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 17 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On • Victoria Park Collegiate Institute • West Hill Collegiate Institute • SATEC @ W.A. Porter CI • Cedarbrae Collegiate Institute • A.Y. Jackson Secondary School • York Mills CI • Sir Wilfrid Laurier CI • C.W. Jefferys CI • David & Mary Thomson CI • Thistletown CI • Central Etobicoke High School • George S. Henry Academy • Birchmount Park CI • Sir Oliver Mowat CI • Wexford Collegiate School for the Arts • Etobicoke School of the Arts • Bowmore Road Jr & Sr PS • Newtonbrook Secondary School • Woburn Collegiate Institute • Sir Robert L. Borden BTI • Oakwood Collegiate Institute • Sir John A. Macdonald CI • John English JMS • Dr. Norman Bethune CI • Silverthorn CI • Etobicoke Collegiate Institute • Yorkdale Secondary School • Riverdale Collegiate Institute • Sir William Osler High School These samples represent approximately the top 40% of project year natural gas consumption. Samples in bold represent the top 25% of project year consumption. Annual electricity consumption data for the following schools and vintage years. Appropriate evidence are exports directly from the TDSB database. Where a school is in bold, we are also requesting the monthly invoices (12) as PDFs that support the annual total. 2014 (22 schools) Nov. 10, 2016 Nov. 25, 2016 • Central Technical School • Riverdale Collegiate Institute • Weston Collegiate Institute

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 18 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On • East York Collegiate Institute • Newtonbrook Secondary School • West Hill Collegiate Institute • York Humber High School • A.Y. Jackson Secondary School • Danforth C. & Tech. Institute • Market Lane Jr. & Sr. PS • West Education Office • Yorkdale Secondary School • Silverthorn CI • David & Mary Thomson CI • George S. Henry Academy • Owen Public School • Dr. Norman Bethune CI • McGriskin Centre • Central Etobicoke High School • Nelson A. Boylen CI • Glamorgan Public School • Rose Avenue Jr. Public School 2015 (21 schools) • Central Technical School • Riverdale Collegiate Institute • Weston Collegiate Institute • East York Collegiate Institute • A.Y. Jackson Secondary School • Newtonbrook Secondary School • West Hill Collegiate Institute • Danforth C. & Tech. Institute • Market Lane Jr. & Sr. PS • Silverthorn CI • West Education Office • David & Mary Thomson CI • McGriskin Centre • George S. Henry Academy • J.B. Tyrrell Sr. Public School • Dr. Norman Bethune CI • Nelson A. Boylen CI • Rose Avenue Jr. Public School • Central Etobicoke High School

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 19 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On • Humber Summit Middle School Additional samples: David and Mary Thomson CI, Richview Collegiate Institute, Maplewood High School 2016 (17 schools) • Central Technical School • Riverdale Collegiate Institute • Weston Collegiate Institute • A.Y. Jackson Secondary School • Newtonbrook Secondary School • West Hill Collegiate Institute • East York Collegiate Institute • Danforth C. & Tech. Institute • David & Mary Thomson CI • Silverthorn CI • Market Lane Jr. & Sr. PS • J.B. Tyrrell Sr. Public School • George S. Henry Academy • Dr. Norman Bethune CI • Central Etobicoke High School These samples represent approximately the top 40% of project year electricity consumption. Samples in bold represent the top 25% of project year consumption. Annual electricity consumption for the following schools for the baseline year (2001). • A.Y. Jackson Secondary School • Avondale Secondary Alternative School • Beverley R PS • Briarcrest Junior School • Brock Public School • Charles G Fraser Jr PS (West End Creche) • Chine Drive Public School Nov. 10, 2016 Dec. 6, 2016 • Claireville Junior School • Cresthaven Public School • Dallington Public School • David Hornell Junior School • David Lewis Public School • Dewson Street Junior PS • Fairmeadow Centre • Fenside Public School • Fleming Public School

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 20 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On • George Webster ES • Grey Owl Public School • Highbrook Learning Centre • Highfield Junior School • Highland Heights Jr. PS • Hillcrest Jr. PS • Hodgson Sr. PS • Hollywood Public School • Indian Road Crescent Jr. PS • Jack Miner Sr. Public School • Lamberton Public School • Lord Dufferin Jr. & Sr. PS • Malvern Junior Public School • Meadowvale Public School • Morse Junior Public School • Nelson A. Boylen CI • Newtonbrook Secondary School • Oak Park • Pierre Laporte Middle School • Regal Road Junior PS • Robert Service Senior PS • Roywood Public School • School of Experiential Ed. • Selwyn ES • Shirley Street Jr. PS • Silverthorn CI • Stanley Public School • Tam O'Shanter Junior PS • Terry Fox Public School • Valleyfield Junior School • Wedgewood Junior School • West Rouge Junior PS • William Burgess ES • Willowdale Middle School • Yorkdale Secondary School • Contact Alternative School • Meadowvale Public School • Norman Cook Junior PS • Secord Elementary School

