1. ALEJANDRA MEJIA SEPTEMBER, 2015 Savings To Code Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets

2. Current Measure Type Rule Set September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 2 No Yes Code Baseline Existing Efficiency Baseline for 1/3 EUL Code Baseline for 2/3 EUL Age > EUL Equipment Failed?

3. There is an Implementation Problem with the Current Rule Set September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 3 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.

4. September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 4 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…

5. Proposed Repair Indefinitely “Master Rule Set” September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 5 Code Baseline Existing Efficiency Baseline for 1/3 EUL Code Baseline for 2/3 EUL Age > EUL Equipment Failed? Existing Conditions Baseline No Yes No Yes Meet RI Criteria? 1. Not catastrophic failure 2. History of repair 3. Cheaper to repair

6. Question to be Clarified September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 6 What does Repair Indefinitely application mean?  Existing conditions baseline for how long?  The retrofit equipment’s entire EUL?

7. September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 7 Now on to tailoring the “Master Rule Set” to the individual measures we are characterizing…

8. MF Boilers September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 8 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?

9. MF Windows September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 9 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?

10. Commercial HVAC September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 10 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?

11. Air Compressors September 2015 Discussion: Repair Indefinitely Rule Sets 11 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?