[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 241 (Monday, December 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71383-71387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-24438]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy


Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision and 
Order Granting a Waiver to Fujitsu General From the Department of 
Energy Residential Central Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure 
[Case No. CAC-010]

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Decision and Order.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice publishes the Department of Energy's Decision and 
Order in Case No. CAC-010, which grants a Waiver to Fujitsu General 
Limited (Fujitsu) from the existing Department of Energy (DOE) 
residential central air conditioner and heat pump test procedure for 
specified Airstage Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) multi-split 
products. As a condition of this waiver, Fujitsu must test and rate its 
Airstage multi-split products according to the alternate test procedure 
set forth in this notice.

DATES: This Decision and Order is effective December 17, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 
1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: 
(202) 586-9611. E-mail: [email protected].
    Francine Pinto or Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of 
the General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-72, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0103. Telephone: (202) 586-9507. E-mail: 
[email protected] or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(l), notice 
is hereby given of the issuance of the Decision and Order set forth 
below. In this Decision and Order, DOE grants Fujitsu a Waiver from the 
applicable DOE residential central air conditioner and heat pump test 
procedure under 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, for its 
Airstage VRF multi-split products, subject to a condition requiring 
Fujitsu to test and rate its Airstage products pursuant to the 
alternate test procedure provided in this notice. Today's decision 
requires that Fujitsu may not make any representations concerning the 
energy efficiency of these products unless such product has been tested 
in accordance

[[Page 71384]]

with the DOE test procedure, consistent with the provisions and 
restrictions in the alternate test procedure set forth in the Decision 
and Order below, and such representation fairly discloses the results 
of such testing.\1\ (42 U.S.C. 6293(c))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Consistent with the statute, distributors, retailers, and 
private labelers are held to the same standard when making 
representations regarding the energy efficiency of these products. 
(42 U.S.C. 6293(c))

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 4, 2007.
Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

Decision and Order

    In the Matter of: Fujitsu General Limited (Fujitsu) (Case No. CAC-
010).

