[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 239 (Thursday, December 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75408-75417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-29335]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Case No. CAC-020]


Energy Conservation Program for Commercial Equipment: Publication 
of the Petition for Waiver From Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, 
Inc. and Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver From the 
Department of Energy Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump 
Test Procedure

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

ACTION: Notice of petition for waiver, granting of application for 
interim waiver, and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of and publishes a Petition for 
Waiver from Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. (Mitsubishi). 
The Petition for Waiver (hereafter ``Mitsubishi Petition'') requests a 
waiver of the Department of Energy (DOE) test procedure applicable to 
commercial package air-cooled central air conditioners and heat pumps. 
The waiver request is specific to the Mitsubishi variable speed and 
variable refrigerant volume S&L Class (commercial) multi-split heat 
pumps and heat recovery systems. Through this document, DOE is: (1) 
Soliciting comments, data, and information with respect to the 
Mitsubishi Petition; and (2) announcing our determination to grant an 
Interim Waiver to Mitsubishi from the applicable DOE test procedure for 
the subject commercial air-cooled, multi-split air conditioners and 
heat pumps.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information with respect to 
the Mitsubishi Petition until, but no later than January 12, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by case number ``CAC-
020,'' by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: [email protected]. Include either the 
case number [CAC-020], and/or ``Mitsubishi Petition'' in the subject 
line of the message.
     Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J/1000 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. Please 
submit one signed original paper copy.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department 
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., 
Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. Please submit one signed original 
paper copy.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and case number for this proceeding. Submit electronic comments in 
WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Portable Document Format (PDF), or text 
(American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII)) file 
format and avoid the use of special characters or any form of 
encryption. Wherever possible, include the electronic signature of the 
author. Absent an electronic signature, comments submitted 
electronically must be followed and authenticated by submitting the 
signed original paper document. DOE does not accept telefacsimiles 
(faxes).
    Any person submitting written comments must also send a copy of 
such comments to the petitioner, pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(d). The 
contact information for the petitioner is: Mr. William Rau, Senior Vice 
President and General Manager, HVAC Advanced Products Division, 
Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc., 4300 Lawrenceville-Suwanee 
Road, Suwanee, GA 30024.
    According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that 
he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public 
disclosure should submit two copies: one copy of the document including 
all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the 
document with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE 
will make its own determination about the confidential

[[Page 75409]]

status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
    Docket: For access to the docket to review the background documents 
relevant to this matter, you may visit the U.S. Department of Energy, 
950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., (Resource Room of the Building Technologies 
Program), Washington, DC 20024; (202) 586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Available 
documents include the following items: (1) This notice; (2) public 
comments received; (3) the Petition for Waiver and Application for 
Interim Waiver; and (4) prior DOE rulemakings regarding similar central 
air conditioning and heat pump equipment. Please call Ms. Brenda 
Edwards at the above telephone number for additional information 
regarding visiting the Resource Room.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Background and Authority
II. Petition for Waiver
III. Application for Interim Waiver
IV. Alternate Test Procedure
V. Summary and Request for Comments

I. Background and Authority

    Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) sets 
forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency, including 
Part A of Title III which establishes the ``Energy Conservation Program 
for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.'' \1\ (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6309) Similar to the Program in Part A, Part A-1 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.\2\ (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This part was originally titled Part B; however, it was 
redesignated Part A, after Part B of Title III was repealed by 
Public Law 109-58.
    \2\ This part was originally titled Part C; however, it was 
redesignated Part A-1, after Part B of Title III was repealed by 
Public Law 109-58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today's notice involves commercial equipment under Part A-1. Part 
A-1 specifically includes definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test procedures 
(42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), energy 
conservation standards (42 U.S.C 6313), and the authority to require 
information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316). With 
respect to test procedures, it generally authorizes the Secretary of 
Energy (the Secretary) to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably 
designed to produce results which measure energy efficiency, energy 
use, and estimated annual operating costs, and that are not unduly 
burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
    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. DOE adopted ARI 
Standard 340/360-2004, ``Performance Rating of Commercial and 
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment,'' for 
small and large commercial package air-cooled heat pumps with 
capacities >= 65,000 Btu/h and < 760,000 British thermal units per hour 
(Btu/h). Id. at 71370. Pursuant to this rulemaking, DOE's regulations 
at 10 CFR 431.95(b)(2) incorporate by reference the relevant ARI 
Standard, and Table 1 to 10 CFR 431.96 directs manufacturers of 
commercial package air-cooled air conditioning and heating equipment to 
use the appropriate procedure when measuring energy efficiency of those 
products. (The cooling capacities of Mitsubishi's commercial S&L Class 
multi-split heat pump products range from 72,000 Btu/hr to 360,000 Btu/
hr, thereby resulting in these products falling within the range 
covered by ARI Standard 340/360-2004.)
    In addition, DOE's regulations contain provisions allowing a person 
to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for covered 
commercial equipment, for which the petitioner's basic model contains 
one or more design characteristics which prevent testing according to 
the prescribed test procedures, or if 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 431.401(a)(1). The waiver provisions for commercial 
equipment are found at 10 CFR 431.401 and are substantively identical 
to those for covered consumer products. 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 431.401(b)(1)(iii). The Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency 
and Renewable Energy (Assistant Secretary) may grant a waiver subject 
to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 
431.401(f)(4). In general, a waiver terminates on the effective date of 
a final rule, published in the Federal Register, 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 431.401(g).
    The waiver process also allows any person who has submitted a 
Petition for Waiver to file an Application for Interim Waiver of the 
applicable test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2). The 
Assistant Secretary will grant an Interim Waiver request if it is 
determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the 
Application for 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 431.401(e)(3). 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 it may be extended by 
DOE for an additional 180 days, if necessary. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(4).

