[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 228 (Friday, November 27, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74020-74039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30057]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430

[Docket No. EERE-2014- BT-TP-0014]
RIN 1904-AD22


Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Portable Air 
Conditioners

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

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposes to modify the 
test procedure proposals for portable air conditioners (ACs), initially 
presented in a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) published on 
February 25, 2015. Upon further analysis and review of the public 
comments received in response to the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposes 
in this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNOPR) the 
following additions and clarifications to its proposed portable AC test 
procedure: (1) Minor revisions to the indoor and outdoor cooling mode 
test conditions; (2) an additional test condition for cooling mode 
testing; (3) updated infiltration air and capacity calculations to 
account for the second cooling mode test condition; (4) removal of the 
measurement of case heat transfer; (5) a clarification of test unit 
placement within the test chamber; (6) removal of the heating mode test 
procedure; (7) a revision to the CEER calculation to reflect the two 
cooling mode test conditions and removal of heating mode testing; and 
(8) additional technical corrections and clarifications. These 
proposals are to be combined with the initial NOPR proposals and would 
be codified in a newly created appendix CC to title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR), part 430, subpart B. The test procedures 
would be used to determine capacities and energy efficiency metrics 
that would be the basis for any future energy conservation standards 
for portable ACs.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
SNOPR, submitted no later than December 28, 2015. See section V, 
``Public Participation,'' for details.

ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the SNOPR for Test 
Procedures for Portable Air Conditioners, and provide docket number 
EERE-2014-BT-TP-0014 and/or regulatory information number (RIN) number 
1904-AD22. 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 and/or RIN in the subject line of the message.
    3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building 
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-5B, 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., Room 
6094, 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 of this document 
(Public Participation).
    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 www.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: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2014-BT-TP-0014 . This Web 
page will contain a link to the docket for this notice on the 
www.regulations.gov site. The www.regulations.gov Web page will contain 
simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public 
comments, in the docket. See Section V, ``Public Participation,'' for 
information on how to submit comments through www.regulations.gov.
    For further information on how to submit a comment, or review other 
public comments and the docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 
586-2945 or by email: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technology Office, EE-5B, 
1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: 202-
586-0371. Email: [email protected].
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, Mailstop GC-33, 1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: 202-586-1777; Email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE intends to incorporate by reference the 
following industry standard into 10 CFR parts 429 and 430: AHAM PAC-1-
2015, Portable Air Conditioners. DOE also intends to incorporate by 
reference the following industry standard into 10 CFR part 430: ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 37-2009, Methods of Testing for Rating Electrically 
Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment.
    Copies of AHAM PAC-1-2015 can be obtained from the Association of 
Home Appliance Manufacturers 1111 19th Street NW., Suite 402, 
Washington, DC 20036, 202-872-5955, or by going to http://www.aham.org/ht/d/ProductDetails/sku/PAC12009/from/714/pid/.
    Copies of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009 can be obtained from the 
American National Standards Institute 25 W. 43rd Street, 4th Floor, New 
York, NY 10036, 212-642-4980, or by going to

[[Page 74021]]

http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=ANSI%2FASHRAE+Standard+37-2009.
    See section IV.B. for a description of these standards.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
    A. General Test Procedure Rulemaking Process
    B. Test Procedure for Portable Air Conditioners
1. The May 2014 NODA
2. The February 2015 NOPR
II. Synopsis of the Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion
    A. Active Mode
    B. Cooling Mode
    1. Test Chamber and Infiltration Air Conditions
    a. Test Chamber Conditions
    b. Infiltration Air Conditions
    c. Infiltration Air Calculations
    2. Test Duration
    3. Seasonally Adjusted Cooling Capacity
    4. Duct Heat Transfer and Leakage
    a. Duct Heat Transfer Impacts
    b. Convection Coefficient
    c. Duct Surface Area Measurements
    5. Case Heat Transfer
    6. Test Unit Placement
    C. Heating Mode
    D. Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio
    1. Annual Operating Mode Hours
    2. CEER Calculation
    E. Compliance with other Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
Requirements
    1. Test Burden
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    B. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
V. Public Participation
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

    Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as 
amended (42 U.S.C. 6291, et seq.; ``EPCA'' or, ``the Act'') sets forth 
various provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. Part A of 
title III of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309) establishes the ``Energy 
Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles,'' 
which covers consumer products and certain commercial products 
(hereinafter referred to as ``covered products'').\1\ EPCA authorizes 
DOE to establish technologically feasible, economically justified 
energy conservation standards for covered products or equipment that 
would be likely to result in significant national energy savings. (42 
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)-(VII)) In addition to specifying a list of 
covered consumer and industrial products, EPCA contains provisions that 
enable the Secretary of Energy to classify additional types of consumer 
products as covered products. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20)) For a given 
product to be classified as a covered product, the Secretary must 
determine that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was re-designated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Classifying the product as a covered product is necessary for 
the purposes of EPCA; and
    (2) The average annual per-household energy use by products of each 
type is likely to exceed 100 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year. (42 U.S.C. 
6292(b)(1))
    To prescribe an energy conservation standard pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 
6295(o) and (p) for covered products added pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 
6292(b)(1), the Secretary must also determine that:
    (1) The average household energy use of the products has exceeded 
150 kWh per household for a 12-month period;
    (2) The aggregate 12-month energy use of the products has exceeded 
4.2 terawatt-hours (TWh);
    (3) Substantial improvement in energy efficiency is technologically 
feasible; and
    (4) Application of a labeling rule under 42 U.S.C. 6294 is unlikely 
to be sufficient to induce manufacturers to produce, and consumers and 
other persons to purchase, covered products of such type (or class) 
that achieve the maximum energy efficiency that is technologically 
feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(1))
    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 products must use as the basis for: (1) certifying to DOE that 
their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards 
adopted under EPCA, and (2) making representations about the efficiency 
of those products. Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to 
determine whether the products comply with any relevant standards 
promulgated under EPCA.

A. General Test Procedure Rulemaking Process

    Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures 
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for 
covered products. EPCA provides in relevant part that any test 
procedures prescribed or amended under this section shall be reasonably 
designed to produce test results that 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 shall not be 
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) In addition, if 
DOE determines that a test procedure should be prescribed or amended, 
it must publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an 
opportunity to present oral and written comments on them. (42 U.S.C. 
6293(b)(2))

B. Test Procedure for Portable Air Conditioners

    There are currently no DOE test procedures or energy conservation 
standards for portable ACs. On July 5, 2013, DOE issued a notice of 
proposed determination (NOPD) of coverage (hereinafter referred to as 
the ``July 2013 NOPD''), in which DOE announced that it tentatively 
determined that portable ACs meet the criteria under 42 U.S.C. 
6292(b)(1) to be classified as a covered product. 78 FR 40403. DOE 
estimated that approximately 974,000 portable AC units were shipped in 
North America in 2012, and projected that approximately 1.74 million 
units would be shipped in 2018, representing nearly 80-percent growth 
in 6 years.\2\ Id. at 40404. In addition, DOE estimated the average 
per-household portable AC electricity consumption for those homes with 
portable ACs to be approximately 650 kWh per year. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Transparency Media Research, ``Air Conditioning Systems 
Market--Global Scenario, Trends, Industry Analysis, Size, Share and 
Forecast, 2012-2018,'' January 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the July 2013 NOPD, DOE received comments from 
interested parties on several topics regarding appropriate test 
procedures for portable ACs that DOE should consider if it issues a 
final determination classifying portable ACs as a covered product.
1. The May 2014 NODA
    On May 9, 2014, DOE published in the Federal Register a notice of 
data availability (NODA) (hereinafter referred to as the ``May 2014 
NODA''), in which it agreed that a DOE test procedure for portable ACs 
would provide consistency and clarity for representations of energy use 
of these products. DOE evaluated available industry test procedures to 
determine whether such methodologies would be suitable for 
incorporation in a future DOE test procedure, should DOE determine to 
classify portable ACs as a covered product. DOE conducted testing on a 
range of portable ACs to determine typical cooling capacities and 
cooling energy efficiencies based on the existing industry test methods 
and other modified approaches for portable ACs. 79 FR 26639, 26640 (May 
9, 2014).

[[Page 74022]]

2. The February 2015 NOPR
    On February 25, 2015, DOE published in the Federal Register a 
notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) (hereinafter referred to as the 
``February 2015 NOPR''), in which it proposed test procedures for 
portable ACs that would provide a means of determining efficiency in 
various operating modes, including cooling mode, heating mode, off-
cycle mode, standby mode, and off mode. 80 FR 10211. For cooling mode 
and heating mode, DOE proposed test procedures based on the then-
current industry-accepted test procedure, Association of Home Appliance 
Manufacturers (AHAM) PAC-1-2014, ``Portable Air Conditioners,'' with 
additional provisions to account for heat transferred to the indoor 
conditioned space from the case, ducts, and any infiltration air from 
unconditioned spaces. DOE also proposed various clarifications for 
cooling mode and heating mode testing, including: (1) Test duct 
configuration; (2) instructions for condensate collection; (3) control 
settings for operating mode, fan speed, temperature set point, and 
louver oscillation; and (4) unit placement within the test chamber. For 
off-cycle mode, DOE proposed a test procedure that would measure 
portable AC energy use when the ambient dry-bulb temperature is at or 
below the setpoint. DOE also identified relevant low-power modes, 
proposed definitions for inactive mode and off mode, and proposed test 
procedures to determine representative energy consumption for these 
modes. Id.
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposed to use a combined energy 
efficiency ratio (CEER) metric for representing the overall energy 
efficiency of single-duct and dual-duct portable ACs. The CEER metric 
would represent energy use in all available operating modes. DOE also 
proposed a cooling mode-specific CEER for units that do not provide a 
heating function to provide a basis for comparing performance with 
other cooling products such as room ACs. In addition, DOE proposed 
separate energy efficiency ratio (EER) metrics for determining energy 
efficiency in cooling mode and heating mode only. 80 FR 10211, 10234-
10235 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    DOE also recently initiated a separate rulemaking to consider 
establishing energy conservation standards for portable ACs. Any new 
standards would be based on the same efficiency metrics derived from 
the test procedure that DOE would adopt in a final rule in this 
rulemaking.

II. Synopsis of the Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    Upon further analysis and review of the public comments received in 
response to the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposes in this SNOPR the 
following additions and clarifications to its proposed portable AC test 
procedure: (1) Minor revisions to the indoor and outdoor cooling mode 
test conditions; (2) an additional test condition for cooling mode 
testing; (3) updated infiltration air and capacity calculations to 
account for the second cooling mode test condition; (4) removal of the 
measurement of case heat transfer; (5) a clarification of test unit 
placement within the test chamber; (6) removal of the heating mode test 
procedure; (7) a revision to the CEER calculation to reflect the two 
cooling mode test conditions and removal of heating mode testing; and 
(8) additional technical corrections and clarifications.
    Other than the specific amendments newly proposed in this SNOPR, 
DOE continues to propose the test procedure originally included in the 
February 2015 NOPR. For the reader's convenience, DOE has reproduced in 
this SNOPR the entire body of proposed regulatory text from the 
February 2015 NOPR, amended as appropriate according to these 
proposals. DOE's supporting analysis and discussion for the portions of 
the proposed regulatory text not affected by this SNOPR may be found in 
the February 2015 NOPR. 80 FR 10211 (Feb. 25, 2015).

III. Discussion

A. Active Mode

    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposed to define active mode, for 
purposes of the portable AC test procedure, as a mode in which the 
portable AC is connected to a mains power source, has been activated, 
and is performing the main functions of cooling or heating the 
conditioned space, circulating air through activation of its fan or 
blower without activation of the refrigeration system, or defrosting 
the refrigerant coil. 80 FR 10211, 10216 (Feb. 25, 2015). DOE has 
determined that the existing statutory definition of ``active mode'' is 
sufficient for purposes of this test procedure and therefore is no 
longer proposing a separate definition of ``active mode'' for portable 
ACs.

