[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 130 (Monday, July 8, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32328-32338]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14461]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 431

[EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003]
RIN 1904-AE42


Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for 
Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-Split Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps

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

ACTION: Notice of data availability and request for information.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is publishing an analysis 
of the energy savings potential of amended industry consensus standards 
for certain classes of variable refrigerant flow multi-split air 
conditioners and heat pumps (VRFs), which are a type of commercial and 
industrial equipment. The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, 
as amended (EPCA), requires DOE to evaluate and assess whether there is 
a need to update its energy conservation standards following changes to 
the relevant industry consensus standards in the American Society of 
Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 
90.1 (ASHRAE Standard 90.1), Additionally under EPCA, DOE must review 
its standards for this equipment at least once every six years and 
publish either a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) to propose new 
standards for VRFs or a notice of determination that the existing 
standards do not need to be amended. Accordingly, DOE is also 
initiating an effort to determine whether to amend the current energy 
conservation standards for classes of VRFs for which DOE has 
tentatively determined that the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 levels have not 
been updated to be more stringent than the current Federal standards. 
This document solicits information from the public to help DOE 
determine whether amended standards for VRFs would result in 
significant energy savings and whether such standards would be 
technologically feasible and economically justified. DOE welcomes 
written comments from the public on any subject within the scope of 
this document (including topics not raised in this document), as well 
as the submission of data and other relevant information.

DATES: Written comments and information are requested and will be 
accepted on or before August 22, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested 
persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2018-BT-
STD-0003, by any of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Email: [email protected]. Include the 
docket number EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003 in the subject line of the message.
    3. Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 
Energy Conservation Standards NODA and RFI for Certain Categories of 
Commercial Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment, 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.
    4. 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) 
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case 
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
    No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed 
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the 
rulemaking process, see section IV of this document (Public 
Participation).
    Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal 
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, 
is available for review at http://www.regulations.gov (search EERE-
2018-BT-STD-0003). 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: https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003. The docket web page contains 
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, 
in the docket. See section IV of this document, Public Participation, 
for information on how to submit comments through http://www.regulations.gov.

[[Page 32329]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Catherine Rivest, U.S. Department 
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building 
Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-7335. Email: 
[email protected].
    Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. 
Telephone: (202) 586-5827. Email: [email protected].
    For further information on how to submit a comment or review other 
public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment 
Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
    A. Authority
    B. Purpose of the Notice of Data Availability
    C. Rulemaking Background
II. Discussion of Changes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016
    A. Amendments to VRF Multi-Split System Standards in ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016
    B. Energy Savings Potential for Considered Equipment Classes
III. Consideration of More-Stringent Standards: Requested 
Information
    A. Rulemaking Process
    B. Request for Information and Comment
    C. Other Energy Conservation Standards Topics
    1. Market Failures
    2. Network Mode/``Smart'' Equipment
    3. Other
IV. Public Participation
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Introduction

A. Authority

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended 
(``EPCA''; 42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq.),\1\ established the Energy 
Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. 
Title III, Part C \2\ of EPCA, Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317, 
as codified), added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV, Sec.  441(a), 
established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial 
Equipment. This covered equipment includes small, large, and very large 
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, which 
includes variable refrigerant flow multi-split air conditioners and 
heat pumps (VRF multi-split systems),\3\ the subject of this document. 
(42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)-(D))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute 
as amended through America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018, 
Public Law 115-270 (Oct. 23, 2018).
    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
    \3\ Air-cooled, single-phase VRF multi-split air conditioners 
and heat pumps with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h are 
considered residential central air conditioners and heat pumps and 
are regulated under the energy conservation program for consumer 
products. 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendices M and M1 and 10 CFR 
part 430, subpart C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to EPCA, DOE's energy conservation program consists 
essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal 
energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement 
procedures. Relevant provisions of the Act specifically include 
definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 
6313), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 
6315), and the authority to require information and reports from 
manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316).
    Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered equipment 
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations 
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42 
U.S.C. 6316(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers 
of Federal preemption for particular State laws or regulations, in 
accordance with the procedures and other provisions set forth under 42 
U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D).
    In EPCA, Congress initially set mandatory energy conservation 
standards for certain types of commercial heating, air-conditioning, 
and water-heating equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)) Specifically, the 
statute sets standards for small, large, and very large commercial 
package air-conditioning and heating equipment, packaged terminal air 
conditioners (PTACs) and packaged terminal heat pumps (PTHPs), warm-air 
furnaces, packaged boilers, storage water heaters, instantaneous water 
heaters, and unfired hot water storage tanks. Id. In doing so, EPCA 
established Federal energy conservation standards at levels that 
generally corresponded to the levels in American Society of Heating, 
Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 90.1, 
Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, as 
in effect on October 24, 1992 (i.e., ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1989), for 
each type of covered equipment listed in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a).
    In acknowledgement of technological changes that yield energy 
efficiency benefits, Congress further directed DOE through EPCA to 
consider amending the existing Federal energy conservation standard for 
each type of equipment listed, each time ASHRAE amends Standard 90.1 
with respect to such equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)) When 
triggered in this manner, DOE must undertake and publish an analysis of 
the energy savings potential of amended energy efficiency standards, 
and amend the Federal standards to establish a uniform national 
standard at the minimum level specified in the amended ASHRAE Standard 
90.1, unless DOE determines that there is clear and convincing evidence 
to support a determination that a more-stringent standard level as a 
national standard would produce significant additional energy savings 
and be technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) If DOE decides to adopt as a national standard the 
minimum efficiency levels specified in the amended ASHRAE Standard 
90.1, DOE must establish such standard not later than 18 months after 
publication of the amended industry standard. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)) However, if DOE determines, supported by clear 
and convincing evidence, that a more-stringent uniform national 
standard would result in significant additional conservation of energy 
and is technologically feasible and economically justified, then DOE 
must establish such more-stringent uniform national standard not later 
than 30 months after publication of the amended ASHRAE Standard 
90.1.\4\ (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II) and (B))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In determining whether a more-stringent standard is 
economically justified, EPCA directs DOE to determine, after 
receiving views and comments from the public, whether the benefits 
of the proposed standard exceed the burdens of the proposed standard 
by, to the maximum extent practicable, considering the following:
    (1) The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and 
consumers of the products subject to the standard;
    (2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated 
average life of the product compared to any increases in the initial 
cost or maintenance expense;
    (3) The total projected amount of energy savings likely to 
result directly from the standard;
    (4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the 
products likely to result from the standard;
    (5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in 
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the 
standard;
    (6) The need for national energy conservation; and
    (7) Other factors the Secretary considers relevant.
    (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although EPCA does not explicitly define the term ``amended'' in 
the context of what type of revision to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 would 
trigger