[[Page 75410]]

II. Petition for Waiver

    On March 28, 2008, Mitsubishi filed a Petition for Waiver from the 
test procedures at 10 CFR 431.96 which are applicable to commercial 
package air-cooled heat pumps and an Application for Interim Waiver. As 
noted above, the applicable test procedure for Mitsubishi's commercial 
S&L Class multi-split heat pumps is ARI Standard 340/360-2004, which 
manufacturers are directed to use pursuant to Table 1 of 10 CFR 431.96. 
The capacities of the Mitsubishi S&L Class multi-split heat pumps range 
from 72,000 Btu/hr to 240,000 Btu/hr, and outdoor units may be combined 
to create systems of up to 360,000 Btu/hr capacity. Accordingly, the 
applicable test procedure for all these sizes is ARI Standard 340/360-
2004.
    Mitsubishi seeks a waiver from the applicable test procedures under 
10 CFR 431.96 on the grounds that its S&L Class multi-split heat pumps 
and heat recovery systems contain design characteristics that prevent 
testing according to the current DOE test procedures. Specifically, 
Mitsubishi asserts that the two primary factors that prevent testing of 
multi-split variable speed products, regardless of manufacturer, are 
the same factors stated in the waivers that DOE granted to Mitsubishi 
Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. (Mitsubishi) for a similar line of 
commercial multi-split air-conditioning systems:
     Testing laboratories cannot test products with so many 
indoor units.
     There are too many possible combinations of indoor and 
outdoor units to test.
72 FR 71383 (December 17, 2007); 72 FR 71387 (December 17, 2007); 72 FR 
17528 (April 9, 2007); 69 FR 52661 (August 27, 2004).
    The S&L Class has operational characteristics similar to 
Mitsubishi's R22 and R410A models, which have already been granted 
waivers, and the WR2 and WY products, which have been granted an 
Interim Waiver. Each of the S&L Class indoor units is designed to be 
used with up to 50 other indoor units, which need not be the same 
models. There are 64 different indoor models. Unlike other multi-split 
products, Mitsubishi's S&L Class has the capability to combine outdoor 
units to create a larger capacity system. Mitsubishi further states 
that its S&L Class products' capability to perform simultaneous heating 
and cooling is not captured by the DOE test procedure. This is true, 
but not relevant. DOE is required by EPCA to use the full-load 
descriptor EER for these products, and simultaneous heating and cooling 
does not occur when operating at full load.
    Accordingly, Mitsubishi requests that DOE grant a waiver from the 
applicable test procedures for its S&L Class product designs, until a 
suitable test method can be prescribed. DOE believes that the S&L Class 
Mitsubishi equipment and Mitsubishi equipment for which waivers have 
previously been granted are alike with respect to the factors that make 
them eligible for test procedure waivers. DOE is therefore granting to 
Mitsubishi an S&L Class product waiver similar to the previous 
Mitsubishi multi-split waivers. Mitsubishi is requesting one 
modification to the alternate test procedure granted in previous 
waivers made necessary to account for the ability of S&L Class products 
to connect multiple outdoor units. This modification would allow 
representation of non-tested combinations based on the capacity-
weighted average of the efficiency ratings of tested combinations of 
the outdoor units used in the system. Furthermore, Mitsubishi states 
that failure to grant the waiver would result in economic hardship 
because it would prevent the company from marketing its S&L Class 
products. Also, Mitsubishi states that it is willing to work closely 
with DOE, ARI, and other agencies to develop appropriate test 
procedures, as necessary.

III. Application for Interim Waiver

    On March 28, 2008, in addition to its Petition for Waiver, 
Mitsubishi submitted to DOE an Application for Interim Waiver. 
Mitsubishi's Application for Interim Waiver does not provide sufficient 
information to evaluate the level of economic hardship Mitsubishi will 
likely experience if its Application for Interim Waiver is denied. 
However, in those instances where the likely success of the Petition 
for Waiver has been demonstrated, based upon DOE having granted a 
waiver for similar product designs, it is in the public interest to 
have similar products tested and rated for energy consumption on a 
comparable basis. DOE has previously granted Interim Waivers to Daikin, 
Mitsubishi, Samsung and Fujitsu for comparable commercial multi-split 
air conditioners and heat pumps. 72 FR 35986 (July 2, 2007), 72 FR 
17533 (April 9, 2007), 70 FR 9629 (Feb. 28, 2005), 70 FR 5980 (Feb. 4, 
2005), respectively.
    Moreover, as noted above, DOE approved the Petition for Waiver from 
Daikin, Fujitsu, Samsung and Mitsubishi for their comparable lines of 
multi-split air conditioners and heat pumps. 73 FR 39680 (July 10, 
2008); 72 FR 71383 (Dec. 17, 2007); 72 FR 71387 (Dec. 17, 2007); 72 FR 
17528 (April 9, 2007). The two principal reasons for granting the 
waivers also apply to Mitsubishi's S&L Class products: (1) Test 
laboratories cannot test products with so many indoor units; \3\ and 
(2) it is impractical to test so many combinations of indoor units with 
each outdoor unit. Thus, DOE has determined that it is likely that 
Mitsubishi's Petition for Waiver will be granted for its new S&L Class 
multi-split models. Therefore, it is ordered that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ According to the Mitsubishi petition, up to 50 indoor units 
are possible candidates for testing of its commercial package multi-
split heat pump and heat recovery systems. However, DOE believes 
that the practical limits for testing would be about five units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Application for Interim Waiver filed by Mitsubishi is hereby 
granted for Mitsubishi's S&L Class air-cooled multi-split central air 
conditioning heat pumps, subject to the specifications and conditions 
below.
    1. Mitsubishi shall not be required to test or rate its S&L Class 
commercial air-cooled multi-split products on the basis of the 
currently applicable test procedure under 10 CFR 431.96, which 
incorporates by reference ARI Standard 340/360-2004.
    2. Mitsubishi shall be required to test and rate its S&L Class 
commercial air-cooled multi-split products according to the alternate 
test procedure as set forth in section IV(3), ``Alternate test 
procedure.''
    The Interim Waiver applies to the following models:
    CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Outdoor 
Equipment:
     Y-Series (PUHY) 208/230-3-60 and 460-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pumps with individual model nominal cooling 
capacities of 72,000, 96,000, 120,000 and 144,000 Btu/h, and associated 
combined model nominal cooling capacities in the range between 144,000 
and 360,000 Btu/hr.
     Hyper-heat Y-Series (PUHY-HP) 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pumps with hyper-heat technology, with individual 
model nominal cooling capacities of 72,000 and 96,000 Btu/h, and 
associated combined model nominal cooling capacities in the range 
between 144,000 and 192,000 Btu/hr.
    CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Indoor 
Equipment:
    P*FY models, ranging from 6,000 to 48,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 and 
from 72,000 to 120,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split system variable-
capacity air conditioner or heat pump.

