PCS ICV 009 ICVCM Eligibility Standard_v1.0

Planetary Carbon Standard — ICVCM Eligibility & Alignment

Document type: Standard (ICVCM Eligibility & Alignment) Version: v1.0 (Draft) Status: Draft for Public Consultation Effective date: To be assigned upon PCS approval Developed by Planetary Carbon Standard (PCS)

© 2025 Planetary Carbon Standard. All rights reserved.

---

Document Control

Document identification

• Document code: PCS-ICV-009

• Title: ICVCM Eligibility & Alignment Standard

• Scope: Defines program-, methodology-, project-, MRV-, and issuance-level requirements for demonstrating alignment with ICVCM Core Carbon Principles, including how ICVCM compliance is assessed, labelled, disclosed, maintained, suspended, or withdrawn over time.

• Outcome: Enables PCS to transparently identify ICVCM-aligned activities and issuances under PCS governance and registry rules.

Version history and change log

Table DC-1. Revision history

Version	Date	Status	Summary of changes	Prepared by	Approved by
v1.0	TBD	Draft	Release for public consultation	PCS	TBD

Superseded versions

No superseded versions for v1.0.

Governance note on versioning and archiving

Only the latest approved version of this Standard shall be used. Superseded versions shall be archived and retained for traceability and audit purposes, consistent with PCS governance rules.

---

Chapter 1 - Introduction

1.1 Purpose of This Standard

1

The PCS Standard on ICVCM Eligibility & Alignment establishes the requirements that projects, methodologies, and credit issuances must meet in order to demonstrate consistency with the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market’s Core Carbon Principles (ICVCM CCPs).

2

This Standard enables PCS to transparently identify which activities satisfy ICVCM’s global integrity benchmark while maintaining the Planetary Carbon Standard’s own governance, labels, and program architecture.

3

The Standard ensures that ICVCM-aligned credits issued under PCS can be recognized by markets, buyers, regulators, and independent evaluators as meeting the highest standards of environmental and social integrity. It does not replace PCS standards, but rather overlays additional integrity requirements consistent with the CCPs.

1.2 Relationship Between PCS Standards and ICVCM Compliance

1

PCS maintains its own system of labels—such as PCS Safeguard+, PCS Safeguard+ (Social), PCS Safeguard+ (Environmental), and the PCS SDG+ Label—which recognize exceptional performance across safeguards and sustainable development.

2

ICVCM compliance is not a PCS label. It is a separate integrity designation that indicates consistency with ICVCM’s criteria but does not alter PCS’s internal recognition system. PCS will therefore disclose ICVCM compliance in the Registry as an independent ICVCM CCP-Compliant mark, applied exclusively after verification of the crediting period in which compliance has been demonstrated.

3

PCS labels and ICVCM compliance marks may coexist, interact, or diverge depending on the nature of a project, but one does not determine the other.

1.3 Objectives of ICVCM Alignment Under PCS

1

Alignment with ICVCM’s Core Carbon Principles serves to ensure that PCS-issued credits meet the most widely recognized global benchmark for carbon credit integrity.

2

It provides a harmonized integrity gateway across diverse sectors and methodologies, facilitates recognition of PCS credits across international markets and regulatory systems, reinforces transparency, conservativeness, and environmental integrity, and supports Host Parties’ confidence in mitigation outcomes associated with PCS projects.

3

By adopting the CCP framework, PCS strengthens its value proposition and enhances interoperability with emerging compliance markets and corporate disclosure systems.

1.4 Scope of ICVCM Requirements Within PCS

1

This Standard applies to all projects seeking to obtain the ICVCM CCP-Compliant designation in the PCS Registry.

2

It also applies to methodologies evaluated for CCP alignment and to credit issuances where ICVCM requirements must be demonstrated at the time of issuance.

3

The Standard establishes:

• the program-level requirements PCS must maintain for ICVCM consistency,

• the methodological criteria necessary to align PCS quantification approaches with CCP expectations,

• the project-level requirements that must be satisfied before ICVCM compliance may be recognized,

• the monitoring and verification obligations that ensure ongoing integrity,

• the issuance rules governing the application of the ICVCM compliance mark.

4

Projects that do not seek ICVCM eligibility remain subject only to standard PCS rules.

1.5 Core Principles Underpinning ICVCM Alignment

1

PCS adopts ICVCM alignment through a set of foundational principles including Environmental Integrity, Robust Quantification, No Double Counting, Sustainable Development Contribution, Robust Governance, and Transparency.

2

These principles serve as the foundation for evaluating ICVCM alignment under PCS.

1.6 Governance of ICVCM Compliance Within PCS

1

Responsibility for ICVCM alignment is distributed across the PCS governance architecture.

2

The PCS Secretariat oversees the review of ICVCM-related requirements, manages public disclosure processes, and determines whether project activities and credit issuances meet CCP standards.

3

Accredited Validation & Verification Bodies evaluate project-level and issuance-level ICVCM criteria and provide recommendations to the Secretariat.

4

Where necessary, PCS may convene technical experts or consult Host Parties to resolve issues relevant to ICVCM compliance.

5

ICVCM itself does not issue credits nor validate projects; rather, it defines the criteria for assessing whether PCS credits meet its CCP benchmark. PCS remains the authority responsible for the issuance and disclosure of ICVCM-compliant credits.

1.7 Transparency and Public Disclosure

1

Transparency is a defining requirement of both PCS and ICVCM. To satisfy CCP expectations, PCS will publicly disclose methodologies, project design documentation, safeguard and SDG information, Host Party authorization details where applicable, monitoring and verification outputs, issuance information, and the final determination of ICVCM compliance.

2

Disclosure is made through the PCS Registry, ensuring stakeholders have access to information that supports independent evaluation and market confidence.

1.8 Structure of This Standard

1. This Standard is organized into subsequent chapters that describe PCS’s alignment with ICVCM in detail. These chapters define the program-level governance requirements for CCP alignment, the methodological and project-level criteria for compliance, the rules for monitoring and verification, and the conditions under which the ICVCM compliance mark may be applied or withdrawn. The structure ensures clarity for methodology developers, project proponents, VVBs, Host Parties, and market participants seeking to understand or demonstrate ICVCM compliance.

1.9 Summary

1

This introduction establishes the foundation for PCS’s integration of ICVCM’s Core Carbon Principles. PCS retains its own integrity framework and labels while incorporating ICVCM compliance as a separate, market-facing designation.

2

The chapters that follow set out the specific requirements needed to demonstrate and maintain alignment with the global CCP benchmark.

---

Chapter 2 - Purpose

2.1 Purpose of the ICVCM Eligibility & Alignment Standard

1

The purpose of this Standard is to define how the Planetary Carbon Standard ensures that its program, methodologies, projects, and issued credits meet the requirements established under the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market’s Core Carbon Principles (CCPs).

2

The Standard does not replace existing PCS rules but establishes additional layers of integrity necessary for external recognition under ICVCM. Through this framework, PCS provides a clear pathway for demonstrating that credits issued under its system satisfy the highest global benchmark for carbon market quality.

3

This Standard supports the uniform interpretation of CCP requirements across PCS processes, ensuring that both new and existing activities can be assessed consistently and transparently. It allows Project Proponents and market participants to understand exactly what must be demonstrated for PCS credits to receive the ICVCM compliance mark, and it provides Validation & Verification Bodies (VVBs) with a structured basis for their assessments.

2.2 Reinforcing PCS Integrity and Global Market Acceptance

1. Although PCS already maintains a comprehensive integrity architecture, alignment with ICVCM strengthens the international credibility of PCS credits by demonstrating that all relevant components—program governance, quantification methods, safeguards, transparency mechanisms, and verification processes—meet a globally recognized benchmark.

2. By structuring an explicit pathway for CCP alignment, PCS ensures that its credits are compatible with the expectations of international buyers, compliance authorities, disclosure standards, and climate finance institutions. The purpose of this Standard is therefore both technical and strategic: to confirm the robustness of PCS while facilitating market access and strengthening host country and private-sector confidence in PCS-certified mitigation outcomes.

2.3 Providing Clarity for Methodology Developers and Project Proponents

1. Another purpose of this Standard is to provide a clear set of expectations for methodology developers and Project Proponents.

2. CCP compliance involves a combination of program-level and project-level criteria. Without explicit guidance, the interpretation of CCP requirements could vary across methodologies or projects, resulting in inconsistent treatment or uncertainty among market participants.

3. This Standard ensures that all actors understand:

• how ICVCM requirements are reflected within PCS methodologies;

• what project elements must be demonstrated to satisfy CCP criteria;

• how VVBs evaluate project and issuance-level compliance;

• what documentation must be made publicly available;

• and how changes in ICVCM guidance will be integrated over time.

1. By consolidating these requirements into a single Standard, PCS ensures consistency and predictability across all activities.

2.4 Enabling Transparent and Credible Assessment of CCP Compliance

1. Transparency is central to ICVCM’s design. The purpose of this Standard includes ensuring that PCS maintains a transparent and auditable process for evaluating CCP compliance at:

• the methodology level,

• the project design level,

• and the issuance level.

