Dak Srong 3B Hydropower Plant
CT-356
Score Breakdown
Integrity
missing Additionality, baseline approach, leakage treatment, and any findings/corrective actions are not stated in available documents
inferred Hydropower is an avoidance-type renewable project, but without documentation the baseline and grid emissions assumptions cannot be validated
Transparency
missing No VVB/assurance information, monitoring period, or MRV details were found in the extracted record
missing Registry/public-data completeness cannot be assessed because no evidence documents were provided
Claim Safety
missing Over-crediting risk cannot be screened because baseline method, grid factor/FNRB approach, and verified vs claimed results are not available
inferred CORSIA/CCP status is not stated in available documents, leaving double-claim/eligibility risk unresolved
Documentation
missing No evidence documents were provided (0 documents used), so key claims are unsupported
missing Low extraction confidence reduces reliability of the extracted record
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
No project documents (PDD, monitoring report, or verification/assurance report) were provided in the extracted record, so additionality testing, baseline selection, and leakage treatment are not stated in available documents. Buffering, reversal events, and any material findings/corrective actions are also not found in the extracted record. Given hydropower’s sensitivity to baseline/grid factor assumptions, the absence of documentation materially weakens integrity confidence.
Transparency
The extracted record contains no evidence documents and therefore no information on monitoring periods, metering/QA-QC procedures, or third-party assurance. The VVB/assurance entity name and any discrepancy between claimed and verified results are not stated in available documents. As a result, transparency is scored very low.
Claim Safety
Without baseline method details, grid emissions factor/FNRB approach, or any comparison of claimed versus verified outcomes, over-crediting risk cannot be evaluated. Eligibility signals such as CORSIA eligibility or CCP status are not stated in available documents, so potential double-claim/marketing risk cannot be screened. This uncertainty drives a conservative claim-safety score.
Documentation
No evidence documents were included (0 documents used), and the minimum extraction confidence is low, indicating at least one key source was poorly readable. Key fields typically needed for assessment (methodology, monitoring, verification/assurance, findings) are not found in the extracted record. This results in a very low documentation score (note: documentation < 3.0 would cap transparency under the gate rules).
Overall
There are no listed contradictions in the extracted record, but this is largely because no documents were available to compare. With zero documents and low extraction confidence, the assessment is dominated by evidence gaps across all dimensions, leading to a low overall score. Under the gate rules, the very low documentation score would cap transparency post-scoring.
Audit Analysis
Only minimal project identifiers were provided, with no extracted content from official documents to substantiate baseline setting, additionality, monitoring, or issuance details. With zero documents and low extraction confidence, the project cannot be quality-assessed beyond a very conservative, high-uncertainty score.
Project Description
Dak Srong 3B is a run of river hydro-electric plant in the Central Highlands of Viet Nam. The plant has a capacity of 19.5MW and was commissioned in 2012.
Red Flags
- No official documents were available in the extracted record (0 documents), preventing verification of baseline, monitoring, and issuance claims
- Low extraction confidence indicates at least one key source was poorly readable, increasing the risk of missing or misread critical information
Credit Vintages
Nessuna emissione registrata sul registro.
Il marketplace dichiara i vintage: 2022 (non verificato).
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide the I-REC registration/issuance documentation and any assurance/verification statement covering the monitoring period and metering QA/QC
- Provide the baseline/grid emissions factor approach (including data sources and vintage) and any leakage/safeguards documentation to enable an over-crediting and safeguards review
Questi suggerimenti indicano quali prove pubbliche aggiuntive potrebbero migliorare il livello di confidenza di questa valutazione. Non garantiscono un punteggio futuro più alto.
Risk Indicators
No additionality assessment found
Reversal/buffering not documented
Leakage treatment not found
Baseline method not stated
Safeguards/FPIC/grievance not found
CORSIA/CCP status not stated
Where to buy
Marketplaces
+ Know where to buy this?
Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].
⚑ Dispute this rating
Sei il proprietario di questo progetto?
Correzione metadati (gratuita)
Nome, paese, marketplace o link errati? Segnalacelo.
Non modifica lo score.
[email protected] →Rivalutazione con nuovi documenti
Hai documentazione aggiornata non ancora inclusa? Puoi richiedere un nuovo run della pipeline con i nuovi input.
Invia Documenti →