JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

JCM Validation Report Form
A. Summary of validation
A.1. General Information
Title of the projectIntroduction of Amorphous High Efficiency
Transformers

inNorthern,

CentralandSouthern Power Grids
Reference number

VN013

Third-party entity (TPE)

Deloitte Tohmatsu Sustainability Co., Ltd.
(DTSUS)

Project participant contracting the TPE

Yuko-Keiso Co., Ltd.

Date of completion of this report

15/03/2019

A.2 Conclusion of validation
Overall validation opinion

Positive
Negative

A.3. Overview of final validation conclusion
Only when all of the checkboxes are checked, overall validation opinion is positive.
Item
Validation requirements
No CAR or CL
remaining
Project design The TPE determines whether the PDD was completed using
document form
the latest version of the PDD forms appropriate to the typeof project and drafted in line with the Guidelines forDeveloping the Joint Crediting Mechanism (JCM) Project
Design Document, Monitoring Plan and Monitoring Report.
Project
The description of the proposed JCM project in the PDD is
description
accurate, complete, and provides comprehension of the
proposed JCM project.
Application of The project is eligible for applying applied methodology andapproved JCM that the applied version is valid at the time of submission of
methodology
the proposed JCM project for validation.
(ies)
Emission
All relevant GHG emission sources covered in thesourcesand methodology are addressed for the purpose of calculating
calculationof project emissions and reference emissions for the proposedemission
JCM project.
reductions
The values for project specific parameters to be fixed ex ante
listed in the Monitoring Plan Sheet are appropriate, if
applicable.
Environmental
The project participants conducted an environmental impact
impactassessment, if required by the Socialist Republic of Vietassessment
Nam, in line with Vietnamese procedures.
Local
The project participants have completed a local stakeholder
1JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

B. Validation team and other experts

Name

Company

Function*

Schemecompetence*

Mr.
Kunio
Team
DTSUS
Ms.
LeaderTada
Mr.
Yuichi
Team
DTSUS
Ms.
Otani
MemberMr.
ChikaraInternal
DTSUS
Ms.
Ishigai
ReviewerMr.
Ms.
Please specify the following for each item.

Technical
competence*On-sitevisit

Authorized

Authorized* Function: Indicate the role of the personnel in the validation activity such as team leader, teammember, technical expert, or internal reviewer.
* Scheme competence: Check the boxes if the personnel have sufficient knowledge on the JCM.
* Technical competence: Indicate if the personnel have sufficient technical competence related
to the project under validation.

C. Means of validation, findings, and conclusion based on reporting requirements
C.1. Project design document form
<Means of validation>
The validation team checked the received project design document (the PDD) andconfirmed that the latest version of the form was applied. The information required by
the PDD and Monitoring Guidelines was described completely in the PDD.
<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
No issue was raised in the PDD form.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team concluded that the PDD was completed using the latest versionof the form and drafted in line with the PDD and Monitoring Guidelines.
C.2. Project description<Means of validation>
The proposed project is replacing existing silicon steel core transformers by setting
highly efficient (less no load loss) amorphous transformers at areas of the four powercompanies (the project participants: the PPs) listed in the PDD.

3

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

The validation team conducted on-site visits at KHPC and Dong Nai PC areas(Although more than half of the project transformers were installed within the EVNSPC
area, the EVNSPC had already participated in other similar JCM projects (VN004 and
VN008) and have experience about the JCM. So the validation team selected KHPC
and Dong Nai PC for on-site visit.
The location of the project listed in the PDD was checked by Google Map and thelisted location was the site of the PP’s office.
The validation team received the list of project transformers with information such astype (capacity, phase), location (address, installed power pole number) and the serial
number, and checked during their on-site visits in the KHPC and Dong Nai PC areas
whether the project transformers were installed correctly by sampling and checking
the electricity distribution map/diagram by which every transformer was managed by
the PPs. Based on the procedures performed, the project transformers were installed
correctly and managed appropriately.
The validation team also confirmed that the expected operational time in the PDD (18years) is the legal life for a pole-mounted transformer in Japan.
The proposed project was financially supported by the Ministry of the Environment ofJapan (MOEJ) through the financing program. The validation team checked the grant
notification letter issued by the MOEJ and confirmed that the financial support was
implemented as reported in the PDD.
<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
The validation team found some project transformers had been relocated, stopped, orchanged their address notation (no relocation) between the start of the project
operation and the on-site visits based on interviews with the PPs and a review of theevent list with information such as replacement, relocation and address notation
change.
The validation team raised CL1 and requested evidence or information from the PPs
to support the event list to check whether these events were managed appropriately.
Such evidence or information included construction records or operation stop/restart
records were received and confirmed that the event details were reflected correctly inthe event list and events were managed appropriately.
The CL1 was closed.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team concluded that the description of the proposed JCM project in the4