Background

    Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) sets 
forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency, including 
Part B of Title III which establishes the ``Energy Conservation Program 
for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.'' (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309) 
Similar to the program in Part B, Part C of Title III provides for an 
energy efficiency program titled, ``Certain Industrial Equipment,'' 
which includes commercial air conditioning equipment, package boilers, 
water heaters, and other types of commercial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 
6311-6317)
    Today's notice involves residential products under Part B, as well 
as commercial equipment under Part C. Under both parts, the statute 
specifically includes definitions, test procedures, labeling 
provisions, energy conservation standards, and the authority to require 
information and reports from manufacturers. With respect to test 
procedures, both parts generally authorize the Secretary of Energy (the 
Secretary) to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to 
produce results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and 
estimated operating costs, and that are not unduly burdensome to 
conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3), 6314(a)(2))
    Relevant to the current Petition for Waiver, the test procedure for 
residential central air conditioning and heat pump products is set 
forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M. For commercial package 
air conditioning and heating equipment, EPCA provides that ``the test 
procedures shall be those generally accepted industry testing 
procedures or rating procedures developed or recognized by the Air-
Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute [ARI] or by the American 
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers 
[ASHRAE], as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 and in effect on 
June 30, 1992.'' (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) Under 42 U.S.C. 
6314(a)(4)(B), the statute further directs the Secretary to amend the 
test procedure for a covered commercial product if the industry test 
procedure is amended, unless the Secretary determines that such a 
modified test procedure does not meet the statutory criteria set forth 
in 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) and (3).
    On December 8, 2006, DOE published a final rule adopting test 
procedures for commercial package air conditioning and heating 
equipment, effective January 8, 2007. 71 FR 71340. The test procedures 
in that final rule apply to three-phase equipment. However, there is no 
prescribed test procedure for single-phase, small commercial package 
air conditioning and heating equipment.
    In addition, DOE's regulations contain provisions allowing a person 
to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for covered 
consumer products, when the petitioner's basic model contains one or 
more design characteristics that prevent testing according to the 
prescribed test procedures, or when the prescribed test procedures may 
evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true 
energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative 
data. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1). Petitioners must include in their petition 
any alternate test procedures known to evaluate the basic model in a 
manner representative of its energy consumption. 10 CFR 
430.27(b)(1)(iii).
    The Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
(the Assistant Secretary) may grant a waiver subject to conditions, 
including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 430.27(l). In 
general, a waiver terminates on the effective date of a final rule 
which prescribes amended test procedures appropriate to the model 
series manufactured by the petitioner, thereby eliminating any need for 
the continuation of the waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(m).
    The waiver process also allows any interested person who has 
submitted a Petition for Waiver to file an Application for Interim 
Waiver of the applicable test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 
430.27(a)(2). The Assistant Secretary will grant an Interim Waiver 
request if it is determined that the applicant will experience economic 
hardship if the Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the 
Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary 
determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to 
grant immediate relief pending a determination on the Petition for 
Waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(g). An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a 
period of 180 days or until DOE issues its determination on the 
Petition for Waiver, whichever occurs first, and may be extended by DOE 
for 180 days, if necessary. 10 CFR 430.27(h).
    On June 14, 2004, Fujitsu filed a Petition for Waiver from the test 
procedures applicable to its Airstage line of residential and 
commercial VRF multi-split air conditioning and heating equipment.\2\ 
Fujitsu's petition requested a waiver from both the residential and 
commercial test procedures. The applicable residential test procedures 
are contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, and, as 
explained above, there is no applicable commercial test procedure for 
such products under 10 CFR part 430 or 431. Fujitsu seeks a waiver from 
the test procedures for this product class because the design 
characteristics of its Airstage VRF multi-split equipment prevent 
testing according to the currently prescribed residential test 
procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Fujitsu Airstage VRF multi-split product line at issue 
here involves single-phase equipment for both residential and 
commercial use. Because there is no DOE test procedure for single-
phase, small commercial package air-conditioning and heating 
equipment, no waiver is required for Fujitsu's single-phase 
commercial Airstage equipment. Nonetheless, Fujitsu's Airstage VRF 
multi-split products are properly classified as ``consumer 
products,'' because, to a significant extent, they are for personal 
use or consumption by individuals (given their frequent residential 
applications). (42 U.S.C. 6291(1)(B)) Thus, the Fujitsu Airstage VRF 
multi-split products require a waiver from DOE's test procedure for 
residential central air conditioners and heat pumps, under 10 CFR 
part 430, subpart B, Appendix M.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 4, 2005, DOE published Fujitsu's Petition for Waiver in 
the Federal Register. 70 FR 5980. On August 8, 2005, Fujitsu separately 
filed an Application for Interim Waiver for the same products for which 
it petitioned for a waiver on June 14, 2004. DOE granted the 
Application for Interim Waiver on January 5, 2006.
    In a similar and relevant case, DOE published a Petition for Waiver 
from Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc. (MEUS) for products 
of the same type as Fujitsu's Airstage VRF multi-split products. 71 FR 
14858 (March 24, 2006). In the March 24, 2006 Federal Register notice, 
DOE also published and requested comment on an alternate test procedure 
for the MEUS products at issue. DOE stated that if it specified an 
alternate test

[[Page 71385]]

procedure for MEUS in the subsequent Decision and Order, DOE would 
consider applying the same procedure to similar waivers for residential 
and commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps, including such 
products for which waivers had previously been granted. Most of the 
comments favored DOE's proposed alternate test procedure. Also, there 
was general agreement that an alternate test procedure is necessary 
while a final test procedure for these types of products is being 
developed. The MEUS Decision and Order, including the alternate test 
procedure, was published in the Federal Register on April 9, 2007. 72 
FR 17528.
    DOE received comments on the Fujitsu petition from Carrier 
Corporation (Carrier), Trane Division of American Standard Inc. 
(Trane), Lennox International Inc. (Lennox), and MEUS. These comments 
are discussed in further detail below.

