Y))) KeystoneEnviro.com
KeystoneEnvironmentalKnowledge-Driven Results
September 15,2017
Ms. Kelly ParkerSenior Carbon AnalystBlue Source CanadaSuite 700, 717 - 7th Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 023
Dear Ms. Parker:
Re: verification Report - Tolko slave Lake Biomass offset projectfor Emission Reduction Credits in 2016Slave Lake, ABProject No. 12885 (r0B)
Please find enclosed the report titled Verification Report for Totko S/ave Lake Biomass OffsefProiect for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016. We are pleased to submit this report that youwill submit to Alberta Emission Offset Registry, along with the Tolko Slave Lake Biomass OfisetProject Report and the corresponding Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Assertion.we appreciate the opportunity in providing the service regarding this project.
lf you have any questions, please contact the undersigned.
Sincerely,
Keystone ronmental Ltd.oç É.s s,
- r.,
fJ,2q f
Judy
>l(^
EngLead Ve
1112800-'12899\12885\Phase 10 B\Report\Finat\1288b 1709'ts FTNAL Veriflcation Report.docx
encl.
Suite 3204400 Dominion StreetBurnaby, Brit¡sh ColumbiaCanada V5G 4G3
Telephone: 604 430 0671Facsimile: 604 430 0672info@KeystoneE nvi ro.comKeysto neE nviro.com
Environmental ConsultingEngineering SolutionsAssessment & Protection
qovl^/'oÊ c
E
B
Environmen
4400 DominiBurnaby, British
Canada
tal Consultin
VerifTolkEmis Slave L Prepar Project NSeptemb
Suite 320ion StreetColumbiaV5G 4G3
ng • Enginee
ficationko Slavession ReLake, AB
red for: Blue
No. 12885 ber 2017
TeFain
ering Solutio
Reporte Lake Beduction
Source Can
elephone: 604 4acsimile: 604 43
nfo@keystoneenv
ons • Environ
Biomassn Credit
ada
30 0671 30 0672 vironmental.ca
nmental Plan
Offset Pts in 201
nning
Project f16
for
PR1. VE2. INT3.
3.13.23.33.4
OB4. SC5.
5.1 PR6. ME7.
7.17.27.3
VE8.8.18.28.38.4
8.58.6
VE9. VE10. VE11.
11.11.
OJECT SUMRIFICATION
TRODUCTIOSummaryProject BoProject VaVerificatio
JECTIVE ...OPE ...........
VerificatioOGRAM CR
ETHODOLOGVerificatioVerificatioSampling
RIFICATIONGeneral PEmissionsData ManSite Visit 8.4.1 O8.4.2 CalculatioDesktop R
RIFICATIONRIFICATIONRIFICATION1 Internal D2 Emission
MMARY ......N SUMMARYON ...............y of Offset Proundary ......ariance .......on Acceptan......................................
on Standard RITERIA ......GY ..............on Strategy .on Plan ....... Plan ..........
N PROCEDUProcedures .s Data and R
nagement an...................On-Site TouInterviews ..on Used ......Review .......N SCHEDULN TEAM ......N RESULTSData Manage
Reduction C
TABLE
...................Y ....................................roject Basel......................................ce .......................................................................................................................................................................
URES .............................Reporting Prnd Control P...................
ur ..........................................................................
LE ..................................
S AND FINDIement and CCalculation ..
Verifica
i
OF CONTE
...................
...................
...................ine ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................rocedures ..
Procedures .......................................................................................................................................INGS ..........
Controls .........................
ation Report – T
NTS
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
Page
...... 1
...... 3
...... 3
...... 3
...... 4
...... 4
...... 5
...... 5
...... 5
...... 6
...... 6
...... 6
...... 6
...... 7
...... 8
...... 8
...... 9
...... 9
...... 9
...... 9
.... 10
.... 11
.... 11
.... 12
.... 13
.... 13
.... 14
.... 14
.... 14
CO12. CO13. LIM14.
Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5
AttachmeAttachmeAttachmeAttachmeAttachmeAttachmeAttachmeAttachme
11.2.1 11.2.2
ONFIRMATIOONCLUSIONMITATIONS .
VerificatioVerificatioEmission Baseline Schedule
ent A ent B ent C ent D ent E ent F ent G ent H
TA
Biomass CoDiesel and P
ON .............. .....................................
on Scope ....on Plan InforFactors ......and Project of Verificati
StatementConflict ofVerificatioRisk AsseStatementAEP ExemAEP ProtoKeystone
ABLE OF C
onsumptionPropane Con.........................................................
LIST OF I
...................rmation ..........................Emissions ..on Activities
LIST OF
t of Qualificaf Interest Chn Plan, Samssment t of Verificati
mption Letterocol DeviatioEnvironmen
Verifica
ii
ONTENTS (
..................nsumption ...........................................................
N-TEXT TA
...................
...................
...................
...................s .................
ATTACHME
ation ecklist
mpling Plan
ion r on Approval ntal Ltd. Gen
ation Report – T
(CONT'D)
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
ABLES
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
ENTS
Letter neral Terms
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
and Conditio
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
...................
ons for Serv
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
Page
.... 14
.... 15
.... 15
.... 15
.... 16
Page
...... 5
...... 7
.... 11
.... 12
.... 13
vices
PROJ1.
Pr
Project
Project
Project Credit S
Credit D
Expectethe Proj
EmissioAchieve
Quantifi
Other EAttribute
Project
Owners
JECT SUMM
roject Title
Description
Location
Start Date Start Date
Duration Peri
ed Lifetime oect
ons Reductioed
ication Proto
nvironmentaes
Registration
hip
MARY
The prrequireonsite arises fossil fdiversi55.260W MitsNovemJanuar
od Initial CAfter th5 year
of The Prexpect
ons From JcarbonFrom Jcarbon
ocol QuantiBiomaEnviro
al This Pother eThere only re
n The prOffset creditsThe Pr
Tolroject uses waed to heat thesteam generprimarily from
fuel usage wition of feedsto082”N;114.50sue Industrial mber 27, 2007ry 1, 2015 Credit Duratiohe initial 8 yeextension pe
roject is expeted to be far iJanuary 1, 20n dioxide equiJanuary 1, 20n dioxide equiification Protoss Waste (Venment (AERSroject is not genvironmentaare no oppor
egistered withroject offset cRegistry (AE
s. roject is owne
Verifica
1
ko Slave Lakaste biomass
e adjoining OSator. The Opp
m direct reducth biomass. T
ock from landf004”W Road, Slave
7
on Period: Janars, the Proje
eriod. cted to operan excess of th
015 – Decembivalents (t CO
016 – Decembivalents (t COocol for Energersion 2.0, ApSD) generating Real benefits/attrrtunities for poh the AEOR. redits will be OR) which tra
ed and operat
ation Report – T
ke Biomass Os to generate tSB mills’ dryeportunity for gctions of GHGThe project wifill.
Lake, AB T0
nuary 1, 2015ect will be re-a
ate for the lifethe credit duraber 31, 2015:
O2e) ber 31, 2016:
O2e) gy Generationpril 2014) prot
enewable Eneributes. otential doubl
registered wiacks the crea
ted by Tolko
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
Offset Projecthermal energ
ers, log pondsgenerating caG emissions bill not claim cr
0G 2A0
5 – Decembeassessed and
time of the eqation period. 51,151 tonne
56,503 tonne
n from the Cotocol publishe
ergy Certifica
e counting as
th the Albertaation, sale and
Industries Ltd
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
ct gy that is s, building andarbon offsets by displacing redits for the
r 31, 2022. d may apply f
quipment,
es of
es of
ombustion of ed by Alberta
tes (RECs) o
s this project
a Emissions d retirement o
d.
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
d
for a
r
is
of
Verification Report – Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
2 Project 12885 / September 2017
Project Title Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
Project Activity This project meets the requirements for offset eligibility as outlined in section 3.1. of the Technical Guidance for Offset Project Developers (version 4.0, February 2013). In particular: 1. The project occurs in AB: as outlined above; 2. The project results from actions not otherwise required by law and
beyond business and sector common practices: Offsets being claimed under this project originate from a voluntary action. The project activity (i.e. conversion of biomass to energy) occurs at a non-regulated facility and is not required by law. The protocol uses a government approved quantification protocol, which indicates that the activity is undertaken by less than 40% of the industry and is therefore not considered to be a sector common practice;
3. The project result from actions taken on or after January 1, 2002: as outlined above
4. The project reductions/approvals are real, demonstrable, quantifiable and verifiable: the project is creating real reductions that are not a result of shutdown, cessation of activity or drop in production levels. The emission reductions are demonstrable, quantifiable and verifiable as outlined in the remainder of this plan.
