[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 151 (Thursday, August 6, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46870-46882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19232]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-TP-0015]
RIN 1904-AD54
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Small, Large,
and Very Large Air-Cooled Commercial Package Air Conditioning and
Heating Equipment
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR), the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) proposes to reaffirm that the currently
prescribed test procedure must be used when measuring the energy
efficiency ratio, integrated energy efficiency ratio, and coefficient
of performance for small, large, and very large air-cooled commercial
unitary air conditioners (CUAC) and commercial unitary heat pumps
(CUHP). With this test procedure rulemaking, DOE fulfills its
obligation under EPCA to review its test procedures for covered
equipment at least once every seven years and either amend the
applicable test procedures or publish a determination in the Federal
Register not to amend them. The proposed amendments would limit the
incorporation by reference of the industry test procedure AHRI Standard
340/360-2007, ``2007 Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial and
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment'' to
certain sections and addenda; specify requirements for indoor airflow
tolerance and adjustment to meet other rating conditions; clarify
requirements for condenser head pressure controls; clarify units of
measurement for airflow; and establish a tolerance on part-load rating
points. DOE also proposes to amend the certification, compliance, and
enforcement provisions for CUACs and CUHPs to specify additional
reporting requirements for indoor airflow and add enforcement
provisions for verifying the rated cooling capacity, as the rated
cooling capacity determines which class of equipment the product
belongs to and also determines certain testing conditions.
DATES: DOE will hold a public meeting on this proposed test procedure
if one is requested by August 13, 2015. If a public meeting is
requested, DOE will announce its date and location on the DOE Web site
and via email. The meeting will also be broadcast as a webinar. DOE
will accept comments, data, and information regarding this notice of
proposed rulemaking (NOPR) before and after any public meeting, but no
later than September 8, 2015. See section V, ``Public Participation,''
for details.
ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the NOPR for Test
Procedures for Small, Large, and Very Large Air-Cooled Commercial
Package Air Conditioning and Heating Equipment, and provide docket
number EERE-2015-BT-TP-0015 and/or regulatory information number (RIN)
number 1904-AD54. Comments may be submitted using any of the following
methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: [email protected] Include the docket
number EERE-2015-BT-TP-0015 and/or RIN 1904-AD54 in the subject line of
the message.
3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC, 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all items on a
CD. It is not necessary to include printed copies.
4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite
600, Washington, DC, 20024. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. If possible,
please submit all items on a CD. It is not necessary to include printed
copies.
For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see section V, ``Public
Participation,'' near the end of this document.
Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for review at regulations.gov. All
documents in the docket are listed in the regulations.gov index.
However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing
information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly
available.
A link to the docket Web page can be found at:
[www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2015-BT-TP-0015]. This Web
page contains a link to the docket for this notice on the
regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov Web page contains
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments,
in the docket. See section V for information on how to submit comments
through regulations.gov.
For further information on how to submit a comment, review other
public comments and the docket, or participate in the public meeting,
contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 or by email:
[email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ashley Armstrong, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building
[[Page 46871]]
Technologies Program, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington,
DC, 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9590, or email
[email protected].
For legal issues, please contact Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department
of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-8145.
Email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE intends to incorporate by reference the
following industry standard into part 429: ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/360-
2007, ``2007 Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial and
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment,'' approved
by ANSI on October 27, 2011 and updated by addendum 1 in December 2010
and addendum 2 in June 2011 (AHRI 340/360-2007) ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/
360-2007 is available at the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute, 2111 Wilson Blvd., Suite 500, Arlington, VA
22201, (703) 524-8800, or go to: http://www.ahrinet.org.
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion
A. Amendments to the Current DOE Test Procedure
1. Sections of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 Incorporated by Reference
2. Indoor Airflow Adjustment and Reporting
3. Condenser Head Pressure Controls
4. Unit of Measurement for Airflow
5. Tolerance on Percent Load for IEER Part-Load Tests
B. Certification and Enforcement Issues
1. Measuring Cooling Capacity for Purposes of Certification,
Assessment, and Enforcement
2. Compliance Dates of the Test Procedure Amendments
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
M. Description of Material Incorporated by Reference
V. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (42
U.S.C. 6291, et seq.; ``EPCA'' or, ``the Act'') sets forth a variety of
provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (All references to
EPCA in this document refer to the statute as amended through the
Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, Pub. L. 114-11 (Apr. 30,
2015).) Part C of Title III, which for editorial reasons was
redesignated as Part A-1 upon incorporation into the U.S. Code (42
U.S.C. 6311-6317, as codified), establishes the Energy Conservation
Program for Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment. This equipment
includes small, large, and very large air-cooled commercial package air
conditioning and heating equipment--which includes commercial unitary
air conditioners (CUACs) and commercial unitary heat pumps (CUHPs), the
subjects of today's notice. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)-(D))
Under EPCA, the energy conservation program consists essentially of
four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. The
testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of
covered equipment must use as the basis for (1) certifying to DOE that
their equipment complies with applicable energy conservation standards
adopted under EPCA, and (2) making representations about the efficiency
of the equipment. Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to
determine whether the equipment complies with any relevant standards
promulgated under EPCA.
General Test Procedure Rulemaking Process
In 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the general criteria and
procedures DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures
for covered equipment. EPCA provides in relevant part that any test
procedures prescribed or amended under this section must be reasonably
designed to produce test results which measure energy efficiency,
energy use or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product
during a representative average use cycle or period of use and must not
be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) In addition, if
DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, it must
publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an opportunity to
present oral and written comments on them. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b))
DOE is also required by EPCA to conduct an evaluation of test
procedures at least every seven years for each class of covered
equipment (including CUACs and CUHPs) to determine if an amended test
procedure would more accurately or fully comply with the requirement to
be reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect the energy
efficiency, energy use, and operating costs during a representative
average use cycle. DOE must either prescribe amended test procedures or
publish a notice in the Federal Register regarding its determination
not to amend test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)-(2))
Background
DOE's test procedure for CUACs and CUHPs is codified at Title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), section 431.96. The current
regulations require that manufacturers use ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/360-
2007, ``2007 Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial and
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment''
(henceforth referred to as ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007) when measuring the
efficiency of a given CUAC or CUHP and certifying that equipment as
compliant with the applicable standard.\1\ 77 FR 28928, 28990 (May 16,
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ DOE notes that for purposes of this notice, all references
to ANSI/ASHRAE 340/360-2007 include Addenda 1 and 2 to this
industry-based standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 1, 2013, DOE published a request for information and
notice of document availability regarding energy conservation standards
for CUACs and CUHPs. 78 FR 7296. The request for information solicited
information from the public to help DOE determine whether national
standards more stringent than those that are currently in place would
result in a significant amount of additional energy savings and whether
those national standards would be technologically feasible and
economically justified. DOE also sought information from the public on
the merits of adopting the integrated energy efficiency ratio (IEER) as
the energy efficiency descriptor for small, large, and very large air-
cooled commercial air conditioners and heat pumps. Currently,
manufacturers must measure the energy efficiency of their equipment
using the energy efficiency ratio (EER), which provides a measurement
of the full-load efficiency of a given unit. The procedure to follow
when measuring and calculating that value, like the proposed IEER
metric, is found in ANSI/ASHRAE
[[Page 46872]]
340/360-2007. See ANSI/ASHRAE 340/360-2007 at sec. 6. Comments received
on the topic of IEER are discussed in a related energy conservation
standards NOPR, which was published in September 2014. 79 FR 58948
(Sept. 30, 2014).
