Download The Climate Registry's General Verification Protocol Version 2.0 PDF

TitleThe Climate Registry's General Verification Protocol Version 2.0
Author
LanguageEnglish
File Size1.6 MB
Total Pages125
Document Text Contents
Page 2

ii


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Climate Registry would like to thank and acknowledge the many experts who contributed to the
development of the General Verification Protocol (GVP). Noteworthy are the efforts of the dedicated
and visionary Board of Directors, who directed this project. Specifically, the GVP is a result of the
commitment and guidance of the following:

An asterisk before a committee member’s
name indicates that they no longer serve on
the committee. Date in parentheses indicates
committee member’s last year of service.

Executive Committee Board of Directors

Doug Scott, Illinois, Chairman of the Board
James Coleman, Massachusetts, Vice-Chair,

Executive and Protocols Committee
David Thornton, Minnesota, Vice Chair, Audit

and Verification Oversight Committee
Steve Anderson, British Columbia
Carol Couch, Georgia
David Littell, Maine
James Martin, Colorado, Secretary
Jim Norton, New Mexico, Treasurer
*Gina McCarthy, Connecticut (2009 Chair)
*Eileen Tutt, California (2009 Vice-Chair,

Protocols)
*Brock Nicholson, North Carolina (2009)
*Steve Owens, Arizona (2009, Secretary)


Audit and Verification Oversight Committee

David Thornton, Minnesota, Chair
John Corra, Wyoming
Vinson Hellwig, Michigan
Stanley Paytiamo, Pueblo
Eddie Terrill, Oklahoma
Leanne Tippett Mosby, Missouri
*James Colman, Massachusetts (2009, Chair)
*Ian Church, Yukon Territory, Canada (2009)
*George Crombie, Vermont (2009)
*Chris Korleski, Ohio (2009)
*Dean Mundee, New Brunswick (2009)
*Richard Opper, Montana (2009)


Protocol Committee Bo ard of Directors

James Coleman, Massachusetts, Chair
Lisa Clarke, Colorado
Colleen Cripps, Nevada
Leo Drozdoff, Nevada
Michael Gibbs, California
Lisa Gover, Campo Kumeyaay Nation
Zac Graves, Colorado

Thomas Gross, Kansas
John Hanger, Pennsylvania
Laurence Lau, Hawaii
David Littell, Maine
Howard Loseth, Saskatchewan
Kevin MacDonald, Maine
James Martin, Colorado
Joanne O. Morin, New Hampshire
Len Peters, Kentucky
Renee Shealy, South Carolina
Joe Sherrick, Pennsylvania
Christopher Sherry, New Jersey
*Eileen Tutt, California (2009 Chair)
*John Corra, Wyoming (2009)
*Jane Gray, Manitoba (2009)
*Chris Korleski, Ohio (2009)
*Chuck Mueller, Georgia (2009)
*Robert Noël de Tilly, Québec (2009)
*Jim Norton, New Mexico (2009)
*Allen Shea, Wisconsin (2009)
*Chris Sherry, New Jersey (2009)
*James Temte, Southern Ute (2009)
*Eddie Terrill, Oklahoma (2009)
*Paul Sloan, Tennessee (2009)
*David Van’t Hof, Oregon (2009)


Stakeholder Advisory Committee (2007 - 2008)

Jim Coleman, Massachusetts, Co-Chair
Brock Nicholson, North Carolina, Co-Chair
David Thornton, Minnesota, Co-Chair
Janice Adair, Washington
George Crombie, Vermont
Leo Drozdoff, Nevada
Onis Glenn, Alabama
Richard Leopold, Iowa
Jim Martin, Colorado
Cesar Salazar Platt, Sonora
Robert Scott, Utah
Renee Shealy, South Carolina
David Small, Delaware
James Temte, Southern Ute
Leanne Tippett Mosby, Missouri
Chris Trumpy, British Columbia

Page 62

54 Completing the Verification Process

P
art 5

PART 5: COMPLETING THE VERIFICATION PROCESS


5.1 Overview

Once a Verification Body has completed
reviewing a Member’s annual GHG emission
report, they must do the following to complete
the verification process:

1. Complete a detailed Verification Report and
deliver it to the Member;

2. Prepare a Verification Statement and deliver
it to the Member;

3. Conduct an Exit Meeting with the Member
to discuss and finalize the Verification
Report and Verification Statement.

4. Indicate Member’s verified status in CRIS;
and

5. Securely file electronic and hardcopy
versions of records and documents needed
to support the Verification Statement for
retention (for a minimum of five years).

The following subsections outline how a
Verification Body must complete each of these
steps.

5.2 Preparing a Verification Report

A Verification Report is typically shared only
between a Verification Body and a Member. In
some cases the Accreditation Body and The
Registry may request to review the Verification
Report. In these cases, the Verification Report
will be treated as a confidential document. No
part of it will be made available to the public or
to any person or organization outside of the
Accreditation Body or The Registry.

At a minimum, a Verification Report must
include the following elements:

• The scope, objectives, criteria, and level of
assurance of the verification process
undertaken and description of the
verification plan employed for the Member;

• The standard used to verify emissions (this
is The Registry’s General Reporting
Protocol, but may also include other
protocols or methodologies for those
sources for which The Registry has yet to
provide detailed guidance);

• A description of the verification plan, based
on the size and complexity of the Member’s
operations;

• A list of facilities and/or emissions sources
using calculation methods not prescribed in
the General Reporting Protocol;

• A description of the sampling plan as well
as techniques and risk assessment
methodologies employed for each source
identified to be sampled;

• An evaluation of whether the Member’s
annual GHG emission report is in
compliance with The Registry’s reporting
requirements (as described in the General
Reporting Protocol);

• The total discrepancy (in tonnes of CO2-e)
between the Verification Body’s emissions
estimate and the Member’s reported
emissions as well as a percentage of the
material discrepancies within a Member’s
total reported emissions at the entity level
(separate totals and percentages must be
provided for Scope 1 and Scope 2
emissions).

