Paulo Manso CDM EB September, 2011

1. Proceeder for Submission & Approval Standardized Baselines Paulo Manso CDM EB September, 2011

2. MANDATE CMP 6 • The CMP “decided that Parties, project participants, as well as international industry organizations or admitted observer organizations through the host country’s designated national authority, may submit proposals for standardized baselines applicable to new or existing methodologies for consideration by the Executive Board of the clean development mechanism” EB 60 • The Board requested the secretariat to “draft new procedures for submission and assessment of standardized baselines for consideration of the Board at the latest at its sixty-third meeting” Operationalizing these decisions needs: • Guidelines • Procedure

3. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GUIDELINES • DEFINITION • “Standardized baseline” = Baseline established for a Party or a group of Parties to facilitate the calculation of emission reductions (and removals) and the determination of additionality for CDM project activities, while assuring environmental integrity. The objective is to translate actual methodology requirements into simple criteria for baseline setting and additionality demonstration on a sector level.

4. Baseline setting & PL for additionality Sector Emission Factor if relevant BASIS OF THE PROPOSED APPROACH Guidelines for the Development and Assessment of SBs First level of standardization Second level of standardization Enough objective and simple both at the setting and at the use of the standard

5. Procedure SCOPE • The procedure applies to proposed standardized baselines developed using an approved methodology or tool, or the “Guidelines for the establishment of sector specific standardized baselines” • Note: The procedure does not apply for submission and approval of new methodological approaches to develop a standardized baseline  should follow a procedure on submission and approval of proposed new methodologies or revision to approved methodologies.

6. MAIN ELEMENTS OF THE PROCEDURE (1) • ASSESSMENT REPORT ON DATA COLLECTION, PROCESSING AND COMPILATION • To be included in the submission from DNA • Assessment to be done by a DOE contracted by DNA • Parties with less than 10 CDM projects as of 31 Dec 2010 may: Request for financial support to prepare the assessment report only for the first submission  The Board may allow funding for subsequent submissions, or Omit assessment report only for the first submission  The Secretariat prepares assessment report

7. MAIN ELEMENTS OF THE PROCEDURE (2) • CONSIDERATION PROCESS • Secretariat conducts initial assessment and prepares a draft recommendation • Consultation with 2 panel/WG members If both members agree with the draft recommendation  Board If at least one member disagrees with the draft recommendation, or requests panel/WG consideration Panel/WG • Possible consultation with panel/WG • Possible clarification requests to DNA • Possible direct communication with DNA in case further clarification needed • Recommendations to the Board are always either “approve” or “not to approve” the proposed standardized baseline • “Not to approve” recommendation at any stage will be submitted to the Board for its final decision

8. DNA Missing doc 42 days 28days Further information 28 days Secretariat 14 days 21 days Further information request Initial-assessment 28 days Further information request Draft recommendation 2 panel/WG members Panel/WG 7 days Max 2 meetings Recommendation Board Parties, PPs, International industry organizations, UNFCCC admitted observers

9. KEY AREAS FOR CONSIDERATION • The Board consider, inter alia: • Whether the conditions for funding for preparation of assessment reports are appropriate, • Whether the roles and involvement of the Secretariat and Panel/WG (members) in preparing a recommendation are appropriate, • Whether it is appropriate to always pass a negative decision to the Board, even for incomplete submissions or DNA’s non-response to clarification requests.

10. Conclusion • The submission and appoval proceeds focus on DNAs, • The role of the DOEs is minimized and in part substituted by the CDM EB support team at the Secretariat, • Lower transaction costs because the finacial support from the Secretariat, • If CMP extend the mandate to others activities from the CDM project cycle the PDD, Monitorng, and othersprocessess could be standardized.