New Planting Procedure - Summary of Assessments

NPP Reference Number
Country of the NPP
Submission:
RSPO Membership Number

MX008

México1-0416-22-000-00

Section 1: General Information
INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A. DE C.V. is a 100% Mexican company dedicated to the cultivation, production, processing andmarketing of palm oil and its derivatives. It belongs to the OLEOMEX GROUP, a conglomerate of fifteen companies that range
from the establishment and maintenance of plantations to industrial processing, refining of oils and their commercialization
with the food and pharmaceutical industry, which has a 40-year tradition. INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A. DE C.V. It hasdevelopments for the production of fresh fruit bunches (RFF) in the southern region of the United States of Mexico, but it also
has benefit plants for the processing of RFF, as well as by-products: kernel, biomass, among others. The OLEOMEX group was
founded in 1978, in the city of Guadalajara, Jalisco at the initiative and leadership of Engineer José Luis Pérez Martínez.
OLEOPALMA was born in 1999 with an agricultural project of 150 collaborators. Currently, the company's properties are locatedin the states of Chiapas, Tabasco and Campeche. Around the year 2001, the first extraction plant was inaugurated in
Mapastepec, Chiapas. Followed by another in 2004 in Palenque, Chiapas, in 2012 in Jalapa, Tabasco and in 2016 in Marqués deComillas, Chiapas. The company's administrative headquarters is in Guadalajara, Jalisco.
It is important to mention that all the production coming from the plantations owned by INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A. DE C.V.
are processed by the benefit plants of the same company and the oil produced is sold to a company that is part of the OLEOMEXGroup called Industrializadora OLEOFINOS, which is certified under the chain of custody system, since 2012 it is a member ofthe standard RSPO and the implementation and compliance process to obtain certification began in 2015. Finally, it isinteresting to note that this industrializer has clients such as Nestlé, Pepsico, Bimbo, Mondelez and Colgate.
Currently, INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A DE C.V. has oil palm plantations established in various regions of the states of Tabasco,Campeche, and Chiapas, in the United States of Mexico. The organization is a member of the RSPO through the Corporate
membership of Grupo OLEOMEX (Oleoquímica Mexicana). To date, INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A DE C.V. it has not been thesubject of complaints or campaigns against it.
The assessments described in this document were carried out for two (2) Management Units (MU) named “El Llano” y “Las
Mercedes” both territories are private property due to land ownership with a lease agreement with the organization
INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A. DE C.V. for the development of oil palm cultivation. These MUs are located at the municipalityof Balancan, state of Tabasco, in the United States of Mexico (see Figure 1). Las Mercedes MU has an area of 299.83 hectares,
while El Llano MU has a total area of 402.33 hectares, comprising a total area of 702.16 hectares between both.
Within the Management Units no peat soils nor HCV 2, HCV 5, HCV 6 areas nor local community lands were found. Thus, theconservation areas (which do not correspond to any of the abovementioned categories) represent 46.50ha and the potential
sowing areas 655.51 hectares, as indicated in Table 1.

Section 2: Maps

Areas and proposed time for new planting - 2024

Section 3: SEIA
Guidance Note: This section is where the summary findings of SEIA is captured. References and pictorial
evidence are recommended. What are the methodology(ies), people involved in the process, date ofassessment and findings? Note: Should an assessment carried out by internal staff, just fill the name ofthe staff and his/her designation.

The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process designed to foresee and report about the affectation that a certain
project may have on the environment throughout detailed identification of possible consequences that its execution may bringto the numerous environmental components that make up for the whole project; Likewise, it allows to establish corrective
measures that can help to control, mitigate, prevent, compensate or to recover for the impacts caused.
Multiple methodologies have been documented concerning the identification and evaluation of environmental aspects andimpacts, for this reason it is necessary to define a structure and model types used for this study.
In accordance with the above, BioAp defines that the analysis structure based on the Logical Framework Methodology (LFM)
developed by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC; 2015), where the analysis of involved
entities, the problem tree, the analytical structure of the project are sequentially exposed these results will be evaluated bymeans of quantitative methodologies of cause and effect, among which are Jorge Arboleda ́s methodology presented by
Fedepalma in 2011 and the methodologies defined in the RSPO 2018.
Rendering the structure given by LFM concerning the assessment of environmental impacts, the scope (current plantations or
new plantations and the extractor) of the study must be defined first, this will allow to describe the causes, effects andresponsible for the anthropic alteration of the physical environment in biotic or socioeconomic scale. This methodology
incorporates important analytical elements that help to manage this process.
Identification of activities was based on the review of primary and secondary information. For both scenarios, a table wasdesigned which contains the name of the activity, its description, and the evaluation criteria that will be considered whenidentifying the impacts for each component.

-- Activity: It refers to the stages that are carried out for both the processing plant and at the oil palm plantations andare identified with the acronym AC (Activity).
- Description: It gives a brief explanation of the process that is carried out in each activity; in the same way, it
corresponds to a delimitation of the starting point and the end of the activity.
- Evaluation criteria: The elements that will be studied in the evaluation process are exposed.

Date of assessment: 19/04/2022
Name of Assessor: Juan Pablo Zorro
Assessor Designation and Company: Erika Naileth Casallas Garzón, Jina Katerine Melo Ramírez. BioAp S.A.S
Table 2 presents the profile of each one of the professionals who participated in the preparation and development of thestudies and evaluations conducted in the areas proposed for the New Oil Palm Plantations of the organization

The Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is the process of identification and management of the social issues within the developmentof a project, including the involvement of the affected communities through participatory processes of identification,
evaluation, and management of possible social impacts. Although it is still used as a mechanism to predict the impact and as
an instrument for those social impacts to be considered, its role is equally important as part of the continuous management ofsocial impacts throughout the project development cycle, from its conception. to the post-closing stage (Vanclay, F; Esteves, A;
Aucamp, I; &, Franks, D., 2015).
The Social Impact Assessment for the establishment of the new plantations by Industries INUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A DE C.V.
carried out consultations with the beforehand defined interested parties about the positive and negative impacts resulting
from the agronomic activities (crop establishment, crop maintenance and harvest), this with the purpose of identifying thepotential effects on the territory.
Based on the conclusions resulting from the consultation process, the social aspects recognized, and the analysis of the activities
proposed for the establishment of the new plantations, an identification of impacts is created in conjunction with the evaluation
criteria and the social aspects integrating it.
It is required to mention that each of the impacts is framed according to the social structure, therefore, the social, economic,
and cultural aspects of the territory are to be understood. Therefore, these impacts must be understood as a projection andnot as a constant throughout the development of the project. This is vital for the company, and it is mandatory to require therespective update of the study, those with the purpose of integrating new elements of social dynamics. For this, the identified
impacts are described with their respective social aspects by stakeholder category (Table 6 and Table 7).
Jorge Arboleda ́s method was taken as basis for the socioeconomic impacts assessment that the establishment of new oil palm
plantations may cause. Each impact must be evaluated based on the parameters or criteria presented in Table 8.

