SMALL-SCALE HYDROPOWER PROJECT SAHAVINOTRY IN MADAGASCAR

Transcription

1 SMALL-SCALE HYDROPOWER PROJECT SAHAVINOTRY IN MADAGASCAR TÜV NORD CERT GmbH JI/CDM Certification Program Langemarckstraße, Essen, Germany Phone: Fax: Project Title Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar Version 01.1 Report ID /042 1

2 Report Title Client Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar HYDELEC Madagascar S.A Pages 29 Date of Issue Prepared By Contact Approved By Work Carried Out By 04-August-2014 TÜV NORD CERT GmbH TÜV NORD CERT GmbH JI/CDM Certification Program Langemarckstraße, Essen, Germany Phone: Fax: Martin Saalmann Grzegorz Kochaniewicz (TL) David Lubanga (TM) Martin Saalmann (TR), Jochen Schubert (TR) Summary: The Hydelect Madagascar SA has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program to carry out the first periodic verification of the project, Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar with regard to the relevant requirements of VCS standard version 03. The VCS project undertaken Sahanivotry Hydro Power Plant is a run-of-river hydropower plant with a capacity of 16.5 MW located on the river Ampamehana within Sahanivotry village about 30 km of Antsirabé, Antananarivo Province, Madagascar (47 08 E S). The SHPP has an average electricity generation of app. 80 GWh (up to 90 GWh in optimal years) per year, connected via a 63 kv transmission line to the substation of the regional grid of Antananarivo (RI TANA) operated by JIRAMA. The estimated annual emission reduction amounts to 44,196 t CO2e. Reporting period: From to In the course of the verification 2 Corrective Action Requests (CARs), 0 Clarification Requests (CLs) were successfully closed and no Forward Action Request (FAR) will be verified as there is no subsequent periodic 2

3 verification under VCS. The verification is based on the draft monitoring report, revised monitoring report, the monitoring plan as set out in the validated PD / GHG Report PD, the validation report, emission reduction calculation spreadsheet and supporting documents made available to the TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP by the project participant. As the result of the pre-cdm periodic verification, the verifier confirms that the GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements in a conservative and appropriate manner. TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP herewith confirms that the project has achieved emission reductions in the above mentioned reporting period ( to ) as follows: GHG Emission Reductions tco 2 e Emissions reductions to ,148 Emissions reductions to ,377 Emissions reductions to ,934 Total Emission reductions 78,459 3

4 4

5 ABBREVIATIONS BAU CA CAR CDM CO 2 CO 2e CP CL DNA EB EIA ER FAR GHG GWP IPCC MP MR QC/QA UNFCCC VCS VCS - PD VCU VT Business as usual Corrective Action / Clarification Action Corrective Action Request Clean Development Mechanism Carbon dioxide Carbon dioxide equivalent Certification Program Clarification Request Designated National Authority CDM Executive Board Environmental Impact Assessment Emission Reduction Forward Action Request Greenhouse gas(es) Global Warming Potential Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Monitoring Plan Monitoring Report Quality control/quality assurance United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Verified Carbon Standard VCS - Project Description Verified Carbon Unit Verification team 5

6 Contents Abbreviations Introduction Objective Scope and Criteria Level of Assurance Summary description of the project Validation Process, Findings and Conclusion Validation Process Method and criteria Appointment of team members and technical reviewer Document review Interviews Site Inspections Resolution of any material discrepancy Validation Findings Gap Validation Methodology Deviations New Project Activity Instances Validation Conclusion Verification Process Method and Criteria Appointment of team members and technical reviewer Document Review Interviews Site Inspections Resolution of Any Material Discrepancy Verification Findings Project Implementation Status Accuracy of GHG Emission Reduction or Removal Calculations Quality of Evidence to Determine GHG Emission Reductions or Removals Management and Operational System Verification conclusion ANNEX