Subsequently, on April 1, 2015, DOE issued a notice of intent to
establish the Commercial Package Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps and
Commercial Warm Air Furnaces Working Group to negotiate either a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) or final rule for energy conservation
standards for this equipment. 80 FR 17363. This Working Group was
established under the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal
Advisory Committee (ASRAC) in accordance with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act. See 5 U.S.C.
Appendix--Federal Advisory Committee Act and 5 U.S.C. 561-570a. The
Working Group, which consisted of 17 members, including one member from
ASRAC and one DOE representative, met six times (five times in-person
and once by teleconference). The meetings were held on April 28, May
11-12, May 20-21, June 1-2, June 9-10, and June 15, 2015. The Working
Group successfully reached consensus on energy conservation standards
for commercial package air conditioners and heat pumps and commercial
warm air furnaces, which included the Working Group's recommendations
to ASRAC on the energy conservation standards. The group also chose to
provide test procedure and metric-related recommendations to the
committee. ASRAC voted unanimously to approve the Working Group's
recommendations on June 17, 2015. Consistent with those
recommendations, DOE proposes to amend the test procedure and
associated certification regulations for small, large, and very large
air-cooled commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment to
implement the Working Group's recommendations. Participants in the
Working Group consisted of the following entities aside from DOE:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participant Acronym, abbreviation Affiliation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Conditioning Contractors ACCA.................. Contractor/
of America. Installer
Group.
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and AHRI.................. HVAC
Refrigeration Institute. Manufacturers
Group.
Appliance Standards Awareness ASAP.................. Energy
Project. Efficiency
Advocacy Group.
Emerson Climate Technologies.. Emerson............... Manufacturer.
Goodman Manufacturing......... Goodman............... Manufacturer.
Lennox International.......... Lennox................ Manufacturer.
Mitsubishi Electric........... Mitsubishi............ Manufacturer.
Natural Resources Defense NRDC.................. Energy
Council. Efficiency
Advocacy Group.
Northwest Energy Efficiency NEEA.................. Energy
Alliance. Efficiency
Advocacy Group.
Pacific Gas & Electric Cal. IOUs............. Investor-Owned
Company, San Diego Gas & Utilities.
Electric Company, Southern
California Edison, and
Southern California Gas
Company.
Rheem Manufacturing Company... Rheem................. Manufacturer.
Sheet Metal and Air SMACCNA............... Contractor/
Conditioning Contractors Installer
National Association, Inc.. Group.
Trane/Ingersoll Rand.......... Trane................. Manufacturer.
United Technologies Carrier............... Manufacturer.
Corporation (Carrier).
Underwriters Laboratories..... UL.................... Test Lab.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE considers the activity associated with this rulemaking
sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirement that DOE review its
test procedures for all covered equipment, including CUACs and CUHPs,
at least once every seven years and either amend the applicable test
procedures or publish a determination in the Federal Register not to
amend them. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1))
II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
DOE is proposing several amendments to its regulations related to
the test procedures prescribed for CUACs and CUHPs in 10 CFR part 431,
subpart F. First, DOE proposes to amend the current DOE test procedure
to incorporate only certain sections of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 rather
than in its entirety. Second, DOE proposes amendments to incorporate a
tolerance on the indoor airflow rate. In particular, during full load
testing in cooling mode, the indoor airflow rate would be required to
remain within +/-5 percent of the rated full-load indoor airflow. The
unit and/or test facility must be adjusted to maintain this tolerance
for indoor airflow rate while ensuring that the ESP remains within the
tolerance required by the test procedure. For any other condition using
full-load airflow (e.g. full-load heating for a heat pump), the +/-5
percent tolerance would also apply and, if necessary, a test facility
adjustment would be made in order to maintain air flow within the
required tolerance, but the unit itself may not be adjusted. Third, DOE
proposes to clarify that condenser head pressure controls, if included
with the unit, must be active during testing. Fourth, DOE proposes to
clarify that reference to cubic feet per minute (CFM) in ANSI/AHRI 340/
360-2007 must be interpreted as referring to standard CFM (SCFM).
Fifth, DOE proposes that when conducting part-load testing to measure
IEER, the difference between the percent load calculated for a part-
load test point and its target value may be as much as three percent
without requiring interpolation or application of the cyclic
degradation factor specified in ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007. Sixth, DOE
proposes to amend the certification, compliance, and enforcement
provisions for CUACs and CUHPs. These amendments include adding
enforcement provisions for verifying the cooling capacity, as the
cooling capacity determines which class of equipment the product
belongs to and also determines certain testing conditions. Lastly, DOE
has proposed a definition of integrated energy efficiency ratio (IEER).
DOE believes that none of these clarifications or amendments would
result in any changes to the energy efficiency of current equipment.
Representations of energy efficiency metrics would be required to be
based on the amended test procedure beginning 360 days after the date
of publication of the final rule. 42 U.S.C. 6314(d) (prescribing a 360-
day period after a test procedure's publication by which manufacturer
representations of energy consumption or energy costs must be based on
that procedure).
[[Page 46873]]
III. Discussion
A. Amendments to the Current DOE Test Procedure
DOE proposes making several amendments to the current DOE test
procedure, which incorporates ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 by reference.
These amendments are detailed below.
1. Sections of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 Incorporated by Reference
Currently, 10 CFR 431.96, Table 2, specifies that when measuring
the energy efficiency of CUACs and CUHPs using the metrics EER and
coefficient of performance (COP), ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 must be used,
but omitting section 6.3 of that industry testing standard. DOE
proposes that when testing CUACs and CUHPs using the EER, COP, and IEER
metrics, only certain sections of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 are required,
specifically sections 3, 4, and 6 (but, again, omitting section 6.3),
rather than applying the entirety of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007. The
sections DOE proposes to incorporate are those that include the
relevant testing provisions that apply directly to the DOE test
procedure, while the excluded sections contain provisions unrelated to
the DOE test procedure. DOE proposes not to incorporate section 5 of
ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007, which consists of a single sentence referring
to use of ASHRAE 37, ``Methods of Testing for Rating Unitary Air-
Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment,'' for test methods and
procedures. DOE proposes this change because the version of this test
method is not specified. Instead, DOE proposes to incorporate by
reference the most recent version of this test procedure--ANSI/ASHRAE
37-2009. The test standard would be listed in 10 CFR 431.95, and
incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 431.96. In case of a conflict
between ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 or ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 and the CFR, the
CFR provisions control.