[[Page 32330]]

DOE's obligation, DOE's longstanding interpretation has been that the 
statutory trigger is an amendment to the standard applicable to that 
equipment under ASHRAE Standard 90.1 that increases the energy 
efficiency level for that equipment. See 72 FR 10038, 10042 (March 7, 
2007). In other words, if the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 leaves the 
energy efficiency level unchanged (or lowers the energy efficiency 
level), as compared to the energy efficiency level specified by the 
uniform national standard adopted pursuant to EPCA, regardless of the 
other amendments made to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 requirement (e.g., 
the inclusion of an additional metric), DOE has stated that it does not 
have the authority to conduct a rulemaking to consider a higher 
standard for that equipment pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A). See 74 
FR 36312, 36313 (July 22, 2009) and 77 FR 28928, 28937 (May 16, 2012). 
However, DOE notes that Congress adopted amendments to these provisions 
related to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 equipment under the American Energy 
Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act (Pub. L. 112-210 (Dec. 18, 
2012); ``AEMTCA''). In relevant part, DOE is prompted to act whenever 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended with respect to ``the standard levels 
or design requirements applicable under that standard'' to any of the 
enumerated types of commercial air conditioning, heating, or water 
heating equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i))
    EPCA does not detail the exact type of amendment that serves as a 
triggering event. However, DOE has considered whether its obligation is 
triggered in the context of whether the specific ASHRAE Standard 90.1 
requirement on which the most current Federal requirement is based is 
amended (i.e., the regulatory metric). For example, if an amendment to 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 changed the metric for the standard on which the 
Federal requirement was based, DOE would perform a crosswalk analysis 
to determine whether the amended metric under ASHRAE Standard 90.1 
resulted in an energy efficiency level that was more stringent than the 
current DOE standard. Conversely, if an amendment to ASHRAE Standard 
90.1 were to add an additional metric by which a class of equipment is 
to be evaluated, but did not amend the requirement that is in terms of 
the metric on which the Federal requirement was based, DOE would not 
consider its obligation triggered.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See the May 16, 2012, final rule for small, large, and very 
large water-cooled and evaporatively-cooled commercial package air 
conditioners, and VRF water-source heat pumps with cooling capacity 
less than 17,000 Btu/h, in which DOE states that ``if the revised 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 leaves the standard level unchanged or lowers 
the standard, as compared to the level specified by the national 
standard adopted pursuant to EPCA, DOE does not have the authority 
to conduct a rulemaking to consider a higher standard for that 
equipment pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A). 77 FR 28928, 28929 
(emphasis added). See also, 74 FR 36312, 36313 (July 22, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, DOE has explained that its authority to adopt an 
ASHRAE amendment is limited based on the definition of ``energy 
conservation standard.'' 74 FR 36312, 36322 (July 22, 2009). In 
general, an ``energy conservation standard'' is limited, per the 
statutory definition, to either a performance standard or a design 
requirement. (42 U.S.C. 6311(18)) Informed by the ``energy conservation 
standard'' definition, DOE has stated that adoption of an amendment to 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 ``that establishes both a performance standard and 
a design requirement is beyond the scope of DOE's legal authority, as 
would be a standard that included more than one design requirement.'' 
74 FR 36312, 36322 (July 22, 2009).
    As noted, the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 provision in EPCA acknowledges 
technological changes that yield energy efficiency benefits, as well as 
continuing development of industry standards and test methods. 
Amendments to a uniform national standard provide Federal requirements 
that continue to reflect energy efficiency improvements identified by 
industry. Amendments to a uniform national standard that reflect the 
relevant amended versions of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 would also help 
reduce compliance and test burdens on manufacturers by harmonizing the 
Federal requirements, when appropriate, with industry best practices. 
This harmonization would be further facilitated by establishing not 
only consistent energy efficiency levels and design requirements 
between ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and the Federal requirements, but 
comparable metrics as well.
    As stated previously, DOE has limited its review under the ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1 provisions in EPCA to the equipment class that was 
subject to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 amendment. DOE has stated that if 
ASHRAE has not amended a standard for an equipment class subject to 42 
U.S.C. 6313, there is no change that would require action by DOE to 
consider amending the uniform national standard to maintain consistency 
with ASHRAE Standard 90.1. See, 72 FR 10038, 10042 (March 7, 2007); 77 
FR 36312, 36320-36321 (July 22, 2009); 80 FR 42614, 42617 (July 17, 
2015).
    In those situations where ASHRAE has not acted to amend the levels 
in Standard 90.1 for the equipment types enumerated in the statute, 
EPCA also provides for a 6-year-lookback to consider the potential for 
amending the uniform national standards. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)) 
Specifically, pursuant to the amendments to EPCA under AEMTCA, DOE is 
required to conduct an evaluation of each class of covered equipment in 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 ``every 6 years'' to determine whether the 
applicable energy conservation standards need to be amended. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) DOE must publish either a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NOPR) to propose amended standards or a notice of 
determination that existing standards do not need to be amended. (42 
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)) In proposing new standards under the 6-year 
review, DOE must undertake the same considerations as if it were 
adopting a standard that is more stringent than an amendment to ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)(II)) This is a separate 
statutory review obligation, as differentiated from the obligation 
triggered by an ASHRAE Standard 90.1 amendment. While the statute 
continues to defer to ASHRAE's lead on covered equipment subject to 
Standard 90.1, it does allow for a comprehensive review of all such 
equipment and the potential for adopting more-stringent standards, 
where supported by the requisite clear and convincing evidence. That 
is, DOE interprets ASHRAE's not amending Standard 90.1 with respect to 
a product or equipment type as ASHRAE's determination that the standard 
applicable to that product or equipment type is already at an 
appropriate level of stringency, and DOE will not amend that standard 
unless there is clear and convincing evidence that a more-stringent 
level is justified.
    As a preliminary step in the process of reviewing the changes to 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, EPCA directs DOE to publish in the Federal 
Register for public comment an analysis of the energy savings potential 
of amended standards within 180 days after ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is 
amended with respect to any of the covered equipment specified under 42 
U.S.C. 6313(a). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A))
    On October 26, 2016, ASHRAE officially released for distribution 
and made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. This action by ASHRAE 
triggered DOE's obligations under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6), as outlined 
previously. This notice of data availability (NODA)

[[Page 32331]]

presents the analysis of the energy savings potential of amended energy 
efficiency standards, as required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i). DOE 
is also taking this opportunity to collect data and information 
regarding other VRF equipment classes for which it was not triggered 
but for which DOE plans to conduct a concurrent 6-year-lookback review. 
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)) Such information will help DOE inform its 
decisions, consistent with its obligations under EPCA.

