Agri-Waste Technology, Inc.

Transcription

1 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Management System Policy and GHG Statement of Qualifications Version 2.3 (Revised February 13, 2015) Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 1

2 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 i. Table of Contents i. Table of Contents ii. Revision History 1. Legal Status and Company Overview Legal and Contractual Matters Governance and Management Commitment Validation/Verification Roles and Responsibilities Impartiality Avoidance of Conflicts of Interest Mechanism for Oversight to Impartiality Liability and Financing 2. Competencies Management and Personnel External Expertise Competencies of Personnel Deployment of Personnel Use of Contracted Validators/Verifiers Personnel Records Outsourcing 3. Communication and Records Information Provided to a Client or Responsible Party Communication of Responsibilities to Clients or Responsible Parties Confidentiality Publicly Accessible Information Control of Records 4. Validation/Verification Process Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) Climate Action Reserve (CAR) Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) Pacific Carbon Trust (PCT) American Carbon Registry (ACR) California Air Resources Board (ARB) 5. Appointing the Team Leader Approach Validation/Verification Review and Issuance of V/V Statement Facts Discovered After the V/V Statement 6. Complaints, Appeal and Disputes Complaints Appeals and Disputes Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 2

3 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Special Validations or Verifications 8. Management System Management System Policy Control of Documents Internal Audits Corrective Actions Preventative Actions Management Review 9. Control of Marks 10. Step-by-Step Process for Registry Protocols Chicago Climate Exchange Climate Action Reserve Verified Carbon Standard Pacific Carbon Trust American Carbon Registry California Air Resources Board 11. Accreditations 12. Project Experience 13. Validation/Verification Team Member Resumes 14. References 15. Authorization of Management System Policy Attachments A. Organizational Charts B. Sample Contracts C. Internal COI D. Impartiality E. Insurance Certificate F. Process to Select, Train, Formerly Authorize and Monitor Validators/Verifiers G. Training Process for Employees H. Training Process for Subcontractors I. Contracting of V/V Services J. Confidentiality/Non-Disclosure K. Control of Documents and Records Policy L. Program Procedures M. Project Overview N. Review of Initial GHG Info Checklist O. Risk Assessment Checklist P. Internal Protocol to Address Facts Discovered After Issuance of V/V Statement Q. Complaints, Appeals and Disputes R. Internal Audits S. Sampling Plan T. -Reserved- U. -Reserved- V. -Reserved- W. Verification Field Audit Protocol X. Verification Desk Audit Protocol Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 3

4 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Y. General/Project Specific COI Z. Validation Field Audit Protocol AA. Validation Desk Audit Protocol AB. Decision Making Process Form for Adding V/V Criteria AC. Validation/Verification Plan AD. Financial Risk Assessment AE. Project Description Document AF. Internal Project Technical Review Appendices 1. Verification Report and Statement (CCX) 2. Verification Checklist (CCX) 3. COI (CCX) 4. NOVA/COI (CAR) 5. Verification Statement (CAR) 6. Verification Report (CAR) 7. Validation Report (VCS) 8. Validation Deed (VCS) 9. Verification Report (VCS) 10. Verification Deed (VCS) 11. Validation Report (PCT) 12. Verification Report (PCT) 13. COI (ACR) 14. Verification Statement (ACR) 15. Verification Report (ACR) 16. COI (ARB) 17. NOVS (ARB) 18. Verification Statement (ARB) 19. Verification Report (ARB) Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 4

5 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 ii. Revision History (Beginning with version 1.5.1) Version (March 11, 2011) Added Section i designation for Table of Contents Added Section ii (Revision History) Revised Section 8.1 to include process for updating the MSP and related internal v/v documents Revised Section 8.1 to include requirement of documenting decision making process for adding a new v/v criteria Revised Section 8.2 to clarify v/v related document locations Added Attachment AB (Decision Making Process Form for Adding V/V Criteria) Version (March 14, 2011) Revised Sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 to specify development of sampling plan and validation/verification plan as separate documents rather than development of verification proposal document which combined the two documents. Revised Section to specify development of validation/verification plan document for client signature rather than verification proposal document. Revised Section by adding a reference to Attachment S (Sampling Plan), deleting requirement to submit the sampling plan to the client/responsible party, and adding notification of complaints, appeals and disputes procedure to the contents of the validation/verification plan. Revised Section 5.2 by removing requirement to submit revised sampling plan to client/responsible party. Revised Section 10.1 by changing Step 5 to include only the development of the Sampling Plan, added development of verification plan as a separate step (Step 6), revised Steps 14 and 15 (formerly Steps 13 and 14) to include possible amendment of sampling plan and trigger and revised Step 17 (formerly Step 16) to include a listing of diversions from the original sampling plan in the verification report. Revised Section 10.2 by adding assignment of Team Leader by V/V Director to Step 1, revised Step 6 to include only development of Sampling Plan, added development of verification plan as a separate step (Step 7), added review of contract by the Internal Peer Reviewer to Step 8 (formerly Step 7), added trigger to amend sampling plan to Step 11 (formerly Step 10), added list of diversions from original sampling plan to contents of verification report in Step 12 (formerly Step 11) and added review of verification report and verification opinion by the Internal Peer Reviewer as Step 13 (former Step 13 and up were increased by one number). Revised Section 10.3 and 10.4 by adding assignment of Team Leader by V/V Director to Step 1, revised Step 5 to include only the development of the sampling plan, added development of validation/verification plan as a separate step (Step 6), added review of contract by Internal Peer Reviewer in Step 10 (formerly Step 9), added trigger for amended sampling plan to Step 13 (formerly Step 12), added amendment of sampling plan to Steps 14 and 15 (formerly Steps 13 and 14) and added list of diversions from original sampling plan to contents of Validation and Verification Reports to Step 16 (formerly Step 15). Revised Attachment S to include only those elements required in the Sampling Plan Added Attachment AC (Validation/Verification Plan) Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 5

6 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Version (April 5, 2011) Revised Attachment R (Internal Audit) to include space for auditor to note facts or documentation reviewed as basis for conclusions drawn. Revised Section to include L.S.S. as an option for licensure to fulfill the Land Use & Forestry scope competency requirements. Revised Sections 2.3 and to include Chris McGee as a Team Leader and Jeff Vaughan as an Internal Peer Reviewer for Land Use & Forestry projects. Revised Sections 2.3 and to include Kevin Davidson as a Team Leader and Hal Langenbach as an Internal Peer Reviewer for Agriculture, Waste Handling & Disposal & GHG Emission Reductions from Fuel Combustion projects. Renamed Voluntary Carbon Standard, Verified Carbon Standard throughout document. Updated Attachment E Insurance Certificate Updated Attachment Q Appeals, Complaints and Disputes indicating that the form only needs to be signed if the client utilizes the appeals, complaints and disputes process. Updated Appendix 7-10 with VCS version 3.0 documents Version 1.6 (April 6, 2011) Incorporated revisions from 1.5.1, and Version 1.7 (January 23, 2012) Revised Section 1 to include ANSI accreditation and approval by CAR, VCS, PCT and ACR as an offset project verifier. Revised Sections and to include all authorized team leaders as possible contract signatories. Revised Section 1.5 to include ACR conflict of interest evaluation requirements. Revised Section 1.7 to reflect professional liability coverage of $4mil/$4mil Revised Sections 2, 4 and to include ACR. Revised Section 2.2 to include external expert, Matt Lamb Revised Section 2.3 to include Michael Wittig and Matt Lamb as technical experts. Revised Section 5.1 to include Michael Wittig and Matt Lamb as subcontractors. Revised Section 10.2 to reflect the current CAR verification process. Added Section 10.5 ACR Step-By-Step Process. Revised Section 11 to update accreditations. Revised Section 12 to update experience. Removed subcontractor resumes from Section 13. Revised Attachment A to update V/V organization chart. Updated Insurance Certificate in Attachment E. Revised Attachment I to add document version # and made language more general to apply to all projects. Revised Attachment L to include references to program documents on client server rather than providing details within Attachment L. Revised Attachment Y to update insurance information, add ACR COI criteria and add ACR and CAR specific COI forms. Revised Attachment S and AC to include frequency of subsequent verifications in Sampling Plan (Version 1.2) and Validation/Verification Plan (Version 1.1). Revised Appendix 5 to replace outdated Verification Opinion template with current Verification Statement template. Revised Appendix 6 to reflect change in terminology from verification opinion to verification statement and added details to checklist. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 6

7 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Added Appendix 13 (American Carbon Registry COI Form) Added Appendix 14 (American Carbon Registry Verification Statement Requirements) Added Appendix 15 (American Carbon Registry Verification Report Requirements) Version 1.8 (October 24, 2012) Revised Section 1 to include ISO as a guideline and added CAR Landfill and Livestock as categories for which AWT can perform verifications. Revised Section 1 and Section 11 to add language clarifying that AWT needs to purchase $5 million professional liability coverage in order to perform VCS verifications. Revised Section to provide more flexibility to the Team Leader regarding the timing of the contract. Revised Section 1.7 to clarify that the contract is developed after COI investigation but prior to the start of verification activities. Also updated VCS professional liability insurance requirement ($5M) and indicated AWT will not offer VCS verification services unless we hold $5M in professional liability insurance. Removed references to GHG emission reductions from fuel combustion in Section 2 and throughout the MSP. Revised Section 2.4.2, 2.5, 2.7 and Section 4 to include ISO Revised Sections and to remove the requirement to have a CSA Greenhouse Gas Verifier certification. Revised Section 3.5 to tie records retention requirements to the applicable registry requirements. Revised Sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 to clarify that the contract is developed at any point after the COI investigation but prior to the execution of the Project Overview document. Revised Section 4.2 to indicate list of findings, verification report and verification statement are uploaded to CAR. Revised Section 5.1 to update personnel information. Revised Section to remove the requirement to submit the v/v plan to the client prior to executing the contract. Revised Sections 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5 to provide flexibility to the Team Leader to execute the contract at any point after the COI determination and before the Project Overview document is executed. Revised Sample Contracts in Attachment B to remove sections not applicable to GHG project verification/validation. Revised Attachment C to remove reference to the CCX. Revised Attachment C, D, N, O, S, AC to add footnote including Client Name, Project Name and Year. Revised Attachment F, G, H, I to add ISO Revised Attachment J to further define confidential documents. Revised Attachment K to tie records retention to registry requirements. Revised Attachment M to show Sampling Plan and Verification Plan as separate documents. Revised Attachment N, O to add Document Version, remove text boxes, number items. Revised Attachment R to remove text boxes, number items, revise CAR items. Revised Attachment Y, Appendix 4 to include the July 2012 CAR NOVA/COI document. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 7

8 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Version (November 9, 2012) Revised Attachment I, to include reference to the AWT MSP Removed all external experts with the exception of Michael Wittig Removed reference to ISO A, B, C throughout the document and replaced with ISO Revised Attachment B, to include provision to accommodate observers. Revised Section 1.1 to further clarify that AWT is not currently a VB for VCS projects. Revised Section 8.6 to provide an avenue to conduct an annual management review for instances where the team leader functions as the team for all projects in a given year. Version (November 21, 2012) Revised references to CSA Certified Greenhouse Gas Verifier to note expiration of certification in 2012 and to clarify that the continued certification is not required to demonstrate competency requirements but that successfully passing the certification exam is a valid avenue for demonstrating competencies. Version 1.9 (December 14, 2012) Incorporated revisions from and Version 2.0 (January 24, 2013) Revised Sections 1 and 11 to include ARB accreditation Revised Section 1 to include language regarding verification of projects not listed on carbon registries Revised/Added Sections 1.5, 2.1.5, 4.6 and 10.6 to include ARB information Revised Sections 2.3 and to include Chris Love as a Team Member Revised Section 9 to allow AWT use of the AWT logo on GHG materials Revised Section 13 to include Chris Love s resume Revised Attachment A to include Chris Love Revised Attachment E to include new insurance certificate Revised Attachment L and Y to include ARB information Revised Attachment R Internal Project Technical Review Form to include ARB specific requirements Added Appendix 16 ARB COI Forms Added Appendix 17 ARB NOVS Form Added Appendix 18 ARB Verification Statement Forms Added Appendix 19 ARB Verification Report Requirements Version (August 5, 2013) Added Attachment AD Financial Risk Assessment and added references to this document in Section 10. Added Attachment AE Project Description Document and added reference to this document in Section 10. Revised Attachment Y and Appendix 4 to include the 5/9/13 version of the CAR NOVA/COI form. Revised Section 1 to include information about Movalada, LLC. Revised Section 1 and Section 11 to include capability to perform CAR Rice Cultivation and Nitrogen Management project verifications Revised Section to clarify the continuing education requirements for engineers. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 8

9 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Revised Table in Section to remove reference to GHG Emission Reductions from Fuel Combustion Revised Sections 8.4 and 8.5 to revise the process for documenting corrective and preventive actions. Version (August 23, 2013) Added a timeline to Attachment AC (Validation/Verification Plan) to address pertinent milestones in the v/v process. Version 2.1 (September 6, 2013) Incorporated revisions from and Version (April 7-11, 2014) Revised Section to indicate that the Director or the Team Leader can prepare the verification quote or proposal (if one is required). Revised Section and to include development of proposals/quotes as responsibilities of the V/V Director and Team Leader. Revised Section 1.1.1, Section 1.6, Section 4.1, Section and Sections to further clarify that the contract cannot be executed prior to the registry approval of our COI evaluation. Revised Section 4.2 and Section 4.6 to remove the description of the kick-off meeting. Section 10 contains the description of the kick-off meeting. Revised Section 1.4.1, 1.6, 4.2, 4.6, , Attachment D and Attachment Y to clarify that the Internal Conflict of Interest and Impartiality need to be fully executed on or before the date the registry specific COI evaluation is signed. Revised Section 5.3 and to emphasize the Internal Project Technical Review form, requiring the form to be completed prior to the verification report/statement in order to create an objective record that the internal review took place. Revised Attachment R to remove the internal project technical review. Moved the internal project technical review form to a new attachment (Attachment AF). Removed the post project assessments from the internal project technical review form allowing the form to be completed prior to submittal of the verification report/statement to the client. Added reference to Attachment AF to Section 5.3. Revised Section 9, Attachment B, Attachment I, Attachment Q to include the new address for AWT. Version 2.2 (May 6, 2014) Incorporated revisions from Version (January 5, 2015) Removed all references to Land-Use Revised Sampling plan (Attachment S) to include category of risk for all identified sources of risk Version (February 12, 2015) Removed forms from Attachment Y, Appendix 4-5 and and replaced with weblink Updated shareholder list and Attachment AB to include Chris McGee Changed references to IAF MD6:2009 to IAF MD6 throughout Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 9

10 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Changed references to ISO 14065:2007 to ISO throughout Added Tiffany Preddy to table in Sections 2.3 and 5.1 Added Tiffany Preddy to the Team Member list in Section 5.1 Added Tiffany Preddy s resume to Section 13 Revised Attachment A to include Tiffany Preddy Revised resumes to note expired certifications Added clarification regarding validation/verification statements to Section 5.3 regarding issuance of v/v statements that reflect material discrepancies that remain after the conclusion of the validation/verification Removed actual insurance certificate from Attachment E. Added reference to insurance company instead. Version 2.3 (February 13, 2015) Incorporated revisions from and Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 10

11 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Legal Status and Company Overview Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. (AWT) is a professional engineering and soils firm, specializing in environmental consulting. AWT is a private, registered small business that operates from its lone corporate office, located in Raleigh, North Carolina. AWT was incorporated on February 2, 1984 by the State of North Carolina. AWT s ownership structure includes 5 shareholders: Jeffrey Vaughan, President Chris Mosley, Vice President Hal Langenbach, Secretary Kevin Davidson, Treasurer Chris McGee The company structure is depicted in block diagram form in Attachment A. AWT has been providing engineering, agronomy, and soils consulting services, with extensive expertise in waste systems engineering and nutrient planning to residential, industrial, municipal, and commercial clients nationwide and internationally in Russia, China, India, Mexico and Canada, for over 25 years. AWT s diverse and highly-skilled staff has 75 years of combined experience along with diverse educational backgrounds and continual industry related training. This diverse staff includes professional engineers, licensed soil scientists, agronomists, GIS/GPS computer mapping technicians, irrigation designers, GHG verifiers and subsurface/surface waste system operators. AWT can assist facilities with quantifying or validating/verifying carbon credits. AWT is experienced with a variety of GHG offset protocols including those used by Chicago Climate Exchange, Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, Verified Carbon Standard, Pacific Carbon Trust and California Air Resources Board. AWT follows the guidelines associated with ISO 14064, ISO 14065, ISO14066, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements, which are standards that provide clear and consistent specifications for quantifying, monitoring, reporting and verifying GHG emission offsets. Since 2006, AWT has been providing independent verification to agricultural clients and carbon offset project developers nationwide and in India. AWT is currently certified by the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) as an approved third-party verifier for offset projects in the following categories: Agricultural Methane and Combustion In 2011, AWT received accreditation by the American National Standards Institute as a greenhouse gas verification body based on its meeting the ANSI accreditation program requirements and those set forth in ISO The scope of our accreditation includes Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 11

12 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 verification of assertions related to GHG emission reductions and removals at the project level for Group 5 Livestock and Group 6 Waste Handling and Disposal. As a result of our ANSI accreditation, AWT is an approved verifier for Pacific Carbon Trust projects for the following sectors: ANSI Group 5 (Livestock) ANSI Group 6 (Waste Handling and Disposal) In 2011 and 2012 AWT was recognized and qualified as a verification body for the Climate Action Reserve for offset projects in the following categories: Organic Waste Composting (2011) Organic Waste Digestion (2011) Livestock (2012) In late 2011, AWT was officially approved as a verifier for American Carbon Registry projects in the following categories: Livestock Waste Management In early 2013, AWT was accredited as a verification body by the California Air Resources Board in the following category: Livestock Additionally, as a result of an agreement between CAR and the Verified Carbon Standard, AWT has the capability to be qualified as a verification body for the Verified Carbon Standard for offset projects in the following categories (pending purchase of $5 million professional liability coverage): Organic Waste Composting Organic Waste Digestion Livestock AWT may verify projects not affiliated with any of the preceding registries provided a clear basis for quantification of offsets is provided and verification criteria are agreed upon prior to initiating the verification process. ISO will be included in the verification criteria. Aside from the carbon credit verification services, AWT has also assisted organizations with carbon offset calculations/models and project design documents, general GHG offset consulting, feasibility determinations, alternative protocol development for unique GHG offset projects, monetization evaluations and review of engineering designs for anaerobic digesters. In 2009, three staff members of AWT became Certified Greenhouse Gas Verifiers with CSA America, Inc. However, these certifications were allowed to Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 12

13 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 lapse in 2012 due to the fact that the certification is not a requirement for any of the programs of which we are aware. AWT maintains a website, which describes our services. The website provides an avenue for AWT to make pertinent validation/verification documents publicly available. The owners of AWT also own two separate businesses, Advanced Septic, Inc. and Movalada, LLC which were both founded in Advanced Septic, Inc. provides septic system installation and repair services. Movalada, LLC owns the offices that AWT and ASI rent. 1.1 Legal and Contractual Matters Agreement Once AWT is contacted by a client for validation or verification of a GHG assertion, the V/V Director or anticipated Team Leader takes into account the following key issues when developing a quote (if a quote is requested): Proposed level of assurance, materiality, criteria, objectives and scope, complexity of the GHG assertion Complexity of the project and its measurement/monitoring processes Organizational environment including the structure of the organization that develops and manages the GHG assertion Baseline scenario for project validation/verification, including selection and quantification of GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs and their monitoring Physical infrastructure, activities, technologies and processes of the GHG project Types of GHGs Processes that deliver the information and data associated with the GHG assertion Organizational links and interactions between stakeholders, responsible parties, client and intended users and validation or verification criteria Allotted time needed to successfully carry out the validation or verification In the case of grouped projects, logistics and planning related to validation or verification of the individual project(s) input to the grouped project single GHG assertion, and its impact on the duration of the validation or verification In the case of multi-facility projects, logistics and planning related to verification of the input from individual and combined facilities data and related information to the GHG assertion, and its impact on the verification duration. A contract is developed during the early stages of the verification process. This contract outlines the level of assurance agreed upon with the client, scope of services, objectives, amount and type of evidence necessary to achieve the agreed level of assurance, methodologies for determining representative samples and risks for potential errors, omissions or misrepresentations. The following information is completed for each client: Page 1-clients name, address, phone number and address Page 5-clients name and address Page 6-contract is signed by the client and AWT s team leader Attachment A-updated with project specific information Attachment A-contract is signed by the client and AWT s team leader Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 13

14 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Attachment B-only applicable for projects that are financially associated with Time and Materials, this page with also be signed by the client and AWT s team leader For flat rate contracts, section 3.1 in the contract is modified and Attachment B is removed Each validation/verification project is bound by a signed and executed contract, which is developed by the Team Leader. The contract if finalized (signed) after the registry has approved our COI evaluation and prior to our execution the project overview document. Hal Langenbach or Kevin Davidson will develop and sign contracts (Sample Contracts are included in Attachment B). Clients are authorized to use any statements contained within their verification document, as long as AWT is properly referenced. Clients are not permitted to use the AWT logo on any of their marketing material, public information sources or documents, unless a signed written request by the client has been authorized. 1.2 Governance and Management Commitment Management AWT s senior management has overall authority and responsibility as follows: a) Development of operational policies: V/V Director/VP Chris Mosley b) Supervision of the implementation of policies and procedures: V/V Director/VP Chris Mosley c) Supervision of finances: V/V Director/VP Chris Mosley d) The adequacy of validation/verification activities: V/V Director/VP Chris Mosley e) The resolution of appeals, disputes and complaints: Team Leader/President Jeff Vaughan f) Validation/Verification statements: Team Leader/Secretary Hal Langenbach or Team Leader/Treasurer Kevin Davidson g) Delegation of authority to committees or individuals to undertake, as required, defined activities on its behalf: V/V Director/VP Chris Mosley h) Contractual arrangements: Team Leader/Secretary Hal Langenbach or Team Leader/Treasurer Kevin Davidson i) Providing adequate, competent resources for validation/verification activities: V/V Director/VP Chris Mosley Operational Policy It is the responsibility of the Validation/Verification (V/V) Director to develop the operational policy for validation/verification services and to gain approval by the board of directors. The operational policy shall be reviewed on an annual basis by the Director and updated as necessary. Approval by the board shall be documented by annual signature of the management system policy by the board of directors. If the management system policy requires more frequent updates due to personnel, scope or programmatic changes, etc., then the Director shall make necessary modifications and obtain approval by the board of directors (signatures by all board members). Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 14

15 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Supervision of the Implementation of Policies/Procedures It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to ensure that validation/verification policies and procedures are implemented properly. This is accomplished through internal audits of the validation/verification program. It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to audit all aspects of the V/V body with the exception of the functions of the V/V Director. It is the responsibility of the President to audit the functions of the V/V Director Supervision of Finances It is the responsibility of the Validation/Verification Director to supervise the finances associated with the validation/verification program. The Director shall utilize the expertise of the company bookkeeper and COI auditor in order to make viable financial decisions and maintain freedom from conflicts of interest. An annual financial report shall be prepared by the Director for presentation to the board of directors detailing accounts payable and accounts receivable relevant to validation/verification services Adequacy of Validation/Verification Activities It is the responsibility of the Validation/Verification Director to ensure that validation/verification activities are adequate. This is accomplished through internal audits of the validation/verification program and supplemented by periodic communication with the team leaders, internal peer reviewers, team members and COI auditor. All relevant communication shall be documented by the V/V Director Resolution of Appeals, Disputes and Complaints It is the responsibility of the Secretary to resolve appeals, disputes and complaints that may occur for Land Use & Forestry projects. It is the responsibility of the President to resolve appeals, disputes and complaints that may occur for Livestock, Waste Handling & Disposal & GHG Emission Reductions from Fuel Combustion projects. The procedure for resolving appeals, disputes and complaints is detailed in Section 6 of the management system policy Validation/Verification Statements It is the responsibility of the Team Leader to develop validation/verification statements. Validation/verification statements shall be developed at the conclusion of the validation/verification activity summarizing the findings of the validation/verification team. The validation/verification statement shall include: reference to the program and approved project implementation document used by the project proponent to prepare the GHG assertion, GHG information and performance verified, level of assurance provided by the verification consistent with the agreed verification scope, objectives, time period and criteria, presentation of the resolution of any qualifications and conclusions on the GHG assertion. The validation/verification statement shall be signed by the Team Leader and Internal Peer Reviewer Delegation of Authority The power to delegate authority to committees or individuals to undertake, as required, defined activities on behalf of AWT is held by the Validation/Verification Director. This Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 15

16 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 delegation of authority extends only to the validation/verification function of AWT. The individual or committee to whom authority is delegated for a given activity must demonstrate competency to perform the activity. Delegated authority and associated competencies shall be documented by the Director and maintained for internal review Contractual Arrangements Contractual arrangements are the responsibility of the Team Leader. Team leaders have full authority to develop and execute contracts for validation/verification services. The required contents of the contract are described in Section Provision of Adequate, Competent Resources It is the responsibility of the Validation/Verification Director to ensure that adequate, competent resources are provided for validation/verification activities. The determination of the efficiency of resources shall include evaluation of project timelines, client feedback, and review of inventory including materials required for field audits and computer hardware/software requirements. These internal reviews shall occur at least annually, be documented by the Director and retained for internal review. 1.3 Validation/Verification Roles and Responsibilities AWT s validation/verification function requires 5 roles to be filled: V/V Director, Team Leader, Internal Peer Reviewer, Team Member and COI Auditor. The responsibilities assigned to each role are as follows: V/V Director Development of operational policies Supervision of implementation of policies and procedures Supervision of finances Evaluation of adequacy of validation/verification activities Delegation of authority to committees or individuals Providing adequate, competent resources for validation and verification activities Selection of team leader/reviewer Development of proposals/quotes Internal audit functions of team leader, internal peer reviewer, COI auditor, team members (including contract team members) and external experts (if utilized) Records retention Personnel records Testing of competencies Evaluation of financial risk Hiring of personnel Public information access Training requirements and implementation Program revisions Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 16

17 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Team Leader Development of proposals/quotes Select team members Review of preliminary documentation, project design documents/monitoring plans/implementation documents and previous assessments (if applicable) Determine eligibility of projects Assess controls for sources of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations Develop validation/verification plan Develop sampling plan Negotiate/execute contract with contracted validators/verifiers (if applicable) Negotiate/execute contract for validation/verification services Develop validation/verification statement Oversee the validation/verification team including contracted validators/verifiers Communicate with client Clearly establish roles/responsibilities of the team members Review and evaluation of GHG assertions Review supporting documentation Conduct field audits Project budget oversight Resolution of Appeals, Disputes and Complaints Technical expert for scope(s) in which technical competencies are demonstrated Management Review Internal audit function of V/V director Report concerns and/or need for procedural changes to carry out assigned duties to the Director Internal Peer Reviewer Technical review of the validation/verification process at the project level Technical review of the validation/verification report Technical review of the validation/verification statement Technical expert for scope(s) in which technical competencies are demonstrated Report concerns and/or need for procedural changes to carry out peer review to the Director Team Member Plan and prepare for field audits Conduct field audits Conduct document review under the direction of the Team Leader Prepare project maps (if applicable) under the direction of the Team Leader Communication/coordination with other team members Develop validation/verification report Report concerns that may arise during the validation/verification process to the Team Leader Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 17

18 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, COI Auditor Assess corporate conflict of interest issues including sources of income and prior professional relationships with project proponents, consultants and aggregators. Assess personal conflict of interest issues including family relations, stock ownership, etc. Ensure assembled team is free from conflict of interest, can operate with impartiality and objectivity exists between the validation/verification team, the client and responsible parties Educate employees and subcontractors regarding definition and importance of impartiality Report concerns and/or need for procedural changes to carry out oversight of impartiality to the Director 1.4 Impartiality Commitment to Impartiality AWT guarantees to act impartially and avoid unacceptable conflicts of interest in all validation and verification projects, by management, staff members and contracted verifiers. AWT is able to avoid potential or actual organizational conflicts of interest because there are no other related entities involved (i.e. a parent company or subsidiaries). AWT utilizes a COI Auditor to oversee the mechanism for impartiality. The COI auditor is responsible for educating employees and subcontractors about issues relevant to maintaining impartiality, as well as ensuring impartiality is maintained as validation/verification activities are accomplished. AWT will review all information received from clients and/or responsible parties to determine potential risks to impartiality. Potential personal conflicts of interest are determined by the utilization of an Internal Conflict of Interest (Attachment C) document that is signed by each validation/verification team member for every validation/verification project. Impartiality is documented through the use of an Impartiality (Attachment D) document. These documents need to be fully executed on or before the date the registry specific COI evaluation is signed in order to provide an objective record that internal evaluations of impartiality and conflict of interest have been carried out. Specific risks to impartiality could include: Self interest: if any member of AWT acts partially for any financial benefit Familiarity: having a personal relationship with a client and not receiving proper validation or verification evidence to complete the project Self review: having an individual on staff review their own work and/or by providing consultancy and then assessing their validation or verification activities Sources of revenue: having a GHG project validation/verification client who is also a client in other areas of the business Intimidation: an individual being coerced openly or secretly to do something that is not impartial AWT is able to avoid impartiality by abiding by the following safeguards: Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 18

19 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 AWT s value of their reputation and any legal liability they could face AWT s commitment to abide by the professional standards and regulatory requirements regarding independence through ANSI By understanding the needs and expectations of our clients AWT s oversight by the COI Auditor, which is then audited by the V/V Director By establishing and applying methods to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of each project, by having an internal audit performed by the internal peer reviewer By identifying potential conflicts of interest and dealing with them appropriately Commitment by team leader, team members, internal peer reviewer and appeals, complaints and disputes representative to support the v/v process and to act impartially throughout the project s entirety, by signing an Impartiality (Attachment D) document for every validation and verification project that they are a part of. AWT has a strict policy when hiring, training and promoting personnel, which emphasizes the importance of impartiality, the potential risks that could arise and evaluating their impartiality regarding each client, so that they are successful at mitigating or eliminating any risks AWT follows a zero-tolerance policy. If impartiality were compromised the following steps would take place: The team leader would discuss the findings with the V/V Director A conference call would then be placed with the client AWT would then inform the protocol administrator about the findings A solution would try to be resolved to include: o Removing the particular team member who compromised impartiality, or o Declining the project altogether if a reasonable solution cannot be reached Commitment to Objectivity AWT will accomplish validation/verification activities with objectivity so that the process retains the utmost credibility. AWT will rely on internal process documents developed by the V/V Director in order to carry out assignments objectively. Team members will rely on the Team Leader to resolve gray issues that may occur during the process. A gray issue is defined as any issue not directly addressed in the program protocols. 1.5 Avoidance of Conflicts of Interest AWT determines and reports any conflicts of interest or lack thereof to the administering program. AWT will strive to avoid any conflicts of interest for validation/verification projects through the following measures: AWT and its subcontractors avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest with the responsible party and the intended users of the information. AWT and its subcontractors will not validate and verify GHG assertions from the same GHG project unless authorized by the applicable GHG program Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 19

20 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 AWT and its subcontractors will not validate or verify GHG assertion where it provided GHG consultancy services to the responsible party that support the GHG assertion AWT and its subcontractors will be independent AWT and its subcontractors will not validate or verify a GHG assertion where a relationship with those who provided GHG consultancy services to the responsible party that support the GHG assertion poses an unacceptable risk to impartiality which could be based on: ownership, governance, management, personnel, shared resources, finances, contracts, marketing, and payment of a sales commission or other inducement for the referral of a new client AWT and its subcontractors will not validate or verify a GHG assertion using personnel who were engaged by those who provided GHG consultancy services to the responsible party in support of the GHG assertion AWT and its subcontractors will not offer products or services that pose an unacceptable risk to impartiality AWT and its subcontractors will not outsource the review and issuance of the validation or verification statement AWT and its subcontractors will not state or imply that verification of a GHG assertion would be simpler, easier, faster or less expensive if a specified GHG consultancy service were used AWT and its subcontractors will demonstrate competence and due professional care consistent with their roles and responsibilities AWT and its subcontractors will demonstrate ethical conduct throughout the validation/verification AWT and its subcontractors will reflect truthfully and accurately validation/verification activities, conclusions and reports AWT and its subcontractors will meet the requirements of the standards or the GHG program to which the responsible party subscribes Climate Action Reserve CAR requires that all verifiers must demonstrate that they do not have significant conflicts of interest with participants in the following ways: Organizational COI In the application process, AWT demonstrates that we have internal mechanisms in place to help maintain our objectivity in verification activities. (NOVA/COI Form-Appendix 4) Case-by-Case COI Before a contract is signed, AWT demonstrates that any preexisting relationship between us and the participant will not impair impartiality in verifying a GHG offset project report Emerging COI For a period of one year following verification, AWT will monitor our relationship with the participant to ensure impartiality has been protected throughout the verification process. If AWT identifies a potential or actual COI, AWT will also submit a plan to avoid, neutralize or mitigate the COI situation. Furthermore under the CAR regulations, if AWT has completed any consulting services for a client, AWT waits a minimum of 3 years prior to providing any validation/verification services. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 20

21 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 AWT demonstrates that our organization is capable of identifying and mitigating situations that would impair our ability to render an impartial verification opinion by demonstrating: Clearly-defined organizational boundaries, internal structures and relationships with other companies that have management or financial control over the applicant The presence of internal mechanisms to identify and mitigate organizational and personal COIs with any potential clients The ability to be objective in providing verification activities Chicago Climate Exchange The Chicago Climate Exchange requires that all verifiers must demonstrate that they do not have significant conflicts of interest with participants, by submitting the following: Statement of any potential or actual conflicts of interest that may result from undertaking verification projects CCX Project Specific Conflicts of Interest form (Appendix 3) CCX Conflict of Interest Questionnaire (Appendix 3) All forms must be signed by both the participant and AWT and submitted to CCX VCS The VCS does not have any registry specific COI requirements, therefore for all VCS projects, AWT will follow the CCX requirements listed above to satisfy this objective until the VCS requires a different approach. Pacific Carbon Trust PCT does not have any registry specific COI requirements, therefore for all PCT projects, AWT will follow the CCX requirements listed above to satisfy this objective until the PCT requires a different approach. American Carbon Registry ACR requires a project specific COI form be completed for each verification project (Appendix 13). California Air Resources Board Specific procedures related to COI determination and mitigation for verification of ARB offset projects follow the requirements of Subchapter 10 Climate Change, Article 5, Subarticle 13, Section The potential for conflict of interest is deemed high where any of the situations described in Section (b) occur. The potential for conflict of interest is deemed low where any of the situations described in Section (c) occur. The potential for conflict of interest is deemed medium where any of the situations described in Section (d) occur. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 21

22 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 AWT will not provide verification services for a client if the potential for conflict of interest is deemed high. If the potential for conflict of interest is deemed medium and AWT intends to provide verification services for the client, AWT will submit a plan to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate the potential conflict of interest situation. The mitigation plan will include: 1) demonstration that members with potential conflicts of interest have been removed and insulated from the project, 2) explanation of any changes to the organizational structure or company to remove the potential conflict of interest and 3) any other circumstances that addresses other sources for potential conflict of interest. Prior to providing any offset verification services, AWT will submit an evaluation of the potential for conflict of interest (Appendix 16) that AWT, its staff, its related entities or any subcontractors may have with the potential client. The evaluation will include the following: Identification of whether the potential conflict of interest is high, low or medium Identification of whether any member of the offset verification team has previously provided offset verification services for the potential client and if so, which years. Identification of whether any member of the offset verification team or related entity has provided any non-offset verification services of any nature to the potential client during the past 3 years. If so, the following will also be submitted: o Identification of the nature and location of the work performed for the client and an evaluation of whether the work is similar to the type of work to be performed during the verification o Description of the nature of past, present or anticipated future relationships with the client including: Instances when any member of the verification team has performed or intends to perform work for the client Identification of whether work is currently being performed for the client and the nature of such work Dollar value of work performed for the client in the last 3 years Whether any member of the verification team has any contracts to perform work for the client or a related entity Dollar value of work performed related to GHG reductions and removal enhancements for the client or related entities. o Explanation of how the amount and nature of work previously performed is such that any member of the verification team s credibility and impartiality should not be questioned. o A list of names of the staff that would perform verification services for the client and a description of any instances of personal or family relationships with management or employees of the client that represent a potential conflict of interest o Identification of any other circumstances known to AWT or the client that could result in conflict of interest Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 22

23 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 o Attest in writing the following: I certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California the information provided in the Conflict of Interest submittal is true, accurate and complete. Conflict of Interest situations will be monitored during the process of providing verification services and for a period of 1 year after the completion of verification services for an ARB offset project. If any situations arise that increase the potential for conflict of interest, these will be made known to ARB in writing and will include the description of actions that AWT has taken or proposes to take in order to avoid, neutralize or mitigate the potential for conflict of interest. If AWT or any of the verification team members enters into a contract with the client within one year after verification services for an ARB offset project are completed, AWT will notify ARB of the contract and the nature of the work to be performed within 30 days. AWT will notify ARB of any emerging conflicts of interest during the time verification services are being offered. Additionally, AWT will report any changes to its organizational structure including mergers, acquisitions or divestitures to ARB if any occur within one year after completion of verification services. 1.6 Mechanism for Oversight of Impartiality The COI Auditor, provides oversight to guarantee that impartiality is being achieved throughout each validation/verification project. The COI Auditor provides impartial monitoring and review to ensure independence. The following step-by-step procedures include: AWT is contacted by a client to provide validation or verification services. The COI Auditor is then provided with contact information for all involved parties and research regarding impartiality and conflict of interest takes place. The COI Auditor then researches the source(s) of income. The V/V Director oversees Validation/Verification finances. The combination of financial oversight provided by the Director and evaluation of sources of income by the COI Auditor demonstrates that commercial, financial and other factors do not compromise impartiality. Both the COI auditor and the V/V Director are completely independent from the validation or verification project. As long as there are no red flags regarding the sources of income and evaluation of finances, then the COI Auditor researches each company to determine the client s parent company and any subsidiaries. All staff members are then made aware of these findings at the initial team meeting to determine if impartiality will be compromised by any of the members. If impartiality is compromised at this point, AWT would determine the necessary steps to maintain impartiality to include: o Removing the particular team member that poses risks to impartiality, or o Declining the project altogether if a reasonable solution cannot be reached. Once it is determined that impartiality is not compromised, the team leader, team members, internal peer reviewer and appeals, complaints and disputes representative then sign the Impartiality (Attachment D) document, which confirms that all members will act impartially throughout the project. The Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 23

24 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Impartiality document must be fully executed on or before the registry specific COI evaluation is signed in order to provide an objective record that internal evaluation of impartiality has been carried out. At this point the members discuss any potential conflicts of interest, as well as any potential conflicts of interest that could arise and all members then sign the Internal Conflict of Interest (Attachment C) document. The Internal Conflict of Interest document must be fully executed on or before the registry specific COI evaluation is signed in order to provide an objective record that internal evaluation of conflict of interest has been carried out. If a conflict of interest would arise at this point, AWT would determine the necessary steps to eliminate conflict of interest entirely to include: o Removing the particular team member that poses a conflict of interest, or o Declining the project altogether. Registry specific COI evaluation forms are completed and submitted to the applicable registry for review and approval. Once impartiality is established and it is determined that no conflicts of interest exist according to internal processes and registry evaluation, a contract is finalized (signed) by the team leader. 1.7 Liability and Financing AWT evaluates financial risks associated with all validation/verification projects. AWT enters into a contract with each client, prior to beginning verification activities (after COI evaluation is complete). The contract outlines the budgeted allotment to successfully complete their validation/verification project. Once the contract is signed, the client is obligated to pay AWT the full amount according to the terms of the contract. AWT has sufficient arrangements, including money in reserves and through our insurance company, to cover liabilities arising from the activities and areas in which we operate. AWT is covered by professional liability insurance, which includes $4,000,000 per claim and $4,000,000 aggregate (Attachment E) which meets the requirements of CAR, CCX, PCT, ACR and ARB. VCS requires professional liability insurance of $5,000,000. No VCS verification services will be offered unless this requirement is met. AWT retains authority and responsibility for all validation/verification activities, decisions and verification statements. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 24

25 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Competencies AWT is committed to maintaining all relevant competencies to offer v/v services for the livestock and waste handling/disposal sectors under the CAR, CCX, VCS, PCT, ACR and ARB programs. 2.1 Management and Personnel Procedure for Determining Required Competencies for Each Sector AWT operates in the following sectors: livestock and waste handling/ disposal. Procedures for determining required competencies for each sector are detailed below (Removed) Livestock and Waste Handling and Disposal Sectors It is the responsibility of the Validation/Verification Director to determine competency requirements for the livestock and waste handling and disposal sectors. The Director sets the competency requirements based on the requirements of the professional licensing board relevant to engineering professionals. AWT specifically utilizes the requirements of the North Carolina Board for Engineers and Land Surveyors. AWT must maintain a professional holding an active license issued by the North Carolina Board for Engineers and Land Surveyors in order to maintain livestock and waste handling & disposal sector competency. It is the policy of AWT to rely on professional licensing bodies to dictate competency requirements for the livestock and waste handling and disposal sectors. Additionally, the license holder must select a minimum of 10 professional development hours (PDHs) per year directly related to the aforementioned scopes. A maximum of 10 hours from one year may be carried over to meet the requirements of the following year. Evidence of the PDHs will be submitted to the V/V Director and will be kept on file as long as the person is employed by AWT. On an annual basis, the Director determines if the requirements are being met by reviewing the submitted evidence of the PDHs and accessing the on-line database and documenting a minimum of one current license among the validation/verification team in the livestock and waste handling and disposal sectors. The requirements and any updates to the requirements are communicated to the livestock and waste handling & disposal Team Leaders by the Director on an annual basis in the form of written notification. Any additional registry specific training is carried out at the discretion of the V/V Director internally unless specific courses are required by the registry Procedure to Demonstrate That Management, Validators, Verifiers and Technical Experts Have Appropriate Competencies in Activities Associated with the Validation or Verification AWT personnel, whether they are employees or subcontractors, are required to exhibit the competencies relevant to their assigned validation/verification activities. These requirements are detailed throughout this Section. The V/V Director verifies competencies in a variety of ways including 3rd party certifications, educational Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 25

26 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 backgrounds, professional licensing, experience, training and internal witnessing of validation/verification activities. Documentation of applicable competencies for all AWT personnel is prepared and maintained by the Director Procedure to Have Access to Relevant Internal or External Expertise AWT requires internal expertise in all sectors and programs under which it operates. Technical expertise requirements for each sector AWT operates in are detailed in Sections and Technical expertise requirements for CCX verification, CAR verification, VCS validation/verification, PCT validation/verification and ACR validation/verification are detailed below. Team leaders and internal peer reviewers shall exhibit these competencies via testing or observation by the V/V Director. CCX Verification: Technical experts shall have knowledge of the CCX specific protocols under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have knowledge of the CCX specific step-by-step process for accomplishing verification activities. Technical experts shall have received all applicable CCX specific training required by CCX for the specific protocols/sectors under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have sector specific competencies as demonstrated by an applicable active professional license or documented professional experience in the sector. CAR Verification: Technical experts shall have knowledge of the CAR specific verification protocols under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have knowledge of the CAR specific step-by-step process for accomplishing verification activities. Technical experts shall have received all applicable CAR specific training required by CAR for the specific protocols/sectors under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have sector specific competencies as demonstrated by an applicable active professional license or documented professional experience in the sector. VCS Validation/Verification: Technical experts shall have knowledge of the VCS specific validation/verification protocols under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have knowledge of the VCS specific step-by-step process for accomplishing validation/verification activities. Technical experts shall have received all applicable VCS specific training required by VCS for the specific protocols/sectors under which they will be operating. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 26

