[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12726-12734]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05932]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Case No. 2017-011]


Notice of Petition for Waiver of Big Ass Solutions (BAS) From the 
Department of Energy Ceiling Fan Test Procedure, and Grating of Interim 
Waiver

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

ACTION: Notice of petition for waiver, notice of grant of an interim 
waiver, and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt of and publishes a petition for 
waiver from Big Ass Solutions (BAS) seeking an exemption from specified 
portions of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) test procedure for 
determining the efficiency of ceiling fans under appendix U (appendix 
U). BAS seeks to use an alternate test procedure to address issues 
involved in testing certain basic models identified in its petition. 
According to BAS, testing at low speed for the low-speed small-diameter 
ceiling fan basic models identified in the petition, may cause BAS 
undue hardship in meeting the stability requirements contained in

[[Page 12727]]

appendix U. Consequently, BAS recommended relaxing the low speed 
stability criteria from DOE's requirement of 5 percent to 10 percent. 
This notice also grants BAS an interim waiver from the DOE's ceiling 
fan test procedure for its specified basic models, subject to use of 
the alternative test procedure as set forth in this notice. DOE 
solicits comments, data, and information concerning BAS's petition and 
its suggested alternate test procedure.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information with respect to 
the BAS petition until April 23, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by case number ``2017-
011'', and Docket number ``EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0049,'' 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. 2017-011] 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: Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of Energy, 
Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, Petition for Waiver Case 
No. 2017-011, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. 
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, Room 6055, Washington, DC 20024. Please submit one 
signed original paper copy.
    Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, 
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for 
review at http://www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are 
listed in the http://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.
    The docket Web page can be found at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0049. The docket Web page will 
contain simple instruction on how to access all documents, including 
public comments, in the docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lucy deButts, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence 
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Email: 
[email protected].
    Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, Mail Stop GC-33, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue 
SW, Washington, DC 20585-0103. E-mail: [email protected]. 
Telephone 202-586-7796.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Authority

    Title III, Part B \1\ of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 
1975 (EPCA), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309, as codified) 
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other 
Than Automobiles, a program that includes ceiling fans that are the 
subject of this notice.\2\ Part B includes definitions, test 
procedures, labeling provisions, energy conservation standards, and the 
authority to require information and reports from manufacturers. 
Further, Part B authorizes the Secretary of Energy to prescribe test 
procedures that are reasonably designed to produce results measuring 
energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated operating costs during a 
representative average use cycle or period of use, and that are not 
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test procedure 
for ceiling fans is contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U 
(referred to in this notice as ``appendix U'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was re-designated Part A.
    \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 430.27 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 product 
when: The basic model for which the petition for waiver was submitted 
contains one or more design characteristics that (1) prevent testing 
according to the prescribed test procedure, or (2) cause the prescribed 
test procedure to evaluate the basic model in a manner so 
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to 
provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1). A 
petitioner must include in its petition any alternate test procedures 
known to the petitioner to evaluate the basic model in a manner 
representative of its energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 
430.27(b)(1)(iii).
    DOE may grant a waiver subject to conditions, including adherence 
to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 430.27(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 430.27(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 430.27(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 test procedure that addresses the 
issues presented in the waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(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 
430.27(h)(2).

II. Petition for Waiver of Test Procedure and Application for Interim 
Waiver

    On June 14, 2017, BAS filed a petition for waiver and an 
application for interim waiver from the test procedure applicable to 
ceiling fans set forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U. 
According to BAS, testing at low speed for the basic models listed in 
the petition,\3\ may cause BAS undue hardship in meeting the 
requirements of the stability requirements contained in appendix U. 
Consequently, in its petition, BAS offered two alternate test 
procedures for determining the stability criteria for testing low-speed 
small-diameter ceiling fans at low speed: (1) BAS's preferred method, 
which would require BAS to employ a stability criteria using airflow 
instead of air velocity measurements, and (2) BAS's alternate method, 
which would require relaxing the low speed stability criteria from 
DOE's requirement of 5 percent to 10 percent. BAS initially stated that 
this second method is not preferred because it could add significant 
variability to the

