[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11335-11355]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03836]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 431

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


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

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'' or 
the ``Department'') is proposing amended energy conservation standards 
for variable refrigerant flow (VRF) multi-split air conditioners and 
VRF multi-split system heat pumps (collectively referred to as ``VRF 
multi-split systems'') that rely on a new cooling efficiency metric and 
are equivalent to those levels specified in the industry standard. DOE 
has preliminarily determined that it lacks the clear and convincing 
evidence required by the statute to adopt standards more stringent than 
the levels specified in the industry standard. This document also 
announces a public meeting webinar to receive comment on these proposed 
standards and associated analyses and results.

DATES: 
    Comments: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding 
this notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) no later than May 2, 2022. 
See section VII, ``Public Participation,'' of this document for 
details.
    Comments regarding the likely competitive impact of the proposed 
standard should be sent to the Department of Justice contact listed in 
the ADDRESSES section on or before March 31, 2022.
    Meeting: DOE will hold a public meeting via webinar on Wednesday, 
March 23, 2022, from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. See section VII, ``Public 
Participation,'' for webinar registration information, participant 
instructions, and information about the capabilities available to 
webinar participants.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons 
may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003, 
by any of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
    (2) Email: to [email protected]. Include docket 
number EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003 in the subject line of the message.
    No telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed 
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this 
process, see section VII of this document (Public Participation).
    Although DOE has routinely accepted public comment submissions 
through a variety of mechanisms, including postal mail and hand 
delivery/courier, the Department has found it necessary to make 
temporary modifications to the comment submission process in light of 
the ongoing corona virus (COVID-19) pandemic. DOE is currently 
suspending receipt of public comments via postal mail and hand 
delivery/courier. If a commenter finds that this change poses an undue 
hardship, please contact Appliance Standards Program staff at (202) 
586-1445 to discuss the need for alternative arrangements. Once the 
COVID-19 pandemic health emergency is resolved, DOE anticipates 
resuming all of its regular options for public comment submission, 
including postal mail and hand delivery/courier.
    Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal 
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, 
is available for review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the 
docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all 
documents listed in the index may be publicly available, such as 
information that is exempt from public disclosure.
    The docket web page can be found at: www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003. The docket web page contains 
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, 
in the docket. See section VII (Public Participation) for information 
on how to submit comments through www.regulations.gov.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this 
proposed rule may be submitted to Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy following the instructions at www.RegInfo.gov.
    EPCA requires the U.S. Attorney General to provide DOE a written 
determination of whether the proposed standard is likely to lessen 
competition. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division 
invites input from market participants and other interested persons 
with views on the likely competitive impact of the proposed standard. 
Interested persons may contact the Antitrust Division at 
[email protected] on or before the date specified in the DATES 
section. Please indicate in the ``Subject'' line of your email the 
title and Docket Number of this proposed rulemaking.

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

[[Page 11336]]

1445 or by email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Synopsis of the Proposed Rule
II. Introduction
    A. Authority
    B. Background
     1. Current Standards
     2. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016
     3. ASRAC Negotiations
III. General Discussion
    A. Methodology for Efficiency Crosswalk Analysis
     1. Crosswalk Background
     2. Crosswalk Details
     3. Crosswalk Results
    B. Equipment Class Structure for VRF
IV. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings
V. Conclusions
    A. Consideration of More-Stringent Efficiency Levels
    B. Review Under the Six-Year Lookback Provision
    C. Proposed Energy Conservation Standards
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
    B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
    D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
    E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
    F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
    G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 1999
    I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
    J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 2001
    K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
    L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
VII. Public Participation
    A. Participation at the Webinar
    B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution
    C. Conduct of the Public Meeting Webinar
    D. Submission of Comments
    E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VIII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Synopsis of the Proposed Rule

