DNV Spot-Check Non-Conformities: EB 44 Annex 2.pdf

1. The CDM-AP identified (5) non-conformities in DNV Certification AS:
a) Analysis of competence required for technical areas within scope sectors has not been undertaken.
b) Assignment of expertise is based on sectoral scopes and not on the basis of technical areas within
the sectoral scope, for the teams.
2. The CDM-AP found the process of internal audits was deficient:
a) Frequency of audits is not defined.
b) Internal audit plan is not followed.
c) Internal audits are not done in all identified hubs for CDM activities.
3. The CDM-AP found there was insufficient evidence of actions considered on the non-conformities
identified in internal audits and insufficient evidence of follow-up in respect of decisions of the
previous management review.
4. A review of a sample of 5 project activities revealed:
a) Lack of evidence that named sector expert’s input and involvement with validation work.
b) Documented contract review was not available in three surveyed cases.
c) Documentation of team nomination process was not available in three surveyed cases.
5. The assessment of the technical review process based on a sample of project activities revealed:
a) The basis of approval of validation/verification work has not been documented.
b) Evidence of technical review was not available for a CDM validation project activity.
c) Approver was not qualified for a CDM project verification project activity.
6. The CDM-AP found that the analysis of competence required for technical areas within the sectoral
scope sectors had not been undertaken.
7. The CDM-AP found that the process of internal audits was deficient.
8. The CDM-AP found there was insufficient evidence of actions considered on the non-conformities
identified in internal audits and insufficient evidence of follow-up in respect of decisions of the
previous management review.
9. The CDM-AP found that there was no written evidence of inputs and involvement of named expert
as a validation team member in sample cases reviewed by the CDM-AT.
10. The CDM-AP found the assessment of the technical review and approval process based on sample
of project activities revealed that the basis of approval of validation/verification work was not
documented.