5. The project has clearly established ownership: Tolko Industries Ltd. owns and operates the Athabasca Engineered Wood Plant. As such, direct emission reductions generated by the project, from the production of thermal energy from biomass, are owned solely by the proponent. Credits created from the specified reduction activity have not been created, recorded or registered in more than one trading registry for the same time period.
6. The project will be counted once for compliance purposes: The project credits will be registered with the Alberta Emissions Offset Registry (AEOR) which tracks the creation, sale and retirement of credits. Credits created from the specified reduction activity have not been, and will not be, created, recorded, or registered in more than one trading registry for the same time period.
Project Contact Authorized Project Contact Kelly Parker, P.Eng. Engineer, Carbon Solutions Blue Source Canada ULC Suite 700 717 – 7th Avenue SW Calgary, AB T2P 0Z3 p: (403) 262-3026 e: [email protected]
Project Proponent Michael Towers Manager, Tolko Energy Supply and Systems Tolko Industries Ltd. PO Box 39 2000 – 28th Street Vernon, BC V1T 6M1 p: (250) 550-2550 e: [email protected]
VERI2.
ProObjectiv
Summa
Lead VeTeam MPeer ReDesignaAuthoritVerificatSite VisReport D
INTR3.
KeystoneCanada the Tolkowas verifGeneratipreparedTolko Ind
3.1 S
The baseWood Plapress, log
A dynam
IFICATION S
oject Title ve
ry
erifier embers
eviewer ated Signing ty tion Date it Date Date
RODUCTION
e EnvironmULC (Blue So Slave Lakefied at a reaon from the
d the offsedustries Ltd.
Summary of
eline conditioant (Athabascg ponds, bu
mic baseline i
SUMMARY
ProvidesupportProject requiremAlberta Based othat theLake Bia fair reaccordaSystemJudy TaEva MaFrancis
Judy Ta
June 9,July 20Septem
N
ental LimiteSource) to ve Biomass Oasonable leve Combustioet project (Tolko) is th
f Offset Proj
on for this prca Plant) to ilding and st
is used as s
Tolke reasonable-ting the emissReport and cments of the SEmissions O
on our reviewe GHG assertiomass Offseepresentation ance with the
m criteria. ai, P.Eng. arcy, EIT sco Perelló, P
ai, P.Eng.
2017 – Augu, 2017
mber 15, 2017
ed (Keystonverify greenhOffset Projecvel of assuraon of Biomdocumentat
he project pr
ject Baselin
roject is the produce heteam genera
pecified in th
Verifica
3
ko Slave Laklevel assuransion reductioncorrespondingSpecified Gas
Offset Registryw, it is our opinion, 56,503 tCt Project in 20of the GHG drequirement
h.D., P.Eng
ust 6, 2017
7
ne Environmhouse gas (Gct (the Projecance againsass Waste tion and Groponent and
ne
use of naturat for dryers
ator.
he Quantific
ation Report – T
ke Biomass Once that data, n calculationsg emission res Emitters Rey. nion to a reasCO2e emissio016 calendar data and infoof the SGER
mental) wasGHG) emissct) for the 20st the Quant
(version 2.GHG Emisd the owner
ral gas at thes and therm
ation Protoc
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
Offset Projec controls and
s as presentedductions conf
egulation (SG
sonable level on reductionsyear, is matermation, and
R and the Albe
s retained sion reductio016 vintage ytification Pro0, April 201
ssion Reduof the proje
e Tolko Athamal oil for th
col (Version
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
ct processes d in the 2016form to the
GER) and the
of assurances in Tolko Slaverially correct is prepared in
erta Offset Cr
by Blue Soons generateyear. The Protocol for En14). Blue So
uction Assect.
abasca Enginhe heating o
2.0).
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
e ve and
n redit
ource ed by roject nergy ource ertion.
eered of the
Verification Report – Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
4 Project 12885 / September 2017
3.2 Project Boundary
Tolko Athabasca Plant is an oriented strand board (OSB) mill located 10 km southeast of Slave Lake, Alberta. It is owned and operated by Tolko. The Project uses waste mill residues to produce heat for energy. In 2007, Tolko purchased two 57 MMBtu/hr GTS Energy Reciprocating Grate Combustion systems, consisting of two gasifiers from GTS Energy. The units convert wood residues into renewable syngas. The syngas is subsequently used to displace natural gas used to produce heat for dryers and thermal oil for the heating of the press, log ponds building and steam generator. The opportunity for generating carbon offsets arises from direct reductions of GHG emissions by displacing fossil fuel usage with wood residues (biomass).
3.3 Project Variance
Changes to the original Offset Project Plan and variance from the Protocol were made for the 2016 credit period.
1. For the 2016 year, primarily due to the biomass combustion emissions from the energy system, the total direct specified gas emissions from the Project exceeded 100,000 t CO2e. The Project has received an exemption from the compliance obligation under the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER) for the 2016 compliance year. The Project has also received permission to create vintage 2016 offsets. The exemption approval letter from AEP is included in Appendix F.
2. The Project does not directly meter steam output from the energy system. As such, baseline emissions from fuel combustion are calculated using energy generation data, as described by SS P15. The project has received a protocol deviation approval allowing for the use of this methodology. The protocol deviation approval letter from AEP is included in Appendix G.
3. Emissions from electricity usage under SS B12 facility operations previously excluded in the Offset Project Plan are included to maintain conservativeness. Electricity usage associated with the hog fuel material handling system and the heat energy system are included under SS P6 Off-site Heat and Electricity not displaced in the project.
4. The Project used three different sources of biomass in 2016. These were: Hog – hog fuel consumption used for the furnaces were measured using a weigh-belt; Wet Fines – wet fines are mixed with hog fuel and were measured using a separate
weigh-belt; Trimmings – wood trimmings off of the press for finish product dimension
were estimated. 5. Onsite energy requirements include only propane and diesel, no natural gas is used onsite.
Propane is used for mobile equipment and upset conditions for the GTS systems. Diesel is used for compressors, motors and diesel trucks.
3.4 V
Verificativerificatioto evaluaof the sigreport. A
OBJE4.
The objewhether considereProject cwas condwith guid
SCO5.
The scopProject Rperiod oflevel of a
Table 1
Physica
Project
Activitie
Types oReduce
Source
RelevanOffset P
Key Dat
Verification A
on acceptaon contract. ate threats ogned Statem
copy of the
ECTIVE
ective of thethe GHG Emed without conforms to ducted in ac
dance for the
PE
pe of the veReport “Tolkf January 1, assurance, w
Verifi
Item
al Boundary
Proponent
es and Proc
of Greenhousd
Categories
nt GHG Project Perio
tes
Acceptance
nce was cKeystone E
or conflicts toment of Quali
signed Con
e verificationmission Redmaterial disthe require
ccordance we validation a
rification is tko Slave La
2016 to Dewith a materi
cation Scop
y
cesses
se Gases
d
e
onducted dEnvironmentao the indepefication for t
nflict of Intere
n is to providuction Assescrepancy thments of th
with the ISOand verificat
the GHG Emke Biomasscember 31, ality thresho
pe
6km East MSE-26-72-4Latitude: 55Longitude: -Tolko IndusLog processtransportatioCarbon DioxMethane (CNitrous OxidBiomass coOn-site tranCarbon dioxJanuary 1, 2First Year CSite Visit: JuReport Date
Verifica
5
uring the pal completed
endence of the verificatioest Checklist
de our opinertion, as stahat the emie SGER an
O 14064 Parion of green
mission Reds Offset Proj
2016. The vold to be 5%
Tolko AthabMitsu Industria
-W5 5.26082 -114.50004 stries Ltd. sing, OSB maon, wood wasxide (CO2)
CH4) de (N2O)
ombustion sounsportation soxide (CO2), M2016 to Dece
Commercial Ouly 20, 2017e: September
ation Report – T
proposal prod an internahe verificatioon team is int is included
nion to a reaated in the Ossion reduc
nd Alberta Grt 3 – Greenhouse gas a
duction Asseject,” v 2.2,verification i.
basca Engineal Park, Slave
anufacture, bste thermal en
urce ources Methane (CH4ember 31, 201Operation: 201
r 15, 2017
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
ocess, prioral conflict of on team to tncluded in A
d in Appendix
asonable levOffset Projecction creditsGHG Offset.nhouse Gasassertions
ertion presen Septembers conducted
eered Wood e Lake, AB T0
biomass combnergy system
4), Nitrous ox16 15
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
r to signinginterest che
the client. A Appendix A ox B of this re
vel of assurct Report, is claimed fo This verific
ses: Specific
nted in the Or 8, 2017 fod to a reason
Plant 0G 2A0
bustion, on sitm
ide (N2O)
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
g the ecklist
copy of this eport.
rance to be
or the cation cation
Offset or the nable
te
EmissioClaimed
5.1 V
The verifISO 140Verificati
PRO6.
