Gold Standard Verification Report

Transcription

1 Gold Standard Verification GS Verification of the Registered Project Tonk Biomass Project, India GS Project # 441 Monitoring period: to No GS 29 July 2010 TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH Carbon Management Service Westendstrasse Munich - GERMANY

2 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 1 of 20 No. Date of first issue Version: Date of this revision No. of pages GS Subject: Gold Standard Verification Executing Operational Unit: TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH, Carbon Management Service Westendstrasse Munich, Federal Republic of Germany Project Participant (client): Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited, 101, Kalpataru Synergy, Opp. Grand Hyatt, Santacruz (E), Mumbai , India; OneCarbon International BV, Kanaalweg 16 G, 3526 KL Utrecht, Netherlands Registration number / Project Title CDM Project 1774: Electricity generation from mustard crop residues: Tonk, India, Version 05, dated GS Project 441: Tonk Biomass Project, India Methodology (name/version) AMS I.D version 11- Grid connected renewable electricity generation Scope(s): 1 Technical Area(s): 1.2 Revised Monitoring Plan Not applicable Monitoring period: to First CDM Monitoring (version/date) Version 1.1 / First GS Monitoring (version/date) Version 1.1 / Final CDM Monitoring (version/date) Version 2.0 / Final GS Monitoring (version/date) Version 1.4 / Project documentation link:

3 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 2 of 20 Summary: TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH has performed the verification of the Gold Standard project: Tonk Biomass Project, India. The project involves implementation of a biomass based power plant by Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited (KPTL) with direct combustion boiler at the plant in Uniara, Tonk district of Rajasthan, India. The plant utilizes mustard crop residues, a renewable biomass that is abundantly available in the region. The electricity generated is primarily supplied to the Rajasthan state electricity grid. The management of KPTL is responsible for the preparation of the GHG emissions data and the reported GHG emission reductions. A document review, followed by a site visit was conducted to verify the information submitted by the project participant regarding the present verification period. Based on the assessment carried out, the verifier confirms the following: The project has been implemented and operated in accordance with the description given in the UNFCCC registered PDD (version 05, ) and Gold Standard Annex (version 05, ); The project is completely implemented as described in registered PDD and GS Annex; The monitoring plan complies with the applied methodology (AMS I.D version 11- Grid connected renewable electricity generation); The parameters are monitored as per the registered monitoring plan; and Installed equipments essential for generating emission reductions run reliably and the meters are calibrated. Since there is delay in conducting the half-yearly testing of the main and backup meters as indicated in the registered monitoring plan, therefore guidance from EB-52, Annex 60 has been followed. The export to the grid has been reduced and the import has been increased for all measured values during the period applying the maximum permissible error of the instrument to the measured values, as the results of the delayed calibration show that the error is smaller than the maximum permissible error of the measuring equipment. Further, forward action requests have been raised (i) to revise the monitoring plan in order to improve the clarity and completeness of information to clearly indicate the monitoring parameters especially regarding the description of the electricity generation and electricity for internal consumption of the power plant; (ii) since the biomass residues are available seasonally, thus the procured and consumed quantity can be reliably measured through the weigh bridge on yearly basis and since the first monitoring period does not cover a full year data, therefore this needs to be further checked during the subsequent verification; and (iii) The number of farmers from whom mustard crop residues have been bought are to be determined in order to know exactly the number of people benefitted by the project activity. The project is generating emission reductions as a GS-CDM project. The verifier can confirm that the GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements. Our opinion refers to the project s GHG emissions and resulting GHG emission reductions reported, both determined due to the valid and registered project s baseline, its monitoring plan and associated documents. Based on the information we have seen and evaluated, we confirm that the implementation of the project resulted in t CO 2 e of emission reductions during the verification period to Assessment Team Leader: Bratin Roy Assessment Team Members: Sandeep Kanda Eswar Murty Certification Body responsible: Thomas Kleiser

4 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 3 of 20 Abbreviations ACM BM CAR CDM CDM-EB CER CM CMP CO 2 e CR / CL DNA DOE EF EIA / EA ER FAR FSR GHG GWP GS IPCC IRL KP KPTL MP MR NGO OM PDD PP TÜV SÜD UNFCCC VVM Approved Consolidated Methodology Build Margin Corrective Action Request Clean Development Mechanism CDM Executive Board Certified Emission Reduction Combined Margin Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol Carbon dioxide equivalent Clarification Request Designated National Authority Designated Operational Entity Emission Factor Environmental Impact Assessment / Environmental Assessment Emission Reduction Forward Action Request Feasibility Study Greenhouse Gas(es) Global Warming Potential Gold Standard Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Information Reference List Kyoto Protocol Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited Monitoring Plan Monitoring Non-Governmental Organisation Operational Margin Project Design Document Project Participant TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Validation and Verification Manual

5 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 4 of 20 Table of Contents Page 1 INTRODUCTION Objective Scope GHG Project Description 5 2 METHODOLOGY Verification Process Verification Team Review of Documents On-site Assessment and follow-up Interviews Quality of Evidence to Determine Emission Reductions Resolution of Clarification, Corrective and Forward Action Requests Internal Quality Control 9 3 VERIFICATION RESULTS FARs from Validation / Previous Verification Project Implementation in accordance with the registered PDD Compliance of the Monitoring Plan with the Monitoring Methodology Compliance of the Monitoring with the Monitoring Plan Assessment of Data and Calculation of GHG Emission Reductions 15 4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS VERIFICATION STATEMENT Annex 1: Verification Protocol Annex 2: Information Reference List

6 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 5 of 20 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited (KPTL) has commissioned an independent verification by TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH (TÜV SÜD) of its registered GS-CDM project: Tonk Biomass Project, India. The objective of the verification work is to comply with the requirements of GS version 1 requirement. According to this assessment TÜV SÜD shall: Ensure that the project activity has been implemented and operated as per the UNFCCC registered PDD Electricity generation from mustard crop residues: Tonk, India Version 05/ , and that all physical features (technology, project equipment, monitoring and metering equipment) of the project are in place; Ensure that the Gold Standard MR and other supporting documents provided are complete and verifiable and in accordance with applicable GS requirements; Ensure that actual monitoring systems and procedures comply with the monitoring systems and procedures described in the monitoring plan and the approved methodology; and Evaluate the data recorded and stored as per the methodology AMS I.D version 11- Grid connected renewable electricity generation. 1.2 Scope The verification scope is defined as an independent and objective review and ex-post determination of the monitored reductions in GHG emissions by the Designated Operational Entity (DOE). The verification is based on the submitted monitoring report, the validated project design document (PDD) including its monitoring plan and validation report, the applied monitoring methodology, relevant decisions, clarifications and guidance from the CMP and the EB and any other information and references relevant to the project activity s resulting emission reductions. These documents are reviewed against the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol and the CDM Modalities and Procedures and rules and guidance of Gold Standard. TÜV SÜD has applied a rule-based approach based on the requirements in the validation and verification manual (VVM). The principles of accuracy and completeness, relevance, reliability and credibility were combined with a conservative approach to establish a traceable and transparent verification opinion. The verification considers both quantitative and qualitative information on emission reductions. The verification is not meant to provide any consultancy towards the client. However, stated requests for clarifications, corrective and/or forward actions may provide input for improvement of the monitoring activities. 1.3 GHG Project Description Project activity: Tonk Biomass Project, India Project Participant(s): Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited Location of the project: Uniara village, District Tonk, Rajasthan, India, Latitude 25 o 52 0 N Longitude 76 o E UNFCCC registration number: 1774-CDMP Date of UNFCCC registration: Date of GS registration: GS registration number: GS-441

7 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 6 of 20 CDM crediting period: to (renewable) The purpose of the project is the installation of biomass based power generation system with high combustion boiler and 8 MW turbo-generator system at Tonk. The power plant uses the locally available mustard crop residues as the fuel. The project employs the modified Rankine cycle technology with regenerative feed water heating and water-cooled condensation. The power plant is designed to operate with multiple agricultural biomass residues besides the mustard crop residues. The PP has signed a Power Purchase Agreement with Rajasthan Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and supplies power to the grid.