Assertions and Determinations

Fujitsu's Petition for Waiver
    On June 14, 2004, Fujitsu submitted a Petition for Waiver from the 
test procedures applicable to residential and commercial package air-
conditioning and heating equipment for its Airstage VRF multi-split 
products. Fujitsu's petition asserts that the energy use of its 
Airstage systems cannot be accurately measured using the current test 
procedure for the following reasons:
    1. The test procedure provides for testing of a pair of indoor and 
outdoor assemblies making up a typical split system, but it provides no 
direction about how Airstage units, with more than ten thousand 
combinations of indoor units, could be evaluated with just one outdoor 
unit test.
    2. The test procedure calls for testing ``matched assemblies,'' but 
Airstage systems are designed to be used in zoned systems where the 
capacity of the indoor units does not match the capacity of the outdoor 
unit.
    In summary, the bases for Fujitsu's Petition for Waiver involve: 
(1) The problem of being physically unable to test most of the complete 
systems in a laboratory; (2) the regulatory requirement to test the 
highest-sales-volume combination; and (3) the lack of a method for 
predicting the performance of untested combinations. These were the 
same bases underlying the MEUS waiver discussed above.
    Therefore, the Fujitsu petition requested that DOE grant a waiver 
from existing test procedures until such time as a representative test 
procedure is developed and adopted for this class of products. Fujitsu 
did not include an alternate test procedure in its Petition for Waiver. 
However, DOE understands that Fujitsu is actively working with ARI to 
develop test procedures that accurately reflect the operation and 
energy consumption of these particular product designs.
    Of the four comments on the Fujitsu Petition for Waiver, only MEUS 
supported the petition. Carrier claimed Fujitsu's Airstage VRF systems 
could be tested using the calorimeter air enthalpy test method set 
forth in ASHRAE Standard 37, ``Methods of Testing for Rating Unitary 
Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment.'' Although DOE believes that 
use of this test, as Carrier recommends, is theoretically possible and 
would likely provide more accurate results in the cooling mode, it is 
not a practical solution because existing calorimeter test rooms are 
too small to test Fujitsu's VRF Airstage systems with more than three 
or four indoor units. Lennox and Trane asserted that without a testing 
and rating requirement, Fujitsu could make energy efficiency claims 
without the burden of providing standardized ratings. DOE believes that 
its alternate test procedure (discussed below) effectively addresses 
these objections.
    As previously noted, DOE recently addressed a situation regarding 
multi-split products that is relevant to the Fujitsu products at issue 
here. Specifically, on March 24, 2006, DOE published in the Federal 
Register a Petition for Waiver from MEUS concerning its R410A CITY 
MULTI VRFZ products, which are very similar to Fujitsu's VRF Airstage 
multi-split products. 71 FR 14858. In that publication, DOE stated:

    To provide a test procedure from which manufacturers can make 
valid representations, the Department is considering setting an 
alternate test procedure for MEUS in the subsequent Decision and 
Order. Furthermore, if DOE specifies an alternate test procedure for 
MEUS, DOE is considering applying the alternate test procedure to 
similar waivers for residential and commercial central air 
conditioners and heat pumps. Such cases include Samsung's petition 
for its DVM products (70 FR 9629, February 28, 2005), Fujitsu's 
petition for its Airstage variable refrigerant flow (VRF) products 
(70 FR 5980, February 4, 2005), and MEUS's petition for its R22 CITY 
MULTI VRFZ products. (69 FR 52660 August 27, 2004).