B. Cooling Mode

    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposed that cooling mode is a mode 
in which a portable AC has activated the main cooling function 
according to the thermostat or temperature sensor signal, including 
activating the refrigeration system or the fan or blower without 
activation of the refrigeration system. 80 FR 10211, 10217 (Feb. 25, 
2015). DOE determined that the existing industry standards used to 
measure portable AC cooling capacity and EER, which are based on air 
enthalpy methods, may not represent true portable AC performance. 
Additionally, DOE is aware that manufacturers may test according to 
different industry standards, causing confusion and variation in the 
reported cooling capacities and EERs for units currently on the market. 
DOE further concluded that varying infiltration air flow rates and heat 
losses would preclude a fixed translation factor that could be applied 
to the results of an air enthalpy measurement to account for the impact 
of these effects. Therefore, although DOE generally proposed a test 
procedure for portable ACs based on AHAM PAC-1-2014, the industry-
accepted standard for testing portable ACs (which is based on an air 
enthalpy approach), the proposed test procedure incorporated 
infiltration air effects and heat losses to more accurately measure 
performance representative of typical operation and provide a clear and 
consistent basis for comparison of portable AC capacity and energy use. 
80 FR 10211, 10222-10223 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    The Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP), Alliance to Save 
Energy (ASE), American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), 
National Consumer Law Center (NCLC), Natural Resources Defense Council 
(NRDC), and Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) (hereinafter 
the ``Joint Commenters'') and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company 
(PG&E), Southern California Gas Company (SCGC), Southern California 
Edison (SCE), and San Diego Gas and Electric Company (SDG&E) 
(hereinafter the ``California IOUs'') supported DOE's proposal to adopt 
AHAM PAC-1-2014 with modifications to account for the impacts of 
infiltration air and heat transfer from the duct(s) and case, as this 
would better reflect real-world performance of both single-duct and 
dual-duct portable ACs. (Joint Commenters, No. 19 at p. 1; California 
IOUs, No. 20 at p. 1) \3\ The Joint Commenters further noted that in

[[Page 74023]]

response to the NODA, they had encouraged DOE to adopt a test procedure 
based on the calorimeter approach. In light of the data presented in 
the February 2015 NOPR, the Joint Commenters now support the proposal 
to base a DOE portable AC test procedure on AHAM PAC-1-2014 as there is 
a good correlation with the calorimeter test results when the proposed 
adjustments that account for the impact of infiltration air and duct 
and case heat transfer are applied. (Joint Commenters, No. 19 at p. 2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A notation in the form ``Joint Commenters, No. 19 at p. 1'' 
identifies a written comment: (1) Made by the Appliance Standards 
Awareness Project, Alliance to Save Energy, American Council for an 
Energy-Efficient Economy, National Consumer Law Center, Natural 
Resources Defense Council, and Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance 
(the ``Joint Commenters''); (2) recorded in document number 19 that 
is filed in the docket of this test procedure rulemaking (Docket No. 
EERE-2014-BT-TP-0014) and available for review at 
www.regulations.gov; and (3) which appears on page 1 of document 
number 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    China WTO/TBT National Notification & Enquiry Center (China) noted 
that, compared to the industry-accepted and commonly used American 
National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American Society of Heating, 
Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 128-
2001, ``Method of Rating Unitary Spot Air Conditioners,'' AHAM PAC-1-
2014 is significantly more complex, increases the cost of testing, and 
would require laboratories to purchase new instrumentation and update 
or reconstruct their chambers. Further, China stated that DOE did not 
provide a comparison between AHAM PAC-1-2014 and ANSI/ASHRAE 128-2001 
based on test data. Without a comparison of the results, China does not 
believe that DOE can conclude there is a marked difference between the 
two, and cannot determine that testing according to AHAM PAC-1-2014 is 
necessary. China requested that DOE provide comparative data between 
the two test procedures. (China, No. 15 at pp. 3-4)
    De' Longhi Appliances s.r.l. (De' Longhi) claimed that in the 
United States, most manufacturers are using the standard ANSI/ASHRAE 
128-2001 to rate the performance of single-duct portable ACs. De' 
Longhi stated, however, that testing a single-duct portable AC 
according to AHAM PAC-1-2014 results in a cooling capacity about 25 
percent lower than the rating obtained with ANSI/ASHRAE 128-2001. 
Despite this rated cooling capacity reduction, De' Longhi supports the 
use of AHAM PAC-1-2014 because it ensures more reliable and repeatable 
testing data. (De' Longhi, No. 16 at pp. 1-2)
    AHAM and De' Longhi support the use of AHAM PAC-1-2014 as the basis 
for a DOE test procedure for portable ACs, albeit without the addition 
of certain test procedure provisions that DOE has proposed. (Public 
Meeting Transcript, AHAM, No. 13 at p. 31; Public Meeting Transcript, 
De' Longhi, No. 13 at pp. 13, 33; AHAM, No. 18 at p. 2; De' Longhi, No. 
16 at p. 2) \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A notation in the form ``AHAM, Public Meeting Transcript, 
No. 13 at p. 31'' identifies an oral comment that DOE received on 
March 18, 2015 during the NOPR public meeting, was recorded in the 
public meeting transcript in the docket for this test procedure 
rulemaking (Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-TP-0014). This particular 
notation refers to a comment (1) made by the Association of Home 
Appliance Manufacturers during the public meeting; (2) recorded in 
document number 13, which is the public meeting transcript that is 
filed in the docket of this test procedure rulemaking; and (3) which 
appears on page 31 of document number 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE agrees that certain portable ACs may be currently tested 
according to ANSI/ASHRAE 128-2001, but believes this is largely due to 
California's regulations for certifying spot coolers sold in that 
State. As discussed in the February 2015 NOPR, DOE is not proposing 
testing procedures for spot coolers at this time. 80 FR 10212, 10214-15 
(Feb. 25, 2015). In addition, ANSI/ASHRAE 128-2001 is an obsolete 
version of that test standard, and DOE expects that manufacturers 
conducting testing of their portable ACs for reasons other than 
certification in California may be using a current, industry-accepted 
test standard such as AHAM PAC-1-2014 or ANSI/ASHRAE 128-2011, both of 
which were discussed and analyzed in the May 2014 NODA and February 
2015 NOPR. For these reasons, and with the general support of 
interested parties, DOE continues to propose a test procedure for 
portable ACs that is based on the current version of AHAM PAC-1. DOE 
notes that AHAM issued a new version of PAC-1 in 2015, with no changes 
in language from the 2014 version. Therefore, although DOE previously 
proposed to adopt a test procedure for portable ACs that is based on 
AHAM PAC-1-2014, DOE now proposes in this SNOPR to reference the 
identical updated version, AHAM PAC-1-2015, in the proposed DOE 
portable AC test procedure. Accordingly, DOE refers to AHAM PAC-1-2015 
for the remainder of this SNOPR when discussing its current proposals.
    Additionally, this notice discusses other modifications to the test 
procedure proposed in the February 2015 NOPR to address commenters' 
concerns, improve repeatability, minimize test burden, and ensure the 
test procedure is representative of typical consumer usage.
1. Test Chamber and Infiltration Air Conditions
    DOE proposed in the February 2015 NOPR to utilize the following 
ambient conditions presented in Table III.1 below, based on those test 
conditions specified in Table 3, ``Standard Rating Conditions,'' of 
AHAM PAC-1-2014. DOE also proposed to determine test configurations 
according to Table 2 of AHAM PAC-1-2014, with Test Configuration 3 
applicable to dual-duct portable ACs and Test Configuration 5 
applicable to single-duct portable ACs. 80 FR 10211, 10226 (Feb. 25, 
2015). For single-duct units, the condenser inlet conditions are the 
same as the evaporator inlet. For dual-duct units, the condenser inlet 
air conditions are monitored at the interface between the condenser 
inlet duct and outdoor test room.

                      Table III.1--Standard Rating Conditions--Cooling Mode--NOPR Proposal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Evaporator inlet air, [deg]F     Condenser inlet air, [deg]F
                                                             ([deg]C)                        ([deg]C)
               Test configuration                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3...............................................       80.6 (27)       66.2 (19)       95.0 (35)       75.2 (24)
5...............................................       80.6 (27)       66.2 (19)       80.6 (27)       66.2 (19)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 74024]]

a. Test Chamber Conditions
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE noted that the AHAM PAC-1-2014 test 
conditions are slightly different from the AHAM PAC-1-2009 test 
conditions, which AHAM revised to harmonize with the temperatures 
specified in Canadian Standards Association (CSA) C370-2013, ``Cooling 
Performance of Portable Air Conditioners'' and ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 
128-2011, ``Method of Rating Portable Air Conditioners.'' DOE's 
analysis and testing was conducted in accordance with AHAM PAC-1-2009, 
as the next version of the standard, AHAM PAC-1-2014, had not yet been 
finalized. DOE tentatively determined that the test condition 
differences between the 2009 and 2014 versions of AHAM PAC-1 would not 
substantively impact test results. Therefore, DOE proposed to use the 
updated test conditions from AHAM PAC-1-2014. DOE also noted in the 
February 2015 NOPR that these conditions are close, but not identical, 
to those required by the DOE room AC test procedure (80 degrees 
Fahrenheit ([deg]F) dry-bulb temperature and 67[emsp14][deg]F wet-bulb 
temperature on the indoor side, and 95[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb 
temperature and 75[emsp14][deg]F wet-bulb temperature on the outdoor 
side, consistent with the AHAM PAC-1-2009 conditions). 80 FR 10211, 
10226 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    AHAM agreed that there are no major differences between the 2009 
and 2014 versions, and that the main changes were editorial in nature 
to harmonize with the Canadian test procedure. AHAM stated that it is 
important that the North American and Canadian methods are harmonized. 
(Public Meeting Transcript, AHAM, No. 13 at pp. 31-32)
    DENSO Products and Services Americas, Inc. (DENSO) commented that 
the room AC indoor test conditions in the DOE test procedure for those 
products correspond to about 50-percent relative humidity, whereas the 
AHAM PAC-1-2014 indoor test conditions are closer to 40-percent 
relative humidity. According to DENSO, this is a significant difference 
in test conditions and thus the AHAM PAC-1-2014 test conditions are not 
comparable to those for room ACs or other air conditioning products. 
DENSO also commented that the test conditions should be expressed in 
whole degrees instead of three-digit dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures 
in [deg]F that are equivalent to whole degrees Celsius in other 
standards. (Public Meeting Transcript, DENSO, No. 13 at pp. 47-48, 69-
70; DENSO, No. 14 at p. 2)
    In response to the comments received regarding the chamber test 
conditions, DOE examined the relative impact of the varying latent heat 
differential between the indoor and outdoor conditions in the February 
2015 NOPR proposal and in AHAM PAC-1-2009. The latent heat differential 
impacts cooling capacity primarily through the effects of infiltration 
air. Based on the average dry air mass flowrate for the single-duct and 
dual-duct units in DOE's test sample, DOE estimated that the change in 
test conditions from the 2009 to either the 2014 or 2015 version of 
AHAM PAC-1 would decrease cooling capacity by increasing the heating 
effect due to infiltration air by an average of 755 Btu/h and 330 Btu/h 
for the two configurations, respectively. With an average PAC-1-2009 
cooling capacity (without accounting for infiltration air, case, or 
duct heat effects) of 7,650 Btu/h for single-duct units and 6,800 Btu/h 
for dual-duct units, adjusting the test conditions from the 2009 to 
2015 version of AHAM PAC-1 would decrease cooling capacity by 5-10 
percent, an amount which DOE considers to be significant. Therefore, 
DOE no longer concludes that the test condition differences between the 
2009 and 2014 (and, thus, 2015) versions of AHAM PAC-1 would not 
substantively impact test results.
    DOE further notes that the test conditions in AHAM PAC-1-2015, 
although harmonized with those in CSA C370-2013 and ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 128-2011, do not align with the test conditions in the DOE 
test procedures for other cooling products, particularly room ACs and 
central ACs. As noted earlier in this section, the AHAM PAC-1-2015 test 
approach is generally appropriate for portable ACs. However, DOE 
believes that the test conditions in AHAM PAC-1-2009, which align with 
the conditions used for testing other DOE covered products, are more 
appropriate for testing portable AC performance than those in AHAM PAC-
1-2015. The temperatures specified in AHAM PAC-1-2015 were rounded to 
produce whole degrees Celsius, which results in a relative humidity on 
the indoor side (47.0 percent) that differs significantly from the 
relative humidity that DOE has previously determined for room ACs and 
central ACs is representative of a residential air-conditioned space 
(51.1 percent). To maintain consistency among products with similar 
functions, DOE proposes in this SNOPR to revise the test conditions 
proposed in the February 2015 NOPR to those presented in Table III.2 
below, which would replace the test conditions specified in Table 3, 
``Standard Rating Conditions,'' of AHAM PAC-1-2015. As discussed in the 
next section, however, these revisions do not comprise the only changes 
that DOE is proposing in this SNOPR to the rating conditions for 
portable ACs.

