gs validation report

Template (CDM-D-32) Version 4.0 Effective 08/08/2013

Validation Report (Gold Standard) GS.14.VAL.002

KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd. Registered Office: 414-424, Om Shubham Tower, Neelam-Bata Road, N.I.T., Faridabad-121001, Haryana India. Contact us at: Tel.: +91-129-4034513, 4054513, 403513, Fax: +91-129-4035139. Webpage: www.kbsindia.in.

GS VALIDATION REPORT

GODAWARI GREEN ENERGY LIMITED

SOLAR THERMAL POWER PLANT BY

GODAWARI GREEN ENERGY LIMITED

REPORT NO. GS.14.VAL.002



of 26

Date of this issue: 03/01/2015 KBS Ref. No.: GS.14.VAL.002

Organisational Unit: Client:

Climate Change Division, KBS Godawari Green Energy Limited

Project Design Document

First GS Passport: Final GS Passport:

Version: 01 Version: 02.1

Date: 12/06/2014 Date: 03/01/2015

Summary of validation:

Godawari Green Energy Limited has commissioned KBS to perform the validation of the proposed Gold Standard project activity:

Project Title: Solar Thermal Power Plant by Godawari Green Energy Limited Methodology Applied: ACM0002 “Grid-connected electricity generation from

renewable sources”, Version 15 Sectoral Scopes: Sectoral Scope 1: Energy industries (renewable - / non-

renewable sources) Validity of methodology/ies (for RfR): Valid from 01/06/2014 onwards

The scope of the validation is defined as an independent and objective review of the project GS Passport, the project’s sustainability and monitoring plan and other relevant documents. The information in these documents is reviewed against the latest version of Gold Standard Toolkit v2.2.

The report is based on the assessment of the GS Passport undertaken through stakeholder consultations, application of standard auditing techniques including but not limited to desk review, follow up actions (e.g., on site visit, electronic (telephone or e-mail) interviews) and also the review of the applicable GS requirements.

The review of the project design documentation and the subsequent follow-up interviews have provided KBS with sufficient evidence to determine the project’s fulfillment of all the stated criteria. In our opinion, the project meets all applicable Gold Standard requirements.

Will be recommended to the Gold Standard with a request for registration Is not recommended for registration

Validation Status: Findings not closed

Project type: Large scale Draft validation report

Subject: CDM Validation Final validation report

Validation Team: Document Distribution

Team Leader: Akhilesh Joshi Local Expert: Akhilesh Joshi Technical Expert (TA 01.1): Gagandeep Kakkar

No Distribution without permission from the Client

Technical Review Team: Manager T&C

Technical Reviewer: Sanjay Kandari Technical Expert (TA 01.1): Kaushik Pal Date: 03/01/2015 Technical Expert: Sanjay Kandari

Name: Sanjay Kandari Date: 03/01/2015

Limited Distribution

Authorized by:

Name: Kaushal Goyal, Managing Director Date: 03/01/2015 Unrestricted Distribution Rev Number: Date: 0 26/12/2014 1 03/01/2015



of 26

Abbreviations

ACM Approved Consolidated Methodology BE Baseline Emissions BM Build Margin CAR Corrective Action Request CDM Clean Development Mechanism CM Combined Margin CER Certified Emission Reduction CL Clarification request COP Conference of Parties DOE Designated Operational Entity DNA Designated National Authority DR Document Review EB Executive Board EF Emission Factor ERs Emission Reductions FAR Forward Action Request GGEL Godawari Greem Energy LimitedGHG Greenhouse gas(es) GS Gold Standard GSC Global Stakeholder ConsultationHCA Host Country Approval IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change KP Kyoto Protocol LSC Local Stakeholder Consultation LE Leakage Emissions LoA Letter of Approval/AuthorizationISO International Organization for Standardization MOP Meeting of Parties MoC Modalities of CommunicationMoV Means of Verification MP Monitoring Plan NTPC National Thermal Power Corporation Limited ODA Official Development Assistance OM Operating Margin PA Project Activity PDD Project Design Document PE Project Emissions PLF Plant Load Factor PP Project Participant PPA Power Purchase Agreement PS Project Standard QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control RfR Request for Registration SFR Stakeholder Feedback Round SD Sustainable Development T&C Technical & Certification UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change VVS Validation & Verification Standard



of 26

Table of Content

1. Validation Opinion .................................................................................................................................... 5

2. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 6 2.1 Objective ............................................................................................................................................ 6 2.2 Scope ................................................................................................................................................. 6

3. Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 7 3.1 Review of GS Passport and Additional Documentation ...................................................................... 7 3.2 Site Visit ............................................................................................................................................. 7 *Telephonic Interview taken by DOE for confirmation on the feedback forms filled by Stakeholders. .......... 7 3.3 Major Milestones in validation ............................................................................................................ 7 3.4 Findings ............................................................................................................................................. 8 3.5 Internal Quality Control ...................................................................................................................... 8

4. Validation Findings .................................................................................................................................. 9 4.1 Approval ............................................................................................................................................. 9 4.2 Authorization ...................................................................................................................................... 9 4.3 Sustainable Development .................................................................................................................. 9 4.4 Gold Standard Passport ..................................................................................................................... 9 4.5 Project Description ............................................................................................................................. 9 4.6 Baseline and monitoring methodology ............................................................................................. 10 4.7 Additionality...................................................................................................................................... 11 4.8 Application of Monitoring Methodology and Monitoring Plan ............................................................ 12 4.9 Environmental Impacts ..................................................................................................................... 12 4.10 Local Stakeholder Comments .......................................................................................................... 12

