Gold Standard Validation Report

Transcription

1 Gold Standard Validation Report GOLD STANDARD VALIDATION OF VPOA GS-911 SOLAR LIGHTING IN RURAL ETHIOPIA VPOA REPORT NO July 2012 TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH Carbon Management Service Westendstr Munich GERMANY

2 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 1 of 20 Report No. Date of first issue Revision No. Date of this revision Certificate No Subject: Gold Standard (GS-911) VPoA Validation of the programme Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Accredited TÜV SÜD Unit: TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH Certification Body climate and energy Westendstr Munich Germany Coordinating and Managing Entity (CME): Stiftung Solarenergie Solar Energy Foundation (SEF) Josefstrasse Zürich, Switzerland Project Site(s): Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia TÜV SÜD Contract Partner: TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH Carbon Management Service Westendstr Munich Germany GPS Coordinates East West South North Longitude N(07) (58,466)' N(07) (56,260)' N(03) (27.514)' N(14) (52,791)' Latitude E(47) (59,353)' E(33) (02.906)' E(39) (33,581)' E(37) (55,564)' Applied Methodology / Version: AMS.I.A / Ver. 14 Scope(s): 1 Technical Area(s): 1.2 First Passports Version: Final Passports version: Date of issuance: Version No.: 01 Date of issuance: Version No.: 04 Assessment Team Leader: Katrin Hartmann Assessment Team Members: Johann Thaler Eswar Murty Technical Reviewer: Nikunj Agarwal Certification Body responsible: Thomas Kleiser Summary: TÜV SÜD Certification Body climate and energy has been ordered by myclimate to perform a Gold Standard VPoA validation based on Gold Standard, Version 2.1 of the project Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA. In summary, it is TÜV SÜD s opinion that the GS VPoA Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA, as described in the final VPoA-DD, VPA-DD and GS passports (all documents dated and version 04), meets all relevant Gold Standard version 2.1 requirements. The project furthermore meets all relevant host country criteria and correctly applies the baseline and monitoring methodology AMS.I.A / Ver. 14. Hence, TÜV SÜD will recommend the project for registration as a Gold Standard VPoA project activity by the GS-TAC. 1 No date is mentioned in both VPoA and VPA passports (version 01) however PPs communicated to the DOE that passports were elaborated on

3 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 2 of 20 Summary of the Validation Opinion: The review of the project design documentation and the subsequent follow-up interviews have provided TÜV SÜD with sufficient evidence to determine the fulfilment of all stated criteria. In our opinion, the project meets all relevant Gold Standard requirements. Hence TÜV SÜD will recommend the project for registration by the Gold Standard Technical Advisory Committee. The review of the project design documentation and the subsequent follow-up interviews have not provided TÜV SÜD with sufficient evidence to determine the fulfilment of all stated criteria. Hence TÜV SÜD will not recommend the project for registration by the Gold Standard Technical Advisory Committee and will inform the project participants and the Gold Standard Technical Advisory Committee on this decision.

4 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 3 of 20 Abbreviations AMS CAR CDM CR/CL DNA DOE EIA / EA ER FAR GHG GS GS-TAC IPCC IRL KP LSFR MP PIP PP SEF TÜV SÜD UNFCCC VPA VPA-DD VPoA VPoA-DD VVM VER Approved Methodology Small Scale Corrective Action Request Clean Development Mechanism Clarification Request Designated National Authority Designated Operational Entity Environmental Impact Assessment / Environmental Assessment Emission Reduction Forward Action Request Greenhouse gas(es) Gold Standard Gold Standard Technical Advisory Committee Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Information Reference List Kyoto Protocol Local Stakeholder Feedback Round Monitoring Plan Project Implementing Partner Project Participant Solar Energy Foundation TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Voluntary Project Activity Voluntary Project Activity Design Document Voluntary Programme of Activities Voluntary Programme of Activities Design Document Validation and Verification Manual Verified Emission Reductions / Voluntary Emission Reduction

5 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 4 of 20 Table of Contents Page 1 INTRODUCTION Objective Scope GHG Project Description 5 2 METHODOLOGY GOLD STANDARD CRITERIA Project Type Eligibility Additionality Sustainable Development Sustainability Monitoring Plan 18 4 VALIDATION OPINION Annex 1: Gold Standard Protocol Annex 2: Information Reference List Annex 3: Appointment Certificates

6 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 5 of 20 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective myclimate has commissioned TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH (TÜV SÜD) to validate the project Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA in accordance with the Gold Standard (GS) version 2.1. The purpose of a validation is to have an independent Third Party perform a compliance test against the additional requirements as set by the GS for VPoA. 1.2 Scope The validation scope is defined as an independent and objective review of the VPoA-DD, VPA- DD, GS passports, the project s baseline study, monitoring plan and other relevant documents. The information in these documents is reviewed against the Gold Standard version 2.1 requirements. The final assessment presented herewith is based on the VPoA-DD, VPA-DD, GS passports, local stakeholder consultation reports and other supporting documents indicated in Annex 2 attached to this report. 1.3 GHG Project Description The VPoA aims to provide households in Ethiopia which have no access to the electricity grid, with solar PV lighting systems. Currently the prevalent form of lighting in rural Ethiopia is the use of kerosene lamps. The VPoA will reduce emissions by replacing GHG emitting kerosene lamps with solar PV lighting systems. In order to distribute the solar lighting systems, so called Solar Centres will be established throughout Ethiopia. Solar Centres will manage the sale, distribution and installation as well as maintenance of the solar systems. It is expected to operate a minimum of 25 solar centres with a target to sell around 200,000 systems by Depending on the type to be installed, systems are equipped with one to four LEDs and the solar modules have a capacity of 1.5 Wp, 2 Wp, 5 Wp or 10 Wp. One LED will reduce kg CO 2 per day. The programme is being implemented by Stiftung Solarenergie the Solar Energy Foundation Switzerland (hereafter SEF), through its office in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. SEF is the Coordinating Managing Entity (CME) for the VPoA and responsible for the overall implementation and coordination of the VPoA. There are no mandatory policies or regulations for the adoption of solar lighting systems in households in Ethiopia. The proposed VPoA is a voluntary action by the CME SEF. The same was confirmed based on a self-declaration submitted by the CME (SEF) (IRL 100), an on-site interview with the Environmental Protection Authority (the same time Ethiopian DNA) and the host country experience of the audit team (IRL 10). Depending on the type of systems, rural households are able to pay either in cash or in instalments. Carbon finance will be used to maintain a sales price affordable to rural households and to eventually expand the programme to reach more rural villages without access to electricity. The VPoA does currently not use public funding directly for the project. In the past, SEF has received some funding from public institutions (e.g. German GTZ and Swiss REPIC). These funds were used to set up some of the infrastructure for the initial Solar Centers in the trial period. In addition some funds were used, and continue to be used for capacity building such as the establishment of the International Solar Energy School (ISES) (IRL 23,105,106). The ISES, also run by SEF, is an important part of the project, as it trains all the technicians for SEF, and is also where the imported solar systems are assembled. However, in line with Gold Standard guidelines,, the Official Development Assistance (ODA) received will not render the project activity ineligible for carbon crediting under the Gold Standard as the previous and possible future ODA was and will not be provided under the condition that

7 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 6 of 20 the credits generated by the project activity will be transferred, either directly or indirectly, to the donor country providing ODA support. The same is confirmed by a self declaration signed by the CME (SEF) (IRL 99). The government of Ethiopia provides no funding for the programme. The starting date of the VPoA is based on the upload date of the VPoA LSC report to GS website (IRL 110). The length of the VPoA is taken as 28 years. The VPoA will not only lead to emission reductions, but also contribute in a significant manner to sustainable development in rural Ethiopian households amongst others in the following ways: Improved lighting conditions will allow children to study in the evenings. It also allows residents to work and run their businesses in the evenings. Improvement of indoor air quality. Kerosene lamps cause respiratory problems so the introduction of lighting from clean energy sources will improve the health of residents. New job opportunities are created for the employees both in the local Solar Centers and in the central office of the Solar Energy Foundation The information presented in the VPoA documents on the technical design is consistent with the actual planning and implementation of the project activity confirmed in the following ways: A review of data and information (see annex 2); An on-site visit to some of the places where the associated specific case VPA is being implemented and interview with relevant stakeholder and personnel with knowledge of the project in attendance; and A review of information related to similar projects or technologies which have been used to validate the accuracy and completeness of the project description. In conclusion, TÜV SÜD confirms that the VPoA project description, as included in the VPoA- DD, is sufficiently accurate and complete in order to comply with the requirements of the Gold Standard.

8 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 7 of 20 2 METHODOLOGY The GS validation of the project must be seen in conjunction with the validation report for the VPoA and VPA. The Gold Standard criteria are divided into the following assessment framework and the monitoring requirements: Project Type Eligibility Additionality o Previous public announcement check o Additionality Tool o ODA additionality test o Conservative approach check o Technology transfer and/or technology innovation Sustainable Development o Do No Harm Assessment o Sustainable development matrix o Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) o Stakeholder consultation procedures Sustainability Monitoring Plan Chapter 3 includes a discussion on each of the elements listed above.

9 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 8 of 20 3 GOLD STANDARD CRITERIA The assessment of the documentation has been done as per the Gold standard criteria and is presented herewith. The CME (SEF) together with the consultant myclimate have prepared the Gold Standard Passports (VPoA passport and VPA passport) which set out the criteria, which was submitted to the validation team for review. This Gold Standard Passports served as a basis for the validation. The reference list of all the documents submitted by the CME and myclimate and used for this validation is included in Annex 2 Information Reference List (IRL). 3.1 Project Type Eligibility The assessed project falls under the category Renewable Energy Supply category, subcategory Improved distributed heating and cooking devices and distributed micro-scale electricity generation units (e.g. micro-hydro and PV for households) as per Annex C of the Gold Standard Toolkit v2.1 The assessed project is a renewable energy generation project. The Project Type also corresponds to category AMS-I.A of those qualifying for small-scale project status. Hence, the project type is eligible for the Gold Standard (IRL 2,3, 23,25,32,33,42,43,44,45,47,48,49,50,52,94). 3.2 Additionality Previous public announcement check There has been no public announcement of the project going ahead without the revenues from carbon credits. This has been confirmed through a self-declaration signed by the CME (SEF) (IRL 118) and through interviews. There was a trial period between January 2009 and August 2010, relying heavily on donor financing (IRL 23), however none of the systems sold during this trial period was applying or will apply for carbon credits. The same has been confirmed through a self-declaration signed by the CME (SEF)(IRL 118). The start date of the VPoA has been defined as , based on the upload of the VPoA LSC report to GS-TAC (IRL 110). The following activities (all dated prior to the start date) prove the early consideration of revenues from VERs: - Project Idea Note (myclimate) Light for education in Ethiopia (February 2008) (IRL 46). -Memorandum of understanding between myclimate and SEF (June 2008) (IRL 48) -Term sheet between Stiftung Solarenergie together with Solar Energy Foundation (SEF) ( seller ) and myclimate The Climate Protection Partnership ( Buyer ) (March 2010) (IRL 47) -LSC held in Addis Ababa and Bokaso (June 2010) (IRL 52) The validation team confirms that revenues from VERs were considered at an early stage of the programme (as well as 1 st VPA) which is in line with GS PoA Rules and Guidance Annex F, December (chapter retroactive registration, scenario 2). The DOE confirms that the 1 st VPA is considered as regular VPA because LSC has been conducted as per GS requirements before the start of implementation. Under this regular project cycle, the VPA is potentially 2 GS PoA Rules and Guidance Annex F, December 2010 are applicable since these were the valid rules/guidance at the time of first submission of documents to GS-TAC.

10 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 9 of 20 eligible for receiving credits for realized emission reductions up to 2 years prior to GS registration Additionality Tool Additionality has been determined at the VPoA level by using the Guidelines for demonstrating additionality of microscale project activities, EB60, Annex 25. However each VPA must comply with the following criteria defined in the Guidelines for demonstrating additionality of microscale project activities to be considered as additional: (1) Project activities up to 5 MW that employ renewable energy technology (2) The geographic location of the project activity is in one of the LDCs The compliance of these criteria is checked within the following eligibility criteria for each VPA: Criterion (1) by eligibility criterion 1: The project activity installs solar home (lighting) systems that supply rural households with electricity and eligibility criterion 2: The total capacity of the solar panels included in a VPA does not exceed 5 MW, according to EB 60, Annex 25, Guidelines for demonstrating additionality of micro-scale project activities. Criterion (2) by eligibility criterion 4: The project takes place within Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia the project boundary. Only rural households that are not connected to the electricity grid can be included in a VPA. The VPA report clearly demonstrates that the 1 st VPA complies with all eligibility criteria including criteria 1,2 and 4 which demonstrate additionality of the 1 st VPA. Based on the aforementioned approach, TÜV SÜD confirms that additionality can be appropriately demonstrated for this 1 st VPA. Based on the above, TÜV SÜD confirms the additionality of the 1 st VPA which is also in line with the GS PoA Rules and Guidance Annex F (dated December 2010), chapter 4. This chapter 4 of GS PoA Rules and Guidance mentions that additionality should be demonstrated both at the PoA level and at the VPA level using an approved UNFCCC or GS additionality tool unless the CME provides convincing argumentation validated by a DOE and approved by the GS as to why this is only required at the PoA level. If such an approach is followed, then additionality at the VPA level has to be defined as part of the eligibility criteria for the inclusion of a project activitiy as a VPA under the PoA. In conclusion, both VPoA-DD, VPA-DD and GS Passports mention how additionality is demonstrated Conservative approach check According to Gold Standard version 2.1 requirements, it must be assessed whether a sufficiently conservative baseline scenario is chosen. The applied methodology AMS I.A, version 14 pre-defines the baseline scenario as the fuel consumption of the technology in use or that would have been used in the absence of the project activity to generate the equivalent level of lighting service. The technology that would have been used in the absence of the project activity is determined as a hurricane kerosene lamp (with 45 lumen output according to Evan Mills Technical and Economic Performance Analysis of kerosene lamps and alternative approaches to illumination in developing countries ) (IRL 16). This is a conservative approach bearing in mind that according to the lighting Africa survey of 2008 in Ethiopia (IRL 14) 69% of households use simple kerosene wick lamps (8 lumen according to Evan Mills Technical and Economic Performance Analysis of kerosene lamps and alternative approaches to illumination in developing countries, IRL 16) and just 14% use kerosene lamps with glass cover, i.e. the hurricane kerosene lamps.