                          Table III.2--Revised Standard Rating Conditions--Cooling Mode
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Evaporator inlet air, [deg]F     Condenser inlet air, [deg]F
                                                             ([deg]C)                        ([deg]C)
               Test configuration                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3...............................................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)         95 (35)       75 (23.9)
5...............................................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Infiltration Air Conditions
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE noted that infiltration from outside 
the conditioned space occurs due to the negative pressure induced as 
condenser air is exhausted to the outdoor space. Although this effect 
is most pronounced for single-duct units, which draw all of their 
condenser air from within the conditioned space, dual-duct units also 
draw a portion of their condenser air from the conditioned space. DOE 
proposed calculating the infiltration air flow rate as the condenser 
exhaust flow rate to the outdoor chamber minus any condenser intake 
flow rate from the outdoor chamber. DOE proposed that the infiltration 
air conditions be 95[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb temperature and 
75.2[emsp14][deg]F wet-bulb temperature, consistent with the outdoor 
conditions specified in AHAM PAC-1-2014. 80 FR 10211, 10224-10225 (Feb. 
25, 2015).
    The Joint Commenters supported the proposal to use 95[emsp14][deg]F 
dry-bulb temperature and 75[emsp14][deg]F wet-bulb temperature outdoor 
air. (Public Meeting Transcript, ASAP, No. 13 at p. 44; Joint 
Commenters, No. 19 at p. 2)

[[Page 74025]]

The Joint Commenters further stated that because AHAM PAC-1-2014 is 
conducted using these outdoor air conditions, it is important that the 
same conditions be used for the infiltration air to reflect the real-
world performance of portable ACs under these outdoor air conditions. 
The Joint Commenters noted that all infiltration air is ultimately 
coming from the outdoors and adding heat to the home where the portable 
AC is installed. The Joint Commenters suspect that, in many cases, the 
bulk of the infiltration air will be coming directly from the outdoors 
due to imperfect installations, resulting in leaks through the window 
where the portable AC is installed. The Joint Commenters also suspect 
that over time, a greater portion of the infiltration air will come 
directly through the window where the portable AC is installed due to 
deterioration of the installation as the unit is repeatedly removed and 
re-installed. (Joint Commenters, No. 19 at p. 2)
    De' Longhi did not agree with DOE's proposed approach to address 
infiltration air, stating that it would improperly represent the 
performance of single-duct products because the proposed infiltration 
air conditions of 95[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb temperature and 
75.2[emsp14][deg]F wet-bulb temperature represent worst-case outdoor 
conditions which occur for a negligible period of time during the 
cooling season. De' Longhi noted that according to ANSI/Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) 210/240, 
``Performance Rating of Unitary Air-Conditioning and Air-Source Heat 
Pump Equipment'', outdoor temperatures ranging from 95 to 
104[emsp14][deg]F represent just 2.2 percent of the season while 
outdoor temperatures range from 65 to 80[emsp14][deg]F during 66.1 
percent of the season. De' Longhi stated that selection of an 
appropriate outdoor temperature for rating testing is critical for 
single-duct portable ACs. As a consequence, De' Longhi commented that 
DOE's proposed procedure overstates the impacts of infiltration air. 
(Public Meeting Transcript, De' Longhi, No. 13 at pp. 39-40; De' 
Longhi, No. 16 at p. 3)
    The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) stated that if the 
test procedure includes an infiltration air adjustment, the temperature 
must be representative and based on data. In NAM's view, given the 
uniqueness of homes, the proposed infiltration air temperatures are not 
practical, nor are they shown to be based on available data. (NAM, No. 
17 at p. 2)
    AHAM commented that portable ACs are not used just on the hottest 
summer days, but also during the transition periods before and after 
summer to cool only a certain room or rooms before central air 
conditioning or heating is turned on. According to AHAM, this use 
pattern suggests that an outdoor temperature representing the hottest 
days of summer is not representative of consumer use. AHAM commented 
that even if consumers use portable ACs only in the summer and only the 
outdoor air temperature is considered, a 95[emsp14][deg]F infiltration 
air temperature would still be too high. (AHAM, No. 18 at p. 4)
    De' Longhi and AHAM suggested that, should DOE include a numerical 
adjustment for infiltration air to the results of testing with AHAM 
PAC-1-2014, the proper temperature for the infiltration air would be 
70[emsp14][deg]F, based on available data. They noted that 
70[emsp14][deg]F is the representative average cooling season 
temperature that DOE found for the United States as a whole. They also 
claimed that according to ANSI/AHRI 210/240-2008, an outdoor 
temperature of 70[emsp14][deg]F represents 50 percent of the total 
cooling season hours. (Public Meeting Transcript, De' Longhi, No. 13 at 
p. 41; De' Longhi, No. 16 at p. 3; AHAM, No. 18 at p. 4) De' Longhi 
further stated that if DOE decides not to use 70[emsp14][deg]F as the 
outdoor air temperature, this test condition should be no greater than 
80.6[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb, the standard rating condition for single-
duct portable ACs in AHAM PAC-1-2014 for both indoor and outdoor 
conditions. In order to compare single-duct and dual-duct portable ACs 
under the same conditions, De' Longhi would also accept 
80.6[emsp14][deg]F as the outdoor conditions for dual-duct units as 
well. (Public Meeting Transcript, De' Longhi, No. 13 at pp. 43-44; De' 
Longhi, No. 16 at p. 4)
    Friedrich commented that 70[emsp14][deg]F is low for an outdoor 
temperature that would necessitate AC use, and suggested DOE consider 
80[emsp14][deg]F as the outdoor condition. (Public Meeting Transcript, 
Friedrich, No. 13 at pp. 84-85)
    In addition to the proposed temperatures for infiltration air, DOE 
received comments regarding the likely origin of the infiltration air 
to help inform the appropriate infiltration air conditions. De' Longhi 
noted that it is possible that some or all of the replacement air is 
drawn from a location other than the outdoors directly, such as a 
basement, attic, garage, or a space that is conditioned by other 
equipment. Thus, De' Longhi stated that DOE's proposed approach is 
unrealistic, as the building spaces from which infiltration air may be 
drawn and other inside air that may be cooled by central cooling 
systems must be taken into account. De' Longhi also commented that 
DOE's approach did not account for any internal heating loads, solar 
radiation, or thermal lag of the building itself. (Public Meeting 
Transcript, De' Longhi, No. 13 at pp. 41-43; De' Longhi, No. 16 at pp. 
3-4)
    AHAM agreed with De' Longhi, and noted that even if all air in a 
home originates from outdoors, the infiltration air may be cooled once 
indoors. Moreover, AHAM noted that the infiltration air could be at 
different temperatures for a portable AC that is moved from room to 
room--for example, the air in a garage is not likely the same 
temperature as the air in an attic or basement. AHAM commented that if 
DOE accounts for the effects of infiltration air, DOE must ensure that 
the temperature is representative and based on data. In AHAM's view, 
given the uniqueness of homes, that is not practical to do. (AHAM, No. 
18 at pp. 3-4)
    AHAM, NAM, and DENSO stated that should DOE nevertheless move 
forward with its proposal, it must ensure it selects a representative 
test temperature for that infiltration air. They commented that DOE's 
current proposal is not representative and should be revised. (AHAM, 
No. 18 at p. 1; NAM, No. 17 at p. 3; DENSO, No. 14 at p. 3)
    In response to comments received on the February 2015 NOPR, DOE 
conducted additional analysis to ensure the DOE test procedure for 
portable ACs is representative of typical cooling product operation and 
consumer usage. On the matter of the source of infiltration air, DOE 
reviewed information developed on infiltration air flow rates and 
sources for room ACs, which encounter issues for sealing in windows 
similar to portable ACs. In a study conducted by the National Renewable 
Energy Laboratory (NREL),\5\ infiltration air flow rates around the 
louvers on either side of three room AC test units and the air flow 
rates through the units themselves were measured when the units were 
installed in a test chamber outfitted with two residential single-hung 
windows. The units, including the side louvers, were installed per 
manufacturer instructions (i.e., no additional sealing around the 
louvers was provided). A variable-speed blower was used to vary the 
differential pressure between the test chamber and ambient (outdoor 
condition) from 0 to 50 Pascals (Pa). NREL found that at 50

[[Page 74026]]

Pa, the infiltration air flow rates around the louvers ranged from 
approximately 50 to 90 standard cubic feet per minute (SCFM) among the 
three test units. These infiltration air flow rates represented as much 
as two thirds of the rated evaporator air flow rates at high fan speed, 
and similarly would also represent a substantial percentage of the 
infiltration air for a single-duct portable AC. NREL estimated that the 
infiltration air leakage path around the louvers was the equivalent of 
a 27 to 42 square-inch hole in the wall. Because DOE observed that the 
window brackets for mounting the portable AC duct(s) in its test sample 
typically did not include any gasket, tape, or other sealing material, 
it concludes that outdoor air leaking through the portable AC's window 
bracket likely also represents the source of a substantial percentage 
of the infiltration air for portable ACs. Additionally, because 
portable ACs that do not draw all of the condenser air from outside the 
conditioned space create net negative pressure within the conditioned 
space, infiltration air flow is likely greater than for room ACs. 
Therefore, DOE continues to conclude that infiltration air temperature 
is best represented as the outdoor test condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Winkler, J., et al., 2013. ``Laboratory Performance Testing 
of Residential Window Air Conditioners,'' National Renewable Energy 
Laboratory, Technical Report NREL/TP-5500-57617, March 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE also notes that the temperature of infiltration air from 
sources other than the window bracket cannot be definitively 
characterized because the air temperature in the other locations may be 
greater than (e.g., an attic) or less than (e.g., a basement) the 
outdoor temperature. In addition, infiltration air that is drawn from 
other conditioned space initially originated from locations that could 
also be direct sources of infiltration air for a portable AC, and thus 
DOE believes that the portable AC should not derive a de facto benefit 
by being rated at a lower infiltration air temperature achieved via the 
energy consumption of other conditioning equipment.
    DOE next considered commenters' suggestion that the outdoor test 
condition in the current version of AHAM PAC-1 may not be 
representative of a significant portion of portable AC operation. DOE 
revisited its climate analysis from the February 2015 NOPR to determine 
the overall average dry-bulb temperature and relative humidity during 
hours allotted for cooling mode operation, in locations where portable 
ACs are likely to be used. DOE again performed this climate analysis 
using 2012 hourly ambient temperature data from the National Climatic 
Data Center (NCDC) of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration (NOAA), collected at weather stations in 44 
representative states. DOE determined the average temperature and 
humidity associated with the hottest 750 hours for each state for which 
there was data available. DOE then reviewed data from the 2009 
Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) \6\ to identify room AC 
ownership in the different geographic regions because no portable AC-
specific usage data were available. Based on the RECS ownership data, 
DOE used a weighted-average approach to combine the average temperature 
and humidity for each individual state into sub-regional, regional, and 
finally, the representative national average temperature and humidity 
for the hottest 750 hours in each state.\7\ DOE found that the national 
average dry-bulb temperature and relative humidity associated with the 
hottest 750 hours are 83[emsp14][deg]F and 45 percent, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ RECS data are available online at: http://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2009/''www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2009/.
    \7\ For more information on the weighted-average approach that 
DOE conducted for this analyses, see the February 2015 NOPR. 80 FR 
10211, 10235-27 (Feb. 25, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To maintain harmonization with other cooling products and the AHAM 
PAC-1-2009 test conditions, as discussed previously, and to continue to 
consider cooling performance under a rating condition at which product 
performance is most important to consumers, DOE proposes to specify the 
outdoor test conditions and associated infiltration air conditions of 
95[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb and 75[emsp14][deg]F wet-bulb temperature. 
However, DOE also proposes in this SNOPR that a second cooling mode 
test be conducted for dual-duct units (Test Configuration 3) at outdoor 
test conditions that reflect the weighted-average temperature and 
humidity observed during the hottest 750 hours (the hours during which 
DOE expects portable ACs to operate in cooling mode): 83[emsp14][deg]F 
dry-bulb temperature and 67.5[emsp14][deg]F wet-bulb temperature. For 
single-duct units (Test Configuration 5), DOE would specify a second 
set of numerical calculations for cooling capacity and CEER based on 
adjustments for infiltration air at these same conditions, rather than 
providing for an additional test at the weighted-average outdoor 
temperature and humidity. In sum, Table III.3 shows the complete set of 
cooling mode rating conditions that DOE proposes for portable ACs in 
this SNOPR.

                      Table III.3--Standard Rating Conditions--Cooling Mode--SNOPR Proposal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Evaporator inlet air, [deg]F     Condenser inlet air, [deg]F
                                                             ([deg]C)                        ([deg]C)
               Test configuration                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 (Condition A).................................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)         95 (35)       75 (23.9)
3 (Condition B).................................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)       83 (28.3)     67.5 (19.7)
5...............................................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Infiltration Air Calculations
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposed that the sensible and 
latent components of infiltration air heat transfer be calculated using 
the evaporator inlet conditions, to be representative of the indoor 
room's ambient conditions. As discussed above, DOE proposed that the 
nominal indoor test chamber conditions for portable AC testing would be 
80[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb temperature and 67[emsp14][deg]F wet-bulb 
temperature, resulting in a humidity ratio of 0.0112 pounds of water 
per pounds of dry air (lbw/lbda). DOE further 
proposed in the February 2015 NOPR that the indoor test chamber dry-
bulb and wet-bulb temperature conditions be maintained within a range 
of 1.0[emsp14][deg]F, with an average difference of 0.3[emsp14][deg]F. 
80 FR 10211, 10224, 10226 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    DOE notes that the allowable tolerances for the indoor evaporator 
inlet conditions would permit variations in the humidity ratio of up to 
8.6 percent. DOE reviewed its test data and found that the maximum 
variation between the measured and proposed humidity ratio was 4.5 
percent. DOE believes that the proposal to use the measured evaporator 
inlet conditions (dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures and the resulting 
humidity ratio) when calculating the impacts of infiltration air

[[Page 74027]]

heat transfer may introduce variability in the test results due to the 
sensitivity of infiltration air to the allowable evaporator inlet 
conditions variability and the resulting impact on overall cooling 
capacity. Therefore, DOE proposes in this SNOPR to calculate the 
sensible and latent heat contributions of infiltration air using the 
nominal test chamber temperatures and subsequent humidity ratio to 
reduce test variability.
    DOE further notes that there was an error in the equations proposed 
in the February 2015 NOPR that divided the quantity of heat, in Btu/
min, by 60 instead of multiplying by 60 to convert to Btu/h. 80 FR 
10211, 10224 (Feb. 25, 2015). This SNOPR corrects the calculation error 
in DOE's proposal.
    Based on these changes, DOE proposes in this SNOPR to calculate the 
sensible and latent heat components of infiltration air, using the 
nominal test chamber temperatures and subsequent humidity ratio, as 
follows:

Qs = m x 60 x [(cp_da x (Tia - 
Tindoor)) + cp_wv x ([ohgr]ia x 
Tia - [ohgr]indoor x Tindoor)]

Where:
Qs is the sensible heat added to the room by infiltration 
air, in Btu/h;
m is the dry air mass flow rate of infiltration air for a single-
duct or dual-dual duct unit, in lb/m;
cp_da is the specific heat of dry air, 0.24 Btu/
lbm-[deg]F.
cp_wv is the specific heat of water vapor, 0.444 Btu/
lbm-[deg]F.
Tindoor is the indoor chamber dry-bulb temperature, 
80[emsp14][deg]F.
Tia is the infiltration air dry-bulb temperature, 
95[emsp14][deg]F.
[omega]ia is the humidity ratio of the infiltration air, 
0.0141 lbw/lbda.
[omega]indoor is the humidity ratio of the indoor chamber 
air, 0.0112 lbw/lbda.
60 is the conversion factor from minutes to hours.