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 21 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On • Central Technical School • Riverdale Collegiate • Weston College • East York Collegiate Institute • West Hill Collegiate Additional samples: remaining schools in the 2014, 2015, and 2016 vintage years. The above represents 60 samples of schools with lighting retrofits, 55 randomly selected and 5 selected from the site visit list. For the schools identified below, provide evidence of equivalent lighting service for all areas where lighting retrofits took place: • Dr. Norman Bethune CI • Heritage Park Public School • Silver Springs Public School • Banting & Best Public School • Parkside Elementary School • David & Mary Thomson CI • Brock Public School • Alexmuir Junior Public School No documented lighting measures • West Glen Junior School could be • Highbrook Learning Centre obtained. Nov. 10, 2016 • Lamberton Public School Anecdotal evidence • Chine Drive Public School gathered during • Central Etobicoke High School site visits. • Driftwood Public School • Wilmington Elementary School • Stanley Public School • Fairmeadow Centre • Park Lawn Junior MS • Eastern Ave Centre • Central Technical School These 20 samples were selected randomly based on the 2016 list of schools with lighting retrofits. Confirmation for each school included in the project that the school was operating in a similar manner in 2001 and in each of 2014, 2015, and 2016. Appropriate evidence is a record from TDSB of the number Nov. 10, 2016 Nov. 30, 2016 of students attending each school in 2001 and in each of 2014, 2015, and 2016. During the site visits, the verifier noted that solar panel systems had been installed on the roofs of a number of schools. For each school Nov. 21, 2016 Dec. 6, 2016 with lighting retrofits in 2014-2016, please identify the following:

December 8, 2016 Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. Page 22 of 22

RE: FINAL VERIFICATION PLAN - CSA CLEANPROJECTS REGISTRY VERIFICATION OF THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

Table 6 Information Requested Information Requested Request Date Obtained On • Whether that school has a solar panel system installed. • Whether the electricity generated by the panels is used by the school directly or is sold to the grid. We require evidence such as a single line drawing or attestation from the panel installer to support this. Updated In the spreadsheet “CEMS_electricity_data.xlsx”, please clarify why the spreadsheet Nov. 21, 2016 statutory holiday flag is not used to determine off-peak days. received on Nov. 28, 2016. The nuclear and hydro emission factors used to develop the peak and marginal emission factors are from an old study that has received Updated criticism for its methodology. Further, the study is a life cycle spreadsheet Nov. 21, 2016 assessment and hence includes emissions that are not directly related received Nov. 24, to the production of electricity. Please justify why these emission 2016. factors are appropriate and reasonable to use. Provide an explanation and demonstration of the TDSB eBill system. Nov. 29, 2016 Nov. 29, 2016 Provide details on how the THESL school contribution is calculated (in Dec. 6, 2016 Removed terms of kW reduction calculation). Evidence to support that Blue Source has been authorized by TDSB to Dec. 7, 2016 Dec. 7, 2016 aggregate emission reductions on their behalf.

CLOSURE

Should you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me directly. Sincerely,

STANTEC CONSULTING LTD. This report was reviewed and approved for transmittal by:

Daniel Hegg, B.Comm, MSc. CEM Vicki Corning, P.Eng. Lead Verifier Independent Peer Reviewer Tel: (250) 217-9729 Tel: (506) 452-7000 [email protected] [email protected]

\\cd1002-f04\ghg\blue_source_tdsb_123220671\6_ver_statement (report)\rpt_final\app_b_vplan_v2_20161208.docx

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR THE TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT

December 8, 2016

Appendix C Submission Documents

STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION BLUE SOURCE CANADA ULC TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT (JANUARY 1, 2014 – JUNE 30, 2016)

1.0 STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION

Stantec Consulting Ltd (Stantec) was contracted by Blue Source Canada ULC (Blue Source) to conduct an independent third-party verification of the greenhouse gas (GHG) Assertion provided in the “Toronto District School Board Energy Efficiency Project GHG Report” dated December 6, 2016 (the Project Report). This Statement of Verification is applicable to the January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2016 crediting period.

