{ "schema": "report-v2", "project": { "project_id": "VCS2505", "project_name": "Fuel Efficient Cooking in South Africa", "registry_url": "https://registry.verra.org/app/projectDetail/VCS/2505", "methodology": "VMR0006", "methodology_version": null }, "document": { "file_name": "Fuel Efficient Cooking in South Africa Grouped PDD_v9_Clean.pdf", "sha256": "be4624f7ee7bb9cc4911edb6913f8910edfdfebc9c8dc078bda3b3453a150713", "pages": 450, "extra_files": [ { "file_name": "VCS MR 2505 01082023-31012024_V1.8_Clean.pdf", "sha256": "9411c563c352965a2aff3f6cfe4df0bd0d0a174de37396b7b15b946563e7b620" }, { "file_name": "VCS MR 2505 01022024-31072024_V1.12_clean.pdf", "sha256": "bd78fdd956957a28e28536b1218dc08c61c0559f7455adb6f2351c6d1a869f8f" }, { "file_name": "VCS_MR6_2505_01082024-24012025_Round2_v1.9_Clean.pdf", "sha256": "a8460c6e506cb0c0cb361a4548c9e7359453b4c232cf5d8b9d8393abb333359a" }, { "file_name": "VCS VerR 2505 01022024-31072024-Clean.pdf", "sha256": "b5d8b4e8a6dfff60e63f0432e668861df5ea36a32f0c485fa09c1714d1467e6e" }, { "file_name": "2022_03_07 FVR_VERRA-R3-Clean.pdf", "sha256": "888e0a7b314c8b3377122f6486344e0d7b96b8c28e2f19fd3b18009938b63943" } ] }, "methodology_status": { "code": "VMR0006", "version": null, "status": "not_ccp_approved", "summary": "No CCP approval for VMR0006. ICVCM approved Verra's successor cookstove methodology VM0050 v1.0 with conditions that constrain fNRB and require stricter fuel-use monitoring.", "sources": [ "https://icvcm.org/integrity-council-approves-three-cookstove-methodologies/", "https://www.calyxglobal.com/research-hub/research/how-the-ICVCM-CCP-labels-are-raising-the-quality-of-cookstoves-and-household-biodigester-projects" ], "table_version": "2026-10-15" }, "method": { "report_schema": "report-v2", "question_set_version": "qs-v2-checklist", "prompt_version": "checklist-v1", "evidence_rule": "yes-cites-excerpt-paragraph-v2", "excerpt_rule": "select_paragraphs(budget_chars=30000, overview_chars=0) on the project description + select_paragraphs(budget_chars=15000, overview_chars=0) on the other documents", "injection_screen": "injection-screen-v1", "review_rule": "person-decides-flagged-checks-v1", "llm_model": "deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash", "second_opinion_model": "typesafe/jev-1.13", "methodology_table_version": "2026-10-15", "pdf_extractor": "pymupdf 1.28.2" }, "method_hash": "0x05f2d815a67e7bfa5eba473409b663801b86b6fe07d2b1da7ae10c8d96d862e5", "principles": [ { "principle": "additionality", "status": "partial_evidence", "score": 25, "rationale": "Evidence found for 1 of 4 checks (A3); not found in the excerpt: A1, A2, A4.", "checks": [ { "id": "A1", "question": "Does the text report a quantified financial analysis: at least one numeric financial indicator (such as IRR or NPV) together with a benchmark or threshold value it is compared against?", "answer": "no", "evidence": [], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.02, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "A2", "question": "Does the text discuss common practice, i.e. whether similar activities are already widespread in the region or sector?", "answer": "no", "evidence": [], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.62, "needs_review": true, "dropped": null }, { "id": "A3", "question": "Does the text state that the project activity is not required by any law or regulation (regulatory surplus)?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p8-19", "page": 8, "text": "1. There \nis \nno \ngovernment \nmandated programme or policy \nin South Africa ensuring the \ndistribution \nof \nnew \nproject \nactivity \ninstances \nor \nfuel \nefficient cookstoves." } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.81, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "A4", "question": "Does the text state that carbon credit revenue was considered before or at the start of the project (prior consideration), for example with a date or a document?", "answer": "no", "evidence": [], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.16, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null } ], "quotes": [ { "text": "1. There \nis \nno \ngovernment \nmandated programme or policy \nin South Africa ensuring the \ndistribution \nof \nnew \nproject \nactivity \ninstances \nor \nfuel \nefficient cookstoves.", "page": 8, "paragraph_id": "p8-19", "verification": "cited_paragraph" } ], "dropped_findings": 0, "review_flags": [ "models_disagree:A2" ], "excerpt": { "paragraphs": [ "p2-18", "p2-19", "p2-20", "p2-29", "p2-30", "p2-31", "p3-01", "p5-08", "p5-09", "p5-10", "p8-05", "p8-06", "p8-11", "p8-12", "p8-13", "p8-14", "p8-16", "p8-17", "p8-19", "p8-20", "p8-21", "p9-07", "p9-08", "p9-11", "p9-12", "p9-13", "p14-03", "p14-04", "p15-05", "p15-06", "p17-08", "p17-09", "p20-05", "p20-06", "p21-07", "p21-08", "p26-02", "p26-03", "p27-03", "p27-04", "p27-05", "p33-02", "p33-03", "p43-06", "p43-07", "p44-03", "p44-04", "p45-07", "p45-15", "p45-16", "p47-11", "p47-12", "p47-13", "p47-14", "p50-10", "p50-11", "p50-12", "p50-13", "p50-14", "p51-02", "p51-03", "p51-04", "p55-08", "p55-09", "p56-09", "p56-10", "p56-11", "p57-08", "p57-09", "p57-10", "p58-09", "p58-10", "x1-p9-02", "x1-p9-03", "x1-p19-03", "x1-p21-07", "x1-p21-08", "x1-p21-13", "x1-p21-14", "x1-p22-02", "x1-p22-04", "x1-p22-05", "x1-p22-06", "x3-p9-02", "x3-p9-03", "x3-p9-04", "x3-p27-10", "x3-p27-11", "x3-p27-13", "x3-p27-14", "x3-p27-15", "x4-p18-07", "x4-p84-07", "x4-p84-08", "x4-p84-09", "x5-p11-02", "x5-p11-03", "x5-p11-04", "x5-p23-03", "x5-p23-04", "x5-p23-05", "x5-p30-04", "x5-p46-03", "x5-p46-04", "x5-p46-05", "x5-p72-12", "x5-p72-13", "x5-p72-14", "x5-p73-02", "x5-p73-04", "x5-p73-05", "x5-p73-10", "x5-p73-11", "x5-p74-05", "x5-p74-06", "x5-p74-07", "x5-p79-06", "x5-p79-07", "x5-p79-08", "x5-p79-09", "x5-p80-07", "x5-p80-08", "x5-p80-09", "x5-p80-15", "x5-p87-12", "x5-p87-13", "x5-p87-14", "x5-p87-15", "x5-p87-16", "x5-p88-18", "x5-p88-19", "x5-p88-20" ], "chars": 29685 } }, { "principle": "permanence", "status": "not_applicable", "score": null, "rationale": "Emission-avoidance activity without stored carbon at risk of reversal; permanence is not applicable (rule based on project category, not AI).", "checks": [], "quotes": [], "dropped_findings": 0, "review_flags": [], "rule": "no_reversal_risk" }, { "principle": "robust_quantification", "status": "strong_evidence", "score": 100, "rationale": "Evidence found for 4 of 4 checks (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4).", "checks": [ { "id": "Q1", "question": "Does the text show how baseline emissions are calculated, with an equation, parameter values or a numeric result?