mare 39 2 MW 3rd PV report Final 39 2 MW 3rd PV report...21-07-2010 TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH...

Verification Report

Mare Manastir Rüzgar Enerjisi Santralı Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.

Third Periodic Verification of the Registered GS VER Project under Gold Standard GS 368

“Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project”

in Turkey

Monitoring period: 01-01-2009 to 28-02-2010

Report No. 600500448- GS 368

21-07-2010

TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH Carbon Management Service

Westendstrasse 199 - 80686 Munich - GERMANY

THIRD PERIODIC VERIFICATION “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” in Turkey Page 1 of 16

Report No. Date of first issue Version: Date of this revision No. of pages 600500448 - GS 368

06-04-2010 03 21-07-2010 16 (excluding cover page and Annexes)

Subject: Third Periodic Verification Executing Operational Unit: TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH, Carbon Management Service Westendstrasse 199 - 80686 Munich, Federal Republic of Germany Project Participant (client): Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Santralı Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş., Feneryolu / Istanbul-Turkey Registration number / Project Title “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” in

Turkey Monitoring period: 01-01-2009 to 28-02-2010 (both days included) First Monitoring Report (version/date) Version 3.0 / 10-02-2010 Final Monitoring Report (version/date) Version 3.2 / 24-05-2010 Summary: TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH has performed the third periodic verification of the registered GS VER Gold Standard project GS 368 “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” in Turkey according to the Gold Standard GSv1 requirements. The project site is situated in the Aegean cost of Çeşme, Izmir, Turkey. The project consists of 49 units of 800kW turbines supplied by ENERCON. It has been in operation since 30.11.2006. The electricity generated is supplied via 154 kV Alaçatı and Urla TM-stations to the Turkish national Grid. The management of Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Santralı Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş., an affiliate of Demirer Holding, is responsible for the preparation of the GHG emissions data and the reported GHG emission reductions. A document review, followed by a site visit on 02-03-2010 was conducted to verify the information submitted by the project participant regarding the present verification period. Based on the assessment carried out, the verifier confirms that : • the project has been implemented and operated in accordance with the description given in the registered

GS-VER PDD (Version 02, 13-09-2007, validation date 09-11-2007, GS registration date 13-11-2007, GS 368).

• the emission reductions presented in this monitoring period are approx. 5% less than those indicated in the registered GS VER PDD and do not deviate significantly.

• the monitoring plan complies with the applied methodology ACM0002 Approved consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources”, version 06 from 19 May 2006 and the monitoring has been carried out exactly following the monitoring plan. Installed equipments essential for generating emission reductions run reliably and the meters are calibrated appropriately. The project is generating emission reductions as a GS-VER project.

The verifier can confirm that the GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements. Our opinion refers to the project’s GHG emissions and resulting GHG emission reductions reported, both determined due to the valid and registered project’s baseline, its monitoring plan and its associated documents. Based on the information we have seen and evaluated we confirm that the implementation of the project resulted in 103,684 t CO2, eq of emission reductions during the verification period 01-01-2009 to 28-02-2010 (both days included). The project emissions PE and the Leakage LE are zero. No Forward Action Requests have been raised in the previous verification report (TÜV SÜD, No. 600500215 – GS 368, dated 30-03-2009). Assessment Team Leader : Thomas Kleiser Assessment Team Members : Robert Mitterwallner Dr. Nuri Mol Bhai Raja Maharjan

Technical Reviewer : Sebastian Randig Johann Thaler Certification Body responsible : Cuiyun Zhang


Abbreviations ACM Approved Consolidated Methodology BM Build Margin CAR Corrective Action Request CDM Clean Development Mechanism CDM-EB CDM Executive Board CER Certified Emission Reduction CM Combined Margin CMP Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto

Protocol CO2, eq Carbon dioxide equivalent CR / CL Clarification Request DNA Designated National Authority DOE Designated Operational Entity EF Emission Factor EGyb Net electricity metered at the backup meter EIA / EA Environmental Impact Assessment / Environmental Assessment EPDK Energy Market Regulatory Authority ER Emission Reduction FAR Forward Action Request FSR Feasibility Study Report GHG Greenhouse Gas(es) GS Gold Standard GWP Global Warming Potential IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IRL Information Reference List KP Kyoto Protocol MP Monitoring Plan MR Monitoring Report NGO Non-Governmental Organisation OM Operational Margin PDD Project Design Document PMUM Electricity Market Financial Settlement Departement PP Project Participant SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition TEIAS Turkish Grid Power Transmission Company TÜV SÜD TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change VVM Validation and Verification Manual VER Voluntary Emission Reduction


Main Documents (referred to in this report) Methodology (name / version) ACM 0002, Version 06, 19 May 2006 Scope 1 Technical Area 1.1 Registered GS VER PDD: Version 01, date 09-05-2007

Version 02, date 13-11-2007 Revised Monitoring Plan: not applicable Version Date Published Monitoring Report V3.0 10-02-2010 Revised Monitoring Report V3.2 24-05-2010 Project documentation link: https://gs1.apx.com/mymodule/ProjectDoc/EditProjectDoc.as

p?id1=368 Table of Contents Page 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Objective ........................................................................................................................ 4 1.2 Scope ............................................................................................................................. 4 1.3 GHG Project Description ................................................................................................ 4

2 Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Verification Process ....................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Verification Team ........................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Review of Documents .................................................................................................... 7 2.4 On-site Assessment and follow-up Interviews ............................................................... 7 2.5 Quality of Evidence to Determine Emission Reductions ................................................ 7 2.6 Resolution of Clarification and Corrective and Forward Action Requests ..................... 8 2.7 Internal Quality Control .................................................................................................. 9

3 Verification Results ............................................................................................................. 10 3.1 FARs from Validation / Previous Verification ............................................................... 10 3.2 Project Implementation in accordance with the registered Project Design Document . 10 3.3 Compliance of the Monitoring Plan with the Monitoring Methodology ......................... 10 3.4 Compliance of the Monitoring with the Monitoring Plan ............................................... 10 3.5 Assessment of Data and Calculation of Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions ........ 13

4 Summary of Findings ......................................................................................................... 15 5 Verification Statement ......................................................................................................... 16 Annex 1: Periodic Verification Protocol Annex 2: Information Reference List


1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Objective Demirer Enerji Üretim San. Ve Tic. A.S. (in the following : ”Demirer Holding”) has commissioned an independent verification by TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH (TÜV SÜD) of its registered VER-GS project GS 368 “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” in Turkey. The objective of the verification work is to check compliance with GS version 1 and GS VER Validation Verification Manual (VVM) 2007 requirements, according to which the verifier shall: • ensure that the project activity has been implemented and operated as per the registered GS

VER PDD “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” in Turkey Version 02, registered 13-09-2007, and that all physical features (technology, project equipment, monitoring and metering equipment) of the project are in place,

• ensure that the published MR and other supporting documents provided are complete and verifiable and in accordance with applicable GS v.1 and GS VER VVM 2007 requirements,

• ensure that actual monitoring systems and procedures comply with the monitoring systems and procedures described in the monitoring plan and the approved methodology,

• evaluate the data recorded and stored as per the “Approved Consolidated Baseline and Monitoring Methodology for grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources” ACM 0002, Version 06, 19 May 2006.

1.2 Scope The verification scope is defined as an independent and objective review and ex-post determination of the monitored reductions in GHG emissions by the Designated Operational Entity. The verification is based on the submitted monitoring report, the validated project design documents including its monitoring plan and validation report, previous verification reports, the applied consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology ACM 0002, version 06, 19 May 2006, relevant decisions, clarifications and guidance from the CMP and the EB and any other information and references relevant to the project activity’s resulting emission reductions. These documents are reviewed against the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol, the CDM Modalities and Procedures and rules and guidance of Gold Standard. TÜV SÜD has, based on the requirements in GS v.1 and GS VER Validation and Verification Manual 2007 (VVM) applied a rule-based approach. The principles of accuracy and completeness, relevance, reliability and credibility were combined with a conservative approach to establish a traceable and transparent verification opinion. The verification considers both quantitative and qualitative information on emission reductions. The verification is not meant to provide any consultancy towards the client. However, stated requests for clarifications, corrective and/or forward actions may provide input for improvement of the monitoring activities.

1.3 GHG Project Description Project activity: “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” in Turkey GS-VER Registration Number: GS 368 Project Participants: Demirer Holding and Enercon GmbH are project

participants. Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Santralı Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. is the license holder of the wind farm and is owned by the project participants.


Location of the project: Manastır Area, Alaçatı-Çeşme, Izmir, Turkey Date of GS registration: 13-11-2007 Starting date of the crediting period: 01-01-2007 End of the first crediting period: 31-12-2013 The main objective of the project is electricity generation by wind turbines and supplying it into the Turkish national grid. By replacing the fossil fuel energy generation, the GHG emissions are reduced. The project is operated by Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Santralı Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş, an affiliate of Demirer Holding. It consists of 49 turbines with 800 kW each, supplied by ENERCON. 32 units have a hub height of 55 m, 17 units are with hub height 50 m. A new built 700m 154 KV high-voltage transmission line connects the power plant to Alaçatı and Urla Transformer stations. As per the registered GS VER PDD, the wind power plant is estimated to generate 129 GWh electricity annually from the proposed project. At the time of the third verification, the wind farm was full in operation.