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

PDD was accurate, complete, and met the requirements of the PDD and Monitoring
Guidelines as it provided an understanding of the project.
C.3. Application of approved methodology(ies)<Means of validation>
The applied methodology for the proposed project is ‘Installation of energy efficienttransformers in a power distribution grid’ (VN-AM005).
The validation team confirmed that the latest version (1.0) of the methodology wasapplied.
The validation team checked the eligibility of the criteria of the applied methodology
as follows.
Criteria 1: Single-phase and/or three-phase oil-immersed transformer with amorphous
metal core is installed in the distribution grid.
The validation team checked the product specification, the brochure of the projecttransformers by the manufacturer, tender specification by the PPs and the projecttransformers list with specification information, and confirmed that all types of projecttransformers were single-phase and/or three-phase oil-immersed transformers withamorphous metal core.
Additionally, the validation team conducted the on-site visits and checked the projecttransformers by sampling. Every checked transformer was single-phase or threephase transformers with amorphous metal core. Although some transformers had
been relocated between the project operation start and the on-site visit, relocation is
not exchange of transformers to those not satisfying the criteria, and does not affectthe applicability of the criteria.
Criteria 2: Load losses of the project transformer determined in line with IEC 60076-1
or national/industrial standards complying with IEC 60076-1 is equal or smaller than
the standard values or specification values of load loss, required by the powercompany of the grid where the project transformer is installed, corresponding to its
capacity and number of phases.
According to the brochure from the manufacturer and tender specification of the
project transformers by the PPs, their products were tested based on the IEC60076
standards, which the validation team confirmed.
TCVN63606-1 is Viet Nam’s equivalent to IEC60076 and is basically a translation of
IEC60076, which the validation team confirmed. It was also confirmed from theinterviews with the PPs that, in the event of a time-lag between the update of these5

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

standards, IEC60076 would be prior to TCVN6306-1.
The validation team checked the tender specification of the project transformers with
the PPs, the product specification of the project transformers with the manufacturer
and the acceptance records with the PPs. In doing so, the validation team also
confirmed that the load losses of the project transformers were equal to or smaller
than that required by the PPs.
<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
No issue was raised on the applicability of the approved methodology.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team concluded that the proposed project was eligible for applying themethodology. The applied version was valid and met the requirements of the PDD andMonitoring Guidelines.
C.4. Emission sources and calculation of emission reductions<Means of validation>
The validation team checked the product specification of the project transformers andreference transformers (tender specification of the ‘silicon’ transformers), conducted
the on-site visits, and interviewed the PPs. In the process, the validation teamconfirmed that reference emission sources and project emission sources were no-loadlosses of grid electricity from the transformers and correspond with the applied
methodology.
The validation team also confirmed that the applied methodology did not allow PPs tochoose whether a source or gas was to be included which is indicated in paragraph
41 of the JCM Guidelines for Validation and Verification.
The validation team checked the Monitoring Plan Sheet (the MPS) and confirmed thatthe calculation spreadsheet of the applied methodology was applied without changes
being made.
The validation team checked the appropriateness and correctness of the parametervalues fixed ex ante as shown below.
Brp (Blackout rate): The default value fixed in the applied methodology was applied.
UNCi (Maximum allowable uncertainty for the no-load losses of the project6

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

transformer): The value (0.15: 15%) was applied from the tolerance of component
losses as defined in IEC60076-1, which was conservative, the validation teamconcluded.
EFgrid (CO2 emission factor of the grid): The source of the emission factor issued by
the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (the MONRE) was checked andan appropriate value was applied.
<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
The validation team checked the appropriateness and correctness of the values of the
below parameters fixed ex ante and found that the values of these parameters forsome types of the project/reference transformers were incorrect (the values of some
types did not correspond to the evidence (product specification and tenderspecification).
NLLRE,i,j,k (No load losses of the reference transformer)
NLLPJ,i,j,k (No load losses of the project transformer)
The validation team raised CAR1 and requested the PPs to revise the applied values
in the MPS. The validation team checked the revised MPS and confirmed the incorrect
values were revised appropriately. CAR1 was closed.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team concluded that all relevant GHG emission sources covered in themethodology were addressed appropriately, and that the parameter values to be fixed
ex ante were appropriate.
C.5. Environmental impact assessment<Means of validation>
The validation team checked the decree of the environmental impact assessment(EIA) issued by the Viet-Nam government and interviewed the PPs, and confirmedthat the proposed project did not require an EIA.
<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
No issue was raised on the EIA.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
7