8 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 7 of 20 2 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Verification Process The verification process is based on the approach depicted in the VVM. Standard auditing techniques have been adopted. The verification team performs first a desk review, followed by an on-site visit which results in a protocol including all the findings. The next step is to close out the findings through direct communication with the PPs and finally prepare the verification report. This verification report and other supporting documents then undergo an internal quality control by the CB climate and energy before submission to the CDM-EB. 2.2 Verification Team The appointment of the team takes into account the coverage of the technical area(s), sectoral scope(s) and relevant host country experience for verifying the emission reductions achieved by the project activity in the relevant monitoring period for the verification. The verification team was consisting of the following members: Name Qualification Coverage of sectoral scope Coverage of technical area Host country experience Bratin Roy ATL - - Sandeep Kanda GHG-A Eswar Murty GHG-A - - Bratin Roy is an Assessment Team Leader for CDM/JI projects for CDM/JI projects and also a lead auditor for quality and environmental management systems (according to ISO 9001 and ISO 14001). He holds a Master Degree in Environmental Science. Mr. Roy has worked for 10 years as a consultant in the field of energy industries, renewable and non-renewable sources, and energy distribution equipment, especially biomass and solar energy. He has presented several papers related to climate change, energy efficiency and corporate sustainability in various national and international seminars and workshops. He has received extensive training in the CDM and JI validation and verification processes and has already participated in several CDM/JI project assessments. Sandeep Kanda is a GHG auditor for CDM/JI projects and energy and environment field expert at TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH. He holds a master degree in energy systems engineering, post graduate diploma in industrial safety and environmental management and bachelors degree in mechanical engineering. Before joining the TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH he has worked extensively as a consultant on projects in energy sector, manufacturing industries, chemical industries and metal production. He has carried out energy audits and worked on development of CDM projects and methodologies for various projects in the aforementioned sectors. Eswar Murty in former times was an appointed Auditor at TÜV SÜD South Asia. He holds a bachelors degree in Civil engineering and a post graduate diploma in Environmental management. Before joining TÜV SÜD South Asia, he worked on environmental management and CDM projects energy projects for 5 years. He has received extensive training on CDM validation and verification process. 2.3 Review of Documents The published MR, Version 1.1 submitted by the PP was made publicly available on the CDM website before the verification activities started. The published MR was assessed based on all the relevant documents as listed above. The aim of the assessment in the desk review was to accomplish the following:

9 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 8 of 20 Verify the completeness of the data and the information presented in the MR; Check the compliance of the MR with respect to the monitoring plan depicted in the registered PDD and verify that the applied methodology was carried out. Particular attention to the frequency of measurements, the quality of the metering equipment including calibration requirements, and the quality assurance and quality control procedures was paid; and Evaluate the data management and the quality assurance and quality control system in the context of their influence on the generation and reporting of emission reductions. A complete list of all documents reviewed is listed in annex 2 of this report. 2.4 On-site Assessment and follow-up Interviews During 23 rd & 24 th April 2009, TÜV SÜD performed a physical site inspection and on-site interviews with project stakeholders as a part of the initial verification for the registered CDM Project 1774: Electricity generation from mustard crop residues: Tonk, India. The data verification and consultation with stakeholders required for the Gold Standard is also done by the audit team during this site visit. This was done to: Confirm the implementation and operation of the project; Review the data flow for generating, aggregating and reporting the monitoring parameters; Confirm the correct implementation of procedures for operations and data collection; Cross-check the information provided in the MR documentation with other sources (raw data); Check the monitoring equipments against the requirements of the PDD and the approved methodology, including calibrations, maintenance, etc.; Review the calculations and assumptions used to obtained the GHG data and ER; and Identify if the quality control and quality assurance procedures are in place to prevent or correct errors or omissions in the reported parameters. A list of the persons interviewed during this verification activity is included in Annex Quality of Evidence to Determine Emission Reductions Among many others the following relevant and reliable evidences have been used by the audit team during the verification process: Compliance check with host country requirements concerning safety and pollution [8, 26]; Joint Meter Readings and invoices of electricity export [11,12]; Quality Assurance/Quality Control documents such as training records and monitoring responsibilities [13, 25]; and Calibration certificates of the metering equipments [15, 16]. Sufficient evidence covering the full verification period in the required frequency is available to validate the figures stated in the final MR. The source of the evidences will be discussed in chapter 3 of this report. Specific cross-checks have been done in cases that further sources were available. All figures in the monitoring report were cross-checked by the audit team against the raw data. The data collection system meets the requirements of the monitoring plan as per the methodology.

10 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 9 of Resolution of Clarification, Corrective and Forward Action Requests The objective of this phase of the verification process was to resolve any outstanding issues which needed to be clarified for TÜV SÜD s positive conclusion on the GHG emission reduction calculation. The findings raised as Forward Action Requests (FARs) (if any) indicated in previous reports (validation/verification) were clarified during communications between the PP and TÜV SÜD. To guarantee the transparency of the verification process, the concerns raised, based on the desk review and subsequent on-site audit assessment and follow up interviews, together with the responses given are documented in Annex 1 (verification protocol). A Corrective Action Request (CAR) is raised where TÜV SÜD identifies: non-conformities in monitoring and/or reporting with the monitoring plan and/or methodology; that the evidence provided is not sufficient to prove conformity; mistakes in assumptions, data or calculations that impair the ER; FARs stated during validation that are not solved until the on-site visit. A Clarification Request (CR) is raised where TÜV SÜD does not have enough information or the information is not clear in order to confirm a statement or data. A Forward Action Request is raised where TÜV SÜD identifies that monitoring and/or reporting required special attention or adjustments for the next verification period. Information or clarifications provided as response to an issue could also lead to a new CAR. 2.7 Internal Quality Control As a final step of verification, the final documentation including the verification report and annexes have to undergo an internal quality control by the Certification Body (CB) climate and energy, i.e. each report has to be finally approved either by the Head of the CB or the Deputy (a Veto person can be used). In case one of these two persons is part of the assessment team, the approval can only be given by the person who is not a part of the assessment team. If the documents have been satisfactorily approved, the Request for Issuance would be submitted to the GS-TAC along with the relevant documents

11 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 10 of 20 3 VERIFICATION RESULTS In the following sections the results of the verification are stated. The verification results relate to the project performance as documented and described in the final Monitoring (Version 2.0 / ) and the associated GS-Annex ( , version 1.4). The verification findings for each verification subject are presented below: 3.1 FARs from Validation / Previous Verification Based on the validation report the verification team identified no missing steps. No FARs has been presented in the validation report. 3.2 Project Implementation in accordance with the registered PDD The project is fully implemented according to the description presented in the PDD. The verifier confirms, through the visual inspection that all physical features of the GS-VER project activity including data collecting systems and storage have been implemented in accordance with the registered PDD. The project activity is completely operational and the same has been confirmed on-site. The energy meters are installed at the Grid sub station and the same are calibrated and sealed by the Meter wing of Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited. 3.3 Compliance of the Monitoring Plan with the Monitoring Methodology The monitoring plan is in accordance with the approved methodology, AMS I.D, Version 11, applied by the CDM project activity. 3.4 Compliance of the Monitoring with the Monitoring Plan The monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered PDD and approved methodology AMS I.D, Version 11. All the parameters were monitored as per the Monitoring Plan of the registered PDD. With respect to GS requirements, the project has to comply with the parameters in Sustainable Development Assessment Matrix (see chapter 3.4.1, VVM-GS). The verification of these parameters required by the monitoring plan and also the Gold Standard requirements (see also Annex 2, MR) are provided as follows: Data / Parameter: Data unit: Description: Source of data used: E t, y GWh/yr Total measured electricity generation from the CDM project activity during the year y Electronic Trivector Meter (Main meter-tnu 01883, Back up meter- TNU 01884) at the 132 KV Grid Sub-station, Uniara. The parameter corresponds to the electricity exported to the grid and is in compliance with the methodology. The meters are maintained by RVPN and are of 0.2 accuracy class. The meters are tested every six months by representative of metering division, Rajasthan Power Procurement Center (RPPC). Daily readings are maintained at the grid sub-station and joint meter reading is carried out by representatives of KPTL and RVPN to record the energy exported and imported by the project on monthly basis. The reading of the main meter taken during JMR forms the basis for the final invoice raised by KPTL. In the event of failure of the main meter the readings from the back-up meter are considered for invoicing. In the event of main meter failure the recording shall be

12 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 11 of 20 Means of verification/comments: Cross-check Data / Parameter: Data unit: Description: Source of data used: Means of verification/comments: done based on back-up meter and will switch back to main meter after repair, calibration, testing and sealing (carried out by RVPN). The values indicated in the emission reduction calculation sheet have been checked from the daily records, JMRs and Invoices and same were found to be consistent except for the month of October It has been found that there has been a delay of 32 days in the testing of the main and backup electricity meters during the period 26/07/2008 and 06/03/2009. Therefore as per the guidance provided in EB-52, Annex 60 the conservative application of the full scale maximum permissible error of the instrument, according to manufacturer s specification, to the measured values has been applied as the error is reported to be smaller than the maximum permissible error. The export to the grid has been reduced for all measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration. The export value for the month of January was also checked from the daily records. The PP has provided the updated monitoring report and emission reduction calculation spreadsheets in response to CAR4 raised. Since the data for the present monitoring period starts from 7 th Oct therefore the daily records for the October month have been checked during the on-site audit and it was found that the values for the October month were over-stated in the published MR and did not correspond to the actual export and import. Subsequently, the MR was corrected corresponding to the actual values of export and import as verified during the on-site audit based on the CAR5 raised. The readings of log book at project plant power house, JMR and invoices checked during the on-site audit have been found to be consistent. E pl, y GWh/yr Total annual electricity for internal consumption of the power plant during the year y Electronic Trivector Meter (Main meter-tnu 01883, Back up meter- TNU 01884) at the 132 KV Grid Sub-station, Uniara. This parameter corresponds to the electricity imported from the grid to meet the auxiliary requirements during the time when the power plant is not running. When the power plant is running the auxiliary requirements are met by the generation itself and the rest being exported. It has been verified during on-site audit that the meters (main and back-up meter) used for measuring the export and import from grid are bi-directional in nature therefore both the indicated parameters (export and import) are measured by both the meters (main and back-up meter). The values indicated in the emission reduction calculation sheet have been checked from the daily records, JMRs and Invoices and same were found to be consistent except for the month of October It has been found that there has been a delay of 32 days in the testing of the main and backup electricity meters during the period 26/07/2008 and 06/03/2009. Therefore as per the guidance provided in EB-52, Annex 60 the conservative application of the full scale

