Presentation from September 2021 CCXG Global Forum

1. Session 2: Understanding current and planned provisions of
reporting and review under A6 and A13
(Part 2 – review)
OECD CCXG
September 13, 2021
MJ Mace

2. Questions
1. How can the content and timing of review under Article 6 enhance
consistency with review under Article 13?
2. What (if any) revisions to draft texts would be needed to reflect this?

3. 1A. How can the content of review under Article 6 enhance consistency
with review under Article 13?
• The A6 review currently is limited to the consistency of information
submitted with “this” guidance (para. 25, v.3),
• Does not refer to consistency also with other “relevant decisions of the
CMA” (cf. 22/CMP.1) which might ultimately include further guidance for
initial reports, for annual information and electronic formats, regular
information, use of A6 database, registries, CARP, etc)
• In the absence of a package of guidance, the A6.2 text must be sufficiently
detailed itself to ensure environmental integrity, ensure the avoidance of
double counting, ensure transparency, including in governance, ensure
robust accounting and address enhanced mitigation and adaptation
ambition (OMGE and SOP), and should refer to other elements for which
guidance will be coming,
• para. 25 will need to be more open-ended
• Gaps and areas that require further detail must be addressed substantively
before review guidelines are put in place

4. • The content of the Article 6 review can best help enhance consistency
with A13 review, if the review process
• Produces stand-alone reviews, of detailed A6 information by A6 experts, in a
consistent format, covering a consistent timeframe
• Clearly indicates participation responsibilities are / are not met;
• Clearly indicates that requirements for use of outcomes/A6.4ERs toward NDCs
are / are not met
• Clearly indicates whether A6 quantitative information is appropriate for
incorporation into a Party’s structured summary / or still requires correction /
adjustment
• Clearly indicates the additions and subtractions to be made and clearly
indicate their source (e.g., 6.2/6.4, which coop approach,
reductions/removals)
• – and hence to what extent ITMO transfer / use impacts NDC progress /
achievement in a given year
• Enabling transparency, accurate, consistent, complete, comparable (TACCC)
input to structured summaries

5. 1.B. How can the timing of review under Article 6 enhance consistency
with review under Article 13?
• Review of initial report
• Annual reviews, to promote TACCC, promote improvement in
reporting over time, and facilitate consistency checks across Parties,
who may otherwise be submitting BTRs on different timeframes
• Complete within 12 months, ready in advance of A13 review (which
has +2, +3 year inventory data lag)
• Annual review enables reviewed information to be slotted into BTRs,
structured summaries, easier for Secretariat to produce annual
reports, inform GST, easier to automate process

6. 2. What revisions to draft texts are needed? - some examples of areas
to be strengthened or clarified or where further detail needed, to
support useful reviews
Corresponding adjustments
• Para 8 - more detail and clarity is needed on how any agreed
accounting options would operate in practice, for example, clarifying
that corresponding adjustments are to be applied annually as the
relevant period progresses – as Parties need to identify their
accounting approach in their initial report
• E.g., what is the relationship between trajectories, budgets and
corresponding adjustments?

7. Initial Report
• Para 18 - timing of submission of initial reports, timing of their review currently unclear
• Important for transparency to have initial reports containing information from Parties at the
earliest possible date.
• “no later than” is problematic, linked to “or” – initial report could become ex post/final report
• “and in conjunction with” is problematic – could imply delay to end or after end of period
• Can solve by urging Parties intending to participate in cooperative approaches to submit by a given
date (e.g., by January [202X]) and setting out a timeframe for review of initial reports submitted
• This can trigger capacity building support for preparation of initial reports
• Para 18 f – description of cooperative approach – useful to provide more detail on
what is expected in this description, e.g.,
• Scope?
• How allocation methodologies and baseline methodologies of each cooperative approach support
domestic NDC achievement and contribute to achievement of PA’s long-term temperature goal?
• Timeframes? Crediting periods? Reversals?
• SOP and OMGE - response to Section VII paras 37 and 39 (resources for adaptation and OMGE)
• etc etc etc – useful to set out expectation for this description

8. • Para 19 – info on “further cooperative approaches” – submit when, what
vehicle, what scope
• greater clarity is needed on when information is to be provided in connection with
“further approaches” that were not detailed in initial reports and the vehicle for
this information to get to the CARP – how is it reviewed?
• this should also include information on the treatment of OMGE and SOP in
connection with each additional cooperative approach if this is not clear in
connection with the rules agreed under section VII.
• This information should come in as soon as it is available, rather than waiting for the
submission of BTRs.
Annual information - to be submitted annually
• Para 20 - clarity needed that annual information for Article 6 is collected
annually and submitted annually
• Para 20 – needs a reference to annual quantitative information on
cancellations for OMGE, and information on SOP for non-6.4 ITMOs

9. • Para 29 - Tracking systems for OMGE – Participating parties need tracking systems for
the purposes of tracking and recording cancellations for OMGE, among other listed
transactions.
• Confirmation that A6 activity falls within reporting on gases and sectors covered by
emissions inventories, consistent with chapter II of the Annex to 18/CMA.1, including
para 48, which requires Parties to report inventory data for gases covered by an activity
under Article 6 – where is this confirmation made?
• Further detail in Section VII on the mechanics and detail of application of both SOP and
OMGE to non-6.4 cooperative approaches under Article 6.2 and the reporting of
quantitative information on SOP and OMGE in annual reporting and to the A6 database
• Protocols for electronic reporting needed, to facilitate reporting and the collation of
information by the secretariat, support the Global Stocktake
• Land sector and non-permanence - clarity that further rules will be developed for ITMOs
involving removals, to ensure reversals and non-permanence are addressed.
• Drive toward highest possible ambition does not fit well with banking – useful to be able
to draw a line under timing of transfers for use toward NDCs from a period, and the
validity of transferred ITMOs for use toward NDCs – so can be checked by review