LCFS - Investigate missing “fuel code” option in carbon intensity determination (2019–2023) Test
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 6
- Forks
- 6
- Avg merge
- 2d 4h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 87
Description
**Describe the Bug**
In historical compliance reports (2019–2023), the “fuel code” option is missing from the carbon intensity determination pathway for petroleum fuels.
**Expected Behaviour**
Where applicable under the Act, the system should include a “fuel code” option as part of determining carbon intensity for petroleum fuels in 2019–2023 reports.
**Actual Behaviour**
The “fuel code” option is not available in the carbon intensity selection, limiting users to incomplete or incorrect determination pathways.
**Implications**
- Incomplete or incorrect carbon intensity determination under the Act
- Inconsistency with expected reporting logic and fuel code structure
- Risk of non-compliant reporting outcomes
- Increased manual intervention by analysts
**Steps to Reproduce**
1. Open a 2019–2023 compliance report
2. Enter petroleum fuel data (gasoline or diesel)
3. Navigate to carbon intensity / section selection
4. Observe absence of “fuel code” option
**Acceptance Criteria**
- “Fuel code” option appears where required for 2019–2023 reporting
- Availability aligns with Act-based carbon intensity determination rules
- Logic is consistent with fuel code configuration and lookup tables
- Behaviour is validated against expected pathways defined in card #867
**Additional context**
- Related to card #867 (section selection restriction for petroleum fuels)
- Likely caused by lookup table or mapping issue affecting historical reporting years
- Identified during testing session review of carbon intensity determination logic
Contributor guide
Research direction
Reproduce the missing option in a 2019–2023 compliance report using petroleum fuel data, then compare the carbon-intensity determination path with the expected pathways in card #867. Inspect the fuel-code configuration or lookup tables and the historical reporting-year mapping. Done means the option appears where required and its availability matches the Act-based rules and expected pathways.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- backend
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 48/100