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p50-31", "page": 50, "text": "Bold \ntonnes/year \n5.49 \nQuantity of biomass \nconsumed in baseline" }, { "paragraph_id": "p50-20", "page": 50, "text": "Efwf,CO2 \ntCO2e/TJ \n112 \nCO2 emission factor of \nbiomass that is substituted \nor reduced" }, { "paragraph_id": "p50-22", "page": 50, "text": "Efwf,non-CO2 \ntCO2e/TJ \n26.23 \nNon-CO2 emission factor of \nbiomass that is substituted \nor reduced" }, { "paragraph_id": "p50-30", "page": 50, "text": "DF \nfraction \n0.95 \nDefault leakage adjustment \nfactor" }, { "paragraph_id": "p52-12", "page": 52, "text": "Comments \nParameter Bold once determined shall remain fixed for the \nentire crediting period. \nWhere charcoal is used by the baseline devices, a default wood \nto charcoal conversion factor of 6 kg of firewood per kg of \ncharcoal may be used in line with paragraph 35 of AMS II.G, \nversion 11." }, { "paragraph_id": "p52-15", "page": 52, "text": "Description \nFraction of woody biomass that can be established as non-\nrenewable biomass" }, { "paragraph_id": "p52-16", "page": 52, "text": "Source of data \nCalculated based on the CDM TOOL 30 “Calculation of the \nfraction of non-renewable biomass” v3.0 for PI1-K2C. \n \nSee associated report: Biomass Baseline for Cookstove \nProject in the Kruger to Canyon and Waterberg Biospheres;" }, { "paragraph_id": "p53-10", "page": 53, "text": "Description \nCO2 emission factor of biomass that is substituted or reduced." }, { "paragraph_id": "p53-11", "page": 53, "text": "Source of data \nVMR0006 methodology default: \n \nIPCC default for wood fuel" }, { "paragraph_id": "p53-19", "page": 53, "text": "Description \nNon-CO2 emission factor of biomass that is substituted or \nreduced." }, { "paragraph_id": "p53-20", "page": 53, "text": "Source of data \nVMR0006 methodology default: \n \nIPCC default for wood fuel" } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.85, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "Q2", "question": "Does the text address leakage (emissions shifted outside the project boundary), either by quantifying it or by justifying why it is zero?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p21-10", "page": 21, "text": "The project adopts a gross-to-net adjustment factor of 95% on emissions reductions to \naccount for leakage as described under the methodology VMR0006, Section 8.3." }, { "paragraph_id": "p46-08", "page": 46, "text": "Leakage shall be considered as default 0.95 in accordance with Section 8.3 of the applied \nmethodology VRM0006 v1." }, { "paragraph_id": "p47-15", "page": 47, "text": "0.95 \nDiscount factor to account for leakage." }, { "paragraph_id": "p48-16", "page": 48, "text": "A net gross leakage factor of 0.95 is applied to ERy,i,j." }, { "paragraph_id": "p50-30", "page": 50, "text": "DF \nfraction \n0.95 \nDefault leakage adjustment \nfactor" } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.95, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "Q3", "question": "Does the text address uncertainty or the use of conservative assumptions in the emission reduction estimate?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p15-04", "page": 15, "text": "from PI1-K2C. Based on the initial number of ICS planned for PI1-K2C and taking the \nexpected 5-year operational lifetime of the ICS into account, the GP’s ex-ante ERs were \nmodelled to represent a conservative approximation. Although the expected lifetime of the \ntechnology is 5 years, it is assumed that some of the devices will still be operational after \nthe 5-year period. For ex-ante estimations, a decreasing operation rate of stoves (“drop off \nrate”) of 2.5% per year was incorporated into the ER calculation for the 10-year crediting \nperiod." }, { "paragraph_id": "p48-06", "page": 48, "text": "0.94 \nAdjustment factor to account for uncertainty related to \nproject cookstove efficiency test." }, { "paragraph_id": "p55-08", "page": 55, "text": "Data from the monitoring survey will be collected at least \nbiennially and applied to the emissions reductions \ncalculations during that monitoring period. Where the required \nlevel of precision is not met either additional surveys may be \ncompleted, or the lower bound value applied." }, { "paragraph_id": "p56-10", "page": 56, "text": "Where the required level of precision is not met either \nadditional monitoring activities may be completed, or the lower \nbound value applied." }, { "paragraph_id": "p57-09", "page": 57, "text": "Where the required level of precision is not met either \nadditional monitoring activities may be completed, or the lower \nbound value applied." }, { "paragraph_id": "p58-09", "page": 58, "text": "Data from the monitoring survey will be collected at least \nonce every two years and applied to the emissions reductions \ncalculations during that monitoring period. Where the required \nlevel of precision is not met either additional surveys may be \ncompleted, or the lower bound value applied." }, { "paragraph_id": "p64-02", "page": 64, "text": "If the required level of precision is not achieved, then further surveys may be completed or the \nlower bound value adopted in the calculations." } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.97, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "Q4", "question": "Does the text describe a monitoring plan that names the parameters to be measured and how often or by what method?