13 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 12 of 20 Cross-check Data / Parameter: Data unit: Description: Source of data used: Means of verification/comments: Cross-check maximum permissible error of the instrument, according to manufacturer s specification, to the measured values has been applied as the error is reported to be smaller than the maximum permissible error. The import from the grid has been increased for all measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration. The import value for the month of January was also checked from the daily records. The PP has provided the updated monitoring report and emission reduction calculation spreadsheets in response to CAR4 raised. Since the data for the present monitoring period starts from 7 th Oct therefore daily records for the October month have been checked during the on-site audit and it was found that the values for October month were over-stated in the published MR and did not correspond to the actual export and import. Subsequently, the MR was corrected corresponding to the actual values of export and import as verified during the on-site audit based on the CAR5 raised. The readings of log book at project plant power house, JMR and invoices checked during the on-site audit have been found to be consistent. BC y,i Tons/yr Total consumption of dry biomass i for year y The parameter corresponds to the biomass being procured and finally is consumed over a period and is in compliance with the registered PDD. It has been verified during the on-site audit that for each fuel type the quantity of fuel is measured at the weigh-bridge at the power plant entrance during arrival. Also, the fuel being fed to the boiler is measured at the belt conveyor. The weigh bridge is calibrated annually. The weighbridge is maintained by KPTL and is of 5 kg uncertainty level The information on the each type of biomass procured and consumed has been indicated in the revised MR. Predominantly mustard crop residues have been used with negligibly small share of wood chips. As the share of wood chips is insignificant therefore the demonstration that these wood resources are from renewable origin as per the GS eligibility rules is not considered necessary. It is understood that mustard crop residues are available seasonally (primarily only in the months of March-June) for every year and have to be stored for the remaining part of the year for consumption, this being a cyclic process. Each type of fuel procured is measured through the weigh bridge. The fuel consumption is also measured at the belt conveyor feeding the boiler and the same is also incorporated in the revised MR. Further it is clarified that since the measurement at the belt conveyor cannot indicate the fuel type and is relatively less reliable thus the quantity of fuel input is based on the weigh bridge data as indicated in the registered PDD. The readings of log book at project plant and biomass purchase receipts have been found consistent. Data / Parameter: FC y, Data unit: Tons/yr

14 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 13 of 20 Description: Source of data used: Means of verification/comments: Cross-check Data / Parameter: Data unit: Description: Source of data used: Means of verification/comments: Cross-check Total consumption of fossil fuels for year y Plant records All data were cross-checked and verified during on-site visit for entire monitoring period. No fossil fuel has been used in the power plant during the monitoring period. Also, during the on-site audit no provision for fossil fuel firing at the project site could be found. It has been found that the amount of electricity generated calculated using specific fuel consumption and amount of each type of biomass fuel used is higher than the actual electricity generated. B y,i Tons/yr Quantity of biomass available in the region The "District Statistical Data Book" published by Economical & Statistical Directorate, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur for the year and the "Survey On the use of Mustard Crop Residue by the Brick Kilns Located in Tonk, Bundi & Sawai Madhpur Districts, Rajasthan (India)", Nature Club of Rajasthan, Jaipur, The stated documentary evidences demonstrate surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity. The quantitative information on the surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity has been incorporated in the revised MR in accordance with the tool and the monitoring plan. Additional GS parameters Data / Parameter: Water Quality Data unit: mg/l Description: Water quality of the plant Source of data used: Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board Means of verification/comments: Based on the consent letter given by Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board Cross-check Payment made towards the water cess Data / Parameter: Air Quality Data unit: μg/m 3 Description: Air quality of the plant Source of data used: Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board & Indian Ambient Air quality standards Means of Consent to operate under the Air Act - consent letter given by verification/comments: Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board. During the course of validation earlier it has been confirmed that in the absence of the project activity the biomass residue is burnt in the fields. Cross-check Technical specifications and operation of the electrostatic precipitator (ESP) Data / Parameter: Livelihood of the poor Data unit: --

15 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 14 of 20 Description: Source of data used: Means of verification/comments: Cross-check Number of farmers benefitted by the sale of biomass residues Biomass purchase data Based on the data for purchase of mustard crop residues from farmers at KPTL plant. The number of farmers from whom mustard crop residues have been bought are to be determined in order to know exactly the number of people benefitted by the project activity. The number of deliveries is not the correct measure as the same farmer may deliver the biomass residues to the plant more than once. The information of the number of farmers with complete details is to be presented and the same would be checked during next verification.accordingly a FAR has been raised to know the actual number of farmers benefitted from sale of mustard crop residues during the next verification period. Certificate from the chartered accountant firm indicating the goods received note (GRN) Data / Parameter: Employment numbers Data unit: ---- Description: Number of people employed in the plant as a result of project activity Source of data used: Employment records of KPTL plant Means of Based on the number of personnel employed verification/comments: Cross-check Salary details of staff of the plant Data / Parameter: Technological self reliance Data unit: -- Description: Number of engineers trained to operate and implement the technology Source of data used: Plant data Means of Based on the training records of KPTL staff verification/comments: Cross-check Based on the employee records of KPTL. Data / Parameter: Resource Competition Data unit: -- Description: Quantity of biomass residues type n available in the region Source of data used: The "District Statistical Data Book" published by Economical & Statistical Directorate, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur for the year and the "Survey On the use of Mustard Crop Residue by the Brick Kilns Located in Tonk, Bundi & Sawai Madhpur Districts, Rajasthan (India)", Nature Club of Rajasthan, Jaipur, Means of The stated documentary evidences demonstrate surplus availability verification/comments: of biomass residue in the region of the project activity. The quantitative information on the surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity has been incorporated in the revised MR in accordance with the tool and the monitoring plan. Cross-check --

16 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 15 of Assessment of Data and Calculation of GHG Emission Reductions The Emission Reduction Calculations are laid down in the Monitoring. As the approach to calculate the baseline emissions is based on the applied methodology AMS I.D. Version 11, net amount of electricity produced solely by biomass and exported to the grid multiplied with the exante defined emission factor for the respective grid. Such an approach is deemed to be acceptable. Also, since there is delay of 32 days in testing of the main meter and backup meter, therefore as per the guidance provided in EB-52, Annex 60 the conservative application of the full scale maximum permissible error of the instrument, according to manufacturer s specification, to the measured values has been applied as the error is reported to be smaller than the maximum permissible error. The export to the grid has been reduced and the import has been increased for all measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration. There are no project emissions related to the project activity. The surplus availability of the biomass demonstrated ensures that there is no leakage associated with the project activity. Therefore, the emission reductions correspond to the baseline emissions. The reported data has been cross checked against other sources as explained in section 3.4. The CERs claimed during the monitoring period are higher by around 31% when compared to the ex ante estimate in the PDD. This is due to the conservative value adopted for PLF at the time of preparation of PDD. The PP has registered a similar project (CDM project no.58) where there were technical problems and hence based on this experience, a low PLF was assumed for this project also. Hence the ERs claimed were higher than that of the PDD. The verifier confirms that the methods and formulae used to obtain the baseline emissions are appropriate. The same have been done in accordance with the methods and formulae described in the registered monitoring plan and applicable methodology.the verifier confirms that the default value (from PDD) for grid emission factor of tco 2 /GWh has been correctly applied.

17 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 16 of 20 4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The verifier can confirm that the published MR and related documents are complete and verifiable in accordance with CDM requirements. All the findings raised by the verification team, the responses by the PPs and the conclusion from the team are presented in Annex 1, the means of verification (MoV) and resulting changes in the MR or related documents are stated as follows: Corrective Action Requests CAR 1: Please include the major planned/forced outage details during the monitoring period in the MR. MoV: The outage details of the plant have been checked from the plant records during on-site audit and can be confirmed. Changes: The MR has been revised to include the planned/forced outages in the plant. CAR 2: Please include the procedure for data recording and archiving for all the monitored parameters in the MR. MoV: The procedure for data recording and archiving of parameters indicated in the submitted monitoring manual has been checked during the on-site audit and can be confirmed. Changes: The indicated procedures are provided in the submitted monitoring manual. CAR 3: Please include the quantitative information on the surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity and also provide the associated supporting documents. MoV: The quantitative information on the surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity has been incorporated in the MR in accordance with the tool and the monitoring plan. The PP has also provided the associated supporting documents. Changes: The revised MR has been submitted to the DOE. CAR 4: With reference to the incompleteness received, it has been noticed that although the PDD stipulates that the main and backup electricity-meters are to be tested every half year; however the date of the last calibration presented in the Monitoring (section B.1.1) is 26/07/2008. Please provide details of the subsequent test. Also, the guidance from EB52 - Annex 60 is to be followed. MoV: The subsequent test report submitted by the PP is dated 06/03/2009 indicating that the main and backup meters are performing within the maximum permissible error of the instrument, according to manufacturer s specification. As per the half year testing frequency stated in the registered PDD since the earlier stated calibration was carried out on 26/07/2008 therefore the subsequent should have been on 26/01/2009. Since there is delay of 32 days in testing of the main meter and backup meter, therefore as per the guidance provided in EB-52, Annex 60 the conservative application of the full scale maximum permissible error of the instrument, according to manufacturer s specification, to the measured values has been applied as the error is reported to be smaller than the maximum permissible error. The export to the grid has been reduced and the import has been increased for all measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration. The daily export and import values for the month of January were also checked for the application of this correction. The PP has provided the updated monitoring report and emission reduction calculation spreadsheets. Changes: The above change resulted in more conservative estimate of emission reductions and the same were reduced by 9 tco 2 e. The change is reflected in the final MR and the