• A list of all of the discovered discrepancies,
including each discrepancy’s estimated
magnitude as a percentage of the total
emissions (Scope 1 or Scope 2, as
appropriate) reported at the entity level.

The Registry developed a “Standard
Verification Report Template” to guide
Verification Bodies in preparing their
Verification Report. This template is Appendix
B2. Use of this template is optional; Verification
Bodies may instead use their own format for

Page 63

55 Completing the Verification Process



P
ar

t 5


the report as long as the resulting Verification
Reports include all of the above-listed
information required by The Registry.
Electronic versions of the Verification Report
Template, and all other forms, are available on
The Registry’s website
(www.theclimateregistry.org ).

5.3 Preparing a Verification
Statement

Verification Bodies must prepare a Verification
Statement for each Member using the form in
Appendix A4. A Verification Statement
documents the verification activities and
outcomes. The Registry makes this document
available to all stakeholders (Members,
Verification Bodies, The Registry, and the
public), upon completion of the verification
process.

While Members are required to report all GHG
emissions sources within the defined inventory
boundary and are required to correct as many
misstatements as is possible, The Registry
allows immaterial misstatements to remain
in a Member’s emissions report. As such,
Verification Bodies are not expected to withhold
a positive verification statement due to
immaterial misstatements or omission of
immaterial sources.

5.4 Quality Assurance Check

When a Lead Verifier prepares a Verification
Report and Verification Statement for a
Member, they must forward the documents to
their Independent Peer Reviewer for review and
confirmation if its findings before sharing the
documents with a Member. Lead Verifiers must
provide the following information to their
Independent Peer Reviewer (at a minimum):

¥ a copy of the Member’s emission report,

¥ a copy of the Verification Report,

¥ a copy of the Verification Statement, and

¥ any additional information that the
Independent Peer Reviewer may need to
assess the quality of the verification
activities and the accuracy of the
Verification Statement

All Verification Reports and Verification
Statements must undergo independent internal
review before they are forwarded as final
documents to Members.

5.5 Finalizing Verification
Activities

After a Lead Verifier prepares and an
Independent Peer Reviewer reviews a
Verification Report and Verification Statement,
the Verification Body must share these
documents with the Member and schedule a
time to discuss and finalize these documents.
This meeting may be conducted in person or
over the phone.

The goals of the Verification Meeting are for the
Verification Body to:

¥ Review the verification activities with the
Member and answer any questions about
the verification process. Verification Bodies
must not provide any GHG consultancy
services when answering a Member’s
questions.

¥ Seek the Member’s acceptance of the
Verification Report and Verification
Statement

¥ Obtain the Member’s authorization to input
its verification findings in CRIS

¥ Exchange lessons learned about the
verification process, and consider providing
useful feedback to The Registry

¥ Discuss schedule for next year’s verification
activities, if the Verification Body is under
contract to provide verification services to
the Member in future years

Page 124

116

A
ppendix C



Sector-Specific GVP Addenda

Attachment 1: Checklist of Questions to Consider in Verifying
O&GP Inventory Emissions Estimates



This list of questions corresponds to GVP Appendix B1.

Preparing for Verification
1. Has the O&GP Member explained how

sources were consolidated and reported
as facilities or fields in CRIS?

Conformance
2. Are the GHG calculation

methodologies/procedures properly
entered in CRIS at the facility or field
level, as appropriate?

3. Are the GHG calculation
methodologies/procedures consistent
with GRP/O&GP requirements and with
other O&GP industry standards?

4. Are calculation methods used by O&GP
Reporter consistent with O&GP protocol,
as well as GRP?

5. Are all CEM-calculated emissions
included and documented as such?

6. For stationary combustion emissions,
has the same method (fuel use, load
factors or CEMS) been used year-to-
year?

7. If CEMS is being used, does the O&GP
Member have an approved CEMS
configuration to measure and report
GHG emissions?

8. If the O&GP Member is reporting CO2
emissions to The Registry using CEMS,
does the fuel-based calculation
corroborate the CO2 emissions reported?

Completeness
9. Has the O&GP Member addressed all

applicable sections of the O&GP
Protocol, including the need for field-level

aggregation of data, as well as all
emissions from stationary combustion,
vented and fugitive emissions, flaring
emissions, and emissions from oil sands
and oil shales operations when
applicable?

10. Does the inventory report include all non-
emissions data items required by the
GRP and O&GP protocol (consolidation
approaches used, equity shares if
applicable, quantification methods used if
the O&GP Member did not use CRIS to
calculate emissions, etc.)?

11. Are all facilities and fields clearly and
accurately defined and grouped in CRIS?

12. Are vented and fugitive emissions
properly categorized and included in the
inventory?

13. Are all fuel types identified for stationary
combustion (start-up fuels, biomass,
etc.)?

14. Are all required GHG emissions data
included?

Risk Assessment
15. Does the O&GP Member’s management

system address the need for emissions
inventory input from personnel who are
knowledgeable of the oil and gas
operations?

Sampling Plan

16. Does the Sampling Plan address direct
and indirect emissions separately for
O&GP Members

Page 125

117

Similer Documents