[[Page 12728]]

calculated airflow on low speed. BAS also requests an interim waiver 
from the existing DOE test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The specific basic models for which the petition applies are 
ceiling fan basic models Isis F-IS2-0601S4 and Isis F-IS2-0601. 
These basic model names were provided by BAS in its June 2017 
petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, by email dated December 6, 2017, BAS withdrew their 
preferred method for modifying the stability criteria from 
consideration. Instead, BAS requested that DOE consider their 
alternative method as their recommendation for the alternate test 
procedure.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A copy of the email is available at regulations.gov, under 
docket number EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0049.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE understands that the basic models identified in BAS's petition 
cannot be tested under the DOE test procedure because at the lower 
operating speeds for these fans, air speed is so low that the 
acceptable variance under the stability criteria (often less than 2 
feet per minute) falls below the required accuracies for air velocity 
sensors in section 3.2 of the DOE test procedure. DOE also understands 
that absent an interim waiver, BAS's products cannot be tested and 
rated according to the DOE test procedure, and BAS is unable to 
advertise performance data for these models. DOE has reviewed the 
alternate procedure suggested by BAS and concludes that relaxing the 
stability criteria for low speed will allow for the accurate 
measurement of efficiency of these products, while alleviating the 
testing problems associated with BAS's implementation of ceiling fan 
testing for the basic models specified in its petition. Further 
discussion on DOE's review of the alternate test procedure are provided 
in section IV of this notice. Consequently, DOE has determined that 
BAS's petition for waiver will likely be granted. Furthermore, DOE has 
determined that it is desirable for public policy reasons to grant BAS 
immediate relief pending a determination of the petition for waiver.

III. Summary of Grant of an Interim Waiver

    DOE has reviewed the manufacturer specifications and test data 
provided by BAS and agrees that it demonstrates that the basic models 
specified in the petition cannot be tested under the DOE test procedure 
because, when testing the basic models at low speed, the air speed is 
so low that the acceptable variance under the stability criteria (often 
less than 2 feet per minute) falls below the required accuracies for 
air velocity sensors in section 3.2 of the DOE test procedure. DOE 
compared BAS's test data to DOE's own test data from previous 
rulemakings and observed that the air velocities at low speed for the 
new BAS basic models are much lower than the test data previously 
evaluated. DOE's understanding is that the primary purpose of low speed 
for the basic models included in BAS's petition is to mix air in the 
room. Achieving the desired mixing effect requires much lower airflow 
that creates highly variable airflow patterns in the room. These 
atypically variable airflow patterns make it hard for the ceiling fan 
to achieve the stability criteria required by the DOE test procedure.
    For the reasons stated above, DOE is granting BAS's application for 
interim waiver from testing for its specified ceiling fan basic models. 
The substance of DOE's Interim Waiver Order is summarized.
    BAS is required to use the alternate test procedure set forth in 
this notice to test and rate the ceiling fan basic models listed in the 
petition (Isis F-IS2-0601S4, Isis F-IS2-0601, Isis F-IS2-0401L8S4, Isis 
F-IS2-0401L8, Isis F-IS2-0401I06L8S4, Isis F-IS2-0401I06L8, Isis F-IS2-
0501L8S4 and Isis F-IS2-0501L8). BAS is permitted to make 
representations about the ceiling fan efficiency of these basic models 
for compliance, marketing, or other purposes to the extent that such 
products have been tested in accordance with the provisions set forth 
in the alternate test procedure and such representations fairly 
disclose the results of such testing in accordance with 10 CFR 429.32.
    DOE makes decisions on waivers and interim waivers for only those 
basic models specifically set out in the petition, not future models 
that may be manufactured by the petitioner. BAS may request that DOE 
extend the scope of a waiver or an interim waiver to include additional 
basic models employing the same technology as the basic model(s) set 
forth in the original petition consistent with 10 CFR 430.27(g). In 
addition, DOE notes that granting of an interim waiver or waiver does 
not release a petitioner from the certification requirements set forth 
at 10 CFR part 429. See also 10 CFR 430.27(a) and (i).
    The interim waiver shall remain in effect consistent with the 
provisions of 10 CFR 430.27(h). Furthermore, this interim waiver is 
conditioned upon the presumed validity of statements, representations, 
and documents provided by the petitioner. DOE may rescind or modify a 
waiver or interim waiver at any time upon a determination that the 
factual basis underlying the petition for waiver or interim waiver is 
incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the alternate 
test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic model's true energy 
consumption characteristics. See 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Similarly, BAS 
may request that DOE rescind or modify a waiver or interim waiver if 
BAS discovers an error or determines that the waiver is no longer 
necessary or for other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).