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p54-20", "page": 54, "text": "The total number of devices in operation compared to the total \nnumber of distributed (according to the monitoring database) \nwill be surveyed." }, { "paragraph_id": "p55-08", "page": 55, "text": "Data from the monitoring survey will be collected at least \nbiennially and applied to the emissions reductions \ncalculations during that monitoring period. Where the required \nlevel of precision is not met either additional surveys may be \ncompleted, or the lower bound value applied." }, { "paragraph_id": "p56-06", "page": 56, "text": "Monitoring equipment \nWhen measured: as specified in WBT protocol" }, { "paragraph_id": "p57-06", "page": 57, "text": "Monitoring equipment \nAs specified in KPT protocol" }, { "paragraph_id": "p58-09", "page": 58, "text": "Data from the monitoring survey will be collected at least \nonce every two years and applied to the emissions reductions \ncalculations during that monitoring period. Where the required \nlevel of precision is not met either additional surveys may be \ncompleted, or the lower bound value applied." }, { "paragraph_id": "p63-05", "page": 63, "text": "Field-based monitoring activities to determine monitored parameter values will be either a field \nsurvey, KPT or WBT." }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p30-02", "page": 30, "text": "based on the information included in the final monitoring report, there are several procedures \nfor data collecting depending on the methodology applicable for each step of the project. The \norganizational structure/26/, along with roles and responsibilities throughout project \nimplementation, has been provided in the MR and verified. \n \nPP conducted sampling surveys to gather information needed for the monitoring of Ny,i,j and μy \nparameters. Monitoring surveys/21/22/23/ were conducted across both PIs between June and July \n2024. The minimum sample size of 100 households as per VMR0006 Section 8.4 Option (b) \nwere selected to survey for the proportion parameter ny,i,j.and µy. \n \nSampling captured information on monitoring variables with required confidence/precision \n(90/10 for individual PIs on an annual basis, or 95/10 confidence/precision basis for groups \nof PIs or sampling on a biennial basis). PP has applied 90/10 confidence/precision for \nsampling for each individual project instance. A simple random sampling was used. \n \nThe applied confidence interval and precision level is 90/10. The sample size for the \nparameter μy is determined based on the section 8.4 Option (b) of the. VMR0006 methodology, \ni.e. Project target population > 1000: Minimum sample size 100. PP has applied a sample size \nof 101 for K2C, 106 for WB and 105 for VH, both parameters Ny,i,j and μy. The sampling \napproach has been demonstrated in the monitoring survey/21/22/23/ for each PIs. \n \nRelative precision of data is calculated at 8.2% for K2C, 0% for WB and 7% for VH determined \nfor the parameter ny,i,j (which is used to calculate parameter Ny,i,j and is less than the precision \nlevel limit of 10 %. \n \nFor parameter μy, calculation of precision level is calculated as 8.1% for K2C, 5.6% for WB and \n7.2% for VH which is used to remove outlier data for average wood fuel consumption for the \nsampled households. Both parameters are derived from survey with sample size accordance \nwith the option (b) provided in the section 8.4 of the VMR0006 methodology/7/ which \ncompliance with 90/10 confidence precision is not obligatory. \n \nInconsistencies, such as sampling data variations and data discrepancies, identified between \nthe MR, ER, and KPT have been addressed in findings CAR#2, CAR#3, CAR#4, and CAR#5. \nEach of these findings has been thoroughly reviewed and fully resolved to ensure alignment \nand data accuracy across all reports. \n \nThe Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programmes of activities (Version \n9.0)/31/ states under paragraph 28 that “When the project participants or the \ncoordinating/managing entity have applied a sampling approach, the VVB may apply \nacceptance sampling as described in the steps indicated in paragraphs 29–38 below as part of \nvalidation/verification activities based on an AQL of 1 % and UQL of 15 %, producer risk 10 % \nand consumer risk 10 % which sample size of 25 and acceptance number of 1 is determined. \nThe sampled users are taken from each project instance, 9 users from K2C, 8 from WB and 8 \nfrom VH." } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.97, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null } ], "quotes": [ { "text": "Bold \ntonnes/year \n5.49 \nQuantity of biomass \nconsumed in baseline", "page": 50, "paragraph_id": "p50-31", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Efwf,CO2 \ntCO2e/TJ \n112 \nCO2 emission factor of \nbiomass that is substituted \nor reduced", "page": 50, "paragraph_id": "p50-20", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Efwf,non-CO2 \ntCO2e/TJ \n26.23 \nNon-CO2 emission factor of \nbiomass that is substituted \nor reduced", "page": 50, "paragraph_id": "p50-22", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "DF \nfraction \n0.95 \nDefault leakage adjustment \nfactor", "page": 50, "paragraph_id": "p50-30", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Comments \nParameter Bold once determined shall remain fixed for the \nentire crediting period. \nWhere charcoal is used by the baseline devices, a default wood \nto charcoal conversion factor of 6 kg of firewood per kg of \ncharcoal may be used in line with paragraph 35 of AMS II.G, \nversion 11.", "page": 52, "paragraph_id": "p52-12", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Description \nFraction of woody biomass that can be established as non-\nrenewable biomass", "page": 52, "paragraph_id": "p52-15", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Source of data \nCalculated based on the CDM TOOL 30 “Calculation of the \nfraction of non-renewable biomass” v3.0 for PI1-K2C. \n \nSee associated report: Biomass Baseline for Cookstove \nProject in the Kruger to Canyon and Waterberg Biospheres;", "page": 52, "paragraph_id": "p52-16", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Description \nCO2 emission factor of biomass that is substituted or reduced.", "page": 53, "paragraph_id": "p53-10", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Source of data \nVMR0006 methodology default: \n \nIPCC default for wood fuel", "page": 53, "paragraph_id": "p53-11", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Description \nNon-CO2 emission factor of biomass