B. Purpose of the Notice of Data Availability

    As explained previously, DOE is publishing this NODA as a 
preliminary step pursuant to EPCA's requirements for DOE to consider 
amended standards for certain categories of commercial equipment 
covered by ASHRAE Standard 90.1, whenever ASHRAE amends its standard to 
increase the energy efficiency level for an equipment class within a 
given equipment category. Specifically, this NODA presents for public 
comment DOE's analysis of the potential energy savings for amended 
national energy conservation standards for VRF multi split systems 
based on: (1) The amended efficiency levels contained within ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016, and (2) more-stringent efficiency levels. DOE 
describes these analyses and preliminary conclusions and seeks input 
from interested parties, including the submission of data and other 
relevant information. DOE is also taking the opportunity to consider 
the potential for more-stringent standards for the other equipment 
classes of the subject equipment category (i.e., where DOE was not 
triggered) under EPCA's 6-year-lookback authority.
    DOE carefully examined the changes for equipment in ASHRAE Standard 
90.1 in order to thoroughly evaluate the amendments in ASHRAE 90.1-
2016, thereby permitting DOE to determine what action, if any, is 
required under its statutory mandate. DOE also will carefully examine 
the energy savings potential for other equipment classes where it was 
not triggered, so as to conduct a thorough review for an entire 
equipment category. Section II of this NODA contains that evaluation, 
and section III of this NODA discusses the possibility of more-
stringent standards for those equipment classes where DOE was not 
triggered by ASHRAE action.
    In summary, the energy savings analysis presented in this NODA is a 
preliminary step required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i). DOE is also 
treating it as an opportunity to gather information regarding its 
obligations under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C). After review of the public 
comments on this NODA, if DOE determines that the amended efficiency 
levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 increase the energy efficiency 
level for an equipment class within a given equipment category 
currently covered by uniform national standards, DOE will commence a 
rulemaking to amend standards based upon the efficiency levels in 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 or, where supported by clear and convincing 
evidence, consider more-stringent efficiency levels that would be 
expected to result in significant additional conservation of energy and 
are technologically feasible and economically justified. If DOE 
determines it appropriate to conduct a rulemaking to establish more-
stringent efficiency levels under the statute, DOE will address the 
general rulemaking requirements applicable under 42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(B), such as the anti-backsliding provision,\6\ the criteria 
for making a determination of economic justification as to whether the 
benefits of the proposed standard exceed the burden of the proposed 
standard,\7\ and the prohibition on making unavailable existing 
products with performance characteristics generally available in the 
United States.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The anti-backsliding provision mandates that the Secretary 
may not prescribe any amended standard that either increases the 
maximum allowable energy use or decreases the minimum required 
energy efficiency of a covered product. (42 U.S.C. 6313 
(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I))
    \7\ In deciding whether a potential standard's benefits outweigh 
its burdens, DOE must consider to the maximum extent practicable, 
the following seven factors:
    (1) The economic impact on manufacturers and consumers of the 
product subject to the standard;
    (2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated 
average life of the product in the type (or class), compared to any 
increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance expenses of 
the products likely to result from the standard;
    (3) The total projected amount of energy savings likely to 
result directly from the standard;
    (4) Any lessening of product utility or performance of the 
product likely to result from the standard;
    (5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in 
writing by the Attorney General, likely to result from the standard;
    (6) The need for national energy conservation; and
    (7) Other factors the Secretary considers relevant.
    (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(I)-(VII))
    \8\ The Secretary may not prescribe an amended standard if 
interested persons have established by a preponderance of evidence 
that the amended standard would likely result in unavailability in 
the U.S. of any covered product type (or class) of performance 
characteristics (including reliability, features, capacities, sizes, 
and volumes) that are substantially the same as those generally 
available in the U.S. at the time of the Secretary's finding. (42 
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Rulemaking Background

    DOE's energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems are 
codified at 10 CFR 431.97. DOE defines ``variable refrigerant flow 
multi-split air conditioner'' as a unit of commercial package air-
conditioning and heating equipment that is configured as a split system 
air conditioner incorporating a single refrigerant circuit, with one or 
more outdoor units, at least one variable-speed compressor or an 
alternate compressor combination for varying the capacity of the system 
by three or more steps, and multiple indoor fan coil units, each of 
which is individually metered and individually controlled by an 
integral control device and common communications network and which can 
operate independently in response to multiple indoor thermostats. 
Variable refrigerant flow implies three or more steps of capacity 
control on common, inter-connecting piping. 10 CFR 431.92. DOE defines 
``variable refrigerant flow multi-split heat pump'' similarly, but with 
the addition that it uses reverse cycle refrigeration as its primary 
heating source and that it may include secondary supplemental heating 
by means of electrical resistance, steam, hot water, or gas. Id.
    DOE's regulations include test procedures and energy conservation 
standards that apply to air-cooled VRF multi-split air conditioners, 
air-cooled VRF multi-split heat pumps, and water-source VRF multi-split 
heat pumps, with cooling capacity less than 760,000 Btu/h, except air-
cooled, single-phase VRF multi-split air conditioners and heat pumps 
with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h.\9\ 10 CFR 431.96 and 10 
CFR 431.97. The energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split 
systems were most recently amended through the final rule for energy 
conservation standards and test procedures for certain commercial 
equipment published on May 16, 2012 (``May 2012 final rule''). 77 FR 
28928. The May 2012 final rule established separate equipment classes 
for VRF multi-split systems and adopted energy conservation standards 
that generally correspond to the levels in the 2010 revision of ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1 for most of the equipment classes. 77 FR 28928, 28995 
(May 16, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Air-cooled, single-phase VRF multi-split air conditioners 
and heat pumps with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h are 
considered residential central air conditioners and heat pumps and 
are regulated under the energy conservation program for consumer 
products. 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendices M and M1 and 10 CFR 
part 430, subpart C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE's test procedure for VRF multi-split systems is codified at 10 
CFR

[[Page 32332]]