IV. Alternate Test Procedure

    Under EPCA, manufacturers may not make representations with respect 
to the energy use or efficiency of a covered product unless the basic 
model has been tested in accordance with the applicable DOE test 
procedure and the representation fairly discloses the results of such 
testing. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)) Consistent representations are important 
for manufacturers to use in making representations about the energy 
efficiency of their products and to demonstrate compliance with 
applicable DOE energy conservation standards. Pursuant to the 
regulations applicable to waivers from applicable test procedures at 10 
CFR 430.27, DOE will consider setting an alternate test procedure for 
BAS in a subsequent Decision and Order.
    In its petition, BAS proposes that the basic models listed in the 
petition be tested according to the test procedure for ceiling fans 
prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix U, except 
that the stability criteria at low speed for low-speed small-diameter 
ceiling fans be modified to either of the recommended alternate test 
procedures as follows:
    (1) Replace the stability criteria to allow a percentage variation 
around airflow, instead of average air velocity, between two 
consecutive tests. Therefore, the suggested test procedure should 
instead state: ``In a successive set of measurements, the lower 
recorded value for airflow multiplied by 1.03 is greater than or equal 
to the higher recorded value for airflow, or these airflow measurements 
vary less than 15 cfm'' (preferred), OR
    (2) Relax the current low speed stability criteria tolerances such 
that the average air velocity measurements for each sensor varies by 
less than 10 percent, instead of 5 percent, compared to the average air 
velocity measured for the same sensor in a successive set of air 
velocity measurements (alternative).
    However, by email dated December 6, 2017, BAS withdrew their 
preferred method for modifying the stability criteria. Instead, BAS 
requested that DOE consider their alternative method as their 
recommendation for the alternate test procedure.

[[Page 12729]]

    DOE reviewed both alternate test procedures and preliminarily 
concluded that the BAS alternate test procedure of applying stability 
criteria to airflow instead of air velocity could allow a greater 
variation in airflow and efficiency results between multiple tests of 
the same fan. Under the current DOE test procedure, air velocity is 
measured at each sensor along the sensor arm, and airflow is calculated 
based on these measurements. The air velocity measurements indicate 
both the amount and location of air provided by the fan within the 
effective area (i.e., the air profile). DOE found that large variations 
in air profile often indicate test room instability (e.g., localized 
temperature gradients that effect airflow). Applying stability criteria 
to the air velocity measurements ensures that successive sets of 
measurements result in similar air profiles, which is indicative of 
test room stability. On the other hand, DOE observed that stability 
criteria applied only to airflow could be met with large variations in 
air profile (i.e., at unstable test room conditions). This allows for 
airflow, and in turn fan efficiency, to vary significantly between 
multiple tests of the same fan because stable airflow can be achieved 
at varied test room conditions.
    DOE also evaluated whether increased tolerances for the air 
velocity stability criteria for low speed tests could be used to reduce 
test burden without materially affecting the results of the test 
procedure. Specifically, DOE used test data from the previous 
rulemaking to compare the airflow and efficiency results using the 
current test procedure and the alternate test procedure. DOE found that 
increasing the stability criteria to 10 percent for low speed would 
allow more fans to meet the stability criteria and reduce the number of 
successive measurements needed to do so without materially changing the 
efficiency results of the test procedure. Under this approach, the 
section of the test procedure would read as follows:

3.3.2 Airflow and Power Consumption Testing Procedure

    Measure the airflow (CFM) and power consumption (W) for HSSD 
ceiling fans until stable measurements are achieved, measuring at high 
speed only. Measure the airflow and power consumption for LSSD ceiling 
fans until stable measurements are achieved, measuring first at low 
speed and then at high speed. Airflow and power consumption 
measurements are considered stable for high speed if:
    (1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by 
less than 5% compared to the average air velocity measured for that 
same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and
    (2) Average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a 
successive set of power consumption measurements.
    Airflow and power consumption measurements are considered stable 
for low speed if:
    (1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by 
less than 10% compared to the average air velocity measured for that 
same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and
    (2) Average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a 
successive set of power consumption measurements.