7 1 INTRODUCTION The HYDELEC Madagascar SA has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program to carry out the verification of the project: Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar with regard to the relevant requirements of the Verified Carbon Standard 3 /VCS/. The verifiers have reviewed the implementation of the monitoring plan (MP) in the registered VCS-PD for the monitoring period to The applied monitoring methodology is ACM0002 version 13 Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources. 1.1 Objective The purpose of this verification, by independent checking of objective evidence, is as follows: to verify that the project is implemented as described in the project design document/ghg Report PD; to assess the implementation of the monitoring plan (MP) content in the VCS-PD; to assess the project s compliance with other relevant rules, including the host country legislation; to confirm that the monitoring system is implemented and fully functional to generate verified emission reductions (VERs / VCUs) or ERs without any double counting; and to establish that the data reported are accurate, complete, consistent, transparent and free of material error or omission by checking the monitoring records and the emissions reduction calculation. 1.2 Scope and Criteria The verification of this project is based on the validated project design document /PDD/ / GHG Report PD /PD/, the monitoring report /MR/, GHG Report MR, emission reduction calculation spread sheet /XLS/, supporting documents made available to the verifier and information collected through performing interviews and during the on-site assessment. Furthermore publicly available information was considered as far as available and required. The TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP has employed a risk-based approach in the verification, focusing on the identification of significant risks and reliability of project monitoring and generation of emission reductions. 7

8 1.3 Level of Assurance The verification has been planned and organized to achieve a Reasonable level of assurance Limited level of assurance 1.4 Summary description of the project The Sahanivotry Hydro Power Plant is a run of a river hydropower plant of 16.5 MW capacity consisting of 3 Pelton turbines and 3 generators with an average electricity generation of between 80 GWh and 90 GWh per year. The electricity generated by the project is delivered to the grid via 63 kv transmission line /PDD//VAL//CDM-MR/MR/. The expected operational lifetime of the project is estimated to be 25 years. 2 VALIDATION PROCESS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION 2.1 Validation Process Method and criteria The validation of the project consisted of the following steps: - Contract review; - Appointment of team members and technical reviewers; - Desk review of the Project Document/PD/ submitted by the client and additional supporting documents. - Validation planning; - On-Site assessment; - Background investigation and follow-up interviews with personnel of the - project developer and its contractors; - Draft validation reporting; - Resolution of corrective actions; (if any) - Final validation/verification reporting; - Technical review; - Final approval of the validation 8

9 Table 2.1.1: Validation sequence Topic Time Assignment of validation On-site visit to Draft reporting finalised N/A Final reporting finalised Technical review on final reporting finalised Final corrections Appointment of team members and technical reviewer On the basis of a competence analysis and individual availabilities a validation team was appointed. Furthermore also the personnel for the technical review and the final approval were determined. The list of involved personnel, the tasks assigned and the qualification status are summarized in the table below. Table 2.1-2: Involved Personnel Name Company Function 1) Qualification Status 2) Scheme competence 3) Technical competence 4) Verification competence 5) Host country Competence On-site visit Ms. Grzegorz Kochaniewicz TÜV NORD CERT GmbH TL LA 1.2 Ms. David Lubanga TÜV NORD CERT GmbH TM A) A - Ms. Jochen Schubert TÜV NORD CERT GmbH TR B) SA Ms. Martin Saalmann TÜV NORD CERT GmbH TR/ FA B) SA - - 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) TL: Team Leader; TM: Team Member, TR: Technical review; OT: Observer-Team, OR: Observer-TR; FA: Final approval GHG Auditor Status: A: Assessor; LA: Lead Assessor; SA: Senior Assessor; T: Trainee; TE: Technical Expert GHG auditor status (at least Assessor) As per S01-MU03 or S01-VA070-A2 (such as 1.1, 1.2, ) In case of verification projects 9