The verif
Alber SGER SGER
Febru SGER
Versi Quan
Versi
METH7.
7.1 V
The apptest of procedursite visit assertion
A sitePlant
Variothe s
Item
on Reductiond
Verification S
fication is co064-3-06 – on of GHG A
GRAM CRIT
fication was
rta’s ClimateR, 2007, undR, Technicuary 2013); R, Technicaon 1.0, Janu
ntification Pron 2.0, Apri
HODOLOGY
Verification S
roach used controls ap
res during thand samp
ns for the Pro
e visit was ct. ous processeite visit and
n Credits
Standard
onducted in aGHGs – P
Assertions (A
TERIA
conducted i
e Change ander the CCEal Guidanc
al Guidanceuary, 2013; rotocol for l 2014.
Y
Strategy
in this verifpproach. Kehe verificatioling proceduoject:
conducted to
es and data interviews.
56,503 tonnCO2: 62,395CH4: 1,339N2O: -4,564CO2e: -2,66
accordance Part 3: SpeAdopted ISO
n accordanc
nd EmissionsEM Act, 2003ce Docume
e for Greenh
Energy Gen
fication inclueystone Enon, with a foures. The f
o confirm the
manageme
Verifica
6
Tolko Athabnes CO2e 5 tonnes CO2 tonnes CO2e
4 tonnes CO267 tonnes CO
with Canadecification wO 14064-3:2
ce with the re
s Manageme3; nt for Offs
house Gas
neration from
udes a comvironmental
ocus on raw following wa
e physical so
ent procedur
ation Report – T
basca Engine
2e e 2e
O2e
ian Standardwith Guidan006, First Ed
equirements
ent (CCEM)
set Project
Verification
m the Com
mbination of relies predata and e
as conducte
ources and s
res were obs
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
eered Wood
ds Associatince for thedition, 2006
s of the follow
Act, 2003;
Developer
at Reason
mbustion of
substantiveedominantly evidence gated to substa
sinks at the
served and
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
Plant
ion (CAN/CSe Validation).
wing criteria
rs (Version
nable Assura
Biomass W
procedureson substa
thered durinantiate the
Tolko Athab
confirmed d
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
SA) – and
a:
4.0,
ance,
Waste,
s and antive g the GHG
basca
during
Verification Report – Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
7 Project 12885 / September 2017
Statistical, strategic, systematic, or stratified sampling (or a combination thereof) was conducted on primary documentation (i.e., third party documentation, invoices) to confirm the processes resulting in GHG assertions.
Original data sources and calculations were evaluated.
Controls reliance is used rarely, and only in supporting the substantive approach as described above.
7.2 Verification Plan
A verification plan was developed by Keystone Environmental to provide a basis for the procedures to be conducted during the verification. The verification plan establishes and outlines the terms of engagement, level of assurance, objective, criteria, scope, materiality threshold and risk assessment. A copy of the Verification Plan is included in Appendix C.
This process was iterative in nature and involved considerable communication with the project proponent team and subsequent revisions to their calculations, report and plan.
Table 2 Verification Plan Information
Level of Assurance
The verification was conducted to a reasonable level of assurance, satisfying requirements in SGER.
Verification Criteria
Alberta’s Climate Change and Emissions Management (CCEM) Act, 2003. SGER, 2007, under the CCEM Act, 2003. SGER, Technical Guidance Document for Offset Project Developers
(Version 4.0, February 2013)
SGER, Technical Guidance for Greenhouse Gas Verification at Reasonable Assurance, Version 1.0, January, 2013;
Quantification Protocol for Energy Generation from the Combustion of Biomass Waste, Version 2.0, April 2014.
The review criteria against which the GHG Assertion and supporting evidence were evaluated include, but are not limited to, the following: Conformance with the requirements and principles of the above regulation and
associated guidance documents
The data supporting the GHG calculations have sufficient controls to be considered fair and accurate and without material discrepancy
The calculations supporting the GHG Report are sufficiently accurate to be considered fair and accurate and without material discrepancy
Any assumptions or approximations made to bridge data gaps are conservative.
Material
Risk Assessm
7.3 S
The samthe princTolko. It to discloBased onverificatio
Proje Meth Confo Integ GHG
cross CO2, Biom Mobi Pane
A detail S
VERI8.
The veriissuanceprocedur
lity QdeEmm
ment
TorethofbaAp
Sampling Pla
mpling plan gciples and qalso ensure
ose any man the emisson plan, the
ect boundaryodologies, eormance to rity of the re data and i
s-checking CH4 and N2ass to energle equipmen
el weight to p
Sampling Pla
IFICATION P
fication wase of the Verres executed
uantitative mietermine the pmission. Thesateriality threo express a cepresentative at were matef selective andased on profeppendix D.
an
guides and quantificationes that sufficterial discreions contribfollowing ke
y emission facthe program
esponsible painformation,
2O emission gy system rent fuel usagepress
an is include
PROCEDUR
s completedrification Red is describe
isstatements percentage ofse discrepancshold of 5%.onclusion thaof all applicab
erial to the GHd statistical sa
essional judgm
ensures than methodoloient and app
epancies thabution analysey parameter
tors and conm criteria
arty's data mincluding ty
factors ecords e
ed in Append
RES
d between port on Sep
ed below.
Verifica
8
are evaluatedf the discrepacies are deem
at is considereble operations
HG assertion. ampling of dament. A copy
at sufficient aogy that forpropriate eviat contributesis the samprs were sam
nversions us
managementype of evide
dix C.
the initial eptember 15,
ation Report – T
d individually ancies relativemed to be mat
ed to be reasos within the dThis was ach
ata, sensitivityof the Risk A
and approprmed the emidence has be to the GHpling plan, a
mpled for rev
sed
t system andence collect
engagement , 2017. A d
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
and in aggree to the reporterial, if they e
onable, the sdefined boundhieved througy analysis, anAssessment is
riate evidenmission assbeen collectHG assertioand the risk
view:
d controls ted, verifica
on June 9escription o
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
gate to rted Annual exceed the
ample data wdary conditiongh a combinatd operations
s included in
ce, in suppoertions madted and revieon, if such k identified i
ation testing,
9, 2017 andof the verific
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
was ns tion
ort of de by ewed exist. n the
, and
d the cation
Verification Report – Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
9 Project 12885 / September 2017
8.1 General Procedures
Assess independence between the Verification Team and the Project Proponent; address conflicts of interest as required.
Obtain an understanding of the management systems, processes and the relevant controls used to generate, aggregate and report the emission reduction.
Assess project and facility boundaries. Assess the information collected for accuracy, consistency, completeness, relevance,
and transparency. Identify potential inherent, detection, and control risks, as well as material misstatements in
net emissions calculations.
8.2 Emissions Data and Reporting Procedures
Assess baseline conditions, calculations, and emissions. Interview relevant emission data management and staff responsible for data collection
and reporting. Review relevant documents and records on a sample basis. Review calculations and methodologies used to calculate net emissions. Assess the use of emission factors and conversions, where applicable. Test and re-calculate information related to the data on a sample basis. Assess the types of information collected for accuracy, consistency, completeness,
relevance, and transparency. Assess the individual data collected for accuracy, consistency, completeness, relevance,
and transparency.
8.3 Data Management and Control Procedures
Assess the organization of management systems and controls. Assess the types of information collected and corresponding methods of collection. Review the back-up procedures of management systems and controls.
8.4 Site Visit
The on-site visit was conducted on July 20, 2017 by Ms. Judy Tai, the Lead Verifier. The following lists the individual who participated in the site visit:
Verification Report – Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
10 Project 12885 / September 2017
Names Title Company Marc Fillion SBB Controller/ Analyst Tolko Industries Ltd. Darrell Trevors Health Safety Coordinator Tolko Industries Ltd. Mike Leach Operations Manager Tolko Industries Ltd. Kelly Parker Senior Carbon Analyst Blue Source Canada Judy Tai Lead Verifier Keystone Environmental Ltd.