2. Indoor Airflow Adjustment and Reporting
Section 6.1.3.2 of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 establishes minimum
external static pressure (ESP) rating requirements for different
equipment capacities and requirements for the indoor-coil airflow rate
for determining standard ratings. DOE notes that AHRI 340/360 also
refers to ESP as ``external pressure'' and ``external resistance.''
Section 6.1.3.2 establishes a tolerance of -0 in. H2O to
+0.05 in. H2O for ESP (i.e., the measured ESP may not be any
lower but can be up to 0.05 in. H2O higher than the required
minimum) but does not contain a tolerance for the airflow rate.
Manufacturers are currently required to report, among other
information, the model number and specifications of the motor and the
drive kit, including settings, associated with that specific motor that
were used to determine the certified rating; as well as the rated
airflow in SCFM for each fan coil; in the supplemental information
submitted with the certification report for the unit. (See 10 CFR
429.43(b)(4)(i))
DOE proposes that any subsequent testing (e.g., DOE assessment and
enforcement testing) must use the same motor and drive assembly and
settings specified in the certification information, and that the party
conducting testing would be required to ensure that the ESP is within
the tolerances set forth in Section 6.1.3.2 of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007
and must verify that the indoor airflow rate is within +/-5 percent of
the manufacturer-rated full-load indoor airflow rate. If the indoor
airflow in SCFM measured at the required ESP is outside the +/-5
percent tolerance, the unit and/or test facility must be adjusted to
set up the unit such that both the airflow and ESP are within the
required tolerances. This process may include, but is not limited to,
adjusting any adjustable motor sheaves, adjusting variable frequency
drive (VFD) settings, or adjusting the code tester fan. DOE believes
that the proposed 5 percent tolerance on airflow is an appropriate
compromise of test burden and precision because holding this tolerance
has been possible without difficulty in DOE's own testing, and because
testing and analysis shows that the impact of up to 5 percent airflow
rate variation on capacity and IEER is minimal. For example, DOE
testing of a 7.5-ton CUAC unit suggested that 5 percent variation in
the full-load airflow would cause 0.5 percent variation in EER and 0.8
percent variation in capacity. DOE also used data available in
manufacturer data sheets to calculate IEER as a function of indoor
airflow for several commercial air conditioners and determined that a 5
percent variation in airflow would be expected to cause, on average, a
1.5 percent variation in IEER. (See EERE-2015-BT-TP-0015.) DOE requests
comment on the appropriateness of the +/-5 percent tolerance and/or
data that might show that a different tolerance level might be more
appropriate. This is Issue 1 in section V.B, ``Issues on Which DOE
Seeks Comment.''
ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007, section 6.1.3.2.e specifies that the full-
load cooling airflow rate must be employed for any other condition
using full-load air flow (e.g., full-load heating) without regard to
resulting ESP. DOE proposes that the +/-5 percent tolerance for air
flow rate must be applied for these other conditions as well. If
necessary, a test facility adjustment may have to be made in order to
maintain air flow within the required tolerance; for example,
adjustment of the code tester fan may be needed to ensure air flow
within the specified tolerance range even if the ESP is no longer
within the range specified for operation in full-capacity cooling mode.
(In this situation, the tester would not adjust the unit under test.)
DOE requests comments on this interpretation and clarification of the
requirements of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007, section 6.1.3.2.e, regarding
operation in modes other than full-capacity cooling. This is Issue 2 in
section V.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
DOE realizes that some units may be designed to operate with a
different indoor airflow rate for cooling or heating mode, such as when
the unit incorporates variable speed indoor fans. In that case, DOE
proposes that manufacturers would report the individual indoor airflow
rates in cooling and heating mode. DOE is proposing this approach in
order to capture air flow rates used in the different full-load tests
(i.e., heating and cooling). DOE requests comment on whether marketed
units actually operate in this manner, and if so, whether this proposed
provision would be appropriate for such units. This is Issue 3 in
section V.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
DOE also proposes that a manufacturer must include in its
certification report the adjusted indoor airflow at each part-load
condition. Inclusion of these part-load air flow rates would allow
confirmation that, during any subsequent third-party testing, the
equipment is operating at part-load as rated.
3. Condenser Head Pressure Controls
Note 2 of Table 6 of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 specifies that
condenser airflow should be adjusted as required by the unit controls
for head pressure control. Condenser head pressure controls regulate
the flow of refrigerant through the condenser and/or adjust operation
of condenser fans to prevent condenser pressures from dropping too low
during low-ambient operation. When employed, these controls ensure that
the refrigerant pressure is high enough to maintain adequate flow
through refrigerant expansion devices such as thermostatic expansion
valves. The use of condenser head pressure controls influences a unit's
performance, making it important that
[[Page 46874]]
this feature be operating during the test because it would be operating
in the field. DOE proposes to specify that condenser head pressure
controls, if included with the unit, must be active during testing.
The use of condenser head pressure controls may prevent a unit from
reaching steady state prior to testing. For example, a unit employing
condenser head pressure control might cycle a condenser fan to control
head pressure. The current DOE test procedure does not address such
operation. Hence, if a unit with condenser head pressure controls
cannot achieve steady-state operation with the controls active, and
thus cannot be tested, the manufacturer would have to request a waiver.
See 10 CFR 431.401 (``Any interested person may submit a petition to
waive for a particular basic model the requirements of any uniform test
method contained in this part, upon the grounds that . . . the basic
model contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing
of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures.'') DOE
requests comment on whether there are any units sold for which this
might occur and what changes, if any, may be needed to DOE's proposal
to address this scenario. This is Issue 4 in section V.B, ``Issues on
Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
4. Unit of Measurement for Airflow
ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 lacks clarity regarding references to CFM as
opposed to SCFM. In order to resolve this, DOE proposes that all
instances of CFM as a unit of airflow must be interpreted to mean SCFM
where they appear in the sections of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007
incorporated by reference in 10 CFR part 431, subpart F.
5. Tolerance on Percent Load for IEER Part-Load Tests
For calculating IEER, section 6.2.2 of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007
specifies that the unit efficiency must be determined at 100 percent,
75 percent, 50 percent, and 25 percent load (defined as part-load net
cooling capacity divided by full-load net cooling capacity, then
multiplied by 100 percent) at the conditions specified in Table 6 of
ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 (Table 6). ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 also provides
instruction for when a unit cannot operate at the 75 percent, 50
percent, and 25 percent part-load test points, but does not specify a
tolerance for the percent load, i.e. how much can the load deviate from
the part-load test point and still be considered operating at the part-
load test point. For example, if the calculated percent load for one of
the part-load tests is 75.5 percent, are the results of this test
acceptable for use as the 75 percent part-load test point condition?
