F-CDM-MR: Monitoring report form. version 02.0

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

Validation report form for CDM project activities

(Version 01.0)

VALIDATION REPORT

Title of the project activity Biomass based power project of VPL

Version number of the validation report 04

Completion date of the validation report 10/02/2020

Version number of PDD to which this report applies 06

Date when PDD was uploaded for global stakeholder consultation

06/08/2015- 04/09/2015 (For CDM Purpose)

28/08/2018 till 08/01/2019 (for Stakeholder Feedback round as per GS4GG)

Project participant(s) Vayunandana Power Limited

Host Party India

Estimated annual average GHG emission reductions or net removals in the crediting period (tCO2e)

49,106 tCO2e

Sectoral scope(s) and selected methodology(ies)

Sectoral scope: 01

Selected Methodology: AMS I.D “Grid connected Renewable electricity generation” (version 18)

Name of DOE KBS Certification Services Private Limited (KBS)

Name, position and signature of the approver of the validation report

Mr. Kaushal Goyal

Managing Director

KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

SECTION A. Executive summary

>>

Vayunandana Power Limited (VPL) has commissioned KBS to perform the validation of the proposed Gold Standard project activity:

Project Title: Biomass based power project of VPL

Methodology Applied: AMS-I.D.: Grid connected renewable electricity generation - Version 18.0

Standardized Baseline Applied: Not Applicable

Sectoral Scopes: Sectoral Scope 1: Energy industries (renewable - / non-renewable sources)

Validity of methodology/ies (for RfR): Valid from 28/11/2014 onwards

The scope of the validation is defined as an independent and objective review of the project design document, the project’s baseline study and monitoring plan and other relevant documents. The information in these documents is reviewed against the requirements of ‘Gold Standard for Global Growth’ in conjunction with CDM Validation and Verification Standard for project activities (version 02), Project Cycle Procedure for project activities (version 02) and Project Standard for project activities (version 02), Kyoto Protocol requirements and UNFCCC rules.

The report is based on the assessment of the project design document undertaken through stakeholder consultations, application of standard auditing techniques including but not limited to desk review, follow up actions (e.g., on site visit, electronic (telephone or e-mail) interviews) and also the review of the applicable approved methodological and relevant tools, GS4GG guidance and CDM decisions.

The project activity consists of installation of biomass based steam power plant at Kaneri village, Gadchiroli district in Maharastra, state of India. The project site location in terms of Latitude (20

007' 59.57" N) and

Longitude (=79056'35.35" E) was cross-checked from the GPS meter during site visit and is deemed correct.

The review of the project design documentation and the subsequent follow-up interviews have provided KBS with sufficient evidence to determine the project’s fulfilment of all the stated criteria. In our opinion, the project meets all applicable requirement for GS 4GG in conjunction with UNFCCC requirements for the CDM.

Will be recommended to the GS Foundation with a request for registration

Is not recommended for registration

SECTION B. Validation team, technical reviewer and approver

B.1. Validation team member

No. Role

Typ

e o

f re

so

urc

e

Last name First name Affiliation (e.g. name of

central or other office of DOE or outsourced

entity)

Involvement in

Desk r

evie

w

On

-sit

e in

sp

ecti

on

Inte

rvie

w(s

)

Valid

ati

on

fin

din

gs

1. Team Leader Internal Kandari Sanjay Central Office

2. Technical Expert

Internal Kandari Sanjay Central Office

3. Financial Expert

Internal Kandari Sanjay Central Office

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

B.2. Technical reviewer and approver of the validation report

No. Role Type of resource

Last name First name Affiliation (e.g. name of

central or other office of DOE or

outsourced entity)

1. Technical Reviewer and TA Expert 1.1

Internal Badaya Rohit Central

2 Manager Technical & Certification

Internal Badaya Rohit Central

SECTION C. Means of validation

C.1. Desk review

>> The report is based on the assessment of the project design document undertaken through stakeholder consultations, application of standard auditing techniques including but not limited to desk review, follow up actions (e.g., on site visit, electronic (telephone or e-mail) interviews) and also the review of the applicable approved methodological and relevant tools, guidance and CDM decisions.

All the documents used for arriving validation conclusion are listed in Appendix 03 and referenced accordingly in validation report.

C.2. On-site inspection

Duration of on-site inspection: 07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019

No. Activity performed on-site Site location Date Team member

1. Approval of project activity from Host Party and local clearances

Project boundary;

Operational lifetime of the project activity,

Monitoring plan (feasibility of monitoring arrangements described in PDD, QA/QC procedures, responsibility of implementation of monitoring plan, data recording & storage procedures

Local Stakeholder Consultation process

Kaneri village, Gadchiroli district, Maharashtra, India

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019

Sanjay Kandari (Team leader & Technical Expert)

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

C.3. Interviews

No.

Interviewee1 Date Subject Team member

Last name First name Affiliation

1. Mrig GC Chairman, VPL 07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019

Project design, monitoring

Sanjay Kandari

2. Ohri Yashapal Director, VPL 07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019

GS transfer, additionality, Project design

Sanjay Kandari

3. Jha TN Managing Director, VPL

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019

Monitoring, Surplus Biomass, Local employment, air quality etc

Sanjay Kandari

4. Venkata Ch General Mananger, VPL

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019

Monitoring Sanjay Kandari

5. Murger NM Representative of Government, stakeholder

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019

Stakeholder Feedback

Sanjay Kandari

6. Chand Phool CDM Consultant

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019

Project design, monitoring, additionality, Local stakeholder process

Sanjay Kandari

7. Urkhede Manjoj Local stakeholder

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019

Stakeholder feedback, LSC

Sanjay Kandari

8. Londe - Local stakeholder, Community head

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019


Sanjay Kandari

9 Jitender Local stakeholder, Community member

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019


Sanjay Kandari

10 Patil BD Local stakeholder, Community member

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019


Sanjay Kandari

11 Borka Vidya Local stakeholder, Community member

07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019


Sanjay Kandari

C.4. Sampling approach

>> Not used.

C.5. Clarification requests, corrective action requests and forward action requests raised

Areas of validation findings No. of CL No. of CAR No. of FAR

stakeholder consultation/Feedback 0 1 0

Project design document 0 0 0

Description of project activity 0 1 0

Application of selected baseline and monitoring methodology and selected standardized baseline

- Applicability of methodology and standardized baseline

0 0 0

- Deviation from methodology 0 0 0

- Clarification on applicability of methodology, tool and/or standardized baseline

0 0 0

1 The list is indicative, validation team interviewed more stakeholders.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

- Project boundary 0 0 0

- Establishment and description of baseline scenario

0 0 0

- Demonstration of additionality 0 0 0

- Emission reductions 0 1 0

- Monitoring plan 0 0 0

Duration and crediting period 0 0 0

Environmental impacts 1 0 0

Local stakeholder/Stakeholder Feedback consultation 0 1 0

GS4GG Requirements 0 1 0 Total 01 04 00

SECTION D. Validation findings

D.1. Project design document

Means of validation The validation team validated that the project design document is based on the currently valid template, available on the GS website and is correctly applied in accordance with the guidelines

given in the form.

Findings Nil

Conclusion The validation team confirms that the proposed project activity meets the requirement of GS for GG and the PDD is completed using the latest version of the PDD form appropriate to the type of project activity.

D.2. Description of project activity

Means of validation The project activity involves installation of new biomass based power generation unit. The project equipment’s consist of a 55 TPH AFBC boiler

/06/ and a 12 MW

bleed cum condensing turbine/06/

and approved for generating not more than 10 MW power on monthly average basis in accordance with signed PPA with grid authority. The steam pressure of 66 kg/cm

2 and the total power demand is

approximately 10 MW in accordance with signed power purchase agreement. The plant is expected to operate at a load factor of 85%

/08/ in first year and 90% from 2

nd

year onwards for the period of operation. However the PRC triggered from the issuance submitted to CDM, PLF has been increased up to 97.926% for GS and validated in the further section of this report. During the site visit it was observed by the validation team that the output capacity of turbine is 12 MW in contradiction to the project design of 10 MW conceptualized during the investment decision and statuary approvals

/11/.

By interviewing the project participant it was confirmed that the technology supplier did not have the 10 MW turbine and therefore supplied 12 MW turbine. A letter from the turbine manufacturer was validated to confirm above. Further it was also reconfirmed from the signed power purchase agreement

/16/ that PP is not allowed

to generate the monthly average electricity more than 10 MWe after deducting auxiliary consumption. The issue is adequately addressed by PP in the PDD and demonstrated that project doesn’t lose its additionality even after the capacity is kept as 12 MWe in contrast to 10 MWe. This is validated in additionality section of report. The validation team found during the course of the on-site visit and subsequent interviews with the PP that the project is expected to operate on 85% biomass as the Biomass Assessment Study

/23/ provides assurance of sustainable supply of

biomass within a distance of 50 km radius from the project site. The emission reductions have been estimated based on 85% biomass and 15% of coal usage of total input energy. As per the statuary requirement, PP is allowed to use co-fire fossil fuel up to 20%.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

Start date of the project activity is 02/05/2007

/06/, which corresponds to the

purchase order of turbine. This is the earliest purchase order placed for the project activity. The project lifetime is opted as 20 years sourced from the information provided by the technology supplier. The total installed capacity of the project activity is 12.0 MW (Turbine output) which is less than the limit 15 MW and thus it is eligible under the small scale category prescribed by the methodological tool: Investment analysis” version 06.

