Burgos Wind Project

Integrity

The validation report (2022) confirms additionality via an investment test and reports no material findings and no corrective actions, supporting baseline/additionality robustness. The project uses a project-specific baseline under ACM0002 (version 20), but the extracted record does not state when the baseline was last reassessed, which adds uncertainty. Leakage is flagged as not addressed in the extracted record, and no leakage deduction is provided, which weakens integrity for an electricity-displacement project where upstream or market effects may need explicit treatment.

Transparency

The extracted record identifies the VVB (RINA Services S.p.A.), the methodology (ACM0002 v20), and a grid emission factor of 0.684 with a stated year range (2015–2017), which supports partial transparency. However, the monitoring period is not stated in available documents, and neither claimed nor verified total emission reductions were found in the extracted record, preventing reconciliation of performance claims. Registry information is inconsistent with the stated standard context (listed as CDM in the extracted record), which also reduces clarity for users trying to trace credits.

Claim Safety

Because verified ER totals are not available in the extracted record, it is not possible to check for over-crediting signals such as large claim-to-verify discrepancies. Leakage is not addressed in the extracted record, which increases the risk that credited reductions could be overstated if any leakage pathways are relevant under the applied approach. CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated in available documents, increasing uncertainty for buyers about how credits may be used and the risk of inappropriate claims.

Documentation

Documentation appears moderately complete: the extracted record references a validation report and PDD, with a recent validation date (2022-11-05) and no corrective actions required. Still, key operational/quantitative fields (monitoring period, claimed/verified ERs) were not found in the extracted record, indicating important evidence gaps. The minimum extraction confidence is medium and one evidence source is labeled unknown, which suggests some limitations in document readability or capture.

Overall

No contradictions were identified in the extracted record, so scores are not reduced for internal inconsistencies. The overall score is driven by VVB-confirmed additionality and the low permanence risk typical of renewable energy avoidance projects, balanced against major MRV/quantification gaps (missing monitoring period and verified ER totals) and missing leakage treatment. Note: if documentation were to fall below 3.0, transparency would be capped by the gate rule; and if integrity were below 4.0, overall would be capped at 6.0—neither gate is triggered by these scores.