27 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Technical experts shall have sector specific competencies as demonstrated by an applicable active professional license or documented professional experience in the sector. PCT Validation/Verification: Technical experts shall have knowledge of the PCT specific validation/verification protocols under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have knowledge of the PCT specific step-by-step process for accomplishing validation/verification activities. Technical experts shall have received all applicable PCT specific training required by PCT for the specific protocols/sectors under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have sector specific competencies as demonstrated by an applicable active professional license or documented professional experience in the sector. ACR Verification: Technical experts shall have knowledge of the ACR specific validation/verification protocols under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have knowledge of the ACR specific step-by-step process for accomplishing validation/verification activities. Technical experts shall have received all applicable ACR specific training required by ACR for the specific protocols/sectors under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have sector specific competencies as demonstrated by an applicable active professional license or documented professional experience in the sector. ARB Verification: Technical experts shall have knowledge of the ARB specific verification protocols under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have knowledge of the ARB specific step-by-step process for accomplishing verification activities. Technical experts shall have received all applicable ARB specific training required by ARB for the specific protocols/sectors under which they will be operating. Technical experts shall have sector specific competencies as demonstrated by an applicable active professional license or documented professional experience in the sector. 2.2 External Expertise If AWT does not have internal technical expertise in a subset of a certain sector, external expertise will be utilized to fulfill scope specific competency requirements. No external experts required. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 27

28 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Competencies of Personnel AWT shall employ personnel having sufficient competence for managing the type and range of its validation/verification activities. Senior management is responsible for managing the validation/verification services performed by AWT as set forth in Section Competency requirements for each of their functions are outlined in the applicable sections of the management system policy. Should management turn over, individuals within the company shall be promoted as appropriate as a first option or qualified personnel shall be hired. The V/V Director is responsible for ensuring management of AWT's validation/verification services is performed by those with sufficient competence for the full range of v/v services offered. The same or similar competency requirements shall be maintained when implementing internal promotion or new hiring. Should the competency requirements change, the board of directors shall approve the new requirements. AWT shall employ or have access to a sufficient number of validation/verification team leaders, validators/verifiers and technical experts to cover the range and volume of its validation/verification activities. AWT shall maintain the following positions for handling v/v activities in the livestock and waste handling/disposal scopes. AWT s V/V Roles and Responsibilities Team Leader: Hal Langenbach or Kevin Davidson Appeals/Complaints/Disputes: Jeff Vaughan Internal Peer Reviewer: Kevin Davidson or Hal Langenbach Team Members: Chris McGee Chris Love Tiffany Preddy COI Auditor: Lisa Tilley V/V Director: Chris Mosley Audit for V/V Director Jeff Vaughan-President The only positions not critical for providing full v/v services are the team member positions. V/V can be handled without the team members based on the competency requirements of the team leaders. The personnel requirements of CCX, CAR, VCS, PCT, ACR and ARB are met by the assignments listed above (it should be noted that the internal peer reviewer serves as the backup for the team leader in order to fulfill the requirement of CAR). Any changes in personnel requirements by these programs shall Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 28

29 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 be monitored by the V/V Director and implemented on a schedule, as required by the programs. It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to determine if additional personnel are required to execute the workload of v/v activities. Should AWT fail to maintain sufficient staff to accomplish v/v activities under a certain scope or program, AWT shall discontinue offering those services until sufficient personnel are added as employees or subcontractors. The V/V Director shall manage the hiring of additional staff and/or subcontractors, such that competencies are maintained in all v/v activities for each program and scope under which AWT operates. AWT shall use validators, verifiers and technical experts only for specific validation/verification activities where they have demonstrated competence. It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to test competencies of validators, verifiers and technical experts and to maintain records of competency testing. Competencies required and the corresponding testing mechanisms are detailed in Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.1.5, (team leaders and internal peer reviewers) and Sections and (team members). AWT shall make clear to appropriate personnel relevant duties, responsibilities and authorities. Duties, responsibilities and authorities are described in detail for each position in Section 1.3. The V/V Director has full authority to delegate to AWT personnel provided relevant competencies are demonstrated. The V/V Director communicates broad expectations to each employee either through group training activities or individual conference. Additionally, team leaders communicate specific responsibilities to the team members during the initial project specific team meeting. AWT selects, trains, formally authorizes and monitors validators/verifiers using a documented process (Attachment F). AWT selects technical experts used in the v/v process based on technical needs of the validation/verification scopes and programs under which it operates. Both the team leader and internal peer reviewer for each v/v project hold relevant technical expertise. Should specific technical expertise be required that is not exhibited by AWT staff, AWT will enlist external experts. Applicable technical expertise is documented via curriculum vitae or resume. It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to ensure that AWT validators/verifiers have access to up-to-date information on GHG validation/verification processes, requirements, methodologies, activities, GHG program provisions and applicable legal requirements. The V/V Director maintains all of the latest process documents and GHG program provisions on file and communicates to AWT staff and subcontractors via , internal meetings, teleconference or training, any modifications, additions or subtractions as necessary. Furthermore, validators/verifiers must demonstrate knowledge of GHG validation/ verification processes, requirements, methodologies, activities, GHG program provisions and applicable legal requirements. It is the responsibility of the V/V director to test and maintain records for AWT validators/verifiers indicating these competencies. AWT requires that the team leaders and internal peer reviewers have the competence to Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 29

30 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 evaluate validation/verification processes, related findings and recommendations of the team in order to write the validation/verification statement. It is the responsibility of the team leaders to write the validation/verification statements. However, the internal peer reviewer must review the statements. As such, AWT requires the team leaders and internal peer reviewers to exhibit all of the competencies listed in Sections through AWT periodically monitors the performance of all personnel involved in the validation/verification (including a combination of on-site observations, review of validation/verification findings, reports and feedback from clients or the market), taking into account their level of activity and risk associated with their activities. It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to monitor the performance of all personnel involved in validation/verification activities on an annual basis. The evaluation shall be based on a thorough review of a sample of work products exhibiting the full breadth of the individuals responsibilities. Additionally, the Director shall contact clients and program representatives who have had contact with each individual to gain perspective on exterior perception of the staff member or subcontractor. Both the V/V Director and the v/v personnel shall sign the evaluation. AWT identifies training needs and provides training on GHG validation/verification processes, requirements, methodologies, activities and other relevant GHG program requirements. It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to identify training needs and provide training in order to keep all AWT staff and subcontractors abreast of validation/verification processes, requirements, methodologies, activities and GHG program requirements. At a minimum, annual training will be provided to all AWT staff and subcontractors based on the roles/responsibilities they fulfill. The V/V Director, as appropriate, may require additional training if deemed necessary. 2.4 Deployment of Personnel General Each member of the validation and/or verification team has detailed knowledge regarding the CCX, CAR, VCS, PCT, ACR and ARB programs and protocols, as well as the following: eligibility requirements, implementation in different jurisdictions (as applicable), effective communication skills and validation/verification requirements and guidelines. All members adhere to the following: Demonstrate competence and due professional care consistent with their roles and responsibilities. Provide ethical conduct and are independent. Avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest with the responsible party and the intended users of the GHG information. Provide truthful and accurate validation/verification activities, conclusions and reports. Meet the requirements of the standards of the GHG program to which the responsible party subscribes. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 30

31 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 AWT typically accomplishes validation/verification projects using a team made up of a team leader and team members. However, if the team leader exhibits all the competencies required for a particular validation/verification project, then the team leader may function as the validation/verification team. Competencies include sector competencies, management competencies, validation/verification activity competencies and program competencies. An internal peer reviewer and AWT representative to handle appeals, complaints and disputes are always assigned to individual projects in addition to the team leader and team members or team leader acting as the validation/verification team, whichever the case may be Validation/Verification Team Knowledge All personnel working on projects to be registered on CAR, CCX, VCS, PCT, ACR or ARB shall undergo training (Attachment G) and competency testing and exhibit an understanding of applicable eligibility requirements, implementation in different jurisdictions, v/v requirements and guidelines. It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to conduct training and competency testing. Alternatively, the program may administer program specific training requirements and competency testing. In either case, it is the responsibility of the V/V Director to document and maintain records indicating competencies. It is the responsibility of the project Team Leader to ensure that language barriers do not hinder communication with project proponents including key personnel to be interviewed during the field audit. The Team Leader, prior to contracting services, must determine if translators are necessary by evaluating language issues. If translators are necessary, AWT will either contract translators or decline the project. All members of the v/v Team: Understand the GHG program requirements and ISO 14064, ISO 14065, ISO 14066, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements. Understand the v/v process and specifically related issues to include: leakage, additionality, baseline setting, monitoring and reporting Communicate effectively to include: ability to explain the v/v process, ability to ask pertinent questions to clients, ability to explain findings from the v/v/ process and their consequences and to understand and analyze the findings from the v/v activities Validation/Verification Team Technical Expertise AWT's validation/verification teams are required to possess sufficient technical expertise to assess the projects: Specific GHG activity and technology, global warming potentials of applicable GHGs, baseline scenarios, leakage and permanence Identification and selection of GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs Quantification methodologies direct measurement via probes, baseline calculations, use of conversion factors, stoichiometric calculations, estimation methodologies and the conservativeness of these approaches. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 31

32 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Monitoring techniques correct installation and usage of equipment, calibration procedures and consequences for data quality, inspection of monitoring equipment, accuracy, uncertainty, interpretation of software GHG assertions Situations that may affect the materiality of the GHG assertion, including typical and atypical operating conditions, completeness of a GHG assertion, determine whether or not the GHG assertion meets GHG program requirements and the significance of a GHG assertion and what needs to be checked Financial, operational, contractual or other agreements that may affect project boundaries, legal requirements related to the GHG assertions or other issues that could lead to double counting/claims relating to ownership It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to administer technical training and competency testing. The Team Leaders exhibit technical expertise relevant to specific GHG activities and technology for scopes under which they provide services by maintaining related professional licenses. Technical expertise related specifically to v/v activities (listed above) is required of the Team Leaders and Internal Peer Reviewers and is tested by the V/V Director. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the V/V Director to document and maintain records of competencies Validation/Verification Team Data and Information Auditing Expertise AWT's validation/verification teams are required to possess sufficient data and information auditing expertise to assess the assertion of the GHG project including the abilities to: Assess the GHG information system to determine whether the project proponent has effectively identified, collected, analyzed and reported on the data necessary to establish a credible GHG assertion, and has systematically taken corrective actions to address any nonconformities related to requirements of the relevant GHG program or standards Design a sampling plan based on an appropriate, agreed upon level of assurance. Analyze risks associated with the use of data and data systems Identify failures in data and data systems Assess the impact of the various data streams on the materiality of the GHG assertion It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to administer data and information auditing training and/or competency testing. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the V/V Director to document and maintain records of competencies. Data and information auditing expertise (listed above) is required of the Team Leaders and Internal Peer Reviewers, as well as any Team Member involved in data review. Successfully passing CSA America's Greenhouse Gas Verifier certification exam is a suitable avenue for demonstration of these competencies in lieu of other competency testing. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 32

33 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Validation Team Competencies AWT's validation teams are also required to have knowledge of relevant sector trends that may impact selection of the baseline scenario and possess the expertise to assess processes, procedures and methodologies used to: Select, justify and quantify the baseline scenario, including underlying assumptions Define the baseline scenario, project boundaries and assess the conservativeness of baselines Demonstrate equivalence between type and level of activities, goods or services of the baseline scenario and the project Demonstrate that project activities are additional to baseline scenario activities. Demonstrate conformity with GHG program requirements such as leakage and permanence It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to administer training and/or competency testing to ensure the selected validation teams exhibit the above listed competencies. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the V/V Director to document and maintain records of competencies. Validation team competencies (listed above) are required of the Team Leaders and Internal Peer Reviewers Verification Team Competencies AWT's verification teams are also required to possess the expertise to: Understand conservativeness, equivalence, additionality, leakage and permanence Compare project plans with actual results Evaluate consistency between the validated project plan and the project implementation Confirm the ongoing appropriateness of the validated project plan including its baseline scenario and underlying assumptions It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to administer training and/or competency testing to ensure the selected verification teams exhibit the above listed competencies. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the V/V Director to document and maintain records of competencies. Verification team competencies (listed above) are required by the Team Leaders and Internal Peer Reviewers. Successfully passing CSA America's Greenhouse Gas Verifier certification exam is a suitable avenue for demonstration of these competencies in lieu of other competency testing Validation/Verification Team Leader Competencies In addition to the competencies listed in Sections and appropriate sector competencies, AWT's validation/verification team leaders shall have: Sufficient knowledge and expertise of the above competencies to assign and manage the v/v team in order to meet the v/v objectives Ability to assign appropriate team members to designated projects, based on their competence, v/v objectives and scope of work Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 33

34 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Ability to assess v/v competencies during the execution of the activities and to supplement the team with required competencies Ability to understand the appropriate GHG terminology and language Ability to apply critical thinking and evaluate and understand risk assessment and missing information Ability to challenge findings from team members Ability to perform v/v and to ensure that it is based on the specific requirements and to manage the development of the v/v report Ability to manage audit teams It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to administer training and/or competency testing, to ensure team leaders and internal peer reviewers exhibit the above listed competencies in addition to all other applicable competencies. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the V/V Director to document and maintain records of competencies Internal Auditor Competencies The internal auditors shall have the following competencies: Hold 4-Year College Degree Hold current professional license Independent of the function audited COI Auditor Competencies The COI auditor shall have the following competencies: Hold 4-Year College Degree Must be independent from all GHG projects Competent knowledge of all relevant COI requirements of GHG registries Ability to determine if COI exists and impartiality has been compromised and report to team leaders and V/V director accordingly The above COI Auditor competencies are documented through completion of COI/Impartiality training administered by the V/V Director V/V Director Competencies The V/V Director shall have the following competencies: Hold 4-Year College Degree Hold current professional license Minimum 2 years validation/verification experience The above V/V Director Competencies shall be approved by the Board of Directors. 2.5 Use of Contracted Validators/Verifiers AWT shall take full responsibility for validation/verification activities performed by contracted validators/verifiers. This is demonstrated by language included in AWT's client contracts relative to contracted validators/verifiers. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 34

35 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 AWT requires contracted validators/verifiers to sign a written agreement including the following: Commitment to comply with AWT's validation/verification policies and procedures, Confidentiality requirements, Independence requirements, Notification requirements should there be any existing prior relationship to the client or responsible party. This is demonstrated by: Language included in AWT's subcontractor contracts Requirement for subcontractors to sign internal conflict of interest documents and impartiality documents for each project in which they are involved AWT currently contracts one verification team member (technical expert) on an asneeded basis: Michael Wittig. AWT takes full responsibility in hiring all contracted verifiers and follows a strict protocol to guarantee that each verifier conforms with ISO 14066, ISO 14065, ISO 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements and that their educational background, professional experience, training (Attachment H) and qualifications meet the necessary standards. All contracted validators/verifiers are required to sign a written agreement, by which they must comply with applicable policies and procedures, address confidentiality and independence from commercial and other interests and notify AWT of any conflicts of interest (Contracting of Validation and/or Verification Services Document (Attachment I)). AWT then contacts their client and receives written consent to use the contracted verifier for that particular project through the use of the Project Overview document. 2.6 Personnel Records and Control AWT maintains all employees up-to-date information regarding education, professional experience, training, qualifications, affiliations, professional status and performance monitoring. The V/V Director maintains these records, which are stored securely and locked each evening in a filing cabinet in the V/V Director s office. No other AWT member of staff has access to these secured documents. 2.7 Outsourcing AWT completes all v/v projects in-house using the designated team members or contracted validators/verifiers. At this time, no projects have been outsourced. In the event that this would change, AWT would inform ANSI that outsourcing of certain validation or verification services would be taking place and would oblige to conform to the applicable standards, by completing the following: AWT will take full responsibility for the validation or verification Independent evidence of the outsourced body would be provided, which demonstrates conformity with ISO 14066, ISO 14065, ISO 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 35

36 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 AWT will receive consent from our client and/or responsible party to use the outsourced body All above information will be documented appropriately throughout the contract between AWT and the client and/or responsible party Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 36

37 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Communication and Records 3.1 Information Provided to a Client or Responsible Party All clients/responsible parties will receive the following information: this management system document, a detailed description of the validation/verification process, changes to the validation/verification requirements and the relevant GHG program that may affect the objectives, schedule of validation/verification activities and tasks, information on team members, fees, validation/verification references and information on procedures for handling complaints and appeals. Much of this information is available on the company website ( Therefore, the client and/or responsible party will be directed to the website by the Team Leader. If a client has any objections to any of the team members assigned to complete their validation/verification project, then that team member will be removed from the project and the team will be reconfigured to include an additional member on staff. Any additional client accommodations will be authorized on a case-by-case basis. 3.2 Communication of Responsibilities To Clients or Responsible Parties It is the responsibility of the team leader to communicate with the clients or responsible parties their responsibility to comply with all applicable validation/verification requirements. These requirements are communicated via the validation/verification plan and as a part of the contract. Additionally, the team leader follows up with the point of contact to ensure that responsibilities were clearly communicated and all requirements are met. It is the responsibility of the team leader to communicate to the client or responsible parties the responsibility to make all arrangements for the conduction of the validation/verification including provisions for examining documentation and providing access to all relevant processes, areas, records and personnel. These responsibilities are communicated using both the validation/verification plan and the contract. Specific requirements for field audits are also communicated to the client or responsible party by the team leader via teleconference prior to making travel plans. AWT communicates to the client or responsible parties the responsibility to make provisions to accommodate observers where applicable. AWT communicates this responsibility to the client or responsible party by inclusion of appropriate language in the project specific contract. Observers could include ANSI representatives, program representatives or AWT personnel. No additional fees are collected by AWT to accommodate observers. 3.3 Confidentiality AWT has developed a document titled, Confidentiality/Non-Disclosure Agreement (Attachment J), which outlines the policies and procedures by which all team leaders, team members, internal peer reviewers, COI auditor, V/V director, contracted validators/verifiers and outsourced members (if applicable) must abide. AWT guarantees that all client information remains strictly confidential and that it will not disclose client Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 37

38 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 information to a third-party without written consent. All employees have signed this agreement upon accepting employment with AWT, which ensures that no employee will disclose or use any client confidential information, either during or after their employment. Furthermore, no one is permitted to remove or make copies of any client records, reports or documents without prior management approval. AWT will inform the client and/or responsible party before placing any information in the public domain. 3.4 Publicly Accessible Information It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to maintain and upon request, provide clear, traceable and accurate information about AWT's activities and the sectors in which AWT operates. CAR, VCS. PCT, ACR and ARB publicly display in detail all projects and scopes, along with the validator/verifier that assisted, on their websites. The CCX website provides a list of all scopes that includes approved verifiers along with a list of all verified projects listing the verifier. AWT will direct interested parties to these websites to view all relevant projects that have been successfully completed. AWT also keeps its website up to date with the registries and scopes under which it operates. Each time a new project is completed, the V/V Director checks all relevant websites to make sure the information concerning the project has been updated and is accurately represented. 3.5 Control of Records All v/v related records are stored securely on AWT s internal server and appropriately identified, collected, indexed, filed, stored, maintained and disposed of properly as managed by the V/V Director. All electronically transmitted records are transmitted via or a password protected File Transfer Protocol (FTP) site that is only accessible by the V/V Director, V/V Team Leader, Team Members and the client. All reports to clients are transported via , ftp or FedEx. Records are only transmitted to the program registry and/or clients via , FedEx and/or using the FTP site. All clients records will remain confidential and onsite at AWT s home office, located in Raleigh, North Carolina. Upon request, records pertaining to the v/v will be retained or destroyed in agreement between the participating parties and in accordance with the v/v plan and any applicable GHG program and contractual arrangements. The requirements of the applicable registry shall be followed when determining the length of time to retain records. Each member of AWT has signed the Control of Documents and Records Policy (Attachment K), which is placed in his or her personnel records. AWT records include the following information: Management System Policy and related documents All project related data submitted by the client or responsible party. Contractual agreements signed by client or responsible party and AWT Records pertaining to any decision-making (including justification for determining time requirement for validation/verification activities) Confirmation of the completion of validation/verification activities, including findings and information on material or non-material discrepancies Validation/Verification statements Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 38

39 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Records of complaints and appeals and any subsequent correction or corrective action, if applicable Personnel records, including evidence of the competence of validators/verifiers and technical experts Records of internal audits and actions taken based on the results of the audits Records of management reviews and actions taken based on the reviews All other records referenced in the Management System Policy Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 39

40 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Validation/Verification Process The AWT validation/verification process consists of the following general phases: preengagement, approach, validation/verification and review and issuance of the validation/verification statement as summarized in Sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5. Additional process details for CCX, CAR, VCS, PCT, ACR and ARB are available in Section 10 and Attachment L Program Procedures. AWT sufficiently documents all validation/verification activities to ensure consistency with all required program criteria and with the ISO 14066, ISO 14065, ISO 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements. As a validator/verifier, AWT provides independent third-party review of project reports, maintenance of project activity and attests to the accuracy of the provided data. AWT completes each validation/verification process with a four-step approach, which includes: 4.1 Chicago Climate Change Pre-engagement: AWT is initially contacted by an aggregator or project owner to complete a verification project. AWT prepares internal impartiality, internal conflict of interest and CCX conflict of interest documents. AWT negotiates and prepares the contract with the client at any point after the COI evaluation has been approved by the CCX and before the project overview document is executed. The Team Leader reviews the preliminary documentation provided by the aggregator or project owner and completes the initial review form and risk assessment form. After the initial review, AWT prepares the sampling plan and verification plan documents. Upon selection of the sample, AWT sends the results of the sample to the CCX. If contractors are planned to be utilized for the project, contracts are executed with contractors. The Team Leader prepares the project overview document detailing the staff assigned to the project. Approach: Upon completion of the pre-engagement activities, the procedures outlined in the verification approach are followed. The information gathering process then takes place. Information gathered from the client or responsible party includes: All data and supporting documentation utilized to perform GHG offset calculations. Description of the procedures and systems used to collect, document and process GHG emissions data at the facility level Description of quality control procedures applied (internal audits, comparison with last year s data, recalculation by a second person, etc.) Listing of responsible individuals for collecting GHG emissions data at each site and at the corporate level, if applicable Information on uncertainties, qualitative and if available, quantitative Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 40

41 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Once all documentation has been collected and reviewed for completeness, AWT creates maps and other materials that are relevant to the project. At this point additional information/clarification is requested, if needed. Verification: Desk/field audits will then be completed to enable AWT to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence of the completeness, accuracy and reliability of reported information. Verification Statement: Once the desk/field audits are finalized, all relevant information is compiled into a final document. This document is then reviewed by the Team Leader and the internal peer reviewer and the verification report, checklist and statement are issued to the aggregator/project owner for approval. AWT then addresses any questions and contestations. Once approved, AWT submits the verification report to the registry. 4.2 Climate Action Reserve Pre-engagement: AWT is initially contacted by an aggregator/project owner to complete a verification project. AWT evaluates COI internally by executing the Impartiality and Internal Conflict of Interest documents and submits the case-specific notification of verification activities and request for evaluation of conflict of interest (NOVA/COI) form to CAR. Once CAR has acknowledged that the project can move forward, AWT finalizes contracts with subcontractors (if applicable) and also finalizes the contract with the participant. It should be noted that the contract may be executed at any point after CAR approves the NOVA/COI form but must be executed before the project overview document is executed. The team leader reviews the preliminary documentation from the aggregator or project owner and completes the initial review form and risk assessment form. After the initial review, AWT prepares the sampling plan and verification plan documents. Prior to beginning verification activities, the project overview document shall be submitted to the client or responsible party for signature. Approach: Upon completion of the pre-engagement activities, the procedures outlined in the verification approach are followed. AWT then completes the project overview document and submits it to the participant. AWT then holds a kick-off meeting with participants. Information and document requests are made at this time. Once all documentation has been collected and reviewed for completeness, AWT creates maps and other materials that are relevant to the project. At this point additional information/clarification is requested, if needed. Verification: Desk/field audits will then be completed to enable AWT to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence of the completeness, accuracy and reliability of reported information. AWT conducts the verification activities in accordance with the General Verification Protocol, which includes: Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 41

42 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Identifying emissions sources Reviewing methodologies and management systems Verifying emission estimates Verification Statement and Report: Once desk and field audits are finalized, all relevant information is compiled and the verification report and verification statement are created. This information is then reviewed by the Team Leader and the internal peer reviewer. The verification report and statement are then issued to the aggregator/project owner for approval. AWT then addresses any questions and contestations. Once approved, AWT uploads the verification report, verification statement, list of findings and in some cases the verification log to CAR. 4.3 Verified Carbon Standard Pre-engagement: AWT is initially contacted by an aggregator/project owner to complete a validation or verification project. AWT then signs VCS s validation and verification agreement before performing any activities. AWT prepares internal impartiality, internal conflict of interest and VCS conflict of interest documents. AWT negotiates and prepares the contract with the client at any point after the COI investigation is complete and before the project overview document is executed. The Team Leader reviews the preliminary documentation from the aggregator or project owner and completes the initial project review form and risk assessment form. After the initial review, AWT prepares the sampling plan and validation/verification plan documents. If contractors are planned to be utilized for the project, contracts are executed with contractors. The Team Leader prepares the project overview document detailing the staff assigned to the project. Approach: Upon completion of the pre-engagement activities, the procedures outlined in the validation/verification approach are followed. The information gathering process then takes place. Information gathered from the client or responsible party includes: All data and supporting documentation utilized to perform GHG offset calculations. Description of the procedures and systems used to collect, document and process GHG emissions data at the facility level Description of quality control procedures applied (internal audits, comparison with last year s data, recalculation by a second person, etc.) Listing of responsible individuals for collecting GHG emissions data at each site and at the corporate level, if applicable Information on uncertainties, qualitative and if available, quantitative Once all documentation has been collected and reviewed for completeness, AWT creates maps and other materials that are relevant to the project. At this point additional information/clarification is requested, if needed. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 42

43 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Validation/Verification: Desk/field audits will then be completed to enable AWT to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence of the completeness, accuracy and reliability of reported information. Validation/Verification Opinion and Report: Once desk/field audits are finalized and all relevant information is compiled, AWT then assesses the claim based on the procedures set forth in the VCS Program Guide and VCS Standard. The following VCS templates are then completed to include: Validation Report, Validation Deed, Verification Report and Verification Deed. The validation/verification report and statement are signed and issued to the aggregator/project owner for approval. AWT then addresses any questions and contestations. Once approved, the validation/verification report is then submitted to the VCS. 4.4 Pacific Carbon Trust Pre-engagement: AWT is initially contacted by an aggregator or project owner to complete a validation or verification project. AWT prepares internal impartiality, internal conflict of interest and PCT conflict of interest documents. AWT negotiates and prepares the contract with the client at any point after the COI investigation is complete and before the project overview document is executed. The Team Leader reviews the preliminary documentation provided by the aggregator or project owner and discusses goals and constraints. At this point, AWT prepares the sampling plan and validation or verification plan documents. If contractors are planned to be utilized for the project, contracts are executed with contractors. The Team Leader prepares the project overview document detailing the staff assigned to the project. Approach: Upon completion of the pre-engagement activities, the procedures outlined in the validation or verification approach are followed. The information gathering process then takes place. Information gathered from the client or responsible party includes: All data and supporting documentation utilized to perform GHG offset calculations. Description of the procedures and systems used to collect, document and process GHG emissions data at the facility level Description of quality control procedures applied (internal audits, comparison with last year s data, recalculation by a second person, etc.) Listing of responsible individuals for collecting GHG emissions data at each site and at the corporate level, if applicable Information on uncertainties, qualitative and if available, quantitative Once all documentation has been collected and reviewed for completeness, AWT creates maps and other materials that are relevant to the project. At this point additional information/clarification is requested, if needed. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 43

44 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Validation or Verification: Desk/field audits will then be completed to enable AWT to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence of the completeness, accuracy and reliability of reported information. Validation or Verification Statement: Once the desk/field audits are finalized, all relevant information is compiled into a final document. This document is then reviewed by the Team Leader and the internal peer reviewer and the validation report and statement or the verification report and statement is issued to the aggregator/project owner for approval. AWT then addresses any questions and contestations. Once approved, AWT submits the validation or verification report to the registry. 4.5 American Carbon Registry Pre-engagement: AWT is initially contacted by an aggregator or project owner to complete a verification project. AWT prepares internal impartiality, internal conflict of interest and ACR conflict of interest documents. AWT negotiates and prepares the contract with the client at any point after the COI investigation is complete and before the project overview document is executed. The Team Leader reviews the preliminary documentation provided by the aggregator or project owner and discusses goals and constraints. At this point, AWT prepares the sampling plan and verification plan documents. If contractors are planned to be utilized for the project, contracts are executed with contractors. The Team Leader prepares the project overview document detailing the staff assigned to the project. Approach: Upon completion of the pre-engagement activities, the procedures outlined in the verification approach are followed. The information gathering process then takes place. Information gathered from the client or responsible party includes: All data and supporting documentation utilized to perform GHG offset calculations. Description of the procedures and systems used to collect, document and process GHG emissions data at the facility level Description of quality control procedures applied (internal audits, comparison with last year s data, recalculation by a second person, etc.) Listing of responsible individuals for collecting GHG emissions data at each site and at the corporate level, if applicable Information on uncertainties, qualitative and if available, quantitative Once all documentation has been collected and reviewed for completeness, AWT creates maps and other materials that are relevant to the project. At this point additional information/clarification is requested, if needed. Verification: Desk/field audits will then be completed to enable AWT to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence of the completeness, accuracy and reliability of reported information. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 44

45 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Verification Statement: Once the desk/field audits are finalized, all relevant information is compiled into a final document. This document is then reviewed by the Team Leader and the internal peer reviewer and the verification report and statement is issued to the aggregator/project owner for approval. AWT then addresses any questions and contestations. Once approved, AWT submits the verification report to the registry. 4.6 California Air Resources Board Pre-engagement: AWT is initially contacted by a project developer to complete a verification project. AWT evaluates COI internally by executing the Impartiality and Internal Conflict of Interest documents and submits the case-specific notification of verification services form (Appendix 17) to ARB and the Offset Project Registry and request for evaluation of conflict of interest form (Appendix 16) to ARB (early action) or the Offset Project Registry (compliance protocol). Once the Offset Project Registry/ARB has acknowledged that the project can move forward, AWT finalizes contracts with subcontractors (if applicable) and also finalizes the contract with the participant. It should be noted that the contract may be executed at any point after the Offset Project Registry/ARB approves the COI form but must be executed before the project overview document is executed. The team leader reviews the preliminary documentation from the project developer and completes the initial review form and risk assessment form. After the initial review, AWT prepares the sampling plan and verification plan documents. Prior to beginning verification activities, the project overview document shall be submitted to the client or responsible party for signature. Approach: Upon completion of the pre-engagement activities, AWT completes the project overview document and submits it to the participant. AWT then holds a kick-off meeting with participants. Information and document requests are made at this time. Once all documentation has been collected and reviewed for completeness, AWT creates maps and other materials that are relevant to the project. At this point additional information/clarification is requested, if needed. Verification: Desk/field audits will then be completed to enable AWT to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence of the completeness, accuracy and reliability of reported information. AWT conducts the verification activities in accordance with Subarticle 13, Section of the Regulation, which includes: Assessing eligibility Confirming offset project boundary Reviewing project baseline calculations and modeling Assessing operations, functionality, data control systems and reviewing GHG measurement and monitoring techniques Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 45

46 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Confirming the project conforms to the requirements of the offset project protocol Interviewing key personnel involved in collecting project data and preparing the Offset Project Data Report Making direct observations of equipment supplying data for GHG emission sources in the sampling plan determined to be high risk Verifying emission estimates Confirming offset project conforms to all regulations including safety regulations Verification Statement and Report: Once desk and field audits are finalized and all issues identified have been corrected, all relevant information is compiled and the verification report and verification statement are created. This information is then reviewed by the Team Leader and the internal peer reviewer. The verification report and statement are then issued to the offset project operator or authorized project designee for approval. AWT then addresses any questions and contestations. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 46

47 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Appointing the Team Leader Team leaders are appointed for specific projects based on the competency requirements outlined in Section It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to authorize team leaders upon demonstration of competencies. The AWT staff members holding team leader competencies are listed in Section Approach Selecting the Validation/Verification Team V/V Teams are selected for specific projects based on the competency requirements outlined in Sections It is the responsibility of the V/V Director to authorize team members upon demonstration of applicable competencies. The AWT staff members holding various competencies are listed in Section 2.3 It is the responsibility of the team leader to assemble the remaining team members (if needed) in addition to the internal peer reviewer, COI auditor, and complaints, appeals and disputes representative. AWT s validation/verification team members include the following: AWT s V/V Roles and Responsibilities Team Leader: Hal Langenbach or Kevin Davidson Appeals/Complaints/Disputes: Jeff Vaughan Internal Peer Reviewer: Kevin Davidson or Hal Langenbach Team Members: Chris McGee Chris Love Tiffany Preddy COI Auditor: Lisa Tilley V/V Director: Chris Mosley Audit for V/V Director Jeff Vaughan-President Validation/Verification Director Chris Mosley, P.E., Vice President/Senior Engineer Chris Mosley, Vice President of AWT, received his B.S. in Biological and Agricultural Engineering in 1996 from North Carolina State University and M.S. in Agricultural and Biological Engineering in 1998 from Purdue University. Mosley is a registered Professional Engineer in the states of North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Ohio and Texas and a Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) verifier for agricultural methane and combustion projects. Mosley is also a NRCS TSP in North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin and is a North Carolina Technical Specialist and a Texas Nutrient Management Specialist. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 47

48 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Mosley s daily responsibilities include: nutrient management planning, waste management system design, engineering design and specifications for commercial and residential septic systems, permitting, irrigation planning, stormwater design and sediment and erosion control design. Mosley s main validation/verification responsibilities include: selection of team leader/reviewer, delegation of authority to committees or individuals, internal audits, records retention, personnel records, testing of competencies, evaluation of financial risk, management system policy, development of operational policies, hiring of personnel, website updates, training requirements/training implementation, program revisions, supervision regarding policies and procedures and finances. Team Leaders Hal Langenbach, P.E., Senior Project Engineer Hal Langenbach, Senior Project Engineer, received his B.S. in Biological and Agricultural Engineering with a concentration in Soil and Water/Environmental Engineering from North Carolina State University in Langenbach maintains his Professional Engineering licenses for the states of North Carolina, Oklahoma, Illinois, Wisconsin and Kentucky. Langenbach also holds certifications in the following: NCSU Stormwater BMP Inspector and NPPC Environmental Odor Assessor, NC Technical Specialist and NRCS TSP in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee and Wisconsin. His greenhouse gas project verification related certifications include: Climate Action Reserve Lead Verifier (Livestock, Landfill, Organic Waste Composting, Organic Waste Digestion) and ARB Lead Verifier (Livestock) Langenbach s daily responsibilities include: waste system design, nutrient management planning, agricultural facility site audits, wetland determination and delineation, permitting and annual reporting. Langenbach s main validation/verification responsibilities include: selecting team members for the following projects: livestock and waste handling and disposal, developing the validation/verification plan, developing the sampling plan, developing the validation/verification statement, signing the statement, overseeing the team members, overseeing the contracted validators/verifiers, communication with clients, contracts, field audits and desk audits. Langenbach is qualified and can represent AWT as the entire validation or verification team for livestock and waste handling and disposal projects, based on his team leader competencies. Langenbach also handles the appeals/complaints/disputes for all land use & forestry projects. Independence remains in tact, as Langenbach takes no active role in the completion of these projects. Kevin Davidson, P.E., Senior Project Engineer Kevin Davidson, Senior Project Engineer, received his B.S. in 1992 and M.S. in 1995 in Biological and Agricultural Engineering from North Carolina State University. Davidson is a registered Professional Engineer in the states of North Carolina, Virginia and Iowa. His greenhouse gas project verification related certifications include: Climate Action Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 48

49 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Reserve Lead Verifier (Livestock, Landfill, Organic Waste Composting, Organic Waste Digestion) and ARB Lead Verifier (Livestock). Davidson s daily responsibilities include: engineering design and specifications for commercial and residential septic systems, permitting, irrigation planning, stormwater design, sewer design and sediment and erosion control. Davidson s main validation/verification responsibilities when functioning as a team leader include: selecting team members for the following projects: livestock and waste handling and disposal, developing the validation/verification plan, developing the sampling plan, developing the validation/verification statement, signing the statement, overseeing the team members, overseeing the contracted validators/verifiers, communication with clients, contracts, field audits and desk audits. Davidson is qualified and can represent AWT as the entire validation or verification team for livestock and waste handling and disposal projects, based on his team leader competencies. Team Members Chris McGee, Associate Agronomist/Soil Scientist Chris McGee is an Associate Agronomist/Soil Scientist for AWT. McGee received his B.S. in Environmental Science with a concentration in Soil Science in 2006 from North Carolina State University. In 2009, McGee became a certified verifier of greenhouse gas for CSA America, Inc. (Certification was held from 2009 through 2012). In 2010, McGee was certified as a licensed soil scientist in North Carolina. In 2012, McGee was certified as a certified professional soil scientist (national certification). McGee is also certified as a lead verifier for Climate Action Reserve Forestry, Urban Forestry, Rice Cultivation and Nitrogen Management projects. McGee s daily responsibilities include: septic and well inspections, soils evaluations, saturated hydraulic conductivity and infiltration testing, drain field layouts and nutrient management. McGee s main validation/verification responsibilities when not functioning as a team leader or internal peer reviewer include: communication with clients, planning/preparation for field audits, desk audits and preliminary reporting for livestock and waste handling & disposal projects. Chris Love, E.I. Chris is a Project Engineer for AWT. Love received his B.S. and M.S. degrees from North Carolina State University in Biological and Agricultural Engineering in 2009 and 2012, respectively. Love s daily responsibilities include: nutrient management planning, waste treatment system design and technical support for the senior project engineers. Love s main validation/verification responsibilities include: desk audits and preliminary reporting for livestock and waste handling & disposal projects. Tiffany Preddy, E.I. Tiffany is a Project Engineer for AWT. Preddy received her B.S. from North Carolina State University in Biological Engineering in Preddy s daily responsibilities Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 49

50 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 include: nutrient management planning, waste treatment system design and technical support for the senior project engineers. Love s main validation/verification responsibilities include: desk audits and preliminary reporting for livestock and waste handling & disposal projects. Internal Peer Reviewers Kevin Davidson, P.E., Senior Project Engineer Davidson s main validation/verification responsibilities when functioning as an internal peer reviewer include: technical review of the validation/verification process at the individual project level and signing the validation/verification statement. Hal Langenbach, P.E., Senior Project Engineer Langenbach s main validation/verification responsibilities when functioning as an internal peer reviewer include: technical review of the validation/verification process at the individual project level and signing the validation/verification statement. COI Auditor Lisa Tilley, Office Manager Lisa Tilley received her undergraduate degree from Meredith College in Raleigh and her master s degree from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Tilley s main responsibilities include: scheduling site visits / inspections, tracking accounts payable and receivable, and coordinating office operations to ensure organizational effectiveness. Tilley s main validation/verification responsibilities include: assessing conflict of interest issues, impartiality and sources of income. Subcontractors N/A Communicating with the Client and Responsible Party AWT communicates with the client and responsible party prior to performing the v/v of each project through several written documents. In the case of CCX projects, a Conflict of Interest (COI) document is sent to the client and/or responsible party indicating AWT's assessment of conflicts of interest. AWT executes a contract for v/v services after the COI evaluation has been approved by the registry. The content of the contract is described in Section A validation/verification plan is also sent to the client and/or responsible party for signature, which details the step-by-step procedure for carrying out the v/v and addresses materiality, v/v objectives, v/v criteria, v/v scope and level of assurance (Attachment AC). Upon receipt of a signed contract and validation/verification plan; AWT prepares the Project Overview (Attachment M) document detailing the names of all the AWT staff members and/or subcontractors assigned to the project. AWT provides the client or responsible party an opportunity to object to any team member assignments. Should the client or responsible party object to any of the team member appointments, a teleconference is carried out between the Team Leader and the client or responsible party. The Team Leader addresses specific concerns and changes are made if necessary and Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 50

51 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 appropriate. As long as impartiality is maintained, conflicts of interest do not arise and competencies are maintained, the requested changes are honored. It is the responsibility of the Team Leader to ensure all internal documents reflect the changes and that the COI document and Project Overview document are appropriately updated. If an acceptable agreement as to the make-up of the team cannot be reached, then AWT must decline the assignment Planning AWT conducts a review of the responsible party's GHG information to develop a validation/verification plan in order to assess the following: The nature, scale and complexity of the validation/verification activity Confidence in the GHG information and assertion and the eligibility to participate in the applicable GHG program The team leader reviews the project documentation, which provides the details of the project (technology implemented, location, offset calculations), baseline, eligibility, applicable GHG protocol(s) and description of the project data, project monitoring and QA/QC. The GHG information is reviewed to determine if AWT has the technical capabilities to accomplish the validation/verification (i.e. knowledge of applicable scopes, personnel available, and authorization from the applicable program). The project documentation is reviewed with special emphasis on whether or not the project is eligible based on program requirements, as well as the overall quality of the information in terms of completeness and process documentation. An internal checklist is utilized to document the initial review of the GHG information (Attachment N). If the documentation falls short in any of these categories or insufficient information is provided in order to conduct a review of the GHG information, the team leader will contact the responsible party and inform them of the areas of concern. Otherwise, the team leader proceeds with the development of the validation/verification plan based on the information provided by the responsible party. The output from the strategic analysis will be used as an input to the assessment of risks, sampling plan and v/v plan. AWT assesses sources and magnitudes of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations based on the project documentation provided by the client or responsible party in order to inform further v/v activities. The risks assessed include: The inherent risk of a material discrepancy occurring, The risk that the controls of the GHG project will not prevent or detect a material discrepancy and The risk that the validator or verifier will not detect any material discrepancy that has not been corrected by the controls of the project The team leader carries out the assessment of inherent risk of material discrepancy occurring by reviewing the specific types of data utilized to determine the project offsets. A determination of the risk of material discrepancy occurring for each data variable is made based on the method utilized by the responsible party to determine the value of said data. Observations are utilized to form the basis of the sampling plan. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 51

52 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 The team leader carries out the assessment of risk that the controls of the GHG project will not prevent or detect material discrepancy by reviewing the controls that the responsible party has in place to ensure quality assurance and quality control of the applicable data. Data associated with processes having limited controls are sampled more heavily than those with robust controls. Observations are utilized to inform the sampling plan. Unless more rigorous sampling is deemed appropriate by the team leader, data that is automated and not subsequently manually transcribed is sampled such that automated calculations/aggregations are checked for a minimum of one data point per data set to ensure software is set up correctly. If material anomalies are observed, a corrective action request would be issued. Where data is manually transcribed, raw data utilized for GHG emission reduction calculations is sampled at a rate of the equivalent of 1 month out of 6 months or 2 months/year for all relevant data sets. Where spreadsheets are utilized, all formulas are reviewed to ensure accuracy. Should the field audit reveal inconsistencies in the project documentation and the implementation of the project in terms of data collection and management, the minimum sampling rate shall be doubled. Should the desk review of data and calculation procedures uncover material errors, the minimum sampling rate of desk reviewable data shall also be doubled. If program requirements set forth detailed sampling requirements that are more rigorous than the internal requirements listed above, the program requirements take precedence. The team leader carries out the assessment of risk that the validator or verifier will not detect any material discrepancy that has not been corrected by the controls of the project by developing and reviewing the sampling plan to ensure that it provides sufficient rigor to go beyond the controls of the project and provide in depth scrutiny of the data utilized to make offset calculations. If it is suspected that the controls of the project do not provide quality assurance for a particular piece of data, then the sampling plan reflects increased scrutiny of said data. An internal checklist is utilized by the team leader for each project to ensure consistency and document findings (Attachment O- Risk Assessment Checklist). AWT develops a documented validation/verification plan that addresses the following: Level of assurance Validation/verification objectives Validation/verification criteria Validation/verification scope Materiality Validation/verification activities and schedules Process for Appeals, Complaints and Disputes It is the responsibility of the team leader to develop and approve the validation/verification plan and revise the plan as necessary during the course of the validation/verification. The validation/verification plan is submitted to the client or responsible party prior to initiating validation/verification activities. AWT will then make any necessary changes agreed upon with the client related to the criteria, scope, materiality, level of assurance, objectives or any additional findings that emerge that Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 52

