VPA - Spouts - 3

Integrity

The project shows a barrier-based additionality approach under TPDDTEC, but the VVB did not explicitly confirm additionality in the extracted record. Leakage is at least addressed as quantified, and the monitoring report dated 2020-10-14 reports no material findings and no corrective actions required. Permanence is weaker because reversal events are noted as not addressed and no buffer pool percentage is found.

Transparency

The monitoring report provides a clear monitoring period from 2019-09-01 to 2020-08-31 and identifies annual survey-based usage monitoring. The FNRB is stated as 82 using a national default method, which helps interpret the project context. Transparency is reduced because total ER claimed and verified are not found, the VVB name is missing, and extraction confidence is only medium.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is moderate at best because the project uses a project baseline and leakage is at least quantified, but the evidence does not show a robust, fully documented over-crediting check. Usage rate assumed and verified are both 82, which is internally consistent, yet the record does not provide the underlying survey detail or a clear public claim status. CORSIA eligibility is not stated and CCP status is only noted as not mentioned, so dual-claim risk cannot be ruled out from the extracted record.

Documentation

Documentation is incomplete but not absent: five documents were used and the monitoring report is dated 2020-10-14. The record still lacks the VVB name, buffer pool information, and several quantified crediting figures, and the extraction confidence is only medium. The crediting period also conflicts with an earlier document, which lowers confidence in the completeness of the file set.

Overall

The project has some credible elements, but the evidence base is not strong enough for a high-confidence score. I privileged the more recent monitoring report for the monitoring period and usage method because it is later and more specific, but I still penalized the score because the record contradicts an earlier document on additionality, usage monitoring, and the crediting period. The gate rule is not triggered because integrity remains above 4.0, but the unresolved contradictions and missing verification details keep the overall assessment in the mid range.