[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 101 (Friday, May 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24330-24336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10865]



[[Page 24330]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

[Case No. CR-006]


Notice of Petition for Waiver of AHT Cooling Systems GmbH and AHT 
Cooling Systems USA Inc. From the Department of Energy Commercial 
Refrigerator, Freezer, and Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedures and 
Partial Granting of an Interim Waiver

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

ACTION: Notice of petition for waiver, partial grant of an interim 
waiver, and request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of and publishes a petition for 
waiver from AHT Cooling Systems GmbH and AHT Cooling Systems USA Inc. 
(AHT) seeking an exemption from specified portions of the U.S. 
Department of Energy (DOE) test procedure for determining the energy 
consumption of commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-
freezers (collectively ``commercial refrigeration equipment'') under 
the regulations. AHT seeks to use an alternate test procedure to 
address issues involved in testing forty-eight basic models identified 
by AHT as part of its petition that do not have a typical defrosting 
cycle (i.e., the cooling coils are built into the body of the units and 
require defrosting once or twice per week). Consequently, AHT seeks to 
test and rate these basic models as ice cream freezers only and to use 
an alternate two-part test procedure to account for the infrequent 
defrosts. This notice also announces that DOE is declining to grant AHT 
an interim waiver regarding multi-mode operation, but DOE is granting 
an interim waiver to address the defrost cycles, with modifications to 
AHT's requested approach. DOE solicits comments, data, and information 
concerning AHT's petition and its suggested alternate test procedure to 
inform its final decision.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information with regard to 
the AHT petition until June 26, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Case Number CR-006, 
by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Email: [email protected] Include the case 
number [Case No. CR-006] in the subject line of the message. Submit 
electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or ASCII file 
format, and avoid the use of special characters or any form of 
encryption.
     Postal Mail: Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, Petition for 
Waiver Case No. CR-006, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-0371. If possible, please submit all 
items on a compact disc (CD), in which case it is not necessary to 
include printed copies.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards 
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 
L'Enfant Plaza SW., 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 
586-6636. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case 
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
    Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, 
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for 
review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed 
in the www.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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of Energy, Building 
Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-0371. Email: 
[email protected].
    Ms. Johanna Jochum, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-33, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence 
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103. Telephone: (202) 287-6307. 
Email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Authority

    Title III, Part C \1\ of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 
1975 (EPCA), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6311-6316, as codified), 
established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial 
Equipment, which includes commercial refrigeration equipment.\2\ Part C 
includes definitions, energy conservation standards, test procedures, 
labeling provisions, and the authority to require information and 
reports from manufacturers. Further, Part C authorizes the Secretary of 
Energy to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to 
produce results that measure energy efficiency, energy use, or 
estimated operating costs during a representative average-use cycle, 
and that are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) 
The test procedure for commercial refrigeration equipment is contained 
in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 10 CFR part 431, subpart C, 
appendix B, ``Amended Uniform Test Method for the Measurement of Energy 
Consumption of Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator-
Freezers.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part C was redesignated as Part A-1.
    \2\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute 
as amended through the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015 
(EEIA), Public Law 114-11 (April 30, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE's regulations set forth at 10 CFR 431.401 contain provisions 
that allow a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure 
requirements for a particular basic model of a type of covered 
equipment when the petitioner's basic model for which the petition for 
waiver was submitted contains one or more design characteristics that 
either (1) prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedures; 
or (2) cause the prescribed test procedures to evaluate the basic model 
in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption as to 
provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1). A 
petitioner must include in its petition various information, including 
a detailed discussion of the need for the requested waiver and any 
alternate test procedures known to the petitioner to evaluate the basic 
model in a manner representative of its energy consumption. See 10 CFR 
431.401(b)(1).
    DOE may grant a waiver subject to conditions, including adherence 
to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). As soon as 
practicable after the granting of any waiver, DOE will publish in the 
Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend its 
regulations so as to eliminate any need for the continuation of such 
waiver. As soon thereafter as practicable, DOE will publish in the 
Federal Register a final rule. 10 CFR 431.401(l).
    The waiver process also allows DOE to grant an interim waiver if it 
appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted and/or if 
DOE determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to 
grant immediate relief pending a determination on the petition for 
waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(2). Within one year of issuance of an interim 
waiver, DOE will either: (i) Publish in the Federal Register a 
determination on the petition for waiver; or (ii) publish in the 
Federal Register a new or amended

[[Page 24331]]

test procedure that addresses the issues presented in the waiver. 10 
CFR 431.401(h)(1). When DOE amends the test procedure to address the 
issues presented in a waiver, the waiver will automatically terminate 
on the date on which use of that test procedure is required to 
demonstrate compliance. 10 CFR 431.401(h)(2).