DOE proposes to apply a +/-3 percent tolerance to each part load
test point. In other words, the difference between the percent load
calculated for a part-load test point and its target value may be as
much as 3 percent and still be considered to be operating at the target
part-load test point. DOE anticipates that this proposal will reduce
testing time and burden by eliminating additional part-load tests in
cases where operation closely approaches but does not exactly meet the
target part-load test points. DOE requests comment on establishing this
tolerance and on the appropriateness of the proposed tolerance level.
This is Issue 5 in section V.B, ``Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment.''
B. Certification and Enforcement Issues
1. Measuring Cooling Capacity for Purposes of Certification,
Assessment, and Enforcement
Manufacturers must certify and report CUAC and CUHP cooling
capacity (in Btu/h) when certifying the efficiency of this equipment,
per 10 CFR 429.43(b)(2). The cooling capacity represented by
manufacturers for certification and compliance purposes must be
determined through testing in accordance with 10 CFR 431.96. DOE
proposes that the cooling capacity certified to DOE for a given basic
model must be the average of the capacities measured for the sample of
units tested to certify that basic model, rounded according to the
multiples in Table 4 in ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007.
DOE proposes that when conducting assessment and enforcement
testing, the total cooling capacity must be measured pursuant to the
test requirements of 10 CFR 431.96 for each unit tested, and the
results of the measurement(s) (either the measured cooling capacity for
a single unit sample or the average of the measured cooling capacities
for a multiple-unit sample) compared to the value of cooling capacity
certified by the manufacturer. The manufacturer-certified cooling
capacity will be considered valid if the cooling capacity determined
through DOE testing is within five percent of the certified cooling
capacity.
2. Compliance Dates of the Test Procedure Amendments
In amending a test procedure for small, large, or very large
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, EPCA directs
DOE to determine to what extent, if any, the test procedure would alter
the measured energy efficiency or measured energy use of a covered
product. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)) If the amended test procedure alters
the measured energy efficiency or measured energy use, the Secretary
must amend the applicable energy conservation standard accordingly. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(4) (requiring that the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6293(e),
which includes determining the impact that changes to a test procedure
would have on the measured energy efficiency or energy use of a covered
product))
In DOE's view, no aspect of this NOPR is likely to alter the
measured efficiency of CUACs and CUHPs. These proposed amendments,
which follow the Working Group's recommendations, relate to DOE's
efforts to establish amended energy conservation standards for CUACs
and CUHPs. As part of that standards rulemaking effort, DOE had
proposed, and the Working Group adopted, an approach that would base
the amended standards for this equipment on IEER instead of EER. See 79
FR 58947 at 58956 (September 30, 2014); ASRAC Commercial Package Air
Conditioners and Commercial Warm Air Furnaces Working Group Term Sheet,
at 2 (June 15, 2015). DOE has also proposed a definition of IEER to
support the Working Group's approach. Consistent with this transition
to IEER as the reporting metric for this equipment, DOE proposes to
require the reporting of indoor part-load airflow rates used in the
IEER calculation as of the compliance date of the new standard. DOE
also proposes another amendment associated with the measurement of
IEER--applying a +/- 3 percent tolerance to each part-load test point
for IEER ratings. This proposed amendment, if adopted, would be
required as of the compliance date of the new standard.
The proposed amendments not specifically related to IEER would,
rather than alter the measured efficiency or measured energy use of
CUAC and CUHP equipment, clarify how to test this equipment. These
proposed amendments would limit the incorporation by reference of ANSI/
AHRI 340/360-2007 to certain sections, establish a tolerance on full-
load indoor airflow, add condenser head pressure control requirements,
and clarify units of measurement for airflow. These proposals, if
adopted, would result in no procedural changes related to how testing
would be performed. These proposed amendments, if adopted,
[[Page 46875]]
would become effective 30 days after publication of the final rule in
the Federal Register. Consistent with 42 U.S.C. 6314(d), any
representations of energy consumption of CUACs and CUHPs must be based
on any final amended test procedures 360 days after the publication of
the test procedure final rule.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that test
procedure rulemakings do not constitute ``significant regulatory
actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). Accordingly, this
action was not subject to review under the Executive Order by the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of
Management and Budget.
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) for
any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the
agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
As required by Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE
published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that
the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly
considered during the DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made
its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General
Counsel's Web site: http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
DOE reviewed today's proposed rule under the provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on
February 19, 2003. This proposed rule prescribes test procedures that
will be used to test compliance with energy conservation standards for
the equipment that are the subject of this rulemaking. DOE has
tentatively concluded that the proposed rule would not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
For manufacturers of small, large, and very large air-cooled CUAC
and CUHP, the Small Business Administration (SBA) has set a size
threshold, which defines those entities classified as ``small
businesses'' for the purposes of the statute. DOE used the SBA's small
business size standards to determine whether any small entities would
be subject to the requirements of the rule. 65 FR 30836, 30848 (May 15,
2000), as amended at 65 FR 53533, 53544 (Sept. 5, 2000) and codified at
13 CFR part 121. The size standards are listed by North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS) code and industry description
and are available at http://www.sba.gov/category/navigation-structure/contracting/contracting-officials/small-business-size-standards.
Manufacturing of small, large, and very large air-cooled CUAC and CUHP
is classified under NAICS 333415, ``Air-Conditioning and Warm Air
Heating Equipment and Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment
Manufacturing.'' The SBA sets a threshold of 750 employees or less for
an entity to be considered as a small business for this category. DOE
initially identified 12 potential manufacturers of commercial packaged
air conditioners sold in the U.S. DOE then determined that 10 were
large manufacturers, manufacturers that are foreign-owned and -
operated, or manufacturers that do not produce products covered by this
rulemaking. DOE was able to determine that 2 manufacturers meet the
SBA's definition of a ``small business'' and manufacture products
covered by this rulemaking.
DOE expects the impact of the proposed rule on manufacturers,
including small businesses, to be minimal. The proposed rule would
amend DOE's certification requirements to specify additional reporting
requirements and add enforcement provisions for verifying cooling
capacity. The proposed rule would also clarify or amend DOE's test
procedures to amend AHRI Standard 340/360-2007, ``2007 Standard for
Performance Rating of Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-
Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment,'' to incorporate certain sections
by reference, specify requirements for airflow adjustment and tolerance
to meet other rating conditions, require units with condenser head
pressure controls to be tested with those controls active, clarify the
unit of measurement for airflow, and establish a tolerance on part-load
rating points.