V. Summary and Request for Comments

    Through this notice, DOE announces receipt of BAS's petition for 
waiver from the DOE test procedure for certain basic models of BAS 
ceiling fans, and grants BAS an interim waiver from the test procedure 
for the ceiling fan basic models listed in BAS's petition. DOE is 
publishing BAS's petition for waiver pursuant to 10 CFR 
439.27(b)(1)(iv). BAS provided confidential performance information 
that is not included in this notice.
    DOE solicits comments from interested parties on all aspects of the 
petition, including the alternate test procedures offered by the 
petitioner. DOE seeks comment on whether either of BAS' alternative 
test procedures would more accurately or fully comply with the EPCA 
test procedure requirements that a test procedure measure the energy 
use or energy efficiency of ceiling fans during a representative use 
cycle or period of use, and not be unduly burdensome to conduct. DOE 
seeks comment on whether the alternate test procedure of applying 
stability criteria to airflow instead of air velocity a greater 
variation in airflow and efficiency results between multiple tests of 
the same fan. DOE also seeks comment on whether use of the test method 
specified in this interim waiver would result in variability in the 
calculated airflow, and if so, to what extent.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(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 Taylor Sawyer 
<[email protected]>, Big Ass Solutions, 2348 Innovation 
Drive, Lexington, KY 40511. All comment submissions to DOE must include 
the Case Number 2017-011 for this proceeding. Submit electronic 
comments in 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: One copy of the document including 
all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the 
document with 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 March 16, 2018.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy.
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) [email protected]">629-6203/[email protected]
June 14, 2017

Via Electronic Mail

Submitted To:
Mr. John Cymbalsky
Ms. Ashley Armstrong
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Building Technologies Program
EE-2J U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC, 20585
[email protected]

Submitted by:
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) [email protected]">629-6203/[email protected]

Re: Petition to waive select provisions under Test Procedures for 
Ceiling Fans

Dear Mr. Cymbalsky and Ms. Armstrong,
    Big Ass Solutions respectfully requests a waiver of one element in 
the Test Procedures for Ceiling Fans, finalized by DOE on July 25, 
2016. The compliance date for representations made with respect to the 
energy use or efficiency of ceiling fans under this final rule was 
January 23, 2017. The docket number is EERE-2013-BT-TP-0050.
    It has come to our attention that the stability requirements 
contained in the

[[Page 12730]]

final test procedure, when tested at low speed for certain small-
diameter ceiling fan models, may cause Big Ass Solutions undue hardship 
in meeting the requirements of the test procedure.

Details

    The final rule includes a specification for the stability criteria 
of the sensors used on small-diameter ceiling fans to evaluate airflow 
and power consumption:
    Airflow and power consumption measurements are considered stable 
if: (1) the average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by 
less than 5% compared to the average air velocity measured for that 
same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and (2) 
average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a successive set of 
power consumption measurements.
    When Big Ass Solutions initiated testing, we discovered that we are 
unable to meet this stability requirement at the lower operating speeds 
of a certain fan containing design characteristics that prevent testing 
per the current DOE test procedures. The average air speed is so low, 
that the acceptable variance under the stability criteria above is 
often less than 2 feet per minute, which falls below the required 
accuracies for airflow sensors that is stated in section 3.2 of the 
Final Rule. The measured velocity at this point also falls below the 
calibrated ranges of our two models of airflow sensors, (~30-1969 fpm) 
and (~30-196 fpm), which are in accordance with the requirements of the 
DOE test method and similar to sensors used at other small-diameter fan 
test labs. We have run several different tests and contracted an 
independent test lab to conduct additional testing, and all testing 
appears to have the same issue with stability at very low airspeeds, 
even with the use of two sets of sensors with different calibrated 
ranges.
    An example test for stability we have conducted is as follows:

                                                                DOE Test Method for LSSD
                                                              [Fans Stability Verification]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Average air velocity (fpm)
         Sensor position                Sensor      --------------------------------     Average           a/b        Stability? 0.95 <=    Range (fpm)
                                                           1a              1b                                           (a/b)  <=1.05
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................  BAF1114                     13.27           14.55           13.91            0.91  Yes................            1.39
2...............................  BAF1119                     13.29           14.74           14.02            0.90  Yes................            1.40
3...............................  BAF1115                     13.35           13.44           13.39            0.99  Yes................            1.34
4...............................  BAF1122                     13.27           13.56           13.41            0.98  Yes................            1.34
5...............................  BAF1118                     15.42           15.80           15.61            0.98  Yes................            1.56
6...............................  BAF1110                     15.02           14.01           14.52            1.07  Yes................            1.45
7...............................  BAF1113                     13.10           13.24           13.17            0.99  Yes................            1.32
8...............................  BAF1121                     11.17           14.71           12.94            0.76  No.................            1.29
9...............................  BAF1111                      7.77           12.52           10.15            0.62  No.................            1.01
10..............................  BAF1120                     16.12           19.57           17.85            0.82  No.................            1.78
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While we are moving forward with testing on other BAS products not 
affected by this issue, the potential for future innovative fan 
products with blade spans under 7ft to become burdened by this may be 
substantial.
    Big Ass Solutions currently manufactures a series of affected 
small-diameter HVLS fans with a blade spans of 6ft and markets them as 
Isis model Big Ass Fans. The two basic model Big Ass Fans found below, 
have physical and mechanical characteristics that meet the criteria for 
LSSD ceiling fan blade thickness and tip speed. Big Ass Solutions has 
included data detailing the exactness of this model's LSSD 
classification eligibility.

Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Direct Mount; Plug 
Winglets--F-IS2-0401L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0401L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4'6'', 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--
F-IS2-0401I06L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4'6'', 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0401I06L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--5ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--F-
IS2-0501L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--5ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0501L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--6ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--F-
IS2-0601S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--6ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0601
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23MR18.014


[[Page 12731]]



Other affected parties

    This requirement does not affect large-diameter fans or high speed 
small-diameter ceiling fans. Furthermore, this problem consistently 
appears only at our lower operating speeds. Because our lowest 
operating speed is designed for mixing of air, without causing a draft, 
in the winter and the typical 3 speed fan is designed to provide 
cooling at the lowest speed, our fan produces a much lower airspeed on 
low than the average fan on the market.
    While there is only a small number of known manufacturers who have 
had their comments to the DOE on this matter published, we expect 
additional fan manufacturers with products where the speed of the air 
exiting the fan is not intended to provide cooling are likely to 
encounter this issue in their respective tests. The product class that 
is most likely to encounter this issue is the ``LSSD'' fan class. The 
manufacturers of LSSD fans include, but are not limited to:

Aertron Pty., Ltd.
Air Comfort Products
Air Cool Industrial
American-De Rosa Lamparts DBA Luminance
Artisan Industrial Company, Ltd. China
Canarm, Ltd.
Casablanca Fan Company
Champ-Ray Industrial Company, Ltd
Chien Luen Industries (Zhongshan), Ltd.
Collins Company, Ltd.
Craftmade
Electric
Emerson Ceiling Fans
Fanim Industries
Fanimation
Generation Brands
Halsey Enterprise Company, Ltd.
Hong Kong China Electric Manufacture Company, Ltd.
Hunter Fan Company
J & P Manufacturing
Kendal Lighting Inc.
Kichler Lighting
King of Fans
Landmark Enterprise, Inc.
Litex Industries Luminance
Madison Avenue Lighting & Fan Company
Maxim Lighting International, Inc.
Minka Group
Modern Fan Company
Orient Electric
Pacific Coast Lighting, Inc.
Pan Air Electric Company, Ltd.
Progress Lighting
Quorum International
Regency Ceiling Fans
Royal Pacific
Savoy House Lighting
Shell Electric Manufacturing (H.K.) Company, Ltd.
Tai-Der Electric Manufacturer Company, Ltd.
The Modern Fan Company Inc.
Torch Lighting, Ltd.
Vaxcel International
Ventamatic, Ltd.
Westinghouse Lighting
YuYuan, Ltd.
Zhongshan Hongwei Motor Manufacturing Company
Zhongshan Weihe Electrical Appliances Company, Ltd.
Zhongshan Zhifa Electrical Appliances Company, Ltd.