that is substituted or \nreduced.", "page": 53, "paragraph_id": "p53-19", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Source of data \nVMR0006 methodology default: \n \nIPCC default for wood fuel", "page": 53, "paragraph_id": "p53-20", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "The project adopts a gross-to-net adjustment factor of 95% on emissions reductions to \naccount for leakage as described under the methodology VMR0006, Section 8.3.", "page": 21, "paragraph_id": "p21-10", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Leakage shall be considered as default 0.95 in accordance with Section 8.3 of the applied \nmethodology VRM0006 v1.", "page": 46, "paragraph_id": "p46-08", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "0.95 \nDiscount factor to account for leakage.", "page": 47, "paragraph_id": "p47-15", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "A net gross leakage factor of 0.95 is applied to ERy,i,j.", "page": 48, "paragraph_id": "p48-16", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "from PI1-K2C. Based on the initial number of ICS planned for PI1-K2C and taking the \nexpected 5-year operational lifetime of the ICS into account, the GP’s ex-ante ERs were \nmodelled to represent a conservative approximation. Although the expected lifetime of the \ntechnology is 5 years, it is assumed that some of the devices will still be operational after \nthe 5-year period. For ex-ante estimations, a decreasing operation rate of stoves (“drop off \nrate”) of 2.5% per year was incorporated into the ER calculation for the 10-year crediting \nperiod.", "page": 15, "paragraph_id": "p15-04", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "0.94 \nAdjustment factor to account for uncertainty related to \nproject cookstove efficiency test.", "page": 48, "paragraph_id": "p48-06", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Data from the monitoring survey will be collected at least \nbiennially and applied to the emissions reductions \ncalculations during that monitoring period. Where the required \nlevel of precision is not met either additional surveys may be \ncompleted, or the lower bound value applied.", "page": 55, "paragraph_id": "p55-08", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Where the required level of precision is not met either \nadditional monitoring activities may be completed, or the lower \nbound value applied.", "page": 56, "paragraph_id": "p56-10", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Where the required level of precision is not met either \nadditional monitoring activities may be completed, or the lower \nbound value applied.", "page": 57, "paragraph_id": "p57-09", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Data from the monitoring survey will be collected at least \nonce every two years and applied to the emissions reductions \ncalculations during that monitoring period. Where the required \nlevel of precision is not met either additional surveys may be \ncompleted, or the lower bound value applied.", "page": 58, "paragraph_id": "p58-09", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "If the required level of precision is not achieved, then further surveys may be completed or the \nlower bound value adopted in the calculations.", "page": 64, "paragraph_id": "p64-02", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "The total number of devices in operation compared to the total \nnumber of distributed (according to the monitoring database) \nwill be surveyed.", "page": 54, "paragraph_id": "p54-20", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Monitoring equipment \nWhen measured: as specified in WBT protocol", "page": 56, "paragraph_id": "p56-06", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Monitoring equipment \nAs specified in KPT protocol", "page": 57, "paragraph_id": "p57-06", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Field-based monitoring activities to determine monitored parameter values will be either a field \nsurvey, KPT or WBT.", "page": 63, "paragraph_id": "p63-05", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "based on the information included in the final monitoring report, there are several procedures \nfor data collecting depending on the methodology applicable for each step of the project. The \norganizational structure/26/, along with roles and responsibilities throughout project \nimplementation, has been provided in the MR and verified. \n \nPP conducted sampling surveys to gather information needed for the monitoring of Ny,i,j and μy \nparameters. Monitoring surveys/21/22/23/ were conducted across both PIs between June and July \n2024. The minimum sample size of 100 households as per VMR0006 Section 8.4 Option (b) \nwere selected to survey for the proportion parameter ny,i,j.and µy. \n \nSampling captured information on monitoring variables with required confidence/precision \n(90/10 for individual PIs on an annual basis, or 95/10 confidence/precision basis for groups \nof PIs or sampling on a biennial basis). PP has applied 90/10 confidence/precision for \nsampling for each individual project instance. A simple random sampling was used. \n \nThe applied confidence interval and precision level is 90/10. The sample size for the \nparameter μy is determined based on the section 8.4 Option (b) of the. VMR0006 methodology, \ni.e. Project target population > 1000: Minimum sample size 100. PP has applied a sample size \nof 101 for K2C, 106 for WB and 105 for VH, both parameters Ny,i,j and μy. The sampling \napproach has been demonstrated in the monitoring survey/21/22/23/ for each PIs. \n \nRelative precision of data is calculated at 8.2% for K2C, 0% for WB and 7% for VH determined \nfor the parameter ny,i,j (which is used to calculate parameter Ny,i,j and is less than the precision \nlevel limit of 10 %. \n \nFor parameter μy, calculation of precision level is calculated as 8.1% for K2C, 5.6% for WB and \n7.2% for VH which is used to remove outlier data for average wood fuel consumption for the \nsampled households. Both parameters are derived from survey with sample size accordance \nwith the option (b) provided in the section 8.4 of the VMR0006 methodology/7/ which \ncompliance with 90/10 confidence