It was confirmed that the PP do not have any project whose boundary is within 1 km of the proposed project boundary. Also, there are no registered small scale CDM project activities within the previous 2 years or an application to register another small scale CDM project activity in the same project category and technology/measure by the project promoters.

PP has registered this project as CDM project however they are now switching to Gold Standard due to better market and sustainability initiatives undertaken by them.

Findings CAR#01 was raised and closed satisfactorily.

Conclusion The validation team conducted document review and onsite interviews/ inspection of this project activity. Based on the same the validation team confirms that the PDD contains a clear description of the project activity that provides a clear understanding of the precise nature of the project activity. This description is also found to be accurate and complete. The details of the site visit conducted by the validation team can be referred in section C.3 of this validation report.

D.3. Application of selected baseline and monitoring methodology and selected standardized baseline

D.3.1. Applicability of methodology and standardized baseline

Means of validation Applicability criteria of the baseline and monitoring methodology, the applicable tools and information/documentation content in the PDD against these criteria are assessed by the validation team by means of document review and interviews. Thus, the validation team considers that the project participant has correctly applied the approved methodology for the proposed project activity.

Applicability criteria as per Methodology AMS-I.D., version 18

PP Response Means of Validation

1. This methodology comprises renewable energy generation units, such as photovoltaic, hydro, tidal/wave, wind, geothermal and renewable biomass: (a) Supplying electricity to a national or a regional grid; or (b) Supplying electricity to an identified consumer facility via national/regional grid through a contractual arrangement such as wheeling.

The project activity is biomass based power generation project with aggregated installed capacity 12 MW, the net generated electricity will be supplied to NATIONAL regional grid.

The project activity is a renewable biomass power plant of 12 MW capacity (actual turbine capacity) and the electricity generated by the project activity will be supplied to the NATIONAL grid of India. The validation team confirms the same based on the review of the Power Purchase Agreement signed between the PP and Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (MSEDCL)

/16/ and project

DPR/08/

. Hence, it is applicable under the option (a) of this category. Thus, this para of

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

methodology is applicable.

2. Illustration of respective situations under which each of the methodology (i.e. “AMS-I.D.: Grid connected renewable electricity generation”, “AMS-I.F.: Renewable electricity generation for captive use and mini-grid” and “AMS-I.A.: Electricity generation by the user) applies is included in the appendix.

As per Table No 2 of AMS – I. D. / Version 18, the AMS I.D is applicable to the project activity.

The validation team has checked the Indian grid connectivity of the project activity

/16/ and sale of

electricity to the grid by verifying against the Power Purchase Agreement signed between PP and Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (MSEDCL)

/16/ . Therefore,

the validation team confirms that the project activity is eligible for the methodology AMS-I.D. as per point 1 of table 1, page 18 of the methodology. Also the methodologies AMS-I.F and AMS-I.A. are not applicable to this project activity. Thus, this para of methodology is applicable.

3. This methodology is applicable to project activities that: (a) Install a new power plant at a site where there was no renewable energy power plant operating prior to the implementation of the project activity (Greenfield plant); (b) Involve a capacity addition in (an) existing plant(s); (c) Involve a retrofit of (an) existing plant(s); (d) Involve a rehabilitation of (an) existing plant(s)/unit(s); or (e) Involve a replacement of (an) existing plant(s).

The project activity is installation of new biomass based power plant. There is no existing power plant at project site prior to the implementation of the project activity.

Bullet no. (a) of the paragraph 3 of the applied methodology is applicable for the present case as project activity install a new power plant at a site where there was no renewable energy power plant operating prior to the implementation of the project activity i.e. a Greenfield plant, the same has been checked from the document review

/06//11/

and from the on-site visit. Thus, this para of methodology is applicable.

4.Hydro power plants with reservoirs that satisfy at least one of the following conditions are eligible to apply this methodology: • The project activity is implemented in an existing reservoir with no change in the volume of reservoir; • The project activity is

The project activity is a biomass based power plant. Hence, not applicable

The proposed biomass based power plant. Hence, this applicability condition of the methodology is not applicable. The compliance of this applicability condition is confirmed through the document review

/11/ and

physical verification during site visit.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

implemented in an existing reservoir, where the volume of reservoir is increased and the power density of the project activity, as per definitions given in the project emissions section, is greater than 4 W/m

2;

• The project activity results in new reservoirs and the power density of the power plant, as per definitions given in the project emissions section, is greater than 4 W/m

2.

5. If the new unit has both renewable and non-renewable components (e.g. a wind/diesel unit), the eligibility limit of 15 MW for a small-scale CDM project activity applies only to the renewable component. If the new unit co-fires fossil fuel, the capacity of the entire unit shall not exceed the limit of 15 MW.

The project activity is only 12MW biomass based renewable electricity generation project. The project has provision to use coal in case of exigencies or as co-firing in case of fuel shortage, however, the same is considered under project emission and total installed capacity will be 12MW only.

The project activity is a biomass based power based 12 MW (actual implementation) power plant. It does not involve any non-renewable component. Based on site visit and review of the documents the DPR

/08/,

NOC from Statutory authority/

11/ and technical

specification of key equipment’s

/06/,

commissioning certificates, validation team confirms that the project is biomass based power project. Thus, the validation team confirms that this applicability condition is not applicable.

6. Combined heat and power (co-generation) systems are not eligible under this category.

The project activity does not involve combined heat and power generation system as it is only a power project.

The project activity is Rankine cycle based biomass power plant and is not a co-generation project; hence this paragraph is not applicable for the project.

7. In the case of project activities that involve the addition of renewable energy generation units at an existing renewable power generation facility, the added capacity of the units added by the project should be lower than

It is a Greenfield project and not the extension of an existing renewable energy facility.

The project activity is a Greenfield project being implemented at a site where no power plant exists and this is not a capacity addition project. Based on site visit and review of the documents

/11/, DPR

/08/ and

NOC from Statutory authority

/11/, the validation

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

15 MW and should be physically distinct

2

from the existing units.

team confirms the above and hence this paragraph is not applicable to the project. Furthermore, the capacity of the Greenfield project is 12 MW (actual) and falls under small scale project activity.

8. In the case of retrofit or replacement, to qualify as a small-scale project, the total output of the retrofitted, rehabilitated or replacement power plant/ unit shall not exceed the limit of 15 MW.

The project activity is a Greenfield project and doesn’t involve any retrofit. Also there is no rehabilitation or replacement due to project activity. The total installed capacity of the project is 2.8 MW only which is well below the threshold of 15 MW.

The project is a green field project and the validation team has confirmed from the DPR

/08/, power

purchase agreement/16/

and commissioning certificate

/22/. Hence this

paragraph is not applicable. The capacity of the Greenfield project is 12 MW (actual turbine capacity) and falls under small scale project activity.

9. In the case of landfill gas, waste gas, wastewater treatment and agro-industries projects, recovered methane emissions are eligible under a relevant Type III category. If the recovered methane is used for electricity generation for supply to a grid then the baseline for the electricity component shall be in accordance with procedure prescribed under this methodology. If the recovered methane is used for heat generation or cogeneration other applicable Type-I methodologies such as “AMS-I.C.: Thermal energy production with or without electricity” shall be explored

The proposed project activity is a biomass based power project, hence criterion not applicable.

The project activity is a 12 MW biomass based power plant and is not a landfill gas, waste gas, wastewater treatment and agro-industries project; hence paragraph is not applicable for the project

10. In case biomass is sourced from dedicated plantations, the applicability criteria in the tool “Project emissions from cultivation of biomass” shall apply

The proposed project activity procures biomass residue from local vendors e.g. rice husk, woody biomass etc., however, it does not source any biomass from

The project activity is a 12 MW biomass power plant and biomass is procured from local vendors and does not involve any dedicated plantation. Therefore not applicable.

2Physically distinct units are those that are capable of generating electricity without the operation of existing units, and that do not directly

affect the mechanical, thermal, or electrical characteristics of the existing facility. For example, the addition of a steam turbine to an existing combustion turbine to create a combined cycle unit would not be considered physically distinct”.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

dedicated plantation. Hence this criterion is not applicable.

Eligibility of the project activity as per the Gold standard requirements:

1. General eligibility requirements: The proposed gold standard project is additional and no announcement has been made previously of the Project going ahead without the revenues from carbon credits. This has been validated in additionality section of this report.

2. Eligible project location: The project activity is located in Host country India. There are no caps on GHG emission in the host country. The same has been confirmed based on the local expertise of validation team.

3. Eligible project gases: The project is claiming emission reduction for CO2 only, which is Eligible for Gold Standard crediting. This is confirmed by reviewing the document and during site visit.

