80 likes | 170 Views
Module 2.2 - Calibration regarding accreditation assessment requirements Calibration through enhanced CDM-AP direct communication with stakeholders (DOEs/ATs) A. Ricardo J. Esparta Accreditation Panel - Methodologies Expert 7 th CDM Joint Coordination Workshop Bonn, 12-13 March 2011.
E N D
Module 2.2 - Calibration regarding accreditation assessment requirementsCalibration through enhanced CDM-AP direct communication with stakeholders (DOEs/ATs)A. Ricardo J. EspartaAccreditation Panel - Methodologies Expert7th CDM Joint Coordination WorkshopBonn, 12-13 March 2011
Methodologies related requirements • VVM - chapter V, section E (baseline and monitoring methodology, p. 65 to 93; additionality of a project activity, p. 94 to 121; monitoring plan, p. 122 to 133), but not limited to it. • AT - always indicate the related VVM requirement for every single non-conformity
Systemic versus project specific • Everybody knows but it doesn't hurt to repeat: both sides should concentrate on addressing the issues at the systemic level instead of on specific project solutions • Examples • Emission factor change from the GSP to the validated PDD • Others?
Avoid personal interpretations, but… • Methodologies are not perfect • Reality rarely corresponds 100% to the methodology scenario • Use of your common sense is very welcome but do not forget to disclose the rationale behind the decision • Upside: if you trust your judgment and the rationale is clearly unveiled faster process
Avoid personal interpretations, but… • Nobody is forced to blindly accept the “other side” interpretation/assessment • In case of doubt/disagreement, request clarification • Clarification is not consulting, interact with the Panel (Assessment team, Secretariat, Panel) • Downside: longer assessment
CMP.6 - Further Guidance to the CDM §22. Requests the Executive Board to develop and implement modalities and procedures with a view to enhancing direct communication with stakeholders and project proponents in relation to issues related to registration, issuance and methodologies work streams; these modalities and procedures should provide for: • Direct communication that can be initiated by the secretariat, as needed, with project proponents, on issues related to registration, issuance and methodologies work streams; • Stakeholder consultations on general issues, and the publication of the outputs thereof; • Intensified use of public calls for input in relation to major regulatory decisions, including the possibility to make submissions;
EB 59th Meeting Report, § 22 • The Board requested the CDM-AP to consider the appropriateness and, if applicable, modalities of its direct interaction with the DOE/AE Coordination Forum, to be considered by the Board at a future meeting.
Thank you very much and do not hesitate to interact with the Panel (Secretariat, Assessment Teams, Accreditation Panel…) at any assessment stage. A. Ricardo J. EspartaAccreditation Panel - Methodologies Expert