II. AHT's Petition for Waiver of Test Procedure and Application for 
Interim Waiver

    On October 25, 2016, AHT filed a petition for waiver and interim 
waiver from the DOE test procedure for commercial refrigeration 
equipment set forth in 10 CFR part 431, subpart C, appendix B. (AHT, 
No. 0001 at pp. 1-10 \3\) AHT petitioned for waiver for six model lines 
\4\ that are capable of multi-mode operation (i.e., as ice cream 
freezer and commercial refrigerator) and that do not have typical 
defrosting cycles (i.e., the cooling coils are built into the body of 
the units and require defrosts once per week). In the petition, AHT 
states that the DOE test procedure is not clear regarding how to test 
multi-mode equipment. Additionally, AHT states that the test 
procedure's 24-hour test period starting with a defrost would grossly 
overstate the energy used by these models due to their longer defrost 
cycles (once per week).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A notation in this form provides a reference for information 
that is in the docket for this test procedure waiver (Docket No. 
EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0027) (available at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0027). This notation indicates that the 
statement preceding the reference is document number 1 in the docket 
and appears at pages 1-10 of that document.
    \4\ The specific basic models for which the petition applies are 
ice cream freezer and commercial refrigerator basic models IBIZA 100 
NAM-R, IBIZA 100 NAM-IC, IBIZA 145 NAM-R, IBIZA 145 NAM-IC, IBIZA 
210 NAM-R, IBIZA 210 NAM-IC, MALTA 145 NAM-R, MALTA 145 NAM-IC, 
MALTA 185 NAM-R, MALTA 185 NAM-IC, MANHATTAN 175 NAM-R, MANHATTAN 
175 NAM-IC, MANHATTAN 210 NAM-R, MANHATTAN 210 NAM-IC, MIAMI 145 
NAM-R, MIAMI 145 NAM-IC, MIAMI 185 NAM-R, MIAMI 185 NAM-IC, MIAMI 
210 NAM-R, MIAMI 210 NAM-IC, MIAMI 250 NAM-R, MIAMI 250 NAM-IC, 
PARIS 145 NAM-R, PARIS 145 NAM-IC, PARIS 185 NAM-R, PARIS 185 NAM-
IC, PARIS 210 NAM-R, PARIS 210 NAM-IC, PARIS 250 NAM-R, PARIS 250 
NAM-IC, SYDNEY 175 NAM-R, SYDNEY 175 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 210 NAM-R, 
SYDNEY 210 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 213 NAM-R, SYDNEY 213 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 223 
NAM-R, SYDNEY 223 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 230 NAM-R, SYDNEY 230 NAM-IC, 
SYDNEY 250 NAM-R, SYDNEY 250 NAM-IC, SYDNEY XL 175 NAM-R, SYDNEY XL 
175 NAM-IC, SYDNEY XL 210 NAM-R, SYDNEY XL 210 NAM-IC, SYDNEY XL 250 
NAM-R, and SYDNEY XL 250 NAM-IC. These basic model names were 
provided by AHT in April 2016 as a supplement to its petition. (AHT, 
No. 0003; https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0027-0003.)
    Notably, in addition to the above listed ice cream freezer and 
commercial refrigerator basic models, AHT's petition for waiver and 
interim waiver previously included commercial freezer basic models 
IBIZA 100 NAM-F, IBIZA 145 NAM-F, IBIZA 210 NAM-F, MALTA 145 NAM-F, 
MALTA 185 NAM-F, MANHATTAN 175 NAM-F, MANHATTAN 210 NAM-F, MIAMI 145 
NAM-F, MIAMI 185 NAM-F, MIAMI 210 NAM-F, MIAMI 250 NAM-F, PARIS 145 
NAM-F, PARIS 185 NAM-F, PARIS 210 NAM-F, PARIS 250 NAM-F, SYDNEY 175 
NAM-F, SYDNEY 210 NAM-F, SYDNEY 213 NAM-F, SYDNEY 223 NAM-F, SYDNEY 
230 NAM-F, SYDNEY 250 NAM-F, SYDNEY XL 175 NAM-F, SYDNEY XL 210 NAM-
F, and SYDNEY XL 250 NAM-F. (AHT, No. 0003; https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0027-0003) However, 
on May 2, 2017, DOE received a letter from AHT that withdrew these 
commercial freezer basic models from its petition for waiver and 
interim waiver request. AHT indicated that it plans to submit a 
separate waiver request for these basic models at a later date. 
(AHT, No. 0007 at pp. 1; https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0027-0007) Thus, these commercial 
freezer basic models were not considered as a part of this Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address multi-mode operation, AHT requests that their equipment 
be tested and rated only as ice cream freezers (with integrated average 
temperature of -15 [deg]F +/- 2.0 [deg]F and use of total display area 
(TDA) to determine associated energy conservation standards).
    To address infrequent defrosts, AHT requests that their equipment 
be subject to an alternate two-part test procedure. The first part 
would be a 24-hour test starting in steady state conditions and 
including eight hours of door opening (according ASHRAE Standard 72). 
The energy consumed in this test would be recorded as ET1. The second 
part would be a defrost cycle test starting after steady state 
conditions are established and ending after the defrost cycle is 
complete. The duration of the defrost cycle, tDI, and the 
energy consumed during this defrost cycle, ET2, would be recorded and 
combined with ET1 based on the once-per-week defrost frequency. In 
AHT's March 6, 2017 letter, AHT noted that although the standard 
duration of the defrost cycle was once-per-week, the basic models have 
an optional manual override that allows up to two defrost cycles per 
week and recommended revising the October 25 test procedure to reflect 
that. (AHT, No. 0008\5\) DOE considered this proposal in developing the 
alternative test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0027-0008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Alternate Test Procedure