The Working Group has recommended amended energy conservation
standards rulemaking that the standards will be based on the metric of
integrated energy efficiency ratio (IEER) instead of energy efficiency
ratio (EER). DOE expects the impact on test burden to be modest. AHRI
ratings already include IEER, indicating that many manufacturers,
representing a large portion of the market, already determine IEER for
their units. ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2013--Energy Standard for
Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings (ASHRAE 90.1-2013) has
adopted an IEER requirement, which makes reporting of IEER necessary
for shipment to those states and localities that will adopt that
standard in building codes. Current procedures relating to alternative
efficiency determination methods (AEDMs), including procedures for
certifying IEER, require a limited amount of testing to be conducted
when validating an AEDM for CUACs and CUHPs. 10 CFR 429.70(c)(2)(iv)
(detailing the minimum number of distinct basic models required to be
test for purposes of AEDM validation for different equipment types and
classes) . DOE expects that most CUAC and CUHP ratings will be based on
results obtained from AEDMs. Although DOE recognizes that some ratings
will be based on testing, DOE expects these ratings to comprise a small
minority of products.
However, to help DOE better understand the burdens when measuring
IEER instead of EER, DOE requests comment and data on manufacturer
expectations of the number of models that will likely be tested rather
than rated with an AEDM. DOE encourages confidential data submissions
if necessary in order to ensure that such data can be provided.
For these reasons, DOE certifies that this proposed rule would not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a regulatory flexibility
analysis for this rulemaking. DOE will transmit the certification and
supporting statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy
of the SBA for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Manufacturers of small, large, and very large air-cooled CUAC and
CUHP equipment must certify to DOE that their equipment complies with
any applicable energy conservation standards. In certifying compliance,
manufacturers must test their equipment according to the appropriate
DOE test procedures for this equipment, including any applicable
amendments. DOE has established regulations for the certification and
recordkeeping requirements for all covered consumer products and
commercial equipment, including CUACs and CUHPs. See 10
[[Page 46876]]
CFR part 429, subpart B. The collection-of-information requirement for
the certification and recordkeeping is subject to review and approval
by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
In the Certification of Commercial Equipment Final Rule published
in May 2014, DOE amended existing regulations governing compliance
certification for a variety of commercial equipment covered by EPCA,
which affected CUAC and CUHP manufacturers. 79 FR 25486 at 25502 (May
5, 2014). In today's NOPR, DOE proposes to amend its certification
requirements to specify additional reporting requirements. DOE does not
believe that these additions to the certification requirements
constitute a significant additional burden upon respondents, as they
require minimal additional information to what manufacturers must
already report in their certification reports. DOE believes that the
Certification of Commercial Equipment Final Rule provides an accurate
estimate of the existing burden on respondents and would continue to
apply to the relevant aspects of the proposed amendments. See 79 FR at
25496-25498 (detailing burden estimates and indicating an average
burden of approximately 30 hours per company on an annual basis). OMB
has approved the revised information collection for DOE's certification
and recordkeeping requirements. 80 FR 5099 (January 30, 2015).
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
In this proposed rule, DOE proposes test procedure amendments that
it expects will be used to develop and implement future energy
conservation standards for commercial unitary air conditioners and
commercial unitary heat pumps. DOE has determined that this rule falls
into a class of actions that are categorically excluded from review
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) and DOE's implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021.
Specifically, this proposed rule would amend the existing test
procedures without affecting the amount, quality or distribution of
energy usage, and, therefore, would not result in any environmental
impacts. Thus, this rulemaking is covered by Categorical Exclusion A5
under 10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, which applies to any rulemaking that
interprets or amends an existing rule without changing the
environmental effect of that rule. Accordingly, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999)
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have Federalism
implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess
the necessity for such actions. The Executive Order also requires
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have Federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental
consultation process it will follow in the development of such
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has
determined that it would not have a substantial direct effect on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the
equipment that is the subject of today's proposed rule. States can
petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and
based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further
action is required by Executive Order 13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1)
Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to
minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected
conduct rather than a general standard; and (4) promote simplification
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable
effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines
key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law,
the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order
12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531).
For a proposed regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may
cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one
year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy.
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small
governments before establishing any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997,
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available
at http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE examined this
proposed rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and
determined that the proposed rule contains neither an intergovernmental
mandate, nor a mandate that may result in the expenditure of $100
million or more in
[[Page 46877]]
any year, so these requirements do not apply.
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being.
This rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity of the
family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it is not
necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this regulation would not
result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by
OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and
DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has
reviewed today's proposed rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those
guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB,
a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an
agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a
final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a
significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action,
the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented,
and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected
benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
Today's regulatory action to amend the test procedure for measuring
the energy efficiency of CUACs and CUHPs is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy, nor has it been designated as a significant energy action by
the Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy
action, and, accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy
Effects.
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974
Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788; FEAA)
Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where a proposed
rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the notice of
proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and background of
such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE to consult with
the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards on
competition.
The proposed rule incorporates testing methods contained in the
following commercial standards: ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/360-2007 and
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009. The Department has evaluated these
standards and is unable to conclude whether they fully comply with the
requirements of section 32(b) of the FEAA, (i.e., that they were
developed in a manner that fully provides for public participation,
comment, and review). DOE will consult with the Attorney General and
the Chairman of the FTC concerning the impact of these test procedures
on competition, prior to prescribing a final rule.
M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference ANSI/AHRI Standard
340/360-2007 (with Addenda 1 and 2), ``2007 Standard for Performance
Rating of Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat
Pump Equipment.'' This is an industry-accepted standard used by
manufacturers when testing and rating the performance of commercial and
industrial unitary air-conditioning and heat pump equipment. Copies of
this testing standard are available for download at http://www.ahrinet.org/App_Content/ahri/files/standards%20pdfs/ANSI%20standards%20pdfs/ANSI%20AHRI%20Standard%20340-360-2007%20with%20Addenda%201%20and%202.pdf.
V. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
proposed rule before or after the public meeting, but no later than the
date provided in the DATES section at the beginning of this proposed
rule. Interested parties may submit comments using any of the methods
described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice.
Submitting comments via regulations.gov. The regulations.gov Web
page will require you to provide your name and contact information.
Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies
staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable
except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and
submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not
processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this
information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE
may not be able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment.
Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not
be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your
comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names,
organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any
documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to regulations.gov information for which disclosure
is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or
financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business
Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through regulations.gov cannot
be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the Web site will waive
any CBI claims for
[[Page 46878]]
the information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the
Confidential Business Information section.
DOE processes submissions made through regulations.gov before
posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being
submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed
simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several
weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that regulations.gov
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery, or mail. Comments and
documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or mail also will be
posted to regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact
information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment
or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact
information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email
address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover
letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any
comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand
delivery, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It is not
necessary to submit printed copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be
accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses.
Documents should not contain special characters or any form of
encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature
of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting
time.
Confidential Business Information. 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 via
email, postal mail, or hand delivery two well-marked copies: One copy
of the document marked confidential including all the information
believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked non-
confidential with the information believed to be confidential deleted.
Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will make
its own determination about the confidential status of the information
and treat it according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat
submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the
items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as
confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from
public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its
confidential character due to the passage of time; and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be
exempt from public disclosure).
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE
is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of
interested parties concerning the following issues:
1. DOE proposes that when conducting full-load cooling tests with
the appropriate external static pressure (ESP) condition in Table 5 of
ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007, the tester must use the motor and drive kit
that was used to determine the certified rating, as specified in the
manufacturer's certification information. During such testing, the
indoor airflow must be within +/-5 percent of the manufacturer's rated
full-load indoor airflow rate. If the indoor airflow at the required
ESP is outside the +/-5 percent tolerance, make necessary adjustments
to the test setup and/or the unit such that both the airflow and ESP
are within the required tolerances. DOE requests comment on the
appropriateness of the +/-5 percent tolerance and/or data showing that
a different tolerance level might be more appropriate, as well as
feedback on the burden of maintaining airflow within the tolerance. See
section III.A.2 for details.
2. Section 6.1.3.2.e of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 specifies that the
full-load cooling airflow rate must be maintained for any other
condition using full-load air flow (e.g., full-load heating) without
regard to resulting ESP. DOE proposes that in this situation, the +/-5
percent tolerance on the full-load cooling airflow rate must also
apply. To maintain the airflow within the required tolerance, the
tester may make adjustments to the test facility or apparatus, but not
the unit being tested. DOE requests comments on this interpretation and
clarification of the requirements of section 6.1.3.2.e of ANSI/AHRI
340/360-2007 regarding operation in modes other than full-capacity
cooling. See section III.A.2 for details.
3. For all units, certification requirements already include
reporting of the indoor airflow at full capacity cooling operation. If
units are designed to operate with a different indoor airflow for
cooling and heating mode, DOE proposes that manufacturers would
separately report the indoor airflow in cooling and heating mode. DOE
requests comment on whether this approach is appropriate and also
requests comment on whether any units in the market are designed to
operate with a different full-load air flow for heating and cooling
modes. See section III.A.2 for details.
4. DOE proposes that condenser head pressure controls, if included
in a unit, must be active during testing. DOE requests comment on
whether there are any units on the market with condenser head pressure
controls that would prevent the unit from achieving steady state under
the test conditions. If so, how should DOE address these kinds of units
for testing purposes? See section III.A.3 for details.
5. For calculating IEER, section 6 of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007
specifies that the unit efficiency must be determined at 100 percent,
75 percent, 50 percent, and 25 percent load (defined as net part-load
cooling capacity divided by full-load net cooling capacity times 100
percent). ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 also provides instruction for when a
unit cannot operate at the 75 percent, 50 percent, and 25 percent part-
load test points, but does not specify a tolerance for the percent
load, i.e. how much can the load deviate from the part-load test point
and still be considered operating at the part-load test point. DOE
proposes to apply a +/-3 percent tolerance on the percent load for
approach to each part-load rating point. In other words, the difference
between the percent load calculated for a part-load test point and its
target value may be as much as 3 percent and still be considered to be
[[Page 46879]]
operating at the target part-load test point. DOE requests comment on
the appropriateness of the tolerance level. See section III.A.5 for
details.
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this proposed
rule.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 429
Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Commercial
equipment, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
10 CFR Part 431
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Commercial equipment, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small
businesses.
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2015.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE proposes to amend parts
429 and 431 of Chapter II, Subchapter D, of Title 10 the Code of
Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 429--CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER
PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317.
0
2. Amend Sec. 429.4 by redesignating paragraph (c) as (d) and adding a
new paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 429.4 Materials incorporated by reference.
* * * * *
(c) AHRI. Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute,
2111 Wilson Blvd., Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22201, (703) 524-8800, or
go to: http://www.ahrinet.org.
(1) ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/360-2007, ``2007 Standard for
Performance Rating of Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-
Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment,'' approved by ANSI on October 27,
2011 and updated by addendum 1 in December 2010 and addendum 2 in June
2011 (AHRI 340/360-2007), IBR approved for Sec. 429.43.
(2) Reserved.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 429.43 by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(iii), (b)(2)(i) and
(ii), (b)(4)(i) and (ii), to read as follows:
Sec. 429.43 Commercial heating, ventilating, air conditioning (HVAC)
equipment.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) For commercial unitary air conditioners and commercial
unitary heat pumps the represented value of cooling capacity must be
the average of the capacities measured for the units in the sample
selected as described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, rounded
to the nearest appropriate Btu/h multiple according to Table 4 of ANSI/
AHRI 340/360-2007 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 429.43).
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Commercial package air-conditioning equipment (except
commercial package air conditioning equipment that is air-cooled with a
cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h):
(A) When certifying compliance with the January 1, 2010 energy
conservation standards: The energy efficiency ratio (EER in British
thermal units per Watt-hour (Btu/Wh)), the rated cooling capacity in
British thermal units per hour (Btu/h), and the type(s) of heating used
by the basic model (e.g., electric, gas, hydronic, none).
(B) When certifying compliance with the January 1, 2018 or the
January 1, 2023 energy conservation standards: The integrated energy
efficiency ratio (IEER in British thermal units per Watt-hour (Btu/
Wh)), the rated cooling capacity in British thermal units per hour
(Btu/h), and the type(s) of heating used by the basic model (e.g.,
electric, gas, hydronic, none).
(ii) Commercial package heating equipment (except commercial
package heating equipment that is air-cooled with a cooling capacity
less than 65,000 Btu/h):
(A) When certifying compliance with the January 1, 2010 energy
conservation standards: The energy efficiency ratio (EER in British
thermal units per Watt-hour (Btu/Wh)), the coefficient of performance
(COP), the rated cooling capacity in British thermal units per hour
(Btu/h), and the type(s) of heating used by the basic model (e.g.,
electric, gas, hydronic, none).
(B) When certifying compliance with the January 1, 2018 or the
January 1, 2023 energy conservation standards: The integrated energy
efficiency ratio (IEER in British thermal units per Watt-hour (Btu/
Wh)), the coefficient of performance (COP), the rated cooling capacity
in British thermal units per hour (Btu/h), and the type(s) of heating
used by the basic model (e.g., electric, gas, hydronic, none).
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(i) Commercial package air-conditioning equipment (except
commercial package air conditioning equipment that is air-cooled with a
cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h): Rated indoor airflow in
standard cubic feet per minute (SCFM) for each fan coil; water flow
rate in gallons per minute (gpm) for water-cooled units only; rated
external static pressure in inches of water; frequency or control set
points for variable speed components (e.g., compressors, VFDs);
required dip switch/control settings for step or variable components; a
statement whether the model will operate at test conditions without
manufacturer programming; any additional testing instructions, if
applicable; and if a variety of motors/drive kits are offered for sale
as options in the basic model to account for varying installation
requirements, the model number and specifications of the motor (to
include efficiency, horsepower, open/closed, and number of poles) and
the drive kit, including settings, associated with that specific motor
that were used to determine the certified rating. When certifying
compliance with the January 1, 2018 or the January 1, 2023 energy
conservation standards, rated indoor airflow in SCFM for each part-load
point used in the IEER calculation and any special instructions
required to obtain operation at each part-load point, such as frequency
or control set points for variable speed components (e.g., compressors,
VFDs), dip switch/control settings for step or variable components, or
any additional applicable testing instructions, are also required.