Social impact qualification (Cs) is the expression of the criteria combined actions with which the social impact was estimatedand represents the severity or importance of the damage that it is causing. The formula developed by the EPM (by its acronym
in Spanish) group is:Cs = C (P [E*M+D])
Where:
Cs= Social qualification C= Class
P= Presence
E= Evolution
M= Magnitude
D= Duration
The impacts assessment is a procedure that allows, in an orderly and objective manner, to establish the importance of an
impact. Based on this, it defines the type of socioeconomic management measures to be adopted. The first applications of theequation showed results in which the rating differed from the obtained with other methodologies (or by ratings assigned by
specialists in the field). A subsequent analysis determined that the criteria used had a different relative weight in the equation,
so it had to be affected by weighting constants that would balance it. Through a sensitivity analysis, the following weighting
constants were determined: a = 7.0 and b = 3.0. The following equation was then obtained to express the socioeconomic ratingof a given impact: Cs = C (P [axEM+bxD]).
Replacing a & b values we obtained Cs = C (P [7.0xEM+3.0xD])
According to the scores assigned individually to each criterion, the absolute value of Cs is greater than zero (0) and less than orequal to ten (10). The value generated by the equation is then converted into an expression that indicates the importance of
the impact, assigning qualification ranges according to the numerical results obtained.
After the analysis, impacts identified for each social component are rated, using the parameters above described, allowing us
to obtain the weighted rating for the socioeconomic impact that was considered. This is obtained by the average of grades
assigned to each activity. Based on this qualification and on the prioritization of impacts, it is possible to determine whichmeasures will be proposed in the social management plan to be executed and which are the most significant for the project.

Table 22 shows the impacts obtained through the participatory dialogue stage between the consulting team and therepresentatives communities’ attendants to the consultation process, there the different social aspects acknowledged andshowing greater significance among the actors and the communities are specified, which converge in the presence of impacts
as focused on social, economic, and cultural conditions in the territory.
In addition, Table 23 shows the relationship and communication as an impact identified between the Balancan council and the
INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A DE C.V., in relation to the establishment of new oil palm plantations, to determine strategies
between the parties in favor of the population.

Section 4: HCV-HCSA Assessment; OR ALS HCV and Standalone HCSA assessment
RSPO Note: A reference should be made to the full report. All the related maps should be included here. What are themethodology(ies), people involved in the process, date of assessment and findings? Note: Should an assessment carried out byinternal staff, just fill the name of the staff and his/her designation.
ALS Satisfactory Date Obteined (ALS HCV % HCV.HCSA assessment): Januart 19, 2023
https://www.hcvnetwork.org/reports/evaluacion-integral-avc-hcsa-para-2-unidades-de-manejo-propuestas-para-eldesarrollo-de-nuevas-plantaciones-de-palma-de-aceite-de-industrias-oleopalma-s-a-de-c-v-ubicadas-en-los-estados-unidosmexicanos-tabasco-municipio-de-balancan

Below is the profile of each of the professionals who participated in the preparation and development of the studies andevaluations carried out in the areas proposed for the New Oil Palm Plantations of the organization.

The identification and evaluation of the threats to the HCV areas was carried out considering the present effects on the High
Conservation Values identified due to the environmental conditions and the anthropic activities that take place there. These
threats were identified considering the time scale in which they occur, finding present threats (in the AOII) and potential ones
that come from the proposed activities (new oil palm plantations) or from external activities.
All threats were identified and classified based on the results obtained from the characterization process of the study areas, aswell as the findings of the stakeholder consultation. Likewise, the threats proposed by the evaluation team were compiled
based on their experience in other evaluations related to the agricultural sector and specific observations were included
considering the field phase. For the above, the guide developed by the Zoological Society of London was taken as a guide. (Zrust,y otros, 2013) for monitoring threats in areas with High Conservation Values; The threats identified for each of the HCVs present
are shown in the Table 34.

To guarantee the maintenance of the identified HCVs, a series of management recommendations are suggested aimed at theprotection, conservation and improvement of the significant and critical environmental and social values present within theevaluated areas. These recommendations consider the environmental and social characteristics of the study area, the resultsof the consultation with interested parties and the internal and external threats identified for each HCV.
For HCV 1 and HCV 3 areas considered present in the context of the assessment due to the identification of vegetation coverwith the capacity to host significant concentrations of biological diversity, mainly RAP, endemic or migratory species, as well as
nationally threatened ecosystems. A buffer strip of 20 meters is proposed around these areas, defined according to theguidelines of (Bentrup, 2008) whose main objective is to protect the concentrations of biological diversity characteristic of theseareas, favoring the flows of matter and energy with the surfaces. surrounding natural resources, especially considering thecurrent threats to this environmental value in terms of loss of species and of the ecosystems and habitats in which they reside.
For the areas considered HCV 4, the proposed management corresponds to a water protection round of about 100-meteraround the Usumacinta River, as well as the protection and conservation of bodies of water associated with this coverage. In
said round of protection, management must be aimed at conserving the areas of forest cover that are within them and startinga reforestation process with native species in order to guarantee the provision of associated ecosystem services.

Finally, for all HCV areas considered to be present in the Management Units, the delimitation of a 10m differentiatedmanagement strip is proposed as an additional management area to the previously mentioned buffer strips and water
protection rounds, in order to generate a transition zone between the cultivation of oil palm and the management and HCV
areas, preventing activities related to the development of the crop from negatively impacting the environmental and social
values that are sought to be protected and improved.
The management and monitoring recommendations for these HCV areas are shown in Table 35.

Based on the definitive land cover map, sampling points were selected for the development of the Rapid Ecological Assessment(REA). The estimation of the presence of rare, threatened, endangered and endemic species, as well as the conservation

condition of the covers in the Management Units, was conducted based on a field study focused on the identification of RAP
species (fauna and flora) in those areas. To obtain information about the flora and fauna species with potential distribution for
the region, especially RAP species, lists, databases, and available inventories were reviewed.
The high degree of transformation presented by the ecosystems in the study area and the absence of forest- type covers or
natural covers in the management units, the experience of the evaluation team and the reviewed literature, the presence ofconcentrations of RAP species was discarded, however, a sampling consisting of active search tours, visual identification anduse of sound signals for birds was carried out, as well as the installation of camera traps for mammals (see Table 12).
Data gathering was conducted in ten (10) transects. Both the transects and the faunal vegetation scenarios undertook thegreatest number of vegetation classes, for which reason secondary vegetation, savannah, holm oak and riparian vegetation
were conducted in the covers (Figure 9). The transects for the sampling of fauna undertook the greatest number of habitats
present in the evaluated area.

Section 5: FPIC
Guidance Note: This section is where the information on stakeholder mapping is put and all required
information that the building blocks for FPIC have been conducted. References and pictorial evidence arerecommended. What are the methodology(ies), people involved in the process, date of assessment andfindings?