    EPCA requires that manufacturers use DOE test procedures when 
making representations about the energy consumption and energy 
consumption costs of products covered by the statute. (42 U.S.C. 
6293(c); 6314(d)) Consistent representations about the energy 
efficiency of covered equipment are important for consumers to evaluate 
equipment when making purchasing decisions and for manufacturers to 
demonstrate compliance with applicable DOE energy conservation 
standards.
    AHT proposes testing the commercial refrigeration equipment at 
issue in their petition according to the following alternate test 
procedure.
    The equipment would be tested and rated as ice cream freezers (with 
integrated average temperature of -15 [deg]F +/- 2.0 [deg]F).
    The equipment would be subject to the following testing instead of 
the corresponding defrost testing in the test procedure. The first part 
would be a 24-hour test starting in steady state conditions and 
including eight hours of door opening (according ASHRAE Standard 72). 
The energy consumed in this test would be recorded as ET1.
    The second part would be a defrost cycle test starting after steady 
state conditions are established. The defrost cycle would be initiated 
and the second part of testing would terminate after the defrost cycle 
is complete. The energy consumed during this defrost cycle, ET2, and 
the duration of the defrost cycle, tDI, would be recorded.
    Based on the measured energy consumption in these two tests, the 
daily energy consumption (DEC), in kilowatt-hours (kWh), would be 
calculated as:

[[Page 24332]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY17.005

Where:

DEC = Daily Energy Consumption in kilowatt-hours (kWh);
ET1 = energy expended during the first part of the test, in kWh;
ET2 = energy expended during the second part of the test, in kWh;
Etd = energy expended by defrosts per week
tNDI = normalized length of defrosting time per day, in minutes;
tDS = sum of defrost time per week;
D = maximum number of defrosts per week
7 = conversion factor of days per week;
1440 = conversion factor to adjust to a 24-hour period in minutes 
per day.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ DOE notes that AHT's proposed test procedure included a 
scrivener's error. That error has been corrected to reflect AHT's 
intended proposal.

    As stated in the Summary above, DOE is declining to grant an 
interim waiver to AHT regarding the multi-mode operation issue, and is 
granting an interim waiver to address the defrost issue with 
modifications to AHT's proposed approach. AHT is required to test the 
basic models according to each of the equipment class definitions that 
it meets, and must do so according to the test procedure for commercial 
refrigeration equipment prescribed by DOE as specified in section V of 
this document. Pursuant to its regulations applicable to waivers and 
interim waivers from applicable test procedures at 10 CFR 431.401, and 
after consideration of public comments on the petition, DOE will 
consider whether to set an alternate test procedure for the equipment 
identified by AHT. DOE will provide that decision in a subsequent 
Decision and Order.

IV. Summary of Declining To Grant an Interim Waiver: Multi-Mode 
Operation

    AHT first is seeking a waiver for commercial refrigeration 
equipment that have multi-mode operation. DOE understands, on the basis 
of AHT's petition, that the equipment at issue have single 
compartments; in other words, the equipment are not ``commercial 
hybrids'' under the definition at 10 CFR 431.62. The applicable 
regulations define a ``commercial freezer'' as a unit that, among other 
criteria, is ``capable of operating below 32 [deg]F.'' 10 CFR 431.62. 
An ``ice-cream freezer'' is a commercial freezer ``that is designed to 
operate at or below -5 [deg]F'' and is meant for ``storing, displaying, 
or dispensing . . . ice cream.'' Id. A ``commercial refrigerator'' is a 
unit that, among other criteria, is ``capable of operating at or above 
32 [deg]F.'' Id.
    With respect to multi-mode operation, DOE has taken the position in 
the most recent commercial refrigeration equipment test procedure final 
rule, that self-contained equipment or remote condensing equipment with 
thermostats capable of operating at temperatures that span multiple 
equipment categories must be certified and comply with DOE's 
regulations for each applicable equipment category. 79 FR 22291 (April 
21, 2014).
    In light of the 2014 final rule, DOE declines at this time to 
provide AHT an interim waiver allowing testing only in the ice cream 
freezer mode. Additionally, DOE notes that DOE's current regulations 
allow for the use of alternative efficiency determination methods 
(AEDMs), which allow manufacturers to simulate the energy use of 
untested basic models once a manufacturer has a validated AEDM and 
could be used to simulate results at other rating temperatures. 10 CFR 
429.70.