18 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 17 of 20 emission reductions spreadsheet submitted to the DOE. CAR 5: Since the data for the present monitoring period starts from 7 th Oct therefore the daily records for the October month have been checked during the on-site audit and it has been found that the values for the October month are over-stated in the published MR and do not correspond to the actual export and import. Please correct the same and provide appropriate justification and procedures to avoid such mistakes in the future. MoV: The MR has been corrected corresponding to the actual values of export and import as verified during the on-site audit. Changes: The revised MR with the corrected data on electricity exported and imported has been submitted to the DOE. CAR 6: Please include the justification in the monitoring report explaining how the biomass quantity for the monitoring period is determined, as this is not done for the complete year. MoV: The information on the each type of biomass procured and consumed has been indicated in the revised MR. It is understood that mustard crop residues are available seasonally (primarily only in the months of March-June) for every year and have to be stored for the remaining part of the year for consumption, this being a cyclic process. Each type of fuel procured is measured through the weigh bridge. The fuel consumption is also measured at the belt conveyor feeding the boiler and the same is also incorporated in the revised MR. It has been found that the amount of electricity generated calculated using specific fuel consumption and amount of each type of biomass fuel used is higher than the actual electricity generated. Further it is clarified that since the measurement at the belt conveyor cannot indicate the fuel type and is relatively less reliable thus the quantity of fuel input is based on the weigh bridge data as indicated in the registered PDD. Also, as the biomass balance of the project can only be finally determined on an annual basis, in this case after the end of the first year of the crediting period. Thus a FAR2 is being raised accordingly. Changes: The revised MR including the information of biomass procured as measured by the weigh bridge and also biomass consumed as measured at the belt conveyor feeding to the boiler during the monitoring period has been submitted to the DOE. CAR 7: Please include the information in the MR in accordance with EB 48, Annex 68, para 10(a), especially regarding the information on the following: calibration of monitoring instruments; emission factor and comparison of the actual emission reduction claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the registered PDD. MoV: The revised MR includes the information on the calibration of the monitoring instruments; emission factor and comparison of the actual emission reduction claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the registered PDD. The calibration certificates have been checked. The emission factor as indicated in the registered PDD has been used. Since the actual emission reductions are higher as compared to the apportioned estimated figure in the PDD, the explanation is provided by the PP. Although the presented emission reductions are higher than the apportioned values presented in the registered PDD, it does not impact the applicability or the additionality of the project. It was also clarified that low plant load factor considered at the time of PDD preparation by the PP, which was based on their previous experience of similar plant at Ganganagar (UNFCCC registered project no.58). After this, KPTL was able to minimize the technical problems. Hence the ER s exceed than that of the PDD. Changes: The revised MR in accordance with EB 48, Annex 68, para 10(a) has been submitted to the DOE.

19 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 18 of 20 Clarification Requests CR 1: Please provide the documentary evidence to demonstrate surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity. MoV: The "District Statistical Data Book" published by Economical & Statistical Directorate, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur for the year and the "Survey On the use of Mustard Crop Residue by the Brick Kilns Located in Tonk, Bundi & Sawai Madhpur Districts, Rajasthan (India)", Nature Club of Rajasthan, Jaipur, 2008, has been checked. Changes: The revised MR includes the information on surplus availability of biomass in accordance with the submitted documents. CR 2: Please clarify why the total generation exceeded 8 MW in the months of November, December and January, during the monitoring period. Also clarify why the auxiliary consumption for 2 nd January is less in comparison of rest of the month. MoV: It has been clarified that the total generation exceeded 8 MW capacity in the months of November, December and January, during the monitoring period due to the overloading of the turbine. This is deemed acceptable in the given context as the overloading is much below the 10% overloading limit. Also it has been clarified that due to the forced outage the auxiliary consumption for 2nd January is less in comparison of rest of the month. Changes: No changes in the MR. Forward Action Requests It is to be noted that the verification of the pre-cdm VERs and this 1 st periodic CDM GS were clubbed together. Therefore the FARs indicated in the pre-cdm verification report is also applicable in the 1 st periodic CDM GS verification. Further, the FARs as stated in the 1 st periodic CDM GS verification report have been re-worded and supersede the FARs stated in the pre- CDM GS verification report.. FAR 1: In accordance with EB-49, Annex-28, in order to improve the clarity and completeness of information the monitoring plan should be revised to clearly indicate the monitoring parameters especially regarding the description of the electricity generation and electricity for internal consumption of the power plant. A request of revision of monitoring plan needs to be submitted before next verification. FAR 2: As the biomass residues are available seasonally, therefore the procured and consumed quantity can be reliably measured through the weigh bridge on yearly basis. As the first monitoring period does not cover entire 12 month data therefore the biomass quantity should be checked during the subsequent verification. FAR 3: The number of farmers from whom mustard crop residues have been bought are to be determined in order to know exactly the number of people benefitted by the project activity. The number of deliveries is not the correct measure as the same farmer may deliver the biomass residues to the plant more than once. The information of the number of farmers with complete details is to be presented and the same would be checked during next verification.

20 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 19 of 20 5 VERIFICATION STATEMENT TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH has performed the Gold Standard verification of the project: Tonk Biomass Project, India. The project consists of installation of a power plant with high combustion boiler and a turbo generator at Tonk plant in Rajasthan, India. The power plant utilizes mustard crop residues and the electricity generated is supplied to the Rajasthan state grid thus reducing emissions. The verification is based on the currently valid documentation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Gold Standard (GS). The management of Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited is responsible for the preparation of the GHG emissions data and the reported GHG emission reductions on the basis set out within the project s Monitoring Plan indicated in the registered PDD version 05, dated and the applied methodology AMS I.D version 11- Grid connected renewable electricity generation. The verifier can confirm that: The development and maintenance of records and reporting procedures are in accordance with the registered monitoring plan; The project is operated as planned and described in the validated and registered PDD (version 05, dated , registration date , crediting period to (renewable)) and the Gold Standard annex (version 05, ); The installed equipment being essential for generating emission reduction runs reliably and is calibrated; Further, since there is delay in conducting the half-yearly testing of the main and backup meters as indicated in the registered monitoring plan, therefore guidance from EB-52, Annex 60 has been followed. The export to the grid has been reduced and the import has been increased for all measured values during the period applying the maximum permissible error of the instrument to the measured values, as the results of the delayed calibration show that the error is smaller than the maximum permissible error of the measuring equipment; The monitoring system is in place and generates GHG emission reductions data; The GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements; The monitoring plan in the monitoring report (Version 2.0, dated ) is as per the PDD; and The monitoring plan in the approved PDD is as per the applied methodology. Our opinion is based on the project s GHG emissions and resulting GHG emission reductions reported, which have been both determined through the valid and registered project s baseline, its monitoring plan and its associated documents.

21 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Page 20 of 20 Based on the information we have seen and evaluated, we confirm the following statement: ing period: From to Verified emissions in the above reporting period: Baseline emissions: Project emissions: Leakage emission: Emission reductions: t CO 2 e 0 t CO 2 e 0 t CO 2 e t CO 2 e Munich, India, Thomas Kleiser Certification Body climate and energy TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH Bratin Roy Assessment Team Leader

22 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Annex 1: Verification Protocol

23 Page 1 of 31 Table of Contents 1. Project Activity Implementation 1.1. Technology 1.2. Organization 1.3. Quality Management System 1.4. Remaining FARs from previous report(s) 2. Monitoring Plan Implementation 2.1. Parameters 2.2. Parameters measured directly with instruments 2.3. Parameters measured through sampling 2.4. Parameters obtained through external sources and accounting data 2.5. Other parameters 3. Data Processing and ER calculation 4. Additional assessment 4.1. Internal Review 4.2. Peculiarities 4.3. Further additional requirements 4.4. Data ing 5. Compilation and Resolutions of CARs, CRs and FARs Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-1

24 Page 2 of Project Activity Implementation 1.1. Technology Location (s) PDD Description Verified Situation Conclusion Description / Address: GPS coordinates: Description: The proposed project is a biomass-based power generation project. The project will use the locally available mustard crop residue as a primarily fuel that is abundantly available near the project area. The installed capacity of the project is 8.0 MW. The electricity generated will be sold primarily to the state grid. Address: Khatoli village, Approximately 5 kilometres from Uniara Town, Tonk District, Rajasthan, India Latitude: N Longitude: E Technical Equipment Main Components During the on-site visit, it has been confirmed that the project site is in compliance with the description of the registered PDD. The description of the on-site situation can also be confirmed by the following documents that were verified during site visit: Power Purchase Agreement between KPTL and Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited (RVPN); Synchronization of 8 MW TG with Uniara grid substation; and Invoices for power export during the monitoring period. The GPS coordinates were verified on site. 1, 2, 3, PDD Description Verified Situation Conclusion Description Biomass Power generation plant Description Installed capacity 8 MW (electrical) Direct combustion boiler technology. Medium-pressure steam boiler (modified Rankine cycle with regenerative feed water The installed capacity of the plant is 8 MW. The Turbo generator installed is of single casing direct couplet condensing type. The manufacturer is Hangzhou steam turbine company limited. The boiler installed is of 38 Tonnes per hour (TPH) capacity. The project equipments installed were verified during on site visit and were found to be in compliance with the 2, 6, 7 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-2