Ql = m x 60 x Hfg x ([ohgr]ia - 
[ohgr]indoor)

Where:
Ql is the latent heat added to the room by infiltration 
air, in Btu/h.
m is the mass flow rate of infiltration air for a single-duct or 
dual-dual duct unit, in lb/m.
Hfg is the latent heat of vaporization for water vapor, 
1061 Btu/lbm.
[omega]ia is the humidity ratio of the infiltration air, 
0.0141 lbw/lbda.
[omega]indoor is the humidity ratio of the indoor chamber 
air, 0.0112 lbw/lbda.
60 is the conversion factor from minutes to hours.
2. Test Duration
    AHAM PAC-1-2015 specifies testing in accordance with certain 
sections of ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009, ``Methods of Testing for 
Rating Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump 
Equipment'' (ASHRAE 37-2009), but does not explicitly specify the test 
duration required when conducting portable AC active mode testing. 
Therefore, DOE proposes in this SNOPR that the active mode test 
duration shall be determined in accordance with section 8.7 of ASHRAE 
37-2009.
3. Seasonally Adjusted Cooling Capacity
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposed a calculation for adjusted 
cooling capacity, ACC, defined as the measured cooling capacity 
adjusted for case, duct, and infiltration air heat transfer impacts. 80 
FR 10211, 10225 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    With the proposal to add a second cooling mode test condition for 
dual-duct portable ACs and, similarly, a second numerically applied 
infiltration air condition for single-duct portable ACs, DOE proposes 
that the adjusted cooling capacities for both sets of conditions be 
combined to create a seasonally adjusted cooling capacity, SACC. The 
higher outdoor temperature condition is consistent with that used for 
testing other air conditioning equipment and ensures that products can 
operate when they are most needed, while the cooler condition 
represents the typical outdoor temperatures encountered during use. 
Because the performance of a portable AC is important under each of 
these scenarios, DOE proposes in this SNOPR to weight the adjusted 
cooling capacities obtained under the two cooling mode conditions to 
calculate the SACC as follows.
    Using an analytical approach based on climate and RECS data that 
was similar to the method used to determine representative rating 
conditions, DOE estimated the percentage of portable AC operating hours 
that would be associated with each rating condition. From the climate 
data, DOE allocated the number of annual hours with temperatures that 
ranged from 80[emsp14][deg]F (the indoor test condition) to 
89[emsp14][deg]F (a temperature mid-way between the two rating 
conditions) to the 83[emsp14][deg]F rating condition. The hours in 
which the ambient temperature was greater than 89[emsp14][deg]F were 
assigned to the 95[emsp14][deg]F rating condition. DOE then performed 
the geographical weighted averaging using the RECS data as discussed in 
section III.1.b to determine weighting factors of 19.7 percent and 80.3 
percent, respectively, for the 95[emsp14][deg]F and 83[emsp14][deg]F 
rating conditions. A similar approach was adopted for central ACs, 
where DOE specifies eight test conditions and corresponding weighting 
factors that are based on the distribution of fractional hours for 
representative temperature bins.\8\ For portable ACs, DOE estimated 
hours per temperature bin from the climate data analysis, and proposes 
in this SNOPR to apply weighting factors of 20 percent and 80 percent 
to the results of its testing at 95[emsp14][deg]F and 83[emsp14][deg]F, 
respectively. DOE welcomes input on whether different weighting factors 
would be appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The DOE test procedure for central ACs is codified at 10 CFR 
part 430, subpart B, appendix M.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, DOE proposes to calculate SACC according to the 
following equation.

SACC = (ACC95 x 0.2) + (ACC83 x 0.8)

Where:
SACC is the seasonally adjusted cooling capacity, in Btu/h.
ACC95 and ACC83 are the adjusted cooling 
capacities calculated at the 95[emsp14][deg]F and 83[emsp14][deg]F 
dry-bulb outdoor conditions, in Btu/h, respectively.
0.2 is the weighting factor for ACC95.
0.8 is the weighting factor for ACC83.
4. Duct Heat Transfer and Leakage
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE presented its determination that 
duct heat losses and air leakage are non-negligible effects, and 
therefore proposed to account for heat transferred from the duct 
surface to the conditioned space in the portable AC test procedure. DOE 
proposed that four equally spaced thermocouples be adhered to the side 
of the entire length of the condenser exhaust duct for single-duct 
units and the condenser inlet and exhaust ducts for dual-duct units. 
DOE proposed to determine the duct heat transfer for each duct from the 
average duct surface temperature as measured by the four thermocouples, 
a convection heat transfer coefficient of 4 Btu/h per square foot per 
[deg]F (Btu/h-ft2-[deg]F), and the calculated duct surface 
area based on the test setup. 80 FR 10211, 10227 (Feb. 25, 2015).
a. Duct Heat Transfer Impacts
    ASAP supported incorporating the duct heat transfer effects into 
the measurement of cooling capacity, and noted that there was a 
reasonably good correlation between the results using the calorimeter 
method and the modified AHAM method, as presented in the February 2015 
NOPR. (Public Meeting Transcript, ASAP, No. 13 at p. 56)
    AHAM and De' Longhi stated that DOE's proposed test for duct heat 
transfer and leakage unnecessarily complicates the test procedure 
without a corresponding benefit. They also stated that the methodology 
for the temperature sensor placement and determination of overall heat 
losses may be interpreted differently. AHAM

[[Page 74028]]

further commented that should DOE decide to include provisions for duct 
heat transfer and leakage, DOE should evaluate the impact of these 
effects on test procedure repeatability and reproducibility, preferably 
through a round robin test including manufacturers and third-party 
laboratories. (AHAM, No. 18 at p. 5; De' Longhi, No. 16 at p. 4)
    China commented that DOE did not present the percent of the total 
cooling capacity associated with the duct and case heat transfer, and 
that it would be necessary to consider such data before adopting an 
approach that accounts for these heat transfer effects. (China, No. 15 
at p. 3)
    In response to these comments, DOE conducted further analysis to 
quantify the impacts of duct heat transfer. Figure III.1 shows the 
impact of duct heat transfer as a percentage of the AHAM PAC-1-2009 
cooling capacity measured in the February 2015 NOPR for each unit in 
DOE's test sample. Exhaust duct heat transfer is presented for each 
single-duct unit, while a pair of values for inlet duct heat transfer 
and exhaust duct heat transfer are presented for each dual-duct unit.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.003

    As shown in Figure III.1, the exhaust duct heat transfer determined 
according to the proposed methodology ranged from just below 6 percent 
to almost 18 percent of the AHAM PAC-1-2009 cooling capacity, with an 
average value of 11.1 percent. The intake duct heat transfer effect was 
lower than that of the exhaust duct due to the lower air temperature at 
the inlet, with values ranging from about 3 percent to almost 5 percent 
of the unadjusted cooling capacity and an average of 3.7 percent. DOE 
finds the exhaust and intake duct heat transfer impacts sufficiently 
significant to warrant the added test burdens associated with 
determining duct heat transfer. Therefore, DOE maintains the proposal 
from the February 2015 NOPR to measure and incorporate the duct heat 
transfer impacts into the overall seasonally adjusted cooling capacity.
b. Convection Coefficient
    DENSO considered the 4 Btu/h-ft\2-\[deg]F convection coefficient 
proposed for the duct heat transfer calculation to be arbitrary, and 
recommended measuring the conditions of the air at the inlet and outlet 
of each duct to substantiate that factor. (Public Meeting Transcript, 
DENSO, No. 13 at p. 53; DENSO, No. 14 at p. 2) DOE recognizes that 
different test setups may have somewhat different convective heat 
transfer coefficients. However, when developing test procedures, DOE 
must consider the test burden and impact on manufacturers and test 
laboratories. Taking that into consideration, DOE proposed an approach 
in the February 2015 NOPR that would minimize burden while capturing 
the impact of heat transfer from ducts, which DOE determined to have a 
significant impact on overall net cooling capacity. DOE also notes that 
the approach proposed by DENSO to characterize heat loss to the 
conditioned space would significantly increase test burden, requiring 
additional thermocouples and modification of the test setup on the 
unit-side of the duct. Further, DOE notes that the convection heat 
transfer coefficient may vary among different laboratories and even for 
different chambers and test setups within each test laboratory. This 
would introduce variability from test to test, as the heat transfer 
coefficient may be highly sensitive to the specific test setup. To 
minimize the test burden and limit variability, DOE proposed one 
convection heat transfer coefficient for all units to provide a 
consistent estimate of the duct heat transfer.
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE estimated the convection heat 
transfer coefficient to be 4 Btu/h-ft\2-\[deg]F based on a midpoint of 
values associated with free convection and forced convection, as 
recommended by the test laboratory that conducted testing for the NOPR. 
80 FR 10211, 10219 (Feb. 25, 2015). The convection coefficient was 
based on values derived from coefficients listed in the 2013 ASHRAE 
Handbook--

[[Page 74029]]

Fundamentals \9\ for various types of assemblies in buildings. 
Depending on the orientation of the surface, direction of heat flow, 
and emissivity of the heat transfer surface, the typical coefficients 
for indoor assemblies, which DOE deduced would be subject primarily to 
free convection, ranged from 0.22 to 1.63 Btu/h-ft\2-\[deg]F. ASHRAE 
also provided coefficients for assemblies located outside and subject 
to wind speeds of 7.5 and 15 miles per hour (5.1 and 10.2 feet per 
second, respectively), which were 4.00 and 6.00 Btu/h-ft\2-\[deg]F, 
respectively. Because these speeds potentially correspond to air flow 
speeds over the portable AC duct(s) due to circulation of the 
conditioned air in the space, for example by the portable AC blower and 
infiltration air, DOE used these values as proxies for convective heat 
transfer coefficients for the duct surfaces. Therefore, DOE proposed in 
the February 2015 NOPR that the overall heat transfer coefficient for 
calculating duct heat losses would be 4 Btu/h-ft\2-\[deg]F, an 
approximate midpoint of the values described.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ASHRAE Handbook--Fundamentals. American Society of Heating, 
Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA. 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To further validate the proposed convection heat transfer 
coefficient for this notice, DOE re-examined the data it obtained from 
testing a sample of four single-duct and two dual-duct portables ACs 
with and without duct insulation for the May 2014 NODA. These tests 
were conducted using the calorimeter approach described in the May 2014 
NODA, such that duct heat losses could be measured by subtracting the 
measured cooling capacity without insulation from the cooling capacity 
with insulation. Using the duct heat losses, duct surface area, and the 
differential between the indoor side ambient temperature and the 
average of the duct surface temperatures, an average duct heat transfer 
coefficient could be empirically determined for units in DOE's test 
sample. The results of this calculation are shown in Table III.4 below.

    Table III.4--Measured Duct Convection Heat Transfer Coefficients
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Duct
                                                            convection
                                                          heat transfer
                       Test unit                           coefficient
                                                           (Btu/h-ft\2-
                                                             \[deg]F)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SD1....................................................             2.74
SD2....................................................             3.08
SD3....................................................             1.70
SD4....................................................             5.26
DD1 (Test 1)...........................................             4.10
DD1 (Test 2)...........................................             3.76
DD2 (Test 1)...........................................             2.11
DD2 (Test 2)...........................................             2.27
Average................................................             3.13
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SD = Single-duct.
DD = Dual-duct.