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

The validation team concluded that the EIA was not required for the proposed project
and the requirements for the EIA were not applicable.
C.6. Local stakeholder consultation<Means of validation>
According to the received PDD, stakeholders’ consultation meetings were held threetimes for the direct stakeholders (the four power companies). Satisfactory responses
were received and, therefore, no further action was required.
The validation team checked the following evidences and confirmed that the local
stakeholder consultation (the LSC) invitation in the PDD was consistent with theevidences received as follows:- Invitation letter to LSC meetings- Presentation documents in the meetings- Attendees list
The LSC was, therefore, held appropriately.
The validation team also checked the records of the LSC meetings and the results of
the LSC in the PDD were confirmed and found to be consistent with the records and,
therefore, no further action was required.
Additionally, the validation team interviewed the PPs at the on-site visit and confirmedthat their opinion on the proposed project was consistent with the PDD.
<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
No issue was raised on the LSC.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team concluded that the LSC process was completed appropriately,
and met the requirements of the PDD and Monitoring Guidelines.
C.7. Monitoring<Means of validation>
The following is the monitoring parameter list for the proposed project. The validationteam confirmed that the list (one parameter was listed) was consistent with theapproved methodology.
Parameter

Description of data8

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

Hi,pEnergizing time of the project transformer i during the period p

The means of monitoring the parameter was not regulated specifically in the applied
methodology, which the validation team confirmed.
According to the monitoring plan, the measurement methods and procedures ofmonitoring the parameter is counting the number of hours during the monitoring period
and then the monitoring frequency is once at the end of the monitoring period.
Actually, it was assumed that the project transformers were always energized inprinciple (i.e. calculated by multiplying the number of days of the monitoring period by
24 hours/day). In case of non-operation (because of such events as replacement,
relocation and etc.), the non-operation time was deducted. The validation teamconfirmed by checking the MPS and interviewing the PPs. No equipment was used formonitoring and there was no monitoring point specified. The validation team concluded
that the means for monitoring was reasonable considering the characteristics of thetransformers. The non-operation time was calculated by multiplying the number of
non-operation days by 24 hours/day. The validation team concluded it wasconservative and reasonable.
As for data management on non-operational time, the validation team confirmed its
appropriateness by checking the event list and its evidences as reported in Section
C.2. of this report.
As for the monitoring structure, the validation team identified the responsible personnel
in each PP based on the monitoring plan explanation document (in which the
responsible personnel and the role of each PP was listed) and interviews with the PPs.
The validation team also checked the monitoring manual and meeting records with thePPs on the JCM monitoring and confirmed that the data management and QA/QC
procedures were established appropriately.
<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
No issue was raised on monitoring.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team concluded that the monitoring plan complied with requirements of
the approved methodology. The PPs had the ability to implement the monitoring so themonitoring plan would be feasible.
C.8. Modalities of Communication
9JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0<Means of validation>
The validation team received the MoC from one of the PPs, Yuko-Keiso Co., Ltd. withwhom the TPE (DTSUS) contracted this validation.
The validation team checked the minutes of agreements for the proposed project
between Yuko-Keiso and each PP (the four power companies) in Viet-Nam andconfirmed that Yuko-Keiso has responsibility as the representative of the PPs.
In addition, the validation team received written confirmation letters from every PP,
including Yuko-Keiso that declared all corporate and personal details, including
specimen signatures, were valid and accurate.
The validation team also checked name cards of Yuko-Keiso, including the official who
signed the MoC and, additionally, confirmed the personnel who signed the MoC andthe written confirmation letter of the PPs (KHPC and Dong Nai PC) by checking thelist of interviewees for this validation, including the PPs who were interviewed.
The validation team also checked the received MoC and confirmed that the latest
version of the form was used and the required information was completed correctly.
<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
No issue was raised on the MoC.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team validated the corporate identities of all project participants and the
focal point included in the MoC, as well as the personal identities.
C.9. Avoidance of double registration<Means of validation>
The validation team checked the MoC and confirmed that the PPs declared as awritten confirmation that the proposed project has not been registered under otherinternational climate mitigation mechanisms.
As a cross-check, the validation team checked the project lists on the websites of the
UNFCCC (CDM/JI) and the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) and there was no similar
project.
There have already been registered JCM projects which are similar to the proposed
project (VN004 and VN008). The validation team received the transformers lists ofthese existing projects and checked the serial numbers of these transformers with thenumbers of the proposed project transformers. There was no duplication among thelists.
10