2. METHODOLOGY

2.1 Verification Process The verification process is based on the approach depicted in GS v.1 and the GS VER VVM 2007. Standard auditing techniques have been adopted. The verification team performs first a desk review, followed by an on-site visit which results in a verification protocol including all the findings. The next step is to close out the findings through direct communication with the PPs and finally prepare the verification report. This verification report and other supporting documents then undergo an internal quality control by the CB “climate and energy” before submission to the Gold Standard.

2.2 Verification Team The appointment of the team takes into account the coverage of the technical area(s), sectoral scope(s) and relevant host country experience for verifying the ER achieved by the GS project activity in the relevant monitoring period for this verification. The verification team was consisting of the following members: Name Qualification Coverage of

technical scope Coverage of sectoral expertise

Host country experience

Thomas Kleiser ATL Robert Mitterwallner Verifier Dr. Nuri Mol* Verifier Bhai Raja Maharjan Verifier

*Dr. Nuri Mol is a Verifier for JI Project Thomas Kleiser– is head of Certification Body”Climate and Energy” division within TÜV SÜD and is an assessment team leader for CDM and JI projects at TÜV SÜD Industry Service GmbH. In this position he is responsible for the implementation of validation and certification processes for GHG mitigation projects. He has participated in more than 100 CDM and JI project assessments. Robert Mitterwallner is a GHG-Auditor with a background as auditor for environmental management systems (according to ISO 14001), as expert in environmental permit procedures for industrial plants and as expert for environmental impact studies assessment. He is located at TUV SÜD Industrie Service in Munich since 1990. He has received training in the JI determination as well as CDM validation process and applied successfully as GHG Auditor for the scope energy industries, among others. Dr. Nuri Mol has been working for 20 years as expert and consultant in environmental sector. He was consultant to various industries, e.g. iron & steel, food, water supply, hazardous waste management. He received intensive training at Carbon Management Service with TÜV SÜD and participated in more than 30 validation and verification processes with various scopes. Dr. Mol is qualified Verifier for JI projects in TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH. Bhai Raja Maharjan is an expert and GHG auditor (Verifier) for CDM/JI, GS and VER projects at TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH. He has extensive experience in Renewable Energy Projects. He holds a Bachelor degree in Electrical Engineering and M.Sc. degree in Renewable


Energy. Before joining the TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH he has worked in various multinational companies as an Engineer and Renewable Energy expert.

2.3 Review of Documents The Monitoring Report version V3.0, dated 10-02-2010 was prepared and submitted by the project developer ORBEO, consultant to Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Santralı Sanayi ve Üretim A.Ş.. The monitoring report (Version V3.0, 10.02.2010) was made publicly available on the TÜV SÜD website http://www.netinform.net (> climate and energy>projects) before the verification activities started. The published MR was assessed based on all the relevant documents as listed earlier. The aim of the assessment in the desk review was to verify the completeness of the data and the information presented in the MR. The compliance check of the MR with respect to the monitoring plan depicted in the registered GS VER PDD and the applied methodology was carried out. Particular attention was paid to the frequency of measurements; the quality of the metering equipment including calibration requirements, and the quality assurance and quality control procedures was paid. The evaluation of data management and the quality assurance and quality control system in the context of their influence on the generation and reporting of emission reductions was also carried out. A complete list of all documents reviewed is available in Annex 2 of this report. The desk review was held on 25.02.2010.

2.4 On-site Assessment and follow-up Interviews On 02-03-2010, TÜV SÜD performed a physical site inspection and on-site interviews with project stakeholders to: • confirm the implementation and operation of the project, • review the data flow for generating, aggregating and reporting the monitoring parameters, • confirm the correct implementation of procedures for operations and data collection, • cross-check the information provided in the MR documentation with other sources (raw data), • check the monitoring equipments against the requirements of the GS VER PDD and the

approved methodology, including calibrations, maintenance, etc., • review the calculations and assumptions used to obtain the GHG data and ER, • identify if the quality control and quality assurance procedures are in place to prevent or

correct errors or omissions in the reported parameters. A list of the persons interviewed during this verification activity is included in Annex 2.

2.5 Quality of Evidence to Determine Emission Reductions Among many others the following relevant and reliable evidences have been used by the audit team during the verification process: • Management Handbook (updated) [IRL 1] • Electricity Generation License [IRL 3] • Registered GS VER PDD v2 [IRL 6] • Validation Report [IRL 7] • Monitoring report [IRL 9] • Excel Workbook Emission Reduction calculations [IRL 10]


• Single line diagram [IRL 11] • Test certificate of main and backup meter (calibration certificate) [IRL 13, 14] • Test certificate of the new installed backup meter (calibration certificate) [IRL 15] • First Reading Protocol for the new installed backup meter [IRL 15] • Manual meter data reading and recording sheets (Logbooks) [IRL 16] • Monthly meter data protocol on generated and consumed energy at the Wind Power Plant :

monitoring Period [IRL 17] • Final monthly meter data issued by PMUM considering the electricity purchased from the grid

and grid losses [IRL 18] • Monthly invoices issued to the Grid operator TEIAS for the electricity amount supplied to the

grid (as fixed in the PMUM data) [IRL 19] • Monthly SCADA data records [IRL 20] • Operation & Maintenance Handbooks for turbines [IRL 21] • Participant’s list [IRL 36] Sufficient evidence covering the full verification period in the required frequency is available to validate the figures stated in the final MR. The source of the evidences will be discussed in chapter 3 of this report. Specific cross-checks have been done in cases that further sources were available. All figures in the monitoring report were cross-checked by the audit team against the raw data. The data collection system meets the requirements of the monitoring plan as per the methodology.

2.6 Resolution of Clarification and Corrective and Forward Action Requests The objective of this phase of the verification process was to resolve any outstanding issues which needed to be clarified for TÜV SÜD’s positive conclusion on the GHG emission reduction calculation. The findings raised as Forward Action Requests (FARs) indicated in the previous verification report were clarified during communications between the project participant and TÜV SÜD. To guarantee the transparency of the verification process, the concerns raised, based on the desk review and subsequent on-site audit assessment and follow up interviews, together with the responses given are documented in Annex 1 (verification protocol). A Corrective Action Request is raised where TÜV SÜD identifies: • non-conformities in monitoring and/or reporting with the monitoring plan and/or methodology; • that the evidence provided is not sufficient to prove conformity; • mistakes in assumptions, data or calculations that impair the ER; • FARs stated during validation that are not solved until the on-site visit. A Clarification Request is raised where TÜV SÜD does not have enough information or the information is not clear in order to confirm a statement or data. A Forward Action Request is raised where TÜV SÜD identifies that monitoring and/or reporting required special attention or adjustments for the next verification period. Information or clarifications provided as response to a CAR, CL or FAR could also lead to a new CAR.


2.7 Internal Quality Control As a final step of verification the final documentation including the verification report and the protocol have to undergo an internal quality control by the Certification Body (CB) “climate and energy”, i.e. each report has to be finally approved either by the Head of the CB or the Deputy. In case one of these two persons is part of the assessment team the approval can only be given by the other one. If the documents have been satisfactorily approved, the Request for Issuance is submitted to the Gold Standard along with the relevant documents.


3 VERIFICATION RESULTS

In the following sections the results of the verification are stated. The verification results relate to the project performance as documented and described in the final Monitoring Report (24-05-2010, version V3.2). The verification findings for each verification subject are presented below:

3.1 FARs from Validation / Previous Verification The verification team confirms that all FARs presented in the validation report and/or previous verification reports have been correctly addressed by the PPs. The FAR raised by Gold standard in the previous verification report No. 600500215 GS368, on training and technological self-reliance has been addressed: Special trainings were conducted as to assure a sustainable and reliable wind power plant operation [IRL 24, 25,and 26]. Hence the issue is closed.

3.2 Project Implementation in accordance with the registered Project Design Document The project is fully implemented according to the description presented in the GS VER PDD. The verifier confirms, through the visual inspection that all physical features of the proposed GS VER project activity including data collecting systems and storage have been implemented in accordance with the registered GS VER PDD. The project activity is completely operational and the same has been confirmed on-site. No data and/or variables presented in the MR differ significantly from the stated in the registered GS VER PDD, which would cause an increment of the ER in this period or in future periods in relation to the estimates in the registered GS VER PDD. The verified emissions reductions of 103,684 t CO2,eq in this monitoring period were approx. 5% lower than the estimates (extrapolated estimate : 108,951 t CO2,eq) in the registered GS VER PDD.

3.3 Compliance of the Monitoring Plan with the Monitoring Methodology The monitoring plan is in accordance with the approved consolidated baseline and monitoring methodology, ACM0002, Version 06 applied by the proposed GS VER project activity.

3.4 Compliance of the Monitoring with the Monitoring Plan The monitoring has been carried out in accordance with the monitoring plan contained in the registered GS VER PDD and in the Monitoring Report. All parameters were monitored and determined as per the Monitoring Plan. The verification of the parameters required by the monitoring plan is provided as follows: Data / Parameter: EGy Generated Electricity (ID1) Data unit: MWh Description: Net amount of electricity supplied to the Grid by the project: The electricity is

measured by bi-directional meters, which measure simultaneously”electricity supplied to the grid” and”electricity purchased from the grid”. Both data are contained in the monthly protocol. The net electricity is the difference between”electricity supplied to the grid” and” electricity purchased from the grid”.

