[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66315-66319]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-29775]



[[Page 66315]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Case No. CAC-020]


Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment: 
Decision and Order Granting a Waiver to Mitsubishi Electric & 
Electronics USA, Inc. From the Department of Energy Commercial Package 
Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures

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

ACTION: Decision and Order.

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

SUMMARY: This notice publishes the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) 
Decision and Order in Case No. CAC-020, which grants a waiver to 
Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. (MEUS) from the existing 
DOE test procedure applicable to commercial package central air 
conditioners and heat pumps. The waiver is specific to the MEUS 
variable speed and variable refrigerant volume S&L Class (commercial) 
multi-split heat pumps and heat recovery systems. As a condition of 
this waiver, MEUS must test and rate its S&L Class multi-split products 
according to the alternate test procedure set forth in this notice.

DATES: This Decision and Order is effective December 15, 2009.

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 Michael Kido, 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 Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR 431.401(f)(4), DOE gives notice of the 
issuance of its Decision and Order as set forth below. In this Decision 
and Order, DOE grants MEUS a waiver from the existing DOE commercial 
package air conditioner and heat pump test procedures \1\ for its S&L 
Class multi-split products, subject to a condition requiring MEUS to 
test and rate its S&L Class multi-split products pursuant to the 
alternate test procedure provided in this notice. Further, today's 
decision requires that MEUS may not make any representations concerning 
the energy efficiency of these products unless such product has been 
tested consistent with the provisions and restrictions in the alternate 
test procedure set forth in the Decision and Order below, and such 
representations fairly disclose the results of such testing. 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. 6314(d))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The applicable test procedure is the Air-Conditioning and 
Refrigeration Institute (ARI) Standard 340/360-2004, ``Performance 
Rating of Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and 
Heat Pump Equipment'' (incorporated by reference at 10 CFR 
431.95(b)(2)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 8, 2009.
Cathy Zoi,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

Decision and Order

    In the Matter of: Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. 
(MEUS) (Case No. CAC-020).

Background

    Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) sets 
forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency, including 
Part A \2\ 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 A, Part A-1 \3\ of Title III 
provides for an energy efficiency program titled, ``Certain Industrial 
Equipment,'' which includes large and small commercial air conditioning 
equipment, package boilers, storage water heaters, and other types of 
commercial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Part B of Title III of EPCA was redesignated Part A by 
Public Law 109-58 for editorial reasons.
    \3\ Part C of Title III of EPCA was redesignated Part A-1 by 
Public Law 109-58 for editorial reasons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today's notice involves commercial equipment under Part A-1. The 
statute specifically includes definitions, test procedures, labeling 
provisions, and energy conservation standards, and provides the 
Secretary of Energy (the Secretary) with the authority to require 
information and reports from manufacturers. 42 U.S.C. 6311-6317. With 
respect to test procedures, the statute generally authorizes the 
Secretary to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to 
produce test results which reflect 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 Secretary must amend the test procedure for a 
covered commercial product if the applicable industry test procedure is 
amended, unless the Secretary determines, by rule and based on clear 
and convincing evidence, 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 210/240-2003 for small commercial package air-cooled air 
conditioning and heating equipment with capacities <65,000 British 
thermal units per hour (Btu/h) and ARI Standard 340/360-2004 for large 
commercial package air-cooled air conditioning and heating equipment 
with capacities >=65,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h. Id. at 71371. 
Pursuant to this final rule, DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 431.95(b)(1)-
(2) incorporate by reference the relevant ARI standards, and 10 CFR 
431.96 directs manufacturers of commercial package air conditioning and 
heating equipment to use the appropriate procedure when measuring 
energy efficiency of those products. The cooling capacities of MEUS's 
S&L Class commercial multi-split products, which have capacities 
between 72,000 Btu/hr to 360,000 Btu/hr, fall in the range covered by 
ARI Standard 340/360-2004.
    In addition, DOE's regulations contain provisions allowing a person 
to seek a waiver for a particular basic model 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 
characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 
10 CFR 431.401(a)(1). A waiver petition must include any alternate test 
procedures