10 A) B) Team Member: GHG auditor (at least Assessor status), Technical Expert (incl. Host Country Expert or Verification Expert), not ETE No team member Document review The supplementary VCS PD /PD/ and supporting background documents related to the project design and baseline were reviewed. Furthermore, the validation team reviewed additional documentation by third parties like host party legislation, technical reports referring to the project design or to the basic conditions and technical data Interviews Before and during the on-site visit, the validator of TÜV NORD performed interviews with the project participants to confirm selected information and to resolve issues identified in the document review. The project proponent(s), other project entity(ies), the consultants, were interviewed to confirm selected information and to resolve issues identified in the documents review. The main topics of the interviews are summarized in Table Table 2.1-4: Interviewed persons and interview topics Interviewed Persons / Entities Interview topics 1. Project Owner & Operations Personnel 2. Consultant General aspects of the project Technical equipment and operation Changes since implementation Monitoring and measurement equipment Calibration procedures Quality management system Involved personnel and responsibilities Training and practice of the operational personnel Implementation of the monitoring plan Monitoring data management Data uncertainty and residual risks Maintenance Environmental aspects Site Inspections Refer section

11 2.1.6 Resolution of any material discrepancy Material discrepancies identified in the course of the validation are addressed either as CARs, CLs or FARs. A Corrective Action Request (CAR) is established where: mistakes have been made in assumptions, application of the methodology or the project documentation which will have a direct influence the project results, the requirements deemed relevant for validation of the project with certain characteristics have not been met or there is a risk that the project would not be registered or that emission reductions would not be able to be verified and certified. A Clarification Request (CL) will be issued where information is insufficient, unclear or not transparent enough to establish whether a requirement is met. A Forward Action Request (FAR) will be issued when certain issues related to project implementation should be reviewed during the first verification. A detailed list of the CARs, CLs and FAR raised and discussed in the course of this validation is included in the next section 3 of this report. 2.2 Validation Findings Gap Validation A Gap validation has been carried out to cover the sections 1.2, 1.3, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.9, 1.10, , , , and 1.13 of the VCS Project Description /PD/. The project confirms to the requirements under VCS Version 3.4 w.r.t to the gap validation. Ownership: The project proponent HYDELEC Madagascar S.A is the owner of the project plant; the same has been confirmed with the commissioning certificate /COM/. Start date: The earliest commissioning date /COM/ of project is , which represents the start date for the VCS project. The project activity got registered under CDM on /unfccc/, thus the eligibility under VCS is compiled as the validation activity has been completed within 2 years from the start date. The project is therefore eligible to participate under VCS standard version 3.4 in the pre-registration period. 11

12 Participation in other GHG programs: The project is registered under an approved GHG program, i.e. CDM registration no Other Environmental Credits: The project proponent has provided a written undertaking which states that The project neither has nor intends to generate any other form of GHG-related environmental credit for GHG emission reductions or removals claimed under the VCS Program /DEC/. Commercially sensitive information: The project activity does not have any commercially sensitive information; the CDM PDD is publicly available and has been cross-checked to confirm the same. During the course of Gap Validation CARs 2.2.1a and 2.1.1b have been raised and subsequently closed out based on the assessments detailed below. Table 2.2-1: Overview of CARs, CLs and FARs issued No. Topic / Chapter CAR CL FAR i. VCS PD Template Section ii. VCS PD Template Section iii. VCS PD Template Section iv. VCS PD Template Section v. VCS PD Template Section vi. VCS PD Template Section vii. VCS PD Template Section viii. VCS PD Template Section ix. VCS PD Template Section x. VCS PD Template Section xi. VCS PD Template Section xii. VCS PD Template Section SUM Finding: 2.2.1a Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding The PD states the project start on but provided Describe the finding in unambiguous style; address the context (e.g. section) Commissioning Certificate /COM/ indicates the installation of meters and export of electricity from Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the corrective action taken in details. Project start date has been corrected accordingly. 12

