YAPRAK WEIR AND HEPP

Transcription

1 YAPRAK WEIR AND HEPP Document Prepared By: KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd. Project Title Yaprak Weir and HEPP Version 01.1 Report ID VCS.15.VER.005 Report Title Client Pages 19 Date of Issue Prepared By Contact Approved By Work Carried Out By Final Verification Report for Yaprak Weir and HEPP Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. 01-December-2015 KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd , Om Shubham Tower, Neelam-Bata Road, N.I.T., Faridabad Haryana INDIA. Tel.: , , , Fax: Webpage: Sanjay Kandari, Manager T&C Mr. Khalid Mahmood (Team Leader, Technical Expert TA1.2, Local Expert) Mr. Akhilesh Joshi (Verifier) Mr. Sanjay Kandari (Technical Reviewer, Expert to TR TA 1.2) v3.3 1

2 Summary: Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti., has commissioned the KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd. (KBS) to carry out the first periodic verification of the project - Yaprak Weir and HEPP, with regard to the relevant requirements of VCS Standard Version 3.3. The project is a grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources. Yaprak Weir and HEPP Project consist of construction and operation of a 9.28 MW hydroelectric power plant. Thus, the project harnesses renewable energy resource, displacing non-renewable natural resource usage thereby leading to sustainable economic and environmental development in the region. A risk based approach has been followed to perform this validation. In the course of the validation 02 Corrective Action Requests (CAR) were raised and successfully closed out. The validation is based on the VCS PD, proof of title, proof of right, additional documents related to baseline and monitoring methodology; the subsequent background investigation, follow-up interviews and supporting documents made available to the validation team by project proponent. As a result of the validation, the validation team confirms that: The project fulfils criteria of VCS Standard Version 3.4. The project is in line with all relevant VCS requirements. Relevant decisions, clarifications and guidance from the CMP and the CDM Executive Board and VCS Association; All information and references relevant to the project activity resulting in emission reductions; The monitoring is transparent, adequate and in line with applied baseline and monitoring methodology of AMS-I.D., Version 17. Based on the information seen and evaluated we confirm that the implementation of the project has resulted in 11,075 tco 2 e emission reductions during period to v3.3 2

3 Table of Contents 1 Introduction Objective Scope and Criteria Level of Assurance Summary Description of the Project Verification Process Method and Criteria Document Review Interviews Site Inspections Resolution of Findings Eligibility for Validation Activities Validation Findings Participation under Other GHG Programs Methodology Deviations Project Description Deviations Grouped Project Verification Findings Project Implementation Status Accuracy of GHG Emission Reduction and Removal Calculations Quality of Evidence to Determine GHG Emission Reductions and Removals Non-Permanence Risk Analysis Verification conclusion APPENDIX 1: References v3.3 3

4 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. has commissioned KBS to perform the first periodic verification of the project, Yaprak Weir and HEPP with regard to the relevant requirements for Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) Project Activity (PA); to attain real, measurable, additional and permanent emission reductions. The VCS project had undergone the independent third party verification and certification of emission reductions as the basis for issuance of Voluntary Carbon Units (VCUs).The objectives of this verification exercise are, by review of objective evidence, to establish that: The project meets the VCS validation requirements as per the VCS rules; The project activity has been implemented and operated as per the validated VCS PD and that all physical features (technology, project equipment, and monitoring and metering equipment) of the project are in place; Monitoring report and other supporting documents are complete; The actual monitoring systems & procedures and monitoring report conforms with the requirements of the approved monitoring plan and the approved monitoring methodology; The data is recorded and stored as per the monitoring methodology and approved monitoring. 1.2 Scope and Criteria The scope of the verification is an independent and objective review and ex-post determination of the monitored reductions in GHG emission by the project activity. The verification is based on the VCS PD /1/, registered monitoring plan and the monitoring report /3/ and approved VCS Validation report /2/. The project is assessed against the requirements of VCS Rules/requirements. KBS has conducted the verification, based on the recommendations in the latest version of VCS Validation and Verification Manual and VCS rules employed a rule-based approach (as criteria) in the verification, focusing on the identification of significant reporting rules and the reliability of project monitoring. 1.3 Level of Assurance Reasonable level of assurance 1.4 Summary Description of the Project The Yaprak Weir and HEPP Project installed by Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. involves installation and operation of a tunnel system and three turbines (having a capacity of MW for three and MW for one of them), which is a grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources. Thus, this project activity positively impacts the environment by displacing the use of fossil fuel by grid connected fossil fuel based power plants. v3.3 4