1. Through this Standard, PCS establishes the documentation requirements, process flow, assurance expectations, and registry disclosures that allow CCP compliance to be independently evaluated and understood by all market actors.

2. The PCS Registry will clearly show whether a project or issuance is recognized as ICVCM-compliant, ensuring that buyers and stakeholders have access to accurate, up-to-date information.

2.5 Supporting Host Parties and National Climate Accounting

1. ICVCM compliance requires alignment with host country requirements, particularly concerning authorization, policy alignment, and the prevention of double counting. This Standard provides host countries with a clear understanding of how PCS ensures that credits are transparently accounted for and remain compatible with national climate strategies.

2. By clarifying how PCS integrates authorization, double counting safeguards, and national registries or reporting structures, the Standard strengthens host country confidence and supports constructive cooperation between the PCS Secretariat and national authorities.

2.6 Ensuring Consistency With PCS Governance and Digital Systems

1. Because ICVCM requires transparent, traceable, and tamper-evident crediting systems, this Standard ensures that PCS’s digital architecture—including its blockchain-integrated registry and digital MRV protocols—meets or exceeds ICVCM expectations.

2. The purpose of this Standard is therefore not only to describe substantive eligibility criteria, but also to confirm that PCS’s governance structure, auditability features, conflict-of-interest safeguards, and digital data integrity systems collectively satisfy the CCP framework.

2.7 Summary

1. The purpose of the PCS-ICVCM Eligibility & Alignment Standard is to establish a clear, structured, and authoritative framework through which PCS projects and credit issuances may demonstrate compliance with the ICVCM Core Carbon Principles. The Standard reinforces PCS integrity, clarifies expectations for all participants, supports host country trust, and ensures transparent alignment with a globally recognized benchmark for carbon market quality.

---

Chapter 3 - Entry Into Force And Scope

3.1 Entry Into Force

1. This Standard enters into force on the date of its official publication by the PCS Secretariat. From that date, all PCS processes, methodologies, and credit issuances seeking recognition under the ICVCM Core Carbon Principles must comply fully with the provisions contained herein.

2. The Standard applies prospectively unless expressly stated otherwise, and forms an integral part of the PCS rulebook governing the integrity of mitigation outcomes and external recognition.

3.2 Applicability to New and Existing Activities

1. This Standard applies to:

• all new projects registering under PCS and seeking ICVCM compliance at issuance;

• all methodologies submitted for PCS approval where ICVCM alignment is required or expected;

• all existing PCS projects that voluntarily seek recognition under ICVCM;

• all credit issuances for which Project Proponents request the ICVCM CCP-Compliant mark.

1. Projects that do not seek ICVCM recognition remain governed by core PCS standards only, without obligation to demonstrate CCP compliance.

2. However, certain elements of this Standard may be indirectly applicable to all projects insofar as they reinforce core PCS integrity principles.

3.3 Transition Provisions

1. PCS recognizes that ICVCM requirements evolve over time and that projects may require a transition period to align methodologies, monitoring systems, or documentation practices with CCP criteria. Therefore, upon publication of this Standard, the PCS Secretariat may issue transitional guidance specifying:

• the deadlines by which methodologies must demonstrate CCP alignment;

• the periods during which existing projects may rely on earlier documentation;

• the conditions under which new ICVCM requirements become mandatory;

• and the procedural steps for migrating existing projects into ICVCM compliance.

1. Where ICVCM releases updated frameworks or new CCP interpretations, PCS may revise this Standard and issue additional transition rules to ensure an orderly and transparent adaptation process.

3.4 Scope of ICVCM-Relevant Sectors

1. ICVCM applies to all mitigation sectors represented within PCS. This Standard therefore covers activities across:

• energy and industrial sectors,

• agriculture and land-use (including removals),

• waste and circular economy systems,

• household and distributed-energy technologies,

• engineered removals technologies,

• digital or technology-enabled mitigation platforms.

1. Although ICVCM criteria are universal, their interpretation may vary depending on the nature of the activity. Sector-specific methodological guidance under PCS may therefore specify how CCP requirements should be applied in the context of different technologies or project types.

3.5 Relationship With PCS Core Standards

1. ICVCM compliance is an additional layer of integrity and does not replace existing PCS rules. Projects remain obligated to comply with:

• the PCS Project Standard,

• the PCS Safeguards Standard,

• the PCS SDG Standard,

• the PCS Methodology Development Standard,

• the PCS Validation & Verification Standard,

• and the PCS Double Counting Standard.

1. Only after satisfying all PCS internal standards may a project demonstrate compliance with ICVCM. This ensures that ICVCM recognition builds upon—not substitutes for—the PCS governance and integrity framework.

3.6 Relationship With Host Party Requirements

1. ICVCM requires that carbon crediting programs maintain robust systems to prevent double counting and respect host country climate strategies. Therefore, this Standard applies in conjunction with PCS’s:

• host country authorization requirements (for internationally transferred mitigation outcomes),

• registry safeguards,

• national policy alignment procedures,

• transparency and public disclosure rules.

1. Projects operating within host countries must satisfy both PCS internal rules and any ICVCM-relevant national requirements prior to issuance of ICVCM-compliant credits.

3.7 Reassessment Over Time

1. The applicability of this Standard may evolve as ICVCM updates its rules, issues guidance, or modifies its evaluation framework.

2. PCS will maintain consistency with the latest ICVCM criteria, and may require projects to undergo reassessment where:

• methodologies are updated,

• material project changes occur,

• CCP requirements evolve,

• or external regulatory conditions shift.

1. Reassessments will follow PCS guidance on versioning and transition periods to ensure fairness, transparency, and predictability for Project Proponents.

3.8 Summary

1. This chapter clarifies the legal applicability of the PCS-ICVCM Eligibility & Alignment Standard. It establishes the date of entry into force, defines which projects and methodologies fall under its scope, and sets the framework for transition, sectoral coverage, host country alignment, and future reassessment.

2. These provisions ensure that ICVCM requirements are integrated transparently into PCS while maintaining stability and predictability for all stakeholders.

---

Chapter 4 - ICVCM Requirements Integrated Into PCS

4.1 Purpose of ICVCM Integration Within PCS

1. The purpose of integrating ICVCM requirements into the PCS framework is to ensure that the Planetary Carbon Standard satisfies the Core Carbon Principles (CCPs) across all aspects of its program design, governance, methodologies, and project implementation.

2. While PCS already adheres to high-integrity standards, ICVCM introduces an additional layer of structured criteria that serve as a benchmark for global carbon market quality. This chapter outlines how PCS incorporates each CCP requirement into its existing rules and operational architecture.

4.2 Overview of ICVCM Core Carbon Principles

1. ICVCM’s Core Carbon Principles establish a set of high-level integrity criteria for carbon-crediting programs.

2. PCS integrates these principles into its regulatory system to ensure that its credits meet global expectations.

3. The CCPs, adapted to the PCS context, are grouped into the following themes:

• Environmental Integrity

• Robust Program Governance

• Transparency

• Tracking and Preventing Double Counting

• Robust Quantification

• Permanence (where applicable)

• Sustainable Development Benefits

• Safeguards

• Robust Verification

• Host Country Alignment

These themes form the backbone of ICVCM alignment under PCS and are elaborated below.

4.3 Environmental Integrity

1. PCS integrates environmental integrity principles by requiring all methodologies to:

• produce real, measurable, and independently verifiable emission reductions or removals;

• apply conservative assumptions to avoid over-crediting;

• establish realistic and justified baselines;

• account for leakage;

• incorporate robust monitoring standards;

• treat uncertainty explicitly.

1. These elements are governed primarily through the PCS Methodology Development Standard, the PCS Project Standard, and the PCS Validation & Verification Standard. PCS’s structure ensures that ICVCM’s environmental integrity requirements are embedded throughout the entire project cycle.

4.4 Robust Governance and Independence

1. ICVCM requires carbon-crediting programs to demonstrate strong governance, independence, and transparent decision-making. PCS satisfies these requirements through:

• a dedicated PCS Secretariat responsible for rulemaking and oversight;

• independent Validation & Verification Bodies accredited according to PCS’s impartiality rules;

• transparent methodology development procedures;

• routine internal controls, conflict-of-interest policies, and documented decision processes;

• grievance mechanisms available to all stakeholders.

1. PCS relies on a clearly defined governance structure that ensures that program rulemaking, methodology approval, and verification oversight are conducted impartially and transparently.

4.5 Transparency and Public Disclosure

1. ICVCM emphasizes the importance of transparency in program documentation and crediting decisions. PCS incorporates these requirements through public disclosure of:

• approved methodologies,

• project design documentation,

• monitoring reports,

• safeguard findings,

• issuance records,

• version histories of methodologies and methodologies under review,

• Host Party authorization information (where applicable).

These elements are made publicly accessible through the PCS Registry, which supports both transparency and auditability.