53 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 would affect the conclusion of the strategic analysis and/or assessment of risks. All information and data to be sampled is determined at this stage of the process. Once the plan is approved, the team leader then confirms that the v/v duration, team competencies and team member assignments are adequate and fit the needs of the v/v. The v/v team will then ensure that there is consistency between the v/v plan and the contractual agreements listed above. All v/v documentation will clearly identify any approved variations to the agreement. AWT provides a reasonable level of assurance that the GHG assertion is or is not materially correct and a fair representation of the associated GHG data for all projects to be validated/verified for eventual registration in a GHG program (CCX, CAR, VCS, PCT, ACR and ARB). AWT also provides a reasonable level of assurance that the GHG assertion is prepared in accordance with the requirements of the program under which the project is seeking registration of offsets. Validation objectives include an assessment of the likelihood that implementation of the planned GHG project will result in the GHG offsets stated by the responsible party. The objectives are agreed upon by the validator and client at the beginning of the validation process and include consideration of the requirements of the GHG program, the documentation associated with the GHG project plan and the planned controls of the GHG project. Verification objectives are agreed upon by AWT and the client at the beginning of the verification process and include the requirements of the GHG program, GHG project documentation (project, baseline, QA/QC, risk management, monitoring and reporting procedures/criteria), any changes in the GHG project since the validation or last reporting period, asserted project and baselines emissions and actual controls of the GHG project. AWT and the client at the beginning of the validation/verification process agree upon validation/verification criteria. Validation/verification criteria are set by the applicable GHG program (CCX, CAR, VCS, PCT, ACR and ARB) and the validation or verification team to guide the v/v process, including: evaluation of findings, conclusions, opinions and decisions reached regarding the GHG assertion. These findings are noted in the AWT validation/verification plan. AWT and the client at the beginning of the validation/verification process agree upon the validation/verification scope. The validation verification scope includes: GHG project and baseline scenarios; activities technologies and processes of the GHG project; GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs; types of GHGs; time period to be covered; frequency of subsequent verification activities during the GHG project; timing and intended user of the validation/verification report and the validation/verification statement; and the relative size of the GHG project. Most of this information is articulated in the project documentation provided by the responsible party. AWT and the client at the beginning of the validation/verification process agree upon a materiality threshold. In most cases, the applicable GHG program sets materiality Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 53

54 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 thresholds. However, if the applicable GHG program does not set materiality thresholds, AWT takes a conservative approach establishing these thresholds (1% is standard). Therefore, any group of errors, omissions or misrepresentations impacting the asserted GHG offsets greater than 1% is considered a material error. A corrective action request is issued by AWT to the client or responsible party in the event of discovery of a material error. Lastly, v/v activities and schedules are communicated in the v/v plan. A step-by-step procedure is provided in Section 10, as well as a general timeline for the activities considering prior engagements, complexity, past history with client and travel considerations. AWT develops a sampling plan (Attachment S) to account for the following: Level of assurance agreed with the client Validation/verification scope Validation/verification criteria Amount and type of evidence necessary to achieve the agreed level of assurance Methodologies for determining representative samples Risks of potential errors, omissions or misrepresentations It is the responsibility of the Team Leader to develop and approve the sampling plan. They will review the outcome of the planning process in light of evidence and information gathered during the v/v process and revise the plan when necessary. This is based on any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions or misrepresentations that are identified throughout the validation/verification process. The sampling plan is utilized as input to develop the validation/verification plan. In addition to the information provided in the validation/verification plan, the team leader details the amount and types of data that will need to be reviewed, methods for determining representative samples, as well as a summary of perceived risks of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations (see discussion of risk assessment above). The team leader uses the guidelines of the applicable GHG program when developing the sampling plan. When specific guidelines for determining representative samples are not available, the team leader determines representative samples based on the complexity of the controls. Unless more rigorous sampling is deemed appropriate by the team leader, data that is automated and not subsequently manually transcribed is sampled such that automated calculations/aggregations are checked for a minimum of one data point per data set to ensure software is set up correctly. If material anomalies are observed, a corrective action request shall be issued. Where data is manually transcribed, raw data utilized for GHG emission reduction calculations is sampled at a rate of the equivalent of 1 month out of 6 months or 2 months/year for all relevant data sets. Where spreadsheets are utilized, all formulas are reviewed to ensure accuracy. Should the field audit reveal inconsistencies in the project documentation and the implementation of the project in terms of data collection and management, a corrective action request shall be issued and the minimum sampling rate shall be doubled. Should the desk review of data and Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 54

55 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 calculation procedures uncover material errors, the minimum sampling rate of desk reviewable data shall also be doubled. 5.2 Validation/Verification Once the validation/verification plan and sampling plan are agreed upon, AWT assesses the project's GHG information system and its controls for sources of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations considering the following: Selection and management of the GHG data and information, Processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting GHG data and information, Systems and processes that ensure the accuracy of the GHG data and information, Design and maintenance of the GHG information systems, Systems and processes that support the GHG information systems, Results of previous assessments, if available and appropriate The team leader reviews the GHG project's documented GHG data and information including documented processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting, documented QA/QC procedures, documented design and maintenance and supporting systems and processes associated with the GHG information systems. AWT takes the approach of professional skepticism, which assumes that the presented information and data may be wrong until proven otherwise and takes into account relevant stakeholder or market concerns and the applicable v/v criteria (including all applicable definitions contained within the agreed upon verification criteria, i.e. ISO , VCS protocols, CCX protocols, etc.). Additionally, the team leader reviews previous assessments and reviews any changes to the GHG project and also considers: outstanding issues from the v/v report, status of the implementation of the project and reliability of the external information and data used to justify the GHG emission determination. In evaluating the risk of material discrepancies related to the GHG assertion, AWT will consider the following: The structure of the organization and the approach used to assign responsibility for monitoring and reporting GHG emissions The approach and commitment of management to GHG monitoring and reporting Development and implementation of policies and processes for monitoring and reporting Processes used to check and review calculation methodologies Adequacy of the GHG information system and controls Design and maintenance of the GHG information system Complexity of organization and nature of GHG project operations Complexity of the computer information system used to process the information The state of calibration and maintenance of meters used and the types of meters used Reliability and availability of input data Assumptions and estimations applied Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 55

56 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Results of previous assessments, validations or verifications (if available) Aggregation of data from different sources Other assurance processes to which the systems and data are subjected internal audit, external reviews and certifications Views of the intended user Relevance and relative contribution of the various GHG emissions from all GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs The level of risk mitigation provided by the GHG information systems and controls will ultimately impact the detail and level of v/v sampling. The team leader, prior to scheduling the field audit, accomplishes the initial review of these components. Items and processes to be reviewed on site are communicated to the responsible AWT employee or subcontractor at this time. Where the v/v criteria impose requirements related to the GHG information systems or controls, conformance with these requirements will be validated or verified. Verification of a project GHG assertion includes the following: Reviewing the v/v report for the project Verification of any changes to the GHG project plan including o Identified GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs o Baseline scenario o Selection and quantification of GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs applicable to baseline scenarios o Verification of any changes to the justification for selection or establishment of the criteria and procedures o Verification of any changes to the organizational links and interactions between stakeholders, responsible party, client and intended users The results of the assessment of the project's GHG information system and controls are used to amend the sampling plan if necessary. Amended sampling plans are communicated to the responsible AWT employees and/or subcontractors. Input into the assessment of the GHG assertion includes the following: Contract requirements related to scope, criteria, objectives, level of assurance and materiality as well as any v/v criteria including applicable definitions contained in said criteria GHG assertion Output from the strategic analysis and assessment of risks Output from the assessment of GHG information system and controls Output from the assessment of GHG data and information Output from the assessment against v/v criteria Output from the assessment of the GHG assertion includes the following: Evidence gathered is sufficient to validate or verify V/v process, as carried out, has delivered the level of assurance as agreed Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 56

57 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Sampling and its results support a conclusion that there are no material discrepancies GHG assertion is free from material discrepancies based on the evidence and findings from the v/v process. If the evidence and findings are not sufficient to reach a conclusion, then o Level of assurance and/or materiality of the engagement will be amended, or o One of the following types of opinions will be formed Adverse Qualified A disclaimer of opinion AWT examines the GHG data and information to develop evidence for the assessment of the project's GHG assertion based on the sampling plan. This is accomplished by the team members assigned to the project via desk and field audit of GHG data and information. Documentation is checked for completeness and accuracy via desk audit. Processes and data that are not easily transported are checked for compliance with GHG program requirements and project documentation. Additional sampling may be necessary if processes to collect, consolidate, report and ensure accuracy of the GHG data and information are not carried out by the responsible party according to the requirements of the project documentation or the applicable GHG program. If additional sampling is necessary, the Team Leader based on the examination amends the sampling plan. AWT confirms the following: Determines whether or not the organization or GHG project conforms to the v/v criteria including all relevant definitions contained within the v/v criteria documents. Considers principles of the standards of GHG program to which the responsible party subscribes, when evaluating material discrepancies Evaluates whether the v/v evidence collected supports the GHG assertion Evaluates whether the evidence collected in the assessment of controls, GHG data and information and applicable GHG program criteria is sufficient and if it supports the GHG assertion Concludes whether or not the GHG assertion is without material discrepancy and whether the v/v activities provide the level of assurance agreed upon at the beginning of the v/v process When criteria allows the client to select or establish procedures that relate to the determination of certain characteristics (baseline, sources, sinks and reservoirs, monitoring processing, etc.) the v/v will include an assessment of the client s justifications If the responsible party amends the GHG assertion, AWT evaluates the modified GHG assertion to determine whether the evidence supports the modified GHG assertion. AWT utilizes the same procedures to assess a modified GHG assertion as are utilized to assess the original GHG assertion (listed above). In cases where errors, omissions or misstatements are identified in the GHG data and information, the v/v team will report Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 57

58 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 them to the client, while explaining their potential impact on the v/v statement and require that these items be corrected. This could require an increase in the sampling. Where these errors, omissions or misstatements can t be corrected, then AWT will qualify the v/v statement. The assessment of GHG information and data also includes that the software and hardware used to process the information is working properly. 5.3 Review and Issuance of Validation/Verification Statement An independent internal peer reviewer is assigned to each validation/verification project based on the competency requirements listed in Sections It is the responsibility of the internal peer reviewer to: Confirm that all validation/verification activities have been completed and Conclude whether or not the GHG assertion is free from material discrepancy and whether the validation/verification activities provide the agreed level of assurance In order to provide an objective record that the internal peer reviewer has fulfilled these requirements, the Internal Project Technical Review (Attachment AF) is completed and signed by the internal peer reviewer. This technical review provides a checks and balances approach for each project in its entirety. This review is completed by the Internal Peer Reviewer who reviews the validation or verification report and accompanying documents to determine whether or not all areas have been completed as agreed upon, as well as making sure that all program protocols were adequately met. This review is completed prior to providing each client with the validation/verification statement and report. AWT issues a validation/verification report and statement written by the Team Leader and signed by both the Team Leader and Internal Peer Reviewer. The validation/verification statement is based on the conclusion of the validation/verification findings detailed in the validation/verification report. The validation/verification statement is submitted to the responsible party along with the validation/verification report. The validation/verification statement will include the following: Address the intended user of the GHG assertion Describe the level of assurance of the V/V statement Describe the objectives, scope and criteria of the validation or verification Describe whether the data and information supporting the GHG assertion were hypothetical, projected and/or historical in nature Include the responsible party s GHG assertion Include the validator s or verifier s conclusion on the GHG assertion, including any qualifications or limitations (including citation of material discrepancies that remain after the conclusion of the validation/verification) Issue a validation or verification statement based on the conclusion of the validation or verification findings, by AWT An accredited validation and/or verification statement related to a GHG assertion that does not include quantified GHG emissions data related to a GHG project will only be issued if: Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 58

59 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 There is a legal agreement between the client and AWT that any new GHG report, GHG project plan or GHG assertion released by the client subsequent to the initial validation or verification statement is validated or verified. For an organization, an internal GHG verification report conforming to ISO , Clause 7.3, is part of the scope of the verification ISO or ISO is part of the validation or verification criteria and the requirements are not reduced Validation or verification statement is clear about what has been validated/verified and does not use language associated with management system certificates or conformity statements The level of assurance for non-regulated markets can vary, so some data or information is assured to reasonable levels of assurance and some is assured to limited levels of assurance. In this case, the v/v statement will need to identify the applicable level of assurance related to each conclusion and how each conclusion influences the final opinion. When verification criteria includes ISO , where a GHG report is optional, and if the client chooses to issue a public GHG report which is verified, then AWT will confirm that the report conforms to the applicable requirements. The validated or verified GHG assertion may include a statement of emission per unit of product manufactured (generated or reduced) or similar. If the client wishes to use statements taken from the GHG assertion for communication purposes these statements must clearly state where the statement came from including: The date of the GHG assertion Whether the statement is based on historical data and Any limitation associated with the statement based on the data and information presented in the GHG assertion 5.4 Facts Discovered After the Validation/Verification Statement Although AWT obtains sufficient evidence and identifies relevant information up to the date of issuance of the v/v statement, it is possible that facts that could materially affect the v/v statement could be discovered after this date. AWT will consider appropriate action if facts that could materially affect the v/v statement are discovered by the client, responsible party or GHG program after the issuance of the v/v statement including the following: Determining if the facts have been adequately disclosed in the GHG assertion, Considering if the validation/verification statement requires revision, Discussing the matter with the client, responsible party or GHG program The Team Leader is responsible for utilizing the internal protocol to address facts discovered after the validation/verification statement has been issued (Attachment P). Should the v/v statement require revision, AWT will issue a revised v/v report and statement, which addresses the reason for the revision according to its internal protocol. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 59

60 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Appeals, Complaints and Disputes (Attachment Q) AWT s objective is to ensure that all GHG information represents a true and fair account, by analyzing each GHG validation/verification project with respect to relevance, completeness, consistency, accuracy, transparency and conservativeness. In the event that a client deems that an aspect of their validation/verification project is not compliant, AWT will commit to the following procedures to ensure a timely, independent and effective resolution. AWT is responsible for all decisions at all levels and ensures that decisions based on complaints, appeals and/or disputes will not result in any discriminatory actions against the client. 6.1 Complaints AWT will commit to the following regarding complaints: All clients must notify AWT in writing of their complaint and outline their objections, in which AWT will acknowledge to have received, via The Project Manager assigned to the project will field the complaint and provide the client with a copy of AWT s Complaints, Appeals and Disputes document, via . AWT will safeguard the confidentiality and subject of the complaint Clients must acknowledge that they have received the Complaints, Appeals and Disputes document and return the signed form to AWT within 5 business days Upon receipt of complaint, AWT will confirm whether the complaint relates to validation/verification activities and whether the validation/verification body is responsible Jeff Vaughan will review the complaint and determine a resolution, within 30 business days. Once a resolution has been made, the Project Manager will contact the client in writing with AWT s outlined conclusion and any necessary modifications to the validation/verification statement or report The client has 5 business days to notify AWT in writing whether or not the complaint has been resolved If the matter can not be resolved between AWT and the client, a formal Appeal by the client will be made 6.2 Appeals and Disputes AWT will commit to the following regarding all appeals: All clients must notify AWT in writing of their appeal and outline their objections, in which AWT will acknowledge to have received, via . The Project Manager assigned to the project will field the appeal and provide the client with a copy of AWT s Complaints, Appeals and Disputes document, via . AWT will safeguard the confidentiality and subject of the complaint. Upon receipt of appeal, AWT will confirm whether or not the following should occur: Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 60

61 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 o To require additional documentation from aggregator or project owner for review o Determine whether another site visit is required Jeff Vaughan will review the appeal and determine a resolution, within 30 business days. Once a resolution has been made, the Project Manager will contact the client in writing with AWT s outlined conclusion and any necessary modifications to the validation/verification statement or report. The client has 5 business days to notify AWT in writing whether or not the appeal/dispute has been resolved. If the matter can t be resolved between AWT and the client, AWT will at that point contact the GHG registry and determine appropriate action. If a dispute still can t be resolved at this point, both parties must state their consent to submit irreconcilable differences for review to the designated program. At that point, their appointed Dispute Resolution Committee will make the final decision. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 61

62 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Special Validations Or Verifications In cases where it is necessary for AWT to conduct at short notice, a validation or verification of a previously validated or verified GHG assertion in response to complaints or facts discovered after the issuance of a validation or verification statement, the assigned team leader notifies the client and/or the responsible party of the conditions under which the special validation or verification is to be conducted and uses additional care in assigning validation or verification team members if there is a lack of opportunity for the responsible party to object. The circumstances of the special v/v are discussed via conference call with the client, responsible party, GHG program and AWT. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 62

63 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Management System 8.1 Management System Policy AWT s management has committed to conforming to all rules and guidelines set forth throughout this management system policy document. AWT has developed a process that it follows for each v/v project specific to sector and GHG program. The V/V Director shall update the management system policy on an annual basis at a minimum (or more frequently as required). The following procedure is followed when the management system policy or related internal v/v documents are updated: 1. V/V Director accesses the current version of the management system policy from the AWT server and makes updates as appropriate. 2. For updates resulting from internal or external audits where further review is required prior to finalization, the document version number is updated by the V/V Director by increasing the version number by The V/V Director also updates the revision date. 3. For major updates incorporating multiple changes that have been reviewed and approved by the internal or external reviewer or periodic updates made by the V/V Director not prompted by an audit, the document version number is updated by the V/V Director by increasing the version number by and updating the revision date. If periodic updates result in revisions to internal v/v documents, the document version number is updated by the V/V Director by increasing the version number by V/V Director notes the contents of the revision in Section ii of MSP (Revision History) 5. If MSP is updated according to #3 above, V/V Director signs the MSP (Section 15) and provides pertinent pages of the MSP to the board of directors for review and signature. Upon receipt of signatures from all board members, the V/V Director compiles the revised MSP in PDF format and uploads the new version to the AWT website (signatures are not uploaded to the website for security reasons), replaces the hard copy version in the office notebook copy, deletes the old version from the AWT website files and sends an notifying employees of revision. Should AWT wish to add v/v scopes or GHG programs under which it operates, it will consider the following when updating the management system policy in preparation for making its application to ANSI and the applicable GHG program(s): Identifying key stakeholders and their expectations and requirements as applicable to the outcome of v/v activities Reviewing and understanding the applicable v/v criteria requirements, involving the criteria owner, where applicable Consideration of AWT s strategic and business risks Identifying the competency requirements for AWT s internal peer reviewers and support personnel Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 63

64 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Validation or verification criteria that is specific to the v/v requirements Confirmation that the proposed v/v arrangements will meet and satisfy the v/v criteria requirements The V/V Director shall document outputs from the evaluation of the above items relative to the addition of v/v criteria and shall obtain signatures from the Board of Directors prior to pursuing the addition of scopes, GHG programs or protocols to the services provided by AWT (Attachment AB). 8.2 Control of Documents AWT has one server to which everyone in the company has access. All project specific documents are held on the server with a folder designated for each client. All reports and supporting documents are maintained on this server. In addition to project specific documentation, program and protocol specific documents and all internally developed documents supporting our validation/verification services are stored on the company server (V-V Reference Documents Folder). The Management System Policy document is available electronically on the company website ( and as a hard copy in the AWT office. Each AWT employee signs the Control of Documents and Records Policy (Attachment K), which is placed in their personnel records. 8.3 Internal Audits (Attachment R) It is the responsibility of the Validation/Verification Director to perform an internal audit of the full GHG management system on an annual basis. Since the V/V Director performs a number of functions vital to the functionality of AWT's GHG management system, it is the responsibility of the President of AWT to perform an annual audit of the functions of the V/V Director. Competency requirements of the internal auditors are described in Section Both the V/V Director and the President must maintain the competencies listed. The annual internal audit by the V/V Director covers the following: Competencies and roles/responsibilities of the team members chosen for projects Team Leader s assessment of preliminary documentation, project design documents/monitoring plans/implementation documents and previous assessments (if applicable) Team Leader s assessment of eligibility of projects COI Auditor s assessment of conflict of interest issues Efficacy of internal COI and impartiality assessments Team Leader s assessment of risk of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations Team Leader s validation/verification plans Team Leader s sampling plans Negotiated/executed contracts with contracted validators/verifiers (if applicable) Negotiated/executed contracts for validation/verification services Team Leader s project overview documents Desk audit methods Field audit methods Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 64

65 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Function of external technical experts (if applicable) Reporting of v/v findings Validation/verification statements Internal Peer Reviewer s technical reviews Project budgets Resolution of Appeals, Disputes and Complaints (if applicable) Team Leader s Management Review Applicable program(s) and client responsible party feedback The annual internal audit by the President covers the following: V/V Director competencies V/V Director s supervision of operational policies and the implementation of them V/V Director s financial reports V/V Director s documentation of adequacy of validation/verification activities V/V Director s records retention (project based) Personnel records maintained by the V/V Director V/V Director s Competency testing records V/V Director s financial risk assessments V/V Director s hiring process V/V Director s training implementation documentation V/V Director s documentation of revisions to management system policy The internal audit of each of the preceding functions is compiled as an annual internal audit report. The report is submitted to the board of directors for signature. Independence is maintained during the internal audit process in several key ways: 1) The V/V Director audits only those functions in which he/she is not directly involved. 2) The President/Team Leader audits only those functions in which he/she is not directly involved. 3) The Board of Directors (made up of the President, Vice President (V/V Director), Secretary and Treasurer must review and sign off on the internal audit report. The internal audit must be approved by all Board members prior to being finalized. No one is auditing their own work. The responsibilities of each are clearly laid out so that there is no risk of compromising independence during the auditing process. 8.4 Corrective Actions The corrective and preventive action log will document all corrective actions that must occur to bring AWT into compliance with internal, ISO, ANSI and GHG program requirements. The log remains open from the conclusion of one internal audit to the conclusion of the following internal audit. The responsibility for addressing corrective actions lies with the personnel responsible for the deficiency. However, it is the responsibility of the internal auditor who documents the necessary corrective actions to ensure the identified corrective actions have been taken. All corrective actions taken are documented by the internal auditors and submitted to the board of directors for signature. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 65

66 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Preventive Actions The corrective and preventive action log will document all preventive actions that must occur to maintain AWT in compliance with internal, ISO, ANSI and GHG program requirements. The log remains open from the conclusion of one internal audit to the conclusion of the following internal audit. The responsibility for addressing preventive actions lies with the personnel responsible for the function(s) for which preventive actions are prescribed. However, it is the responsibility of the internal auditor who documents the necessary preventive actions to ensure the identified preventive actions have been taken. All preventive actions taken are documented by the internal auditors and submitted to the board of directors for signature. 8.6 Management Review It is the responsibility of the team leaders to perform annual reviews of the performance of the personnel associated with their projects. The reviews will include all functions and responsibilities of the assembled teams including avoiding COI, maintaining independence and impartiality, work quality, ability to communicate effectively with the team leader and team members. This information will be reported using a standard internal form by the team leaders to the V/V Director and utilized by the V/V Director as a part of the annual internal audit. (Attachment R) In the event the team leader functions as the team for all projects during the year, the review of the personnel made by the V/V Director shall serve as the management review. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 66

67 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Control of Marks AWT has clearly outlined in their contract that clients are authorized to use any statements contained within their verification document, as long as AWT is properly referenced. Clients are not permitted to use the AWT logo on any of their marketing material, public information sources, products, product packaging or documents without written consent from AWT. The following logo may be used by AWT personnel on any GHG validation/verification documents. Engineers and Soil Scientists Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. 501 N. Salem Street, Suite 203 Apex, North Carolina Misuse of the AWT logo will be dealt with under the copyright laws of the United States. Incorrect references to the validation/verification system or misleading use of marks found in advertisements, catalogues, etc., shall be dealt with by corrective action, publication of the transgression and, if necessary, other legal action. AWT will not claim accredited status for reports or marks issued before appropriate accreditation has been granted. AWT understands that ANSI may require AWT to subsequently withdraw them if they are made. AWT understands that such actions may require ANSI to notify the owner of the Greenhouse Gas program under which such reports or marks were issued. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 67

68 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Step-by-Step Process for Registry Protocols 10.1 Chicago Climate Exchange Verification 1. Participant selects verifier. V/V director performs financial risk assessment (Attachment AD) and assigns team leader based on sector using the project description document (Attachment AE). The contract can be drafted at this point but cannot be fully executed until the COI evaluation has been approved by the CCX. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews contract. Team leader sends contract to client for signature. 2. The team leader notifies the COI Auditor of the potential project including all parties involved. The COI Auditor researches the involved parties to determine if there is any potential conflict of interest. The COI Auditor prepares the Internal Conflict of Interest document (Attachment C) and Impartiality document (Attachment D). Upon receipt of the signed Internal Conflict of Interest and Impartiality documents, the COI Auditor prepares the CCX general/project specific conflict of interest (Appendix 3) and presents it to the Team Leader for signature. 3. Team leader signs and sends the CCX conflict of interest form to the client for review and signature. Upon receipt of the signed CCX COI form, the team leader sends the form to the CCX. 4. After receipt of approval from the CCX to proceed with the project, the Team Leader executes the contract (Attachment B). It should be noted that steps 4-10 occur somewhat simultaneously and the order is not important as long as all are completed prior to initiating Step Team leader reviews preliminary documentation, approved Project Implementation Document (PID) and any results of previous assessments (if applicable) from aggregator or project owner and discuss goals and constraints. This review will include determining the following: Nature, scale and complexity of the verification activity to be undertaken on the client s behalf Confidence in the responsible party s GHG information and assertion Completeness of the responsible party s GHG information and assertion and the eligibility of the responsible party to participate in the GHG program. As part of the initial review of the project documentation, the Team Leader completes the Initial Review Form (Attachment N) and the Risk Assessment Form (Attachment O). Previous Assessments--If a previous verification has been completed for the client, then AWT would request a copy of the report to review it and make sure that all relevant information is addressed appropriately. Reviewing these reports helps to Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 68

69 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 eliminate any duplicate site/desk audits and includes a review of the conclusion, so that it can be carried forward to the current report appropriately. 6. Team leader assesses the controls for sources of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations, while taking the following into account: Selection and management of the GHG data and information Risk of a material discrepancy occurring Processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting GHG data and information Risk that the controls of the organization or GHG project will not prevent or detect a material discrepancy Risk that the verifier will not detect any material discrepancy that has not been corrected by the controls of the organization or GHG project 7. Team leader forms verification team. 8. Team leader prepares the sampling plan (Attachment S). 9. Team leader prepares the verification plan (Attachment AC) and sends to the client for signature. 10. Team leader prepares subcontractor agreement if applicable (Attachment I). 11. Upon receipt of the signed contract and signed verification plan, the team leader prepares the project overview document (Attachment M) and sends to the client for review and signature. 12. Upon receipt of the signed Project Overview form, the team leader requests full project documentation, which includes: Description of the procedures and systems used to collect, document and process GHG emissions data at the facility level Description of quality control procedures applied (internal audits, comparison with last year s data, recalculation by a second person, etc.) Listing of responsible individuals for collecting GHG emissions data at each site and at the corporate level, if applicable Information on uncertainties, qualitative and if available, quantitative All data and supporting documentation utilized to determine offsets. 13. Verification team reviews project documentation for completeness, create maps and other materials relevant to the project 14. Team leader requests additional information/clarification and amends the sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 15. Verification team schedules and performs site visit/field audit (Attachment W (if required)). Team leader amends the sampling plan if any new risks or material Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 69

70 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 16. Verification team completes desk audit (Attachment X) and compile site visit information 17. Verification team writes verification report and statement (Appendix 1-CCX Verification Statement Template), to include the following: An opening or introductory statement including: o Identification of the Project Proponent s assertions and CCX Protocol and verification requirements against which the verification was conducted o A statement of the roles and responsibilities of the organization-level or GHG project-level management, and the roles and responsibilities of the Verifier including full contact information A section detailing the scope of the verification work including: o Reference to the principles and requirements of the applicable CCX protocol, which may be accompanied by an approved PID or documented CCX verification requirements against which the verification was conducted o Reference to the verification scope, objectives, and criteria, including the level of assurance required o A description of the work the verification team performed, including the techniques and processes used to test the GHG information and associated GHG assertion prepared by the Project Proponent o List of amendments to the sampling plan (if amendment(s) are necessary) A section detailing the conclusions containing: o A reference to the CCX Protocol and approved PID requirements used to prepare the GHG assertion o GHG information and performance verified o The level of assurance provided by the verification, consistent with the agreed verification scope, objectives, time period and criteria assertion o Presentation of the resolution of any qualifications o Conclusions on the GHG assertion A completed CCX verification checklist corresponding to the appropriate project type (Appendix 2 CCX Verification Checklists). The completeness, accuracy and quality of evidence of each checklist item should be described in this section to ensure that the level of verification was performed such that no material discrepancy exists at the level of assurance required by CCX rules. For each item in the checklist, the Verifier should state the methods by which the criteria were evaluated, including: Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 70

71 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 o Review of documentation, records, equipment, data or measurements o An elaboration of on-site inspections o Interviews and meetings o The identification of and resolution to any corrective action requests o Other relevant evidence utilized by the Verifier to reach their conclusion The verification report and statement will be completed and signed by the Team Leader. 18. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews the verification report, verification statement and accompanying documents to confirm that all verification activities have been completed, whether or not the GHG assertion is free of material discrepancy and whether or not the verification activities provide the agreed upon level of assurance. The Internal Project Technical Review (Attachment AF) is utilized to document the internal review. The internal peer reviewer signs the Internal Project Technical Review form, the verification report and the verification statement. 19. Team leader sends verification report and statement to aggregator/project owner for approval. 20. AWT address contestations using its documented process for handling appeals, complaints and disputes. 21. Upon receipt of the signed verification statement, the team leader submits the verification report, verification statement and verification checklist to the CCX. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 71

72 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Climate Action Reserve Verification 1. Participant selects verifier. V/V director performs financial risk assessment (Attachment AD) and assigns team leader based on sector using the project description document (Attachment AE). The contract can be drafted at this point but cannot be fully executed until the COI evaluation has been approved by CAR. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews contract. Team leader sends contract to client for signature. 2. Team Leader and COI Auditor prepare Internal Conflict of Interest and Impartiality documents and obtain signatures from all team members. The Team Leader prepares NOVA/COI form (Appendix 4) and submits to the COI Auditor for completion. COI Auditor determines if there are issues with COI and completes NOVA/COI form (Appendix 4). Team leader reviews the NOVA/COI form, signs the form and submits it to CAR at a minimum of 10 business days prior to beginning any verification services (submit updated COI form every year). 3. After receipt of approval from CAR to proceed with the project, the Team Leader executes the contract (Attachment B). It should be noted that steps 3-8 are all occurring somewhat simultaneously. The specific order of completion is not important as long as all are completed prior to beginning step Team leader reviews preliminary documentation and any results of previous assessments (if applicable) from aggregator or project owner and discuss goals and constraints. This review will include determining the following: Nature, scale and complexity of the verification activity to be undertaken on the client s behalf Confidence in the responsible party s GHG information and assertion Completeness of the responsible party s GHG information and assertion and the eligibility of the responsible party to participate in the GHG program As part of the initial review of the project documentation, the Team Leader completes the Initial Review Form (Attachment N) that is reviewed by the internal peer reviewer. Previous Assessments--If a previous verification has been completed for the client, then AWT would request a copy of the report to review it and make sure that all relevant information is addressed appropriately. Reviewing these reports helps to eliminate any duplicate site/desk audits and includes a review of the conclusion, so that it can be carried forward to the current report appropriately. 5. Team Leader assesses the controls for sources of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations, while taking the following into account: Selection and management of the GHG data and information Risk of a material discrepancy occurring Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 72

73 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting GHG data and information Risk that the controls of the organization or GHG project will not prevent or detect a material discrepancy Risk that the verifier will not detect any material discrepancy that has not been corrected by the controls of the organization or GHG project As part of the assessment of controls, the Team Leader completes the Risk Assessment Form (Attachment O) that is reviewed by the internal peer reviewer. 6. Team leader forms verification team as well as negotiates and executes subcontractor agreements (if applicable). 7. Team leader prepares sampling plan (Attachment S). Internal peer reviewer reviews sampling plan. 8. Team leader prepares the verification plan (Attachment AC) and submits to the client for signature upon review by internal peer reviewer. 9. Upon receipt of the signed contract and signed verification plan, the team leader completes project overview (Attachment M) and submits to client for signature. 10. Team leader holds a kick-off meeting with participants, which includes: Introduction of the verification team Review and confirmation of verification process and scope, objectives, level of assurance, criteria and materiality Transfer of background information, underlying activity data and results of previous assessments (if applicable) Review and confirmation of the verification process and schedule 11. Conduct verification activities in accordance with the General Verification Protocol. Identify emissions sources Review methodologies and management systems Review project documentation for completeness Schedule and perform site visit/field audit (Attachment W Verification Field Audit Protocol) (if required) Complete desk audit (Attachment X Verification Field Audit Protocol) and compile site visit information Verify emission estimates Amend Sampling Plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 12. Team leader prepares list of findings, internal peer reviewer reviews list and team leader submits to client. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 73

74 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Team leader prepares and signs the verification statement (Appendix 5) and verification report (Appendix 6). The verification statement is a brief, one-page summary that confirms the verification activities and outcomes. The verification report includes the following elements: a. The scope of the verification process b. The standard used to verify emissions c. A description of the verification activities based on size and complexity of the participant s operations d. A list of diversions from the original sampling plan e. A list of the emissions sources identified f. A description of the sampling techniques and risk assessment methodologies employed for each source g. An evaluation of the participant s emissions report compliance with the Climate Registry s General Reporting Protocol h. A comparison of the participant s overall emission estimates with the verifier s overall emission estimates i. A list of material discrepancies, if any j. A list of immaterial discrepancies, if any k. A general conclusion to be reflected in the Verification Statement forwarded to CAR 14. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews the verification report, verification statement and accompanying documents to confirm that all verification activities have been completed, whether or not the GHG assertion is free of material discrepancy and whether or not the verification activities provide the agreed upon level of assurance. The Internal Project Technical Review (Attachment AF) is utilized to document the internal review. The internal peer reviewer signs the Internal Project Technical Review form, the verification report and the verification statement. 15. Exit meeting is scheduled, so that the Team leader and participant can discuss the verification report and statement (participant has up to 30 days to review and to make comments) 16. Upon approval, team leader uploads the list of findings, verification report and verification statement to CAR. 17. CAR then completes the reporting process 18. Recordkeeping--AWT will keep participants hard and electronic copies for a minimum of seven years to include the following: Participant s GHG emissions report Verification report Verification statement Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 74

75 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Contact information for the lead verifier and a responsible corporate officer at the participants organization General description of the participant s organization Geographic boundaries Number of facilities and operations assessed in the verification activities GHGs evaluated Sources of emissions identified Assessment of emission factors, demonstrating greater accuracy if not default emission factors Copies of fuel use, mileage or other activity data records used in sample recalculations Verification methodology used based on the size and complexity of the participant Sampling procedures for selecting site visits Dates of site visits Verifiers evaluation of the participants management systems Verifiers estimates of the participants emissions Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 75

76 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Verified Carbon Standard Validation/Verification 1. Participant Selects a Validator/Verifier. V/V director performs financial risk assessment (Attachment AD) and assigns team leader based on sector using the project description document (Attachment AE). Once the validator/verifier is chosen for a VCS project, the validator/verifier must sign VCS validation and verification agreement with the VCS Association before performance of any validation/verification in connection with VCS Program. The contract can be drafted at this point but cannot be fully executed until the COI evaluation has been approved by VCS. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews contract. Team leader sends contract to client for signature. 2. The project proponent submits its VCS project description, monitoring plan and reports, proof of title, validation report (if available), results of previous assessments (if applicable) and other information required to AWT. 3. COI Auditor prepares internal COI and impartiality documents. COI Auditor prepares the Conflict of Interest (Attachment Y) document and provides to the Team Leader who reviews, signs and sends to the client for signature. Upon receipt of signature from the client the Team Leader sends the document to the VCS Association. 4. After the conflict of interest evaluation has been approved by VCS, the team leader executes the contract (Attachment B). It should be noted that steps 4-10 are all occurring somewhat simultaneously. The specific order of completion is not important as long as all are completed prior to beginning step Team leader reviews preliminary documentation and any results of previous assessments (if applicable) from aggregator or project owner and discuss goals and constraints. This review will include determining the following: Nature, scale and complexity of the validation/verification activity to be undertaken on the client s behalf Confidence in the responsible party s GHG information and assertion Completeness of the responsible party s GHG information and assertion and the eligibility of the responsible party to participate in the GHG program As part of the initial review of the project documentation, the Team Leader completes the Initial Review Form (Attachment N) and the Risk Assessment Form (Attachment O). Previous Assessments--If a previous verification has been completed for the client, then AWT would request a copy of the report to review it and make sure that all relevant information is addressed appropriately. Reviewing these reports helps to eliminate any duplicate site/desk audits and includes a review of the conclusion, so that it can be carried forward to the current report appropriately. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 76

77 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Team leader assesses the controls for sources of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations, while taking the following into account: Selection and management of the GHG data and information Risk of a material discrepancy occurring Processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting GHG data and information Risk that the controls of the organization or GHG project will not prevent or detect a material discrepancy Risk that the validator/verifier will not detect any material discrepancy that has not been corrected by the controls of the organization or GHG project 7. Team leader prepares sampling plan (Attachment S). 8. Team leader prepares the verification plan (Attachment AC) and submits to the client for signature. 9. Team leader forms validation/verification team. 10. Team leader negotiates/executes subcontractor contracts (if applicable). 11. Upon receipt of the signed contract and signed verification plan, the team leader then completes the project overview (Attachment M) document and submits to client for signature. 12. Validation/Verification Team reviews project documentation for completeness, create maps and other materials relevant to the project. 13. Team leader requests additional information/clarification and amends sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 14. Schedule and perform site visit/field audit (Attachment W Verification Field Audit Protocol or Attachment Z Validation Field Audit Protocol) (if required) and amend sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 15. Complete desk audit (Attachment X Verification Desk Audit Protocol or Attachment AA Validation Desk Audit Protocol), compile site visit information and amend sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 16. The Team Leader then assesses the claim based on the procedures set forth in the VCS Program Guide and VCS Standard. and produces: Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 77

78 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Validation - validation of the VCS Project Description (PD) including an assessment of additionality. 1. Validation Components: Participation requirements are met Comments of stakeholders collected and addressed Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) undertaken Project meets additionality requirements Baseline is established Appropriate methodologies for Certified Emission Reductions (CER) calculation and monitoring are selected Mew methodologies get approved before validating the projects using them Take written approval of the voluntary participation from the designated national authority Make Project Design Document (PDD) available to public and consider their comment before validation Inform project participants on: o Confirmation of validation and date of submission or o Explanation of reasons for non-acceptance Submit request for registration to Executive Board (EB) Make validation report publicly available 2. Validation Report-Complete Validation Report Template-(Appendix 7) to include list of diversions from original sampling plan. 3. Validation Deed-Complete Validation Deed-(Appendix 8) Verification-Periodic independent review of emissions of GHG that occurred as a result of registered VCS project. 1. Verification Components: Verifies projects documentations are as per requirement Conduct site audits and collect outside data to determine reductions in emissions Identify and inform the project participants of any concerns related to conformity Provides a verification report to the project participants and EB. The report is made publicly available. Certifies in writing the VCUs for the specific time period 2. Verification Report-Complete Verification Report Template- (Appendix 9) to include list of diversions from original sampling plan. 3. Verification Deed-Complete Verification Deed-(Appendix 10) Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 78

79 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Internal Peer Reviewer reviews the validation/verification report, validation/verification deed and accompanying documents to confirm that all validation/verification activities have been completed, whether or not the GHG assertion is free of material discrepancy and whether or not the validation/verification activities provide the agreed upon level of assurance. The Internal Project Technical Review (Attachment AF) is utilized to document the internal review. The internal peer reviewer signs the Internal Project Technical Review form, the validation/verification report and the validation/verification deed. 18. Send validation/verification report(s) to aggregator/project owner for approval. 19. Address questions and contestations. 20. The project proponent opens a VCS Registry account, including submitting a signed copy of the VCS Program Terms and Conditions, and then submits the VCS PD, validation report, monitoring report, verification report and proof of title to the VCS Registry operator. 21. The VCS Registry operator checks the documentation submitted to ensure that the required VCS Program documents have been submitted. If the VCS Registry operator is satisfied, it submits electronic copies of these documents to the VCS Project Database and requests VCU serial numbers for the VCUs. Projects that received an up-front validation, but have not had any GHG emissions reductions or removals verified can volunteer to be recorded on the VCS Project Database in line with the normal VCS Program requirements. 22. The VCS Project Database checks that the project has not been previously registered under the VCS Program, by searching to see that the project s GPS boundaries have not been registered in the VCS Project Database. It then issues VCU serial numbers to the VCS Registry, logging these on the VCS Program Project Database along with project documentation. The VCS Registry operator requests and receives payment from the project proponent of the VCS Registration Levy. 23. The VCS Registry deposits any original documentation submitted into custodial service. The VCS Registry issues VCUs into the account of the project proponent. 24. Recordkeeping AWT will keep all documents and records used for the validation/verification project in a secure and retrievable manner for at least 2 years after the end of the project-crediting period. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 79

80 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Pacific Carbon Trust Validation or Verification 1. Participant selects verifier. V/V director performs financial risk assessment (Attachment AD) and assigns team leader based on sector using the project description document (Attachment AE). The contract can be drafted at this point but cannot be fully executed until the COI evaluation has been signed by the client. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews contract. Team leader sends contract to client for signature. 2. The project proponent submits its PCT project plan (if validation is requested) or validation report and project report (if verification is requested), results of previous assessments (if applicable) and any other information required to AWT. 3. The COI Auditor prepares the internal COI and impartiality documents. After the internal COI and impartiality documents have been fully executed, the Conflict of Interest (Attachment Y) is prepared by the COI Auditor and submits it to the Team Leader for review and signature. The Team Leader submits the signed Conflict of Interest document to the client. 4. Upon receipt of the signed conflict of interest document from the client, the Team leader executes the contract (Attachment B). It should be noted that steps 4-10 are all occurring somewhat simultaneously. The specific order of completion is not important as long as all are completed prior to beginning step Team leader reviews preliminary documentation and any results of previous assessments (if applicable) from the project proponent and discusses goals and constraints. This review will include determining the following: Nature, scale and complexity of the validation or verification activity to be undertaken on the client s behalf Confidence in the responsible party s GHG information and assertion Completeness of the responsible party s GHG information and assertion and the eligibility of the responsible party to participate in the GHG program 6. Team leader assesses the controls for sources of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations, while taking the following into account: Selection and management of the GHG data and information Risk of a material discrepancy occurring Processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting GHG data and information Risk that the controls of the organization or GHG project will not prevent or detect a material discrepancy Risk that the validator or verifier will not detect any material discrepancy that has not been corrected by the controls of the organization or GHG project Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 80

81 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 As part of the initial review of the project documentation, the Team Leader completes the Initial Review Form (Attachment N) and the Risk Assessment Form (Attachment O). Previous Assessments--If a previous verification has been completed for the client, then AWT would request a copy of the report to review it and make sure that all relevant information is addressed appropriately. Reviewing these reports helps to eliminate any duplicate site/desk audits and includes a review of the conclusion, so that it can be carried forward to the current report appropriately. 7. Team leader prepares sampling plan (Attachment S). 8. Team leader prepares the verification plan (Attachment AC) and submits to the client for signature. 9. Team leader forms validation or verification team. 10. Team leader negotiates/executes subcontractor contracts (if applicable). 11. Upon receipt of signed contract and signed verification plan, validator or verifier completes the project overview (Attachment M) document and submits to client for signature. 12. Validation/Verification Team reviews project documentation for completeness, create maps and other materials relevant to the project. 13. Team leader requests additional information/clarification and amends sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 14. Schedule and perform site visit/field audit (Attachment W Verification Field Audit Protocol or Attachment Z Validation Field Audit Protocol) (if required) and amend sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 15. Complete desk audit (Attachment X Verification Desk Audit Protocol or Attachment AA Validation Desk Audit Protocol), compile site visit information and amend sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 16. The Team Leader then assesses the claim against the applicable protocol and produces a validation or verification report (whichever the case may be). I. Validation - validation of the PCT Project Plan (PP) including an assessment of additionality according to the processes set forth in ISO Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 81