431.96 and was established in the May 2012 final rule. 77 FR 28928, 
28990-28991 (May 16, 2012). DOE's current regulations require that 
manufacturers test VRF multi-split systems using American National 
Standards Institute (ANSI)/Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration 
Institute (AHRI) Standard 1230-2010 with Addendum 1, Performance Rating 
of Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-Split Air-Conditioning and 
Heat Pump Equipment (AHRI 1230-2010), except for sections 5.1.2 and 
6.6. DOE's current test procedure also requires that manufacturers 
adhere to additional requirements listed in 10 CFR 431.96(c)-(f) 
pertaining to compressor break-in period and equipment set-up for 
testing, including requirements for refrigerant charging, refrigerant 
line length, air flow rate, and compressor speed, when measuring the 
energy efficiency ratio (EER) and coefficient of performance (COP) for 
air-cooled VRF multi-split systems with a cooling capacity between 
65,000 Btu/h and 760,000 Btu/h and water-source VRF multi-split systems 
with a cooling capacity less than 760,000 Btu/h, and when measuring the 
seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER) and heating seasonal 
performance factor (HSPF) for three-phase air-cooled VRF multi-split 
systems with a cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h, and when 
certifying that equipment is compliant with the applicable standard.
    On May 27, 2015, the ASHRAE Standards Committee approved Addendum n 
to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013, which raised the minimum integrated 
energy efficiency ratio (IEER \10\) for air-cooled VRF multi-split 
systems, effective January 1, 2017. Subsequently, ASHRAE proposed 
Addendum bs to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013, which would raise the minimum 
IEER and the minimum COP for water-source VRF multi-split systems, 
effective January 1, 2018. Both of these addenda are incorporated into 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. However, at the current time, the Federal 
energy conservation standards applicable to VRFs do not use IEER as 
their regulatory metric.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Integrated energy efficiency ratio (IEER) factors in the 
efficiency of operating at part-load conditions of 75-percent, 50-
percent, and 25-percent of capacity, as well as the efficiency at 
full-load. The IEER metric is intended to provide a more 
representative measure of cooling season energy consumption in 
actual operation using a weighted average of EER values determined 
for the four test points.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 26, 2016, ASHRAE officially released for distribution 
and made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 
revised the efficiency levels for certain commercial equipment, 
including certain classes of VRF multi-split systems (as discussed in 
the following section).\11\ For the remaining equipment, ASHRAE left in 
place the preexisting levels (i.e., the efficiency levels specified in 
EPCA or the efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013). ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016 did not change any of the design requirements for 
the commercial heating, air conditioning, and water-heating equipment 
covered by EPCA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 also revised standards for 
certain classes of computer room air conditioners (CRACs) and 
established new standards for dedicated outdoor air systems 
(DOASes). DOE is addressing CRACs and DOASes in a separate document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 11, 2018, DOE published in the Federal Register a notice 
of its intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking working group 
(Working Group) under the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal 
Advisory Committee (ASRAC), in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (FACA \12\) and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (NRA \13\), 
to negotiate proposed test procedures and amended energy conservation 
standards for VRF multi-split systems. 83 FR 15514. The purpose of the 
Working Group is to discuss and, if possible, reach consensus on a 
proposed rule regarding test procedures and energy conservation 
standards for VRF multi-split systems, as authorized by EPCA. 83 FR 
15514 (April 11, 2018). DOE explained that the primary reason for using 
the negotiated rulemaking process for this equipment is that 
stakeholders strongly support a consensual rulemaking effort and that 
such a regulatory negotiation process will be less adversarial and 
better suited to resolving complex technical issues. 83 FR 15514 (April 
11, 2018). DOE further stated that an important virtue of negotiated 
rulemaking is that it allows expert dialog that is much better than 
traditional techniques at getting the facts and issues right and will 
result in a proposed rule that will effectively reflect congressional 
intent. 83 FR 15514 (April 11, 2018). The Working Group has held a 
number of meetings. Public meeting dates and information are located on 
the Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-Split Air Conditioners and Heat 
Pumps rulemaking web page \14\ and all related notices, public 
comments, public meeting transcripts, and supporting documents are 
available in the associated docket.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 5 U.S.C. App. 2, Public Law 92-463.
    \13\ 5 U.S.C. 561-570, Public Law 104-320.
    \14\ Available at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=71&action=viewlive.
    \15\ Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion of Changes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016

A. Amendments to VRF Multi-Split System Standards in ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2016

    As noted, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 revised the efficiency levels 
for certain commercial equipment, but for the remaining equipment, 
ASHRAE left in place the preexisting levels. DOE has determined that 
ASHRAE 90.1-2016 increased the efficiency level for six of the 20 DOE 
VRF multi-split system equipment classes. Table II.I shows the VRF 
multi-split system equipment classes provided in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2016 and the corresponding efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2013 and in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Table II.I also displays the 
existing Federal energy conservation standards for those equipment 
classes and indicates whether the update in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 
triggers DOE evaluation as required under EPCA (i.e., whether the 
update results in a standard level more stringent than the current 
Federal level). (As discussed in the following paragraphs, DOE's 
standards disaggregate VRF multi-split systems into 20 equipment 
classes, whereas ASHRAE Standard 90.1 has 22 classes.) The remainder of 
this section assesses each of these equipment classes and describes 
whether the amendments in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 constitute 
increased energy efficiency levels, which would necessitate further 
analysis of the potential energy savings from corresponding amendments 
to the Federal energy conservation standards. The conclusions of this 
assessment are presented in the last column of Table II.I of this 
document.

[[Page 32333]]