4.6 Avoiding Double Counting

1. Avoidance of double counting is a core ICVCM requirement and is embedded in PCS through the PCS Standard on Avoidance of Double Counting.

2. PCS ensures that credits are not subject to double issuance, double use, or double claiming through:

• a blockchain-anchored registry architecture,

• unique serial issuance of all credits,

• robust Host Party authorization requirements for internationally transferred mitigation outcomes,

• reconciliation with national registries and reporting systems,

• procedures that prevent registry overlap or duplicate listings.

1. These systems satisfy ICVCM’s requirements for ensuring the uniqueness and traceability of credits.

4.7 Robust Quantification Requirements

1. ICVCM requires programs to adhere to rigorous quantification standards. PCS integrates these requirements through:

• detailed methodological requirements for baseline-setting, additionality, monitoring, leakage, uncertainty, and quantification;

• alignment with IPCC good practice guidance and ISO standards;

• digital MRV integration to strengthen data integrity;

• structured approach for parameter updates and version control.

1. Quantification under PCS must be transparent, reproducible, conservative, and based on sound scientific principles.

4.8 Permanence (Where Applicable)

1. For activities where carbon storage may not be permanent (e.g., AFOLU, soil carbon, or biomass-based removals), ICVCM requires programs to mitigate reversal risk.

2. PCS integrates permanence requirements through:

• mandatory risk assessments,

• buffer-account contributions or equivalent risk mitigation instruments (if applicable),

• monitoring obligations that extend beyond the crediting period when scientifically justified,

• rules for managing and compensating reversals.

1. PCS may specify sector-specific buffer requirements or risk mitigation measures depending on the methodology.

4.9 Sustainable Development Contributions

1. PCS supports sustainable development outcomes and incorporates robust safeguard and SDG requirements through its PCS Safeguards Standard and PCS SDG Integrity Standard.

2. ICVCM requires demonstration that activities do not cause significant social or environmental harm and contribute positively to local well-being. PCS integrates these requirements through:

• mandatory safeguard screening,

• stakeholder engagement,

• FPIC for Indigenous Peoples,

• social and environmental monitoring indicators,

• independent verification of safeguard compliance,

• disclosure of SDG contributions where claimed.

These rules fully align PCS with ICVCM’s expectations on sustainable development benefits.

4.10 Safeguards

1. ICVCM requires programs to implement environmental and social safeguards to avoid harm. PCS meets these requirements through the PCS Environmental & Social Safeguards Standard (PCS-ESS 2.0), which includes:

• a risk-based safeguard assessment system,

• an Environmental & Social Management Plan framework,

• Indigenous Peoples and FPIC protocols,

• labor, gender, and community safety provisions,

• enforcement and corrective action mechanisms.

1. Safeguard compliance is mandatory for all PCS projects but is independently evaluated for ICVCM purposes at issuance.

4.11 Robust Verification and Assurance

1. ICVCM requires programs to maintain impartial and credible assurance systems. PCS integrates this requirement through:

• accreditation of VVBs under rigorous eligibility criteria,

• third-party assessment of all validation and verification activities,

• strict conflict-of-interest rules,

• periodic performance oversight of VVBs,

• digital MRV systems that enhance verifiability.

1. The PCS Validation & Verification Standard ensures alignment with ICVCM’s verification expectations.

4.12 Host Country Alignment and Authorization

1. ICVCM requires programs to demonstrate coherence with national climate strategies and to implement transparent procedures for Host Party authorization where credits are intended for international transfer. PCS incorporates these requirements through:

• mandatory Host Party approval for internationally transferred mitigation outcomes,

• classification of credit use (Article 6, voluntary, compliance),

• disclosure of authorization details in the PCS Registry,

• alignment with national registries or tracking systems.

These procedures safeguard the environmental and legal integrity of credits issued under PCS.

4.13 Summary

1. PCS integrates the full suite of ICVCM Core Carbon Principles through its regulatory framework, methodologies, safeguards, quantification rules, governance structure, verification system, and registry operations. This chapter outlines how these elements work together to ensure that PCS credits can achieve ICVCM recognition while maintaining PCS’s own identity, standards, and digital architecture.

---

Chapter 5 - PCS Program-Level Requirements For ICVCM Alignment

5.1 Purpose of Program-Level Requirements

1. ICVCM evaluates not only the integrity of methodologies and project activities but also the underlying governance and operational systems of the carbon-crediting program. This chapter establishes how PCS satisfies these program-level criteria and the institutional requirements necessary for credits issued under PCS to be considered eligible for ICVCM recognition. The chapter describes PCS’s governance model, rule-making procedures, transparency systems, grievance functions, and mechanisms for ensuring program-wide integrity.

5.2 Governance Structure and Independence

1. ICVCM requires programs to demonstrate that governance is independent, structured, and free from undue influence. PCS meets this requirement through an institutional arrangement wherein strategic oversight, operational management, rule-making, and verification oversight are clearly separated.

2. The PCS Secretariat administers rules, maintains the Registry, and oversees VVB performance, while the PCS Methodology Panel and technical working groups operate independently to review methodological proposals. All decision-making processes are documented, transparent, and guided by conflict-of-interest controls. This structure ensures governance independence and consistency with ICVCM expectations on program impartiality.

5.3 Transparent Rulemaking and Public Consultation

1. PCS maintains a structured rule-making process that includes public consultation for major program revisions, publication of draft standards, and opportunities for stakeholder feedback.

2. ICVCM requires carbon-crediting programs to demonstrate that material rule changes undergo transparent consultation and that final decisions are publicly disclosed with accompanying rationale. PCS satisfies this requirement by publishing consultation reports, stakeholder summaries, methodological review notes, and all rule revisions through the PCS Portal and Registry. This ensures that program rules evolve transparently and remain open to scrutiny.

5.4 Financial Integrity and Operational Capacity

1. ICVCM requires programs to demonstrate adequate financial and operational resources. PCS maintains a dedicated operational structure with sufficient capacity to administer methodologies, evaluate project submissions, manage the Registry, oversee VVBs, and conduct periodic audits.

2. PCS operates under financial management principles that ensure program stability and independence from project-level or developer-level financial influence.

3. These measures collectively satisfy ICVCM’s expectations for financial integrity and operational robustness.

5.5 Accreditation and Oversight of Validation & Verification Bodies

1. ICVCM requires carbon programs to maintain a rigorous and impartial system for accrediting and overseeing VVBs. PCS meets this requirement through:

• a structured VVB accreditation system based on ISO 14065 principles,

• mandatory conflict-of-interest declarations,

• performance reviews and periodic oversight audits,

• clear criteria for suspension, removal, or corrective action.

1. Oversight is exercised continuously through validation and verification review processes.

2. PCS’s VVB governance structure ensures consistency with ICVCM’s assurance-level expectations.

5.6 Public Disclosure of Program Documents

1. ICVCM requires that programs disclose all essential documentation—including methodologies, standards, governance procedures, and credit issuance information—to ensure transparency and independence of assessment. PCS fulfills this requirement by publishing:

• all approved standards and methodologies,

• archived versions and revision histories,

• public project documentation (PDDs, monitoring reports, verification reports),

• safeguard and SDG information,

• credit issuance records,

• Host Party authorization information where applicable.

1. Public disclosure occurs via the PCS Registry, which maintains searchable, permanent, and timestamped records.

5.7 Grievance Redress and Appeals Mechanisms

1. ICVCM requires programs to maintain effective grievance and appeals mechanisms that are accessible to stakeholders and the public.

2. PCS maintains a formal grievance procedure that allows individuals, communities, civil society organizations, and market participants to raise concerns related to project impacts, procedural fairness, or safeguard performance.

3. Complaints are reviewed by the PCS Secretariat and, where appropriate, escalated to the PCS Regulatory Committee for further consideration.

4. Independent appeals processes allow Project Proponents or affected stakeholders to contest decisions related to registration, verification, issuance suspension, or safeguard determinations.

5. These procedures meet ICVCM’s expectations for accessible, fair, and transparent grievance mechanisms.

5.8 Prevention of Fraud, Misconduct, and Improper Influence

1. ICVCM requires programs to maintain strong internal controls to prevent fraud, manipulation of data, and improper influence on crediting decisions.

2. PCS maintains:

• strict conflict-of-interest rules for staff, VVBs, and independent experts,

• documented procedures for investigating misconduct,

• registry tools that detect anomalies or irregularities in credit issuance or transfer,

• audit trails embedded within its digital monitoring and registry systems.

1. PCS’s digital infrastructure—particularly its blockchain-anchored registry—ensures tamper-proof tracking and satisfies ICVCM’s requirements for transparency, record integrity, and fraud prevention.

5.9 Recordkeeping and Documentation Practices

1. All project and program documentation must be retained and accessible for independent review.

2. PCS maintains robust documentation requirements for methodologies, monitoring data, verification outputs, and registry transactions.

3. ICVCM requires long-term retention to allow ex-post review; PCS satisfies this requirement through version-controlled archival systems and mandatory retention protocols across all project categories.