13 Finding: DOE Assessment #1 The assessment shall encompass all open issues. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and DOE assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion Tick the appropriate checkbox 2.2.1a The start of MP was corrected in PD Version 3.3 as per provided evidence /COM/. To be checked during the next periodic verification Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed Finding: 2.2.1b Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Chapter Describe the finding in unambiguous style; address the 1. The description in PD version 3 is not correct. context (e.g. section) 2. A confirmation/declaration of non-rejection and non-claim of other environmental credits was not provided. Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the corrective action taken in details. DOE Assessment #1 The assessment shall encompass all open issues. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and DOE assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. 1. The description has been updated with the correct start date. 2. This has been confirmed by written declaration of the Project Proponent. 1. The description has been revised to indicate the correct start date as per commissioning certificate, that is, A signed and stamped declaration has been furnished to the VT /DEC/. The PP (General Manager) declares the following: - Neither emissions trading program nor binding limits on GHG emissions exist in Madagascar; The project neither has nor intends to generate any other form of GHG-related environmental credit for GHG emission reductions or removals claimed under the VCS program; The project has been registered as a CDM project activity by the UNFCCC-CDM Executive Board on (number 3558). The project has not been rejected by any other GHG programs. 13

14 Finding: Conclusion Tick the appropriate checkbox 2.2.1b To be checked during the next periodic verification Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed Methodology Deviations Not applicable New Project Activity Instances Not applicable as this is not a grouped project 2.3 Validation Conclusion The project conforms with the validation criteria for projects, as set out in VCS Version

15 3 VERIFICATION PROCESS 3.1 Method and Criteria The verification of the project consisted of the following steps: - Contract review, - Appointment of team members and technical reviewers, - Desk review of the Monitoring Report /MR/ submitted by the client and additional supporting documents, - Verification planning, - On-Site assessment, - Background investigation and follow-up interviews with personnel of the Project developer and its contractors, - Draft verification reporting, - Resolution of corrective actions (if any), - Final verification reporting, - Technical review, - Final approval of the verification Table 3-1: Verification sequence Topic Time Assignment of verification On-site visit to Draft reporting finalised N/A Final reporting finalised Technical review on final reporting finalised Final corrections Appointment of team members and technical reviewer On the basis of a competence analysis and individual availabilities a verification team was appointed. Furthermore also the personnel for the technical review and the final approval were determined. The list of involved personnel, the tasks assigned and the qualification status are summarized in the table 3-2 below. 15

16 Table 3-2: Involved Personnel Name Company Function 1) Qualification Status 2) Scheme competence 3) Technical competence 4) Verification competence 5) Host country Competence On-site visit Ms. Grzegorz Kochaniewicz TÜV NORD CERT GmbH TL LA 1.2 Ms. David Lubanga TÜV NORD CERT GmbH TM A) A - Ms. Jochen Schubert TÜV NORD CERT GmbH TR B) SA Ms. Martin Saalmann TÜV NORD CERT GmbH TR/ FA B) SA - - 1) TL: Team Leader; TM: Team Member, TR: Technical review; OT: Observer-Team, OR: Observer-TR; FA: Final approval 2) GHG Auditor Status: A: Assessor; LA: Lead Assessor; SA: Senior Assessor; T: Trainee; TE: Technical Expert 3) GHG auditor status (at least Assessor) 4) As per S01-MU03 or S01-VA070-A2 (such as 1.1, 1.2, ) 5) In case of verification projects A) Team Member: GHG auditor (at least Assessor status), Technical Expert (incl. Host Country Expert or Verification Expert), not ETE B) No team member 16

17 3.3 Document Review The VCS PD /PD/, GHG Report PD and supporting background documents related to the project design and baseline were reviewed. Furthermore, the verification team used additional documentation by third parties like host party legislation, technical reports referring to the project design or to the basic conditions and technical data. The references used in the course of this verification are summarized in section Interviews The verification team has carried out interviews in order to assess the information included in the project documentation and to gain additional information regarding the compliance of the project with the relevant criteria applicable for the VCS / ISO During verification the verification team has performed interviews to confirm selected information and to resolve issues identified in the document review. The main topics of the interviews were summarized in Table 3-4. Table 3-4: Interviewed persons and interview topics Interviewed Persons / Entities Interview topics 1. Project Owner & Operations Personnel 2. Consultant General aspects of the project Technical equipment and operation Changes since implementation Monitoring and measurement equipment Remaining issues from validation Calibration procedures Quality management system Involved personnel and responsibilities Training and practice of the operational personnel Implementation of the monitoring plan Monitoring data management Data uncertainty and residual risks GHG calculation Procedural aspects of the verification Maintenance Environmental aspects Editorial issues of the Monitoring Report 3.5 Site Inspections An onsite visit was conducted by the verification team, involving but not limited to the following exercises; An assessment of the implementation and operation of the proposed VCS project activity as per the registered PDD /PDD/. 17