 Table II.I--Federal Energy Conservation Standards and Energy Efficiency Levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 and
               the Corresponding Levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for VRF Multi-Split Systems 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Energy efficiency       Energy                                    DOE  Triggered
                                 levels in ASHRAE     efficiency                                     by ASHRAE
Considered equipment class \2\    Standard 90.1-   levels in ASHRAE  Federal energy conservation  Standard  90.1-
                                     2013 (as       Standard 90.1-            standards                2016
                                  corrected) \3\         2016                                       Amendment?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-      13.0 SEER........  13.0 SEER.......  13.0 SEER..................  No.
 cooled, <65,000 Btu/h.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-      11.2 EER, 13.1     11.2 EER, 15.5    11.2 EER...................  No.
 cooled, >=65,000 Btu/h and      IEER.              IEER.
 <135,000 Btu/h, No Heating or
 Electric Resistance Heating.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-      No standard......  No standard.....  11.0 EER...................  No.
 cooled, >=65,000 Btu/h and
 <135,000 Btu/h, All Other
 Types of Heating \4\.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-      11.0 EER, 12.9     11.0 EER, 14.9    11.0 EER...................  No.
 cooled, >=135,000 Btu/h and     IEER.              IEER.
 <240,000 Btu/h, No Heating or
 Electric Resistance Heating.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-      No standard......  No standard.....  10.8 EER...................  No.
 cooled, >=135,000 Btu/h and
 <240,000 Btu/h, All Other
 Types of Heating \4\.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-      10.0 EER, 11.6     10.0 EER, 13.9    10.0 EER...................  No.
 cooled, >=240,000 Btu/h and     IEER.              IEER.
 <760,000 Btu/h, No Heating or
 Electric Resistance Heating.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-      No standard......  No standard.....  9.8 EER....................  No.
 cooled, >=240,000 Btu/h and
 <760,000 Btu/h, All Other
 Types of Heating \4\.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled,     13.0 SEER, 7.7     13.0 SEER, 7.7    13.0 SEER, 7.7 HSPF........  No.
 <65,000 Btu/h.                  HSPF.              HSPF.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled,     11.0 EER, 12.9     11.0 EER, 14.6    11.0 EER, 3.3 COP..........  No.
 >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000     IEER, 3.3 COPH.    IEER, 3.3 COPH.
 Btu/h, No Heating or Electric
 Resistance Heating \5\.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled,     10.8 EER, 12.7     10.8 EER, 14.4    10.8 EER, 3.3 COP..........  No.
 >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000     IEER; 3.3 COPH.    IEER; 3.3 COPH.
 Btu/h, All Other Types of
 Heating 4 5.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled,     10.6 EER, 12.3     10.6 EER, 13.9    10.6 EER, 3.2 COP..........  No.
 >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000    IEER, 3.2 COPH.    IEER, 3.2 COPH.
 Btu/h, No Heating or Electric
 Resistance Heating \5\.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled,     10.4 EER, 12.1     10.4 EER, 13.7    10.4 EER, 3.2 COP..........  No.
 >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000    IEER; 3.2 COPH.    IEER; 3.2 COPH.
 Btu/h, All Other Types of
 Heating 4 5.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled,     9.5 EER, 11.0      9.5 EER, 12.7     9.5 EER, 3.2 COP...........  No.
 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000    IEER, 3.2 COPH.    IEER, 3.2 COPH.
 Btu/h, No Heating or Electric
 Resistance Heating \5\.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled,     9.3 EER, 10.8      9.3 EER, 12.5     9.3 EER, 3.2 COP...........  No.
 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000    IEER; 3.2 COPH.    IEER; 3.2 COPH.
 Btu/h, All Other Types of
 Heating 4 5.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source,   12.0 EER, 4.2      12.0 EER, 16.0    12.0 EER, 4.2 COP..........  Yes.\7\
 <17,000 Btu/h, Without heat     COPH.              IEER,\6\ 4.3
 recovery.                                          COPH \6\.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source,   11.8 EER, 4.2      11.8 EER, 15.8    11.8 EER, 4.2 COP..........  Yes.\7\
 <17,000 Btu/h, With heat        COPH.              IEER,\6\ 4.3
 recovery.                                          COPH \6\.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source,   12.0 EER, 4.2      12.0 EER, 16.0    12.0 EER, 4.2 COP..........  Yes.\9\
 >=17,000 Btu/h and <65,000      COPH (without      IEER,\6\ 4.3
 Btu/h \8\.                      heat recovery);    COPH \6\
                                 11.8 EER, 4.2      (without heat
                                 COPH (with heat    recovery); 11.8
                                 recovery).         EER, 15.8
                                                    IEER,\6\ 4.3
                                                    COPH \6\ (with
                                                    heat recovery).
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source,   12.0 EER, 4.2      12.0 EER, 16.0    12.0 EER, 4.2 COP..........  Yes.\9\
 >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000     COPH (without      IEER,\6\ 4.3
 Btu/h \8\.                      heat recovery);    COPH \6\
                                 11.8 EER, 4.2      (without heat
                                 COPH (with heat    recovery); 11.8
                                 recovery).         EER, 15.8
                                                    IEER,\6\ 4.3
                                                    COPH \6\ (with
                                                    heat recovery).
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source,   10.0 EER, 3.9      10.0 EER, 14.0    10.0 EER, 3.9 COP..........  Yes.\7\
 >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000    COPH.              IEER,\6\ 4.0
 Btu/h, Without heat recovery.                      COPH \6\.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source,   9.8 EER, 3.9 COPH  9.8 EER, 13.8     9.8 EER, 3.9 COP...........  Yes.\7\
 >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000                       IEER,\6\ 4.0
 Btu/h, With heat recovery.                         COPH \6\.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source,   10.0 EER, 3.9      10.0 EER, 12.0    10.0 EER, 3.9 COP..........  No.
 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000    COPH.              IEER,\6\ 3.9
 Btu/h, Without heat recovery.                      COPH.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source,   9.8 EER, 3.9 COPH  9.8 EER, 11.8     9.8 EER, 3.9 COP...........  No.
 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000                       IEER,\6\ 3.9
 Btu/h, With heat recovery.                         COPH.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``SEER'' means Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio; ``EER'' means Energy Efficiency Ratio; ``IEER'' means
  Integrated Energy Efficiency Ratio; ``HSPF'' means Heating Seasonal Performance Factor; ``COPH'' means
  Coefficient of Performance for heating; and ``COP'' means Coefficient of Performance (equivalent to COPH).
\2\ Considered equipment classes may differ from the equipment classes defined in DOE's regulations, but no loss
  of coverage will occur (i.e., all previously covered DOE equipment classes remained covered equipment).
\3\ This table represents values in ASHRAE 90.1-2013 as corrected by various errata sheets issued by ASHRAE. All
  of the IEER values for air-source VRF multi-split system equipment are based on errata sheets. These errata do
  not impact existing DOE standards, which are in terms of EER, not IEER.

[[Page 32334]]

 
\4\ In ASHRAE 90.1, this equipment class is referred to as units with heat recovery rather than all other types
  of heating.
\5\ In terms of Federal standards, VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-Cooled) with heat recovery fall under the
  category of ``All Other Types of Heating'' unless they also have electric resistance heating, in which case it
  falls under the category for ``No Heating or Electric Resistance Heating.''
\6\ Rating effective 1/1/2018.
\7\ An energy savings analysis for this class of equipment was not conducted because there is no equipment on
  the market that would fall into this equipment class.
\8\ DOE cannot adopt the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 efficiency standard for units with heat recovery because it
  would be back-sliding. As in the original final rule adopting standards for VRF multi-split heat systems
  (final rule for Energy Conservation Standards and Test Procedures for Commercial Heating, Air-Conditioning,
  and Water-Heating Equipment), DOE will not subdivide this equipment class. 77 FR 28928, 28938-28939 (May 16,
  2012).
\9\ DOE did not conduct an energy savings analysis for this equipment class as when combined with the other
  water-source equipment class with market share their combined market share is estimated to be less than three
  percent, which would result in minimal national energy savings.