Calling process and prior approaches with Nuevo Pochote, Vicente Guerrero and San Juan communities, were identified by the
consulting team throughout the definition and characterization of the HCV's Indirect Area of Influence. This was carried out by
INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A. DE C.V., whose members held a negotiation with ejidos ́ representatives in which the project for
new oil palm plantations was presented through an informative document. Aspects such as the scope of the project, activities
to be developed and the role of the community were identified. Additionally, during the meeting the document was delivered
and by signing the acceptance documents, the communities agreed to participate in the consultation exercise with theinterested parties; These minutes contain the name and position in charge of the representatives who will participate in themeeting, date and time of the consultation, agreements between the parties, among others. These documents are in custodyby the organization and were reviewed by the social consulting team. The foregoing considering that the scoping study phase
was not necessary, since the consulting team had developed preliminary HCV and EISA studies in the study area that allowed
for the recognition of relevant analysis factors such as: non-identification of community use areas within MUs, recognition ofproperty boundaries and land tenure by private parties, MUs historical changes for agricultural purposes, etc.
Based on the due diligence components verification, the consulting team confirmed land legibility as defined within the publicdeed documents and property certificates and lease contracts of the MUs, considering that this is considered as private
property and its use and management is governed by agreements between the parties.
In addition, a follow-up and guidance were developed by the consulting team for a transparent development of the first
approach to the communities and other interested parties through meetings with those responsible for the organization
INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA S.A. DE C.V., taking as a precautionary measure that this will not be used as a persuasion mechanism
to achieve personal benefits of community representatives.
Even so, the consultant team will follow up and lead the transparent development of the first approach to the communities
and other interested parties through meetings with those responsible for the companies , taking as a precaution that this will
not be used as a persuasion mechanism to obtain personal benefits from the community representatives, which is made explicitin the informative document. In accordance with the above, the consulting team begins the HCV-HCSA study with the Scoping
Study phase and the collection of information from secondary sources.
Consultation to interested parties was oriented under the principles of transparency and respect for free participation andopinion, so it was necessary for the interested parties to approve to take photographs, attendance record (only for adults), andrecording of opinions by BioAp SAS consulting team. In addition, from the implementation of the participatory mapping it isidentified that the communities have concerns regarding palm crops and their possible effects on the ecosystems present in
the area, therefore, they want that according to the results of the studies apply actions to mitigate harmful effects on theenvironment, as well as this can contribute to the improvement of payment conditions in labor in the area.
On the other hand, the commitment to the participants of the socialization and feedback of the results of the HCV and EISA
studies as well as the actions proposed for continuous improvement is verified, this as part of the establishment of a joint work
agenda with the parties. Interested.

Table 19 presents the summary of the participants for the consultation process developed in the field phase, where the numberof participants, applied methodological tool and photographic record are specified. In total, the consulting team had 84
participants in the activities carried out; among them: Communities of the area of influence and government entities.

The consultation of interested parties was carried out with a large part of the social actors as established in the agreements
defined during the previous approaches and call. However, the meeting with the representation of the Emiliano Zapata council
could not take place due to the availability of time of the representatives of the entity; Likewise, in Balancan only theEnvironmental Protection and Sustainable Development Department participated, finding these two limitations. The foregoing
considering the contingency due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the administrative changes due to electoral processes thatwere taking place during the social field phase.
The information obtained from the field work is presented in Table 20, where the perceptions of the territory and its relationshipwith the project are presented, as well as the identification of possible HCV areas. Said perceptions, comments and suggestions
were identified during the participatory activities with the interest groups and are considered according to their relevance forthe study by the consulting team.

Section 6: Soil and topography
RSPO Note: This section should indicate the type of soil identified and the area of it. Sampling points should be indicated.
Topographic maps will be included here as well. Any potential areas identified as steep terrain according to the P&C 2018
definition should be mentioned accordingly. What are the methodology(ies), people involved in the process, date ofassessment and findings? Note: Should an assessment carried out by internal staff, just fill the name of the staff and his/her
designation.
Date of Assessment: May 2023
Name of Assessor: Juan Pablo Zorro
Assessor Designation and Company: Fabio Ernesto Álvarez Morales, Wendy Julieth Álvarez Morales, BioAp S.A.S.
Based on the soil chart of the United Mexican States Series II (Chart E15-9) (INEGI, 2002) one soil unit corresponding
to Vertisol pelico (Vp) was identified in the Management Units. Vertisol (V) is a type of soil characteristic of temperate
and warm climates, especially in areas with a marked dry season and a rainy season; It is characterized by its massive
structure and its high clay content that expands when wet, forming sliding surfaces called facets, and because they
are collapsible when dry, they can form cracks on the surface or at a certain depth. They are very fertile soils, but
their hardness makes tillage difficult, they have low susceptibility to erosion and high risk of salinization (INEGI, 2002).
On the other hand, the topography of the land made it possible to identify that in both cases the gentle slope,
characterized by having inclinations between 0 and 5°, is the one that predominates, occupying 80.47% of the El
Llano MU and 76.60% of Las Mercedes MU; This is followed by the moderate slope, where the inclinations are
between 5 and 10° and which represents 18.90% of the El Llano MU and 22.29% of the Las Mercedes MU. The othercategories (steep and fairly steep slope) occupy less than 1% of the surface area of the MUs.
In accordance with the National Interpretation of the Principles and Criteria for the Production of Sustainable Palm
Oil in Mexico (Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, 2020), it is indicated in Criteria 7.5, 7.6 and 7.7 that new oil palm
plantations should not be developed on steep slopes, on marginal and fragile soils or on peaty soils, regardless of
their depth. Annex 1 of this document includes the following definitions:-

Fragile soil: A soil that is susceptible to degradation (reduction in fertility) when disturbed. A soil is particularly
fragile if degradation leads rapidly to an unacceptably low level of fertility or if the degradation is irreversibleusing economically viable management inputs.
Marginal Soil: A soil that is unlikely to produce acceptable economic returns for the proposed crop based onreasonable projections of crop value and improvement costs. Degraded soils are not marginal soils if theirimprovement and the resulting productivity is profitable.
Steep terrain: Surfaces with an inclination of more than 25° or as indicated in a National Interpretation
process.

Thus, and considering the identification and soil description for each study MU, no soil units are identified that can beclassified as marginal or fragile, peat soils or areas with steep slopes (>25°); however, in areas with a steep slope,the necessary measures must be adopted to ensure the preservation of the soil and prevent its erosion, taking into
account the previously mentioned guidelines and definitions within the framework of the RSPO.

Section 7: Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
RSPO Note: this section should be used to explain the findings that come out from the usage of the New Development GHG
calculator. Please include what are the significant sources and type of emissions expected from this area. What are themethodology(ies), people involved in the process, date of assessment and findings? Note: Should an assessment carried out byinternal staff, just fill the name of the staff and his/her designation.
Date of Assessment: March, 2023
Name of Assessor: Juan Pablo Zorro
Assessor Designation and Company: María Paula Romero Cerón / BioAp S.A.S

GREENHOUSE GAS (GHG) EVALUATION STUDY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW
PLANTATIONS (NPP) IN THE MANAGEMENT UNITS ABREU FRANCISCO EL LLANO AND ABREU
LUIS FELIPE (LAS MERCERDES) OF INDUSTRIAS OLEOPALMA SA DE CV (MEXICO)PREPARED FOR:

PRODUCED BY:

1.

BOGOTA DC
MARCH 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTSINTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 26

2.

SCOPE .................................................................................................................... 27

3.

METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 28
3.1

Interpretation of images .................................................................................... 28

4. OVERLAPPING AREAS OF HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE (HCV) AND CARBON-FIXING PLANT
COVERS. ....................................................................................................................... 28
5.

ESTIMATION OF GHG EMISSIONS WITH THE RSPO GHG NPP TOOL. ............. 30

6.