82 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Validation Components (to be included in the PP): Project description (title, purpose, objectives, project proponent and responsible parties contact information including description of roles and responsibilities, technical description of the project and how the project will achieve GHG reductions, unique geographical location information, chronological plan for project) Identification of protocols utilized and justification Baseline scenario description and evaluation of conservativeness Additionality of project activity Identification of project sources, sinks and reservoirs (including justification of selections) Description of methods used to calculate emissions reductions and undertake relevant data collection and monitoring including QA/QC procedures and justification of methods. Description of frequency of measurement and monitoring and justification of frequency Assertion that project and chosen methodologies ensure the emission reduction is accurate and conservative Estimated project reduction for each year of the project including description of formulas and calculations used to make the estimations. Claim of ownership Results of uncertainty assessment associated with the GHG reduction. Environmental impact assessment Summary of consultations regarding project Assertion that PP meets the requirements of the Emission Offsets Regulation Risk mitigation/contingency plan (if applicable) 2. Validation Report-Complete Validation Report Template-(Appendix 11) to include list of diversions from the original sampling plan. II. Verification-periodic independent review of emissions of GHG that occurred as a result of registered PCT project. 1. Verification Components: Verifies projects documentations are as per requirement Conduct site audits and collect outside data to determine reductions in emissions Identify and inform the project participants of any concerns related to conformity Provides a verification report to the project participants and EB. The report is made publicly available. Certifies in writing the CERs for the specific time period Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 82

83 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Verification Report-Complete Verification Report Template-(Appendix 12) to include list of diversions from the original sampling plan. 17. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews the validation/verification report and accompanying documents to confirm that all validation/verification activities have been completed, whether or not the GHG assertion is free of material discrepancy and whether or not the validation/verification activities provide the agreed upon level of assurance. The Internal Project Technical Review (Attachment AF) is utilized to document the internal review. The internal peer reviewer signs the Internal Project Technical Review form and the validation/verification report. 18. Team leader sends validation or verification report to aggregator/project owner for approval. 19. AWT addresses questions and contestations. 20. Upon approval by the project owner or responsible party, the validation or verification report is submitted to the PCT. 21. Recordkeeping AWT will keep all documents and records used for the validation/ verification project in a secure and retrievable manner for at least 2 years after the end of the project-crediting period. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 83

84 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, American Carbon Registry Verification 1. Participant selects verifier. V/V director performs financial risk assessment (Attachment AD) and assigns team leader based on sector using the project description document (Attachment AE). The contract can be drafted at this point but cannot be fully executed until the COI evaluation has been approved by ACR. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews contract. Team leader sends contract to client for signature. 2. The project proponent submits results of previous assessments (if applicable) and any other information required to AWT. 3. Team Leader and COI Auditor prepare Internal Conflict of Interest and Impartiality documents and obtain signatures from all team members. The Team Leader prepares the ACR specific COI form (Appendix 13) and submits to the COI Auditor for completion. COI Auditor determines if there are issues with COI and completes ACR specific COI form (Appendix 13). Team leader reviews the ACR specific COI form, signs the form and submits it to the client for signature. Upon receipt of the signed form from the client, the form is submitted to ACR. 4. Upon receipt of approval of the COI evaluation from ACR, the team leader executes the contract (Attachment B). It should be noted that steps 4-10 are all occurring somewhat simultaneously. The specific order of completion is not important as long as all are completed prior to beginning step Team leader reviews preliminary documentation and any results of previous assessments (if applicable) from the project proponent and discusses goals and constraints. This review will include determining the following: Nature, scale and complexity of the verification activity to be undertaken on the client s behalf Confidence in the responsible party s GHG information and assertion Completeness of the responsible party s GHG information and assertion and the eligibility of the responsible party to participate in the GHG program 6. Team leader assesses the controls for sources of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations, while taking the following into account: Selection and management of the GHG data and information Risk of a material discrepancy occurring Processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting GHG data and information Risk that the controls of the organization or GHG project will not prevent or detect a material discrepancy Risk that the validator or verifier will not detect any material discrepancy that has not been corrected by the controls of the organization Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 84

85 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 or GHG project As part of the initial review of the project documentation, the Team Leader completes the Initial Review Form (Attachment N) and the Risk Assessment Form (Attachment O). Previous Assessments--If a previous verification has been completed for the client, then AWT would request a copy of the report to review it and make sure that all relevant information is addressed appropriately. Reviewing these reports helps to eliminate any duplicate site/desk audits and includes a review of the conclusion, so that it can be carried forward to the current report appropriately. 7. Team leader prepares sampling plan (Attachment S). 8. Team leader prepares the verification plan (Attachment AC) and submits to the client for signature. 9. Team leader forms verification team. 10. Team leader negotiates/executes subcontractor contracts (if applicable). 11. Upon receipt of signed contract and signed verification plan, the team leader completes the project overview (Attachment M) document and submits to client for signature. 12. Verification Team reviews project documentation for completeness, create maps and other materials relevant to the project. 13. Team leader requests additional information/clarification and amends sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 14. Schedule and perform site visit/field audit (Attachment W Verification Field Audit Protocol) (if required) and amend sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 15. Complete desk audit (Attachment X Verification Desk Audit Protocol), compile site visit information and amend sampling plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 16. The Team Leader then assesses the claim against the applicable protocol and produces a verification report. Verifies projects documentations are as per requirement Conduct site audits and collect outside data to determine reductions in emissions Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 85

86 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Identify and inform the project participants of any concerns related to conformity Provides a verification report to the project participants and EB. The report is made publicly available. Certifies in writing the CERs for the specific time period 17. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews the verification report, verification statement and accompanying documents to confirm that all verification activities have been completed, whether or not the GHG assertion is free of material discrepancy and whether or not the verification activities provide the agreed upon level of assurance. The Internal Project Technical Review (Attachment AF) is utilized to document the internal review. The internal peer reviewer signs the Internal Project Technical Review form, the verification report and the verification statement. 18. Team leader sends verification report to aggregator/project owner for approval. 19. AWT addresses questions and contestations. 20. Upon approval by the project owner or responsible party, the verification report is submitted to the PCT. 21. Recordkeeping AWT will keep all documents and records used for the verification project in a secure and retrievable manner for at least 2 years after the end of the project-crediting period. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 86

87 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Air Resources Board (California) Note: The verification process for conversion of early action offset credits to ARB offset credits roughly follows this procedure. However, there are differences as set forth in Section of the cap and trade regulation. Where the following procedure and the regulation conflict, the regulation is followed. 1. Participant selects verifier. V/V director performs financial risk assessment (Attachment AD) and assigns team leader based on sector using the project description document (Attachment AE). The contract can be drafted at this point but cannot be fully executed until the COI evaluation has been approved by the offset project registry or ARB. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews contract. Team leader sends contract to client for signature. 2. Team Leader and COI Auditor prepare Internal Conflict of Interest and Impartiality documents and obtain signatures from all team members. Team Leader then prepares notice of verification services (NOVS-Appendix 17) and request for evaluation of conflict of interest (COI-Appendix 16) forms and submits to the COI Auditor for completion. COI Auditor determines if there are issues with COI and completes NOVS and COI forms. Team leader reviews these documents, signs and submits them to the offset project registry and/or ARB at a minimum of 10 business days prior to beginning any verification services (submit updated COI form every year). 3. After receipt of approval from ARB or the offset project registry to proceed with the project, the Team Leader executes the contract (Attachment B). It should be noted that steps 3-8 are all occurring somewhat simultaneously. The specific order of completion is not important as long as all are completed prior to beginning step Team leader reviews preliminary documentation and any results of previous assessments (if applicable) from aggregator or project owner and discuss goals and constraints. This review will include determining the following: Nature, scale and complexity of the verification activity to be undertaken on the client s behalf Confidence in the responsible party s GHG information and assertion Completeness of the responsible party s GHG information and assertion and the eligibility of the responsible party to participate in the GHG program As part of the initial review of the project documentation, the Team Leader completes the Initial Review Form (Attachment N) that is reviewed by the internal peer reviewer. Previous Assessments--If a previous verification has been completed for the client, then AWT would request a copy of the report to review it and make sure that all relevant information is addressed appropriately. Reviewing these reports helps to Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 87

88 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 eliminate any duplicate site/desk audits and includes a review of the conclusion, so that it can be carried forward to the current report appropriately. 5. Team Leader assesses the controls for sources of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations, while taking the following into account: Selection and management of the GHG data and information Risk of a material discrepancy occurring Processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting GHG data and information Risk that the controls of the organization or GHG project will not prevent or detect a material discrepancy Risk that the verifier will not detect any material discrepancy that has not been corrected by the controls of the organization or GHG project As part of the assessment of controls, the Team Leader completes the Risk Assessment Form (Attachment O) that is reviewed by the internal peer reviewer. 6. Team leader forms verification team as well as negotiates and executes subcontractor agreements (if applicable). 7. Team leader prepares sampling plan (Attachment S). The sampling plan must include a ranking of GHG emission sources within the project boundary by amount of contribution to total CO2e emissions and GHG reductions. The sampling plan must also include a ranking of GHG emission sources in order of calculation uncertainty. Internal peer reviewer reviews sampling plan. In addition, the sampling plan must include a narrative of uncertainty risk assessment for data acquisition equipment, data sampling and frequency, data processing and tracking, project baseline and annual GHG emissions and GHG reductions calculations, data reporting and management policies in developing offset project data reports. The sampling plan must include GHG emission sources that will be targeted for document reviews and data checks and an explanation of why they were chosen, methods used to conduct data checks for each GHG emission source and a summary of information analyzed in the data checks and document reviews for each GHG emission source. 8. Team leader prepares the verification plan (Attachment AC) and submits to the client for signature upon review by internal peer reviewer. The verification plan must include the date of planning meeting, date of site visit, types of proposed document and data reviews and expected date of completing verification services. 9. Upon receipt of the signed contract and signed verification plan, the team leader completes project overview (Attachment M) and submits to client for signature. 10. Team leader holds a planning meeting with participants, which includes: Introduction of the verification team Review and confirmation of verification process and scope, objectives, level of assurance, criteria and materiality Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 88

89 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Transfer of background information, underlying activity data and results of previous assessments (if applicable) Review and confirmation of the verification process and schedule 11. Conduct verification activities in accordance with the Article 5, Subarticle 13 and 14 of the cap and trade regulation. Assess offset project eligibility Review information submitted for listing of project Confirm offset project boundary is appropriately defined Review project baseline calculations and modeling Assess operations, functionality, data control systems and review GHG measurement and monitoring techniques Confirm that project conforms to the requirements of the offset project protocol Interview key personnel involved in collecting offset project data and preparing the Offset Project Data Report Make direct observations of equipment supplying data for GHG emissions sources in the sampling plan determined to be high risk Confirm offset project conforms to all regulations including safety regulations Perform data checks according to the sampling plan 12. Team leader prepares issues log based on the results of the site and desk audits, internal peer reviewer reviews list and team leader submits to client. The issues log must identify the section of the regulation or the offset protocol related to the nonconformance, must indicate whether the issues could have any bearing on material misstatement or conformance and must indicate that issues were corrected by the offset project operator or authorized project designee prior to completing verification services. 13. Team leader prepares and signs the verification statement (Appendix 18) and verification report (Appendix 19). The verification statement is a brief, one-page summary that confirms the verification activities and outcomes. The verification report includes the following elements at a minimum: a. Verification plan b. Detailed comparison of data checks c. Issues log and resolutions d. Qualifying comments e. Calculations performed 14. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews the verification report, verification statement and accompanying documents to confirm that all verification activities have been completed, whether or not the GHG assertion is free of material discrepancy and whether or not the verification activities provide the agreed upon level of assurance. The Internal Project Technical Review (Attachment AF) is utilized to document the Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 89

90 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 internal review. The internal peer reviewer signs the Internal Project Technical Review form, the verification report and the verification statement. 15. Exit meeting is scheduled, so that the Team leader and participant can discuss the verification report and statement. 16. Upon approval, team leader uploads the issues log, verification report and verification statement to the offset project registry. 17. Recordkeeping--AWT will keep participants electronic copies of information utilized during the verification process for a minimum of fifteen years. Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 90

91 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Accreditations AWT is currently accredited for the following: ANSI Accreditation under ISO Requirements Accreditation ID#0898 ANSI Scopes Scope 5 (Livestock) Scope 6 (Waste Handling and Disposal) ARB Accreditation Executive Order H ARB Protocols Livestock Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) Agricultural Methane Capture and Combustion Landfill Methane Capture and Combustion Climate Action Reserve (CAR) Organic Waste Composting Organic Waste Digestion Livestock Pacific Carbon Trust (PCT) ANSI Scope 5 (Livestock) ANSI Scope 6 (Waste Handling and Disposal) American Carbon Registry (ACR) Livestock Waste Handling & Disposal Please access the AWT MSP from our website ( to insure you are referencing the latest version. 91

92 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Project Experience TerraPass Inc. AWT provided verification services for several landfill gas projects based on the Climate Action Reserve LFG protocol. Fibrowatt AWT provided consulting services to Fibrowatt, which included the projects in Minnesota, North Carolina and Arkansas. AWT assisted the Fibrominn facility located in Minnesota with decision-making relative to the monetization of environmental assets. AWT also advised Fibrowatt on how to maximize revenue of environmental assets for planned facilities in North Carolina and Arkansas. This activity included the evaluation of potential environmental assets and comparative calculations of GHG offset credits based on options determined by the joint effort of AWT and Fibrowatt. Upon reaching a decision on where the offset credits would be registered, a protocol was established to streamline data collection and recordkeeping prior to bringing the projects on-line in order to maximize offset credits. Farm Power Northwest AWT provided consulting services to Farm Power Northwest LLC for their regional digester project planned in Skagit County, Washington. AWT was consulted to determine the baseline case calculations and project case calculations on five farms, as well as assisting in developing the verification plan and monitoring plan. Environmental Power Corporation AWT has provided agricultural methane verification services for Environmental Power Corporation (EPC), on a semi-annual basis, for three sites located in Wisconsin. AWT s verification services include ongoing verification reports for Chicago Climate Exchange. AgRefresh AWT provided GHG offset verification services for three dairy anaerobic digester projects located in Washington and Wisconsin. The offset verification reporting was based on the AgRefresh standard and protocol. Carbonless Promise AWT provided GHG offset verification for approximately 94,000 acres of rangeland/grassland/conservation tillage in Montana. Four verification reports were developed and submitted to the Chicago Climate Exchange for these acres (two reports covering rangeland and two reports covering grassland/conservation tillage). All grassland/conservation tillage contracts were verified through a field audit, so that a 10% representation (or random sample) would be confirmed for the acres enrolled. All rangeland projects were first-year verifications and were verified (both by desk and field audit) so that a 10% representation (or random sample) would be confirmed for the group of ranches whose acres enrolled were under 10,000 contracted acres. For the ranches over 10,000 contracted acres, a desk audit and on-site visit was completed for 100% (all ranches). 92

93 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 National Carbon Offset Coalition AWT provided GHG offset verification services for approximately 349,000 acres of rangeland located in New Mexico and Texas. The verification process included desk audits (review of contracts, records, maps, etc.) and field audits of all ranches in Pool 4 and 5. One verification report was filed with the Chicago Climate Exchange for each pool. North Dakota Farmers Union AWT provided GHG offset verification for rangeland, grassland and conservation tillage for pools 1, 2, 3 and 4. Once field audits were completed, pictures (one overview and one close-up for each point), GPS Points and site visit notes for all ranches were compiled and verification reports were prepared for each farm/ranch in the pools. These projects have included ranches/farms in Virginia, Maryland, Oklahoma, Colorado, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming and New Mexico. Ranchlands Management AWT completed the GHG offset verification for approximately 234,000 acres of rangeland in Texas and Colorado associated with SW Pool 1 and approximately 223,000 acres of rangeland in Texas and New Mexico associated with SW Pool 2. One verification report has been submitted to the Chicago Climate Exchange for each pool. We have also completed verification services for an additional pool (SW Pool 2) totaling approximately 226,000 acres in addition to the second year verification of SW Pool 1. Natural Capital AWT completed the GHG offset verification for approximately 64,855 acres of rangeland, no-till and grassland in Montana. The verification process included: initial review of maps/records, a site visit to accomplish the field verification, and three verification reports covering all of the acreage for rangeland, no-till and grassland, respectively. We have completed Pool 2 which consists solely of rangeland contracts located in Montana and Wyoming totaling approximately 870,000 acres. Global Green Energy AWT has completed the GHG offset verification for two wind energy projects located in India. AWT verified the carbon credits due to renewable energy production and wrote verification reports based on the CCX renewable energy protocol in conjunction with applicable CDM protocols and associated calculation tools. Three other wind projects are under contract. SunOne Solutions AWT completed the GHG offset verification for rangeland, grassland, and conservation tillage projects located in Nebraska, Texas, Montana and Wyoming. The verification process included initial review of maps/records, site visits to accomplish the field audit, and verification reports covering all of the acreage for rangeland, grassland and conservation tillage. 93

94 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Camco Global AWT provided livestock verification services for several livestock digester projects based on the Climate Action Reserve protocol. C-Lock Technology AWT provided GHG offset verification for approximately 23,000 acres of soil carbon sequestration and fuel use reduction located in South Dakota. The verification process included an initial review of maps, records and model documentation, a site visit to accomplish the field verification and review of the model and two verification reports signed by AWT. CARBONyatra AWT has completed eight renewable energy (wind) projects and is under contract for an additional three renewable energy (wind) projects located in India. All of these projects are Chicago Climate Exchange projects using the CCX Renewable Energy protocol in conjunction with the grid connected renewable energy CDM protocol and associated calculation tools. In addition to the wind projects, we have completed two biomass to energy project verifications and one methane recovery/renewable energy project with one additional related project under contract. The biomass and methane recovery/renewable energy projects are based on several CDM protocols including AMS III.H (Methane Recovery in Wastewater Treatment), ACM0006 (Consolidated methodology for electricity generation from biomass residues) and AMS I.D (Grid connected renewable electricity generation). Mission Climate AWT has completed one renewable energy (wind) project verification in India. The verification report was submitted to and approved by the Chicago Climate Exchange. Agrinergy AWT has completed one biomass to energy project verification located in India. The verification report was submitted to and approved by the Chicago Climate Exchange. The biomass project emission reduction calculations were based on ACM0006 and AMS I.D. Ecolutions AWT has completed four renewable energy (wind) projects located in India and Africa (Morocco). All of these projects are Chicago Climate Exchange projects using the CCX Renewable Energy protocol in conjunction with the grid connected renewable energy CDM protocol and associated calculation tools. 94

95 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Validation/Verification Team Members Resumes Jeffrey David Vaughan EDUCATION Ph.D. Soil Science, December, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina. M.S. Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences, December Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia. B.S. Agronomy, May Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia. Concentration: Crop Science and Turfgrass Management. Minor: Agricultural Economics. EXPERIENCE President/Senior Agronomist/Soil Scientist-Agri-Waste Technology, Inc., Raleigh, NC, March Present. - Oversee a comprehensive records management system (called the Nutri- Link System or NLS) developed for managing/monitoring livestock farming operations and insuring compliance with federal/state/local regulations. Assess all waste management records in NLS to insure proper farm management/compliance and make recommendations for corrective action when needed. The types of records maintained with this system include waste/effluent land application, waste/effluent analysis, field maps and identifications, crop types, crop yield/analysis, soil analysis, well water analysis, freshwater irrigation, precipitation, livestock water use, waste lagoon levels, and waste lagoon pumping. Farms in the following states use NLS: Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wisconsin. The following companies participate in the NLS: Cargill Pork, Inc., DeKalb Swine Breeders, Inc., Hanor Company, Inc., Iowa Select Farms, Inc., Land O Lakes Ag Services, Inc., National Farms, Inc., New Dominion Farms, Inc., Pig Improvement Company, Inc., Seaboard Farms, Inc., and Vall, Inc. - Oversee weekly management of 21 MGD municipal wastewater land application system on approximately 4500 acres. - Develop expert reports and presentations and provide depositions regarding soils, agronomy, land application of waste, etc., for clients involved in litigation. - Develop cropping systems and nutrient application recommendations for livestock waste management plans, nutrient management plans, environmental permits, and pollution prevention plans. - Make fertility and liming recommendations for a variety of crop/soil systems in the United States. These recommendations are made using soil 95

96 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 analyses and up-to-date crop and soils information on a site and/or state specific basis. - Diagnose crop abnormalities and suggest corrective action(s). - Make sampling, handling, and analysis recommendations for soils, crops, waste, and freshwater (ground and surface). - Provide basic information on crops (types, management, etc.) and soils (management, nutrient transformations, etc.) to clients as needed. - Audit waste application systems and cropping systems for livestock farming operations and recommend necessary management upgrades/changes. - Interact with federal/state/local regulatory officials to insure compliance with recordkeeping/monitoring requirements and in the preparation of livestock waste (nutrient) management plans, environmental permits, and pollution prevention plans. - Interact with laboratory personnel to insure proper quality assurance and control. The labs dealt with include A&L Analytical Laboratories, Inc., Midwest Laboratories, Inc., North Carolina Department of Agriculture- Agronomic Division, Prairie Analytical Systems, Inc., Southern Testing and Research Laboratories, Inc., and Servi-Tech Laboratories, Inc. - Conduct soil evaluations and develop soil scientist reports for wastewater (industrial, municipal, residential) system suitability as well as permit applications and wastewater system design. - Conduct wastewater system inspections in the central NC area. - Manage nine full-time and two part-time employees. - Participate in the marketing of company services through client contact and mailing materials development. - Verification of land use carbon offset projects. Ph.D. Graduate Student, Soil Science Department, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, January December Dissertation title: Assessment of Winter Cover Crops and Manure for Supplying Nitrogen to Corn and Burley Tobacco. - Planned and designed Ph.D. research project with the assistance of Dr. G.D. Hoyt. - Investigated the effectiveness of soil testing and plant analysis for predicting burley tobacco and corn nitrogen needs following winter cover cropping or manure application. - Investigated cover crop residue decomposition and N mineralization patterns in conventional and no-till corn systems using nylon mesh bags. - Prepared research presentations for the National Meetings of the American Society of Agronomy and the state meetings of the Soil Science Society of North Carolina. - Assisted in planting, fertilization, and soil sampling (using a Giddings Soil Probe) operations associated with Ph.D. research project. - Sampled plant tissue and soil at specific plant growth stages for Ph.D. research project. 96

97 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Conducted 2M KCl soil extractions and plant tissue drying and grinding associated with doctoral research project. - Analyzed soil and plant samples for nitrate-nitrogen using the Nitrate Quick Test kit developed by Hawk Creek Laboratory in conjunction with Pennsylvania State University. - Statistically analyzed data from Ph.D. research project using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS). M.S. Graduate Student, Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences Department, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, August December Thesis title: Management and Assessment of Winter Cover Crop Systems for Supplying Nitrogen to Corn in the Mid-Atlantic Region of the United States. - Planned and designed master's research project with the assistance of Dr. G.K. Evanylo. - Studied the ability of soil testing and plant analysis to predict nitrogen contributions from winter cover crops to corn. - Studied the influence of winter cover crop spring kill time, particle size, and soil incorporation on the nitrogen availability from winter cover crops to corn. - Assisted in the preparation of research presentations for the National Meetings of the American Society of Agronomy. - Assisted in tillage, planting, fertilization, and spraying operations associated with master's research project. - Sampled plant tissue and soil at specific plant growth stages for master's research project. - Executed lab work including 2M KCl soil extractions, plant tissue drying and grinding, plant tissue digestion for total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) analysis, and prepared buffer solutions, color reagents, and other reagents for various laboratory analyses. - Analyzed soil samples for nitrate-nitrogen using the Nitrate Quick Test kit developed by Hawk Creek Laboratory in conjunction with Pennsylvania State University, N-Trak Quick Test kit developed by the Hach Company in conjunction with Iowa State University, and the Cardy Nitrate Quick Test kit developed by Spectrum Technologies. - Operated a Lachat Quikchem Automated Ion Analyzer for soil nitratenitrogen and ammonium-nitrogen analysis and plant tissue TKN analysis. - Managed an undergraduate student worker from May September 1992 and March May Statistically analyzed data from master's research project using the Statistical Analysis System (SAS). Undergraduate Research Student, Agronomy Department, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, May February

98 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Studied yield potential of prolific corn hybrids as influenced by plant population. - Assisted in tillage, spraying, and data collection operations associated with undergraduate research project. Lab Technician (Mechanic) A, Agricultural Engineering Department, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, summers of Assisted in building and assembling machine components for various projects (i.e. used metal and woodworking shops). - Assisted in planting, tillage, harvesting, and drying various crops including corn, sweet sorghum, grain sorghum, broccoli, cabbage, peanuts, and various forage crops. - Worked on projects dealing with sustainable agriculture, conservation tillage, energy use, and soil compaction. Data Entry Operator, Virginia Geographic Information Systems (VirGIS) Project, Agricultural Engineering Department, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, summers of and March May VirGIS was a project studying the non-point source pollution runoff into the Chesapeake Bay. - Interpreted maps including United States Geographical Service 7.5 minute topographic sheets, county soil surveys, and high altitude infrared aerial photographs. - Digitally encoded data (manually and electronically) using IBM PC and IBM 3090 mainframe computers and Numonics Electrical Digitizing Tablets. Publications/Presentations Vaughan, Jeffrey D., Greg D. Hoyt, and Arthur G. Wollum Assessment of Burley Tobacco Nitrogen Needs after Cover Cropping and Manure Application. Tobacco Sci. 47:1-10. Vaughan, Jeffrey D. and Greg D. Hoyt Evaluation of a Quick Test Method for Tobacco Petiole Nitrate Analysis. Tobacco Sci. 47: Vaughan, J.D., G.D. Hoyt, and A.G. Wollum, II Cover crop nitrogen availability to conventional and no-till corn: soil mineral N, corn N status, and corn yield. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 31: Vaughan, J.D. and G.K. Evanylo Soil nitrogen dynamics in winter cover crop-corn systems. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 30: Vaughan, J.D. and G.K. Evanylo Corn response to cover crop species, spring desiccation time, and residue management. Agron. J. 90:

99 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Vaughan, J.D. and G.D. Hoyt Nitrogen dymanics in conventional and no-till corn systems following winter cover cropping. Soil Sci. Soc. North Carolina Proc. 40: Vaughan, J.D., G.D. Hoyt, and A.G. Wollum Mineralization of cover crop and manure nitrogen in burley tobacco production systems. Agron. Abstr. p I presented a poster of the same title at the 1997 National Meetings of the American Society of Agronomy in Anaheim, California. Hoyt, G.D., J.D. Vaughan, and A.G. Wollum Cover crop decomposition and nitrogen release in conventional and no-till corn. Agron. Abstr. p I presented a poster of the same title at the 1997 National Meetings of the American Society of Agronomy in Anaheim, California. Vaughan, J.D. and G.D. Hoyt Nitrogen dynamics in conventional and no-till corn systems following winter cover cropping. Agron. Abstr. p Vaughan, J.D. and G.K. Evanylo Nitrogen cycling in cover crop-corn rotations. Agron. Abstr. p Evanylo, G.K. and J.D. Vaughan Nitrogen availability to corn under varying cover crop management. Agron. Abstr. p I presented a poster of the same title at the 1993 National Meetings of the American Society of Agronomy in Cincinnati, Ohio. Vaughan, J.D. and G.K. Evanylo Soil and tissue testing to determine nitrogen availability from cover crops to corn. Agron. Abstr. p I presented a talk of the same title at the National Meetings of the American Society of Agronomy in Cincinnati, Ohio. Ess, D.R., D.H. Vaughan, J.D. Vaughan, and G.K. Evanylo Nutrient management strategies for sustainable cropping systems. ASAE Paper No Vaughan, J.D. and G.K. Evanylo Nitrogen dynamics in reduced-till corn following winter cover cropping. Agron. Abstr. p I presented a poster of the same title at the 1992 National Meetings of the American Society of Agronomy in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Vaughan, J.D., J.R. McKenna, and S.T. Reed Evaluation of genetic-population interactions as they relate to prolificacy and silk delay in corn. Agron. Abstr. p

100 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 I presented a talk of the same title at the 1991 Southern Branch Meetings of the American Society of Agronomy in Fort Worth, Texas. Teaching Taught Soils Laboratory (SSC 012) in Spring Semesters of and Fall Semesters of 1995 and 1997 in the Soil Science Department at North Carolina State University. - Prepared and administered weekly lectures and laboratory experiments, prepared and graded tests and homework assignments, and assigned final grades associated with this lab. - Received an overall rating of 4.63 out of 5.00 by student evaluation. Taught Soils Laboratory (CSES 3124) in Fall Semesters of and Spring Semesters of in the Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences Department at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. - Prepared and administered weekly lectures and laboratory experiments, prepared and graded tests and homework assignments, and assigned final grades associated with this lab. - Assisted or taught in some lectures, prepared test questions, and graded quizzes associated with Soils (CSES 3114) in Fall Semesters of and Spring Semesters of Received an overall rating of 3.50 out of 4.00 by student evaluation. Teaching Assistant for Soil Fertility and Management (CSES 4214) in Spring Semesters of in the Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences Department at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. - Prepared, administered, and graded homework assignments. - Prepared and presented one lecture each semester. - Assisted in exam preparation, administration, and grading. - Assisted in assigning final grades. HONORS/ACTIVITIES - All items are from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University unless otherwise specified. - Selected to attend the Tenth Annual Graduate Student Professional Development Workshop in 1996 for North Carolina State University, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, graduate students. - Selected to present my research at the 1996 Chancellor's Circle for North Carolina State University scholarship donors. - William Walton Stevens and Emily Inscoe Stevens Conservation Graduate Fellowship from North Carolina State University, Fred Bond Graduate Scholarship from North Carolina State University, Graduate Teaching Assistant Award Honorable Mention, David R. Spence Graduate Scholarship, Moderator for the "Cover Crops for Soil Fertility" section of the 1992 Virginia Sustainable Agriculture Conference. 100

101 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Alpha Zeta Outstanding Senior in Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences, Sigma Xi Undergraduate Research Award, John Lee Pratt Animal Nutrition Scholarship, Agronomy Club Scholarship, John Lee Pratt Memorial Scholarship, Treasurer of Agronomy Club, Chair of Agronomy Club annual fundraiser for two years, Member of Agricultural Club Council, Representative for the Dean of the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at my former high school recruiting potential students, MEMBERSHIPS/TITLES - Certified Crop Advisor (CCA), Certified Professional Agronomist (CPAg), and Certified Professional Soil Scientist (CPSSc) as certified by ARCPACS, A Federation of Certifying Boards in Agriculture, Biology, Earth and Environmental Sciences. - Technical Service Provider (TSP) for the Natural Resources Conservation Service. - CAR Lead Verifier for Forestry, Urban Forestry, Rice Cultivation and Nitrogen Management Protocols, CCX Verifier for Agricultural Soil Carbon Sequestration and Rangeland Soil Carbon Sequestration, CSA America, Inc. Verifier for Greenhouse Gas ( ) - Licensed Soil Scientist as licensed by the North Carolina Board for Licensing of Soil Scientists. - Certified Professional Soil Scientist as certified by Virginia Board for Professional Soil Scientists and Wetland Professionals. - Certified Soil Classifier as certified by the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. - Licensed Professional Geoscientist (Soil Science) as licensed by the State of Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists. - Subsurface Water Pollution Control System Operator as certified by the North Carolina Water Pollution Control Systems Operators Certification Commission. - Certified Septic System Inspector as certified by the North Carolina Onsite Wastewater Contractors and Inspectors Certification Board. - Nutrient Management Consultant as licensed by the State of Maryland, Maryland Department of Agriculture, Office of Resource Conservation. - Certified Nutrient Management Planner as certified by the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Soil and Water Conservation. - Soil Science Society of North Carolina President, Continuing Education Committee Chair for Soil Science Society of North Carolina,

102 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Member of Annual Meeting Planning Committee for 2010 North Carolina On-site Wastewater Conference. - Member of American Society of Agronomy. - Member of Soil Science Society of America. - Member of Soil and Water Conservation Society. - Member of Alpha Zeta, Gamma Sigma Delta and Phi Sigma 102

103 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Christopher T. Mosley Education North Carolina State University (1996) Degree: Bachelor of Science in Biological and Agricultural Engineering Concentration: Soil and Water / Environmental GPA: 3.8 / 4.0 Summa Cum Laude Purdue University (1998) Degree: Master of Science in Agricultural and Biological Engineering Concentration: Soil and Water / Environmental GPA: 3.9 / 4.0 Work Experience September Present August September 2000 August August 1998 Summer 1996 Summer 1994 Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Vice President/Senior Project Engineer Responsibilities: Project management, engineering design and specifications for animal waste management systems and residential septic systems, nutrient management planning, waste management planning, permitting, irrigation planning, greenhouse gas offset quantification and verification, director of validation/verification services North Carolina State University Research Assistant Responsibilities: Data collection, management, and analysis; equipment maintenance and troubleshooting; hydrologic model testing and evaluation; redesign of gypsum dispenser. Purdue University Graduate Research Assistant Responsibilities: Master s thesis research; teaching DRAINMOD to graduate and undergraduate students; organizing and gathering data for long-term agricultural research center; and field work. Precision Partners, Hope, IN Position: Crop Scout Responsibilities: Checked corn and soybeans for crop growth, weeds, and injury; wrote reports for farmers; and advised farmers of potential problems. Will Connell, Agricultural Consultant PO Box 422, Greenville, NC Position: Crop Scout Responsibilities: Checked tobacco, peanuts, and cotton for crop growth, weeds, and injury. 103

104 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Professional Licenses and Certifications 2005-Present: North Carolina, Professional Engineer (License #029424) 2006-Present: South Carolina, Professional Engineer (License #025556) 2008-Present: Alabama, Professional Engineer (License #29693-E) 2008-Present: Ohio, Professional Engineer (License #73355) 2009-Present: Texas, Professional Engineer (License #102607) 2006-Present: NRCS Technical Service Provider 2006-Present: NC Technical Specialist : Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) Verifier for Agricultural Methane & Combustion and Landfill Methane : CSA America, Inc. Verifier for Greenhouse Gas 2012-Present: Texas Nutrient Management Specialist Publications Master s Thesis, Title: Prediction of subsurface drain flow and water table depth in southern Indiana. Wang, X, C.T. Mosley, J.R. Frankenberger, E.J. Kladivko Subsurface drain flow and crop yield predictions for different drain spacings using DRAINMOD Agricultural Water Management 79(2006): Deerhake, M., P. Peterson, N. Ubaka-Blackmoore, J. M. Rice, C. Mosley. Achieving Livestock and Poultry Nutrient Runoff Reductions through Voluntary Farm Assistance Programs American Society of Civil Engineers, Madison, WI. August 23-27, Deerhake, M., J.M. Rice, K.Schaffner, N.Ubaka-Blackmoore, A.Wesley-Snider, P. Peterson, C. Mosley. CLEANEASTTM Project: Performance of a Voluntary Approach to Environmental Protection at Livestock and Poultry Operations Final Project Results American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers Annual International Meeting. Dallas, TX. August Schaffner, K., N. Ubaka-Blackmoore, A. Wesley-Snider, P. Peterson, J.M. Rice, C. Mosley. CLEANEASTTM Project: Final Results from Nutrient Management Planning and Other Environmental Services to More Than 400 Animal Feeding Operations American Water Resources Association Annual Meeting, Jacksonville, FL. November Deerhake, M., A. Wesley-Snider, J.M. Rice, K. Schaffner, N. Ubaka-Blackmoore, C. Mosley. What Motivates Farmers to Protect Water Quality? Analysis of a Voluntary Nutrient Management Planning Project American Water Resources Association Annual Meeting, Jacksonville, FL. November

105 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Technical Skills Computer-aided drawing software (AutoCAD) Water quality modeling software including GLEAMS, DRAINMOD, AGNPS, ANSWERS, and SWAT. Nutrient Management Software (AWM, AFOPro, MMP, NutMan, WatNut, NC, TX, GA) Erosion Software (RUSLE2) Honors Graduate research assistantship offers from Purdue University, Texas A&M, and Virginia Tech (1996). Graduate fellowship offer from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (1996). Phi Kappa Phi honor society (1996). Charles W. Suggs, R.J. Reynolds, and NC Section ASAE scholarships ( ). 105

106 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Kevin D. Davidson Education North Carolina State University (1992) Degree: Bachelor of Science in Biological and Agricultural Engineering North Carolina State University ( ) Degree: Master of Science in Agricultural and Biological Engineering Work Experience 1995-Present Agri-Waste Technology, Inc., Raleigh, NC Senior Project Engineer Responsibilities: Project management, engineering design and specifications for animal waste management systems and residential septic systems, nutrient management planning, waste management planning, permitting, irrigation planning and greenhouse gas offset verification Professional Licenses and Certifications North Carolina, Professional Engineer (License #024582) Virginia, Professional Engineer (License # ) Iowa, Professional Engineer (License #19214) NRCS Technical Service Provider Climate Action Reserve (CAR) Lead Verifier: Livestock Climate Action Reserve (CAR) Lead Verifier: Landfill ( ) CAR Lead Verifier: Organic Waste Digestion CAR Lead Verifier: Organic Waste Composting ARB Lead Verifier: Livestock Publications K. Davidson. Relative Odor Levels from Swine Production Facilities and Lagoons, Presented at 7 th International Symposium on Agricultural and Food Processing Wastes. K. Davidson. Manure Management and Odor Control-Current Industry Setting and Future Technologies, Presented at American Association of Swine Practitioners. Technical Skills Computer-aided drawing software (AutoCAD) Nutrient Management Software (AWM, MMP) Erosion Software (RUSLE2) Honors Gamma Sigma Delta-Honorary Agricultural Fraternity Outstanding Teaching Assistant 106

107 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Hal Langenbach Education North Carolina State University (1995) Degree: Bachelor of Science in Biological and Agricultural Engineering Concentration: Soil and Water / Environmental Work Experience 1995-Present Agri-Waste Technology, Inc., Raleigh, NC Senior Project Engineer Project management Engineering design and specifications for anaerobic lagoon systems for the treatment of livestock waste Development of Nutrient Management Plans for livestock operations throughout the United States Perform site visits for routine and construction inspections Develop and provide training to managers of livestock operations Develop construction plans and specifications for compacted clay liners and flexible membrane liners Provide coordination between clients and regulatory authorities Greenhouse gas offset verification (livestock, waste handling/disposal) Professional Licenses and Certifications North Carolina, Professional Engineer (License #25452) Oklahoma, Professional Engineer (License #23308) Kentucky, Professional Engineer (License #25955) Illinois, Professional Engineer (License # ) Wisconsin, Professional Engineer (License #396826) NC Stormwater BMP Inspector NPDC Environmental and Odor Assessor NRCS Technical Service Provider Climate Action Reserve (CAR) Lead Verifier: Livestock CAR Lead Verifier: Landfill ( ) CAR Lead Verifier: Organic Waste Digestion CAR Lead Verifier: Organic Waste Composting ARB Lead Verifier: Livestock 107

108 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Training and Technical Skills Computer-aided drawing software (AutoCAD) Erosion Software (RUSLE2) North Carolina Nutrient Management Software Wetland delineation of jurisdictional wetlands in coastal and piedmont soils Sediment and erosion control design and inspections Low impact development design for construction projects Stormwater wetland design Soil mechanics and damage prevention during excavation Nutrient Management Software (AWM, MMP) 108

109 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Christopher E. McGee, LSS, CPSS Education North Carolina State University ( ) Degree: Bachelor of Science in Environmental Science Concentration: Soil Science GPA: 3.6 / 4.0 Work Experience October Present Agri-Waste Technology, Inc., Raleigh, NC Associate Agronomist/Soil Scientist Assist with Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMPs) for the NRCS in Ohio, South Carolina, and Virginia Conduct soil evaluations and delineations for on-site wastewater disposal systems Wetland and stream delineation Perform septic/well inspections, collect soils samples, and conduct in-situ saturated hydraulic conductivity tests Routine septic system design/layout for on-site wastewater systems Greenhouse Gas offset project verification Professional Tools Nutrient Management Software (AWM, AFOPro, MMP, NutMan, WatNut) Erosion Software (RUSLE2) Coursework with ArcGIS and Solidworks Honors and Activities North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist #1324 Climate Action Reserve (CAR) Approved Lead Verifier Forestry, Urban Forestry, Rice Cultivation and Nitrogen Management ( ) Soil Science Society of America (ARCPACS) - Certified Professional Soil Scientist CCX Verifier for Agricultural Soil Carbon Sequestration and Rangeland Soil Carbon Sequestration ( ) CSA America, Inc. Verifier for Greenhouse Gas ( ) Certified North Carolina Septic Inspector North Carolina On-Site Wastewater Contractors and Inspectors Certification Board (NCOWCICB) Certified North Carolina Water Pollution Control System Operator Subsurface Member of the Soil Science Society of North Carolina Member of the NCSU Soil Judging Team (2006) Recipient of the 2006 Hubert J. Byrd Memorial Scholarship from the Soil Science Society of North Carolina Member National Beta Club, EAA Young Eagles Program, and Who s Who Among America High School Students 109

110 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Lisa Tilley Education University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (2000) Master s Degree in Special Education with an emphasis in Early Childhood Intervention and Family Support Meredith College, Raleigh, North Carolina, May, 1993 Bachelor of Arts Degree in Spanish & Concentration in Mathematics Work Experience Agri-Waste Technology, Inc., February, 2009 Present Manages budgets and financial responsibilities by tracking accounts payable and accounts receivable Runs monthly employee payroll & ensures paycheck direct deposit Runs & submits monthly payroll taxes, quarterly taxes, privilege taxes, & yearly property tax returns Oversees the renewal of state PE Licenses & COA registrations required by states, completing and submiting the periodic, quarterly, and annual reports required by the states Schedules & Develops contracts for Well, Well / Septic, Septic, and Soil Evaluations Coordinates / Communicates with company Accountant as necessary Answers phone, copies papers, binds documents, mails correspondence, and makes calls as necessary Ensures Impartiality and avoids personal and organizational Conflict of Interest in client relations Wake County Public School System, July, 2004 February, 2009 The Literacy Connection Project Assistant & Data / Evaluation Coordinator, Project Enlightenment Planned, implemented, and evaluated all Project Enlightenment services Completed summative evaluation activities including data collection, preparation of quarterly data reports Managed day-to-day business operations of programs including statistical reporting, purchasing, accounting, contracts, payroll, and recruitment and payment of substitute teachers Tracked budget expenditures, ran and interpreted budget and personnel reports Created Service Agreements, Purchase Orders, Direct Pays, and Invoices Extensive experience with Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Access, Oracle, MySequel, and NC Wise data systems 110

111 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Wake County Public School System, August, 2000 July, 2004 Lead Teacher, Title I Prekindergarten Programs & Migrant Education Program Provided intervention services to Title I Prekindergarten students and Migrant Education students, grades K-12 Planned, implemented, and evaluated summer Migrant Education program for grades K-5 Hired and daily supervised approximately 20 staff members at summer Migrant program Assisted Prekindergarten teachers in the implementation of developmentallyappropriate practices Trained Title I Prekindergarten staff on the implementation of various prekindergarten screening tools The Agency for Public Telecommunications, March, 2002 June, 2005 Bilingual Telephone Operator Answered the telephone and directed English and Spanish language calls to the live call-in programs of Open Net and Open Net en Español Operated the teleprompter for English and Spanish program broadcasts Wake County Public School System, January, 1997 July, 2000 Pre-Kindergarten Teacher Developed developmentally, age-appropriate activities for migrant and at-risk preschoolers Assessed, supervised, and taught approximately sixteen at-risk prekindergarteners Translated for weekly and monthly parenting classes North Carolina Primary Health Care Association & Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Health Promotion, August, 1996 January, 1997 Farmworker Health Library Database Coordinator & Bilingual Materials Specialist Reviewed, abstracted, and entered farmworker health materials into the Farmworker Health Library database Organized the layout of the Farmworker Health Library Contacted state agencies to request bilingual materials Collected, evaluated, and abstracted all incoming bilingual materials Developed the NC Health and Human Service s electronic database of bilingual materials Office Specialist, December, 1995 April, 1996 Administrative Assistant Formulated and typed forms, letters, graphs, spreadsheets, reports, etc. for corporate office personnel Edited records, kept detailed files, and typed 60 WPM 111