5 The project is environmentally benign as it results in the reduction of emissions from grid connected fossil fuel based power plants. The project activity is located on the river Gevye passing through the Alanya district of the Province of Antalya in Turkey. The project site is accessible by means of access roads to the nearest town. The geographical coordinates of the site are given below Regulator (Weir Intake) Turbines (Power House) Latitude (N) Longitude (E) Latitude (N) Longitude (E) v3.3 5

6 2 VERIFICATION PROCESS 2.1 Method and Criteria The project activity applies approved CDM methodology Grid connected renewable electricity generation, AMS-I.D., version 17, categorized under sectoral scope 1 Energy industries (renewable - / non-renewable sources). The validation consisted of the following phases: I. Completeness check and desk review of the Project Description. II. Onsite inspection, interview with project representatives and issuance of findings III. Resolution of findings followed by preparation of the final validation report and opinion Timeline of Verification: Date of signing contract On-site verification (Draft) Reporting (Final) Reporting Document Review A desk review is undertaken, involving but not limited to A review of the data and information presented to verify their completeness; A review of the monitoring plan and monitoring methodology, paying particular attention to the frequency of measurements, the quality of metering equipment including calibration requirements, and the quality assurance and quality control procedures; An evaluation of data management and the quality assurance and quality control system in the context of their influence on the generation and reporting of emission reductions. The list of document reviewed is included in the section References. 2.3 Interviews Please refer section 2.4, where complete list of interviewed personnel and key points discussed is provided. 2.4 Site Inspections A site visit is undertaken by members of verification team, involving but not limited to, An assessment of the implementation and operation of the proposed VCS project activity as per the approved VCS PD; 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, purchase records or similar data sources; A check of the monitoring equipments including calibration performance and observations of monitoring practices against the requirements of the PD and the selected methodology; v3.3 6

7 A review of calculations and assumptions made in determining the GHG data and emission reductions; An identification of quality control and quality assurance procedures in place to prevent or identify and correct any errors or omissions in the reported monitoring parameters. The site visit for this verification assessment was undertaken by the Khalid Mahmood (Team Leader, Technical Expert and Local Expert) and details are mentioned below: Location: River Gevye, Alanya/Antalya/Turkey Dates: Key points discussed: Name of person, interviewed Designation, Organization Operational data Calibration Data collection QA/QC procedures Calculation of ERs VCS requirements Others, if any Mr. Murat Demirel Ms. Müge Karaca Ms. Neslihan Alkan Mr. Murat Demirel Ms. Müge Karaca Ms. Neslihan Alkan Mr. Murat Demirel Ms. Müge Karaca Mr. Murat Demirel Ms. Müge Karaca Ms. Müge Karaca Ms. Neslihan Alkan Ms. Müge Karaca Ms. Neslihan Alkan Ms. Müge Karaca Ms. Neslihan Alkan Power House Manager Power House Manager Power House Manager Power House Manager 2.5 Resolution of Findings KBS applies the risk based approach aimed at focusing on high risk issues to the validation results whilst not omitting any part of the mandatory processes. A few discrepancies were found during the validation and the validation report was submitted to the project proponent, indicated under the titles corrective action requests (CARs) and clarification requests (CLs). Corrective action request (CAR): - the project participants have made mistakes that will influence the ability of the project activity to achieve real, measurable additional emission reductions; - the Voluntary Carbon Standard s requirements have not been met, or - there is a risk that emission reductions cannot be monitored or calculated. Clarification request (CL): Information is insufficient or not sufficiently clear to determine whether the applicable VCS requirements have been met. v3.3 7