V. Summary of Granting an Interim Waiver: Long Defrost Cycles

    Regarding the second issue of infrequent defrosts, DOE understands 
that defrosts are highly dependent upon the as-installed conditions of 
the commercial refrigeration equipment. DOE has adopted the industry 
procedure that accounts for the energy consumption associated with a 
defrost cycle by requiring a defrost at the start of the test period. 
Under the current applicable test procedure, all manufacturers test at 
``typical'' conditions and allow commercial customers to compare 
performance of competing units in the marketplace at such conditions.
    DOE agrees that the test protocol that AHT proposes may better 
reflect energy consumption on the equipment identified in the petition 
for waiver. As AHT stated in the petition for waiver, the test 
procedure requires beginning the test period at the start of a defrost 
cycle and recording data for 24 hours. Based on AHT's petition and 
additional supporting information, DOE understands that these model 
lines are not capable of defrosting once every 24 hours as simulated by 
the DOE test procedure. Instead, AHT identified model lines that use a 
control strategy that requires a single defrost once per week and 
allows the commercial customer to initiate an additional defrost each 
week, as needed. Accordingly, DOE is granting an interim waiver to AHT 
on this issue, but with modifications to AHT's requested approach as 
described below.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This interim waiver does not apply to the commercial freezer 
models that were previously listed in AHT's petition and 
subsequently withdrawn by AHT on May 2, 2017. For those models, AHT 
must test in accordance with the applicable DOE test procedure at 10 
CFR part 431, subpart C, appendix B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The two-part test method outlined in AHT's petition for waiver is 
an appropriate method to account for defrost energy consumption when 
the

[[Page 24333]]

defrost interval is known. The DOE test procedures for consumer 
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers include a similar 
method. AHT indicated in its petition for waiver that the controls for 
these basic models initiate a defrost once per week and indicated that 
the controls for the equipment allow for user-initiated defrosts as 
often as twice per week. DOE assumes that users would likely use this 
feature to minimize frost build up, and, therefore, DOE has accounted 
for two defrosts per week in the energy use equation in the interim 
waiver. DOE notes that if AHT were to change the defrost control 
schemes for this equipment, then they would be new basic models to 
which this interim waiver does not apply.
    In order for AHT to appropriately select the test period for the 
defrost portion of the test, DOE added specific provisions to clarify 
that test period to AHT's proposed alternative test procedure. For 
example, capturing only the defrost occurrence may omit other aspects 
of the defrost cycle that would impact energy performance, such as the 
temperature recovery period immediately following the defrost cycle. To 
better reflect unit operation during a defrost, DOE is clarifying that 
the defrost test period include any complete compressor cycles 
immediately before or after the defrost and temperature recovery 
compressor cycle with cabinet temperatures that are not within 
0.5[deg]F of the average cabinet temperature measured during the first 
test with stable operation. DOE references the consumer refrigerator 
and refrigerator-freezer test procedure at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, 
Appendix A to incorporate this requirement into the interim waiver.
    Therefore, DOE has issued an Order, stating:
    After careful consideration of all the material submitted by AHT in 
this matter, DOE grants an interim waiver regarding the specified basic 
models. Accordingly, it is ordered that:
    (1) AHT must, going forward, test and rate the following AHT basic 
models as set forth in paragraph (2) below:
    IBIZA 100 NAM-R, IBIZA 100 NAM-IC, IBIZA 145 NAM-R, IBIZA 145 NAM-
IC, IBIZA 210 NAM-R, IBIZA 210 NAM-IC, MALTA 145 NAM-R, MALTA 145 NAM-
IC, MALTA 185 NAM-R, MALTA 185 NAM-IC, MANHATTAN 175 NAM-R, MANHATTAN 
175 NAM-IC, MANHATTAN 210 NAM-R, MANHATTAN 210 NAM-IC, MIAMI 145 NAM-R, 
MIAMI 145 NAM-IC, MIAMI 185 NAM-R, MIAMI 185 NAM-IC, MIAMI 210 NAM-R, 
MIAMI 210 NAM-IC, MIAMI 250 NAM-R, MIAMI 250 NAM-IC, PARIS 145 NAM-R, 
PARIS 145 NAM-IC, PARIS 185 NAM-R, PARIS 185 NAM-IC, PARIS 210 NAM-R, 
PARIS 210 NAM-IC, PARIS 250 NAM-R, PARIS 250 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 175 NAM-R, 
SYDNEY 175 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 210 NAM-R, SYDNEY 210 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 213 NAM-
R, SYDNEY 213 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 223 NAM-R, SYDNEY 223 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 230 
NAM-R, SYDNEY 230 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 250 NAM-R, SYDNEY 250 NAM-IC, SYDNEY 
XL 175 NAM-R, SYDNEY XL 175 NAM-IC, SYDNEY XL 210 NAM-R, SYDNEY XL 210 
NAM-IC, SYDNEY XL 250 NAM-R, and SYDNEY XL 250 NAM-IC.
    (2) The applicable method of test for the AHT basic models listed 
in paragraph (1) is the test procedure for commercial refrigeration 
equipment prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 431, subpart C, appendix B, 
except that the test period shall be selected as follows.
    The first part of the test shall be a 24-hour test starting in 
steady-state conditions and including eight hours of door opening 
(according to ASHRAE Standard 72). The energy consumed in this test, 
ET1, shall be recorded.
    The second part of the test shall be a defrost cycle, including any 
operation associated with a defrost. The start and end points of the 
defrost cycle test period shall be determined according to the 
instructions for consumer refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers 
outlined in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A, section 4.2.1.1 
(for cycling compressor systems) or section 4.2.1.2 (for non-cycling 
compressor systems). The energy consumed in this test, ET2, and 
duration, tDI, shall be recorded.
    Based on the measured energy consumption in these two tests, the 
daily energy consumption (DEC) in kWh shall be calculated as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY17.006