112 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Extensive experience using WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Q&A Database Translated for Latin American negotiations Prospect Hill Migrant Head Start, June, 1994 November, 1995 Provided translation, transportation services, and other services to migrant farmworker families Prepared and maintained all forms, reports, and parent and child records Formed partnerships and collaborated with local agencies and resources Scheduled, planned, and conducted parent activities, training sessions, and meetings Hired, trained, evaluated and daily supervised six transportation staff Developed bus routes and implemented changes as necessary Piedmont Community College, June, 1994 September, 1995 Family Literacy & English-as-a-Second Language Instructor Taught an English-as-a-Second Language & Family Literacy course to adult migrant farmworkers Coordinated weekly transportation services to and from the classes North Carolina Teaching Licensure Spanish K-12, English-as-a-Second Language K-12, and Graduate Level Birth Kindergarten 112

113 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Chris Love, E.I. Education M.S. B.S. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC Biological Engineering GPA: 3.6/4.0 North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC Biological Engineering, Environmental Engineering Concentration GPA: 3.6/4.0 Major GPA: 3.9/4.0 Master s Thesis Transpired solar duct for tempering air in North Carolina turkey brooder barn and swine nursery Relevant Coursework Agricultural waste management, soil and water engineering, ArcGIS, open channel flow, water quality modeling, surveying, hydraulics, research statistics, solar thermal and electric systems Experience Assistant Project Engineer, September 2012-Current Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. o Write Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMPs) for farmers o Create maps for plans, with extensive use of ArcGIS o Waste treatment system design o Carbon offset verification Masters Student, October 2010 August 2012 Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University o Researched impact of a transpired solar collector duct (thermal collector) on propane consumption and animal performance at two animal farms in eastern N.C. o With a faculty advisor, managed all aspects of project, including construction, field data collection, data analysis, interaction with integrators and producers, and report writing Research Assistant, September 2008 September 2010 (Full time May 2009 September 2010) Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University o Assisted with start up and ongoing maintenance for various research projects including measuring ammonia adsorption on activated carbon, chicken house air pollution reduction, swine lagoon purification, and others o Independently managed and carried out research for projects and formulated reports Skills ArcGIS and ArcSWAT Excel, SAS, Matlab AutoCAD and Civil 3D HEC-RAS, Retscreen 113

114 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Publications Love, C. D., P. Kolar, J. J. Classen, and L. Das Adsorption of ammonia on ozonated activated carbon. Transactions of the ASABE 54(5): Shah, S. B., P. Kolar, C. D. Love Feasibility of extracting ammonia from broiler litter and scale up considerations. Applied Engineering in Agriculture (in press). Love, C.D., S. B. Shah Transpired solar duct for tempering air in North Carolina turkey brooder barn and swine nursery. ASABE Paper No St. Joseph, Mich.: ASABE. Activities American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers member Engineers Without Borders - Bolivia Water Sanitation Committee (Head for fall 08 spring 09) o Traveled to Bolivia during July of 09 to implement rainwater collection system 114

115 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Tiffany Anne Preddy, E.I Hwy 96 Oxford, NC Objective: To obtain an entry-level position within the field of Environmental Engineering Education North Carolina State University May 10, 2014 College of Engineering B.S. Biological and Agricultural Engineering Environmental Engineering Concentration Passed Fundamentals of Engineering Exam (E.I.) December 2013 Work Experience Engineer Intern May 2014 Present Agri-Waste Technologies, Inc. Provide technical reports and CAD drawings for Senior Engineer Assist Senior Engineer with onsite wastewater system permits and designs Survey various site locations and perform septic inspections Summer Engineering Intern May to August 2013 Cormetech, Inc. Completed various projects involved in the company s production phase by using and implementing 5S strategies Developed policies optimizing box utilization Streamlined and leaned extrusion process Tear Down/Clean machine procedures Designed and implemented an DOE to enhance product defect characterization Conducted process analysis through Lean/Waste diagrams Conducted various project data analysis through Microsoft Excel Job Shadow Intern Spring Break March 2013 Cormetech, Inc. Validated Cormetech Durham site impervious surface using supplied plot plan determined compliance to Durham County impervious surface, storm water, and erosion watershed requirements Surveyed site and produced information and results in Microsoft Excel Summer Camp Counselor March 2010 to April 2012 Camp Oak Hill and Retreat Center Responsible for supervising daily camp activities and camper safety for girls ages 7 to 9 along with managing morning activity rotations 115

116 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, 2015 Academic Work Senior Design Green Roof Project, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC August 2013 April 2014 Designing and implementing a green roof for Carol Woods Retirement Center in Chapel Hill, NC Relevant Courses: Hydrology, Irrigation & Drainage Design, Soil Science, ArcGIS Water Modeling, Surveying, Stormwater Treatment Design, Wetland & Stream Restoration Skills: Microsoft Office, ArcGIS and SWAT Analysis, AutoCAD Civil 3D

117 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, References Origin Climate, Inc. Nick Facciola 4 Embarcadero Suite 1400 San Francisco, CA [email protected] Farm Power Northwest Daryl/Kevin Maas 1934 South Wall Street Mount Vernon, WA [email protected] AgRefresh Jeffrey Frost PO Box 843 Burlington, VT [email protected] North Dakota Farmers Union Liz Mathern PO Box 2136 Jamestown, ND x154 [email protected] Natural Capital Ryan Allen 224 E. Main Street Bozeman, MT [email protected] Environmental Credit Corp. Derek Six 101 S. Frasier St. 2 nd Floor State College, PA [email protected] Fibrowatt John O Neill One Summit Square, Suite Langhorne-Newton Road Langhorne, PA [email protected] HMI Energy Mike Casper P.O. Box 309 Kenosha, WI [email protected] Carbonless Promise Mike Lammi PO Box 787 Stillwater, MN x3 [email protected] National Carbon Offset Coalition Ted Dodge 305 West Mercury Room 405 Butte, MT [email protected] Camco Charles Purshouse 275 Century Circle, Suite 202 Louisville, CO [email protected] Mission Climate Milind Chittawar RH-13, Sanchayani Prestige Nagpur, India [email protected] 117

118 Version 2.3 Revised: February 13, Authorization of Management System Policy This management system policy outlines the roles, responsibilities and procedures of AWT for validation and verification projects. Top management, employees and contracted verifiers acknowledge, understand and have committed to act impartially and will avoid conflicts of interest. This document is authored by: Chris Mosley, Vice President The following top management personnel (board of directors) are committed to act impartially in all validation or verification activities and their signatures acknowledge approval of this document. Kevin Davidson, Chairman Date Jeff Vaughan, Member Date Chris Mosley, Member Date Hal Langenbach, Member Date Chris McGee, Member Date 118

119 Attachments A. Organizational Charts B. Sample Contracts C. Internal COI D. Impartiality E. Insurance Certificate F. Process to Select, Train, Formerly Authorize and Monitor Validators/Verifiers G. Training Process for Employees H. Training Process for Subcontractors I. Contracting of V/V Services J. Confidentiality/Non-Disclosure K. Control of Documents and Records Policy L. Program Procedures M. Project Overview N. Review of Initial GHG Info Checklist O. Risk Assessment Checklist P. Internal Protocol to Address Facts Discovered After Issuance of V/V Statement Q. Complaints, Appeals and Disputes R. Internal Audits S. Sampling Plan T. Reserved U. Reserved V. Reserved W. Verification Field Audit Protocol X. Verification Desk Audit Protocol Y. General/Project Specific COI Z. Validation Field Audit Protocol AA. Validation Desk Audit Protocol AB. Process for Adding V/V Criteria AC. Validation/Verification Plan AD. Financial Risk Assessment AE. Project Description Document AF. Internal Project Review Form

120 Attachment A. Organizational Charts

121 Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Organizational Chart President Jeff Vaughan Manages Septic/Soils Office Manager Lisa Tilley Septic/Soils Team Assoc. Agronomist/Soil Scientist-Chris McGee Environmental Tech./GIS Specialist-Julie Peele Soil Technician-Trent Bostic Project Engineer-Chris Love Vice President Chris Mosley Secretary Hal Langenbach Treasurer Kevin Davidson Manages Validation/Verification Manages Agriculture/Stormwater Manages Wastewater System Design Refer to V/V Organizational Chart Environmental Technician/GIS Specialist Julie Peele Project Engineer Chris Love, Tiffany Preddy Environmental Technician/GIS Specialist Julie Peele Project Engineer Chris Love, Tiffany Preddy

122 Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Validation/Verification Organizational Chart Director of Validation/Verification Chris Mosley V/V Team Leader Hal Langenbach or Kevin Davidson Internal Peer Reviewer Kevin Davidson or Hal Langenbach V/V Team Members Chris McGee Tiffany Preddy Chris Love Appeals/Complaints/Disputes Jeff Vaughan COI Auditor Lisa Tilley

123 Attachment B. Sample Contracts

124 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES This Agreement for Professional Environmental Services ( Agreement ) made and entered into on Date by and between client s name, (hereinafter referred to as "Client") located at clients address, phone, and AGRI- WASTE TECHNOLOGY, INC., a North Carolina corporation, having its principal place of business located at 501 N. Salem St., Suite 203, Apex, NC 27502, (919) (hereinafter referred to as "AWT"). R E C I T A L S: WHEREAS, Client is desirous of entering into a contract with AWT and AWT is desirous of entering into a contract with Client to perform professional environmental services (the "Services") for a property or facility located at various client sites covering the whole United States and foreign countries ("Site"), upon the terms and subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, AWT is engaged in the business of providing such professional environmental services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and for such other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby admitted and acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1.0 Retention of Professional Services. AWT shall perform the Services specified in Attachment A to this Agreement, which is incorporated herein by reference. The Services shall be performed as described in Attachment A, and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 2.0 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence as of the date of this Agreement and continue from time to time thereafter, subject to a right of the parties to terminate such Agreement as provided in Section 10.0 herein. 3.0 Compensation. 3.1 AWT shall receive compensation and Client shall pay AWT for the Services and expenses incurred in accordance with the payment schedule specified in Attachment A, which is incorporated herein by reference. Each invoice, on presentation, is due and payable by Client. Invoices are past due after 30 days. Past due amounts are subject to a service charge of 1.5 percent per month (18 percent per annum) on the outstanding balance. Attorney's fees and other costs incurred in collecting past due amounts shall be paid by Client. 3.2 The terms of this Agreement do not in any way relieve Client from the obligation to pay for services rendered for Client by AWT under another agreement or any additional services as specifically authorized by Client in excess of those stated in this Agreement. 3.3 The Client's obligation to pay for the Services contracted for is in no way dependent upon the Client's ability to obtain financing. 3.4 Unless specified otherwise, all payments received from Client shall be applied to the most outstanding account balance. 4.0 Warranties of AWT. AWT represents and warrants as follows: 4.1 That AWT has full right and power to enter into and fully perform this Agreement. 4.2 That AWT is or intends to be engaged in like or similar Agreements with other parties. 4.3 That AWT will perform the Services for Client in a professional manner, using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by and consistent with the standards of competent consultants practicing in the same or similar locality as the Project.

125 4.4 That each of the AWT personnel assigned to undertake the Services under this Agreement is professionally qualified to undertake such Services, and has received all applicable and appropriate certifications and licenses required to perform such Services. 4.5 That AWT will provide supervisory and other appropriate personnel with adequate experience with planning and engineering services to make professional judgments concerning the adequacy of the Services. 4.6 That AWT will, to the maximum extent reasonably possible, make all efforts to ensure the continuity of AWT personnel assigned to this project. 5.0 Warranties of Client. Client represents and warrants as follows: 5.1 That Client has full right and power to enter into and fully perform this Agreement. 5.2 That all information provided by Client to AWT regarding the Site and Services are complete and accurate to the best of Client's knowledge. 5.3 That Client owns or controls the Site, or has otherwise been granted access to the Site by the party that owns or controls the Site. If Client owns or controls the Site, Client agrees to furnish AWT and its agents and subcontractors a right-of-entry onto the Site and permission to perform the Services. If the Site is not owned or controlled by Client, Client represents and warrants that it has fully disclosed to AWT the conditions imposed on access to the Site by the party which owns or controls the Site. 5.4 That AWT has fully described the risks and limitations associated with the Services, including the risks and limitations associated with the review of available records, visual inspections, and sampling and analytical techniques which AWT will use to perform the Services, and that Client fully understands such risks and limitations, and that Client has engaged AWT to undertake the services described herein with such understanding. 5.5 That sufficient funds are available or will be available upon receipt of AWT's invoice to make payment in full for the Services. 5.6 That neither AWT nor any of AWT's consultants or subcontractors has offered any fiduciary service to Client and no fiduciary responsibility shall be owed to Client by AWT or any of AWT's subconsultants or subcontractors, as a consequence of AWT's entering into this Agreement with Client. 6.0 Protection Against Disclosure of Confidential Information. 6.1 AWT shall not directly or indirectly disclose or use at any time, either during or subsequent to this Agreement, any secret or confidential information provided to AWT by Client during the term of this Agreement unless (a) such disclosure or use is authorized by this Agreement, (b) such information is otherwise publicly available, or (c) AWT receives written consent by Client to so disclose or use such information. 6.2 Disclosure by AWT of any confidential information to any party designated by Client to receive such information shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement. 7.0 Reports. 7.1 In connection with the performance of the Services, AWT shall deliver to Client, or to any other party which Client designates, one or more reports or other written documents reflecting the Services provided, the results of such Services and AWT's evaluation of the results of such Services. -2-

126 7.2 All drafts and final versions of all reports and written documents delivered to Client are instruments reflecting the services provided by AWT pursuant to this Agreement and are made available for Client's use subject to the limitations of this Agreement. 7.3 The Services, and any data, recommendations, proposals, reports, design criteria, and similar information provided by AWT to Client pursuant to this Agreement are provided for the exclusive use of Client regarding the Site, and are not to be used or relied upon in connection with other projects or by third parties. Computer disks, computer files or data on computers or disks are the property of AWT are not deliverable products or services, unless specifically identified in the attached Scope of Work. 8.0 Safety. With respect to the performance of the Services, AWT shall take safety precautions required by federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations, statutes or ordinances. AWT shall abide Client's safety rules to the extent that Client informs AWT of such rules. If Client conducts activities at the Site at any time scheduled by AWT to undertake Services at the Site, AWT shall not be responsible for Site safety, and shall have neither the right nor the obligation to direct or stop the work of Client's contractors, agents, or employees. 9.0 Independent Contractor The parties acknowledge that nothing contained in this Agreement shall create an employeremployee, joint venture, agency, or other relationship between AWT and Client. The parties acknowledge that AWT is acting as an "independent contractor." 9.2. Neither party s employees or agents are authorized to represent the other party or to make commitments in any form whatsoever on behalf of the other party unless expressly authorized by this Agreement or in a separate writing signed by the other party Termination of Contract. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven days' written notice in the event of substantial failure by the other party to perform in accordance with the terms hereof. Such notice shall specify a reasonable period of time to cure the alleged substantial failure to perform in accordance with the terms hereof. Such termination shall not be effective if that substantial failure has been cured before expiration of the period specified in the written notice. In the event of termination, AWT shall be paid for Services performed to the termination date plus reasonable termination expenses Unforeseen Occurrences. If during the performance of services hereunder, any unforeseen Hazardous Substance, conditions or occurrences are encountered which, in AWT's sole judgment, significantly affect or may affect the Services, the risk involved in providing the Services, or the recommended scope of Services, AWT will promptly stop that portion of the work and notify Client thereof. Subsequent to that notification, AWT may: (A) If practicable, in AWT's sole judgment and with approval of Client, complete the original scope of Services in accordance with the procedures originally intended in the Proposal; (B) Agree with Client to modify the scope of Services and the estimate of charges to include study of the previously unforeseen conditions or occurrences, such revision to be in writing and signed by the parties and incorporated herein; or (C) Terminate the services effective on the date of notification pursuant to the terms of Section 10.0 herein Force Majeure. Should completion of any portion of the Services be delayed for causes beyond the control of, or without the fault or negligence of AWT, including force majeure, the time for performance shall be extended for a period equal to the delay and the parties shall mutually agree on the terms and conditions upon which the Services may be continued. Force majeure includes, but is not restricted to, acts of God or the public enemy, acts of the Government of the United States or of the several states, or any foreign country, or any of them acting in their sovereign capacity, -3-

127 acts of Client's contractors or Agents, fires, floods, epidemics, riots, quarantine restrictions, strikes, civil insurrections, freight embargoes, and weather, which in AWT's sole judgment, may affect the services Indemnification Client agrees to indemnify and hold harmless AWT against all claims, suits, losses, and liabilities on account of injuries to, or death of persons (including employees of either party), or damage to property, in connection with or as a result of the performance of the Services undertaken pursuant to this Agreement except when such injuries, death, or property damage were the result of the sole negligence of AWT, or intentional act of AWT beyond the scope of the Services Absent negligence for which AWT, its agent or subcontractors is solely responsible, or an intentional act by AWT, its agents or subcontractors beyond the scope of the Services, Client agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless AWT against any claims by the owner or persons having possession of the Site other than Client which are related to alteration or damage at the Site due to the performance of the Services Insurance. AWT shall maintain at its own expense the following insurance subject to normal industry exclusions: (1) Workmen's Compensation Insurance for statutory obligations impose by Workman's Compensation or occupational disease laws; (2) Employer's General Liability Insurance; (3) Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance; (4) Professional Liability Insurance; (5) Pollution Liability Insurance. Certificates can be issued upon request identifying details and limits of coverage. Client agrees that liability on behalf of AWT shall be limited and shall not exceed the contracted value of services as specified in Attachment A Delegation And Assignment. AWT may delegate, orally or in writing, the performance of the Services to be provided by AWT under this agreement. Any such delegation shall not relieve AWT of its responsibilities under this Agreement Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any action brought by either party against the other arising out of this Agreement, or for the purposes of enforcing the Agreement or collection of any damages alleged to have resulted to one of the parties by reason of the breach or failure of performance of the other, the party prevailing in any such action shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and cost of suit as may be determined by the court Entire Agreement This Agreement, including all attachments and amendments to this Agreement, all proposals for services to be rendered by AWT, and other documents incorporated into the above by reference, represents the entire understanding and agreement between the parties hereto related to the Services and supersedes any and all prior agreements, whether written or oral, that may exist between the parties regarding same To the extent that any additional or different Terms or Conditions of this Agreement, the Terms and Conditions of this Agreement shall govern. No amendment or modifications to this Agreement or any waiver of any provisions hereof shall be effective unless in writing, signed by both parties Modification of Agreement. This Agreement may not be modified except in writing signed by the parties hereto Errors, Omissions or Misrepresentation AWT will assess errors, omissions or misrepresentations to the best of their ability based on the full context within which information is presented. -4-

128 20.0 Notice. All notices required to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be delivered if personally delivered or dispatched by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage paid, addressed to the parties as follows: Client: AWT: Company Name Attn: Contact Name Street Address City, State, Zip Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Attn: Team Leader 501 N. Salem St., Suite 203 Apex, N.C Notice shall be deemed given on the date that it is deposited in the mail in accordance with the foregoing. Any party may change the address to which to send notices by notifying the other party of such change of address in writing in accordance with the foregoing Paragraph Headings. The subject headings of the paragraphs of this Agreement are included for purposes of convenience only and shall not affect the construction of interpretation of any of its provisions Severability. In the event that any of the terms of this Agreement are held to be partially or wholly invalid or unenforceable for any reason whatsoever, such holdings shall not affect, alter, modify or impair in any manner whatsoever, any of the other terms, or the remaining portion of any term, held to be partially invalid or unenforceable Gender. Whenever required by the context, the singular number shall include the plural number, the plural number shall include the singular number, the masculine gender shall include the neuter and feminine genders and vice versa Waiver. The failure of AWT or Client at any time to demand strict performance by the other of any terms, covenants or conditions set forth herein shall not be construed as a continuing waiver or relinquishment thereof, and either party may, at any time, demand strict and complete performance by the other of said terms, covenants or conditions Governing Law/Venue. It is the intent of the parties hereto that all questions with respect to the construction of this Agreement and the rights and liabilities of the parties hereto shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of the laws of the state of North Carolina, in such case made and provided. Venue, for the purposes of this Agreement, shall be considered the county of Wake and state of North Carolina Invalid Provision. The invalidity or unenforceability of any other particular provision of this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provisions were omitted. -5-

129 27.0 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives. CLIENT: By: Title: Insert Client Name, Project Name, Reporting Period AGRI-WASTE TECHNOLOGY, INC., a North Carolina corporation: Insert Team Leader Name, Team Leader -6-

130 ATTACHMENT A AWT retains authority and legal responsibility for all validation activities, decisions and validation statements. Clients are authorized to use any statements contained within their validation document, as long as AWT is properly referenced. Clients, however, are not permitted to use the AWT logo on any of their marketing material, public information sources or documents, unless a signed written request by the client has been authorized. If required, it is the responsibility of the client or responsible party to make provisions to accommodate observers. Observers could include ANSI representatives, program representatives or AWT personnel. No additional fees are collected by AWT to accommodate observers. AWT will perform validation of the following project (DESCRIBE) based on the DESCRIBE GHG PROGRAM AND PROTOCOL, ISO 14064, ISO 14065, ISO 14066, IAF MD6 and AWT internal procedures required to fulfill the ANSI requirements. Objective: Enter objective of project here to include service provided and intention of client. Scope: Enter scope of project here to include: GHG project and baseline scenario, physical infrastructure, activities, technologies and processes of the project, GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs, types of GHGs, and time period. AWT will carry out an assessment of the likelihood that implementation of the planned GHG project will result in the GHG reductions asserted. Criteria: Enter validation criteria here to include program specific protocol. Level of Assurance: This is a reasonable assurance engagement meaning that AWT will provide a reasonable, but not absolute, level of assurance that the GHG offset project meets eligibility requirements and will likely result in the asserted GHG offsets. Methodologies for Determining Representative Samples: Copy information from sampling plan. Timeline: AWT will complete the validation report within amount of receipt of all information from client or responsible party. Materiality: AWT will assess any errors, omissions and/or misrepresentations and provide additional information requests, clarification requests and corrective action requests to client. The materiality threshold for typical VCS projects is 5% (Mega projects = 1%). Errors found in the sample in excess of 5% will trigger corrective action requests. Contracted Validators: I agree to allow name of company to complete validation services on behalf of AWT. This individual has received formal training to conform to the ISO 14066, ISO 14065, 14064, IAF MD6, ANSI requirements, policies and procedures and is qualified to complete such services based on their educational background, professional experience, training and qualifications. This individual guarantees to keep all client information confidential and independent from commercial and other interests and will notify AWT of any conflicts of interest. AWT takes full responsibility for validation activities performed by contracted validators. All validators sign a written agreement and comply with applicable policies and procedures of AWT. -7-

131 Cost Estimate:( EXAMPLE) The total cost estimate (including travel time, travel expenses, office work/desk audit, validation report development, and office expenses) for this project will be $FEE. Invoices will be sent monthly based on time and materials according to the attached schedule of fees (Attachment B). Prior written notification in the form of a contract addendum will be provided to the Client for signature prior to initiating any work exceeding this cost estimate. Client Date Team Leader, Agri-Waste Technology Date Insert Client Name, Project Name, Reporting Period -8-

132 ATTACHMENT B SCHEDULE OF FEES Fees for the Year 2015 AWT will invoice Client at a rate as outlined in Attachment B for providing the services listed. Staff Kevin Davidson Chris Mosley Hal Langenbach Jeff Vaughan Chris McGee Julie Davidson Scott Jones Chris Love Tiffany Preddy Nancy DeRosa Lisa Tilley Rate $ per hr; $1, per day $ per hr (legal rate) $ per hr; $1, per day $ per hr (legal rate) $ per hr; $1, per day $ per hr (legal rate) $ per hr; $1, per day $ per hr (legal rate) $70.00 per hr; $ per day $61.00 per hr; $ per day $50.00 per hr; $ per day $50.00 per hr; $ per day $40.00 per hr; $ per day $40.00 per hr; $ per day $40.00 per hr In order to ensure client satisfaction, the following arrangements are proposed to ensure that the amount invoiced does not exceed expectations: - Client will be invoiced on a monthly basis. - A cost estimate is provided prior to beginning work on any projects not outlined in this scope of services. Other arrangements will be considered at Client's recommendation. Reimbursable Expenses: Air Travel Cost Lodging Cost Mileage $0.565/mile Meals Cost Outside Sub-Consultants Cost + 15% Miscellaneous Direct Project Expenses Cost + 15% Copies of Reports $0.16/Page + $5.00 Binding Fee Plotted Drawings $1.75 Per Square Foot 8-1/2" X 11-1/2" Color Drawings $1.00 Each Archive Records $25.00 Fee + Copy Charge Postage Cost Shipping (Fed Ex, UPS, etc.) Cost Fax - Incoming $0.50/Page Envelopes - Letter Size $0.05 Each Envelopes - Large $0.15 Each Envelopes - Oversize $0.25 Each Notebooks $4.00 Each Insertable Big Tabs $0.20 Each Clear Label Dividers 5/8 Tab $1.00 Each Laser Dividers $5.00 Per Set CD $1.00 Each -9-

133 Binding Supplies $1.00 Each Invoices shall be sent to client on a monthly basis. Invoices are due and payable in full upon receipt. Any amounts outstanding after 30 days are considered past due and shall accrue at 1.50% per month (18% per annum) late fee until paid in full. AWT shall stop work and commence collection action on any projects with past-due amounts outstanding for greater than 30 days past date of invoice. Client Date Team Leader, Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Date Insert Client Name, Project Name, Reporting Period -10-

134 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES This Agreement for Professional Environmental Services ( Agreement ) made and entered into on DATE by and between CLIENT, (hereinafter referred to as "Client") located at ADDRESS, Phone:PHONE#, ADDRESS and AGRI-WASTE TECHNOLOGY, INC., a North Carolina corporation, having its principal place of business located at 501 N. Salem St., Suite 203, Apex, NC 27502, (919) (hereinafter referred to as "AWT"). RECITALS: WHEREAS, Client is desirous of entering into a contract with AWT and AWT is desirous of entering into a contract with Client to perform professional environmental services (the "Services") for a property or facility located at various sites covering the whole United States and foreign countries ("Site"), upon the terms and subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, AWT is engaged in the business of providing such professional environmental services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and for such other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby admitted and acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1.0 Retention of Professional Services. AWT shall perform the Services specified in Attachment A to this Agreement, which is incorporated herein by reference. The Services shall be performed as described in Attachment A, and in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. 2.0 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence as of the date of this Agreement and continue from time to time thereafter, subject to a right of the parties to terminate such Agreement as provided in Section 10.0 herein. 3.0 Compensation. 3.1 AWT shall receive compensation and Client shall pay AWT for the Services and expenses incurred in accordance with the payment schedule specified in Attachment A, which is incorporated herein by reference. Each invoice, on presentation, is due and payable by Client. Invoices are past due after 30 days. Past due amounts are subject to a service charge of 1.5 percent per month (18 percent per annum) on the outstanding balance. Attorney's fees and other costs incurred in collecting past due amounts shall be paid by Client. 3.2 The terms of this Agreement do not in any way relieve Client from the obligation to pay for services rendered for Client by AWT under another agreement or any additional services as specifically authorized by Client in excess of those stated in this Agreement. 3.3 The Client's obligation to pay for the Services contracted for is in no way dependent upon the Client's ability to obtain financing. 3.4 Unless specified otherwise, all payments received from Client shall be applied to the most outstanding account balance. 4.0 Warranties of AWT. AWT represents and warrants as follows: 4.1 That AWT has full right and power to enter into and fully perform this Agreement. 4.2 That AWT is or intends to be engaged in like or similar Agreements with other parties. 4.3 That AWT will perform the Services for Client in a professional manner, using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by and consistent with the standards of competent consultants practicing in the same or similar locality as the Project.

135 4.4 That each of the AWT personnel assigned to undertake the Services under this Agreement is professionally qualified to undertake such Services, and has received all applicable and appropriate certifications and licenses required to perform such Services. 4.5 That AWT will provide supervisory and other appropriate personnel with adequate experience with planning and engineering services to make professional judgments concerning the adequacy of the Services. 4.6 That AWT will, to the maximum extent reasonably possible, make all efforts to ensure the continuity of AWT personnel assigned to this project. 5.0 Warranties of Client. Client represents and warrants as follows: 5.1 That Client has full right and power to enter into and fully perform this Agreement. 5.2 That all information provided by Client to AWT regarding the Site and Services are complete and accurate to the best of Client's knowledge. 5.3 That Client owns or controls the Site, or has otherwise been granted access to the Site by the party that owns or controls the Site. If Client owns or controls the Site, Client agrees to furnish AWT and its agents and subcontractors a right-of-entry onto the Site and permission to perform the Services. If the Site is not owned or controlled by Client, Client represents and warrants that it has fully disclosed to AWT the conditions imposed on access to the Site by the party which owns or controls the Site. 5.4 That AWT has fully described the risks and limitations associated with the Services, including the risks and limitations associated with the review of available records, visual inspections, and sampling and analytical techniques which AWT will use to perform the Services, and that Client fully understands such risks and limitations, and that Client has engaged AWT to undertake the services described herein with such understanding. 5.5 That sufficient funds are available or will be available upon receipt of AWT's invoice to make payment in full for the Services. 5.6 That neither AWT nor any of AWT's consultants or subcontractors has offered any fiduciary service to Client and no fiduciary responsibility shall be owed to Client by AWT or any of AWT's subconsultants or subcontractors, as a consequence of AWT's entering into this Agreement with Client. 6.0 Protection Against Disclosure of Confidential Information. 6.1 AWT shall not directly or indirectly disclose or use at any time, either during or subsequent to this Agreement, any secret or confidential information provided to AWT by Client during the term of this Agreement unless (a) such disclosure or use is authorized by this Agreement, (b) such information is otherwise publicly available, or (c) AWT receives written consent by Client to so disclose or use such information. 6.2 Disclosure by AWT of any confidential information to any party designated by Client to receive such information shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement. 7.0 Reports. 7.1 In connection with the performance of the Services, AWT shall deliver to Client, or to any other party which Client designates, one or more reports or other written documents reflecting the Services provided, the results of such Services and AWT's evaluation of the results of such Services. -2-

136 7.2 All drafts and final versions of all reports and written documents delivered to Client are instruments reflecting the services provided by AWT pursuant to this Agreement and are made available for Client's use subject to the limitations of this Agreement. 7.3 The Services, and any data, recommendations, proposals, reports, design criteria, and similar information provided by AWT to Client pursuant to this Agreement are provided for the exclusive use of Client regarding the Site, and are not to be used or relied upon in connection with other projects or by third parties. Computer disks, computer files or data on computers or disks are the property of AWT are not deliverable products or services, unless specifically identified in the attached Scope of Work. 8.0 Safety. With respect to the performance of the Services, AWT shall take safety precautions required by federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations, statutes or ordinances. AWT shall abide Client's safety rules to the extent that Client informs AWT of such rules. If Client conducts activities at the Site at any time scheduled by AWT to undertake Services at the Site, AWT shall not be responsible for Site safety, and shall have neither the right nor the obligation to direct or stop the work of Client's contractors, agents, or employees. 9.0 Independent Contractor The parties acknowledge that nothing contained in this Agreement shall create an employeremployee, joint venture, agency, or other relationship between AWT and Client. The parties acknowledge that AWT is acting as an "independent contractor." 9.2. Neither party s employees or agents are authorized to represent the other party or to make commitments in any form whatsoever on behalf of the other party unless expressly authorized by this Agreement or in a separate writing signed by the other party Termination of Contract. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven days' written notice in the event of substantial failure by the other party to perform in accordance with the terms hereof. Such notice shall specify a reasonable period of time to cure the alleged substantial failure to perform in accordance with the terms hereof. Such termination shall not be effective if that substantial failure has been cured before expiration of the period specified in the written notice. In the event of termination, AWT shall be paid for Services performed to the termination date plus reasonable termination expenses Unforeseen Occurrences. If during the performance of services hereunder, any unforeseen Hazardous Substance, conditions or occurrences are encountered which, in AWT's sole judgment, significantly affect or may affect the Services, the risk involved in providing the Services, or the recommended scope of Services, AWT will promptly stop that portion of the work and notify Client thereof. Subsequent to that notification, AWT may: (A) If practicable, in AWT's sole judgment and with approval of Client, complete the original scope of Services in accordance with the procedures originally intended in the Proposal; (B) Agree with Client to modify the scope of Services and the estimate of charges to include study of the previously unforeseen conditions or occurrences, such revision to be in writing and signed by the parties and incorporated herein; or (C) Terminate the services effective on the date of notification pursuant to the terms of Section 10.0 herein Force Majeure. Should completion of any portion of the Services be delayed for causes beyond the control of, or without the fault or negligence of AWT, including force majeure, the time for performance shall be extended for a period equal to the delay and the parties shall mutually agree on the terms and conditions upon which the Services may be continued. Force majeure includes, but is not restricted to, acts of God or the public enemy, acts of the Government of the United States or of the several states, or any foreign country, or any of them acting in their sovereign capacity, -3-

137 acts of Client's contractors or Agents, fires, floods, epidemics, riots, quarantine restrictions, strikes, civil insurrections, freight embargoes, and weather, which in AWT's sole judgment, may affect the services Indemnification Client agrees to indemnify and hold harmless AWT against all claims, suits, losses, and liabilities on account of injuries to, or death of persons (including employees of either party), or damage to property, in connection with or as a result of the performance of the Services undertaken pursuant to this Agreement except when such injuries, death, or property damage were the result of the sole negligence of AWT, or intentional act of AWT beyond the scope of the Services Absent negligence for which AWT, its agent or subcontractors is solely responsible, or an intentional act by AWT, its agents or subcontractors beyond the scope of the Services, Client agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless AWT against any claims by the owner or persons having possession of the Site other than Client which are related to alteration or damage at the Site due to the performance of the Services Insurance. AWT shall maintain at its own expense the following insurance subject to normal industry exclusions: (1) Workmen's Compensation Insurance for statutory obligations imposed by Workman's Compensation or occupational disease laws; (2) Employer's General Liability Insurance; (3) Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance; (4) Professional Liability Insurance; (5) Pollution Liability Insurance. Certificates can be issued upon request identifying details and limits of coverage. Client agrees that liability on behalf of AWT shall be limited and shall not exceed the contracted value of services as specified in Attachment A Delegation And Assignment. AWT may delegate, orally or in writing, the performance of the Services to be provided by AWT under this agreement. Any such delegation shall not relieve AWT of its responsibilities under this Agreement Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any action brought by either party against the other arising out of this Agreement, or for the purposes of enforcing the Agreement or collection of any damages alleged to have resulted to one of the parties by reason of the breach or failure of performance of the other, the party prevailing in any such action shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and cost of suit as may be determined by the court Entire Agreement This Agreement, including all attachments and amendments to this Agreement, all proposals for services to be rendered by AWT, and other documents incorporated into the above by reference, represents the entire understanding and agreement between the parties hereto related to the Services and supersedes any and all prior agreements, whether written or oral, that may exist between the parties regarding same To the extent that any additional or different Terms or Conditions of this Agreement, the Terms and Conditions of this Agreement shall govern. No amendment or modifications to this Agreement or any waiver of any provisions hereof shall be effective unless in writing, signed by both parties Modification of Agreement. This Agreement may not be modified except in writing signed by the parties hereto Errors, Omissions or Misrepresentation AWT will assess errors, omissions or misrepresentations to the best of their ability based on the full context within which information is presented. -4-

138 20.0 Notice. All notices required to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be delivered if personally delivered or dispatched by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage paid, addressed to the parties as follows: Client: AWT: Company Name Attn: Contact Name Street Address City, State, Zip Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Attn: Team Leader 501 N. Salem St., Suite 203 Apex, N.C Notice shall be deemed given on the date that it is deposited in the mail in accordance with the foregoing. Any party may change the address to which to send notices by notifying the other party of such change of address in writing in accordance with the foregoing Paragraph Headings. The subject headings of the paragraphs of this Agreement are included for purposes of convenience only and shall not affect the construction of interpretation of any of its provisions Severability. In the event that any of the terms of this Agreement are held to be partially or wholly invalid or unenforceable for any reason whatsoever, such holdings shall not affect, alter, modify or impair in any manner whatsoever, any of the other terms, or the remaining portion of any term, held to be partially invalid or unenforceable Gender. Whenever required by the context, the singular number shall include the plural number, the plural number shall include the singular number, the masculine gender shall include the neuter and feminine genders and vice versa Waiver. The failure of AWT or Client at any time to demand strict performance by the other of any terms, covenants or conditions set forth herein shall not be construed as a continuing waiver or relinquishment thereof, and either party may, at any time, demand strict and complete performance by the other of said terms, covenants or conditions Governing Law/Venue. It is the intent of the parties hereto that all questions with respect to the construction of this Agreement and the rights and liabilities of the parties hereto shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of the laws of the state of North Carolina, in such case made and provided. Venue, for the purposes of this Agreement, shall be considered the county of Wake and state of North Carolina Invalid Provision. The invalidity or unenforceability of any other particular provision of this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provisions were omitted. -5-

139 27.0 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized representatives. CLIENT: By: Title: AGRI-WASTE TECHNOLOGY, INC., a North Carolina corporation: Insert Team Leader Name, Team Leader Insert Client Name, Project Name and Reporting Period -6-

140 ATTACHMENT A AWT retains authority and legal responsibility for all verification activities, decisions and verification statements. Clients are authorized to use any statements contained within their verification document, as long as AWT is properly referenced for as long as the project is in operation. Clients, however, are not permitted to use the AWT logo on any of their marketing material, public information sources or documents, unless a signed written request by the client has been authorized. If required, it is the responsibility of the client or responsible party to make provisions to accommodate observers. Observers could include ANSI representatives, program representatives or AWT personnel. No additional fees are collected by AWT to accommodate observers. AWT will perform verification of the following project(s) based on the Insert Registry Specific Protocol, as well as ISO 14066, ISO 14065, 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements, policies and procedures. List Projects Here Objective: Enter objective of project here to include service provided and intention of client. Scope: Enter scope of project here to include: GHG project and baseline scenario, physical infrastructure, activities, technologies and processes of the project, GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs, types of GHGs, and time period. Criteria: Enter verification criteria here to include program specific protocol. Level of Assurance: This is a reasonable assurance engagement meaning that AWT will provide a reasonable, but not absolute, level of assurance that the GHG offset assertion is materially correct. Methodologies for Determining Representative Samples: Copy information from sampling plan. Timeline: AWT will accomplish the field audit during the week of Date and complete the verification report within two weeks of receipt of all 2010 documentation from client name. Materiality: AWT will assess any errors, omissions and/or misrepresentations and provide additional information requests, clarification requests and corrective action requests to client name. Insert registry specific materiality requirements. Contracted Verifiers: I agree to allow contracted verifiers name to complete verification services on behalf of AWT. This individual has received formal training to conform to the ISO 14066, 14065, 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements, policies and procedures and is qualified to complete such services based on their educational background, professional experience, training and qualifications. This individual guarantees to keep all client information confidential and independent from commercial and other interests and will notify AWT of any conflicts of interest. Contracted verifiers name agrees to complete the project in its entirety and AWT takes full responsibility for all verification activities performed by the above designated contracted verifier. All contracted verifiers sign a written agreement and comply with applicable policies and procedures of the verification body. -7-

141 Fees: The total cost (including travel, travel expenses, office work/desk audit, verification report development, and office expenses) for this project is $Fee (½ payable after completion of the site visit and ½ payable at the completion of the verification report). Client Date Team Leader Date Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Insert Client Name, Project Name and Reporting Period -8-

142 Attachment C. Internal COI

143 Internal Conflict of Interest Version 1.1 A conflict of interest is a situation in which, because of other activities or relationships, impartiality in performing validation or verification activities is or could be compromised. AWT will strive to avoid any conflicts of interest through the following measures: AWT and its subcontractors avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest with the responsible party and the intended users of the information. AWT and its subcontractors will not validate and verify GHG assertions from the same GHG project unless authorized by the applicable GHG program AWT and its subcontractors will not validate or verify a GHG assertion where it provided GHG consultancy services to the responsible party that support the GHG assertion AWT and its subcontractors will be independent AWT and its subcontractors will not validate or verify a GHG assertion where a relationship with those who provided GHG consultancy services to the responsible party that support the GHG assertion poses an unacceptable risk to impartiality which could be based on: ownership, governance, management, personnel, shared resources, finances, contracts, marketing, and payment of a sales commission or other inducement for the referral of a new client AWT and its subcontractors will not validate or verify a GHG assertion using personnel who were engaged by those who provided GHG consultancy services to the responsible party in support of the GHG assertion AWT and its subcontractors will not offer products or services that pose an unacceptable risk to impartiality AWT and its subcontractors will not outsource the review and issuance of the validation or verification statement AWT and its subcontractors will not state or imply that verification of a GHG assertion would be simpler, easier, faster or less expensive if a specified GHG consultancy service were used AWT and its subcontractors will demonstrate competence and due professional care consistent with their roles and responsibilities AWT and its subcontractors will demonstrate ethical conduct throughout the validation/verification AWT and its subcontractors will reflect truthfully and accurately validation/verification activities, conclusions and reports AWT and its subcontractors will meet the requirements of the standards or the GHG program to which the responsible party subscribes Circumstances that Present an Actual or Potential Conflict of Interest: Performance of the following services for a client may result in a conflict of interest for AWT wishing to provide verification services to that client: Insert Client Name, Insert Project Name, Insert Year 1

144 Designing, developing, implementing, or maintaining a GHG emissions inventory Designing or developing GHG information systems Developing GHG emissions factors or other GHG-related engineering analysis Designing energy efficiency, renewable, or other projects which explicitly identify GHG reductions as a benefit Preparing or producing GHG-related manuals, handbooks, or procedures specifically for the project developer, project owner or technical consultant. Appraisal services of carbon or GHG liabilities or assets Brokering in, advising on, or assisting in any way in carbon or GHG-related markets Management over health, environment and safety functions Legal and expert services unrelated to verification services Conflicts of interest may occur if, in the previous 3 years, AWT, any related organizations such as parent or subsidiary companies or other organizations with which AWT has a long-standing financial or legal relationship, or any of the staff that will be providing the verification services (regardless of whether such staff were employed by AWT at the time) provided any of the services listed above. In addition, AWT is not allowed to provide any of the services listed above for at least 1 year following the cessation of performance of verification services for the client. V/V Members The following team leader, team members, internal peer reviewer and appeals, complaints and disputes member have concluded that there are no conflicts of interest between and themselves, therefore GHG validation/verification can indeed take place. Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Insert Client Name, Insert Project Name, Insert Year 2

145 Attachment D. Impartiality

146 Impartiality Version 1.2 AWT guarantees to act impartially and will avoid unacceptable conflicts of interest in all validation and verification projects, by management, staff members and contracted verifiers. Clients Name: Client s Main Contact: Phone: Address: Parent Company: Subsidiaries: Project Owner: Aggregator: Project Name: Specific risks to impartiality could include: Self interest: if any member of AWT acts partially for any financial benefit Familiarity: having a personal relationship with a client and not receiving proper validation or verification evidence to complete the project Self review: having an individual on staff review their own work and/or by providing consultancy and then assessing their validation or verification activities Sources of revenue: having a client pay for their validation or verification of GHG assertions Intimidation: an individual being coerced openly or secretly to do something that is not impartial AWT is able to maintain impartiality by abiding by the following safeguards: AWT s value of their reputation and any legal liability they could face AWT s commitment to abide by the professional standards and regulatory requirements regarding independence through ANSI By understanding the needs and expectations of our clients AWT s oversight by the COI Auditor, which is then audited by the V/V Director By establishing and applying methods to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of each project, by having an internal audit performed by the internal peer reviewer By identifying potential conflicts of interest and dealing with them appropriately Commitment by team leader, team members, internal peer reviewer and appeals, complaints and disputes representative to support the v/v process and to act impartially, by signing an Impartiality document for every validation and verification project that they are a part of. Insert Client Name, Insert Project Name, Insert Year 1

147 AWT has a strict policy when hiring, training and promoting personnel, which emphasizes the importance of impartiality, the potential risks that could arise and evaluating their impartiality regarding each client, so that they are successful at mitigating or eliminating any risks AWT follows a zero-tolerance policy. If impartiality is compromised the following steps would take place: The team leader would discuss the findings with the V/V Director. A conference call would then be placed with the client. AWT would then inform the protocol administrator about the findings. A solution would try to be resolved to include: o Removing the particular team member who compromised impartiality, or o Declining the project altogether if a reasonable solution cannot be reached. Mechanism for Oversight of Impartiality Lisa Tilley, COI Auditor, provides oversight to guarantee that impartiality is being achieved throughout each validation/verification project. The COI Auditor provides impartial monitoring and review to ensure independence. The following step-by-step procedures include: AWT is contacted by a client to provide validation or verification services A proposal by the Team Leader is constructed, which outlines the scope, objectives and level of assurance The COI Auditor is then provided with contact information for all involved parties and research regarding impartiality and conflict of interest takes place. AWT s validation and verification client base is completely different from our client base for other services offered. The COI Auditor then researches the source(s) of income. Validation/verification finances are overseen by the V/V Director. The combination of financial oversight provided by the Director and evaluation of sources of income by the COI Auditor demonstrates that commercial, financial and other factors do not compromise impartiality. Both the COI auditor and the V/V Director are completely independent from the validation or verification project. As long as there are no red flags regarding the sources of income and evaluation of finances, the COI Auditor researches each company to determine the client s parent company and any subsidiaries. All staff members are then made aware of these findings at the initial team meeting to determine if impartiality will be compromised by any of the members. If impartiality is compromised at this point, AWT would determine the necessary steps to maintain impartiality entirely to include: o Removing the particular team member that poses risks to impartiality, or o Declining the project altogether if a reasonable solution cannot be reached. Once it is determined that impartiality is not compromised, the team leader, team members, internal peer reviewer and appeals, complaints and disputes representative then sign the Impartiality (Attachment D) document, which confirms that all members will act impartially throughout the project. The Insert Client Name, Insert Project Name, Insert Year 2

148 Impartiality document must be fully executed on or before the registry specific COI evaluation is signed in order to provide an objective record that internal evaluation of impartiality has been carried out. At this point the members discuss any potential conflicts of interest, as well as any potential conflicts of interest that could arise and all members then sign the Internal Conflict of Interest (Attachment C) document. The Internal Conflict of Interest document must be fully executed on or before the registry specific COI evaluation is signed in order to provide an objective record that internal evaluation of conflict of interest has been carried out. If a conflict of interest would arise at this point, AWT would determine the necessary steps to eliminate conflict of interest entirely to include: o Removing the particular team member that poses a conflict of interest, or o Declining the project altogether. Registry specific COI evaluation forms are completed and submitted to the applicable registry for review and approval. Once impartiality is established and it is determined that no conflicts of interest exist according to internal processes and registry evaluation, a contract is finalized (signed) by the team leader. Validation/Verification Team Members/Internal Peer Reviewer/Appeals, Complaints and Disputes Representative: The following validation/verification team leader, team members and internal peer reviewer confirm to act impartially and acknowledge to the best of their knowledge that there are no known conflicts of interest by providing guidance and expertise for this project. The undersigned have the proper education and training to successfully assist in the specific areas assigned. Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Name/Title: Signature: Date: Insert Client Name, Insert Project Name, Insert Year 3

149 Attachment E. Insurance Certificate

150 Insurance Certificate Available from Hartsfield & Nash Agency upon request

151 Attachment F. Process to Select, Train, Formerly Authorize and Monitor Validators/Verifiers

152 Formal Process for Selecting, Training, Formally Authorizing and Monitoring Validators/Verifiers The following describes AWT s process of selecting, hiring, training, formally authorizing and monitoring validators/verifiers. The following process is relevant to new AWT employees (or current employees hired before process was officially in place): The v/v director receives and reviews a resume from an individual that is interested in assisting with the validation or verification process. If this individual has qualified experience and seems like a good addition to the team, a face-to-face interview is conducted. This allows both parties to outline goals, determine past experience and to answer any necessary questions. Once individual becomes hired, they immediately sign the Confidentiality/Non- Disclosure Agreement and Control of Documents and Records Policy The employee is then trained on the following: o Understanding of ISO 14066, ISO 14065, ISO 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements o Applicable GHG protocols o GHG terminology o Field audit procedure o Desk audit procedure o Specific training depending on their v/v roles and responsibilities (Team Leader/Technical Reviewer/Team Member) o CSA GHG certification (if applicable) For the field audit shadowing, the team leader walks them through the entire process and expectations at one of AWT s client s field visit. The employee will accompany AWT to additional field visits as necessary and will be trained according to AWT s procedures regarding necessary documentations, pictures, etc. that are expected for each visit. Upon successful completion of the training, evaluations and/or testing, the prospective validator/verifier is formally authorized by the Validation/Verification Director by way of letter of authorization. Documentation is maintained for each validator/verifier by the V/V Director along with annual auditing to include field audit spot checks, review of reports, interview of clients or responsible parties, etc.