SCENARIOS ........................................................................................................... 31

7.

6.1

Emissions scenario 1 ........................................................................................ 32

6.2

Emissions scenario 2 ........................................................................................ 33

6.3

Emissions scenario 3 ........................................................................................ 34

6.4

Emissions scenario 4 ........................................................................................ 35

6.5

Scenario selection. ........................................................................................... 36

RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................ 37

TABLE INDEX
Table 1. Areas for the development of new plantations ................................................... 27
Table 2 Project conservation areas. ................................................................................ 29
Table 3. Conservation areas by MU ................................................................................ 29
Table 4. Description of scenarios .................................................................................... 31
Table 5. Emissions scenario 1. ....................................................................................... 32
Table 6. Emissions scenario 2. ....................................................................................... 33
Table 7. Emissions scenario 3. ....................................................................................... 34
Table 8. Emissions scenario 4. ....................................................................................... 35
INDEX OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Location of management units. ......................................................................... 27
Figure 2. Potential planting and conservation areas. ....................................................... 28
Figure 3. Management areas – High conservation values. .............................................. 30
Figure 4. Graph of final emissions of the 4 scenarios. ..................................................... 37

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AVC: High conservation values
HCS: High carbon stock
UM: Management unit

GHG: Greenhouse gases
INEGI: National Institute of Statistics and Geography
LUC: Land use change
RFF: Fresh fruit bunches
tCO2: Ton of Carbon Dioxide
RFV: Empty fruit clusters
PKS: Husk
AC: Ammonium chloride
AN: Ammonium nitrate
COD: Chemical oxygen demand
APC: Crude palm oil
DAP: Diammonium phosphate
FW: Fresh weight
GWP: Global Warming Potential
H&C: Harvest and collection
KER: Palm Kernel Extraction Rate
MOP: Muriate of potassium
OER: Oil Extraction Rate
PK: Palm kernel
PKO: Palm kernel oil
PKE: Palm kernel ejector
EEAP: Palm oil mill effluent
RSPO: Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil
Seq: Kidnapping
1. INTRODUCTION
The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is an international multi-stakeholder certification scheme
for sustainable palm oil whose mission includes advancing the production, procurement, financing and useof sustainable palm oil products; and the development, implementation, verification, assurance andperiodic review of credible global standards for the entire sustainable palm oil supply chain.
Criteria 7.7., 7.10 and 7.12 of the 2018 RSPO principles and criteria have added several new requirements
regarding the sustainable development of oil palm plantation expansion, most importantly the prohibitionof any new peat plantations, the adoption of the Carbon Stock Approach (HCSA) toolkit and AVC-HCSA
manual and the requirement to conduct an integrated assessment before any new development.
The RSPO GHG assessment for new developments 2021, currently in its fourth version, aims to update
the procedures of the previous version in line with the 2018 PYC. Among the significant revisions to thisversion, evaluations are carried out to identify and estimate carbon stocks before and after new
developments, as well as the main sources of emissions that may result from development related to palm
plantations.
The purpose of this procedure is to guide RSPO members planning new development to identify andestimate carbon stocks prior to development, as well as the main sources of emissions that may result
directly from development related to palm plantations. The selection of optimal scenarios for development
will be carried out taking into account the social, environmental and economic impacts of development,
The result of this evaluation will be the final development plan specifying the proposed development andconservation. Emphasis has also been placed on encouraging the use of widely available guidelines andpractices, while adding other information and calculations (e.g. belowground biomass (BGB), soil carbon,
scenario testing) to facilitate application and implementation. report of this procedure.
The present study is developed in order to determine the greenhouse gas emissions present in the new oilpalm areas of the Abreu Francisco El Llano Y Abreu Luis Felipe MU (Las Mercerdes) of INDUSTRIASOLEOPALMA SA DE CV, located in the state of Tabasco, Mexico.
For this study, two (2) management units (MU) were considered with a total area of 702.16 ha, in which
the potential planting areas were evaluated and identified, and with it the greenhouse gas emissions
generated. a future, the consumption and production of the current plantations that the company has, aswell as the information provided by the extraction plant, were taken as a reference.

Figure 1Location of management units.
2. SCOPE
This study aims to comply with Principle 7, Criterion 7.10 and 7.12 established by the RSPO (2018) for the
production, conservation and improvement of ecosystems and the environment. Two UMs were validatedwith a total area of 702.16 ha, of which 655.51 ha were identified as potential planting areas, 46.50 ha asconservation areas and 0.14 as human settlements, then in the Table 1presents the areas proposed forthe new plantation evaluated.

Table 1. Areas for the development of new plantations

DRIVE UNIT

AVC area(ha)

Potential
planting area
(ha)

Other
areas (ha)Total area (ha)ABREU FRANCISCO
EL LLANO

35.52

366.660.14

402.32

ABREU LUIS FELIPE
LAS MERCEDES

10.99

288.85-299.83

Figure 2. Potential planting and conservation areas.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Image interpretation
For the analysis of coverage and biomass estimation, satellite images were used as base information
supported by official vector information on coverage in the digital resources of the National Institute of
Statistics and Geography (INEGI); The information processing was carried out under the ArcGIS desktop
system with ESRI license (Version 10.5), Quantum GIS (QGIS desktop version 2.12.1) and ERDASIMAGINE.
Satellite images are one of the most suitable and precise resources to obtain conclusive results that allow
decision making. In this case, LANDSAT 8 images were used, being the main source of analysis tocorroborate and update coverage. This process was carried out carried out under the concept of visualinterpretation and band mapping. This method was divided into 2 phases (interpretation and verification
and analysis and digitization).
Phase 1. Interpretation and verification
For the interpretation of the management area, LANSAT 8 images from 2018 were analyzed, with aresolution of 30 m for the OLI ( Operational Land Imager ) bands 1-7, in the same way the panchromatic
OLI band 8 was used with a resolution of 15 m was used to carry out the capacity adjustment, these bands
were compiled into an image and structured in a mosaic over the general management area.
For interpretation, combinations of bands were made which allowed determining the type of coverage andits state, supported as previously described with vector data on coverage and land use from the INEGI.
Likewise, field coverage, some geographical features, structures and constructions were corroborated,
said data were georeferenced and documented.
Phase 2. Analysis and digitization
All the information was organized and analyzed together, firstly, the visual interpretation was carried out
on the images, superimposing the coverage verification points and the land use shape, this process was
carried out by combining bands using the SENTINEL 2 sensor For the interpretation, the combinations
3,2,1 for natural color and 4,3,2 for infrared of vegetation status were used and thus finally the vector layer
was digitized by UM and the value of areas for each type of coverage. The entire process was carried out
in a geographic database.
4. OVERLAPPING AREAS OF HIGH CONSERVATION VALUE (HCV) AND CARBON-FIXINGPLANT COVERS.