5.10 Program-Level Transparency Mapping Against CCP Requirements

1. To support external evaluation, PCS provides a mapping of program-level ICVCM requirements against PCS governance elements.

2. This mapping, reproduced in Table 5-A, allows stakeholders to understand how PCS satisfies each CCP criterion.

Table 5-A: Program-Level Mapping of PCS Governance Elements to ICVCM CCP Requirements

ICVCM CCP Theme	Corresponding PCS Component
Governance & Independence	PCS Secretariat structure; Methodology Panel; VVB impartiality framework
Transparency	PCS Registry disclosures; public documentation; rulemaking procedures
Robust Program Integrity	Accreditation & oversight of VVBs; conflict-of-interest controls
Tracking & Double Counting Prevention	PCS Registry; double counting standard; Host Party authorization
Complaint & Appeals Mechanisms	PCS grievance redress system; Regulatory Committee oversight
Monitoring & Reporting Integrity	PCS MRV standards; digital MRV alignment
Financial & Operational Capacity	PCS internal financial governance and administrative systems

1. This table provides a high-level correspondence between ICVCM requirements and PCS mechanisms.

5.11 Continued Alignment With Evolving ICVCM Requirements

1. ICVCM periodically updates its CCP Assessment Framework, program documentation expectations, and criteria for eligible methodologies and projects. PCS incorporates these updates through formal amendment processes, which may include stakeholder consultation, expert review, and publication of updated version histories. This ensures that PCS remains continuously aligned with ICVCM expectations over time and that credits issued under PCS can retain global acceptance.

5.12 Summary

1. This chapter establishes the program-level systems through which PCS satisfies ICVCM’s Core Carbon Principles.

2. Through its independent governance structure, transparent rulemaking, strong VVB oversight, accessible grievance mechanisms, and robust digital infrastructure, PCS meets or exceeds the expectations required for a carbon-crediting program to issue CCP-compliant credits.

---

Chapter 6 - Methodology Requirements For ICVCM Eligibility

6.1 Purpose of Methodology Requirements Under ICVCM

1. ICVCM places significant emphasis on the integrity, transparency, and scientific validity of methodologies used by carbon-crediting programs.

2. This chapter describes how PCS methodologies must be structured and evaluated to satisfy the methodological component of the Core Carbon Principles (CCPs). It builds upon the PCS Methodology Development Standard while introducing specific requirements necessary for ICVCM recognition. Compliance with these requirements is essential before any credit issuance may receive the ICVCM CCP-Compliant mark.

6.2 Alignment With ICVCM Methodology Integrity Criteria

1. ICVCM requires that methodologies used by crediting programs adhere to recognized scientific principles, provide clear quantification rules, and avoid any material risk of over-crediting.

2. PCS ensures this alignment by requiring methodologies to demonstrate:

• scientifically grounded baseline-setting approaches,

• transparent demonstration of additionality,

• comprehensive treatment of leakage,

• conservative treatment of uncertainty,

• robust monitoring requirements,

• practicality and enforceability across all applicable project contexts.

1. PCS methodologies are reviewed against these criteria during approval and periodically re-evaluated to maintain alignment with evolving ICVCM expectations.

6.3 Required Structure of PCS Methodologies for ICVCM Alignment

1. To satisfy ICVCM, all PCS methodologies must follow a coherent, standardized structure that includes:

• applicability conditions and exclusions;

• precise definition of the project boundary and emission sources;

• detailed baseline scenario determination;

• additionality requirements aligned with CCP criteria;

• quantification methods for baseline, project, and leakage emissions;

• clear monitoring and data requirements;

• explicit uncertainty and conservativeness provisions;

• documentation and reporting expectations;

• revision mechanisms and version-control rules.

These elements ensure transparency and replicability, allowing independent validators and verifiers to apply methodologies consistently.

6.4 Baseline Scenario Requirements

1. ICVCM requires that baselines reflect realistic, conservative, and policy-aligned conditions.

2. PCS methodologies must therefore establish baselines that:

• are grounded in credible data and evidence,

• reflect economically and technologically feasible alternatives,

• incorporate relevant Host Party regulations and policies,

• avoid creating perverse incentives,

• remain conservative in the presence of uncertainty,

• include clear rules for updates, validity periods, or baseline renewal.

1. Methodologies must document the data sources, assumptions, and justification used to determine baseline emissions.

2. Where multiple plausible baselines exist, the methodology must require selection of the baseline that minimizes the risk of over-crediting.

6.5 Additionality Requirements

1. ICVCM requires credible demonstration of additionality. PCS integrates this through methodologies that specify:

• regulatory surplus tests ensuring no legal mandates require the activity,

• common practice assessments to eliminate widely adopted technologies from crediting,

• financial or investment analyses where relevant,

• use of positive lists only where strong, evidence-backed justification exists.

1. Methodologies must specify documentation, data, and criteria needed to demonstrate additionality.

2. Assumptions must be conservative, and positive lists must be periodically reviewed to ensure continued relevance.

6.6 Leakage Requirements

1. ICVCM requires methodologies to identify and mitigate all significant sources of leakage. PCS methodologies must therefore require assessment and quantification of:

• activity-shifting leakage (movement of emissions outside the boundary),

• market leakage (changes in supply or demand affecting emissions),

• upstream and downstream leakage (e.g., transportation, fuel handling),

• inter-pool or inter-region leakage in land-use sectors.

1. Where leakage cannot be quantified, methodologies must apply conservative deductions or discount factors.

2. Methodologies must ensure that leakage does not undermine environmental integrity.

6.7 Monitoring Requirements

1. ICVCM expects monitoring requirements to be feasible, transparent, and able to produce verifiable results.

2. PCS methodologies must include:

• clear parameter definitions and units,

• acceptable data sources,

• minimum measurement frequencies,

• calibration requirements for instruments,

• data retention rules consistent with PCS Registry needs,

• provisions for digital monitoring where applicable.

1. Monitoring requirements must be strict enough to ensure accuracy but practical enough to be applied consistently across projects and geographies.

6.8 Quantification, Uncertainty, and Conservativeness

1. ICVCM emphasizes the need for quantification systems that prevent systematic overestimation.

2. PCS methodologies must incorporate:

• transparent equations and calculation steps,

• definitions and sources for all parameters,

• explicit treatment of uncertainty,

• conservative default factors where data are limited,

• clear rules governing sampling, modelling, and data substitution.

1. The methodology must define how uncertainty impacts crediting, including deductions where uncertainty cannot be resolved.

2. In line with ICVCM expectations, conservativeness must be embedded as a structural safeguard rather than an optional adjustment.

6.9 Compatibility With PCS Digital MRV Systems

1. ICVCM requires traceable, auditable, tamper-proof records. PCS satisfies this by requiring methodologies to specify data requirements compatible with PCS’s digital architecture, including:

• machine-readable parameter structures,

• compatibility with automated validation checks,

• metadata requirements for transparency,

• versioning controls to trace parameter updates,

• clear rules for integrating remote sensing or IoT data where applicable.

These elements ensure that methodologies align with the digital MRV expectations of modern carbon markets.

6.10 Treatment of Permanence (Where Applicable)

1. For land-use, forestry, or biological carbon storage methodologies, ICVCM requires programs to address non-permanence risk. PCS methodologies must therefore:

• require risk assessments,

• identify reversal risks across natural and human drivers,

• specify mitigation measures,

• integrate PCS buffer-account or risk mitigation tools (where applicable),

• define monitoring requirements beyond crediting where justified,

• specify how reversals are reported and compensated.

1. Methodologies must be explicit and conservative in treating permanence to satisfy ICVCM criteria.

6.11 Periodic Review and Revision Requirements

1. ICVCM requires programs to maintain up-to-date methodologies.

2. PCS methodologies must therefore include revision triggers such as:

• significant changes in scientific knowledge,

• technological advances,

• new Host Party regulations,

• updated IPCC factors,

• ICVCM framework revisions.

1. PCS reviews methodologies periodically and updates them as necessary, applying transition rules consistent with both PCS and ICVCM governance expectations.

6.12 Methodology Approval for ICVCM Purposes

1. Not all PCS methodologies automatically qualify for ICVCM alignment.

2. A methodology may only be applied for ICVCM-compliant crediting if:

• it has undergone a detailed review against CCP criteria,

• all relevant requirements in this chapter are satisfied,

• the PCS Methodology Panel has confirmed alignment,

• the PCS Secretariat has formally approved the methodology for ICVCM use.

1. The PCS Registry will indicate which methodology versions are ICVCM-eligible.

6.13 Summary

1. This chapter establishes the methodology-level requirements PCS must incorporate to satisfy ICVCM’s expectations. The rules ensure that baseline setting, additionality, leakage assessment, quantification, monitoring, and permanence treatment are robust, conservative, and transparent. Only methodologies meeting these criteria may be used to generate ICVCM-compliant credits under PCS.

---

Chapter 7 - Project Design Requirements For ICVCM Eligibility

7.1 Purpose of Project Design Requirements

1. This chapter establishes the project-level requirements that must be satisfied for a project registered under the Planetary Carbon Standard to be recognized as eligible for ICVCM compliance. Project design represents the point at which environmental integrity, safeguards, host country coherence, and methodological rigor converge.