Where:

DEC = daily energy consumption, in kWh;
ET1 = energy consumed during the first part of the test, in kWh;
ET2 = energy consumed during the second part of the test, in kWh;
tNDI = normalized length of defrosting time per day, in minutes;
tDI = length of time of defrosting test period, in minutes;
3.5 = time between defrost occurrences, in days; and
1440 = conversion factor, minutes per day.

    (3) Representations. AHT must make representations about the energy 
use of the equipment identified in paragraph (1) for compliance, 
marketing, or other purposes only to the extent that such equipment 
have been tested in accordance with the provisions set forth above and 
such representations fairly disclose the results of such testing in 
accordance with 10 CFR part 429, subpart B.
    (4) This interim waiver shall remain in effect consistent with the 
provisions of 10 CFR 431.401.
    (5) This interim waiver is issued on the condition that the 
statements, representations, and documentary materials provided by the 
petitioner are valid. If AHT makes any modifications to the defrost 
controls of these basic models, the waiver would no longer be valid and 
AHT would either be required use the current Federal test method or 
submit a new application for a test procedure waiver. DOE may revoke or 
modify this waiver at any time if it determines the factual basis 
underlying the petition for waiver is incorrect, or the results from 
the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' 
true energy consumption characteristics.
    (6) Granting of this interim waiver does not release AHT from the 
certification requirements set forth at 10 CFR part 429.

[[Page 24334]]

    Because DOE has found it likely that AHT's waiver petition will be 
granted, with modifications as described earlier in this section, DOE 
is granting an interim waiver to address the defrost cycles of the 
relevant basic models. DOE is now seeking comment from interested 
stakeholders on whether either the interim waiver approach or AHT's 
proposed test is likely to be representative of the energy use of the 
basic models that are the subjects of the waiver petition, or whether 
another alternative test may be more appropriate.

VI. Summary and Request for Comments

    Through this notice, DOE announces receipt of AHT's petition for 
waiver from the DOE test procedure for certain basic models of AHT 
commercial refrigeration equipment and announces DOE's decision to 
partially grant AHT's request for an interim waiver. DOE is publishing 
AHT's petition for waiver in its entirety, pursuant to 10 CFR 
431.401(b)(1)(iv). The petition contains no confidential information. 
The petition includes a suggested alternate test procedure, as 
specified in section III of this notice, to determine the energy 
consumption of AHT's specified basic models of commercial refrigeration 
equipment. DOE may consider including this alternate procedure in a 
subsequent Decision and Order based on comments from interested 
parties. However, DOE is granting a partial interim waiver using a 
modified test approach as described in section V of this notice. DOE is 
denying the portion of AHT's request regarding the multi-mode 
operation.
    DOE solicits comments from interested parties on all aspects of the 
petition, including the suggested alternate test procedure and 
calculation methodology. Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(d), any person 
submitting written comments to DOE must also send a copy of such 
comments to the petitioner. The contact information for the petitioner 
is Scott Blake Harris, Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP, 1919 M Street 
NW., Eighth Floor, Washington, DC 20036. All comment submissions must 
include the agency name and Case Number CR-006 for this proceeding. 
Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Portable 
Document Format (PDF), or text (American Standard Code for Information 
Interchange (ASCII)) file format and avoid the use of special 
characters or any form of encryption. Wherever possible, include the 
electronic signature of the author. DOE does not accept telefacsimiles 
(faxes).
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that 
he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public 
disclosure should submit two copies to DOE: One copy of the document 
marked ``confidential'' with all of the information believed to be 
confidential included, and one copy of the document marked ``non-
confidential'' with all of the information believed to be confidential 
deleted. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential 
status of the information and treat it according to its determination.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 18, 2017.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy.