8 Forward Action request (FAR): FARs is to be raised to highlight issues related to project implementation that require review during the first verification of the project activity. FARs does not relate to VCS requirements for registration. CARs and CLs are to be resolved or closed out if the PP modifies the project description, rectifies the PD or provides adequate additional explanations or evidence that satisfies the concerns. If this is not completed, the project activity cannot be recommended for registration under VCS registry. The project description document was revised addressing the CARs & CLs issued by KBS. After reviewing the revised and resubmitted monitoring report /3/ ; resolving the CARs & CLs rose and outstanding concerns, KBS issues this final validation report and opinion. 02 CAR were raised during verification and closed satisfactorily. The list of CARs/CLs raised and the response provided, the means of verification, reasons for their closure and references to correction in the MR are provided in Appendix 2 of this report. The revised MR /3/ with changes incorporated as per the issues raised were rechecked with the documentary evidences and found to be inline. Date Type & Number Raised by Reference CAR-01 Assessment Team Verification Protocol Non conformities raised a) Actual project implementation status of the project activity has not been described transparently in the VCS MR. b) Technical Specification of the major equipment s like Turbine has not been mentioned in the VCS MR. Project Participant s response Date: a) It has been described in the revised Monitoring Report. b) Technical Specifications have been added. Documentation Provided as Evidence by Project Participant Revised Monitoring Report dated Information Verified by Team Leader Date of review: Monitoring Report, version 02, dated Reasoning for not acceptance or close out PP as a response, have now revised the MR to show the actual implementation status of the project activity. Also, technical specification of all 4 Turbines installed at project site has now been mentioned in MR. Assessment team confirms that, actual project implementation status and technical specification of all 4 Turbines installed at project site as mentioned in revised MR is in line with the on-site observation. Therefore, this CAR is closed. Date of acceptance or non- acceptance Date: Status: Closed v3.3 8

9 Date Type & Number Raised by Reference CAR-02 Assessment Team Verification Protocol Non conformities raised After March 2015, the energy meter installed at Grid substation, reads combined reading for Yaprak Project and one more Hydro Project (Berat HEPP) owned by same PP. However, PP used the combined reading for baseline emissions calculation of Yaprak project (from march 2015 to July 2015), which is not correct. PP to substantiate the same. Project Participant s response Date: It is not possible to monitor the electricity generation values separately for Yalnızardıç Dam and Berat HEPP and Yaprak Weir and HEPP after March 2015, because their generations are being monitored by one single measurement device (energy meter). Therefore, calculation method after March 2015 will be based on the installed capacity of both the projects. Documentation Provided as Evidence by Project Participant Revised MR and ER Calculation Sheet Information Verified by Team Leader Date of review: Monitoring Report, version 02, dated ER Calculation Spread sheet, dated Reasoning for not acceptance or close out PP as a response, have now provided apportioning formula for calculating the share of Yaprak Weir and HEPP in electricity production per month as provided by TEIAS. Since, both the projects are owned by the same PP. Also, Yalnızardıç Dam and Berat HEPP is located upstream of the Yaprak Weir and HEPP on the same river stream and there is no other HEPP project in between both the projects. Hence, the approach to be used by PP for calculation of electricity produced is appropriate and hence acceptable. However, the same changes need to be assessed during next periodic verification of the project activity. Therefore, this CAR is converted to FAR-03. Date of acceptance or non- acceptance Date: Status: Converted to FAR-03 Date Type & Number Raised by Reference FAR-03 Assessment Team CAR-02 Non conformities raised PP has now provided apportioning formula for calculating the share of Yaprak Weir and HEPP in electricity production per month as provided by TEIAS from March 2015 onwards. To ensure consistency in calculation of electricity exported value, same need to be assessed and confirmed during next periodic verification. Project Participant s response Date: PP understands the deviation taken in calculation of electricity exported is permanent and will be applied during next periodic verification. Same apportioning formula will be applied for calculation of electricity exported in future. Documentation Provided as Evidence by Project Participant -- Information Verified by Team Leader Date of review: Reasoning for not acceptance or close out The proposed action plan by the PP is acceptable. This would be verified in the next periodic verification. Date of acceptance or non- acceptance Date: Status: OPEN v3.3 9

