[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 106 (Tuesday, June 2, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33643-33655]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11765]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Case Number 2018-004; EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007]


Energy Conservation Program: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver 
to LG Electronics USA, Inc. From the Department of Energy Portable Air 
Conditioner Test Procedure

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

ACTION: Notice of decision and order.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') gives notice of a 
Decision and Order (Case Number 2018-004) that grants LG Electronics 
USA, Inc. (``LG'') a waiver from specified portions of the DOE test 
procedure for determining the energy efficiency of listed portable air 
conditioner basic models. Under the

[[Page 33644]]

Decision and Order, LG is required to test and rate the listed basic 
models of its portable air conditioners in accordance with the 
alternate test procedure specified in the Decision and Order.

DATES: The Decision and Order is effective on June 2, 2020. The 
Decision and Order will terminate upon the compliance date of any 
future amendment to the test procedure for portable air conditioners 
located in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix CC that addresses the 
issues presented in this waiver. At that time, LG must use the relevant 
test procedure for this product for any testing to demonstrate 
compliance with standards and any representations of energy use.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Ms. Lucy deButts, 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. Email: 
[email protected].
    Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-33, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, 
Washington, DC 20585-0103. Telephone: (202) 586-1777. Email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (``CFR'') (10 CFR 430.27(f)(2)), DOE gives notice 
of the issuance of its Decision and Order as set forth below. The 
Decision and Order grants LG a waiver from the applicable test 
procedure in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix CC (``Appendix CC'') 
for listed basic models of portable air conditioners, if LG tests and 
rates those portable air conditioners using the alternate test 
procedure specified in the Decision and Order. LG's representations 
concerning the energy efficiency of the listed basic models must be 
based on testing according to the provisions and restrictions in the 
alternate test procedure set forth in the Decision and Order, and the 
representations must fairly disclose the test results. Distributors, 
retailers, and private labelers also must comply with the same 
requirements when making representations regarding the energy 
efficiency of these products. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c))
    Consistent with 10 CFR 430.27(j), not later than August 3, 2020, 
any manufacturer currently distributing in commerce in the United 
States a product employing a technology or characteristic that results 
in the same need for a waiver from the applicable test procedure must 
submit a petition for waiver. Manufacturers not currently distributing 
such products in commerce in the United States must petition for and be 
granted a waiver prior to the distribution in commerce of those 
products in the United States. Manufacturers may also submit a request 
for interim waiver pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 430.27.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on May 8, 
2020, by Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Energy Efficiency, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary 
of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is 
maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance 
with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the 
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to 
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as 
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative 
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon 
publication in the Federal Register.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.

Case #2018-004

Decision and Order

I. Background and Authority

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (``EPCA''),\1\ authorizes 
the U.S. Department of Energy (``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 B \2\ of EPCA 
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other 
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to 
improve energy efficiency for certain types of consumer products. In 
addition to specifying a list of covered products and industrial 
equipment, EPCA contains provisions that enable the Secretary of Energy 
to classify additional types of consumer products as covered products. 
(42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20)) In a final determination of coverage published 
in the Federal Register on April 18, 2016, DOE classified portable air 
conditioners as covered products under EPCA. 81 FR 22514.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 B was redesignated as Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The energy conservation program under EPCA 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. 6291), test 
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), 
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to 
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
    The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that 
manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for: (1) 
Certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy 
conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), 
and (2) making other representations about the efficiency of that 
product (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). Similarly, DOE must use these test 
procedures to determine whether the product complies with relevant 
standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
    Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures 
DOE is required to follow when prescribing or amending test procedures 
for covered products. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed 
or amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce 
test results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated 
annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative 
average use cycle or period of use and requires that test procedures 
not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test 
procedure for portable air conditioners is contained in the Code of 
Federal Regulations (``CFR'') at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix 
CC, Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of 
Portable Air Conditioners (``Appendix CC'').
    Any interested person may submit a petition for waiver from DOE's 
test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1). DOE will grant a 
waiver from the test procedure requirements if DOE determines either 
that the basic model for which the waiver was requested contains a 
design characteristic that prevents testing of the basic model 
according to the prescribed test procedures, or that the prescribed 
test procedures evaluate the basic model in a manner so 
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to 
provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2). 
DOE may grant the waiver subject to

[[Page 33645]]

conditions, including adherence to an alternate test procedure. Id.

II. LG's Petition for Waiver: Assertions and Determinations

    By letter dated May 15, 2018, LG submitted a petition for waiver 
and application for an interim waiver from the portable air conditioner 
test procedure set forth in Appendix CC.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ LG's petition for a waiver and petition for an interim 
waiver is provided in the docket located at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-00007-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The portable air conditioner test procedure in Appendix CC provides 
test instructions for two configurations of portable air conditioners: 
dual-duct and single-duct. Dual-duct units use two parallel airflow 
paths: With the first airflow path, air from the conditioned space 
(i.e., indoors) is drawn into the unit, passes over a cold heat 
exchanger (i.e., the evaporator), and is discharged back into the room. 
With the second airflow path, air from outdoors is drawn into the unit, 
passes over a hot heat exchanger (i.e., the condenser), and is 
discharged back outdoors. In this type of system, the heat that is 
removed from the indoor airflow path is essentially transferred to the 
outdoor airflow path and discharged outdoors. The temperature of the 
air flowing across the condenser significantly affects a portable air 
conditioner's cooling capacity. Because the air passing across the 
condenser is drawn from outdoors, and outdoor air temperatures vary 
during portable air conditioner use, the cooling capacity of a dual-
duct unit is significantly affected by changes in outdoor air 
temperatures. Therefore, to produce representative test results, 
Appendix CC requires dual-duct units to be tested at two different 
``test conditions'' in the test chamber that supplies the condenser 
inlet air, representing two different outdoor temperatures: 95 degrees 
Fahrenheit ([deg]F) and 83 [deg]F. Under both test conditions, the test 
chamber in which the unit is installed is maintained at a temperature 
of 80 [deg]F, which is a representative indoor temperature, and the 
unit is operated at full load.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The requirement in section 3.1.2 of Appendix CC to set the 
controls on the unit to the lowest available temperature setpoint 
applies to both the 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F tests. The lowest 
available setpoint on any portable air conditioner is significantly 
less than the indoor air temperature of 80 [deg]F, which is 
maintained by external reconditioning equipment throughout the 
duration of the test. Therefore, since the indoor temperature 
setpoint remains lower than the indoor air temperature throughout 
the duration of the test, the unit operates at full load throughout 
the duration of both tests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Single-duct units also use two parallel airflow paths; however, in 
contrast to dual-duct units, the condenser airflow path draws air from 
inside the conditioned space rather than from outside. This air is 
drawn into the unit through air grates in the unit's chassis, passes 
over the condenser, and is discharged to the outdoors through the 
single duct. During the test, the indoor air temperature remains 
steady, and thus the condenser always sees the same temperature at its 
inlet. Therefore, Appendix CC requires only one test condition for 
single-duct portable air conditioners, 80 [deg]F in the test chamber in 
which the unit is installed (corresponding to the specified indoor air 
temperature). As with the dual-duct unit tests, the single-duct unit is 
operated at full load throughout the duration of the test.
    The cooling capacity of both dual-duct and single-duct portable air 
conditioners is reduced by the infiltration of hotter outside air 
(i.e., ``infiltration air'') into the conditioned space due to any 
indoor air being exhausted outside the conditioned space through the 
condenser duct.\5\ Appendix CC accounts for infiltration air at the two 
different outdoor temperature operating conditions (95 [deg]F and 83 
[deg]F) for both single-duct and dual-duct portable air conditioners. 
The infiltration air heat transfer is calculated (as opposed to being 
directly measured) using a set of equations provided in section 4.1.2 
of Appendix CC. Finally, the cooling capacity of both dual-duct and 
single-duct portable air conditioners is also reduced by the heat 
transferred from the duct surface(s) to the conditioned space; i.e., 
``duct heat transfer.'' Duct heat transfer is accounted for in section 
4.1.1 of Appendix CC based on measurements of the surface temperature 
of the duct(s) and the total surface area of the duct(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Infiltration air'' refers to air that infiltrates from 
outside the conditioned space (e.g., from outdoors, attic, adjacent 
rooms) to inside the conditioned space as a result of negative air 
pressure induced as the outlet air is exhausted outside the 
conditioned space. This effect is particularly pronounced for 
single-duct units because single-duct units draw all of the air in 
the condenser airflow path from within the conditioned space and 
discharge that air outdoors. However, dual-duct units also typically 
draw a portion of their inlet air from the conditioned space 
(inadvertently), which creates a slight negative pressure in the 
conditioned space and results in some infiltration air for dual-duct 
units as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LG requested a waiver for the following portable air conditioner 
basic models: LP1419IVSM, LP1419HVSM, LP1219IVSM, LP1019IVSM, and 
LP0819IVSM, all of which are single-duct models.\6\ LG noted that the 
current DOE test procedure for portable air conditioners has different 
requirements for dual-duct and single-duct products. For dual-duct 
products, testing must occur under two test conditions, (i.e., at a 
high-temperature test condition and a lower-temperature test 
condition). For single-duct products, the test procedure requires 
testing at only a single full-load test condition. LG asserted that the 
current DOE test procedure for single-duct portable air conditioners 
does not take into account the specific performance and efficiency 
benefits associated with single-duct variable-speed portable air 
conditioners under part-load conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ LG provided these basic model numbers in an appendix to its 
May 15, 2018 petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LG stated that single-duct variable-speed portable air conditioners 
use frequency controls to constantly adjust the compressor rotation 
speed to maintain the desired temperature in the home without turning 
the motor on and off; that the compressor responds automatically to 
surrounding conditions to operate in the most efficient possible 
manner; and that this results in both significant energy savings and 
faster cooling compared to a portable air conditioner without a 
variable-speed compressor. LG asserted that, because the DOE test 
procedure does not account for the general part-load performance 
benefits of single-duct variable-speed portable air conditioners or 
properly account for the favorable difference in ``cycling losses'' \7\ 
for single-duct variable-speed portable air conditioners resulting from 
use of variable-speed technology, the results of the test procedure are 
not representative of the actual energy consumption of single-duct 
variable-speed portable air conditioners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ When the cooling load of the space is less than the full 
cooling power of the compressor, a single-speed compressor cycles on 
and off. This cycling behavior introduces inefficiencies, i.e., 
``cycling losses,'' due to the surge in power draw at the beginning 
of each ``on'' cycle, before the compressor reaches steady-state 
performance. As described above, the current DOE test procedure 
measures the performance of a portable air conditioner while 
operating under a full cooling load; i.e., the compressor is 
operated continuously in its ``on'' state. As a result, Appendix CC 
does not capture any inefficiencies due to compressor cycling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its petition, LG requested an alternate test procedure, which 
would provide for testing the listed basic models according to Appendix 
CC, except that units of the listed single-duct variable-speed basic 
models would be tested at the two test conditions defined for dual-duct 
units, at two different fixed compressor speeds; specifically, at the 
high-temperature (95 [deg]F) outdoor air test condition with the 
compressor speed set to maximum; and at the lower-temperature (83 
[deg]F) outdoor air test condition with the compressor speed set to 
minimum. As