Source of data used: The data sources checked and used : - Raw data recorded by meters (1x main and 1x backup)


- Raw data manually recorded in excel spreadsheets (4-5xdaily) - Monthly Data Protocol of TEIAS - PMUM data - Invoice Data - Logbook - SCADA data (internal) controlled by turbine supplier ENERCON

were read and crosschecked. The metering equipment used has been calibrated according to the requirements of the approved monitoring plan, e.g. the meters are owned and checked by the grid operator TEIAS, who is in charge for the accuracy and reliability of the meters. [IRL 25 and 26]

Means of verification/Comments:

According to the methodology, electricity supplied to the grid is measured hourly and recorded monthly. The verification team verified that the net amount of power supplied to the grid by the project used in the calculation sheet (excel sheet) and reported in the MR are correct and traceable to the raw data. The hourly measured data is saved in the internal meter storage device. The meter readings are recorded monthly by the Grid operator TEIAS, whose technical staff comes on the first days of the month and performs the measurements for the previous month. This data is the basis for billing. These monthly records are double checked by receipt of sales. Furthermore, the raw data from the daily log books recording and monthly calculation sheet has been checked through recalculation of all values and found to be correct. Furthermore the stated values have also been verified from the sales invoices. Finally, the monthly SCADA data was used as a cross check of the monthly meter data protocol for plausibility [IRL 20]. Note : The monthly meter data protocol is the basis for the emission reduction calculations. Transmission losses are not considered in the ER calculations. The invoice data includes TM losses, which make up to 2-3 % of the amount metered onsite and documented in the monthly protocols. This adjustment is done by the commercial department of the grid operator, PMUM (Market Financial Settlement Dept. - Piyasa Mali Uzlaştırma Merkezi) and has been accepted by the project participant.

Cross-check The net electricity generation at the power plant was cross-checked against the daily recorded log book. The data recorded by the metering instruments is cross checked against the data indicated in the monthly invoices. The estimated annual net generated electricity in the registered GS VER PDD is 129 GWh/yr; the annual measured data for 2009 is 114 GWh/yr. This reduction is due to lower wind conditions. The wind power plant was fully operational at an availability of 98.3%, the plant load factor was within the estimated range (0.33 compared to 0.37 estimated in the Micrositing Report, IRL 33).

With respect to GS requirements, the project has to comply with the parameters in Sustainable Development Indicators Matrix (see chapter 3.4.1, GS VER VVM 2007). Even though most of the parameters remain unchanged; the project owner has defined 3 indicators out of this Matrix to be audited regularly, as to identify any short term fluctuations:

- Employment (ID2) : job quality - Employment (ID3) : number of employees - Technological Self Reliance (ID4) : technology transfer

The verification of these parameters required by the monitoring plan (GS VER PDD version 2, 13.09.2007) according to the Gold Standard GS v.1 and GS VER VVM 2007 requirements (see also Annex 2, MR) are provided as follows: Data / Parameter: Employment (ID2) Data unit: Job quality


Description: As per PDD : Number of staff trained, certified by Enercon and Demirer

Holding regarding technical and security issues is outlined in the updated Management Handbook [IRL 1] :Chapter 1 : Organisation, Job Description, Staff Qualification (certificates), Labor Insurance contracts (employment certificates) Chapter 2 : Training (update ), Qualification (update) The plant manager is electric/electronic engineer, Enercon WTG service technicians have a diploma from 2-year high schools, the High Voltage technicians are from branch technical schools.

Source of data used: Updated payrolls and qualification certificates of the staff have been submitted.


All training certificates and further qualification measures regarding the qualification of the staff have been documented in the updated Management Handbook and presented to the audit team. The working environment and working conditions were in a positive shape. The training programs were prepared in order to assure a sustainable and reliable plant operation: The WTG trainings were conducted by qualified trainers organized by ENERCON. The HV trainings were conducted the qualified staff of the grid operator TEIAS [IRL 24, 25, 26].

Cross-check The staff present at the day of the onsite assessment was interviewed. They were identified as the staff described according to the payrolls and certificates of the plant by crosschecking the information regarding labor insurance and residence registry documents. Issues rose during the onsite assessment on the specific topics, i.e. WTG operation & maintenance and data management were addressed by the trained staff with competence.

Further parameter out of the SDI Matrix is as follows: Data / Parameter: Employment (ID3) Number of Employees Data unit: Description: Detailed information on the staff employed by the operator is described in the

updated Management Handbook : Chapter 1 : Organisation, Job Description, Personnel Qualification (certificates), Labour Insurance contracts (employment certificates) Chapter 2 : Training (update ), Qualification (update)

Source of data used: The Management Handbook presented to the audit team was used for the evaluation of this issue. Further documents submitted to the audit team were:

- Labour insurance (employment certificate) - Residence registry


The number of employees (the same people as in the previous period) has not changed within this verification period : High Voltage (HV) Team: It consists of 4 technicians. Enercon Service Team: It consists of 4 technicians. Security Guard Team: It consists of 3 employees. Plant manager : 1 electrical engineer In total, there are 12 employees at Mare Wind Farm.

Cross-check The personnel in duty at the day of the onsite assessment were interviewed. They were identified as the personnel of the plant by crosschecking the information regarding labor insurance and residence register.

Further parameter out of the SDI Matrix is as follows: Data / Parameter: Technological self reliance (ID4) Data unit: Description: As described and documented for ID2 and ID3, the number of employment

and the qualification certificates show, that local qualified people are capable to manage the high technology equipment. The special trainings strengthen


the self reliance of the Wind Power Plant operation. The staff has shown his capability to operate and maintenance the plant. There is a Service & Maintenance Contract between the plant operator and Enercon (Enercon Partner Konzept, EPK), which covers a period of 12 years. The service contract is re-scheduled yearly. This contract strengthens the sustainability and reliability of the project as well, (IRL 24, 25 and 26). The ENERCON staff consists of local technicians trained by ENERCON and qualified for the maintenance works onsite.

Source of data used: Certificates, EPK contract, Instruction manualMeans of verification/Comments:

For a steady and reliable operation of the wind farm, the plant operator and the turbine supplier have made continuous efforts to update the qualification of the personnel in charge of the plant. By doing so, a qualified team was created for the operation and maintenance of a highly sophisticated system, as it was monitored. The turbines are maintained by the Enercon Service technicians in duty. Further support is given by the SCADA system connected to ENERCON Head Quarters in Germany. It can be stated, that the technological self reliance remains intact.

Cross-check The staff in duty at the day of the onsite assessment was interviewed. The utilization of the SCADA system was explained by the staff in charge. The maintenance protocol of a turbine could be followed at the SCADA display and protocols were documented. The Enercon Service technicians were checked regularly by Enercon auditors. Corresponding certificates and instruction guides have been submitted to the audit team.

3.5 Assessment of Data and Calculation of Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions The reported data has been cross checked against other sources when available as explained above in chapter 3.4. The verifier confirms that the methods and formulae used to obtain the baseline emissions are appropriate. The same have been done in accordance with the methods and formulae described in the registered monitoring plan and applicable methodology. The verifier confirms that all the assumptions and the emission factor (ex-ante value) from the registered GS VER PDD have been correctly justified. All data has been available and all the parameters have been monitored in accordance with the registered GS VER PDD Monitoring Plan. There were no gaps in data reporting. The audit team has been provided with data covering the whole monitoring period (01/01/2009–28/02/2010). The main data, the exported and imported electricity is measured by main and backup meter continuously and is recorded by a trained professional meter reader in the log book. The accuracy of the used meters is 0.2s (active) and 0.5 (reactive). The verification was done according to approved GS VER validation and verification manual 2007. The reported data has been verified and cross checked against other sources when available as explained above in chapter 3.4. Also, the verifier confirms that the methods and formulae used to obtain the baseline emissions are appropriate. The same have been done in accordance with the methods and formulae described in the registered GS VER PDD (version 2, dated 13-09-2007) and monitoring plan and applicable methodology. The values have been correctly applied and the calculations are transparently presented. Every calculation is based on the underlying approved consolidated methodology ACM 0002, Version 6. The main data, the exported and imported electricities were recorded hourly by the


trained professional meter readers in the power house as well as in the grid company. The accuracy of both meters was 0.2s (active), as requested according to the directive of Electricity Market Regulation Authority EMRA [IRL 12]. There were following types of meters in following locations:

Bi-directional Meters M1 (main) and M2 (backup), located at the high voltage side of the step-up transformer station constructed at the project site. These meters were used by the grid operator TEIAS and the project entity to log the value in both electronic and hard copy format. At the end of each month the TEIAS grid company staff dropped at site and recorded the meter data digitally. Also the recorded readings by the project entity were submitted to the grid company TEIAS [IRL 17] for a cross check. These mutually agreed monthly readings were the basis for sales invoices of the project entity. The meters measured continuously imported and exported electricity at project site. The meters were calibrated as per GS VER PDD MP [IRL 13, 14 and 15].