10 2.5.1 Forward Action Requests No FAR was raised during the monitoring period. 2.6 Eligibility for Validation Activities The validation has been conducted by the Germanischer Lloyd Certification GmbH (GLC) and the validation report issued by the Validation body (GLC) can be assessed on VCS Project database 1. 3 VALIDATION FINDINGS 3.1 Participation under Other GHG Programs The project is only registered under VCS program. It has been confirmed by the project participant that the VERs will be claimed only from the VCS programme. The declaration is submitted from the project participant during the VCS validation, that the project will not claim any ERs from any other programme. 3.2 Methodology Deviations The verification team confirms that the VCS PD complies with the requirements in the applied monitoring methodology AMS-I.D., Version 17 /15/. Therefore, no methodology deviations are applied during the monitoring period. 3.3 Project Description Deviations There is a deviation in the monitoring of EG facility,y from approved VCS-PD after March 2015, due to the fact that the energy meter installed at Grid substation, reads combined reading for Yaprak Project and one more Hydro Project (Yalnızardıç Dam and Berat HEPP) owned by same PP. Yalnızardıç Dam and Berat HEPP is located upstream of the Yaprak Weir and HEPP on the same river stream and there is no other HEPP project in between both the projects. Hence, it is not possible to monitor the electricity generation values separately for Yalnızardıç Dam and Berat HEPP and Yaprak Weir and HEPP after March 2015, because their generations are being monitored by one single measurement device (energy meter). Therefore, calculation method after March 2015 will be based on the installed capacity of both the projects as follows 1 v3.3 10

11 This is considered acceptable, since both the projects are owned by same PP and located next to each other with no other Hydro project in between. Yalnızardıç Dam and Berat HEPP is located upstream of the Yaprak Weir and HEPP on the same river stream and there is no other HEPP project in between both the projects. Hence, the approach to be used by PP for calculation of electricity produced is appropriate and hence acceptable. CAR-02 has been raised by assessment team in this regard, which is further converted to FAR-03. Same changes need to be assessed during next periodic verification. 3.4 Grouped Project The project activity is not identified as a grouped project as per the description in the approved VCS PD /1/. 4 VERIFICATION FINDINGS 4.1 Project Implementation Status Yaprak Weir and HEPP Project involve the construction and operation of a 9.28 MW hydroelectric power plant. There is a hydropower plant with Four (4) turbines having a capacity of MW for three (Make: Wasserkraft Volk AG) and MW for one (Make: Andritz) of them. The turbines are first hand Kaplan type turbine. Project was implemented and equipment installed as per the project description provided in the VCS PD /01/. Project activity was commissioned in Verification team confirmed the commissioning dates from the First meter reading document issued by Energy Market Regulatory Authority (EMRA) /6/. The current monitoring period is the first periodic verification. The first periodic verification covers the period to As per the Monitoring Report version 02, dated /3/, no change has been observed from the validation stage and the same was confirmed during the site visit. The project activity description and the monitoring plan as described in the monitoring report is in line with the registered VCS PD /01/ except the deviation in the monitoring of EG facility,y from approved VCS-PD. Same is discussed in detail under section 3.3 of this report. Ownership and other programs The PP Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. declared that the project is not registered any other mechanism apart from VCS. Thus, emission reductions generated by project will be solely claimed by PP and PP has right of use and hence, accepted. Net GHG emission reductions or removals generated by this project will not be used for compliance with an emissions trading program or to meet binding limits on GHG emissions as the host country i.e. Turkey is not a participant in any emission trading programs or nor does it have any binding limits. PP will not claim the carbon credits under any other GHG emission reduction scheme for the crediting period under VCS and PP has provided declaration on the same during the validation. Hence, there is no possibility of double counting. Apart from VCS, it has neither applied nor been rejected under any other GHG program. All parameters stated in the monitoring plan and the applied methodology has been fulfilled in the current monitoring report except the deviation in the monitoring of EG facility,y from approved VCS-PD v3.3 11