153 The following process is relevant for each new subcontractor: The v/v director receives and reviews a resume from an individual that is interested in assisting with the validation or verification process. If this individual has qualified experience and seems like a good addition to the team, a phone interview is conducted. This allows both parties to outline goals, determine past experience and to answer any necessary questions. The next step includes meeting this individual onsite at one of our client s field visits (if necessary). At this point, the team leader walks them through the entire process and expectations and gets a feel of whether or not this individual would be an asset to AWT. The subcontractor is then trained on the following: o Understanding of ISO 14066, 14065, ISO 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements o Applicable GHG protocols o GHG terminology o Field audit procedure o Specific training depending on their v/v roles and responsibilities (Team Member) Once all training is complete, the subcontractor is required to complete the Contracting of Verification Services Form, which outlines that this individual has completed all necessary training to conform to the ISO 14066, ISO 14065, ISO 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements and is also qualified to complete such services based on their educational background, professional experience, training and qualifications. The subcontractor is also required to sign the Confidentiality/Non-Disclosure Agreement and Control of Documents and Records Policy Upon successful completion of the training, evaluations and/or testing, the prospective validator/verifier is formally authorized by the Validation/Verification Director by way of letter of authorization. Documentation is maintained for each validator/verifier by the V/V Director along with annual auditing to include review of reports, interview with subcontractor and selected clients or responsible parties.

154 Attachment G. Training Process for Employees

155 Training Process for AWT Validation/Verification Employees The v/v director receives and reviews a resume from an individual that is interested in assisting with the validation or verification process. If this individual has qualified experience and seems like a good addition to the team, a face-to-face interview is conducted. This allows both parties to outline goals, determine past experience and to answer any necessary questions. Once individual becomes hired, they immediately sign the Confidentiality/Non- Disclosure Agreement and Control of Documents and Records Policy The employee is then trained on the following: o Understanding of ISO 14066, 14065, ISO 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements o Applicable GHG protocols o GHG terminology o Field audit procedure o Desk audit procedure o Specific training depending on their v/v roles and responsibilities (Team Leader/Technical Reviewer/Team Member) For the field audit shadowing, the team leader walks them through the entire process and expectations at one of AWT s client s field visit. The employee will accompany AWT to additional field visits as necessary and will be trained according to AWT s procedures regarding necessary documentations, pictures, etc. that are expected for each visit. Upon successful completion of the training, evaluations and/or testing, the prospective validator/verifier is formally authorized by the Validation/Verification Director. Documentation is maintained for each validator/verifier by the V/V Director.

156 Attachment H. Training Process for Subcontractors

157 Training Process for Subcontractors The v/v director receives and reviews a resume from an individual that is interested in assisting with the validation or verification process. If this individual has qualified experience and seems like a good addition to the team, a phone interview is conducted. This allows both parties to outline goals, determine past experience and to answer any necessary questions. The next step includes meeting this individual onsite at one of our client s field visits (if necessary). At this point, the team leader walks them through the entire process and expectations and gets a feel of whether or not this individual would be an asset to AWT. The prospective contractor will accompany AWT to additional field visits as necessary and will be trained according to AWT s procedures regarding necessary documentations, pictures, etc. that are expected for each visit. AWT prepares and sends relevant training materials so that the contractor will conform to all applicable ISO, IAF and ANSI guidelines. The prospective contractor studies the material and completes the accompanying exam. Upon successful completion of the training and exam, the prospective contractor is formally authorized by the Verification/Validation Director. Once all training is complete, the subcontractor is required to complete the Contracting of Verification Services Form, which outlines that this individual has completed all necessary training to conform to the ISO 14066, 14065, ISO 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements and is also qualified to complete such services based on their educational background, professional experience, training and qualifications. They are also required to sign the Confidentiality Document and the Control of Documents and Records Document Documentation is maintained for each contractor by the V/V Director.

158 Attachment I. Contracting of V/V Services

159 Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. 501 N. Salem St., Suite 203 Apex, NC (office) (fax) Version 1. Contracting of Validation and/or Verification Services on Behalf of Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. I,, agree to provide independent, third-party validation/verification services on behalf of Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. (AWT). I have received formal training to conform to the ISO 14066, ISO 14065, ISO 14064, IAF MD6 and ANSI requirements and am qualified to complete such services based on my educational background, professional experience, training and qualifications. I agree to comply with AWT policies and procedures set forth in the AWT Management System Policy. I will keep all client information confidential and independent from commercial and other interests and will notify AWT of any conflicts of interest with potential clients or responsible parties. I agree to complete the portion of the projects assigned to me and will provide continual open communication between AWT, the client and myself. Consultant Date V/V Director Date

160 Attachment J. Confidentiality/Non-Disclosure

161 Confidentiality/Non-Disclosure Agreement Version 1.1 I, the undersigned, am aware that during the course of my employment at Agri-Waste Technology (AWT) or during the course of my subcontractor agreement, confidential information (such as product designs, marketing strategies, client information and files, pricing policies, etc.) will be available to me. All information disclosed to me and identified by AWT as confidential shall be treated as Confidential Information during the performance of the services included herein. Confidential Information shall not include (i) information which can be proven to have been publicly available at the time of receipt or which subsequently becomes publicly available through no fault of me, (ii) information which can be proven to have been known by me prior to the date hereof, (iii) information which can be proven to have been lawfully received from an unaffiliated third party without restriction on disclosure, provided such third party is not under an obligation of non-disclosure to me, or (iv) disclosure which can be demonstrated to have been compelled by law. I further understand this disclosed information is proprietary and critical to the success of AWT and therefore must not be given out or used other than for AWT business purposes. Furthermore, I am not permitted to remove or make copies of any disclosed client records, reports or documents without prior management approval. Finally, all employees and subcontractors are required to inform the client and/or responsible party before placing any disclosed information into the public domain. In the event of termination of employment (or completion) of subcontracting services), whether voluntary or involuntary, I hereby agree not to utilize or exploit such disclosed information with another individual or company. Signature Date

162 Attachment K. Control of Documents and Records Policy

163 Control of Documents and Records Version 1.1 All v/v related records are stored securely on AWT s internal server and appropriately identified, collected, indexed, filed, stored, maintained and disposed of properly as managed by the V/V Director. All electronically transmitted records are transmitted via or a password protected File Transfer Protocol (FTP) site that is only accessible by the V/V Director, V/V Team Leader, Team Members and the client. All reports to clients are transported via , ftp or FedEx. Records are only transmitted to the program registry and/or clients via , FedEx and/or using the FTP site. All clients records will remain confidential and onsite at AWT s home office, located in Raleigh, North Carolina. Upon request, records pertaining to the v/v will be retained or destroyed in agreement between the participating parties and in accordance with the v/v plan and any applicable GHG program and contractual arrangements. All records and documents shall be maintained according to the registry specific requirements. AWT records include the following information: Management System Policy and related documents All project related data submitted by the client or responsible party. Contractual agreements signed by client or responsible party and AWT Records pertaining to any decision-making (including justification for determining time requirement for validation/verification activities) Confirmation of the completion of validation/verification activities, including findings and information on material or non-material discrepancies Validation/Verification statements Records of complaints and appeals and any subsequent correction or corrective action, if applicable Personnel records, including evidence of the competence of validators/verifiers and technical experts Records of internal audits and actions taken based on the results of the audits Records of management reviews and actions taken based on the reviews All other records referenced in the Management System Policy I have read this document and understand the Document and Records Control Policy and agree to abide by the criteria listed above. Signature Date 1

164 Attachment L. Program Procedures

165 Program Procedures Chicago Climate Exchange Current program procedures relevant to CCX projects are located on the AWT Server under V-V Reference Documents\Chicago Climate Exchange. Climate Action Reserve (CAR) Current program procedures relevant to CAR projects are located on the AWT server under V-V Reference Documents\Climate Action Reserve. Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) Current program procedures relevant to VCS projects are located on the AWT server under V-V Reference Documents\Verified Carbon Standard. Pacific Carbon Trust Current program procedures relevant to PCT projects are located on the AWT server under V-V Reference Documents\Pacific Carbon Trust. American Carbon Registry Current program procedures relevant to ACR projects are located on the AWT server under V-V Reference Documents\American Carbon Registry. Air Resources Board Current program procedures relevant to ARB projects are located on the AWT server under V-V Reference Documents\Air Resources Board. 1

166 Attachment M. Project Overview

167 Project Overview Version 1.1 Project Name Client Address Contact Phone Initial Review of GHG Data Yes X No Risk Assessment Yes X No Sampling Plan Yes X No Verification Plan Signed Yes X No Internal Conflict of Interest Signed Yes X No Impartiality Signed Yes X No Conflict of Interest Signed Yes X No Contract Signed Yes X No Team: Team Leader Jeff Vaughan Phone (919) [email protected] Team Members/Roles: Team Members Julie Peele Phone (919) [email protected] Phone Phone Phone Phone Internal Peer Reviewer Chris McGee Phone (919) [email protected] Technical Expert Jeff Vaughan Phone (919) [email protected] Contract Jeff Vaughan Phone (919) [email protected] Site Visits Jeff Vaughan Phone (919) [email protected] Chris McGee Phone (919) [email protected] Phone Phone Data Collection Julie Peele Phone (919) [email protected] Chris McGee Phone (919) [email protected] Phone GIS Mapping Julie Peele Phone (919) [email protected] Phone Records Review Julie Peele Phone (919) [email protected] Chris McGee Phone (919) [email protected] Jeff Vaughan Phone (919) [email protected] Phone Verification Statement Jeff Vaughan Phone (919) [email protected] Complaints/Appeals/Disputes Hal Langenbach Phone (919) [email protected] Acknowledgement Client acknowledges that they have received and reviewed the Project Overview document and understand the active roles regarding all members of the verification team. I do not foresee any conflicts of interest with any members listed above in completing my validation/verification project. I do have an objection with the following team member(s) listed above in completing my validation/verification project and would like them removed from the project. Client Date Verifier Date

168 Attachment N. Review of Initial GHG Info Checklist

169 Version 1.0 Review of Initial GHG Information for Purpose of Development of V/V Plan and Sampling Plan 1. Project Description (Registry/Project Activities): Notes: Include description of appropriate GHG protocol and version and relevant project activities. 2. Level of assurance of V/V activity? Notes: Most projects are reasonable level of assurance engagements unless there is a circumstance that warrants other consideration. Discuss with V/V Director if reasonable level of assurance is not desired by the client or responsible party. 3. List relevant data reported in PDD, PID, MR or equivalent along with method of data recording: Notes: Important to consider all data (qualitative and quantitative) in order to prepare a comprehensive sampling plan. 4. Program/Protocol specific sampling requirements (if any): List all program or protocol specific sampling requirements and factor into the sampling plan. In the absence of program/protocol sampling requirements, apply greater scrutiny to data with high degree of uncertainty or limited QA/QC. 5. Objectives of V/V activity: List objectives of the v/v activity Insert Client Name, Insert Project Name, Insert Year

170 Version Describe the following: a. Baseline Scenario: b. Physical Infrastructure: c. GHG sources, sinks and/or reservoirs: d. Types of GHGs: e. Crediting Period: Notes: Ensure all have been appropriately documented prior to moving forward with the project. 7. Describe QA/QC Procedures Employed by Client/Responsible Party: Notes: Evaluate QA/QC procedures in conjunction with relative uncertainty of corresponding data and utilize to inform the sampling plan. 8. Describe any potential language issues or general field audit logistical issues: Notes: Note potential issues that need to be dealt with up front to avoid inefficiencies during the field audit. 9. Describe any requirements of the client or responsible party: Notes: Provide detailed description of AWT s expectations of the client or responsible party over the course of the validation/verification. Team Leader Date Insert Client Name, Insert Project Name, Insert Year

171 Attachment O. Risk Assessment Checklist

172 Version 1.0 Checklist for Determining and Controlling Risks Complete the following with reference to the complete list of GHG data compiled during the initial review of the GHG information. Incompleteness 1. Was there any exclusion of significant sources? Y N Notes: 2. Were there any incorrectly defined boundaries? Y N Notes: 3. Were there any leakage effects? Y N Notes: Inaccuracy 4. Any double counting? Y N Notes: 5. Any significant manual transfer of key data? Y N Notes: 6. Are sufficient processes in place to check and review calculation methodologies? Y N Notes: 7. Any inappropriate use of emission factors, assumptions or estimations? Y N Notes: 8. Is sufficient data available and reliable in order to perform validation/verification? Y N Notes: Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year

173 Version 1.0 Inconsistency 9. Any undocumented methodological changes in calculating GHG emissions or removals from those used in previous years? Y N Notes: Data Management and Control Weaknesses 10. Organization structure as it relates to the assignment of responsibility for monitoring and reporting GHG emissions. Notes: 11. Any insufficient checking of manual transfers of data from the point of origin and between calculation spreadsheets? Y N Notes: 12. Was there an internal audit and review process in effect? Y N Notes: 13. Any inconsistent monitoring, calibration and/or maintenance of key process parameters/measurements found? Y N Notes: 14. Have results from previous assessments, validations or verification been provided? Y N Notes: 15. Are the GHG information system and controls adequate? Comment on the approach and commitment of management to GHG monitoring and reporting. Y N Notes: Team Leader Signature Date Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year

174 Attachment P. Internal Protocol to Address Facts Discovered After Issuance of V/V Statement

175 Internal Protocol to Address Facts Discovered After the Issuance of a V/V Statement Although AWT obtains sufficient evidence and identifies relevant information up to the date of issuance of the v/v statement, it is possible that facts that could materially affect the v/v statement could be discovered after this date. AWT s assigned team leader will consider appropriate action if facts that could materially affect the v/v statement are discovered by the client, responsible party or GHG program after the issuance of the v/v statement including the following: Were the facts adequately disclosed in the GHG assertion? Yes No Notes: Does the validation/verification statement require a revision? Should the v/v statement require a revision, AWT will issue a revised v/v report and statement, which addresses the reason for the revision. Yes No Notes: Has this matter been discussed with the client, responsible party or GHG program? Yes No Notes: AWT Team Leader Signature Date

176 Attachment Q. Complaints, Appeals and Discputes

177 Complaints, Appeals and Disputes Version 1.3 AWT s objective is to ensure that all GHG information represents a true and fair account, by analyzing each GHG validation/verification project with respect to relevance, completeness, consistency, accuracy, transparency and conservativeness. In the event that a client deems that an aspect of their validation/verification project is not compliant, AWT will commit to the following procedures to ensure a timely, independent and effective resolution. AWT is responsible for all decisions at all levels and ensures that decisions based on complaints, appeals and/or disputes will not result in any discriminatory actions against the client. Facts Discovered After the Validation/Verification Statement AWT will consider appropriate action if facts that could materially affect the validation/verification statement are discovered by our client, responsible party or GHG program after the issuance to include the following: Determine if the facts have been adequately disclosed in the GHG assertion Consider if the validation/verification statement requires revision Discuss the matter with the client, responsible party or GHG program If the validation/verification statement requires a revision, AWT will meet with the initial validation/verification team members to discuss the concerns and to issue a revised report and statement, which specifically addresses the reason for the revision. AWT will obtain sufficient evidence and identify relevant information up to the date of the validation/verification statement. If facts that could materially affect the validation/verification statement are discovered after this date, AWT will consider appropriate action on a case-by-case basis. Complaints AWT will commit to the following regarding complaints: All clients must notify AWT in writing of their complaint and outline their objections The Project Manager assigned to the project will field the complaint and provide the client with a copy of AWT s Complaints, Appeals and Disputes document. AWT will safeguard the confidentiality and subject of the complaint Clients must acknowledge that they have received the Complaints, Appeals and Disputes document and return the signed form to AWT within 5 business days Upon receipt of complaint, AWT will confirm whether the complaint relates to validation/verification activities and whether the validation/verification body is responsible A validation/verification team member that was not originally assigned to the project in question will be chosen to review the complaint and determine a resolution, within 30 business days. Typically, this individual would be the President of the company. Once a resolution has been made, the Project Manager will contact the client in writing with AWT s outlined conclusion and any necessary modifications to the validation/verification statement or report The client has 5 business days to notify AWT in writing whether or not the complaint has been resolved If the matter can not be resolved between AWT and the client, a formal Appeal by the client will be made Appeals and Disputes AWT will commit to the following regarding all appeals: 1

178 All clients must notify AWT in writing of their appeal and outline their objections The Project Manager assigned to the project will field the appeal Upon receipt of appeal, AWT will confirm whether or not the following should occur: o To require additional documentation from aggregator or project owner for review o Determine whether another site visit is required A validation/verification team member that was not originally assigned to the project in question will be chosen to review the appeal and determine a resolution, within 30 business days. Typically, this individual would be the President of the company. Once a resolution has been made, the Project Manager will contact the client in writing with AWT s outlined conclusion and any necessary modifications to the validation/verification statement or report The client has 5 business days to notify AWT in writing whether or not the complaint has been resolved If the matter can t be resolved between AWT and the client, AWT will at that point contact the GHG registry and determine appropriate action. acknowledges receipt of the above Complaints, Appeals and Disputes document and understands the procedures and timelines outlined to successfully complete the complaint/appeal. AWT ensures a timely, independent and effective resolution of all complaints and appeals. Client Name (Signature) Phone Number Note: Signature is required only if the complaints, appeals and disputes process is being used by the client. Please return signed document to: Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. 501 N. Salem St., Suite 203 Apex, NC Attn: President of Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. 2

179 Attachment R. Internal Audits

180 Version 1.5 AWT s Internal Audit AWT s internal audit addresses existing and/or potential nonconformities and their causes, determining and implementing the actions needed, recording results of actions taken and reviewing the effectiveness of the actions taken. Internal audits will occur at least once a year, which will verify that AWT s management system is effective and to ensure that its operations continue to comply with all accreditation requirements, as well as all internal procedures. This internal audit will include the following: Be conducted by personnel independent of the function audited Timely corrective actions to ensure compliance with proper protocol Timely preventive actions to ensure continued compliance Ensure adequate recording of the function audited, the audit findings and corrective actions Verification and recording of the implementation and effectiveness of the corrective actions taken through follow-up audit activities Address all elaborated requirements in the present documents There are two components to the internal audit: Annual Full V/V Body Internal Audit: This audit is the most comprehensive of the internal audits performed by AWT. It is completed on a yearly basis by the V/V Director and the President unless more frequent audits are warranted. The V/V Director audits the functions of the COI Auditor, Team Leaders, Team Members, Technical Experts and Internal Peer Reviewers. The President audits the function of the V/V Director. The results of the Annual Full V/V Body Internal Audit are presented to the Board of Directors. The Board signs the results and the V/V Director maintains the results. The Team Member Performance Evaluation form, the Annual Full V/V Body Internal Audit forms are utilized for this purpose (attached). Management Review: This audit is carried out by the Team Leaders and includes a performance review of all team members under the supervision of the Team Leaders. It is completed on a yearly basis unless more frequent reviews are warranted. The management reviews are submitted to the V/V Director for review and are maintained by the V/V Director. The Team Member Performance Evaluation form is utilized for this purpose (attached). 1

181 Version 1.5 Team Member Performance Evaluation Part I Employee Identification Name Title Part II Significant Duties and Responsibilities A. List significant duties and responsibilities (attach list if necessary): Instructions: Evaluate the employee on the job currently being performed. Check (X) the box above the descriptions for each quality that most clearly defines the employee. Any additional comments or concerns can be included, as well. Knowledge of Work Consider knowledge of job gained through experience, general education and specialized training Well informed on all phases of work Well rounded job knowledge. Infrequently requires assistance Adequate grasp of essentials. Some assistance required. Requires considerable assistance Inadequate knowledge. Requires improvement to retain. COMMENTS: Quantity of Work Consider the volume of work produced under normal conditions regardless or errors COMMENTS: Rapid worker. Produces exceptionally high volume. Above average volume Average volume Often unacceptable, frequent errors or rejections Excessive errors or rejections. Requires improvement to retain 2

182 Version 1.5 Quality of Work Consider neatness, accuracy and dependability of results regardless of volume Exceptional quality. Practically no mistakes. Above average quality. Infrequent errors or rejections Acceptable, seldom necessary to check work Often unacceptable, frequent errors or rejections Excessive errors or rejections. Requires improvement to retain. COMMENTS: Initiative Consider contribution of new ideas and methods. Selfstarted. Works independently toward approved goals. Consistently and aggressively works toward approved goals Frequently sets and works toward approved goals Initiates activity within normal routine. Seldom initiates activity during normal routine. Need frequent direction. Requires improvement to retain. COMMENTS: Dependability/ Responsibility Consider the degree to which he/she can be relied upon to carry out duties COMMENTS: Consistently fulfills all job responsibilities and duties. Totally reliable. Can be depended upon to get the job done with little or no follow up. Very reliable. Assumes all responsibilities specifically assigned. Reliable. Accepts some responsibilities, but must be reminded. Fails to accept responsibility even when specifically assigned. Requires improvements to retain. 3

183 Version 1.5 Quality of Interpersonal Relationships Consider the degree to which employee interacts and works harmoniously with the public and co-workers COMMENTS: Use of exceptional tact and diplomacy. Cooperation and promotion of teamwork. Cooperates well with others. Frequently promotes teamwork and harmony. Adequate skills at promoting teamwork and harmony Has difficulty interacting with people. Frequent conflicts with others. Requires improvement to retain. Attendance Consider appropriate request and use of leave COMMENTS: Consistently regular in attendance. Adjusts schedule to work needs. Regular in attendance. Frequently considers work load when requesting leave. Generally present. Usually considers work load when requesting leave. Frequent absences. Impacts job performance. Excessive absences. Requires improvement to retain. Punctuality Consider prompt attendance with regards to employee s responsibilities Consistently prompt. Regularly prompt. Seldom Tardy. Frequent tardiness. Impacts job performance. Excessive tardiness. Requires improvement to retain. COMMENTS: 4

184 Version 1.5 GHG EVALUATION: GHG Terminology Consider the fluency of being able to properly discuss with clients and coworkers Expert Extremely Fluent Fluent Semi-Fluent, could use some reinforcement Non-Fluent, needs additional training to be able to complete working on these projects COMMENTS: Basis for Conclusion (What was reviewed?) Conformed to ISO 14604/14065 Consider ISO s guidelines, policies and procedures to able to complete validation/verification that conforms to ISO 14064/14065 Expert Extremely aware of ISO s guidelines and procedures Aware of the guideline and policies, but still poses questions Some-what aware of ISO s guidelines and procedures, but is still not completely clear Unaware of ISO s guidelines and procedures and needs additional training COMMENTS: Basis for Conclusion (What was reviewed?) Desk Audits Consider all material that has to be gathered, created and evaluated Expert Extremely efficient and rarely needs guidance and/or assistance Efficient, needs some guidance and/or assistance Some-what efficient, but is unable to independently complete task Inefficient, completely unaware of task and needs additional training COMMENTS: Basis for Conclusion (What was reviewed?) 5

185 Version 1.5 Field Audits Consider being able to coordinate/ communicate effectively with client, complete necessary paperwork and ability to use equipment on-site Expert Extremely aware of requirements and how to successfully complete Aware of requirements, but has questions while on-site and needs assistance Some-what aware of requirements, but can t complete independently, needs guidance Unaware of requirements, needs additional training COMMENTS: Basis for Conclusion (What was reviewed?) A. SUPERVISOR COMMENTS: Based on the appraisal you have made, please answer the following questions in your own words. Use additional paper if necessary. 1. In what ways has the employee contributed to AWT beyond normal requirements of their current position? 2. Yes No This employee is well suited for the type of work that he/she is currently performing? 3. Recommendations for additional professional development or training: 4. What is your overall evaluation of this employee? Excellent Above Average Average Poor Unsatisfactory 5. I have been employee s supervisor for years and months 6

186 Version 1.5 B. EMPLOYEE COMMENTS: I agree with the above evaluation and comments I disagree with the above evaluation and comments for the following reasons: Employee s request for professional or personal development or training: Development or training sessions/classes completed during the evaluation period: SIGNATURES Signature of Employee Date Signature of Supervisor Date 7

187 Version 1.5 Annual Full V/V Body Internal Audit (Team Leader/Internal Peer Reviewer/COI Auditor) 1. Follow-Up Actions from Previous Internal Audit: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 2. Understanding and Proper Execution of Policies and Procedures: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 3. Results of Internal and External Audits: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 4. Project Types in Which Involved: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 8

188 Version Status of Corrective and Preventative Actions: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 6. Results and Status of Quality Assurance Measures Undertaken: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 7. Fulfillment of Quality Assurance Measures: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 8. Status of Complaints, Disputes and Appeals: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 9

189 Version Recommendations for Improvement: 10. Projects Rejected or Placed Under Review: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 11. Other Relevant Issues, Such as Changes in the Volume and Scope of Work, Resources, Competences and Personnel Training: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: I agree with the above management audit regarding all comments. AWT Staff Signature Date V/V Director Date 10

190 Version 1.5 Annual Full V/V Body Internal Audit (V/V Director) 1. Follow-Up Actions from Previous Internal Audit: What is the status of corrective and preventive actions from the previous audit? Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 2. The Suitability of Policies and Procedures: Has the V/V Director s supervision of operational policies and implementation been sufficient? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 3. Results of Internal and External Audits: Have results of previous audits been documented and maintained by the V/V Director? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 11

191 Version Personnel Records: Are all personnel records maintained and up-to-date? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 5. Management System Policy and Related Documents Updated: Has the documentation of revisions to management system policy been handled adequately? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 6. Process of Selecting, Training, Authorizing and Monitoring Validators/Verifiers: a. Has the hiring process been followed based on company policy, along with all necessary documents signed, dated and filed accordingly? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 12

192 Version 1.5 b. Has the training process for employees been followed based on company policy, along with all necessary documents retained and filed accordingly? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: c. Has the training process for subcontractors been followed based on company policy, along with all necessary documents retained and filed accordingly? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: d. Has the authorization process been followed based on company policy, along with all necessary documents retained and filed accordingly? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: e. Has the monitoring process been followed based on company policy, along with all necessary documents retained and filed accordingly? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 13

193 Version V/V Resources Provided: Have adequate V/V resources including equipment and training been provided? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 8. Employee Competencies: Has competency testing been completed and records filed accordingly? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 9. Financial Risk Assessment: Have the financial risk assessments been handled adequately? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 10. Financial Reports: Are the V/V Director s financial reports up to date and accurate? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 14

194 Version Records Retention (Project Based): Have the records retention (project based) been kept up-to-date and complete? Y N Notes: Facts and Documentation Reviewed As a Basis for Conclusions Drawn: 12. Recommendations for Improvement: Notes: I agree with the above audit regarding all comments. V/V Director Date President Date 15

195 Version 1.5 The internal audit of each of the preceding functions is compiled as an annual internal audit report. The report is submitted to the board of directors for signature. Board of Directors: Kevin Davidson, Chairman Date Jeff Vaughan, Member Date Chris Mosley, Member Date Hal Langenbach, Member Date Chris McGee, Member Date 16

196 Attachment S. Sampling Plan

197 Sampling Plan Version 1.4 Client: Project Name: Date: Revised: Written By: The sampling plan is based on risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and/or misrepresentations that are identified throughout the verification process and is amended accordingly. This plan is used in developing the validation/verification plan and is approved by the team leader. The following elements are included in the sampling plan: Level of Assurance Typical Language: This is a reasonable assurance engagement meaning that AWT will provide a reasonable, but not absolute, level of assurance that the GHG offset assertion is materially correct. The level of assurance is used to determine the depth of detail that AWT designs into the validation/verification plan and sampling plan. AWT participates in reasonable assurance engagements meaning that AWT will provide a reasonable, but not absolute, level of assurance that the GHG offset assertion is materially correct or in the case of validations, that the GHG offset project is eligible and likely to result in the asserted GHG offsets. Verification Scope The verification scope is an up-front specification that indicates the type of validation/verification to be undertaken including types of GHGs and crediting years, GHG project and baseline scenarios, physical infrastructure, activities, technologies and processes of the GHG project, and GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs. The verification scope also includes the frequency of subsequent verifications. Verification Criteria The verification criteria is consistent with the ISO standard, IAF MD6 and the Insert Relevant Program Specific Protocol Here. Amount and type of evidence (qualitative and quantitative) necessary to achieve the agreed level of assurance AWT will examine the GHG data and information to develop an accurate account of the project s GHG assertion. AWT will determine whether or not the project conforms to the validation/verification criteria and any discrepancies will be addressed by the client or responsible party. AWT will then examine whether or not the validation/verification evidence collected supports the GHG assertion, by evaluating the collected evidence in the assessments of controls, GHG data and information and applicable GHG program criteria to support the GHG assertion. It will then be determined whether or not the GHG assertion is without material discrepancies and that AWT provided the level of assurance Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year 1

198 agreed upon in the original contract. Any modifications to the GHG assertion will then be evaluated, so that all evidence supports its findings. Specific data/information requirements to be provided by the client or responsible party include but are not limited to: Description of the procedures and systems used to collect, document and process GHG emissions data at the facility level Description of quality control procedures applied (internal audits, comparison with last year s data, recalculation by a second person, etc.) Listing of responsible individuals for collecting GHG emissions data at each site and at the corporate level, if applicable Information on uncertainties, qualitative and if available, quantitative Include list of all information/data that will be reviewed here including the quantity of data to review based on the risk assessment, AWT MSP document or program specific requirements. Methodologies for Determining Representative Samples AWT determines representative samples based on the requirements of the program and specific protocol. Absent specific requirements, AWT evaluates the specific project including data uncertainties, QA/QC procedures and methods for data collection to determine representative sampling intensity. Unless more rigorous sampling is deemed appropriate by the team leader, data that is automated and not subsequently manually transcribed is sampled such that automated calculations/aggregations are checked for a minimum of one data point per data set to ensure software is set up correctly. If material anomalies are observed, a corrective action request would be issued. Where data is manually transcribed, raw data utilized for GHG emission reduction calculations is sampled at a rate of the equivalent of 1 month out of 6 months or 2 months/year for all relevant data sets. Where spreadsheets are utilized, all formulas are reviewed to ensure accuracy. Should the field audit reveal inconsistencies in the project documentation and the implementation of the project in terms of data collection and management, the minimum sampling rate shall be doubled. Should the desk review of data and calculation procedures uncover material errors, the minimum sampling rate of desk reviewable data shall also be doubled. If program requirements set forth detailed sampling requirements that are more rigorous than the internal requirements listed above, the program requirements take precedence. Risks of Potential Errors, Omissions or Misrepresentations AWT assesses risks of potential errors, omissions or misrepresentations and reports relative magnitudes in this section. The risks are utilized to inform the sampling. Insert Table showing relative magnitude of perceived risks of potential errors, omissions or misrepresentations. Indicate the category of risk (inherent, controlled or detectable) for each source of risk. Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year 2

199 Attachment T. Reserved

200 Attachment U. Reserved

201 Attachment V. Reserved

202 Attachment W. Verification Field Audit Protocol

203 Verification Physical Site Inspection Procedure for Livestock and Waste Handling/Disposal Projects AWT will conduct a physical site inspection for all validated projects to verify that the implementation of the project activity and the steps taken to report emission reductions comply with the program criteria and relevant ISO guidelines. The site visit includes the following: Assessment of the implementation and operation of the validated project activity as per the project design document. The project activity is documented by AWT via photographs. Review of information flows for generating, aggregating and reporting the monitoring parameters. AWT observes the monitoring procedures and documents observations. Interviews with relevant personnel to confirm that the operational and data collection procedures are implemented in accordance with the monitoring plan. AWT interviews personnel responsible for operational procedures and data collection procedures including QA/QC procedures and documents results of the interviews. Cross-check between information provided in the monitoring report and data from other sources such as plant log books, inventories, purchase records or similar documents. AWT performs cross-checks according to the sampling plan. Check of the monitoring equipment including calibration performance and observations of monitoring practices against the requirements of the project design document and the applicable methodology. AWT observes the monitoring equipment as data is collected, calibration procedures and/or documentation and overall monitoring practices and records observations. Review of calculations and assumptions made in determining the GHG data and the emission reductions. AWT reviews the calculations and assumptions with the responsible party and records observations. Identification of QA/QC procedures in place to prevent or identify and correct any errors or omissions in the reported monitoring parameters. AWT observes QA/QC procedures and/or interviews personnel responsible for carrying out the procedures and records observations. All site visit observations are compiled by AWT personnel in a site visit report that is utilized in the preparation of the verification report. Should on-site observations raise concerns about the emission reduction assertions, the team leader should be immediately notified to determine if the sampling plan needs to be revised.

204 Attachment X. Verification Desk Audit Protocol

205 Verification Methodology (Desk Audit) Objective of Verification AWT ensures that the project activity has been implemented and operated as per the project design document (or equivalent) and that all physical features of the project are in place. AWT ensures that the monitoring report and other supporting documents provided are complete and verifiable and in accordance with the applicable requirements. AWT ensures that actual monitoring systems and procedures comply with the monitoring systems and procedures described in the monitoring plan and approved methodology. AWT evaluates the data recorded and stored as per the monitoring plan. Approach AWT reviews the monitoring documentation, the project design document or equivalent, monitoring plan, corresponding validation report (if available), previous verification reports (if any), applied monitoring methodology and any guidelines from the applicable GHG program. Methods This document addresses the desk review portion of the verification activity. The on-site assessment portion is described in a separate document. The desk review includes a review of the data and information presented by the project proponent or client to verify their completeness, a review of the monitoring plan and methodology (frequency of measurements, quality of metering equipment, calibration requirements and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures) as well as an evaluation of data management and the QA/QC system as it influences the generation and reporting of GHG offsets. AWT ensures there is a clear audit trail that contains the evidence and records to confirm or deny stated calculations. AWT determines whether sufficient evidence is available (frequency and coverage of full monitoring period), the source and nature of the evidence and uses comparable information when available to confirm that the GHG offset calculations are correct. AWT determines if the data collection system meets the requirements of the monitoring plan. AWT raises a corrective action request (CAR) if one of the following occurs: Non-conformities with the monitoring plan or methodology are found in monitoring and reporting; Mistakes have been made in applying assumptions, data or calculations of GHG offsets which impair the estimate of GHG offsets; Issues identified during validation have not been resolved. AWT raises a clarification request (CL) if information is insufficient or not clear enough to determine whether or not applicable requirements have been met. All CARs and CLs are resolved prior to issuance of the verification report or verification statement. Each CAR and CL are reported in the verification report so that the issues raised are clear along with how the project proponents responded, verification of responses and clear references to any changes in the monitoring report.

206 Specific Requirements Each verification activity involves the review of four main components relative to GHG projects: implementation, compliance with methodology, compliance with monitoring plan and appropriateness of data and calculations. 1. Project implementation in accordance with the project design document (or equivalent) Accomplished via on-site assessment (covered in separate document). 2. Compliance of the monitoring plan with the monitoring methodology AWT reviews the monitoring plan to determine if it fulfills the requirements of the applicable approved methodology. If the monitoring plan does not fulfill the requirements of the methodology then AWT requests a revision to the monitoring plan. 3. Compliance of monitoring with monitoring plan AWT reviews the monitoring results to determine if the monitoring activities are carried out in accordance with the monitoring plan. Project emission parameters, baseline emission parameters, leakage parameters and the management and operational system are reviewed. The management and operational systems are assessed to determine if the responsibilities and authorities for monitoring and reporting are consistent with the monitoring plan. The accuracy of equipment used for monitoring is assessed to determine if it is being utilized, maintained and calibrated according to the monitoring plan. AWT reviews monitoring results to determine if they are being recorded at the frequency designated in the monitoring plan. Additionally, AWT reviews QA/QC procedures relative to the equipment used for monitoring to determine if they have been applied in accordance with the monitoring plan. Each parameter required by the monitoring plan shall be listed in the verification report along with a clear statement detailing how each has been verified. 4. Assessment of data and calculation of GHG offsets AWT determines whether or not: a complete set of data for the monitoring period is available information provided in the monitoring report has been cross-checked calculations of baseline emissions, project activity emissions and leakage have been carried out according to the monitoring plan and the approved methodology assumptions used in calculations have been justified appropriate emission factors or other reference values have been correctly applied The verification report prepared by AWT shall contain: an indication whether data were not available due to lack of monitoring required in the monitoring plan any action taken by AWT to ensure the most conservative assumption has been made regarding missing data a description of how AWT cross-checked reported data

207 conformation that appropriate methods and formulas were utilized to calculate baseline, project and leakage emissions an opinion if the assumptions, emission factors and other reference values utilized in the calculations have been justifed.