71 FR 14858, 14861 (March 24, 2006).

    Since that time, DOE has developed such an alternate test 
procedure. Therefore, to enable Fujitsu to make energy efficiency 
representations for its specified Airstage VRF multi-split products, 
DOE has decided to require use of the alternate test procedure 
described below, as a condition of Fujitsu's waiver. This alternate 
test procedure is substantially the same as the one that DOE applied to 
the MEUS waiver.
DOE's Alternate Test Procedure
    The alternate test procedure has two basic components. First, it 
permits Fujitsu to designate a ``tested combination'' for each model of 
outdoor unit. The indoor units designated as part of the tested 
combination must meet specific requirements. For example, the tested 
combination must have from two to five indoor units so that it can be 
tested in available test facilities. The tested combination must be 
tested according to the applicable DOE test procedure, as modified by 
the provisions of the alternate test procedure as set forth below. 
Second, having a DOE test procedure that can be applied to its products 
allows Fujitsu to represent the energy efficiency of that product, 
because any such representation must fairly disclose the results of 
such testing. The DOE test procedure, as modified by the alternate test 
procedure set forth in this Decision and Order, provides for testing of 
a non-tested combination in two ways: (1) At an energy efficiency level 
determined under a DOE-approved alternative rating method; or (2) if 
the first method is not available, then at the efficiency level of the 
tested combination utilizing the same outdoor unit. Until an 
alternative rating method is developed, all combinations with a 
particular outdoor unit may use the rating of the combination tested 
with that outdoor unit.
    DOE believes that adopting this alternative test procedure as 
described above (thereby allowing Fujitsu to make energy efficiency 
representations for non-tested combinations) is reasonable because the 
outdoor unit is the principal efficiency driver. The current DOE test 
procedure \3\ tends to rate these products conservatively, because they 
are tested under conditions where they operate less efficiently than 
found in typical use. The multi-zoning feature of these products, which 
enables them to cool only those portions of the building that require 
cooling, uses less energy than if the unit is operated to cool the 
entire home or a comparatively larger area of a commercial building in 
response to a single thermostat. Therefore, the alternate test 
procedure will provide a conservative basis for assessing the energy 
efficiency for such products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 71386]]