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON, DC 20585

    In the Matter of: Energy Efficiency Program: Test Procedure for 
Commercial Refrigeration Equipment
    Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-TP-0025;
    RIN 1904-AC99.

I. PETITION OF AHT COOLING SYSTEMS FOR WAIVER OF TEST PROCEDURE FOR 
COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION EQUIPMENT

    AHT Cooling Systems GmbH and AHT Cooling Systems USA Inc. 
(collectively AHT) \1\ respectfully submit this Petition for Waiver and 
Application for Interim Waiver \2\ from DOE's test procedure for 
commercial refrigeration equipment.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ AHT's U.S. subsidiary is AHT Cooling Systems USA Inc., 3235 
Industry Drive, North Charleston, South Carolina 29418 (tel. 843-
767-6855). AHT's worldwide headquarters are AHT Cooling Systems 
GmbH, Werkgasse 57, 8786 Rottenmann, Austria (tel. 011-43-3614/2451-
0).
    \2\ See 10 CFR 431.401 (petitions for waiver and interim 
waiver).
    \3\ Id. Part 431, Subpart C, Appendix B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AHT is a world leader in the production of plug-in refrigerators 
and freezers for the commercial sector. It currently manufactures its 
products in Austria, and imports them into the United States through 
its wholly-owned subsidiary in South Carolina. AHT USA is also about to 
open a new manufacturing facility in the Charleston area. AHT products 
are distributed to major supermarket retail chains, convenience stores, 
wholesalers, and consumer-packaged goods companies throughout the 
United States and Canada. AHT's pursuit of innovation has led it 
continuously to develop and market cutting-edge technology. Its 
philosophy focuses on sustainability, energy efficiency, innovation, 
and customer benefit. AHT's products, as is reflected by their use of 
propane as a refrigerant, are among the most energy efficient and 
environmentally friendly in the world.
    Commercial refrigeration equipment, such as AHT's, will soon be 
subject to a new regulatory regime. This includes new test procedures 
\4\ and efficiency standards.\5\ The new procedures will apply to 
representations of energy efficiency or use made on and after March 28, 
2017. The new standards will apply to products manufactured on or after 
March 27, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Id. Part 431, Subpart C, Appendix B, as adopted, 79 FR 22277 
(April 21, 2014).
    \5\ Id. Sec.  431.66, as adopted, 79 FR 17725 (March 28, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In part because of their advanced design and features, many AHT 
commercial refrigerators and freezers cannot be fairly evaluated by 
DOE's mandated testing protocols. First, because of their implicit 
assumptions, it is not clear which of the DOE tests should be applied 
to the AHT appliances. Second, any of the DOE tests would overstate the 
amount of energy used by the AHT appliances. Accordingly, a waiver of 
those test requirements is necessary.

I. BASIC MODELS FOR WHICH A WAIVER IS REQUESTED

    The basic models for which a waiver is requested are set forth in 
Appendix I. These models are all display merchandisers with transparent 
doors. They are distributed in commerce under the AHT brand name.

II. NEED FOR THE REQUESTED WAIVER

    As noted, the DOE test procedures will take effect on March 28, 
2017. It is not clear which DOE test procedure should apply to AHT's 
advanced models, and all would grossly overstate the energy used by 
these models. There are two critical features of the AHT models that 
raise issues under the forthcoming testing procedure.

A. The AHT Appliances Are Multi-Mode.

    The AHT appliances for which we seek a waiver are all multi-mode 
models; they have three modes of operation among which the user can 
choose merely by turning a switch. In one mode, the units operate as an 
ice cream freezer. In another mode, they operate as a regular 
commercial freezer. In yet another mode, they operate as a commercial 
refrigerator. The advantage to a user of having a single appliance that 
can operate in three different modes

