[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 145 (Monday, July 29, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36480-36488]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16048]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 36480]]



DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 431

[EERE-2017-BT-STD-0032]
RIN 1904-AE07


Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for 
Evaporatively-Cooled Commercial Package Air Conditioners and Water-
Cooled Commercial Package Air Conditioners

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

ACTION: Request for information.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') is initiating an 
effort to determine whether to amend the current energy conservation 
standards for evaporatively-cooled commercial package air conditioners 
and water-cooled commercial package air conditioners (referred to as 
evaporatively-cooled commercial unitary air conditioners (ECUACs) and 
water-cooled commercial unitary air conditioners (WCUACs) in this 
document, respectively). Under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
of 1975, as amended, DOE must review these standards at least once 
every six years and publish either a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(``NOPR'') to propose new standards for ECUACs and WCUACs or a notice 
of determination that the existing standards do not need to be amended. 
This request for information (``RFI'') solicits information from the 
public to help DOE determine whether amended standards for ECUACs and 
WCUACs would result in significant additional conservation of energy 
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 RFI).

DATES: Written comments and information are requested and will be 
accepted on or before September 12, 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 and provide 
docket number EERE-2017-BT-STD-0032, 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-2017-BT-STD-0032 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, 
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: 
(202) 287-1445. 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 this 
process, see section III of this document.
    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. All documents in 
the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.govindex. 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-STD-0032. The docket web page contains 
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, 
in the docket. See section III for information on how to submit 
comments through http://www.regulations.gov.

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. Pete Cochran, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. 
Telephone: (202) 586-9496. 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 and Background
    B. Rulemaking Process
II. Requests for Information and Comments
    A. Market Analysis
    1. Shipments Estimates
    2. Model Counts
    3. Current Market Efficiency Distributions
    B. Energy Efficiency Descriptors
    1. General
    2. Representativeness of IEER for Evaporatively-Cooled and 
Water-cooled Units
    3. Representativeness of IEER for Evaporatively-Cooled Units 
With Cooling Capacity Less Than 65,000 Btu/h
    4. Burden of IEER Testing
    C. Other Energy Conservation Standards Topics
    1. Market Failures
    2. Other
III. Submission of Comments

I. Introduction

A. Authority and Background

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended 
(``EPCA''),\1\

[[Page 36481]]

among other things, authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of 
a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 
U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part C \2\ of EPCA established the Energy 
Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth 
a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. This 
equipment includes ECUACs and WCUACs, the subject of this RFI. (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 (October 23, 2018).
    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under 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 EPCA 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 in limited instances 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).
    EPCA contains mandatory energy conservation standards for 
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 that generally correspond 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). ECUACs and WCUACs are covered under 
EPCA's definition of commercial package air conditioning and heating 
equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)) EPCA established initial standards for 
ECUACs and WCUACs with cooling capacity less than 240,000 Btu/h. (42 
U.S.C. 6313(a))
    If ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended with respect to the standard 
levels or design requirements applicable under that standard for 
certain commercial equipment, including ECUACs and WCUACs, not later 
than 180 days after the amendment of the standard, DOE must publish in 
the Federal Register for public comment an analysis of the energy 
savings potential of amended energy efficiency standards. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(A)(i)) With certain exceptions,\3\ DOE must adopt amended 
energy conservation standards at the new efficiency level in ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1, unless clear and convincing evidence supports a 
determination that adoption of a more-stringent efficiency 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 adopts as a national standard the 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)) If DOE 
determines that a more-stringent standard is appropriate under the 
statutory criteria, DOE must establish the more-stringent standard not 
later than 30 months after publication of the revised ASHRAE Standard 
90.1. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ DOE cannot adopt an ASHRAE standard that (1) increases 
energy use or decreases the minimum required energy efficiency or 
(2) results in the unavailability in any equipment class of 
performance characteristics that are currently available in the 
market. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPCA also requires that every six years DOE evaluate the energy 
conservation standards for certain commercial equipment, including 
ECUACs and WCUACs, and publish either a notice of determination that 
the standards do not need to be amended, or a NOPR that includes new 
proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a final rule, as 
appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) EPCA further provides that, 
not later than 3 years after the issuance of a final determination not 
to amend standards, DOE must publish either a notice of determination 
that standards for the product do not need to be amended, or a NOPR 
including new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a 
final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(iii)(II)) DOE 
must make the analysis on which the determination is based publicly 
available and provide an opportunity for written comment. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(C)(ii)) Further, a determination that more-stringent 
standards would (1) result in significant additional conservation of 
energy and (2) be both technologically feasible and economically 
justified must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. (42 
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i); 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A))
    Following an update to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (i.e., ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2010), DOE published a final rule on May 16, 2012 (``May 2012 
final rule''), amending the standards for 12 classes of ECUACs and 
WCUACs by adopting the energy efficiency ratio (EER) levels for this 
equipment established in ASHRAE 90.1-2010. 77 FR 28928. Since ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2010 was published, ASHRAE Standard 90.1 has undergone 
two revisions. On October 9, 2013, ASHRAE published ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2013, and on October 31, 2016, ASHRAE published ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2016. In neither of these publications did ASHRAE amend minimum 
EER levels for small, large, and very large water-cooled and 
evaporatively-cooled unitary air conditioners, and, thus, DOE was not 
triggered to examine amended standards for this equipment under 42 
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A). As a result, the current standards for ECUACs and 
WCUACs are those set forth in the May 2012 final rule and codified at 
10 CFR 431.97. These standards are reproduced in Table I.1.