The purpose of the site visit was to review the Project operations and physical boundaries, and inspect the relevant GHG emission sources and sinks identified in the Project Report. The data management procedures, such as data collection control devices and record retention practices were also observed. Activities on-site can be summarized as follows:
8.4.1 On-Site Tour
Ms. Tai was accompanied by Mr. Marc Fillion and Mr. Mike Leach of Tolko, and Ms. Kelly Parker of Blue Source during the site tour. Mr. Leach provided Ms. Tai a general overview of the biomass combustion operation and the offset project. The tour enabled Ms. Tai to become familiar with the on-site operation and to verify whether there is discrepancy in the emission sources identified in the Project Plan. The following areas of operation were visited:
Biomass waste combustion system (GTS Energy Reciprocating Grade Combustion systems)
Biomass storage and transfer areas Biomass waste conveying systems Weigh scale house and log storage area Log debarking process Project monitoring and metering Two rotary drum dryers and thermal oil heaters Onsite mobile equipment Propane and diesel tanks Process control room Press operations
During the tour, Ms. Tai observed the transfer of biomass waste from the storage area to the combustion system through conveyors. Ms. Tai located the meters monitoring the transfer of biomass displaying the flow rate and total amount fed to the combustion system. The combustion system was operating at time of the site visit. Ms. Tai also toured the press operation and finish products area.
Verification Report – Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
11 Project 12885 / September 2017
8.4.2 Interviews
Interviews were conducted to gain understanding of the specify processes relevant to the Project. Mr. Leach explained the data collection process for the log consumption and data transfer process, control activities and data management procedures. He also explained the log sampling procedures prescribed by AEP to estimate the conversion from weight to volume. He explained the general procedures that were taken to compile the propane and diesel consumption data. He explained the quality control procedure for verifying the accuracy of the data.
Mr. Leach described the sources of biomass waste feeding to the combustion system, biomass waste collection and monitoring process. He provided a general overall of the data collection system.
8.5 Calculation Used
The emissions factors used in this verification are as follows:
Table 3 Emission Factors
Type CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Natural Gas Combustion (kg/m3) 1.918 0.000037 0.000033
AESRD Carbon Offset Emission Factor Handbook 2015
Natural gas Extraction & Processing (kg/m3)
0.133 0.0026 0.000007 AESRD Carbon Offset Emission Factor Handbook 2015
Wood Waste (g/Kg) - 0.00009 0.00006 National Inventory (2016), Table A4-2
Diesel Production (kg/L) 0.138 0.0109 0.000004
AESRD Carbon Offset Emission Factor Handbook 2015
Diesel Combustion (Kg/L) 2.663 0.000133 0.0004
AESRD Carbon Offset Emission Factor Handbook 2015
Propane Combustion (kg/L) 1.507 0.000024 0.000108
AESRD Carbon Offset Emission Factor Handbook 2015
Verification Report – Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
12 Project 12885 / September 2017
The calculations used in this verification are as follows:
Table 4 Baseline and Project Emissions
Baseline Emissions 66,123 tonnes CO2e in 2016
Major Sources of Emissions
Emission from Displaced On-site Heat Generation (B18) Emission from Fuel Extraction and Processing (B4)
Calculations Used EmissionReduction = EmissionBaseline - EmissionProject EmissionBaseline = EmissionsDisplaced On-site Heat Generation (B18) + EmissionsFuel Extraction and Processing (B4)
Project Emissions 9,620 tonnes CO2e in 2016
Major Sources of Emissions
Emissions Facility Operation = emissions under SS (P12) Emissions Combustion of Biomass and Fossil Fuels = emission under SS (P15) Emissions Fuel Extraction and Processing = emission under SS (P4) Emissions Offsite Heat and Electricity Not Displaced in the Project = emission under SS (P6)
Calculations
EmissionReduction = EmissionBaseline - EmissionProject EmissionProject = EmissionsFacility Operation (P12) + EmissionsCombustion of Biomass and Fossil Fuels (P15) + EmissionsFuel Extraction and Processing (P4) + EmissionsOffsite Heat and Electricity Not Displaced in the Project (P6)
8.6 Desktop Review
The following relevant supporting documents and records, provided by Blue Source, were reviewed to assess the supporting data, and select areas of data flow from the custom calculator was retraced back to the source measurement, or estimation:
Proof of ownership of the project Site layout figure Meter calibration documents Monthly diesel and propane invoices for January to December 2016 Summary of diesel and propane consumption spreadsheet for 2016 GTS Heat Energy System Efficiency document Panel weight through press
Data was then extracted to independently compute the emission reduction to corroborate Tolko’s GHG calculation. Keystone Environmental’s GHG calculation was compared to the reported emission reductions to identify any discrepancy, if present, resulting from compilation error of source data. Assessment of the emission data integrity was conducted by reviewing the primary records such as invoices, meter calibrations, and manual logs.
Desktop to assess
Emis Entry Math
Finally, threported
VERI9.
The sche
Table 5
VERI10.
To confoassessmfindings Conflict owas not i
The Verifthe SGEoutlined of the Ve
Judyto grepre
Franindep
Eva Mand c
review of ths consistenc
sion factors y of data useematical for
he final ProjGHG assert
IFICATION S
edule for the
Sched
VerificS
VerificVerificat
Final Verifi
IFICATION T
orm to the prment was con
and conclusof Interest Cidentified. Th
fication TeaR. The Verifin the Statem
erification Te
y Tai, P.Enguide the v
esentative, acisco Perelpendent inteMarcy, E.I.Tcalculations
he calculatiocy between T
applied ed for the camulae used
ect Report wtion to ensur
SCHEDULE
e verification
dule of Veri
Task ation PlanninSite Visit cation Reviewtion Completiication Docum
TEAM
rinciple of innducted to idsion of the
Checklist, reahe Conflict o
m meets thefication Teamment of Qua
eam member
g. – Ms. Tai’sverification tnd track prolló, Ph.D., Prnal peer rev
T. – Ms. Marchecks.
n spreadsheTolko's calcu
lculation in the sprea
was reviewere that the d
E
is presented
ification Ac
g
w ion ments
dependencedentify potenverification
al or perceivof Interest Ch
e requiremenm is competalification attrs and their
s role as the team, lead
oject progresP.Eng. – Dview of the vrcy’s role wa
Verifica
13
eet was perfulation and t
adsheet
d to assess ata is consis
d in Table 2.
tivities
e in the ISOntial threats prior to co
ved conflict hecklist is in
nts of Third tent to perfortached in Attroles:
Lead Verifiethe on-Sit
ss. r. Perelló’s
verification was to suppor
ation Report – T
formed to exthe Approve
whether disstent with th
.
ComJune 9, 2
JuJuly 21, 2
SeptSepte
14064-3 stathat may in
onducting thof interest th
ncluded in At
Party Auditorm the verifitachment D.
er and Desigte verificatio
role as Peework. rt the Lead V
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
xam the follod Quantifica
screpancy we GHG calc
mpletion Dat017 – July 19uly 20, 2017 2017 – Sept 8tember 8, 201ember 15, 20
andard, a Cnfluence the e work. As hat may threttachment B
ors as statedcation of the. The followi
gnated Signion, corresp
er Reviewer
Verifier, prim
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
owing information Protoco
was present iculation revie
te 9, 2017
8, 2017 17
017
Conflict of Intobjectivity oindicated in
eaten impar.
d in Section e GHG projeing is a sum
ing Authoritypond with
r was to pro
marily in rese
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
mation ol.
in the ewed.
terest of the n the rtiality
18 of ect as
mmary
y was client
ovide
earch
VERI11.
11.1 In
The datareportingstreams and man
There athe proto
Amou Amou Amou Amou
Data ma
1. Elect(biom
2. Dieseinvoic
3. Reten4. Invoic5. Reten
back 6. Keep
11.2 E
The quanPlan andmaterial 2016 SG
11.2.1 B
The majautomatsent to tmeasureenergy sestimateinfeed an
IFICATION R
nternal Data
a control prg, and manu
involved in ual data ent
re four maocol:
unt of biomaunt of propaunt of dieselunt of trim lo
nagement a
tronic recordmass, propanel and propces are retaintion of metece informationtion of hardup drive ind
ping all recor
Emission Re
ntification md the quantif
and immatGER Data Re
Biomass Con
jority of theic data loggthe GTS syed through system as aed based onnd output fo
RESULTS A
a Manageme
rocess emplual entry ofthis Project
try.
ain data so
ass burned inne used in t used to loa
oss burned in
nd record ke
ding of valuene, diesel, loane invoiceined in files er calibrationon is enteredd copies of ddefinitely. rds available
eduction Ca
ethodologiefication prototerial discreeport and su
nsumption
e biomass fging system stem: hog fDGS. Trima source of
n the weight or finished p
AND FINDIN
ent and Con
loyed for thf values intt: electronic
ources requ
n the energyhe operationd biomass n the energy
eeping pract
es of logged og consumpts are sent on site. n records. d into a facildata for a pe
e for review b
alculation
s used for thocol except epancies incpporting cal
fed to the (DGS). The
fuel, wet finm waste fro
f fuel but wof trim loss
products.