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
No issue was raised on the avoidance of double registration.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team concluded that the proposed project was not registered underother international climate mitigation mechanisms, and that the avoidance of double
registration met the requirements of the PDD and Monitoring Guidelines.
C.10. Start of operation<Means of validation>
The validation team checked the correctness of the start date of operations of eachproject transformer on the lists by checking the records for the operation start date bysampling and confirmed that the operation start date of the checked transformers werecorrect (the dates on the lists were consistent with those in the records). The validationteam concluded that the operation start date of each project transformer was managed
appropriately.
The validation team checked the latest operation start date of the project transformers
and found that the project transformer whose operation start is the latest was that
installed by the EVNSPC (i = 652) and the latest operation start date was 22 December
2017.
The validation team concluded that it is conservative and appropriate to set theoperation start date of the proposed project as of 1 January 2018, which was later thanthe latest operation start date (22 December 2017).
<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
No issue was raised on the start of operation.
<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team concluded that the starting date of project operation in the PDD
was appropriate. The starting date did not predate 1 January 2013 and did meet therequirement of the PDD and Monitoring Guidelines.
C.11. Other issues<Means of validation>
Through the validation process reported in C.1 - C.11, the validation team states theconclusion as shown below.
11

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0<Findings>
Please state if CARs, CLs, or FARs are raised, and how they are resolved.
N/A<Conclusion based on reporting requirements>
Please state conclusion based on reporting requirements.
The validation team undertook a reasonable assurance engagement based on
ISO14064-3 and the engagement has not been undertaken based on the International
Standard on Assurance Engagement (ISAE) 3000 ‘Assurance Engagements Other
than Audit or Reviews of Historical Financial Information’ issued by the International
Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB).
The implemented procedures are as shown below:- On-site visits were implemented in the areas of KHPC and Dong Nai PC,- Sampling is applied according to Paragraph 17 of the ‘Joint Crediting Mechanism
Guidelines for Validation and Verification’ (Version 1.0), and the sampling size was 61transformers- Evidence obtained included information that cannot be externally obtained,- Validation is the process of independent evaluation of a proposed JCM project by athird-party entity against the validation guidelines as developed by the Joint Committee
on the basis of the PDD, but does not assure the feasibility and achievability of the
proposed project,- The implemented procedures involve assessing the suitability in the circumstancesof the project participant’s use of ‘Joint Crediting Mechanism Guidelines forDeveloping Project Design Document and Monitoring Report’ (Version 2.0) and theapproved methodology (VN AM005 Version 1.0) as the basis for the preparation of the
PDD.

D. Information on public inputs
D.1. Summary of public inputs
Call for public inputs was opened from 24 January 2019 to 22 February 2019, and no
public input was submitted.

D.2. Summary of how inputs received have been taken into account by the project participants
No public input was submitted.

12

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

E. List of interviewees and documents received
E.1. List of interviewees
Khanh Hoa PC (KHPC)
Do Thanh Son
Tran Dang Hien
Thai Quoc Hung
Nguyen Xuan Thu
Vo Ngoc Tuan
Phan Manh Hung
Nguyen Quang Tien
Vinh Nguyen PC (a subsidiary of KHPC)
Nguyen Dang Thanh Loi
Bui Hoang Lam
Nha Trang Center PC (a subsidiary of KHPC)
Nguyen Van Hung
Dinh Van Tuan
Vinh Hai PC (a subsidiary of KHPC)
Nguyen Thanh Nam
Nguen Thanh Hai
Dong Nai PC (DNPC)
Thinh Xuan Dung
Nguyen Ngoc Tuan
Le Minh Hoang
Thai Nhu Hai
Tran Nguyen Tuong
Bui Cong Tuan
Do Huu Hoang
Bien Hoa PC (a subsidiary of DNPC)
Tran Nam Long
13