  Table I.1--Federal Energy Conservation Standards for Water-Cooled and Evaporatively-Cooled Commercial Package
                                     Air-Conditioning and Heating Equipment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Cooling capacity
        Equipment type               (Btu/h)         Heating type      Minimum EER         Compliance date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Water-Cooled............  <65,000..........  All.............            12.1  October 29, 2003.

[[Page 36482]]

 
Small Water-Cooled............  >=65,000 and       No Heating or               12.1  June 1, 2013.
                                 <135,000.          Electric
                                                    Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types             11.9  June 1, 2013.
                                                    of Heating.
Large Water-Cooled............  >=135,000 and      No Heating or               12.5  June 1, 2014.
                                 <240,000.          Electric
                                                    Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types             12.3  June 1, 2014.
                                                    of Heating.
Very Large Water-Cooled.......  >=240,000 and      No Heating or               12.4  June 1, 2014.
                                 <760,000.          Electric
                                                    Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types             12.2  June 1, 2014.
                                                    of Heating.
Small Evaporatively-Cooled....  <65,000..........  All.............            12.1  October 29, 2003.
Small Evaporatively-Cooled....  >=65,000 and       No Heating or               12.1  June 1, 2013.
                                 <135,000.          Electric
                                                    Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types             11.9  June 1, 2013.
                                                    of Heating.
Large Evaporatively-Cooled....  >=135,000 and      No Heating or               12.0  June 1, 2014.
                                 <240,000.          Electric
                                                    Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types             11.8  June 1, 2014.
                                                    of Heating.
Very Large Evaporatively-       >=240,000 and      No Heating or               11.9  June 1, 2014.
 Cooled.                         <760,000.          Electric
                                                    Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types             11.7  June 1, 2014.
                                                    of Heating.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE is publishing this RFI to collect data and information to 
inform its decision consistent with its obligation under EPCA.

B. Rulemaking Process

    DOE must follow specific statutory criteria for prescribing new or 
amended standards for covered equipment. EPCA requires that in order to 
adopt a more-stringent standard for ECUACs and WCUACs, DOE must 
determine, supported by clear and convincing evidence, that adoption of 
a more-stringent efficiency 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)(C)(i); 42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(A)) 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 affected products;
    (2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average 
life of the product compared to any increases in the initial cost, or 
maintenance expenses;
    (3) The total projected amount of energy and water (if applicable) 
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))
    DOE fulfills these and other applicable requirements by conducting 
a series of analyses throughout the rulemaking process. Table I.2 shows 
the individual analyses that are performed to satisfy each of the 
requirements within EPCA.

       Table I.2--EPCA Requirements and Corresponding DOE Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            EPCA requirement                Corresponding DOE analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Significant Energy Savings.............   Shipments Analysis.
                                          National Impact
                                          Analysis.
                                          Energy and Water Use
                                          Determination.
Technological Feasibility..............   Market and Technology
                                          Assessment.
                                          Screening Analysis.
                                          Engineering Analysis.
Economic Justification:                  ...............................
    1. Economic impact on manufacturers   Manufacturer Impact
     and consumers.                       Analysis.
                                          Life-Cycle Cost and
                                          Payback Period Analysis.
                                          Life-Cycle Cost
                                          Subgroup Analysis.
                                          Shipments Analysis.
    2. Lifetime operating cost savings    Markups for Product
     compared to increased cost for the   Price Determination.
     product.                             Energy and Water Use
                                          Determination.
                                          Life-Cycle Cost and
                                          Payback Period Analysis.
    3. Total projected energy savings..   Shipments Analysis.
                                          National Impact
                                          Analysis.
    4. Impact on utility or performance   Screening Analysis.
                                          Engineering Analysis.
    5. Impact of any lessening of         Manufacturer Impact
     competition.                         Analysis.
    6. Need for national energy and       Shipments Analysis.
     water conservation.                  National Impact
                                          Analysis.

