Skip to main content

SSS Methodology

Why this methodology exists​

Organizations often fund carbon-free resources through standard utility rates but cannot credibly claim that value in Scope 2 market-based reporting because of:

  1. No REC/EAC verification path for some default-supply resources
  2. No independent third-party verification of utility-level allocation methods
  3. Reporting gaps between utility portfolio data and customer-facing audit documentation
  4. Inconsistent treatment of utility inputs across reporting cycles

SSS addresses these gaps with a transparent, repeatable, and reviewable framework.

Methodology objectives​

  • Create defensible pro-rata allocation of qualified utility carbon-free energy
  • Align reporting outputs with Scope 2 market-based quality expectations
  • Preserve traceability from source datasets to final customer claims
  • Reduce risk of double counting and resource-shuffling outcomes

End-to-end process (6 steps)​

  1. Collect source datasets
    • Utility resource mix, generation and retirement context, retail sales denominators, and customer load data
  2. Normalize + validate inputs
    • Unit checks, period alignment, and consistency controls
  3. Apply qualification rules
    • Determine which carbon-free volumes are eligible for allocation
  4. Run pro-rata allocation
    • Allocate qualified volumes to customers by formula
  5. Generate reporting outputs
    • Build customer-ready and reviewer-ready report packages
  6. Verification support
    • Maintain evidence trail, assumptions register, and change logs for third-party review

Core pro-rata allocation formula​

(Qualified Utility CFE / Utility Retail Sales) × Customer Load = Customer Claimable CFE

Worked example​

  • Qualified Utility CFE = 1,200,000 MWh
  • Utility Retail Sales = 6,000,000 MWh
  • Customer Load = 50,000 MWh

Allocation factor = 1,200,000 / 6,000,000 = 0.20

Customer claimable CFE = 0.20 × 50,000 = 10,000 MWh

This claimable CFE quantity is then carried through documentation and quality checks for reporting use.

Data hierarchy and evidence priority​

When multiple sources exist, SSS applies a quality hierarchy:

  1. Supplier-attested / utility-verified data (highest confidence)
  2. Regulatory filings / official published disclosures
  3. Fallback public proxy estimates (clearly flagged and limited)

Each report records which level was used and why.

Scope 2 alignment guardrails​

SSS is structured to support market-based accounting expectations by emphasizing:

  • Allocation transparency (formula, assumptions, and denominator clarity)
  • Temporal and boundary consistency
  • Evidence traceability for assurance
  • Explicit treatment of exclusions and limitations

Anti-shuffling and double-counting controls​

  • Controlled eligibility filters before allocation
  • Source and claim boundary checks
  • Separation of utility allocation from voluntary procurement claims
  • Review checkpoints for overlapping instruments

Outputs delivered​

  • Customer claim summary (MWh and implied emissions impact context)
  • Methodology appendix with assumptions and formulas
  • Data lineage and source references
  • Verification-ready evidence packet

FAQ (methodology)​

Is this supplier qualification or resource qualification?​

Primarily resource qualification with supplier data quality controls. Eligibility is tied to qualified carbon-free volumes and defined reporting boundaries.

Does SSS replace voluntary RECs or PPAs?​

No. SSS establishes a utility-allocation baseline. Voluntary instruments can then address residual load.

How often should methodology runs be refreshed?​

Typically aligned to reporting cadence (monthly, quarterly, annual), with reruns when source data revisions are material.

Next step​

Book a Demo or contact info@sssregistry.com / support@sssregistry.com.