Verifica
14
NGS
ntrols
he Project cto a quantif
data captu
ired for the
y system n
y system
tices for the
primary partion). to Tolko de
ity databaseeriod of 7 ye
by a verifica
he Offset Prfor the apprcluded in thculations pro
combustionere were thnes, and trimm board ed
was not mes calculated
ation Report – T
consists of efication calcred and rep
e calculatio
project cons
rameters for
etailing the
e. ears. Electro
tion body.
roject is conroved varianhe emissionovided by To
n system wree differenm waste. Hdges after tered. The by width di
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
electronic dculator. Theported by m
on methodo
sist of:
r each meas
usage at th
onic data is s
sistent with nces. There ns reportedolko.
was meterednt streams oog fuel andpress was amount of fference be
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
data capturere are two
metering syst
ology outline
surement int
he facility. T
stored in ext
its Offset Pris no unreso
d, based on
d in 2016 uof biomass bd wet fines
directed totrim waste
etween the p
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
e and data
tems;
ed in
terval
These
ternal
roject olved n the
using being were o the
e was panel
11.2.2 D
The emiscalculate
Data enThe valuBlue Sou
CON12.
As AEP r
Cons Offse Proje Offse Comp
CON13.
We comp
SpecAlta R
Tech Tech
(AES Quan
(AES Gree
green
Keystoneour conc
Based onProject Rin accordmisstatem
A copy o
Diesel and Pr
ssion of stated based on
ntry errors ue reported urce has res
FIRMATION
required, the
sistency of ofet project locect plan and et project conpleteness an
CLUSION
pleted our re
cified Gas EmReg. 170/20nical Guidannical Guida
SRD, Januaryntification PrSRD, April 20
nhouse gasnhouse gas
e Environmlusion.
n our reviewReport and tdance with thments, omis
f the Statem
ropane Cons
ionary combthird-party in
were identfor total die
solved the e
N
e verifier has
ffset project cation; report existsntact, reportnd accuracy
eview in acco
mitters Regu12, July 1, 2nce for Offsence for Grey 2013) rotocol for E014) es – Part 3: assertions (
mental has
w, it is our ophe Greenhohe requirem
ssions, or mis
ment of Verifi
sumption
bustion of prnvoices.
tified in caesel and prerrors.
s confirmed
information
s; dates and tof process
ordance with
ulation (SGE2007) et Project Deeenhouse Ga
Energy Gene
Specificatio1st Edition,
conducted
pinion that thouse Gas Asents of the Asrepresenta
ication is pre
Verifica
15
ropane gas a
alculation foropane usag
the following
across offse
the amount oand data flow
h the:
ER) (Alta Re
evelopers v. as Verificati
eration From
on with guida2006)
sufficient
he emission ssertion are Alberta GHGtions.
esented in A
ation Report – T
and on-site t
or diesel age are diffe
g information
et project do
of GHG emisw.
eg. 139/2007
4 (AESRD, on at Reas
m the Combu
ance for the
procedures
reduction crpresented fa
G Offset Sys
Attachment G
olko Slave Lake for Emission Re
Project 128
transportatio
and propanerent from t
n:
ocumentation
ssion reduct
7 includes am
February 20onable Leve
ustion of Bio
validation a
to provid
redits presenairly, in all mstem and are
G.
Biomass Offset eduction Credits
Slave La
885 / September
on fuel usag
e consumpthe invoice
n;
tions; and
mendments
013) el Assuranc
omass Wast
and verificati
e the bas
nted in the Omaterial respe free of ma
Project in 2016 ake, AB
r 2017
e are
ption. total.
up to
ce v.1
te v.2
ion of
is of
Offset pects, aterial
Verification Report - Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Projectfor Emission Reduction Credits in 2016
Slave Lake, AB
14. LIMITATIONS
Findings and conclusions documented in this report have been prepared in a manner consistentwith that level of care and skill normally exercised by other members of the environmentalconsulting profession practising under similar circumstances ¡n the area at the time of theperformance of the work. This report is not intended nor is it able to provide a totallycomprehensive review of the proposed project.
This report has been prepared solely for the internal use of Blue Source Canada ULC andTolko lndustries Ltd., and for review by Alberta Environment and Parks pursuant to theagreement between Keystone Environmental Ltd. and Blue Source Canada ULC. A copy of thegeneral terms and conditions associated with this agreement is attached in Attachment H. Byusing this report, Blue Source Canada ULC, Tolko lndustries Ltd., and Alberta Environment andParks agree that they will review and use the report in its entirety. Any use which other partiesmake of this report, or any reliance on or decisions made based on it, are the responsibility ofsuch parties. Keystone Environmental Ltd. accepts no responsibility for damages, if any,suffered by other parties as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report.
We are available to address questions that Alberta Environment and Sustainable ResourceDevelopment might pose after their review of this submission.
Sincerely,
Keystone Environmental Ltd.
c
SZJ, S >.¡tf
Judy ngLead V
l:\12800-12899\12885\Phase 10 B\Report\Finat\1288s 17091s FINAL Verlfìcation Report.docx
ATTACHMENTS:. Appendix A: Statement of Qualification. Appendix B: Conflict of lnterest Checklisto Appendix C: Verification Plan and Sampling Plan. Appendix D: Risk Assessment. Appendix E: Statement of Verificationo Appendix F:AEP Exemption Lettero Appendix G: AEP Protocol Deviation Approval Letter. Appendix H: General Terms and Conditions for Services
.J.YW.T
KeystoneEnvironmentalKnowledge-Driven Results
16 Project 12885 / September 2017
ær#
ATTACHMENT A
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATION
Statement of Qualification Tolko Slave Lake GHG Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
Page 1 of 2 Project 12885 / September 2017
STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATION
This Statement of Qualification states that the Verifier meets or exceeds the qualifications of third party verifier as stated in section 18 of the SGER, and the Offset Credit Verification Guidance Document. A signed SoQ must be submitted to Alberta Environment, along with the Project report to complete the verification receive emission offsets.
Keystone Environmental has completed the verification of emission reductions generated from Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project for the period of January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016. Keystone Environmental’s verification team meets the requirements of Section 18 of the Alberta SGER. This signed statement of qualifications is submitted in conjunction with Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project under the Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP) Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER).
VERIFICATION TEAM QUALIFICATIONS 1.
Table 1 below lists the verification team members and their roles.
Name Role
Judy Tai, P.Eng. Lead Verifier & Designated Signing Authority
Francisco A. Perelló, PhD, P.Eng Independent Peer Reviewer
Eva Marcy, E.I.T. Verifier
Judy Tai, M.A.Sc., P.Eng. – Lead Verifier
Ms. Tai is a Professional Engineer registered with APEGBC under the Engineering and Geoscience professions Act, with technical expertise related to the project sector.
Ms. Tai has led multiple GHG offset credit verification projects. She has completed successful verification projects, for submission to Alberta Environment at both reasonable and limited levels of assurance. She has detailed technical knowledge of GHG emission quantification methodologies, the Alberta GHG Offset Credit System, SGER reporting system and verification experience in fuel switching, energy efficiency, and landfill gas capture projects for both regulatory and voluntary offset systems.
Ms. Tai has completed the three-day training course for the CSA GHG Verification and Validation using ISO 14064 and received her Certificate of Completion. She supervised the progress of the verification, conducted the on-site verification and prepared the Verification Report. She also signed the required verification documentations as the designated signing authority.
Francisco A. Perelló, PhD, P.Eng. – Independent Peer Reviewer
Dr. Perelló completed the peer review of this Verification Report, Verification Statement, Verification Plan, and verification activities, to provide an independent review.
Statement of QualificationTolko Slave Lake GHG Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016Slave Lake, AB
Dr. Perelló's provides senior-level expertise in client and regulatory liaison, permitting, processengineer¡ng, equ¡pment selection, process optimization, and commissioning of watei, stormwater and wastewater treatment facilities. He also assists clients during the-development andevaluation of remedial solutions for landfills, contaminated sites, hãzardous wastes andindustrial effluents.