4. Eligible project types: The project activity is generating steam from the renewable biomass (rice husk) and exporting electricity to grid. This is confirmed by reviewing the document and during site visit.

5. Eligible project scale: The aggregated installed capacity i.e. 12 MWth is

less than thresold specified in applied small scale approved methodology i.e. 45MWth. This comes under small scale project activity as per UNFCCC rules.

6. Eligible methodologies for project activities: The project activity is applying the CDM Approved small scale methodology AMS I.D (Version 18.0) – “Thermal energy production with or without electricity”. Hence it is meeting the requirement.

7. Official Development Assistance (ODA) funding: No ODA funds are involved as the project is funded with equity and debt from banks. The same is validated by the team by document review and interview during site visit. ODA declaration (Annex D) provided by PP has also been checked by the validation team.

8. Relationship between GS VCS/JI submissions and GS VER submissions: The project will be submitted to only GS VER stream.

9. Project involvement in other certification or emissions trading schemes: The project was initially registered as CDM project, PP is willing to switch it from CDM to GS. There is no involvement of project activity in any other certification or emissions trading schemes. The project is now submitted as GS VER stream.

Eligibility as per Annex C In line with the requirement of Annex C for biomass based project activities, Project participant has demonstrated that the Biomass (rice husk) is available in surplus quantity in the region. The Biomass Assessment Study (BAS) was carried out in the region by third party.

Findings No finding raised

Conclusion The validation team confirms the following in accordance to the CDM PS for project activities:

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

i. The applicability conditions of the selected approved methodology AMS-I.D., Version 18

are appropriately described in PDD.

ii. The validation of each relevant applicability conditions is described above.

iii. The applied methodology is applicable in the context of the proposed CDM project activity and the selected version of the methodology is valid at the time of submission for registration.

D.3.2. Deviation from methodology

Means of validation No deviation applied.

Findings Refer above

Conclusion Refer above

D.3.3. Clarification on applicability of methodology, tool and/or standardized baseline

Means of validation No clarification applied/sought.

Findings Refer above

Conclusion Refer above

D.3.4. Project boundary

Means of validation Project activity boundary is delineated as physical and geographical boundary of the biomass cogeneration plant and is adequately described in Section B.3 of the PDD

/02/. The project boundary includes the boiler, turbine under proposed project

activity, grid and sub-stations The onsite visit and the lay out plan confirm the project boundary as described in the PDD

/02/.

Findings Nil

Conclusion The validation team considers that the greenhouse gas emissions occurring within the proposed CDM project activity boundary. The GHG emissions as a result of the implementation of the proposed CDM project activity which is not addressed by the applied methodology, i.e. AMS-I.D., Version 18

is deemed to contribute less than

1% of the overall expected average annual emissions reductions. Hence, the validation team confirms the project activity is validated in accordance to the requirements of VVS V2 for project activities.

D.3.5. Establishment and description of baseline scenario

Means of validation The proposed project is implementation of grid connected 12 MW biomass based power generation facility and the generated power is evacuated to national grid system. In the absence of the project activity the equivalent amount of electricity would have been generated by the predominantly fossil fuel fired carbon intensive power plants of the grid system. Thus the PP has correctly identified the baseline of the proposed CDM project activity as per §19 of the selected methodology AMS-I.D., Version 18.

“The baseline scenario is that the electricity delivered to the grid by the project activity would have otherwise been generated by the operation of grid-connected power plants and by the addition of new generation sources into the grid.” Determination of Baseline Emissions The baseline emissions have been calculated as per §22 of the selected methodology AMS-I.D,Version 18

/27/:

BEy = EGPJ,y * EFgrid,y

Where: BEy Baseline Emissions in year y (tCO2) EGPJ, y Quantity of net electricity generation that is produced and fed into the grid as a result of the implementation of the CDM project activity in year y (MWh) EFgrid, y Combined margin CO2 emission factor for grid connected power generation in year y calculated using the latest version of the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” (tCO2/ MWh) The baseline emission factor has been calculated as per §23(a) of the methodology AMS-I.D., Version 18:

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

“The emission factor can be calculated in a transparent and conservative manner as follows: (a) A combined margin (CM), consisting of the combination of operating margin (OM) and build margin (BM) according to the procedures prescribed in the “Tool to calculate the Emission Factor for an electricity system”.” The PP adopts the ex-ante calculation of emission factors (OM and BM) of the grid. The combined margin emission factor for NATIONAL grid of India has been calculated as 0.9127 tCO2e/MWh

/3/. This has been calculated using the source from

the Central Electricity Authority CO2 Baseline Database/3/

. Central Electricity Authority (CEA) (under Ministry of Power, Government of India) have worked out baseline emission factor for various grids in India and made them publicly available. The DNA of the host party (India) has also given a reference link of the CEA on their official website. The data from CO2 Baseline Database for the Indian Power Sector User Guide - Version 14.0

/30/ is the most recent data at the time of

submission of GS-PDD for validation. Validation team has checked the calculation of the combined margin grid emission factor and confirms that the applied value of the emission factor follows the tool

/28/ and the values of OM and BM incorporated in

the PDD are taken from publically available database i.e. by CEA (Government of India)

/3/.

Nevertheless, following stepwise procedures have been followed to validate the calculation of combined margin emission factor. Step 1- In line with the requirements specified in the step of the tool

/28/, the PP has

used a regional grid definition as applicable for large countries like India having layered dispatch systems. The Indian power system is now synchronized. The project activity is connected to NATIONAL Grid and hence for the purpose of estimation of baseline emission factor the consideration of NATIONAL Grid is appropriate and correct. Step 2: This step of the tool

/28/ gives an option to include off-grid power plants in

the project electricity system. PP has considered option I (i.e. only grid power plants are included in the calculation). Step 3 : Out of the four methods provided in the tool

for calculating the operating

margin (EFgrid,OM,y), simple OM method, is selected. The tool specifies that the simple OM method can only be used if the low cost/must-run resources constitute less than 50% of total grid generation in: 1) average of the five most recent years, or 2) based on long-term averages for hydro electricity production. The Simple OM method selected is justified and found to be appropriate as the average proportion of low-cost/must run resources is less than 50% in average of 5 most recent years. The ex-ante option for determining the simple OM is opted by the PP. Step 4– The PP has considered the national published data (CEA database, version 14.0) for simple OM. The simple OM emission factor calculated by the CEA is the generation weighted average CO2 emissions per unit net electricity generation (tCO2/MWh) of all generating power plants serving the system, not including low-cost/must power plants (Refer page 06, User Guide – CO2 Baseline Database, version 14.0 for the Indian power sector). The validation team confirms that the PP has rightly followed the CEA CO2 Baseline Database version 14.0

/36/ and the EFgrid,OM,y for the NATIONAL grid is

based on three year generation weighted average which is in conformity with the tool to calculate emission factor of an electricity system, version 06

/28/ and the value

of the same works out as 0. 9610 tCO2/MWh/7/

. Step 5– The set of power capacity additions in the electricity system that comprise 20% of the system generation (in MWh) and that have been built most recently has been considered by CEA which is in line with the option (b) of tool. Validation team checked independently and confirms that the selection of the options is correct. This conclusion has been made based on analyzing both the options (Refer option “a” and “b” of the tool) and it was found that the set of power plants as per option

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

(b) comprises of larger annual generation and hence confirm the requirement of the tool. In validating this step, validation team further confirms that: (i) The identified power capacity additions comprise 20% of the system generation for the year under consideration. (ii) None of the considered power capacity additions considered under (i) above have been built more than ten years earlier. PP has fixed the Build Margin emission factor as ex-ante for the whole crediting period which is in conformity with the tool to calculate emission factor, version 04

/and the value of the same is 0. 0.8644 tCO2/MWh

/7/. The PP has considered

the national published data (CEA database, version 14/36/

) for BM. Step 6: The PP has rightly considered option (a) i.e. weighted average CM for the calculation of combined margin emission factor. For Weighted average CM, tool

/28/ requires calculation of the combined margin

emission factor as per the following equation: EFgrid, CM, y = EFgrid,OM,y x WOM + EFgrid,BM,y X WBM The weighted average of the “operating margin” and the “build margin” emission factor for NATIONAL grid of India has thus been determined in tCO2e/MWh

/3/ (fixed

ex-ante), using a OM:BM weight of 50:50 as recommended for biomass power projects in the “Tool to calculated the emission factor for an electricity system 07”

/30/.

The calculation of OM & BM emission factors is provided in ER spreadsheet

/3/

which can be treated as attachment of PDD/2/

. The same sheet assessed independently by validation team was found correct and consistent with PDD

/2/ as

well as CEA database/30/

. The baseline determination is considered as transparent and reasonable.

Findings No finding raised.