[[Page 33646]]

discussed, the current single-duct portable air conditioner test 
procedure in Appendix CC relies on a single test condition. LG's 
suggested alternate approach for single-duct variable-speed portable 
air conditioners would involve measuring performance at two different 
outdoor temperature conditions, with two compressor speeds, which would 
reflect how a single-duct variable-speed portable air conditioner would 
reduce its compressor speed under reduced load conditions accompanying 
lower outdoor temperature operating conditions.
    Under the requested alternate test procedure, a single-duct 
variable-speed portable air conditioner unit's final combined energy 
efficiency ratio (``CEER'') metric would be calculated by multiplying a 
``performance adjustment factor'' by the unit's measured weighted CEER 
value (as measured according to the existing procedure for a dual-duct 
portable air conditioner at two representative outdoor temperature test 
conditions). The performance adjustment factor would reflect the 
average performance improvement, relative to a theoretical comparable 
single-duct single-speed unit, resulting from the variable-speed unit 
avoiding cycling losses associated with the lower-temperature test 
condition currently used for testing dual-duct portable air 
conditioners. Determining a unit's performance adjustment factor would 
require calculating two CEER values for a theoretical comparable 
single-duct single-speed portable air conditioner (i.e., a unit that 
has the same performance as the variable-speed test unit when operating 
at the full compressor speed). The two CEER values would reflect the 
unit's efficiency with and without efficiency losses due to compressor 
cycling. The performance adjustment factor would be calculated as the 
percent change of the weighted CEER value of the theoretical comparable 
single-duct single-speed portable air conditioner with accounting for 
cycling losses compared to the weighted CEER value of the theoretical 
comparable single-duct single-speed portable air conditioner without 
accounting for cycling losses. The performance adjustment factor 
represents the difference in real-world performance between the 
variable-speed unit and an actual comparable single-speed unit.
    The requested alternate test procedure implements a performance 
adjustment factor because use of a performance adjustment factor allows 
for an appropriate comparison between a single-duct variable-speed 
portable air conditioner tested at two different compressor speeds and 
a single-duct single-speed portable air conditioner tested at a single 
speed. The performance adjustment factor represents the relative 
benefit under the conditions represented by the test of a variable-
speed unit's avoidance of compressor cycling that would otherwise occur 
in a comparable single-speed unit. Applying it to the measured single-
duct variable-speed portable air conditioner weighted CEER accounts for 
the avoidance of efficiency losses due to cycling and provides a more 
appropriate comparison to the existing CEER metric for single-duct 
single-speed portable air conditioners.
    On August 9, 2019, DOE published a notice that announced its 
receipt of the petition for waiver and granted LG an interim waiver 
(``August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver''). 84 FR 39274. In the 
August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, DOE presented LG's claim 
that the results of the test procedure in Appendix CC are not 
representative of the actual energy consumption of the variable-speed 
single-duct portable air conditioner basic models listed in LG's 
petition for waiver and LG's requested alternate test procedure 
described above.
    In the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, DOE specified an 
alternate test procedure as suggested by LG with certain modifications 
and additional requirements. First, the alternate test procedure 
specified in the interim waiver provides compressor speed nomenclature 
and definitions that are derived from those in an industry standard for 
testing consumer central air conditioning products with variable-speed 
compressors. DOE clarified the low compressor speed definition to 
ensure the test unit provides adequate cooling capacity under reduced 
loads, based on the expected load at those conditions.\8\ Second, LG 
must maintain the compressor speed required for each test condition in 
accordance with the instructions LG submitted to DOE on July 8, 
2019.\9\ DOE did not include measuring performance at two different 
outdoor temperature conditions, each at a different compressor speed, 
as suggested by LG. Given that the condenser airflow path on a single-
duct unit draws air from inside the conditioned space rather than from 
outside, and the indoor air temperature is held constant during 
testing, changing the outdoor temperature conditions between each test 
would add unnecessary test burden with no impact on test results. 
Therefore, DOE specified a single temperature for only the condenser 
inlet air for the two test conditions, one at each compressor speed, 
and not the outdoor air test conditions in August 2019 Notice of 
Petition for Waiver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The compressor speed nomenclature and definition 
clarifications are derived from Air Conditioning, Heating, and 
Refrigeration Institute Standard (AHRI) 210/240-2017, ``Performance 
Rating of Unitary Air-conditioning & Air source Heat Pump 
Equipment,'' and adapted to apply to portable air conditioners. 
Equation 11.60 in AHRI 210/240-2017 relates the building load to an 
AC's full-load cooling capacity and outdoor temperature, and assumes 
full-load operation at 98 [deg]F outdoor temperature. DOE adjusted 
(i.e. normalized) this equation to reflect full-load operation at 95 
[deg]F outdoor temperature, to provide consistency with the full-
load test condition for portable air conditioners. Using the 
adjusted equation suggests that the representative cooling load at 
the 83 [deg]F rating condition would be 60 percent of the full-load 
cooling capacity for portable air conditioners. DOE recognizes that 
variable-speed portable air conditioners may use compressors that 
vary their speed in discrete steps and may not be able to operate at 
a speed that provides exactly 60-percent cooling capacity; 
therefore, the defined cooling capacity associated with the low 
compressor speed is presented as a 10-percent range rather than a 
single value. A 60-percent cooling load is the upper bound of the 
10-percent range defining the cooling capacity associated with the 
lower compressor speed (i.e., the range is defined as 50 to 60 
percent). This ensures that the variable-speed portable air 
conditioner is capable of matching the representative cooling load 
(60 percent of the maximum) at the 83 [deg]F rating condition, while 
providing the performance benefits associated with variable-speed 
operation. In contrast, if the 10-percent range were to be defined 
as, for example, 55 to 65 percent (with 60 percent as the midpoint), 
a variable-speed portable air conditioner could be tested at 63 
percent, for example, without demonstrating that the unit is capable 
of maintaining variable-speed performance down to 60 percent.
    \9\ The instructions provided by LG were marked as confidential 
and, as such, the instructions will be treated as confidential. The 
document is located in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons explained here and in the August 2019 Notice of 
Petition for Waiver, without a waiver, the five portable air 
conditioner basic models identified in the interim waiver, to which 
this Order applies, contain a design characteristic--variable-speed 
compressors--that yields test results unrepresentative of their true 
energy consumption, and thus efficiency. Thus, DOE is requiring LG to 
test and rate the five portable air conditioner basic models identified 
in this Order according to the alternate test procedure in this Order. 
The alternate test procedure in this Order is a modified version of the 
procedure in the interim waiver.
    In the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, DOE also 
solicited comments from interested parties on all aspects of the 
petition. Id. DOE received comments from the Appliance Standards 
Awareness Project and the Natural Resources Defense Council,