[[Page 36483]]

 
    7. Other factors the Secretary        Employment Impact
     considers relevant.                  Analysis.
                                          Utility Impact
                                          Analysis.
                                          Emissions Analysis.
                                          Monetization of
                                          Emission Reductions Benefits.
                                          Regulatory Impact
                                          Analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As detailed throughout this RFI, DOE is publishing this document 
seeking input and data from interested parties to aid in the 
development of an energy use analysis for ECUACs and WCUACs. The issues 
relevant to the energy use analysis are also relevant to the technical 
and economic analyses should DOE determine it necessary to conduct 
them. In addition to the specific issues identified in the following 
section on which DOE requests comment, DOE requests comment on its 
overall approach and analyses used to evaluate potential standard 
levels for ECUACs and WCUACs.

II. Requests for Information and Comments

    DOE seeks comment on whether there have been sufficient 
technological or market changes 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. In the following sections, DOE has identified a variety 
of issues on which it seeks input to aid in determining whether to 
proceed with a ``no new standard'' determination or propose more-
stringent standards for ECUACs and WCUACs.

A. Market Analysis

    In preparation for this RFI, DOE conducted a review of the current 
market for ECUACs and WCUACs, including equipment literature, and the 
DOE Compliance Certification Management System (CCMS) database.\4\ In 
addition, DOE reviewed market data and stakeholder comments received as 
part of the previous standards rulemaking for ECUACs and WCUACs, as 
well as the energy savings potential for amended standards determined 
in that rulemaking. The following subsections discuss DOE's analysis of 
the current market for ECUACs and WCUACs as well as relevant results 
from the May 2012 final rule, including shipments estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The DOE CCMS database can be found at: http://www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Shipments Estimates
    As part of the previous rulemaking, AHRI provided historical 
shipments data from 1989 to 2009 for WCUACs by cooling capacity range. 
DOE searched for, but was unable to identify, publicly available 
sources of shipments of ECUACs and WCUACs.
    Previously submitted historical AHRI data showed strongly 
decreasing shipments for certain small (i.e., greater than 65,000 Btu/h 
and less than 135,000 Btu/h cooling capacity) and large WCUACs over the 
period from 1989 to 2009. (Docket No. EERE-2011-BT-STD-0029-0003) For 
the analyses conducted for a notice of data availability (NODA) 
published on May 5, 2011 (``May 2011 NODA''), DOE developed shipments 
projections for these equipment classes using an exponential curve fit 
to the 21 years of available data. 76 FR 25622, 25641-25642. The energy 
savings estimates from the May 2011 NODA (which depend on the shipments 
projections) were presented unchanged in the May 2012 final rule. 77 FR 
28969-28971. Because the historical trends showed a steep decline in 
shipments for these classes, the shipment projections resulted in very 
few shipments by the end of the 30-year analysis period. For very large 
WCUACs, the decline in shipments was less definitive, although a linear 
fit of the available 21 years of shipment data showed gradually 
declining shipments. For each of the WCUAC equipment classes analyzed, 
DOE used these shipments data to analyze two shipment scenarios: (1) 
Based on historical trends of declining shipments, and (2) based on 
shipments remaining constant at 2009 levels. DOE analyzed the energy 
savings potential by equipment class for both scenarios to provide a 
range of energy savings estimates. 76 FR 25641-25642. Estimates of 
annual shipments averaged over the 30-year analysis periods used in the 
previous rulemaking, 2013-2042 for small WCUACs and 2014-2043 for large 
and very large WCUACs, resulted in the shipment estimates shown in 
Table II.1 for each equipment class.
    In the May 2012 final rule analysis, DOE did not identify any 
models of certain small (i.e., greater than 65,000 Btu/h but less than 
135,000 Btu/h cooling capacity) or large ECUACs, and thus DOE assumed 
no shipments for these equipment classes. Id. At 76 FR 25639. DOE 
identified multiple models of very large ECUACs. Because no shipments 
data were available for ECUACs, DOE developed shipment estimates based 
on the ratio of the number of identified models of very large ECUACs 
(9) to the number of models of very large WCUACs (35). Id. at 76 FR 
25642. The average of the projected shipments per year (averaged over 
the 30-year analysis period) under both scenarios considered is shown 
in Table II.1. Average shipment estimates for ECUACs and WCUACs in 
Table II.1 are shown as ranges bounded by the estimates for the two 
different analyzed shipment scenarios (i.e., (1) based on historical 
trends of declining shipments, and (2) based on shipments remaining 
constant at 2009 levels). Shipments for ECUACs and WCUACs are also 
shown as a percentage of package air conditioner and package heat pump 
annual shipments reported by AHRI, averaged over the 5-year period from 
2013-2017, for each cooling capacity range.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ U.S. Manufacturers' Shipments of Central Air Conditioners 
and Air-Source Heat Pumps by Btu/h, AHRI Shipments Data. http://www.ahrinet.org/Resources/Statistics/Historical-Data/Central-Air-Conditioners-and-Air-Source-Heat-Pumps.aspx (last accessed April 8, 
2019). DOE interprets the cited AHRI data as consisting of shipments 
for air-cooled and water-cooled package air conditioners and air-
cooled heat pumps. Because the AHRI data uses cooling capacity 
ranges that differ from DOE's equipment class structure, AHRI 
shipments data for equipment with cooling capacity between 135,000 
and 249,900 Btu/h are included in the row designated for equipment 
with cooling capacity >=135,000 and <240,000 Btu/h in Table II.1. 
Additionally, AHRI shipments data for equipment with cooling 
capacity greater than or equal to 640,000 Btu/h are included in the 
row designated for equipment with cooling capacity >=240,000 and 
<760,000 Btu/h in Table II.1. DOE estimates that shipments of 
package air conditioners with cooling capacity greater than 760,000 
Btu/h are very small relative to shipments of all very large 
packaged air conditioner and heat pumps (i.e., with cooling capacity 
>=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h).