18 A review of information flows for generating, aggregating and reporting the monitoring parameters; Interviews with relevant personnel to confirm that the operational and data collection procedures are implemented in accordance with the approved monitoring plan; A cross-check between information provided in the monitoring report and data from other sources such as plant log books, inventories, invoices, purchase records etc; A check of the monitoring equipment including calibration performance and observations of monitoring procedures against the applied methodology /ACM02/ and approved monitoring plan /PDD/ ; A review of calculations and assumptions made in determining the GHG data and emission reductions; Identification of quality assurance and quality control procedures in place to prevent or identify and correct any errors or omissions in the reported monitoring parameters. 3.6 Resolution of Any Material Discrepancy Material discrepancies identified in the course of the verification are addressed either as CARs, CLs or FARs. A Corrective Action Request (CAR) is established where: mistakes have been made in assumptions, application of the methodology or the project documentation which will have a direct influence the project results, the requirements deemed relevant for verification of the project with certain characteristics have not been met or there is a risk that the project would not be registered or that emission reductions would not be able to be verified and certified. A Clarification Request (CL) will be issued where information is insufficient, unclear or not transparent enough to establish whether a requirement is met. A Forward Action Request (FAR) will be issued when certain issues related to project implementation should be reviewed during the first verification. A detailed list of the CARs CLs and FAR raised and discussed in the course of this verification is included in the next section 4 of this report. 4 VERIFICATION FINDINGS In this section the assessments and findings from the desk review of the VCS PD / GHG Report PD, site visit, interviews and supporting documents as well as the final assessments are summarised. Table 4-1 includes an overview of all raised CARs, CLs and FARs. 18

19 Table 4-1: Overview of CARs, CLs and FARs issued No. Topic / Chapter CAR CL FAR 4.1 Project implementation status Accuracy of GHG emission reduction or Removal calculations Quality of evidence to determine emission reductions or removals Management and operational system SUM Project Implementation Status The project construction commenced in March 2007, and the hydropower plant started commercial operation on The project activity was registered as a CDM project on under the UNFCCC reference number Post-registration changes have been undertaken and approved under the unfccc. The installed capacity was upsized from 15 to 16.5 MW. The PDD was updated from small-scale to large-scale framework, using the latest version of ACM0002 methodology (version ) at that time and related tools. During this monitoring period, the project has operated continuously and satisfactorily, with the exception of the following event; to , the main meter dysfunction time has been conservatively excluded from total ER accounting due to unavailability of JIRAMA alternative meters M3 & M4 calibration evidence and visual inspection (both meters being under the control of third parties). No issues from the validation were identified for this project. Furthermore as this is the pre-cdm periodic verification no issues from former verifications are to be considered. Essential data of the project is presented in the following Table 4-1a. Table 4-1a: Project Characteristics Item Project title Project owner Any specific project categories VCS PD/GHG Report PD dated Applied Methodology Data Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar HYDELEC MADAGASCAR S.A Large project (> t CO 2eq / a) Project (< t CO 2eq / a) AFOLU project Grouped project No specific project category Draft: Final: Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources (version 13) 19