5. Stakeholder Feedback Round and Grievance Mechanism .................................................................... 13

6. Grievance Mechanism ........................................................................................................................... 13

7. Sustainability Assessment ..................................................................................................................... 13

7.1 Do no harm assessment .................................................................................................................... 13

7.2 Monitoring of do no harm assessment ............................................................................................... 16

8. Sustainability Development Matrix ......................................................................................................... 16

9. References ............................................................................................................................................ 19

Annexes:

Annex 1: Detailed Findings ........................................................................................................................... 21

Annex 2: Certificate of Competence ............................................................................................................. 25



1. Validation Opinion

KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd. has been contracted by Godawari Green Energy Limited to perform a GS validation of the project:

Project title: Solar Thermal Power Plant by Godawari Green Energy Limited

Host Party: India

The validation was performed in accordance with the applicable Gold Standard guidance and host country criteria, as well as criteria given to provide for consistent project operations, monitoring and reporting.

The proposed CDM project activity will result in reductions of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that are real, measurable and give long-term benefits to the mitigation of climate change. In our opinion, the project meets all relevant Gold Standard, CDM criteria and all relevant host country criteria.

The project correctly applies methodology ACM0002 version 15. It is demonstrated that the project is not a likely baseline scenario. The emission reductions attributable to the project are hence additional to any that would occur in the absence of the project activity.

The total emission reductions from the project are estimated to be 1,131,600 tCO2e over a 10 year crediting period during 19/06/2013 to 18/06/2023, averaging 131,160 tCO2e annually. The emission reduction forecast has been checked and it is deemed likely that the stated amount is achievable given the underlying assumptions do not change.

The project will hence be recommended by KBS for request for registration with the Gold Standard.

Authorized Signatory

Signature:

Name: Kaushal Goyal

Place: Faridabad

Date: 03/01/2015



of 26

2. Introduction

2.1 Objective

Godawari Green Energy Limited has commissioned KBS to perform the validation of the project: Solar Thermal Power Plant by Godawari Green Energy Limited with regard to the relevant requirements for Gold Standard (GS) project activities.

The purpose of validation is to ensure a thorough, independent assessment of proposed project activities submitted for registration as a proposed GS project activity against the applicable Gold Standard requirements.

In particular, the project's baseline, the monitoring plan (MP) and the project’s compliance with relevant GS and host country criteria are validated in order to confirm that the project design as documented is sound and reasonable and meets the stated requirements and identified criteria. The validation is seen as necessary to provide assurance to stakeholders of the quality of the project and its intended generation of emission reductions (ER).

2.2 Scope

The scope of the validation is defined as an independent and objective review of the project design document, the project’s baseline study and monitoring plan and other relevant documents. The information in these documents is reviewed against Gold Standard requirements, UNFCCC rules and associated interpretations. KBS has employed a rule-based approach in the validation, focusing on the identification of significant risks for project implementation and the generation of ERs.



of 26

3. Methodology

3.1 Review of GS Passport and Additional Documentation

The validation is performed primarily as a document review of the GS passport version 01 dated 12/06/2014, version 02 dated 26/11/2014 and version 02.1 dated 03/01/2015 (final version)/2/. The assessment is performed by a validation team using a validation protocol. The cross checks between information provided in the GS Passport and information from sources other than those used, if available, the validation team’s sectoral or local expertise and, if necessary, independent background investigations.

3.2 Site Visit

The site visit to the project site was conducted by KBS during the CDM validation of the project activity and discussed in detail in the CDM validation report/29/. Subsequently, a visit to GGEL corporate office and telephonic interview with various stakeholders was undertaken by Akhilesh Joshi (Team Leader, Technical Expert and Local Expert) and details are mentioned below;

Location: Godawari Green Energy Limited Hira Arcade, 2nd Floor, Pandri, Raipur Raipur – 492 004, Chhattisgarh, India

Dates: 28/10/2014 Key points discussed: Name of person, interviewed Designation, OrganizationProject design and start date Mr. Lakshman Prasad

Mr. Sudeep Chakraborty Mr. T. Bose Mr. Pradeep Shukla Mr. Rahul Dewangan

Advisor, GGEL Director, GGEL Director, GPIL General Manager, GGEL Consultant , PE Sustainability

Sustainability parameters

Mr. Lakshman Prasad Mr. Pradeep Shukla Mr. Rahul Dewangan

Advisor, GGEL General Manager, GGEL Consultant , PE Sustainability

They were interviewed about the work atmosphere, safety requirements, compensation paid.

Mr. Pradeep Shukla Mr. Jitendra Singh Solanki* Mr. Mayur Singh* Mr. Mahendra Kumar* Mr. Jugal Kishor Sharma* Mr. Swaroop Singh* Mr. Neeraj Kumar Ahlawat*

General Manager, GGEL Genaral Manager(Works), GGEL Sr. Electrician, GGEL Officer-CSR, GGEL Officer- Finance & Accounts, GGEL Officer-Security, GGEL Deupty Manager- E&I, GGEL

Other villagers were also interviewed to access the impact of the project activity on the non-related

Mr. Dugar Singh* Mr. Bhawar Singh Sisodia* Mr. Khetram Meghwal*

Village Nokh, Tehsil Pokhran, Distt Jaisalmer

The CSR activities mentioned in the project documents were confirmed.