[[Page 36484]]



    Table II.1--Shipments for Water-Cooled, Evaporatively-Cooled, and Air-Cooled Air-Conditioning and Heating
                                          Equipment by Equipment Class
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Annual
                                                                    shipments--
                                                                   average over                    Percentage of
                                                                   30 years (Low   AHRI package    AHRI package
            Equipment type              Cooling capacity (Btu/h)     and High      AC/HP annual        AC/HP
                                                                    Projections    shipments **    shipments (%)
                                                                   from May 2012
                                                                   Final Rule) *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Water-Cooled....................  >=65,000 and <135,000...          51-152         180,377       0.03-0.08
Large Water-Cooled....................  >=135,000 and <240,000..          85-182          72,797       0.12-0.25
Very Large Water-Cooled...............  >=240,000 and <760,000..         585-909          27,282         2.1-3.3
Small Evaporatively-Cooled............  >=65,000 and <135,000...               0         180,377               0
Large Evaporatively-Cooled............  >=135,000 and <240,000..               0          72,797               0
Very Large Evaporatively-Cooled.......  >=240,000 and <760,000..         150-234          27,282       0.55-0.86
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Projected average annual shipments shown were averaged over the 30-year analysis periods used in the May 2012
  final rule analysis: 2013-2042 for small WCUACs, and 2014-2043 for large and very large WCUACs and very large
  ECUACs. Shipment estimates in the May 2012 final rule were developed for two different scenarios: (1) Based on
  historical trends of declining shipments, and (2) based on shipments remaining constant at 2009 levels.
  Estimates for the two different scenarios are the bounds for the ranges of shipments provided for each
  equipment class.
** U.S. Manufacturers' Shipments of Central Air Conditioners and Air-Source Heat Pumps by Btu/h, AHRI Shipments
  Data. http://www.ahrinet.org/Resources/Statistics/Historical-Data/Central-Air-Conditioners-and-Air-Source-Heat-Pumps.aspx (last accessed April 8, 2019).