(ii) Commercial package heating equipment (except commercial
package heating equipment that is air-cooled with a cooling capacity
less than 65,000 Btu/h): The rated heating capacity in British thermal
units per hour (Btu/h); rated indoor airflow in standard cubic feet per
minute (SCFM) for each fan coil (in cooling mode); rated airflow in
SCFM for each fan coil in heating mode if the unit is designed to
operate with different airflow rates for cooling and heating mode;
water flow rate in gallons per minute (gpm) for water cooled units
only; rated external static pressure in inches of water; frequency or
control set points for variable speed components (e.g., compressors,
VFDs); required dip
[[Page 46880]]
switch/control settings for step or variable components; a statement
whether the model will operate at test conditions without manufacturer
programming; any additional testing instructions, if applicable; and if
a variety of motors/drive kits are offered for sale as options in the
basic model to account for varying installation requirements, the model
number and specifications of the motor (to include efficiency,
horsepower, open/closed, and number of poles) and the drive kit,
including settings, associated with that specific motor that were used
to determine the certified rating. When certifying compliance with the
January 1, 2018 or the January 1, 2023 energy conservation standards,
rated indoor airflow in SCFM for each part-load point used in the IEER
calculation and any special instructions required to obtain operation
at each part-load point, such as frequency or control set points for
variable speed components (e.g., compressors, VFDs), dip switch/control
settings for step or variable components, or any additional applicable
testing instructions, are also required.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 429.134 by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 429.134 Product-specific enforcement provisions.
* * * * *
(c) Commercial unitary air conditioners and commercial unitary heat
pumps--Verification of cooling capacity. The cooling capacity of each
tested unit of the basic model will be measured pursuant to the test
requirements of part 431 of this chapter for each unit tested. The
results of the measurement(s) will be compared to the value of cooling
capacity certified by the manufacturer. The certified cooling capacity
will be considered valid only if the measurement(s) (either the
measured cooling capacity for a single unit sample or the average of
the measured cooling capacities for a multiple unit sample) is within
five percent of the certified cooling capacity.
(1) If the certified cooling capacity is found to be valid, the
certified cooling capacity will be used as the basis for determining
the equipment class.
(2) If the certified cooling capacity is found to be invalid, the
average of the measured cooling capacity will be used as the basis for
determining the equipment class.
* * * * *
PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
5. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317.
0
6. Amend Sec. 431.92 by adding a definition of ``integrated energy
efficiency ratio'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 431.92 Definitions concerning commercial air conditioners and
heat pumps.
* * * * *
Integrated energy efficiency ratio, or IEER, means a single number
part-load efficiency based on weighting of EER at various load
capacities, as measured in Appendix A to Subpart F of part 431,
expressed in Btu/watt-hour.
* * * * *
Sec. 431.95 [Amended]
0
6. Amend Sec. 431.95 by adding ``and Appendix A to subpart F of part
431'' at the end of paragraphs (b)(5) and (c)(2).
0
5. Amend Sec. 431.96 by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (c) and Table 1
to read as follows:
Sec. 431.96 Uniform test method for the measurement of energy
efficiency of commercial air conditioners and heat pumps.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Determine the energy efficiency of each type of covered
equipment by conducting the test procedure(s) listed in Table 1 of this
section along with any additional testing provisions set forth in
paragraphs (c) through (g) of this section and appendix A to this
subpart, that apply to the energy efficiency descriptor for that
equipment, category, and cooling capacity. The omitted sections of the
test procedures listed in Table 1 of this section must not be used.
Table 1 to Sec. 431.96--Test Procedures for Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional test
Use tests, procedure provisions
Equipment type Category Cooling capacity Energy efficiency conditions, and as indicated in the
descriptor procedures \1\ in listed paragraphs of
this section
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Commercial Packaged Air- Air-Cooled, 3-Phase, <65,000 Btu/h......... SEER and HSPF........ AHRI 210/240-2008 Paragraphs (c) and
Conditioning and Heating Equipment. AC and HP. (omit section 6.5). (e).
Air-Cooled AC and HP.. >=65,000 Btu/h and EER, IEER, and COP... Appendix A to this None.
<135,000 Btu/h. subpart.
Water-Cooled and <65,000 Btu/h......... EER.................. AHRI 210/240-2008 Paragraphs (c) and
Evaporatively-Cooled (omit section 6.5). (e).
AC.
>=65,000 Btu/h and EER.................. AHRI 340/360-2007 Paragraphs (c) and
<135,000 Btu/h. (omit section 6.3). (e).
Water-Source HP....... <135,000 Btu/h........ EER and COP.......... ISO Standard 13256-1 Paragraph (e).
(1998).
Large Commercial Packaged Air- Air-Cooled AC and HP.. >=135,000 Btu/h and EER, IEER and COP.... Appendix A to this None.
Conditioning and Heating Equipment. <240,000 Btu/h. subpart.
Water-Cooled and >=135,000 Btu/h and EER.................. AHRI 340/360-2007 Paragraphs (c) and
Evaporatively-Cooled <240,000 Btu/h. (omit section 6.3). (e).
AC.
Very Large Commercial Packaged Air- Air-Cooled AC and HP.. >=240,000 Btu/h and EER, IEER and COP.... Appendix A to this None.
Conditioning and Heating Equipment. <760,000 Btu/h. subpart.
Water-Cooled and >=240,000 Btu/h and EER.................. AHRI 340/360-2007 Paragraphs (c) and
Evaporatively-Cooled <760,000 Btu/h. (omit section 6.3). (e).
AC.
Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners AC and HP............. <760,000 Btu/h........ EER and COP.......... Paragraph (g) of this Paragraphs (c), (e),
and Heat Pumps. section. and (g).
Computer Room Air Conditioners..... AC.................... <65,000 Btu/h......... SCOP................. ASHRAE 127-2007 (omit Paragraphs (c) and
section 5.11). (e).
>=65,000 Btu/h and SCOP................. ASHRAE 127-2007 (omit Paragraphs (c) and
<760,000 Btu/h. section 5.11). (e).
[[Page 46881]]
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi- AC.................... <65,000 Btu/h......... SEER................. AHRI 1230-2010 (omit Paragraphs (c), (d),
split Systems, Air-Cooled. sections 5.1.2 and (e), and (f).
6.6).