The total amount of the EGexported [IRL 17, 18] and EGimported [IRL 17, 18] accumulated in each month was recorded in the Monthly Reading Records [IRL 17, 18], which were checked by the audit team and also cross-checked with the sales invoices from the grid company and electricity transaction receipts. The net electricity exported to the grid company was calculated by EGexport minus EGimport. In addition, all the input data was kept in retraceable form in multiple paper copies as well as in a computer system. The calculation spreadsheets were integral part of the log-books. The verification team also cross-checked daily data with monthly data and no inconsistencies have been found. All figures in the revised monitoring report [IRL 9] were cross-checked by the audit team using an excel spreadsheet [IRL 10]. All emission reduction calculations were found appropriate in this excel spreadsheet. Regarding information/process flow, data transfer and data trails, the necessary procedures have been defined in the protocol (Annex-1) and were also checked during onsite audit. Excel spreadsheet [IRL 10] were also cross-checked in detail. The data collection, transfer and processing were checked in detail along with the calculations within the excel sheets. The emission factor was calculated according to the baseline methodology ACM0002, version 06. The combined margin baseline emission factor of the Turkish Public Grid is EFy= 0.733 tCO2,eq/MWh, which was determined ex-ante and fixed for the first crediting period. The verifier confirms that all the data have been correctly justified.


4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The verifier can confirm that the published MR and related documents are complete and verifiable in accordance with the GS version 1 and GS VER VVM 2007 requirements. All the findings raised by the verification team, the responses by the PPs and the conclusion from the team are presented in Annex 1, the means of verification and resulting changes in the MR or related documents are stated as follows: Corrective Action Request No.1. : Please indicate data reading and recording frequency in the MR. Corrective Action Request No.1. , means of verification The verification team could monitor onsite that the meters were monitoring the electricity generation data online continuously. 4 intermediate data in 15 minute-intervals were integrated to the hourly measured data. This data has been saved in the internal meter storage device. The aggregated data at the internal meter storage device has been recorded by the TEIAS staff monthly, who come onsite on the first days of the following month. The issue is closed. Corrective Action Request No.1. , changes in the MR or related documents Relevant adjustments have been done in the MR, section B.2.2. The issue is closed. Corrective Action Request No.2. : Please indicate the accuracy level of the meters. Corrective Action Request No.2. : means of verification The verification team could confirm the information on meter accuracy at the front display of the installed meters (main and backup). Furthermore the submitted test and calibration certificates were cross checked with the information given in the MR and found to be consistent. The issue is closed. Corrective Action Request No.2. : changes in the MR or related documents Relevant changes have been done in the MR, section B.1.1. The issue is closed.

Clarification Request 1 : Please submit the certificate of the completed training for Umut Özgör and Tamer Eker. Clarification Request 1 , means of verification The official invitation letter by ENERCON (dated 30.11.2009) with the scheduled training period from 25.-27.01.2010 has been submitted. The certificates have been submitted on 29.03.2010. The verification team corroborated the certificates and confirms that the same are appropiate. Clarification Request 1 , changes in the MR or related documents No changes in the relevant assessment documents were necessary. The issue is closed Clarification Request 2 : Please submit - Monthly PMUM data February 2010

- Monthly Invoice February 2010

Clarification Request 2, means of verification The electricity data for month of February 2010 was not confirmed by PMUM and no invoices could be issued to TEIAS at the time of the onsite audit on 02.03.2010. This issue has been raised during the onsite assessment. The PMUM data and invoice for February 2010 have been submitted on 25.03.2010 by the PP. The audit team has checked both documents against the monthly protocol and found it to be consistent. Clarification Request 2, changes in the MR or related documents No changes in the relevant assessment documents were necessary. The issue is closed.

No Forward Action Request has been issued in this assessment.


5 VERIFICATION STATEMENT

TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH has performed the third periodic verification of the GS VER project GS368 “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” in Turkey. The verification is based on the Gold Standard version 1 and GS VER VVM 2007 requirements. The management of Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Santralı Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş. is responsible for the preparation of the GHG emissions data and the reported GHG emission reductions on the basis set out within the document “GS Validation and Verification Manual for VER Projects” and the project’s Monitoring Plan indicated in the registered GS VER PDD version 02, dated 13-09-2007 and the applied methodology ACM0002, Version 06, 19 May 2006. The verifier can confirm that: • the development and maintenance of records and reporting procedures are in accordance

with the registered monitoring plan; • the project is operated as planned and described in the validated and registered project

design document; • the installed equipment being essential for generating emission reduction runs reliably and is

calibrated appropriately; • the monitoring system is in place and generates GHG emission reductions data; • the GHG emission reductions are calculated without material misstatements; • the monitoring plan in Monitoring Report is as per the registered GS VER PDD; • the monitoring plan in registered GS VER PDD is as per the applied methodology. Our opinion refers to the project’s GHG emissions and resulting GHG emission reductions reported both determined due to the valid and registered project’s baseline, its monitoring plan and its associated documents. Based on the information we have seen and evaluated, we confirm the following statement: Reporting period: From 01-01-2009 to 28-02-2010 (both days included) Verified emissions in the above reporting period: Baseline emissions: 103,684 t CO2, eq Project emissions: 0 t CO2, eq Leakage emission: 0 t CO2, eq Emission reductions: 103,684 t CO2, eq Munich, 21-07-2010

__________________________________

Munich, 21-07-2010

___________________________________

Cuiyun Zhang Certification Body “climate and energy” TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH

Thomas Kleiser Assessment Team Leader

THIRD PERIODIC VERIFICATION “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” Turkey

Annex 1: Verification Protocol

Verification Protocol Project Title: Mare Manastir 39.2 MW Wind Farm, GS VER 3rd PV,

GS 368 Date of Completion: 21.07.2010 Number of Pages: 37

Checklist is applicable to registered GS VER – Project Activity No.: GS 368 Page A-1

Table of Contents

1. Project Activity Implementation 1.1. Technology 1.2. Organization 1.3. Quality Management System 1.4. Outstanding FARs from previous Verifications (or forwarded issues from the validation report) 2. Monitoring Plan Implementation 2.1. Parameters 2.2. Parameters measured directly with instruments in the field 2.3. Parameters measured through sampling

2.4. Parameters obtained through external sources and accounting data 2.5. Other parameters not included in the methodology/tool but included in the PDD 3. Data Processing and ER calculation 4. Additional assessment 4.1. Internal Review 4.2. Peculiarities 4.3. Further additional requirements 4.4. Data Reporting 5. Compilation and Resolutions of CARs, CRs and FARs




1. Project Activity Implementation 1.1. Technology

Project Location (s)

PDD Description Verification Findings (or Results?) Conclusion and IRL

Site Description / Address:

The onshore Mare Manastır 39.2MW Wind Farm project is situated in Manastır area, Alaçatı district, on the Aegean pen-insula of Çeşme, Turkey. It is approx. 70 km from İzmir city centre. The purpose of the project will generate electricity and feed it in the public grid.

The onsite visit was on 02 March 2010. The project site boundaries are found to be the same as described in the PDD.

GPS coordinates: Geographic coordinates for the Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project : Latitude : 38 17’ 58.30’’ N Longitude : 26 29’ 04.75’’ E

GPS coordinates are indicated in the electricity generation license issued by the EPDK license, see IRL No.3. The GPS coordinates are consistent to those indicated in the registered GS VER PDD. See Management HANDBOOK (HB), section 4, IRL 1

IRL1 IRL 3 IRL 4

Technical Equipment – Main Components

PDD Description Verification Findings (or Results?) Conclusion and IRL

Equipment Description Main equipment

The Mare Manastir 39.2 MW wind farm project will be consisting of 49 Enercon E48 and E44 Wind-Turbine-Generator

49 WTG units have been identified onsite as described in PDD.




(WTG) units

Component 1: Technical Features Only main equipments

Component 1: 17 E48 type turbines, installed at 50 m altitude 32 E44 type turbines, installed at 55 m altitude

There are 49 ENERCON WTG units on-site : 17 x E48 800 kW WTG units and 32x E44 900 kW WTG units’ onsite. Information note : The maximum nominal capacity of E44 type WTG is 800 kW, even though the rated capacity is given as 900 kW, see Micrositing Report IRL No. 33 and the License, IRLNo.3

IRL 3 IRL 33

Component 2: Technical Features

Wind Farm Substation 24 kV underground cables.

Single Line Diagram submitted. HB chapter 6, IRL No.1, see IRL No. 11

IRL 1 IRL 11

Component 3: Technical Features

Transmission line (from wind farm to pub-lic Grid) : 700 m 24kV/154 kV Alaçatı and Urla TM Sta-tions

Single Line Diagram submitted. No changes in electrical project design have been identified. See HB chapter 6, IRL No. 1 Distance to HV Grid 700 m

IRL No.1

Component 4 : Technical Features

Not mentioned in the GS VER PDD

An emergency diesel generator, IVECO 30 kVA, is in standby operation onsite. Diesel consumption data and invoices have been submitted. Furthermore the logbook of the Gen-Set stand-by opera-tion was provided. Consumption data : 130 L consumed in 2009-2010 period

IRL 30 IRL 31




The GHG emissions caused by the fuel oil consumption during the Gen-Set op-eration were less than 1% of the total emission reductions in this monitoring period and therefore negligible according to the GS guidelines. See IRL No. 30 and 31, invoice, standby operation protocol.