[[Page 66316]]

known to the petitioner to evaluate characteristics of 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). Waivers remain effective pursuant to the provisions of 
10 CFR 431.401(g).
    The waiver process also allows any interested person who has 
submitted a petition for waiver to file an application for interim 
waiver from the applicable test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 
431.401(a)(2). An interim waiver will terminate 180 days after issuance 
or upon the issuance of DOE's determination on the petition for waiver, 
whichever occurs first, which may be extended by DOE for an additional 
180 days. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(4).
    On March 28, 2008, MEUS filed a petition for waiver and an 
application for interim waiver from the test procedures applicable to 
small and large commercial package air-cooled air-conditioning and 
heating equipment. The applicable test procedure is ARI 340/360-2004, 
specified in Tables 1 and 2 to 10 CFR 431.96. MEUS asserted that the 
two primary factors that prevent testing of multi-split variable speed 
products are the same factors stated in the waivers that DOE granted 
previously to MEUS, and also to Fujitsu General Ltd. (Fujitsu), and 
Samsung Air Conditioning (Samsung) for similar lines of commercial 
multi-split air-conditioning systems: (1) Testing laboratories cannot 
test products with so many indoor units; and (2) There are too many 
possible combinations of indoor and outdoor unit to test. On December 
11, 2008, DOE published MEUS's Petition for Waiver in the Federal 
Register, asking for public comment thereon, and granted the 
Application for Interim Waiver. 73 FR 75408. DOE received no comments 
on the MEUS petition.
    In a similar case, DOE published a Petition for Waiver from MEUS 
for products very similar to the S&L Class 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 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. 
Id. at 14861. Comments were published along with the MEUS Decision and 
Order in the Federal Register on April 9, 2007. 72 FR 17528 (April 9, 
2007). Most of the comments responded favorably to DOE's proposed 
alternate test procedure; while one commenter did not believe a waiver 
was necessary, the commenter did not provide a solution to the testing 
difficulties that led to the grant of previous waivers for similar 
products. Id. at 17529. 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. Id. The MEUS Decision and 
Order included the alternate test procedure adopted by DOE. Id

Assertions and Determinations

MEUS's Petition for Waiver
    MEUS seeks a waiver from the DOE test procedures for this product 
class on the grounds that its S&L Class multi-split heat pump and heat 
recovery systems contain design characteristics that prevent testing 
according to the current DOE test procedures. As stated above, MEUS 
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 previously to MEUS, and 
also to Fujitsu General Ltd. (Fujitsu), and Samsung Air Conditioning 
(Samsung) for similar lines of commercial multi-split air-conditioning 
systems:
     Testing laboratories cannot test products with so many \4\ 
indoor units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ According to the MEUS petition, up to 50 indoor units of its 
commercial package multi-split air conditioners may be connected in 
a single system. However, DOE believes that, based on communications 
with multi-split manufacturers and commercial testing laboratories, 
test room limitations at laboratory testing facilities make testing 
this number of indoor units extremely difficult.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     There are too many possible combinations of indoor and 
outdoor unit to test.
    Mitsubishi (72 FR 17528, April 9, 2007); Samsung (72 FR 71387, Dec. 
17, 2007); Fujitsu (72 FR 71383, Dec. 17, 2007); Daikin (73 FR 39680, 
July 10, 2008); Daikin (74 FR 15955, April 8, 2009); Sanyo (74 FR 
16193, April 9, 2009); and Daikin (74 FR 16373, April 10, 2009).
    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. MEUS further states that its 
S&L Class products' capability to perform simultaneous heating and 
cooling is not captured by the DOE test procedure. Notwithstanding this 
fact, DOE is required by EPCA to use the full-load descriptor Energy 
Efficiency Ratio (EER) for these products, and simultaneous heating and 
cooling does not occur when operating at full load.
    Accordingly, MEUS requests that DOE grant a waiver from the 
applicable test procedures for its S&L Class product designs, until a 
suitable test procedure can be prescribed. DOE believes that the S&L 
Class MEUS equipment and 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 MEUS 
an S&L Class product waiver similar to the previous MEUS 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. 
DOE is adopting this modification, which enables testing of products 
with multiple outdoor units.
    Previously, in addressing MEUS's R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ products, 
which are similar to the MEUS products at issue here, 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 14861.

[[Page 66317]]

