Jbel Sendouq-Khalladi (“Khalladi”) wind farm project in Morocco

Integrity

The project has a formal additionality basis through an investment test, and the methodology is identified as ACM0002 version 12.3, which is a positive sign for baseline structure. However, the monitoring report lists 12 findings and 10 corrective actions, reversal events are not addressed, and no buffer pool information is found in the extracted record, all of which weaken confidence in permanence and implementation quality.

Transparency

The monitoring period is clearly stated and the VVB is identified, which helps traceability. That said, total ERs claimed and verified are not stated, usage monitoring is not described, and the record does not provide a quantified FNRB or other key public-facing MRV details, so transparency is only moderate.

Claim Safety

As a wind project under a standard methodology, the project is in a relatively lower-risk category for over-crediting than many other project types. Still, leakage is only described as negligible without a deduction percentage, and the project is marked CORSIA-eligible while CCP status is not stated, leaving some residual claim-safety uncertainty.

Documentation

The evidence base is reasonably broad, with 16 documents used and references to a PDD, validation report, monitoring report, and appendix. Even so, the monitoring report shows many corrective actions, and the crediting-period dates conflict with the later validation report; I privileged the later validation report for the crediting-period update because it is more recent, but the inconsistency itself lowers documentation reliability.

Overall

I privileged the later validation report where it conflicts with the monitoring report on crediting-period dates and on whether additionality was VVB-confirmed, because it is more recent and appears to be the higher-priority assurance document. Even so, the contradiction on additionality is material: the older validation report says it was confirmed, while the later one says it was not, so I treat the record as unreliable on that point and score downward. The leakage contradiction is less severe because the monitoring report at least provides a negligible-leakage rationale, but the absence of a quantified deduction still weakens confidence.