[[Page 24335]]

is obvious. And if a retail operator can purchase one appliance that 
can operate in three modes, rather than having to buy multiple 
appliances to meet the same needs, there are sustainability benefits as 
well. The problem is that the DOE rules implicitly assume that an 
appliance is exclusively an ice cream freezer, exclusively a standard 
commercial freezer, or exclusively a commercial refrigerator.\6\ And 
the DOE rules mandate different testing protocols for an ice cream 
freezer than they do for a standard commercial freezer or a commercial 
refrigerator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id. Sec.  431.66.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE testing rules often require that products be tested in their 
default configuration, or in the typical configuration. In the case of 
the AHT multi-mode appliances however, there isn't a ``default'' 
configuration or one ``typical'' configuration. The machines are 
designed to be easily and equally usable in all three modes. DOE 
precedent also suggests that when there is no default or typical mode 
for testing purposes, products with multiple configurations should be 
tested in the most energy consumptive mode. In this case, that would 
mean that AHT should test its products in the ice cream freezer mode 
and treat them as such for regulatory purposes.
    Accordingly, AHT asks for a ``waiver'' to be allowed to do 
precisely that.
    The only obvious alternative to testing in the most energy 
consumptive mode would be to require testing in all three modes. But 
such a requirement would be unique, burdensome, and inconsistent with 
the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), which requires that the 
test procedures ``shall be reasonably designed'' and ``shall not be 
unduly burdensome to conduct.'' \7\ Moreover, in this situation it is 
not clear how one would evaluate whether an appliance passed a multiple 
test regime, particularly since testing the appliances as ice cream 
freezers would require using total display area (TDA) as the 
normalizing metric, while testing them in the other modes would require 
using volume as a normalizing metric. Such a testing regime would be 
both confusing and burdensome.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, testing these appliances as ice cream freezers makes most 
sense because DOE has determined that TDA is the best metric for 
display equipment with transparent doors, and is moving increasingly in 
that direction in its testing protocols. As DOE has concluded, ``where 
the function is to display merchandise for sale, TDA best quantifies 
the ability of a piece of equipment to perform that function.'' \8\ 
That is surely true here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 79 FR 17725, 17741 (March 28, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The AHT Appliances Do Not Have a Typical Defrosting Cycle.

    The AHT appliances are innovative, and perhaps unique, in one other 
respect: Their cooling coils are built into the body of the units. This 
means the cooling coils are not exposed to the air and do not get 
covered with frost. This also means the coils do not need to be 
defrosted. The DOE test procedure understandably assumes that 
commercial refrigerators and freezers have cooling or evaporator coils 
that need to be defrosted for the equipment to function effectively. 
Indeed, the Technical Support Document for the test procedure 
essentially defines ``defrosting'' to mean melting ice from evaporator 
coils:

As the air in the refrigerated space is cooled, water vapor condenses 
on the surface of the evaporator coil. . . . There are several methods 
available for defrosting the evaporator coil . . .\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ DOE, Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program 
for Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment; 
Commercial Refrigeration Equipment (Feb. 2014), Sec.  3.3.1.11 
(Defrost Cycle; Defrost Mechanism).

    In addition, the ASHRAE test procedure mandated by the DOE 
regulations provides that the defrost adequacy assurance test ``shall 
verify that any defrost setting and arrangement is adequate to melt all 
frost and ice from coils and flues and drain it out of the 
refrigerator.'' \10\ Based on the assumption that all refrigerators and 
freezers that have evaporator coils from which frost must be melted 
regularly in order to function, the test procedure calls for starting 
testing with a full defrost cycle, and may require additional defrost 
cycles in a 24-hour period before the test is complete (depending on 
the expected operation of the model).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, ``Method of Testing 
Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,'' Sec.  7.8 (Defrost Adequacy 
Assurance). ASHRAE 72-2005 is incorporated by reference in the DOE 
test procedure. 10 CFR 431.63(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AHT appliances, however, have no need to defrost their coils. 
Rather, small amounts of frost can build up on the inner walls of the 
cabinet when the appliances are in a freezer mode. But this is a 
strictly esthetic matter that is easily resolved. Thus, rather than 
running one or more defrosting cycles a day to keep the machines 
operating efficiently, AHT appliances have a defrost (in the generic 
sense rather than as defined by DOE/ASHRAE) function that operates just 
once per week to keep the machines looking good.\11\ As a result, the 
test procedure, which provides for at least one full defrost cycle in a 
24-hour period is not appropriate for these models. It would overstate 
the energy usage from the defrosting function by at least a factor of 
seven.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ We also note that AHT appliances have a manual override, 
such that a user could activate the defrost cycle a second time in 
any one week period. But the default automatic setting, and we 
expect the typical use, is one defrost cycle per week.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, AHT asks for a waiver to test its appliances with the 
defrost cycle activated in a way that reflects the actual operation of 
the units. To this end, AHT proposes to test the appliances in two 
phases. Phase one shall be a 24-hour test according to ASHRAE 72 
including eight hours of door openings but without defrost. The second 
phase should be a separate measurement of the energy used during the 
defrost cycle. One-seventh of the measured energy in phase two should 
be added to the energy measured in phase one. This approach would 
translate the once-a-week defrost cycle into an average daily energy 
usage factor.