Operation Status during verification

Verification Findings Conclusion and IRL

Approvals / Licenses Electricity Generation Licence is issued by EMRA (EPDK), the Energy Market Regula-tion Authority: 20.10.2005. It is valid for 49 years. see also the EPDK web page www.epdk.gov.tr EPDK License submitted. No changes in the original capacity and duration of project activity identified, see IRL No. 3

IRL 3

Actual Operation Status Check the validity of licenses

Start date of operation (each site if applicable): Under construction In operation Out of operation Reason and date (if out of operation): No extraordinary breakdown or shutdown of operation reported by the project owner During the onsite visit, two of the WTG units were found to be in routine maintenance service: WTG 14 and WTG 25. The commissioning date of Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm project is 08.12.2006. The Provisional Permission Contract by ETKB 30.11.2006 was identified in HB chap-ter 7, see IRL1. The Wind Power Plant was inspected by a 3rd Party. See “Statement of Completion”,

IRL 1 IRL 32




IRL No. 32

Reason and Date (if out of operation) Not relevant

Remarks on Special Operational Circumstances During the Verifica-tion Period

not relevant No special circumstances on operation (WTG units, meter devices) reported by the project owner. Therefore no logbook documents on this issue were presented.

1.2. Organization

Project Participant (s)


Entity / Responsible person: The energy production licence by the EMRA (Energy Market Regulation Authority) is issued for the operating company “Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.”. The company is shared by Demirer Enerji Üretim Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (in the following: Demirer Holding) (47.4 % share) and Enercon GmbH (50 % share). The project participants are: - Demirer Holding

No changes in legal status of the project owner were reported. The status quo of the entity is as described in the PDD. See also the EPDK License, p. 6, IRL No.2. An updated organisation chart has been submitted. See IRL No.7 and HB section 1, IRL No.3. , IRL No. 27. Labour contracts with the project owner have been presented, see IRL No. 28.

IRL 1 IRL 3 IRL 27 IRL 28




- Enercon GmbH

GS VER Project management : Mrs. Çağla Balcı Eriş signes for the GS VER Project management.

Mrs. Çağla Balcı Eriş is in charge of the GS VER Carbon Management for the project owner.

1.3. Quality Management System

General aspects of the Quality Management System


Quality Management Manual: No defined QM / QA system (e.g. ISO 9001 / ISO 14001) is imple-mented according to the PDD.

An updated QM Handbook was available onsite. It includes detailed operational proce-dures on Mare Manastır 39.2MW Wind Farm project management See IRL 1.

IRL No.1

Responsibilities: Updated Organisation chart submitted, see IRL No.7. Job description and responsibili-ties are included in the Management HB section 1, see IRL1, IRL 27.

IRL 1 IRL 27

Qualification and Training:

Updated training and qualification certificates of the staff are included in HB section 2. Electrical Training organised by ENERCON Egemen Girgin (05.-16.10.2009) Wind Generator Training organised by ENERCON Umut Özgör (25.-27.01.2010) Tamer Eker (25.-27.01.2010)

CR1 IRL 1 IRL 26




The invitation letter for this staff has been submitted. Clarification Request 1 Please submit the certificate of the completed training for Umut Özgör and Tamer Eker The updated certificates are submitted. See IRL No. 26

Implementation of QM-system See remarks above

1.4. Outstanding FARs from previous Verifications (or forwarded issues from the validation report) Outstanding Requests from Previous Verifications

Summary of project ownerresponse

Audit teamConclusion and IRL

Forward action request No. 1: No FAR is indicated in the previous verification re-port.




2. Monitoring Plan Implementation

2.1. Parameters

Parameters

Meth/tool PDD MR Included in table Compliance Conclusion and IRL

EGy EGy EGy Listed in section D.2.2.1, PDD Listed in Table, chapter B.2.2, MR

EGy is the only parameter to monitor for determining the Emissions Reductions.

ID2 (Em-ployment)

ID2 (Em-ployment, job quality)

Section E , MR ID2 is one of the SDI parameters in the validated Monitoring Plan, it is monitored according to the Gold Standard

ID3 (Em-ployment, numbers)

ID3 (Em-ployment, numbers)

Section E , MR ID3 is one of the SDI parameters in the validated Monitoring Plan, it is monitored according to the Gold Standard

ID4 (Techno-logical self reliance)

ID4 (Tech-nological self reli-ance)

Section E , MR ID4 is one of the SDI parameters in the validated Monitoring Plan, it is monitored according to the Gold Standard.

EFy EFy EFy See PDD, chapter B2; section B.2.1, MR The combined margin EF is determined ex-ante and is validated.




2.2. Parameters measured directly with instruments in the field Table 1 Bi-directional main meter for Net Electricity Measurement

Parameter and instrumentation Information

Check in chain : PDD METH – MR

PDD Meth/Tool MR Verification Find-ings

Conclusion and IRL

Net Generated Electricity measured with bi-directional main meter

Net Generated Electricity


Net Generated Electricity The electricity is measured by bi-directional meters online. The net electricity (the amount pur-chased from the grid is deducted) is used for the ER calculations.

Parameter ID (if available) EGy

EGy

EGy

Net generated electricity

Data Unit MWh MWh MWh MWh

Monitoring frequency (read-ing)

Not relevant hourly measure-ment

The reading frequency has not been indicated in MR. Corrective Action Request No.1. Please indicate data reading and

continuously, online, hourly measurement

CAR1




recording frequency in the MR.

Monitoring frequency (re-cording) Methodology requirements

Monthly

Monthly recording

The recording frequency has not been indicated in the MR. See CAR1

Measured data saved in the in-ternal meter memory is re-corded monthly by the grid opera-tor TEIAS. Note: The hourly measured data is the calculated average value of the last 4 read-ings taken in 15-minute-intervals

Calibration requirements

Periodically by Grid operator

Not applicable

According to the official Directive on the Calibration and Maintenance of Metering Devices (24.07.1994, RG 22000), the periodic test and cali-bration period of electricity meters is set to 10 years (see IRL 12). In the Grid Usage Agreement with the PP, the Grid operator TEIAS has set the calibration and test pe-riod to 5 years. The PP is obliged to follow this special agreement (see IRL12). The periodic maintenance

The routine cali-bration frequency for digital meters is set to 5 years by the Grid op-erator TEIAS. Calibration certifi-cates for CIRCU-TOR main meter by TEIAS have been submitted. See IRL No.13

IRL 12 IRL 13




&calibration period by the meter supplier companies (CIRCUTOR, ACTARIS) is set to 10 years (see IRL 13 to IRL 15).

Uncertainty level

Not applicable Not applicable The uncertainty levels required by the Grid operator are as follows :(IRL 12) Active : 0.5S class (100MVA -10MVA), IEC-EN 60687 Reactive : class 2, IEC-EN 61268 The installed meters have a higher (CIRWATT) or the same (ACTARIS) accuracy as required by the grid operator. Corrective Action Request No.2. Please indicate the uncertainty level of the installed meters in the MR.

CIRCUTOR me-ter model CIR-WAT Active 0.2 Reactive 0.5 Note : Remote data monitoring device by TEIAS in-stalled onsite, it is in test phase.

CAR2

Measurement Principle (if applicable)

not applicable not applicable

not applicable

3 phase 4 qua-drant digital me-ter, with billing upon load profiles

Technical aspects

Conclusion and IRL

Instrument Type: Current at the TM line, 0.2 S active, 0.5S reactive

Serial Number: 342750001




Manufacturer Model Nr.: CIRCUTOR, electricity meter (main) CIRWATT D / 402-LT1A-29D Important dates : 21.12.2007 : Test of the meter by Circutor 29.02.2008: Calibration on 29.02.2008, TEIAS 22.04.2008 installation reset certificates by TEIAS Further information is given in HB section 7, IRL 1 See also the “First Reading Protocol”, IRL No.13

IRL1 IRL 13

Specific Location: At 154 kV high voltage line See Single Line Diagram

IRL 11

Measurement Range:

Voltage : (L) 57/100 V ac (M) 63.5/110 V ac Current : I n 5 A 1 A I max 10 A 2 A

Gap in operating time of in-strument : Any break down of instru-mentation Any deviation to notify Default value

No breakdown of instrumentation reported

Default value used: not relevant

Justification: not relevant

QA/QC aspects : check onsite and evidence Calibration Reset certificates

Conclusion and IRL




Source of data / RAW DATA

The raw data, e.g. manual excel spreadsheets recorded from the meter display have been sub-mitted. According to the manual records, the generated electricity for the verification period is 141,541.328 MWh. See IRL No. 16. It differs slightly from the brutto monthly protocol data of 141,540.010 MWh. The WTG supplier ENERCON is implementing a SCADA system with remote online monitoring and control of the WTG units. The SCADA integrates the electricity generation data from the start up date continuously, e.g. the data for the verification period is not immediately available. In order to get comparability with the meter data, the raw SCADA data has to be transferred in to an Excel file and processed. See IRL 20 The SCADA data is not used for ER calculations. Exemplary Logbook sheets have been submitted, see also HB section 8, IRL No.1 Data Management : The data management is described in Work Operation Procedures, HB section 5 and section 7, see IRL No.1

IRL 1 IRL 16 IRL 20

Procedures: see remarks above

Implementation of procedure: The instructions are integrated in to Work Operation Procedure (OP) in HB section 7. Mr. Sarper Başak is operation manager and responsible for data cross check and approval. The plant manager sends the data report to operation manager for review.