precision is not obligatory. \n \nInconsistencies, such as sampling data variations and data discrepancies, identified between \nthe MR, ER, and KPT have been addressed in findings CAR#2, CAR#3, CAR#4, and CAR#5. \nEach of these findings has been thoroughly reviewed and fully resolved to ensure alignment \nand data accuracy across all reports. \n \nThe Sampling and surveys for CDM project activities and programmes of activities (Version \n9.0)/31/ states under paragraph 28 that “When the project participants or the \ncoordinating/managing entity have applied a sampling approach, the VVB may apply \nacceptance sampling as described in the steps indicated in paragraphs 29–38 below as part of \nvalidation/verification activities based on an AQL of 1 % and UQL of 15 %, producer risk 10 % \nand consumer risk 10 % which sample size of 25 and acceptance number of 1 is determined. \nThe sampled users are taken from each project instance, 9 users from K2C, 8 from WB and 8 \nfrom VH.", "page": 30, "paragraph_id": "x4-p30-02", "verification": "cited_paragraph" } ], "dropped_findings": 0, "review_flags": [], "excerpt": { "paragraphs": [ "p3-02", "p3-03", "p3-04", "p3-05", "p3-06", "p3-07", "p3-08", "p3-09", "p3-10", "p8-09", "p8-11", "p8-12", "p8-13", "p8-14", "p11-03", "p11-04", "p11-05", "p11-08", "p11-09", "p11-10", "p11-11", "p11-12", "p11-13", "p11-14", "p13-14", "p13-15", "p14-11", "p15-03", "p15-04", "p15-05", "p17-05", "p17-06", "p21-10", "p22-02", "p22-03", "p24-02", "p24-03", "p24-04", "p24-05", "p24-06", "p30-03", "p30-04", "p30-05", "p32-05", "p32-06", "p32-07", "p35-07", "p35-08", "p35-14", "p35-15", "p35-16", "p36-06", "p36-07", "p36-08", "p43-06", "p43-07", "p44-04", "p44-05", "p44-06", "p44-07", "p44-08", "p44-09", "p44-10", "p45-02", "p45-03", "p46-04", "p46-06", "p46-08", "p46-09", "p47-11", "p47-12", "p47-13", "p47-14", "p47-15", "p47-16", "p48-05", "p48-06", "p48-07", "p48-16", "p49-02", "p49-03", "p49-04", "p49-10", "p49-11", "p49-12", "p49-13", "p49-14", "p50-10", "p50-11", "p50-12", "p50-13", "p50-14", "p50-20", "p50-22", "p50-30", "p50-31", "p52-11", "p52-12", "p52-15", "p52-16", "p53-02", "p53-10", "p53-11", "p53-19", "p53-20", "p54-13", "p54-20", "p54-22", "p55-08", "p55-09", "p56-02", "p56-05", "p56-06", "p56-09", "p56-10", "p56-11", "p57-06", "p57-08", "p57-09", "p57-10", "p57-12", "p57-18", "p58-02", "p58-03", "p58-09", "p58-10", "p58-11", "p59-19", "p59-20", "p59-21", "p59-22", "p59-24", "p60-14", "p60-15", "p60-16", "p61-07", "p61-08", "p61-13", "p62-02", "p62-04", "p62-06", "p62-08", "p62-09", "p63-03", "p63-05", "p63-06", "p63-07", "p63-09", "p63-10", "p63-12", "p64-02", "p64-03", "p64-05", "p64-06", "p64-08", "p64-10", "p64-11", "x1-p42-15", "x4-p2-14", "x4-p2-15", "x4-p2-16", "x4-p13-07", "x4-p29-13", "x4-p29-14", "x4-p30-02", "x4-p35-03", "x4-p35-04", "x4-p38-02", "x4-p38-03", "x4-p42-05", "x4-p42-06", "x4-p44-07", "x4-p46-03", "x4-p50-02", "x4-p50-03", "x4-p50-04", "x4-p51-03", "x4-p54-04", "x4-p54-05", "x4-p56-03", "x4-p58-11", "x4-p58-12", "x4-p60-09", "x4-p60-10", "x4-p75-11", "x4-p75-12", "x4-p75-13", "x5-p36-02", "x5-p36-03", "x5-p36-04" ], "chars": 44854 } }, { "principle": "no_double_counting", "status": "partial_evidence", "score": 67, "rationale": "Evidence found for 2 of 3 checks (D1, D2); not found in the excerpt: D3.", "checks": [ { "id": "D1", "question": "Does the text state whether the project is registered, or issues credits, under another GHG program (e.g. CDM, Gold Standard)?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p20-10", "page": 20, "text": "This is a new project and has not been registered or seeking registration under any other \nGHG programs." }, { "paragraph_id": "p21-02", "page": 21, "text": "This is a new project and has not been rejected by any other GHG program." }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-04", "page": 17, "text": "The project activity is not registered under any other GHG and \nnon-GHG program or registry/12/. This has been confirmed by \nmeans of research on relevant applicable registries and \navailable information in public domain and through declaration \nfrom the Project Owner." }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-05", "page": 17, "text": "The assessment team has searched for similar projects having \nsame nature, capacity and project proponent as well as legal \nowner. The name of the owners mentions in the regulatory \nlicenses are also matched and checked. It was concluded that \nno such projects having same location and geo-coordinates, \ntechnology or project/legal owners are registered in various \ncarbon schemes like CDM, GCC, and Gold Standard." }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p74-18", "page": 74, "text": "5. The project is not active in any other crediting \nschemes other than the VCS. A signed \ndeclaration labelled \n“Double_Counting_Declaration_v1.0 signed \n(MP5)” is included as evidence." }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p75-02", "page": 75, "text": "(MP5).pdf” that the current project is not \nregistered under any other GHG program." } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.81, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "D2", "question": "Does the text address other environmental credits or certificates (e.g. renewable energy certificates, I-RECs) or participation in an emissions trading scheme?