For the overlap, these must be superimposed together with the recognized restriction areas and the areas
with high carbon storage values (HCS), in this way the identification of the main coverage and ecologicallyimportant areas for the maintenance of the local and migratory flora and fauna. In the case of the Abreu
Francisco El Llano and Abreu Luis Felipe (Las Mercerdes) MUs, 46.50 ha were identified as conservation
areas, in the table they are presented in a general way and in the table the conservation areas arepresented by MU , in which the corresponding coverages are identified:
Table 2Project conservation areas.
PROPOSED CONSERVATION AREAS
Water body
Cultivated Grassland
Secondary arboreal vegetation of the Medium Subevergreen
ForestShrub Secondary Vegetation of Medium Subevergreen Forest
GRAND TOTAL

Table 3. Conservation areas by UM
PROPOSED CONSERVATION AREAS BY UM
Abreu Francisco El Llano
Cultivated Grassland
Secondary arboreal vegetation of the Medium Subevergreen
ForestShrub Secondary Vegetation of Medium Subevergreen Forest
Abreu Luis Felipe (Las Mercerdes)
Water body
Cultivated Grassland
Secondary arboreal vegetation of oak forest
Secondary arboreal vegetation of the Medium Subevergreen
ForestShrub Secondary Vegetation of Medium Subevergreen Forest
GRAND TOTAL

HA
0.53
4.30
35.50
6.18
46.50

35.52
1.86
27.94
5.72
10.99
0.53
2.44
1.55
6.01
0.46
46.50

Figure 3. Management areas – High conservation values.
5. ESTIMATION OF GHG EMISSIONS WITH THE RSPO GHG NPP TOOL.
Once the information from the HCS and AVC studies is available, the New Developent GHG Calculator
spreadsheet opens, where it is worth mentioning that when downloading the tool, RSPO gives the option
to download it in the desired language, For this study, it was downloaded in the original version (English),
it is important to keep in mind that regardless of the language in which the tool is downloaded, theinformation that must be filled out remains the same.
In this spreadsheet, there are 16 tabs of which only 8 must be filled out. Likewise, in the tool these tabs
are in yellow. It is worth mentioning that for this study the peat tab was not filled out, since it is not The
presence of this was identified in the study areas.
LUC
emissionsFFB
production

Fuel

Peat

Fertilizers
and N 2 O

Conservation
Extractor dataarea

It should be taken into account that all the information that is filled out in these tabs are the expected
performance and production values for the new development. Additionally, the tab where the summary of
the results is made is presented, where it presents:
Field emissions and sinks for small producers.
Field emissions and sinks for use in large-scale operations.
The emissions generated in the extraction plant.
Total emissions, tCO 2e (field and extractor).
Below is a step-by-step description of how to run the calculator.
A.
LUC emissions:
In this tab you must enter the areas that are going to be cleared for new plantations and the estimatedcarbon stocks of the existing soil cover. If carbon stocks were estimated by indicators using the default
values provided in the GHG assessment procedure, then you can select the list of default values provided
on the same tab. However, if field measurements were carried out, the type of land cover and thecorresponding carbon stocks must be defined (filling the yellow cells).
B.
Production of FFB :The expected yield data of tRFF/ha for the new development must be entered; it is important to keep inmind that the planted area data is automatically entered by the same tool. Therefore, it is important tocomplete the LUC tab, since the tool will automatically indicate what the final expected yield will be per ton
of Fresh Fruit Bunch per year in the plantations for the new development.

C.
Fuel in the field
The expected annual fuel consumption is indicated, which must include the transportation of FFB to theextraction plant, the transportation of FFB and/or fertilizers to the field, transportation of workers andmaterials in the field, operation of machinery, such as spreaders. of fertilizers, pumps and fertilizer turners,
and maintenance of infrastructure such as roads and drains. Fuel used for land clearing activities (inpreparation for new planting) is excluded.
D.
Fertilizers and N 2 O
The expected annual consumption of fertilizer must be entered. For this data, an average of the annual
use of fertilizers that are being applied in the plantations that the company already has can be made. This
sheet calculates the total CO 2e produced from the manufacturing, transportation and use of fertilizers. The
N 2 O produced from the application of fertilizers in the RFV, fertilizer and EEAP field is also calculated .
The tool provides a list of simple fertilizers, however, for compound fertilizers, each user must first add it in
the "User-defined fertilizers" sheet. Emissions from the manufacture of compound fertilizers can be
estimated using the "User-defined fertilizers" sheet.
E.
Conservation areas seq:
In this tab it is necessary to enter the total conservation areas, taking into account the conservation areas
established for each scenario and also the areas identified as HCV. Once the total area is obtained, it isimportant that the equation be carried out to determine the tC and in this way enter it into the average
Cseq, this is done in order to calculate the emissions of the entire conservation area (ha). The RSPO
default Cseq rate is provided on the same tab. You can use the regional/national/local custom Cseq rateby providing references of that rate.
F.
Extractor data :It is important to note that if the new development does not include mill operations, it will not be necessary
to enter data on this sheet. However, for the company it does apply since it is planning to send all the fruit
generated from the new developments to its respective extraction plant, therefore, the projected data of
this, in terms of CPO and PK production, must be indicated. (t/year), the estimate of methane production
from EEAP and fuel consumption in the extraction plant as well as electricity consumption from the network.
Depending on the scenario, an estimate is made for the capture of methane for burning or electricity
generation, or if none of these processes is done, but it is left to be sent to the ponds and carry out theconventional procedure.
6. SCENARIOS
According to the results obtained from the carbon stock and the analysis of the Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
calculator, 4 scenarios were defined. Table Table 4a description of the scenarios.
Table 4. Description of scenarios
SCENERY

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3

DESCRIPTION
All potential areas for new oil palm plantings, except the areaof human settlements, it is important to mention that all areas
identified for conservation will also be respected. For this
scenario, in terms of fertilizer and fuel consumption, it was
taken as refers to the consumption that exists in alreadyestablished plantations. In this case, for the extraction plant,
effluent treatment is carried out in a conventional manner, thatis, methane capture is not generated.
All potential areas for new oil palm plantings, except the areaof human settlements, it is important to mention that all areas
identified for conservation will also be respected. For this
scenario, the use of a smaller amount of fertilizers and fuel was
also proposed. The extraction plant for effluent treatment isconventional, and a lower consumption of electricity acquired
from the electrical grid is also proposed.
All potential areas for new oil palm plantings, except the areaof human settlements, it is important to mention that all areas
identified for conservation will also be respected. For this
scenario, the use of a greater amount of fertilizers and fuel was
also proposed. As for the extraction plant in the effluent
treatment, it is conventional, however, it was also proposed tostart with a 10% methane capture.

All potential areas for new oil palm plantings, except the areaof human settlements, it is important to mention that all areas
identified for conservation will also be respected. For this
scenario, the use of a greater amount of fertilizers and fuel was
also proposed. Regarding the extraction plant in the treatmentof effluents it is carried out in a conventional way, regarding thetreatment of PKS it was proposed that 20% be distributed forenergy generation and 8% for direct distribution in the field.