    Although the average heat transfer coefficient calculated from 
DOE's test results was slightly lower than the value proposed in the 
February 2015 NOPR, DOE notes that there is variation in individual 
results that is likely due to different duct types, installation 
configurations, forced convection air flow patterns, and other factors. 
Therefore, DOE proposes to maintain the original duct heat transfer 
proposal from the February 2015 NOPR, including the convection heat 
transfer coefficient of 4 Btu/h-ft\2-\[deg]F.
c. Duct Surface Area Measurements
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposed that the duct surface area 
be calculated using the outer duct diameter and extended length of the 
duct while under test. 80 FR 10211, 10227 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    De' Longhi and AHAM commented that ducts often have a corrugated 
surface, so that the measure of the duct(s) surface area will have high 
uncertainty. (De' Longhi, No. 16 at p. 4; AHAM, No. 18 at p. 5) DOE 
further examined the surface area of the ducts in its test sample. DOE 
calculated the surface area in two ways, one with the ducts fully 
extended and the other with the duct setup as required in AHAM PAC-1-
2015. DOE found that the average difference in surface area calculated 
using the fully extended duct versus using the test setup was 7.5 
percent. With the average duct impact on cooling capacity of 11.1 
percent and 3.7 percent for single-duct and dual-duct units, 
respectively, the overall variability that differences in duct surface 
area determinations would introduce into the cooling capacity would be 
no greater than 1 percent. Therefore, DOE concludes that any 
uncertainty in duct surface area measurements would not have a 
significant impact on test repeatability and reproducibility and 
maintains the surface area measurement as proposed in the February 2015 
NOPR.
5. Case Heat Transfer
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposed that case heat transfer be 
determined using a method similar to the approach proposed for duct 
heat transfer. DOE proposed that the surface area and average 
temperature of each side of the case be measured to determine the 
overall case heat transfer, which would be used to adjust the cooling 
capacity and efficiency. DOE noted that the case heat transfer 
methodology would impose additional test burden, but determined that 
the burdens were likely outweighed by the benefit of addressing the 
heat transfer effects of all internal heating components. 80 FR 10211, 
10227-10229 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    DENSO commented that DOE should incorporate the effects of 
evaporator fan heat rather than case heat transfer effects, because all 
of the fan motor power ends up in the evaporator exhaust air stream. 
DENSO also stated that heat transfer mechanics for all surfaces of the 
case are not the same. (DENSO, No. 14 at p. 2)
    Friedrich believes that there is no need to measure heat loss from 
the electrical components inside the case because the end result of the 
test would be the total cooling capacity coming from the portable AC 
and the total measure of energy consumption. (Public Meeting 
Transcript, Friedrich, No. 13 at p. 34)
    De' Longhi noted that because there is a wide range in unit design, 
each portable AC may have uniquely shaped faces on the case, and it 
would be very difficult or impossible to identify the front, back, 
right, left, top, and bottom of the case. De' Longhi stated that 
laboratories may measure the surface temperature differently, and 
therefore, the proposal in the February 2015 NOPR may lead to 
inconsistencies among different laboratories. De' Longhi further 
suggested that the convection coefficient should be different for each 
side of the case due to the different orientation of each surface, and 
commented that a small variation in the position of the temperature 
sensors can cause significant differences in the average temperatures 
of each case. (Public Meeting Transcript, De' Longhi, No. 13 at pp. 55-
56; De' Longhi, No. 16 at p. 4)
    AHAM stated that the proposed methodology for determining case heat 
transfer unnecessarily complicates the test procedure and will likely 
lead to variation. AHAM believes the impact of case heat transfer is 
negligible and does not justify the added burden and variation. 
According to AHAM, if DOE

[[Page 74030]]

continues to consider case heat transfer, DOE should characterize the 
proposed test procedure's repeatability and reproducibility, preferably 
through a round robin test including manufacturers and third-party 
laboratories. (AHAM, No. 18 at pp. 5-6)
    In response to these comments, DOE further investigated the effects 
of case heat transfer as a percentage of the overall cooling capacity 
by analyzing the data determined in accordance with AHAM PAC-1-2009 for 
the February 2015 NOPR. Figure III.2 shows, for each portable AC in its 
test sample, the heat transfer determined for each case side and the 
sum of all case sides as a percentage of the AHAM PAC-1-2009 cooling 
capacity.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.004

    From the data in Figure III.2, DOE calculated that the average heat 
transfer for individual case sides was 0.29 percent of the AHAM PAC-1-
2009 cooling capacity, and the maximum heat transfer observed for a 
single side was 2.27 percent. The total case heat transfer impact was, 
on average, 1.76 percent of the AHAM PAC-1-2009 cooling capacity, with 
a maximum of 6.53 percent. Because the total case heat transfer impact 
is, on average, less than 2 percent of the cooling capacity without 
adjustments for infiltration air and heat transfer effects, DOE 
proposes to remove the provisions for determining case heat transfer 
from the proposed portable AC test procedure.
6. Test Unit Placement
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposed that for all portable AC 
configurations, there must be no less than 6 feet between the 
evaporator inlet and any chamber wall surface, and for single-duct 
units, there must be no less than 6 feet between the condenser inlet 
surface and any other wall surface. Additionally, DOE proposed that 
there be no less than 3 feet between the other surfaces of the portable 
AC with no air inlet or exhaust (other than the bottom of the unit) and 
any wall surfaces. 80 FR 10211, 10229-10230 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    According to DENSO, the 6-foot minimum spacing would cause an 
unreasonable performance penalty when duct losses are incorporated into 
the efficiency rating. DENSO further noted that the ducted side of a 
portable AC is often located relatively close to the wall where the 
duct is mounted. (DENSO, No. 14 at p. 3)
    AHAM objected to the proposed test unit placement, commenting that, 
due to duct length, it may not be feasible to maintain the proposed 
distances from the partition wall. AHAM stated that this particular 
distance is variable and unit-dependent, and should not be applicable 
for single-duct or dual-duct units. (AHAM, No. 18 at pp. 6-7)
    De' Longhi requested clarification as to whether the back of the 
unit, or side with the duct attachments, is considered a side that must 
be placed at the minimum distance from the chamber or partition walls. 
If so, De' Longhi commented that the unit should be placed at least 6 
feet from the partition wall and the ducts would likely not reach. 
(Public Meeting Transcript, De' Longhi, No. 13 at pp. 59-60; De' 
Longhi, No. 16 at p. 4)
    DOE recognizes that the length of the duct and duct setup as 
outlined in AHAM PAC-1-2015 dictate the distance of the portable AC 
from the partition wall. Therefore, DOE proposes to adjust the February 
2015 NOPR proposals for unit placement that would have required no less 
than 6 feet between the evaporator inlet and any chamber wall surfaces, 
and for single-duct units, no less than 6 feet between the condenser 
inlet surface and any other wall surface. Because AHAM PAC-1-2015 
specifies the distance between the test unit and the partition wall, 
DOE proposes that the test unit be placed in such a way that there is 
no less than 3 feet between any test chamber wall and any surface on 
the portable AC, except the surface or surfaces that have a duct 
attachment, as prescribed by the AHAM PAC-1-2015 test setup 
requirements. DOE notes that this test unit placement would provide 
manufacturers and test laboratories more flexibility in the use of 
their test chambers than that proposed in the

[[Page 74031]]

February 2015 NOPR, and would still provide sufficient space around the 
test unit to ensure free air flow with no air constriction.

C. Heating Mode

    As discussed in the February 2015 NOPR, certain portable ACs, 
including some of the units in DOE's test sample, incorporate a heating 
function in addition to cooling mode. DOE proposed to define heating 
mode as an active mode in which a portable AC has activated the main 
heating function according to the thermostat or temperature sensor 
signal, including activating a resistance heater, the refrigeration 
system with a reverse refrigerant flow valve, or the fan or blower 
without activation of the resistance heater or refrigeration system. 80 
FR 10211, 10217 (Feb. 25, 2015). In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE 
concluded that a heating mode test to measure heating mode performance 
was feasible, and proposed a heating mode test procedure that utilized 
AHAM PAC-1-2014 at lower temperature ambient conditions and with 
comparable adjustments as were considered for cooling mode. 80 FR 
10211, 10230-10231 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    AHAM and De' Longhi opposed DOE's proposal to require testing in 
heating mode. They noted that heating mode is not the main consumer 
utility offered by portable ACs, and commented that it was not clear 
how often consumers use the heating feature and whether the burden of 
including this mode in the test procedure would be justified. AHAM, 
NAM, and De' Longhi commented that there are not sufficient heating 
mode data upon which to determine whether to include measurement of or 
assign annual operating hours to heating mode. AHAM and NAM further 
noted that in the heating analysis, DOE assumed that the consumer will 
use a portable AC in heating mode when the temperature has fallen below 
45[emsp14][deg]F, but presented no consumer data to support that 
assumption. According to AHAM, consumer usage of portable ACs in 
heating mode is extremely limited due to the seasonality of the 
product. AHAM, NAM, and De' Longhi commented that DOE should be 
consistent with its other analyses when considering heating mode. For 
example, they stated that DOE did not propose testing in fan-only mode 
because it would be impractical, nor did it propose testing in 
dehumidification mode because it is not the primary mode of operation 
for portable ACs. These commenters considered heating mode to be no 
different, and therefore concluded that DOE should not require it to be 
tested. (Public Meeting Transcript, AHAM, No. 13 at p. 64; AHAM, No. 18 
at pp. 7, 10; De' Longhi, No. 16 at p. 5; NAM, No. 17 at p. 2)
    AHAM noted that many of the comments submitted regarding cooling 
mode would also apply to heating mode where applicable. Specifically, 
should DOE require measurement of heating mode, AHAM would not object 
to DOE's proposal to use the unit and duct setup requirements and 
control settings of AHAM PAC-1-2014, as well as the test configurations 
referenced in Table 2 of AHAM PAC-1-2014. AHAM opposed the inclusion of 
infiltration air, duct heat transfer, case transfer, and test unit 
placement for heating mode as discussed for cooling mode. (AHAM, No. 18 
at pp. 7-8)
    DENSO stated that its cooling mode comments are generally 
applicable for heating mode as well. (DENSO, No. 14 at p. 3)
    After considering stakeholder comments opposing the test procedure 
for heating mode and in light of the test burden that the heating mode 
test would impose, DOE proposes to remove the heating mode test 
provisions from the proposed DOE portable AC test procedure, including 
the definition of heating mode and calculations for EERhm 
and total combined energy efficiency ratio. Accordingly, the cooling-
specific energy efficiency ratio, EERcm, is no longer 
necessary, as the combined efficiency ratio, CEER, would appropriately 
represent energy efficiency in all modes under consideration. DOE 
expects that measuring performance in cooling mode, off-cycle mode, 
standby mode, and off mode would capture representative performance of 
portable ACs during the cooling season. DOE may reconsider including a 
test for heating mode in a future test procedure rulemaking.

D. Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio

    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE proposed a single energy 
conservation standard metric for portable ACs, in accordance with the 
requirements of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)(A)) The single integrated 
efficiency metric, CEER, weights the average power in each operating 
mode, as measured by the proposed test procedure, with estimated annual 
operating hours for each mode. The modes considered in the February 
2015 NOPR procedure were cooling mode, heating mode, off-cycle mode 
(with and without fan operation), inactive mode (including bucket-full 
mode), and off mode. 80 FR 10211, 10234-10235 (Feb. 25, 2015).
1. Annual Operating Mode Hours
    As presented in the February 2015 NOPR, DOE developed several 
estimates of portable AC annual operating mode hours for cooling, 
heating, off-cycle, and inactive or off modes. However, the three 
estimates that addressed units with both cooling and heating mode 
operating hours are no longer applicable with the removal of the 
heating mode test procedure. Therefore, for this revised analysis, DOE 
considered the annual operating mode hours for all portable ACs to be 
those from the ``Cooling Only'' scenario presented in the February 2015 
NOPR as follows:

          Table III.5--Proposed Annual Operating Hours by Mode
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Operating
                           Modes                                hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cooling Mode...............................................          750
Off-Cycle Mode.............................................          880
Off/Inactive Mode..........................................        1,355
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More information on the development of these annual hours for each 
operating mode can be found in the February 2015 NOPR. 80 FR 10211, 
10235-10237 (Feb. 25, 2015).
    Friedrich noted that it rates its portable AC energy consumption 
based on 750 hours, the same cooling mode operating hours as room ACs. 
Friedrich suggested that DOE maintain the proposal of 750 annual 
cooling mode operating hours for portable ACs to maintain harmonization 
with room ACs and properly reflect unit annual energy consumption. 
(Public Meeting Transcript, Friedrich, No. 13 at p. 84)
    AHAM and NAM disagreed with DOE's proposals, stating that the 
majority of the analysis was based on outdated room AC data. They 
asserted that although portable ACs and room ACs are similar in some 
ways, the usage profiles and installation locations of the two products 
differ. AHAM and NAM urged DOE to obtain data on consumer usage of 
portable ACs or demonstrate that consumer use of portable ACs and room 
ACs are sufficiently comparable. (Public Meeting Transcript, AHAM, No. 
13 at pp. 81-83; AHAM, No. 18 at p. 10; NAM, No. 17 at pp. 1-2)
    AHAM and NAM also objected to DOE basing the proposed unplugged 
hours on assumptions, without any consumer study or supporting data. 
These commenters stated that DOE should obtain consumer use data in 
order to inform its proposal on the number of unplugged hours. (Public 
Meeting Transcript, AHAM, No. 13 at p. 81; AHAM, No. 18 at p. 10; NAM, 
No. 17 at p. 2)

[[Page 74032]]