    As shown in Table II.1, average shipments of ECUAC and WCUACs with 
cooling capacity greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h were previously 
estimated to be less than 1,000 for each equipment class and are only a 
small fraction of shipments of air-cooled commercial unitary air 
conditioners (ACUACs). DOE is not aware of any publicly-available 
shipments data for ECUACs or WCUACs more recent than the data presented 
in the May 2012 final rule. On July 25, 2017, DOE published an RFI for 
test procedures for several categories of commercial air conditioners 
and heat pumps, including ECUACs and WCUACs (``July 2017 TP RFI''). 82 
FR 34427. In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, Goodman Global, Inc 
(Goodman) stated that the market for WCUACs is extremely small and 
represents only a fraction of a percentage of ACUAC shipments. (Docket 
No. EERE-2017-BT-TP-0018-0014 at p. 3)
    Issue A.1 DOE seeks comment on whether the shipments estimates for 
WCUACs and ECUACs analyzed in the May 2012 final rule are 
representative of the current market.
    Issue A.2 DOE requests feedback and/or data on historical and 
recent shipments for each of the current seven equipment classes of 
WCUACs and seven equipment classes of ECUACs, including for units with 
cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h. DOE also seeks evidence or 
reasoning for expected trends in future shipments that differ from 
those analyzed in the May 2012 final rule.
    Issue A.3 DOE requests feedback on whether the historical decline 
in shipments for WCUACs that was found in the May 2012 final rule 
analysis still applies for the current WCUAC market. Specifically, DOE 
seeks information on market forces that are expected to influence 
future WCUAC shipment trends and could support DOE's assessment of 
future shipments. DOE also requests feedback on the market forces 
affecting shipments for the ECUAC market, and on whether there is any 
information to suggest a growing or declining market. DOE requests any 
shipment data that maps into the model counts as shown in table II.2.

2. Model Counts

    For this RFI, DOE conducted a review of the current market for 
WCUACs and ECUACs based on models included in the DOE CCMS database. 
DOE also compared the number of ECUAC and WCUAC models to the number of 
ACUAC models listed in DOE's CCMS database. Table II.22 shows the 
number of models listed within the DOE CCMS database \6\ that DOE has 
identified for each class of ACUACs, ECUACs, and WCUACs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Accessed on April 1, 2019.

  Table II.2--Model Counts for Evaporatively-Cooled, Water-Cooled, and Air-Cooled Air Conditioners by Equipment
                                                      Class
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Number of models
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
             Cooling capacity range (Btu/h)                Evaporatively-
                                                               cooled          Water-cooled        Air-cooled
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<65,000................................................                  9                 15            * 2,307
>=65,000 and <135,000..................................                  0                 49              2,301
>=135,000 and <240,000.................................                  0                 33              1,975
>=240,000 and <760,000.................................                 15                251              2,843
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This <65,000 Btu/h air-cooled model count includes only unique basic models of three-phase air-cooled
  commercial air conditioners with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h.


[[Page 36485]]

    As shown in Table II.22, the number of models of ECUACs and WCUACs 
currently on the market is significantly less than the number of ACUAC 
models on the market for all capacity ranges, suggesting that the 
current market for ECUACs and WCUACs is much smaller than the market 
for ACUACs.
    In the May 2012 final rule, DOE did not analyze small ECUACs and 
WCUACs with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h. As shown in Table 
II.22 of this RFI, DOE's CCMS database includes 9 models of ECUACs with 
cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h and 15 models of WCUACs with 
cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h. DOE identified only one 
manufacturer of ECUACs in this capacity range, and the models offered 
by this manufacturer are single-phase equipment and appear to be 
predominantly marketed for residential applications. Further, 
examination of the manufacturer literature for these models indicates 
that they are marketed specifically toward regions of the United States 
with hot and dry climates, suggesting that there are few if any 
shipments in other regions of the United States. In contrast, there are 
listings for over 3,000 basic models of air-cooled residential central 
air conditioners (CACs) in DOE's CCMS database, suggesting that 
evaporatively-cooled units comprise a very small share of the market 
for residential air conditioners.
    DOE's CCMS database includes data for only two distinct product 
lines of WCUACs with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h. From 
examination of manufacturer literature for WCUACs with cooling capacity 
less than 65,000 Btu/h, the unit design and marketed application of 
these WCUAC models suggest that they do not comprise a significant 
share of the market for air conditioners in residential or commercial 
applications. As shown in Table II.22, the model count of WCUACs with 
cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h is less than 1 percent of the 
model count of three-phase ACUACs in this capacity range.
    Issue A.4 DOE seeks comment on the size of the current market for 
ECUACs and WCUACs, as compared to the market for ACUACs.
3. Current Market Efficiency Distributions
    For this RFI, DOE examined the efficiency ratings of ECUACs and 
WCUACs currently on the market. Table II.3 presents the summary 
statistics by equipment category and size of equipment from DOE's CCMS 
database. As mentioned previously in section II.A.2 of this document, 
there were no ECUAC models listed in the DOE CCMS Database with cooling 
capacities between 65,000 Btu/h and 240,000 Btu/h.