11 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 10 of 20 Results from on-site field visits carried out by the validation team confirmed that Ethiopian rural households use actually only simple kerosene wick lamps, thus to take hurricane kerosene lamps as baseline is very conservative. Further, the lumen equivalent of hurricane kerosene lamps vs. LED is the most conservative assumption. Other indicators like LUX would lead to much higher number of kerosene lamps which would be needed to achieve the same brightness as SEF LEDs. The same could be validated by the following data sources: -Rural Lighting Services: A comparison of lamps for domestic lighting in developing countries: F.D.J Nieuwenhout, P.J.N.M. van de Rijt, E.J. Wiggelinkhuizen (IRL 31) -Evan Mills (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory): Technical and economic performance analysis of kerosene lamps and alternative approaches to illumination in developing countries (IRL 16). Hence the VPoA-DD, VPA-DD and the Gold Standard Passports clearly demonstrate that the baseline scenario predefined in the methodology is the most appropriate one with conservative assumptions. Hence the validation team confirms that the baseline has been developed in a conservative manner Technology transfer and/or technology innovation The technology employed (renewable solar technology) is environmentally safe and sound which is confirmed by the local and sectoral expertise of the validation team. The new solar lighting products are imported from Germany and Asia as there is (currently) no production in Ethiopia (host country). Thus, there is technology transfer to the host country. 3.3 Sustainable Development Do No Harm assessment The programme/project has used the Do No Harm assessment matrix as required by the GS. None of the components has been identified to have high risk. Except Anti-corruption which has been assessed with medium risk, all other components have been assessed with low risk. Therefore for the eligibility to the GS is complied with, as follows: Human Rights: The project activity respects the human rights of people. The solar lighting systems are directly sold to the families. The dignity, cultural properties and the economic, social and cultural freedom of the participants and local people are not affected. All families decide independently and voluntarily whether they want to participate and every family, who can afford the technology, can participate regardless of their political or social background. There is no involuntary resettlement involved with the project, either indirectly or directly. One of the main goals of the project activity is to improve the political and economic situation of the remote regions and offer alternatives to city migration. The project will not alter any cultural building or site besides the houses of the families. The solar panel is installed on the roof and the battery and the light bulb in the building. Moreover, the product can be easily removed without damaging the building. The aforementioned could be validated by the DOE during on-site field visits of households (IRL 11). Besides, SEF in its code of ethics (IRL 65) mentions as one of the main principles to maximize its effectiveness by building partnerships with other organizations, governments, businesses and local communities as long as they respect the human rights. Ethiopia has ratified many UN Human Rights Conventions and thus has made binding international commitments to adhere to the standards laid down in these universal human rights documents. All inhabitants of Ethiopia may turn to the UN Human Rights Committee through proce-

12 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 11 of 20 dure 1503, to the Special Rapporteurs for violations of specific human rights or to ECOSOC for women's rights violations (IRL 79). The referenced data sources have been validated by the DOE. Labour Standards: SEF respects the employees freedom of association and their right to collective bargaining and is not complicit in restrictions of these freedoms and rights. Ethiopia, which is a member of the ILO since 1923, has ratified both the convention 87 (freedom of association) and 98 (right to collective bargaining) (IRL 79). The project activity does not involve any form of compulsory or forced labour which has been validated by the DOE through a self-declaration issued by SEF (CME) (IRL 96) and the code of ethics (IRL 65). Additionally, the same was confirmed in interviews during the on-site visit (IRL 10). All the employees offer their labour on a voluntary basis. Both the ILO Convention 29 and 105 are ratified by Ethiopia. The project does not employ and is not complicit in any form of child labour and SEF commits itself not to employ or train any child for any service in the project activity. The same could be validated through the aforementioned self-declaration issued by SEF (CME) (IRL 96) and the code of ethics (IRL 65). Both ILO Convention 138 and 182 have been ratified by Ethiopia which could be validated at (IRL 79). The project activity and its proponents do not engage in any discrimination based on gender, race, religion, sexual orientation or any other basis. SEF maintains a zero-tolerance policy towards discrimination. Managers are encouraged to hire female staff and consider gender equity within hiring and promotion decisions as it was confirmed in interviews during the on-site visit. SEF in its code of ethics (IRL 65) commits itself to always be honest and open, never discriminate or pre-judge others for cultural, ethnic, religious or political or any other reasons. Ethiopia has ratified both ILO Convention 100 and 111 (IRL 79). The project provides workers with a safe and healthy work environment and is not complicit in exposing workers to unsafe or unhealthy work environments. The workers involved in the project activities will not be exposed to hazardous chemicals or other dangerous materials. Employees will learn how to install and maintain solar systems in a safe way. The solar systems only provide low-voltage electricity. The same could be confirmed during on-site interviews with technicians, technical director and country director and with the technical specifications of the solar lighting systems (IRL 10). The above referenced data sources have been validated by the DOE. Environmental Protection: The project takes a precautionary approach in regard to environmental challenges and is not complicit in practices contrary to the precautionary principle. No harm to human health or environment is expected. However, in case any harm is discovered or anticipated by the stakeholders and project participants, SEF would stop the activities and would not continue unless the risk is assessed and mitigated appropriately. The only significant critical issues for the environment validated by the DOE could be old batteries and old panels which end up in the environment. However, appropriate mitigation measures have been indicated by the CME in the passports. Since it is difficult to find suitable GEL batteries in Ethiopia in the usual market, the user has to contact a technician or a solar center to get a new battery. A new battery will be only provided in the case after the old one has been given back. It will be ensured that old batteries will be collected and recycled. A similar procedure will be applied for old panels. Consumers have to contact SEF for replacing old panels by new ones that are compatible with the system. The project does not involve and is not complicit in significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats. Neither the production nor the installation nor operation of the solar plants threatens natural habitats. Solar panels are placed on the roofs of houses, rather than in critical natural habitats. The same could be confirmed during on-site field visits of households with installed solar lighting systems (IRL 11).

13 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 12 of 20 Anti Corruption: The project does not involve and is not complicit in corruption. In order to mitigate possible risks of corruption, all employees are informed that corruption will not be accepted. The Personnel Administrative Policy of SEF (IRL 91) has been submitted to the DOE in which it is stated that causes for dismissal without notice are amongst others - to delete, forge and altar the records and documents of the Foundation or to use them fraudulently ; - Accepting a bribe, enriching oneself unlawfully or committing any act of corruption ; - Using the materials and equipment s of the Foundation without permission from the appropriate authority. SEF in its code of ethics (IRL 65) clearly explains that towards suppliers and consultants favours or bribes are not accepted and SEF will not allow any tokens of appreciation which might affect SEF s judgement. Further it is mentioned in the code of ethics that SEF will not allow family, religious, tribal, political or any other personal connections to influence the award of contracts. Ethiopia has ratified the UN Convention against corruption on 12 Nov 2008 (IRL 77). According to the Global Corruption Barometer 2010 Ethiopia is not considered one of the most corrupt countries as it is not included in the study (IRL 80). The aforementioned referenced data sources have been validated by the DOE and the same concludes that the project is deemed not to involve corruption and not to be complicit in corruption Sustainable Development assessment The project has used the sustainable development assessment matrix as required by the GS. None of the components has been identified to have a negative score. Therefore for the eligibility to the GS is complied with, as follows: Air quality (score +): The air quality in the project case is an improvement over the baseline scenario, where kerosene lamps would have been continued to be used. In general, kerosene lamps cause severe indoor air pollution by emitting noxious smoke and hazardous gases. This results in cases of asthma and respiratory illnesses. On the contrary, using solar energy for lighting does not cause any air pollution. The air quality improvement is monitored by verifying the number of installed LEDs and therefore by the number of substituted kerosene lamps. The fact that kerosene lamps cause indoor air pollution could be validated through several documents like -Schare S. and K.R. Smith, Particulate emission rates of simple kerosene lamps, Energy for Sustainable Development, IRL 82; -WHO, Addressing the Links between Indoor Air Pollution, Household Energy and Human Health, IRL 81; -Bruce N, Perez-Padilla R, Albalak R., Indoor Air Pollution in Developing Countries: A Major Environmental and Public Health Challenge, IRL 83; and through field visits (during on-site audit) of households using kerosene lamps (IRL 11). Water quality and quantity (score 0): No significant impact on water quality and quantity is expected. The project does not use any water during its installation and operation phase and does not produce any wastewater. Nevertheless water quality could be influenced by the disposal of different parts of the solar system, particularly the batteries. The mitigation measure as follows will account for this case: Firstly used batteries will be taken back for recycling to avoid any pollution to the soil. Due to the relative inaccessibility of GEL-batteries in the market, if users want

14 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 13 of 20 to replace their battery, they will need to go to the local solar centre or contact the technician to replace such a battery. The solar centre will only offer a new battery by submitting the old one. Secondly, the used GEL-batteries are completely sealed and are therefore leak-proof and maintenance-free. Only in the very seldom case of accidentally overcharging (when the battery is producing hydrogen and oxygen), special one way valves allow the gases to escape thus avoiding excessive pressure inside the battery. Battery specifications of the manufacturer have been submitted to the DOE (IRL 32). The specifications clearly mention that the battery is completely sealed and is, therefore, maintenancefree, leak proof and usable in any position. The validation team could get insights during the field visits of households already using solar lighting systems that the batteries are sealed. Measures are in place to recycle batteries which have been evidenced by the template for maintenance and replacement activities (IRL 45) as well as by the visual inspection of the storage center in SEF Solar Valley (Addis Ababa). The collected batteries will be recycled locally or returned to the manufacturer (as soon as sufficient batteries are collected that it is possible to fill up one ship container). The collection procedure of old batteries has been confirmed by interviewing technicians and Technical Director (IRL 10). Soil condition (score 0): No significant impact on soil condition is expected. Except for the batteries and the solar panels, whose inappropriate disposal could have some negative impact on soil conditions (mitigation measures for batteries and solar panels have been described earlier), there are no other critical parts of the solar lighting systems for soil contamination. Other pollutants (score 0): No other pollutants could be identified by the validation team. Biodiversity (score 0): No significant issues impacting the biodiversity could be identified by the validation team. Quality of employment (score +): The project activity provides technical jobs, particularly for the installation and maintenance of the solar systems that require significant training. By providing these jobs, the project activity improves the overall quality of employment in rural Ethiopia, which is predominantly based around agriculture. The following evidences have been provided to support the positive score of quality of employment and have been validated by the DOE: -List of employees of SEF (IRL 72) -SEF payroll of employee on sample basis (IRL 73) -Certificate of training in Photovoltaic technology provided by SEF to University professors as a part of Capacity Building program (IRL 74) -Report on the Workshop on Solar technology and microfinance conducted by SEF (IRL 75) -Participation lists of Students Attained in ISEI (International Solar Energy Institute for Rural Development) (IRL 76) -Samples of Certificates of Training for Technicians who completed the Rural Solar Energy Manager program (IRL 30) -Accreditation certificate for International Solar Energy Institute by ANRS TVET Promotion Agency (IRL 38) -Registration request to Ministry of Education for 2 nd International Solar Energy Institute (IRL 36) Besides, interviews have been conducted with technicians and the technical director during the on-site visit (IRL 10) confirming the qualification of the employees of SEF. Livelihood of the poor (score +): Ethiopia is one of the world s poorest countries, ranked 174 out of 187 by the UNDP s Human Development Index (HDI) (IRL 114). The project is likely to im-

15 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 14 of 20 prove the livelihood of the poor by giving residents in rural Ethiopia access to better quality lighting, higher quality jobs, and reduced health risks (due to the reduction of indoor kerosene use). In particular the health condition of local residents is improved due to the reduction of indoor air pollution and risk of burns and loss of property due to fires also are decreased. By installing solar lighting systems, kerosene use is reduced, and health outcomes are improved for poor rural residents. The amount of installed solar systems sold indicates the amount of kerosene replaced and is therefore monitored. The fact that kerosene lamps cause indoor air pollution could be validated by several documents like IRL 81,82,83 and by field visits (during on-site audit) of households using kerosene lamps (IRL 11). On the other side, the validation team could identify improved living conditions (like e.g. less indoor pollution and thus preventing diseases, access to better quality of lighting, possibility for children to study in the evening and for adults to practice commercial activities and thus generating income) when visiting households using solar lighting systems. Access to affordable and clean energy services (score +): The project offers improved access to clean energy services, including installation and maintenance from trained professionals. The DOE by interviewing technicians and the technical director from SEF as well as by assessing training certificates (IRL 30 and 74), workshop report (IRL 75), participation lists of students attaining the International Solar Energy Institute for Rural Development (IRL 76) confirms the same. Solar lighting powered by batteries is a reliable and a sustainable form of energy. The amount of installed solar systems indicates the increase in access to affordable and clean energy services and shall therefore be monitored. 2 websites have been further checked by the DOE (IRL 111) which clearly indicate that Ethiopia is a 100% oil importer and therefore as well from kerosene. No oil is extracted within Ethiopia. Thus, the project by implementing solar systems improves access to clean energy services and contributes to the reduction of dirty energy services related with fossil fuels. Human and institutional capacity (score +): Giving high quality lighting to poor rural areas in Ethiopia is likely to improve human capacity in certain ways, for example, children will be able to do their homework in evening hours. In addition, higher quality lighting allows residents to work in the evening, increasing local incomes. The amount of installed solar systems indicates the improvement in human capacity brought about by higher quality lighting, and is therefore monitored. It could be confirmed during the onsite field visits of households (IRL 11) already using the solar lighting systems that children are able to study in the evening hours and adults can work in the evening thus increasing local income. Quantitative employment and income generation (score +): The installation of the solar systems is mainly conducted by local Ethiopians. The number of jobs is monitored as an indicator for the development of the quantitative employment thanks to the project. The created jobs position will be permanent over the whole project period and beyond. All jobs involve different skills and qualifications with low health and safety risks. The following evidences have been provided to support the positive score of Quantitative employment and income generation and support the argument that all jobs involve different skills and qualifications. The following documentation has been validated by the DOE: -List of employees of SEF (more than 60 employees for the 1st VPA) (IRL 72) -SEF payroll of employee on sample basis (IRL 73) -Certificate of training in Photovoltaic technology provided by SEF to University professors as a part of Capacity Building program (IRL 74)

16 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 15 of 20 -Report on the Workshop on Solar technology and microfinance conducted by SEF (IRL 75) -Participation lists of Students Attained in ISEI (International Solar Energy Institute for Rural Development) (IRL 76) -Samples of Certificates of Training for Technicians who completed the Rural Solar Energy Manager program (IRL 30) - Accreditation certificate for International Solar Energy Institute by ANRS TVET Promotion Agency (IRL 38) -Registration request to Ministry of Education for 2 nd International Solar Energy Institute (IRL 36) -Job descriptions of different job positions (like country director, program manager, rural solar energy technical director, director of International Solar Energy School, IT officer, Finance desk officer, revolving fund officer, head office accountant, logistics officer, liaison officer, warehouse keeper, solar energy inspector, solar energy technician and others) (IRL 92) Besides, interviews have been conducted with technicians and the technical director during the on-site visit (IRL 10) confirming the apprenticeship of current and future employees of SEF. Balance of payments and investment (score 0): As kerosene is substituted by solar energy, the dependency on imported kerosene will decrease. Thus the balance of payments situation will be improved. 2 websites have been checked by the DOE (IRL 111) which clearly indicate that Ethiopia is a 100% oil importer and therefore as well from kerosene. No oil is extracted within Ethiopia. However, due to a current lack of solar technology in Ethiopia, most parts of the solar systems are imported. Therefore the balance of payments situation can be, for conservative reasons, be considered neutral. Technology transfer and technological self-reliance (score +): In addition the project also introduces a relatively advanced technology into Ethiopia, and encourages the accumulation of skills. Thus by installing solar systems, the project brings about technology transfer and improves technological self-reliance. The number of workshops and training courses will therefore be used as the metric to measure improvements in technology transfer and technological self-reliance. The following supporting documentation for such workshops and training courses have been submitted to the DOE and was checked by the same: -Samples of Certificates of Training for Technicians who completed the Rural Solar Energy Manager program (IRL 30) -Certificate of training in Photovoltaic technology provided by SEF to University professors as a part of Capacity Building program (IRL 74) -Report on the Workshop on Solar technology and microfinance conducted by SEF (IRL 75) -Participation lists of Students Attained in ISEI (International Solar Energy Institute for Rural Development) (IRL 76). Furthermore, the accreditation certificate for International Solar Energy Institute by ANRS TVET Promotion Agency (IRL 38) and the registration request to Ministry of Education for 2 nd International Solar Energy Institute (IRL 36) demonstrate the availability of facilities for the propagation of skills, qualification and know-how. The positive score of the indicator Technology transfer and technological self-reliance could be further substantiated through interviews the DOE carried out during on-site visit with technicians and the technical director (IRL 10) confirming the apprenticeship of current and future employees of SEF and thus the dissemination of skills and know-how to employees of SEF.