20 Project starting date Crediting period Renewable Crediting Period (7 y) Fixed Crediting Period (10 y) Start of crediting period VERIFICATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 The details of the project location are given in table 4-1b: Table 4-1b: Project Location No. Host Country Region: Project location address: Latitude: Longitude: Project Location Madagascar Sahanivotry, Vakinankaratra, Antananarivo Provice 15, Avenue de l Indépendance, Analakely, 101 Antananarivo, Madagascar South East The key parameters of the project are given in table 4-1c: Table 4-1c: Technical data of the project Parameter Unit Value Turbine capacity MW 3*5.676 Turbine rated head m 210 Turbine rated flow m 3 /s 3.12 Generator capacity MW 3*5.5 Generator rated voltage kv 6.3 Generator rotation speed r/min Table 4-1d: Parameters confirmed during verification Parameter Unit Value Turbine capacity MW 3*5.676 Turbine rated head m 210 Turbine rated flow m 3 /s 3.12 Generator capacity MW 3*5.5 Generator rated voltage kv 6.3 Generator rotation speed r/min

21 Related Findings No CARs, CLs or FARs have been identified in this context The following finding(s) have been addressed: Final Assessment The project is with VCS requirements w.r.t this issue 4.2 Accuracy of GHG Emission Reduction or Removal Calculations Description The baseline emission reductions are based on net electricity exported to the grid by the project activity. The project emissions are considered zero for the project activity. Also, as per the methodology the leakage emission need not be calculated for this project activity. Therefore the baseline emission equals the Emission Reductions. The formula used to calculate the baseline emission is as per the registered CDM PDD. According to the ACM0002, ver , quantity of net electricity generation supplied by the project activity to the grid in year y is monitored for the purpose of baseline emission reductions. Other parameter monitores ifs the fossil fuel consumption by the backup diesel generator onsite (FC diesel ) for estimation of possible project emissions. As per ACM0002, leakage is not considered. Quantity of net electricity exported to the grid (EG Facility,y ) is measured by two bi-directional energy meters M1 (main) and M2 (back-up) are used to monitor the net electricity generated (ACTARIS SL 7000 Type SL 761 B 060; Serial number: and ; Manufactured by ACTARIS France with a respective accuracy of 0.5% and 1%). M1 and M2 are installed on the 63 kv substation of the hydro power plant to measure directly and continuously the electricity generation and the net electricity supply to the grid. The metering instruments M1 and M2 satisfy the accuracy class requirements as per Article 05 of original Power Purchase Agreement dated 17/02/2001 and have been calibrated on-site annually by JIRAMA in accordance with the national practice set by JIRAMA PPA and 16/08/2007 amendment about ownership and maintenance /CDM-MR/. Based on the above, values used in the emission reduction calculation /XLS/ are checked and deemed correct and formula and justification used for the calculation is traceable and consistent with the 21

22 registered PDD and applied methodology and related tools. Related Findings No CARs, CLs or FARs have been identified in this context The following finding(s) have been addressed: Finding: VCS1 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Describe the finding in unambiguous style; address the context (e.g. section) Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the corrective action taken in details. DOE Assessment #1 The assessment shall encompass all open issues. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion Tick the appropriate checkbox Meter value for is missing in ER excel sheet. The meter was reset to 0 value during installation on 04 October Meter value was included in the ER calculation. Meter value of 0 on 04 October 2008 was confirmed by meter installation certificate /COM/. To be checked during the next periodic verification Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed Final Assessment The project is with VCS requirements w.r.t this issue 4.3 Quality of Evidence to Determine GHG Emission Reductions or Removals Description Proper data management inclusive of data acquisition and aggregation, data management system is being followed for the project activity. All records needed for monitoring are archived in line with the requirements of the registered monitoring plan /PDD/. No significant lack of evidence and missing data were detected during on-site verification. It is evident from the monitoring data that the monitoring system ensures for continuous (except some routine breakdowns or outage) operation. 22