[[Page 33647]]

jointly (hereinafter the ``Joint Advocates''); the Pacific Gas and 
Electric Company, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California 
Edison, commenting jointly as the California Investor Owned Utilities 
(hereinafter the ``California IOUs''); GE Appliances, a Haier Company 
(``GEA''), and the Midea America Research Center (``Midea''). On 
September 27, 2019, LG subsequently submitted a rebuttal statement 
(pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(d)(3)) in response to these comments.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Comments submitted by the Joint Advocates, California IOUs, 
GEA, and Midea, and the rebuttal statement submitted by LG can be 
accessed at: https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commenters generally agreed that the current test procedure for 
portable air conditions does not produce results representative of the 
actual performance of single-duct variable speed portable air 
conditions. GEA generally supported the need for a test procedure 
waiver for portable air conditioners with variable-speed compressors, 
asserting that the current test procedure is not representative of the 
actual performance of single-duct variable-speed units. (GEA, No. 7 at 
p. 1) \11\ Midea stated that it fully supports granting a final waiver 
to LG, subject to minor revisions that are discussed in the following 
paragraphs. (Midea, No. 8 at p. 3) The Joint Advocates stated that they 
share LG's concern that the current test procedure for portable air 
conditioners does not capture the potential benefits of variable-speed 
technology. (Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 1) The California IOUs stated 
that an alternate test procedure is warranted to demonstrate the 
benefits of variable-speed compressor technology, whose primary benefit 
in improving energy efficiency is the reduction of cyclic losses. 
(California IOUs, No. 6 at pp. 1-2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A notation in the form ``GEA, No. 7 at p. 1'' identifies a 
written comment: (1) Made by GE Appliances, a Haier Company; (2) 
recorded in document number 7 that is filed in the docket of this 
waiver (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007) and available for review 
at http://www.regulations.gov; and (3) which appears on page 1 of 
document number 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The California IOUs urged DOE to make various changes. First, they 
asked DOE to ensure the test procedure was representative of real-world 
use, consistent with previously developed concepts, and justified with 
data. Second, they asked DOE to ensure the alternate test procedure 
results are comparable with existing single-speed units, assumptions 
are clearly justified, and methods are representative and reproducible. 
They also asked DOE to address a number of additional issues prior to 
granting the waiver. (California IOUs, No. 6 at pp. 1-2)
    The Joint Advocates argued that, instead of granting a test 
procedure waiver to LG to address single-duct portable air conditioners 
with variable-speed compressors, DOE should instead investigate a load-
based test procedure for all portable air conditioners to capture part-
load operation for all unit configurations. Because the current test 
procedure is a fixed-conditions test, they argued it is not 
representative of how either single-speed or variable-speed units 
perform in the field. Specifically, variable-speed units are not 
allowed to adjust to reduced loads, and single-speed units do not cycle 
under the current fixed-conditions test. (Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 
1)
    In its rebuttal statement, LG stated that granting this test 
procedure waiver does not preclude DOE from investigating a load-based 
test procedure in a future portable air conditioner test procedure 
rulemaking that DOE must conduct after granting a test procedure 
waiver. LG stated that the current DOE test procedure misrepresents the 
actual energy consumption of LG's portable air conditioners that use 
variable-speed compressors, and that denying this test procedure waiver 
for these units would, contrary to statutory requirements, mislead 
consumers about the energy efficiency of variable-speed portable air 
conditioners until DOE completes a test procedure rulemaking. LG 
asserted that, because it has met all the criteria for a test procedure 
waiver, DOE must grant the waiver. (LG, No. 9, at pp. 3-4)
    DOE has determined that the alternate test procedure in the August 
2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, as modified in this order, produces 
efficiency results for variable-speed portable air conditioners which 
are comparable with the results for single-speed units. The alternate 
test procedure accomplishes this by adjusting the efficiency rating of 
the variable-speed portable air conditioner by the amount the variable-
speed unit would outperform a theoretical comparable single-speed unit 
in a representative period of use. The alternate test procedure is 
based on industry-accepted test procedures. Values used for the cycling 
loss factor at the 83 [deg]F test condition are based on Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (``AHRI'') Standard 
210/240, ``Performance Rating of Unitary Air-conditioning & Air-source 
Heat Pump Equipment'' (``AHRI Standard 210/240''), as discussed below. 
The building load calculation is widely accepted by industry, used in 
AHRI Standard 210/240, and is constructed to be broadly applicable to a 
number of building cooling configurations. It also specifies that the 
compressor speed must be fixed at each test condition. LG has provided 
DOE instructions for fixing the compressor, to ensure that the 
alternate test procedure is repeatable and reproducible.
    Portable air conditioners are tested in psychometric chambers \12\ 
that are designed to maintain specific constant temperature conditions 
throughout the duration of the test (i.e., a constant-temperature 
test). DOE agrees that the concept of a load-based test may be more 
representative of typical portable air conditioner operation, where the 
conditions within a room vary and the portable air conditioner operates 
to maintain the room conditions based on the set point and monitored 
conditions. However, implementing a load-based test for portable air 
conditioners would present a number of significant challenges.\13\ 
First, implementing a part-load test condition would require first 
determining the full cooling capacity of a portable air conditioner 
unit, which is most easily and repeatably achieved with a constant-
temperature test. In practice, this would result in the need for 
chambers to accommodate both constant-temperature and constant-load 
operation, which could require significant chamber redesigns associated 
with new or upgraded chamber reconditioning equipment and software 
adjustments. Second, the external reconditioning equipment in existing 
psychometric chambers is controlled using software with feedback 
control to maintain constant temperature conditions. Operating the 
chamber to provide a constant load--and thus allowing the temperature 
to vary--would require continuous manual override of the software 
controls, thus requiring more technician involvement, and resulting 
expense, throughout the test. Alternatively, the software controls 
could be redesigned to accommodate constant-load operation; however, 
this would require significant financial and time investments by test 
laboratories. Third, the current test procedure does not provide any 
requirements for the type of instrumentation, hardware, or other 
equipment that can occupy

[[Page 33648]]