    The alternate test procedure applies to both residential and 
commercial multi-split products. However, some provisions are specific 
to residential or commercial products. For example, section (A) of the 
alternate test procedure has different provisions for residential and 
commercial products. In contrast, section (B), which defines the 
combinations of indoor and outdoor units to test, and section (C), 
which sets forth the requirements for making representations, are the 
same for both residential and commercial products.
    Section (A) of the alternate test procedure distinguishes between 
residential and commercial products for two reasons. First, 10 CFR 
430.24, used for residential products, already has requirements for 
selecting split-system combinations based on the highest sales volume. 
However, part 431 of 10 CFR, which applies to commercial products, has 
no comparable requirements. Therefore, section (A) of the alternate 
test procedure modifies the existing residential and commercial 
requirements so that both residential and commercial products can use 
the same definition of a ``tested combination,'' which is set forth in 
section (B). Second, section (A) requires several test procedure 
revisions to determine the seasonal energy efficiency ratio and heating 
seasonal performance factor for the tested combination of residential 
products. No test procedure revisions are introduced for commercial 
products because EPCA directs DOE to adopt generally accepted industry 
test standards (unless amendments to those industry test procedures are 
determined by clear and convincing evidence not to meet the 
requirements of the statute). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)) The changes for 
residential products relate to: (1) The requirement that all indoor 
units operate during all tests; (2) the restriction on using only one 
indoor test room; (3) the selection of the modulation levels (maximum, 
minimum, and a specified intermediate speed) used when testing; and (4) 
the algorithm for estimating performance over the intermediate speed 
operating range. DOE proposed these changes in its July 20, 2006 notice 
of proposed rulemaking. 71 FR 41320.
    For today's Decision and Order, the changes made by the final rule 
published in the Federal Register on October 22, 2007 (72 FR 59906) to 
test procedure sections 2.1, 2.2.3, 2.4.1, 3.2.4 (including Table 6), 
3.6.4 (including Table 12), 4.1.4.2, and 4.2.4.2 constitute mandatory 
elements of the alternate test procedure. These changes allow indoor 
units to cycle off, allow the manufacturer to specify the compressor 
speed used during certain tests, and introduce a new algorithm for 
estimating power consumption.
    With regard to the laboratory testing of both residential and 
commercial products, some of the difficulties associated with the 
existing test procedure are avoided by the alternate test procedure's 
requirements for choosing the indoor units to be used in the 
manufacturer-specified tested combination. For example, in addition to 
limiting the number of indoor units, another requirement is that all of 
the indoor units must be subject to meeting the same minimum external 
static pressure. This requirement allows the test lab to manifold the 
outlets from each indoor unit into a common plenum that supplies air to 
a single airflow measuring apparatus. This requirement eliminates 
situations in which some of the indoor units are ducted and some are 
non-ducted. Without this requirement, the laboratory must evaluate the 
capacity of a subgroup of indoor coils separately, and then sum the 
separate capacities to obtain the overall system capacity. This would 
require that the test laboratory be equipped with multiple airflow 
measuring apparatuses (which is unlikely), or that the test laboratory 
connect its one airflow measuring apparatus to one or more common 
indoor units until the contribution of each indoor unit has been 
measured.
    Furthermore, DOE stated in the notice publishing the MEUS Petition 
for Waiver that if the Department decides to specify an alternate test 
procedure for MEUS, it would consider applying the procedure to waivers 
for similar residential and commercial central air conditioners and 
heat pumps produced by other manufacturers. 71 FR 14858, 14861 (March 
24, 2006). Most of the comments received by DOE in response to the 
March 2006 notice favored the proposed alternate test procedure. 
Commenters generally agreed that an alternate test procedure is 
appropriate for an interim period while a final test procedure for 
these products is being developed.
    In light of the discussion above, DOE believes that the problems 
described above would prevent testing of Fujitsu's Airstage VRF multi-
split products according to the test procedures currently prescribed in 
10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M. After reviewing and considering 
all of the comments submitted regarding the proposed alternate test 
procedure, DOE has decided to adopt the proposed alternate test 
procedure, with the clarifications discussed above. DOE will also 
consider applying the same alternate test procedure to waivers for 
similar central air conditioners and heat pumps.
Consultations With Other Agencies
    DOE consulted with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concerning 
the Fujitsu Petition for Waiver. The FTC did not have any objections to 
the issuance of a waiver to Fujitsu.

Conclusion

    After careful consideration of all the materials submitted by 
Fujitsu, the comments received, and consultation with the FTC, it is 
ordered that:
    (1) The ``Petition for Waiver'' filed by Fujitsu General Limited 
(Fujitsu) (Case No. CAC-010) is hereby granted as set forth in the 
paragraphs below.
    (2) Fujitsu shall not be required to test or rate its Airstage 
variable refrigerant flow multi-split air conditioner and heat pump 
models listed below on the basis of the current test procedures 
contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, but shall be 
required to test and rate such products according to the alternate test 
procedure as set forth in paragraph (3).

Outdoor unit, Heat pump type: AOU54U****
51.9 kBtu/hr cooling/54.4 kBtu/hr heating, single phase, 208-230Vac, 
60Hz.
Outdoor unit, Cooling-only type: AOU54F****
51.9 kBtu/hr cooling, single phase, 208-230Vac, 60Hz.