Scenario 4

Area avoided fordevelopment

Conservation area

Annual agriculture
Area devoid of vegetation
Potential areas for
Pastureland
new developments
Tree secondary vegetation(ha)
Shrubby secondary vegetation
Conventional treatment
EEAP treatment
methane capture

S1

S2

S3

S4

46.50

46.50

46.50

46.50

0.00030.90
564.41
40.02
50.18
AND
-

0.00030.90
564.41
40.02
50.18
AND
-

0.00030.90
564.41
40.02
50.18
AND
10%

0.00030.90
564.41
40.02
50.18
AND
-

6.1 Emissions scenario 1
For scenario 1, it was proposed to take the total of the potential areas for planting with a total of 655.51 ha,as well as the areas identified for conservation with 46.50 ha, the remaining 0.14 ha refers to humansettlements therefore not was considered for no use. In this scenario we take as a reference the fertilizers
that are currently used in the established plantations that are within the area of influence of the UMproposed for the new plantings, this in order to be able to have values that are closer or as a reference
and that can be used in the development of the project, as well as the fuel consumption of agriculturalactivities.
Regarding the activities of the extraction plant, it is important to mention that the company has an effluent
treatment system in anaerobic ponds (conventional), and they also use the electrical network to carry out
office activities and other external activities. to the process. It is worth mentioning that the company also
sells biomass, therefore, it is considered as a bonus.
Once the values were established, the required values were entered into the calculator, which gave us thefollowing emissions as seen in Table 5.
Table 5. Emissions scenario 1.
FIELD EMISSIONSLand uset CO2et CO2e/hat CO2e/t FFB

796.02

1.21

0.05

Kidnapping by cultivation-5,699.75

-8.70

-0.33

Fertilizers

3,273.33

4.99

0.19

N2O

2,034.84

3.10

0.12

95.87

0.15

0.01

0.00
-14,020.22

0.00-21.390.00-0.82-13,519.91-20.63-0.79

Fuel in field
Peat
Credit for conservation areas
Total
EXTRACTOR PLANT
EMISSIONS

tCO2e

t CO2e/ha

tCO2e/tFFB

3,340.77

5.10

0.20

Fuel in extraction plant

15.89

0.02

0.00

Use of electrical network

1.07

0.00

0.00

credit (Energy export)
Credit (sale of biomass forenergy)

0.00

0.00

0.00

-154.48

-0.24

-0.01

3,203.25

4.89

0.19

POME

Total

Total emissions, tCO2e-10,317

As can be seen in Table 5, the total values of emissions generated in both field and extraction plant
activities are evident, in which a value of -10,317 tCO2e was obtained.
The emissions generated by field activities totaled -13,519.91 tCO2e. where it was identified that theactivity that generates the highest emissions is given by the application of fertilizers, representing 12.63%of the total, followed by N 2 O emissions with 7.85%, it is worth mentioning when evaluating emissions fromfertilizer application in the field. The transport of the fertilizers from the point of origin to the storage pointand finally the application is considered, while when evaluating N2O emissions, the emissions from theapplication of chemical and organic fertilizers to the field are evaluated, we continue with the emissions
generated by the change in land use with 3.07% and finally emissions from fuel consumption with 0.37%.
Likewise, we have activities that generate CO 2 capture , where conservation areas are identified first,
representing 54.09%, followed by crop sequestration with 21.99%.
Regarding the emissions generated in the extraction plant, a total of 3,512.20 tCO2e was obtained, where
the main activity that generates the greatest impact is given by the treatment of effluents (POME),
representing 95.12% of the total emissions. followed by fuel consumption with 0.45% and finally by the useof electrical grid energy with 0.03%, just like the field activities in the extraction plant, there are also
activities that generate a positive impact in this case. It is the sale of biomass for energy generation which
represents 4.40%.
6.2 Emissions scenario 2
In scenario 2, it was proposed, like scenario 1, to take the total of the potential areas for planting as wellas the areas identified for conservation. In this scenario it was established that according to the amount of
fertilizers, fuel that was used as reference that are currently used in the established plantations that arewithin the area of influence of the MU proposed for the new ones, half the quantity of these was entered,with the possibility that the activities at the beginning will not demand as much quantity.
Regarding the activities of the extraction plant, 100% was left with the effluent treatment system inanaerobic ponds (conventional), however, it was also proposed that there be a decrease in the use of theelectrical network for the development of office activities and other activities external to the process. It is
worth mentioning that the company also sells biomass, therefore, it is considered as a bonus.
Once the values were established, the required values were entered into the calculator, which gave us thefollowing emissions as seen in Table 6
Table 6. Emissions scenario 2.
FIELD EMISSIONSLand use
Kidnapping by cultivation
Fertilizers
N2O
Fuel in field
Peat
Credit for conservation areas
Total
EXTRACTOR PLANT EMISSIONSPOMEFuel in extraction plant
Use of electrical network
credit (Energy export)
Credit (sale of biomass for energy)
Total
TOTAL EMISSIONS, tCO2e.

t CO2e796.02-5,699.75
1,629.20
1,067.70
86.00
0.00-14,020.22-16,141.03
tCO2e
3,340.77
15.89
1.02
0.00
-154.483,203.20-12,938t CO2e/t
FFB
1.21
0.05
-8.70
-0.33
2.49
0.10
1.63
0.06
0.13
0.01
0.00
0.00
-21.39-0.82-24.62-0.95
t CO2e/ha tCO2e/tFFB
5.10
0.20
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.24
-0.01
4.89
0.19

t CO2e/ha

2 were obtained , this as a result of the sum of the emissions given in the field activities and the extraction

plant.
As we see in table 6, the emissions generated by field activities were a total of -16,141.03 tCO 2, where it
can be identified that there are both emissions and capture of CO2, it was identified that the case of theactivities that generate the greatest emissions is given by the application of fertilizers with 6.99% of thetotal, followed by N 2 O emissions with 4.58, the change in land use with 3.24% and finally the emissions
generated due to fuel consumption with 0.37%, likewise, as mentioned at the beginning, capture activities
were also identified, where it was identified that the one that has the greatest impact is given by the captureof CO2 that is generated in the areas of conservation with 60.18%, followed by kidnapping by the cultivation
establishment in the area representing 24.46%.
Regarding the emissions generated in the extraction plant process, a total of 3,203.02 tCO 2 was obtained,
where it was identified that the main source of emissions is given by the POME, which represents 95.12%,
followed by the fuel consumption with 0.45% and finally as a source of emission due to the use of theelectrical grid with 0.03%. However, it is important to mention that the company has a bonus for the saleof biomass for energy which represents 4.40%.
6.3 Emissions scenario 3
For scenario 3, it was proposed, like scenarios 1 and 2, to take the total of the potential areas for planting
as well as the areas identified for conservation. However, for this scenario it was established that theamount of fertilizers, which are taken as a reference, would be doubled, according to what is being appliedin the AII of the UMs proposed for the new ones, this providing that the soil needs a greater amount of
nutrients, among other circumstances, in terms of fuel consumption, it was left standard.
Regarding the activities of the extraction plant, it was proposed to begin with the capture of methane mainly
for burning with 10% and 90% to continue with the effluent treatment system in anaerobic ponds(conventional). For the energy consumption of the electrical network remained with the default values, aswell as the use of fuel, as already mentioned above the company has the sale of biomass, therefore, it isconsidered as a bonus.
Once the values were established, the required values were entered into the calculator, which gave us thefollowing emissions as seen in Table 7.
Table 7. Emissions scenario 3.
FIELD EMISSIONSLand use
Kidnapping by cultivation
Fertilizers
N2O
Fuel in field
Peat
Credit for conservation areas
Total
EXTRACTOR PLANT
EMISSIONSPOMEFuel in extraction plant
Use of electrical network
credit (Energy export)
Credit (sale of biomass forenergy)Total
TOTAL EMISSIONS, tCO2e.