existing chambers. The thermal mass of such equipment inside the 
chamber can affect the variation in chamber temperature as a function 
of the cooling load, and therefore could affect the test results under 
a constant-load test in which the temperature is allowed to change. 
Ensuring the reproducibility of the test would require closely 
specifying every aspect of the test chamber, including instrumentation, 
hardware, and other equipment inside the test chamber, which would 
increase test burden by adding complexities to the test method beyond 
what is already specified, although DOE is unable to exactly quantify 
this test burden increase at this time, particularly given the 
variability in existing test chamber designs. Further, DOE is unable to 
quantify the potential benefits of requiring a load-based test 
procedure at this time. For these reasons, DOE is not specifying a 
load-based test for variable-speed portable air conditioners in this 
Decision and Order. This does not preclude DOE from considering such 
testing in a future rulemaking, particularly if industry and third-
party test laboratories were to implement load-based testing 
capabilities into psychrometric chambers, which are the type of test 
chamber typically used for portable air conditioner testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ A psychometric chamber uses ducts installed on the 
evaporator and condenser exhausts to measure the air-enthalpy and 
calculate cooling capacity.
    \13\ DOE found that the same challenges applied to load-based 
testing for room air conditioners in calorimeter chambers in the 
notice of decision and order published on May 8, 2019, in which DOE 
granted a waiver to LG for variable-speed room air conditioners. 84 
FR 20111, 20114.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to preferring a load-based test, the Joint Advocates 
expressed concern that the alternate test procedure in the interim 
waiver does not reflect real-world performance of variable-speed 
portable air conditioners, because the compressor speeds are fixed for 
each of the two test conditions (full speed at the 95 [deg]F condition 
and low speed at the 83 [deg]F condition). The Joint Advocates prefer 
capturing how the programmed control strategies change speeds in 
response to load changes and thus affect overall efficiency. (Joint 
Advocates, No. 5 at pp. 1-2)
    DOE agrees that variable-speed portable air conditioners in the 
field are likely to adjust their compressor speed in real time in 
response to variations in the cooling load. However, as DOE discussed 
for variable-speed room air conditioners in the May 2019 RAC Decision 
and Order, because of the large variation in cooling loads, both for 
rooms within a house, and among different housing types and 
geographical areas, identifying a single or multiple representative 
cooling loads would not be feasible. (84 FR 20111, 20115) Furthermore, 
DOE determined in the May RAC 2019 Decision and Order that load-based 
testing would impose undue cost and burden on manufacturers and test 
laboratories due to the unique construction and capabilities of 
existing calorimeter chambers and unit response variability during 
load-based testing. Id. DOE concludes that the same burdens would be 
imposed by load-based testing of variable-speed portable air 
conditioners in psychrometric chambers, but the approach suggested by 
LG to measure performance for a representative range of variable-speed 
operation (i.e., at low and full compressor speed under relevant 
outdoor temperature operating conditions), as modified in this order, 
provides a sufficient determination of variable-speed portable air 
conditioner performance.
    The Joint Advocates stated that, according to LG, these variable-
speed portable air conditioners can operate over a range of compressor 
speeds, and if a variable-speed unit provides sustained cooling at the 
high compressor speed (i.e., at a higher compressor speed than a 
comparable single-speed unit at full-load operating conditions), the 
faster cooling would come at the expense of higher energy consumption, 
an effect that would not be captured by the waiver test procedure. 
(Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 2)
    In its rebuttal statement, LG explained that its variable-speed 
portable air conditioners only cool the room at boost compressor speed 
(i.e., a speed faster than full speed--the speed at full-load testing 
conditions) for less than 10 minutes when they begin cooling the room, 
making the energy consumption of this phase of cooling ``very small'' 
compared to the energy consumed during the remainder of cooling mode 
operation. LG noted that AHRI Standard 210/240 describes this operation 
as ``boost compressor speed,'' and that boost compressor speed is 
standard at start-up in all air conditioners with variable-speed 
compressors. (LG, No. 9 at pp. 5-6)
    DOE has observed that a variable-speed room air conditioner 
operates at boost compressor speed to provide initial cooling to the 
conditioned space during testing. DOE expects its experience with boost 
compressor speed for variable-speed room air conditioners to be 
analogous to boost compressor speed operation in variable-speed 
portable air conditioners; this experience indicates that the amount of 
energy consumed in this operation is insignificant compared to the 
energy consumed during the remainder of cooling mode operation. As a 
result, the potential improvements in test procedure representativeness 
do not warrant the additional test burden associated with measuring 
variable-speed portable air conditioner performance at the boost 
compressor speed.
    The Joint Advocates questioned what they stated is LG's apparent 
claim that the performance of dual-duct units, but not single-duct 
units, under reduced load conditions is accounted for in the DOE test 
procedure by testing at two test conditions. The Joint Advocates, 
however, assert that both dual-duct test conditions are full-load 
tests, and that Seasonally Adjusted Cooling Capacity (``SACC'') and 
Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio (``CEER'') are calculated to provide a 
direct comparison between dual-duct and single-duct units. (Joint 
Advocates, No. 5 at pp. 2-3)
    DOE agrees that the portable air conditioner test procedure for 
dual-duct units at Appendix CC does not measure part-load performance. 
Instead, it requires full-load tests at each test condition, and as a 
result does not account for single-speed unit cycling under part-load 
conditions or variable-speed compressor speed adjustments to match 
part-load conditions. However, LG's claims regarding the test 
conditions and procedure for dual-duct portable air conditioners are 
not directly relevant to the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver 
and this Decision and Order, which only address the single-duct 
variable-speed portable air conditioners listed in the LG petition for 
waiver submitted on May 15, 2018.
    The Joint Advocates and the California IOUs stated that the 
portable air conditioner test procedure is only conducted at one 
outdoor temperature test condition for single-duct units because such 
portable air conditioners draw condenser inlet air from the conditioned 
space, so the indoor and outdoor temperature for each test condition 
should always be equal. (Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 3; California 
IOUs, No. 6 at p. 2) The Joint Advocates questioned why the alternate 
test procedure in the interim waiver provides for testing single-duct 
variable-speed portable air conditioners at two different condenser 
inlet test conditions. (Joint Advocates, No. 5 at p. 3) The California 
IOUs recommended that these units be tested at only the single test 
condition required by Appendix CC, but with varying compressor speeds. 
(California IOUs, No. 6 at p. 2)
    In response to comments pertaining to the two test conditions 
listed in the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver, LG stated that 
while outdoor air temperature minimally affects the cooling capacity 
test measurement, it does affect the calculation of CEER and SACC due 
to the influence of infiltration air. The outdoor air temperature 
affects the magnitude of the infiltration air

[[Page 33649]]

impact on portable air conditioners, and, therefore, it is necessary to 
calculate infiltration at two different test conditions.
    DOE agrees with the Joint Commenters and the California IOUs that 
the specification for condenser inlet air found in Table 1 of the 
alternate test procedure in the interim waiver should be the same as 
the indoor temperature for single-duct portable air conditioners 
because the condenser inlet air for a single-duct unit is drawn from 
indoors. DOE notes that the alternate test procedure in the interim 
waiver included a note specifying that, for the purposes of this 
cooling mode test procedure, condenser inlet air is considered the 
``outdoor air'' outside of the conditioned space. 84 FR 39274, 39277. 
As such, the outdoor air temperatures of 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F shown 
in Table 1 represent the outdoor temperature operating conditions, 
rather than the actual condenser inlet air test conditions, as the 
column heading would imply.\14\ To alleviate any potential confusion 
about the distinction between outdoor air temperature and condenser 
inlet air temperature, in this Decision and Order DOE specifies in 
Table 1 of the alternate test procedure that variable-speed single-duct 
portable air conditioners must be tested at the same condenser inlet 
temperature as the indoor-side air temperature for both test conditions 
(i.e., 80 [deg]F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ DOE further notes that, for a single-duct portable air 
conditioner, because both the evaporator air and condenser air are 
drawn from the conditioned space through air grates that are 
integral to the unit itself, the evaporator and condenser inlet air 
temperature test conditions are necessarily the same.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The California IOUs and Midea suggested that the alternate 
calculation for infiltration air mass flowrate is incorrect because 
condenser inlet air for a single-duct portable air conditioner is drawn 
from the indoors, thus making the infiltration air associated with 
single-duct units independent of condenser inlet air. These commenters 
urged DOE to require that the mass flow rate of infiltration air for 
all single-duct portable air conditioners, including variable-speed 
units, be calculated using the existing formula in the DOE test 
procedure at Appendix CC, thus removing the terms in the mass flow rate 
of infiltration air accounting for condenser inlet air flow in the 
alternate test procedure. (California IOUs, No. 6 at p. 3; Midea, No. 8 
at pp. 2-3)
    LG responded that the alternate calculation in section 4.1.2 of the 
interim waiver test procedure provides the correct value for 
infiltration air mass flow. Because, for single-duct units, the average 
volumetric flow rate of the condenser inlet duct air is zero, the 
second term of the equation, referring to the condenser inlet duct air, 
is reduced to zero. (LG, No. 9, at pp. 2, 7)
    DOE agrees that the equation for infiltration air mass flow from 
the interim waiver alternate test procedure produces the correct 
results when the average volumetric flow rate of the condenser inlet 
duct air is appropriately set to zero, given that single-duct portable 
air conditioners do not have a condenser inlet duct. However, DOE 
recognizes that including the condenser inlet air term for single-duct 
units may lead to confusion. To reduce the possibility of such 
confusion, the equation in the alternate test procedure specified in 
this Decision and Order to calculate the mass flow rate of infiltration 
air for variable-speed single-duct portable air conditioners is based 
on only the condenser exhaust air mass flow, like the current equation 
for single-speed single-duct portable air conditioners. Because the 
value of the condenser inlet air term is zero, as explained above, this 
revision does not change any values calculated using the interim waiver 
alternate test procedure.
    The California IOUs suggested that DOE correct an error in the 
equation for adjusted cooling capacity at the higher outdoor 
temperature condition in section 5.1 of the alternate test procedure 
specified in the August 2019 Notice of Petition for Waiver. They noted 
that the two adjusted cooling capacity equations erroneously used two 
different equations to calculate the same Adjusted Cooling Capacity 
(``ACC'') value (i.e., ACC83), which the California IOUs 
stated should be two different values representing the two outdoor 
temperature conditions. The California IOUs further recommended 
subscripts for these two values based on compressor speed rather than 
outdoor temperature. (California IOUs, No. 6 at p. 4)
    DOE acknowledges there was a typographical error in August 2019 
Notice of Petition of Waiver. The two equations identified by the 
California IOUs calculate different adjusted cooling capacity values 
(i.e., ACC95 and ACC83), but were both labeled as 
calculating ACC83. In this Decision and Order, DOE has 
corrected this typographical error and provides additional 
clarification of the alternate test procedure by implementing ``Full'' 
and ``Low'' subscripts to represent the compressor speed setting for 
each calculation. DOE also has standardized subscripts accordingly 
throughout the alternate test procedure to be consistent with this 
approach.
    The California IOUs requested clarification on the use of the 83 
[deg]F outdoor temperature condition rather than the 95 [deg]F 
condition in the equation when calculating the theoretical single-speed 
unit capacity at 83 [deg]F. The California IOUs commented that both 
conditions hold true, because capacity is independent of the outdoor 
air temperature. The California IOU's had similar concerns about the 
mass flow of infiltration air equation, requesting clarification as to 
why the mass flow equation for the theoretical single-speed unit at 83 
[deg]F uses the volumetric air flow rate measured at 95 [deg]F. 
(California IOUs, No. 6 at p. 5)
    As noted above, DOE recognizes that, unlike for a dual-duct unit, 
for a single-duct unit, the outdoor air temperature has no direct 
bearing on the cooling capacity, because the condenser inlet air for a 
single-duct unit is drawn from within the conditioned space. DOE notes 
that section 5.5.1 of the alternate test procedure explicitly defines 
the theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner 
capacity at the 83 [deg]F outdoor temperature operating condition as 
equal to the full-load capacity of the variable-speed portable air 
conditioner at the 95 [deg]F outdoor temperature operating condition 
because the theoretical comparable single-speed unit is based upon the 
full compressor speed of the variable-speed unit. DOE recognizes the 
confusion that may arise from these equations. This Decision and Order 
revises the nomenclature of the two variable-speed unit tests to refer 
to the compressor speed (e.g., CapacityFull) instead of the 
``outdoor temperature test condition''. Further, in contrast to the 
alternate test procedure granted in the interim waiver, this Decision 
and Order specifies a condenser inlet air temperature of 80 [deg]F--
consistent with the 80 [deg]F evaporator inlet air temperature--rather 
than specifying condenser inlet air temperatures of 83 [deg]F and 95 
[deg]F for the two test conditions. DOE maintains the distinction 
between theoretical comparable single-speed unit capacity at 83 [deg]F 
and 95 [deg]F because the respective adjusted cooling capacities at 
each of these conditions reflect the impact of infiltration air at 
these two temperatures. While the infiltration air mass flow rate for 
the theoretical comparable single-speed unit remains constant, the heat 
entering the room due to infiltration air will differ based on the 
outdoor temperature. Therefore, DOE has provided equations for 
calculating the infiltration air mass flow rates at both temperatures 
for a theoretical