[[Page 75411]]

     PCFY Series--Ceiling Suspended--with capacities of 12/18/
24/30/36 MBtu/h.
     PDFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted--with capacities of 
06/08/12/15/18/24/27/30/36/48 MBtu/h.
     PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Low Profile)--with 
capacities of 06/08/12/18/24 MBtu/h.
     PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Alternate High 
Static Option)--with capacities of 15/18/24/27/30/36/48/54/72/96 MBtu/
h.
     PEFY-F Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (100% OA Option)--
with capacities of 30/54/72/96/120 MBtu/h.
     PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Concealed)--with capacities 
of 06/08/12/15/18/24 MBtu/h.
     PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Exposed)--with capacities of 
06/08/12/15/18/24 MBtu/h.
     PKFY Series--Wall-Mounted--with capacities of 06/08/12/18/
24/30 MBtu/h.
     PLFY Series--4-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--with 
capacities of 12/18/24/30/36 MBtu/h.
     PMFY Series--1-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--with 
capacities of 06/08/12/15 MBtu/h.
    This Interim Waiver is conditioned upon the presumed validity of 
statements, representations, and documents provided by the petitioner. 
DOE may revoke or modify this Interim Waiver at any time upon a 
determination that the factual basis underlying the Petition for Waiver 
is incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the 
alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true 
energy consumption characteristics.

IV. Alternate Test Procedure

    In response to two recent Petitions for Waiver from Mitsubishi, DOE 
specified an alternate test procedure to provide a basis from which 
Mitsubishi could test and make valid energy efficiency representations 
for its R410A CITY MULTI products, as well as for its R22 multi-split 
products. Alternate test procedures related to the Mitsubishi petitions 
were published in the Federal Register on April 9, 2007. 72 FR 17528; 
72 FR 17533.
    In general, DOE understands that existing testing facilities have a 
limited ability to test multiple indoor units at one time, and the 
number of possible combinations of indoor and outdoor units for some 
variable refrigerant flow zoned systems is impractical to test. We 
further note that subsequent to the waiver that DOE granted for 
Mitsubishi's R22 multi-split products, ARI formed a committee to 
discuss the issue and to work on developing an appropriate testing 
protocol for variable refrigerant flow systems. However, to date, no 
additional test methodologies have been adopted by the committee or 
submitted to DOE. The ARI committee has considered a draft ISO 
methodology, ISO CD 15042, for multi-split systems. However, it 
contains no guidance that would affect this waiver.
    Therefore, as discussed below, as a condition for granting this 
Interim Waiver to Mitsubishi, DOE is including an alternate test 
procedure similar to those granted to Mitsubishi for its R22 and R410A 
products. DOE plans to consider the same alternate test procedure in 
the context of the subsequent Decision and Order pertaining to 
Mitsubishi's Petition for Waiver. Utilization of this alternate test 
procedure will allow Mitsubishi to test and make energy efficiency 
representations for its S&L Class products. More broadly, DOE has 
applied a similar alternate test procedure to other waivers for similar 
commercial air conditioners and heat pumps. Such cases include 
Samsung's waiver for its multi-split products at 72 FR 71387 (Dec. 17, 
2007), Fujitsu's waiver for its multi-split products at 72 FR 71383 
(Dec. 17, 2007), and Daikin's waiver for its multi-split products at 73 
FR 39680 (July 10, 2008). DOE believes that an alternate test procedure 
is needed so that manufacturers of such products can make valid and 
consistent representations of energy efficiency for their air-
conditioning and heat pump products.
    In the present case, DOE is modifying the alternate test procedure 
taken from the above-referenced waiver granted to Mitsubishi for its 
R410A and R22 CITY MULTI products, with an additional modification to 
account for combinations using multiple outdoor units. DOE plans to 
consider inclusion of the following waiver language in the Decision and 
Order for Mitsubishi's S&L Class commercial multi-split air-cooled heat 
pump models:
    (1) The ``Petition for Waiver'' filed by Mitsubishi Electric & 
Electronics USA, Inc. is hereby granted as set forth in the paragraphs 
below.
    (2) Mitsubishi shall not be required to test or rate its S&L Class 
variable refrigerant volume multi-split heat pump products listed above 
in section III, on the basis of the currently applicable test 
procedures, but shall be required to test and rate such products 
according to the alternate test procedure as set forth in paragraph 
(3).
    (3) Alternate test procedure.
    (A) Mitsubishi shall be required to test the products listed in 
section III above according to the test procedures for central air 
conditioners and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR 431.96, except 
that Mitsubishi shall test a ``tested combination'' selected in 
accordance with the provisions of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph. 
For every other system combination using the same outdoor unit as the 
tested combination, Mitsubishi shall make representations concerning 
the S&L Class products covered in this waiver according to the 
provisions of subparagraph (C) below.
    (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:
    (1) The basic model of a variable refrigerant flow system used as a 
tested combination shall consist an outdoor unit (an outdoor unit can 
include multiple outdoor units that have been manifolded into a single 
refrigeration system, with a specific model number) that is matched 
with between 2 and 8 indoor units in total; for multi-split systems, 
each of these indoor units shall be designed for individual operation.
    (2) The indoor units shall--
    (i) Represent the highest sales model family, or another indoor 
model family if the highest sales model family does not provide 
sufficient capacity (see ii);
    (ii) Together, have a nominal cooling capacity that is between 95% 
and 105% of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor unit;
    (iii) Not, individually, have a nominal cooling capacity that is 
greater than 50% of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor unit;
    (iv) Operate at fan speeds that are consistent with the 
manufacturer's specifications; and
    (v) All be subject to the same minimum external static pressure 
requirement while being configurable to produce the same static 
pressure at the exit of each outlet plenum when manifolded as per 
section 2.4.1 of 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix M.
    (C) Representations. In making representations about the energy 
efficiency of its S&L Class variable speed and variable refrigerant 
volume air-cooled multi-split heat pump and heat recovery system 
products, for compliance, marketing, or other purposes, Mitsubishi must 
fairly disclose the results of testing under the DOE test procedure, 
doing so in a manner consistent with the provisions outlined below:

[[Page 75412]]

    (i) For S&L Class combinations using a single outdoor unit tested 
in accordance with this alternate test procedure, Mitsubishi may make 
representations based on these test results.
    (ii) For S&L Class combinations using a single outdoor unit that 
have not been tested, Mitsubishi may make representations 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 (ARM) 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.
    (iii) For S&L Class combinations utilizing multiple outdoor units 
that have been tested in accordance with this alternate test procedure, 
MEUS may make representations based on those test results.
    (iv) For S&L Class combinations utilizing multiple outdoor units 
that have not been tested, MEUS may make representations which are 
consistent with any of the three following methods, except that only 
method (a) may be used, if available:
    (a) Representation of non-tested combinations according to an 
Alternative Rating Method (``ARM'') approved by DOE.
    (b) Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy 
efficiency level as the tested combination with the same combination of 
outdoor units.
    (c) Representation of non-tested combinations based on the 
capacity-weighted average of the efficiency ratings for the tested 
combinations for each of the individual outdoor units used in the 
system, as determined in accordance with the provisions of this 
alternate test procedure.

V. Summary and Request for Comments

    Through today's notice, DOE announces receipt of the Mitsubishi 
Petition for Waiver from the test procedures applicable to Mitsubishi's 
S&L Class commercial multi-split heat pump products, and for the 
reasons articulated above, DOE is granting Mitsubishi an Interim Waiver 
from those procedures. As part of this notice, DOE is publishing 
Mitsubishi's Petition for Waiver in its entirety. The Petition contains 
no confidential information. Furthermore, today's notice includes an 
alternate test procedure that Mitsubishi is required to follow as a 
condition of its Interim Waiver and that DOE is considering including 
in its subsequent Decision and Order. In this alternate test procedure, 
DOE is defining a ``tested combination'' which Mitsubishi could use in 
lieu of testing all retail combinations of its S&L Class multi-split 
heat pump products.
    Furthermore, should a subsequent manufacturer be unable to test all 
retail combinations, DOE is considering allowing such manufacturers to 
rate waived products according to an ARM approved by DOE, or to rate 
waived products the same as the specified tested combination with the 
same outdoor unit(s). DOE is also considering applying a similar 
alternate test procedure to other comparable Petitions for Waiver for 
commercial air conditioners and heat pumps. Such cases include 
Samsung's Petition for Waiver for its Digital Variable Multi (DVM) 
products at 72 FR 71387 (Dec. 17, 2007), and Fujitsu's Petition for 
Waiver for its Airstage variable refrigerant flow products at 72 FR 
71383 (Dec. 17, 2007). DOE is interested in receiving comments on the 
issues addressed in this notice. Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(d), any 
person submitting written comments must also send a copy of such 
comments to the petitioner, whose contact information is included in 
the section entitled ADDRESSES section above.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 1, 2008.
David E. Rodgers,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Office of Technology 
Development, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
March 28, 2008
Alexander Karsner
Assistant Secretary
Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave., SW.
Washington, DC 20585-0121
Re: Petition for Waiver of Test Procedures and Application for Interim 
Waiver for CITY MULTI VRFZ S&L Class Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
Dear Assistant Secretary Karsner:
    Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. (``MEUS'') respectfully 
submits this petition for waiver, and application for interim waiver, 
of the commercial test procedures applicable to the new S&L Class of 
MEUS's CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning (``VRFZ'') product 
line pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 431.401. The S&L Class is 
similar to the R22 and R410A models of MEUS's CITY MULTI VRFZ product 
line, which were previously granted waivers, except that (1) these 
units have a more compact chassis design, and (2) the outdoor units may 
be installed individually in a VRFZ system or combined together to 
create larger capacity VRFZ systems, up to 240,000 Btu/h for the R2-
Series units and 360,000 Btu/h for the Y-Series units. Similar to the 
CITY MULTI systems covered by the earlier waivers, the systems covered 
by this petition cannot be tested according to the prescribed test 
procedures for commercial products, and, therefore, should be granted a 
waiver from the applicable test procedures. MEUS proposes that DOE 
impose an alternate test procedure that can be applied practicably to 
these products, consistent with the alternate test procedure outlined 
in the waivers applicable to the R22 and R410A models. MEUS 
simultaneously requests an interim waiver covering the S&L Class.
    The S&L Class contains units that fall into the commercial category 
of air conditioners. Thus, MEUS is seeking a waiver from the commercial 
test procedures applicable to these models. While the Department of 
Energy (``DOE'' or ``Department'') has provided a test procedure which 
allows manufacturers to practically test and rate their residential 
multi-split systems that can be combined into many potential system 
combinations,\4\ currently no such solution exists for similar 
commercial products. The Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration 
Institute (``AHRI'') is currently in the process of developing a test 
procedure for these types of commercial products, but the test 
procedure has yet to be finalized. MEUS is simply seeking a waiver for 
the interim period of time until a standard test procedure that can 
test and rate these commercial multi-split products is developed and 
codified by DOE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Test 
Procedure for Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, 
72 FR 59906 (Oct. 22, 2007) (hereinafter, ``October 2007 Final 
Rule''). MEUS will test and rate the residential sizes of the S&L 
Class pursuant to the test procedure outlined in the October 2007 
Final Rule. As described below, the S&L Class has the capability of 
combining outdoor units together to create larger capacity systems, 
with combined capacities of a commercial-sized unit. We expect to 
test and rate systems with single outdoor units with capacities of 
less than 65,000 Btu/h under the residential test procedure to avoid 
any confusion caused by multiple ratings for the same unit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    DOE has previously granted waivers and interim waivers from the 
applicable air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for other 
models of MEUS's

[[Page 75413]]