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p21-05", "page": 21, "text": "The project is not included in an emissions trading program or any other mechanism that \nincludes GHG allowance trading." }, { "paragraph_id": "p21-07", "page": 21, "text": "The project has not sought, nor received another form of GHG-related environmental \ncredit." }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-06", "page": 17, "text": "No double claiming with \nemissions trading \nprograms or binding \nemission limits" }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-07", "page": 17, "text": "The project activity has been thoroughly search on the various \nwebsites of various emission trading programs and or ETS \nprograms running in various counties, using nature, capacity \nand project proponent as well as legal owner as the search \noption. The project is not double claiming/35/ with other with \nother emission trading programs or binding emission limits. The \nassessment team has searched for similar projects having \nsame nature, capacity and project proponent as well as legal \nowner. The name of the owners mentions in the regulatory \nlicenses are also matched and checked. It was concluded that \nno such projects having same location and geo-coordinates, \ntechnology or project/legal owners are registered in other \nemission trading programs or binding emission limits various \ncarbon schemes like CDM, GCC, and Gold Standard. Therefore, \nit is confirmed by VVB that the project is not double claiming \nwith other emission trading programs or binding emission limits \nthereby complying with VCS Standard, v4.7; Sections 3.24.3." }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-08", "page": 17, "text": "No double claiming with \nother forms of \nenvironmental credit" }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-09", "page": 17, "text": "As discussed above the, the project has been thoroughly search \nin the currently active environment schemes and found that the \nproject is not registered with any other environmental credits. \nPP has also submitted a declaration/12/ stating that the project \nis not registered with any other registry (see CL#2). \nTherefore, it can be concluded that the project is not claiming \nany credits from other programs/schemes." }, { "paragraph_id": "x4-p74-19", "page": 74, "text": "3. Section 1.10, MR: In order to avoid \nthe double counting of the credits, PP \nshall provide a declaration stating the \ncredits generated under this \nmonitoring period will not be used \nwith any other GHG programs and \nenvironmental credits" }, { "paragraph_id": "x1-p9-15", "page": 9, "text": "Are project reductions and removals or project activities also included in an emissions trading \nprogram or binding emission limit? See the VCS Program Definitions for definitions of \nemissions trading program and binding emission limit." }, { "paragraph_id": "x1-p9-19", "page": 9, "text": "Has the project activity sought, received, or is planning to receive credit from another GHG-\nrelated environmental credit system? See the VCS Program Definitions for definition of GHG-\nrelated environmental credit system." }, { "paragraph_id": "x2-p9-12", "page": 9, "text": "Are project reductions and removals or project activities also included in an emissions trading \nprogram or binding emission limit? See the VCS Program Definitions for definitions of emissions \ntrading program and binding emission limit." }, { "paragraph_id": "x2-p9-15", "page": 9, "text": "Has the project activity sought, received, or is planning to receive credit from another GHG-related \nenvironmental credit system? See the VCS Program Definitions for definition of GHG-related \nenvironmental credit system." }, { "paragraph_id": "x3-p10-04", "page": 10, "text": "Are project reductions and removals or project activities also included in an emissions trading \nprogram or binding emission limit? See the VCS Program Definitions for definitions of \nemissions trading program and binding emission limit." }, { "paragraph_id": "x3-p10-08", "page": 10, "text": "Has the project activity sought, received, or is planning to receive credit from another GHG-\nrelated environmental credit system? See the VCS Program Definitions for definition of GHG-\nrelated environmental credit system." } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.88, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "D3", "question": "Does the text address the host country's national accounting or registry, or a corresponding adjustment?", "answer": "no", "evidence": [], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.09, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null } ], "quotes": [ { "text": "This is a new project and has not been registered or seeking registration under any other \nGHG programs.", "page": 20, "paragraph_id": "p20-10", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "This is a new project and has not been rejected by any other GHG program.", "page": 21, "paragraph_id": "p21-02", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "The project activity is not registered under any other GHG and \nnon-GHG program or registry/12/. This has been confirmed by \nmeans of research on relevant applicable registries and \navailable information in public domain and through declaration \nfrom the Project Owner.", "page": 17, "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-04", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "The assessment team has searched for similar projects having \nsame nature, capacity and project proponent as well as legal \nowner. The name of the owners mentions in the regulatory \nlicenses are also matched and checked. It was concluded that \nno such projects having same location and geo-coordinates, \ntechnology or project/legal owners are registered in various \ncarbon schemes like CDM, GCC, and Gold Standard.", "page": 17, "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-05", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "5. The project is not active in any other crediting \nschemes other than the VCS. A signed \ndeclaration labelled \n“Double_Counting_Declaration_v1.0 signed \n(MP5)” is included as evidence.", "page": 74, "paragraph_id": "x4-p74-18", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "(MP5).pdf” that the current project is not \nregistered under any other GHG program.", "page": 75, "paragraph_id": "x4-p75-02", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "The project is not included in an emissions trading program or any other mechanism that \nincludes GHG allowance trading.", "page": 21, "paragraph_id": "p21-05", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "The project has not sought, nor received another form of GHG-related environmental \ncredit.", "page": 21, "paragraph_id": "p21-07", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "No double claiming with \nemissions trading \nprograms or binding \nemission limits", "page": 17, "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-06", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "The