Grid Connected Wind Power Project By M/S. D. J. Malpani In Rajasthan

Integrity

The project’s additionality is supported because the verification report confirms an investment test and the VVB is identified as VKU Certification Pvt. Ltd. The project is an avoidance-type wind project, so reversal risk is inherently lower, and no reversal events are reported. However, leakage is explicitly marked as not addressed in the latest record, the buffer pool is not stated, and the monitoring report required several corrective actions, which weakens the overall integrity assessment.

Transparency

Transparency is mixed. The issuance documentation provides a monitoring period and a named verifier, but the monitoring report also requested corrections for inconsistent project naming, missing technical specifications, unclear inclusion of period boundaries, and incomplete disclosure of the emission-factor tool. The record also does not state the usage monitoring method, which limits MRV clarity.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is weakened by the large gap between the amount claimed and the amount verified: the record shows 34,931 claimed versus 2,505 verified. The project is not CORSIA-eligible, which helps reduce dual-claim risk, but the contradiction history shows major changes in reported totals and a shift in crediting-period framing, which raises over-crediting and reporting-risk concerns. Leakage treatment is also unresolved in the latest record, adding to claim uncertainty.

Documentation

The documentation set is fairly broad, with 28 documents used and a recent issuance document dated 2023-01-17. Even so, extraction confidence is only medium, and the monitoring report contains multiple corrective actions that indicate incomplete or inconsistent documentation. The crediting period is stated, but the record does not clearly show a recent baseline reassessment or complete supporting detail for several key items.

Overall

Overall, this is a moderate-to-low confidence project assessment with some real strengths but meaningful reliability concerns. I privileged the latest issuance record and the more recent monitoring/verification information over older values where contradictions existed, because those are more current and operationally relevant; for example, I used the later verified issuance figure rather than the older claimed total, and the later leakage statement rather than the earlier negligible-leakage note. The contradictions in benefit sharing, safeguards, grievance mechanism, FPIC, leakage treatment, verified issuance, and crediting period all reduce confidence and justify a downward adjustment in the scores.