Dr. Perelló has conducted many on-site verification visits and meetings. He has also completedpeer review of verification activities and provided independent review to the project team.Dr. Perelló has led GHG Offset project verifications for fuel switching (biomass) projects, energyefficiency projects. He has also led the team for the verification of compliance report at-ãreasonable level assurance for the pulp mill with an anaerobic lagoon in Alberta.
Dr. Perelló leads the Quality Assurance and Quality Control on Keystone Environmental and isresponsible for developing long-term energy and emission strategies for many industrialprocesses and regional economies. Dr. Perelló is a Professional Engineer, registered in BritishColumbia and Alberta.
Eva Marcy, B.A.Sc., EIT - Verifier
Ms. Marcy reviewed and checked the data supporting the GHG emission reduction creditsclaimed. She has been a member of the Keystone Environmental verification team for GHGoffset and SGER compliance project related to fuel switching projects in Alberta. She hascompleted the National Pollutant Release lnventory for various forestry-based facilities.
The verification team is eligible to conduct a verification review for the offset project and candemonstrate freedom from any conflict of interest to the Proponent and owner of the project asdocumented in the Conflict of lnterest Checklist in Appendix B.
lf you have any questions, please contact the undersigned.
Sincerely,
ronmental Ltd
J.YtÇ,zt:tT
Judy ï ngLead Verifier
l:\12800-12899\12885\Phase 10 B\Report\Final\12885 12091s Qualification statement.docx
KeystoneEnvironmentalKnowledge-Dr¡ven Resulta
¡?Þr#Page 2 of 2 Project 12885 i September 2017
ATTACHMENT B
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CHECKLIST
Conflict of Interest Checklist Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
Page 1 of 2 Project 12885 / September 2017
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CHECKLIST
Please note that a signed original Conflict of Interest Checklist must be submitted along with Project information in any Offsets used for Compliance in the Alberta system.
Question Yes No
1. Can the verifying organization or the verification team members directly benefit from a financial interest in the Project Developer or the Project Developer’s Project?
For example:
Owning shares of the Project Developer
Having a close business relationship with the Project Developer
Contingent fees relating to the results of the engagement
Potential employment with the Project Developer
Undue concern about the possibility of losing the verification or other fees from the Project Developer
2. Can the verifying organization or verification team members be in a position of assessing their own work?
For example:
Involvement of the verification organization in the compilation of the data contained in the GHG assertion
Involvement of the verification organization in the development of a quantification protocol other than protocol recognized or recommended by the regulatory authority
A verification organization member performing non-verification services that directly impinge on the client’s GHG assertion, such as implementing the GHG data management system, or having performed validation services on the project being reviewed
A member of the verification engagement team having previously been a GHG data compiler of the Project Developer or who was employed by the Project Developer in a position to exert direct and significant influence over the Project Developer's GHG assertion being verified
3. Does the verifying organization or a member of the verification team, or a person in the chain of command for the verification, promote or be perceived to promote, a Project Developer's position or opinion to the point that objectivity may, or may be perceived to be, compromised?
For example:
Dealing in, or being a promoter of, GHG credits on behalf of a Project Developer
Acting as an advocate on behalf of the Project Developer in litigation or in resolving disputes with third parties.
Conflict of lnterest ChecklistTolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016Slave Lake, AB
Question Yes No4. ls one or more of the verification team too sympathetic to the Project Developer's
interests by virtue of a close relationship with a Project Developer, its directors,officer or employees?
For example:. A person on the verification team has a close personal retationship with a
person who is in a senior GHG compilation role at the project Developer¡ The verification team or a person of influence on the verification team has
or from thels a member of the verification team or a person in the chain of command isdeterred from acting objectively and exercising professional scepticism by threats,actual or perceived, from the directors, officers or employees of the projectDeveloper.
5
For example:o The threat of being replaced as a third party verifier due to a disagreement
with the application of an GHG quantification protocol¡ Fees from the Proiect Developer represent a targe percentage of the overall
revenues of the verifying organizationo The application of pressure to inappropriately reduce the extent of work
performed in order to reduce or limit feesa Threats of from the
Keystone Environmental Ltd.
aj
J,YW
ilvJudy Tai, Eng. Date : September 15,2017Lead VerifierBurnaby, British Columbia
1112800-12899\12885\Phase 10 B\Report\Finat\l2BB5 17091S COt Checktist.docx
KeystoneEnvironmentalKnowledge-Driven Rssults
¡ü)fÉ
Yx Page 2 of 2 Project 1 2885 / September 201 7
ATTACHMENT C
VERIFICATION PLAN, SAMPLING PLAN
Verification Plan Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
Page 1 of 6 Project 12885 / September 2017
VERIFICATION PLAN
OBJECTIVE
The objective of the verification is to provide assurance to Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP)
that the GHG Assertion is materially correct and presented fairly in accordance with the
relevant criteria.
SCOPE
The scope of this verification is presented in Table C-1. It includes the Project boundaries,
activities, technologies, and processes of the operation, GHG sources, sinks, and/or reservoirs,
types of GHGs for the time period covered, materiality and level of assurance. The geographic
verification scope is defined by the Project boundaries.
Table C-1 Scope Information
Item Tolko Athabasca Engineered Wood Plant
Geography
6km East Mitsu Industrial Park, Slave Lake, AB T0G 2A0
SE-26-72-4-W5
Latitude: 55.26082
Longitude: -114.50004
Organization Tolko Industries Ltd.
Activities Log processing, OSB manufacture, biomass combustion, on site
transportation, wood waste thermal energy system
Relevant GHG Carbon dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous oxide (N2O)
GHG Reduction
CO2: 62,395 tonnes CO2e
CH4: 1,339 tonnes CO2e
N2O: -4,564 tonnes CO2e
CO2e: -2,667 tonnes CO2e
Sources
Baseline: Emissions : displace on site heat generation, fuel extraction and
processing
Project: Emissions: facility operations, combustion of biomass, fuel extraction
and processing
Time Period January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016
Materiality 5%
Verification Plan Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
Page 2 of 6 Project 12885 / September 2017
LEVEL OF ASSURANCE
The verification was conducted to a reasonable level of assurance. The objective of a verification program is to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence to express a conclusion, providing reasonable or limited assurance, as to whether the audited body has complied with the specified requirements of the program criteria in all material respects.
Reasonable level of assurance is a higher level of assurance, providing a greater confidence the individual can place in the matter being verified. To provide a higher level of assurance, the verification needs to reduce the risk that a material misstatement exists in the matter being audited. The verification team achieves this by conducting a more in-depth and rigorous assessment of the verification.
MATERIALITY
According to AEP requirements, quantitative discrepancies exceed 5% of the total reported GHG emission are considered material.
VERIFICATION STANDARD
The verification is conducted in accordance with the ISO 14064 Part 3: Greenhouse Gases: Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions.
PROGRAM CRITERIA AND RELEVANT SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Alberta Climate Change and Emissions Management Act (CCEMA) (SA 2003, Chapter 16.7)
Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER) (Alta Reg. 139/2007 includes amendments up to Alta Reg. 254/2007, July 1, 2007)
SGER, Technical Guidance Document for Offset Project Developers (Version 4.0, February 2013)
Technical Guidance for Greenhouse Gas Verification at Reasonable Level Assurance v.1.0 (AESRD, January 2013)
Quantification Protocol for Quantification Protocol for Energy Generation from the Combustion of Biomass Waste (Version 2.0, April 2014)
Offset Project Plan for Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset, version 1.0 December 15, 2015
Offset Project Report for Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project, version 2.2 September 8, 2017.
RISK ASSESSMENT
As part of the verification process, a risked-based verification and sampling plan must be developed that outlines the amount and type of evidence necessary to achieve the agreed level of assurances, methodologies for determining representative samples, and risks of potential errors, omissions, or misrepresentation.
Verification Plan Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
Page 3 of 6 Project 12885 / September 2017
The risk assessment is conducted by the verification team considering inherent risk, control risk, and detection risk.
Inherent Risk
Inherent risk is the risk of error due to the data complexity or lack of understanding by the staff. Inherent risk is determined to be Medium due to:
Second time reporting to AEP.
Single facility with limited number of emission sources.
Control Risk
Control risk is the risk that the responsible party’s control system will not detect and rectify a discrepancy. Control risk is determined to be Medium due to:
Data gathering system for hog fuel was automated and metered in 2016. Trim residues to the GTS system was estimated based on press production.
Tolko has a data management system to review, and cross check data recorded for reasonableness.