CITY MULTI products. On August 27, 2004, DOE granted a waiver from the 
commercial air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for MEUS's R22 
CITY MULTI products.\5\ DOE found that the R22 models should be granted 
a waiver because they have ``one or more design characteristics which * 
* * prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test 
procedures.'' \6\ In April 2007, the Department granted MEUS's 
requested waiver for its R410A CITY MULTI models based on an identical 
finding.\7\ DOE found that ``the testing problems described [by MEUS] 
do prevent testing of the R410A CITY MULTI basic model according to the 
test procedures prescribed.'' \8\ Both the R22 and R410A products 
cannot be tested according to the prescribed test procedures for two 
main reasons: (1) The test laboratories cannot test products with so 
many indoor units; and (2) there are too many possible combinations of 
indoor and outdoor units (well over 1,000,000 combinations for each 
outdoor unit), and it is impractical to test so many combinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision 
and Order Granting a Waiver From the DOE Commercial Package Air 
Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure to Mitsubishi Electric 
(Case No. CAC-008), 69 FR 52660 (Aug. 27, 2004) (hereinafter, ``R22 
Waiver'').
    \6\ R22 Waiver at 52662. See also 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1) and 
(f)(4) (2007) (outlining the standards that must be met for the 
grant of a waiver).
    \7\ Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision 
and Order Granting a Waiver From the Department of Energy (DOE) 
Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump 
Test Procedures to Mitsubishi Electric, and Modification of a 2004 
Waiver Granted to Mitsubishi Electric From the Same DOE Test 
Procedures (Case No. CAC-012), 72 FR 17528 (Apr. 9, 2007) 
(hereinafter, ``R410A Waiver'').
    \8\ R410A Waiver at 17531.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 9, 2007, DOE granted an interim waiver for the WR2 and WY 
models of MEUS's CITY MULTI products.\9\ MEUS's WR2 and WY models are 
similar to the R410A products except that they represent the models of 
the CITY MULTI product line that are water-source heat pumps. Since DOE 
found that the testing problems that existed with the R22 and R410A 
products applied to the WR2 and WY products as well, it was ``likely 
that MEUS' Petition for Waiver will be granted.'' \10\ Thus, DOE 
granted an interim waiver for the WR2 and WY models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: 
Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the 
Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE 
Commercial Water Source Heat Pump Test Procedure [Case No. CAC-015], 
72 FR 17533 (Apr. 9, 2007) (hereinafter, ``WR2/WY Interim Waiver'').
    \10\ WR2/WY Interim Waiver at 17535.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. S&L Class Design Characteristics

    MEUS's line of CITY MULTI VRFZ products combines advanced 
technologies and are complete, commercial zoning systems that save 
energy through the effective use of variable refrigerant control and 
distribution, zoning diversity, and system intelligence. As highlighted 
in the previous petitions for waiver for the other CITY MULTI products, 
the operating characteristics of a VRFZ system allow each indoor unit 
to have a different mode of operation (i.e., on/off/heat/cool/dry/auto/
fan) and a different set temperature allowing great flexibility of 
operation. The variable speed compressor and the system controls direct 
refrigerant flow throughout the system to precisely match the 
performance of the system to the load of the conditioned areas. The 
CITY MULTI VRFZ systems also have variable frequency inverter driven 
scroll compressors, and, therefore, have nearly infinite steps of 
capacity. Additionally, the CITY MULTI VRFZ R2-Series products offer 
consumers the option of simultaneous heating and cooling. These 
characteristics allow the CITY MULTI VRFZ systems to offer cost-
effective functionality and significant energy savings.
    Similar to the other CITY MULTI models, the S&L Class has the 
capability of connecting a single outdoor unit to up to 30 indoor 
units.\11\ Unlike the other CITY MULTI products, however, the S&L Class 
has the additional capability of installing the outdoor units 
individually in a VRFZ system or combining them together to create 
larger capacity VFRZ system. The Y-Series and R2-Series outdoor units 
have nominal cooling capacities between 72,000 and 144,000 Btu/h, which 
may be combined to create systems with nominal cooling capacities up to 
240,000 Btu/h for the R2-Series units and 360,000 for the Y-Series 
units. A three module outdoor unit system may be connected to up to 50 
indoor units. The ability to combine smaller outdoor units to create 
larger outdoor units is a unique feature of the S&L Class that gives 
these systems tremendous flexibility to meet customers' specific 
demands. This feature, however, increases the already very large number 
of potential combinations by several times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ MEUS offers 64 indoor models in its S&L Class CITY MULTI 
product line. The number of potential combinations of the 64 models 
in sets of up to 30 is in the millions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the energy saving characteristics of these products are 
not credited under current rules, they are precisely the types of 
technological innovations and applications that advance the 
Congressional intent of promoting energy savings. These CITY MULTI VRFZ 
systems represent a revolutionary advance in HVAC technology, well 
positioned to provide new and existing commercial buildings with 
effective use of energy and an operationally cost-effective source of 
heating and cooling. Additionally, with some of the innovative 
capabilities of the CITY MULTI Controls Network, the potential for 
energy management and energy savings are even greater. The CITY MULTI 
products' unique design characteristics are clearly consistent with 
U.S. government's efforts to encourage the availability of high 
performance products that consume less energy.

III. Test Procedures From Which Waiver Is Requested

    MEUS's petition requests waiver from the commercial test procedures 
for its S&L Class products. As stated above, the S&L Class contains 
units that fall into both the residential and commercial categories of 
air conditioners. However, since DOE recently provided a test procedure 
which allows manufacturers to test and rate their residential multi-
split systems that can be combined into multiple potential system 
combinations, MEUS is only seeking a waiver from the commercial test 
procedures applicable to these models.
    Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (``EPCA'') sets 
forth the provisions concerning energy efficiency. Part C of EPCA Title 
III provides the energy efficiency requirements and test procedures for 
commercial products.\12\ On October 21, 2004, DOE published a direct 
final rule, effective December 21, 2004, adopting updated test 
procedures for commercial package air conditioning equipment.\13\ These 
test procedures are outlined in DOE's regulations, at 10 CFR 431.96. 
For commercial package air conditioning equipment with capacities 
between 65,000 and 760,000 Btu/h, ARI Standard 340/360-2004 is the 
applicable test procedure. The capacities of MEUS's S&L Class CITY 
MULTI products sold for commercial use fall in that range. Therefore, 
MEUS requests waiver from

[[Page 75414]]

the test procedures for commercial products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 42 U.S.C. 6311-6317.
    \13\ Energy Efficiency Program for Certain Commercial and 
Industrial Equipment: Test Procedures and Efficiency Standards for 
Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, Direct Final Rule, 69 FR 
61962 (Oct. 21, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MEUS proposes to test and rate a tested combination for each 
individual outdoor unit pursuant to an alternate test procedure 
discussed below. As noted earlier, however, the outdoor units in the 
S&L Class can be combined to make larger capacity systems. Thus, MEUS 
is also proposing that it may make representations about the efficiency 
of systems using combinations of outdoor units based on: (1) The 
results of testing such combinations pursuant to the alternate test 
procedure outlined below; or (2) the capacity-weighted average of the 
efficiency ratings, determined pursuant to the alternate test 
procedure, of the individual outdoor units that make up the combined 
system.