t CO2e796.02-5,699.75
5,863.04
3,560.04
121.120.00-14,020.22-9,379.75

t CO2e/ha
1.21
-8.70
8.94
5.43
0.18
0.00
-21.39-14.31

t CO2e/t
FFB
0.05
-0.33
0.34
0.21
0.01
0.00
-0.82
-0.55

tCO2e t CO2e/ha tCO2e/tFFB
3,069.71
4.68
0.18
15.89
0.02
0.00
1.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-231.01
2,855.66

-0.35
4.36

-0.01
0.17

-6,5242 were obtained , this as a result of the sum of the emissions given in the field activities and the extraction

plant.
As we see in table 7, the emissions generated by field activities were a total of -9,379.75 tCO 2, where it
can be identified that, like the other scenarios, there are both emissions and capture of CO 2 . As a sourceof emissions, it was identified that the activity that generates the greatest amount of emissions is theapplication of fertilizers with 19.50% of the total, followed by N 2 O emissions with 11.84%, the change inthe use of soil with 2.65% and finally the emissions generated by fuel consumption with 0.40%, likewise
capture activities were identified, where the activity that has the greatest impact is the capture of CO 2 thatis generated in conservation areas with 46.64%, followed by kidnapping by the cultivation establishment in
the area representing 18.96%.
Regarding the emissions generated in the extraction plant process, a total of 2,855.66 tCO 2 was obtained,
where it was identified that the main source of emissions is given by the POME, which represents 92.53%,
followed by the fuel consumption with 0.48% and finally as a source of emission due to the use of theelectrical grid with 0.03%. However, it is important to mention that the company has a bonus for the saleof biomass for energy which represents 6.96%.
6.4 Emissions scenario 4
Finally, in scenario 4, it was proposed, like the previous scenarios, to take the total of the potential areasfor planting as well as the areas identified for conservation. In this scenario we take as a reference thefertilizers that are currently used in the established plantations that are within the area of influence of the
UM proposed for the new plantings, this in order to be able to have values that are closer or as a reference
and that can be used in the development of the project, as well as the fuel consumption of agriculturalactivities.
Regarding the activities of the extraction plant, it is important to mention that the company has an effluent
treatment system in anaerobic ponds (conventional), and they also use the electrical network to carry out
office activities and other external activities. to the process. In this scenario, it was established that theamount of RFV is distributed 80% for direct application to the field and 20% for energy generation. Likewise,
the company sells biomass, therefore, it is considered as a bonus.
Once the values were established, the required values were entered into the calculator, which gave us thefollowing emissions as seen in Table 8.

Table 8. Emissions scenario 4.
FIELD EMISSIONSLand use
Kidnapping by cultivation
Fertilizers
N2O
Fuel in field
Peat
Credit for conservation areas
Total
EXTRACTOR PLANT EMISSIONSPOMEFuel in extraction plant
Use of electrical network
credit (Energy export)
Credit (sale of biomass for energy)
Total
TOTAL EMISSIONS, tCO2e.

t CO2e796.02-5,699.75
3,273.33
2,003.70
95.87
0.00-14,020.22-13,551.04
tCO2e2,826.80
13.44
1.07
0.00
-283.992,557.33

t CO2e/t
FFB
1.21
0.06
-8.70
-0.40
4.99
0.23
3.06
0.14
0.15
0.01
0.00
0.00
-21.39-0.97-20.67-0.94
t CO2e/ha tCO2e/tFFB
4.31
0.20
0.02
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.43
-0.02
3.90
0.18

t CO2e/ha-10,994

2 were obtained , this as a result of the sum of the emissions given in the field activities and the extraction

plant.
As we see in table 8, the emissions generated by field activities were a total of -13,551.04 tCO 2, where it
can be identified that, like the other scenarios, there are both emissions and capture of CO 2 . For this
scenario, it was identified that the activity that generates the greatest amount of emissions is the applicationof fertilizers with 12.64% of the total, followed by N 2 O emissions with 7.74%, the change in land use with

3.07% and finally the emissions generated by fuel consumption with 0.37%, capture activities were also
identified, where the activity that has the greatest impact is the capture of CO 2 that is generated inconservation areas with 54.16%, followed by kidnapping by the cultivation establishment in the area
representing 22.02%.
Regarding the emissions generated in the extraction plant process, a total of 2,577.33 tCO 2 was obtained,
where it was identified that the main source of emissions is given by the POME, which represents 90.45%,
followed by the fuel consumption with 0.43% and finally as a source of emission due to the use of theelectrical grid with 0.03%. However, it is important to mention that since in this scenario it was proposedthat the use of RFV not only be taken directly to the field, but also used as a source of energy in theprocess, a bonus was obtained that represents 9. 09%, that is, this practice would help the extraction
plant's emissions greatly.
6.5 Scenario selection.
Once the 4 scenarios were established, several factors were taken into account for the selection in whichan attempt was made to choose the scenario that best suited the development of the project.
In the case of field activities, it was possible to identify that for the 4 scenarios what generated the mostimpact was the application of fertilizers, however, it is very important to take into account that the amountand type of fertilizers can vary. , because its application and composition will depend on the state of thesoil and the needs that the palm requires over the years, that is, a certain amount of these cannot beestablished, nor can the consumption of fuel in agricultural activities. However, it is also very important tohighlight that planting palm crops in the area will bring a positive impact on the area, as will maintaining
the areas identified for conservation.
For the extraction plant activities, the emissions generated by the POME were considered to have a greater
impact, because it has a conventional treatment system, and the CH 4 emissions cause this process to belargely affected, in terms of the Consumption of electricity from the network and fuel are variables that withthe development and implementation of good practices could reflect a decrease in consumption. It should
be noted that the company has been implementing the sale of PKS for energy generation, which has been
attributed to a positive impact.
Taking these aspects into account, it can be established that the scenario that adapts to the conditions
proposed for the development of its new plantations is scenario 4 , since this best suits the operational
capacity of the company. However, it is important to be clear that establishing this scenario does notguarantee that 100% of what is proposed will be met. In the case of the extraction plant, implementing theuse of RFV as an energy source will be a process which with the time it can be adapted, this does not
imply that the company has to increase this percentage immediately, I know that it is clear that it implies
an adjustment in the operation and an economic impact can also be seen.
In the following graph we can see that the field emissions in the scenarios vary mainly to the amount of
fertilizers applied, however, between scenario 1 and 4 very close emissions are obtained, while in scenario
3 it is observed that at Establishing a greater amount of fertilizers, the emissions will have a slightly morenegative effect compared to the others, contrary to what happens in scenario 2, which when applying alower amount of fertilizers, the emissions are much higher, that is, they have a positive impact.
In the case of the emissions from the extraction plant, it is observed that for scenarios 1 and 2 theiremissions are very similar, due to the fact that the POME is managed in a conventional manner, while inscenario 3 identifies a decrease in its emissions because the implementation of methane capture is
proposed, and finally in scenario 4 it is also possible to identify that the emissions generated are lower thanthose of the other scenarios, this occurs because it is about giving other beneficial uses of the by-products
obtained during the process.