Conclusion The context of application of the methodology is clearly discussed in the PDD/2/

including a clear description of how each methodological step has been applied in the calculation of baseline emissions. Validation of the documentation referred to in the PDD including verification of the content and discussion of information is critical for an independent readers understanding of the application of the requirement. In addition to this, in accordance to VVS V02, there are no relevant national or sectoral policies and circumstances which have impact in the identification of the baseline scenario. The same is rightly explained in section B.4 of the PDD for this type of project sectors. Thus, the baseline determination is accepted and complies with VVS. The validation team has checked the following in accordance with the latest version of CDM VVS and final version of PDD and the results are tabulated as follows:

The approved baseline methodology applicable to the project

- explicit criteria

- implicit criteria (e.g. available scenarios, applicability of formulas for BE/PE/LE calculations)

Yes

No

Details in Section 4.7.1

PDD includes all assumptions and data used by project participants

Yes

No

As per AMS-I.D., Version 18

All the references and documents used are relevant for establishing the baseline scenario

Yes

No


CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

All the references and documents used are correctly quoted and conservatively interpreted in the PDD

Yes

No


All relevant policies / regulations considered are listed in the PDD

Yes

No


Identified potential baseline scenarios reasonably represent what would/could occur in the absence of the proposed project activity

Yes

No


The baseline scenario selection is appropriate and determined according to the methodology

Yes

No


The approved methodology used is applicable to the identified baseline scenario

Yes

No


D.3.6. Demonstration of additionality

Means of validation Additionality of the project is already validated and approved by the CDM EB. CDM Validation Report can be reviewed from the UNFCCC webpage and also submitted with the first review response by GS. Further PP has also submitted a crosscheck IRR sheet based on the actual parameters and all references were validated by validation team with their respective sources.

Also, the PRC triggered from the first issuance request to UNFCCC due to the higher PLF is validated in this section.

The following key changes are proposed by the PP in the PDD based on the actual operating parameters. Validation details are provided below.

S.N

Section

PDD Changes considered for GS (Variation from CDM PDD)

Validation Remarks

1. B.5 PLF is changed from 85% in 1

st

year and 90% from 2

nd year

onwards to 97.926% throughout the lifetime of project activity.

During the validation PP had sourced the PLF from the third part DPR in accordance with EB 48, Annex 11. However it was observed during first verification that the plant operation is not in line with respect to plant load factor considered during the validation. PP has changed the PLF in revised PDD as 97.926% throughout the lifetime of project activity based on the highest PLF achieved by the project activity since based on the last 3 years and 10 month operational data The PLF data is presented below:

Year

Gross Generation (MWh)

Auxiliary Consumption (MWh)

Net Generation (MWh)

PLF(%)

Auxiliary Consumption (%)

2014 73442.12 6766.95

66675.17

83.8% 9.2

2015 83636.37 7948.65

75687.72

95.5% 9.5

2016 85016.00 8370.00

76646.00

97.1% 9.8

2017

3 71447.00 6750.86

64696.14

97.9% 9.4

Plant logs were verified to confirm the actual generation by plant since 2014. The approach of considering highest PLF deems conservative and reasonable.

3Calculated for 10 months only

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

Further based on the clarification raised by GS review team, PP has updated the data and submitted a new IRR sheet considering updated data. It was concluded that IRR further reduces and becomes negative. Validation team checked plant records and found them adequate.

2. B.5 Working days Changed from 330 to 365

The operational days are changed by PP from 330 to 365, the approach is conservative and therefore accepted by validation team. Moreover PLF itself includes the number of shutdown hours therefore consideration of 365 days operation is reasonable.

3. B.5 Auxiliary consumption changed by PP from 8% to 9.5%

Auxiliary consumption is also sourced by PP from the actual plant data as per the details provided in above row. Average auxiliary consumption based on average considered adequate by validation team. Plant logs were verified to confirm the actual generation by plant since 2014. The auxiliary consumption is for the same plant/project and it is an average of more than 3 years data therefore validation team considers it reasonable to use.

4. B.5 Gross power generation is updated based on updated value of PLF and 365 days. 71.20 Million Units to 85.78 Million Units.

The value is updated by PP based on the revised PLF and 365 operating days. This is calculated number and calculation is appropriate

5. B.5 Net power generation changed from 65.578 Million units to 77.63 Million units.

The value is updated by PP based on the updated value of auxiliary consumption. This is calculated number and calculation is appropriate.

The sensitivity analysis has been performed based on actual 4 years data, the same reveals that project activity does not breach the benchmark value.

6. B.5 Fuel quantity (Biomass, woodchip & Coal)

Fuel quantity is updated based on the number of 365 operating days by PP. The calculations were verified and found appropriate by validation team. The fuel ratio remained unchanged only the calculation changed based on the number of 365 days. Therefore this is in compliance with para 244 (a) of CDM PS, version 02 of project activities.

7. A.1 Description of project activity

PP has updated the description of project activity based on the above changed parameters. PP has included the information in the revised PDD that the project has clearance for 10 MWe power generations therefore maximum gross generation is capped as 10 MW gross on 100% PLF as per PPA. It is further demonstrated by PP that the project activity doesn’t render its additionality at 100% PLF.

Impaction on additionality by considering above permanent changes: PP has submitted revised PDD and IRR sheet by taking into account the aforementioned changes and it is demonstrated that IRR changed from 1.42% to 8.8%/2/ and still below the benchmark 11.125% considered during the validation. PP has also demonstrated that the maximum allowed gross generation (@100% PLF) changes the IRR from 1.42% to 9.9%, therefore the value of the same is updated in section B.7.2 as monitoring parameter. Sensitivity analysis is also updated by PP based on PRC and tabulated below:

Factor Variation Breaching value

10% Base case -10%

Project Cost 0.8% 8.8% 13.80% 4.40% decrease

Fuel cost negative 8.8% 16.90% 2.00% decrease

PLF 13.20% 8.8% 1.70% 5.00% increase

Tariff 19.80% 8.8% negative 1.40% increase

Benchmark 11.125%

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

Sensitivity analysis revised parameters i.e. PLF, IRR breaches at 5% variation. The 5% variation is hypothetical as it would change PLF which is beyond the allowed capped value by statutory body. Moreover, the same would monitor. Tariff would also not increase further as PP has already entered into a long term PPA as validated in validation report during validation. Actual project cost incurred by PP is also higher than the cost considered for IRR and the same is validated in detail in validation report. Fuel cost also increased over a time and validated at the time of validation.

Findings Nil

Conclusion Validation team concludes that all above changes incorporated by PP are in compliance with the para 242 (e) of CDM PS, version 02 for project activities. The changes do not impact additionality, scale of project and applicability of applied methodology. It also does not impact level of accuracy and completeness in the monitoring of the project activity compared with the requirements contained in the registered monitoring plan.

D.3.7. Emission reductions

Means of validation The GHG emissions reduction calculations are transparently documented and appropriate assumptions regarding the expected amount of electricity generated have been used to forecast emission reductions. According to the applied formulae in the PDD, the emission reductions (ERy) by the project activity during the crediting period is the difference between the baseline emissions (BEy) and project emissions (PEy), which is expressed as follows: ERy = BEy – PEy – LEy (section B.6.3 of PDD

/P02/ and equation (9) of the

methodology/27/

) According to the applied meth, the baseline emissions are demonstrated in Section B.6.1 of PDD and are calculated using methodology equations is as follows:

Where,

BEy = EGPJ,y * EFgrid,y

Where,

BEy = Baseline emissions in year y (tCO2/yr) EGPJ,y = Quantity of net electricity generation that is produced and fed into the grid as a result of the implementation of the project activity in year y (MWh) = 655,77.6 MWh/annum

/7/ Source: ER sheet

/7/

EFgrid,y = Combined margin CO2 emission factor for grid connected power generation in year y calculated using the latest version of the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system” (tCO2/MWh) = 0.9127 tCO2/MWh

/3/ .

Project Emissions:

In accordance with para 40 of applied methodology, CO2 emissions from on-site consumption of fossil fuels due to the project activity shall be calculated using the latest version of the "Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion”. The proposed project activity envisages the use of Coal along with biomass for the electricity generation. Therefore, the project emission arising due to use of coal is calculated as mentioned below:

PEFC,j,y = ∑ FCi,j,y X COEFi,y

FCi,j,y 12,011Tonnes of coal used in the project activity. The ratio is validated from the submitted DPR

COEFi,y = NCVi,y X EFCO2,i,y

EFCO2,i,y 95.8 tCO2/GJ (Validated from the CEA data base)/7/

NCVi,y 43 TJ/Gg (validated from IPCC data base)

PEFC,j,y 21,749 (calculated based on above validated parameters in

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

accordance with, “Tool to calculate project emission”)

Projects emissions from the usage of DG set is not calculated for ex-ante ER, the project activity has provision of usage of DG set and it shall be monitored ex-post and accounted in project emission calculation.

Leakage emissions:

The project activity adopts the ex-ante demonstration of surplus availability

of biomass i.e. rice husk in line with “Methodological tool, Leakage in

biomass small-scale project

activities”, version 06/24/

. The surplus availability of rice husk and woody biomass is more than 25% as per biomass assessment survey report.

therefore LEy = 0

Emission reductions:

The emission reduction from the project activity can be estimated as the difference between the baseline emissions and the project emissions as follows:

ERy = BEy – PEy – LEy

ERy = 70855 – 21749 – 0

The average annual emission reduction is 49,106 tCO2e (rounded down) per year over 05 years fixed crediting period

/3/.