[[Page 33650]]

comparable single-speed portable air conditioner.
    The California IOUs requested that the manufacturer justify the 
cyclic loss factor proposed by citing references or providing data, 
although they stated that the value appears reasonable. (California 
IOUs, No. 6 at p. 5)
    In response to this comment, LG noted that the cycling loss factor 
it suggested in the alternate test procedure was the value DOE provided 
based on DOE's research. (LG, No. 9, at pp. 7-8)
    The cycling loss factor in the alternate test procedure is based on 
the default cycling loss factors in Section 11.2 of AHRI Standard 210/
240, an industry-accepted test procedure. The cycling loss factor at 
the 83 [deg]F condition for a theoretical comparable single-speed 
single-duct portable air conditioner is calculated using the default 
cooling degradation coefficient of 0.25, which corresponds to a part-
load (cycling loss) factor of 0.875, as determined in Section 11.2 of 
AHRI Standard 210/240.
    GEA commented that LG's proposed alternate test procedure 
calculates a weighted efficiency for a unit with a variable-speed 
compressor that reflects only decreased energy use but not reduced 
cooling capacity when the unit runs at a lower speed. GEA suggested the 
test procedure account for both the reduced energy usage and the 
reduced cooling capacity of a variable-speed compressor by 
incorporating the reduced cooling capacity in the SACC calculation 
equations. (GEA, No. 7 at p. 1)
    GEA's suggestion that the alternate test procedure does not reflect 
decreased cooling capacity is incorrect. The reduced cooling capacity 
at the low compressor speed is used when calculating the adjusted 
cooling capacity at the lower outdoor temperature operating condition, 
ACC83, in section 5.1 of the alternate test procedure. This 
lower adjusted cooling capacity is included in the weighted-average 
overall adjusted cooling capacity calculated in section 5.3 of the 
alternate test procedure. By calculating the adjusted cooling capacity 
based on performance at both outdoor temperature operating conditions 
and compressor speeds, the alternate test procedure accounts for not 
only the reduced energy usage of the variable-speed portable air 
conditioner but also the reduced cooling capacity from operation at the 
low compressor speed.
    For the reasons explained here and in the August 2019 Notice of 
Petition for Waiver, the basic models identified by LG in its petition 
cannot be tested and rated for energy consumption on a basis 
representative of their true energy consumption characteristics using 
Appendix CC. DOE has reviewed the procedure suggested by LG and 
concludes that, subject to the modifications discussed in this Decision 
and Order, the test procedure in this Decision and Order will allow for 
the accurate measurement of the energy consumption of the listed 
models, while alleviating the problems associated with testing these 
models following DOE's portable air conditioner test procedure. LG must 
test and rate the five listed portable air conditioner basic models 
according to the alternate test procedure specified in the Decision and 
Order. This alternate test procedure is substantively consistent with 
the interim waiver's alternate test procedure but includes clarifying 
modifications.
    Based on further review of the alternate test procedure required 
under the interim waiver order and the comments received, the alternate 
test procedure required under today's Decision and Order: (1) Corrects 
a typographical error in the Adjusted Cooling Capacity equations; (2) 
changes certain calculated value subscripts to refer to the compressor 
speed for which the value is being calculated, rather than the outdoor 
temperature test condition; (3) specifies in Table 1 of the alternate 
test procedure that single-duct portable air conditioners are only 
tested at one condenser inlet air temperature (i.e., the indoor air 
temperature), although two different outdoor temperatures are 
represented by the two tests required by the alternate test procedure, 
and makes corresponding changes to references to Table 1 throughout the 
text; and (4) removes a term describing condenser inlet air from the 
air infiltration mass flow equation. DOE has determined that these 
changes ensure better repeatability and reproducibility of the 
alternate test procedure, improving the representativeness of the 
results. The changes will not affect the performance of single-duct 
variable-speed portable air conditioners as measured under the 
alternate test procedure specified in the interim waiver. Below is a 
more detailed discussion of each change.
    DOE is changing a subscript to correct a typographical error in the 
two Adjusted Cooling Capacity equations in section 5.1, Adjusted 
Cooling Capacity. The interim waiver erroneously labeled both 
calculations for the adjusted cooling capacity at each test condition 
as ACC83. This Order changes the label in the first 
calculation to ACC95.
    DOE is changing subscripts throughout the alternate test procedure 
to refer to specified compressor speed instead of the outdoor 
temperature test condition represented by the compressor speed setting 
(i.e., instead of ``95'' and ``83,'' the subscripts now read ``Full'' 
and ``Low''). DOE made this change to clarify the compressor speed 
setting required.
    DOE is revising Table 1 in the alternate test procedure to specify 
that the alternate test procedure only requires one condenser inlet air 
temperature for both tests. The condenser inlet air temperature is the 
same as the indoor air temperature because single-duct units draw air 
from the indoor room. While the outdoor temperature test condition 
represented by each test is different, it does not directly impact the 
performance of a test unit.
    DOE is simplifying the equation to calculate the mass flow rate of 
infiltration air for variable-speed single-duct portable air 
conditioners using only the condenser exhaust air mass flow, reflecting 
the current approach for single-speed single-duct portable air 
conditioners in Appendix CC. This revision removes a second term that 
accounted for infiltration air due to condenser inlet air, which does 
not impact the mass flow rate of infiltration air for single-duct 
units, because single-duct units intake condenser inlet air from 
indoors, unlike dual-duct portable air conditioners, which intake 
condenser inlet air from the outdoors.
    DOE further requires in this Decision and Order, testing of the 
listed basic models in accordance with the instructions submitted by LG 
on July 8, 2019, regarding the compressor frequencies and control 
settings used at each test condition for each basic model.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The instructions provided by LG were marked as confidential 
and, as such, the instructions will be treated as confidential. The 
document is located in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This Decision and Order applies only to the five basic models 
listed in the Order and does not extend to any other basic models. DOE 
evaluates and grants waivers for only those basic models specifically 
set out in the petition, not future models that may be manufactured by 
the petitioner. LG may request that DOE extend the scope of this waiver 
to include additional basic models that employ the same technology as 
those listed in the Order. 10 CFR 430.27(g). LG may also submit another 
petition for waiver from the test procedure for additional basic models 
that employ a different technology and meet the criteria for test 
procedure waivers. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1).
    DOE notes that it may modify or rescind the waiver at any time upon 
a determination that the factual basis