In this work, Toronto District School Board (TDSB) was responsible for the collection of data used in the calculations and data management. Blue Source responsible for the completion of the calculations, presentation of the information within the Project Report, and for the supporting technical documents. The TDSB owns the emission reductions generated by the Project.

Stantec is accredited with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), a member of the International Accreditation Forum (IAF), in accordance with ISO 14065 (Accreditation ID #0805 issued to Stantec Consulting Ltd. for greenhouse gas (GHG) verification). Stantec was responsible for planning and executing the verification in order to deliver an opinion as to whether the Project Report is presented fairly and in accordance with the verification criteria.

1.1 INTENDED USER

This verification statement has been prepared for the CSA CleanProjects® Registry for the express purpose of facilitating the creation of verified emission reductions/removals (VERRs) for registration on the Registry.

1.2 VERIFICATION OBJECTIVE

The objective of the verification was to assess whether the GHG Assertion (as presented in Table 1.1) contained within the Project Report satisfied the CleanProjects Registry requirements in the Verification Criteria in accordance with the Verification Standards identified in Section 1.5

1.3 PROJECT DETAILS

1.3.1 Description

The TDSB has undertaken energy efficiency retrofits of schools in the district. The retrofits include:

• Lighting replacements; • Building Automation Systems (BAS) and mechanical systems – installation of new systems or upgrading old systems; and, • Roofing retrofits. STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION BLUE SOURCE CANADA ULC TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT (JANUARY 1, 2014 – JUNE 30, 2016)

Emission reductions due to BAS and mechanical system retrofits are only considered based on natural gas emissions (i.e., electricity reductions are not considered).

The retrofits began in November 2000 and continue to this day. This project was previously listed on the Green Power Action’s Greening Canada Fund and generated offset credits for the 2002- 2013 vintage years. The current reporting period is January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016; and the project is seeking to register with CSA CleanProjects Registry starting with this reporting period. The quantification of emission reductions will be carried out in the same manner as in previous years, except for the following:

• T12 to T8 baseline adjustment (as discussed above) • Use of both on-peak and off-peak electricity emissions intensity factors: TSBD now has access to hour by hour electricity use in at least some schools. Blue Source used this information to STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION BLUE SOURCE CANADA ULC TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT (JANUARY 1, 2014 – JUNE 30, 2016)

develop a prorating scheme to determine the amount of electicity consumed during on- peak and off-peak hours. This was done because Ontario has phased out coal-based electricity use and resulting variation between the on-peak and off-peak power is less. Previously, Blue Source had used a single intensity factor that represented the marginal power, which is the difference between on-peak and baseload power generation.

The following GHGs were included within the scope of the verification:

• Carbon dioxide (CO2); • Methane (CH4); • Nitrous oxide (N2O); • Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); • Perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and, • Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).

The total equivalent GHG emissions are reported as tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (t CO2e).

Sources of baseline and project GHG emissions included:

Negligible sources of GHGs have not been identified in the Project Report. Stantec did not identify negligible sources of GHGs during the site visit.

1.3.2 Emission Reduction Period

The verification was for the period of January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2016.

1.4 GHG ASSERTION

The fundamental GHG Assertion verified was that the Project Report dated December 6, 2016 met the verification criteria for the period of January 1, 2014 through June 30, 2016 (see Section 2.3).

The essential information contained within the GHG Assertion verified by Stantec is presented in Table 1.1 below. STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION BLUE SOURCE CANADA ULC TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT (JANUARY 1, 2014 – JUNE 30, 2016)

Table 1.1 GHG Assertion

Baseline Project

Emission Year Tonnes Tonnes Tonnes Tonnes Tonnes Total Tonnes Tonnes Tonnes Reductions1 CO2e CO2e Total Project CO2 as CH4 as N2O as Baseline CO2 as CH4 as N2O as (electric (electric (t CO2e) CO2e CO2e CO2e (t CO2e) CO2e CO2e CO2e ity only) ity only) Jan. 1, 2014 – Dec. 31, 44,619 22 247 11,045 55,933 31,473 15 173 7,805 39,466 15,750 2014 Jan. 1, 2015 – Dec. 31, 52,260 26 286 9,321 61,892 37,115 18 203 6,359 43,695 17,600 2015 Jan. 1, 2016 – June 30, 44,021 22 241 3,312 47,595 32,071 16 176 2,247 34,510 12,764 2016 Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding 1 Emission reductions do not include emissions reductions from THESL funding. STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION BLUE SOURCE CANADA ULC TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT (JANUARY 1, 2014 – JUNE 30, 2016)

1.5 VERIFICATION CRITERIA

Stantec has conducted sufficient and appropriate procedures in order to express a reasonable level of assurance opinion as to whether the Project (the GHG Assertion), for the January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016 crediting period, satisfies the requirements of the:

1.6 VERIFICATION STANDARDS

The verification was conducted in accordance with ISO 14064:3 and ISO 14065:2013.

