GS1247 VPA 41 Gatsibo District Boreholes (GS4202)

Integrity

The validation report (2025-08-18) states additionality was confirmed via a financial test and verified by the VVB, which supports additionality. The baseline is project-specific but was last reassessed in 2024 (validation report), which is positive. However, leakage is treated as a 0% deduction without justification in the most recent documentation and reversal events are listed as not addressed; CARs and CLs were raised and closed per the validation report, indicating material issues were found and required corrective actions. The lack of a buffer pool percentage and absence of documented treatment for reversals lower permanence confidence.

Transparency

The project names the VVB (Earthood Services Limited) and provides a clear monitoring period (2023-01-01 — 2024-12-31) in the validation report. Despite 29 documents being used, the extracted evidence documents are recorded as unknown and the total verified emission reductions are not provided in the extracted record, which limits independent verification. The extraction confidence is low, which further reduces transparency and increases the chance that key data were missed or mis-extracted.

Claim Safety

A recent baseline reassessment (2024) supports the baseline claim, but there are multiple contradictions across documents: usage rates (90% vs 100%), FN/RB values (0.85 vs 0.98), and crediting period (current vs historic period). The validation report (2025-08-18) values are privileged because it is the most recent authoritative document; privileging the 2025 validation report lowers confidence in older, conflicting values. CORSIA and CCP status are not stated, leaving potential double-claiming risk unresolved. Overall these inconsistencies increase the risk of over-crediting.

Documentation

Although 29 documents were reportedly used and a validation report dated 2025-08-18 exists, the extracted record shows evidence documents as unknown and the minimum extraction confidence is low. Several corrective actions were issued (detailed in the validation report) including requests for original filled questionnaires and declarations to be uploaded to the registry. These outstanding/recorded corrective actions and low extraction confidence reduce the documentation score.

Overall

I privileged the most recent validation report (2025-08-18) for resolving contradictions because it is the latest authoritative verification output; where older documents presented more favorable values (for example, FN/RB of 0.98 or usage rate 100%), the validation report records lower or more conservative values (FN/RB 0.85 and usage rate verified 90%). Contradictions indicate data reliability issues and informed downward adjustments to transparency and claim safety. The overall score reflects moderate integrity but material gaps in leakage treatment, missing verified issuance numbers, outstanding corrective action items, and low extraction confidence that together limit confidence in the project's credits.