Ms. Meenakshi Jain* CMD, Positive Climate Care Pvt. Ltd.

The opinion of the local population about the project activity was asked for.

Mr. Dugar Singh* Mr. Bhawar Singh Sisodia* Mr. Khetram Meghwal* Mr. Surya Prakash Solanki*

Village Nokh, Tehsil Pokhran, Distt Jaisalmer

*Telephonic Interview taken by DOE for confirmation on the feedback forms filled by Stakeholders.

3.3 Major Milestones in validation

Validation Contract 17/06/2014

Visit to GGEL corporate office and telephonic interview with various

28/10/2014



of 26

stakeholders

Draft Verification Report 26/12/2014

Final Verification Report 03/01/2015

3.4 Findings

As an outcome of the validation process, the validation team can raise different types of findings

A Clarification Request (CL) is raised if information is insufficient or not clear enough to determine whether the applicable GS requirements have been met

Where a non-conformance arises the validator shall raise a Corrective Action Request (CAR). A CAR is issued, where:

The project participants have made mistakes that will influence the ability of the project activity to achieve real, measurable additional emission reductions;

The GS requirements have not been met; There is a risk that emission reductions cannot be monitored or calculated.

A Forward Action Request (FAR) is raised during validation to highlight issues related to project implementation that require review during the first verification of the project activity. FARs shall not relate to the GS requirements for registration.

Corrective Action Requests and Clarification Requests are raised in the draft validation protocol and detailed in a separate finding document (Annex 1). In this document, the project participant is given the opportunity to “resolve” the outstanding CARs and respond to CLs and FARs.

3.5 Internal Quality Control

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

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

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



of 26

4. Validation Findings

4.1 Approval

The project is already validated under other approved GHG program (CDM). Thus, only the validation of Gold Standard requirements have been undertaken. The information has been verified from the registered CDM PDD and project web page was found correct and consistent to the onsite observation.

The assessment of validation team on the LoA has been presented by the PP and confirmed that the LoA contain the elements requested by the CDM EB:

a) Confirmation of the Party’s ratification to the Kyoto Protocol. b) Voluntary participation. c) The project activity’s contribution to sustainable development of the country (host Party), and d) The precise title of the CDM project activity of the registered PDD referenced.

4.2 Authorization

The project already registered as CDM project and authorization letter issued from the host country could be found on the project webpage.

4.3 Sustainable Development

The project already registered as CDM project .The validation team confirms that, the host Party’s DNA has confirmed the contribution of the project to the sustainable development of the host Party.

4.4 Gold Standard Passport

The GS Passport version 01 (in latest available template) was submitted to GS initially. The final version of the GS Passport is version 02.1 (in latest available template) dated 03/01/2015 which is in line with latest available GS Passport template.

4.5 Project Description

Discussion:

The project activity involves implementation of a new grid connected 50 MWe/9/ solar thermal power plant employing concentrated solar power based parabolic trough technology. The project activity is located at village Nokh, Tehsil Pokaran, District Jaisalmer in the state of Rajasthan, India.

The DOE have already visited the project site during CDM Validation of the project activity on 05/06/2012/29/ .DOE has conducted physical visit to GGEL office on 28/11/2014 and also conducted telephonic interview with various stakeholders to verify the SFR conducted by PP. The representative unique project site location in terms of Latitude (270 36’ 13’’ N) and Longitude (720 14’ 9.2’’ E) were cross checked at the project site through a GPS device during the CDM validation on site visit and were found to be consistent. This proposed project activity is implemented under the umbrella of batch I of phase I of Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission of Government of India.

The crediting period of CDM starts from 19/06/2013, thus the Gold standard crediting period is proposed from 19/06/2013 to 18/06/2023 (retroactive cycle).

The project activity was validated for CDM by KBS (validation report: CDM.11.VAL.0147), issued on 16/11/2012) and it was registered on 03/12/2012 under the UNFCCC reference number 7379. The emission reductions from the date of commissioning are being availed under the retroactive cycle of the Gold Standard certification scheme.



of 26

During GS validation, no physical on site visit to the project site was undertaken as confirmed through GS focal point during pre-feasibility assessment meeting.

A validation of the registered CDM project activity has been undertaken in order to check the conformance of the gold standard requirements.

Findings:

CAR#01 was raised and closed successfully. Please refer Annex 1 of this report for complete details of the same.

Opinion:

(a) The assessment team confirms that passport contains a transparent and accurate description of the project activity and provides reader a clear understanding of the project activity.

(b) In the opinion of the assessment team, the project description in the passport is clear, accurate and complete.

4.6 Baseline and monitoring methodology

4.6.1 General requirement Discussion:

The project applies the approved methodology for selected CDM project activity categories, “Consolidated methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources” (ACM0002.) version 15/24/, which also uses the “Tool to calculate the emission factor for electricity an electricity system” version 04/27/.

The PP has updated the version of the applied methodology from version 12.3 to version 15, which is latest at the time of requesting registration to Gold Standard.