    AHAM further commented that it is not aware of consumer usage data 
for portable ACs, but would attempt to request that information from 
its members. AHAM urged DOE not to proceed in the absence of such 
consumer use data. (Public Meeting Transcript, AHAM, No. 13 at pp. 83-
84)
    Neither AHAM nor manufacturers provided additional consumer usage 
data, and no further data were available from RECS or other sources. 
Therefore, DOE continues to utilize the most relevant consumer use data 
available and proposes the annual operating hours in Table III.5, 
maintaining the analysis and approach described in the February 2015 
NOPR. DOE welcomes any additional information and data regarding 
consumer use to further inform the proposed annual mode operating 
hours.
2. CEER Calculation
    In addition to the CEER metric that incorporated energy consumption 
in all operating modes, including heating mode, DOE proposed a 
simplified CEER metric in the February 2015 NOPR for portable ACs that 
do not include a heating mode (CEERcm). The CEER calculation 
in the February 2015 NOPR would equal CEERcm for units 
without heating mode. With the newly proposed removal of heating mode 
from the test procedure and addition of a second set of testing 
conditions for dual-duct units, DOE also proposes in this SNOPR to 
eliminate the CEERcm calculation and to revise the CEER 
metric calculation as follows, using the same weighting factors as were 
developed for SACC. The revised calculations also correctly divide 
energy consumption by annual cooling mode hours rather than total 
annual hours, as was initially proposed in the February 2015 NOPR.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.005


Where:

CEERSD and CEERDD are the combined energy 
efficiency ratios for single-duct and dual duct units, respectively, 
in Btu/Wh.
ACC95 and ACC83 are the adjusted cooling 
capacities, tested at the 95[emsp14][deg]F and 83[emsp14][deg]F dry-
bulb outdoor conditions, respectively, in Btu/h.
AECSD is the annual energy consumption in cooling mode 
for single-duct units, in kWh/year.
AEC95 is the annual energy consumption in cooling mode 
for dual-duct units, assuming all cooling mode hours would be at the 
95[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions, in kWh/year.
AEC83 is the annual energy consumption in cooling mode 
for dual-duct units, assuming all cooling mode hours would be at the 
83[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions, in kWh/year.
AECT is the total annual energy consumption attributed to 
all modes except cooling, in kWh/year.
t is the number of cooling mode hours per year, 750.
k is 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor for watt-hours to kilowatt-
hours.
0.2 is the weighting factor for the 95[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb 
outdoor condition test.
0.8 is the weighting factor for the 83[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb 
outdoor condition test.

    The February 2015 NOPR included incorrect text stating that the 
representative CEER would be the mean of the test unit efficiencies. 
DOE proposes in this SNOPR to clarify that the representative CEER for 
a basic model is calculated based on the sampling plan instructions 
proposed in 10 CFR 429.62. DOE further maintains its proposal that the 
CEER would be rounded to the nearest 0.1 Btu/Wh.

E. Compliance With Other Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
Requirements

1. Test Burden
    EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or amended shall 
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 
shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) In 
the February 2015 NOPR, DOE concluded that establishing a test 
procedure to measure the energy consumption of portable ACs in active 
mode, standby mode, and off mode would produce the required test 
results and would not be unduly burdensome to conduct. This 
determination was driven by the many similarities between the necessary 
testing equipment and facilities for portable ACs and other products, 
whose performance is currently certified through a DOE test procedure. 
Therefore, DOE concluded that manufacturers would not be required to 
make significant investment in test facilities and new equipment.
    DOE notes that the modifications to the portable AC test procedures 
introduced in this notice, mainly the additional test condition in 
cooling mode for dual-duct units and the removal of heating mode 
testing and case heat transfer considerations, would not significantly 
increase the overall test burden compared to the test procedure 
proposed in the February 2015 NOPR. Further, because the added cooling 
mode test conditions are closer to those of the originally proposed 
cooling mode test than the test conditions for the heating mode test, 
DOE estimates that less time would be required to achieve and maintain 
the chamber conditions for the second cooling mode test than for a 
heating mode test, decreasing the test burden for dual-duct units with 
a heating mode. In addition, the outdoor test chamber would not be 
required to reach the low temperatures required for the proposed 
heating mode test, which may have presented difficulties for some 
manufacturers and test laboratories to achieve.
    For dual-duct units without a heating mode, the proposals in this 
notice would introduce test burden by requiring a second cooling mode 
test. However, the removal of case surface temperature measurements 
would likely mitigate the increased burden associated with this second 
cooling mode test, resulting in similar overall test burden as for the 
test procedure proposed in the February 2015 NOPR.
    DOE concludes that although this SNOPR introduces modifications to 
the test procedures proposed in the February 2015 NOPR, it does not 
significantly increase the test burden,

[[Page 74033]]

and may instead reduce the overall test burden. Therefore, the 
determination in the February 2015 NOPR that the proposed portable AC 
test procedure would produce test results that measure energy 
consumption during representative use and that the test procedure would 
not be unduly burdensome to conduct still applies.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

    DOE has concluded that the determinations made pursuant to the 
various procedural requirements applicable to the February 2015 NOPR, 
set forth at 80 FR 10212, 10238-10241, remain unchanged for this SNOPR, 
except for the following additional analysis and determination DOE 
conducted in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.).

A. 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 (IFRA) 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 this proposed rule under the provisions of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on 
February 19, 2003. DOE's IRFA is set forth in the February 2015 NOPR, 
with additional analysis below based on the proposals in this SNOPR. 
DOE seeks comment on its analysis and the economic impacts of the rule 
on small manufacturers. In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE estimated that 
there is one small business that manufactures portable ACs. Since the 
February 2015 NOPR, DOE has determined that this small business no 
longer produces portable ACs and, therefore, DOE is unable to identify 
any small businesses that currently manufacture portable ACs. For this 
reason, DOE tentatively concludes and certifies that the 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 Small Business Administration (SBA) for 
review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    In the alternative, should any small business manufacturers of 
portable ACs be identified, DOE evaluated the modifications proposed in 
this SNOPR to determine if these modification would have a significant 
economic impact on small businesses as compared to the proposals in the 
February 2015 NOPR. DOE believes that these modifications are likely to 
reduce overall test burden with respect to the proposals in the 
February 2015 NOPR, and therefore would not have a significant economic 
impact on small businesses, should any be identified.
    In this SNOPR, DOE proposes to increase the number of cooling mode 
tests for dual-duct portable ACs from one test to two tests at 
different outdoor test conditions. Although this increase requires 
running the cooling mode test a second time, DOE notes that the test 
setup would not need to be modified between testing and as such would 
not significantly increase the test burden beyond that for a single 
cooling mode test. The remaining changes associated with the additional 
outdoor test condition impact the post-testing calculations and 
therefore do not increase test burden.
    DOE further proposes in this SNOPR to remove the measurement of 
case heat transfer and the heating mode testing requirements that were 
originally proposed in the February 2015 NOPR. The removal of the case 
heat transfer measurement eliminates the added burden of determining 
surface area of each case surface and measuring the average temperature 
of each surface. In addition, the removal of the heating mode test 
significantly reduces test burden for dual-duct units with a heating 
mode, in that a substantial stabilization period is avoided that would 
require reducing the outdoor chamber conditions well below those for 
the cooling mode test.
    In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE concluded that the costs associated 
with the February 2015 NOPR proposals were small compared to the 
overall financial investment needed to undertake the business 
enterprise of developing and testing consumer products. 80 FR 10211, 
10239. Compared to the proposals in the February 2015 NOPR, there is no 
net change in the number of tests or power metering instrumentation 
required. In addition, the elimination of the case heat transfer 
requirement would avoid the potential need for setting up and 
purchasing additional temperature sensors, estimated to cost less than 
$500 for both equipment and labor.
    On the basis of this analysis, DOE tentatively concludes that the 
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, should any small business 
manufacturers of portable ACs be identified.
    DOE seeks comment on the determinations in this section and 
information on whether any small businesses manufacture portable ACs.

B. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference

    In this SNOPR, DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the test 
standard published by AHAM, titled ``Portable Air Conditioners,'' AHAM 
PAC-1-2015. AHAM PAC-1-2015 is an industry accepted test procedure that 
measures portable AC performance in cooling mode and is applicable to 
products sold in North America. AHAM PAC-1-2015 specifies testing 
conducted in accordance with other industry accepted test procedures 
(already incorporated by reference) and determines energy efficiency 
metrics for various portable AC configurations. The test procedure 
proposed in this SNOPR references various sections of AHAM PAC-1-2015 
that address test setup, instrumentation, test conduct, calculations, 
and rounding. AHAM PAC-1-2015 is readily available on AHAM's Web site 
at http://www.aham.org/ht/d/ProductDetails/sku/PAC12009/from/714/pid/.
    In this SNOPR, DOE also proposes to incorporate by reference the 
test standard ASHRAE Standard 37-2009, titled ``Methods of Testing for 
Rating Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump 
Equipment,'' (ANSI Approved). ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009 is an 
industry-accepted test standard referenced by AHAM PAC-1-2015 that 
defines various uniform methods for measuring performance of air 
conditioning and heat pump equipment. Although AHAM PAC-1-2015 
references a number of sections in ANSI/ASHRAE Standards 37-2009, the 
test procedure proposed in this SNOPR additionally references one 
section in ANSI/ASHRAE Standards 37-2009 that addresses test duration. 
ANSI/ASHRAE Standards 37-2009 is readily available on ANSI's Web site 
at http://webstore.

[[Page 74034]]

ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=ANSI%2FASHRAE+Standard+37-2009.

V. Public Participation

    DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
proposed rule 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 www.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 www.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 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).

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this 
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.

List of Subjects

10 CFR Part 429

    Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Household 
appliances, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

10 CFR Part 430

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small 
businesses.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 17, 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 430 of Chapter II of Title 10, 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. Section 429.4 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(3) to read as 
follows:

[[Page 74035]]

Sec.  429.4  Materials incorporated by reference.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) AHAM PAC-1-2015, Portable Air Conditioners, 2015, IBR approved 
for Sec.  429.62.
* * * * *
0
3. Add Sec.  429.62 to read as follows:


Sec.  429.62  Portable air conditioners.

    (a) Sampling plan for selection of units for testing. (1) The 
requirements of Sec.  429.11 are applicable to portable air 
conditioners; and
    (2) For each basic model of portable air conditioner, a sample of 
sufficient size shall be randomly selected and tested to ensure that--
    (i) Any represented value of energy consumption or other measure of 
energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor 
lower values shall be greater than or equal to the higher of:
    (A) The mean of the sample:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.006
    

Where:

x is the sample mean;
xi is the ith sample; and
n is the number of units in the test sample.

Or,

    (B) The upper 95 percent confidence limit (UCL) of the true mean 
divided by 1.10:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.007


Where:

x is the sample mean;
s is the sample standard deviation;
n is the number of units in the test sample; and
t0.95 is the t statistic for a 95% one-tailed confidence 
interval with n-1 degrees of freedom.

And,

    (ii) Any represented value of the combined energy efficiency ratio 
or other measure of energy consumption of a basic model for which 
consumers would favor higher values shall be less than or equal to the 
lower of:
    (A) The mean of the sample:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.008
    

Where:

x is the sample mean;
xi is the ith sample; and
n is the number of units in the test sample.

Or,

    (B) The lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL) of the true mean 
divided by 0.90:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.009


Where:

x is the sample mean;
s is the sample standard deviation;
n is the number of units in the test sample; and
t0.95 is the t statistic for a 95% one-tailed confidence 
interval with n-1 degrees of freedom.

And,

    (3) The value of seasonally adjusted cooling capacity of a basic 
model shall be the mean of the seasonally adjusted cooling capacities 
for each tested unit of the basic model. Round the mean capacity value 
to the nearest 50, 100, 200, or 500 Btu/h, depending on the value being 
rounded, in accordance with Table 1 of AHAM PAC-1-2015, (incorporated 
by reference, see Sec.  429.4), ``Multiples for reporting Dual Duct 
Cooling Capacity, Single Duct Cooling Capacity, Spot Cooling Capacity, 
Water Cooled Condenser Capacity and Power Input Ratings.''
    (4) Round the value of combined energy efficiency ratio of a basic 
model to the nearest 0.1 Btu/Wh.
    (b) Certification reports. [Reserved]

PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS

0
4. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

0
5. Section 430.2 is amended by adding the definition of ``portable air 
conditioner'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  430.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Portable air conditioner means an encased assembly, other than a 
``packaged terminal air conditioner,'' ``room air conditioner,'' or 
``dehumidifier,'' designed as a portable unit for delivering cooled, 
conditioned air to an enclosed space, that is powered by single-phase 
electric current, and which may rest on the floor or other elevated 
surface. It includes a source of refrigeration and may include 
additional means for air circulation and heating.
* * * * *
0
6. Section 430.3 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (g)(4);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (i)(8) as (i)(9), and adding a new paragraph 
(i)(8); and
0
c. Revising paragraph (p)(4).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  430.3  Materials incorporated by reference.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (4) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009, (``ASHRAE 37-2009''), Methods of 
Testing for Rating Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and 
Heat Pump Equipment, ANSI approved June 25, 2009, IBR approved for 
appendix AA and CC to subpart B.
* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (8) AHAM PAC-1-2015, Portable Air Conditioners, 2015, IBR approved 
for appendix CC to subpart B.
* * * * *
    (p) * * *
    (4) IEC 62301 (``IEC 62301''), Household electrical appliances--
Measurement of standby power, (Edition 2.0, 2011-01), IBR approved for 
appendices C1, D1, D2, G, H, I, J2, N, O, P, X, X1, Z and CC to subpart 
B.
* * * * *
0
7. Section 430.23 is amended by adding paragraph (dd) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  430.23  Test procedures for the measurement of energy and water 
consumption.