project activity has been thoroughly search on the various \nwebsites of various emission trading programs and or ETS \nprograms running in various counties, using nature, capacity \nand project proponent as well as legal owner as the search \noption. The project is not double claiming/35/ with other with \nother emission trading programs or binding emission limits. The \nassessment team has searched for similar projects having \nsame nature, capacity and project proponent as well as legal \nowner. The name of the owners mentions in the regulatory \nlicenses are also matched and checked. It was concluded that \nno such projects having same location and geo-coordinates, \ntechnology or project/legal owners are registered in other \nemission trading programs or binding emission limits various \ncarbon schemes like CDM, GCC, and Gold Standard. Therefore, \nit is confirmed by VVB that the project is not double claiming \nwith other emission trading programs or binding emission limits \nthereby complying with VCS Standard, v4.7; Sections 3.24.3.", "page": 17, "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-07", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "No double claiming with \nother forms of \nenvironmental credit", "page": 17, "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-08", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "As discussed above the, the project has been thoroughly search \nin the currently active environment schemes and found that the \nproject is not registered with any other environmental credits. \nPP has also submitted a declaration/12/ stating that the project \nis not registered with any other registry (see CL#2). \nTherefore, it can be concluded that the project is not claiming \nany credits from other programs/schemes.", "page": 17, "paragraph_id": "x4-p17-09", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "3. Section 1.10, MR: In order to avoid \nthe double counting of the credits, PP \nshall provide a declaration stating the \ncredits generated under this \nmonitoring period will not be used \nwith any other GHG programs and \nenvironmental credits", "page": 74, "paragraph_id": "x4-p74-19", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Are project reductions and removals or project activities also included in an emissions trading \nprogram or binding emission limit? See the VCS Program Definitions for definitions of \nemissions trading program and binding emission limit.", "page": 9, "paragraph_id": "x1-p9-15", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Has the project activity sought, received, or is planning to receive credit from another GHG-\nrelated environmental credit system? See the VCS Program Definitions for definition of GHG-\nrelated environmental credit system.", "page": 9, "paragraph_id": "x1-p9-19", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Are project reductions and removals or project activities also included in an emissions trading \nprogram or binding emission limit? See the VCS Program Definitions for definitions of emissions \ntrading program and binding emission limit.", "page": 9, "paragraph_id": "x2-p9-12", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Has the project activity sought, received, or is planning to receive credit from another GHG-related \nenvironmental credit system? See the VCS Program Definitions for definition of GHG-related \nenvironmental credit system.", "page": 9, "paragraph_id": "x2-p9-15", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Are project reductions and removals or project activities also included in an emissions trading \nprogram or binding emission limit? See the VCS Program Definitions for definitions of \nemissions trading program and binding emission limit.", "page": 10, "paragraph_id": "x3-p10-04", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Has the project activity sought, received, or is planning to receive credit from another GHG-\nrelated environmental credit system? See the VCS Program Definitions for definition of GHG-\nrelated environmental credit system.", "page": 10, "paragraph_id": "x3-p10-08", "verification": "cited_paragraph" } ], "dropped_findings": 0, "review_flags": [], "excerpt": { "paragraphs": [ "p2-16", "p2-17", "p2-18", "p20-07", "p20-08", "p20-09", "p20-10", "p21-02", "p21-04", "p21-05", "p21-07", "p21-08", "p28-06", "p28-07", "p35-06", "p35-07", "p35-08", "p35-16", "p35-17", "p35-18", "p37-05", "p37-06", "p37-07", "p37-08", "p37-15", "p37-16", "p37-17", "p38-04", "p38-05", "p38-06", "p38-07", "p39-08", "p39-09", "p39-10", "p44-03", "p44-04", "p44-05", "p44-06", "p44-10", "p44-11", "p52-15", "p52-16", "p61-13", "p61-16", "p61-17", "p61-18", "x1-p2-14", "x1-p2-15", "x1-p8-16", "x1-p9-02", "x1-p9-03", "x1-p9-08", "x1-p9-09", "x1-p9-10", "x1-p9-15", "x1-p9-19", "x1-p9-20", "x1-p9-21", "x1-p31-15", "x1-p37-21", "x1-p39-03", "x1-p39-12", "x1-p41-05", "x1-p41-06", "x1-p42-02", "x1-p54-07", "x1-p55-03", "x1-p55-04", "x2-p2-14", "x2-p2-15", "x2-p8-15", "x2-p9-02", "x2-p9-07", "x2-p9-08", "x2-p9-12", "x2-p9-15", "x2-p9-20", "x2-p27-14", "x2-p33-19", "x3-p9-02", "x3-p9-03", "x3-p10-04", "x3-p10-08", "x3-p46-16", "x4-p17-02", "x4-p17-03", "x4-p17-04", "x4-p17-05", "x4-p17-06", "x4-p17-07", "x4-p17-08", "x4-p17-09", "x4-p74-16", "x4-p74-18", "x4-p74-19", "x4-p74-20", "x4-p75-02", "x5-p23-02", "x5-p23-03", "x5-p23-04", "x5-p29-06", "x5-p29-07", "x5-p29-08", "x5-p41-09", "x5-p41-10", "x5-p46-03", "x5-p46-04", "x5-p46-05", "x5-p67-02", "x5-p73-10", "x5-p73-11", "x5-p74-05", "x5-p74-06", "x5-p74-07" ], "chars": 23670 } }, { "principle": "safeguards", "status": "strong_evidence", "score": 100, "rationale": "Evidence found for 4 of 4 checks (S1, S2, S3, S4).", "checks": [ { "id": "S1", "question": "Does the text describe a stakeholder consultation with specifics such as dates, places, participants or comments received?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p23-06", "page": 23, "text": "i. \nOnline \nmeeting, \n22/01/2021 \nii. \nWebinar, \n22/04/2021 \niii. \nSedawa \nMunicipal Hall, \n11/05/2021 \niv. \nLulekani \nMunicipal Hall, \n12/05/2021 \nv. \nBrooklyn \nNazarene \nChurch, \n13/05/2021 \nvi. \nMnisi \nTribal \nHall, \n14/05/2021" } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.97, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "S2", "question": "Does the text describe a grievance or complaint mechanism through which affected people can raise concerns?