Findings:

CL#02(a) was raised and closed successfully. Please refer Annex 1 of this report for complete details of the same.

Opinion:

The assessment team confirms that the applied baseline and monitoring methodology and relevant tool are latest and applicable to the project activity.

4.6.2 Applicability of selected methodology to the project activity Discussion:

The project activity involves setting up of 50 MWe Solar Thermal based power plant and has applied approved methodology “Consolidated methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources” (ACM0002) version 15/24/. The project is registered as a CDM project/22/. There is no additional requirements related to solar thermal based power project is identified during application of the latest version of ACM0002/24/ compared to the old version applied during CDM registration of the project activity. Therefore, the applicability has already been checked and validated during CDM validation and no additional requirements have been added in latest version of methodology. The applied methodology is also the latest methodology available at the UNFCCC website, therefore the section was not assessed.

Findings:

CL#02(a) was raised and closed successfully. Please refer Annex 1 of this report for complete details of the same.

Opinion:



of 26

The assessment team confirms that the applied baseline and monitoring methodology and relevant tool are latest and applicable to the project activity

4.6.3 Project boundary Discussion:

The project is registered as a CDM project/22/. Therefore, the applicability has already been checked. The applied methodology is also the latest methodology available at the UNFCCC website therefore the section was not assessed.

4.6.4 Baseline identification Discussion:


Findings:

CL#02(b) was raised and closed successfully. Please refer Annex 1 of the report for complete details of the same

Opinion:

The applied baseline and monitoring methodology and relevant tool are latest and applicable to the project activity. However, it might be noted that the baseline grid emission factor applied for the calculation of emission reduction has been used for the vintage (2009, 2010 and 2011) as was considered at the time of CDM registration/28/. The grid emission factor as per the latest available data is 0.974 tCO2/MWh in comparison to the previously considered (at the time of CDM registration) factor of 0.952 tCO2/MWh. The grid emission factor following the data for the latest vintage would have resulted in higher emission reductions therefore it was not appropriate to apply. Thus, grid emission factor of 0.952 tCO2/MWh/28/ applied on grounds of conservativeness and found acceptable by the validation team.

4.6.5 Algorithms and/or formulae used to determine emission reductions Discussion:


4.7 Additionality The project is registered as a CDM project (UN Ref. No. 7379)/22/ .Therefore the additionality has already been checked. The applied methodology is also the latest methodology available at the UNFCCC website therefore the section was not assessed.

4.7.1 Prior consideration of the clean development mechanism

Discussion:

The project is registered as a CDM project (UN Ref. No. 7379)/22/. Therefore the prior consideration has already been checked. The applied methodology is also the latest methodology available at the UNFCCC website therefore the section was not assessed.

4.7.2 Identification of alternatives

Discussion:



of 26

The project is registered as a CDM project (UN Ref. No. 7379)/22/. Therefore, the alternatives have already been checked. The applied methodology is also the latest methodology available at the UNFCCC website therefore the section was not assessed.

4.7.3 Investment analysis

Discussion:


4.7.4 Barrier analysis

Discussion:


4.7.5 Common practice analysis

Discussion:


4.8 Application of Monitoring Methodology and Monitoring Plan

Discussion:

The project is registered as a CDM project (UN Ref. No. 9074)/22/ . Therefore, the applicability has already been checked. The applied methodology is also the latest methodology available at the UNFCCC website therefore the section was not assessed.

4.9 Environmental Impacts

Discussion:

The project activity is involved in installations of Solar Thermal based power plant and therefore has no adverse environmental impact.

Opinion:

The assessment team confirms that the project activity complies with the local environmental regulations.

4.10 Local Stakeholder Comments

Discussion:

The project is a retro-active CDM registered project activity/22/ and therefore local stakeholder consultation at the start of the project activity was undertaken before the PDD was made available for global consultation on 15/11/2011/8/. The meeting was held in GGEL Premises, where the project is now implemented.

The local villagers, village heads participated in the local stakeholder consultation. The meeting was conducted keeping the CDM requirements. Feedback was taken for the project activity and no negative comments were received.

Opinion:



of 26

The project activity is a retro-active project however during the site visit interviews with the beneficiaries and local villagers were undertaken and it can be confirmed that the project proponent takes into account the feedback of local people.

5. Stakeholder Feedback Round and Grievance Mechanism

The project activity is a retroactive project and therefore PP was required to conduct a physical meeting during Stakeholder Feedback Round (SFR) covering the issues highlighted in the pre-feasibility assessment. For the concerned project, Stakeholder Feedback Round (SFR) was conducted in September 2014. Four groups of people were interviewed including employees, villagers (both men and women), local NGOs and GS NGO supporters in writing/20/. General impression of the project was gathered and people were informed about the continuous input mechanism.

The SFR process was undertaken as per the procedures defined in the toolkit 2.2. Valid and adequate mode of communication were adopted and copies of filled and signed SFR feedback forms/20/ were verified during assessment by the validation team.

Findings:

CAR#03 was raised and closed successfully. Please refer Annex 1 of the report for complete details of the same.

Opinion:

The validation team confirms that the project activity meets the Gold Standard requirements for stakeholder feedback round.

6. Grievance Mechanism

During the stakeholder feedback round the local villagers and other stakeholders were informed about the continuous input mechanism, the expression method and contact details were briefed. This was confirmed by the validation team during telephonic interviews with stakeholders and review of the feedback forms. The grievance booklet has been placed in the project office, which is accessible to the villagers and the contact details provided are active.