Conclusion In accordance with VVS the validation team confirms that the project activity complies with the specified requirements of algorithms and/or formulae used to determine emission reductions and discussed above. The validation team confirms (a) All assumptions and data used by the project participants are listed in the PDD, including their references and sources; (b) All documentation used by project participants as the basis for assumptions and source of data is correctly quoted and interpreted in the PDD; (c) All values used in the PDD are considered reasonable in the context of the proposed project activity; (d) The baseline methodology and corresponding tool(s) have been applied correctly to calculate project emissions, baseline emissions, leakage and emission reductions; (e) All estimates of the baseline emissions can be replicated using the data and parameter values provided in the PDD. The validation team confirms that the project activity complies with the requirements of VVS, version 02 for project activities.

D.3.8. Monitoring plan

Means of validation The project activity applies the monitoring methodology AMS-I.D., Version 18/27/

for monitoring of emission reduction which is valid from 28/11/2014 onwards. The project activity meets the entire requirement as stated in the methodology and provided all the parameters in the current version of the PDD in terms of ex-ante and ex-post in the respective section of the PDD i.e. B.6.2 and B.7.1.

A) Data and parameters that are available at validation:

Following are parameters fixed as ex-ante and would remain fixed for the entire crediting period;

Operating Margin CO2 emission factor for project electricity system in the year y

(EFgrid,OM , y): Value taken is 0. 9610 tCO2e/MWh, calculated as weighted

average of the last three years of the Operating margin provided by Central

Electricity Authority (CEA) Baseline Carbon Dioxide Emission database version

10.0/36/

. The team has verified the value taken from ER spread sheet/7/

and

found to be acceptable and hence accepted.

Build margin CO2 emission factor for the project electricity system in year y

(EFgrid,BM , y): Value taken is 0.8644 tCO2e/MWh, calculated as recent most

Build margin provided by Central Electricity Authority (CEA) Baseline Carbon

Dioxide Emission database version 14.0. The team has verified the value taken

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

from ER spread sheet/7/

and found to be acceptable and hence accepted.

Combined margin CO2 emission factor for the project electricity system in year

y (EFgrid,CM,y): Value taken is 0.9127 tCO2e/MWh, calculated as 0.50* EFgrid,OM , y

+ 0.50* EFgrid,BM , y. The team has verified the value taken from ER

spreadsheet/3/

and found to be acceptable and hence accepted.

Net calorific value of the Diesel (NCVi,y): Value taken as 43 (TJ/Gg) sourced

from IPCCC, crosschecked from from Table 5.2 of “India: Greenhouse Gas

Emissions 2007 – Indian Network for Climate Change Assessment”4. The

team has verified the value taken from sources and found to be acceptable and

hence accepted.

Density of Diesel (P): Value taken as 0.8439 (Kg /liter) sourced from Table A3.8

Page 181 of the Energy Statistics Manual of OECD/IEA, 20045.. The team has

verified the value taken from source with CEA Database/30/

and found to be

acceptable and hence accepted.

CO2 emission factor of Diesel in year y (EFCO2,i,y): Value taken as 74.8

(tCO2e/TJ), from IPCC database. The team has verified the value taken from

sources and found to be acceptable and hence accepted.

CO2 emission factor of Coal (EFCO2,i,y): Value taken as 95.8 (tCO2e/GJ), from

national data i.e. CEA database. The team has verified the value taken from

sources and found to be acceptable and hence accepted.

B) Data and parameters monitored:

The data required to be monitored ex-post include:

Quantity of gross electricity generation by the project plant/unit in year y

EGgross,y)

Quantity of net electricity generation supplied by the project plant/unit to the grid in year y (EGPJ, facility,y)

Quantity of biomass residue type k consumed in year y (FCbiomass, PJ,y)

Quantity of fossil fuel consumed in year y (FCFF,y)

Net calorific value of fossil fuel combusted in the project activity during the year y (NCVFF)

Net calorific value of biomass residue type k combusted in the project activity

during the year y (NCVBiomass,k) Quantity of diesel consumed in DG set for emergency purpose, the preparation

of fuel, which are attributable to the project activity during the year, y (FFd,y) Moisture content of the biomass (wet basis) by type i for the year y (MBiomass,i,y)

All the monitoring parameters have been mentioned in section B.7.1 of the PDD. The validation team has verified the values used against the sources and conclude that all relevant parameters to calculate the GHG emissions reductions of the project have been sufficiently considered and the value of the ex-ante fixed parameter used for emission reduction calculation has been determined conservatively and the estimation ex-post parameters are reasonable. The validation team considers that the monitoring plan has complied with the requirements in the approved methodology thereby satisfying requirements of VVS Steps undertaken to assess the monitoring plan: Compliance of the monitoring plan with the approved methodology - According to the PDD, the project’s monitoring plan outlines the followings:- Monitoring parameters: the monitoring parameters of the project are listed

above as “Parameters monitored ex-post”.

4 http://www.moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/Report_INCCA.pdf

5 http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ramon/statmanuals/files/Energy_statistics_manual_2004_EN.pdf

http://www.moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/Report_INCCA.pdf

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

Operational and management structure: management structure is illustrated for the CDM project monitoring, responsibilities of personnel for recording and cross verification for the monitored parameter;

Monitoring Equipment’s, frequency of monitoring / measurement / recording of each parameter, frequency of calibration, accuracy of measurements;

Quality Control and Data Archive: Verification of data monitored (consistency and completeness), Ensuring adequate training of staff, Ensuring adequate maintenance, Ensuring calibration of monitoring instruments, Data archiving: ensuring adequate storage of data monitored (integrity and backup), Identification of non-conformance and corrective/preventive actions and monitoring plan improvement and Emergency procedures

All of these parameters are recorded in the plant log book. The net quantity of electricity supplied will be monitored continuously, measured on hourly basis and aggregated for daily, monthly and annually by energy meter installed at the project site. The cross-checking of monitored parameters is included in the PDD in line with the methodology requirements. Management System and Quality Assurance: Detailed responsibilities and authorities for project management, monitoring procedures, calibration procedures and QA/QC procedures have been presented and were verified during follow up interviews. The detailed monitoring practice is considered appropriate and the implementation of these will enable subsequent verification of the project’s emission reductions. Implementation of the plan: According to document review in the PDD and on-site interviews with the representatives of the PP, detailed monitoring procedures, monitoring structure, management team, monitoring items and functions are clearly demonstrated in the PDD which will enable subsequent verification of the project’s emission reductions in line with the applied methodology. The validation team confirms that the monitoring procedure and frequency of all the monitoring parameters complies with the requirement of the applied methodology AMS-I.D., version 18. The specific uncertainty levels, methods and associated accuracy level of measurement instruments and calibration procedures used for various parameters and variables are identified in the PDD

/02/, along with detailed quality assurance and quality

control procedures. The accuracy class and the method and frequency of calibration of all the monitoring instruments confirm to the national industrial standards

/B05/. All the monitored data will be archived until 2 years or the last

issuance of CERs whichever occurs later after the crediting period to facilitate crosschecking during the crediting period. Moreover, the PP will provide appropriate training

prior to the project operation for the management team and

operation team in order for ensuring that they are suitable and competent for carrying out the work. Hence, the validation team considers that the PP is capable to implement the monitoring plan.


Conclusion The validation team confirms that: (a) All the values used from official sources and the authenticity of sources has

been verified by the validation team and confirms that all relevant parameters to calculate the GHG emissions reductions of the project have been sufficiently considered and the value of the ex-ante fixed parameter used for emission reduction calculation i.e. grid emission factor has been determined conservatively and the estimation of ex-post parameters are reasonable. The validation team considers that the monitoring plan has complied with the requirements in the approved methodology.

(b) The monitoring plan based on the approved monitoring methodology, AMS-I.D., Version 18 is included in Section B.7 of the PDD

/02/ and is correctly applied to

the CDM project activity. The monitoring plan has been found to be in compliance with the requirements of the applied methodology. The monitoring

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

plan will give opportunity for real measurements of achieved emission reductions.

(c) The validation team considers that monitoring arrangements described in the monitoring plan is feasible within the project design and the PP will be capable to implement the monitoring plan.

D.4. Duration and crediting period

Means of validation The fixed crediting period of 05 years has been opted by PP, the length of the crediting period is less than the technical lifetime of project activity. The technical lifetime is validated in the additionality section as 20 years. The start date of crediting period is retroactive (01/12/2017).


Conclusion Validation team confirms that the project activity comply the requirements of CDM PS, version 02.

