The purpose of this meeting is to discuss where the RTF should draw its boundaries on quality standards. To frame the conversation, by "quality standards," we will specifically discuss what is sufficient for Proven.
Reminder on Terms
- Proven: RTF considers the measure to be sufficiently reliable that programs can use it directly to claim savings. All that is required is to count the number of verified delivered units and multiple that by the UES value.
- Not-Proven: Anything else. If small enough (i.e. a Small Saver) no additional research is warranted. Otherwise, the RTF will develop a Research Strategy which addresses data required in order to move the measure to Proven.
Questions for the Subcommittee
- What is the scope of the quality standard with respect to the unit energy consumption (UEC) verses the unit energy savings (UES)? For example, when determining whether a measure is Proven, should the RTF focus on how well it knows the UECs (both incumbent and efficient technologies), or should it also include consideration of how well it knows the underlying stock or market data required to develop the UES?
- What is the scope of the quality standard with respect to timing? Does the quality standard of Proven" only apply to the first year, to the sunset period of the measure, or to the lifetime?
- Should the RTF reconsider its approach to remaining useful life (RUL)?
Considerations when answering these questions: Whatever is included in the boundary for quality standards and Proven will (if not sufficiently reliable) require research to move the measure to Proven and, in the meantime, will require the measure to undergo full impact evaluation until those aspects move forward.