17 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 16 of 20 Hence the above parameters show that the project contributes to sustainable development in Ethiopia, thereby complying with the GS requirements. All the assumptions used in defining the sustainability matrix have been reviewed by TÜV SÜD based on the on-site visit made during the validation of the project and the review of all the supporting documentation submitted and listed above. Hence, the project activity complies with the Gold Standard criterion Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) It has been indicated in chapter C.1. of the VPoA-DD that the environmental analysis is done at the VPoA level and VPA level. A passport will be submitted for each VPA (and has been indicated for the 1 st VPA) indicating the environmental impacts within the sustainable development matrix and the results of the Do No Harm assessment. This is in line with the PoA Rules and Guidance, Annex F (December 2010), which states in chapter 7.1 and 7.2 that coordinating entities submitting a PoA for GS registration shall conduct the Do No Harm assessment [and] Detailed Impact Assessment at the VPA equivalent level, unless convincing argumentation validated by a DOE and approved by the GS is provided as to why this should not be required for the particular PoA. As per regulations defined by the Ethiopian DNA, no EIA is necessary for the given kind of programme, however an appropriate management plan (addressing adverse impacts of the project and any unforeseen fact of serious implication that may arise during implementation) has to be submitted to the Ethiopian DNA (IRL 64). This management plan has been submitted to the Ethiopian DNA as well as to the DOE for review (IRL 103) and has been accepted by the Ethiopian DNA through the issuance of the Host Country Letter of Approval (IRL 107). Both management plan and Host Country Letter of Approval have been validated by the DOE. No significant negative impacts on the environment and/or people are expected due to this programme. On the contrary, the programme will bring several benefits to the environment like e.g. reducing the consumption of non-renewable natural resources, such as fossil fuels, GHG emissions and indoor air pollution Stakeholder consultation procedures It has been indicated in chapter D.1. of the VPoA-DD that the local stakeholder consultation has been done at the VPoA level and 1st VPA level and will be done for each future VPA individually. This is in accordance with the GS PoA Rules and Guidance, Annex F (December 2010) which states in paragraph 6 that stakeholder consultation must happen at both the VPoA level (generic consultation) and the CPA/VPA level (specific consultations) unless convincing argumentation validated by a DOE and approved by the GS is provided as to why this should not be required for the particular VPoA. Stakeholder opinion has been sought from different groups like policy makers, local NGOs and international NGOs through stakeholder meeting at national level on June 29, 2010 in the capital city of Addis Ababa. The relevant stakeholders have been invited via invitation letters or s (IRL 52,54). The minutes and evidence of stakeholder consultations carried out on the VPoA level have been submitted (IRL 52,59). The assessment team has reviewed the documentation in order to validate the inclusion of relevant stakeholders. It can be confirmed that the communication method used to invite the stakeholders is appropriate. For the 1st VPA, stakeholder consultation meeting took place in Bokaso (village close to the solar center of Yirgalem which makes part of the 1 st VPA) on June 27, Stakeholder opinion has been sought from different groups like district (Woreda) administrators, village (Kebele) chairpersons, beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries of solar lighting systems.

18 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 17 of 20 Stakeholder opinion has been sought from different groups like district (Woreda) administrators, village (Kebele) chairpersons beneficiaries and potential beneficiaries of solar lighting systems. The relevant stakeholders have been invited via invitation letters or word of mouth (IRL 55,58). The minutes and evidence of stakeholder consultations carried out on the VPA level have been submitted (IRL 52,60). The assessment team has reviewed the documentation in order to validate the inclusion of relevant stakeholders. It can be confirmed that the communication method used to invite the stakeholders is appropriate. However, as per the information provided during the on-site visit, the non-technical summary as presented in the local stakeholder consultation report, has not been sent together with the invitations prior to the meeting (as requested by Gold Standard). The invitation letters, even though sent in local language, contained only a few words about the programme/project, however not the whole non-technical summary. Nevertheless, during the stakeholder consultation meetings at VPoA and VPA level both a nontechnical and technical summary have been presented, at VPA level as well in local language. Even though the GS procedure was not completely followed, the DOE accepts the same for the 1 st VPA, however a FAR was raised that for future VPAs a non-technical summary in local language should be already provided to stakeholders when inviting the same. Forward Action Request No.1 (GS protocol): It should be ensured for future VPAs that a non-technical summary report is provided in local language together with the invitation (letter). During the on-site field visits, the DOE had the chance to talk with some of the stakeholders who were participating in the stakeholder meeting at VPA level as well as with household owners who could not participate. The DOE confirms that those stakeholders not participating in the stakeholder meeting had no different comments to the ones participating in the meeting, thus it is accepted by the DOE for this VPA to have invited stakeholders only from Bokaso region and not from other regions included as well in the VPA, however the following FAR was raised. Forward Action Request No.1 (VPA protocol): CME/PIP should take care for future VPAs that stakeholders are invited in a more representative way considering comments from as many regions as possible participating in the VPA, unless a justification is given that stakeholder invitations of one region are enough for representing the whole VPA. A detailed list of all comments can be found in the Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Reports (VPoA and VPA level). Participants at the consultation meeting filled out the project evaluation form and gave their comments amongst others to the SD indicators. The summary of comments presented in the VPOA-DD and VPA-DD and 2 passports has been verified with the documentation of the stakeholder consultations (IRL 52) and has been found to be complete. The DOE confirmed in interviews with households and other stakeholders that no other comments than the ones provided during the stakeholder consultations have been expressed. The vast majority of comments were neutral or positive. Amongst the SD indicators, the only indicator that was considered neutral or positive by less than 95% of respondents was the other pollutants indicator, for which about 92% of respondents still gave a positive or neutral rating. The reason that 8% of respondents did not give a neutral or positive response on the other pollutants was due to fears about the polluting effects of batteries. All other SD indicators were scored minimum 95% neutral or positive. Regarding the battery issue, the Solar Energy Foundation responded that there are clear mitigation measures in place for used batteries. Firstly, used batteries will be collected and recycled to prevent any pollution to the soil. Due to the relative inaccessibility of the type of batteries (GEL

19 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 18 of 20 Batteries) in the market, users have to go to a solar center or contact a technician in order to replace an old battery by a new one. The solar centre will only offer a new battery by submitting the old one. Secondly, the used GEL-batteries are completely sealed and are therefore leakproof and maintenance-free. Only in the very seldom case of accidentally overcharging (when the battery is producing hydrogen and oxygen), special one way valves allow the gases to escape thus avoiding excessive development of pressure inside the battery. Battery specifications of the manufacturer have been submitted to the DOE (IRL 32). The specifications clearly mention that the battery is completely sealed and is, therefore, maintenancefree, leak proof and usable in any position. Besides, the validation team could get insights during the field visits of households already using solar lighting systems that the batteries are sealed. Measures are in place to recycle batteries which have been evidenced by the template for maintenance and replacement activities (IRL 45) as well as by the visual inspection of the storage center in SEF Solar Valley (Addis Ababa). The collected batteries will be recycled locally or returned to the manufacturer (as soon as so many batteries are collected that it is possible to fill up one ship container). The collection procedure of old batteries has been confirmed by interviewing technicians and Technical Director during the DOE on-site visit. As for other standalone GS project activities, GS stakeholder consultation for PoAs is also comprised of 2 consultations (local stakeholder consultation and local stakeholder feedback round (LSFR)). LSFR at VPA level took place in Bokaso village on in Amharic and Sidamigna local languages and at VPoA level in Addis Ababa in English language during DOE on-site visit on Invitation letters (sent out in English language to policy makers, local and international NGOs and private companies at VPoA level and sent out/distributed both in English and local language to policy makers of the Woreda 3 and direct beneficiaries of SHSs at VPA level) and participation lists of both LSFR have been submitted to the DOE and were checked by the same (IRL 56,57,61,62). The summary of comments presented in the VPoA-DD and VPA-DD and VPoA/VPA passports has been verified with the documentation of the stakeholder feedback rounds (IRL 53,93) and has been found to be complete and consistent. Stakeholders comments in VPoA/VPA LSFRs did not trigger any change in the programme design. Hence, the criterion is fulfilled by the project as per the GS requirements. 3.4 Sustainability Monitoring Plan The validation team has validated that the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied monitoring methodology AMS I.A, version 14. The assessment team has checked all the parameters presented in the monitoring plan against the requirements of the methodology and no deviations relevant for the project activity have been found in the plan. The monitoring procedures have been reviewed by the assessment team through document review and interviews with the relevant personnel. All parameters that are deemed necessary for the estimation of emission reductions have been included in the VPoA-DD and VPA-DD. The parameters to be monitored as indicated in the GS passports to further confirm that the project is contributing positively to sustainable development are as follows: - Air quality will be monitored by number of solar systems sold replacing kerosene lamps. - Water quality and quantity will be monitored by checking batteries prior to installation whether they are sealed. Besides, the collection of old batteries for recycling will be monitored to avoid water pollution. 3 WOREDA is the Ethiopian equivalent of a county

20 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 19 of 20 - Soil condition will be monitored by checking batteries prior to installation whether they are sealed. Besides, the collection of old batteries for recycling will be monitored to avoid water pollution. - Quality of employment will be monitored by payrolls and certificates/training reports which show how many people with technical (solar) skills are working in the project activity. - Livelihood of the Poor will be monitored by number of solar systems installed replacing kerosene lamps. - Access to affordable and clean energy services will be monitored by number of solar systems installed in rural households and replacing kerosene lamps. - Human and institutional capacity will be monitored by number of solar systems installed replacing kerosene lamps. - Quantitative employment and income generation will be monitored by number of employees working for the project activity and payrolls. - Technology transfer and technological self-reliance will be monitored by number of workshops and training courses. TÜV SÜD confirms that the PP will be able to monitor the above parameters and implement the sustainability monitoring plan. Hence, the project complies with the GS requirements.

21 Gold Standard VPoA Validation of the Project: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Page 20 of 20 4 VALIDATION OPINION TÜV SÜD has performed a validation of the following proposed GS VPoA: Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Standard auditing techniques have been used for the validation of the project. A Gold Standard specific protocol has been prepared to conduct the audit in a transparent and comprehensive manner. In summary, it is TÜV SÜD s opinion that the project Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA as described in the VPoA-DD, VPA-DD (specific case and generic form), GS passports, meets all relevant Gold Standard version 2.1 requirements for VPoA. The project complies with GS requirements and additionally meets all relevant host country criteria and correctly applies the baseline and monitoring methodology AMS I.A, version 14, titled Electricity generation by the user. The validation is based on the information made available to TÜV SÜD, as well as the engagement conditions detailed in this report. The validation has been performed following the VVM and GS requirements. The single purpose of this report is its use during the registration process as part of the GS VER project cycle. The review of the GS and VPoA design documentation, subsequent follow-up interviews, and further verification of references have provided TÜV SÜD with sufficient evidence to determine the fulfilment of stated criteria in the protocol. In the opinion of TÜV SÜD, the VPoA meets all relevant GS requirements if the underlying assumptions do not change. TÜV SÜD recommends the GS VPoA project for registration by the GS-TAC. Munich, Munich, Thomas Kleiser Certification Body climate and energy TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH Katrin Hartmann Assessment Team Leader

22 Gold Standard Validation of the Project Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Annex 1: Gold Standard Validation Protocol

23 Pages: 1 Table 1: Conformity with Project activity and GS-Passports (VPoA and VPA) Note: The following comments including Nonconformities (Corrective Action Requests/Clarification Requests) refer to both VPoA passport and VPA passport, unless it is explicitly stated that it refers only to VPoA or VPA. CHECKLIST TOPIC / QUESTION Ref. COMMENTS A. Project Title - Toolkit 1.6 A.1.1. Is project title in the Passport the same as in the PDD? A.1.2. Does the project Passport comply with the Passport template published by GS? B. Project Description - Toolkit 1.6 B.1.1. Is the project description consistent with the non-technical sum- 6 Yes, the project title Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia in GS passport (VPoA) is the same as in the VPoA-DD. Yes, the project title Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia Phase I in GS passport (VPA) is the same as in the VPA-DD, however Clarification Request No.1 The project title in VPoA-DD ( Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia ) is not consistent with the title mentioned on GS website Rural Solar Lighting PoA in Ethiopia ) and the project title in VPA-DD ( Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia Phase I ) is not consistent with the title mentioned on GS website ( Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPA 1 ). PPs are requested to clarify. 6 Corrective Action Request No.1 The passports use template, version 2.0. This is not in accordance with the most recent template published by GS (version 2.1.). Templates have to be updated and confirmation of uploading of the passports to GS website has to be submitted to the validation team. 6,63 The project description in the passports is consistent with the nontechnical summary (presented to stakeholders) and the summary in section A of the VPoA-DD and VPA respectively, except the Passport in GSP CR CAR CAR Final Passport Page GS-1

24 Pages: 2 mary which has been presented to the stakeholders and consistent with the project summary in section A of the VPoA-DD? items raised in the following CAR. Corrective Action Request No.2 The project description in the VPoA passport and non-technical summary in the stakeholder report state that the target is to sell over 300,000 solar home (lighting) systems by 2019, however the description in the VPoA-DD mentions that the target is to sell over 450,000 systems by Consistent information has to be provided. C. Proof of Project Eligibility C.1. Scale of the Project - Toolkit C.1.1. Has the right project size and the right project type been selected? Does the project proponent has a written statement (e.g. in the VPoA-DD) against debundling of the project? De-bundling of small- and large-scale projects to create micro-scale projects is not allowed. C.2. Host Country - Toolkit C.2.1. CDM/JI: Is the host country an eligible state according to UNFCCC for CDM/JI? 6,115 Yes, the project size (small scale) and type (voluntary PoA) has been indicated which is correct. The VPoA-DD does not mention anything so far about debundling. De-bundling is not an issue (as per EB 54, Annex 13, paragraph 10), as long as none of the subsystems included in a VPA of the VPoA is larger than 1% of 15 MW (SSC threshold). This will be by far not the case for none of the VPAs however has to (nevertheless) be included as eligibility criterion into the VPoA- DD. See CAR in A of the validation protocol (VPoA-DD). Section of A.4.6. of the VPA-DD has to be revised, see CAR in A of the validation protocol (VPA). 6 Yes, the host country Ethiopia is an eligible country according to UNFCCC for CDM/VER. There is no cap & trade scheme in Ethiopia. See CAR CAR Page GS-2

25 Pages: 3 Or VER: If there is an applicable cap & trade scheme in the project s host country, has an arrangement been made to cancel allowances (as back up for issued GS VER credits) in the applicable cap & trade scheme? C.3. Project Type - Toolkit 1.2.3, 1.2.4, and Annex C C.3.1. Is the project activity listed in Annex C of the toolkit and hence eligible for the Gold Standard? C.3.2. Have the specific project type eligibility criteria been addressed? Corrective Action Request No.3 Information is missing in the passports that Ethiopia is also eligible for VER projects. 2,6 Yes, the project activity (solar home (lighting) systems) is listed in Annex C (within Improved distributed heating and cooking devices and distributed micro-scale electricity generation units (e.g. micro-hydro and PV for households ) of the toolkit and is eligible for the Gold Standard 2,6 The passports refer to the inclusion criteria for individual project activities (VPAs) mentioned in the VPoA-DD. Corrective Action Request No.4 1) The reference to the eligibility criteria has to be corrected to chapter A of the VPoA-DD (instead of A.4.4.2). 2) PPs are requested to provide a clear description of the transfer of credits ownership all along the investment chain and with proof that end-users are aware of and willing to give up their rights on emission reductions (as per GS eligibility criteria, page 18, Toolkit, Annexes A-N) 3) The wording in eligibility of your project activity is not appropriate. CAR See CAR Page GS-3