Figure 4. Graph of final emissions of the 4 scenarios.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS
To reduce GHG emissions in plantations and extraction plants, a series of good agricultural practices andoperations must be implemented that will help to make better use of natural resources and also reduce
operating costs. The management plans proposed below are developed in order to meet the goals
established by the RSPO of generating an annual decrease in GHG emissions, which are produced bothin plantations and in the extraction plant, however, it is worth mentioning that the The company is NOT
subject to complying with them, but if plans for GHG reduction must be presented, therefore it has theoption of modifying the proposed plans or can establish new ones to achieve the reduction of GHG
emissions throughout its process. where all the activities carried out from planting to obtaining the final
product are taken into account.
MANAGEMENT ACTION PLAN
TYPE OF MEASURE:
PreventivexCorrectivex

MitigationxCompensation
Description of activities:
No.

Action1

Field implementation of organic
fertilizers such as prepared
Biofertilizers, in order to obtain
optimal growth for palms, andthus reduce the use of chemicalfertilizers in the field.

2

Environmental benefit

Optimization of the amount oforganic
fertilizers
andreduction in the use ofchemical fertilizers, in orderto reduce associated GHG
Promotion of the use of legume emissions.
covers to reduce the use of
inorganic nitrogen fertilizers

Responsible

Year

Plantation
management2023-2024

Plantation
management2023-2024

3

Maintain weeds inside the box
manually, using either a hoe ormachete, in order to reduce or
eliminate the use of herbicides.
If the company continues with Reduction of N 2 O emissions.
the application of herbicides, it
mustincreasetheimplementationof
good
agricultural practices.

Plantation
management2023-2024

4

Design and implementation of aperiodic maintenance plan formachinery and tools that run on
fossil fuels.

Reduction of CO 2 emissions,since if you have old or poorly
maintained machinery, theiremissions will be greater.

Plantation
management2023-2024

5

Know the critical points with
Implementation of a savings
high energy consumption toplan and efficient use of energy
proposeenvironmentallyin the extraction plant
efficient alternatives.

Extraction
plantcoordinatorandenvironmental
coordinator

2023-2024

Section 8: Land Use Change Analysis (LUCA)RSPO Note: This section will be used to analyse that there has been no land clearing in the area before the NPP is submitted.
Arrangement should be following the proxy dates indicated in section 2.2.7 of the current NPP Document. Please ensure thatthe minimum resolution is 300 dpi. What are the methodology(ies), people involved in the process, date of assessment andfindings? Note: Should an assessment carried out by internal staff, just fill the name of the staff and his/her designation.
Date of RSPO approval as satisfactory: 16/02/2023
Name of Assessor: Juan Pablo Zorro
Assessor Designation and Company: Juan Pablo Zorro, Wendy Julieth Acosta Rodríguez / BioAp S.A.S

Landsat images: Multispectral Landsat images with 30 meters resolution were used for the interpretation of land use or land
cover. These images were downloaded from the following site: http://earthexplorer.usgs.gov. Land use classification of theLandsat imagery was performed using the "visual classification" method, described below. The specifications of the images
used are described in Table 16.

Google Earth AND Bing Images
Eventually it was necessary to use Google Earth images from 2003-2018 and some Bing images to verify the correctinterpretation of the cover. This was done using the ArcBruTile app for ArcGIS software. Interpreting satellite imagery andcreating cover maps for 2005, 2007, 2010, 2014, and 2020.

Data gaps in Landsat 7 Images. Landsat images from 2005, 2007, and 2010 contained an error commonly known as 'gaps',which are bands of invalid data caused by faults in remote sensor components. To fill in the information gaps, two or three
images were used for each date.
Satellite band combination True color: the band combination was 321. False color: the bands were combined to obtain Landsat
ETM + 432 and Landsat 8 543 combinations.
Pan-Sharpened Process. The Landsat images were enhanced by a combination with the 15-meter-per-pixel panchromatic band
obtaining a 15-meter-per-pixel multispectral image. This process was performed with the Create Dataset Bitmap from the
ArcGIS software.
Classification of satellite images. The interpretation of the vegetation cover was carried out within the property areas evaluatedby visual classification.
Four criteria were used to classify areas that have been cleared for palm oil plantations cropping (no previous HCV studies had
been documented previously) were specified by the RSPO (Table 17). These coefficients or categories are representative of theforest/habitat type and probable land use present in areas suitable for commercial palm oil plantations. In most situations, canbe easily identified through the use of remote sensing.

Based on the analysis of the satellite images mentioned in the section 4.2.4, we continue with the following stages

1. a) Assessment phase: consisting of the primary classification of satellite images.
2. b) Field verification phase: in which the present land cover is corroborated based on the changes in land use of the

3.

4.
5.

periods 2005, 2007, 2010, 2014 and 2022, taking coordinates and photographs for each case and whose information
obtained is used for subsequent validation. In this phase, 6 classes were identified for the Management Units: clean
pastures, open areas, pastures with shrubs, secondary vegetation, shrubs and urban-industrial; these coverages were
subject to verification for the next step.
c) Analysis and evaluation phase: Data obtained in field are compared with the information of the classified land
covers, information that is combined in a shapefile of precision evaluation points. Subsequently, the confusion matrix
that is used to carry out the truth analysis of the terrain is constructed, as well as the Kappa value. If the latter is lessthan 60%, the information must be adjusted, otherwise the next step is continued.
d) Composition and reporting phase: in this phase, the analysis of the satellite images, digitization and final adjustment
are carried out, including the classification of vegetation coefficients and the compensation analysis, and the
preparation of the respective maps.
e) Phase of identification of land cover change areas: after obtaining the vectorized cover, the intersection is made to
identify areas of change, which were recalculated and tabulated to identify land use values between the analysis
periods. . The entire process was carried out using ArcGIS, ERDAS Imagine 2014, QGIS, BaseCAMP and Google Earthsoftware. The georeferenced and preprocessed satellite images for each analysis period are shown below in the Figure
26.

Section 9: Conclusions
RSPO Note: Please conclude all the findings of the assessment and how this will be translated into a management plan. If
there is any known significant issue, the RSPO member needs to acknowledge its existence and ensure it is a priority for the
management to address those issues.

During the field tour and documentary review of both internal documentation and studies carried out by an external company,
it was possible to determine that these meet the minimum requirements established by the RSPO procedure, as well as theranches in the field visit, it was possible to show that there is no risk clearing or clearing since these are livestock.
In addition, with the evaluations carried out, it was possible to verify that there are no peat soils or the existence of carbon.
The establishment of new plantations will be carried out in two ranches called: "El llano and Las Mercedes" these lands havethe corresponding legality, and the owners can be identified, they signed a lease contract through a public deed for a period of
20 years with the right to be able to renew, in the procedure for new plantations in annex 5. (Legality in land tenure, moredetails are found).

Section 10: Confirmation of Report
RSPO Note: This section is used to confirm that all findings are accepted by the grower company and will be responsible for its
ownership and development process for as long as it is within their control
It was possible to demonstrate that they have a declaration and acceptance of responsibilities accepted and signed by theGeneral Director of the company and by the consultants who carried out the study, in addition the area that oversees thecontrol, monitoring and implementation is the Sustainability Management.

Date of Completion
Signature

July, 2023

Name
Position

Jorge Esteban Coronel

Sustainability Manager