25 Page 3 of 31 Operation Status during verification heating and water-cooled condensation) project description. The commissioning certificate of the 8 MW turbine, technical specifications of the turbine and boiler have been checked on site. Approvals / Licenses Actual Operation Status Remarks to Special Operational Status During the Verification Period Verified Situation The Plant has got the consent to operate the biomass based power plant from Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board under Air and Water Acts. The same have been checked during the on-site visit. Start date of operation: (Synchronisation with Grid) Under construction In operation Out of operation Reason and date (if out of operation): NA Project has been implemented and operating as described in registered PDD. The outages during the monitoring period are due to grid and electrical disturbances and the details regarding the same have been checked during the on site visit. Corrective Action Request No.1. Please include the major planned/forced outage details during the monitoring period in the MR. Conclusion 2, 8 9 2, 3, 5-10 CAR Organization Project Participant (s) PDD Description Verified Situation Conclusion Entity: Kalpataru Power Transmission This has been verified on-site. 2, 3 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-3

26 Page 4 of 31 Limited (KPTL) Responsible person: Mr. Ajay Munot (Executive Director) CDM Project management: KPTL management is responsible for CDM project management As Mr. Ajay Munot has left the organization, Mr. Anand Chopra takes the overall responsibility of the monitoring plan and its implementation. One Carbon International is responsible for preparation and submission of the Monitoring. The monitoring and measurement of power generation are done diligently every month as a core business of the company and hence a permanent control of the figures in joint meter readings as well as invoices raised takes place. The procedure for data collection and archiving has been verified on site. The shift operators record the data from the energy meter in a logbook or a computer system. The data is collected in daily plant operation reports and presented to the responsible manager who has to verify the data for the purpose of quality control. The verified report is then presented to the deputy manager who also has to verify the data before the data will be finally approved by the senior vice president of KPTL. Corrective Action Request No.2. Please include the procedure for data recording and archiving for all the monitored parameters in the MR. CAR CR 1.3. Quality Management System General aspects of the Quality Management System Quality Management Manual: KPTL is responsible for all kinds of quality management manual Responsibilities: Shift engineer or Electrical Manager assistant Qualification and Training: KPTL will hire the qualified person Verified Situation The CDM monitoring manual has been submitted to the audit team. This was confirmed through interviews and discussions during on site visit. KPTL has provided in house training to its staff on equipment operation, fire safety and also has sent their employees to external training programmes. The documents Conclusion Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-4

27 Page 5 of 31 who will be trained on job later Implementation of QM-system: KPTL is responsible for development and implementation of QM-system supporting these trainings have been verified during on site visit. Description in PDD has found to be implemented on site. Quality assurance procedures are in place; for example, the joint meter reports are reviewed for accuracy and correctness by plant manager and then the invoices are prepared for submission to the State Electricity Board. 11,12, Remaining FARs from previous report(s) Remaining Requests from Previous (s) Summary of project owner response Audit team Conclusion Forward action request No. 1: Not applicable (NA) NA Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-5

28 Page 6 of Monitoring Plan Implementation 2.1. Parameters Parameters Meth/tool PDD MR Included in table Electricity generated by the renewable technology (Corresponding to the net electricity generated/supplied to the grid as referred from SSC_315) Amount of biomass input (each type) Total measured electricity generation from the CDM project activity during the year y Total annual electricity for internal consumption of the power plant during the year y Total consumption of dry biomass category i for year y Total measured electricity generation from the CDM project activity during the year y Total annual electricity for internal consumption of the power plant during the year y Total consumption of dry biomass i for year y 2.2 table table table 2 Compliance The parameter corresponds to the electricity exported to the grid and is in compliance with the methodology. Forward Action Request No.1. In accordance with EB-49, Annex-28, in order to improve the clarity and completeness of information the monitoring plan should be revised to clearly indicate the monitoring parameters especially regarding the description of the electricity generation and electricity for internal consumption of the power plant. A request of revision of monitoring plan needs to be submitted before next verification. This parameter corresponds to the electricity imported from the grid to meet the auxiliary requirements during the time when the power plant is not running. When the power plant is running the auxiliary requirements are met by the generation itself and the rest being exported. Thus the parameter is in compliance with the methodology. Further refer FAR above. The parameter corresponds to the biomass being procured and finally is consumed over a period and is in compliance with the registered PDD. Conclusion FAR 1-4 FAR Amount of Total consumption Total 2.2 table The parameter is in compliance with the registered Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-6

29 Page 7 of 31 Parameters Meth/tool PDD MR Included in table fossil fuel input (each type) Surplus of the biomass in the region of the project activity (The revised version of the General guidance on leakage in biomass project activities, Version 03 indicates that the evaluation of surplus of the biomass in the region of the project activity is to be carried out ex-ante) Other GS Parameters of fossil fuels in year y Quantity of biomass residue type n used for heat generation as a result of the project activity for which leakage cannot be ruled out consumption of fossil fuel in year y Surplus of the biomass Compliance Conclusion 2 PDD table 1 GS 1 Water quality Water quality 2.3 table 1 GS 2 Air quality Air quality 2.3 table 2 GS 3 Livelihood of the poor Livelihood of the poor 2.5 table 1 Although the surplus demonstration has been carried out ex-ante in the registered project, the parameter is included in the MR to be in compliance with the registered PDD. Corrective Action Request No.3. Please include the quantitative information on the surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity and also provide the associated supporting documents. The water quality is analyzed by Rajasthan Pollution Control Board (RPCB) during their yearly inspection in order to grant consent to operate the Water Act. The air quality is analyzed by Rajasthan Pollution Control Board (RPCB) during their yearly inspection in order to grant consent to operate under Air Act. The data pertaining to the number of farmers benefitted as a result of the project are assessed. CAR 8 8 2, 22 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-7

30 Page 8 of 31 Parameters Meth/tool PDD MR Included in table Other GS Parameters Compliance Conclusion GS 4 Employment numbers Employment numbers 2.5 table 2 The data pertaining new jobs generated as a result of the project are assessed. 2, 13 GS 5 Technological self reliance KPTL 2.5 table 3 The data pertaining to the numbers of people received trainings as a result of the project are assessed. 2, 13 GS 6 Resource competition Surplus of the biomass / Resource competition 2.4 table 1 Please refer CAR3 CAR 2.2. Parameters measured directly with instruments Table 1 Parameter and instrumentation Information Parameter title PDD Meth/Tool MR Verified Conclusion 1. Total measured electricity generation from the CDM project activity during the year y 2. Total annual electricity for Electricity generated by the renewable technology 1. Total measured electricity generation from the CDM project activity during the year y 2. Total annual electricity for It has been verified during on-site audit that the meters (main and back-up meter) used for measuring the export and import from grid are bi-directional in nature therefore both the indicated parameters (export and import) are measured by both the meters (main and back-up meter). Further, please refer FAR1 FAR Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-8

31 Page 9 of 31 internal consumption of the power plant during the year y internal consumption of the power plant during the year y Parameter ID (if available) E t,y, E pl, y NA E t,y, E pl, y Please refer FAR1 FAR Data Unit GWh /year kwh GWh /year Please refer FAR1 FAR Monitoring frequency (reading) Monthly NA Monthly Yes 1-3, 27 Monitoring frequency (recording) Monthly NA Monthly Recording of parameter has been done continuously by energy meters Calibration requirements Half yearly NA Half yearly The meters are tested every six months by representative of metering division, Rajasthan Power Procurement Center (RPPC) Corrective Action Request No.4. With reference to the incompleteness received, it has been noticed that although the PDD stipulates that the main and backup electricity-meters are to be tested every half year; however the date of the last calibration presented in the Monitoring (section B.1.1) is 26/07/2008. Please provide details of the subsequent test. Also, the guidance from EB52 - Annex 60 is to be followed. Uncertainty level Not Mentioned NA Not Mentioned The meters are maintained by RVPN and are of 0.2 accuracy class 1-3, 27 CAR 1,11,16 Measurement Principle (if Energy meter - Energy meter - Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-9

32 Page 10 of 31 applicable) 11,16 Technical aspects Conclusion Instrument Type: Electronic Trivector Energy meter (Digital Display) Bidirectional. 1, 2, 16 Serial Number: Main Meter - TNU Back up Meter - TNU , 2, 16 Manufacturer Model Nr.: SECURE 1, 2, 16 Specific Location: 132 KV Grid Substation, UNIARA 1, 2, 16 Measurement Range: 0.00 to kwh 1, 2, 16 Gaps in operating time of instrument : Period: NA Default value used: NA Source of data Justification: NA QA/QC aspects Electronic Trivector Meter Reading (Main & Back-up Meter) Type: Digital Procedures: Daily readings are maintained at the grid sub-station and joint meter reading is carried out by representatives of KPTL and RVPN to record the energy exported and imported by the project on monthly basis. The reading of the main meter taken during JMR forms the basis for the final invoice raised by KPTL. In the event of failure of the main meter the readings from the back-up meter are considered for invoicing. In the event of main meter failure the Conclusion 1,16 2, 11,12,16 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-10