IV. Basic Models for Which Waiver Is Requested

    MEUS requests a waiver from the test procedures for the basic 
models consisting of combinations of the following products:
    CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Outdoor 
Equipment:
     Y-Series (PUHY) 208/230-3-60 and 460-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pumps with individual model nominal cooling 
capacities of 72,000, 96,000, 120,000 and 144,000 Btu/h, and associated 
combined model nominal cooling capacities in the range between 144,000 
and 360,000 Btu/h.
     Hyper-heat Y-Series (PUHY-HP) 208/230-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pumps with hyper-heat technology, with individual 
model nominal cooling capacities of 72,000 and 96,000 Btu/h, and 
associated combined model nominal cooling capacities in the range 
between 144,000 and 192,000 Btu/h.
     R2-Series (PURY) 208/230-3-60 and 460-3-60 split-system 
variable-speed heat pumps with heat recovery and with individual model 
nominal cooling capacities of 72,000, 96,000, 120,000 and 144,000 Btu/
h, and associated combined model nominal cooling capacities in the 
range between 144,000 and 240,000 Btu/h.
    CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Indoor 
Equipment:
    P*FY models, ranging from 6,000 to 48,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 and 
from 72,000 to 120,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split system variable-
capacity air conditioner or heat pump.
     PCFY Series--Ceiling Suspended--with capacities of 12/18/
24/30/36 MBtu/h.
     PDFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted--with capacities of 
06/08/12/15/18/24/27/30/36/48 MBtu/h.
     PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Low Profile)--with 
capacities of 06/08/12/18/24 MBtu/h.
     PEFY Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Alternate High 
Static Option)--with capacities of 15/18/24/27/30/36/48/54/72/96 MBtu/
h.
     PEFY-F Series--Ceiling Concealed Ducted (100% OA Option)--
with capacities of 30/54/72/96/120 MBtu/h.
     PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Concealed)--with capacities 
of 06/08/12/15/18/24 MBtu/h.
     PFFY Series--Floor Standing (Exposed)--with capacities of 
06/08/12/15/18/24 MBtu/h.
     PKFY Series--Wall-Mounted--with capacities of 06/08/12/18/
24/30 MBtu/h.
     PLFY Series--4-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--with 
capacities of 12/18/24/30/36 MBtu/h.
     PMFY Series--1-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette--with 
capacities of 06/08/12/15 MBtu/h.

V. Need for Waiver of Test Procedures

    The Department's regulations contain provisions allowing a person 
to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for commercial 
equipment. These provisions are set forth in 10 CFR 431.401. These 
waiver provisions allow DOE to temporarily waive test procedures for a 
particular basic model when a petitioner shows that the 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.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1) and (f)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In both the R22 Waiver and R410A Waiver, DOE found that MEUS's CITY 
MULTI products contained one or more design characteristics which 
prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test 
procedures.\15\ DOE granted MEUS's request for an interim waiver for 
the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI products because the testing problems that 
existed with the R22 and R410A products applied to the WR2 and WY 
products as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ R22 Waiver at 52662; R410A Waiver at 17531.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The S&L Class has similar operational characteristics as the R22 
and R410A models, which have already been granted a waiver, and the WR2 
and WY products, which have been granted an interim waiver. Similar to 
the R22 and R410A models, and the WR2 and WY systems, the S&L Class can 
connect more indoor units than the test laboratories can physically 
test at one time. Each of the S&L Class indoor units is designed to be 
used with up to 50 other indoor units with a three modual outdoor unit 
system. These connected indoor units need not be the same models--there 
are 64 different indoor models that can be combined in a multitude of 
different combinations to address customer needs. The testing 
laboratories will not physically be able to test many of the S&L Class 
system combinations because of the inability to test products with so 
many indoor units.
    Additionally, there are millions of potential combinations that can 
be created with the various S&L Class models. It is not practical to 
test all of the potentially available combinations, of which there are 
more than one million. Finally, the S&L Class models have the ability 
to connect multiple outdoor units together to create larger capacity 
systems. This unique feature increases the number of potential 
combinations significantly. Therefore, the same design characteristics 
that prevent testing of the basic R22, R410A, WR2 and WY CITY MULTI 
models also prevent testing of the S&L Class CITY MULTI models.
    As shown above, the S&L Class products cannot be tested according 
to the prescribed test procedures. MEUS also believes that the 
requested waiver is supported on the grounds that the test procedures 
``may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its 
true energy consumption characteristics * * * as to provide materially 
inaccurate comparative data.'' \16\ In particular, the benefits of 
variable refrigerant control and distribution, zoning diversity, part 
load operation and simultaneous heating and cooling, as described 
above, are not credited under the current test procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1) (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The October 2007 Final Rule provides a test procedure to test and 
rate multi-split residential systems that can be configured in many 
different potential combinations. No such test procedure exists for 
multi-split commercial products, however. DOE has not adopted a similar 
test procedure to test and rate multi-split commercial products. The 
currently-effective test procedure for commercial products cannot 
accurately test and rate multi-split commercial products that can be 
configured into millions of combinations.

[[Page 75415]]

VI. Outdoor Unit Combinations

    As described above, one of the unique features of the S&L Class is 
the ability to combine outdoor units to create larger capacity systems. 
For example, if three of the Y-Series PUHY 120,000 Btu/h outdoor units 
are combined, the resulting outdoor unit will have a nominal cooling 
capacity of 360,000 Btu/h. This unique capability gives these systems 
tremendous flexibility to meet the customer's specific demands. DOE's 
test procedures do not provide any direction on how to test and rate 
products that have the capability to connect outdoor units.
    MEUS proposes that, until such a time that test procedures 
expressly address this issue, MEUS may make representations about the 
efficiency of systems using combinations of outdoor units based on: (1) 
The results of testing such combinations pursuant to the alternate test 
procedure outlined below; or (2) the capacity-weighted average of the 
efficiency ratings of the individual outdoor units, as determined 
pursuant to the alternate test procedure, that make up the combined 
system.