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p30-06", "page": 30, "text": "Stakeholders \nhave \nbeen provided with the \ncontact details of K2C \nand TASC during the \nstakeholder \nconsultations and at \nthe point of distribution. \n \nGrievances \nmay \nbe \nreported telephonically, \nvia email or in person \nto \nK2C \nor \nTASC, \ncontact details of which \nare provided on all \nproject documentation, \nincluding \nthe \nnon-\ntechnical summary and \nthe \n‘how \nto \nguide’ \nprovided to all end \nusers. \n \nGrievances \nwill \nbe \naddressed by the IP or \nthe TASC PI manager \nand reported. These \nshall be dealt with as \nfollows: \n- \nBy responding to \nthe stakeholder in" } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.98, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "S3", "question": "Does the text report an environmental impact assessment or an analysis of the project's environmental risks?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p31-10", "page": 31, "text": "No Listed Activities requiring an environmental impact assessment under the National \nEnvironmental Management Act (NEMA, Act 107 of 1998), Environmental Impact" } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.76, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null }, { "id": "S4", "question": "Does the text address the rights of local communities or indigenous peoples, such as free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) or benefit sharing?", "answer": "yes", "evidence": [ { "paragraph_id": "p28-11", "page": 28, "text": "1) The project proponent \nshall \nrecognize, \nrespect and support \nlocal \nstakeholders’ \nproperty \nrights \nand \nwhere feasible, take \nmeasures \nto \nhelp \nsecure \nrights. \nThe \nproject \nshall \nnot \nencroach on private, \nstakeholder \nor \ngovernment property \nor relocate people off \ntheir \nlands \nwithout \nconsent. The project \nmay affect property \nrights if free, prior and \ninformed consent is \nobtained from those \nconcerned \nand \na" } ], "second_opinion_p_yes": 0.81, "needs_review": false, "dropped": null } ], "quotes": [ { "text": "i. \nOnline \nmeeting, \n22/01/2021 \nii. \nWebinar, \n22/04/2021 \niii. \nSedawa \nMunicipal Hall, \n11/05/2021 \niv. \nLulekani \nMunicipal Hall, \n12/05/2021 \nv. \nBrooklyn \nNazarene \nChurch, \n13/05/2021 \nvi. \nMnisi \nTribal \nHall, \n14/05/2021", "page": 23, "paragraph_id": "p23-06", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "Stakeholders \nhave \nbeen provided with the \ncontact details of K2C \nand TASC during the \nstakeholder \nconsultations and at \nthe point of distribution. \n \nGrievances \nmay \nbe \nreported telephonically, \nvia email or in person \nto \nK2C \nor \nTASC, \ncontact details of which \nare provided on all \nproject documentation, \nincluding \nthe \nnon-\ntechnical summary and \nthe \n‘how \nto \nguide’ \nprovided to all end \nusers. \n \nGrievances \nwill \nbe \naddressed by the IP or \nthe TASC PI manager \nand reported. These \nshall be dealt with as \nfollows: \n- \nBy responding to \nthe stakeholder in", "page": 30, "paragraph_id": "p30-06", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "No Listed Activities requiring an environmental impact assessment under the National \nEnvironmental Management Act (NEMA, Act 107 of 1998), Environmental Impact", "page": 31, "paragraph_id": "p31-10", "verification": "cited_paragraph" }, { "text": "1) The project proponent \nshall \nrecognize, \nrespect and support \nlocal \nstakeholders’ \nproperty \nrights \nand \nwhere feasible, take \nmeasures \nto \nhelp \nsecure \nrights. \nThe \nproject \nshall \nnot \nencroach on private, \nstakeholder \nor \ngovernment property \nor relocate people off \ntheir \nlands \nwithout \nconsent. The project \nmay affect property \nrights if free, prior and \ninformed consent is \nobtained from those \nconcerned \nand \na", "page": 28, "paragraph_id": "p28-11", "verification": "cited_paragraph" } ], "dropped_findings": 0, "review_flags": [], "excerpt": { "paragraphs": [ "p2-19", "p2-20", "p2-21", "p2-22", "p2-23", "p2-24", "p2-25", "p2-26", "p4-03", "p4-04", "p5-02", "p5-09", "p5-10", "p5-11", "p6-07", "p6-08", "p11-07", "p11-08", "p11-09", "p11-12", "p11-13", "p11-14", "p18-02", "p22-06", "p22-07", "p22-16", "p22-17", "p22-19", "p22-20", "p23-02", "p23-03", "p23-04", "p23-05", "p23-06", "p23-07", "p23-08", "p24-02", "p24-03", "p24-04", "p24-05", "p24-06", "p24-07", "p24-08", "p25-02", "p25-03", "p25-04", "p25-05", "p25-06", "p25-07", "p25-08", "p25-09", "p26-02", "p26-03", "p27-02", "p27-03", "p27-04", "p27-05", "p27-06", "p27-07", "p28-02", "p28-03", "p28-04", "p28-06", "p28-07", "p28-08", "p28-09", "p28-10", "p28-11", "p29-04", "p29-07", "p29-08", "p29-09", "p29-11", "p29-12", "p29-13", "p30-03", "p30-04", "p30-05", "p30-06", "p31-05", "p31-06", "p31-07", "p31-08", "p31-10", "p33-02", "p33-03", "p33-05", "p33-06", "p33-07", "p34-02", "p34-03", "p35-11", "p35-12", "p35-13", "p35-14", "p35-15", "p35-16", "p61-07", "p61-08", "x1-p15-02", "x1-p15-03", "x1-p15-04", "x1-p15-06", "x1-p55-03", "x1-p55-04", "x2-p16-04", "x2-p16-05", "x2-p16-06", "x2-p16-08", "x2-p16-09", "x2-p17-02", "x2-p17-03", "x2-p39-06", "x2-p39-07", "x3-p18-09", "x3-p18-10", "x4-p20-04", "x4-p22-02", "x4-p22-03", "x4-p23-06", "x4-p23-07", "x4-p24-02", "x4-p25-05", "x4-p25-06", "x4-p39-02", "x4-p39-03", "x4-p81-16", "x5-p72-18", "x5-p72-19" ], "chars": 43360 } } ], "overall": { "score": 70, "included": [ "additionality", "robust_quantification", "no_double_counting", "safeguards" ], "excluded": [ "permanence" ], "weights": { "additionality": 0.25, "permanence": 0.2, "robust_quantification": 0.25, "no_double_counting": 0.15, "safeguards": 0.15 } }, "disclaimer": "Signal, not verdict. Each check says whether a specific kind of evidence is present in an excerpt of the submitted documents, not whether the evidence is true. Scores are not an ICVCM assessment, a rating of the project, or a statement about its real-world impact.", "generated_at": "2026-10-20T17:35:14+00:00" }