[[Page 33651]]

underlying the petition for waiver is incorrect, or that the results 
from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic 
models' true energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). 
Likewise, LG may request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if the 
company discovers an error in the information provided to DOE as part 
of its petition, determines that the waiver is no longer needed, or for 
other appropriate reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
    As set forth above, the test procedure specified in this Decision 
and Order is not the same as the test procedure offered by LG. If LG 
believes that the alternate test method it suggested provides 
representative results and is less burdensome than the test method 
required by this Decision and Order, LG may submit a request for 
modification under 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2) that addresses the concerns that 
DOE has articulated about the procedure LG suggested. LG may also 
submit another less burdensome alternative test procedure not expressly 
considered in this notice under the same provision.

III. Consultations With Other Agencies

    In accordance with 10 CFR 430.27(f)(2), DOE consulted with the 
Federal Trade Commission staff concerning the LG petition for waiver.

IV. Order

    After careful consideration of all the material that LG and 
commenters submitted in this matter, it is Ordered that:
    (1) LG must, as of the date of publication of this Order in the 
Federal Register, test and rate the following portable air conditioner 
basic models with the alternate test procedure as set forth in 
paragraph (2):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Brand                             Basic model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LG Electronics USA, Inc.................  LP1419IVSM
LG Electronics USA, Inc.................  LP1419HVSM
LG Electronics USA, Inc.................  LP1219IVSM
LG Electronics USA, Inc.................  LP1019IVSM
LG Electronics USA, Inc.................  LP0819IVSM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) The alternate test procedure for the LG basic models listed in 
paragraph (1) of this Order is the test procedure for portable air 
conditioners prescribed by DOE at appendix CC to subpart B of 10 CFR 
part 430 (``Appendix CC'') and 10 CFR 430.23(dd), except: (i) Determine 
the combined energy efficiency ratio (``CEER'') as detailed below, and 
(ii) calculate the estimated annual operating cost in 10 CFR 
430.23(dd)(2) as detailed below. In addition, for each basic model 
listed in paragraph (1), maintain compressor speeds at each test 
condition and set control settings for the variable components 
according to the instructions LG submitted to DOE (Docket No. EERE-
2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002). Upon the compliance date of any new energy 
conservation standards for portable air conditioners, LG must report 
product-specific information pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12(b)(13) and 10 
CFR 429.62(b). All other requirements of Appendix CC and DOE's other 
relevant regulations remain applicable.
    In 10 CFR 430.23, in paragraph (dd) revise paragraph (2) to read as 
follows:
    (2) Determine the estimated annual operating cost for a single-duct 
variable-speed portable air conditioner, expressed in dollars per year, 
by multiplying the following two factors:
    (i) The sum of AEC95 multiplied by 0.2, AEC83 
multiplied by 0.8, and AECT as measured in accordance with 
section 5.3 of appendix CC of this subpart; and
    (ii) A representative average unit cost of electrical energy in 
dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary.
    (iii) Round the resulting product to the nearest dollar per year.
    In Appendix CC:
    Add in Section 2, Definitions:
    2.11 Single-speed means a type of portable air conditioner that 
cannot automatically adjust the compressor speed based on detected 
conditions.
    2.12 Variable-speed means a type of portable air conditioner that 
can automatically adjust the compressor speed based on detected 
conditions.
    2.13 Full compressor speed (full) means the compressor speed 
specified by LG (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002) at which the 
unit operates at full load testing conditions.
    2.14 Low compressor speed (low) means the compressor speed 
specified by LG (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002), at which the 
unit operates at low load test conditions, such that 
CapacityLow, the measured cooling capacity at this speed at 
the test condition in Table 1 of this appendix, is no less than 50 
percent and no greater than 60 percent of CapacityFull, the 
measured cooling capacity with the full compressor speed at the test 
condition in Table 1 of this appendix.
    2.15 Theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner 
means a theoretical single-speed portable air conditioner with the same 
cooling capacity and electrical power input as the single-duct 
variable-speed portable air conditioner under test, with no cycling 
losses considered, when operating with the full compressor speed and at 
the test conditions in Table 1 of this appendix.
    Add to the end of Section 3.1.2, Control settings:
    Set the compressor speed during cooling mode testing as described 
in section 4.1 of this appendix, as amended by this Order.
    Replace Section 4.1, Cooling mode with the following:
    Cooling mode. Instead of the test conditions in Table 3 of ANSI/
AHAM PAC-1-2015, establish the test conditions presented in Table 1 of 
this appendix. Test each sample unit twice, once at each test condition 
in Table 1. For each test condition, measure the sample unit's indoor 
room cooling capacity and overall power input in cooling mode in 
accordance with Section 7.1.b and 7.1.c of ANSI/AHAM PAC-1-2015 
(incorporated by reference; see Sec.  [thinsp]430.3), respectively, and 
determine the test duration in accordance with Section 8.7 of ASHRAE 
Standard 37-2009 (incorporated by reference; Sec.  [thinsp]430.3). 
Conduct the first test in accordance with ambient conditions for Test 
Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix, with the compressor speed set 
to full, for the duration of cooling mode testing 
(CapacityFull, PFull), which represents an 
outdoor temperature operating condition of 95 [deg]F dry-bulb and 67 
[deg]F wet-bulb temperatures. Conduct the second test in accordance 
with the ambient conditions for Test Condition 2, in Table 1 of this 
appendix, with the compressor speed set to low, for the duration of 
cooling mode testing (CapacityLow, PLow), which 
represents an outdoor temperature operating condition of 83 [deg]F dry-
bulb and 67.5 [deg]F wet-bulb temperatures. Set the compressor speed 
required for each test condition in accordance with the instructions LG 
submitted to DOE (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-WAV-0007-0002).

[[Page 33652]]



                        Table 1--Evaporator and Condenser (Indoor) Inlet Test Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Evaporator and condenser inlet
                                                    air [deg]F ([deg]C)
               Test condition                --------------------------------          Compressor speed
                                                 Dry bulb        Wet bulb
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Condition 1............................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)  Full.
Test Condition 2............................       80 (26.7)       67 (19.4)  Low.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Replace the provisions in Section 4.1.1, Duct Heat Transfer that 
follow ``j represents the condenser exhaust duct and, for dual-duct 
units, the condenser exhaust duct and the condenser inlet duct.'' to 
read as follows:
    Calculate the total heat transferred from the surface of the 
condenser exhaust duct to the indoor conditioned space while operating 
in cooling mode at each test condition in Table 1 of this appendix, as 
follows:

Qduct_Full = 3 x Aduct x (Tduct_Full-
Tei)
Qduct_Low = 3 x Aduct x (Tduct_Low-
Tei)

Where:

Qduct_Full and Qduct_Low = the total heat 
transferred from the condenser exhaust duct to the indoor 
conditioned space in cooling mode, in Btu/h, when tested at Test 
Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, 
respectively.
3 = convection coefficient in Btu/h per square foot per [deg]F.
Aduct = surface area of the condenser exhaust duct, in 
square feet.
Tduct_Full and Tduct_Low = average surface 
temperature for the condenser exhaust duct, as measured at Test 
Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, 
respectively, as required in section 4.1 of this appendix.
Tei = average evaporator inlet air dry-bulb temperature, 
as measured in this section, in [deg]F.