VII. Alternate Test Procedures

    Currently, there are no standard test procedures known to MEUS that 
can accurately evaluate these products. AHRI is currently in the 
process of developing a test procedure that will be able to accurately 
test and rate all multi-split systems, including commercial-sized 
systems, which have the ability to be combined to create numerous 
potential system combinations. The test procedure, AHRI Draft Standard 
1230, will next be submitted for a vote to the members of the Ductless 
Split-System Production Section. After it is approved by that Section, 
it will be submitted to the General Standards Committee for final 
approval by AHRI. After it is approved by AHRI, the test procedure will 
be submitted to DOE to be incorporated into 10 CFR Part 431. MEUS's 
requested waiver would only be valid in the interim until AHRI Standard 
1230, or another test procedure that will accurately test and rate 
commercial multi-split air conditioning equipment, is approved and 
incorporated into DOE's regulations.
    While the requested waiver is in effect, MEUS proposes that DOE 
impose an alternate test procedure that can be applied practicably to 
these products. In response to MEUS's petition for waiver for the R410A 
products, DOE adopted an alternate test procedure to provide a 
conservative basis from which manufacturers covered by a test procedure 
waiver for commercial VRFZ products can test and make valid energy 
efficiency representations, for compliance, marketing, or other 
purposes, regarding these products.\17\ DOE adopted a similar test 
procedure for residential products in the October 2007 Final Rule. MEUS 
requests that DOE apply the alternate test procedure provided in the 
R410A Waiver to the S&L Class in order to allow MEUS to test and make 
energy efficiency representations regarding these products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ R410A Waiver at 17530.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Manufacturers face restrictions with respect to making 
representations about the energy consumption and energy consumption 
costs of products covered by EPCA.\18\ As DOE acknowledged in the R410A 
Waiver, ``the ability of a manufacturer to make representations about 
the energy efficiency of its products is important, for instance, to 
determine compliance with state and local energy codes and regulatory 
requirements. Energy efficiency representations also provide valuable 
consumer purchasing information.'' \19\ Therefore, MEUS respectfully 
requests that DOE apply the alternate test procedure outlined in the 
R410A Waiver to the S&L Class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See 42 U.S.C. 6314(d); 42 U.S.C. 6293(c).
    \19\ R410A Waiver at 17530.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The alternate test procedure outlined in the R410A Waiver has two 
basic components. First, it will permit MEUS 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. This tested combination must be tested according to the 
applicable DOE test procedures. Second, the alternate test procedure 
will permit MEUS to represent the energy efficiency for a non-tested 
combination in two ways. MEUS may represent the energy efficiency of a 
non-tested combination: (1) At an energy efficiency level determined 
under a DOE-approved alternate rating method; or if that option is not 
available, then (2) at the efficiency level of the tested combination 
utilizing the same outdoor unit. Pursuant to the alternate test 
procedure provided in the R410A Waiver, 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.
    According to DOE:

    Allowing MEUS to make energy efficiency representations for non-
tested combinations as described above is reasonable because the 
outdoor unit is the principal efficiency driver. The current test 
procedure tends to rate these products conservatively. This is 
because the current test procedure does not account for the 
product's simultaneous heating and cooling capability, which is more 
efficient than requiring all zones to be either heated or cooled. 
Further, the multi-zoning feature of these products, which enables 
them to cool only those portions of the building that require 
cooling, can use 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. Additionally, the 
current test procedure for commercial equipment requires full load 
testing, which disadvantages these products because they are 
optimized for best efficiency when operating with less than full 
loads. In fact, these products normally operate at part-load 
conditions. Therefore * * * the alternate test procedure will 
provide a conservative basis for assessing the energy efficiency for 
such products.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ R410A Waiver at 17530.

    MEUS proposes that representations about the efficiency of the S&L 
Class combinations that have combined individual outdoor units to 
create larger capacity VFRZ systems would be permitted based on: (1) 
The results of testing of such combinations pursuant to the alternate 
test procedure; or (2) the capacity-weighted average of the efficiency 
ratings of the individual outdoor units that make up the combined 
system.
    Attached to this Application, as Appendix 1, is a proposed 
alternate test procedure for the S&L Class products. The proposed 
alternate test procedure is based on the alternate test procedure 
provided in the R410A Waiver, except for new provisions relating to the 
treatment of systems that combine individual outdoor units to create 
larger capacity VFRZ systems.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ MEUS proposes two other minor deviations from the alternate 
test procedure approved in the R410A Waiver. First, MEUS proposes 
that the tested combination consist of one outdoor unit that is 
matched with between 2 and 8 indoor units. In the alternate test 
procedure provided in the R410A Waiver, a tested combination 
consisted of one outdoor unit that is matched with between 2 and 5 
indoor units. MEUS is proposing to increase the maximum number of 
indoor units in a tested combination from 5 to 8 to account for the 
fact that the S&L Class products that have combined outdoor units 
can accommodate a greater number of indoor units. Second, MEUS is 
proposing a clarification of the prior language concerning the 
capacities of the outdoor and indoor units to specify that 
references to capacities are references to the nominal cooling 
capacities of the units. Since cooling and heating capacities of 
units may differ, MEUS would like to clarify these references to 
avoid any confusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. Similar Products

    To the best of our knowledge, models similar to MEUS's S&L Class 
products, which have the ability to combine multiple outdoor units to 
create larger capacity systems, are also offered in the

[[Page 75416]]

United States by Daikin AC (Americas), Inc. and LG Electronics U.S.A., 
Inc.