7. Sustainability Assessment

7.1 Do no harm assessment

The project passport has taken into account all the safeguarding principles as mentioned in Annex H/30/. The project proponent has assessed all the risks and all the safeguarding principle are associated with low risk. None of the principles is associated with the medium/ high risk of breaching the safeguarding principles.

S.No. Safeguarding principle Level of risk Assessment team’s Opinion/ justification for the mitigation measure

1. The project respects internationally proclaimed human rights including dignity, cultural property and uniqueness of indigenous people. The project is not complicit in Human Rights abuses.

Low Project involves setting up of solar thermal power plant and generating power from renewable energy sources like solar is a clean technology. Through the stakeholder’s consultation process, it is evident that it does not conflict the local communities values or practices.

2. The project does not involve and is not complicit in

Low Not relevant for project activity as no resettlement was required.



of 26

involuntary resettlement. Project activity has been envisaged on Barren land, which was not used for any purpose before the project activity. Hence, the low risk level was found applicable.

3. The project does not involve and is not complicit in the alteration, damage or removal of any critical cultural heritage.

Low No cultural heritage has been hampered, and has been verified during the CDM validation on site visit. Hence, the low risk level was found applicable.

4. The project respects the employees’ freedom of association and their right to collective bargaining and is not complicit in restriction of these freedoms and rights.

Low The employees were interviewed and no such restriction was imposed. Also, confirmed the same through HR policy of GGEL/17/ and model code of conduct of GGEL/18/. Hence, the low risk level was found applicable.

5. The project does not involve and is not complicit in any form of forced or compulsory labor.

Low The employees were interviewed and no such restriction was imposed. Also, confirmed the same through HR policy of GGEL/17/ and model code of conduct of GGEL/18/. Hence, the low risk level was found applicable

6. The project does not employ and is not complicit in any form of child labour.

Low The employees were interviewed and no such restriction was imposed. Also, confirmed the same through HR policy of GGEL/17/ and model code of conduct of GGEL/18/. Hence, the low risk level was found applicable

7. The project does not involve and is not complicit in any form of discrimination based on gender, race, religion, sexual orientation or any other basis.

Low The employees were interviewed and no such discrimination was imposed. Also, confirmed the same through model code of conduct of GGEL/18/. Hence, the low risk level was found applicable

8. The project provides worker with a safe and healthy work environment and is not complicit in exposing worker to unsafe or unhealthy work environments.

Medium As the project activity exposes workers to electrical and mechanical components, the principle has been allotted medium risk. The risk has been identified by the PP as medium risk and has proposed trainings as mitigation measure. Safety trainings provided to the workers has been included in the monitoring plan proposed and will be recorded and safeguarded.

9. The project takes a precautionary approach in regards to environmental challenges and is not complicit

Medium

No harm to the environment has been indicated. The PP has adopted all precautions laid in approval of Pollution Control Board.



of 26

in practices contrary to the precautionary principles.

The mitigation measures mentioned in the report have been replicated in the Gold Standard Passport and were verified by the assessment team during physical verification through interviews with the locals.

10. The project does not involve and is not complicit insignificant conversion of degradation of critical natural habitats, including those that are (a) Legally protected (b) Officially proposed for protection (c) Identified by authoritative sources for their high conservation value or (d) Recognized as protected by traditional local communities.

Low No harm to the environment has been indicated. Project activity has been envisaged on Barren land, which was not used for any purpose before the project activity. Hence, the low risk level was found applicable

11. The project does not involve and is not complicit in corruption.

Low All the legal requirements/6/ were taken care regarding the project and were checked by the assessment team. It can be confirmed that all the operations are done as per the provisions. Hence, the low risk level was found applicable



of 26

7.2 Monitoring of do no harm assessment

The project developer was not required to develop a monitoring plan for do no harm assessment since there is no risk of breaching any of the indicator. One of the safeguarding principle “safe and healthy work environment for the workers” was allocated medium risk for which the PP would be providing trainings/11/ as mitigation measures. Trainings are also include in the monitoring plan under the indicator employment quality.

8. Sustainability Development Matrix

The project participant has considered all the indicators mentioned in Annex I/30/ and all the suitable indicators required in case of project activity. The project activity scores a positive score for some of the indicators evaluated based on the chosen parameter. The other indicators that have been indicated as neutral score as the positive impact of these parameters cannot be monitored effectively. The project also does not have any negative score against any of the indicator/parameter selected.

S.No. Indicator Reason for acceptance by the DOE

1. Air quality-1 and Air quality - 2

This has been indicated positive as the project generates clean energy, which replaces the fossil fuel intensive electricity generation at grid connected power plants. In addition, the project generates clean energy, which has no SPM or dust residues.

2. Water quality and quantity

It has been indicated as Neutral. The water received from Canal is for drinking and other non-productive uses. Thermal boiler uses treated water and has been fully recycled with minimal replacement. There is no wastewater discharge from power plant and wastewater is used for cleaning of solar panels and horticulture after in house treatment.

3. Soil condition

It has been indicated as Neutral. The project has been constructed on a barren land and Land tilling was done inside the project area only and dug land soil was used to create elevated location only. There is no waste in installation of Solar panel or demolition to create debris or excavation waste.