Indoor units:
AR Series, Compact duct type (ceiling/floor standing), ARU 7/9/12/14/
18/20/22****
AR Series, Duct type, ARU25/30/36/45****
AS Series, Wall mounted type, ASU7/9/12/14/18/24/30****
AU Series, Compact ceiling cassette type, AUU7/9/12/14/18****
AU Series, Ceiling cassette type, AUU20/25/30/36/45/54****

    The ``****'' denotes engineering differences in the basic models.
    (3) Alternate test procedure.
    (A) Fujitsu shall be required to test the products listed in 
paragraph (2) above according to the test procedures for central air 
conditioners and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 430, 
except that:
    (i) Fujitsu shall not be required to comply with: (1) The first 
sentence in 10 CFR 430.24(m)(2), which refers to ``that combination 
manufactured by the condensing unit manufacturer likely to have the 
largest volume of retail sales;'' and (2) the third sentence in 10 CFR 
430(m)(2), including the provisions of 10 CFR 430(m)(2)(i) and (ii). 
Instead of

[[Page 71387]]

testing the combinations likely to have the highest volume of retail 
sales, Fujitsu may test a ``tested combination'' selected in accordance 
with the provisions of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph. 
Additionally, instead of following the provisions of 10 CFR 
430(m)(2)(i) and (ii) for every other system combination using the same 
outdoor unit as the tested combination, Fujitsu shall make 
representations concerning the Airstage variable refrigerant flow 
multi-split products covered in this waiver according to the provisions 
of subparagraph (C) below.
    (ii) Fujitsu shall be required to comply with 10 CFR part 430, 
subpart B, Appendix M as amended by the final rule published in the 
Federal Register on October 22, 2007. 72 FR 59906. The test procedure 
changes applicable to multi-split products are in sections: 2.1, 2.2.3, 
2.4.1, 3.2.4 (including Table 6), 3.6.4 (including Table 12), 4.1.4.2, 
and 4.2.4.2.
    (B) Tested combination. The term ``tested combination'' means a 
sample basic model comprised of units that are production units, or are 
representative of production units, of the basic model being tested. 
For the purposes of this waiver, the tested combination shall have the 
following features:
    (i) The basic model of a variable refrigerant flow system used as a 
tested combination shall consist of an outdoor unit that is matched 
with between two and five indoor units.
    (ii) The indoor units shall:
    (a) Represent the highest sales volume type models;
    (b) Together, have a capacity between 95 percent and 105 percent of 
the capacity of the outdoor unit;
    (c) Not, individually, have a capacity greater than 50 percent of 
the capacity of the outdoor unit;
    (d) Have a fan speed that is consistent with the manufacturer's 
specifications; and
    (e) All have the same external static pressure.
    (C) Representations. In making representations about the energy 
efficiency of its Airstage variable refrigerant flow multi-split air 
conditioner and heat pump products, for compliance, marketing, or other 
purposes, Fujitsu must fairly disclose the results of testing under the 
DOE test procedure, doing so in a manner consistent with the provisions 
outlined below:
    (i) For Airstage multi-split combinations tested in accordance with 
this alternate test procedure, Fujitsu must disclose these test 
results.
    (ii) For Airstage multi-split combinations that are not tested, 
Fujitsu must make a disclosure based on the testing results for the 
tested combination and which are consistent with either of the two 
following methods, except that only method (a) may be used, if 
available:
    (a) Representation of non-tested combinations according to an 
alternative rating method approved by DOE; or
    (b) Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy 
efficiency level as the tested combination with the same outdoor unit.
    (4) This waiver shall remain in effect from the date of issuance of 
this Order until April 21, 2008, which is the effective date of a DOE 
final rule prescribing an amended test procedure appropriate to the 
model series manufactured by Fujitsu listed above. This final rule was 
published on October 22, 2007 (72 FR 59906).
    (5) This waiver is conditioned upon the presumed validity of 
statements, representations, and documentary materials provided by the 
petitioner. This waiver may be revoked or modified at any time upon a 
determination that the factual basis underlying the Petition for Waiver 
is incorrect, or DOE determines that the results from the alternate 
test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true energy 
consumption characteristics.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 4, 2007.


Alexander A. Karsner,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. E7-24438 Filed 12-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P