26 Pages: 4 C.3.3. Is it ensured that the project does not receive ODA under the condition that the credits coming out of the project are transferred to the donor country? C.3.4. Has the project been previously announced and is there a statement available? C.4. GHG - Toolkit C.4.1. Does the project reduce an applicable GHG? C.5. Project Registration Type - Toolkit 1.2.6, C.5.1. Does the project apply the correct project cycle (regular vs. prefeasibility assessment)? C.5.2. Is it excluded that double counting occurs with other certification See CAR in A of the validation protocol (VPoA) 6,99 A declaration signed by SEF (CME) has been submitted to the validation team confirming that no financing for the project has come from or will come from ODA that has been or will be provided under the condition that any or all of the credits issued as a result of the project s operation will be transferred directly or indirectly to the country of origin of the ODA. 6,23 Yes, statement is available that the project has not been previously announced. There was a trial period between January 2009 and August 2010, relying heavily on donor financing, however none of the systems sold during this trial period was applying or will apply for carbon credits. See CARs in A.2.1. (establishing pilot solar centres) and E.5.6. (regarding trial activities in REMA) of the validation protocol (VPoA) requesting an evidence for the donations. See CAR 6 Yes, project reduces CO 2 an applicable GHG, which is indicated. 6,52 Yes, the project correctly applies the regular project cycle as Local Stakeholder Consultation has been conducted as per GS requirements before the start of implementation. 6 Yes, the system to avoid double counting has been indicated in VPoA-DD and VPA-DD. Unique system numbers will be recorded to avoid double counting. However, see CAR in A of the Page GS-4

27 Pages: 5 schemes? validation protocol (VPoA) D. Unique Project Identification D.1. GPS-coordinates of Project Location - Toolkit 1.6 D D.1.1. Are the exact GPS coordinates of the project location for point source activities and the boundaries for projects spread over a broader area stated? D.1.2. For Programme of Activity projects, is the reasoning behind the definition of the project location and coordinates carefully explained? D.2. Map - Toolkit 1.6 D D.2.1. Are the coordinates illustrated with a map, i.e. E. Outcome of Local Stakeholder Consultation Process 6 Corrective Action Request No.5 Regarding VPoA passport: PPs are requested to specify the GPS coordinates extent of Ethiopia as the project covers the entire region. Regarding VPA passport: See CR and CAR in A of the validation protocol (VPA) 6 It is explained in the passport that VPAs will be situated throughout rural Ethiopia. However see CAR in D A map of Ethiopia is indicated; however the coordinates of Ethiopia are missing. See CAR in D.1.1. E.1. Assessment of Stakeholder Comments Toolkit 1.7, Annex Q, (Local Stakeholder consultation report) E.1.1. Does the report on the stakeholder consultation meeting follow the 6,52 Yes the report on the stakeholder consultation meeting follows the template presented on GS webpage. CAR See CAR/CR See CAR See CAR Page GS-5

28 Pages: 6 template which is presented on the GS webpage? E.1.2. Has the report been uploaded separately? E.1.3. Is the non-technical summary provided in the local language? E.1.4. Have local officials and local NGOs, including GS NGOs supports been invited and how? E.1.5. Has a copy of the invitation been provided? E.1.6. Has the tracking invitations template been used? E.1.7. Have DNA/DFP been notified at the same time as inviting stakeholders for the local stake- 6,52,110 Yes. 6,52,63 The non-technical summary is included in the Local Stakeholder Consultation report, however Clarification Request No.2 It has to be clarified whether the non-technical summary has been provided in the local language when invitations were sent to stakeholders. Respective evidence has to be submitted. CR 6,52,54,55 Yes, on VPoA level local officials and policy makers, local people, local NGOs and NGOs supporting the GS have been invited CAR through word of mouth, mail, fax and . On VPA level county administrators, district chair persons and local people were invited. However, see CR in D.2.1. of the validation protocol (VPA) Corrective Action Request No.6 It has to be further elaborated in the documents (VPoA-DD, VPA- DD and passports) how the word of mouth invitations looked like. 6,52,54,55 Yes, the copy of the invitation letters has been provided in the LSC Report. The objective of the consultation is explained and it is mentioned that for those people who cannot personally attend the meeting, comments are also welcomed via , Phone and Fax. 6,52 Yes. 6,52 The Local Stakeholder Consultation Report mentions that a representative from the DNA (Environmental Protection Authority (EPA)) has been invited. Clarification Request No.3 CR Page GS-6

29 Pages: 7 holder consultation meeting? E.1.8. About the stakeholder consultation meeting itself: - was the agenda appropriate? - participation list provided? E.1.9. Follow-up after the meeting: 1. evaluation of the comments 2. actions for negative comments 3. minutes of meeting 4. have comments been taken into account for development of the project 5. finalize SD-Matrix (still negative comments)? 6. upload of the report within one month after the meeting The document supporting the notification to DNA regarding stakeholder consultation has to be submitted. 6,52,59,60 Yes, the agenda was appropriate and the list of participants is provided. The 1 st VPA is considered a regular VPA, as the Local Stakeholder Consultation has been conducted as per GS requirements before the start of implementation. 6,32,52 Minutes of meeting, assessment and evaluation of comments are indicated in the Local Stakeholder Consultation Report (both VPoA and VPA level). The SD assessment was not being revised (revisited) once the huge majority of indicator evaluations were at least neutral or positive. As there were already many feedbacks from end users and local authorities during the pilot phase, all major comments received during the LSC were already considered before. All indicators were scored minimum 95% neutral or positive (7 out of the 12 indicators even with more than 98%), only one indicator other pollutants was scored with less than 95% (namely 92.2% because of the usage of GEL lead acid batteries). Regarding the batteries, there is an effective mitigation measure in place to avoid negative impacts. Since GEL batteries are not easily accessible in the market, the user has to come to a solar center to replace his battery. He will get only a new battery in exchange of an old one. Besides, the used GEL batteries are completely sealed and thus leak-proof and maintenance free. CAR Clarification Request No.4 Page GS-7

30 Pages: 8 PPs are requested to provide evidence that Local Stakeholder Consultation Report was uploaded one month after the meeting. The GS screenshot submitted to the validation team so far refers to the LSC Report (at VPA level) however not to the one at VPoA level. E.2. Local Stakeholder Feedback Round - Toolkit 2.11 E.2.1. Has the documentation listed below been made publicly available for a period of two month prior to completion of the validation in a readily accessible form including: - The latest version of the complete VPoA-DD, VPA- DD, LSC report and GS Passport (including the EIA, if applicable); - A non-technical summary of the project (in appropriate local language(s)); - All relevant supporting information (if available, in appropriate local language(s)); - Have any requests for translated information into local language been raised? And if so, were the translated documents pro- 6 Clarification Request No.5 Clarifying information about the Local Stakeholder Feedback Round (LSFR) has to be provided to the validation team, amongst others 1) whether/when LSFR has been done/will be done both on VPoA and VPA level; 2) whether/when respective stakeholder feedback report (on VPA level) where uploaded to GS; 3) why 2 LSC feedback reports (on VPoA level) are uploaded on GS even though feedback round is intended to be done during onsite visit; 4) how it is ensured that documentation (VPoA-DD, VPA-DD, LSC Report, GS Passport) is made publicly available for a period of two month prior to completion of the validation; 5) is there any other supporting documentation (besides VPoA- DD, VPA-DD, LSC Report, GS Passport) available for the LSC feedback round? 6) how it is ensured that the necessary documentation for the LSC feedback is publicly available for stakeholders not having access to the internet? Corrective Action Request No.7 Chapter E.2. (in both passports) regarding stakeholder feedback CR CAR Page GS-8

31 Pages: 9 vided? round has to be updated. Amongst others the following information has to be provided: - A description of the procedure followed to invite comments, including addressing all the details of the oral hearing such as place, date, participants, language, local or national Gold Standard NGO supporters, etc. - All written or oral comments received - The argumentation on whether or not comments are taken into account and the respective changes to the project design? E.2.2. Have all the stakeholders who participated in the Local Stakeholder Consultation been invited for the feedback round? E.2.3. Has a physical meeting been per-formed as Stakeholder Feedback Round or any other, e.g. by telephone? The site visit is mandatory for retroactive projects! E.2.6 Does the final passport include the report of the Stakeholder 6,56,57 Invitation letters sent to different stakeholders for the Second Round Local Stakeholder Consultation (Feedback Round) both at VPoA and VPA level have been presented to the validation team during the on-site visit. Clarification Request No.6 PPs are requested to show/evidence by submitting supporting documentation that stakeholders who were invited for the Local Stakeholder Consultation (both at VPoA and VPA level) were invited for the feedback round as well. 6 See CR in E.2.1. See CR 6 See CAR in E.2.1. See CAR CR Page GS-9

32 Pages: 10 Feedback Round, taking into account: - A description of the procedure followed to invite comments, including addressing all the details of the oral hearing such as place, date, participants, language, local or national Gold Standard NGO supporters, etc. - All written or oral comments received - The argumentation on whether or not comments are taken into account and the respective changes to the project design? F. Outcome Sustainability Assessment F.1. Do no harm assessment - Toolkit and Annex H F.1.1. Has a Do no harm assessment been carried out? Has the do no harm assessment table 2.7 been included to the project passport? 6 Yes, it is included. Clarification Request No.7 PPs are requested still to clarify whether Do No harm assessment will be conducted at VPA level as required by Annex F of GS Rules and Guidance. If not PPs are requested to provide convincing argumentation as to why this is not required for the particular PoA. CR Page GS-10

33 Pages: 11 Have following safeguarding principals been assessed concerning relevance to and risk of the project? F.1.2. Human Rights: Does the project respects internationally proclaimed human rights including dignity, cultural property and uniqueness of indigenous people? Is the project involved in involuntary resettlements? Is the project involved in alteration, damage or removal of any cultural heritage? 6,11,65,79 Yes, all relevant items have been assessed by IRL 6,11,65,79 and there is low risk of breaching human rights due to the project activity. Clarification Request No.8 PPs are requested to clarify in the passport whether Ethiopia has ratified the relevant conventions on human rights? CR F.1.3. Labour standards: Does the project respect the employees freedom of association and their right to collective bargaining and is the project not complicit in restrictions of these freedoms and rights? Is the project involved in any form of forced or compulsory labour? Is the project involved in any form of child labour? Is the project involved in 79 Yes, all relevant items have been assessed by IRL 79 and there is low risk of breaching labour standards due to the project activity. Ethiopia has ratified ILO conventions 87 (freedom of association), 98 (right to collective bargaining), 29 (forced labour convention) and 105 (abolition of forced labour convention), 138 (minimum age convention) and 182 (worst forms of child labour convention), 100 (equal remuneration convention) and 111 (discrimination (employment and occupation)). CR Clarification Request No.9 PPs are requested to provide supporting documentation that SEF does not employ and is not complicit in any form of child labour or compulsory or forced labour. Besides, supporting documentation has to be provided for the statement that managers are encour- Page GS-11

34 Pages: 12 any form of discrimination based on gender, race, religion, sexual orientation or any other basis? Does the project provide workers a safe and healthy work environment? F.1.4. Environmental protection: Does the project takes a precautionary approach in regard to environmental challenges and is it not complicity in practices contrary to the precautionary principle? Is the project involved in significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats, including those that are (a) legally protected, (b) officially proposed for protection, (c) identified by authoritative sources for their high conservation value or (d) recognised as protected by traditional communities? aged to hire female staff and consistently promote gender equity within all hiring and promotion decisions. 6,11 Yes, all relevant items have been assessed and according to the passport there is low risk of breaching environmental protection due to the project activity. Corrective Action Request No.8 1) The disposal of batteries might be a risk for the environment, thus the risk assessment has to rather result in medium than in low or it has to be justified why low risk is appropriate. Mitigation measures have to be indicated. 2) The disposal of solar panels at the end of the life cycle might be a risk for the environment. Respective risk assessment has to be carried out and disposal of solar panels has to be possibly considered in the SD Matrix. F.1.5. Anti-Corruption: 6,65,77,80,91 The risk of the item Anti-corruption has been assessed as me- CAR CAR Page GS-12

35 Pages: 13 Is the project involved or complicit in corruption? F.1.6. Mitigation measures? Have the appropriate mitigation measures been identified? dium according to the ranking of Ethiopia in the Global Corruption Barometer. However, mitigation measures have been indicated: Any employee which is involved in corruption suffers a working contract termination. Corrective Action Request No.9 Clarity has to be provided why not a more recent data source (the indicated corruption barometer is from 2007) has been used. Clarification Request No.10 1) PPs are requested to clarify in the passport whether Ethiopia has ratified the UN Convention against corruption and the OECD Convention on combating bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions? 2) Supporting documentation/evidence for the statement that the labour contracts contain an article stating that corruption is punishable by contract termination has to be submitted. 6 Yes for anti-corruption, however see CAR in F See CAR F.2. Sustainable Development assessment - Toolkit and Toolkit Annex I F.2.1. Have clear benefits in terms of SD been demonstrated? - Local/global environment sustainability - Social sustainability and development - Economic and techno- 6 Yes, the benefits of the project activity in terms of SD have been demonstrated. CR Page GS-13

36 Pages: 14 logical development F.2.2. Have each of the 12 indicators been scored negative, positive or neutral in comparison with the baseline situation? The project s performance must be assessed using the following scoring system (-, 0, +): - : Negative impacts, in case negative impact is not fully mitigated. i.e. where there is damage to ecological, social and/or economic systems that cannot be mitigated through preventive (not remedial) measures. 0 : in case impact is planned to be fully mitigated. 0 : no change in impacts + : positive impact 6 Yes, each of the 12 indicators (air quality, water quality and quantity, soil condition, other pollutants, biodiversity, quality of employment, livelihood of the poor, access to affordable and clean energy services, human and institutional capacity, quantitative employment and income generation, balance of payments and investment, technology transfer and technological self-reliance) has been scored. There is no negative impact. F.2.3. Has the Sustainable Development Matrix been included to the document? 6 Yes, however see the following CAR. Corrective Action Request No.10 The references to MDG in the LSC Report are different to the passport and for some indicators in the LSC Report reference to MDG is given whereas in the passport not. PPs are requested to provide consistent information. Page GS-14

37 Pages: 15 Have the following indicators been included to the passport? F.2.4. Air quality Has an appropriate mitigation measure been identified? Has the relation of the indicator to MDG been described? Has a relevant parameter for the indicator been identified? Has a preliminary score been identified? Are justification choices mentioned? Have data sources been mentioned? Have references been provided in a sufficient degree of detail and transparency? (Sources: existing reports, results from stakeholder consultations, experiences with similar projects, independent opinions and expert judgements) 6,11,81 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure NA relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator Yes preliminary score Yes justification choices Yes data source Yes provision of references Yes During the on-site field visits, the validation team could see that the kerosene lamps used indoors can cause diseases, like respiratory problems and others due to noxious gases. Solar lighting systems however do not cause such gases and thus improve the air quality. Indoor air pollution due to kerosene lamps is further supported by the document WHO, Addressing the Links between Indoor Air Pollution, Household Energy and Human Health, Clarification Request No.11 PPs are requested to provide supporting documentation (relevant pages) for indoor air pollution of kerosene lamps: -Schare S. and K.R. Smith, Particulate emission rates of simple kerosene lamps, Energy for Sustainable Development, Volume 2 - Developing Countries: A Major Environmental and Public Health Challenge. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. Vol. 78 (9): F.2.5. Water quality and 6 Data checklist yes/no CR CR Page GS-15