4. Other pollutants – Noise, Hazardous waste etc.

It has been indicated as Neutral. Solar thermal power plant does not generate any noise pollution. The project has no effect on this parameter. However, disposal of batteries and used solar equipment can lead to pollution, if not done in the proper manner. The disposal of the used batteries is being done through a proper vendor/14/ who ensures it is recycled.

5. Biodiversity

It has been indicated as Neutral. Since, project has been installed on barren land. No animals, plants or habitats are affected by the project activity

6. Quality of employment

This has been indicated positive. The project as the project engages the employees in trainings and awareness programmes therefore a positive indicator has



of 26

been accepted.

7. Livelihood of the poor

This has been indicated neutral.Project activity created direct and indirect employment opportunities in local population during construction and operation stages.

8. Access to affordable and clean energy services

This has been indicated positive as the project generates clean energy which replaces the fossil fuel intensive electricity generation.

9. Human and institutional capacity

This has been indicated neutral. The same is ensured by conducting training sessions at multiple levels regarding operation and maintenance, environmental aspect, health and hygiene of employees.

10. Quantitative employment and income generation

This has been indicated positive . Remuneration offered by GGEL for its employees is at par with market standard and local persons always gets preference for employment in project activity.

11. Balance of payments and investment

This has been indicated neutral. The project will help in saving foreign exchange which would have been otherwise used for buying fossil fuels for use in the generation of electricity which the solar thermal project will displace from the national grid.

12. Technology transfer and technological self-reliance

This has been indicated neutral . Since, the project activity contributes to technological self reliance as solar units are designed and manufactured indigenously.

Overall it can be summed that the project activity has no negative outcome and aids in sustainable development. The assessment team reviewed the sustainability development matrix as required by the Gold Standard toolkit/30/ and is of the opinion that the PP takes into account all the indicators and sufficiently measures the outcome in order to conclude that the project will have a positive impact. The cross cutting issues for Solar Thermal projects as mentioned in Annex G/30/ have all been included under the indicators discussed in section F.2 of the passport/2/ and were found acceptable to the validation team.

8.1 Sustainability monitoring plan

The project developer has developed a credible and rational monitoring plan to assist the monitoring of the sustainability indicators. The parameters being monitored are as follows:

Parameter Indicator Monitoring

Electricity generation from the project

Air Quality Annually

Number of trainings provided to unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled people

Employment Quality Annually

Number of people employed and other employment opportunities created in unskilled jobs

Livelihood of the poor Annually



of 26

Number of jobs created Quantitative employment and income generation

Annually

State of soil at project site Soil Once during the first verification

Quantity of water withdrawal from the canal

Water quality and quantity Monthly

In view of the assessment team the monitoring is transparent and robust resulting in reliable output to access the contribution of the project in the sustainable development of the project location.

Findings:

CAR#05 was raised and closed successfully, refer annex 1 of the report for complete details of the same.

Opinion:

The validation team confirms that the project activity meets the Gold Standard requirements/30/ for Sustainability Development Matrix. The indicator have been appropriately identified and sufficiently monitored.



of 26

9. References

S. No. Name of document (Validation/Registration Process)

/1/ GS Passport Version 01 dated 12/06/2014 (submitted to GS initially)

/2/ GS Passport Version 02.1 dated 03/01/2015 (final version)

/3/ Validation contract in between KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd. and Godawari Green Energy

Limited dated 17/06/2014

/4/ Certificate of Incorporation of GGEL dated 03/02/2010

/5/ Standardized Power Purchase Agreement between NTPC Vidyut Vyapar Nigam Ltd and GGEL

dated 28/11/2011

/6/ Extract of Statuary clearances:

-Land Lease Deed signed between Government of Rajasthan and GGEL dated 24/05/2011

- Water allocation letter issued by RRECL dated 30/05/2011

- Environment Clearance (Consent to Establish) issued by State Pollution Control Board dated 02/08/2011

- Consent of State Transmission Utility for connectivity with Grid dated 30/05/2011

/7/ Layout plan indicating location of whole power plant with grid connectivity.

/8/ Relevant proofs of local stakeholder consultation process.(= Notification & Attendance) dated 15/11/2011

/9/ Proof for rated capacity of generator of the Solar Thermal Power Plant (Annex A of EPC Contract dated 20/08/2011)

List of make of major equipment. (Annex R and Annex S of EPC contract dated 20/08/2011) Detailed Project Report (Document .Number 1109177-ME-DPR-700-001) prepared by

FICHTNER Consulting Engineers (India) Pvt Ltd dated December 2010

/10/ Training plan of the person engaged in O & M (=Covered in section 5.5 of Annexure – T in EPC contract dated 20/08/2011).