IRL No.1

Responsibility: Mr. Egemen Girgin, the plant manager signs for Data management onsite. See HB section 1 (Job description), IRL No.1

IRL No.1

Archiving of raw data and protection measures

Raw data is archived in metal cages and is available onsite. Digital data is archived in external backup utilities and is updated weekly. Furthermore, the data is stored in the HQ by Mrs. Çağla Balcı Eriş.




Data transfer and protection of input data for calculations Transfer to EXCEL file (PC)

The transfer of raw data in to usable data for ER calculations is managed by Mrs. GS VER Manager. The approved Monthly Protocols are transferred to :

- Mrs. Çağla Balcı Eriş, GS VER Manager, - Mr. Sarper Başak, Operation Manager

The protocols are cross checked and archived by the GS VER Manager. In case of discrepan-cies in data correctness, the GS VER manager contacts the Grid operator TEIAS and clarifies the issue. See also Grid Usage Agreement with TEIAS. Further instructions on data manage-ment (processing, storage) are included in HB section 7, IRL No.1. The data registered in the approved Monthly Protocols are used for the Emissions Reductions calculations.

IRL No.1

Quality of evidence Conclusion and IRL

Completeness of data The data covers a period between 01 January 2009 and 28 February 2010. Relevant manually recorded data for the entire verification period has been submitted (see IRL No.10). Relevant Monthly TEIAS (Grid operator) Protocols for the applied verification period have been submitted (see IRL No.11) Relevant Monthly PMUM Protocols for the applied verification period have been submitted (see IRL no. 12). Relevant Monthly Invoices for the applied verification period have been submitted (see IRL No.19). Clarification Request 2 Please submit :

- Monthly PMUM data February 2010 - Monthly Invoice February 2010

IRL 16 IRL 17 IRL 18 IRL 19 CR2




Data verification Various available data sources were cross checked, e.g. own calculation with an excel sheet were implemented by the audit team. The correctness of data is both monitored and cross checked by Grid operator and the plant operator. Consequently the monthly generation data is verified and confirmed both by TEIAS and Mare management. The monthly data is read and recorded by TEIAS staff onsite and the Protocol is filled then onsite. It is signed by both Parties.

The emissions reductions calculation tool is consistent with monitoring report. The missing data in Excel table in MR D.2.2. should be completed. See CR1 above.

Crosscheck (if available) Various cross checks with the available data sources were done : Manual data records for the verification period result in an electricity amount of 141,541.328 MWh. Monthly TEIAS Protocols for the same period result in an electricity amount of 141,540.010 MWh (brutto). The results are consistent. The PMUM data and the Monthly TEIAS Protocol for the same period were cross checked. The PMUM data was 2-3% less than the Monthly TEIAS Protocol data. This is done by the Grid op-erator TEIAS and is justified with Grid losses. The PMUM data and the invoice data for the same period were cross checked and found to be consistent. But see remarks in CR2

Table 2 Bi-directional backup meter for Net Electricity Measurement

See Table 1 for further details

Parameter and instrumentation Information

Check in chain : PDD METH – MR

PDD Meth/Tool MR Verification Find-ings

Conclusion and IRL




Net Generated Electricity measured with bi-directional meter (backup meter)



Net Generated Electricity The electricity is measured in par-allel with a bi-directional backup meter. The data of the backup meter has not been used for billing.

Check METH – PDD – MR

Parameter ID (if available) EGy

EGy

EGy

EGy (backup)


Monitoring frequency (read-ing) PDD / methodology requir-ments !!!

Not relevant hourly meas-urement

The reading frequency has not been indicated in MR. See further remarks in Table 1

continuously, online, hourly measurement

Monitoring frequency (re-cording)

Monthly

Monthly re-cording

See CAR1

Monthly Note : backup data is for cross-check of the main meter data

Calibration requirements

Periodically by Grid operator

Not applicable

See remarks in Table 1, section 2.2. IRL 12).

The routine cali-bration frequency for digital meters is set to 5 years by the Grid op-erator TEIAS..

IRL 1 IRL 13 IRL 14




Note : The CIRCUTOR backup meter was replaced on 24.02.2010 by TEIAS. The new installed backup meter is AC-TARIS see re-marks below

Uncertainty level

Not applicable Not applicable The uncertainty level of the installed CIRCUTOR meter is 0.2s (active) and 0.5s (reactive). The uncertainty level of the installed ACTARIS meter is 0.5s (active) and 0.5s (reactive). See CAR2

CIRCUTOR backup meter model CIRWAT Active 0.2 Reactive 0.5 see HB section 7, IRL No. 1 For ACTARIS : Active 0.5 Reactive 0.5 For further details see IRL No. 15.

IRL 1 IRL 15

Measurement Principle (if applicable)

not applicable not applicable

not applicable

3 phase 4 qua-drant digital me-ter, with billing upon load profiles

Technical aspects Conclusion and IRL




Instrument Type: Current at the TM line, 0.5S, 5A, reactive

Serial Number: New Backup Meter installed

342802002 (backup meter, installed until 24.02.2010) Important note : The CIRCUTOR backup meter was replaced on 24.02.2010. See IRL No. 15. Justification for the replacement: A new communication software protocol for remote data monitoring and recording by the project owner was needed. The New ACTARIS SL7000 SLB 071 backup meter was calibrated by Aktif Enerji and installed by TEIAS. The calibration has been done on 24.02.2010. Further details on calibration certifi-cates are given in IRL No. 15. Serial Number (new backup meter) : 530 642 72

IRL 15

Manufacturer Model Nr.: CIRCUTOR, electricity meter (backup meter, operational until 24.02.2010). The calibration has been done on 29.02.2008. CIRWATT D / 402-LT1A-29D. Calibration / reset certificates of the old backup meter are in-cluded in HB section 7, IRL No.1.

IRL 1 IRL 14 IRL 15

Specific Location: At 154 kV high voltage line

Measurement Range:

For CIRWATT Voltage : (L) 57/100 V ac (M) 63.5/110 V ac Current : I n 5 A 1 A I max 10 A 2 A For ACTARIS : Voltage : (L) 3*58/100 V ac (M) 3*240/415 V ac Current : I n 5 A 1 A




I max 10 A 1 A

Gap in operating time of in-strument : Any break down of instru-mentation Any deviation to notify Default value

Not reported

Default value used: see remarks above

Justification: see remarks above

QA/QC aspects Conclusion and IRL

Source of data / RAW DATA

Type: see discussion in Table 1, section 2

Procedures : see discussion in Table 1, section 2

Implementation of procedure : see discussion in Table 1, section 2

Responsibility : see discussion in Table 1, section 2


see discussion in Table 1, section 2

Data transfer and protection of input data for calculations Transfer to EXCEL file (PC)

see discussion in Table 1, section 2 The backup meter data has not been used for electricity sale receipts and billing.


Completeness of data See CR2




Data verification

Note : For February 2010, the data of the backup meter consists of two parts : - 01.-24.02.2010 (old CIRWAT meter installed until 24.02.2010) - 24.02.-28.02.2010 (new ACTARIS meter installed on 24.02.100) The total amount of electricity for February results in as the sum of these 2 periods.

Consistency of calculation tool with monitoring report: Crosscheck with the main meter data has been done, the deviation is less than 1%

Crosscheck (if available) See remarks above (main meter) Data of main meter and backup meter for the same period were cross checked. The deviation was less than 1 % .

2.3. Parameters measured through sampling Table 1 NOT RELEVANT

Sampling information

PDD Meth/Tool MR Verified Conclusion and IRL

Parameter title

Parameter ID (if available)




Data Unit

Sampling frequency

Sampling point

Uncertainty level

Conclusion and IRL

Sampling Principle:

Methodology of Sampling:

Sample Analysed by:

Certification of Analyser/ Laboratory:

Approved Test Methodology of Sam-ple Analysis (if applicable)

Measurement Range:

Gaps in sampling frequency Period:

Default value used:

Justification:


Source of data





Data transfer and protection of input data for calculations

Quality of evidence Several meters in 1 table if analogue equipment supplier /

Conclusion and IRL

Completeness of data

Data verification

Crosscheck (if available)

2.4. Parameters obtained through external sources and accounting data Table 1

External sources and accounting information

PDD Meth/Tool MR Verified Conclusion and IRL

Parameter title Generated Electric- Generated Electric- Generated Electric- Generated Electric-




ity ity ity ity for Sale

Parameter ID (if available) EGy EGy EGy EGy



Description of Data / Data Refers to: Invoices, TEIAS, PMUM

Date of Data: Period between 01 January 2009 and 28 February 2010 Further details on external sources and accounting data are given in Table1, section 2.2, see above.

Gaps in data Missing documents should be submitted for a final evaluation. See CR2.

See CR2

Default value used: not relevant

Justification: na


Source of data Type: Invoices issued to TEIAS , digital, hard copies, PMUM data on PMUM website

Responsibility: TEIAS (PMUM), Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş

Representativeness : The Grid operator is the buyer of generated electricity

Reliability of Data Source: The data from various sources has been cross checked :




- TEIAS (Grid Operator) - PMUM (Commercial Dept. of the Grid Operator) - Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.(Project Owner)

These various documents were cross checked and found to be consistent.