2. ICVCM places strong emphasis on transparent, well-documented, and scientifically credible project design.

3. PCS incorporates these expectations through requirements that complement, and build upon, the PCS Project Standard and the PCS Environmental & Social Safeguards Standard.

7.2 Integration With PCS Core Standards

1. A project cannot be considered for ICVCM eligibility unless it fully complies with the underlying PCS architecture.

2. Compliance with the PCS Project Standard, the PCS Safeguards Standard, the PCS SDG Standard, the PCS Methodology Development Standard, the PCS Validation & Verification Standard, and—where relevant—the PCS Double Counting Standard is a fundamental prerequisite.

3. ICVCM recognition therefore rests upon a project first demonstrating conformity with all internal PCS obligations; only then may ICVCM-specific criteria be assessed.

7.3 Transparency of Project Design Documentation

1. ICVCM requires project design documents to be complete, transparent, and publicly accessible.

2. PCS requires that the Project Design Document (PDD) provide a full account of the project’s purpose, technologies, boundary, baseline conditions, data sources, justification for assumptions, additionality demonstration, and relevant environmental and social considerations.

3. The PDD must be written clearly, structured according to PCS requirements, and supported by sufficient evidence to permit an independent reviewer to replicate the reasoning and calculations.

4. Once validated, the PDD must be published through the PCS Registry in accordance with PCS disclosure rules.

7.4 Stakeholder Engagement and Consultation

1. Stakeholder engagement is a core component of ICVCM’s integrity expectations. PCS requires that stakeholder consultations occur early, are inclusive, and follow culturally appropriate processes.

2. Information presented to stakeholders must be understandable, and the consultation process must allow adequate time for feedback.

3. Project design must demonstrate how concerns were considered and, where relevant, incorporated into the project’s mitigation or safeguard planning.

4. Validation includes an assessment of whether engagement was adequate, well-documented, and free from coercion or bias.

7.5 Environmental and Social Safeguard Requirements

1. ICVCM mandates that carbon projects do not cause environmental or social harm. PCS satisfies this requirement through the PCS Environmental & Social Safeguards Standard (PCS-ESS 2.0), which includes risk screening, hazard identification, mitigation planning, monitoring obligations, and community-level protections.

2. A project seeking ICVCM eligibility must demonstrate that safeguard screening was completed, that the risk classification is accurate, and that any required Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) is incorporated into project design.

3. The PDD must summarize these safeguard outcomes and indicate how safeguard requirements will be implemented and monitored.

7.6 Requirements Relating to Indigenous Peoples and FPIC

1. Where a project affects Indigenous Peoples or their territories, ICVCM requires full adherence to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). PCS implements this through a dedicated FPIC Protocol.

2. Project design must respect traditional governance systems, provide culturally appropriate information, and allow communities to deliberate without external pressure.

3. Consent must be clearly documented, and FPIC must be maintained throughout the project lifecycle.

4. Validation includes an independent assessment of whether FPIC was achieved and properly recorded.

7.7 Host Country Policy Alignment

1. ICVCM requires that projects be consistent with national climate strategies, sectoral policies, and regulatory frameworks. PCS therefore requires the PDD to contain a description of applicable laws, regulatory mandates relevant to baseline selection or additionality, and any planned or required Host Party authorizations.

2. Where the project anticipates generating internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs), the PDD must include information necessary to support the Host Party’s authorization process and subsequent disclosures in the PCS Registry.

3. Projects must demonstrate that they do not conflict with national climate policies or undermine national reporting obligations.

7.8 Use of PCS-Approved Methodologies

1. All PCS projects must apply a methodology approved by PCS, but ICVCM adds the requirement that only methodologies designated as “ICVCM-eligible” may be used to generate CCP-compliant credits.

2. The project design must demonstrate correct and complete application of the selected methodology, including clear definition of baseline emissions, proper treatment of leakage, and accurate identification of monitored parameters.

3. Where methodologies allow for methodological choices (e.g., selection among multiple baseline options), the project must justify the chosen approach and demonstrate that it is consistent with conservativeness and environmental integrity.

7.9 Evidence and Data Quality Requirements

1. ICVCM requires that all data used for project design be credible, transparent, and verifiable. PCS therefore requires project design to document the origin of all data inputs, including:

• measured values,

• host country statistics,

• international default values,

• expert assessments,

• geospatial or remote-sensing evidence.

1. Data sources must be traceable, and their selection must be justified clearly. Projects must ensure that the quality of evidence is sufficient to allow independent replication of calculations during validation.

2. To support clarity, PCS provides a standardized evidence table format, shown below.

Table 7-A: Project Design Evidence Summary (Illustrative Structure)

Parameter or Claim	Evidence Source	Type of Evidence	Traceability Requirements
Baseline activity data	Utility bills, surveys	Primary data	Linked to timestamp and location
Emission factor	National inventory or IPCC	Secondary/default value	Version-controlled documentation
Stakeholder engagement outcomes	Meeting records	Qualitative evidence	Attendance logs and summaries

1. Actual content varies by methodology.

7.10 Permanence Considerations for Land-Use and Removals Projects

1. Where projects store carbon in land, biomass, or other reversible pools, ICVCM requires a clear and credible system for addressing the risk of reversal. PCS requires such projects to identify all relevant risks, describe mitigation measures, and estimate potential reversals.

2. The project design must document how buffer contributions or other permanence tools will be applied, if required by the applicable methodology.

3. Projects must also describe long-term monitoring responsibilities if reversals may occur after the crediting period ends.

7.11 Project-Level Grievance Mechanisms

1. ICVCM requires accessible and legitimate grievance processes. PCS implements this through mandatory project-level grievance mechanisms that must be operational prior to validation.

2. The PDD must describe how grievances will be received, acknowledged, investigated, and resolved. It must further explain how affected communities are informed of the mechanism and how complaints are recorded and used to improve project performance.

7.12 Transparency and Publication Requirements

1. Before ICVCM-compliant credits may be issued, PCS requires all relevant project design documentation to be publicly available through the PCS Registry. This includes the full PDD, validation report, safeguard screening results, Host Party authorization (where relevant), and other disclosures required under PCS rules.

2. Redactions are permitted only to protect personal or commercially sensitive information; all material content relevant to integrity must remain public.

7.13 Determination of Eligibility for ICVCM Compliance

1. A project is deemed eligible for ICVCM compliance only after the PCS Secretariat determines that:

2. the project fully complies with PCS requirements;

3. all ICVCM-specific project design criteria in this chapter are met;

4. the VVB confirms compliance during validation;

5. all required documentation has been disclosed publicly;

6. no safeguard, legal, or Host Party conflicts remain unresolved.

7. Eligibility does not grant compliance automatically; it allows the project to seek ICVCM recognition at issuance.

7.14 Summary

1. This chapter establishes the project-level requirements necessary to achieve ICVCM eligibility under PCS. It reinforces PCS’s existing integrity framework while ensuring conformity with ICVCM expectations relating to safeguards, FPIC, stakeholder engagement, host country alignment, monitoring readiness, and transparency. These requirements collectively ensure that project design is robust, ethical, and scientifically credible prior to issuance of ICVCM-compliant credits.

---

Chapter 8 - Monitoring, Reporting & Verification Requirements

8.1 Purpose of MRV Requirements Under ICVCM

1. Monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) form the backbone of ICVCM’s integrity criteria.

2. This chapter sets out the requirements that PCS projects must meet during implementation and verification when seeking to generate ICVCM-compliant credits. The requirements ensure that monitoring records are accurate, reporting is transparent, and verification is carried out independently and to a high standard. These provisions supplement the PCS Validation & Verification Standard and the PCS Methodology Development Standard, aligning them with the expectations of ICVCM’s Program Assessment Framework.

8.2 Monitoring Requirements

8.2.1 Monitoring Framework and Data Integrity

1. ICVCM requires that monitoring be sufficiently rigorous to ensure that emission reductions and removals are measured reliably.

2. Under PCS, projects must establish a monitoring framework consistent with the applicable methodology, including all parameters required for baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage, and activity data.

3. Data used for quantification must be traceable, supported by evidence, and maintained in formats compatible with PCS’s digital MRV architecture.

4. Monitoring frameworks must reflect a combination of direct measurement, sampling, or conservative default factors, depending on the methodology.

5. Where monitoring involves sensors, remote-sensing systems, or digital tools, the project must ensure that equipment is calibrated, maintained, and capable of producing data with sufficient accuracy to meet ICVCM expectations.

8.2.2 Monitoring Frequency and Coverage

1. Projects must adhere strictly to methodological monitoring frequencies.

2. The frequency of monitoring must be adequate to detect significant deviations in project performance or conditions affecting baseline assumptions.

3. For parameters that fluctuate seasonally or depend on operational cycles, methodologies may specify differentiated monitoring frequencies; the project must comply accordingly.

4. Deviations from required monitoring schedules must be recorded and justified, and may require conservative adjustments.