Detection Risk
Detection risk is the risk that the verification team will not identify a material discrepancy. Detection risk must be low due to:
Reasonable level of assurance requires a medium to low detection risk.
A detail risk assessment is summarized in Appendix D.
Table C-2 Summary of Emission Reduction
GHG In tonnes CO2e CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Total
Baseline 63,705.5 2,047.7 370.2 - 66,123.4
Project 1,310.6 708.8 4,933.6 2,667.1 9,620.1
Total Emission Reductions
62,394.9 1,338.9 -4,563.3 -2,667.1 56,503.4
Verification Plan Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
Page 4 of 6 Project 12885 / September 2017
VERIFICATION PROCEDURES
The verification procedures to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence can be summarized into the following tasks.
General Procedures
Assess independence between the Verification Team and the Facility; address conflicts of
interest as required
Obtain an understanding of the management systems, processes and the relevant controls
used to generate, aggregate and report GHG emissions
Assess the information collected for accuracy, consistency, completeness, relevance,
and transparency
Identify potential inherent, detection, and control risks, as well as material misstatements in
net emissions calculations
Emissions Data and Reporting Procedures
Interview relevant Tolko Athabasca Plant’s management and staff responsible for data
collection and reporting
Review Offset Project Plan and Report
Review relevant documents and records on a sample basis
Review calculations and methodologies used to calculate net emission reductions
Assess the use of emission factors and conversions, where applicable
Test and re-calculate information related to the data on a sample basis
Assess the types of information collected for accuracy, consistency, completeness,
relevance, and transparency
Assess the individual data collected for accuracy, consistency, completeness, relevance,
and transparency
Data Management and Control Procedures
Assess the organization of management systems and controls
Assess the types of information collected and corresponding methods of collection
Review the back-up procedures of management systems and controls
Verification Plan Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
Page 5 of 6 Project 12885 / September 2017
SCHEDULE OF ACTIVITIES
Table C-3 Schedule of Activities
Activity Deliverable Date
Authorization to Proceed Tolko Slave Lake OSB Mill June 9, 2017
GHG calculator and other supporting documents
Tolko Slave Lake OSB Mill June - July, 2017
Perform Risk Analysis and prepare Verification Plan and Sample Plan
Keystone Environmental July 10 – 19, 2017
Site Visit Keystone Environmental July 20, 2017
Verification Review Keystone Environmental July 21, 2017 – Sept 8, 2017
Peer review Keystone Environmental Sept 11, 2017
Exit Meeting Keystone Environmental and Tolko Slave Lake OSB Mill
Sept 12, 2017
Final Verification Documents Keystone Environmental Sept 15, 2017
VERIFICATION TEAM
Table C-4 Verification members and roles
Role Name
Lead Verifier, Designated Signing Authority Judy Tai, MASc., P.Eng
Independent Peer Reviewer Francisco Perello, PhD., P.Eng
Verifier Eva Marcy, BASc., EIT
CHANGES TO OPERATIONS, AND ORGANIZATIONAL OR OPERATIONAL BOUNDARIES SINCE PREVIOUS VERIFICATION
No Change.
GHG SUBJECT MATTER ASSOCIATED WITH ASSERTION
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Methane (CH4)
Nitrous Oxide (N2O)
Verification Plan Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
Page 6 of 6 Project 12885 / September 2017
DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
General data management – Production and sales are collected in the Tolko internal automatic system which links to the accounting system for financial reporting. Accounting staff review all invoices received and conduct reasonableness accuracy reviews.
Biomass to energy system – biomass feedstock (hog fuel and wet fines) to the energy system was automatically measured by meters and recorded through the Data Gathering System (DGS). The data was reviewed by Production Manager for reasonableness check.
Production – OSB production at various operation stages was capture in the DGS.
Diesel & propane – Invoices were provided by the suppliers. Monthly cross checks were performed for reasonableness by accounting department.
Trim loss – wood fines generated during the trimming of the board edges after the press The amount of trim waste was estimated based on the weight of trim loss calculated by width difference between the panel infeed and output for finished products. The weight and the width of panels through press were captured by the DGS system.
Comments Requires Corrective Action (Y/N) Procedures Issue Addressed
None N Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency, conservativeness
None N Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency, conservativeness
None N Tested for completeness
None N Tested for completeness
None N Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency
None N Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency, conservativeness
None N Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency
None N Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency
None N Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency
None N Tested for completeness, consistency
None N Tested for completeness, consistency
5
Not all sources of hog fuel were accounted for. Trim loss from boarding cutting was not included.
Y Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency, conservativenessIncluded trim loss as a source for fuel.
Not all sources of hog fuel were accounted for. Trim loss from boarding cutting was not included.
Y Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency, conservativeness
Trim loss was estimated based on the weight of trim loss calculated by width difference between the panel infeed and output for finished products.
None N Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency, conservativeness
Not all invoices matched with data entry Y
Tested for completeness, accuracy, consistency, conservativeness Data entry corrected.
None N Reviewed for completenessNone N Reviewed for completenessNone N Reviewed for completeness
Tolko Athabasca Engineered Wood Plant GHG Verification - 2016Sampling Plan
Verification Line Items Site Visit Confirmation/Documents Reviewed
1
SGER Carbon Offset Emission Factors Handbook. V.1.0 March 2015
2016 National Inventory Report
Emission Factors
Others7
3
Biomass consumption records
Diesel and Propane Usage Tracking Spreadsheet, 20164 Data Management System
IT/Security procedures
Interviewed site staffReviewed data management proceduresProcess Layout
Upstream electricity usage
Propane and diesel invoices
Calculation Process
Data backup & storage
Record keeping procedures
Weigh belt meters calibration records for press operation
Biomass
Calibration Records2
6
Biomass meters calibration records
Biomass calculations
Diesel Invoices (12 months)
Propane Invoices (12 months)Invoices
Metering system to track hog fuel to combustion.
ATTACHMENT D
RISK ASSESSMENT
Level of Risk(high, med, low)
Type of Risk(inherent, control,
detection)Considerations for Procedures
low inherent Review against content of report. Review against Keystone Environmental process.
low inherent Indicated questions, weaknesses, edits required by client.
low inherent Discuss with client and site visit conducted .
medium inherent
Invoices and raw data records review to ensure data is complete and availableDiscuss with client to ensure mutual understanding. Revise content if necessary (e.g., elaborate).
medium control
Data collection was automatic and direct to plant process operations. Review biomass metering system and transfer system on site. Interview personnel on processes.
low control Review invoices for usage. Review to ensure data is complete and available.
low control Review invoices for usage. Review to ensure data is complete and available.
3 medium controlData collection was automatic for weight of wood through press. Review process flow diagram and estimation methodology.
4 medium controlData collection direct to mill process operations. Interview personnel on processes.
5 low control Interview with personnel.6 low control Review emission factors source publication.
Definitions:inherent risk:
control risk:detection risk:
Is the susceptibility of an assertion to misstatements assuming that there are no internal related controls.Is the risk that the responsible party’s internal controls do not detect, prevent or correct a material misstatement in the greenhouse gas assertion.Is the risks that the verification procedures will not detect a misstatement that exists in a greenhouse gas assertion that could be material to the assertion.
Emission Factors Choice/calculation of emission factors
Trim Loss Trim loss estimation to energy system
QA/QC Procedures QA/QC as well as storage of records
Biomass consumption
Diesel consumption
Data Management/ Record Keeping Data sources and collection
Propane consumption
2
Tolko Athabasca Engineered Wood Plant GHG Verification - 2016Risk Assessment
Item Risk Identification
Offset project documents, level of detail, format, quality of plans, etc. – general issues;
1
Sources and sinks considered;
Sources and sinks considered
Project boundaries;General Statement
Fuel Consumption
ATTACHMENT E
STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION
September 15, 2017 Alberta Environment and Park Climate Change Secretariat 12th Floor, Baker Centre 10025 - 106 Street Edmonton, AB T5J 1G4 Dear Sir or Madam: Re: Verification Statement – Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
Project No. 12885 (10) Keystone Environmental Ltd. (Keystone Environmental) is pleased to submit this Verification Statement to Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP) for the Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project (the Project) at the Tolko Athabasca Engineered Wood Plant, located in Slave Lake, AB.
Keystone Environmental has completed the verification of emission reductions generated from Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset project for the period of January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016. The Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Reduction Assertion was prepared by Blue Source Canada ULC (the project developer) on behalf of Tolko Industries, Ltd. (Tolko), the project owner. The project generates GHG offset credits from direct reduction of GHG emissions by displacing fossil fuel usage with biomass.