    Title III, Part C \1\ of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as 
amended (EPCA),\2\ established the Energy Conservation Program for 
Certain Industrial Equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317) Such equipment 
includes small, large, and very large commercial package air 
conditioning and heating equipment, of which VRF multi-split systems, 
the subject of this rulemaking, are a category. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)-
(D))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part C was re-designated Part A-1.
    \2\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute 
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116-260 (Dec. 
27, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to EPCA, DOE is required to consider amending the energy 
efficiency standards for certain types of covered commercial and 
industrial equipment, including the equipment at issue in this 
document, whenever the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and 
Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) amends the standard levels or 
design requirements prescribed in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, ``Energy 
Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings,'' (ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1), and at a minimum, every six 6 years. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(A)-(B)) For each type of equipment, EPCA directs that if 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended, 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 would produce 
significant additional energy savings and be technologically feasible 
and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii); referred to 
as the ``ASHRAE trigger'') If DOE adopts as a uniform national standard 
the efficiency level 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 such 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)(i))
    Under EPCA, DOE must also review its energy conservation standards 
for VRF multi-split systems every six years and either: (1) Issue a 
notice of determination that the standards do not need to be amended, 
as adoption of a more-stringent level under the relevant statutory 
criteria is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; or (2) 
issue a notice of proposed rulemaking including new proposed standards 
based on certain criteria and procedures in subparagraph (B).\3\ (42 
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ In relevant part, subparagraph (B) specifies that: (1) In 
making a determination of economic justification, DOE must consider, 
to the maximum extent practicable, the benefits and burdens of an 
amended standard based on the seven criteria described in EPCA; (2) 
DOE may not prescribe any standard that increases the energy use or 
decreases the energy efficiency of a covered equipment; and (3) DOE 
may not prescribe an amended standard that interested persons have 
established by a preponderance of evidence is likely to result in 
the unavailability in the United States of any product type (or 
class) of performance characteristics (including reliability, 
features, sizes, capacities, and volumes) that are substantially the 
same as those generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)-(iii))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ASHRAE officially released ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 on October 26, 
2016, thereby triggering DOE's previously referenced obligations 
pursuant to EPCA to determine for certain classes of VRF multi-split 
systems, whether: (1) The amended industry standard should be adopted; 
or (2) clear and convincing evidence exists to justify more-stringent 
standard levels. For any class where DOE was not triggered, the 
Department routinely considers those classes under the statute's 6-
year-lookback provision at the same time, so as to address the subject 
equipment in a comprehensive fashion.
    The current Federal energy conservation standards for air-cooled 
VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity greater than or equal to 
65,000 Btu/h and water-source VRF multi-split heat pumps are codified 
in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 431.97. These standards are specified in 
terms of Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER) for cooling mode and Coefficient 
of Performance (COP) for heating mode based on the Federal test 
procedure at 10 CFR 431.96, which references American National 
Standards Institute (ANSI)/Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration 
Institute (AHRI) Standard 1230-2010, ``2010 Standard for Performance 
Rating of Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-Split Air-Conditioning 
and Heat Pump Equipment,'' approved August 2, 2010 and updated by 
Addendum 1 in March 2011 (ANSI/AHRI 1230-2010).
    The current Federal energy conservation standards for air-cooled, 
three-phase VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity less than 
65,000 Btu/h are also codified in 10 CFR 431.97. These standards are 
specified in terms of Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) for 
cooling mode and Heating Seasonal Performance Factor (HSPF) for heating 
mode based on the rating conditions in ANSI/AHRI 1230-2010. Although 
the current standards levels are based on the same test procedure as 
used for all other categories of VRF systems (i.e., air-cooled VRF 
multi-split systems with cooling capacity greater than or equal to 
65,000 Btu/h and water-source VRF multi-split systems), the 
organizations that maintain the industry consensus test procedures have 
recently updated their scope such that air-cooled, three-phase VRF 
multi-split systems with

[[Page 11337]]

cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h are now covered under AHRI 210/
240-2023 instead of AHRI 1230-2021. Consequently, DOE is addressing 
test procedures for air-cooled, three-phase VRF multi-split systems 
with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h in a separate test 
procedure rulemaking for air-cooled, three-phase, small commercial 
package air conditioning and heating equipment with cooling capacity 
less than 65,000 Btu/h (86 FR 70316 (Dec. 9, 2021)) instead of in the 
test procedure rulemaking for VRF multi-split systems (86 FR 70644 
(Dec. 10, 2021)). Accordingly, DOE is not evaluating the Federal energy 
conservation standards for such equipment in this notice and is instead 
addressing energy conservation standards for air-cooled, three-phase 
VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h in 
a separate energy conservation standards rulemaking for air-cooled, 
three-phase, small commercial package air conditioning and heating 
equipment with a cooling capacity of less than 65,000 Btu/h.
    The efficiency levels set forth in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for 
VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity 65,000 Btu/h or greater 
are specified in terms of both EER and Integrated Energy Efficiency 
Ratio (IEER) for cooling mode and COP for heating mode. These 
efficiency levels are based on the rating conditions of ANSI/AHRI 
Standard 1230-2014 with addendum 1 (ANSI/AHRI 1230-2014), which are 
identical rating conditions to those found in AHRI 1230-2010. The EER 
levels found in ASHRAE 90.1-2016 are unchanged from the current Federal 
EER requirements; however, for certain classes of water-source VRF 
multi-split heat pumps, the COP levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2016 are more stringent. See additional discussion in section 
II.B.2 of this document.
    On April 11, 2018, DOE published in the Federal Register a Notice 
of Intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking working group (Working 
Group) under the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory 
Committee (ASRAC) to negotiate a proposed test procedure and amended 
energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems. 83 FR 15514. 
The Working Group reached consensus on an energy conservation standards 
term sheet (VRF ECS Term Sheet) on November 5, 2019, outlining 
recommended amended energy conservation standards for all equipment 
classes of VRF multi-split systems. The standard levels recommended by 
the Working Group in the VRF ECS Term Sheet are in terms of the IEER 
and COP metrics and equivalent to the levels specified in ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016.\4\ However, the levels recommended by the working 
group are measured according to an amended industry test standard for 
VRF multi-split systems \5\--AHRI Standard 1230, ``2021 Standard for 
Performance Rating of Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi-Split Air-
Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment'' (AHRI 1230-2021). See additional 
discussion in section II.B.3 of this NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The VRF ECS Term Sheet can be accessed at 
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003-0055.
    \5\ The VRF ASRAC Working Group recommended a 2019 draft version 
of AHRI 1230 with additional recommendations for further development 
of the test standard outside of the Working Group. The 2019 draft of 
AHRI 1230 was later released as AHRI 1230-2021, which included the 
Working Group's recommendations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in detail in section III.A of this document, DOE 
conducted a crosswalk analysis during the ASRAC negotiation meetings to 
validate the translation of the EER levels currently required by the 
DOE standards to IEER, as well as the IEER efficiency levels as 
recommended by the Working Group. DOE notes that IEER is a more 
comprehensive metric because it reflects the energy efficiency across a 
range of operating conditions, as opposed to the efficiency at a single 
condition. The crosswalk translates the current Federal EER standards 
(measured per the current DOE test procedure) to IEER levels of 
equivalent stringency (measured per the September 20, 2019 draft 
version of the AHRI 1230 standard). As described in section II.B.3 of 
this document, the recommended 2019 draft test procedure was later 
published as AHRI 1230-2021, and no substantive changes were made that 
impact crosswalk results. Differences in the metrics and test 
procedures cause the crosswalk analysis to yield a range of IEER values 
corresponding to a given EER value. DOE's translation of the current 
EER levels to IEER according to the updated test procedure shows that 
each value recommended by the Working Group is within the range 
resulting from DOE's evaluation. Given that the metric takes into 
account a wider breadth of energy consumption across a variety of 
operating conditions, DOE has tentatively determined that the 
recommended IEER values are at least equivalent in stringency to the 
current EER values. Further, given that IEER is a more comprehensive 
metric, DOE has tentatively determined that the recommended IEER values 
would not decrease the minimum required energy efficiency of VRF basic 
models.
    Because the updates in AHRI 1230-2021 do not affect the measurement 
of COP, no crosswalk was required to evaluate the stringency of the COP 
levels proposed in the VRF ECS Term Sheet as compared to the existing 
Federal COP levels.
    In this document, DOE proposes to adopt the energy conservation 
standard levels and the equipment class structure from ASHRAE 90.1-2016 
for air-cooled VRF multi-split systems with cooling capacity greater 
than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h and for all water-source VRF multi-split 
heat pumps. The proposed standards, which are expressed in terms of 
IEER and COP, are presented in Table I-1. These proposed standards, if 
adopted, would apply to all VRF multi-split systems listed in Table I-1 
manufactured in, or imported into, the United States starting on 
January 1, 2024. The proposed standard levels are equivalent to the 
standard levels recommended by the Working Group in the VRF ECS Term 
Sheet. The proposed equipment class structure differs from the existing 
DOE equipment class structure regarding capacity break points and 
designations based on heating type; however, DOE has tentatively 
concluded that none of the changes to the equipment class structure for 
VRF multi-split systems would constitute backsliding--see section III.B 
of this document for additional discussion.
    For the reasons described in section IV of this document, DOE has 
tentatively determined that the potential energy savings associated 
with adopting the ASHRAE 90.1-2016 standard levels for the triggered 
classes are de minimis. Also, as described in section V of this 
document, DOE has tentatively determined that insufficient data are 
available to determine, based on clear and convincing evidence, that 
more-stringent standards would result in significant additional energy 
savings and be technologically feasible and economically justified. As 
such DOE has not conducted further analysis of more-stringent standard 
levels for this rulemaking. Consequently, DOE is proposing to adopt the 
levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016, as required by EPCA.

