[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 69 (Monday, April 11, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19913-19914]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8588]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 69 / Monday, April 11, 2011 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 19913]]



DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket No. EERE-2008-BT-TP-0010]


Compliance Testing Procedures: Correction Factor for Room Air 
Conditioners

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

ACTION: Decision on petition for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: On November 15, 2010, the Department of Energy (DOE) received 
a petition for rulemaking from the Association of Home Appliance 
Manufacturers (AHAM). The petition requests the initiation of a 
rulemaking regarding compliance testing procedures for room air 
conditioners. The petition seeks temporary enforcement forbearance, or 
in the alternative, a temporary, industry-wide waiver or guidance, to 
allow the use of a data correction factor in compliance testing 
procedures for room air conditioners. In this document, DOE denies the 
petition as moot because the amended test procedure for room air 
conditioners and clothes dryers incorporates use of the correction 
factor requested in the AHAM petition.

DATES: The petition is denied as of April 11, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of all materials related to this 
petition and the test procedure rulemaking for room air conditioners 
and clothes dryers at the U.S. Department of Energy, Resource Room of 
the Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite 600, 
Washington, DC, (202) 586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards 
at the above telephone number for additional information regarding 
visiting the Resource Room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ashley Armstrong, U.S. Department 
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building 
Technologies Program, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, 
DC, 20585-0121, (202) 586-6590, e-mail: [email protected].
    Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-7796. E-mail: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 
U.S.C. 551 et seq., provides among other things, that ``[e]ach agency 
shall give an interested person the right to petition for the issuance, 
amendment, or repeal of a rule.'' (5 U.S.C. 553(e)). Pursuant to this 
provision of the APA, AHAM petitioned the Department of Energy for the 
issuance of a new rule to allow manufacturers of room air conditioners 
to use a correction factor that was not included in the regulations 
governing DOE's compliance testing procedures at that time. The 
petition also sought temporary enforcement forbearance, or a temporary 
industry-wide waiver or guidance, to allow use of this methodology. DOE 
published the petition for public comment until December 27, 2010, 
seeking views on whether it should grant the petition and undertake a 
rulemaking to consider the proposal contained in the petition. (75 FR 
72739, Nov. 26, 2010).
    In addition to a comment from AHAM reiterating support for their 
petition, DOE received a jointly filed comment from the Appliance 
Standards Awareness Project (ASAP) and Earth Justice regarding AHAM's 
petition. ASAP and Earth Justice were concerned that the correction 
factor is not appropriate and may not have a sound technical basis. 
ASAP and Earth Justice stated that the cooling capacity of a room air 
conditioner may actually be higher rather than lower when barometric 
pressure is lower than standard pressure (due to greater moisture 
content in the air, which generally increases latent heat removal). As 
a result, the correction factor, which adjusts the measured capacity 
upwards when barometric pressure for the test is lower than standard 
pressure, may actually correct the capacity in the wrong direction. 
ASAP and Earth Justice also commented that the correction factor 
referenced in AHAM's petition applies to test room conditions only 
where the barometric pressure is lower than standard pressure, but that 
it would seem appropriate that the correction factor should account for 
any deviation from standard barometric pressure regardless of the 
direction (i.e., both higher and lower). (ASAP and Earth Justice, No. 
42 at pp. 1-2)
    ASAP and Earth Justice indicated their understanding that in the 
latest revision of ASHRAE Standard 37 (which applies to central air 
conditioners), the correction factor was removed when the committee 
could not find any reference as to where the correction factor 
originated or data demonstrating the problem of barometric pressure 
variation and how this problem could be addressed. ASAP and Earth 
Justice stated their understanding that the correction factor will be 
removed in the next revision of ASHRAE Standard 16. ASAP and Earth 
Justice also stated that DOE should fully investigate the issue in the 
test procedure rulemaking, which was ongoing at the time the comment 
was submitted, to ensure that the correction factor appropriately 
reflects the relationship between barometric pressure and measured 
total capacity. (ASAP and Earth Justice, No. 42 at pp. 1-2)
    ASAP and Earth Justice commented that any use of a correction 
factor is contrary to DOE's regulations for room air conditioners to 
meet specific Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER) levels as prescribed under 
10 CFR 430.23(f)(2) and 430.32(b), and determined in accordance with 
ASHRAE Standard 16-69. ASHRAE Standard 16-69 does not contain a 
correction factor to adjust the tested unit's capacity to a standard 
barometric pressure. Further, ASAP and Earth Justice stated that any 
deviation from DOE's test procedure regulations negates the effect of 
any demonstration of compliance with the applicable room air 
conditioner standards. (ASAP and Earth Justice, No. 42 at p. 2)
    DOE notes that the removal of the correction factor in ASHRAE 
Standard 37 (which applies to central air conditioners) does not 
indicate that its use is inappropriate in ASHRAE Standard 16, which is 
used for rating of room air conditioners. Room air conditioners operate 
with a ``wet'' condenser in rating test conditions, because room air 
conditioners use the