    Before beginning an analysis of the potential energy savings that 
would result from adopting a uniform national standard at the minimum 
level specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 or a more-stringent 
uniform national standard, DOE must first determine whether the ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016 standard levels actually represent an increase in 
efficiency above the current Federal standard levels, thereby 
triggering DOE action. This section contains a discussion of each 
equipment classes of VRF multi-split systems where the ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2016 efficiency levels differed from the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 
level(s) \16\ (based on a rating metric used in the relevant Federal 
energy conservation standards) or where ASHRAE created new equipment 
classes, along with DOE's preliminary conclusion regarding the 
appropriate action to take with respect to that equipment. DOE is also 
examining the other equipment classes (i.e., non-triggered classes) of 
VRFs under its 6-year-lookback authority. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 did not change any of the design 
requirements for the commercial heating, air conditioning, and water 
heating equipment covered by EPCA, so this potential category of 
change is not discussed in this section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current Federal energy conservation standards include 20 
equipment classes in the equipment category for VRF multi-split 
systems, which can be found in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 431.97. The 
Federal energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems are 
differentiated based on whether it is an air-conditioner or a heat 
pump, the cooling capacity, and the heat source (air-cooled or water-
source). Additionally, air-cooled equipment classes are further 
differentiated based on the supplemental heating type (No Heating or 
Electric Resistance Heating; or All Other Types of Heating). Finally, 
some water-source equipment classes with cooling capacity <17,000 Btu/h 
or with cooling capacities >=135,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h are 
differentiated based on whether or not they have heat recovery. The DOE 
equipment classes do not disaggregate per these characteristics in all 
cases. For example, the VRF multi-split system equipment classes for 
water-source heat pumps >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 do not 
differentiate based on whether or not the units have heat recovery. 
Also, as discussed in the following paragraph, the divisions between 
equipment classes, including the disaggregation between equipment class 
capacity ranges, is not entirely consistent between the Federal 
standards and ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ In addition to the items listed in the subsequent 
paragraphs, there are some nomenclature differences in the VRF air-
cooled heat pump equipment classes, as described in Table I.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE notes that in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 (as in previous 
versions of ASHRAE Standard 90.1), the equipment class VRF Heat Pumps, 
Water-source, >=17,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h and the equipment class 
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h are 
disaggregated into units with heat recovery and units without heat 
recovery, with each ASHRAE equipment class having a separate minimum 
cooling efficiency. Currently, the Federal standards do not 
disaggregate such VRF multi-split systems based on the presence of heat 
recovery. The cooling efficiency EER standard in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2016 for these units with heat recovery is below the current Federal 
standard. Under EPCA, the Secretary may not prescribe any amended 
standard under the ASHRAE review provisions that increases the maximum 
allowable energy use, or decreases the minimum required energy 
efficiency, of a covered product. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)) 
Therefore, as in May 2012 final rule, DOE has not subdivided these 
equipment classes. DOE does not consider whether heat recovery is a 
performance characteristic under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II)(aa), 
unless DOE is doing so in the context of considering uniform national 
standards that are more-stringent than the corresponding standards set 
by ASHRAE in Standard 90.1.
    DOE also notes that ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 has subdivided the 
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=135,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h 
classes, both with and without heat recovery, into separate equipment 
classes for units with cooling capacities >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 
Btu/h and units with cooling capacities >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 
Btu/h, and included different minimum efficiency levels for each. All 
efficiency levels meet or exceed the current Federal standards for 
DOE's broader efficiency class. Further, although DOE does not regulate 
VRF multi-split systems with an efficiency metric of IEER, ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016 specifies lower IEER standards for water-source 
systems that are >=240,000 Btu/h, as compared to those in the >=135,000 
Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h class. As such, DOE is assuming that there 
could be technical reasons for which water-source systems in the 
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h cooling capacity range may not be 
able to achieve the same efficiency levels as systems that are 
>=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, and that this likely justifies 
establishing separate DOE equipment classes which are split at the 
240,000 Btu/h point. For these reasons, DOE is considering revising its 
current equipment class structure to align more closely with the 
structure used by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. If DOE were to revise the 
above water-source equipment classes, then the total number of 
equipment classes for VRF multi-split systems would increase from 20 to 
22.
    Issue 1: DOE requests feedback on its consideration of additional 
equipment classes for VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=135,000 Btu/h and 
<760,000 Btu/h, both with and without heat recovery, by separating the 
equipment classes into units with cooling capacities >=135,000 Btu/h 
and <240,000 Btu/hand and units with cooling capacities >=240,000 Btu/h 
and <760,000 Btu/h.
    ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 increased the heating energy efficiency 
levels, as represented by the COP metrics, for six of the 20 DOE

[[Page 32335]]

equipment classes in the VRF multi-split system equipment category that 
DOE is considering for this NODA.\18\ These classes are:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ ASHRAE 90.1-2016 left in place the existing EER levels for 
these classes, which are equivalent to current Federal standards.

1. VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, <17,000 Btu/h, Without heat recovery
2. VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, <17,000 Btu/h, With heat recovery
3. VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=17,000 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h
4. VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h
5. VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, 
Without heat recovery
6. VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, 
With heat recovery