38 Pages: 16 quantity mitigation measure Yes relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator Yes preliminary score Yes justification choices Yes data source No provision of references No Clarification Request No.12 PPs are requested to provide an evidence (reference) that batteries are sealed and leak proof. See CAR in F.1.4. See CAR F.2.6. Soil condition 6 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure Yes relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator Yes preliminary score Yes justification choices Yes data source No provision of references No See CR in F.2.5. and CAR in F.1.4. See CR and CAR F.2.7. Other pollutants 6 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure NA relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator NA preliminary score Yes Page GS-16

39 Pages: 17 justification choices NA data source NA provision of references NA F.2.8. Biodiversity 6 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure NA relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator NA preliminary score Yes justification choices NA data source NA provision of references NA F.2.9. Quality of employment mitigation measure NA 6 Data checklist yes/no relation of indicator to MDG Yes parameter for indicator Yes preliminary score Yes justification choices Yes data source No provision of references No F poor Livelihood of the Clarification Request No.13 PPs are requested to provide relevant supporting information for the quality of employment, like e.g. training certificates, workshops, seminars, capacity building activities, payrolls, evidence of the existence of the International Solar Energy School. 6,11 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure NA CR CAR Page GS-17

40 Pages: 18 relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator Yes preliminary score Yes justification choices Yes data source Yes provision of references Yes During the on-site field visits, the validation team could see that the kerosene lamps used indoors can cause illnesses, like respiratory problems and others due to noxious gases. Solar lighting systems however do not cause such gases and thus improve the livelihood of poor people. Clarification Request No.14 PPs are requested to clarify why improved health outcomes for poor residents through kerosene replacement is indicated as mitigation measure. Mitigation measure makes only sense if it is for neutralising a score of - or if is indicated as mitigation measure in the do no harm table and is copied into the SD matrix. F Access to affordable and clean energy services 6 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure NA relation of indicator to MDG Yes parameter for indicator Yes preliminary score Yes justification choices Yes data source NA provision of references NA Clarification Request No.15 CR Page GS-18

41 Pages: 19 1) PPs are requested to submit documentary evidences for the private partnerships to improve the access to clean energy. 2) PPs are requested to provide supporting documentation that kerosene consumed in Ethiopia is 100% imported. F Human and institutional capacity 6,11 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure NA relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator Yes preliminary score Yes justification choices Yes data source NA provision of references NA It could be confirmed during the on-site field visits of households already using the solar lighting systems that children are able to study in the evening hours and adults can work in the evening (like in restaurants, small shops, other indoor activities like handcraft) thus increasing local income. F Quantitative employment and income generation 6 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure NA relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator Yes preliminary score Yes justification choices Yes data source No provision of references No Clarification Request No.16 CR Page GS-19

42 Pages: 20 It is argued that all jobs involve different skills and qualifications. PPs are requested to support this argument with evidence like e.g. job descriptions, training certificates, workshops, seminars, capacity building activities, working contracts etc. Besides, the quantity of jobs created has to be supported by evidence like e.g. payroll, list of employed people etc. F Balance of payments and investments 6 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure NA relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator preliminary score justification choices data source provision of references See CR in F NA Yes Yes NA Yes See CR F Technology transfer and technological selfreliance 6 Data checklist yes/no mitigation measure NA relation of indicator to MDG NA parameter for indicator Yes preliminary score Yes justification choices Yes See CR Page GS-20

43 Pages: 21 data source Yes provision of references No See CR in F.2.9 F Public Consultation: (Section C, Stakeholder Consultation Report) Check if the SD indicators were discussed during the stakeholder consultations? Have the results of the blind SD exercise with the stakeholders been included in the consolidated SD matrix? 6 Yes, the SD indicators were discussed during the stakeholder consultations and the results of the blind SD exercise with the stakeholders has been included in the consolidated SD matrix F Matrix: Scoring Requirements: - Each of the components must have a sub-total score that is non-negative - The total score must be positive F Matrix: Crucial SD indicators: Those indicators that are either crucial for an overall positive impact on SD or particularly sensitive to changes in the framework 6 Required criteria are fulfilled. SD indicators have positive or neutral scores (none of them has a negative scoring) and the total score is positive. 6 Yes, indicated. Those marked with an asterisk (*) will be monitored in the sustainable monitoring plan. Page GS-21

44 Pages: 22 conditions and/or where the public consultation (see Ch ) has yielded concerns of stakeholders must be: - Marked with an asterisk (*) F EIA: Does the project activity conform to the host country (local, regional, national) requirements concerning an EIA? 6 See CR in C.1.1. of the validation protocol (VPoA) See CR G. Sustainability Monitoring Plan Toolkit and Annex I - Not for voluntary projects/programs! G.1.1. Has a sustainability monitoring plan according to the table 1.5, Annex I been used for each indicator to monitor? 6 Yes. Have all non-neutral parameters, as well as all mitigation measures from the SD assessment been included into the document? G.1.2. Air quality If the indicator is not included, is justification given? 6 Data checklist yes/no No. Yes Indicator Yes Page GS-22

45 Pages: 23 Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter Yes Current situation of parameter No Estimation of baseline situation of parameter Yes Future project target for parameter No How Yes Monitoring When Yes By who yes Corrective Action Request No.11 Regarding the monitoring of parameter Air quality : 1) Current Situation of parameter has to be updated: Project started in August 2010, thus there were already sales of solar home (lighting) systems apart from the pilot phase 2) The number of future target (VPoA passport) is not consistent with the figure indicated in other parts of the passport, LSC Report and VPoA-DD. 3) The number of future target (VPA passport) has to be VPA specific and not on VPoA level (also relevant for the indicators quality of employment, livelihood of the poor, Access to affordable and clean energy services, Human and institutional capacity, Quantitative employment and training, Technology transfer and technological self-reliance ). G.1.3. Water quality and quantity If the indicator is not included, is justification given? 6 Data checklist yes/no No. Yes Indicator Yes Mitigation measure Yes Chosen parameter Yes Current situation of parameter No See CAR Page GS-23

46 Pages: 24 G.1.4. Soil condition If the indicator is not included, is justification given? Estimation of baseline situation of parameter Yes Future project target for parameter yes How Yes Monitoring When Yes By who yes See CAR (item 1) in G Data checklist yes/no No. Yes Indicator Yes Mitigation measure Yes Chosen parameter Yes Current situation of parameter No Estimation of baseline situation of parameter Yes Future project target for parameter yes How Yes Monitoring When Yes By who yes See CAR (item 1) in G.1.2. See CAR Page GS-24

47 Pages: 25 G.1.5. Other pollutants If the indicator is not included, is justification given? G.1.6. Biodiversity If the indicator is not included, is justification given? G.1.7. Quality of employment If the indicator is not in- 6 Data checklist yes/no No. NA Indicator NA Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter NA Current situation of parameter NA Estimation of baseline situation of parameter NA Future project target for parameter NA How NA Monitoring When NA By who NA Monitoring not necessary, as indicator other pollutants is scored neutral. 6 Data checklist yes/no No. NA Indicator NA Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter NA Current situation of parameter NA Estimation of baseline situation of parameter NA Future project target for parameter NA How NA Monitoring When NA By who NA Monitoring not necessary, as indicator (Biodiversity) is scored neutral. 6 Data checklist yes/no No. Yes Indicator Yes See CAR Page GS-25

48 Pages: 26 cluded, is justification given? Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter Yes Current situation of parameter No Estimation of baseline situation of parameter Yes Future project target for parameter No How Yes Monitoring When Yes By who yes See CAR (item 1 and 3) in G.1.2. G.1.8. Livelihood of the poor If the indicator is not included, is justification given? 6 Data checklist yes/no No. Yes Indicator Yes Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter No Current situation of parameter No Estimation of baseline situation of parameter Yes Future project target for parameter No How Yes Monitoring When Yes By who yes See CAR (item 1 and 3) in G.1.2. Corrective Action Request No.12 Regarding monitoring of livelihood of the poor : 1) The explanation in Future target for parameter is not clear once the chosen parameter is number of systems sold and the future target refers to the solar centers. 2) The chosen parameter is not consistent between section F.2. and section G of the pass- CAR See CAR Page GS-26

49 Pages: 27 port. G.1.9. Access to affordable and clean energy services If the indicator is not included, is justification given? 6 Data checklist yes/no No. Yes Indicator Yes Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter Yes Current situation of parameter No Estimation of baseline situation of parameter Yes Future project target for parameter No How No Monitoring When Yes By who yes See CAR (item 1 and 3) in G.1.2. and CAR in G.1.8. Clarification Request No.17 Regarding the monitoring of the parameter Access to affordable and clean energy services : It is not plausible how the number of local villages with access to solar energy can be determined by the number of operating solar See CAR CR Page GS-27

50 Pages: 28 centers alone. A solar center could provide more or less villages. PPs are requested to clarify. G Human and institutional capacity If the indicator is not included, is justification given? G Quantitative employment and income generation If the indicator is not included, is justification 6 Data checklist yes/no No. Yes Indicator Yes Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter Yes Current situation of parameter Yes Estimation of baseline situation of parameter Yes Future project target for parameter No How Yes Monitoring When Yes By who yes See CAR in G.1.2., item 2 and 3 6 Data checklist yes/no No. Yes Indicator Yes Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter Yes Current situation of parameter Yes See CAR See CAR CR Page GS-28

51 Pages: 29 given? Estimation of baseline situation of parameter Yes Future project target for parameter No How Yes Monitoring When Yes By who yes G Balance of payments and investment If the indicator is not included, is justification given? See CAR in G.1.2., item 3 Clarification Request No.18 Why parameter Quantitative employment and income generation refers in the monitoring plan to training instead of income generation? 6 Data checklist yes/no No. NA Indicator NA Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter NA Current situation of parameter NA Estimation of baseline situation of parameter NA Future project target for parameter NA How NA Monitoring When NA By who NA Monitoring not necessary as parameter is scored neutral. G Technology transfer and technological selfreliance If the indicator is not included, is justification given? 6 Data checklist yes/no No. Yes Indicator Yes Mitigation measure NA Chosen parameter Yes Current situation of parameter Yes See CAR CR Page GS-29

52 Pages: 30 Estimation of baseline situation of parameter Yes Future project target for parameter No How Yes Monitoring When Yes By who yes See CAR in G.1.2., item 2 and 3 Clarification Request No.19 Supporting documentation for technological self- reliance/technology transfer resulting in a positive score has to be submitted. G Is the plan feasible? 6 Yes H. Additionality and Conservativeness Toolkit 2.3, Annex G H.1. Additionality H.1.1. Has the correct tool for the demonstration of additionality been selected and applied by the PP? (Toolkit, Chapter 2.3, Table 2.4 and 2.5, p34) 4,6 Additionality is demonstrated as per the Guidelines for demonstrating additionality of microscale project activities, EB60, Annex 25. Additionality is demonstrated at VPoA level, however an eligibility criterion has been included that total capacity of the solar panels included in each VPA must not exceed 5 MW (as per the Guidelines). Corrective Action Request No.13 Information in chapter H.1. is not plausible since additionality is not determined at VPA level and not by applying the first of its kind barrier but by using the Guidelines for demonstrating additionality of microscale project activities, EB60, Annex 25. An eligibility criterion is missing that indicates that total capacity of the solar panels included in each VPA must not exceed 5 MW (as per the Guidelines). CAR Page GS-30

53 Pages: 31 H.1.2. Is the project additional, using the following guidance: - Identify the main arguments that have been used by the project proponent to demonstrate additionality - Assess the correctness of the line of argumentation - The argumentation shall also be addressed during the interviews with project stakeholders. - References; check that the references used to demonstrate additionality are up-to-date and reliable - Normal practice in the region; check that the project proponent has compared the proposed project activity to normal practice in the region. This is particularly relevant if similar projects have already been implemented on a commercial basis in the region - Conservative assump- 4 NA as additionality is demonstrated as per the Guidelines for demonstrating additionality of microscale project activities, EB60, Annex 25. Page GS-31

54 Pages: 32 tions; check that assumptions (quantitative or qualitative) used to demonstrate additionality are conservative? H.2. Conservativeness Toolkit H.2.1. Can it be confirmed that the baseline has been constructed in a conservative manner? 6,11,14,16 The methodology defines as baseline the fuel consumption of the technology in use or that would have been used in the absence of the project activity to generate the equivalent level of lighting service. The technology that would have been used in the absence of the project activity is determined as a hurricane kerosene lamp (with 45 lumen output according to Evan Mills Technical and Economic Performance Analysis of kerosene lamps and alternative approaches to illumination in developing countries ). This is a conservative approach bearing in mind that according to the lighting Africa survey of 2008 in Ethiopia 69% of households use simple kerosene wick lamps (8 lumen according to Evan Mills Technical and Economic Performance Analysis of kerosene lamps and alternative approaches to illumination in developing countries ) and just 14% use kerosene lamps with glass cover, i.e. the hurricane kerosene lamps. Results from on-site field visits done by the validation team confirmed that Ethiopian rural households use actually only simple kerosene wick lamps, thus to take hurricane kerosene lamps as baseline is very conservative. Besides, 3.5 hours of lighting per day are considered (default value provided in the methodology). Clarification Request No.20 1) Regarding conservativeness, the passports still provides the CR CAR Page GS-32

55 Pages: 33 Annex 1 ODA Declaration Toolkit 1.2.5, Annex D Does the Passport include the declaration of non-use of ODA by the PP and the Financier(s)? argument that lumen equivalent of hurricane kerosene lamps vs. LED is the most conservative assumption. Other indicators like LUX would lead to much higher number of kerosene lamps which would be needed to achieve the same brightness as SEF LEDs. PPs are requested to provide supporting documentation for this argument (amongst others the document cited on footnote 2). 2) Even though during the on-site field visits most of the households responded to use the kerosene lamps for more than 3.5 hours per day, some supporting documentation has to be submitted to confirm that it is justified to include it in chapter H.2. (Conservativeness) of the VPoA passport (otherwise it has to be taken out). The Lighting Africa Market Assessment Results e.g. states that the average number of hours lights are on is approximately 3-4 hours. Corrective Action Request No.14 Chapter H.2. (Conservativeness) mentions See PDD for further details on conservativeness of ER assumptions, however those further details are not mentioned in the passports which demonstrate the conservativeness of ER assumptions. 6,99 It is confirmed by a signed commitment from SEF that any kind of ODA received in the past or in the future will not be provided under the condition that the credits generated by the project activity will be transferred, either directly or indirectly, to the donor country providing ODA support. This is in line with the GS requirements. The passports provide information that ODA is not dependent on the transfer of credits to the ODA provider, in line with GS rules. Clarification Request No.21 Annex 1 of the passports mentions that Solar Energy Foundation does receive some Overseas Development Aid. This is not con- CR See CR Page GS-33

56 Pages: 34 sistent with what is stated in the VPO-DD (and also VPA-DD), namely that VPoA does not currently use public funding directly for the project. PPs are requested to provide consistent information. See CR in A of the validation protocol (VPA) Page GS-34