    Replace Section 4.1.2, Infiltration Air Heat Transfer with the 
following:
    Infiltration Air Heat Transfer. Calculate the sample unit's heat 
contribution from infiltration air into the conditioned space for both 
cooling mode tests, which represent the 95 [deg]F and the 83 [deg]F 
dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating conditions, as described in this 
section. Calculate the dry air mass flow rate of infiltration air 
according to the following equations:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.015

Where:

m95 and m83 = dry air mass flow rate of 
infiltration air, as calculated for Test Condition 1 and Test 
Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, representative of the 95 
[deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
conditions, respectively, in pounds per minute (lb/m).
Vco_Full and Vco_Low = average volumetric flow 
rate of the condenser outlet air as determined in section 4.1 of 
this appendix, during cooling mode testing for Test Condition 1 and 
Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, respectively, in cubic 
feet per minute (cfm).
[rho]co_Full and [rho]co_Low = average density 
of the condenser outlet air as determined in section 4.1 of this 
appendix, during cooling mode testing at Test Condition 1 and Test 
Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, respectively, in pounds 
mass per cubic foot (lbm/ft\3\).
[omega]co_Full and [omega]co_Low = average 
humidity ratio of condenser outlet air as determined in section 4.1 
of this appendix, during cooling mode testing at Test Condition 1 
and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, respectively, in 
pounds mass of water vapor per pounds mass of dry air 
(lbw/lbda).

    Replace Section 5.1, Adjusted Cooling Capacity with the following:
    Adjusted Cooling Capacity. Calculate the adjusted cooling capacity 
at each outdoor temperature operating condition, ACC95 and 
ACC83, expressed in Btu/h, according to the following 
equations:

ACC95 = CapacityFull-Qduct\Full-Qinfiltration\95
ACC83 = CapacityLow-Qduct\Low-Qinfiltration\83


Where:

CapacityFull and CapacityLow = cooling 
capacity, as measured in section 4.1 of this appendix, at Test 
Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this appendix, 
respectively, in Btu/h.
Qduct_Full and Qduct_Low = duct heat transfer 
while operating in cooling mode as calculated in section 4.1.1 of 
this appendix.
Qinfiltration_95 and Qinfiltration_83 = total 
infiltration air heat transfer in cooling mode as calculated in 
section 4.1.2 of this appendix, representative of the 95 [deg]F and 
83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating conditions, 
respectively, in Btu/h.

    Replace Section 5.3, Annual Energy Consumption with the following:
    Annual Energy Consumption. Calculate the sample unit's annual 
energy consumption in each operating mode according to the equation 
below. Use the following annual hours of operation and equation for 
each operating mode:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Annual
         Operating mode                  Subscript           operating
                                                               hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cooling Mode, Full \1\..........  full..................             750
Cooling Mode, Low \1\...........  low...................             750
Off-Cycle.......................  oc....................             880
Inactive or Off.................  ia or om..............           1,355
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These operating mode hours are for the purposes of calculating
  annual energy consumption under different ambient conditions and are
  not a division of the total cooling mode operating hours. The total
  cooling mode operating hours are 750 hours.

AECm = Pm x tm x 0.001

Where:

AECm = annual energy consumption in each operating mode, 
in kWh/year.
Pm = average power in each operating mode, in watts.
m represents the operating mode (``Full'' and ``Low'' cooling mode 
compressor speeds that represent operation at 95 [deg]F and 83 
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating conditions, 
respectively, ``oc'' off-cycle, and ``ia'' inactive or ``om'' off 
mode).
tm = number of annual operating time in each operating 
mode, in hours.
0.001 kWh/Wh = conversion factor from watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.

    Calculate the sample unit's total annual energy consumption in off 
cycle

[[Page 33653]]

mode and inactive or off mode according to the equation below:

AECT = [Sigma]mAECm

Where:

AECT = total annual energy consumption attributed to off 
cycle mode and inactive or off mode, in kWh/year;
AECm = total annual energy consumption in each operating 
mode, in kWh/year.
m represents the operating modes, off cycle mode and inactive or off 
mode.

    Replace Section 5.4, Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio with the 
following:
    Unadjusted Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio. Using the annual 
operating hours, as outlined in section 5.3 of this appendix, calculate 
the sample unit's unadjusted combined energy efficiency ratio, 
CEERUA, expressed in Btu/Wh, according to the following 
equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.016

Where:

CEERUA = unadjusted combined energy efficiency ratio for 
the sample unit, in Btu/Wh.
ACC95 and ACC83 = adjusted cooling capacity, 
tested at Test Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 in Table 1 of this 
appendix, respectively, that are representative of operation at the 
95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
conditions, respectively, as calculated in section 5.1 of this 
appendix, in Btu/h.
AECFull and AECLow = annual energy consumption 
for cooling mode operation at Test Condition 1 and Test Condition 2 
in Table 1 in this appendix that represent operation at 95 [deg]F 
and 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating conditions, 
respectively, as calculated in section 5.3 of this appendix, in kWh/
year.
AECT = total annual energy consumption attributed to off 
cycle mode and inactive or off mode, in kWh/year, calculated in 
section 5.3 of this appendix.
750 = number of cooling mode hours per year.
0.001 kWh/Wh = conversion factor for watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.
0.2 = weighting factor for the 95 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
temperature operating condition.
0.8 = weighting factor for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
temperature operating condition.

    Add after Section 5.4, Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio:
    5.5 Adjustment of the Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio. Adjust the 
sample unit's combined energy efficiency ratio as follows.
    5.5.1 Theoretical Comparable Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner 
Cooling Capacity and Power at the Lower Outdoor Temperature Operating 
Condition. Calculate the cooling capacity and cooling capacity with 
cycling losses, expressed in British thermal units per hour (Btu/h), 
and electrical power input, expressed in watts, for a theoretical 
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-
bulb outdoor temperature operating condition.

Capacity83_SS = CapacityFull
Capacity83_SS_CLF = CapacityFull x 0.875
P83_SS = PFull

Where:

Capacity83_SS = theoretical comparable single-speed 
portable air conditioner cooling capacity, in Btu/h, calculated for 
the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition.
Capacity83_SS_CLF = theoretical comparable single-speed 
portable air conditioner cooling capacity with cycling losses, in 
Btu/h, calculated for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature 
operating condition.
CapacityFull = cooling capacity, in Btu/h, measured in 
section 4.1 of this appendix at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this 
appendix.
P83_SS = theoretical comparable single-speed portable air 
conditioner electrical power input, in watts, calculated for the 83 
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition.
PFull = electrical power input, in watts, measured in 
section 4.1 of this appendix at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this 
appendix.
0.875 = cycling loss factor for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
temperature operating condition.

    5.5.2 Duct Heat Transfer for a Theoretical Comparable Single-Speed 
Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower Outdoor Temperature Operating 
Condition. Calculate the condenser exhaust duct heat transfer to the 
conditioned space for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable 
air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
condition, as follows:

Qduct_83_SS = 3 x Aduct x (Tduct_Full-
Tei)

Where:

Qduct_83_SS = total heat transferred from the condenser 
exhaust duct to the indoor conditioned space in cooling mode, for a 
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 
83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, in Btu/
h.
3 = convection coefficient, in Btu/h per square foot per [deg]F.
Aduct = surface area of the condenser exhaust duct, as 
calculated in section 4.1.1 of this appendix, in square feet.
Tduct_Full = average surface temperature for the 
condenser exhaust duct, as measured in section 4.1.1 of this 
appendix at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix, in [deg]F.
Tei = average evaporator inlet air dry-bulb temperature, 
measured in section 4.1.1 of this appendix, in [deg]F.

    5.5.3 Infiltration Air Heat Transfer for a Theoretical Comparable 
Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower Outdoor Temperature 
Operating Condition. Calculate the heat contribution from infiltration 
air for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner 
at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, as 
described in this section. Calculate the dry air mass flow rate of 
infiltration air according to the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.017

Where:

m83_SS = dry air mass flow rate of infiltration air for a 
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 
83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, in lb/m.
Vco_Full = actual average volumetric flow rate of the 
condenser outlet air, as determined in section 4.1 of this appendix 
during cooling mode testing with the full compressor speed at Test 
Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix, in cfm.
[rho]co_Full = actual average density of the condenser 
outlet air, as determined in section 4.1 of this appendix during 
cooling mode at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix, in 
lbm/ft\3\.
[omega]co_Full = average humidity ratio of condenser 
outlet air, as determined in section 4.1 of this appendix during 
cooling mode testing at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this 
appendix, in pounds mass of water vapor per pounds mass of dry air 
(lbw/lbda).