12 from March All baseline emission parameters have been verified and found satisfactory. The discussion regarding each parameter has been elaborated in the further section of this report. Purpose of data Monitoring equipment (type, accuracy class, serial number, calibration frequency, date of last calibration, validity) Measuring/Reading/ Recording frequency Data collection (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) Verified value Cross checks QA/QC procedures applied Discussion and verification assessment Baseline emissions The quantity of net electricity generation supplied by the project plant to the grid are monitored from the bidirectional energy meter of accuracy class 0.2s. Continuous monitoring of electricity generation and import, monthly recording of net electricity export (Market Financial Settlement Center(PMUM) Report) /8/ At the end of each month, the data from the monthly meter readings as provided in Market Financial Settlement Center(PMUM) Report /8/, will be added up to obtain the total monitoring period net electricity generation MWh The verified values were crosschecked from the monthly TEIAS Readings available on TEIAS website /7/. The values in TEIAS monthly reading and Market Financial Settlement Center(PMUM) Report are same. The calibration detail of the energy meter is mentioned in next section of this report. The calibration was conducted by the TEIAS once in 10 years as per the Turkey national legislation (Item 9-b of Regulation Regarding Inspection of Meters and Metering Devices, Official Gazette: , No: 22000) 2. Refer the below section 4.3 of the report for the calibration details of monitoring equipment. 2 v3.3 12

13 4.2 Accuracy of GHG Emission Reduction and Removal Calculations Monitored Parameters: Assessment of monitoring procedures for all monitoring parameters is discussed below: Data/Parameter, Unit Quantity of net electricity generation supplied by the project plant to the grid in year y (EG facility,y ) in MWh/ year Purpose of data Monitoring equipment (type, accuracy class, serial number, calibration frequency, date of last calibration, validity) Measuring/Reading/ Recording frequency Data collection (from data generation, aggregation, to recording, calculation and reporting) Verified value Cross checks QA/QC procedures applied Discussion and verification assessment Baseline emissions The quantity of net electricity generation supplied by the project plant to the grid are monitored from the bi-directional energy meter of accuracy class 0.2s. Make: EMH metering GmbH & Co. KG Model Number IMXCRS-E00 (year 2013) Serial no. of Main Meter Serial Number of Backup Meter Accuracy class by energy meter 0.2s Date of First calibration /9/ Calibration Frequency Once in 10 years Continuous monitoring of electricity generation and import, monthly recording of net electricity export (Market Financial Settlement Center(PMUM) Report) /8/ At the end of each month, the data from the monthly meter readings as provided in Market Financial Settlement Center(PMUM) Report /8/, will be added up to obtain the total monitoring period net electricity generation MWh The verified values were crosschecked from the monthly TEIAS Readings available on TEIAS website /7/. The values in TEIAS monthly reading and Market Financial Settlement Center(PMUM) Report are same. The calibration detail of the energy meter is mentioned in next section of this report. The calibration was conducted by the TEIAS once in 10 years as per the Turkey national legislation (Item 9-b of Regulation Regarding Inspection of Meters and Metering Devices, Official Gazette: , No: 22000) 3. Refer the below section 4.3 of the report for the calibration details of monitoring equipment. 3 v3.3 13

14 . Verification team confirms that, GHG emission reductions and removals have been quantified correctly in accordance with the project description and applied methodology. 4.3 Quality of Evidence to Determine GHG Emission Reductions and Removals The project activity under consideration consists of a well-defined management structure which ensures the quality of data monitored. The project monitoring system and reporting procedure are well managed by Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.. The project facility has a dedicated team comprising of the members having vast standing experience in the said field of operations and the roles and responsibilities towards the project operation and management are well structured. The project activity ensures the data acquisition and data processing system in two parallel ways, one is automatically online registering procedure through Distributed Control System (DCS) and another is the manual logging procedure in the log book. The project activity employs trained personnel at project site as per the operational responsibility to monitor and archive data. The applied monitoring methodology AMS-I.D., Version 17, does not specify exact requirements for calibration of the measuring equipment but recommends following the relevant industry standards. The calibration frequency defined in the approved monitoring plan /1/ is followed by the project participant and described in the above section corresponding to each monitoring parameter. Details about the calibration of equipment s are provided in the section above. The aforementioned baseline emission parameter was measured in accordance with the approved VCS PD /01/ and monitoring plan of the applied methodology as ex-post. The following parameters was directly taken from the approved VCS PD /01/ to calculate the emission reduction as ex-ante fixed: Parameters as ex-ante fixed Applied values Emission Factor of the grid (tco2/mwh) v3.3 14