B. Energy Savings Potential for Considered Equipment Classes

    As required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A), for VRF equipment 
classes for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 set more stringent levels 
than the current Federal standards, DOE performed an assessment to 
determine the energy-savings potential of amending Federal standard 
levels to reflect the efficiency levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2016.
    DOE has determined, based on a report by Cadeo Group,\19\ that four 
of the six VRF water-source classes for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 
increased the energy efficiency levels--those with cooling capacities 
that are less than 17,000 Btu/h or greater than or equal to 135,000 
Btu/h--do not have any market share and, therefore, no energy savings 
potential at this time. Also based on the Cadeo Group report, DOE has 
tentatively determined that the remaining two VRF water-source classes, 
with cooling capacities greater than or equal to 17,000 Btu/h and less 
than 135,000 Btu/h, together represent only three percent of the entire 
VRF market. Due to the low market share and corresponding minimal total 
potential energy savings, DOE has tentatively determined that the 
energy savings potential for more stringent efficiency standards for 
these two equipment classes is de minimis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Cadeo Report, Variable Refrigerant Flow: A Preliminary 
Market Assessment. See: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0018-0002. The report presents market share by VRF multi-
split system equipment class, based on confidential sales data given 
in interviews with several major manufacturers of VRF multi-split 
equipment and DOE's Compliance Certification Database.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the extremely low market share of the VRF equipment classes 
for which DOE was triggered, DOE did not conduct a quantitative 
estimate of potential energy savings. If DOE does not identify any 
other data regarding market share for the above six classes, DOE would 
propose to adopt the levels in ASHRAE 90.1-2016 as the Federal 
standards, as required by EPCA, because more-stringent standards for 
these equipment classes would be unlikely to produce significant 
additional energy savings.
    Issue 2: DOE requests feedback on its proposal to adopt the levels 
in ASHRAE 90.1-2016 as the Federal standards for the six VRF water-
source classes that are triggered by ASHRAE 90-1.2016.

III. Consideration of More-Stringent Standards: Requested Information

    As discussed, if DOE determines, by rule published in the Federal 
Register and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that adoption 
of a uniform national standard more stringent than the amended ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1 level for the equipment in question would result in 
significant additional conservation of energy and is technologically 
feasible and economically justified, DOE must adopt the more-stringent 
standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II) and (B)(i)) Therefore, for 
the six equipment classes identified in the prior section for which 
ASHRAE has amended the standards, DOE is evaluating whether more-
stringent standards would meet the specified statutory criteria (as 
discussed in section II of this notice).
    In addition, DOE is also evaluating the remaining 16 VRF equipment 
classes for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 did not increase the 
stringency of the standards pursuant to the six-year look-back 
provision at 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i). In making a determination of 
whether standards for such equipment need to be amended, DOE must also 
follow specific statutory criteria. Similar to the consideration of 
whether to adopt a standard more stringent than an amended ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1 standard, DOE must evaluate whether amended Federal 
standards would result in significant additional conservation of energy 
and are technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(C)(i)(I)-(II))

A. Rulemaking Process

    To determine whether a standard is economically justified, EPCA 
requires that DOE determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed 
its burdens by considering, to the greatest extent practicable, the 
following seven factors:
    (1) The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and 
consumers of the equipment subject to the standard;
    (2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average 
life of the covered equipment in the type (or class) compared to any 
increases in the price, initial charges, or maintenance expenses for 
the covered equipment likely to result from the standard;
    (3) The total projected amount of energy savings likely to result 
directly from the standard;
    (4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the products 
likely to result from the standard;
    (5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in 
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the 
standard;
    (6) The need for national energy and water conservation; and
    (7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) considers 
relevant.

(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)(I)-(VII)).
    DOE fulfills these and other applicable requirements by conducting 
a series of analyses throughout the rulemaking process. Table III.I 
shows the individual analyses that are performed to satisfy each of the 
requirements within EPCA.

                          Table III.I--EPCA Requirements and Corresponding DOE Analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         EPCA requirement                                    Corresponding DOE analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technological Feasibility.........   Market and Technology Assessment.
                                     Screening Analysis.
                                     Engineering Analysis.
Economic Justification:
    1. Economic impact on            Manufacturer Impact Analysis.
     manufacturers and consumers.

[[Page 32336]]

 
                                     Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis.
                                     Life-Cycle Cost Subgroup Analysis.
                                     Shipments Analysis.
    2. Lifetime operating cost       Markups for Product Price Determination.
     savings compared to increased
     cost for the product.
                                     Energy and Water Use Determination.
                                     Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis.
    3. Total projected energy        Shipments Analysis.
     savings.
                                     National Impact Analysis.
    4. Impact on utility or          Screening Analysis.
     performance.
                                     Engineering Analysis.
    5. Impact of any lessening of    Manufacturer Impact Analysis.
     competition.
    6. Need for national energy      Shipments Analysis.
     and water conservation.
                                     National Impact Analysis.
    7. Other factors the Secretary   Employment Impact Analysis.
     considers relevant.
                                     Utility Impact Analysis.
                                     Emissions Analysis.
                                     Monetization of Emission Reductions Benefits.
                                     Regulatory Impact Analysis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE is publishing this document seeking input and data from 
interested parties to aid in the development of the technical analyses 
for VRF multi-split systems. The issues listed below primarily pertain 
to the VRF market and the requested information will be relevant to 
conducting the technical and economic analyses. Information received in 
response to this document is intended to supplement any information 
received in the course of the ASRAC Working Group's efforts.

B. Request for Information and Comment

    In addition to the specific issues identified below on which DOE 
seeks comment, DOE requests comment on its overall approach and 
analyses that will be used to evaluate potential standard levels for 
VRFs. In particular, DOE notes that under Executive Order 13771, 
``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,'' Executive 
Branch agencies such as DOE are directed to manage the costs associated 
with the imposition of expenditures required to comply with Federal 
regulations. See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). Consistent with that 
Executive Order, DOE encourages the public to provide input on measures 
DOE could take to lower the cost of its energy conservation standards 
rulemakings, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and compliance 
and certification requirements applicable to VRF multi-split systems 
while remaining consistent with the requirements of EPCA.
    Based on the Cadeo report, DOE has determined that only four of the 
16 equipment classes for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1 did not amend the 
standard have market share, specifically the air-source heat pumps with 
cooling capacities greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h and less than 
240,000 Btu/h. These equipment classes, which are listed below, are the 
focus of DOE's request for information.

1. VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, No 
Heating or Electric Resistance Heating
2. VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, All 
Other Types of Heating
3. VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, No 
Heating or Electric Resistance Heating
4. VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, All 
Other Types of Heating

    Below are the specific issues that DOE is seeking input and data 
from interested parties pertaining to the VRF multi-split system market 
and industry.
    Issue 3: DOE seeks comment on whether, in the context of its 
consideration of more-stringent standards, there have been sufficient 
technological or market changes for VRFs since the most recent 
standards update that may justify a new rulemaking to consider more-
stringent standards. Specifically, DOE seeks data and information that 
could enable the agency to determine whether DOE should propose a ``no 
new standard'' determination because a more-stringent standard: (1) 
Would not result in significant additional savings of energy; (2) is 
not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically justified; or (4) 
any combination of the foregoing.
    Issue 4: DOE requests information on the typical applications of 
VRF multi-split systems and what the most common applications are 
(e.g., specific building types and climates). DOE also requests 
information on typical practices for sizing outdoor units (e.g., sized 
to match calculated building loads or oversized) and zoning indoor 
units.
    Issue 5: DOE seeks historical shipments data for VRF multi-split 
systems and projections for growth of the market based on trends 
stakeholders have observed. DOE is interested in this data by equipment 
class, efficiency, and climatic region.
    Issue 6: DOE requests data on the breakdown of the market between 
new construction, replacements, and new owners (i.e., owners that 
choose to replace their current system with a VRF multi-split system in 
an existing building).
    A table of the types of shipments data requested in Issues 5 and 6 
can be found in Table III.2 of this document. Interested parties are 
also encouraged to provide additional shipments data as may be 
relevant.