D.5. Environmental impacts

Means of validation Ministry of Environment and Forests Vide Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification S.O.3067, dated 01

st December 2009

6 (in supersession of the

notification number S.O. 60 (E), dated the 27th January 1994), the biomass based

cogeneration project is not included in the list of projects that have to get Prior Environmental Clearance (EC) either from State or Central Govt. authorities. The project activity does not result in any negative impacts on environment. It results in no emission of GHGs and other gases i.e. SO2 and NOx common in conventional power generation sources. Assessment team using its sectoral expertise, concluded that the host party i.e. India does not require prior environmental clearance for biomass based cogeneration projects below 15 MW. PDD section D.1 is in line with this requirement.

Findings Nil

Conclusion In line with above discussions of validation team confirms that there is no mandatory requirement to conduct the EIA for the proposed CDM project activity in the host Party. The project activity is in compliance with requirement of VVS V9.

D.6. Local stakeholder consultation

Means of validation A local stakeholders’ meeting was carried out by the project participant on 22/10/2008

/11/, which was prior to the publication of PDD on the UNFCCC website

(i.e. 06/08/2015) as part of CDM process. The validation team noted that all the relevant stakeholders were identified are in line with the definition of stakeholders as per latest version of CDM Glossary of terms. The local stakeholders identified by the PP were the villagers, gram panchayat and workers on the project site who will be affected by the project activity. The PP has utilized appropriate media to invite these stakeholders. Stakeholders were invited through personal invitation. Stakeholders were directly asked to provide their feedback on the project through an open meeting conducted on 22/10/2008 on the project site. A summary of the comments received and a note on how due account was taken of the concerns raised in the meeting are included in sections E.2 and E.3 of the PDD

/02/.

Further PP conducted stakeholder feedback rounds in accordance with the requirements of GS for GG and validated by the validation team in subsequent sections of this report.

Findings Nil

Conclusion The validation team have verified all relevant documents of local stakeholder consultation meeting

and conducted interview with the stakeholders available at the

time of on-site visit. It concludes that the project participant conducted the stakeholders’ consultation process in transparent and unbiased manner. The

6Source http://moef.nic.in/downloads/rules-and-regulations/3067.pdf

http://moef.nic.in/downloads/rules-and-regulations/3067.pdf

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

validation team confirms that the LSC meeting meets to the requirement of CDM VVS

that the process for conducting the local stakeholders meeting is adequate

and credible.

D.7. Contribution to Sustainable Development Goals

Discussion:

In PDD, PP claimed the project contributes to the following sustainable development goals: SDG 7 – Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all

SDG 8: Decent work and economic growth

SDG 13 – Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts Validation team assessed the PPs claim on the contributions to the SDGs as below:

SDG 7 – Affordable and clean energy

1. By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services.

2. By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix.

SDG 8: Decent work and economic growth

1. Promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium- sized enterprises, including through access to financial services.

2. By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men, including for young people and persons with disabilities, and equal pay for work of equal value.

3. Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including migrant workers, in particular women migrants, and those in precarious employment.

SDG 13- Climate action

1. Improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning.

2. Promote mechanisms for raising capacity for effective climate change- related planning and management in least developed countries and small island developing States, including focusing on women, youth and local and marginalized communities.

Findings: CL-01 is raised and closed successfully. Opinion:

a) The validation team confirms the proposed project will results in contributions to the SDGs 7, 8 & 13

b) Since the project contributes to three SDGs the validation team is in the opinion that the project is

eligible under Gold standard as per GS4GG

D.8. Monitoring of Other SDGs

Discussion: In PDD, the monitoring parameters for other SDGs are and the respective monitoring procedures are described. The assessments of the parameters are given below:

SDG Parameters Monitoring procedure & Assessment

SDG 7 7.1 by 2030 ensure universal access to affordable, reliable, and clean energy services

This will be taken from the project data log i.e. energy meters and other monitoring instruments. Also the selected parameter is found to be appropriate to monitor the contribution to SDG 7. Hence OK.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

SDG 8 The goal 2 (SDG8) contribution was discussed during the stakeholder consultation that the records of the people directly employed by the project will indicate the income generation benefits of the project according to the target 8.5 “By 2030 achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men”. Job created by the project activities with records from projects as well as vendors.

During the site visit validation team interviewed the top management of VPL and numbers of local employees employed by them. It is concluded that adequate records are available regarding the employment. PP shall maintain in plant by VPL and their vendors.

SDG 13-

According to the selected methodology AMS I.D, the project will help to save fossil fuel which therefore reduces the GHG emission.

The project uses biomass more than 80% and will thus reduce the fossil fuel which therefore reduces the GHG emission. The quantity of biomass shall be monitored and recorded in plant logs. The same shall be crosschecked from the invoices raised by vendors and payments made by VPL.

Findings: Nil

Opinion:

The validation team considers that monitoring arrangements described for the other SDG parameters in the monitoring plan and feasible within the project design and the PP will be capable to implement the monitoring plan.

D.9. Stakeholder Feedback Round

During the site visit conducted on 07/01/2019 & 08/01/2019/23/, KBS team met a section of the stakeholders during the stakeholder feedback meeting, the stakeholder feedback was conducted in presence of validation team of KBS. The stakeholders were mainly Panchayat members, NGO members, government representatives, neighbouring and local villagers and employees of VPL. The stakeholders confirmed the stakeholder meet held by the PP and that they had no concerns with respect to the project activity. Stakeholders stated that the project activity helped the village by generating employment opportunities for the local villagers. The photograph captured by the member of validation team is inserted below. The attendance sheet of attendees is available with DoE. The SFR process was undertaken as per the procedures defined in the GS4GG. Valid and adequate mode of communication were adopted and verified during on site assessment by the validation team. The GS

stakeholder consultation report was made available publically on consultant’s website7 of consultant for SFR

for 60 days, relevant stakeholders were invited.

Summary of the Interviews conducted: Four groups of people were interviewed including Village Panchayat (Elected Member of Village), local residents, local NGOs, employees of VPL and officials from government authorities. General impression of the project was gathered and people were informed about the continuous input mechanism.

7 http://pars-consultants.com/news_details?97@biomass-based-power-project-of-vpl-by-vayunandana-power-stakeholders-are-invited-for-the-stakeholder-feedback-round/

http://pars-consultants.com/news_details?97@biomass-based-power-project-of-vpl-by-vayunandana-power-stakeholders-are-invited-for-the-stakeholder-feedback-round/

http://pars-consultants.com/news_details?97@biomass-based-power-project-of-vpl-by-vayunandana-power-stakeholders-are-invited-for-the-stakeholder-feedback-round/

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

The plant officers briefed stakeholders about the project and its benefits to the local community. The local residents were happy with the project, as they got employment opportunity in nearby area of their locality. In response to the questions asked by validation team about the positive and negative impacts of project activity the local administration members and government representative have shown their acceptance about positive impact of the project activity on the economy, health of people and environment due to increased income and employment and lesser dust and air emissions. Also, migration of local people has been reduced due to increase in employment opportunity due to the project. Govt. official was also happy about the benefits due to installation of project activity in the region.

It was reasonably believed that the general attitude of the local stakeholders, who were likely to be affected by the project, was positive towards the project and same has been verified from the onsite visit interviews with the representative of local stakeholders.

Photo: Interaction with the villagers employed by ‘VPL’, members of NGOs, government officials and panchayat members.

D.10. Grievance Mechanism

Discussion: During the stakeholder feedback round the local villagers and other stakeholders were informed about the continuous input mechanism, the expression method and contact details were briefed. This was confirmed by the validation team during interview with the stakeholders. The grievance book has been placed at PP’s office. The book is available at the PP’s office to receive the feedback or confirmation of corresponding stakeholder which is accessible to the stakeholders. Validation team also verified the telephone numbers and e-mail ID and found that to be valid. Findings: No findings Opinion: The grievance mechanism proposed in the PDD by PP is verified to be adequate and in line with the requirement of GS4GG.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

D.11 Safeguarding Principles Assessment

Project Proponent has done the safeguarding principles assessment analysis and presented assessment in the Gold standard PDD

/P2/. The assessment has been performed in accordance to requirements prescribed

in the Section 3.2 of GS4GG Principles & Requirements/ & Safeguarding Principles & Requirements

Validation team has carried out the project site visit to cross check the safeguarding principle assessment conducted by the PP. DOE has also reviewed the initial GS local stakeholder consultation report and GS4GG PDD and found that the PP has assessed all the required critical safeguarding principle of United Nations

/B20/ in project activity. It has been found that the project activity fulfil all the principles like Human

Rights, Labour standards, environment protection, and anti-corruption.

The validation approach didn’t reveal any situation that could lead to the violation of safeguarding principles and DOE has confirmed that the project activity fulfill all the safeguarding principles given by United Nations.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

SECTION E. Internal quality control

>> Following the completion of the assessment process and a recommendation by the assessment team, the validation opinion prepared by Team Leader is independently reviewed by internal Technical Reviewer (TR). TR reviews if all the KBS procedures have been followed and all conclusions are justified in accordance with applicable standards, procedures, guidance and CDM decisions. The TR either is qualified for the technical area within the CDM sectoral scope(s) applicable to project activity or is supported by qualified independent technical expert at this stage.