IX. Application for Interim Waiver

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2), MEUS also submits an application 
for interim waiver of the applicable test procedures for the S&L Class 
CITY MULTI models listed above. DOE's regulations contain provisions 
allowing DOE to grant an interim waiver from the test procedure 
requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned the Department for a 
waiver of such prescribed test procedures.\22\ As DOE has previously 
stated, ``an Interim Waiver may be granted if it is determined that the 
applicant will experience economic hardship if the Application for 
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.'' \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2).
    \23\ WR2/WY Interim Waiver at 17535, citing 10 CFR 
431.401(e)(3). See also Energy Conservation Program for Consumer 
Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the 
Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE 
Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump 
Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-012), 71 FR 14858 at 14860 (Mar. 24, 
2006); and Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: 
Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the 
Application for Interim Waiver of Samsung Air Conditioning From the 
DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump 
Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-009), 70 FR 9629 at 9630 (Feb. 28, 
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MEUS will experience economic hardship if the application for 
interim waiver is denied. Additionally, precedent indicates that DOE 
will likely grant MEUS's petition for waiver. Finally, it is in the 
public interest to grant an interim waiver. Therefore, MEUS 
respectfully requests DOE to grant the application for interim waiver.
    MEUS plans to introduce the new S&L Class products into the U.S. 
market in September 2008. The procedure for granting a petition for 
waiver can be a time-consuming process--DOE must publish the petition 
in the Federal Register, allow time for public comment, and then 
consider any comments before it makes a decision. Thus, the process 
typically takes a number of months. If an interim waiver is not 
granted, MEUS will suffer economic hardship because MEUS will be 
required to delay its introduction of these products to U.S. customers.
    In addition, DOE will likely grant MEUS's petition for waiver. As 
described above, the design characteristics which prevented testing of 
the basic R22, R410A, WR2 and WY products are present for the new S&L 
Class models as well. The best evidence that DOE is likely to grant 
this waiver petition is the fact that it granted similar petitions in 
the R22 Waiver and R410A Waiver. In addition, DOE granted an interim 
waiver for the WR2 and WY products based on the fact that the 
``identical testing problems [made] it likely that MEUS' Petition for 
Waiver will be granted.'' \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ WR2/WY Interim Waiver at 17535.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, DOE's regulations state that the Assistant Secretary may 
grant an interim waiver if he determines that it would be desirable for 
public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination 
for the Petition for Waiver. In response to MEUS's Application for 
Interim Waiver for its WR2 and WY products, DOE stated that ``in those 
instances where the likely success of the Petition for Waiver has been 
demonstrated, based upon DOE having granted a waiver for a similar 
product design, it is in the public interest to have similar products 
tested and rated for energy consumption on a comparable basis.'' \25\ 
MEUS's S&L Class CITY MULTI products are similar to the R22, R410A, WR2 
and WY CITY MULTI products. Thus, it would be in the public interest to 
grant the requested interim waiver to allow MEUS to test and rate 
similar products on a comparable basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ WR2/WY Interim Waiver at 17535.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

X. Conclusion

    MEUS seeks a waiver of the applicable test procedures for the 
products listed in Section IV above. Such a waiver is necessary because 
the basic S&L Class CITY MULTI models ``contain[] one or more design 
characteristics which * * * prevent testing of the basic model 
according to the prescribed test procedures.'' \26\ MEUS respectfully 
asks the Department of Energy to grant a waiver from the test 
procedures until such time as an appropriate test procedure is 
developed and adopted for this class of commercial products. MEUS 
expects to continue working with AHRI and DOE to develop appropriate 
test procedures. MEUS further requests DOE to grant its request for an 
interim waiver while its Petition for Waiver is pending.
    If you have any questions or would like to discuss this request, 
please contact Paul Doppel at (678) 376-2923 or Douglas Smith at (202) 
298-1902. We greatly appreciate your attention to this matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sincerely,

William Rau

Senior Vice President and General Manager
HVAC Advanced Products Division
Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc.
4300 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road
Suwanee, GA 30024.

CERTIFICATE

    I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing 
Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver upon the 
following companies known to Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, 
Inc. to currently market systems in the United States which appear 
to be similar to the S&L CITY MULTI VRFZ system design. I have 
notified this manufacturer that the Assistant Secretary for Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy will receive and consider timely 
written comments on the Application for Interim Waiver.

Daikin AC (Americas), Inc.
1645 Wallace Drive, Suite 110
Carrollton, TX 75006
Attn: Mike Bregenzer, VP and GM

LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.
1000 Sylvan Avenue
Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632
Attn: Mark O'Donnell

Dated this 28th day of March 2008.

William Rau
Senior Vice President and General Manager
HVAC Advanced Products Division
Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc.
3400 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road
Suwanee, GA 30024

APPENDIX 1--PROPOSED ALTERNATE TEST PROCEDURE

    (A) MEUS shall be required to test the S&L Class products listed 
above according to those test procedures for central air conditioners 
and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR Part 431, except that:
    (i) For each S&L Class outdoor unit, MEUS shall test a tested 
combination selected in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph 
(B) of this paragraph.
    (ii) For every other system combination using the same outdoor unit 
as the tested combination, MEUS shall make representations concerning 
the S&L Class products covered in this waiver according to the 
provisions of subparagraph (C) below.
    (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 one outdoor unit that is matched 
with between 2 and 8 indoor units.
    (ii) The indoor units shall--

[[Page 75417]]

    (a) Represent the highest sales volume type models;
    (b) Together, have a nominal cooling capacity between 95% and 105% 
of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor unit;
    (c) Not, individually, have a nominal cooling capacity greater than 
50% of the nominal cooling 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. MEUS may make representations about the energy 
efficiency of the S&L Class, for compliance, marketing, or other 
purposes, only to the extent that such representations are made 
consistent with the provisions outlined below:
    (i) For S&L Class combinations utilizing a single outdoor unit that 
has been tested in accordance with this alternate test procedure, MEUS 
may make representations based on these test results.
    (ii) For S&L Class combinations utilizing a single outdoor unit 
that has not been tested, MEUS may make representations which are 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 (``ARM'') approved by DOE.
    (b) Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy 
efficiency level as the tested combination with the same outdoor unit.
    (iii) For S&L Class combinations utilizing multiple outdoor units 
that have been tested in accordance with this alternate test procedure, 
MEUS may make representations based on those test results.
    (iv) For S&L Class combinations utilizing multiple outdoor units 
that have not been tested, MEUS may make representations 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 (``ARM'') approved by DOE.
    (b) Representation of non-tested combinations based on the 
capacity-weighted average of the efficiency ratings for the tested 
combinations for each of the individual outdoor units used in the 
system, as determined in accordance with the provisions of this 
alternate test procedure.

 [FR Doc. E8-29335 Filed 12-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P