33 Page 11 of 31 recording shall be done based on back-up meter and will switch back to main meter after repair, calibration, testing and sealing (carried out by RVPN). Archiving of raw data and protection measures Data transfer and protection of input data for calculations Completeness of data Data verification Implementation of procedure: The procedure has been followed as indicated above. Responsibility: Joint meter reading by RVPN in presence of representative of KPTL. The monthly joint meter reading is carried out in front of representatives of KPTL and RVPN and is signed by both the parties. Quality assurance procedures are in place as the joint meter reports and respective billings are reviewed for accuracy and correctness by a staff member before submission. The raw data are confirmed by meter readers from the owner and the grid company. It is verified by the data verifier in every steps of the transformation. After internal cross-checking, all plausible records will be deemed as useable data. Quality of evidence All data were cross-checked and verified during on-site visit. JMR and invoices raised to RVPN for entire monitoring period has been submitted by PP and same has been verified. Consistency of raw data with calculation tool: The values indicated in the emission reduction calculation sheet have been checked from the daily records, JMRs and Invoices and same has been found to be consistent except for the month of October Corrective Action Request No.5. Since the data for the present monitoring period starts from 7 th Oct therefore the daily records for the October month have been checked during the on-site audit and it has been found that the values for the October month are over-stated in the published MR and do not correspond to the actual export and import. Please correct the same and provide appropriate justification and procedures to avoid such mistakes in the future. Consistency of calculation tool with monitoring report: The values indicated in the emission reduction calculation sheet and monitoring report have been checked and found to be consistent. Further please refer CAR above. 2, 11,12,16 2, 11,12,16 2, 11,12,16 2, 11,12,16 Conclusion 11,12 CAR CAR Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-11

34 Page 12 of 31 Crosscheck (if available) The readings of log book at project plant power house, JMR and invoices checked during the on-site audit have been found to be consistent. 2, 11,12 Table 2 Parameter and instrumentation Information Parameter title PDD Meth/Tool MR Verified Conclusion 1. Total consumpti on of dry biomass category i for year y 2. Total consumpti on of fossil fuels in year y Amount of biomass and fossil fuel consumption (each type) 1. Total consumpti on of dry biomass category i for year y 2. Total consumpti on of fossil fuel in year y It has been verified during the on-site audit that for each fuel type the quantity of fuel is measured at the weigh-bridge at the power plant entrance during arrival. Also, the fuel being fed to the boiler is measured at the belt conveyor. 2,15,20,22 Parameter ID (if available) NA NA NA Yes Data Unit Tonnes NA Tonnes Yes Monitoring frequency (reading) Daily NA Daily Every entry into the plant premises is being measured and recorded Monitoring frequency (recording) Monthly NA Monthly Every entry into the plant premises is being measured and recorded 2,15,20,22 2,15,20,22 Calibration requirements Annually NA Annually The weigh bridge is calibrated annually 15,20,22 Uncertainty level Not Mentioned NA Not Mentioned The weighbridge is maintained by KPTL and is of 5 kg uncertainty level Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-12

35 Page 13 of 31 Measurement Principle (if applicable) Not Mentioned Technical aspects - Not Mentioned Load cell 15,20,22 15,20,22 Conclusion Instrument Type: Weighbridge 2,15,20,22 Serial Number: ,15,20,22 Manufacturer Model Nr.: Leotronic scales 2,15,20,22 Specific Location: Plant entrance 2,15,20,22 Measurement Range: 40 Metric Ton (MT) 2,15,20,22 Gaps in operating time of instrument : Period: NA Default value used: NA Justification: NA QA/QC aspects Conclusion Source of data Weighbridge 2,15,20,22 Procedures: The amount of fuel coming to the power plant is weighed by weighbridge upon its arrival in the plant premises. 2,15,20,22 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-13

36 Page 14 of 31 Archiving of raw data and protection measures Data transfer and protection of input data for calculations Completeness of data Data verification Implementation of procedure: The procedure has been followed as indicated above. Responsibility: KPTL The daily weighbridge data is entered by the shift in-charge and then transferred into the computer system. The data transfer procedures are verified. Quality of evidence All data were cross-checked and verified during on-site visit for entire monitoring period. No fossil fuel has been used in the power plant during the monitoring period. Also, during the on-site audit no provision for fossil fuel firing at the project site could be found. Consistency of raw data with calculation tool: The values indicated in the emission reduction calculation sheet have been checked from the purchase receipts. Predominantly mustard crop residues have been used with negligibly small share of wood chips. As the share of wood chips is insignificant therefore the demonstration that these wood resources are from renewable origin as per the GS eligibility rules is not considered necessary. Corrective Action Request No.6. Please include the justification in the monitoring report explaining how the biomass quantity for the monitoring period is determined, as this is not done for the complete year. Forward Action Request No.2. As the biomass residues are available seasonally, therefore the quantity can be reliably measured through the weigh bridge on yearly basis. As the first monitoring period does not cover entire 12 month data therefore the biomass quantity should be checked during the subsequent verification. Consistency of calculation tool with monitoring report: Please refer CAR above 2,15,20,22 2,15,20,22 2,15,20,22 2,15,20,22 Conclusion 2,15,20,22 CAR, FAR CAR Crosscheck (if available) The readings of log book at project plant and biomass purchase receipts have been found Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-14

37 Page 15 of 31 consistent. 15,20, Parameters measured through sampling Table 1 PDD Verified Situation Conclusion ID-PDD: ID GS1 ID-Internal: - Description: Water Quality Unit (if appropriate): - Date: Source: Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board 8, 19 Reliability of Source: Reliable (Government regulatory authority) Up-to-date? Yearly review is done by the authority to verify the compliance with local environmental standards. Uncertainty Level: N.A Table 2 PDD Verified Situation Conclusion Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-15

38 Page 16 of 31 ID-PDD: ID GS2 ID-Internal: - Description: Air Quality Unit (if appropriate): - Date: Source: Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board 8 Reliability of Source: Reliable (Government regulatory authority) Up-to-date? Yearly review is done by the authority to verify the compliance with local environmental standards. The limits specified for ambient air do comply with the rules where as the gas outlet emission indicated for the ESP specification is 115 mg/nm 3 which is more than the limit of 50 mg/m 3 as specified in the consent. However this value The permissible limits comply with the EPA rules as specified in the Consent letter and within the permissible limits. (the client has also requested for correction in the letter). Uncertainty Level: N.A 2, Parameters obtained through external sources and accounting data Table 1 External sources and accounting information use a separate table for each single parameter Parameter title Quantity of biomass residue type n used for PDD Meth/Tool MR Verified Conclusion Surplus of the biomass in the region of the project Surplus of the biomass / Resource Although the title is differently stated but it still refers to the same CAR Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-16

39 Page 17 of 31 heat generation as a result of the project activity for which leakage cannot be ruled out activity competition parameter and can be deemed acceptable. Also refer CAR3 above Parameter ID (if available) B FLE,n,y - ID GS6 Refer CAR3 above CAR Data Unit Tonnes NA Tonnes Yes Description of Data / Data Refers to: Technical aspects Refers to the surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity to rule out any leakage occurring during to the competing use of biomass Conclusion Date of Data: Refer CAR3 above CAR Gaps in data Refer CAR3 above CAR Source of data QA/QC aspects Clarification Request No.1 Please provide the documentary evidence to demonstrate surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity. Conclusion Reliability of Data Source: Please refer CR1 above CR Is the Data up-to-date? Please refer CR1 above CR Archiving of raw data and protection measures Data transfer and protection of input data for calculations NA NA Quality of evidence CR Conclusion Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-17

40 Page 18 of 31 Completeness of data Please refer CR1 above CR Data verification Please refer CR1 above CR Crosscheck (if available) Please refer CR1 above CR 2.5. Other parameters Table 1 PDD Verified Situation Conclusion ID-PDD: ID GS3 Description: Livelihood of the poor - Number of people benefitted by the sale of biomass residues Unit (if appropriate): - Date: Source: Biomass receipt and payment made - KPTL 20, 22 Reliability of Source: Reliable as also checked during the on-site audit with interviews of the local people. Forward Action Request No.3. The number of farmers from whom mustard crop residues have been bought are to be determined in order to know exactly the number of people benefitted by the project activity. The number of deliveries is not the correct measure as the same farmer may deliver the biomass residues to the plant more than once. The information of the number of farmers with complete details is to be presented and the same would be checked during next verification. Up-to-date? See FAR3 FAR Uncertainty Level: N.A - FAR Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-18

41 Page 19 of 31 Table 2 PDD Verified Situation Conclusion ID-PDD: ID GS4 Description: Employment numbers - Number of people employed in the plant as a result of project activity Unit (if appropriate): - Date: Source: Employment records - KPTL 13 Reliability of Source: Reliable as also checked during the on-site audit with interviews of the employees 2 Up-to-date? Yes Uncertainty Level: N.A - Table 3 PDD Verified Situation Conclusion ID-PDD: ID GS5 Description: Technological self reliance - Number of engineers trained to operate and implement the technology Unit (if appropriate): - Date: Source: Training records - KPTL Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-19