[[Page 32337]]



                              Table III.2--Summary Table of Shipments Data Requests
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Annual shipments (year)
                Equipment class                -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        New construction            New owners     Replacements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Cooled, No Heating or Electric Resistance.  >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000.....
                                                >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/
                                                 h.
Air-Cooled, All Other Types of Heating........  >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000.....
                                                >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/
                                                 h.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the manufacturer impact analysis (MIA), DOE intends to 
analyze potential impacts of amended energy conservation standards on 
subgroups of manufacturers of covered equipment, including small 
business manufacturers. DOE uses the Small Business Administration's 
(``SBA'') small business size standards to determine whether 
manufacturers qualify as small businesses, which are listed by the 
applicable North American Industry Classification System (``NAICS'') 
code. Manufacturing of VRF multi-split systems is classified under 
NAICS 333415, ``Air-Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and 
Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing,'' and 
the SBA sets a threshold of 1,250 employees or less for a domestic 
entity to be considered as a small business 13 CFR 121.201. This 
employee threshold includes all employees in a business' parent company 
and any other subsidiaries.
    Issue 7: DOE requests the names and contact information of small 
business manufacturers, as defined by the SBA's size threshold, of VRF 
multi-split systems that distribute products in the United States. In 
addition, DOE requests comment on any other manufacturer subgroups that 
could be disproportionally impacted by amended energy conservation 
standards for VRF multi-split systems. DOE requests feedback on any 
potential approaches that could be considered to address impacts on 
manufacturers, including small businesses.
    Issue 8: To the extent feasible, DOE seeks to identify all VRF 
multi-split system manufacturers that currently distribute equipment in 
the United States. Currently, DOE has identified Daikin, Fujitsu, GD 
Midea, Gree, Hitachi, LG, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, Samsung, and Toshiba 
as VRF multi-split system manufacturers. DOE seeks comment on the 
comprehensiveness of this list of manufacturers, and requests the names 
and contact information of any other domestic or foreign-based 
manufacturers that sell or otherwise market their VRF multi-split 
systems in the United States.

C. Other Energy Conservation Standards Topics

1. Market Failures
    In the field of economics, a market failure is a situation in which 
the market outcome does not maximize societal welfare. Such an outcome 
would result in unrealized potential welfare. DOE welcomes comment on 
any aspect of market failures, especially those in the context of 
amended energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems.

2. Network Mode/``Smart'' Equipment

    DOE recently published an RFI on the emerging smart technology 
appliance and equipment market. 83 FR 46886 (Sept. 17, 2018). In that 
RFI, DOE sought information to better understand market trends and 
issues in the emerging market for appliances and commercial equipment 
that incorporate smart technology. DOE's intent in issuing the RFI was 
to ensure that DOE did not inadvertently impede such innovation in 
fulfilling its statutory obligations in setting efficiency standards 
for covered products and equipment. DOE seeks comments, data, and 
information on the issues presented in the RFI as they may be 
applicable to VRFs.
3. Other
    In addition to the issues identified earlier in this document, DOE 
welcomes comment on any other aspect of energy conservation standards 
for VRF multi-split systems not already addressed by the specific areas 
identified in this document.

IV. Public Participation

    DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by the date 
specified previously in the DATES section of this document, comments, 
data, and information on matters addressed in this NODA and RFI and on 
other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of amended energy 
conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems. Interested parties 
may submit comments, data, and other information using any of the 
methods described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this 
document.
    Submitting comments via http://www.regulations.gov. The http://www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and 
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE 
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be 
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization 
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your 
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, 
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
    However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you 
include it in the comment itself or in any documents attached to your 
comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable 
should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to 
your comment. Otherwise, persons viewing comments will see only first 
and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, 
and any documents submitted with the comments.
    Do not submit to http://www.regulations.gov information for which 
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and 
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as 
Confidential Business Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through 
http://www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received 
through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information 
submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential 
Business Information section.
    DOE processes submissions made through http://www.regulations.gov 
before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of 
being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being 
processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to 
several weeks. Please keep the comment

[[Page 32338]]

tracking number that http://www.regulations.gov provides after you have 
successfully uploaded your comment.
    Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal 
mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/
courier, or postal mail also will be posted to http://www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact 
information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment 
or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact 
information in a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email 
address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover 
letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any 
comments.
    Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, 
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via postal mail 
or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if 
feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies.
    Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE 
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that 
are not secured, that are written in English, and that are free of any 
defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or 
any form of encryption.
    Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the 
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters 
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled 
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting 
time.
    Confidential Business Information. 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 via 
email, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier two well-marked copies: 
One copy of the document marked ``confidential'' including all the 
information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document 
marked ``non-confidential'' with the information believed to be 
confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if 
feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential 
status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
    Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat 
submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the 
items, (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as 
confidential within the industry, (3) whether the information is 
generally known by or available from other sources, (4) whether the 
information has previously been made available to others without 
obligation concerning its confidentiality, (5) an explanation of the 
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from 
public disclosure, (6) when such information might lose its 
confidential character due to the passage of time, and (7) why 
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
    It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public 
docket, without change and as received, including any personal 
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be 
exempt from public disclosure).
    DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of 
the process for developing energy conservation standards. DOE actively 
encourages the participation and interaction of the public during the 
comment period in each stage of the rulemaking process. Interactions 
with and between members of the public provide a balanced discussion of 
the issues and assist DOE in the rulemaking process. Anyone who wishes 
to be added to the DOE mailing list to receive future notices and 
information about this process or would like to request a public 
meeting should contact Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff 
at (202) 287-1445 or via email at 
[email protected].

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of 
data availability and request for information.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on June 28, 2019.
Alexander N. Fitzsimmons,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2019-14461 Filed 7-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6450-01-P