[[Page 19914]]

condensate from the evaporator side of the product to enhance 
performance of the condenser. Central air conditioners, which are 
covered under ASHRAE Standard 37, generally do not have this feature 
and operate primarily with dry condensers. DOE notes that changes in 
the barometric pressure have an impact on the moist air conditions, and 
this may affect room air conditioner performance differently than it 
would affect central air conditioners because of the difference in 
condenser operation. This factor could lead to different efficiency 
measurement impacts of barometric pressure for these two types of 
products. DOE has not received any information from ASHRAE indicating 
that ASHRAE is considering revisions to Standard 16 at this time.
    DOE also received additional information from AHAM supporting the 
inclusion of the barometric pressure correction factor in the 
calculation of cooling capacity from ASHRAE Standard 16. AHAM indicated 
that as atmospheric pressure drops, so does the air density and, 
therefore, the mass of air in a room. As atmospheric pressure drops, 
the efficiency of a unit would also drop because there would be less 
medium for heat transfer. ``The performance of the cooling coil is 
considerably influenced, and the cooling capacity of the air supplied 
to the conditioned room is reduced, by altitude effects because air 
density reduces * * *. Air mass flow rate is probably the most 
important effect of barometric pressure changes upon system 
performance. It is the air mass flow rate that transfers heat between 
cooler coils or condensers and airstreams and removes the sensible and 
latent heat gains from the conditioned space. Therefore, it is of vital 
importance that the correct air density or specific volume be used in 
calculations.'' (William Peter Jones, Air Conditioning Applications and 
Design, 32 (2d Ed. 1997)). AHAM indicated that because barometric 
pressure is connected to the measured efficiency of the unit, multiple 
tests of the same unit, under slightly different barometric pressure 
conditions, will likely produce different results.
    AHAM also provided data from a room air conditioner performance 
simulation using IMST-ART version 3.30 modeling software of five 
simulations, in each case progressively reducing the barometric 
pressure inputs by 1 in. Hg starting from standard barometric pressure 
(29.92 in. Hg). The results from this simulation, presented below in 
Table 1, show that the cooling capacity decreases as atmospheric 
pressure decreases.

                         Table 1--AHAM Room Air Conditioner Performance Simulation Data
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   1. Units       2. Case 1    3. Case 2    4. Case 3    5. Case 4    6. Case 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaporator Inlet Pressure      psia............       14.695       14.204       13.713       13.222       12.731
 (Atmospheric Pressure
 Inputs).
Condenser Inlet Pressure       psia............       14.695       14.204       13.713       13.222       12.731
 (Atmospheric Pressure
 Inputs).
Condensation Temp............  [deg]F..........       122.21       122.65       123.12       123.62       124.15
Evaporation Temp.............  [deg]F..........       47.867       47.689       47.511        47.33       47.144
Condensation Press...........  psia............       446.62        449.1        451.8        454.7        457.8
Evaporation Press............  psia............       151.96       151.53       151.09       150.64       150.18
EER Fan/Pump Included........  ................           11         10.8         10.7         10.6         10.4
Cooling Capacity.............  Btu/h...........       11,740       11,670       11,590       11,500       11,420
Refrigerant..................  ................        R410A        R410A        R410A        R410A        R410A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE recently published a final rule to amend the test procedure for 
room air conditioners and clothes dryers. (75 FR 972, Jan. 6, 2011). In 
the final rule, DOE noted that section 6.1.3 of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 
16-1983 (RA 2009) introduces a correction factor based on the test room 
condition's deviation from the standard barometric pressure of 29.92 
inches (in.) of mercury (Hg) (101 kilopascal (kPa)). Section 6.1.3 of 
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 16-1983 (RA 2009) states that the cooling capacity 
may be increased 0.8 percent for each in. of Hg below 29.92 in. of Hg 
(0.24 percent for each kPa below 101 kPa). For the reasons stated in 
the final rule, DOE amended the DOE test procedure to reference the 
relevant section of the ANSI/ASHRAE Standard and include use of the 
barometric pressure correction factor.
    The amended test procedure was effective February 7, 2011 and 
applies prospectively. DOE notes that the Administrative Procedure Act 
defines a rule as being prospective in nature. 5 U.S.C. 551(4) (`` 
`rule' means the whole or a part of an agency statement of general or 
particular applicability and future effect * * *'') In addition, the 
Supreme Court has stated that absent express statutory authority, 
agencies cannot promulgate retroactive rules. See Bowen v. Georgetown 
University Hospital, 488 U.S. 204 (1988). The Energy Policy and 
Conservation Act of 1975, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6291, et seq., does not 
authorize DOE to specify retroactive application of any portion of the 
test procedure in a test procedure rulemaking.
    For the reasons stated above, DOE denies AHAM's petition as moot.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 4, 2010.
Sean A. Lev,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2011-8588 Filed 4-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P