    MEUS requested that DOE apply the alternate test procedure provided 
in the R410A Waiver to the S&L Class. This alternate test procedure was 
published in the Federal Register on April 9, 2007. 72 FR 17528; 72 FR 
17533.
    To enable MEUS to make energy efficiency representations for its 
specified S&L Class multi-split products, DOE has decided to require 
use of the alternate test procedure described below, as a condition of 
MEUS's waiver. With the exception of the modification for testing 
multiple outdoor units, this alternate test procedure is the same as 
the one that DOE applied to the waiver for MEUS's R22 and R410A 
products, which was published at 72 FR 17528.
    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 MEUS'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.
    DOE issues today's Decision and Order granting MEUS a test 
procedure waiver for its commercial S&L Class multi-split heat pumps. 
MEUS must use the alternate test procedure described below as a 
condition of the waiver. With the exception of the modification for 
testing multiple outdoor units, this alternate test procedure is the 
same as the one that DOE applied to the previous MEUS waivers.
Alternate Test Procedure
    The alternate test procedure developed in conjunction with the MEUS 
waiver permits 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. For example, the 
tested combination must have from two to eight \5\ indoor units so that 
it can be tested in available test facilities. The tested combination 
must be tested consistent with the provisions of the alternate test 
procedure as set forth below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The ``tested combination'' was originally defined to consist 
of one outdoor unit matched with between 2 and 5 indoor units. The 
maximum number of indoor units in a tested combination is here 
increased from 5 to 8 to account for the fact that these larger-
capacity products can accommodate a greater number of indoor units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The alternate DOE test procedure also allows MEUS to represent the 
energy efficiency of that product. These representations 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 efficiency rating of a non-tested combination in 
one of two ways: (1) At an energy efficiency level determined under a 
DOE-approved alternative rating method; or (2) at the efficiency level 
of the tested combination utilizing the same outdoor unit.
    As in the MEUS matter, DOE believes that allowing MEUS to make 
energy efficiency representations for non-tested combinations by 
adopting this alternative test procedure as described above is 
reasonable because the outdoor unit is the principal efficiency driver. 
The current DOE test procedure for commercial products tends to rate 
these products conservatively. The multi-zoning feature of these 
products, which enables them to cool only those portions of the 
building that require cooling, would be expected to 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. This feature would not be captured by the current test 
procedure, which requires full-load testing. Full load testing, under 
which the entire building would require cooling, disadvantages these 
products because they are optimized for their highest efficiency when 
operating with less than full loads. Therefore, the alternate test 
procedure will provide a conservative basis for assessing the energy 
efficiency for such products.
    With regard to the laboratory testing of 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 decided 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 supported the proposed alternate test procedure. 72 
FR 17529. Comments generally agreed that an alternate test procedure is 
appropriate for an interim period while a final test procedure for 
these products is being developed. Id.
    Based on the discussion above, DOE believes that the testing 
problems described above would prevent testing of MEUS's S&L Class 
multi-split products according to the test procedure currently 
prescribed in 10 CFR 431.96 (ARI Standard 340/360-2004) and 
incorporated by reference in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 431.95(b)(2). 
After careful consideration, DOE has decided to adopt the proposed 
alternate test procedure for MEUS's S&L Class multi-split products, 
with the clarifications discussed above.
Consultations With Other Agencies
    DOE consulted with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) staff 
concerning the MEUS Petition for Waiver. The FTC staff did not have any 
objections to the issuance of a waiver to MEUS.

Conclusion

    After careful consideration of all the materials submitted by MEUS, 
the absence of any comments, and consultation with the FTC staff, it is 
ordered that:
    (1) The ``Petition for Waiver'' filed by MEUS AC (Americas), Inc., 
(MEUS) (Case No. CAC-019) is hereby granted as set forth in the 
paragraphs below.
    (2) MEUS shall not be required to test or rate its S&L Class multi-
split air conditioner and heat pump models listed below on the basis of 
the currently applicable test procedure cited in 10 CFR 431.96, 
specifically, ARI Standard 340/360-2004 (incorporated by reference in 
10 CFR 431.95(b)(2)), but shall be required to test and rate such

[[Page 66318]]

products according to the alternate test procedure as set forth in 
paragraph (3).
    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 capacities 
ranging from 65,000 to 144,000 Btu/h, and combined model nominal 
capacities ranging from 130,000, to 480,000 Btu/h.
     H2I-Series (PUHY-HP) 208/230-3-60 and 460-3-60 split-
system variable-speed heat pumps with hyper-heat technology, with 
individual model nominal capacities ranging from 65,000 to 120,000 Btu/
h, and combined model nominal capacities ranging from 130,000 to 
300,000 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 capacities ranging from 65,000 to 144,000 Btu/h, and combined 
model nominal capacities ranging from 130,000 to 300,000 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.
    (3) Alternate test procedure.
    (A) MEUS shall be required to test the products listed in paragraph 
(2) above according to the test procedure for central air conditioners 
and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR Part 431 (ARI 340/360-2004, 
(incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 431.95(b)(2)), except that MEUS 
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, 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 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.
    (ii) The indoor units shall--
    (a) Represent the highest sales model family, or another indoor 
model family if the highest sales model family does not provide 
sufficient capacity (see ii);
    (b) Together, have a nominal cooling capacity that is between 95% 
and 105% of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor unit;
    (c) Not, individually, have a nominal cooling capacity that is 
greater than 50% of the nominal cooling capacity of the outdoor unit;
    (d) Operate at fan speeds that are consistent with the 
manufacturer's specifications; and
    (e) 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:
    (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:
    (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:
    (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.
    (4) This waiver shall remain in effect from the date of issuance of 
this Order consistent with the provisions of 10 CFR 431.401(g).
    (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.



[[Page 66319]]


    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 8, 2009.
Cathy Zoi,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

[FR Doc. E9-29775 Filed 12-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P