Is the Data up-to-date? see CR1


Invoices and PMUM data are stored in company HQ, 2 copies are kept as backup in HQ, 1 copy is stored by the external accountant of the operator. External backup weekly in HQ


Already discussed, see remarks above


Completeness of data See CR2

Data verification Consistency of raw data with calculation tool: It has been cross checked and found to be consistent.

Consistency of calculation tool with monitoring report: It is consistent with the Tool.

Crosscheck (if available) see remarks above (raw data) The invoice data is approx. 2-3% less than the Monthly TEIAS Protocol data measured and recorded by the main meter onsite. This difference is due to Grid losses and is set by the Grid operator TEIAS.




2.5. Other parameters not included in the methodology/tool but included in the PDD

Table 1 SDI Parameter – Job quality ID2

Other information use a separate table for each single parameter

PDD MR Verified Conclusion and IRL

Parameter title

Job quality, ch. D.2 Job quality : section E According to the Organisa-tion Chart (see IRL No.27) Training Certificates (see IRL No.26) and HB section 2 (IRL No. 1), the qualifica-tion of the staff onsite is confirmed upon the pre-sented certificates.

IRL 1 IRL 24 IRL 25 IRL 26 IRL 27 IRL 28 IRL 29

Parameter ID (if available) ID2 :

Sustainability Assessment matrix (SDI) parameter ac-cording to the Goldstandard

Employment, fulfilment of labour standards : section E

The plant operation re-quires qualified personnel : Plant manager is electrical engineer, service techni-cians for the WTG units are high school graduates HV technicians have been trained in special courses.

Data Unit n.a. n.a. n.a.





Description of Data / Data Refers to: As per PDD : Number of staff trained, certified by Enercon and Demirer Holding regarding technical and security issues is outlined in the Organisation Chart. The plant manager is electric/electronic engineer, Enercon WTG service technicians have a diploma from 2-year high schools, the High Voltage technicians are from branch technical schools. All staff is further qualified by special trainings offered by the Grid operator TEIAS (High Voltage Training) and by WTG supplier ENERCON. Updated training and qualification certificates of the staff are included in HB section 2, see IRL No.1 Electrical training conducted by Enercon (SQA)) on 05.-16.10.2009 (See IRL No. 24) : - Egemen Girgin Wind Generator training conducted by Enercon (SQA ) on 25.-27.01.2010 : attended by Umut Özgör and Tamer Eker. See IRL No.26, See CR 1 in section 1.3.

see CR1 IRL 1 IRL 24 IRL 26

Date of Data: The abovementioned activities on “Job Quality” are all within the verification period : 01 January 2009 – 28 February 2010

Gaps in data Period: Not relevant

Default value used: Not relevant

Justification: Not relevant





Source of data Type Documents to be submitted, see CR2

See CR2

Responsibility: See organisation chart

Representativeness: The submitted official documents have been cross checked and found to be correct.

Reliability of Data Source: Certificates to be submitted See CR2


not relevant


Not relevant


Completeness of data The documents were cross checked and found to be complete.

Data verification Consistency of raw data with calculation tool: Not relevant

Consistency of calculation tool with monitoring report: Not relevant

Crosscheck (if available) See remarks above Not relevant

Table 2: SDI Parameter – Employment (number) ID3






Parameter title

Employment (number)

Currently 12 full time posi-tions are occupied related to the project (1 wind farm Manager, 4 positions for service technicians, 3 po-sitions for security person-al and 4 positions for high voltage switchgear opera-tors).

12 persons are employed onsite the Mare Plant : - 4 Enercon service techni-cians - 4 HV operator - 3 security staff - 1 responsible engineer (Plant Manager). Relevant documents have been submitted.


Sustainability Assessment matrix (SDI) parameter ac-cording to the Goldstandard GS

Furthermore : - Social insurance

docs submitted - Training certifi-

cates provided - Maintenance Con-

tract with Enercon for WTGs

have been submitted

Relevant documents : - Social insurance

docs submitted - Training certificates

provided - Maintenance Con-

tract with Enercon for WTGs

- Salary payment sheets

have been submitted

Data Unit Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable

Technical aspects Conclusion




and IRL

Description of Data / Data Refers to: Various supporting documents have been submitted : - Reemployment Declaration Forms with the startup employment date in the com-

pany (see IRL No. 15a and b) - Insured Employment data of company staff (see IRL No. 28)

Furthermore all staff employed in the company is residence living in the local region (see IRL No.29) A payroll for December 2009 of the company staff has been submitted (see IRL No.28)

IRL 28 IRL 29

Date of Data: The dates of the documents are within the verification period.

Gaps in data Period : Not relevant

Default value used : Not relevant

Justification : Not relevant


Source of data Type: Official documents approved by state insurance entity

Responsibility: HR Department of the Company

Representativeness: The submitted documents have been cross checked and found to be correct.

Reliability of Data Source: Official Labour contracts, social insurance docs, see IRL No.28




IRL 28


HR Department of the Company


Not relevant


Completeness of data The number of staff employed by the Company could be identified on the Labour Con-tracts submitted to the audit team.

Data verification Consistency of raw data with calculation tool: not relevant

Consistency of calculation tool with monitoring report: not relevant

Crosscheck (if available) See remarks in Table 1 (ID2) Not relevant

Table 3: SDI Parameter – Technological Self Reliance ID4



Parameter title Technological self reli- Technological Self Reli- Updated qualification certif-




ance ance, section E icates of the personnel in charge of the plant (HV and WTG units) were submitted (see ID2 and ID3).


Sustainability Assessment matrix (SDI) parameter ac-cording to the Goldstandard GS

Section E, Monitoring Re-port

Section E, Monitoring Re-port

Data Unit n.a. n.a. n.a.


Description of Data / Data Refers to: The number of employment and the qualification certificates show, that local qualified people are capable to manage the high technology equipment. This strengthens the self reliance of the Wind Power Plant. There is a Service & Maintenance Contract between the plant operator and Enercon (Enercon Partner Konzept), which covers a period of 12 years. It is scheduled yearly. This contract strengthens the sustainibility and reliability of the project, see IRL No.23 The actual maintenance status is the following : 14.02.2007 + 2 years 15.02.2009 + 15.03.2010, it is extended periodically.

IRL 22 IRL 23

Date of Data: See above

Gaps in data Period: not relevant

Default value used: n/a

Justification:




n/a


Source of data Type n/a

Responsibility: Enercon is responsible for the technological reliability and sustainability due to the En-ergie-Partner-Konzept model.

Representativeness: n/a

Reliability of Data Source: Relevant Q-certificates of operation submitted, see IRL No.24, 26, see CR1 IRL 24 IRL 26


See certificates submitted in the context with ID2 and ID3


n/a


Completeness of data n/a

Data verification Consistency of raw data with calculation tool: n.a.




Consistency of calculation tool with monitoring report : . n.a.

Crosscheck (if available) See remarks above




3. Data Processing and ER calculation

Description of data processing from transferred data to final results in the calculation tool

Step Description Conclusion and IRL

Consistency Check all

Monthly data recorded and saved by the electricity meter has been transferred in to a Monthly Protocol. These data has been cross checked by both the Grid operator and the plant operator and signed. The monthly net electricity amount is transferred into an Excel workbook and ER calculations have been com-pleted by the project owner. The data in the Excel workbook is cross checked with the Monthly Protocol data and found to be consistent within the verification period. The units and abbreviations were checked and found to be correct.

Calculation Tool description

The calculation tool is conforming to the PDD description. 1 ERy = BEy - PEy - Ly 2 BEy = GENy* EFy ER= GEN*EFy (E7*$F$20) ERy = BEy Total emission reductions! F24 = sum of G8 to G21 GENy Sum of D7 to D20 from raw data electricity Exported minus imported. EFy emission factor, E20 from GS-VER PDD

Elimination of not plausible data (if applicable)

Not reported. Various data sources (raw, TEIAS, Invoice, PMUM) were cross checked and found to be consistent.

Transformation from useable data to in-put data for further calculation (if appli-

See previous remarks




cable)

Ex-ante data For the public Grid, it is : EF = 0.733 t CO2, e/MWh (ex-ante determined in PDD)

Default parameter EF=0.733

Formulae check See remarks above

Rounding functions The final figures have been rounded down.

Calculation tool changes and pro-tection measures

The calculations have been done according to ACM 0002 as referred in the GS VER PDD.

Reported data The data for February 2010 are missing. It has to be submitted, see CR2




4. Additional assessment 4.1. Internal Review

Description and performance of internal review

Description Conclusion and IRL

Procedure Cross check in cooperation with TEIAS Daily cross check by the operation manager. Details on internal review of data management are defined in the Management Handbook (HB). See sec-tion 5, and section 7 HB, IRL No.1 This issue has been explained in chapter 2.2 of the Protocol as well. Further measures have been taken by the Plant Management to ensure the sustainabililty of the Plant operation : - Emergency Action Plan within Wind Farm for 2009 and 2010 (see IRL No. 34) - Annual HV check timetable (see IRL 34) - Weekly Enercon service check timetable See IRL 25) - Weekly Action Report (see IRL 22) - SQA (Service Quality Assurance) by ENERCON, IRL No. 22, see HB section 2, 5, 8, IRL. No. 1

IRL 1 IRL 22 IRL 23 IRL 25 IRL 34

Documentation Operational Procedure (OP) for data management existent, see HB, IRL No.1

Responsibilities The GS VER Manager is responsible for Data Management. The Operational Manager together with the Plant manager is responsible for Plant Technical Safety measures.




