As the days turn colder and the winter air breezes through Harvard's windows, administrators will still be busy figuring out which brand of storm windows they should have installed this year.

Stephen S.J. Hall, vice president for administration, said Monday that if the Faculty and administration had no dispute about different types of windows, the Faculty might have been able to chop off $500,000 from its ever-rising fuel costs.

Although Hall later disputed the $500,000 figure and the existence of a Faculty-administration rift, there remains no decision on the windows which could have saved 15 per cent of the Faculty's heating bill.

Administrators are currently conducting storm window tests on Thayer and Holworthy, outfitted with the Faculty's favored triple-tracks, and Kirkland House, decked in Mass Hall's choice of two-track, to settle the matter once and for all.

But Mass Hall's models have gotten off to a false start, causing Devac, the Milwaukee-based double-track maker, to fly in a team of engineers to investigate charges of window sticking and improper fitting at Kirkland House.

If the administration finds that too many students in the test dormitories leave their windows open, then no purchase may be made. But for now the Faculty favors the three-track because it costs less and has a movable screen, while the administration wants the fixed-screen two-track, which Hall says may conserve more heat energy.

Nevertheless, Consumer Affairs reports that the installation of any storm windows can save up to 18 per cent and pay back installation costs plus interest within seven years. And Don Johnson, an engineer for Devac, said yesterday that every day that Harvard goes without residential storm windows it costs the Faculty "a lot of money."