The Technical Reviewer will either accept or reject the recommendation made by the assessment team. The findings can be raised at this stage and PP must resolve them within agreed timeline.

The opinion recommended by Technical Reviewer will be confirmed by Manager Technical & Certification and finally authorized by the Managing Director on behalf of KBS as final validation opinion. The Technical Reviewer and Manager T&C maybe be same person.

SECTION F. Validation opinion

>>KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd. has been contracted by Vayunandana Power Limited to perform a

validation of the project: Project title: Biomass based power project of VPL Host Party: India The validation was performed in accordance with the GS for GG in conjunction with UNFCCC criteria for the Clean Development Mechanism, latest version of Validation and Verification Standard and related Standards/Guidance and host country criteria, as well as criteria given to provide for consistent project operations, monitoring and reporting. The proposed CDM project activity will result in reductions of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that are real, measurable and give long-term benefits to the mitigation of climate change. In our opinion, the project meets all relevant UNFCCC, CDM criteria and all relevant host country criteria. The project correctly applies methodology AMS-I.D. version 18.0. It is demonstrated that the project is not a likely baseline scenario. The emission reductions attributable to the project are hence additional to any that would occur in the absence of the project activity. The total emission reductions from the project are estimated to be 245,530 tCO2e over a 05 year crediting period, averaging 49,106 tCO2e annually. The emission reduction forecast has been checked and it is deemed likely that the stated amount is achievable given the underlying assumptions do not change. The project will hence be recommended by KBS for request for registration with the Gold Standard Foundation.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

Appendix 1. Abbreviations

Abbreviations Full texts

AMS Approved Methodology for Small-scale

BE Baseline Emissions

BM Build Margin

CAR Corrective Action Request

CDM Clean Development Mechanism

CM Combined Margin

CER Certified Emission Reduction

CL Clarification request

COP Conference of Parties

DOE Designated Operational Entity

DNA Designated National Authority

DR Document Review

EB Executive Board

EF Emission Factor

ERs Emission Reductions

FAR Forward Action Request

GHG Greenhouse gas(es)

GSC Global Stakeholder Consultation

HCA Host Country Approval

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

KBS KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd.

KP Kyoto Protocol

LSC Local Stakeholder Consultation

LE Leakage Emissions

LoA Letter of Approval/Authorization

ISO International Organization for Standardization

MEDA Maharashtra Electricity Development Agency

MERC Maharashtra State Regularly Commission

MSEDCL Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd

MOP Meeting of Parties

MoC Modalities of Communication

MoV Means of Verification

MP Monitoring Plan

OM Operating Margin

PA Project Activity

PDD Project Design Document

PE Project Emissions

PLF Plant Load Factor

PP Project Participant

PS Project Standard

PO Purchase Order

PCP Project Cycle Procedure

QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control

RfR Request for Registration

SD Sustainable Development

T&C Technical & Certification

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

VVS Validation & Verification Standard

VPL Vayunandana Power Limited

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

Appendix 2. Competence of team members and technical reviewers

Personnel Name: Sanjay Kandari

Qualified to work as:

Team Leader Technical Expert

Validator/Verifier Financial Expert

Technical Reviewer Local Expert (India)

Area(s) of Technical Expertise

Sectoral Scope Technical Area

Energy Industries (renewable/non-renewable sources)

TA 1.1: Thermal energy generation from fossil fuels and biomass including thermal electricity from solar

Energy industries (renewable/non-renewable sources)

TA 1.2: Energy generation from renewable energy sources

Waste Handling and Disposal TA 13.1 Waste Handling and Disposal TA 13.2 Manure

Approved by (Manager C & T) Gagandeep Kakkar

Approval date: 03/11/2015

Personnel Name: Rohit Badaya

Qualified to work as:

Team Leader Technical Expert

Validator/Verifier Financial Expert

Technical Reviewer Local Expert (India)

Area(s) of Technical Expertise

Sectoral Scope Technical Area

Energy industries (renewable/non-

renewable sources)

TA 1.1: Thermal energy generation from fossil fuels and biomass

including thermal electricity from solar

TA 1.2: Energy generation from renewable energy sources

Energy demand TA 3.1. Energy Demand

Waste Handling and Disposal TA 13.1 Solid waste and wastewater TA 13.2 Manure

Approved By Manager Competency & Training

Approval date: 16/10/2017

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

Appendix 3. Documents reviewed or referenced

No. Author Title References to the

document

Provider

1 Project Participant PDD [For pre-feasibility assessment] version 01. – 22/08/2018

/1/ Project participant

2 Project Participant PDD [Internediate], version 02 – dated 06/02/2019 PDD, version 03 – dated 22/02/2019 PDD , version 04- dated 28/09/2019 PDD , version 05- dated 11/12/2019 PDD [Final], version 06- dated 07/02/2020


3 DNA of India Letter of Approval issued by DNA of India vide Ref. No 04/12/2099-CCC dated 25/08/2009


4 Gold Standard GS4GG Renewable Energy Activity requirements, version 1.1

/4/ Publically available

5 KBS Validation contract in between KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd. and M/s VPL – 20/07/2015

/5/ KBS

6 Project Participant Proof of starting date of CDM project activity. (PO of Turbine to Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd) – 02/05/2007

Purchase order of boiler placed to “Thermodyne Technologies Pvt. Ltd” dated 16/08/2007

Work order for pile foundation


7 Project Participant Spread sheets for Emission Reduction calculations and Grid Emission Factor

Version 01 corresponding to webhosted version of PDD

Version 02 corresponding to final version of PDD


8

Zenith Energy Detailed project report for the capacity 08 MW dated 15/12/2003

Addendum DPR report based on the capacity 10 MW dated 10/03/2006


Project Participant Proof of the investment decision of this project activity with CDM consideration dated 18/12/2003

Revised investment decision of this project activity with CDM consideration dated 24/01/2007

Evidence of change of board of director (Communication with Ministry of Corporate affairs)

/8.1/ Project participant

9 Project Participant Investment analysis spread sheets: Corrosponding to version 01 of PDD Corrosponding to version 02 of PDD


10 Project Participant Relevant proofs of local stakeholder consultation process dated 22/10/2008 Communication between PP and CDM EB


CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

regarding exemption of local stakeholder dates in accordance with para 69 of EB 85.

11 Pollution Control Board Maharastra

MEDA

Statuary clearances:

Pollution Control Board clearances

Consent to Establish

MEDA clarances dated 07/03/2008


12 Project Participant Organizational chart showing operational and management structure of the proposed CDM project activity.


13 Technology supplier of equipment

Technical specifications of the project activity boilers and turbine


14 VDNR & Associate State Bank of Mysore

CA Certificate regarding actual project cost incurred dated 12/12/2011. Loan sanction letter dated 11/03/2008


15 MERC Biomass tariff order 2005 issued by MERC /15/ Web link

16 MSEDCL and PP Power Purchase Agreement dated 22/09/2008

between PP and MSEDCL for 13 years /16/ Project

participant

17 Project Participant Appointment and termination letters of

appointments of consultants /17/ Project

participant

18 Project Participant Signed contract and Termination with Previous

DoE (TUN NORD) /18/ Project

participant

19 Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd.

Letter regarding unavailability of 10 MW turbine /19/ Project participant

20 Gram Panchayat No Objection Certificate issued from local gram

panchayat dated 17/01/2006 /20/ Project

participant

21 MSEDCL Commissioning certificate dated 28/12/2010

stating date of commissioning as 09/12/2010 /21/ Project

participant

22 Project Participant Training plan of Operating Personnel. /22/ Project

Participant

23

Zenith Energy Surplus biomass assessment report, part of DPR

Surplus biomass assessment report carried by “Zenith Energy” and acknowledged by MEDA dated 08 Feb 2008.

/23/ Project Participant

24 UNFCCC CDM VVS Version 2.0 /24/ UNFCCC

Website

25 UNFCCC CDM PS Version 2.0 /25/ UNFCCC

Website

26 UNFCCC CDM PCP Version 2.0 /26/ UNFCCC

Website

27

UNFCCC AMS I. D “Grid connected renewable electricity generation”, version 18

/27/ UNFCCC Website

28

UNFCCC Instruction to fill the Project design document for small scale project activity Version 6.0

/28/ UNFCCC Website

29

UNFCCC Tool to calculate the emission factor for

an electricity System (Version 06.0)

Tool to calculate baseline, project and

/or leakage emissions from electricity

consumption” (Version 01)

Leakage in biomass small-scale project

Activities (Version 4)

/29/ UNFCCC Website

30

UNFCCC Methodological tool for Demonstration of Additionality of Small Scale Project Activities (Version 10.0)

/30/ UNFCCC Website

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

31

UNFCCC Methodological tool: Investment analysis” version 06.

/31/ UNFCCC Website

32

UNFCCC Methodological tool on assessment of de-bundling for SSC project activities version 4.0

/32/ UNFCCC Website

33

CERC CERC (Terms and Conditions for Tariff determination from Renewable Energy Sources) Regulations, 2009

/33/ CERC Website

34

MERC

Tariff and Related Dispensation for Procurement of Power from Biomass based Generation Projects, MERC dated 8th August, 2005.