15 Calculation of Baseline Emissions: BE y = EG PJ,y * EF grid,cm,y Where, EF grid,cm,y = tco 2 /MWh (fixed Ex-ante for the entire crediting period) Period Baseline Emission (tco 2 ) Project Emission (tco 2 ) Leakage Emission (tco 2 ) Emission Reduction (tco 2 ) , ,983 Total 11, ,075 Remark The root parameters to derive the base line emissions are verified as above. The fixed ex-ante emission factor was validated during the validation and correctly applied by the project participant in the expost ER calculation. Therefore, total emission reduction during monitoring period is = 11,075 tco 2 Calibration Details of Monitoring Equipment s: The calibration of energy meters was carried out by the TEIAS once in 10 years, as per the local government regulations in Turkey. The electricity meters for the monitoring of grid electricity is under control of the TEIAS and PP has no control over this energy meter. The calibration was only done in between (before 10 years) in case of malfunction as reported above in the monitoring parameter. All the parameters used for the determination of the Emission Reductions are discussed in previous section and in this section of report. All the data recorded are in compliance with the monitoring plan. During the site visit the assessment team visited all the departments for the entire data flow system and ensures the robustness of the data corroboration procedure maintained in the Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.. v3.3 15

16 4.4 Non-Permanence Risk Analysis Not applicable to the project activity. 5 VERIFICATION CONCLUSION KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd. has been contracted by Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. to undertake independent first verification and certification for the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions reported from the Yaprak Weir and HEPP for the monitoring period to The verification is based on the validated VCS PD and the monitoring report for this project. Our verification approach was based on the requirements as defined under the VCS Standard Version 3.5. The management of the Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti. is responsible for the preparation of the GHG emissions data and the reported GHG emissions reductions on the basis set out within the project Final Monitoring Report, Version 2.1 and dated The calculation and determination of GHG emission reductions from the project is the responsibility of the management of the Albe Enerji Elektrik Elektronik Danışmanlık Müşavirlik San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti.. The development and maintenance of records and reporting procedures are in accordance with the Final Monitoring Report, Version 2.1 and dated It is our responsibility to express an independent GHG verification opinion on the GHG emissions and on the calculation of GHG emission reductions from the project for the period to based on the reported emission reductions in the Final Monitoring Report Version 2.1 and dated for the same period. Based on an understanding of the risks associated with reporting GHG emissions data and the controls in place to mitigate these, KBS planned and performed our work to obtain the information and explanations that we considered necessary to provide sufficient evidence for us to give reasonable assurance that this reported amount of GHG emission reductions for the period is fairly stated. v3.3 16

17 KBS confirms the following; Verification period: From to Verified GHG emission reductions and removals in the above verification period: Year Year 2012 Year 2013 Year 2014 Total Baseline emissions or removals (tco 2 e) Project emissions or removals (tco 2 e) Leakage emissions (tco 2 e) Net GHG emission reductions or removals (tco 2 e) , ,941 6, ,983 11, ,075 Date: Kaushal Goyal Managing Director KBS Certification Services Ltd. v3.3 17

18 APPENDIX 1: REFERENCES S. No. Name of document (Validation/Registration Process) /1/ Final VCS PD, Version 03 dated /2/ Final VCS Validation Report issued by GLC, version 04 dated /3/ /3.1/ VCS MR Version 01 dated /3.2/ VCS MR Version 02 dated /3.3/ VCS MR Version 02.1 dated /4/ /4.1/ ER spread sheet corresponding to MR Version 01 /4.2/ ER spread sheet corresponding to MR Version 02 /4.3/ ER spread sheet corresponding to MR Version 02.1 /5/ Generation License issued by Energy Market regulatory Authority dated /6/ Proof of project start date (i.e ) or First Meter reading document, /7/ Monthly TEIAS Readings between the dates to /8/ PMUM Records between the dates to /9/ Certificate of first calibration(testing) of the energy meters installed and operated by TEIAS dated /10/ Plant operation records including downtime kkk/running hours, gross generation etc. from SCADA system during the monitoring period to /11/ Single Line Diagram /12/ Verification Audit plan sent to PP for the site inspection /13/ VCS Program Guide, Version 03.5 /14/ VCS Standard, Version 03.4 /15/ AMS-I.D. Grid connected renewable electricity generation, Version 17 /16/ Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, version 04 v3.3 18