208 Attachment Y. General/Project Specific COI

209 Conflict of Interest Version 1.5 A conflict of interest is a situation in which, because of certain activities or relationships, a person or organization is unable to provide impartial validation/verification services in relation to a potential client s greenhouse gas emissions, since the objectivity in performing such verification activities could be compromised. There are two types of conflicts of interest, which include the following: Personal Conflict of Interest Personal Conflict of Interest is when a relationship of an employee may impair the objectivity of the employee in performing validation/verification services. Organizational Conflict of Interest Organizational Conflict of Interest is when certain instances where the ability to render objective GHG validation/verification services may be affected by the services provided by, shared management and/or financial resources with, or other situations created by a parent organization or other related entities. Avoidance of Conflicts of Interest AWT determines and reports any conflicts of interest or lack thereof to the administering program. AWT will strive to avoid any conflicts of interest for each validation/ verification project through the following measures: AWT and its subcontractors avoid any actual or potential conflicts of interest with the responsible party and the intended users of the information. AWT and its subcontractors will not validate and verify GHG assertions from the same GHG project unless authorized by the applicable GHG program. AWT and its subcontractors will not validate or verify GHG assertion where it provided GHG consultancy services to the responsible party that support the GHG assertion. AWT and its subcontractors will be independent. AWT and its subcontractors will not validate or verify a GHG assertion where a relationship with those who provided GHG consultancy services to the responsible party that support the GHG assertion poses an unacceptable risk to impartiality which could be based on: ownership, governance, management, personnel, shared resources, finances, contracts, marketing, and payment of a sales commission or other inducement for the referral of a new client. AWT and its subcontractors will not validate or verify a GHG assertion using personnel who were engaged by those who provided GHG consultancy services to the responsible party in support of the GHG assertion. AWT and its subcontractors will not offer products or services that pose an unacceptable risk to impartiality. AWT and its subcontractors will not outsource the review and issuance of the validation or verification statement. 1

210 AWT and its subcontractors will not state or imply that verification of a GHG assertion would be simpler, easier, faster or less expensive if a specified GHG consultancy service were used. AWT and its subcontractors will demonstrate competence and due professional care consistent with their roles and responsibilities. AWT and its subcontractors will demonstrate ethical conduct throughout the validation/verification. AWT and its subcontractors will reflect truthfully and accurately validation/verification activities, conclusions and reports. AWT and its subcontractors will meet the requirements of the standards or the GHG program to which the responsible party subscribes. Climate Action Reserve CAR requires that all verifiers must demonstrate that they do not have significant conflicts of interest with participants in the following ways: Organizational COI In the application process, AWT demonstrates that we have internal mechanisms in place to help maintain our objectivity in verification activities. (Conflict of Interest Declaration of Ability & Intent to Comply) Case-by-Case COI Before a contract is signed, AWT demonstrates that any preexisting relationship between us and the participant will not impair impartiality in verifying a GHG emissions report. (NOVA/COI Form) Emerging COI For a period of one year following a verification, AWT will monitor our relationship with the participant to ensure impartiality has been protected throughout the verification process. (NOVA/COI Form) If AWT identifies a potential or actual COI, AWT will also submit a plan to avoid, neutralize or mitigate the COI situation. Furthermore under the CAR regulations, if AWT has completed any consulting services for a client, AWT must wait 3 years prior to providing any validation/verification services. AWT will demonstrate that our organization is capable of identifying and mitigating situations that would impair our ability to render an impartial verification opinion by demonstrating: Clearly-defined organizational boundaries, internal structures and relationships with other companies that have management or financial control over the applicant The presence of internal mechanisms to identify and mitigate organizational and personal COIs with any potential clients The ability to be objective in providing verification activities Chicago Climate Exchange The Chicago Climate Exchange requires that all verifiers must demonstrate that they do not have significant conflicts of interest with participants, by submitting the following: Statement of any potential or actual conflicts of interest that may result from undertaking verification projects CCX Conflict of Interest Questionnaire 2

211 All forms must be signed by both the participant and AWT and submitted to CCX VCS The VCS does not have specific requirements for evaluating conflicts of interest. Therefore, AWT utilizes the CCX procedure along with its own internal controls. Pacific Carbon Trust PCT does not have specific requirements for evaluating conflicts of interest. Therefore, AWT utilizes the CCX procedure along with its own internal controls. American Carbon Registry In order to fulfill the requirement by ACR, AWT must complete the American Carbon Registry Validation/Verification Body Project-Specific Conflict of Interest Attestation and submit it to ACR prior to initiating V/V activities. California Air Resources Board Specific procedures related to COI determination and mitigation for verification of ARB offset projects follow the requirements of Subchapter 10 Climate Change, Article 5, Subarticle 13, Section The potential for conflict of interest is deemed high where any of the situations described in Section (b) occur. The potential for conflict of interest is deemed low where any of the situations described in Section (c) occur. The potential for conflict of interest is deemed medium where any of the situations described in Section (d) occur. AWT will not provide verification services for a client if the potential for conflict of interest is deemed high. If the potential for conflict of interest is deemed medium and AWT intends to provide verification services for the client, AWT will submit a plan to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate the potential conflict of interest situation. The mitigation plan will include: 1) demonstration that members with potential conflicts of interest have been removed and insulated from the project, 2) explanation of any changes to the organizational structure or company to remove the potential conflict of interest and 3) any other circumstances that addresses other sources for potential conflict of interest. Prior to providing any offset verification services, AWT will submit an evaluation of the potential for conflict of interest (ARB form) that AWT, its staff, its related entities or any subcontractors may have with the potential client. The evaluation will include the following: Identification of whether the potential conflict of interest is high, low or medium Identification of whether any member of the offset verification team has previously provided offset verification services for the potential client and if so, which years. Identification of whether any member of the offset verification team or related entity has provided any non-offset verification services of any nature to the 3

212 potential client during the past 3 years. If so, the following will also be submitted: o Identification of the nature and location of the work performed for the client and an evaluation of whether the work is similar to the type of work to be performed during the verification o Description of the nature of past, present or anticipated future relationships with the client including: Instances when any member of the verification team has performed or intends to perform work for the client Identification of whether work is currently being performed for the client and the nature of such work Dollar value of work performed for the client in the last 3 years Whether any member of the verification team has any contracts to perform work for the client or a related entity Dollar value of work performed related to GHG reductions and removal enhancements for the client or related entities. o Explanation of how the amount and nature of work previously performed is such that any member of the verification team s credibility and impartiality should not be questioned. o A list of names of the staff that would perform verification services for the client and a description of any instances of personal or family relationships with management or employees of the client that represent a potential conflict of interest o Identification of any other circumstances known to AWT or the client that could result in conflict of interest o Attest in writing the following: I certify under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of California the information provided in the Conflict of Interest submittal is true, accurate and complete. Conflict of Interest situations will be monitored during the process of providing verification services and for a period of 1 year after the completion of verification services for an ARB offset project. If any situations arise that increase the potential for conflict of interest, these will be made known to ARB in writing and will include the description of actions that AWT has taken or proposes to take in order to avoid, neutralize or mitigate the potential for conflict of interest. If AWT or any of the verification team members enters into a contract with the client within one year after verification services for an ARB offset project are completed, AWT will notify ARB of the contract and the nature of the work to be performed within 30 days. AWT will notify ARB of any emerging conflicts of interest during the time verification services are being offered. Additionally, AWT will report any changes to its organizational structure including mergers, acquisitions or divestitures to ARB if any occur within one year after completion of verification services. Commitment to Impartiality AWT will act impartially and avoid unacceptable conflicts of interest in all validation and verification projects, by management, staff members and contracted verifiers. AWT is 4

213 able to avoid potential or actual organizational conflicts of interest because there are no other related entities involved (i.e. a parent company or subsidiaries). AWT utilizes a COI Auditor (Lisa Tilley) to oversee the mechanism for impartiality. The COI auditor is responsible for educating employees and subcontractors about issues relevant to maintaining impartiality as well as ensuring impartiality is maintained as validation/verification activities are accomplished. AWT will review all information received from clients and/or responsible parties to determine potential risks to impartiality. Potential personal conflicts of interest are determined by the utilization of an Internal Conflict of Interest document that is signed by each validation/verification team member for every validation/verification project. Impartiality is documented through the use of an Impartiality document. Mechanism for Oversight of Impartiality Lisa Tilley, COI Auditor, provides oversight to guarantee that impartiality is being achieved throughout each validation/verification project. The COI Auditor provides impartial monitoring and review to ensure independence. The following step-by-step procedures include: AWT is contacted by a client to provide validation or verification services A proposal by the Team Leader is constructed, which outlines the scope, objectives and levels of assurance The COI Auditor is then provided with contact information for all involved parties and research regarding impartiality and conflict of interest takes place. AWT s validation and verification client base is completely different from our client base for other services offered. The COI Auditor then researches the source(s) of income. Validation/verification finances are overseen by the V/V Director. The combination of financial oversight provided by the Director and evaluation of sources of income by the COI Auditor demonstrates that commercial, financial and other factors do not compromise impartiality. Both the COI auditor and the V/V Director are completely independent from the validation or verification project. As long as there are no red flags regarding the sources of income and evaluation of finances, then the COI Auditor researches each company to determine the client s parent company and any subsidiaries. All staff members are then made aware of these findings at the initial team meeting to determine if impartiality will be compromised by any of the members. If impartiality is compromised at this point, AWT would determine the necessary steps to maintain impartiality to include: o Removing the particular team member that poses risks to impartiality, or o Declining the project altogether if a reasonable solution cannot be reached. Once it is determined that impartiality is not compromised, the team leader, team members, internal peer reviewer and appeals, complaints and disputes representative then sign the Impartiality (Attachment D) document, which confirms that all members will act impartially throughout the project. The Impartiality document must be fully executed on or before the registry specific 5

214 COI evaluation is signed in order to provide an objective record that internal evaluation of impartiality has been carried out. At this point the members discuss any potential conflicts of interest, as well as any potential conflicts of interest that could arise and all members then sign the Internal Conflict of Interest (Attachment C) document. The Internal Conflict of Interest document must be fully executed on or before the registry specific COI evaluation is signed in order to provide an objective record that internal evaluation of conflict of interest has been carried out. If a conflict of interest would arise at this point, AWT would determine the necessary steps to eliminate conflict of interest entirely to include: o Removing the particular team member that poses a conflict of interest, or o Declining the project altogether. Registry specific COI evaluation forms are completed and submitted to the applicable registry for review and approval. Once impartiality is established and it is determined that no conflicts of interest exist according to internal processes and registry evaluation, a contract is finalized (signed) by the team leader. Liability and Financing AWT evaluates all financial risks associated with all validation/verification projects. AWT enters into a contract with each client, prior to starting any portion of the project. The contract outlines the budgeted allotment to successfully complete their validation/verification project. Once the contract is signed, the client is obligated to pay AWT the full amount according to the terms of the contract. AWT has sufficient arrangements, including money in reserves and through our insurance company, to cover liabilities arising from the activities and areas in which we operate. Each project is covered by general liability and professional liability insurance, which includes $4,000,000 per claim and $4,000,000 aggregate. AWT retains authority and responsibility for all validation/verification activities, decisions and verification statements. 6

215 Attachment A Conflicts of Interest Statement Required for Third- Party Verification Projects 7

216 Chicago Climate Exchange Conflict of Interest Client Clients Name: Address: Parent Company: Subsidiaries: Project Name: Client s Main Contact: Phone: Projects: Requirement to Submit a Statement of Conflicts of Interest: Before AWT and its subcontractors begin any verification work for a CCX Member or Participant Member, AWT must submit to CCX a statement of any potential or actual conflicts of interest that may result from undertaking such verification work. The statement shall include proposed steps that may be taken to avoid, mitigate or neutralize the potential or actual conflict of interest. The statement shall be signed by a representative of the CCX Member or Participant Member for which the verification work will be performed. The statement shall also refer to any appearance of conflict of interest that may arise even if this does not lead, in the opinion of the parties signing the statement, to a substantive conflict of interest. The CCX Offsets Committee shall evaluate statements of potential or actual conflicts of interest on a case-by-case basis and make recommendations on an appropriate course of action. AWT and its subcontractors shall make full disclosure in writing to CCX immediately of any change in circumstances that may lead to the emergence of any conflict of interest in the provision of verification services to any CCX Member or Potential Member for which it is currently providing such services. This disclosure shall include a description of actions taken or that will be taken to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate the actual or potential conflict of interest. Circumstances that Present an Actual or Potential Conflict of Interest: Performance of the following services for a CCX Member or Participant Member may result in a conflict of interest for AWT and its subcontractors wishing to provide verification services to that CCX Member or Participant Member: Designing, developing, implementing, or maintaining a GHG emissions inventory Designing or developing GHG information systems Developing GHG emissions factors or other GHG-related engineering analysis Designing energy efficiency, renewable, or other projects which explicitly identify GHG reductions as a benefit Preparing or producing GHG-related manuals, handbooks, or procedures specifically for the CCX Member or Participant Member 8

217 Appraisal services of carbon or GHG liabilities or assets Brokering in, advising on, or assisting in any way in carbon or GHG-related markets Management over health, environment and safety functions Legal and expert services unrelated to verification for CCX purposes Conflicts of interest may occur if, in the previous 3 years, AWT, its subcontractors and/or any related organizations such as parent or subsidiary companies or other organizations with which AWT has a long-standing financial or legal relationship, or any of the staff that will be providing the verification services (regardless of whether such staff were employed by AWT at the time) provided any of the services listed above. In addition, AWT and its subcontractors are not allowed to provide any of the services listed above for at least 1 year following the cessation of performance of verification services for the CCX Member or Participant Member. Currently there is no maximum term for which AWT and its subcontractors may provide verification services to a CCX Member or Participant Member. However, in light of SEC rulings and other rules, laws, and regulations, regarding conflicts of interest for auditors and other professionals providing certification and verification services, this position may change. Other factors that may constitute a conflict of interest include, without limitation: If AWT and its subcontractors and the recipient of verification services share any board members or senior management If there is a financial, functional or structural link (e.g. common ownership, contractual arrangement, or informal contract) between AWT, it s subcontractors and the recipient of verification services, whether directly or through affiliated organizations (e.g. holding companies, parent companies, subsidiaries, formal partners, affiliates, etc.) If staff and senior management of AWT are involved in any commercial, financial or other processes that might influence their judgment and render it not impartial or not objective. Process for Evaluating Statement of Conflicts of Interest: The statement will be evaluated by the CCX Offsets Committee, which will recommend a suitable course of action in response to any potential or actual conflicts identified. The Offsets Committee may request additional information or a personal appearance in order to make their determination. 9

218 Organization Name: Organization Website: Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Mailing Address: 501 N. Salem St., Suite 203 Apex, NC CCX Member or Participant Member Requesting Verification: Organization Name: Project Name: Project Type Instructions: 1. Please print out and complete this form. 2. On a separate sheet, please answer the questions overleaf. 3. Any other papers attached as evidence should be clearly numbered and indexed and attached behind your answer to the questions below. Please Note: All information submitted to CCX is strictly confidential. All questions relating to any CCX-Approved Verifier, CCX Member or Participant Member shall include reference to any other organization with which such CCX- Approved Verifier, CCX Member or Participant Member has a financial, functional or structural link (e.g. common ownership, shared staff and management, contractual arrangement, or informal contract) such as a holding company, parent organization, subsidiary, formal partner or affiliate. A CCX-Approved Verifier shall be responsible for identification of any form of conflict of interest it may face, even if that type of conflict of interest is not specified in this document. 10

219 CCX Conflict of Interest Questionnaire Please respond to all questions. 1. Has your organization provided certification or verification services for the above-named CCX Member or Participant Member in connection with CCX or any other greenhouse gas trading, registry or other system during the previous three years? If yes, list the years and nature of the verification services provided. 2. Has your organization provided any non-verification services of any nature for this CCX Member or Participant Member during the previous three years? Are there any plans or contracts for your organization to continue to provide such services on an ongoing basis or in the future? If yes, what was the nature of the work performed? When was it performed? What was the scale of the work performed in dollars and/or percentage of your organization s revenue? 3. Document the structures and procedures in place in your company to identify potential or actual conflicts of interest and to avoid, mitigate or neutralize any potential or actual conflicts of interest identified. Identify steps taken in order to minimize any risks to your company's impartiality. 4. Identify all potential sources of conflict of interest that may arise if your organization performs verification services for the above-named CCX Member or Participant Member. If the potential conflict of interest may arise indirectly through an affiliated organization, please describe the nature of that link. 5. Please provide a list of names of the staff that may participate in providing verification services to the above-named CCX Member or Participant Members. For these staff, are there any instances of personal or professional relationships or financial interests that may represent a potential conflict of interest? If yes, please detail. 6. Provide details about the policies and structures your organization has put in place to avoid, mitigate or neutralize the specific conflicts of interest you have identified related to your organization s provision of verification services to the above-named CCX Member or Participant Member. 11

220 7. Are there particular reasons why this work should be considered sensitive, highly visible or subject to special scrutiny (e.g., press coverage, special Congressional interest, prior controversy, etc.)? We hereby warrant the truthfulness of the answers to all questions on this form and the attached statement and documentation and to any other questions that may be asked by CCX or its designated representatives. We agree to maintain the accuracy and completeness of the information contained in this form and the attached statement and documentation. We undertake to immediately notify CCX in writing about any material change in any information contained in this form and the attached statement and documentation. We authorize CCX or its designated representatives to obtain information from sources that they deem appropriate in order to adequately evaluate and process this form and the attached statement and documentation and to ensure the integrity and effective operation of the CCX in the future. We understand that failure to provide full and accurate information may result in the delay or rendering invalid of any decision made in response to the information contained in this form and the attached statement and documentation. Signed and accepted by duly authorized representatives of: CCX-Approved Verifier CCX Member or Participant Member Signature of Lead Verifier Print Name Title Date Signature Print Name Title Date 12

221 Climate Action Reserve Conflict of Interest 13

222 Climate Action Reserve NOVA/COI Form

223 Verified Carbon Standard Conflict of Interest Client Clients Name: Address: Parent Company: Subsidiaries: Project Name: Client s Main Contact: Phone: Projects: Requirement to Submit a Statement of Conflicts of Interest: Before AWT and its subcontractors begin any verification work for a VCS Member or Participant Member, AWT must submit to VCS a statement of any potential or actual conflicts of interest that may result from undertaking such verification work. The statement shall include proposed steps that may be taken to avoid, mitigate or neutralize the potential or actual conflict of interest. The statement shall be signed by a representative of the VCS Member or Participant Member for which the verification work will be performed. The statement shall also refer to any appearance of conflict of interest that may arise even if this does not lead, in the opinion of the parties signing the statement, to a substantive conflict of interest. The VCS shall evaluate statements of potential or actual conflicts of interest on a case-by-case basis and make recommendations on an appropriate course of action. AWT and its subcontractors shall make full disclosure in writing to VCS immediately of any change in circumstances that may lead to the emergence of any conflict of interest in the provision of verification services to any VCS Member or Potential Member for which it is currently providing such services. This disclosure shall include a description of actions taken or that will be taken to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate the actual or potential conflict of interest. Circumstances that Present an Actual or Potential Conflict of Interest: Performance of the following services for a VCS Member or Participant Member may result in a conflict of interest for AWT and its subcontractors wishing to provide verification services to that VCS Member or Participant Member: Designing, developing, implementing, or maintaining a GHG emissions inventory Designing or developing GHG information systems Developing GHG emissions factors or other GHG-related engineering analysis Designing energy efficiency, renewable, or other projects which explicitly identify GHG reductions as a benefit Preparing or producing GHG-related manuals, handbooks, or procedures specifically for the VCS Member or Participant Member 14

224 Appraisal services of carbon or GHG liabilities or assets Brokering in, advising on, or assisting in any way in carbon or GHG-related markets Management over health, environment and safety functions Legal and expert services unrelated to verification for VCS purposes Conflicts of interest may occur if, in the previous 3 years, AWT, its subcontractors and/or any related organizations such as parent or subsidiary companies or other organizations with which AWT has a long-standing financial or legal relationship, or any of the staff that will be providing the verification services (regardless of whether such staff were employed by AWT at the time) provided any of the services listed above. In addition, AWT and its subcontractors are not allowed to provide any of the services listed above for at least 1 year following the cessation of performance of verification services for the VCS Member or Participant Member. Currently there is no maximum term for which AWT and its subcontractors may provide verification services to a VCS Member or Participant Member. However, in light of SEC rulings and other rules, laws, and regulations, regarding conflicts of interest for auditors and other professionals providing certification and verification services, this position may change. Other factors that may constitute a conflict of interest include, without limitation: If AWT and its subcontractors and the recipient of verification services share any board members or senior management If there is a financial, functional or structural link (e.g. common ownership, contractual arrangement, or informal contract) between AWT, it s subcontractors and the recipient of verification services, whether directly or through affiliated organizations (e.g. holding companies, parent companies, subsidiaries, formal partners, affiliates, etc.) If staff and senior management of AWT are involved in any commercial, financial or other processes that might influence their judgment and render it not impartial or not objective. Process for Evaluating Statement of Conflicts of Interest: The statement will be evaluated by the VCS, which will recommend a suitable course of action in response to any potential or actual conflicts identified. VCS may request additional information or a personal appearance in order to make their determination. 15

225 Pacific Carbon Trust Conflict of Interest Client Clients Name: Address: Parent Company: Subsidiaries: Project Name: Client s Main Contact: Phone: Projects: Requirement to Submit a Statement of Conflicts of Interest: Before AWT and its subcontractors begin any verification work for a PCT Member or Participant Member, AWT must submit to PCT a statement of any potential or actual conflicts of interest that may result from undertaking such verification work. The statement shall include proposed steps that may be taken to avoid, mitigate or neutralize the potential or actual conflict of interest. The statement shall be signed by a representative of the PCT Member or Participant Member for which the verification work will be performed. The statement shall also refer to any appearance of conflict of interest that may arise even if this does not lead, in the opinion of the parties signing the statement, to a substantive conflict of interest. The PCT shall evaluate statements of potential or actual conflicts of interest on a case-by-case basis and make recommendations on an appropriate course of action. AWT and its subcontractors shall make full disclosure in writing to PCT immediately of any change in circumstances that may lead to the emergence of any conflict of interest in the provision of verification services to any PCT Member or Potential Member for which it is currently providing such services. This disclosure shall include a description of actions taken or that will be taken to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate the actual or potential conflict of interest. Circumstances that Present an Actual or Potential Conflict of Interest: Performance of the following services for a PCT Member or Participant Member may result in a conflict of interest for AWT and its subcontractors wishing to provide verification services to that PCT Member or Participant Member: Designing, developing, implementing, or maintaining a GHG emissions inventory Designing or developing GHG information systems Developing GHG emissions factors or other GHG-related engineering analysis Designing energy efficiency, renewable, or other projects which explicitly identify GHG reductions as a benefit Preparing or producing GHG-related manuals, handbooks, or procedures specifically for the PCT Member or Participant Member 16

226 Appraisal services of carbon or GHG liabilities or assets Brokering in, advising on, or assisting in any way in carbon or GHG-related markets Management over health, environment and safety functions Legal and expert services unrelated to verification for PCT purposes Conflicts of interest may occur if, in the previous 3 years, AWT, its subcontractors and/or any related organizations such as parent or subsidiary companies or other organizations with which AWT has a long-standing financial or legal relationship, or any of the staff that will be providing the verification services (regardless of whether such staff were employed by AWT at the time) provided any of the services listed above. In addition, AWT and its subcontractors are not allowed to provide any of the services listed above for at least 1 year following the cessation of performance of verification services for the PCT Member or Participant Member. Currently there is no maximum term for which AWT and its subcontractors may provide verification services to a PCT Member or Participant Member. However, in light of SEC rulings and other rules, laws, and regulations, regarding conflicts of interest for auditors and other professionals providing certification and verification services, this position may change. Other factors that may constitute a conflict of interest include, without limitation: If AWT and its subcontractors and the recipient of verification services share any board members or senior management If there is a financial, functional or structural link (e.g. common ownership, contractual arrangement, or informal contract) between AWT, it s subcontractors and the recipient of verification services, whether directly or through affiliated organizations (e.g. holding companies, parent companies, subsidiaries, formal partners, affiliates, etc.) If staff and senior management of AWT are involved in any commercial, financial or other processes that might influence their judgment and render it not impartial or not objective. Process for Evaluating Statement of Conflicts of Interest: The statement will be evaluated by the PCT, which will recommend a suitable course of action in response to any potential or actual conflicts identified. PCT may request additional information or a personal appearance in order to make their determination. 17

227 Organization Name: Organization Website: Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. Mailing Address: 501 N. Salem St., Suite 203 Apex, NC PCT Member or Participant Member Requesting Verification: Organization Name: Project Name: Project Type 18

228 PCT Conflict of Interest Questionnaire Please respond to all questions. 1. Has your organization provided certification or verification services for the above-named PCT Member or Participant Member in connection with PCT or any other greenhouse gas trading, registry or other system during the previous three years? If yes, list the years and nature of the verification services provided. 2. Has your organization provided any non-verification services of any nature for this PCT Member or Participant Member during the previous three years? Are there any plans or contracts for your organization to continue to provide such services on an ongoing basis or in the future? If yes, what was the nature of the work performed? When was it performed? What was the scale of the work performed in dollars and/or percentage of your organization s revenue? 3. Document the structures and procedures in place in your company to identify potential or actual conflicts of interest and to avoid, mitigate or neutralize any potential or actual conflicts of interest identified. Identify steps taken in order to minimize any risks to your company's impartiality. 4. Identify all potential sources of conflict of interest that may arise if your organization performs verification services for the above-named PCT Member or Participant Member. If the potential conflict of interest may arise indirectly through an affiliated organization, please describe the nature of that link. 5. Please provide a list of names of the staff that may participate in providing verification services to the above-named PCT Member or Participant Members. For these staff, are there any instances of personal or professional relationships or financial interests that may represent a potential conflict of interest? If yes, please detail. 6. Provide details about the policies and structures your organization has put in place to avoid, mitigate or neutralize the specific conflicts of interest you have identified related to your organization s provision of verification services to the above-named PCT Member or Participant Member. 7. Are there particular reasons why this work should be considered sensitive, highly visible or subject to special scrutiny (e.g., press coverage, special Congressional interest, prior controversy, etc.)? We hereby warrant the truthfulness of the answers to all questions on this form and the attached statement and documentation and to any other questions that may be asked by PCT or its designated representatives. We agree to maintain the accuracy and 19

229 completeness of the information contained in this form and the attached statement and documentation. We undertake to immediately notify PCT in writing about any material change in any information contained in this form and the attached statement and documentation. We authorize PCT or its designated representatives to obtain information from sources that they deem appropriate in order to adequately evaluate and process this form and the attached statement and documentation and to ensure the integrity and effective operation of the PCT in the future. We understand that failure to provide full and accurate information may result in the delay or rendering invalid of any decision made in response to the information contained in this form and the attached statement and documentation. Signed and accepted by duly authorized representatives of: PCT-Approved Verifier PCT Member or Participant Member Signature of Lead Verifier Print Name Title Date Signature Print Name Title Date 20

230 American Carbon Registry Conflict of Interest 21

231 American Carbon Registry Validation/Verification Body Project-Specific Conflict of Interest Attestation Before performing any validation and/or verification services for ACR project proponents or inventory members, ACR-approved Validation/Verification Bodies (V/VB) are required to complete and submit this project-specific conflict of interest attestation. Completed forms should be sent to Name of Validation/Verification Body (V/VB) Name of project proponent/corporate inventory member seeking validation/verification services from V/VB Name of project/corporate inventory for which validation/verification services are requested Date project-specific COI form submitted to ACR As agreed to in the Attestation of Verification Body : The ACR-approved V/VB will not conduct validation and/or verification with respect to any ACR project or corporate inventory where the V/VB or any member of the validation/verification team has a financial interest in the project or corporation, has played a role in developing the project or has any other conflict of interest. (Absent unusual circumstances, validating a monitoring or verification protocol and/or serving as a member of a scientific peer review process does not constitute having a role in developing a project.) Without limiting the foregoing, the V/VB will not conduct validation/verification with respect to a project or corporate inventory if an independent observer could reasonably conclude that current or prior personal or business relationships between the V/VB or its team member(s) and the project, project proponent or corporation present a conflict of interest. Please complete the following: 1. Describe all relationships in the last three years between the V/VB (and its affiliate organization(s), if applicable) and validation/verification team members, on the one hand, and the project, project proponent or corporate inventory being verified, on the other. If any of these past or current relationships involve affiliate organization(s) of the V/VB please describe the connection. Empowering the disadvantaged, increasing economic opportunity, and sustaining natural resources. Page 1 of 3

232 2. Describe the procedures and structures in place within the ACR-approved V/VB to identify and prevent/mitigate any potential or actual conflicts of interest. 3. Describe all potential conflicts of interest that may result in the V/VB providing validation/verification services to the project proponent/corporate inventory member. 4. List all staff and/or contractors of the ACR-approved V/VB who may provide validation/verification services to this project proponent/corporate inventory member. Attestation: We hereby attest that: a. Neither the ACR-approved V/VB nor any member of the validation/verification team has a conflict of interest with respect to this proposed work; b. All potential conflicts of interest have been identified and there are structures and processes in place to successfully avoid or mitigate them; c. All information provided in this form is accurate to the best of our knowledge; d. We will maintain the accuracy and completeness of the information contained herein by notifying ACR in writing to [email protected] of any material change. In witness whereof, the V/VB and ACR Project Proponent/Corporate Inventory Member have caused this Attestation to be executed by duly authorized representatives as of the dates set forth below. ACR-Approved V/VB ACR-Project Proponent/Corporate Inventory Signature of Lead Verifier Print Name Title Signature of representative Print Name Title Empowering the disadvantaged, increasing economic opportunity, and sustaining natural resources. Page 2 of 3

233 Date Date Empowering the disadvantaged, increasing economic opportunity, and sustaining natural resources. Page 3 of 3

234 Air Resources Board Conflict of Interest 22

235 California Air Resources Board COI Forms (Early Action and Compliance)

236 Attachment Z. Validation Field Audit Protocol

237 VCS Validation Physical Site Inspection Procedure For proposed VCS project activities in existing facilities or utilizing existing equipment, AWT will conduct a physical site inspection to confirm that the description in the project design document reflects the proposed VCS project activity. During the course of the site visit, AWT determines if the delineation of the project boundary is correct and meets the requirements of the selected baseline methodology. AWT also confirms that all sources and GHGs required by the methodology have been included in the project boundary. If the methodology allows project proponents to choose whether or not to include a source or GHG, AWT determines if the choice is justified based on observations during the site visit. AWT assesses whether the monitoring procedures described in the monitoring plan are feasible within the project design and the means of implementation of the monitoring plan are sufficient to ensure that the emission reductions achieved by the proposed VCS activity can be reported ex post and verified. AWT personnel will visit the project location and document (through photographs) all components of the project including GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs. Finally, AWT will interview appropriate personnel associated with the project who are responsible for undertaking monitoring activities to evaluate consistencies of the monitoring plan and the understanding of the responsible parties.

238 Attachment AA. Validation Desk Audit Protocol

239 Validation Methodology (Desk Audit) Objective of Validation AWT ensures that the project design of the proposed project activity meets the VCS 2007 or other GHG program requirements as approved under the VCS program. AWT reports the results of the assessment in a validation report. ISO is followed along with the requirements of VCS All VCS validation activities are reasonable level of assurance engagements. The validation criteria is VCS 2007 or other GHG program as approved under the VCS program. The materiality shall be 5% for all projects except mega projects (1% for mega projects). Approach AWT uses objective evidence to assess the completeness and accuracy of the assertions and conservatism of assumptions made in the project design document (PDD) or equivalent. Methods This document addresses the desk review portion of the validation activity. The on-site assessment portion is described in a separate document. AWT performs a document review including a review of the data and information provided by the project proponents to verify its correctness and credibility. AWT also cross-checks information provided in the PDD or equivalent with other sources if available. Follow-up actions include on-site assessments (described in a separate document) and telephone or interviews with relevant stakeholders in the host country and personnel with knowledge of the project design and implementation. Information provided by the interviewed personnel is crosschecked utilizing other sources or additional interviews as appropriate. AWT reviews available information relating to similar projects or technologies. AWT reviews the calculations to determine the appropriateness of the formula and accuracy of the calculations based on the approved methodology. AWT raises a corrective action request (CAR) if one of the following occurs: project proponents have made mistakes that will impact the ability of the project to achieve real, measurable, additional GHG offsets; applicable requirements have not been met; there is a risk that GHG offsets cannot be monitored or calculated. AWT raises a clarification request (CL) if information is insufficient or not clear enough to determine whether or not applicable requirements have been met. AWT raises a forward action request (FAR) to highlight issues related to project implementation that require review during the first verification of the project. All CARs and CLs are resolved prior to issuance of the validation report or validation statement. Each CAR, CL and FAR are reported in the validation report so that the issues raised are clear along with how the project proponents responded, validation of responses and clear references to any resultant changes in the PDD or equivalent. Stakeholder Consultation Process

240 The VCS makes the PDD or equivalent of the project activity publicly available. AWT takes into account the comments received and includes actions taken to account for these comments during the validation process in the validation report. Specific Requirements Each validation activity involves the review of the following components relative to GHG projects: project design, baseline, monitoring plan, calculations, environmental impacts and stakeholder comments. 1. Project Design AWT evaluates the following items in order to form an opinion on the accuracy and completeness of the project description and whether or not it is eligible under the VCS: the technology used project duration, crediting time and project start date Ownership Proof of title Double counting and whether the project participated in another emission trading program Project applicability to the VCS for projects rejected under other GHG program (if applicable) Whether the project is eligible under the VCS 2. Baseline AWT assesses the following to ensure the baseline methodology is properly selected: Approval of the baseline methodology AWT determines whether the methodology is correctly quoted and applied by comparing it to the actual text of the methodology Correct application and justification of selected baseline methodology AWT determines if the project activity meets the applicable conditions of the methodology by validating the documentation referred to in the PDD or equivalent and verifying that its content is correctly quoted and interpreted. Application of methodology deviations or revisions (if applicable) AWT determines if deviations or revisions are justified and appropriately applied. Appropriate setting of baseline scenario AWT determines whether all scenarios considered by the project proponent are reasonable and that no reasonable alternative has been omitted. AWT determines whether the baseline scenario selected is reasonable by validating the assumptions, calculations and rationales used to justify its selection. AWT determines whether the PDD or equivalent provides a verifiable description of the identified baseline scenario. Assessment and demonstration of additionality AWT assesses and verifies the reliability and credibility of all data, rationales, assumptions and justifications provided by the project proponents to support the demonstration of additionality.

241 3. Monitoring Plan AWT reviews the monitoring plan to determine if it fulfills the requirements of the applicable approved methodology and the means of implementing the monitoring plan are sufficient to ensure that the GHG offsets resulting from the project activity can be reported and verified. If the monitoring plan does not fulfill the requirements of the methodology or the means of implementation are insufficent then AWT requests a revision to the monitoring plan. AWT assesses the following to ensure the project proponents' ability to implement an appropriate monitoring plan: Approval of the monitoring methodology Correct application and justification of selected monitoring methodology Whether the monitoring plan provides detailed information related to the collection and archiving of all relevant data needed to: Estimate or measure emissions occurring from GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs Determine the baseline emissions Estimate changes in emissions from the site The frequency, responsibility and authority for registration, monitoring, measurement and reporting activities 4. Calculations AWT assesses the following to ensure the steps taken and equations applied to calculate project emissions, baseline emissions leakage and GHG offsets comply with the selected baseline and monitoring methodology: The appropriateness of the sources, sinks and reservoirs AWT evaluates the sources, sinks and reservoirs included in the PDD or equivalent to ensure all have been identified and properly accounted. The correctness and transparency of equations and factors used AWT determines whether equations and factors have been correctly applied by comparing them to those in the approved methodology. AWT verifies the justification given for the choice of data and factors used in the equations. AWT assesses any fixed data and factors that will not be monitored during the crediting period but have been determined for appropriateness and conservatism. The assumptions made for estimating GHG offsets AWT evaluates justification of any assumptions made to determine appropriateness. Uncertainties AWT evaluates uncertainties to determine if any will materially impact the expected GHG offsets. 5. Environmental Impacts AWT assesses the following to determine if the project proponents have analyzed the environmental impacts of the project activity: Requirements for and approval of an Environmental Impact Assessment (if applicable) The sufficient documentation of environmental impact

242 6. Stakeholder Comments AWT determines if the project proponents have taken into account any stakeholder comments received and have described the process in the PDD or equivalent.

243 Attachment AB. Process for Adding V/V Criteria

244 Documentation of Decision Making Process for Adding V/V Criteria Version 1.1 V/V Criteria Under Consideration Scope: GHG Program: Protocol: Required Outputs for Consideration Identify key stakeholders and their expectations and requirements as applicable to the outcome of v/v activities Comments: Review and understand the applicable v/v criteria requirements, involving the criteria owner, where applicable Comments: Consider AWT s strategic and business risks Comments: Identify the competency requirements for AWT s internal peer reviewers and support personnel Comments: Validation or verification criteria that is specific to the v/v requirements Comments: Confirm that the proposed v/v arrangements will meet and satisfy the v/v criteria requirements Comments: Recommendation by V/V Director Pursue Addition of V/V Criteria Do Not Pursue Addition of V/V Criteria Chris Mosley, V/V Director Date

245 Approval By Board of Directors The undersigned have read and considered the recommendation of the V/V Director and agree with the recommendation. Kevin Davidson, Chairman Jeff Vaughan, Director Chris Mosley, Director Hal Langenbach, Director Chris McGee, Director Date Date Date Date Date

246 Attachment AC. Validation/Verification Plan

247 Validation/Verification Plan Version 1.3 Client: Project Name: Date: Revised: Written By: Level of Assurance This is a reasonable assurance engagement meaning that AWT will provide a reasonable, but not absolute, level of assurance that the GHG offset assertion is materially correct. The level of assurance is used to determine the depth of detail that AWT designs into the validation/verification plan and sampling plan. AWT participates in reasonable assurance engagements meaning that AWT will provide a reasonable, but not absolute, level of assurance that the GHG offset assertion is materially correct or in the case of validations, that the GHG offset project is eligible and likely to result in the asserted GHG offsets. Validation/Verification Objectives The objective of this engagement is the validation/verification of the Insert Project Name Here against the Insert Program Specific Protocol Here for the purpose of registration with the Insert GHG Program Here. If the project is a verification project, then the objective would include an assessment of the integrity of the asserted offsets to the agreed upon level of assurance. If the project is a validation project, then the objective would include an assessment of the likelihood that implementation of the the planned GHG project will result in the GHG emission reductions and/or removal enhancements as stated by the responsible party. Validation/Verification Criteria The validation/verification criteria is consistent with the ISO standard, IAF MD6 and the Insert Relevant Program Specific Manuals/Protocol and project specific variances Here. Validation/Verification Scope The validation/verification scope is an up-front specification that indicates the type of validation/verification to be undertaken including types of GHGs and reporting period, baseline scenario, GHG project description (physical infrastructure, activities, technologies and processes), and GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs. The scope also includes the frequency of subsequent verifications. Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year

248 a. Baseline Scenario b. Project Description: Physical Infrastructure, Activities, Technologies and Processes c. GHG sources, sinks and/or reservoirs d. Types of GHGs e. Reporting Period f. Frequency of Subsequent Verifications Materiality Based on the full context within which the information is presented, AWT will assess any errors, omissions and/or misrepresentations and make requests to Insert Client Name for additional information, clarifications or corrective actions. Any discrepancy resulting in a material errors, will result in a corrective action request. The required materiality shall be established based on the requirements of the GHG program or in the absence of GHG program requirements, best professional judgement considering objectives, level of assurance, criteria and scope. Based on the Climate Action Reserve s methodology to determine the materiality threshold, the following will apply: For projects asserting less than 25,000 tco 2 e per year the materiality threshold is 5%. For projects asserting between 25,000 tco 2 e and 100,000 tco 2 e per year, the materiality threshold is 3%. For project asserting greater than 100,000 tco 2 e per year, the materiality threshold is 1%. Verification Activities (Example for CAR Landfill) Make appropriate substitutions/adjustments for other GHG Programs and Protocols. Agri-Waste Technology, Inc. (AWT) follows a consistent methodology for all Climate Action Reserve s U.S. Landfill Gas project verifications. 1. Participant selects verifier. V/V director performs financial risk assessment and assigns team leader based on sector using the project description document. 2. Team Leader prepares NOVA/COI form and submits to the COI Auditor for completion. COI Auditor determines if there are issues with COI and completes NOVA/COI form along with internal COI and impartiality documents. Team leader Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year

249 reviews these documents, obtains needed signatures and submits case-specific notification of verification activities and request for evaluation of Conflict of Interest form to CAR at a minimum of 10 business days prior to beginning any verification services (submit updated COI form every year). 3. After receipt of approval from CAR to proceed with the project, the Team Leader prepares the contract. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews contract. Team leader sends contract to client for signature. It should be noted that steps 3-8 are all occurring somewhat simultaneously. The specific order of completion is not important as long as all are completed prior to beginning step Team leader reviews preliminary documentation and any results of previous assessments (if applicable) from aggregator or project owner and discuss goals and constraints. This review will include determining the following: Nature, scale and complexity of the verification activity to be undertaken on the client s behalf Confidence in the responsible party s GHG information and assertion Completeness of the responsible party s GHG information and assertion and the eligibility of the responsible party to participate in the GHG program As part of the initial review of the project documentation, the Team Leader completes the Initial Review Form that is reviewed by the internal peer reviewer. Previous Assessments--If a previous verification has been completed for the client, then AWT would request a copy of the report to review it and make sure that all relevant information is addressed appropriately. Reviewing these reports helps to eliminate any duplicate site/desk audits and includes a review of the conclusion, so that it can be carried forward to the current report appropriately. 5. Team Leader assesses the controls for sources of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations, while taking the following into account: Selection and management of the GHG data and information Risk of a material discrepancy occurring Processes for collecting, processing, consolidating and reporting GHG data and information Risk that the controls of the organization or GHG project will not prevent or detect a material discrepancy Risk that the verifier will not detect any material discrepancy that has not been corrected by the controls of the organization or GHG project As part of the assessment of controls, the Team Leader completes the Risk Assessment Form that is reviewed by the internal peer reviewer. 6. Team leader forms verification team as well as negotiates and executes subcontractor agreements (if applicable). Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year

250 7. Team leader prepares sampling plan. Internal peer reviewer reviews sampling plan. 8. Team leader prepares the verification plan and submits to the client for signature upon review by internal peer reviewer. 9. Upon receipt of the signed contract and signed verification plan, the team leader completes project overview and submits to client for signature. 10. Team leader holds a kick-off meeting with participants, which includes: Introduction of the verification team Review and confirmation of verification process and scope, objectives, level of assurance, criteria and materiality Transfer of background information, underlying activity data and results of previous assessments (if applicable) Review and confirmation of the verification process and schedule 11. Conduct verification activities in accordance with the General Verification Protocol. Identify emissions sources Review methodologies and management systems Review project documentation for completeness Schedule and perform site visit/field audit Complete desk audit and compile site visit information Verify emission estimates Amend Sampling Plan if any new risks or material concerns that could potentially lead to errors, omissions and misrepresentations are identified. 12. Team leader prepares list of findings, internal peer reviewer reviews list and team leader submits to client. 13. Team leader prepares the verification statement and verification report. The verification statement is a brief, one-page summary that confirms the verification activities and outcomes. The verification report includes the following elements: a. The scope of the verification process b. The standard used to verify emissions c. A description of the verification activities based on size and complexity of the participant s operations d. A list of diversions from the original sampling plan e. A list of the emissions sources identified f. A description of the sampling techniques and risk assessment methodologies employed for each source g. An evaluation of the participant s emissions report compliance with the Climate Registry s General Reporting Protocol h. A comparison of the participant s overall emission estimates with the verifier s overall emission estimates Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year

251 i. A list of material discrepancies, if any j. A list of immaterial discrepancies, if any k. A general conclusion to be reflected in the Verification Opinion forwarded to CAR 14. Internal Peer Reviewer reviews the verification statement and verification report and signs the verification statement. 15. Exit meeting is scheduled, so that the Team leader and participant can discuss the verification report and statement (participant has up to 30 days to review and to make comments) 16. Team leader completes the verification activity log (if applicable) and uploads to CAR. 17. Upon approval, team leader uploads the list of findings, verification report and verification statement to CAR. 18. CAR then completes the reporting process 19. Recordkeeping--AWT will keep participants hard and electronic copies for a minimum of seven years. Validation/Verification Timeline Please note that the schedule listed is tentative and dependent on obtaining the appropriate information from the project developer. If the schedule changes during the project activities, the changes will be communicated to the project developer. This verification plan will be updated at the end of the project to reflect all schedule changes. 1. Kickoff Meeting 2. Field Audit 3. Draft Verification Report/Statement to Client 4. Upload Verification Report/Statement to Registry Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year

252 Complaints, Appeals and Disputes Process AWT has a defined process for handling complaints, appeals and disputes which is located on our website ( under Related Documents. Team Leader Date Client Date Insert Client Name, Project Name, Year

253 Attachment AD. Financial Risk Assessment

254 Version 1.0 Project Name: Insert Name of Project Client: Insert Name of Client Date: Insert Date Financial Risk Assessment Form 1. Has AWT worked with the client listed above in the past? 2. If yes, list engagements along with invoiced amount for services. 3. Anticipated budget for project listed above. 4. Current AWT bank balance. 5. Is client listed above corporately linked to any of our other clients? 6. If yes, list client(s) and nature of business. 7. Is there an outstanding balance still owed to AWT by client for previous services? 8. If yes, payment of outstanding balance needs to be made prior to providing additional services. Final Recommendation: Proceed with verification. Financial risk is acceptable. OR Do not proceed with verification. Financial risk is too high. Chris Mosley, V/V Director

255 Attachment AE. Project Description Document

256 Version 1.0 GHG V/V Project Description Document 1. Inquiry Received: Insert Date 2. Project Contact: Insert Name of Contact 3. Client: Insert Client Name 4. Project Name: Insert Project Name 5. Reporting Period: Insert Dates 6. Registry: Insert Name of Registry 7. Project Type: Insert Project Type 8. Protocol Version: Insert Protocol Version Team Leader Assigned by V/V Director: Insert Name of Team Leader Basis for selection: Insert supporting information for choice of Team Leader Team Members Assigned by Team Leader: Insert Name(s) of Team Members Basis for selection: Insert supporting information for choices of Team Members Internal Peer Reviewer Assigned by Team Leader: Insert Name of Staff Assigned Basis for selection: Insert supporting information for choice of Internal Peer Reviewer Appeals, Complaints and Disputes: Insert Name of Staff Assigned Basis for selection: Insert supporting information for choice of staff V/V Director Team Leader

257 Attachment AF. Internal Project Review Form

258 Version 1.5 Internal Project Technical Review Clients Name: Address: Client s Main Contact: Number/ Project Name: Team Leader: Team Members: Essential Documents: Impartiality Signed/Dated Internal Conflict of Interest Signed/Dated Conflict of Interest Signed/Dated/Submitted Contract Signed/Dated Contracting of Verification Services Signed/Dated (if applicable) Initial Review of GHG information Risk Assessment Sampling Plan Verification/Validation Plan Signed/Dated Project Overview Signed/Dated CAR Notification of Verification Activities/Conflict of Interest (NOVA/COI) Signed/Dated/Submitted Conducted Verification Activities According to the General Verification Manual and Project Specific Protocol Prepared List of Findings and Provided to Participant 1