/34/ MERC Website

35

CEA CEA database, version 14, dated December 2019

/35/ CEA website

36

Web links http://law.incometaxindia.gov.in http://www.mercindia.org.in/ http://www.mercindia.org.in/ www.powermin.nic.in www.rbi.org.in http://cdm.unfccc.int

/36/ Various websites

37

Reserve Bank of India

Page no. 79, Table 1.58 of Report of the Central Board of Directors on the working of the Reserve Bank of India for the year ended June 30, 2006 submitted to the Central Government in terms of Section 53(2) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934

/37/ Project Participant

38

GS4GG Rules & Requirements

Gold standard Principles and Requirements, version 1.1 Gender Equality Requirements & Guidelines, version 1.1 Stakeholder Procedure, Requirements & Guidelines, version 1.1 Safeguarding Principles & Requirements, version 1.1 Report Templates: GS4GG project design Document (PDD), version 1.1 Stakeholder Consultation Report, version 1.0

/38/ Publically available

http://law.incometaxindia.gov.in/

http://www.mercindia.org.in/

http://www.mercindia.org.in/

http://www.powermin.nic.in/

http://www.rbi.org.in/

http://cdm.unfccc.int/

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

Appendix 4. Clarification requests, corrective action requests and forward action requests

Table 1. CL from this validation

CL ID 01 Section no. A.1 Date: 09/01/2019

Description of CL

The PP shall clarify if any EIA/ESIA was carried out for the project activity or not.

Project participant response Date: 07/02/2019

The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), Government of India, under the Environment Impact Assessment Notification vide S.O. 1533 (E) dated 14/09/2006 has listed a set of industrial activities in Schedule I of the notification for setting up new projects or modernization/ expansion will require environmental clearance and will have to conduct an Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) study. However, the project under consideration does not require any EIA to be conducted, as the activity is not included in Schedule I.

Documentation provided by project participant

Revised PDD

DOE assessment Date: 18/02/2019

The justification provided by PP is accepted based on the local and sectoral expertise of validation team.

Table 2. CAR from this validation

CAR ID 01 Section no. A. Date: 09/01/2019

Description of CAR

1) It is mentioned that the aforementioned project was registered with the UNFCCC. PD shall clarify the reason for its transition to GS VERs. 2) It is observed from the UNFCCC webpage that the issuance request was rejected. PD shall clarify on the reasons for the same. 3) The PD shall include the start and end dates of the crediting period in the table under section B.6.5. 4) The PD shall provide the emission reduction calculations to GS. 5) In key project info, the PD shall revise the certification pathway to project certification. 6) PD shall specify the version number of the methodology on the cover page.


CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

1) The project activity started with a vision to use 100% renewable resource, however the cost of biomass resource and its transportation has increased significantly than assumed at the time of project conceptualization, which was expected to be covered from additional revenue from sale of CERs, however CER prices since registration of the project activity has decreased below a level that it cannot fulfill the gap. The PP has assessed the GS VER price and project eligibility and found it promising to switch to GS and de-register from CDM.

2) The issuance request was rejected on the ground that project activity has achieved higher PLF than

mentioned in registered PDD. As mentioned on page number 2 of registered PDD the installed capacity of project is 12 MW, which can operate 330 days and 24 hour, however as per Power Purchase Agreement signed with DISCOM, the PP is eligible to supply electricity to grid 10MW equivalent monthly generation less auxiliary consumption.

The maximum electricity can be generated by project on monthly basis is Monthly electricity to grid = 10MW x 31 days x 24 hours = 7440 MWh (for 31 days month) Monthly electricity to grid = 10MW x 30 days x 24 hours

= 7200 MWh (for 30 days month)

Hence in a 31 days and 30 days month the PP can supply net electricity after deducting auxiliary consumption of 8% as 6844.8MWh and 6624MWh respectively. It can be noted from ER spread sheet that monthly average supplied to grid is lower than above estimated. The same can be verified from monthly joint meter reading reports as well. It is to be noted that the Plant Load Factor of project has not increased rather the project is able to generate 10MW equivalent in less number of days owing to higher installed capacity of the project activity i.e. 12MW. Based on potential of higher generation per installed capacity on page of 27 of registered PDD, the EGcap was incorporated to check on electricity generation used for emission reduction calculation as "The PPA has been signed for the project activity, which mentions a maximum power of 10MW can be supplied to grid after deducting auxiliary consumption, hence in case exported net electricity supplied to grid on monthly basis is observed higher than value mentioned above same shall be capped at specified limit for calculation of emission reduction". Due to higher generation potential the monthly electricity supplied to grid is capped in registered PDD considering case when actual project installed capacity would have been 10MW, in that case the maximum generation would have been limited to either 330days or with 90% PLF generation taking a conservative approach. The current gross generation i.e. 85016MWh comes at an increase of PLF by 19.271% and the project IRR comes out to be 11.05% is lower than benchmark value 11.125%. It is also noteworthy that as per IRR sheet with current generation the net supplied to grid would have been 78215MWh, which is in actual is 76862MWh is lower and hence will further reduce the IRR lower side. However as mentioned in response to first clarification, the PP has decided not to pursue CDM further owing to CER prices and uncertainty in CDM market.

3) The same is incorporated in revised PDD. 4) The emission reduction spreadsheet is attached herewith and will be submitted to GS. 5) Certification pathway is corrected in revised PDD. 6) The methodology version is incorporated on cover page of revised PDD


Revised PDD and ER spreadsheet.


CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

1) The justification was confirmed by interviewing the chairman of VPL, it was informed to validation team that the prevailing carbon market trend resulted into the switch of project activity from CDM to GS. Moreover the project comply all the requirements of GS4GG. They further inform that they would deregister the project from CDM and shall initiate the process. CAR is closed.

2) The project issuance in CDM rejected due to higher power generation in contrast to ex-ante power generation envisaged in PDD. This resulted in PRC, the same is validated in main section of this report and concluded that even on the higher generation the project doesn’t lose its additionality. CAR is closed.

3) Revision made in revised PDD and found adequate. CAR is closed. 4) ER spreadsheet is provided and the impact of PRC is taken account from the registered CDM PDD.

CAR is closed. 5) PDD is amended and pathway indicated as per GS4GG. CAR is closed. 6) The methodology version is incorporated on cover page of revised PDD and found that the latest

version of methodology is being used by the PP. CAR is closed.

CAR ID 02 Section no. A.1 Date: 09/01/2019

Description of CAR

The PP shall discuss the project specific eligibility criteria laid down in ‘Renewable Energy Activity Requirements’ for ‘Gold Standard For the Global Goals’. . Project participant response Date: 07/02/2019

The relevant criterion included in sustainability monitoring plan in line with GS4GG requirement as below 1. Percentage use of renewable resource 2. Biomass surplus monitoring on yearly basis

It is to be noted that regarding GMO use and land type etc it’s already established in PDD that it does not required further action.


Revised PDD


The above listed monitoring parameters are included in revised PDD and validation team confirms that it complies with the requirements of GS4GG. CAR is closed.

CAR ID 03 Section no. Date: 09/01/2019

Description of CAR

Please describe in the PDD how the requirements of step 4 & 5 of ‘Stakeholder Consultation & Engagement Procedure, Requirements & Guidelines’ met by the project activity. Project participant response Date: 07/02/2019

The local stakeholder identified inline with Stakeholder guidelines as local villagers, local NGO, regulator, ministry at National level. All the identified stakeholders have been invited by sending personal invitation letter and emails. The details has been incorporated in stakeholder documents and also briefly mentioned in PDD.


Revised PDD, photographs and other supporting documents.


Revised PDD along with supporting furnished by PP demonstrates that the project comply with the ‘Stakeholder Consultation & Engagement Procedure, Requirements & Guidelines’ requirements of GS4GG. CAR is closed.

CAR ID 4 Section no. Date: 09/01/2019

Description of CAR

1) Coal quantity considered for ER calculation is not consistent between PDD and ER sheet. 2) CEA version used for ER calculation and computation of emission factor is not the latest.


1) The inconsistency is corrected with in documents.

2) CEA version and coal quantity amended. Refer revised documents.

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35


Revised PDD, photographs and other supporting documents.


Revised documents are found adequate and in line with the correction required for the finding. CAR is closed.

Table 3. FAR from this validation

FAR ID XX Section no. XX Date: DD/MM/YYYY

Description of FAR

Project participant response Date: DD/MM/YYYY

NA Documentation provided by project participant

NA

DOE assessment Date: DD/MM/YYYY

NA

CDM-VAL-FORM

Version 01.0 of 35

- - - - -

Document information

Version Date Description

01.0 23 March 2015 Initial publication.

Decision Class: Regulatory Document Type: Form Business Function: Registration Keywords: project activities, validation report

F-CDM-MR: Monitoring report form. version 02.0

Documents

Transcript of F-CDM-MR: Monitoring report form. version 02.0