23 All internal data are subjected to QA/QC measures. Staff record the operation status and reading of metering equipment daily on site (6:00 am) in production log-sheets. The electricity production is aggregated weekly by designated staff and cross-checked by the supervisor. To secure data integrity, Two additional meters M3 (n at Antsirabe sub-station) and M4 (n at Holcim Ibity cement factory) are used by JIRAMA as a cross-check at Antsirabe s substation and Ibity end-user connection. During any emergency or maintenance situation, and if back-up electricity is not available from the grid, the quantity of diesel fuel consumed by the diesel generator is measured and recorded in a log book. The CDM (VCS) Manager is responsible for the supervision of the monitoring process, the data measuring, collection and recording, QA/QC, audit and reporting of all data. Related Findings No CARs, CLs or FARs have been identified in this context The following finding(s) have been addressed: Finding: VCS2 Classification CAR CL FAR Description of finding Describe the finding in unambiguous style; address the context (e.g. section) Corrective Action #1 This section shall be filled by the PP. It shall address the corrective action taken in details. DOE Assessment #1 The assessment shall encompass all open issues. In case of non-closure, additional corrective action and VT assessments (#2, #3, etc.) shall be added. Conclusion Tick the appropriate checkbox Required information related to meters M3 and M4 used during main meter dysfunction in November 2009 was not provided. From 12th to 17th of November 2009, the main meter dysfunction time has been conservatively excluded from total ER accounting due to unavailability of JIRAMA alternative meters M3 & M4 calibration evidence and visual inspection (both meters being under the control of third parties). No emission reduction was claimed during main meter dysfunction. To be checked during the next periodic verification Additional action should be taken (finding remains open) The finding is closed Final Assessment The project is with VCS requirements w.r.t this issue 23

24 4.4 Management and Operational System Description Quality Management procedures for measurements, collection and compilation of data, data storage and archiving, calibration, maintenance and training of personnel in the framework of this VCS project activity have been defined. Two bi-directional meters were installed onsite. They are calibrated annually in line with PPA between PP and JIRAMA. The verification team was able to check the consistency of the procedures by interviews and reports. Procedures for internal QA/QC have been established and implemented as described in detail in the MR. Related Findings No CARs, CLs or FARs have been identified in this context The following finding(s) have been addressed: Final Assessment The project is in line with the VCS requirements w.r.t this issue 5 VERIFICATION CONCLUSION HYDELEC Madagascar SA has commissioned the TÜV NORD JI / CDM Certification Program to carry out the verification of the Project Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar in Sahanivotry (Antananarivo Province), Madagascar with regard to the requirements of VCS 3 Standard. The run-of-river project activity involves generation of renewable hydro-electric power using 3 Pelton turbines and 3 generators provided by Hunan Lingling Hengyuan Generating Equipment Co., Ltd. The total capacity of the plant is 16.5 MW. The power is fed to regional grid of Antananarivo RI TANA, and operated by national grid operator JIRAMA Reporting period: From to (both dates inclusive) In the course of the verification 2 Corrective Action Requests (CARs), 0 Clarification Requests (CLs) were successfully closed and no Forward Action Request (FAR) were raised. The verification is based on the draft monitoring report, revised monitoring report, the monitoring plan 24

25 as set out in the validated PD / GHG Report PD, the validation report, emission reduction calculation spreadsheet and supporting documents made available to the TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP by the project participant. In detail the conclusions can be summarised as follows: - all operations of the project are implemented and installed as planned and described in the validated project description / GHG Report PD. - the monitoring plan is in accordance with the applied approved methodology,ie, ACM0002 Ver the installed equipment essential for measuring parameters required for calculating emission reductions is calibrated appropriately. - the monitoring system is in place and functional. The project has generated GHG emission reductions. As the result of the pre-cdm periodic verification, the verifier confirms that the GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements in a conservative and appropriate manner. TÜV NORD JI/CDM CP herewith confirms that the project has achieved emission reductions in the above mentioned reporting period as follows: GHG Emission Reductions or Removals tco 2 e Baseline Emissions to ,148 Baseline Emissions to ,377 Baseline Emissions to ,934 Project Emissions 0 Leakage 0 Net GHG emission reduction or removals 78,459 Essen, Kigali, Essen, Dr. Grzegorz Kochaniewicz TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program Verification Team Leader Martin Saalmann TÜV NORD JI/CDM Certification Program Final Approval 25