                  Table II.3--Current Market Efficiency Distributions for Water-Cooled and Evaporatively-Cooled Air Conditioners Models
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                EER                           Current         Current
                                                              Average    ------------------------------------------------   federal EER     federal EER
                                            Number  of        cooling                                                        standard        standard
     Cooling capacity range  (Btu/h)          models      capacity  (Btu/                                                   level  (no      level  (all
                                                                h)            Minimum         Average         Maximum         heat or      other  types
                                                                                                                          electric heat)   of  heating)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Water-Cooled Air Conditioners
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<65,000.................................              15          52,907            12.2            12.9            14.8              * 12.1
                                                                                                                         -------------------------------
>=65,000 and <135,000...................              49         100,837            12.1            13.3            15.3            12.1            11.9
>=135,000 and <240,000..................              33         173,939            12.5            15.0            16.3            12.5            12.3
>=240,000 and <760,000..................             251         485,143            12.5            13.9            16.5            12.4            12.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Evaporatively-Cooled Air Conditioners
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<65,000.................................               9          38,300            13.2            14.8            16.0              * 12.1
                                                                                                                         -------------------------------
>=65,000 and <135,000...................               0             N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A            12.1            11.9
>=135,000 and <240,000..................               0             N/A             N/A             N/A             N/A            12.0            11.8
>=240,000 and <760,000..................              15         440,267            11.8            12.7            13.4            11.9            11.7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The <65,000 Btu/h equipment classes for Water-cooled and Evaporatively cooled Air Conditioners are not divided by heating type.

    Issue A.5 DOE seeks comment on the range of efficiency levels 
currently on the market for each equipment class of ECUACs and-WCUACs, 
and on whether efficiency levels above the current baseline are 
achievable for equipment across all cooling capacity ranges.

B. Energy Efficiency Descriptors

1. General
    The current Federal energy conservation standards for ECUACs and 
WCUACs use EER as the energy descriptor. DOE notes that in addition to 
using EER for standard levels, ASHRAE Standard 90.1 also specifies 
standard levels using the integrated energy efficiency ratio (IEER). 
Unlike the EER metric, which only utilizes the efficiency of the 
equipment operating at full load, IEER factors in the efficiency of 
operating at part loads of 75 percent, 50 percent, and 25 percent of 
capacity as well as the efficiency at full load. This is accomplished 
by weighting the full- and part-load efficiencies with the average 
amount of time operating at each loading point. Additionally, IEER 
incorporates reduced condenser temperatures (i.e., reduced entering 
water temperature for WCUACs and reduced outdoor air dry-bulb and wet-
bulb temperatures for ECUACs) for part-load operation. ASHRAE 90.1 has 
included minimum efficiency levels for ECUACs and WCUACs in terms of 
both EER and IEER since 2010.
    In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, the Appliance Standards 
Awareness Project (ASAP), Alliance to Save Energy, American Council for 
an Energy-Efficiency Economy (ACEEE), Northwest Energy Efficiency 
Alliance (NEEA), and Northwest Power and Conservation Council 
encouraged DOE to adopt IEER as the metric for WCUACs and ECUACs, 
stating that WCUACs and ECUACs provide the same function as

[[Page 36486]]

ACUACs and, like ACUACs, spend most of their operating hours at part 
load. (Docket No. EERE-2017-BT-TP-0018-0009 at p.4) In contrast, 
Goodman commented that the WCUAC market is so small that there would be 
no value in revising the regulated metric to IEER for WCUACs. (Docket 
No. EERE-2017-BT-TP-0018-0014 at p.3)
    In the following sub-sections, three issues regarding IEER for 
ECUACs and WCUACs are discussed: (1) Representativeness of IEER for 
ECUACs and WCUACs of all capacities; (2) representativeness of IEER for 
ECUACs with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h; and (3) potential 
burdens to manufacturers of IEER testing.