8.2.3 Evidence and Recordkeeping

1. All monitoring data must be supported by verifiable evidence.

2. PCS requires projects to maintain a complete audit trail for each monitored parameter, including measurement logs, calibration certificates, geospatial files, remote-sensing datasets, survey results, photographs, and other forms of documentation.

3. These records must be retained for the duration of the crediting period and for the prescribed retention period thereafter.

4. To enhance clarity, PCS provides an illustrative evidence structure in Table 8-A.

Table 8-A: Illustrative Monitoring Evidence Structure

Parameter	Evidence Type	Acceptable Sources	Traceability Requirement
Fuel consumption	Meter readings	Calibrated meters	Timestamped records; calibration files
Biomass removal	Field surveys, remote sensing	Survey logs, satellite data	Spatial coordinates and dates
Grid emission factor	National dataset	Host Party published data	Version number and publication date

1. Actual requirements depend on the methodology.

8.3 Reporting Requirements

8.3.1 Monitoring Report Content

1. Monitoring Reports (MRs) submitted for verification must provide a complete and transparent account of project performance during the reporting period.

2. An MR must:

• describe project activities and any operational changes;

• summarize monitored parameters and underlying evidence;

• disclose deviations from the methodology;

• present calculations of emission reductions or removals;

• report safeguard-related outcomes and grievances, if any;

• detail corrective actions undertaken during the period.

1. MRs must be written clearly so that an independent reviewer can fully replicate calculations and assess the integrity of the mitigation outcomes.

8.3.2 Transparency and Public Disclosure

1. ICVCM requires that Monitoring Reports be publicly accessible.

2. Under PCS, all MRs and associated verification reports are published on the PCS Registry, subject only to limited redactions for personal data or confidential business information.

3. Substantive information relating to emission reductions, safeguard performance, monitoring methods, and data sources must remain unredacted.

8.3.3 Reporting of Changes and Deviations

1. Projects must disclose all material changes that affect baseline conditions, activity levels, risk classification, or data accuracy.

2. Where deviations from the methodology occur, the MR must explain the reasons, estimate their effect on crediting, and propose corrective measures.

3. Undisclosed deviations constitute non-compliance and may affect ICVCM eligibility.

8.4 Verification Requirements

8.4.1 Role of the VVB in ICVCM Compliance

1. Verification ensures that project performance and reported emission reductions are accurate and credible.

2. ICVCM requires verification to be conducted by qualified, impartial, and accredited bodies.

3. Under PCS, only Validation & Verification Bodies accredited under the PCS VVB Accreditation Framework may verify projects seeking ICVCM-compliant issuance.

4. VVBs must evaluate monitoring data, assess compliance with the methodology, confirm safeguard performance, and provide an independent opinion on the validity of reported outcomes.

8.4.2 Scope of Verification

1. Verification must cover:

• conformity with the applicable PCS methodology;

• accuracy and completeness of monitored data;

• correct application of formulas and emission factors;

• evaluation of evidence supporting all monitored parameters;

• compliance with safeguard and stakeholder engagement requirements;

• accurate treatment of uncertainty, leakage, and conservativeness;

• proper documentation and disclosure obligations.

1. ICVCM expects verification to be thorough, replicable, and based on sufficient evidence.

8.4.3 Verification of Safeguards and FPIC Requirements

1. VVBs must independently assess whether safeguard requirements were implemented as described in the project design and whether stakeholder engagement and FPIC processes were maintained during the reporting period.

2. Verification of safeguard performance is essential for ICVCM alignment, as ICVCM requires that projects demonstrate no significant negative environmental or social impacts throughout implementation.

3. Any safeguard non-compliance must be documented and may impact the issuance of ICVCM-compliant credits.

8.4.4 Verification of Host Country Requirements

1. Where Host Party authorization is required—for example, when internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs) are generated—VVBs must verify the validity and completeness of authorization documentation.

2. The verification report must confirm that authorization corresponds to the reporting period and is consistent with PCS’s double counting safeguards.

3. Failure to verify Host Party requirements prevents ICVCM-compliant issuance.

8.4.5 Verification Reporting and Disclosure

1. Verification Reports must provide clear, structured findings and an explicit verification statement.

2. Reports are published in the PCS Registry and must include:

• verification scope and objectives,

• methods used,

• assessment of monitoring data quality,

• evaluation of compliance with PCS rules,

• description of identified non-conformities,

• final verification opinion.

1. Reports must be sufficiently detailed to allow third parties to understand the basis of the verification opinion.

8.5 Treatment of Non-Conformities

1. ICVCM requires corrective action where non-conformities are identified. Under PCS:

• minor non-conformities must be corrected prior to issuance;

• material non-conformities prevent issuance until resolved;

• unresolved or repeated non-conformities may affect ICVCM eligibility permanently.

1. Corrective measures must be documented in the Monitoring Report and evaluated during subsequent verification.

8.6 Determination of ICVCM-Compliant Issuance

1. A credit issuance may be marked ICVCM CCP-Compliant only when:

2. the Monitoring Report is complete and transparent;

3. verification has been conducted by an eligible VVB;

4. all ICVCM project design and MRV requirements were fulfilled;

5. safeguards and FPIC obligations were maintained;

6. Host Party authorization (if applicable) is verified;

7. the PCS Secretariat confirms alignment with ICVCM criteria.

8. Issuance determinations are recorded in the PCS Registry and disclosed publicly.

8.7 Summary

1. This chapter establishes the monitoring, reporting, and verification requirements that PCS projects must fulfill to achieve ICVCM-compliant issuance. By aligning PCS monitoring frameworks, reporting procedures, verification standards, and transparency requirements with ICVCM expectations, PCS ensures that its credits meet the highest global thresholds for MRV integrity.

---

Chapter 9 - Issuance Requirements For ICVCM-Compliant Credits

9.1 Purpose of Issuance Requirements

1. This chapter sets out the conditions under which the PCS Secretariat may apply the ICVCM CCP-Compliant mark to credits issued under the Planetary Carbon Standard. These requirements ensure that credits recognized as ICVCM-aligned have undergone rigorous assessment at the program, methodology, project, and issuance levels. Only credits that satisfy all relevant criteria may be labelled as ICVCM-compliant, ensuring market confidence and alignment with the Core Carbon Principles.

9.2 Prerequisites for ICVCM-Compliant Issuance

1. A credit may only be considered for ICVCM recognition if all preceding stages have been satisfied. This includes:

• approval of an ICVCM-eligible methodology;

• a validated project demonstrating ICVCM eligibility;

• a Monitoring Report consistent with PCS and methodology requirements;

• a complete and compliant Verification Report;

• satisfaction of Host Party authorization rules, where applicable;

• full transparency through disclosure of all required documents.

Projects meeting these prerequisites may proceed to issuance-level assessment by the PCS Secretariat.

9.3 Issuance Review by the PCS Secretariat

1. Before applying the ICVCM compliance mark, the PCS Secretariat performs an issuance-level review. The review examines:

• the completeness and accuracy of the verification findings,

• consistency between monitoring results and project design,

• conformity with safeguard performance requirements,

• adequate treatment of deviations or corrective actions,

• currency and validity of applied methodology versions,

• compliance with Host Party authorization (if international transfer is intended).

1. The Secretariat may request clarifications from the Project Proponent or the VVB if any aspect requires further evaluation.

9.4 Host Party Authorization for Credits Intended for International Transfer

1. Where mitigation outcomes are intended for use internationally—including under voluntary markets, Article 6 transactions, or corporate claims requiring avoidance of double counting—the project must have secured Host Party authorization consistent with PCS and ICVCM rules.

2. Authorization must be specific to the reporting period and indicate whether corresponding adjustments apply.

3. The Secretariat verifies that authorization documents:

• originate from the designated national authority;

• align with national registry or reporting systems;

• are internally consistent with project information;

• cover the precise number and nature of credits subject to issuance.

1. No ICVCM-compliant credit may be issued without valid authorization where required.

9.5 Application of the ICVCM CCP-Compliant Mark

1. Following completion of the issuance review, the PCS Secretariat may apply the ICVCM CCP-Compliant mark to eligible credits. The compliance mark indicates that all ICVCM requirements have been met for the specific issuance. It does not imply that future issuances will automatically be eligible; rather, eligibility must be reconfirmed for every crediting period.

2. The PCS Registry displays ICVCM compliance as a separate attribute, distinct from PCS labels such as Safeguard+ or SDG+.

9.6 Partial or Conditional Issuance

1. In some cases, only part of a project’s reported mitigation outcome may satisfy ICVCM requirements. This may occur when:

• incomplete Host Party authorization is provided,

• certain monitored parameters do not meet ICVCM evidence thresholds,

• non-conformities affect only a subset of quantified activities,

• uncertainty or leakage adjustments must be applied conservatively.

1. PCS allows issuance of partial ICVCM-compliant volumes, with the remaining volume issued as standard PCS credits without the ICVCM mark. The Registry will distinguish between these categories clearly.