42 Page 20 of 31 Reliability of Source: Reliable as also checked during the on-site audit with interviews of the employees 2 Up-to-date? Yes Uncertainty Level: N.A - 13 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-20

43 Page 21 of Data Processing and ER calculation Description of data processing from transferred data to final results in the calculation tool Step Description Conclusion Consistency Calculation Tool description Yes all abbreviations and units are consistent with PDD and Methodology and traceable to the raw data. Further please refer FAR1 All formulae, intermediate steps and constants are described transparently including correct units and in compliance with the methodology and the PDD. Further please refer above CAR and FAR1 FAR CAR, FAR Elimination of not plausible data (if applicable) Transformation from useable data to input data for further calculation (if applicable) NA NA Ex-ante data Baseline Grid Emission factor has been taken correctly as mentioned in section B,6.2 of the registered PDD as tco 2 /GWh. Default parameter NA Formulae check Yes all the formulae included in the calculation tool are in compliance with the registered PDD and applied methodology. Rounding functions Yes rounding functions has been correctly and conservatively applied. 1, 3, 24, 27 Calculation tool changes and protection measures ed data Please refer to CAR4 corresponding to the data reported for October Yes the values of the calculation tool and the MR are consistent. Further please refer to CAR4 corresponding to the data reported for October ,3,4 1,3,4 CAR CAR Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-21

44 Page 22 of Additional assessment 4.1. Internal Review Description and performance of internal review Procedure Description As KPTL is into generation of power and selling to grid, the internal review is done as per the Company requirements. Conclusion Documentation The internal audit reports were checked on site by the audit team. 2 Responsibilities The final internal approval of the Monitoring was given by the senior vice-president of biomass energy division of KPTL Peculiarities Description of Peculiarities and unexpected Daily Events during the verification period Performance Description The major shutdowns in the plant during the monitoring period were in November 08 and February 09. The plant was shut down for a total of 49 hours due to disturbances in the grid, electrical and mechanical problems. Clarification Request No.2 Please clarify why the total generation exceeded 8 MW in the months of November, December and January, during the monitoring period. Also clarify why the auxiliary consumption for 2 nd January is less in comparison of rest of the month. Conclusion Documentation The shutdown details were verified on site. 2, 23 Measures NA CR 2 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-22

45 Page 23 of Further additional requirements Not applicable 4.4. Data ing Description of the Monitoring Compliance with UNFCCC regulations Completeness and Transparency Comments and Results The first monitoring report for the registered CDM project activity 1774, is dated 31/03/2009, Version 1.1 This being the first monitoring report, the verification period is from the day of registration of the project (07/10/2008) to 28/02/2009. Corrective Action Request No.7. Please include the information in the MR in accordance with EB 48, Annex 68, para 10(a), especially regarding the information on the following: calibration of monitoring instruments; emission factor and comparison of the actual emission reduction claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the registered PDD. Please refer to CARs and FARs above Conclusion CAR CAR, FAR Correctness Please refer to CARs above CAR Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-23

46 Page 24 of Compilation and Resolutions of CARs, CRs and FARs Corrective Action Requests by audit team Comments and Results Ref Conclusion Issue Corrective Action Request No.1 Please include the major planned/forced outage details during the monitoring period in the MR. Response The planned/forced outages during the monitoring period are integrated in the revised monitoring report , 27 Assessment The planned/forced outages during the monitoring period as checked during the onsite audit have been indicated in the revised MR. Issue Corrective Action Request No.2 Please include the procedure for data recording and archiving for all the monitored parameters in the MR. Response Assessment The related information is given in detail in the monitoring manual (version 1.0) that was provided to the DOE. The procedure for data recording and archiving is provided in the CDM monitoring manual which has been verified on site Issue Corrective Action Request No.3 Please include the quantitative information on the surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity and also provide the associated supporting documents. Response The quantitative information on the surplus availability of mustard crop residues in the region (50 km radius around the Tonk plant) has been added to the monitoring report and is available to the DOE. Please note the following explanation: The check has been performed in accordance with the General guidance on leakage in biomass project activities (Version 02) which is applicable to the project and requires an annual check although , 18, 20, 27 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-24

47 Page 25 of 31 Corrective Action Requests by audit team this guidance has been updated and requires the check now only ex-ante, which has also been performed for the project activity. In the following the approach of the check is explained. As Juliflora has not been used during this monitoring period the check is performed on mustard crop residues. For the determination of the total amount of available mustard crop residues in the region official data of the "District Statistical Data Book" published by Economical & Statistical Directorate, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, for the year has been used. The amount available for the related period is 265,756 t of mustard crop residues. Based on a third party study performed at the time of the procurement of the mustard crop residues for this monitoring period in 2008, as the only competing users of the biomass, brick kilns were found. According to this study 41,300 t of mustard crop residues are used by brick kilns in the region (50 km radius around the Tonk plant). The amount of residues used by brick kilns has been calculated based on the information of the related report. Please see the table below for the details: Assessment Type of brick kiln Number of brick kilns Mustard crop residue consumption per kiln and year [t] Chimney kiln 20 1,500 30,000 Pajawa kiln ,300 Brick kilns in the region in total 41,300 Mustard crop residue consumption in all kilns during one year [t] (Source: "Survey On the use of Mustard Crop Residue by the Brick Kilns Located in Tonk, Bundi & Sawai Madhpur Districts, Rajasthan (INDIA)", Nature Club of Rajasthan, Jaipur, 2008) For conservativeness reasons we are using for the Tonk plant the amount of biomass procured for the period from until which is 135, tons or 52.68% of the available mustard crop residues in the region. Summing up the two users of the mustard crop residues, the total amount of used biomass is 176, tons, which is equal to 68.78%, leaving 31.32% of mustard crop residues is available for other purposes what is leading to the fact that leakage can be ruled out. The quantitative information on the surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity has been incorporated in the MR in accordance with the tool and the monitoring plan. The PP Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-25

48 Page 26 of 31 Corrective Action Requests by audit team has also provided the associated supporting documents. This issue is thus closed. Issue Corrective Action Request No.4 With reference to the incompleteness received, it has been noticed that although the PDD stipulates that the main and backup electricity-meters are to be tested every half year; however the date of the last calibration presented in the Monitoring (section B.1.1) is 26/07/2008. Please provide details of the subsequent test. Also, the guidance from EB52 - Annex 60 is to be followed. Response Assessment The UNFCCC secretariat issued an "incomplete" note on requesting the PP to follow the requirements of EB52 guidance Annex 60 related to the calibration frequency of the electricity meters. Please note that the calibration of the electricity meters is not under control of the PP, as this is carried out by the Metering Division of Rajasthan Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited (RVPNL). Nevertheless the electricity meter testing was not performed within the exact 6 month period noted in the PDD. The delay determined is 32 days, defining the half year period sharply as 6 months. In order to be conservative we follow the guidance of the UNFCCC EB 52 Annex 60, as noted above. For these mentioned 32 days the maximum error will be applied on the electricity meter import and export readings. Please see for the details the related Excel spreadsheet. The subsequent test report submitted by the PP is dated 06/03/2009 indicating that the main and backup meters are performing within the maximum permissible error of the instrument, according to manufacturer s specification. As per the half year testing frequency stated in the registered PDD since the earlier stated calibration was carried out on 26/07/2008 therefore the subsequent should have been on 26/01/2009. Since there is delay of 32 days in testing of the main meter and backup meter, therefore as per the guidance provided in EB-52, Annex 60 the conservative application of the full scale maximum permissible error of the instrument, according to manufacturer s specification, to the measured values has been applied as the error is reported to be smaller than the maximum permissible error. The export to the grid has been reduced and the import has been increased for all measured values taken during the period between the scheduled date of calibration and the actual date of calibration. The daily export and import values for the month of January were also checked for the application of this correction. The PP has provided the updated monitoring report and emission reduction calculation spreadsheets. The above change resulted in more conservative estimate of emission reductions and the same were reduced by 9 tco 2 e. 2.2 Table 1 2, 11, 12, 16, 24, 27 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-26

49 Page 27 of 31 Corrective Action Requests by audit team Issue Corrective Action Request No.5 Since the data for the present monitoring period starts from 7 th Oct therefore the daily records for the October month have been checked during the on-site audit and it has been found that the values for the October month are over-stated in the published MR and do not correspond to the actual export and import. Please correct the same and provide appropriate justification and procedures to avoid such mistakes in the future. 2.2 Table 1 2, 11, 12, 24, 27 Response Assessment The data has been corrected as requested. A misunderstanding has led to a mistake in the Excel sheet presented to the DOE. However, the raw data presented to the DOE onsite was clear and correct. Therefore it is obvious that during the transfer of the data into the Excel sheet an error occurred. As this is the first verification process for this CDM project activity sources of error are likely to be detected that were not obvious before. These are now being resolved. The CDM requirements had to be fully implemented into the KPTL quality control system, what has happened now. As KPTL has implemented a very strict internal auditing system it is assured that such mistakes will be avoided in the future. The MR has been corrected corresponding to the actual values of export and import as verified during the on-site audit. Issue Corrective Action Request No.6 Please include the justification in the monitoring report explaining how the biomass quantity for the monitoring period is determined, as this is not done for the complete year. Response Assessment The justification on the biomass consumed is given in chapter D in order to provide as much clarity and transparency as possible. Details on the quantities of the biomass for one full year before the start of the crediting period as well as for the monitoring period itself are given in the table under chapter D More details are to be found in the related Excel sheet under "biomass balance". The information on the each type of biomass procured and consumed has been indicated in the revised MR. It is understood that mustard crop residues are available seasonally (primarily only in the months of March-June) for every year and have to be stored for the remaining part of the year for 2.2 Table 2 2, 20, 22, 27 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-27