4.2. Peculiarities Description of Peculiarities and unexpected Daily Events during the verification period


Performance Not reported

Documentation Not relevant

Measures Not relevant

4.3. Further additional requirements

Description of additional requirements to be checked


e.g. environmental issues

Domestic wastewater generated onsite is stored in a septic tank and is emptied by sewage trucks.

e.g. market price of the product

NA

4.4. Data Reporting

Description of the Monitoring Report

Comments and Results Conclusion and IRL

Compliance with GS The methodology and MR are following the GS VER regulations.




VER regulations

Completeness and Transparency

The submitted monthly protocols indicate the period from January 2009 to Februar 2010.

Correctness

Note : Estimations in the PDD for the Mare Manastir 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project according to the PDD are : GEN : 129 GWh electricity, corresponding to 93,791 tCO2,e Measured data for 2009 : GEN : 114 GWh electricity, corresponding to 83,991 tCO2,e This corresponds to an electricity generation lower than 12 % against the PDD. Explanation by the Project Owner : - According to the revised Micrositing report (2006, see IRL 3), the expected energy generation is 129 GWh, e.g. the gap is only 12%. The availability is set to 98.3%. - The wind conditions were lower than expected. - The Plant Load Factor is 0.33, compared to 0.37 in Micrositing Report, IRL No. 33 The actual energy production is within the expected range.




5. Compilation and Resolutions of CARs, CRs and FARs Corrective Action Requests by audit team

Comments and Results Ref Conclusion and IRL

Issue Corrective Action Request No.1 Please indicate data reading and recording frequency in the MR.

IRL1 Section 2.2

Response Monitoring frequency is continuous and measuring is hourly. The recording frequency is monthly. Monthly protocols are used for the emission reduction calculation. See section B.2.2., MR.

Assessment The verification team could monitor onsite that the meters were monitoring the electricity generation data online continuously. 4 intermediate data in 15 minute-intervals were inte-grated to the hourly measured data. This data has been saved in the internal meter storage device. The monthly aggregated data at the internal meter storage device has been re-corded by the TEIAS staffs, who comes onsite on the first days of the following month. The issue is closed.

Issue Corrective Action Request No.2 Please indicate the accuracy level of the meters.

IRL1

Response According to the test certificates, the accuracy of CIRWATT meters is given as 0.2s (active) and 0.5s (reactive). The test certificate for ACTARIS backup meter refers to an accuracy of 0.5s (active) and 0.5 (reactive).

Assessment The relevant information has been integrated in section B.1.1, MR. The verification team could confirm the information on meter accuracy at the front display of the installed meters (main and backup). Furthermore the submitted test and calibration certificates were cross checked with the information given in the MR. The issue is closed.




Clarification Requests by audit team


Issue Clarification Request 1 Please submit the certificate of the completed training for Umut Özgör and Tamer Eker.

IRL 26

IRL 26

Response The project participant has submitted to the DOE the invitation letter for Umut Özgör and Tamer Eker for the training of Enercon.

Assessment The relevant training certificates for Umut Özgör and Tamer Eker have been submitted on 29.03.2010. The issue is closed.

Issue Clarification Request 2 Please submit :

- Monthly PMUM data February 2010 - Monthly Invoice February 2010

IRL 17, 18

IRL 17 IRL 18

Response The PMUM and the invoice of February 2010 have been submitted to the DOE.

Assessment The data for the monitoring period is complete. The issue is closed

Forward Action Requests by audit team


Issue Forward Action Request No. 1 N/A

Response N/A

Assessment N/A

THIRD PERIODIC VERIFICATION “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” Turkey

Annex 2: Information Reference List

Final Report 21-07-2010

Verification of the GS VER GS 368 “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” in Turkey Information Reference List

Page 1 of 3

TÜV SÜD INDUSTRIE SERVICE GMBH

Ref. No.

Issuance and/or submission

date(dd/mm/yyyy) Title/Type of Document Author/Editor/

Issuer

Additional Information

(Relevance in CDM Context)

1. 2009

(updated) Management Handbook (includes) : Organisation Chart, Training, WTG units, Measuring Systems, SCADA, a.o.

UNFCCC homepage http://cdm.unfccc.int

2. 19.05.2006 Approved Consolidated Baseline and Monitoring Methodology for grid connected electricity generation from renewable sources ACM0002, version 06

UNFCCC homepage http://cdm.unfccc.int

3. 20.10.2005 Electricity Generation License issued for Mare Manastır Rüzgar Enerjisi Santralı Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş., Feneryolu / Istanbul-Turkey

EPDK (EMRA) www.epdk.gov.tr issued for 49 years

4. 02.03.2010 Google Map with turbine coordinates Mare

5. 09.05.2007 GS VER PDD “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project in Turkey, v01, Ecofys/Onecarbon

6. 13.09.2007 GS VER PDD “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” in Turkey, v02 Ecofys/Onecarbon registered at Gold

Standard : 13-11-2007

7. 09.11.2007 Validation Report “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” Turkey Validation Report, final version TÜV Rheinland

8. 29.05.2008 Monitoring Report v1.4, First Verification : 01/01/2007-31/12/2007 Orbeo

9. 24.05.2010 Monitoring Report v3.2, Third Verification : 01/01/2009-28/02/2010 Orbeo

10. 04.03.2010 Excel Workbook on calculation of emission reductions Orbeo 1st version on 10.02.2010

11. 02.03.2010 SINGLE LINE Diagram indicating the meters and connections to 154 kV Alaçatı and Urla TM stations Mare, TEIAS

12. 22.03.2003 Directive on Meter Usage in Electricity Generation Facilities EPDK (EMRA)

13. 22.04.2008 Test Certificate for CIRCUTOR Main meter No. 342 750 001 - Calibration Report, Calibration date : 29.02.2008 CIRWATT

14. 22.04.2008 Test Certificate for CIRCUTOR Backup meter No. 342 802 002 - CIRWATT



Page 2 of 3


Ref. No.



Issuer



Calibration Report, Calibration Date : 29.02.2008

15. 24.02.2010 Test Certificate for the new ACTARIS Backup meter No. 530 64 272 - Calibration Report, Calibration date: 24.02.2010. TEIAS

16. 02.03.2010 Manual raw data reading and recording spreadsheets (Logbook with daily meter readings and other relevant data, e.g. hourly HV values) Mare

17. 02.03.2010 TEIAS Monthly meter data protocol on generated and consumed energy at the Wind Farm TEIAS, Mare

18. 02.03.2010 PMUM monthly meter data protocol considering grid losses, basis for invoicing PMUM, TEIAS

19. 02.03.2010 Monthly invoices issued by the project owner to TEIAS for the electricity amount supplied to the Grid (as fixed in the PMUM monthly protocol) Mare

20. 02.03.2010 Monthly SCADA data records on energy generation for each WTG unit ENERCON, Mare

21. 2008 Technical Description E48 and E44 WTG units ENERCON See also IRL1

22. 14.06.2006 Service and Maintenance Agreement regarding WTG units, (renewal in 2-year-steps) ENERCON, Mare

23. 02.03.2010 SCADA Wind Farm Performance Report Samples (Availability, Error logbook) ENERCON, Mare

24. 02.03.2010 Training Certificates for plant staff on High Voltage TEIAS 2008, see also IRL 1

25. 02.03.2010 Work Program chart for HV and WTG units Mare and ENERCON 2009 and 2010

26. 2009 - 2010 Training certificates of ENERCON maintenance staff ENERCON Staff trained and employed by ENERCON

27. March 2010 Organisation Chart Mare issued by state Labor Entity

28. 2009-2010 Labor insurance certificates State Social Security issued by the State



Page 3 of 3


Ref. No.



Issuer



Registry

29. 02.03.2010 Residential certificates for plant staff State Registry

30. 2009 and 2010 Stand-by Operation Protocol for the 30kVA IVECO Diesel Generator Set, Invoice for Diesel purchase

JENMAR

31. 11.02.2009 Service Protocol for 30 kVA IVECO Diesel Gen-Set JENMAR

32. 2007 Statement of Completion TÜV SÜD

33. March 2005 Micrositing Report (excerpt) : Plant Load Factor Estimations ENERCON

34. 2010 Emergency Action Plan Mare

35. 02.03.2010 Pictures shot onsite TÜV SÜD

36. 02.03.2010 Participants list TÜV SÜD

37. 02.03.2010

On-site interviews conducted by TÜV SÜD. Verification Team: Dr. Nuri MOL TÜV SÜD CMS, GHG Auditor Interviewed People onsite : Cağla Balcı Eriş Demirer Holding Egemen Girgin Plant Manager Mehmet Demirer HV Technician Tamer Eker Enercon Service Technician

TÜV SÜD

38. 26.03.2009 Monitoring Report v2.3: Second verification : 01/01/2008 - 31/12/2008 Orbeo

39. 28.05.2008 Verification Report v1.2 “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” Turkey, Report No. 1 129 575 TÜV SÜD

40. 13.05.2009 Verification Report v2.2. “Mare Manastır 39.2 MW Wind Farm Project” TurkeyReport No. 600 500 215 TÜV SÜD

Date post:	15-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dangthuan
View:	217 times
Download:	2 times