2. Representativeness of IEER for Evaporatively-Cooled and Water-Cooled 
Units

    As previously mentioned, IEER includes lower condenser temperatures 
for part-load tests. Specifically, Table II.4 shows the IEER test 
conditions for ECUACs and WCUACs specified in AHRI 340/360-2019.

 Table II.4--IEER Test Conditions for Water-Cooled and Evaporatively-Cooled Air Conditioners From AHRI 340/360-
                                                      2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Water-cooled                Evaporatively-cooled
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Entering      Entering  air   Entering  air
                  Percent load                         water         dry-bulb        wet-bulb      Makeup  water
                                                    temperature     temperature     temperature     temperature
                                                     ([deg]F)        ([deg]F)        ([deg]F)        ([deg]F)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
100.............................................            85.0            95.0            75.0            85.0
75..............................................            73.5            81.5            66.2            81.5
50..............................................            62.0            68.0            57.5            68.0
25..............................................            55.0            65.0            52.8            65.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Performance of equipment at each of the four IEER testing 
conditions are combined in a weighted average to determine the IEER 
rating. The following equation shows the weighting factors for each 
testing condition.

IEER = (0.020 [middot] A) + (0.617 [middot] B) + (0.238 [middot] C) + 
(0.125 [middot] D)

Where (see Table II.4 for condenser temperature for all four test 
points):

A = EER, Btu/W [middot] h at 100% capacity at standard rating 
conditions
B = EER, Btu/W [middot] h at 75% capacity and reduced condenser 
temperature
C = EER, Btu/W [middot] h at 50% capacity and reduced condenser 
temperature
D = EER, Btu/W [middot] h at 25% capacity and reduced condenser 
temperature.

    The intent of this weighted average across a range of condenser 
temperatures is to produce an IEER rating that is more representative 
of outdoor conditions that air conditioners face for much of the year, 
rather than just the peak temperature experienced in most climates for 
only a small minority of operating hours. However, these weighting 
factors may not be representative of typical applications for ECUACs. 
ECUACs may be disproportionally marketed and sold in relatively hot and 
dry climates in which there is a larger efficiency benefit to using 
evaporative condenser cooling. As previously shown in the IEER 
equation, the weighting factor for the full-load test point is only 2 
percent, so almost all of the IEER rating reflects performance at 
cooler outdoor air temperatures.
    Marketing literature for one ECUAC model line advertises its 
efficient performance at high outdoor air temperatures (90 [deg]F and 
above) and states that the 95 [deg]F outdoor air temperature used to 
determine EER is more representative of typical summer heat in hot 
climates than the lower outdoor air temperatures used to determine the 
seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER) rating (the seasonal cooling 
metric used for residential central air conditioners). (Docket No. 
EERE-2017-BT-STD-0032-0001 at p. 4) Presumably the same argument may 
apply for the suitability of IEER for ECUACs, as 98 percent of 
performance in the IEER rating is based on outdoor air dry-bulb 
temperatures of 81.5 [deg]F or less.
    In response to the July 2017 TP RFI, the California Investor Owned 
Utilities (CA IOUs) commented that their locations regularly experience 
summer ambient dry-bulb temperatures above 110 [deg]F. CA IOUs further 
stated that the highest ambient IEER test point, 95 [deg]F, does not 
reflect the conditions experienced in the western climate, and that 
IEER should include a ``hot-dry'' test point to reflect the conditions 
in the western climate. (Docket No. EERE-2017-BT-TP-0018-0007 at p. 3)
    Issue B.1 DOE requests information on whether the IEER metric and 
weighting factors are representative of the average use cycles for 
ECUACs and WCUACs. Specifically, DOE seeks comment on the extent to 
which ECUACs and/or WCUACs are installed in hot and dry climates as 
compared to other climates. DOE also seeks comment on the types of 
buildings that represent the primary markets for ECUACs and WCUACs. DOE 
requests this information for all ECUAC and WCUAC equipment classes, 
including units with cooling capacities less than 65,000 Btu/h.
3. Representativeness of IEER for Evaporatively-Cooled Units With 
Cooling Capacity Less Than 65,000 Btu/h.
    ASHRAE 90.1-2016 includes IEER efficiency requirements for all 
classes of ECUACs, including ECUACs with cooling capacity less than 
65,000 Btu/h. However, DOE's preliminary analysis of models in this 
equipment class certified in DOE's CCMS database suggests that these 
units are primarily marketed for residential applications. In contrast, 
the IEER metric was developed for commercial applications by analyzing 
air conditioner energy use in commercial buildings. Therefore, it is 
not clear whether IEER is representative of average use cycles for 
ECUACs with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h.
    One issue is the condenser conditions and weighting factors used 
for determining IEER. Over a third of the weighting for determining 
IEER for ECUACs is based on performance at outdoor air dry-bulb 
temperatures of 68 [deg]F and 65 [deg]F. While many commercial 
buildings have substantial cooling loads at these temperatures, 
residential cooling loads at these temperatures are likely 
significantly lower. Therefore, for residential applications, IEER may 
overweight cooling at lower outdoor ambient temperatures and 
underweight cooling at higher ambient temperatures.
    Another issue is that the IEER equation for adjusting for cyclic

