New Registration and Issuance Procedures 7th CDM Joint Coordination Workshop Bonn, Germany, 12 – 13 March 2011 Module 4.1 (Project Cycle) Dhirendra KUMAR UNFCCC Secretariat, Sustainable Development Mechansims Programme
Outline of the presentation • Background • New Registration & Issuance Procedures • New Registration & Issuance Review Procedures • Results and statics to date… • Conclusion
Background • During the course of 2009/2010, the waiting time associated with new project submissions has become an area of increasing focus and urgency for the Executive Board. • In 2009/2010, the Board, supported by the secretariat, has undertaken a number of measures (VVM, new procedures etc.) in an attempt to: • Reduce the waiting time for new project submissions; • Increase efficiency in CDM project cycle; and • Assess quality of submissions.
Background The Board has taken several measures to address the issue, including: • Introduction of an enhanced completeness check for project submissions (EB 48); • Prioritizing new submissions over resubmissions (EB 53); • Adoption of new procedures for registration of project activities and issuance of CERs (EB 54); • Adoption of new review procedures for registration and issuance (EB 55).
New Registration & Issuance Procedures • Adopted during EB 54 (May 2010). • It has increased transparency regarding the secretariat’s assessment of project submissions and include predictable timelines for when a project submission is handled by the secretariat. • Checklists for each of the two stage completeness checks (initial completeness check and information and reporting check) were issued. • Further, to incentivize the high quality initial submissions, the Board at its 59th Meeting revised this procedure with the effective date of registration being the date by which the DOE submits a complete request for registration.
New Registration & Issuance Procedures • Initial Completeness Check (CC) is the first “action” taken by the Secretariat when dealing with “Requests for Registration & Issuance”;
New Registration & Issuance Procedures • As per the new procedures, projects that fail to pass either of these two stage completeness checks (initial CC and I&RC) are sent back to the PP/DOE for corrections and when resubmitted, these requests are treated like new submissions (without priority). • The idea behind this change is to create an incentive for high quality initial submissions. • Similarly, making the secretariat’s checklists publicly available is intended to increase transparency and allow PP/DOEs to anticipate work performed by the secretariat and thereby also improve the quality of submissions.
New Registration & Issuance Review Procedures • Adopted during EB 55 (July 2010). • Key features: • Multiple rounds of review assessments and corrections have been eliminated. • The Board discussion of each review case is now triggered only if there is a disagreement between the assessments provided by respectively the secretariat and the RIT, or if a Board member disagrees with the recommendation made by the secretariat and the RIT. • These two features are expected to simplify and speed up the review process for requests for registration and issuance.
Commence Review Decision Becomes Final Start Objection Period Request for Review DOE Response (28 Days) Secretariat + RIT Assessm. (14 Days) EB Member Objection Period (20 Days) In Case of Rejection: Ruling objection period (10days) Objection => Discuss at next EB New Review Procedures Timeline
EB56: RfRs under old procedures considered EB58: “Last” batch of projects approved or rejected under old procedures EB54: Reg&Iss Procedures Adopted EB55: Review Procedures Adopted Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec First reviews commenced under new procedures First batch of projects with new review procedure considered at EB58 All requests for review after July 30 handled in accordance w new procedures R&I Procedures Implemented for all new submissions New Procedures Implementation Timeline - Summary
Results and statics to date….. Compliance charts – Registration & Issuance • Time taken for steps in assessment process - actions are being completed within the timelines established; • Seems revised procedures have also partially led to a decrease in the overall waiting time due to the streamlining of the steps in general.
Results and statics to date….. • Since December 2010 for Registration and since January 2011 for Issuance, projects upon submission have been commenced for assessment within less than a month’s time. • Operational planning will continue to make use of outsourcing (external experts) to address future peaks in submissions and reoccurrence of similar backlog. • Approved staffing levels is expected to be completed within 2011.
Conclusion… • Although registration related submissions may be sustainably handled with recent operational adjustments and resource plans (including outsourcing), this is unlikely for issuance given the continued expected growth in requests. • To achieve a longer term balance and to ensure secretariat provides timely assessment of projects, the Board will need to consider further improvements and clarifications of its rules and guidelines (for example sampling).