HCS Removal Documentazione completa General Methodology v2.0

Orlivske LLC

TC-2053 ↗

2.0 / 10

Integrity

2.4

Transparency

1.1

Claim Safety

2.0

Documentation

2.8

Score Breakdown

Integrity

verified The verification report is from Control Union Malaysia and covers the 2024 monitoring period, which provides some independent oversight.

missing Key integrity inputs are missing: no additionality test, no baseline method, no leakage deduction, and no buffer pool or reversal information are stated in the available documents.

Transparency

verified A specific monitoring period is stated, and the project has at least two source documents listed in the extracted record.

missing The extracted record does not state total credits claimed or verified, usage monitoring, or any registry completeness details, limiting public MRV transparency.

Claim Safety

missing The project’s baseline approach is not stated, so over-crediting risk cannot be checked against a defined counterfactual.

inferred CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated, so dual-market claim risk cannot be ruled out from the available record.

Documentation

verified The record identifies a named verifier and a dated verification report, which supports some documentation traceability.

missing Extraction confidence is only medium, and the key supporting fields are largely absent rather than quantified, indicating a weak documentation package.

Detailed Analysis

Integrity

The verification report from Control Union Malaysia covers the 2024 monitoring period, which is a positive sign for independent review. However, the extracted record does not state any additionality test, baseline method, leakage deduction, buffer pool, or reversal history, so the core integrity case is largely unsubstantiated. No material findings or corrective actions were reported, but that does not offset the missing methodological evidence.

Transparency

Transparency is limited because the extracted record does not provide total credits claimed or verified, usage monitoring details, or registry completeness information. The monitoring period is clearly stated, and two documents are referenced, but the public-facing MRV picture remains incomplete. With no quantified issuance or verification figures available, it is difficult to assess whether reporting is comprehensive.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is weak because the baseline approach is not stated, leaving the counterfactual and over-crediting risk unclear. Leakage treatment is also absent, and there is no evidence in the extracted record for usage-rate verification or assumptions. CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated, so dual-claim exposure cannot be excluded from the available documents.

Documentation

The documentation set includes a dated verification report and a named VVB, which supports some traceability. Still, the extracted record shows many key fields as not found in available documents, and extraction confidence is only medium. The absence of quantified methodological details suggests the documentation package is incomplete rather than merely concise.

Overall

No contradictions were reported in the extracted record, so there is no need to privilege one conflicting value over another. The main issue is not inconsistency but missing evidence: the available documents do not state additionality, baseline, leakage, permanence safeguards, or claim-eligibility status. Given those gaps, the project scores poorly on reliability and claim safety, and the low documentation depth keeps confidence modest.

Audit Analysis

The available verification record is too thin to support a strong quality assessment. It confirms a monitoring period and an independent verifier, but key elements such as additionality, baseline design, leakage treatment, and permanence safeguards are not stated in the extracted documents. This creates a high evidence-gap risk for both integrity and claim safety.

Project Description

Credits issued: 1,162

Red Flags

No additionality test or VVB-confirmed additionality is stated in the available record.
Baseline method, leakage treatment, buffer pool, and reversal information are all not found in the extracted documents.

Credit Vintages

		Issued	Retired	Available
2024		1,162	0	1,162
Total		1,162	0	1,162

Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio

Provide the full validation and verification package showing the additionality test, baseline methodology, leakage assessment, and any buffer or reversal provisions.
Disclose quantified issuance and verification figures, plus explicit statements on CORSIA eligibility, CCP status, and social safeguards such as FPIC and grievance mechanisms.

Questi suggerimenti indicano quali prove pubbliche aggiuntive potrebbero migliorare il livello di confidenza di questa valutazione. Non garantiscono un punteggio futuro più alto.