50 Page 28 of 31 Corrective Action Requests by audit team consumption, this being a cyclic process. Each type of fuel procured is measured through the weigh bridge. The fuel consumption is also measured at the belt conveyor feeding the boiler and the same is also incorporated in the revised MR. It has been found that the amount of electricity generated calculated using specific fuel consumption and amount of each type of biomass fuel used is higher than the actual electricity generated. Further it is clarified that since the measurement at the belt conveyor cannot indicate the fuel type and is relatively less reliable thus the quantity of fuel input is based on the weigh bridge data as indicated in the registered PDD. Also, as the biomass balance of the project can only be finally determined on an annual basis, in this case after the end of the first year of the crediting period. Thus a FAR2 is being raised accordingly. Issue Corrective Action Request No.7 Please include the information in the MR in accordance with EB 48, Annex 68, para 10(a), especially regarding the information on the following: calibration of monitoring instruments; emission factor and comparison of the actual emission reduction claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the registered PDD , 3, 15, 16, 24, 27 Response Assessment All details as requested by the applicable EB Guidelines are included in the revised monitoring report. The PP has revised the MR in accordance with EB 48, Annex 68, para 10(a). The revised MR includes the information on the calibration of the monitoring instruments; emission factor and comparison of the actual emission reduction claimed in the monitoring period with the estimate in the registered PDD. The calibration certificates have been checked. The emission factor as indicated in the registered PDD has been used. Although the actual emission reductions are higher as compared to the apportioned estimated figure in the PDD, the explanation provided by the PP is deemed acceptable. Clarification Requests by audit team Comments and Results Ref Conclusion Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-28

51 Page 29 of 31 Clarification Requests by audit team Issue Clarification Request No. 1 Please provide the documentary evidence to demonstrate surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity. 2.4 Table 1 17, 18, 20 Response Assessment The documentary evidence has been submitted to the DOE in electronic copy and was available onsite. The references of both documents are stated in the Monitoring. These are: the "District Statistical Data Book" published by Economical & Statistical Directorate, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur for the year and the "Survey On the use of Mustard Crop Residue by the Brick Kilns Located in Tonk, Bundi & Sawai Madhpur Districts, Rajasthan (INDIA)", Nature Club of Rajasthan, Jaipur, The stated documentary evidence to demonstrate surplus availability of biomass residue in the region of the project activity has been submitted. This issue is thus closed. Issue Clarification Request No. 2 Please clarify why the total generation exceeded 8 MW in the months of November, December and January, during the monitoring period. Also clarify why the auxiliary consumption for 2 nd January is less in comparison of rest of the month. Response 1) The system is designed to deliver 8 MW el. However the actual available capacity always differs slightly from the designed capacity within a range of a few percent due to the discrepancy between reality and modelling. As the planning of the energy generation system is based on assumptions and the system contains a number of devices, it is unavoidable that there are slight deviations from the operational capacity. This is the case at the Tonk plant. The deviation is within a very small range of the total capacity and can therefore be seen as neglectible. The total generation slightly exceed 8 MW during the monitoring period on some days in December, January, March and April as the DOE mentions. The designed capacity is exceeded in maximum by 0.75 %. It is a known fact that the rated capacity under normal circumstances is subject to availability and the conditions of the steam and therefore a variation of the maximum electricity generation is possible that might even exceed the design capacity. This is a fact of based on basic thermodynamic laws. The design capacity is 8 MW, however the peak capacity 4.2 2, 27 Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-29

52 Page 30 of 31 Clarification Requests by audit team Assessment that can be reached for short terms is usually ~10% larger (Reference: Page L 50, "Dubbel: Taschenbuch für den Maschinenbau"; Springer, 2004). However the amount of emission reductions is not influenced by the generated gross electricity as it is for conservativeness reasons determined based on the exported electricity. 2) Furthermore a forced outage happened on January As a result the load of the plant was gradually reduced before coming to a total halt. Resulting from this the auxiliary consumption is lower. It has been clarified that the total generation exceeded 8 MW capacity in the months of November, December and January, during the monitoring period due to the overloading of the turbine. This is deemed acceptable in the given context as the overloading is much below the 10% overloading limit. Also it has been clarified that due to the forced outage the auxiliary consumption for 2nd January is less in comparison of rest of the month. This issue is thus closed. Forward Action Requests by audit team Comments and Results Ref Conclusion Issue Forward Action Request No.1. In accordance with EB-49, Annex-28, in order to improve the clarity and completeness of information the monitoring plan should be revised to clearly indicate the monitoring parameters especially regarding the description of the electricity generation and electricity for internal consumption of the power plant. A request of revision of monitoring plan needs to be submitted before next verification. 2.1 Response Assessment As requested by the DOE a revision of the monitoring plan will be submitted before the next verification in order to provide more clarity on the monitoring parameters regarding the electricity generation. The PP accepts to revise the monitoring plan in order to improve the clarity of the monitoring parameters before proceeding with the next verification. Issue Forward Action Request No Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-30

53 Page 31 of 31 Forward Action Requests by audit team As the biomass residues are available seasonally, therefore the procured and consumed quantity can be reliably measured through the weigh bridge on yearly basis. As the first monitoring period does not cover entire 12 month data therefore the biomass quantity should be checked during the subsequent verification. Table 2 Response Assessment As explained in the revised monitoring report we support the opinion of the DOE. Therefore the check of the the first full year of the crediting period will be finally performed as defined in the PDD during the subsequent verification. However data is available for crosscheck that the amount of biomass fed to the boiler and weighted by the feeding system is fully consistent. As is clarified that the biomass balance of the project can only be finally determined on an annual basis, therefore the cross-check of the biomass procured and biomass consumed need to be carried out in this case after the end of the first year of the crediting period. Issue Forward Action Request No.3. The number of farmers from whom mustard crop residues have been bought are to be determined in order to know exactly the number of people benefitted by the project activity. The number of deliveries is not the correct measure as the same farmer may deliver the biomass residues to the plant more than once. The information of the number of farmers with complete details is to be presented and the same would be checked during next verification. 2.5 Table 1 Response Assessment The project owner will evaluate a satisfying solution until the next periodic verification. The issue would be verified during the next verification. Checklist is applicable to registered Project Activity No.: 1774 (CDM), 441 (GS) Page A-31

54 PERIODIC VERIFICATION Annex 2: Information Reference List

55 Information Reference List (IRL) Page 1 of 2 IRL # Document or Type of Information Date of document 1. Published Monitoring for CDM project:1774,version 1.1 and associated annex for GS related parameters for GS project:441,version 1.1 respectively 2. On-site interviews at KPTL plant in Tonk, Rajasthan by TÜV SÜD audit team on 23 rd - 24 th April 2009 : Sandeep Kanda TUV SUD Industrie Service Eswar Murty TUV SUD South Asia Interviewed persons: Anand Chopra Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited Hitesh Goyal Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited S.K.Basu Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited M.S.Malik Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited Manish Sharma Kalpataru Power Transmission Limited Alexander Samai One Carbon International Carsten Warnecke One Carbon International 3. Project documents for project:1774-cdm, 441-GS Approved small scale methodology-ams 1.D.version and Power Purchase Agreement Purchase order of 8 MW turbo generator Technical specifications-hangzhou steam turbine company limited & 38 TPH Boiler Consent to operate under Air and Water Acts from Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board Synchronization of 8 MW turbine with GSS grid Notification from Rajasthan Power Procurement Center regarding power distribution

56 Information Reference List (IRL) Page 2 of Joint Meter Readings-KPTL plant from October 08 to February Invoices for electricity export-kptl plant October 08 to February Details of Employment records and trainings conducted to staff of KPTL plant Boiler inspection certificate Weighing scale calibration certificate Calibration report of energy meters TNU and TNU , , , Survey On the use of Mustard Crop Residue by the Brick Kilns Located in Tonk, Bundi & Sawai 2008 Madhpur Districts, Rajasthan (India)", Nature Club of Rajasthan, Jaipur 18. District Statistical Data Book" published by Economical & Statistical Directorate, Government of --- Rajasthan, Jaipur, for the year indicating the total amount of available mustard crop residues in the region 19. Invoice for water and assessment of water cess for KPTL plant October Audited certificate for biomass purchase in KPTL plant Request to Pollution Control Board for correction in the consent Sample purchase ledger for Mustard crop residues at Tonk plant October Details of outage in the plant during the monitoring period Excel sheet for emission reduction calculations cross-checked with the log-books during on-site audit Monitoring manual for the CDM project activity Revised final monitoring report for CDM project:1774,version 2.0 and associated annex for GS related parameters for GS project:441,version 1.4 respectively and