Integration Issues for RTF Guidelines: Savings, Lifetimes and Cost/Benefit. October 24, 2012 Regional Technical Forum Presented by: Michael Baker, SBW. Topics for Today. Review the Guidelines Integration Plan Obtain Guidance on How to Resolve Integration Issues
Integration Issues for RTF Guidelines: Savings, Lifetimes and Cost/Benefit
October 24, 2012
Regional Technical Forum
Presented by: Michael Baker, SBW
Life Guidelines allow measure specifications that are more detailed than found in the Savings specification. This would result (for UES) in more than one life value associated with a line in a measure table. These values would have to be weighted according to market shares.
Some UES measures have 200+ applications in their measure tables.
In addition, life adjustment factors can reflect the specific characteristics for a cohort of participants in an single operator’s program.
Is this getting too detailed?
If we need this detail to get life correct, do we also need it to get UES or cost/benefit correct?
The quality standard for savings determines how good the data needed to be to justify and measure category (Proven, provisional, etc.)
What is the purpose of the quality standard for Life guideline if values of any quality are acceptable? Why not simply list sources in order of quality, search in that order and then document where you found best values.
Cost does not use quality standards, just best available.
UES measures get Cost/Benefit and Life summary sheets added to savings workbook.
Should Cost/Benefit and Life sections be added to standard protocol outline and custom measure report outline.
Where should the derivation of the Cost/Benefit and Life be documented? No standardized Excel home in either case, as standard protocol may not have a single RTF calculator and there is no standardized Excel product for custom.
Savings Guidelines refer to measure delivery. Elsewhere installation and implementation is used. Can we use delivery throughout?
Costs/Benefits has “Standard Information Workbook”, Life uses Default Table. Should we have a common name for default values? Is Default ok?
Both Cost/Benefit and Life guidelines have similar sections dealing with how to analyze data.
Are these also applicable to data supporting various savings parameters?
Should we have a common appendix that all guidelines address based on the one in Cost/Benefit Guidelines
Life summary sheet tracks dates for RTF presentations and decisions.
Should there be a central system for doing this. RTF website?