259 Version 1.5 ARB Notification of Verification Services form Signed/Dated/Submitted to offset project registry/arb Conflict of Interest form Signed/Dated/Submitted to Participant/offset project registry/arb Conducted Verification Activities According to the Cap and Trade Regulation and Project Specific Protocol Prepared Issues Log and Provided to Participant VCS Validation and Verification Agreement with the VCS Association Signed/Dated Validation/Verification Proposal, Sampling Plan and Approach Submitted Validation Project Description Signed/Submitted ACR Project Specific Conflict of Interest (COI) Signed/Dated/Submitted All Projects are reviewed for the following: Validation or verification plan, sampling plan and validation or verification process and its stated conclusions and opinions are consistent with the agreement related to the level of assurance, materiality, criteria, objectives and scope Findings from the initial review of GHG information and the assessment of risks Design of the v/v process and its stated conclusions and opinions are consistent with the requirements in the contract Changes to the validation or verification plan and/or sampling plan took place (if necessary) Conclusions were reached on GHG data and information Recommendations were related to the GHG assertion Validation or verification statement is consistent with findings from the v/v activities and that its stated conclusion and opinions are consistent with findings from the v/v and that nothing has been omitted 2

260 Version 1.5 The following items have been verified as a part of this technical review: Confirmation that all validation/verification activities have been completed Concluded whether or not the GHG assertion is free from material discrepancy and that the validation/verification provides the level of assurance agreed upon at the beginning of the process AWT has issued a validation/verification statement, which includes the following components: o Addressed to the intended user o Describes the level of assurance of the validation/verification statement o Describes the objectives, scope and criteria of the validation/verification o Describes whether the data and information supporting the assertion were hypothetical, projected and/or historical in nature o Accompanied by the responsible parties GHG assertion o Includes the validator s/verifier s conclusion on the assertion, including any qualification or limitations o AWT issued a validation/verification statement based on the conclusion of validation/verification findings, set out in the v/v criteria was issued to the responsible party and conforms with ISO , Clause 4.9 (except in cases where regulated requirements overrule this) 1. Were the roles/responsibilities of the team members chosen for projects adequately carried out? Y N Notes: 2. Did the Team Leader complete an assessment of preliminary documentation, project design documents/monitoring plans/implementation documents and previous assessments (if applicable) Y N Notes: 3. Did the Team Leader complete an assessment of eligibility of projects? Y N Notes: 4. Did the COI Auditor complete an assessment of conflict of interest/impartiality issues and address findings accordingly? Y N Notes: 5. Did the Team Leader appropriately assess risk of potential errors, omissions and misrepresentations? Y N Notes: 2. Were the Team Leader s validation/verification plans followed accordingly? Y N Notes: 3. Were the Team Leader s sampling plans followed accordingly? Y N Notes: 3

261 Version Were the negotiated/executed contracts with contracted validators/verifiers appropriately executed (if applicable)? Y N Notes: 5. Were the negotiated/executed contracts for validation/verification services appropriately executed? Y N Notes: 6. Were the Team Leader s project overview documents appropriately executed? Y N Notes: 7. Were the desk audits reviewed? Y N Notes: 8. Were the field audits reviewed? Y N Notes: 9. Were the findings of external technical experts reviewed (if applicable) and deemed accurate? Y N Notes: 10. Were the reports of v/v findings reviewed for accuracy? Y N Notes: 11. Were the validation/verification statements reviewed and signed? Y N Notes: 12. Did the v/v plan and/or sampling plan need to be amended, if so why? Y N Notes: Internal Peer Reviewer: Signature Date 4

262 Appendices 1. Verification Report and Statement (CCX) 2. Verification Checklist (CCX) 3. COI (CCX) 4. COI (CAR) 5. Verification Statement (CAR) 6. Verification Report (CAR) 7. Validation Report (VCS) 8. Validation Deed (VCS) 9. Verification Report (VCS) 10. Verification Deed (VCS) 11. Validation Template (PCT) 12. Verification Template (PCT) 13. COI (ACR) 14. Verification Statement (ACR) 15. Verification Report (ACR) 16. COI (ARB) 17. NOVS (ARB) 18. Verification Statement (ARB) 19. Verification Report (ARB)

263 Appendix 1. Verification Report and Statement (CCX)

264 CCX Verification Statement This statement issued by (CCX-Approved Verifier) to the Chicago Climate Exchange is to confirm that (CCX Approved Verifier) has evaluated the GHG assertion by (Project Proponent) covering the period from (MM/DD/YY) to (MM/DD/YY) according to the protocols outlined in the Chicago Climate Exchange and in conformity with ISO :2006. (CCX-Approved Verifier) confirms all verification activities have been completed and concludes without any qualification or limiting conditions that the GHG assertion by (Project Proponent) is without material discrepancy and that the verification activities provided the reasonable level of assurance prescribed by CCX program rules that the GHG assertion is materially correct. The GHG assertion provided by (Project Proponent) has resulted in the removal, emission reduction, or removal enhancement of: CCX Vintage: Metric Tons CO2e: Beginning (MM/DD/YY): End (MM/DD/YY): CCX Vintage: Metric Tons CO2e: Beginning (MM/DD/YY): End (MM/DD/YY): CCX Vintage: Metric Tons CO2e: Beginning (MM/DD/YY): End (MM/DD/YY): (Repeat for each vintage verified) Attestation: Lead Verifier (Print Name) Senior Internal Reviewer (Print Name) Lead Verifier (Signature) Senior Internal Reviewer (Signature) Date (MM/DD/YY) Date (MM/DD/YY) Project Proponent Authorization: I, (CCX member), authorize the above-named verifier to submit this Verification Evaluation to the Chicago Climate Exchange. Member Representative (Print Name) Member Representative (Signature) Date (MM/DD/YY)

265 Appendix 2. Verification Checklist (CCX)

266

267

268

269

270

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286 CCX Offset Project Protocol: Forestry Carbon Sequestration APPENDIX A: VERIFICATION CHECKLIST CCX Requirement Assessment Criteria Verification Findings Management staff and titles; Organizational chart; Defined roles, responsibilities, and authorities regarding forest carbon and CCX verification. Forestry Program General Guidelines Validation CCX Project Approval Letter. Verification: Conflicts of Interest Contract Information CCX Membership Ownership and Control Project Location Project Boundary Eligible Carbon Pools Project Emissions Additionality -- Regulatory Test Prevention of Double- Counting Project Permanence Complete a conflicts of interest assessment. Verifier must obtain and review the contract to confirm inclusion of the information listed in the Protocol. Confirm the Project Owner is a CCX Member or working through CCX Member. Entity acknowledges understanding and to comply with CCX Project Guidelines in contract. Confirm the CCX Member / Participant Member has management control of the enrolled land and the GHG mitigation rights associated with the project. Project is in approved location. Appropriate acreage, species, and age. Only approved carbon pools are included. Entity has less than 10,000 Mt CO2e annually if emissions not enrolled in CCX in contract. Project-based emissions that occurred as result of project in contract. Project is not required by law. Explicit statement to prevent doubleselling included in contract. Catastrophic loss (if any) reported Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. 43

287 CCX Offset Project Protocol: Forestry Carbon Sequestration Lands with catastrophic loss excluded until baseline level (if applicable). Land Acquisition / Disposition 15-year commitment included in contract. Letter of Intent signed. Confirm acquisition / disposition accurately reported. Confirm land acquisition / disposition properly quantified. Afforestation / Reforestation and Widely-Spaced Tree Planting Guidelines Additionality -- Performance Test Plantings were initiated on or after 1/1/03. Land was in unforested condition for 10 years (for Afforestation). Land satisfies definition of a forest (for Afforestation / Reforestation). Management Activity Additionality -- Performance Test Confirm no biomass removal, harvest, or thinning has occurred. Sustainably Managed Forest Guidelines Entity-wide sustainable certification by CCX-approved standard. Project Leakage Carbon accumulation tables Afforestation or Widely-Spaced Tree Only Inventory Establishment through In-Field Measurement Confirm all entity-owned forest lands included. Confirm lands excluded as approved (if applicable). Confirm harvests deducted from lands excluded as approved (if applicable). Quantification Methodology Appropriate region, acreage, species, and age. Sampling procedure implemented and processed as approved. Measurements accurately performed. Baseline calculated as approved. Confirm harvests are properly documented and consistent with 2009 Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. 44

288 CCX Offset Project Protocol: Forestry Carbon Sequestration management plan. Confirm post-harvest cruise conducted after harvest. Inventory documentation is sufficient to support reported data and that calculations were performed correctly. Inventory Establishment through Remote Sensing Growth-and-Yield Model CCX conversion factors correctly used. Statistical error at 90% CI. Confirm flight occurred. Confirm data covered appropriate boundary. Confirm instrument calibrated. Confirm data corrected for errors. Confirm ground-truthing performed. Confirm remote sensing correlations were determined using ground-truth inventories. Confirm calculations of error around total volume estimate. Confirm in-field inventory verified according to standard procedures. Use of model implemented as approved. Retroactive modeling is not occurring prior to baseline establishment. Parameters estimated / model calibrated as approved. Conditions for Landowner at Harvest Carbon flux from all project land included in each project accounting year. Carbon loss from harvests properly debited. Long-Lived Wood Products Confirm entity using proper CCX quantification method. Confirm sales contract retaining carbon rights from manufacturer Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. 45

289 CCX Offset Project Protocol: Forestry Carbon Sequestration Primary Wood Products Manufacturer Conditions Confirm entity using proper CCX quantification method. Confirm sales contract retaining carbon rights for purchased timber (if purchased timber included). Confirm entity has chain-of-custody certification by CCX-approved standard (if purchased timber included). Confirm % of purchased timber from sustainably certified forest (if purchased timber included) Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. 46

290 Appendix 3. COI (CCX)

291 CCX-Approved Verifiers Statement of Potential or Actual Conflicts of Interest CCX-APPROVED VERIFIERS STATEMENT OF POTENTIAL OR ACTUAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Requirement to Submit a Statement of Conflicts of Interest: Before a CCX-Approved Verifier begins any verification work for a CCX Member or Participant Member, the CCX-Approved Verifier must submit to CCX a statement of any potential or actual conflicts of interest that may result from undertaking such verification work. The statement shall include proposed steps that may be taken to avoid, mitigate or neutralize the potential or actual conflict of interest. The statement shall be signed by a representative of the CCX Member or Participant Member for which the verification work will be performed. The statement shall also refer to any appearance of conflict of interest that may arise even if this does not lead, in the opinion of the parties signing the statement, to a substantive conflict of interest. CCX Staff shall evaluate statements of potential or actual conflicts of interest on a case-by-case basis and make recommendations on an appropriate course of action. The CCX-Approved Verifier shall make full disclosure in writing to CCX immediately of any change in circumstances that may lead to the emergence of any conflict of interest in the provision of verification services to any CCX Member or Potential Member for which it is currently providing such services. This disclosure shall include a description of actions taken or that will be taken to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate the actual or potential conflict of interest. Circumstances that Present an Actual or Potential Conflict of Interest: Performance of the following services for a CCX Member or Participant Member may result in a conflict of interest for a CCX-Approved Verifier wishing to provide verification services to that CCX Member or Participant Member: 1. Designing, developing, implementing, or maintaining a GHG emissions inventory. 2. Designing or developing GHG information systems. 3. Developing GHG emissions factors or other GHG-related engineering analysis. 4. Designing energy efficiency, renewable energy, or other projects which explicitly identify GHG reductions as a benefit. 5. Preparing or producing GHG-related manuals, handbooks, or procedures specifically for the CCX Member or Participant Member. 6. Appraisal services of GHG liabilities or assets. 7. Brokering in, advising on, or assisting in any way in carbon or GHG-related markets Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc.

292 CCX-Approved Verifiers Statement of Potential or Actual Conflicts of Interest 8. Management over health, environment and safety functions. 9. Legal and expert services unrelated to verification for CCX purposes. Conflicts of interest may occur if, in the previous 3 years, the CCX-Approved Verifier, any related organizations such as parent or subsidiary companies or other organizations with which the CCX- Approved Verifier has a long-standing financial or legal relationship, or any of the staff that will be providing the verification services (regardless of whether such staff were employed by the CCX- Approved Verifier at the time) provided any of the services listed above. In addition, a CCX-Approved Verifier is not allowed to provide any of the services listed above for at least 1 year following the cessation of performance of verification services for the CCX Member or Participant Member. Currently there is no maximum term for which a CCX-Approved Verifier may provide verification services to a CCX Member or Participant Member. However, in light of SEC rulings and other rules, laws, and regulations, regarding conflicts of interest for auditors and other professionals providing certification and verification services, this position may change. Other factors that may constitute a conflict of interest include, without limitation: 1. If the CCX-Approved Verifier and the recipient of verification services share any board members or senior management. 2. If there is a financial, functional or structural link (e.g. common ownership, contractual arrangement, or informal contract) between the CCX-Approved Verifier and the recipient of verification services, whether directly or through affiliated organizations (e.g. holding companies, parent companies, subsidiaries, formal partners, affiliates, etc.). 3. If staff and senior management of the CCX-Approved Verifier are involved in any commercial, financial or other processes that might influence their judgment and render it not impartial or not objective. Process for Evaluating Statement of Conflicts of Interest: The statement will be evaluated by the CCX Offsets Committee which will recommend a suitable course of action in response to any potential or actual conflicts identified.. The Offsets Committee may request additional information or a personal appearance in order to make their determination Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. 1

293 CCX-Approved Verifiers Statement of Potential or Actual Conflicts of Interest CCX-Approved Verifier Providing Verification Services Organization Name: Organization Website: Mailing Address: CCX Member or Participant Member Requesting Verification: Member Organization Name: Project Name: Project Type: Mailing Address: Instructions: Please print out and complete this form. Please complete the Project Specific Conflicts of Interest Questionnaire. Any other papers attached as evidence should be clearly numbered and indexed and attached behind your answer to the questions below. Please Note: All information submitted to CCX is strictly confidential. All questions relating to any CCX-Approved Verifier, CCX Member or Participant Member shall include reference to any other organization with which such CCX- Approved Verifier, CCX Member or Participant Member has a financial, functional or structural link (e.g. common ownership, shared staff and management, contractual arrangement, or informal contract) such as a holding company, parent organization, subsidiary, formal partner or affiliate. A CCX-Approved Verifier shall be responsible for identification of any form of conflict of interest it may face, even if that type of conflict of interest is not specified in this document Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. 2

294 CCX Project Specific Conflict of Interest Questionnaire CCX PROJECT SPECIFIC CONFLICT OF INTEREST QUESTIONNAIRE Please respond to all questions: Has your organization provided certification or verification services for the above-named CCX Member or Participant Member in connection with CCX or any other GHG trading, registry or other system during the previous three years? If yes, list the years and nature of the verification services provided. Has your organization provided any non-verification services of any nature for this CCX Member or Participant Member during the previous three years? Are there any plans or contracts for your organization to continue to provide such services on an ongoing basis or in the future? If yes, what was the nature of the work performed? When was it performed? What was the scale of the work performed in dollars and/or percentage of your organization s revenue? Document the structures and procedures in place in your company to identify potential or actual conflicts of interest and to avoid, mitigate or neutralize any potential or actual conflicts of interest identified. Identify steps taken in order to minimize any risks to your company's impartiality. Identify all potential sources of conflict of interest that may arise if your organization performs verification services for the above-named CCX Member or Participant Member. If the potential conflict of interest may arise indirectly through an affiliated organization, please describe the nature of that link Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc.

295 CCX-Approved Verifiers Statement of Potential or Actual Conflicts of Interest Please provide a list of names of the staff that may participate in providing verification services to the above-named CCX Member or Participant Members. For these staff, are there any instances of personal or professional relationships or financial interests that may represent a potential conflict of interest? If yes, please detail. Provide details about the policies and structures your organization has put in place to avoid, mitigate or neutralize the specific conflicts of interest you have identified related to your organization s provision of verification services to the above-named CCX Member or Participant Member. Are there particular reasons why this work should be considered sensitive, highly visible or subject to special scrutiny (e.g., press coverage, special Congressional interest, prior controversy, etc.)? 2009 Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. 1

296 CCX-Approved Verifiers Statement of Potential or Actual Conflicts of Interest We hereby warrant the truthfulness of the answers to all questions on this form and the attached statement and documentation and to any other questions that may be asked by CCX or its designated representatives.. We agree to maintain the accuracy and completeness of the information contained in this form and the attached statement and documentation. We undertake to immediately notify CCX in writing about any material change in any information contained in this form and the attached statement and documentation. We authorize CCX or its designated representatives to obtain information from sources that they deem appropriate in order to adequately evaluate and process this form and the attached statement and documentation and to ensure the integrity and effective operation of the CCX in the future. We understand that failure to provide full and accurate information may result in the delay or rendering invalid of any decision made in response to the information contained in this form and the attached statement and documentation. Signed and accepted by duly authorized representatives of: CCX-Approved Verifier CCX Member or Participant Member Signature of Lead Verifier Signature Print Name Print Name Title Title Date Date 1. Completed CCX Conflict of Interest Questionnaire. 2. Additional materials attached as evidence, clearly numbered and indexed Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. Reproduction or quotation is expressly prohibited without written consent of Chicago Climate Exchange, Inc. 2

297 Appendix 4. COI (CAR)

298 Climate Action Reserve NOVA/COI Form

299 Appendix 5. Verification Statement (CAR)

300 Climate Action Reserve Verification Statement Form

301 Appendix 6. Verification Report (CAR)

302 CAR Verification Report Checklist A verification report prepared for projects registered on the Climate Action Reserve shall include the following items: Scope of Verification Process Standard Used to Verify Emissions Description of the Verification Activities (based on size and complexity of participants operation) Physical and Temporal Boundaries including GHGs considered Description of the Sampling Techniques and Risk Assessment Materiality Threshold Verification of Eligibility Evaluation of the Participant s Emissions Report Compliance with the CAR Reporting Protocol Comparison of the Participant s Overall Emission Reductions/Removals Estimates with the Verifier s Overall Emission Reductions/Removals Estimates List of Material Discrepancies, If Any List of Immaterial Discrepancies, If Any General Conclusion Reflected in the Verification Statement

303 Appendix 7. Validation Report (VCS)

304 VALIDATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 VCS Validation Report Template Instructions for completing the validation report: TITLE PAGE: All items in the boxes on this title page must be completed using Arial 10pt, black, regular (non-italic) font. All boxes must appear in the final document. Reports may also feature the title and preparers name, logo and contact information more prominently on the title page, using Arial 24pt font for title and Arial 11pt, black font for all other information. VALIDATION REPORT: Instructions for completing the validation report can be found under the section headings in this template. All sections must be completed using Arial 10pt, black, regular (non-italic) font. Sections which are not applicable may be left blank but should NOT be deleted from the final document. All instructions, including this introductory text, should be deleted from the final document. VALIDATION REPORT TITLE Logo (optional) Document Prepared By (individual or entity) Contact Information (optional) Project Title Version Name of project Version number of validation report Report Title Client Pages Date of Issue Prepared By Contact Approved By Work Carried Out By Title of validation report Client for whom the report was prepared Number of pages of this report DD-Month-YYYY report issued Validation/verification body that prepared report Physical address, telephone, , website Individual at the validation/verification body who approved the validation report Individuals who conducted the validation v3.0 1

305 VALIDATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 Summary: Provide the following: A brief description of the validation and the project, The purpose and scope of validation The method and criteria used for validation Any findings, restrictions of uncertainties related to the validation Summary of the validation conclusion v3.0 2

306 VALIDATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 Table of Contents Insert table of contents v3.0 3

307 VALIDATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective Explain the purpose of the validation. 1.2 Scope and Criteria Describe the scope and criteria of the validation. 1.3 Level of assurance Indicate the level of assurance of the validation report. 1.4 Summary Description of the Project Provide a summary description of the project. 2 VALIDATION PROCESS 2.1 Method and Criteria Describe the method and criteria used for undertaking the validation. 2.2 Document Review Describe how the validation was performed as an audit where the project description and any supporting documents were reviewed and compared with identified and stated requirements. 2.3 Interviews Describe the interview process and identify personnel, including their roles, who were interviewed and/or provided information additional to that provided in the project description and any supporting documents. 2.4 Site Inspections Describe the method and objectives for any on-site inspections performed. 2.5 Resolution of Any Material Discrepancy Describe the process for the resolution of any material discrepancies (corrective actions, clarifications or other findings) raised by the validation team during the validation process. v3.0 4

308 VALIDATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 3 VALIDATION FINDINGS 3.1 Project Design Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the following: Project scope, type, technologies and measures implemented, and eligibility of the project Project proponent Project start date Project crediting period Project scale and estimated GHG emission reductions or removals Project activities Project location Project compliance with applicable laws, statutes and other regulatory frameworks Ownership and other programs Proof of title Emissions trading programs and other binding limits Participation under other GHG programs Other forms of environmental credit sought or received Rejection by other GHG programs Additional information relevant to the project Eligibility criteria for grouped projects Leakage management for AFOLU projects Commercially sensitive information Any further information 3.2 Application of Methodology Title and Reference Identify the title and reference of the applied methodology. v3.0 5

309 VALIDATION REPORT: VCS Version Applicability Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the applicability of the methodology Project Boundary Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the definition of the project boundary Baseline Scenario Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the determination of the baseline scenario Additionality Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the demonstration of additionality Quantification of GHG Emission Reductions and Removals Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the following: Quantification of baseline emissions Quantification of project emissions Quantification of leakage Summary of GHG emission reductions or removals Uncertainties associated with the calculation of emissions Methodology Deviations Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding methodology deviations applied to the project Monitoring Plan Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the following: Data and parameters available at validation Data and parameters monitored Applicability and eligibility of monitoring equipment and procedures 3.3 Environmental Impact Identify and discuss the implications of any environmental impact assessments conducted with respect to the project. v3.0 6

310 VALIDATION REPORT: VCS Version Comments by stakeholders Summarize relevant outcomes from any stakeholder consultations held in respect of the project. 4 VALIDATION CONCLUSION Clearly state whether the project conforms with the validation criteria for projects, as set out in VCS Version 3, and include any qualifications or limitations. Conclude whether the project is likely to achieve estimated GHG emission reduction or removals. v3.0 7

311 Appendix 8. Validation Deed (VCS)

312 VCS VALIDATION DEED OF REPRESENTATION BY [VALIDATION/VERIFICATION BODY] v

313 THIS DEED OF REPRESENTATION is made on [DATE] BY [NAME AND ADDRESS OF VALIDATION/VERIFICATION BODY] (as VVB) THIS DEED WITNESSES as follows: 1. INTERPRETATION 1.1 In this Deed: "Accountholder" means any person holding a VCU account with a VCS Registry; "Project" means [NAME OF PROJECT]; "Validation Report" means the written report of validation [report no. [ ], dated [ ]] prepared by the VVB in accordance with the VCS Rules; "Validation/Verification Body" means an organization approved by the VCSA to act as a validation/verification body in respect of providing validation and/or verification services in accordance with the VCS rules; "VCSA" means the Verified Carbon Standard Association; "VCS Program" means the GHG program operated by the VCSA which establishes the rules and requirements that operationalize the VCS to enable the validation of GHG projects and the verification of GHG emission reductions and removals; "VCS Registry" means a registry operating within the VCS registry system and holding a current, valid agreement with the VCSA to provide registry services on behalf of the VCSA. VCS registries interact with the VCS project database to issue VCUs, and hold, transfer (to and from other VCS registries), retire, suspend, cancel and provide custodial services for VCUs on behalf of its account holders; "VCS Rules" means the rules and requirements set out in the VCS Program Guide, the VCS Standard and the other VCS Program documents, as such rules and requirements may be updated from time to time; and "VCU" means a verified carbon unit; 2. REPRESENTATIONS 2.1 I am the Validation/Verification Body in relation to the validation of the Project. 2.2 I hereby represent that: I have validated the Project's compliance with the VCS Program requirements as set out in the VCS Rules; and All information which I have provided in the Validation Report is true and accurate in all material respects. 2.3 Notwithstanding any other provisions contained in the Validation Report, I hereby acknowledge that a VCS Registry shall hold this Deed for the benefit of Accountholders holding VCUs relating to the Project at any given time. v

314 3. GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION This Deed is governed by and interpreted in accordance with English law, and the English courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute arising from or connected with this Deed including a dispute regarding the existence, validity or termination of this Deed or the consequences of its nullity. 4. COUNTERPARTS This Deed may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when executed and delivered is an original and all of which together evidence the same deed. 5. DELIVERY This Deed is delivered on the date written at the start of the Deed. EXECUTED by [VALIDATION/VERIFICATION BODY] as a deed Signature of director Name of director Signature of director/secretary Name of director/secretary v

315 Appendix 9. Verification Report (VCS)

316 VERIFICATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 VCS Verification Report Template Instructions for completing the verification report: TITLE PAGE: All items in the boxes on this title page must be completed using Arial 10pt, black, regular (non-italic) font. All boxes must appear in the final document. Reports may also feature the title and preparers name, logo and contact information more prominently on the title page, using Arial 24pt font for title and Arial 11pt, black font for all other information. VERIFICATION REPORT: Instructions for completing the verification report can be found under the section headings in this template. All sections must be completed using Arial 10pt, black, regular (nonitalic) font. Where the validation/verification body has also, at the time of this verification, undertaken a gap validation of a project that is participating in an approved GHG program, or has validated a methodology deviation or inclusion of new project activity instances into a grouped project, the validation sections of this template shall be completed. Sections which are not applicable may be left blank but should NOT be deleted from the final document. All instructions, including this introductory text, should be deleted from the final document. VERIFICATION REPORT TITLE Logo (optional) Document Prepared By (individual or entity) Contact Information (optional) Project Title Version Name of project Version number of validation report Report Title Client Pages Date of Issue Prepared By Contact Title of validation report Client for whom the report was prepared Number of pages of this report DD-Month-YYYY report issued Validation/verification body that prepared report Physical address, telephone, , website v3.0 1

317 VERIFICATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 Approved By Work Carried Out By Individual at the validation/verification body who approved the verification report Individuals who conducted the verification Summary: Provide the following: A brief description of the verification and the project, The purpose and scope of verification The method and criteria used for verification Any findings, restrictions of uncertainties related to the verification Summary of the verification conclusion v3.0 2

318 VERIFICATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 Table of Contents Insert table of contents v3.0 3

319 VERIFICATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective Explain the purpose of the verification. 1.2 Scope and Criteria Describe the scope and criteria of the verification. 1.3 Level of assurance Indicate the level of assurance of the verification report. 1.4 Summary Description of the Project Provide a summary description of the project. 2 VALIDATION PROCESS, FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION 2.1 Validation Process Provide the following: Method and Criteria: Describe method and criteria used for undertaking the validation. Document Review: Describe how the validation was performed as an audit where the project description, monitoring report and any supporting documents were reviewed and compared with identified and stated requirements. Interviews: Describe the interview process and identify personnel, including their roles, that were interviewed and/or provided information additional to that provided in the project description and supporting documents. Site Inspections: Describe the method and objectives for any on-site inspection performed. Resolution of Any Material Discrepancy: Describe the process for the resolution of any material discrepancies (corrective actions, clarifications or other findings) raised by the validation team during the validation process. 2.2 Validation Findings Gap Validation Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the additional project description (and any supporting documents) produced in accordance with the VCS rules on participation under approved GHG programs. v3.0 4

320 VERIFICATION REPORT: VCS Version Methodology Deviations Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding any methodology deviations applied to the project New Project Activity Instances For grouped projects, identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the following: Number of new project activity instances included in the project at this monitoring/verification event. Quality and completeness of evidence, data and documentation of new project activity instances Eligibility of new project activity instances Sampling process for validation of new project activity instances 2.3 Validation Conclusion Clearly state whether the project conforms with the validation criteria for projects, as set out in VCS Version 3, and include any qualifications or limitations. 3 VERIFICATION PROCESS 3.1 Method and Criteria Describe the method and criteria used for undertaking the verification. 3.2 Document Review Describe how the verification was performed as an audit where the project description, monitoring report and any supporting documents were reviewed and compared with identified and stated requirements. 3.3 Interviews Describe the interview process and identify personnel, including their roles, who were interviewed and/or provided information additional to that provided in the project description, monitoring report and any supporting documents. 3.4 Site Inspections Describe the methods and objectives for any on-site inspections performed. v3.0 5

321 3.5 Resolution of Any Material Discrepancy VERIFICATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 Describe the process for the resolution of any material discrepancies (corrective actions, clarifications or other findings) raised by the verification team during the verification process. v3.0 6

322 VERIFICATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 4 VERIFICATION FINDINGS 4.1 Project Implementation Status Identify, discuss and justify conclusions with respect to the following: Implementation status of the project activity(s), including any material discrepancies between the project and the project description. Implementation status of the monitoring plan and the completeness of monitoring, including any material discrepancies between the project and the project description. Any remaining issues from previous validation or verification. List any previously validated methodology deviations (each verification report should contain the exhaustive list of all and any methodology deviations in respect of the project). 4.2 Accuracy of GHG Emission Reduction or Removal Calculations Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding data and parameters, including spreadsheet formulas and connections, conversions, aggregations, consistent use of data and parameters set out in the monitoring plan, possible manual transposition errors between data sets, uncertainty of technology (eg, metering) and appropriateness of default data where specific source data is lacking, 4.3 Quality of Evidence to Determine GHG Emission Reductions or Removals Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the sufficiency of quantity and appropriateness of quality of the evidence, the reliability of the evidence, and the source and nature of the evidence (external or internal, oral or documented) for the determination of GHG emission reductions or removals. 4.4 Management and Operational System Identify, discuss and justify conclusions regarding the suitability of the management system for monitoring and reporting (ie, organisational structure, responsibilities, competencies, nonconformance handling, internal audits and management review). 5 VERIFICATION CONCLUSION Clearly state whether the project conforms with the verification criteria for projects and their GHG emission reductions or removals set out in the VCS rules, including any qualifications or limitations. Confirm that the project has been implemented in accordance with the project description and subsequently validated variations. Provide a conclusion on the quantity of GHG emission reductions or removals in tco2 equivalents achieved by the project during the verification period. Reporting period: From [day-month-year] to [day-month-year] v3.0 7

323 VERIFICATION REPORT: VCS Version 3 Verified GHG emission reductions or removals in the above reporting period: GHG Emission Reductions or Removals tco 2 e Baseline Emissions Project Emissions Leakage Net GHG emission reductions or removals v3.0 8

324 Appendix 10. Verification Deed (VCS)

325 VCS VERIFICATION DEED OF REPRESENTATION BY [VALIDATION/VERIFICATION BODY] v

326 THIS DEED OF REPRESENTATION is made on [DATE] BY [NAME AND ADDRESS OF VALIDATION/VERIFICATION BODY] (as VVB) THIS DEED WITNESSES as follows: 1. INTERPRETATION 1.1 In this Deed: "Accountholder" means any person holding a VCU account with a VCS Registry; "Project" means [NAME OF PROJECT]; "Project Crediting Period" means the time period for which GHG emission reductions or removals generated by the project are eligible for issuance as VCUs (the rules with respect to the length of such time period and the renewal of the project crediting period are set out in the VCS Standard); "Reduction" means a reduction or removal of one tonne of CO 2 e caused by the activities of a Project during the Project Crediting Period; "Verification Report" means the written report of verification [report no. [ ], dated [ ]] prepared by the VVB in accordance with the VCS Rules; "Validation/Verification Body" means an organization approved by the VCSA to act as a validation/verification body in respect of providing validation and/or verification services in accordance with the VCS rules; "VCSA" means the Verified Carbon Standard Association; "VCS Program" means the GHG program operated by the VCSA which establishes the rules and requirements that operationalize the VCS to enable the validation of GHG projects and the verification of GHG emission reductions and removals; "VCS Registry" means a registry operating within the VCS registry system and holding a current, valid agreement with the VCSA to provide registry services on behalf of the VCSA. VCS registries interact with the VCS project database to issue VCUs, and hold, transfer (to and from other VCS registries), retire, suspend, cancel and provide custodial services for VCUs on behalf of its account holders; "VCS Rules" means the rules and requirements set out in the VCS Program Guide, the VCS Standard and the other VCS Program documents, as such rules and requirements may be updated from time to time; and "VCU" means a verified carbon unit; 2. REPRESENTATIONS 2.1 I am the Validation/Verification Body in relation to the verification of the Project. 2.2 I hereby represent that: v

327 2.2.1 I have independently verified the Reductions generated by the Project in accordance with the VCS Rules; and All information which I have provided in the Verification Report is true and accurate in all material respects. 2.3 Notwithstanding any other provisions contained in the Verification Report, I hereby acknowledge that a VCS Registry shall hold this Deed for the benefit of Accountholders holding VCUs relating to the Project at any given time. 3. GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION This Deed is governed by and interpreted in accordance with English law, and the English courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute arising from or connected with this Deed including a dispute regarding the existence, validity or termination of this Deed or the consequences of its nullity. 4. COUNTERPARTS This Deed may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which when executed and delivered is an original and all of which together evidence the same deed. 5. DELIVERY This Deed is delivered on the date written at the start of the Deed. EXECUTED by [VALIDATION/VERIFICATION BODY] as a deed Signature of director Name of director Signature of director/secretary Name of director/secretary v

328 Appendix 11. Validation Template (PCT)

329 Validation Report: Name of Validation company: Date of the issue: Report Title: Approved by: Client: Project Title: Summary: The summary should contain: - a brief description of the validation project and the GHG project - the purpose and scope of validation - the methodology and criteria used for validation - any restrictions or uncertainties related to the validation - main conclusions and corrective action requests when relevant - summary of the validation conclusion Work carried out by: Number of pages: 1

330 [Table of Contents] 2

331 1 Introduction 1.1 Objective The objective of the validation should explain the purpose of validation 1.2 Scope and Criteria The scope and criteria of the validation should be described. 1.3 PCT project Description A brief description of the PCT project should be described. 1.4 Level of assurance The level of assurance of the validation report should be defined. 3

332 2 Methodology Explain the means of validation used. 2.1 Review of Documents Explain how the validation is performed as an audit where the project design documents and any other supporting documents are reviewed and compared with identified and stated requirements. 2.2 Follow-up Interviews Identify any personnel who have been interviewed and/or provided additional information to the presented documentation. 2.3 Resolution of any material discrepancy This section should explain how material discrepancies were resolved raised by the validation team were resolved during communications between the Client and the validation team if there were any. 4

333 3 Validation Findings 3.1 Project Design The conclusions regarding: the technology used project duration, crediting time and project start date Ownership o Proof of title o Double counting and whether the project participated in another emission trading program Project applicability to PCT for projects rejected under other GHG program (if applicable) Whether the project is eligible under PCT Any relevant findings relating to the project 3.2 Baseline The conclusions regarding: Approval of the baseline methodology Correct application and justification of selected baseline methodology Application of methodology deviations or revisions (if applicable) Appropriate setting of baseline scenario Assessment and demonstration of additionality 3.3 Monitoring Plan The conclusions regarding: Approval of the monitoring methodology, Correct application and justification of selected monitoring methodology, and Whether the monitoring plan provides detailed information related to the collection and archiving of all relevant data needed to: Estimate or measure emissions occurring from GHG sources, sinks and reservoirs Determine the baseline emissions Estimate changes in emissions from the site The frequency, responsibility and authority for registration, monitoring, measurement and reporting activities 3.4 Calculation of GHG Emissions The conclusions regarding: The appropriateness of the source, sink and reservoir The correctness and transparency of formulas and factors used The assumptions made for estimating GHG emission reductions Uncertainties 5

334 3.5 Environmental Impact The conclusions regarding: The sufficient documentation of environmental impact 6

335 4 Validation Conclusion The validation conclusion should clearly state whether the project meets the relevant criteria for PCT project activities whether the project is likely to achieve estimated emission reductions, and whether any quantifications or limitations should be added to the validation outcome. 7

336 Appendix 12. Verification Template (PCT)

337 Verification Report: Name of Verification company: Date of the issue: Report Title: Approved by: Client: Project Title: Summary: The summary should contain: - the purpose and scope of validation - a brief description of the Initial Verification project and the GHG project - the methodology and criteria used for verification - any restrictions or uncertainties related to the initial verification - main conclusions and corrective action requests when relevant - summary of the initial verification conclusion Work carried out by: Number of pages: 1

338 [Table of Contents] 2

339 1 Introduction 1.1 Objective The purpose of the periodic verification. 1.2 Scope and Criteria The scope and criteria of the periodic verification. 1.3 VCS project Description A brief description of the PCT project. 1.4 Level of assurance The level of assurance of the verification report. 3

340 2 Methodology Explain the means of verification used. Review of project documentation on-site inspections, including; review of performance records, interviews with project participants and local stakeholders, collection of measurements, observation of established practices and testing of the accuracy of monitoring equipment review of monitoring results and verification of the correct application of monitoring methodologies determination of the reductions in GHG emissions, and review of additional data from other sources if appropriate. 4

341 3 Verification Findings 3.1 Remaining issues, including any material discrepancy, from previous validation The discussion, findings and conclusion regarding the remaining issues from the validation/determination stage of the project. 3.2 Project Implementation The discussion, findings and conclusion regarding the conformity of the actual project activity with the registered project design document. 3.3 Completeness of Monitoring The discussion, findings and conclusion regarding correct application of the monitoring methodologies and the completeness of the monitoring. 3.4 Accuracy of Emission Reduction Calculations The discussion, findings and conclusion regarding spreadsheet formulas and connections, conversions, aggregations, consistent use of factors in line with the monitoring plan, possible manual transposition errors between data sets, uncertainty of technology (e.g. metering) and appropriateness of default data where specific source data is lacking. 3.5 Quality of Evidence to Determine Emission Reductions The discussion, findings and conclusion related to that the evidence is of sufficient quantity and appropriate quality, the reliability of the evidence and the source and nature of the evidence (external/internal, oral, documented). 3.6 Management and Operational System The discussion, findings and conclusions regarding the suitability of the management system for monitoring and reporting, i.e. organizational structure, responsibilities, competencies, non-conformance handling, internal audits and management review. 5

342 4 Verification conclusion The verification statement should include an explanation of: the scope of the verification the period of the verification conclusions of the verification, including the verified amount of emission reductions for the given period liability statement with regards to the accuracy of the verification statement statement of confidentiality The verification statement should give the final verdict of the project in terms of the completeness, comparability, accuracy and correctness of the reported GHG emission reductions. Reporting period: From dd-mm-yyyy to dd-mm-yyyy Verified emission in the above reporting period: Project emissions yy t CO 2 equivalents Baseline emissions zz t CO 2 equivalents Emission reductions xx t CO 2 equivalents 6

343 Appendix 13. COI Form (ACR)

344 American Carbon Registry Validation/Verification Body Project-Specific Conflict of Interest Attestation Before performing any validation and/or verification services for ACR project proponents or inventory members, ACR-approved Validation/Verification Bodies (V/VB) are required to complete and submit this project-specific conflict of interest attestation. Completed forms should be sent to Name of Validation/Verification Body (V/VB) Name of project proponent/corporate inventory member seeking validation/verification services from V/VB Name of project/corporate inventory for which validation/verification services are requested Date project-specific COI form submitted to ACR As agreed to in the Attestation of Verification Body : The ACR-approved V/VB will not conduct validation and/or verification with respect to any ACR project or corporate inventory where the V/VB or any member of the validation/verification team has a financial interest in the project or corporation, has played a role in developing the project or has any other conflict of interest. (Absent unusual circumstances, validating a monitoring or verification protocol and/or serving as a member of a scientific peer review process does not constitute having a role in developing a project.) Without limiting the foregoing, the V/VB will not conduct validation/verification with respect to a project or corporate inventory if an independent observer could reasonably conclude that current or prior personal or business relationships between the V/VB or its team member(s) and the project, project proponent or corporation present a conflict of interest. Please complete the following: 1. Describe all relationships in the last three years between the V/VB (and its affiliate organization(s), if applicable) and validation/verification team members, on the one hand, and the project, project proponent or corporate inventory being verified, on the other. If any of these past or current relationships involve affiliate organization(s) of the V/VB please describe the connection. Empowering the disadvantaged, increasing economic opportunity, and sustaining natural resources. Page 1 of 3

345 2. Describe the procedures and structures in place within the ACR-approved V/VB to identify and prevent/mitigate any potential or actual conflicts of interest. 3. Describe all potential conflicts of interest that may result in the V/VB providing validation/verification services to the project proponent/corporate inventory member. 4. List all staff and/or contractors of the ACR-approved V/VB who may provide validation/verification services to this project proponent/corporate inventory member. Attestation: We hereby attest that: a. Neither the ACR-approved V/VB nor any member of the validation/verification team has a conflict of interest with respect to this proposed work; b. All potential conflicts of interest have been identified and there are structures and processes in place to successfully avoid or mitigate them; c. All information provided in this form is accurate to the best of our knowledge; d. We will maintain the accuracy and completeness of the information contained herein by notifying ACR in writing to [email protected] of any material change. In witness whereof, the V/VB and ACR Project Proponent/Corporate Inventory Member have caused this Attestation to be executed by duly authorized representatives as of the dates set forth below. ACR-Approved V/VB ACR-Project Proponent/Corporate Inventory Signature of Lead Verifier Print Name Title Signature of representative Print Name Title Empowering the disadvantaged, increasing economic opportunity, and sustaining natural resources. Page 2 of 3

346 Date Date Empowering the disadvantaged, increasing economic opportunity, and sustaining natural resources. Page 3 of 3

347 Appendix 14. Verification Statement (ACR)

348 Requirements for American Carbon Registry Verification Statement The Verification Statement shall: Be addressed to the ACR Chief Technical Officer; Provide the name and contact information of the verifier; Include an introductory paragraph: o Identifying the reporting period covered by the verification; o Referencing the ACR Standard, applicable sector standard if any, and approved methodology against which the verification was conducted. Include a scope paragraph with a brief description of the roles and responsibilities of the verifier, work performed, techniques and processes used; State the quantity of GHG emission reductions or removal enhancements in the GHG assertion for the reporting period; State the verifier s conclusion on the GHG assertion, including any qualifications or limitations. For acceptance by ACR, the Verification Statement shall confirm that the GHG assertion is without material discrepancy, as defined by ACR, and that the verification activities provide a reasonable level of assurance; Be signed by the lead verifier and internal reviewer.

349 Appendix 15. Verification Report (ACR)

350 Requirements for American Carbon Registry Verification Report The Verification Report shall: Provide the name, address, and other contact information of the verifier; Identify the GHG assertion verified and reporting period covered; Reference the ACR Standard, applicable sector standard if any, and approved methodology against which the verification was conducted; Describe the verification objectives, scope, and activities, including but not limited to: o GHG information or performance data verified (e.g., baseline GHG emissions, project GHG emissions, GHG emissions reductions and/or removal enhancements); o Techniques and processes used to test the GHG information and associated GHG assertion; o The results of quantitative uncertainty assessment and analysis of the quantification methodologies and applicable data sets and sources; o Whether the data and information supporting the GHG assertion were based on assumptions and industry defaults, future projections, and/or actual historical records in nature; o Leakage assessment if required; o Describe any issues raised during the verification and their resolutions, including issues that required consultation with ACR and ACR s determinations on these issues, citing the specific communication and date. For projects requiring Project Proponents to assess risk of reversal and apply an ACRapproved risk reversal mechanism, include the verifier's opinion on the risk assessment; Describe the level of assurance; State the verifier s conclusion on the GHG assertion, including any qualifications or limitations. For acceptance by ACR, the Verification Statement shall confirm that the GHG assertion is without material discrepancy, as defined by ACR, and that the verification activities provide a reasonable level of assurance.

351 Appendix 16. COI (ARB)

352 California Air Resources Board COI Forms (Early Action and Compliance)

353 Appendix 17. NOVS (ARB)

354 California Air Resources Board NOVS Form (Early Action and Compliance)

355 Appendix 18. Verification Statement (ARB)

356 California Air Resources Board Offset Verification Statement (Early Action Desk Review and Compliance)

357 Appendix 19. Verification Report (ARB)

358 ARB Verification Report Checklist A verification report prepared for projects registered on the Air Resources Board shall include the following items: Verification Plan Detailed Comparison of Data Checks Calculations Performed Issues Log and Resolutions Qualifying Comments