* * * * *
    (dd) Portable air conditioners. (1) For portable air conditioners, 
measure the seasonally adjusted cooling capacity, expressed in British 
thermal units per hour (Btu/h), and the combined energy efficiency 
ratio, expressed in British thermal units per watt-hour (Btu/Wh) in 
accordance with section 5 of appendix CC of this subpart.
    (2) Determine the estimated annual operating cost for portable air 
conditioners, expressed in dollars per year, by multiplying the 
following two factors:
    (i) For dual-duct portable air conditioners, the sum of 
AEC95 multiplied by 0.2, AEC83 multiplied by 0.8, 
and AECT as measured in accordance with section 5.3 of 
appendix CC of this subpart; or for single-duct portable air 
conditioners, the sum of AECSD and AECT as 
measured in accordance with section 5.3 of appendix CC of this subpart; 
and
    (ii) A representative average unit cost of electrical energy in 
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
    (iii) Round the resulting product to the nearest dollar per year.
0
7. Add appendix CC to subpart B of part 430 to read as follows:

[[Page 74036]]

Appendix CC to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring 
the Energy Consumption of Portable Air Conditioners

1. Scope

    This appendix covers the test requirements used to measure the 
energy performance of single-duct and dual-duct portable air 
conditioners. It does not contain testing provisions for measuring 
the energy performance of spot coolers at this time.

2. Definitions

    2.1 AHAM PAC-1 means the test standard published by the 
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, titled ``Portable Air 
Conditioners,'' AHAM PAC-1-2015 (incorporated by reference; see 
Sec.  430.3).
    2.2 Combined energy efficiency ratio is the energy efficiency of 
a portable air conditioner as measured in accordance with this test 
procedure in Btu per watt-hours (Btu/Wh) and determined in section 
5.4.
    2.3 Cooling mode means a mode in which a portable air 
conditioner has activated the main cooling function according to the 
thermostat or temperature sensor signal, including activating the 
refrigeration system or the fan or blower without activation of the 
refrigeration system.
    2.4 Dual-duct portable air conditioner means a portable air 
conditioner that draws some or all of the condenser inlet air from 
outside the conditioned space through a duct, and may draw 
additional condenser inlet air from the conditioned space. The 
condenser outlet air is discharged outside the conditioned space by 
means of a separate duct. 2.6 IEC 62301 means the test standard 
published by the International Electrotechnical Commission, titled 
``Household electrical appliances--Measurement of standby power,'' 
Publication 62301 (Edition 2.0 2011-01) (incorporated by reference; 
see Sec.  430.3).
    2.5 Inactive mode means a standby mode that facilitates the 
activation of an active mode or off-cycle mode by remote switch 
(including remote control), internal sensor, or timer, or that 
provides continuous status display.
    2.6 Off-cycle mode means a mode in which a portable air 
conditioner:
    (1) Has cycled off its main cooling or heating function by 
thermostat or temperature sensor signal;
    (2) May or may not operate its fan or blower; and
    (3) Will reactivate the main function according to the 
thermostat or temperature sensor signal.
    2.7 Off mode means a mode in which a portable air conditioner is 
connected to a mains power source and is not providing any active 
mode, off-cycle mode, or standby mode function, and where the mode 
may persist for an indefinite time. An indicator that only shows the 
user that the portable air conditioner is in the off position is 
included within the classification of an off mode.
    2.8 Seasonally adjusted cooling capacity means a measure of the 
cooling, measured in Btu/h, provided to the indoor conditioned 
space, measured under the specified ambient conditions.
    2.9 Single-duct portable air conditioner means a portable air 
conditioner that draws all of the condenser inlet air from the 
conditioned space without the means of a duct, and discharges the 
condenser outlet air outside the conditioned space through a single 
duct.
    2.10 Spot cooler means a portable air conditioner that draws 
condenser inlet air from and discharges condenser outlet air to the 
conditioned space, and draws evaporator inlet air from and 
discharges evaporator outlet air to a localized zone within the 
conditioned space.
    2.11 Standby mode means any mode where a portable air 
conditioner is connected to a mains power source and offers one or 
more of the following user-oriented or protective functions which 
may persist for an indefinite time:
    (1) To facilitate the activation of other modes (including 
activation or deactivation of cooling mode) by remote switch 
(including remote control), internal sensor, or timer; or
    (2) Continuous functions, including information or status 
displays (including clocks) or sensor-based functions. A timer is a 
continuous clock function (which may or may not be associated with a 
display) that provides regular scheduled tasks (e.g., switching) and 
that operates on a continuous basis.

3. Test Apparatus and General Instructions

    3.1 Active mode.
    3.1.1 Test conduct. The test apparatus and instructions for 
testing portable air conditioners in cooling mode and off-cycle mode 
shall conform to the requirements specified in Section 4, 
``Definitions'' and Section 7, ``Tests,'' of AHAM PAC-1-2015 
(incorporated by reference; see Sec.  430.3), except as otherwise 
specified in this appendix. Where applicable, measure duct heat 
transfer and infiltration air heat transfer according to section 
4.1.1.1 and section 4.1.1.2 of this appendix, respectively.
    3.1.1.1 Duct setup. Use ducting components provided by the 
manufacturer, including, where provided by the manufacturer, ducts, 
connectors for attaching the duct(s) to the test unit, and window 
mounting fixtures. Do not apply additional sealing or insulation.
    3.1.1.2 Single-duct evaporator inlet test conditions. When 
testing single-duct portable air conditioners, maintain the 
evaporator inlet dry-bulb temperature within a range of 
1.0[emsp14][deg]F with an average difference within 
0.3[emsp14][deg]F.
    3.1.1.3 Condensate Removal. Setup the test unit in accordance 
with manufacturer instructions. If the unit has an auto-evaporative 
feature, keep any provided drain plug installed as shipped and do 
not provide other means of condensate removal. If the internal 
condensate collection bucket fills during the test, halt the test, 
remove the drain plug, install a gravity drain line, and start the 
test from the beginning. If no auto-evaporative feature is 
available, remove the drain plug and install a gravity drain line. 
If no auto-evaporative feature or gravity drain is available and a 
condensate pump is included, or if the manufacturer specifies the 
use of an included condensate pump during cooling mode operation, 
then test the portable air conditioner with the condensate pump 
enabled. For units tested with a condensate pump, apply the 
provisions in Section 7.1.2 of AHAM PAC-1-2015 (incorporated by 
reference; see Sec.  430.3) if the pump cycles on and off.
    3.1.1.4 Unit Placement. There shall be no less than 3 feet 
between any test chamber wall surface and any surface on the 
portable air conditioner, except the surface or surfaces of the 
portable air conditioner that include a duct attachment. The 
distance between the test chamber wall and a surface with one or 
more duct attachments is prescribed by the test setup requirements 
in Section 7.3.7 of AHAM PAC-1-2015 (incorporated by reference; see 
Sec.  430.3).
    3.1.1.5 Electrical supply. Maintain the input standard voltage 
at 115 V 1 percent. Test at the rated frequency, 
maintained within 1 percent.
    3.1.1.6 Duct temperature measurements. Measure the surface 
temperatures of each duct using four equally spaced thermocouples 
per duct, adhered to the outer surface of the entire length of the 
duct. Temperature measurements must have an error no greater than 
0.5[emsp14][deg]F over the range being measured.
    3.1.2 Control settings. Set the controls to the lowest available 
temperature setpoint for cooling mode. If the portable air 
conditioner has a user-adjustable fan speed, select the maximum fan 
speed setting. If the portable air conditioner has an automatic 
louver oscillation feature, disable that feature throughout testing. 
If the louver oscillation feature is included but there is no option 
to disable it, testing shall proceed with the louver oscillation 
enabled. If the portable air conditioner has adjustable louvers, 
position the louvers parallel with the airflow to maximize air flow 
and minimize static pressure loss.
    3.1.3 Measurement resolution and rounding. Record measurements 
at the resolution of the test instrumentation. Round the seasonally 
adjusted cooling capacity value in accordance with Table 1 of AHAM 
PAC-1-2015 (incorporated by reference; see Sec.  430.3). Round CEER 
as calculated in section 5 of this appendix, to the nearest 0.1 Btu/
Wh.
    3.2 Standby mode and off mode.
    3.2.1 Installation requirements. For the standby mode and off 
mode testing, install the portable air conditioner in accordance 
with Section 5, Paragraph 5.2 of IEC 62301 (incorporated by 
reference; see Sec.  430.3), disregarding the provisions regarding 
batteries and the determination, classification, and testing of 
relevant modes.
    3.2.2 Electrical energy supply.
    3.2.2.1 Electrical supply. For the standby mode and off mode 
testing, maintain the input standard voltage at 115 V 1 
percent. Maintain the electrical supply at the rated frequency 
1 percent.
    3.2.2.2 Supply voltage waveform. For the standby mode and off 
mode testing, maintain the electrical supply voltage waveform 
indicated in Section 4, Paragraph 4.3.2 of IEC 62301 (incorporated 
by reference; see Sec.  430.3).
    3.2.3 Standby mode and off mode wattmeter. The wattmeter used to 
measure

[[Page 74037]]

standby mode and off mode power consumption must meet the 
requirements specified in Section 4, Paragraph 4.4 of IEC 62301 
(incorporated by reference; see Sec.  430.3).
    3.2.4 Standby mode and off mode ambient temperature. For standby 
mode and off mode testing, maintain room ambient air temperature 
conditions as specified in Section 4, Paragraph 4.2 of IEC 62301 
(incorporated by reference; see Sec.  430.3).

4. Test Measurement

    4.1 Cooling mode. Measure the indoor room cooling capacity and 
overall power input in cooling mode in accordance with Section 7.1.b 
and 7.1.c of AHAM PAC-1-2015 (incorporated by reference; see Sec.  
430.3), respectively. The test duration shall be determined in 
accordance with Section 8.7 of ASHRAE 37-2009 (incorporated by 
reference; Sec.  430.3). Substitute the test conditions in Table 3 
of AHAM PAC-1-2015 with the test conditions for single-duct and 
dual-duct portable air conditioners presented in Table 1 of this 
appendix. For single-duct units, measure the indoor room cooling 
capacity, CapacitySD, and overall power input in cooling 
mode, PSD, in accordance with the ambient conditions for 
test configuration 5, presented in Table 1 of this appendix. For 
dual-duct units, measure the indoor room cooling capacity and 
overall power input in accordance with ambient conditions for test 
configuration 3, condition A (Capacity95, 
P95), and a second time in accordance with the ambient 
conditions for test configuration 3, condition B 
(Capacity83, P83), presented in Table 1 of 
this appendix.

                             Table 1--Evaporator and Condenser Inlet Test Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Evaporator inlet air, [deg]F     Condenser inlet air, [deg]F
                                                             ([deg]C)                        ([deg]C)
               Test configuration                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Dry bulb        Wet bulb        Dry bulb        Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 (Condition A).................................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)       95 (35.0)       75 (23.9)
3 (Condition B).................................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)       83 (28.3)     67.5 (19.7)
5...............................................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4.1.1. Duct Heat Transfer. Measure the surface temperature of 
the condenser exhaust duct and condenser inlet duct, where 
applicable, throughout the cooling mode test. Calculate the average 
temperature at each individual location, and then calculate the 
average surface temperature of each duct by averaging the four 
average temperature measurements taken on that duct. Calculate the 
surface area (Aduct_j) of each duct according to the 
following:

    Aduct_j = [pi] x dj x Lj

Where:

dj = the outer diameter of duct ``j''.
Lj = the extended length of duct ``j'' while under test.
j represents the condenser exhaust duct and, for dual-duct units, 
condenser inlet duct.

    Calculate the total heat transferred from the surface of the 
duct(s) to the indoor conditioned space while operating in cooling 
mode for the outdoor test conditions in Table 1 of this appendix, as 
follows. For single-duct portable air conditioners:

Qduct_SD = hxAduct_jx(Tduct_SD_j-
Tei)
    For dual-duct portable air conditioners:

    Qduct_95=[sum]j{hxAduct_jx(Tduct_95_j
-Tei){time} 
    Qduct_83=[sum]j{hxAduct_jx(Tduct_83_j
-Tei){time} 

Where:
Qduct_SD = for single-duct portable air conditioners, the 
total heat transferred from the duct to the indoor conditioned space 
in cooling mode when tested according to the test conditions in 
Table 1 of this appendix, in Btu/h.
Qduct_95 and Qduct_83 = for dual-duct portable 
air conditioners, the total heat transferred from the ducts to the 
indoor conditioned space in cooling mode when tested according to 
the 95[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb and 83[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
test conditions in Table 1 of this appendix, in Btu/h.
h = convection coefficient, 4 Btu/h per square foot per [deg]F.
Aduct_j = surface area of duct ``j'', in square feet.
Tduct_SD_j = average surface temperature for the 
condenser exhaust duct of single-duct portable air conditioners, as 
measured during testing according to the test condition in Table 1 
of this appendix, in [deg]F.
Tduct_95_j and Tduct_83_j = average surface 
temperature for duct ``j'' of dual-duct portable air conditioners, 
as measured during testing according to the two outdoor test 
conditions in Table 1 of this appendix, in [deg]F.
j represents the condenser exhaust duct and, for dual-duct units, 
condenser inlet duct.
Tei = average evaporator inlet air dry-bulb temperature, 
in [deg]F.