Blue Source is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the information within the Offset Project Plan, Offset Project Report and the Greenhouse Gas Assertion of Emission Reduction Credits in accordance with the requirements of the Alberta Offset Credit System under the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER). Tolko is responsible for the implementation and operation of the Project at the site location.
Keystone Environmental is responsible to provide our opinion to a reasonable level of assurance that the GHG Emission Reduction Assertion in the Project in 2016 calendar year is materially correct and presented fairly in accordance with the applicable criteria.
Verification Statement – Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project
for Emission Reduction Credits in 2016 Slave Lake, AB
2 Project 12885 / September 2017
VERIFICATION STATEMENT
We have reviewed the Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction presented in the following report prepared by Blue Source:
Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Project, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Offset Project Report For the Reporting Period 1 January 2016 – 31 December 2016, Final Report, v. 2.2, dated September 8, 2017
Greenhouse Gas Assertion of Emission Reduction Credits, dated September 15, 2017
Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Offset Project Plan, Version 1.0, December 15, 2015
The above documents cover the period from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016.
Based on the above documents, the total GHG emission reductions reported by Blue Source in the GHG Assertion for the Project during the reporting period of 2016 are 56,503 tonnes of CO2 equivalent.
Year Emission Reduction Credits
(Tonnes CO2e)
2015 51,151
2016 56,503
Total 107,654
Tolko is responsible for the operation of the Project and the implementation of data collection and internal control as determined necessary to enable the preparation of the GHG Assertion that is free from material misstatement.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion as to whether anything has come to our attention to suggest that the GHG Assertion is not presented fairly in accordance with the requirements of the Alberta GHG Offset System. We conducted the verification in accordance with the requirements of the Alberta Environment and Parks Technical Guidance for Offset Project Developers v. 4.0 (February 2013) and the International Standard ISO 14064-3, Greenhouse gases – Part 3: Specification with guidance for the validation and verification of greenhouse gas assertions (1st Edition, 2006). Those standards require that we plan and perform the verification to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the emission reduction credits claimed by Tolko Industries Ltd. are free from material misstatement.
METHODOLOGY
We completed our review in accordance with the International Standard Organization ISO 14064; part 3. We planned and performed our work in order to provide reasonable level assurance (positive level assurance), with respect to the GHG emission reduction. Our review criteria were based on Alberta Environment’s approved quantification methodology
o
a
a
Verification Statement - Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset projectfor Emission Reduction Cred¡ts in 2016
Slave Lake, AB
(Quantification Protocol for Energy Generation from the Combustion of Biomass Waste, Version2.0, April 2014); the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation and associated guidance documents.we believe our work prov¡des a reasonable basis for our conclusion. The review criteria againstwhich the GHG assertion and supporting evidence was evaluated include, but not limited tó, thefollowing:
o Conformance with the requirements and principles of the above quantification protocol,regulation, and associated guidance documentsThe data supporting the GHG calculations have sufficient controls to be considered fair andaccurate and without material discrepancy
The calculations supporting the GHG assertion are sufficiently accurate to be considered fairand accurate and without material discrepancy
Any assumptions or approximations made to bridge data gaps are conservative
CONCLUSION
Based on our review, the emission reduction credits presented in the Offset project Reportdated September 8, 2017 and the Greenhouse Gas Assertion dated September 15, 2311provided by Blue Source, is presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance wíth therequirements of the Alberta GHG Offset Credit System. ln our opinion, the emission reductioncredits presented in the Project Report are free of material misstatements, omissions, ormisrepresentations.
lf you have any questions, please contact the undersigned.
Sincerely,
Keystone Environmental Ltd.fCc. i;
?,i)'r I Ár
J. ìi Vil
Judy Tai, M.Lead VerifierKeystone Environmental Ltd.Burnaby, BC
l:\12800-12899\12885\Phase l0 B\Report\Final\'12885 170915 Tolko Slave Lake Ver¡fìcation Statement.docx
lprs"uT
KeystoneEnvironmentalKnowlgdge-Dr¡ven Results
3
Õ)ÈÉ
Yx Project 12885 / September 2017
ATTACHMENT F
AEP EXEMPTION LETTER
Albert Climate Change OfficeRegulatory and Compliance12th Floor, 10025 106 Street Edmonton, Alberta T5J 1G4 CanadaTelephone: 780-427-5200www.alberta.ca
January 18, 2017
Michael Towers Manager, Energy and EnvironmentTolko Industries Ltd.Box 393000 - 28th Street Vernon, British Columbia V1T 6M1
Subject: 2016 Exemption Request for Tolko Slave Lake OSB (Athabasca) Facility (EPEA Approval #277285) under the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation.
Dear Mr. Towers:
Your request to exempt Tolko Slave Lake OSB (Athabasca) Facility from a compliance obligation under the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation for the 2016 compliance year has been accepted.
This is in keeping with the possible removal of biomass CO2 emissions from the calculation of the threshold with respect to the SGER in future cycles as well as provisions under section 24 of the regulation. In the case of your facility, in the absence of biomass emissions the remainingfacility emissions are less than 10 kilotonnes, well below the 100 kilotonne threshold.
For the 2016 compliance period Tolko Slave Lake OSB is required to submit a verified data report by the compliance deadline of March 31, 2017.
Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project (9963-2876) will remain eligible to generate offset credits for the 2016 calendar year. Tolko Slave Lake will have to apply next year for exemption from the 2017 SGER Compliance obligation.
Please direct any questions you may have to [email protected].
Sincerely,
John Storey-Bishoff, M.Sc., P.EngDirector, Climate Change Compliance
Digitally signed by John Storey-Bishoff DN: cn=John Storey-Bishoff, o=Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, ou=Air and Climate Change Policy Branch, [email protected], c=CA Date: 2017.01.18 13:48:24 -07'00'
ATTACHMENT G
AEP PROTOCOL DEVIATION APPROVAL LETTER
Climate Change Policy and Regulations Branch12th Floor, 10025 106 Street Edmonton, Alberta T5J 1G4 CanadaTelephone: 780-427-5200www.alberta.ca
May 9, 2016
Aleena DewjiBlue Source CanadaSuite 700, 717-7th Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2P 0Z3
Dear Ms. Dewji,
Subject: Request to obtain audit findings and clarify calculation of fuel combustion emissions in the Tolko Slave Lake Biomass Offset Project (9963-2876)
The Climate Change Office has reviewed your email sent April 5, 2016 requesting access to the government audit findings from recent biomass projects and clarification on the calculation of emissions from the combustion of biomass in the Quantification Protocol for Energy Generation from the Combustion of Biomass v2.0. Blue Source is collecting energy generation data and utilizing emission factors to calculate emissions from fuel combustion (as described through source/sink P15 in the project condition) and is requesting to use this same methodology to calculate emissions from fuel combustion in the baseline condition.
A government audit has not been conducted thus far on a project that is using the current (2014) version of the protocol, thus there are no audit reports available to share at this time. Blue Source may use the methodology described for source/sink P15 of Table 6 to calculate emissions from heat generation in the baseline condition, provided that all protocol requirementsrelated to the application of this methodology are met in both the baseline and project condition.
If you have further questions please do not hesitate to contact our office directly at [email protected].
Sincerely,
John Storey-Bishoff, P.Eng. Director, Climate Change ComplianceAlberta Climate Change Office
cc: Alberta Emissions Offset Registry (file)
Digitally signed by John Storey-Bishoff DN: cn=John Storey-Bishoff, o=Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, ou=Air and Climate Change Policy Branch, [email protected], c=CA Date: 2016.05.10 14:14:40 -06'00'
ATTACHMENT H
KEYSTONE ENVIRONMENTAL LTD. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR SERVICES
1
KEYSTONE ENVIRONMENTAL LTD. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR SERVICES
The terms and conditions set forth below govern all work or services requested by CLIENT as described and set forth in the Proposal and/or Work Plan of Keystone Environmental Ltd. ("Keystone Environmental "), any Purchase Order issued by CLIENT or Agreement between Keystone Environmental and CLIENT. The provisions of said Proposal or Agreement govern the scope of services to be performed, including the time schedule, compensation, and any other special terms. The terms and conditions contained herein shall otherwise apply expressly stated to the contract including any terms in addition to or inconsistent with said Proposal or Agreement. 1. COMPENSATION
The fees for services provided by Keystone Environmental consists of: (1) an hourly billing rate for any staff member actively working on a project, except for lump-sum or percent of construction fee basis projects; (2) reimbursement of direct expenses