9.7 Denial of ICVCM Recognition at Issuance

1. ICVCM recognition may be denied if:

• the project fails to meet ICVCM requirements during the crediting period,

• verification identifies material non-conformities,

• Host Party authorization cannot be verified,

• methodologies used are no longer ICVCM-eligible,

• safeguard or FPIC non-compliance is identified,

• transparency obligations are not met.

1. Denial does not affect the validity of PCS-issued credits but prevents them from carrying the ICVCM compliance mark.

9.8 Suspension or Withdrawal of ICVCM Compliance

1. PCS may suspend or withdraw ICVCM compliance after issuance if:

• post-issuance information reveals methodological or data errors,

• reversals occur in permanence-sensitive projects,

• legal or safeguard violations emerge,

• Host Party authorization is revoked or modified,

• ICVCM requirements are amended and the issuance is no longer consistent.

1. Suspension or withdrawal is recorded in the PCS Registry, and market participants can view the updated compliance status.

9.9 Registry Disclosure of ICVCM Compliance

1. ICVCM-compliant credits receive a dedicated attribute within the PCS Registry.

2. The Registry displays:

• the issuance volume recognized as ICVCM-compliant,

• the methodology version used,

• the reporting period,

• Host Party authorization details (where relevant),

• verification reports,

• project-level safeguards and SDG information.

This ensures transparency for buyers, regulators, and market auditors.

9.10 Periodic Review of Issuance Requirements

1. PCS may update issuance-level ICVCM requirements as ICVCM revises its CCP Assessment Framework. When such updates occur, PCS will:

• publish updated procedures,

• define transition arrangements,

• apply revised criteria to subsequent crediting periods,

• reassess methodologies or projects if required.

This ensures continuity of alignment with ICVCM’s evolving standards.

9.11 Summary

1. This chapter establishes the issuance-level requirements necessary for PCS credits to receive ICVCM recognition. It reinforces the need for stringent issuance review, safeguard compliance, data integrity, Host Party authorization, and transparent Registry disclosure. Only credits meeting all these criteria may be marked ICVCM CCP-Compliant.

---

Chapter 10 - Changes To ICVCM Requirements Over Time

10.1 Purpose of This Chapter

1. ICVCM periodically updates its Core Carbon Principles, assessment criteria, and program requirements. PCS must therefore maintain a flexible yet disciplined approach to incorporating such updates without compromising predictability for Project Proponents or Host Parties.

2. This chapter explains how PCS integrates future ICVCM changes into its operational framework, how transition arrangements are managed, and how issued or pending credits are treated when new ICVCM requirements emerge.

10.2 Dynamic Nature of ICVCM Frameworks

1. The ICVCM framework is intentionally designed to evolve as climate science advances, as new sectoral guidelines are developed, and as global market expectations shift.

2. Updates may relate to methodology quality, safeguard requirements, rules on Host Party authorization, expectations for transparency, or revisions to quantification principles. PCS must respond to such updates in a structured and timely manner to maintain its alignment with the Core Carbon Principles.

10.3 PCS Integration of ICVCM Updates

1. Whenever ICVCM publishes revised guidance, PCS conducts an internal assessment to determine the implications for its program rules, methodologies, and issuance requirements. This assessment considers whether the change affects overall program governance, whether methodologies require modification, whether project-level documentation must be updated, and whether shifts in monitoring or verification procedures are necessary. Only after this assessment does PCS issue amendments or revised standards, ensuring that the response remains proportionate and aligned with the broader PCS architecture.

10.4 Transition Periods

1. PCS utilizes transition periods to allow ongoing projects and methodologies to adjust to updated ICVCM requirements.

2. The length of a transition period depends on the nature, scope, and urgency of the update.

3. Minor clarifications may require little or no transition time, while substantive revisions to methodology requirements, safeguard obligations, or Host Party alignment rules may require longer adjustment periods.

4. Transition arrangements are published by the PCS Secretariat to ensure clarity and predictability.

5. To support transparency, the indicative transition periods commonly used by PCS are shown below.

Table 10-A: Typical Transition Timeframes for ICVCM Updates

Category of Change	Indicative Transition Period	Notes
Clarifications and minor procedural updates	Immediate to three months	No expected impact on crediting outcomes
Methodological adjustments	Six to twelve months	Applied through methodology versioning controls
Safeguard or FPIC-related updates	Six to twelve months	Allows time for community and field-level integration
Host Party authorization or double counting rules	Three to six months	Reflects regulatory importance and national coordination
Major ICVCM framework revisions	Twelve to twenty-four months	PCS may require reassessment for certain project types

1. These timeframes serve as guidance; actual periods may differ depending on the significance of the ICVCM change.

10.5 Effect on Issued ICVCM-Compliant Credits

1. ICVCM compliance is assessed at the time of issuance. Therefore, credits that have already been issued with an ICVCM compliance mark remain compliant unless ICVCM explicitly requires retroactive reassessment or if significant integrity issues come to light after issuance.

2. PCS will only revisit compliance status in circumstances where environmental integrity, host country conditions, or methodological validity are materially affected by new information.

10.6 Effect on Ongoing Projects and Future Issuances

1. Projects undergoing monitoring and verification must comply with the updated ICVCM-aligned PCS rules once the relevant transition period has ended. This may require revisions to monitoring procedures, use of updated parameters, adjustment of baseline assumptions, strengthening of safeguard measures, or updated Host Party authorization disclosures.

2. Issuance eligibility for ICVCM compliance is determined using the version of ICVCM requirements in force at the time of issuance, not at the time of registration. As a result, a project may have earlier issuances recognized as ICVCM-compliant while later issuances fail to meet updated requirements.

10.7 Methodology Revision Under Updated ICVCM Criteria

1. If ICVCM changes affect baseline-setting rules, additionality criteria, uncertainty treatment, permanence requirements, or quantification principles, PCS methodologies must be reviewed and updated.

2. The PCS Methodology Panel conducts these reviews and prepares revised methodology versions.

3. Updated methodologies are subject to PCS’s established public consultation and approval procedures.

4. Transition mechanisms allow projects to continue using earlier methodology versions for a limited period unless ICVCM updates indicate that continued use may compromise environmental integrity.

10.8 Communication and Disclosure of Changes

1. PCS publishes all updates relating to ICVCM changes through the PCS Portal and Registry. Each notice includes an explanation of the update, its implications for projects, and the timeline for required adjustments.

2. Revised standards or methodologies are clearly versioned, and any change affecting ICVCM eligibility is reflected in the Registry, ensuring that users can determine which methodology versions and project issuances qualify under the latest ICVCM criteria.

10.9 Reassessment Requirements

1. Some updates issued by ICVCM may require reassessment of ongoing or future project activities. PCS determines whether reassessment is required based on the scale and nature of the ICVCM update.

2. Reassessment may involve a new validation cycle, an updated Monitoring Report, or supplementary Host Party confirmation.

3. PCS provides clear guidance on the scope and timing of any reassessment obligations.

10.10 Maintaining Consistency Across Issuances

1. Successive issuances from the same project may fall under different ICVCM frameworks depending on when monitoring and verification took place. PCS reflects this by allowing projects to generate issuances under evolving criteria, provided that the applicable ICVCM requirements for each period are met. The PCS Registry therefore differentiates between crediting periods, ensuring transparency where some issuances are ICVCM-compliant and others are not.

10.11 Summary

1. This chapter sets out how PCS incorporates updates to ICVCM requirements into its standards and processes in a manner that preserves integrity while supporting program stability.

2. Through structured assessment, defined transition periods, transparent communication, methodology revision, and periodic reassessment where needed, PCS ensures continuous alignment with ICVCM as its global integrity benchmark evolves. The approach allows PCS to remain responsive to international developments while maintaining clarity and fairness for all participants.

---

Annex A - Mapping Table: PCS Standards vs ICVCM Core Carbon Principles

A.1 Purpose of the Annex

This Annex presents a consolidated mapping of the Core Carbon Principles (CCPs) of the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market and the specific PCS standards, procedures, and governance elements that satisfy each CCP requirement.

The mapping ensures full transparency regarding PCS alignment with ICVCM expectations and provides a reference for project developers, VVBs, Host Parties, and market stakeholders assessing CCP compliance.

This Annex does not introduce new PCS requirements; it serves purely as a cross-reference tool.