>=65,000 Btu/h and EER.................. AHRI 1230-2010 (omit Paragraphs (c), (d),
<760,000 Btu/h. sections 5.1.2 and (e), and (f).
6.6).
HP.................... <65,000 Btu/h......... SEER and HSPF........ AHRI 1230-2010 (omit Paragraphs (c), (d),
sections 5.1.2 and (e), and (f).
6.6).
>=65,000 Btu/h and EER and COP.......... AHRI 1230-2010 (omit Paragraphs (c), (d),
<760,000 Btu/h. sections 5.1.2 and (e), and (f).
6.6).
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi- HP.................... <760,000 Btu/h........ EER and COP.......... AHRI 1230-2010 (omit Paragraphs (c), (d),
split Systems, Water-source. sections 5.1.2 and (e), and (f).
6.6).
Single Package Vertical Air AC and HP............. <760,000 Btu/h........ EER and COP.......... AHRI 390-2003 (omit Paragraphs (c) and
Conditioners and Single Package section 6.4). (e).
Vertical Heat Pumps.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.95.
* * * * *
(c) Optional break-in period for tests conducted using AHRI 210/
240-2008, AHRI 390-2003, AHRI 1230-2010, and ASHRAE 127-2007.
Manufacturers may optionally specify a ``break-in'' period, not to
exceed 20 hours, to operate the equipment under test prior to
conducting the test method specified by AHRI 210/240-2008, AHRI 390-
2003, AHRI 1230-2010, or ASHRAE 127-2007 (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 431.95). A manufacturer who elects to use an optional
compressor break-in period in its certification testing should record
this information (including the duration) in the test data underlying
the certified ratings that is required to be maintained under 10 CFR
429.71.
* * * * *
0
7. Add Appendix A to subpart F of part 431 to read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart F of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Air-Cooled Small, Large, and Very
Large Commercial Packaged (Unitary) Air Conditioning and Heating
Equipment
Note: Prior to [DATE 360 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL
RULE IN THE Federal Register], representations with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of commercial unitary air conditioners and
heat pumps (CUACs and CUHPs), including compliance certifications,
must be based on testing conducted in accordance with either Table 1
to Sec. 431.96 as it now appears or Table 1 to Sec. 431.96 as it
appeared at 10 CFR part 431, subpart F, in the 10 CFR parts 200 to
499 edition revised as of January 1, 2015. After [DATE 360 DAYS
AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE], representations with
respect to energy use or efficiency of commercial unitary air
conditioners and heat pumps (CUACs and CUHPs), including compliance
certifications, must be based on testing conducted in accordance
with Table 1 to Sec. 431.96.
(1) Cooling mode test method. The test method for testing
commercial unitary air conditioners and commercial unitary heat
pumps in cooling mode must consist of application of the methods and
conditions in ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 sections 3, 4, and 6 (omitting
section 6.3) (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 431.95), and in
ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 (incorporated by reference; see Sec. 431.95).
In case of a conflict between ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 or ANSI/ASHRAE
37-2009 and the CFR, the CFR provisions control.
(2) Heating mode test method. The test method for testing
commercial unitary heat pumps in heating mode must consist of
application of the methods and conditions in ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007
sections 3, 4, and 6 (omitting section 6.3) (incorporated by
reference; see Sec. 431.95), and in ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 431.95). In case of a conflict
between ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 or ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009 and the CFR,
the CFR provisions control.
(3) Minimum External Static Pressure. Use the certified cooling
capacity for the basic model to choose the minimum external static
pressure found in table 5 of section 6 of ANSI/AHRI 340/360-2007 for
testing.
(4) Optional Break-in Period. Manufacturers may optionally
specify a ``break-in'' period, not to exceed 20 hours, to operate
the equipment under test prior to conducting the test method in
appendix A. A manufacturer who elects to use an optional compressor
break-in period in its certification testing should record this
information (including the duration) as part of the information in
the supplemental testing instructions under 10 CFR 429.43.
(5) Additional Provisions for Equipment Set-up. The only
additional specifications that may be used in setting up a unit for
test are those set forth in the installation and operation manual
shipped with the unit. Each unit should be set up for test in
accordance with the manufacturer installation and operation manuals.
Paragraphs (5)(a) through (b) of this section provide specifications
for addressing key information typically found in the installation
and operation manuals.
(a) If a manufacturer specifies a range of superheat, sub-
cooling, and/or refrigerant pressure in its installation and
operation manual for a given basic model, any value(s) within that
range may be used to determine refrigerant charge or mass of
refrigerant, unless the manufacturer clearly specifies a rating
value in its installation and operation manual, in which case the
specified rating value shall be used.
(b) The air flow rate used for testing must be that set forth in
the installation and operation manuals being shipped to the
commercial customer with the basic model and clearly identified as
that used to generate the DOE performance ratings. If a certified
air flow value for testing is not clearly identified, a value of 400
standard cubic feet per minute (scfm) per ton shall be used.
(6) Indoor airflow testing and adjustment.
(i) When testing full-capacity cooling operation at the required
external static pressure condition, the full-load indoor airflow
rate must be within +/-5 percent of the certified-rated airflow at
full-capacity cooling operation. If the indoor airflow rate at the
required minimum external pressure is outside the +/-5 percent
tolerance, the unit and/or test setup must be adjusted such that
both the airflow and ESP are within the required tolerances. This
process may include, but is not limited to, adjusting any adjustable
motor sheaves, adjusting variable drive settings, or adjusting the
code tester fan.
(ii) When testing other than full-capacity cooling operation
using the full-load indoor airflow rate (e.g., full-load heating),
the full-load indoor airflow rate must be within +/-5 percent of the
certified-rated full-load cooling airflow (without regard to the
resulting external static pressure), unless the unit is designed to
operate at a different airflow for cooling and heating mode. If
necessary, a test facility setup may be made
[[Page 46882]]
in order to maintain air flow within the required tolerance;
however, no adjustments to the unit under test may be made.
(7) Condenser head pressure controls. Condenser head pressure
controls of commercial unitary air conditioners and commercial
unitary heat pumps, if typically shipped with units of the basic
model by the manufacturer or available as an option to the basic
model, must be active during testing.
(8) Standard CFM. In the referenced sections of ANSI/AHRI 340/
360-2007 for commercial unitary air conditioners and commercial
unitary heat pumps, all instances of CFM refer to standard CFM
(SCFM). Likewise, all references to airflow or air quantity refer to
standard airflow and standard air quantity.
(9) Capacity rating at part-load. When testing commercial
unitary air conditioners and commercial unitary heat pumps to
determine EER for the part-load rating points (i.e. 75 percent load,
50 percent load, and 25 percent load), if the measured capacity
expressed as a percent of full load capacity for a given part-load
test is within three percent above or below the target part-load
percentage, the EER calculated for the test may be used without any
interpolation to determine IEER.
[FR Doc. 2015-19232 Filed 8-5-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P