57 Pages: 35 Table 2 Resolution of Corrective Action and Clarification Requests Clarifications and corrective action requests by validation team Corrective Action Request No.1. The passports use template, version 2.0. This is not in accordance with the most recent template published by GS (version 2.1.). Templates have to be updated and confirmation of uploading of the passports to GS website has to be submitted to the validation team. Ref. To table 1 A.1.2. Summary of programme activity implementer s response Both passports now use the latest template version (2.1). Both passports have been uploaded. Please accept screenshot (1) and (2) of the passports (VPA and VPoA) on the GS website as evidence for the upload. Validation team Conclusion Passports use the latest template version now. Print-screens of uploading of the 2 passports (VPoA and VPA) have been submitted (IRL 110). CAR is closed. Corrective Action Request No.2. The project description in the VPoA passport and non-technical summary in the stakeholder report state that the target is to sell over 300,000 solar home (lighting) systems by 2019, however the description in the VPoA-DD mentions that the target is to sell over 450,000 systems by Consistent information has to be provided. B.1.1. The estimation in the VPoA- DD has been revised to 300,000 systems. The estimation had to be further revised to 200, 000 due to a new sales forecast. Further PP response: Supporting documentation has been submitted substantiating the estimation of total number of solar systems to be sold by The estimation in the VPoA-DD has been finally revised to about 200,000 systems to reflect the most recent sales forecast. Even though this figure is lower than the one stated in VPoA passport and non-technical summary in the stakeholder report (300,000 systems), it deems to better reflect the reality and most recent developments regarding the programme. Further DOE Request: However, no supporting documentation has been provided Page GS-35

58 Pages: 36 Corrective Action Request No.3. Information is missing in the passports that Ethiopia is also eligible for VER projects. so far which substantiates the dissemination of about 200,000 solar lighting systems for the PoA by Final conclusion: An additional excel spreadsheet (IRL 109) has been submitted to the DOE which transparently demonstrates the dissemination of about 200,000 solar lighting systems for the PoA by The PoA anticipates to add 14 more Solar Centers (SC) by Given that each SC continues to sell around 1,000 systems, the total number of systems sold by 2020 would amount to about 200,000 systems. The DOE checked the excel file and concludes that the assumptions and calculation are plausible. CAR is closed. C.2.1. Both passports have been revised accordingly. Correction has been carried out as requested. CAR is closed. Corrective Action Request No.4. C ) The reference has been changed to A in both 1) Has been corrected as re- Page GS-36

59 Pages: 37 1) The reference to the eligibility criteria has to be corrected to chapter A of the VPoA-DD (instead of A.4.4.2). 2) PPs are requested to provide a clear description of the transfer of credits ownership all along the investment chain and with proof that end-users are aware of and willing to give up their rights on emission reductions (as per GS eligibility criteria, page 18, Toolkit, Annexes A-N) 3) The wording in eligibility of your project activity is not appropriate. passports. 2) A clear description has been provided in both passports 3) The phrasing has been revised in both passports. quested. 2) A description has been provided in both passports that each buyer (household) transfers the carbon rights to SEF. 3) Wording has been revised to...the substitution of kerosene lamps by photovoltaic panels.... CAR is closed. Corrective Action Request No.5. Regarding VpoA passport: PPs are requested to specify the GPS coordinates extent of Ethiopia as the project covers the entire region. Corrective Action Request No.6. It has to be further elaborated in the documents (VPoA-DD, VPA-DD and passports) how the word of mouth invitations looked like. D.1.1. E.1.4. The coordinates have been included in the VPoA passports. The requested has been further elaborated in all the documentation. The GPS coordinates of Ethiopia have been included in the VPoA passport and are consistent with the VPoA. The coordinates have been crosschecked at the internet ude.com/?loc=kamashi%2c+e thiopia&id=21485 (IRL 85). CAR is closed. It has been clarified now how word of mouth invitations were carried out. District (Woreda) administrators assigned one focal person and together with 2 inspectors from Page GS-37

60 Pages: 38 Corrective Action Request No.7. Chapter E.2. (in both passports) regarding stakeholder feedback round has to be updated. Amongst others the following information has to be provided: - A description of the procedure followed to invite comments, including addressing all the details of the oral hearing such as place, date, participants, language, local or national Gold Standard NGO supporters, etc. - All written or oral comments received - The argumentation on whether or not comments are taken into account and the respective changes to the project design? E.2.1. Section has been revised for the VPA passport. Further PPs response: 1. The paragraph was revised to include the requested information. The paragraph now states: A Local Stakeholder Feedback Round (LSFR) meeting was held in Bokaso on 24 th June 2011 Before the meeting took place, invitation letters, in English language, were sent out via post along with the LSC report including the Sustainable Development Assessment Matrix, both in English as well as in the national language Amharic. SEF invited both policy makers of the Woreda and direct beneficiaries of Solar Home System whereby for their acknowledgement, invitees were requested to sign on the invitation letter. The meeting was conducted in Amharic and Sidamigna, the local language. The comments did not trigger any change in the project design. SEF they disseminated the letter with explanation of content and intention to the invitees. CAR is closed. Further DOE Request: 1) Regarding LSFR on VPA level: PPs are requested to provide more detailed information which kind of copies to the participants were sent to local officials and explain the further meaning of and these explained orally the report to other participants. Further it has to be clarified which stakeholders exactly were invited by telephone to the LSFR and when exactly the LSF meeting took place in Bokaso. Besides, it has to be clarified in which language stakeholders were invited and in which language the meeting took place. Further, information has to be provided whether the comments triggered any changes in the project design. 2) Section E.2. of the passport Page GS-38

61 Pages: 39 Corrective Action Request No.8. 1) The disposal of batteries might be a risk for the environment, thus the risk assessment has to rather result in medium than in low or it has to be justified why low risk is appropriate. Mitigation measures have to be indicated. 2) The disposal of solar panels at the end of the life cycle might be a risk for the environ- F.1.4. The following sentences and these explained orally the report to other participants and were invited by telephone were deleted as they are not relevant (e.g. on SEF staff were invited by telephone.) 2. In the GS PoA passport, Section E.2 has been updated with all necessary information. 1) Both passport were revised to include the table with additional relevant critical issues for my project type copied from the LSC report. The recycling of batteries is indicated as medium risk and mitigation measures are stated. Further PPs response: (VPoA) has to be updated and all relevant information to the LSFR has to be provided. Final conclusion: 1) All requested information has been provided in the revised VPA passport (section E.2.) and sentences which were previously not clear, have been removed. None of the comments triggered any change in the project design. 2) Section E.2. of the passport (VPoA) has been updated and all relevant information regarding the LSFR, carried out on August 15, 2011 has been provided to the DOE and were checked by the DOE (IRL 56,61,70,93,97). CAR is closed. 1. Risk for disposal of batteries has been assessed as medium. Further, mitigation measures have been indicated: For every new battery an old one has to be given back to the Solar Centre. Be- Page GS-39

62 Pages: 40 ment. Respective risk assessment has to be carried out and disposal of solar panels has to be possibly considered in the SD Matrix. Corrective Action Request No.9. Clarity has to be provided why not a more recent data source (the indicated corruption F.1.5. A risk assessment for the disposal of solar panels was carried out. The issue was included in the Do no harm assessment in the table with the heading; Additional relevant critical issues for my project type. Further, the issue was included in the SD Matrix, in both passports. The data source has been updated in both reports. (Corruption barometer from 2010) Please see document 3. Global Corruption Barometer sides, it is very difficult to find the type of batteries used in the project activity in the common market. 2. A risk assessment for the disposal of solar panels at the end of the life cycle has been carried out. As mitigation measure has been indicated that SEF will assure the recycling of the panels by collecting the old panels. Further DOE Request: Why the disposal of solar panels have not been considered in the SD Matrix as requested in the CAR? Final conclusion: Disposal of solar panels has been finally considered in the SD Matrix (both VPoA and VPA passports). CAR is closed. The more recent Global Corruption Barometer 2010 has been submitted to the DOE Page GS-40

63 Pages: 41 barometer is from 2007) has been used (IRL 80). According to this document Ethiopia is not considered one of the most corrupt countries as it is not included in this study. Ethiopia has ratified the UN Convention against corruption on 12 Nov 2008 (IRL 77). Passports have been updated. CAR is closed. Corrective Action Request No.10. The references to MDG in the LSC Report are different to the passport and for some indicators in the LSC Report reference to MDG is given whereas in the passport not. PPs are requested to provide consistent information. F.2.3. Reference to MDGs has been revised to be consistent in the LSC report and the two passports. Consistent information related to reference to MDGs is now provided between LSC report and the 2 passports. CAR is closed. Corrective Action Request No.11. Regarding the monitoring of parameter Air quality : 1) Current Situation of parameter has to be updated: Project started in August 2010, thus there were already sales of solar home (lighting) systems apart from the pilot phase 2) The number of future target (VPoA passport) is not consistent with the figure indicated in other parts of the passport, LSC Report and VPoA-DD. 3) The number of future G ) The parameter has been updated in both documents. 2) All numbers for future target have been revised to the latest estimate of 200,000 systems.(number in LSC report should not be amended retrospectively.) 3) The numbers were revised to be VPA specific Further PPs response: 1. The monitoring plan was corrected for parameters with lds 2,3,5,6,9 (in both passports) 3. Quantitative employment and training now provides for a future target and the future target 2) The future target (VPoA passport) of 200,000 solar lighting systems is now consistent with the figure indicated in other parts of the passport, LSC Report and VPoA-DD. Further DOE Request: 1) Correction has not been carried out yet in the monitoring plan (of both passports) as requested. Provide also correc- Page GS-41

64 Pages: 42 target (VPA passport) has to be VPA specific and not on VPoA level (also relevant for the indicators quality of employment, livelihood of the poor, Access to affordable and clean energy services, Human and institutional capacity, Quantitative employment and training, Technology transfer and technological self-reliance ). of Quality of employment gives a précises reference. Regarding the sales forecast, please refer to document 7 of the supporting documentation. 2 nd Further PP response: Parameter 1 Air quality has been corrected as well, in both passports. tion for parameters with IDs 2,3,5,6,9. 3) The information in future target of the parameters in the monitoring plan is VPA specific now, except: Quantitative employment and training does not provide any future target (VPA passport) yet, in Quality of employment the future target ( 25 employees are proposed to be trained per year and they will increase the overall number of people in the Centers every year ) has to indicate whether it refers to the VPA. Besides, PPs are requested to submit explanation/supporting documentation/justification for the sales forecasts (120,000 solar lighting systems). See Further DOE Request CAR, B.3.1., VPA protocol. 2 nd Further DOE Request: 1) Current situation has been corrected for the parameters 2,3,5,6,9, however for parameter Air quality the current situation has not been updated Page GS-42

65 Pages: 43 Corrective Action Request No.12. Regarding monitoring of livelihood of the poor : 1) The explanation in Future target for parameter is not clear once the chosen parameter is number of systems sold and the future target refers to the solar centers. 2) The chosen parameter is not consistent between section F.2. and section G of the passport. G ) The passports have been revised accordingly 2) As the parameters have been revised in Section G., parameters are now consistent in both sections. Further PPs response: 1. The VPoA-DD passport now mentions a minimum of 25 solar centres as stated in the VPoA- DD yet. 3) It is clear now that it is intended to train 25 employees per year for the VPoA and this will increase the overall number of people in the solar centers available for the VPA every year. Revised sales forecast has been presented to the DOE (IRL 94). The figure of 100,000 solar lighting systems for the 1 st VPA is plausible. Final conclusion: The current situation for the parameter air quality has been corrected and is plausible now. CAR is closed. Further DOE Request: 1) Explanation has been revised, however VPoA-DD passport has to mention a minimum of 25 solar centres as stated in the VPoA-DD (instead of just indicating 25 solar centres). 2) The chosen parameter of livelihood of the poor is not Page GS-43

66 Pages: 44 Corrective Action Request No.13. Information in chapter H.1. is not plausible since additionality is not determined at VPA level and not by applying the first of its kind barrier but by using the Guidelines for demonstrating additionality of microscale project activities, EB60, Annex 25. An eligibility criterion is missing that indicates that total capacity of the solar panels included in each VPA must not exceed 5 MW (as per the Guidelines). H Consistent information has been provided in both sections (F.2. and G) The information has been revised. Further PPs response: The sentence please refer to the VPoA-DD for further details of how these criteria are met as it is no longer relevant and was deleted. consistent yet between F.2. (mentioning tons of replaced kerosene ) and G (indicating number of household systems sold ). PPs are requested to provide consistent information. Final conclusion: 1) It has been corrected to minimum of 25 solar centres in the VPoA passport as requested. 2) Chosen parameter livelihood of the poor is consistent now between section F.2. and section G in the VPoA passport. CAR is closed. Information in chapter H.1. of both passports has been revised as requested. Further DOE Request: Not clear what is meant with the sentence in the VPoA passport please refer to the VPoA-DD for further details of how these criteria are met, once each VPA has to demonstrate the compliance with the eligibility criteria defined at Page GS-44

67 Pages: 45 Corrective Action Request No.14. Chapter H.2. (Conservativeness) mentions See PDD for further details on conservativeness of ER assumptions, however those further details are not mentioned in the passports which demonstrate the conservativeness of ER assumptions. H.2.1. The sentence was deleted from chapter H.2. as the conservativeness is already discussed demonstrating the most convincing aspects. VPoA level. Final conclusion: Sentence has been removed. CAR is closed. Sentence which was unclear was taken out. Arguments for choosing a conservative approach had been already provided before. CAR is closed. Clarification Request No. 1. The project title in VPoA-DD ( Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia ) is not consistent with the title mentioned on GS website Rural Solar Lighting PoA in Ethiopia ) and the project title in VPA-DD ( Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia Phase I ) is not consistent with the title mentioned on GS website ( Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPA 1 ). PPs are requested to clarify. A.1.1. The title on the GS website should be changed to Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia, which is the appropriate title for the VPoA. However, as changes to the GS website regarding title are not possible, the PoA DD has been revised to be consistent with the GS website Further PPs response: The GS-TAC was consulted and the VPoA title on the GS websites was changed to title refered to in the documentation, which is: Solar Lighting in rural Ethiopia VPoA. However, the terminology VPoA had to be added to the original title as to be able to identify the activity as a programme. However, that will not require for a revision of all titles in project documentation. Further DOE Request: The DOE suggests the PPs to consult GS-TAC whether the project title (VPoA) can remain as Solar Lighting in rural Ethiopia as this is the title used throughout all the relevant documents (VPoA-DD, VPA-DD, passports) and supporting documentation (like stakeholder reports etc.) and only the GS website mentions Rural Solar Lighting PoA in Ethiopia. A change of the project title would cause a lots of revision work and would be not consistent to the title indicated in the first documents uploaded Page GS-45

68 Pages: 46 Clarification Request No. 2. It has to be clarified whether the nontechnical summary has been provided in the local language when invitations were sent to stakeholders. Respective evidence has to be submitted. The VPA title remains Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPA 1 as stated on the GS website. The title has consequently been changed in the documentation. The title in the VPA GS passport was revised to Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPA, which is the appropriate title for the VPA. E.1.3. A project summary has been provided within the invitation letter, which was composed in local language, at VPA level. to GS. Final conclusion: The title of the programme is finally to be Solar Lighting in rural Ethiopia VPoA. This is the same as before mentioned in the relevant documents. Only VPoA has been added to identify the activity as a programme. The VPA title is Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPA 1 as stated on the GS website. The documentation is consistent now. CR is closed. According to information provided during the on-site visit, the non-technical summary as presented in the local stakeholder consultation report, has not been sent together with the invitations prior to the meeting. The invitation letter itself contains only a few words about the programme/project, however was sent in local language at VPA level. Nevertheless, during the Page GS-46

69 Pages: 47 stakeholder consultation meetings at VPoA and VPA level both a non-technical and technical summary (IRL 63,66,67) have been presented, at VPA level in local language. Even though the GS procedure was not completely followed, the DOE accepts the same for the 1 st VPA, however a FAR was raised that for future VPAs a non-technical summary in local language has to be already provided when inviting the stakeholders. Forward Action Request No. 1.: It has to be ensured for future VPAs that a non-technical summary report is provided in local language together with the invitation (letter). Clarification Request No. 3. The document supporting the notification to DNA regarding stakeholder consultation has to be submitted. E.1.7. Evidence of the invitation was provided during the onsite visit by the project developer. DNA was notified (invited) to the stakeholder consultation in Addis Abeba (VPoA level) on 31/05/2010. The Notification to Ethiopian DNA regarding stakeholder consultation has been presented to the DOE (IRL 35). Page GS-47