    4.1.2 Infiltration Air Heat Transfer. Measure the heat 
contribution from infiltration air for single-duct portable air 
conditioners and dual-duct portable air conditioners that draw at 
least part of the condenser air from the conditioned space. 
Calculate the heat contribution from infiltration air for single-
duct and dual-duct portable air conditioners for both cooling mode 
outdoor test conditions, as described in this section. The dry air 
mass flow rate of infiltration air shall be calculated according to 
the following equations. For single-duct portable air conditioners:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.010

    For dual-duct portable air conditioners:

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.011
    

[[Page 74038]]


Where:
mSD = dry air mass flow rate of infiltration air for 
single-duct portable air conditioners, in pounds per minute (lb/m).
    m95 and m83 = dry air mass flow rate of 
infiltration air for dual-duct portable air conditioners, as 
calculated based on testing according to the test conditions in 
Table 1 of this appendix, in lb/m.
    Vco_SD, Vco_95, and Vco_83 = 
average volumetric flow rate of the condenser outlet air during 
cooling mode testing for single-duct portable air conditioners; and 
at the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions for dual-
duct portable air conditioners, respectively, in cubic feet per 
minute (cfm).
    Vci_95, and Vci_83 = average volumetric 
flow rate of the condenser inlet air during cooling mode testing at 
the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions for dual-
duct portable air conditioners, respectively, in cfm.
    [rho]co_SD, [rho]co_95, and 
[rho]co_83 = average density of the condenser outlet air 
during cooling mode testing for single-duct portable air 
conditioners, and at the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
conditions for dual-duct portable air conditioners, respectively, in 
pounds mass per cubic foot (lbm/ft\3\).
    [rho]ci_95, and [rho]ci_83 = average 
density of the condenser inlet air during cooling mode testing at 
the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions for dual-
duct portable air conditioners, respectively, in lbm/
ft\3\.
    [omega][hairsp]co_SD, 
[omega][hairsp]co_95, and [omega][hairsp]co_83 
= average humidity ratio of condenser outlet air during cooling mode 
testing for single-duct portable air conditioners, and at the 95 
[deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions for dual-duct 
portable air conditioners, respectively, in pounds mass of water 
vapor per pounds mass of dry air (lbw/lbda).
    [omega][hairsp]ci_95, and 
[omega][hairsp]ci_83 = average humidity ratio of 
condenser inlet air during cooling mode testing at the 95 [deg]F and 
83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions for dual-duct portable air 
conditioners, respectively, in lbw/lbda.
    For single-duct and dual-duct portable air conditioners, 
calculate the sensible component of infiltration air heat 
contribution according to the following:

Qs_95 = m x 60
x [(cp\da x (Tia_95-Tindoor)) + cp\wv x 
([omega][hairsp]ia_95 x Tia_95-
[omega][hairsp]indoor x Tindoor)]
Qs_83 = m x 60
x [(cp\da x (Tia_83-Tindoor)) + cp\wv x 
([omega][hairsp]ia_83 x Tia_83-
[omega][hairsp]indoor x Tindoor)]

Where:

Qs_95 and Qs_83 = sensible heat added to the 
room by infiltration air, calculated at the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F 
dry-bulb outdoor conditions in Table 1 of this appendix, in Btu/h.
m = dry air mass flow rate of infiltration air, mSD or 
m95 when calculating Qs_95 and mSD 
or m83 when calculating Qs_83, in lb/m.
cp_da = specific heat of dry air, 0.24 Btu/
lbm- [deg]F.
cp_wv = specific heat of water vapor, 0.444 Btu/
lbm- [deg]F.
Tindoor = indoor chamber dry-bulb temperature, 80 [deg]F.
Tia_95 and Tia_83 = infiltration air dry-bulb 
temperatures for the two test conditions in Table 1 of this 
appendix, 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F, respectively.
[omega][hairsp]ia_95 and [omega][hairsp]ia_83 
= humidity ratios of the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb 
infiltration air, 0.0141 and 0.01086 lbw/lbda, 
respectively.
[omega][hairsp]indoor = humidity ratio of the indoor 
chamber air, 0.0112 lbw/lbda.
    60 = conversion factor from minutes to hours.

    Calculate the latent heat contribution of the infiltration air 
according to the following:
Q[hairsp]l_95 = m x 60 x Hfg x 
([omega][hairsp]ia_95-[omega][hairsp]indoor)
Q[hairsp]l_83 = m x 60 x Hfg x 
([omega][hairsp]ia_83-[omega][hairsp]indoor)

Where:

Q[hairsp]l_95 and Q[hairsp]l_83 = latent heat 
added to the room by infiltration air, calculated at the 95 [deg]F 
and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions in Table 1 of this 
appendix, in Btu/h.
m = mass flow rate of infiltration air, mSD or 
m95 when calculating Ql,95 and mSD 
or m83 when calculating Ql_83, in lb/m.
Hfg = latent heat of vaporization for water vapor, 1061 
Btu/lbm.
[omega][hairsp]ia_95 and [omega][hairsp]ia_83 
= humidity ratios of the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb 
infiltration air, 0.0141 and 0.01086 lbw/lbda, 
respectively.
[omega][hairsp]indoor = humidity ratio of the indoor 
chamber air, 0.0112 lbw/lbda.
60 = conversion factor from minutes to hours.

    The total heat contribution of the infiltration air is the sum of 
the sensible and latent heat:
Q[hairsp]infiltration_95 = Q[hairsp]s_95 + 
Q[hairsp]l_95
Q[hairsp]infiltration_83 = Q[hairsp]s_83 + 
Q[hairsp]l_83

Where:

Q[hairsp]infiltration_95 and 
Q[hairsp]infiltration_83 = total infiltration air heats in 
cooling mode, calculated at the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb 
outdoor conditions in Table 1 of this appendix, in Btu/h.
Q[hairsp]s_95 and Q[hairsp]s_83 = sensible heat 
added to the room by infiltration air, calculated at the 95 [deg]F and 
83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions in Table 1 of this appendix, in 
Btu/h.
Q[hairsp]l_95 and Q[hairsp]l_83 = latent heat 
added to the room by infiltration air, calculated at the 95 [deg]F and 
83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions in Table 1 of this appendix, in 
Btu/h.

    4.2 Off-cycle mode. Establish the test conditions specified in 
section 3.1.1 of this appendix for off-cycle mode, except that the duct 
measurements in section 3.1.1.6 shall not be used and the wattmeter 
specified in section 3.2.3 of this appendix shall be used. Begin the 
off-cycle mode test period 5 minutes following the cooling mode test 
period. Adjust the setpoint higher than the ambient temperature to 
ensure the product will not enter cooling mode and begin the test 5 
minutes after the compressor cycles off due to the change in setpoint. 
The off-cycle mode test period shall be 2 hours in duration, during 
which the power consumption is recorded at the same intervals as 
recorded for cooling mode testing. Measure and record the average off-
cycle mode power of the portable air conditioner, Poc, in 
watts.
    4.3 Standby mode and off mode. Establish the testing conditions set 
forth in section 3.2 of this appendix, ensuring that the portable air 
conditioner does not enter any active modes during the test. For 
portable air conditioners that take some time to enter a stable state 
from a higher power state as discussed in Section 5, Paragraph 5.1, 
Note 1 of IEC 62301, (incorporated by reference; see Sec.  430.3), 
allow sufficient time for the portable air conditioner to reach the 
lowest power state before proceeding with the test measurement. Follow 
the test procedure specified in Section 5, Paragraph 5.3.2 of IEC 62301 
for testing in each possible mode as described in sections 4.3.1 and 
4.3.2 of this appendix.
    4.3.1 If the portable air conditioner has an inactive mode, as 
defined in section 2.5 of this appendix, but not an off mode, as 
defined in section 2.7 of this appendix, measure and record the average 
inactive mode power of the portable air conditioner, Pia, in 
watts.
    4.3.2 If the portable air conditioner has an off mode, as defined 
in section 2.7 of this appendix, measure and record the average off 
mode power of the portable air conditioner, Pom, in watts.

5. Calculation of Derived Results From Test Measurements

    5.1 Adjusted Cooling Capacity. Calculate the adjusted cooling 
capacities for portable air conditioners, ACC95 and 
ACC83, expressed in Btu/h, according to the following 
equations. For single-duct portable air conditioners:

ACC95 = CapacitySD - Q[hairsp]duct\SD-
Q[hairsp]infiltration_95
ACC83 = CapacitySD - Q[hairsp]duct\SD-
Q[hairsp]infiltration_83

    For dual-duct portable air conditioners:

ACC95 = Capacity95 - Q[hairsp]duct\95-
Q[hairsp]infiltration_95
ACC83 = Capacity83 - Q[hairsp]duct\83-
Q[hairsp]infiltration_83

Where:

CapacitySD, Capacity95, and Capacity83 
= cooling capacity measured in section 4.1.1 of this appendix.
Q[hairsp]duct_SD, Q[hairsp]duct_95, and 
Q[hairsp]duct_83 = duct heat transfer while operating in 
cooling mode, calculated in section 4.1.1.1 of this appendix.
Q[hairsp]infiltration_95 and 
Q[hairsp]infiltration_83 = total infiltration air heat 
transfer in

[[Page 74039]]

cooling mode, calculated in section 4.1.1.2 of this appendix.

    5.2 Seasonally Adjusted Cooling Capacity. Calculate the seasonally 
adjusted cooling capacity for portable air conditioners, SACC, 
expressed in Btu/h, according to the following:
SACC = ACC95 x 0.2 + ACC83 x 0.8

Where:

ACC95 and ACC83 = adjusted cooling capacity, in 
Btu/h, calculated in section 5.1 of this appendix.
0.2 = weighting factor for ACC95.
0.8 = weighting factor for ACC83.

    5.3 Annual Energy Consumption. Calculate the annual energy 
consumption in each operating mode, AECm, expressed in 
kilowatt-hours per year (kWh/year). The annual hours of operation in 
each mode are estimated as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Annual
                        Operating mode                         operating
                                                                 hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cooling Mode, Dual-Duct 95 [deg]F \1\........................        750
Cooling Mode, Dual-Duct 83 [deg]F \1\........................        750
Cooling Mode, Single-Duct....................................        750
Off-Cycle....................................................        880
Inactive or Off..............................................      1,355
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These operating mode hours are for the purposes of calculating
  annual energy consumption under different ambient conditions for dual-
  duct portable air conditioners, and are not a division of the total
  cooling mode operating hours. The total dual-duct cooling mode
  operating hours are 750 hours.

AECm = Pm x tm x k

Where:

AECm = annual energy consumption in each mode, in kWh/year.
Pm = average power in each mode, in watts.
m represents the operating mode (``95'' and ``83'' cooling mode at the 
95[emsp14][deg]F and 83[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb outdoor conditions, 
respectively for dual-duct portable air conditioners, ``SD'' cooling 
mode for single-duct portable air conditioners, ``oc'' off-cycle, and 
``ia'' inactive or ``om'' off mode).
t = number of annual operating time in each mode, in hours.
k = 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor from watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.

    Total annual energy consumption in all modes except cooling, is 
calculated according to the following:

AECT = [sum]mAECm

Where:

AECT = total annual energy consumption attributed to all 
modes except cooling, in kWh/year;
AECm = total annual energy consumption in each mode, in kWh/
year.
m represents the operating modes included in AECT (``oc'' 
off-cycle, and ``im'' inactive or ``om'' off mode).

    5.4 Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio. Using the annual operating 
hours, as outlined in section 5.3 of this appendix, calculate the 
combined energy efficiency ratio, CEER, expressed in Btu/Wh, according 
to the following:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27NO15.012

Where:

CEERSD and CEERDD = combined energy efficiency 
ratio for single-duct and dual-duct portable air conditioners, 
respectively, in Btu/Wh.
ACC95 and ACC83 = adjusted cooling capacity, 
tested at the 95[emsp14][deg]F and 83[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
conditions in Table 1 of this appendix, in Btu/h, calculated in section 
5.1 of this appendix.
AECSD = annual energy consumption in cooling mode for 
single-duct portable air conditioners, in kWh/year, calculated in 
section 5.3 of this appendix.
AEC95 and AEC83 = annual energy consumption for 
the two cooling mode test conditions in Table 1 of this appendix for 
dual-duct portable air conditioners, in kWh/year, calculated in section 
5.3 of this appendix.
AECT = total annual energy consumption attributed to all 
modes except cooling, in kWh/year, calculated in section 5.3 of this 
appendix.
t = number of cooling mode hours per year, 750.
k = 0.001 kWh/Wh conversion factor for watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.
0.2 = weighting factor for the 95[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
condition test.
0.8 = weighting factor for the 83[emsp14][deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
condition test.

[FR Doc. 2015-30057 Filed 11-25-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6450-01-P