What is the impact on Big Ass Solutions?

    Without a waiver or modification of the stability requirement for 
low speed air movement, the BAS fan models named above cannot be tested 
per federal standards.
    Thus, Big Ass Solutions' current products are unable to pass the 
stability requirements at low speeds and in these cases, the entirety 
of the product test will be considered inadequate under the DOE 
rulemaking. Big Ass Solutions received from DOE a 180 day extension on 
Test Procedure compliance, so our compliance date is July 22, 2017. For 
our products unable to satisfy the DOE test procedures, BAS will not be 
able to advertise performance data for these products into the US 
market after July 22nd.

Suggested correction/alternative procedure

    Big Ass Solutions recommends modifying the stability requirement 
with a process of comparing the airflow between two consecutive tests. 
This would replace the comparison of measured air speed on a senor by 
sensor basis which is problematic for the turbulent airflow generated 
by ceiling fans.
    For example, in two successive tests Sensor 3 may show a reduction 
in airflow whereas Sensor 4 registers an increase, but the total 
airflow is the same between the tests. Instead of achieving stability 
based on average air velocity per each individual sensor position, Big 
Ass Solutions recommends basing the stability criteria on airflow. For 
example, on the high speed test the lower airflow from two consecutive 
test runs shall be within 3% of the higher aiflow.
    BAS proposes the aforementioned basic models be tested according to 
the test procedure prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR 430, Subpart B, Appendix 
U, but using the following alternative definition for stability:
    ``In a successive set of measurements, the lower recorded value for 
airflow multiplied by 1.03 is greater than or equal to the higher 
recorded value for airflow, or these airflow measurements vary less 
than 15 cfm''
    Alternatively, DOE could maintain the original methodology and 
simply relax the low speed stability requirement to 10%. However, this 
method is not preferred as it could add significant variability to the 
calculated airflow on low speed. An example of the relaxed low speed 
stability requirement is provided below:
    ``(1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies 
by less than 5% for high speed and 10% for low speed compared to the 
average air velocity measured for that same sensor''

Closing

    It is our sincere intent to comply with the new test requirements, 
and we appreciate DOE's efforts to consider input from Big Ass 
Solutions as part of their stakeholder engagement process. We also 
appreciate DOE's efforts so far to resolve this isolated but impactful 
difficulty in the final rule.
    Thank you for your consideration and we are available to answer any 
questions you may have.

Sincerely,
Taylor Sawyer
Government Affairs Director
    Big Ass Solutions

Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) [email protected]">629-6203/[email protected]

June 14, 2017

Via Electronic Mail

Submitted To:
Mr. John Cymbalsky
Ms. Ashley Armstrong
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
Building Technologies Program
EE-2J U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC, 20585
[email protected]

Submitted by:
Big Ass Solutions
2348 Innovation Drive
Lexington, KY 40511
Contact: Taylor Sawyer. (859) [email protected]">629-6203/[email protected]

Re: Petition to waive select provisions under Test Procedures for 
Ceiling Fans

Dear Mr. Cymbalsky and Ms. Armstrong,
    Big Ass Solutions respectfully requests an interim waiver of one

[[Page 12732]]

element in the Test Procedures for Ceiling Fans, finalized by DOE on 
July 25, 2016. The compliance date for representations made with 
respect to the energy use or efficiency of ceiling fans under this 
final rule was January 23, 2017. The docket number is EERE-2013-BT-TP-
0050.
    It has come to our attention that the stability requirements 
contained in the final test procedure, when tested at low speed for 
certain small-diameter ceiling fan models, may cause Big Ass Solutions 
undue hardship in meeting the requirements of the test procedure. 
Therefore, we request an interim waiver so that product testing can 
proceed and regular operations can continue as DOE considers our 
application for the permanent waiver.