1.7 UNRESOLVED DISCREPANCIES

A materiality limit of 5% for quantitative material discrepancies was set for this verification. The materiality of quantitative discrepancies was calculated on an absolute basis (i.e., no mitigation of over- or under-reporting). Qualitative discrepancies were at the professional judgment of the verification body. Stantec planned and executed the verification accordingly. The following is a high level summary of the unresolved discrepancies. For more information, see the verification report.

• The baseline emissions have not been identified separately in the Report. • The discussion and calculation of the on-peak and off-peak emission factors in the offset report causes confusion as to whether the marginal intensity or the on-peak intensity is used with the on-peak electricity use. The report also does not fully disclose how the electricity proration fractions and emission factors are calculated. This does not materiality affect the report or assertion. • The baseline and project sources related to Testing of Equipment and Site Decommissioning were excluded however they were not specified in the Report to be excluded. This does not materiality affect the report or assertion. • Two discrepancies were detected in the emission reductions removed due to THESL funding. The total discrepancy is 172 t CO2e or 0.4% of the emission reductions. • The results of the tracing indicate that electricity and natural gas anomalies occurred when the data was normalized by TDSB for the calendar year. The magnitude of the discrepancy cannot be precisely determined; however, it is Stantec’s opinion that the anomalies do not contribute to a material discrepancy. STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION BLUE SOURCE CANADA ULC TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT (JANUARY 1, 2014 – JUNE 30, 2016)

1.8 OPINION

Based on the procedures undertaken and described in this report, Toronto District School Board Energy Efficiency Project (the Project), for the January 1, 2014 – June 30, 2016 crediting period, satisfies the requirements of the:

• Alberta’s Quantification Protocol For Energy Efficiency Projects (v1.0, September 2007); and • CSA CleanProjects Registry.

1.9 VERIFICATION CLOSURE

The findings presented herein were used to make a reasonable level of assurance opinion.

Stantec did not conduct direct GHG emissions monitoring or other environmental sampling and analysis in conjunction with this verification.

Because of the inherent limitations in any internal control structure it is possible that fraud, error or non-compliance with other laws and regulations may occur and not be detected. Further, the verification was not designed to detect all weaknesses or errors in internal controls as the verification has not been performed continuously throughout the period and the procedures performed on the relevant internal controls were on a test basis. Any projection of the evaluation of control procedures to future periods is subject to the risk that the procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with them may deteriorate.

STANTEC CONSULTING LTD.

Daniel Hegg, B.Comm, M.Sc. CEM. Vicki Corning, P.Eng. Lead Verifier Independent Peer & Quality Reviewer Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec Consulting Ltd. 400 - 655 Tyee Road Victoria, BC V9A 6X5 845 Prospect Street Fredericton, NB E3B 2T7 Phone: (250) 217-9729 Phone: (506) 452-7000 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Issued in Victoria, BC

December 8, 2016

Conflict of Interest Checklist

Yes No Details Independence Stantec undertakes a conflict of interest Remain independent of the activity assessment during proposal development. being verified, and free from bias and This assessment includes a review of conflict of interest. Stantec’s prior work for Blue Source and Maintain objectivity throughout the TDSB, whether any verification team verification to ensure that the findings members have worked for Blue Source or and conclusions will be based on TDSB, and whether there are any actual or objective evidence generated during perceived conflicts of interest with Stantec the verification. as a whole. Ethical conduct Stantec has a Code of Ethics Policy that all Demonstrate ethical conduct through employees agree to adhere to on an trust, integrity, confidentiality and annual basis. In addition, Stantec has a discretion throughout the verification mandatory annual ethics refresher course. process. Fair presentation Stantec is accredited by ANSI. Our GHG Reflect truthfully and accurately validation and verification system is verification activities, findings, designed to document all work conducted. conclusions and reports. Report significant obstacles encountered during the verification process, as well as unresolved, diverging opinions among verifiers, the responsible party and the client. Due professional care Stantec’s GHG validation and verification Exercise due professional care and system include a process for identifying and judgment in accordance with the maintaining competency. All verification importance of the task performed and team members have been confirmed to

the confidence placed by clients and have the appropriate competencies to intended users. Have the necessary undertake the verification. skills and competences to undertake the verification.