70 Pages: 48 CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 4. PPs are requested to provide evidence that Local Stakeholder Consultation Report was uploaded one month after the meeting. The GS screenshot submitted to the validation team so far refers to the LSC Report (at VPA level) however not to the one at VPoA level. E.1.9. Please see the document 2. Screenshot of VPoA for evidence. Further PPs response: The LSCR for the VPA was not uploaded within one month after the meeting because initially one LSCR, for both, PoA and VPA, was submitted within one month after the LSC meetings, to the GS. myc however was informed by the GS that two separate LSCRs for the PoA and VPA were required. Thus, an additional LSCR for the VPA was devised. It was only in August that myc first received feedback from the GS regarding the issue, which explains the delay. Further DOE Request: Print-screens have been submitted to the DOE (IRL 110). PPs are requested to clarify why LSCR at VPA level was uploaded not within one month after meeting, i.e. on August 13, 2010 and inform whether the reasons were communicated to GS? Final conclusion: Clarification has been provided and GS is informed about it (IRL 90). Thus, it is accepted by the DOE. CR is closed. For evidence please see the threat between the GS and myc, document 3. Clarification Request No. 5. Clarifying information about the Local Stakeholder Feedback Round (LSFR) has to be provided to the validation team, amongst others 1) whether/when LSFR has been done/will be E ) A LSFR meeting on VPA level was held in Bokaso on 24 th June Please see the document 4. LSFR Bokaso for evidence. A LSFR meeting on PoA level was held on 15 th August 2011 in Addis. A LSFR report was devised accordingly and submitted to the DOE. 1. The LSFR reports at VPoA and VPA level have been submitted to the DOE (IRL 53, 93) and were checked by the DOE. LSFR at VPA level took place on Page GS-48

71 Pages: 49 done both on VPoA and VPA level; 2) whether/when respective stakeholder feedback report (on VPA level) where uploaded to GS; 3) why 2 LSC feedback reports (on VPoA level) are uploaded on GS even though feedback round is intended to be done during onsite visit; 4) how it is ensured that documentation (VPoA-DD, VPA-DD, LSC Report, GS Passport) is made publicly available for a period of two month prior to completion of the validation; 5) is there any other supporting documentation (besides VPoA-DD, VPA-DD, LSC Report, GS Passport) available for the LSC feedback round? 6) how it is ensured that the necessary documentation for the LSC feedback is publicly available for stakeholders not having access to the internet? 2) The LSFR report was uploaded on the 15 th August Please see document 1. VPA screenshot for evidence. 3) The LSC feedback reports you are referring to are relating to the feedback from the GS concerning the LSC report. 4) myc will publish the stated documents on their company`s website to make it publicly available at least for a period of two months before the completion of validation. 5) Please see the document 4. LSFR Bokaso for evidence 6) Again, as for the LSC invitation, Woreda officials and SEF were responsible that the letter with explanation of content and intention, along with the LSC report in local language, were disseminated to invitees. Further PP response: The information stated above has been included in the passports. June 24, 2011, at VPoA level on August 15, LSFR (at VPA level) was uploaded on August 15, The print-screen has been submitted to the DOE (IRL 110). 3. o.k clarification has been provided. 4. Clarification has been provided. The documents are made available at: carbon-offsetprojects/internationalprojects/detail/mycproject/105.ht ml 5. LSFR (at VPA level) has been submitted (IRL 53). During onsite visit, the LSFR (at VPoA level) took place in Addis Abeba. Besides invitation letters and participation lists of both LSFR have been submitted to the Page GS-49

72 Pages: 50 Clarification Request No. 6. PPs are requested to show/evidence by submitting supporting documentation that stakeholders who were invited for the Local Stakeholder Consultation (both at VPoA and VPA level) were invited for the feedback round as well. Clarification Request No. 7. PPs are requested still to clarify whether Do No harm assessment will be conducted at VPA level as required by Annex F of GS DOE (IRL 56,57,61,62) and were checked by the DOE. Further DOE Request: 6) PPs are requested to include the information given as answer in the protocol in the passports. Final conclusion: 6) The requested information was included in the passports and checked by the DOE. CR is closed. E.2.2. Please see document 10. for supporting evidence. Even though not all of the stakeholders participating at the LSC have been invited for the feedback round, quite a few of them were invited for both rounds, thus it is accepted by the DOE. Invitation lists for both rounds (at VPoA and VPA level) have been submitted to the DOE (IRL 54,55,56,57) and were checked by the DOE. CR is closed. F.1.1. The Do NO harm assessment will be conducted at VPA level for future VPAs. It has been clarified that the Do NO harm assessment will be conducted at VPA level for future VPAs. Page GS-50

73 Pages: 51 Rules and Guidance. If not PPs are requested to provide convincing argumentation as to why this is not required for the particular PoA. Further PPs response: The VPoA passport now states the Do NO harm assessment will be conducted at VPA level for future VPAs. Further DOE Request: PPs are requested to make that clear in the VPoA passport. Final conclusion: It is clearly stated now in the VPoA passport that the Do NO harm assessment will be carried out at VPA level for future VPAs. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 8. PPs are requested to clarify in the passport whether Ethiopia has ratified the relevant conventions on human rights? F.1.2. The passports have been revised to include: Ethiopia has ratified many UN Human Rights Conventions and thus has made binding international commitments to adhere to the standards laid down in these universal human rights documents. All inhabitants of Ethiopia may turn to the UN Human Rights Committee through procedure 1503, to the Special Rapporteurs for violations of specific human rights or to ECOSOC for women s rights violations. Additional information has been provided in the passports regarding conventions on human rights. It is clarified now that Ethiopia has ratified several UN Human Rights Conventions. Has been cross-checked with ethiopia.html (IRL 79). CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 9. PPs are requested to provide supporting documentation that SEF does not employ and is not complicit in any form of child labour F.1.3. Please see document 9 for supporting evidence. Further, the sentence regarding female hiring was changed to managers are encouraged to hire female staff and consider gender equity within hiring and promotion deci- A declaration (IRL 96) signed by the CME has been submitted to the DOE confirming that SEF will not employ and is not Page GS-51

74 Pages: 52 or compulsory or forced labour. Besides, supporting documentation has to be provided for the statement that managers are encouraged to hire female staff and consistently promote gender equity within all hiring and promotion decisions. sions in all passports. complicit in any form of child labour or compulsory or forced labour. Besides, it is confirmed in the declaration that managers are encouraged to hire female staff and consider gender equity within hiring and promotion decisions. CR is closed. Clarification Request No ) PPs are requested to clarify in the passport whether Ethiopia has ratified the UN Convention against corruption and the OECD Convention on combating bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions? 2) Supporting documentation/evidence for the statement that the labour contracts contain an article stating that corruption is punishable by contract termination has to be submitted. F ) As Ethiopia is not member of the OECD and only The 34 OECD member countries and four non-member countries Argentina, Brazil, Bulgaria, and South Africa have ratified the Convention. Therefore, we believe this is not yet really relevant for LDCs. Nevertheless it has been mention as below: The passports have been revised to include Ethiopia has ratified the UN Convention against 52escription on 12 Nov The OECD Convention on combating bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions have not yet been ratified by LDCs, like Ethiopia _ _1_1_1_1,00.html 2) Please refer to p. 17 of document 4 Personnel Ad- 1) It has been clarified that Ethiopia has ratified the UN convention against corruption (IRL 77). The same was crosschecked with /treaties/cac/signatories.html. Ethiopia has not ratified the OECD Convention on combating bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions. This can be accepted since it is not usual for non OECD countries to sign this Convention. 2) The Personnel Administrative Policy of SEF (IRL 91) has been submitted to the DOE in which it is stated that causes for dismissal without notice are amongst others Page GS-52

75 Pages: 53 ministrative Policy of the supporting documentation. - to delete, forge and altar the records and documents of the Foundation or to use them fraudulently. - Accepting a bribe, enriching oneself unlawfully or committing any act of corruption ; -- Using the materials and equipment s of the Foundation without permission from the appropriate authority. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 11. PPs are requested to provide supporting documentation (relevant pages) for indoor air pollution of kerosene lamps: -Schare S. And K.R. Smith, Particulate emission rates of simple kerosene lamps, Energy for Sustainable Development, Volume 2 Developing Countries: A Major Environmental and Public Health Challenge. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. Vol. 78 (9): F.2.4. Both documents (1 and 2) requested are provided and the relevant sections are highlighted. The requested supporting documentation (IRL 82,83) has been submitted to the DOE and confirms indoor air pollution due to the use of kerosene lamps. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 12. PPs are requested to provide an evidence (reference) that batteries are sealed and leak proof. F.2.5. Please refer to document 5. Gel batteries. Further PPs response: Please see reference in both passports (VPA p. 19 and Battery specifications of the manufacturer (IRL 32) have been submitted to the DOE. The specifications clearly mention that the battery is completely sealed and is, therefore, Page GS-53

76 Pages: 54 PoA p.17) maintenance-free, leak proof and usable in any position. The validation team could get insights during the field visits of households already using solar lighting systems that the batteries are sealed. Further DOE Request: PPs are requested to include the data source/reference in the passports. Final conclusion: The passports refer to the technical specifications data sheet now (IRL 32): Suntransfer, Gel-tech battery, HRL 645. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 13. PPs are requested to provide relevant supporting information for the quality of employment, like e.g. training certificates, workshops, seminars, capacity building activities, payrolls, evidence of the existence of the International Solar Energy School. F.2.9. Further PPs response: All requested and relevant information has been provided during the on-site visit. The evidence is also referred to in the passports. The following evidences have been provided to support the positive score of quality of employment : -List of employees of SEF (IRL 72) -SEF payroll of employee on sample basis (IRL 73) -Certificate of training in Photovoltaic technology provided by SEF to University professors as a part of Capacity Page GS-54

77 Pages: 55 Building program (IRL 74) -Report on the Workshop on Solar technology and microfinance conducted by SEF (IRL 75) -Participation lists of Students Attained in ISEI (International Solar Energy Institute for Rural Development) (IRL 76) -Samples of Certificates of Training for Technicians who completed the Rural Solar Energy Manager program (IRL 30) - Accreditation certificate for International Solar Energy Institute by ANRS TVET Promotion Agency (IRL 38) -Registration request to Ministry of Education for 2 nd International Solar Energy Institute (IRL 36) Besides, interviews have been conducted with technicians and the technical director during the on-site visit (IRL 10) confirming the qualification of the employees of SEF. Further DOE Request: Page GS-55

78 Pages: 56 PPs are requested to include the data source/reference in the passports. Final conclusion: Some of the data sources/references presented to the DOE have been included in the passports. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 14. PPs are requested to clarify why improved health outcomes for poor residents through kerosene replacement is indicated as mitigation measure. Mitigation measure makes only sense if it is for neutralising a score of - or if is indicated as mitigation measure in the do no harm table and is copied into the SD matrix. F Point noted. Therefore, the mitigation measure was deleted from the passports. Revision carried out as requested. CR is closed. Clarification Request No ) PPs are requested to submit documentary evidences for the private partnerships to improve the access to clean energy. 2) PPs are requested to provide supporting documentation that kerosene consumed in Ethiopia is 100% imported. F ) Suntransfer, the technology provider, is a private company owned by the Solar Foundation. Please see website for evidence: 2) Please refer to the following webpages for evidence that Ethiopia is an importer of oil. Further DOE Request: 1) Target 8.F: In cooperation with the private sector, make available benefits of new technologies has to be more transparently evidenced as SUNTRANSFER is a subsidiary company of SEF and this can actually not be considered as cooperation with the private sector. Transparent supporting Page GS-56

79 Pages: 57 rofile.html CIA statistics: 2nd Further DOE Request: 1) Target 8.F. has been changed to Target 7.A, as the target is more applicable to that specific GS indicator. documentation for private partnership has to be submitted. 2) Still open 2 nd Further DOE Request/Conclusion: 1) Further DOE Request (see above) has not been considered so far. 2) The submitted web-links (IRL 111) clearly show that there is no oil production in Ethiopia, thus all oil (kerosene) has to be imported. Final conclusion: Target 8.F. has been changed to Target 7.A. Target 7.A. mentions the following: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss of environmental resources. The same is substantiated by the Host Country Approval Letter by the Ethiopian DNA which mentions that the programme contributes to the sustainable development of Ethiopia. The Host Country Approval Letter (IRL 107) has Page GS-57

80 Pages: 58 been checked by the DOE. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 16. It is argued that all jobs involve different skills and qualifications. PPs are requested to support this argument with evidence like e.g. job descriptions, training certificates, workshops, seminars, capacity building activities, working contracts etc. Besides, the quantity of jobs created has to be supported by evidence like e.g. payroll, list of employed people etc. F The majority of requested information was provided onsite by the developer. Further PPs response: 1. Regarding job descriptions, please see document 5 SEF Job Description of the supporting documentation. 2. The data source has been included in both passports. The following evidences have been provided to support the positive score of Quantitative employment and income generation and support the argument that all jobs involve different skills and qualifications : -List of employees of SEF (IRL 72) -SEF payroll of employee on sample basis (IRL 73) -Certificate of training in Photovoltaic technology provided by SEF to University professors as a part of Capacity Building program (IRL 74) -Report on the Workshop on Solar technology and microfinance conducted by SEF (IRL 75) -Participation lists of Students Attained in ISEI (International Solar Energy Institute for Rural Development) (IRL 76) -Samples of Certificates of Training for Technicians who completed the Rural Solar En- Page GS-58

81 Pages: 59 ergy Manager program (IRL 30) - Accreditation certificate for International Solar Energy Institute by ANRS TVET Promotion Agency (IRL 38) -Registration request to Ministry of Education for 2 nd International Solar Energy Institute (IRL 36) Besides, interviews have been conducted with technicians and the technical director during the on-site visit (IRL 10) confirming the apprenticeship of current and future employees of SEF. Further DOE Request: 1) PPs are requested to submit job descriptions (of different jobs) and working contracts in order to further substantiate the argument that all jobs involve different skills and qualifications. 2) PPs are requested to include the data source/reference in the passports. Page GS-59

82 Pages: 60 Final conclusion: 1) Job descriptions of different job positions (like country director, program manager, rural solar energy technical director, director of International Solar Energy School, IT officer, Finance desk officer, revolving fund officer, head office accountant, logistics officer, liaison officer, warehouse keeper, solar energy inspector, solar energy technician and others) have been submitted to the DOE (IRL 92). 2) Reference to SEF job descriptions is indicated in the passports now. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 17. Regarding the monitoring of the parameter Access to affordable and clean energy services : It is not plausible how the number of local villages with access to solar energy can be determined by the number of operating solar centers alone. A solar center could provide more or less villages. PPs are requested to clarify. G.1.9. Further PPs response: The paragraph has been revised to: Improvement in energy access by establishing solar centers, thus increasing access to renewable energy to rural populations by installing solar systems in rural households. 2 nd Further PP Response: The paragraph now refers to the following: Operational solar centers will serve as an additional check, based on Further DOE Request: No change in the monitoring plan of the passports or clarification has been provided so far addressing the CR. 2 nd Further DOE Request: Paragraph has not been revised yet (please see in the passports monitoring section, parameter Access to afforda- Page GS-60