Details

    The final rule includes a specification for the stability criteria 
of the sensors used on small-diameter ceiling fans to evaluate airflow 
and power consumption:
    Airflow and power consumption measurements are considered stable 
if: (1) the average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies by 
less than 5% compared to the average air velocity measured for that 
same sensor in a successive set of air velocity measurements, and (2) 
average power consumption varies by less than 1% in a successive set of 
power consumption measurements.
    When Big Ass Solutions initiated testing, we discovered that we are 
unable to meet this stability requirement at the lower operating speeds 
of a certain fan containing design characteristics that prevent testing 
per the current DOE test procedures. The average air speed is so low, 
that the acceptable variance under the stability criteria above is 
often less than 2 feet per minute, which falls below the required 
accuracies for airflow sensors that is stated in section 3.2 of the 
Final Rule. The measured velocity at this point also falls below the 
calibrated ranges of our two models of airflow sensors, (~30--1969 fpm) 
and (~30--196 fpm), which are in accordance with the requirements of 
the DOE test method and similar to sensors used at other small-diameter 
fan test labs. We have run several different tests and contracted an 
independent test lab to conduct additional testing, and all testing 
appears to have the same issue with stability at very low airspeeds, 
even with the use of two sets of sensors with different calibrated 
ranges.
    An example test for stability we have conducted is as follows:

                                                                Doe Test Method for LSSD
                                                              [Fans Stability Verification]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Average air velocity (fpm)                                      Stability?
             Sensor position                  Sensor     --------------------------------     Average           a/b        0.95<= (a/b)    Range  (fpm)
                                                                1a              1b                                            <=1.05
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.......................................         BAF1114           13.27           14.55           13.91            0.91             Yes            1.39
2.......................................         BAF1119           13.29           14.74           14.02            0.90             Yes            1.40
3.......................................         BAF1115           13.35           13.44           13.39            0.99             Yes            1.34
4.......................................         BAF1122           13.27           13.56           13.41            0.98             Yes            1.34
5.......................................         BAF1118           15.42           15.80           15.61            0.98             Yes            1.56
6.......................................         BAF1110           15.02           14.01           14.52            1.07             Yes            1.45
7.......................................         BAF1113           13.10           13.24           13.17            0.99             Yes            1.32
8.......................................         BAF1121           11.17           14.71           12.94            0.76              No            1.29
9.......................................         BAF1111            7.77           12.52           10.15            0.62              No            1.01
10......................................         BAF1120           16.12           19.57           17.85            0.82              No            1.78
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While we are moving forward with testing on other BAS products not 
affected by this issue, the potential for future innovative fan 
products with blade spans under 7ft to become burdened by this may be 
substantial.
    Big Ass Solutions currently manufactures a series of affected 
small-diameter HVLS fans with a blade spans of 6ft and markets them as 
Isis model Big Ass Fans. The two basic model Big Ass Fans found below, 
have physical and mechanical characteristics that meet the criteria for 
LSSD ceiling fan blade thickness and tip speed. Big Ass Solutions has 
included data detailing the exactness of this model's LSSD 
classification eligibility.

Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Direct Mount; Plug 
Winglets--F-IS2-0401L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0401L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4'6'', 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--
F-IS2-0401I06L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--4'6'', 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0401I06L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--5ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--F-
IS2-0501L8S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--5ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0501L8
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--6ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase; Plug Winglets--F-
IS2-0601S4
Isis, Commercial Fan Kit--6ft, 110-125 Volt/1 Phase--F-IS2-0601

[[Page 12733]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN23MR18.015

Other affected parties

    This requirement does not affect large-diameter fans or high speed 
small-diameter ceiling fans. Furthermore, this problem consistently 
appears only at our lower operating speeds. Because our lowest 
operating speed is designed for mixing of air, without causing a draft, 
in the winter and the typical 3 speed fan is designed to provide 
cooling at the lowest speed, our fan produces a much lower airspeed on 
low than the average fan on the market.
    While there is only a small number of known manufacturers who have 
had their comments to the DOE on this matter published, we expect 
additional fan manufacturers with products where the speed of the air 
exiting the fan is not intended to provide cooling are likely to 
encounter this issue in their respective tests. The product class that 
is most likely to encounter this issue is the ``LSSD'' fan class. The 
manufacturers of LSSD fans include, but are not limited to:

Aertron Pty., Ltd.
Air Comfort Products
Air Cool Industrial
American-De Rosa Lamparts DBA Luminance
Artisan Industrial Company, Ltd. China
Canarm, Ltd.
Casablanca Fan Company
Champ-Ray Industrial Company, Ltd
Chien Luen Industries (Zhongshan), Ltd.
Collins Company, Ltd.
Craftmade
Electric
Emerson Ceiling Fans
Fanim Industries
Fanimation
Generation Brands
Halsey Enterprise Company, Ltd.
Hong Kong China Electric Manufacture Company, Ltd.
Hunter Fan Company
J & P Manufacturing
Kendal Lighting Inc.
Kichler Lighting
King of Fans
Landmark Enterprise, Inc.
Litex Industries Luminance
Madison Avenue Lighting & Fan Company
Maxim Lighting International, Inc.
Minka Group
Modern Fan Company
Orient Electric
Pacific Coast Lighting, Inc.
Pan Air Electric Company, Ltd.
Progress Lighting
Quorum International
Regency Ceiling Fans
Royal Pacific
Savoy House Lighting
Shell Electric Manufacturing (H.K.) Company, Ltd.
Tai-Der Electric Manufacturer Company, Ltd.
The Modern Fan Company Inc.
Torch Lighting, Ltd.
Vaxcel International
Ventamatic, Ltd.
Westinghouse Lighting
YuYuan, Ltd.
Zhongshan Hongwei Motor Manufacturing Company
Zhongshan Weihe Electrical Appliances Company, Ltd.
Zhongshan Zhifa Electrical Appliances Company, Ltd.

What is the impact on Big Ass Solutions?

    Without an interim waiver or modification of the stability 
requirement for low speed air movement, the BAS fan models named above 
cannot be tested per federal standards.
    Thus, Big Ass Solutions' current products are unable to pass the 
stability requirements at low speeds and in these cases, the entirety 
of the product test will be considered inadequate under the DOE 
rulemaking. Big Ass Solutions received from DOE a 180 day extension on 
Test Procedure compliance, so our compliance date is July 22, 2017. For 
our products unable to satisfy the DOE test procedures, BAS will not be 
able to advertise performance data for these products into the US 
market after July 22nd.

Suggested correction/alternative procedure

    Big Ass Solutions recommends modifying the stability requirement 
with a process of comparing the airflow between two consecutive tests. 
This would replace the comparison of measured air speed on a senor by 
sensor basis which is problematic for the turbulent airflow generated 
by ceiling fans.
    For example, in two successive tests Sensor 3 may show a reduction 
in airflow whereas Sensor 4 registers an increase, but the total 
airflow is the same between the tests. Instead of achieving stability 
based on average air velocity per each individual sensor position, Big 
Ass Solutions recommends basing the stability criteria on airflow. For 
example, on the high speed test the lower airflow from two consecutive 
test runs shall be within 3% of the higher aiflow.
    BAS proposes the aforementioned basic models be tested according to 
the test procedure prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR 430, Subpart B, Appendix 
U, but using the following alternative definition for stability:
    ``In a successive set of measurements, the lower recorded value for 
airflow multiplied by 1.03 is greater than or equal to the higher 
recorded value for airflow, or these airflow measurements vary less 
than 15 cfm''
    Alternatively, DOE could maintain the original methodology and 
simply relax the low speed stability requirement to 10%. However, this 
method is not preferred as it could add significant variability to the 
calculated airflow on low speed. An example of the

[[Page 12734]]

relaxed low speed stability requirement is provided below:
    ``(1) The average air velocity for all axes for each sensor varies 
by less than 5% for high speed and 10% for low speed compared to the 
average air velocity measured for that same sensor''

Closing

    It is our sincere intent to comply with the new test requirements, 
and we appreciate DOE's efforts to consider input from Big Ass 
Solutions as part of their stakeholder engagement process. We also 
appreciate DOE's efforts so far to resolve this isolated but impactful 
difficulty in the final rule.
    Thank you for your consideration and we are available to answer any 
questions you may have.

Sincerely,

Taylor Sawyer

Government Affairs Director
Big Ass Solutions

[FR Doc. 2018-05932 Filed 3-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6450-01-P