2.2 MW hydropower plant in Birsinghpur, Madhya Pradesh of Ascent Hydro Projects Limited (AHPL)

Integrity

The project’s integrity is weakened by the absence of a stated additionality test and the lack of VVB-confirmed additionality in the extracted record. The baseline is only described as a project baseline, and leakage is marked as not addressed, which is a material gap for a hydropower CDM project. The validation report also records three corrective action requests and one clarification request, which further reduces confidence in the robustness of the underlying case.

Transparency

Transparency is limited because the extracted record does identify the VVB and the validation report date, but it does not provide the monitoring period, total emissions reductions claimed or verified, or the usage monitoring method. The absence of these core MRV fields makes it difficult to assess whether the public documentation is complete. The medium extraction confidence also suggests that at least one source was not fully readable.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is constrained by the weak baseline description and the lack of quantified leakage treatment. No information is provided on CORSIA eligibility or CCP status, so the risk of overlapping claims cannot be excluded from the available record. Because the project is a hydropower CDM activity, missing baseline and leakage details are especially important for over-crediting risk.

Documentation

Documentation quality is only moderate because there is at least one validation report and a defined crediting period, but the record is sparse on key technical fields. The presence of multiple CARs and a CL indicates that the VVB identified issues requiring follow-up. Medium extraction confidence also lowers confidence that the available record fully captures the project file.

Overall

Overall, this project scores poorly because several core quality signals are missing or unresolved: additionality is not evidenced, leakage is not addressed, and the validation report contains multiple corrective actions. There are no contradictions listed in the extracted record, so no document hierarchy decision was needed; however, the score is still conservative because the available evidence is incomplete and only moderately legible. The result is a low-confidence, weakly documented CDM hydropower case with elevated integrity and claim-safety concerns.