A.2 Mapping Table: PCS Alignment With ICVCM Core Carbon Principles

Table A-1: PCS Standards and Governance Elements Corresponding to ICVCM CCP Requirements

ICVCM Core Carbon Principle (CCP)	PCS Standards / Systems Providing Alignment	Summary of Alignment Mechanism
1. Effective Program Governance	PCS Governance Framework; PCS Secretariat; PCS Methodology Panel; VVB Accreditation System	PCS governance ensures independence, clear authority lines, documented decision-making, and strong internal controls.
2. Tracking and Preventing Double Counting	PCS Standard on Avoidance of Double Counting; PCS Registry (DLT-anchored); Host Party Authorization Procedures	PCS prevents double issuance, double use, and double claiming through robust registry safeguards, unique serialisation, and authorization tracking.
3. Robust Quantification	PCS Methodology Development Standard; approved PCS Methodologies; PCS Validation & Verification Standard	PCS requires conservative baseline setting, additionality tests, leakage accounting, explicit uncertainty treatment, and transparent formulas.
4. Real Emission Reductions and Removals	PCS Project Standard; PCS MRV Framework; PCS Registry Evidence Requirements	PCS mandates transparent monitoring, conservative crediting rules, and verifiable quantification consistent with IPCC and ISO norms.
5. Additionality	PCS Methodology Development Standard (additionality rules); PCS Project Standard	PCS requires regulatory surplus, common practice analysis, or justified financial barriers; positive lists undergo evidence-backed justification.
6. Permanence (where applicable)	PCS Safeguards Standard; PCS Methodology Requirements for Permanence; PCS Buffer or Risk Mitigation Tools	PCS manages non-permanence through risk assessment, mitigation strategies, long-term monitoring, and reversal reporting obligations.
7. No Net Harm / Safeguards	PCS Environmental & Social Safeguards Standard (PCS-ESS 2.0); PCS FPIC Protocol; PCS Grievance Mechanisms	PCS ensures projects avoid significant harm, comply with FPIC, follow community engagement protocols, and maintain accessible grievance channels.
8. Contribution to Sustainable Development	PCS SDG Integrity Standard; PCS SDG+ Label System; PCS Monitoring Indicators	PCS requires material, measurable, and verifiable SDG contributions, with transparent reporting and independent verification.
9. Robust Verification	PCS Validation & Verification Standard; PCS VVB Accreditation; VVB Performance Oversight	Verification under PCS is independent, ISO-aligned, risk-based, and supported by strong oversight systems.
10. Transparency	PCS Registry; PCS Public Disclosure Policy; mandatory publication of PDDs, MRs, VRs, safeguards, authorizations	PCS provides public access to project documents, methodology versions, credit issuance history, and safeguard information.

A.3 Narrative Explanation of Alignment

The mapping demonstrates that PCS’s architecture aligns comprehensively with ICVCM’s Core Carbon Principles.

PCS integrates ICVCM requirements through independent governance bodies, conservative and scientifically grounded methodologies, digital MRV systems, Host Party authorization processes, strong safeguard and FPIC obligations, and full transparency in project and issuance information. These components collectively ensure that PCS is capable of issuing carbon credits that meet or exceed the standards demanded by ICVCM.

A.4 Limitations and Interpretation

This Annex is intended as a high-level summary rather than a legal interpretation of ICVCM criteria.

Where ICVCM updates its CCP framework, this mapping will be revised to reflect changes.

Users should consult the relevant PCS standards directly for detailed requirements.

---

Annex B - Documentation Requirements For ICVCM Assessment

B.1 Purpose of This Annex

This Annex defines the documentation that must be provided by Project Proponents, Validation & Verification Bodies, and the PCS Secretariat for the purposes of assessing alignment with the ICVCM Core Carbon Principles (CCPs).

ICVCM relies heavily on transparency and the availability of verifiable information. The purpose of this Annex is therefore to ensure that all relevant documents are produced, disclosed, and maintained in a manner that enables independent evaluation of ICVCM compliance at the program, methodology, project, and issuance levels.

This Annex does not replace PCS documentation requirements; instead, it consolidates them to ensure clarity for ICVCM evaluation.

B.2 Documentation Required at the Methodology Level

Projects seeking ICVCM compliance must apply a methodology designated as eligible under the PCS-ICVCM framework.

To enable this determination, PCS requires the following methodology-level documents to be made publicly available and maintained with version control:

• the full PCS-approved methodology (including formulas, parameters, baseline rules, uncertainty treatment, and monitoring requirements);

• the methodology version history, including change logs;

• methodological tools referenced within the methodology;

• justification documents for any positive list or standardized additionality approaches;

• baseline datasets where the methodology relies on standardized, top-down, or jurisdictional values.

All methodology documents must remain accessible through the PCS Registry.

Table B-1: Methodology Documentation Required for ICVCM Assessment

Document	Purpose	Disclosure Requirement
PCS-approved methodology	Defines quantification and baseline rules	Publicly accessible
Methodology change log	Shows version history and updates	Publicly accessible
Additionality justification papers	Demonstrates alignment with CCP additionality criteria	Publicly accessible
Default factors and data sources	Ensures transparency and replicability	Publicly accessible
Any referenced methodological tools	Clarifies external dependencies	Publicly accessible

B.3 Documentation Required at the Project Design Stage

ICVCM requires project design documentation to be comprehensive, accurate, and fully transparent.

PCS requires each project seeking ICVCM alignment to prepare a Project Design Document (PDD) that includes all information relevant to baseline determination, additionality, safeguards, stakeholder engagement, and alignment with host country requirements.

The PDD must contain:

• a complete description of the project technology and activity;

• project boundary and emission sources;

• baseline selection rationale and underlying data;

• additionality demonstration and assumptions;

• environmental and social safeguard screening results;

• stakeholder consultation summaries;

• FPIC documentation (if Indigenous Peoples are affected);

• Host Party policy context and regulatory alignment;

• evidence supporting all claims and parameter choices;

• geospatial or field data supporting project boundaries.

All documents submitted at design stage must be uploaded to the PCS Registry and made publicly accessible.

Table B-2: Project Design Documentation Required

Document	Purpose	Disclosure
Project Design Document (PDD)	Provides full project rationale and design	Public
Baseline data and justification	Demonstrates CCP-aligned baseline integrity	Public
Additionality demonstration	Shows regulatory surplus and common practice results	Public
Safeguard screening results	Confirms no significant harm	Public
Stakeholder engagement records	Demonstrates consultation and inclusion	Public
FPIC documentation (if relevant)	Confirms Indigenous Peoples’ consent	Public (sensitive details redacted)
Host Party alignment assessment	Ensures consistency with national policy	Public
Supporting evidence (maps, surveys, datasets)	Underpins project claims	Public or partially redacted

B.4 Documentation Required During Monitoring

Monitoring documentation must allow independent verification of all project data. ICVCM requires transparency regarding all monitored parameters, so PCS obligates Project Proponents to maintain evidence records that are comprehensive, traceable, and auditable.

Monitoring documentation includes:

• all raw data underlying monitored parameters;

• calibration certificates for equipment;

• field records, survey sheets, sample logs, and geospatial datasets;

• digital monitoring outputs, including metadata;

• documentation of deviations and corrective actions;

• updated safeguard and stakeholder engagement documentation;

• grievance mechanism records maintained during the monitoring period.

All monitoring evidence must be retained and made available to the VVB, with a summary disclosed publicly through Monitoring Reports.

Table B-3: Monitoring Documentation Requirements

Document	Purpose	Disclosure
Monitoring Report (MR)	Summarizes all monitored parameters and results	Public
Raw monitoring datasets	Enables verification of results	Available to VVB; summary public
Calibration and QA/QC records	Ensures data accuracy	Available to VVB
Records of deviations	Documents changes and impacts	Public summary
Updated safeguard indicators	Confirms no harm during implementation	Public
Grievance records	Demonstrates accessible accountability	Public summary

B.5 Verification Documentation

Verification documentation is crucial to ICVCM’s assurance framework. The Verification Report must be sufficiently detailed to allow independent stakeholders to understand how the VVB reached its conclusions.

PCS requires the VVB to prepare a structured Verification Report that includes:

• verification objectives and scope;

• criteria applied during verification;

• assessment of monitoring data accuracy;

• evaluation of baseline and additionality application;

• review of safeguard performance;

• evaluation of FPIC maintenance (where applicable);

• assessment of Host Party authorization;

• identification of non-conformities;

• the final verification opinion.

All Verification Reports must be published through the PCS Registry, ensuring transparency.

B.6 Host Party Authorization Documentation

Where ICVCM requirements apply to internationally transferred mitigation outcomes, Host Party authorization documents must be included. These documents must:

• be issued by the designated national authority;

• specify the exact reporting period;

• confirm whether corresponding adjustments are applied;

• align with project information and PCS Registry entries.

A summary of Host Party authorization must be disclosed publicly in the PCS Registry, while the official communication may be partially redacted where required by national law.

B.7 Issuance Documentation

At issuance, PCS requires disclosure of:

• the final issuance quantity;

• the methodology version applied;

• verification results;

• Host Party authorization (if applicable);

• any deductions (leakage, uncertainty, non-conformities);

• whether the issuance is ICVCM-compliant;

• identification of any volume issued without ICVCM marks.

This information is presented clearly in the PCS Registry for each issuance batch.

B.8 Summary

This Annex consolidates all documentation requirements necessary for assessing ICVCM compliance within PCS.

By ensuring complete and transparent documentation at the methodology, project design, monitoring, verification, authorization, and issuance stages, PCS provides a clear and auditable foundation for the application of the ICVCM CCP-Compliant mark. These documentation rules reinforce program transparency, integrity, and confidence among market participants and Host Parties.