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

Bien Hoa 2 PC (a subsidiary of DNPC)
Vo Van Bao Duy
Yuko-Keiso Co., Ltd.
Shiro Tokura
Saori Iwasaki
Vu Huy Hieu
Mitsubishi UFJ Morgan Stanley Securities Co., Ltd.
Chisato Nakade

E.2. List of documents received- Modalities of Communication (MoC)- Financial support documents by the Ministry of Environment of Japan- List of transformers installed by the proposed project (EVNSPC, EVNHN, KHPC,
DNPC)- Event list of the project transformers (EVNSPC, EVNHN, KHPC: No event by DNPC)- Evidence of events (relocation, replacement and others: Construction records,
Installation Records)- Product specification for the project transformers- Tender specification for the project transformers (EVNSPC, EVNHN, KHPC, DNPC)- Tender specification for the reference transformers (EVNSPC, EVNHN, KHPC,
DNPC)- Manufacturer’s brochure for the project transformers- Acceptance (Operation start) records by the PPs (EVNSPC, EVNHN, KHPC, DNPC)- Pre-delivery inspection reports of the installed transformers by the manufacturer- Location map of transformers installed by the proposed project (EVNSPC, EVNHN,
KHPC, DNPC)- Transmission line map by KHPC (sampling)- Transmission line diagram by DNPC (sampling)- Evidence of expected operational lifetime (18 years) of the proposed project-

DECREEonenvironmental

protection

planning,

strategic

environmental

assessment, environmental impact assessment and environmental protection plans
14

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0(No.18/2015/ND-CP)- Invitation letter/email to stakeholder meetings- Presentation materials for stakeholder meetings- Attendees list for each meeting- Records of each meeting- Brochure of the PPs (Yuko-Keiso, EVNSPC, EVNHN, KHPC, DNPC)- Document that explains the monitoring plan
- Written confirmation in which all corporate and personal details are valid and accurate- Minutes of agreement on the JCM between Yuko-Keiso and PPs in which all the PPs
are listed and Yuko-Keiso is assigned as the focal point (EVNSPC, EVNHN, KHPC,
DNPC) for communication- Monitoring manual about the proposed project (to check and record events such as
replacement, relocation, address change)- Education record about the JCM, the proposed project, and monitoring of the powercompanies- IEC 60076-1- National/industrial standard adopted to determine loss losses of transformers(TCVN6306-1: 2015)- Source of the emission factor (0.9185 tCO2/kWh) issued by the Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment (the MONRE)- List of transformers installed by EVNSPC in the registered JCM projects (VN004,
VN008)

15

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

Annex Certificates or curricula vitae of TPE’s validation team members, technicalexperts and internal technical reviewers
Please attach certificates or curricula vitae of TPE’s validation team members, technical experts
and internal technical reviewers.
Team Leader
Name:
Position:

Fields ofExpertise:

TADA, Kunio
1. Lead Auditor
2. Auditor
3. Technical Expert
Sectoral Scopes (SS)SS 1: Energy industries(renewable/nonrenewable sources)
SS 2: Energy distribution
SS 3: Energy demand

Technical Areas (TA)TA 1.1: Thermal energy generation
TA 1.2: Renewables
TA 2.1: Electricity distribution
TA 3.1: Energy demand

SS 4: Manufacturingindustries

TA 4.1: Cement and lime production
TA 5.1: Chemical process industries
TA 5.2: Caprolactam, nitric and adipic acid
TA 6.1: Construction
TA 7.1: Transport

SS 5: Chemical industry
SS 6: Construction
SS 7: Transport
SS 8: Mining/mineralproduction

TA 8.1: Mining and mineral production
TA 9.1: Aluminum and magnesium production
TA 9.2: Iron steel and ferro-alloy production

SS 9: Metal production
SS 10: Fugitive
emissions from fuels(solid, oil and gas)
SS 11: Fugitive
emissions fromproduction andconsumption of
halocarbons and sulphur
hexafluoride
SS 12: Solvents use
SS 13: Waste handlingand disposal
SS 14: Afforestation andreforestation

TA 10.1: Fugitive emissions from oil and gas
TA 11.1: Emissions of fluorinated gases

TA 11.2: Refrigerant gas production

TA 12.1: Chemical industries
TA 13.1: Solid waste and wastewater
TA 13.2: Manure
TA 14.1: Afforestation and reforestation

SS 15: Agriculture

TA 15.1: Agriculture

SS 16: Carbon captureand storage of CO2 ingeological formations

TA 16.1: Carbon capture and torage

Approved by:

TATSUWAKI, Keiko, Chief Executive Officer of DTSUS
NOTE: In accordance with “Auditor’s List with Technical Areas of Sectoral Scopes” by DTSUS.