83 Pages: 61 their sales records, for how many rural households have the access to the clean solar energy instead of the kerosene. ble and clean energy services, way of monitoring). Final conclusion: The way of monitoring of the parameter Access to affordable and clean energy services has been revised in the final passports. It is clear now that by checking the sales records of operational solar centers it can be verified how many rural households have access to solar energy instead of kerosene. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 18. Why parameter Quantitative employment and income generation refers in the monitoring plan to training instead of income generation? G The parameter has been changed, both passports (VPoA and VPA) to refer to income generation as this is more adequate phrasing, The parameter Quantitative employment and income generation refers in the monitoring plan of both passports to income generation instead of training now. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 19. Supporting documentation for technological self- reliance/technology transfer resulting in a positive score has to be submitted. G The parameter for indicator 9 has been changed to number of workshops and courses held. Further PP response: The parameter 9, now states consistent information. Further DOE Request: The parameter for indicator 9 has not been continuously changed to number of workshops and courses within the passports. PPs are requested to take care that information is Page GS-61

84 Pages: 62 consistent. Final conclusion: Final passports present consistent information. The chosen parameter for indicator 9 (Technology transfer and technological self-reliance) is mentioned as number of workshops and training courses. Supporting documentation for workshops/training courses has been submitted to the DOE (IRL 30,74,75,76). CR is closed. Clarification Request No ) Regarding conservativeness, the passports still provides the argument that lumen equivalent of hurricane kerosene lamps vs. LED is the most conservative assumption. Other indicators like LUX would lead to much higher number of kerosene lamps which would be needed to achieve the same brightness as SEF LEDs. PPs are requested to provide supporting documentation for this argument (amongst others the document cited on footnote 2). 2) Even though during the on-site field visits most of the households responded to use the kerosene lamps for more than 3.5 hours per day, some supporting documentation has to H Please see documents -Rural Lighting Services: A comparison of lamps for domestic lighting in developing countries: F.D.J Nieuwenhout, P.J.N.M. van de Rijt, E.J. Wiggelinkhuizen -Evan Mills (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory): Technical and economic performance analysis of kerosene lamps and alternative approaches to illumination in developing countries for evidence. 2. The sentence was deleted in the VPoA passport. The following 2 documents confirm the statement that lumen equivalent of hurricane kerosene lamps vs. LED is the most conservative assumption. Other indicators like LUX would lead to much higher number of kerosene lamps which would be needed to achieve the same brightness as SEF LEDs : -Rural Lighting Services: A comparison of lamps for domestic lighting in developing countries: F.D.J Nieuwenhout, P.J.N.M. van de Rijt, E.J. Page GS-62

85 Pages: 63 be submitted to confirm that it is justified to include it in chapter H.2. (Conservativeness) of the VPoA passport (otherwise it has to be taken out). The Lighting Africa Market Assessment Results e.g. states that the average number of hours lights are on is approximately 3-4 hours. Wiggelinkhuizen (IRL 31) -Evan Mills (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory): Technical and economic performance analysis of kerosene lamps and alternative approaches to illumination in developing countries (IRL 16). 2) Sentence was removed. CR is closed. Clarification Request No. 21. Annex 1 of the passports mentions that Solar Energy Foundation does receive some Overseas Development Aid. This is not consistent with what is stated in the VPO-DD (and also VPA-DD), namely that VPoA does not currently use public funding directly for the project. PPs are requested to provide consistent information. Annex 1 (ODA) The passports have been revised to include the paragraph from Section A.4.5. of the VPoA. The information in Annex 1 of the passports has been revised and is consistent with VPoA- DD and VPA-DD now. CR is closed. Table 3 Unresolved Corrective Action and Clarification Requests (in case of denials) Clarifications and / or corrective action requests by validation team Id. Of CAR/CR Explanation of Conclusion for Denial Page GS-63

86 Gold Standard Validation of the Project Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Annex 2: Information Reference List

87 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 1 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place 1. Gold Standard Requirements Gold Standard v2.1 and Toolkit Approved Small Scale Methodology AMS.I.A. ver.14, Electricity generation by the user EB54 Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 4. Guidelines for demonstrating additionality of microscale project activities, version 02 EB60, Annex GSP VPoA Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia (version 01), VPA (specific case) Solar Lighting in rural Ethiopia Phase 1 (version 01), VPA (generic case) GS Passport (VPoA) and GS Passport (VPA), version 1 Final VPoA-DD Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA, version 04 Final VPA-DD, Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPA 1, version Final Gold Standard Passport VPoA and VPA, both version (both VPoA and VPA (specific case)) No date mentioned in passports (version 01) however PPs communicated that passports were elaborated on (both VPoA-DD and VPA- DD) (both VPoA and VPA passports) 9. Gold Standard PoA Rules and Guidance - Annex F TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

88 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 2 of Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place On-site visit (Interview) between to Participants: Johann Thaler TÜV SÜD Eswar Murty TÜV SÜD Worku Abebe Financal Administrator, SEF Samson Tsegaye Country Director, SEF Birham Ayalew Special Advisor, Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) Azamach Aseefa Secretary, Woreda office, Bokaso Gima Koreso Officer, Water & Energy, Bokaso Arega Hewiso Farmer (Stakeholder), Bokaso Endalkachew Kayuso Politician, Bokaso Abraham Lencho Technician, SEF Anteneh Samson IT & Revolving Fund officer, SEF Dereje Agonafir Director, EPA Yonas Workie Technical Director, SEF Nebiyou Wolderufael Technician, SEF 11. Field visits and Interviews in villages with project stakeholders Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) SSC WG Report on Consideration of Potential Fossil Fuel Lighting Replacement Methodology EB25, Annex Approved Small Scale Methodology AMS.II.J. ver.04, Demand-side activities for efficient lighting technologies EB54 14 IFC/ Worldbank, Lighting Africa survey: Lighting Africa Market Assessment Results Quantitative Assessment Ethiopia, TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

89 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 3 of Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place The socio environmental impacts of solar home lighting project implementation, A case analysis of REMA solar home lighting project, A project report under the guidance of Mr. Andrew Marevesa submitted by Worku Abebe Tessema, MBA, Roll Number: , Sri Sai Learning Center, LC Code No: 2540, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Evan Mills (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory): Technical and economic performance analysis of kerosene lamps and alternative approaches to illumination in developing countries World Health Organization: Indoor air pollution in developing countries: a major environmental and public health challenge Electrifying the poor: Highly economic off-grid PV systems in Ethiopia A basis for sustainable rural development, Ch. Breyer, A. Gerlach, M. Hlusiak, C. Peters, P.Adelmann, J. Winiecki, H. Schützeichel, S. Tsegaye, W. Gashie Delft University of Technology: Renewable Energy Support Policy Options for sustainable development: Using the analytic hierarchy process: The case of rural Ethiopia Cree XLamp LEDs Data Sheet Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) VPA Solar Lighting in rural Ethiopia Phase 1, ER calculation excel file, version Project implementation schedule 23 Stiftung Solarenergie (Solar energy foundation): Business Plan for sustainable solar energy business in Ethiopia describing the operational and management plan, stating that the PoA is a voluntary action and evidence for donor financing of pilot/trial project without date - submitted in June 2011 for document review Business plan of SEF to understand the donor fundings September Samples for sales agreement with Customers for ST 10 for the discounted price TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

90 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 4 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 26 Energy Policy of the Transitional Government of Ethiopia March Light for Education II Rema Ethiopia- Final report Oct 2006-March Light for learning- Report on the installation phase of Pilot Project by SEF March/April Report on the Inspection visit of Solar Pilot Project by SEF September Samples of Certificates of Training for Technicians who completed the Rural Solar Energy Manager program Without date 31 Rural Lighting Services: A comparison of lamps for domestic lighting in developing countries: F.D.J Nieuwenhout, P.J.N.M. van de Rijt, E.J. Wiggelinkhuizen 32 Technical specifications of GEL Tech battery Without date 33 Specifications (sales) sheets of Suntransfer types ST1, ST2, ST5 and ST10 34 Self-Declaration of Non-use of official development assistance by project owner (Stiftung Solarenergie Solar Energy Foundation) without date submitted in June 2011 for document review Notification to Ethiopian DNA regarding Stakeholder consultation Registration request to Ministry of Education for 2 nd International Solar Energy Institute Growth and Transformation Plan Document published from the DNA, Ethiopia Accreditation certificate for International Solar Energy Institute by ANRS TVET Promotion Agency ---- TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

91 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 5 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 39 SEF- Certificate of Registration and License SEF- General Description of Reporting & Related Formats Without date 41 SEF-Flowchart for Revolving Fund Reporting procedures Without date 42 Template of Sales and maintenance reporting Without date 43 Template of Sales report Without date 44 Template for New system installation and Inventory activity Without date 45 Template for Maintenance and Replacement activities Without date 46 Project Idea Note (My climate) Light for education in Ethiopia Term sheet between Stiftung Solarenergie together with Solar Energy Foundation (SEF) ( seller ) and myclimate The Climate Protection Partnership ( Buyer ) Memorandum of Understanding between Stiftung Solarenergie Solar Energy Foundation and Foundation myclimate 49 Template for Carbon Right Transfer Agreement 50 ERPA between Stiftung Solarenergie together with Solar Energy Foundation (SEF) ( seller ) and myclimate The Climate Protection Partnership , signed on and respectively (signed on the same date) Without date, submitted in June 2011 for document review (signed on the same date) TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

92 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 6 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 51 List of LDC countries Access in July Stakeholder Consultation Report at VPoA and VPA level June Stakeholder Feedback Round Consultation Report at VPA level Invitation letters sent to different stakeholders for the First Round Local Stakeholder Consultation PoA level June Invitation letters sent to different stakeholders for the First Round Local Stakeholder Consultation VPA level June Invitation letters sent to different stakeholders for the Second Round Local Stakeholder Consultation (Feedback Round) PoA level August Invitation letters sent to different stakeholders for the Second Round Local Stakeholder Consultation (Feedback Round) VPA level June Invitation letters sent to stakeholders in Amharic at VPA level June List of Participants attended for First Round Local Stakeholder Consultation -PoA level List of Participants attended for First Round Local Stakeholder Consultation VPA level TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

93 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 7 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 61 List of Participants attended for Second Round Local Stakeholder Consultation -PoA level List of Participants attended for Second Round Local Stakeholder Consultation -VPA level Power Point Presentation (non-technical and technical summary) in local language hold at VPA level Letter from Environmental Protection Authority, Addis Ababa to SEF for requirement of management plan and no requirement of EIA Code of Ethics, version 02, Stiftung Solarenergie (Solar Energy Foundation) for supporting the Do not harm assessment Non Technical Summary of the project in Amharic language Power point presentation during stakeholder consultation in local language including Non technical and technical summary Sustainable Development Matrix during First Round Stakeholder Consultation at PoA level Sustainable Development Matrix during First Round Stakeholder Consultation at VPA level ---- TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

94 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 8 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 70 Sustainable Development Matrix during Second Round Stakeholder Consultation at PoA level Sustainable Development Matrix during Second Round Stakeholder Consultation at VPA level List of Employees of SEF SEF payroll of employee on sample basis April Certificate of training in Photovoltaic technology provided by SEF to University professors as a part of Capacity Building program November Report on the Workshop on Solar technology and microfinance conducted by SEF November Participation lists of Students Attained in ISEI (International Solar Energy Institute for Rural Development) UN Convention against corruption : OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions Accessed on December 2011 Accessed on December 2011 TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

95 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 9 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place UN Human Rights convention: Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 79 ILO conventions: Accessed on December Transparency International: Global corruption Barometer WHO, Addressing the Links between Indoor Air Pollution, Household Energy and Human Health, Schare S. and K.R. Smith, Particulate emission rates of simple kerosene lamps, Energy for Sustainable Development, Volume 2 (2) Bruce N, Perez-Padilla R, Albalak R Indoor Air Pollution in Developing Countries: A Major Environmental and Public Health Challenge. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. Vol. 78 (9): IPCC values for NCV and emissions factor of kerosene GPS data of Ethiopia and the Solar Centers access on 20 th August 2011 TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

96 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 10 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 86 Ethiopian legislation (proclamation N 299/2002) about environmental impact assessment Ethiopia s Climate Resilient Green Economy (Green Economy Strategy) issued by Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia 88 Density of kerosene: & Stifftung Solar Energie: -- November Conversation between GS Foundation and myclimate about the uploading of LSC Reports 08/ SEF Personnel Administrative Policy (Personnel Manual) 08/ SEF Job descriptions (country director, program manager, rural solar energy technical director, director of International Solar Energy School, IT officer, Finance desk officer, revolving fund officer, head office accountant, logistics officer, liaison officer, warehouse keeper, solar energy inspector, solar energy technician and others) Without date 93 Stakeholder Feedback Round Consultation Report at VPoA level Information about sales forecasts (1st VPA and VPoA) Submitted in November Database check during the on-site visit On-site visit 96 Self-Declaration signed by CME (SEF) that SEF does not employ and is not complicit in any form of child labour or compulsory or forced labour List of participants being invited both for the LSC and LSC feedback round (at VPA level and VPoA level) Without date 98 Self-Declaration signed by CME (SEF) that VPA Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPA 1 is neither registered as an individual VER/CDM project activity nor is part of another registered PoA/VPoA Self-Declaration signed by CME (SEF) confirming that the project will not receive or benefit from ODA under the TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

97 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 11 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place condition that some or all credits coming out of the project are transferred to the ODA donor country. Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 100 Self-Declaration signed by CME (SEF) confirming that the PoA is a voluntary action and is not required by law Cover Letter (including Modalities of Communication) to be submitted to GS Foundation, issued by myclimate Manufacturer (SunSumSolar) declaration confirming the use of Cree LED chip Cool White Q4 with a luminous flux of 100 lumen (XPCWHT-L C01) in the PoA for all systems (ST1, ST2, ST5 and ST10) and confirming that the climatic conditions do not influence the LFR of the SHS (ST1, ST2, ST5 and ST10) Without date Project management plan, prepared by SEF conversation between GS and myclimate about title change of VPoA and 1 st VPA October Project Report for the foundation Antonia Ruut, Build up of revolving fund: Light for education and development (from the German Aufbau des Revolving Funds: Licht für Bildung und Entwicklung ) Without date 106 REPIC final report Ethiopia project Light for education and development Without date 107 Host Country Approval Letter issued by the Ethiopian DNA (Environmental Protection Authority (EPA)) 13/12/ Specification sheets of solar modules, SUNTRANSFER Without date 109 Excel spreadsheet prepared by SEF demonstrating the dissemination of around 200,000 solar home systems by 2020 Without date 110 Screenshot GS website (VPoA and VPA) 02/ Supporting documentation that Ethiopia is a oil importer: Accessed on 15/12/2011. TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

98 Validation of GS VPoA 911 Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Information Reference List Page 12 of 12 Ref. No. Title/Type of Document. Publication place Issuance and/or submission date(dd/mm/yyyy) 112 VPA Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPA 1, ER calculation excel file, version Applied Statistics in Business and Economics, chapter: Sampling distributions and estimation, issued by Doane and Seward 114 UNDP Human Development Index (HDI), Submitted 13/03/ Accessed in December Guidelines on assessment of debundling for SSC project activities EB54, Annex Guidelines on the consideration of suppressed demand in CDM methodologies EB62, Annex Suntransfer confirming the use of the same LED chip Cool White Q4 for all system types (ST-1,ST-2,ST-5 and ST-6) Self-Declaration signed by the CME (SEF) confirming that -there was no public announcement of the project going ahead without the revenue from carbon credits; -the 1 st VPA will not exceed 5 MW; -none of the systems sold during the trial period was applying or will apply for carbon credits; 119 Extract of sales records 120 Sales agreement template 13/02/ /04/2012 Submitted on 07/05/2012 Submitted on 15/06/2012 TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

99 Gold Standard Validation of the Project Solar Lighting in Rural Ethiopia VPoA Annex 3: Appointment Certificates

100

101

102

103