/11/ Records of internal trainings to the HR personnel, O&M, health, safety and environment issues of employees and workers

/12/ CDM monitoring plan regarding the use of revenue from 2% CERs for sustainable development

/13/ Annex D – ODA declaration issued by GGEL dated 26/08/2014

/14/ Battery Replacement agreement signed with M/s EHV Engineers dated 01/01/2014

/15/ Commissioning Certificate issued by RRECL dated 02/07/2013

/16/ Stakeholder Feedback Round documents (SFR filled forms)

/17/ HR Policy Manual of GGEL version 01 (dated 26/07/2011)

/18/ Model Code of Conduct of GGEL

/19/ List of Employees of GGEL with their Name, Designation, previous employment details and native

address

/20/ Copies of filled and signed stakeholder feedback forms received from various stakeholders during

Stakeholder feedback round



of 26

S. No. Name of document (Background documents used during validation process)

/21/ Registered CDM PDD Version 04 dated 14/11/2012

/22/ Project Webpage on CDM Website (http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/DB/KBS_Cert1348206450.84/view)

/23/ Letter of Approval from India (host Party) dated 14/11/2012 (Reference number 4/5/2012-CCC)

/24/ Approved Baseline & Monitoring Methodology: ACM0002, Version 15

/25/ CO2 Baseline Database for Indian Power Sector -User Guide, Version 7 dated January 2012 (covering data vintage 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11).

/26/ CO2 Baseline Database for Indian Power Sector -User Guide, Version 9 dated January 2014 (covering data vintage 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13).

/27/ Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system, version 04

/28/ ER spreadsheet corresponding to Registered CDM PDD Version 04

/29/ CDM Validation report (CDM.11.VAL.0146) issued by KBS Certification Services Pvt. Ltd. dated 16/11/2012

/30/ The Gold Standard Toolkit version 2.2 (related documents)

-



of 26

Annex 1: Detailed Findings

Nature of findings:

CARs CLs FARs Total Number raised

3 2 - Date Type & Number Raised by Reference 10/10/2014 CAR-01 The Assessment Team Section B of GS Passport Non conformities raised The project passport is not transparent in terms of the proposed crediting period of the project activity. Project Participant’s response Date: 26/11/2014 The crediting period of the project activity is from 19 June 2013 to 18 June 2023, the same is being visible in the UNFCCC web page against the Project Reference: 7379 Documentation Provided as Evidence by Project Participanthttps://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/DB/KBS_Cert1348206450.84/view Information Verified by Team Leader Date of review: 08/12/2014Revised GS Passport version 02 dated 26/11/2014 Reasoning for not acceptance or close outPP as a response have corrected the crediting period start date in line with the UNFCCC web page. The crediting period start date is consistent with commissioning date of the project activity (i.e. 19/06/2013). Therefore, this CAR is closed. Date of acceptance or non- acceptance Date: 08/12/2014 Status: Closed Date Type & Number Raised by Reference 10/10/2014 CL-02 The Assessment Team Section C of GS Passport Non conformities raised a) Registered CDM PDD refers to ACM0002, Version 12.3.0 (older version). However, PP has applied the

latest version of the methodology ACM0002 (Version 15) in GS passport. PP to confirm, that project still meets the additional eligibility criteria of the revised methodology ACM0002 (Version 15).

b) PP to confirm that the emission factor calculated using Grid tool (version 02.2.1) in the registered CDM PDD is still conservative compared to the emission factor calculated using Grid tool (version 04) and latest available CEA database.

Project Participant’s response Date: 26/11/2014 a) As per the ACM0002(Version 15) Large-scale Consolidated Methodology Grid-connected electricity

generation from renewable sources. This methodology is applicable to grid-connected renewable energy power generation project activities that: Install a Greenfield power plant; Involve a capacity addition to (an) existing plant(s); Involve a retrofit of (an) existing operating plants/units; Involve a rehabilitation of (an) existing plant(s)/unit(s); or (e) Involve a replacement of (an) existing plant(s)/unit(s). The project activity comes under Greenfield Project activity. The change in eligibility applies for those which uses multiple renewable technology, the Project activity does not fall into that category.

b) A more conservative approach has been followed for emissions reductions by taking lower value of emission factor over the period of project activity. The latest emission factor is higher than the emission factor taken at the time of CDM registration at UNFCCC.

Documentation Provided as Evidence by Project Participant-



of 26

Information Verified by Team Leader Date of review: 08/12/2014- Reasoning for not acceptance or close outa) PP as a response, have clarified that the project activity comes under Greenfield Project activity. The change in eligibility applies for those, which uses multiple renewable technology, the Project activity does not fall into that category. Hence, there is no impact of using the new methodology and found acceptable. Therefore , this CL is closed. b) The baseline grid emission factor applied for the calculation of emission reduction has been used for the vintage (2009, 2010 and 2011) as was considered at the time of CDM registration. The grid emission factor as per the latest available data is 0.974 tCO2/MWh in comparison to the previously considered (at the time of CDM registration) factor of 0.952 tCO2/MWh. The grid emission factor following the data for the latest vintage would have resulted in higher emission reductions therefore it was not appropriate to apply. Thus, grid emission factor of 0.952 tCO2/MWh applied on grounds of conservativeness and found acceptable by the validation team. Therefore , this CL is closed. Date of acceptance or non- acceptance Date: 08/12/2014 Status: Closed Date Type & Number Raised by Reference 10/10/2014 CAR-03 The Assessment Team Section E of GS Passport Non conformities raised Section E.2. of the GS passport has not been filled by the PP. Project Participant’s response Date: 26/11/2014 The Section has been updated with details of Stakeholder consultation. Documentation Provided as Evidence by Project ParticipantRevised GS Passport version 02 dated 26/11/2014 Information Verified by Team Leader Date of review: 08/12/2014Revised GS Passport version 02 dated 26/11/2014 Reasoning for not acceptance or close outPP as a response, has provided the details of stakeholders consultation process under section E of revised GS passport, which is verified by validation team and found consistent with the evidences of stakeholders meeting conducted by PP. Therefore, the CAR is closed. Date of acceptance or non- acceptance Date: 08/12/2014 Status: Closed Date Type & Number Raised by Reference 10/10/2014 CL-04 The Assessment Team Section F of GS Passport Non conformities raised a) PP to clarify the reason for scoring a neutral for water quality and quantity despite of the fact that project

