A L E J A N D R A M E J I A
S E P T E M B E R , 2 0 1 5
Savings To Code Discussion:Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets
2
Current Measure Type Rule Set
September 2015
No No
Yes Yes
Code Baseline
Existing Efficiency Baseline for 1/3 EUL
Code Baseline for 2/3 EUL
Age > EULEquipment Failed?
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets
3
There is an Implementation Problem with the Current Rule Set
September 2015
No
Yes
Code Baseline
Age > EUL
Existing Efficiency Baseline for 1/3 EUL
Code Baseline for 2/3 EUL
Commission policy is to have no default option—to allow field conditions to dictate measure application type.
However, implementation has led to assumed “Yes” answer unless “preponderance of evidence” standards are met.
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 4 September 2015
However, implementing a Repair Indefinitely measure type goes beyond fixing implementation of current Commission Policy.
It adds a completely new option to be implemented correctly…
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets
5
Proposed Repair Indefinitely “Master Rule Set”
September 2015
Code Baseline
Existing Efficiency Baseline for 1/3 EUL
Code Baseline for 2/3 EULAge > EULEquipment
Failed?
Existing Conditions Baseline
No No
Yes
Yes
No
YesMeet RI Criteria?1. Not catastrophic failure2. History of repair3. Cheaper to repair
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets
6
Question to be Clarified
September 2015
What does Repair Indefinitely application mean? Existing conditions baseline for how long?
The retrofit equipment’s entire EUL?
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 7 September 2015
Now on to tailoring the “Master Rule Set” to the individual measures we are characterizing…
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets
8
MF Boilers
September 2015
1. The failure mode is not catastrophic How can this be established?
Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
2. There is a history of rebuild and repair rather than replace
How can this be established? Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
3. It is more economic to rebuild and repair than to replace How can this be established?
Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets
9
MF Windows
September 2015
1. The failure mode is not catastrophic How can this be established?
Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
2. There is a history of rebuild and repair rather than replace
How can this be established? Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
3. It is more economic to rebuild and repair than to replace How can this be established?
Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets
10
Commercial HVAC
September 2015
1. The failure mode is not catastrophic How can this be established?
Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
2. There is a history of rebuild and repair rather than replace
How can this be established? Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
3. It is more economic to rebuild and repair than to replace How can this be established?
Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets
11
Air Compressors
September 2015
1. The failure mode is not catastrophic How can this be established?
Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
2. There is a history of rebuild and repair rather than replace
How can this be established? Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
3. It is more economic to rebuild and repair than to replace How can this be established?
Should it be case-by-case or “deemed” for particular equipment?
Top Related