Chestnut Mountain

Integrity

The monitoring report (2019) indicates an 18% buffer pool contribution and reports no intentional or unintentional reversals during the 2018–2019 reporting period, which supports permanence management. Additionality is indicated as confirmed by the VVB in the extracted record, but the specific additionality test type was not found, limiting how robustly it can be evaluated. The baseline approach and the leakage deduction percentage were not found in the extracted record, even though leakage is described as quantified, which reduces confidence in the integrity of the credited ERs.

Transparency

The monitoring report (2019) clearly states the monitoring period (2018-12-06 to 2019-12-05) and identifies the verifier (Aster Global Environmental Solutions, Inc). However, the extracted record does not include total claimed or total verified ERs for the period, preventing a basic reconciliation of what was monitored versus what was issued. The method for monitoring activity/usage was also not found in the extracted record, limiting MRV transparency.

Claim Safety

The extracted record states the project is not CORSIA-eligible, which reduces the risk of certain high-profile eligibility-based claims. At the same time, the baseline method is not stated in the extracted record and the leakage deduction value is missing despite being described as quantified, both of which elevate over-crediting and greenwashing risk because outsiders cannot validate the core accounting choices. CCP status was not found in the extracted record, leaving uncertainty about how the credits may be marketed against integrity labels.

Documentation

Documentation quality is moderate: the extracted record includes a monitoring report dated 2019 plus an appendix, and extraction confidence is high. No material findings or corrective actions are reported in the extracted record, which is a positive signal for audit outcomes. Still, with only two documents captured and multiple missing core fields (baseline method, ER totals, leakage deduction value), the documentation set appears incomplete for independent assessment.

Overall

No contradictions were identified in the extracted record, so no cross-document reconciliation was required. The project has some integrity-positive signals (VVB-confirmed additionality, buffer contribution, and no reversals reported in the monitoring report (2019)), but major evidence gaps around baseline setting, leakage deduction magnitude, and ER totals materially limit confidence. These gaps reduce transparency and increase claim risk, pulling the overall score into the mid range.