uses water from canal, which may have other domestic uses in local community. b) As the risk level identified for Safeguarding Principle # 8 and 9 is ‘medium’, the PP shall include the

relevant mitigation measures in the SD monitoring plan in the GS Passport. c) PP to submit the following documents as mentioned in the GS passport (section F) –

1) HR Policy of GGEL. 2) CDM monitoring plan regarding the use of revenue from 2% CERs for sustainable development. 3) Records of internal trainings to the HR personnel, O&M, health, safety and environment issues of

employees and workers 4) List of employees at GGEL with their designation, native address and there previous associations.

Project Participant’s response Date: 26/11/2014



of 26

a) The project activity is not water resource consuming power plant and whatever is being withdrawn is being monitored on monthly basis. There is no waste water discharged outside the plant. Treated water is used for cleaning and horticulture.

b) As the Project Activity provides safe & healthy environment also project does not involve any work to expose the workers to unsafe environment. Moreover as per HR Policy Section 6.2, the objective of healthy environment is mentioned and also communication policy to resolve any issues is clearly mentioned in Section 10.3 of HR Policy.

c) The following documents are being submitted along with the response: 1) HR Policy of GGEL 2) 2% CSR fund Management 3) Training records attached 4) List of employees with address and previous associations

Documentation Provided as Evidence by Project Participant1) HR Policy 2) 2% CSR fund management 3) Training Records 4) List of employees(local employees are marked in Green cells) Information Verified by Team Leader Date of review: 08/12/20141) HR Policy 2) 2% CSR fund management 3) Training Records 4) List of employees(local employees are marked in Green cells) Reasoning for not acceptance or close outa) PP as a response, has clarified that water received from Canal is for drinking and other non-productive uses. Thermal boiler uses treated water and has been fully recycled with minimal replacement. There is no wastewater discharge from power plant and wastewater is used for cleaning of solar panels and horticulture after in house treatment. Therefore, this CL is closed. b) PP as a response have clarified that GGEL HR policy adequately covers all the relevant guidelines to ensure safe and secure work environment for all the employees of GGEL. Also, Air Quality of the local environment is regularly monitored and local population will be consulted regularly for any adverse effect on environment due to implementation of the project activity. No additional parameter is added in this regard. Therefore, this CL is closed. c) The requested documents has now been provided by the PP. Therefore , this CL is closed. Date of acceptance or non- acceptance Date: 08/12/2014 Status: Closed Date Type & Number Raised by Reference 10/10/2014 CAR-05 The Assessment Team Section G of GS Passport Non conformities raised PP has mentioned in the GS passport, “Quantity of water withdrawal from the canal is being monitored on monthly basis”. However, monitoring parameter has not been added under sustainability monitoring plan for the same. Project Participant’s response Date: 26/11/2014 Yes, PP takes into account the water withdrawn from the canal on the monthly basis. As part of Sustainability Monitoring Plan “Water quality and Quantity” has been added in the Section G of the passport. Documentation Provided as Evidence by Project ParticipantRevised GS Passport version 02 dated 26/11/2014 Information Verified by Team Leader Date of review: 08/12/2014Revised GS Passport version 02 dated 26/11/2014 Reasoning for not acceptance or close out



of 26

The parameter related to monitoring of water withdrawal from the canal is now added in revised GS passport. Therefore, the CAR is closed. Date of acceptance or non- acceptance Date: 08/12/2014 Status: Closed



of 26

Annex 2: Certificate of Competence

Personnel Name: Akhilesh Joshi

Qualified to work as:

Team Leader Technical Expert

Validator/Verifier Financial Expert

Technical Reviewer Local Expert (India)

Area(s) of Technical Expertise

Sectoral Scope Technical Area

Energy industries (renewable/non-renewable sources)

TA 1.2: Energy generation from renewable energy sources

Energy Demand TA 3.1: Energy Demand

Approved by (Manager C & T) Gagandeep Kakkar

Approval date: 28/04/2014

Personnel Name: Sanjay Kandari

Qualified to work as:

Team Leader Technical Expert

Validator/Verifier Financial Expert

Technical Reviewer Local Expert (India)

Area(s) of Technical Expertise

Sectoral Scope Technical Area

Energy industries (renewable/non-renewable sources)

TA 1.2: Energy generation from renewable energy sources

Approved by (Manager C & T) Mayank Kumar Jain

Approval date: 09/08/2012



of 26

History of the document

Version Date Nature of revision Reviewed by Approved by 4.0 29/07/2013 Revised for VVS 3.0

and 4.6 section added Manager CDM Quality 04/08/2012

Managing Director 08/08/2013

3.0 05/09/2012 Revised for VVS track Manager CDM Quality 07/09/2012


2.0 31/12/2011 Comprehensively revised

Manager CDM Quality 31/12/2011


gs validation report

Documents