[[Page 36487]]

degradation \7\ (see equation 4 of AHRI 340/360-2019) assumes 
continuous operation of the indoor fan when the compressor is not 
operating. While this may be representative of commercial applications 
(in which the indoor fan often runs continuously to provide 
ventilation), the indoor fan presumably does not run continuously in 
many residential applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For units that cannot reduce compressor capacity 
sufficiently to meet a target IEER load fraction during steady-state 
operation, the cyclic degradation adjustment in AHRI 340/360-2019 
quantifies the reduced efficiency that would be seen in field 
applications from compressor cycling at part-load conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue B.2 DOE requests comment on whether the IEER metric is 
representative of the average use cycle for ECUACs with cooling 
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h. Specifically, DOE seeks comment on 
whether ECUACs in this equipment class are typically installed in 
residential or commercial applications. Additionally, DOE seeks 
feedback on whether the outdoor air dry-bulb and wet-bulb temperatures 
and weighting factors specified for IEER testing of ECUACs in AHRI 340/
360-2019 are representative for ECUACs with cooling capacity less than 
65,000 Btu/h. Further, DOE requests comment on whether the indoor fan 
typically runs continuously for ECUACs in this capacity range when 
installed in the field.
4. Burden of IEER Testing
    Some manufacturers already rate performance in terms of EER and 
IEER for ECUAC and WCUAC models, but this is not the case for all 
models. IEER testing involves significantly more tests than an EER 
test--rather than a single test for EER, an IEER test requires at least 
four tests, and more tests can be required if interpolation for the 
target load fraction is needed for any part-load tests.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Per AHRI 340/360-2019, if a unit cannot achieve the target 
part-load fraction (i.e., 75%, 50%, or 25%) within tolerance but can 
operate at a load above and below the part load test point at the 
applicable reduced condenser temperature, the results of both tests 
at the applicable condenser temperature are used to interpolate the 
unit performance at the target load fraction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue B.3 DOE requests data on the share of ECUAC and WCUAC models 
on the market, by capacity range, that are currently rated with both 
EER and IEER. For models that are not already rated for IEER, DOE also 
requests comment on the extent to which testing to IEER would impose 
testing and certification burden on manufacturers, including small 
business manufacturers.

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 ECUACs and WCUACs.
2. Other
    DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant to the conduct of 
this rulemaking that may not specifically be identified in this 
document. 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 (February 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 ECUACs and WCUACs while 
remaining consistent with the requirements of EPCA. Additionally, DOE 
also 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 ECUACs and WCUACs.

III. Submission of Comments

    DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by 
September 12, 2019, comments and information on matters addressed in 
this notice and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of 
amended energy conservation standards for ECUACs and WCUACs. After the 
close of the comment period, DOE will review the public comments 
received and may begin collecting data and conducting the analyses 
discussed in this RFI.
    Submitting comments via http://www.regulations.gov. The http://www.regulations.gov web page requires 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. 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 tracking number that http://www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your 
comment.
    Submitting comments via email, hand delivery, or mail. Comments and 
documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or mail also will be 
posted to http://www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal 
contact information to be publicly viewable, do

[[Page 36488]]

not include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, 
provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first 
and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing 
address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it 
does not include any comments.
    Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, 
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand 
delivery, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It is not 
necessary to submit printed copies. No telefacsimiles (faxes) will be 
accepted.
    Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE 
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that 
are not secured, written in English, and free of any defects or 
viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of 
encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature 
of the author.
    Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the 
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters 
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled 
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting 
time.
    Confidential Business Information. 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 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 that 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].

    Signed in Washington, DC, on July 22, 2019.
Daniel R. Simmons,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2019-16048 Filed 7-26-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6450-01-P