III. PROPOSED ALTERNATE TEST PROCEDURE

    In line with the waivers outlined above, AHT proposes the following 
alternate test procedure to evaluate the performance of the basic 
models listed in Appendix I of this petition and application.
    Effective March 28, 2017, AHT shall be required to test the 
performance of the basic models listed in Appendix I according to the 
test procedures for commercial refrigeration equipment prescribed by 
DOE at 10 CFR Part 431, Subpart C, Appendix B, except as follows.
    The basic models shall be tested and rated as ice cream freezers 
(Integrated Average Temperature of -15[deg]F +/-2.0[deg]F and use of 
TDA).
    The basic models shall be subject to the following testing instead 
of the corresponding defrost testing in the test procedure.
    The first part shall be a 24-hour test starting in steady state 
conditions and including eight hours of door opening (according ASHRAE 
Standard 72). The energy consumed in this test shall be recorded, ET1.
    The second part shall be a defrost cycle test starting after steady 
state conditions are established. The defrost cycle is initiated and 
terminates after the defrost cycle is complete. The energy consumed 
during this defrost

[[Page 24336]]

cycle, ET2, and the duration of the defrost cycle, tDI, shall be 
recorded.
    Based on the measured energy consumption in these two tests, the 
daily energy consumption (DEC) in kWh shall be calculated as
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY17.007

Where:

DEC = Daily Energy Consumption in kilowatt-hours (kWh);
ET1 = energy expended during the first part of the test, in kWh;
ET2 = energy expended during the second part of the test, in kWh;
tNDI = normalized length of defrosting time per day, in minutes;
tDI = length of time of one defrosting cycle, in minutes;
7 = conversion factor of days per week;
1440 = conversion factor to adjust to a 24-hour period in minutes 
per day.

The waiver shall continue until DOE adopts an applicable amended test 
procedure.

IV. REQUEST FOR INTERIM WAIVER

    AHT also requests an interim waiver for its testing and rating of 
the basic models listed in Appendix I. Based on its merits, the 
petition for waiver is likely to be granted. Further, it is essential 
that an interim waiver be granted, as AHT plans to distribute units of 
the models that would be affected by the DOE rule as otherwise 
applicable on and after the March 28, 2017, compliance date. Without 
waiver relief, AHT will be at a competitive disadvantage in the market 
for these important products and would suffer economic hardship. AHT 
would be subject to requirements that clearly should not apply to such 
products.

V. OTHER MANUFACTURERS

    A list of manufacturers of all other basic models distributed in 
commerce in the United States and known to AHT to incorporate overall 
design characteristic(s) similar to those found in the basic model(s) 
that are the subject of the petition is set forth in Appendix II.
* * * * *
    AHT requests expedited treatment of the Petition and Application.

    Respectfully submitted,

    Scott Blake Harris,
    John A. Hodges,

    Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP, 1919 M Street NW., Washington, 
DC 20036, (202) 730-1313.

    Counsel to AHT Cooling Systems GmbH and AHT Cooling Systems USA 
Inc.

October 25, 2016.

Appendix I

    The waiver and interim waiver requested herein should apply to 
testing and rating of the following basic models that are 
manufactured by AHT:

SYDNEY [supcaret] *
MIAMI [supcaret] *
PARIS [supcaret] *
MANHATTAN [supcaret] *
MALTA [supcaret] *
IBIZA [supcaret] *

    The models use the following model number layout:

SYDNEY, MIAMI, etc.--Represent the name of the model platform.
([supcaret])--Represents characters in the model number that 
correspond to the size.
(*)--Represents characters in the model number that correspond to 
marketing features.

The * and [supcaret] characters have no impact on the compartment 
function, product class, or test method.

Appendix II

    The following are manufacturers of all other basic models 
distributed in commerce in the United States and known to AHT to 
incorporate overall design characteristic(s) similar to those found 
in the basic model(s) that are the subject of the petition for 
waiver.

AMF Sales & Associates (importing LUCKDR)
ARNEG USA
Avanti Products LLC
Beverage Air
Dellfrio (importing Liebherr cabinets)
Electrolux Home Products
Excellence
Fogel de Centroamerica S.A.
Foshan City Shunde District Sansheng
Electrical Manufacture Co., Ltd.

Hillphoenix
Hussmann
Innovative DisplayWorks Inc.
Jiangsu Baixue Electric Appliances Co., Ltd.
Metalfrio Solutions Mexico S.A.
Mimet S.A.
Minus Forty Technologies Corp.
MTL Cool
Novum USA
Ojeda USA
Panasonic
PREMIERE Corporation
Sanden Vendo
Silver King
Stajac Industries
Thermell Manufacturing
True Manufacturing Co.
Turbo-Air
Vestfrost Solutions

[FR Doc. 2017-10865 Filed 5-25-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P