16

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

Team Member
Name:
Position:

Fields ofExpertise:OTANI, Yuichi
1. Lead Auditor
2. Auditor
3. Technical Expert
Sectoral Scopes (SS)SS 1: Energy industries(renewable/nonrenewable sources)
SS 2: Energy distribution
SS 3: Energy demand

Technical Areas (TA)TA 1.1: Thermal energy generation
TA 1.2: Renewables
TA 2.1: Electricity distribution
TA 3.1: Energy demand

SS 4: Manufacturingindustries

TA 4.1: Cement and lime production
TA 5.1: Chemical process industries
TA 5.2: Caprolactam, nitric and adipic acid
TA 6.1: Construction
TA 7.1: Transport

SS 5: Chemical industry
SS 6: Construction
SS 7: Transport
SS 8: Mining/mineralproduction

TA 8.1: Mining and mineral production
TA 9.1: Aluminum and magnesium production
TA 9.2: Iron steel and ferro-alloy production

SS 9: Metal production
SS 10: Fugitive
emissions from fuels(solid, oil and gas)
SS 11: Fugitive
emissions fromproduction andconsumption of
halocarbons and sulphur
hexafluoride
SS 12: Solvents use
SS 13: Waste handlingand disposal
SS 14: Afforestation andreforestation

TA 10.1: Fugitive emissions from oil and gas
TA 11.1: Emissions of fluorinated gases

TA 11.2: Refrigerant gas production

TA 12.1: Chemical industries
TA 13.1: Solid waste and wastewater
TA 13.2: Manure
TA 14.1: Afforestation and reforestation

SS 15: Agriculture

TA 15.1: Agriculture

SS 16: Carbon captureand storage of CO2 ingeological formations

TA 16.1: Carbon capture and storage

Approved
TATSUWAKI, Keiko, Chief Executive Officer of DTSUS
by:
NOTE: In accordance with “Auditor’s List with Technical Areas of Sectoral Scopes” by DTSUS.

17

JCM_VN_F_Val_Rep_ver01.0

Internal Reviewer
Name:
Position:

Fields ofExpertise:

ISHIGAI, Chikara
1. Lead Auditor
2. Auditor
3. Technical Expert
Sectoral Scopes (SS)SS 1: Energy industries(renewable/nonrenewable sources)
SS 2: Energy distribution
SS 3: Energy demand

Technical Areas (TA)TA 1.1: Thermal energy generation
TA 1.2: Renewables
TA 2.1: Electricity distribution
TA 3.1: Energy demand

SS 4: Manufacturingindustries

TA 4.1: Cement an lime Production
TA 5.1: Chemical process industries
TA 5.2: Caprolactam, nitric and adipic acid
TA 6.1: Construction
TA 7.1: Transport

SS 5: Chemical industry
SS 6: Construction
SS 7: Transport
SS 8: Mining/mineralproduction

TA 8.1: Mining and mineral production
TA 9.1: Aluminum and magnesium production
TA 9.2: Iron steel and ferro-alloy production

SS 9: Metal production
SS 10: Fugitive
emissions from fuels(solid, oil and gas)
SS 11: Fugitive
emissions fromproduction andconsumption of
halocarbons and sulphur
hexafluoride
SS 12: Solvents use
SS 13: Waste handlingand disposal
SS 14: Afforestation andreforestation

TA 10.1: Fugitive emissions from oil and gas
TA 11.1: Emissions of fluorinated gases

TA 11.2: Refrigerant gas production

TA 12.1: Chemical industries
TA 13.1: Solid waste and wastewater
TA 13.2: Manure
TA 14.1: Afforestation and reforestation

SS 15: Agriculture

TA 15.1: Agriculture

SS 16: Carbon captureand storage of CO2 ingeological formations

TA 16.1: Carbon capture and storage

Approved
TATSUWAKI, Keiko, Chief Executive Officer of DTSUS
by:
NOTE: In accordance with “Auditor’s List with Technical Areas of Sectoral Scopes” by DTSUS.

18