26 ANNEX 1 REFERENCES Table Annex 1.1: Reference Documents provided by the project participant Document /PD/ Supplementary Verified Carbon Standard Project Description version 0.3, dated Supplementary Verified Carbon Standard Project Description version 3.3, dated /MR/ Sahanivotry VCS Monitoring Report v3, dated Sahanivotry VCS Monitoring Report v3.3, dated /COM/ Meter Installation Certificate (Date de mise en service Sahanivotry) /EEG/ Electricity Generation Data /DEC/ Declaration letter from HYDELEC Madagascar S.A General Manager, dated /LEG/ Registre du Commerce et des Societes; (authorization of activity starting from until ) Contrat de Concesions, dated April Contrat de Concesion (extention), dated /DIA/ Electric Circuit Diagram /DSL/ Log sheet for use of diesel in backup generator Diesel purchase invoices /EL/ Authorisation Encironnementale, date (Environmental Licences) /MP/ Sahanivotry Project Hydroelectric CDM Monitoring Manual Amenagement Hydroelectrique de Sahanivotry. Sucurite Generale des Amenagements (Safety Manual) /OM/ Plant Operational Manuals 26

27 Reference Document /PPA/ Contrat d achat d Energie, dated /XLS/ VCS Sahanivotry Production data v2 Table Annex 1.2: Reference Background investigation and assessment documents Document /ACM02/ Approved CDM Methodology ACM0002, version 13: Consolidated baseline methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources /TOOL/ Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emssions from fossil fuel combustion (Version 02); EB 41, Annex 11 /VVM/ VCS Validation and Verification Manual Version 3.1 /CPM/ TÜV NORD JI / CDM CP Manual (incl. CP procedures and forms) /IPPC/ IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: work book IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories: work book /ISO 14064/ Greenhouse gases -- Part 1: Specification with guidance at the organization level for quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals Greenhouse gases -- Part 2: Specification with guidance at the project level for quantification, monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emission reductions or removal enhancements Greenhouse gases -- Part 3: Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions /ISO14065/ Greenhouse gases -- Requirements for greenhouse gas validation and verification bodies for use in accreditation or other forms of recognition /CDM-MR/ CDM 1 st periodic Monitoring Report Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar, version 02, dt /PDD/ Project Design Document for CDM project: Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar version 03, dated

28 Reference Document Project Design Document for CDM project: Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar version 04.3, dated /VAL/ Validation Report for CDM project version 05, dated /VER/ CDM 1st Periodic Verification and Certification Report: Small-Scale Hydropower Project Sahanivotry in Madagascar, dated /PRC/ Validation Report No , dated /LOA/ Host County Letter of Approval, dated /PG/ VCS Program Guide: VCS Version 3 /PS/ VCS Standard: VCS Version 3 VCS Verified Carbon Standard 3 /VCS-PD-T/ VCS PD Template /VCS-MR-T/ Monitoring Report Form (F-CDM-MR), Version 04.3 Table Annex 1.3: Websites used Reference Link Organisation /vcs/ VCSA /cd4cdm/ UNEP Riso Centre /dna-hp1/ Ministére de l'environnement, des Eaux et Forets (DNA of Madagascar) /ipcc/ IPCC publications 28

29 Reference Link Organisation /unfccc/ UNFCCC Table Annex 1.4: List of interviewed persons Reference MoI 1 Name Organisation / Function /IM01/ V Ms Dieudonne Raoelijona Hydelec/Managing Director /IM01/ V Ms Celestine Randriamiarimana Hydelec/Director Technique /IM01/ V Ms. Elisoa Feno Randrianarison Hydelec/CDM officer /IM01/ V Ms. Vonjianfely Dimbinasandratnatolotsoa Hydelec/Plant Manager /IM01/ V Ms. Vonjirianne Rakotaoroa Nameryanalary Hydelec/Production Manager /IM01/ V Ms. Andrianjalla Ratsimbazafy Rado Hydelec/Production Staff /IM02/ V Ms. Alexandre Dunod Ecosur afrique/ Consultant /IM02/ V Ms. Jean Marie Raoeliarison MDP/ Consultant 1) Means of Interview: (Telephone, , Visit) 29