    Calculate the sensible component of infiltration air heat 
contribution for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air 
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-

[[Page 33654]]

bulb outdoor temperature operating condition as follows:

    Qs_83_SS = m83_SS x 60 x [(0.24 x 
(Tia_83-80)) + (0.444 x (0.01086 x Tia_83-0.0112 
x 80))]

Where:

Qs_83_SS = sensible heat added to the room by 
infiltration air for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable 
air conditioner, at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature 
operating condition, in Btu/h.
0.24 Btu/lbm-[deg]F = specific heat of dry air.
0.444 Btu/lbm-[deg]F = specific heat of water vapor.
80 = indoor chamber dry-bulb temperature, in [deg]F.
Tia_95 and Tia_83 = infiltration air dry-bulb 
temperatures for the 95 [deg]F and the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
temperature operating conditions, 95 [deg]F and 83 [deg]F, 
respectively.
0.01086 = [omega]ia_83 = humidity ratio of the 
infiltration air for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature 
operating condition, in lbw/lbda.
0.0112 = humidity ratio of the indoor chamber air at Test Condition 
1 in Table 1 of this appendix, in lbw/lbda.
60 = conversion factor from minutes to hours.
m83_SS as previously calculated in this section.

    Calculate the latent component of infiltration air heat 
contribution for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air 
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
condition as follows:

Ql_83_SS = m83_SS x 63660 x 
([omega]ia_83-0.0112)

Where:

Ql_83_SS = latent heat added to the room by infiltration 
air for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air 
conditioner, at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
condition, in Btu/h.
63660 Btu-m/lbm-h = latent heat of vaporization for water 
vapor, 1060 Btu/lbm, multiplied by the conversion factor 
from minutes to hours, 60 m/h.
0.0112 lbw/lbda = humidity ratio of the indoor 
chamber air.
m83_SS and [omega]ia_83 as previously 
calculated and defined, respectively, in this section.

    Calculate the total heat contribution of the infiltration air for a 
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83 
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition according to 
the following equation:

Qinfiltration_83_SS = Qs_83_SS + 
Ql_83_SS

Where:

Qinfiltration_83_SS = total infiltration air heat in 
cooling mode for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air 
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
condition, in Btu/h.
Qs_83_SS, Ql_83_SS as previously calculated in 
this section

    5.5.4 Adjusted Cooling Capacity for a Theoretical Comparable 
Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower Outdoor Temperature 
Operating Condition. Calculate the adjusted cooling capacity for a 
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83 
[deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition without cycling 
losses, ACC83_SS, and with cycling losses, 
ACC83_SS_CLF, in Btu/h, according to the following 
equations:

ACC83_SS = Capacity83_SS-Qduct_83_SS-
Qinfiltration_83_SS
ACC83_SS_CLF = Capacity83_SS_CLF-
Qduct_83_SS-Qinfiltration_83_SS

Where:

ACC83_SS and ACC83_SS_CLF = adjusted cooling 
capacity for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air 
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
condition without and with cycling losses, respectively, in Btu/h.
Capacity83_SS and Capacity83_SS_CLF = 
theoretical comparable single-speed portable air conditioner cooling 
capacity without and with cycling losses, respectively, in Btu/h, at 
the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, 
calculated in section 5.5.1 of this appendix.
Qduct_83_SS = total heat transferred from the ducts to 
the indoor conditioned space in cooling mode for a theoretical 
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F 
dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, in Btu/h, 
calculated in section 5.5.2 of this appendix.
Qinfiltration_83_SS = total infiltration air heat in 
cooling mode for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air 
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
condition, in Btu/h, calculated in section 5.5.3 of this appendix.

    5.5.5 Annual Energy Consumption in Cooling Mode for a Theoretical 
Comparable Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner at the Lower Outdoor 
Temperature Operating Condition. Calculate the annual energy 
consumption in cooling mode for a theoretical comparable single-speed 
portable air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature 
operating condition, in kWh/year, according to the following equation:

AEC83_SS = P83_SS x 750 x 0.001

Where:

AEC83_SS = annual energy consumption for a theoretical 
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner in cooling mode at 
the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, in 
kWh/year.
P83_SS = electrical power input for a theoretical 
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner at the 83 [deg]F 
dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition as calculated in 
section 5.5.1 of this appendix, in watts.
750 = number of cooling mode hours per year, as defined in section 
5.3 of this appendix.
0.001 kWh/Wh = conversion factor from watt-hours to kilowatt-hours.

    5.5.6 Combined Energy Efficiency Ratio for a Theoretical Comparable 
Single-Speed Portable Air Conditioner. Calculate the combined energy 
efficiency ratio for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air 
conditioner without cycling losses, CEERSS, and with cycling 
losses, CEERSS_CLF, in Btu/Wh, according to the following 
equations:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.018


[[Page 33655]]


Where:

CEERSS and CEERSS_CLF = combined energy 
efficiency ratio for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable 
air conditioner without and with cycling losses considered, 
respectively, in Btu/Wh.
ACC95 = adjusted cooling capacity for the sample unit, as 
calculated in section 5.1 of this appendix, when tested at Test 
Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix that is representative of 
operation at the 95 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
condition, in Btu/h.
ACC83_SS and ACC83_SS_CLF = adjusted cooling 
capacity for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable air 
conditioner at the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating 
condition without and with cycling losses, respectively, as 
calculated in section 5.5.4 of this appendix, in Btu/h.
AECFull = annual energy consumption for the sample unit, 
as calculated in section 5.3 of this appendix, for cooling mode 
operation at Test Condition 1 in Table 1 of this appendix that 
represents operation at a 95 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature 
operating condition, in kWh/year.
AEC83_SS = annual energy consumption for a theoretical 
comparable single-speed portable air conditioner in cooling mode at 
the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor temperature operating condition, 
calculated in section 5.5.5 of this appendix, in kWh/year.
AECT = total annual energy consumption attributed to all 
operating modes except cooling for the sample unit, calculated in 
section 5.3 of this appendix, in kWh/year.
750 and 0.001 as defined previously in this section.
0.2 = weighting factor for the 95 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
temperature operating condition.
0.8 = weighting factor for the 83 [deg]F dry-bulb outdoor 
temperature operating condition.

    5.5.7 Single-Duct Variable-Speed Portable Air Conditioner 
Performance Adjustment Factor. Calculate the sample unit's performance 
adjustment factor, Fp, according to the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN02JN20.019

Where:

CEERSS and CEERSS_CLF = combined energy 
efficiency ratio for a theoretical comparable single-speed portable 
air conditioner without and with cycling losses considered, 
respectively, calculated in section 5.5.6 of this appendix, in Btu/
Wh.

    5.5.8 Single-Duct Variable-Speed Portable Air Conditioner Combined 
Energy Efficiency Ratio. Calculate the sample unit's final combined 
energy efficiency ratio, CEER, in Btu/Wh, according to the following 
equation:

CEER = CEERUA x (1 + Fp)

Where:

CEER = combined energy efficiency ratio for the sample unit, in Btu/
Wh.
CEERUA = unadjusted combined energy efficiency ratio for 
the sample unit, calculated in section 5.4 of this appendix, in Btu/
Wh.
Fp = sample unit's performance adjustment factor, 
determined in section 5.5.7 of this appendix.''

    (3) Representations. LG may not make representations about the 
efficiency of any basic model listed in paragraph (1) of this Order for 
any purpose, including compliance and marketing, unless the basic model 
has been tested in accordance with the provisions set forth above and 
such representations fairly disclose the results of such testing.
    (4) This waiver shall remain in effect according to the provisions 
of 10 CFR 430.27.
    (5) DOE issues this waiver on the condition that the statements, 
representations, and information provided by LG are valid. If LG makes 
any modifications to the controls or configurations of a basic model 
subject to this waiver, such modifications will render the waiver 
invalid with respect to that basic model, and LG will either be 
required to use the current Federal test procedure or submit a new 
application for a test procedure waiver. DOE may rescind or modify this 
waiver at any time if it determines the factual basis underlying the 
petition for waiver is incorrect, or the results from the alternate 
test procedure are unrepresentative of a basic model's true energy 
consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). Likewise, LG may 
request that DOE rescind or modify the waiver if LG discovers an error 
in the information provided to DOE as part of its petition, determines 
that the waiver is no longer needed, or for other appropriate reasons. 
10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
    (6) LG remains obligated to fulfill the certification requirements 
set forth at 10 CFR part 429.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2020.

Alexander N. Fitzsimmons,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency 
and Renewable Energy.

[FR Doc. 2020-11765 Filed 6-1-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6450-01-P