[[Page 11338]]



                  Table I-1 Proposed Energy Conservation Standards for VRF Multi-Split Systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Equipment type                Size category          Heating type             Minimum efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners    >=65,000 and <135,000  All.................  15.5 IEER.
 (Air-Cooled).                       Btu/h.
                                    >=135,000 and          All.................  14.9 IEER.
                                     <240,000 Btu/h.
                                    >=240,000 Btu/h and    All.................  13.9 IEER.
                                     <760,000 Btu/h.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-    >=65,000 and <135,000  Heat Pump without     14.6 IEER, 3.3 COP.
 Cooled).                            Btu/h.                 Heat Recovery.
                                                           Heat Pump with Heat   14.4 IEER, 3.3 COP.
                                                            Recovery.
                                    >=135,000 and          Heat Pump without     13.9 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                     <240,000 Btu/h.        Heat Recovery.
                                                           Heat Pump with Heat   13.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                                            Recovery.
                                    >=240,000 Btu/h and    Heat Pump without     12.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                     <760,000 btu/h.        Heat Recovery.
                                                           Heat Pump with Heat   12.5 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                                            Recovery.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water-  <65,000 Btu/h........  Heat Pump without     16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
 Source).                                                   Heat Recovery.
                                                           Heat Pump with Heat   15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                                            Recovery.
                                    >=65,000 and <135,000  Heat Pump without     16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                     Btu/h.                 Heat Recovery.
                                                           Heat Pump with Heat   15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                                            Recovery.
                                    >=135,000 and          Heat Pump without     14.0 IEER, 4.0 COP.
                                     <240,000 Btu/h.        Heat Recovery.
                                                           Heat Pump with Heat   13.8 IEER, 4.0 COP.
                                                            Recovery.
                                    >=240,000 Btu/h and    Heat Pump without     12.0 IEER, 3.9 COP.
                                     <760,000 Btu/h.        Heat Recovery.
                                                           Heat Pump with Heat   11.8 IEER, 3.9 COP.
                                                            Recovery.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Introduction

    The following section briefly discusses the statutory authority 
underlying this proposed rule, as well as some of the relevant 
historical background related to the establishment of standards for VRF 
multi-split systems.

A. Authority

    EPCA, 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 of EPCA, Public Law 
94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317, as codified) added by Public Law 95-619, 
Title IV, section 441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program 
for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of 
provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. This covered 
equipment includes small, large, and very large commercial package air 
conditioning and heating equipment, which includes the VRF multi-split 
systems that are the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)-
(D)) Additionally, as discussed in further detail subsequently, the 
statute requires DOE to consider amending the energy efficiency 
standards for certain types of commercial and industrial equipment, 
including the equipment at issue in this document, whenever ASHRAE 
amends the efficiency levels or design requirements prescribed in 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, and even in the absence of an ASHRAE trigger 
event, a separate provision of EPCA requires DOE to consider amended 
standards for such equipment, at a minimum, every six 6 years. (42 
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)-(C))
    The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of 
four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) the establishment of 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 circumstances for particular State 
laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other 
provisions set forth under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D))
    Subject to certain statutory criteria and conditions, DOE is 
required to develop test procedures that are reasonably designed to 
produce test results which measure the energy efficiency, energy use, 
or estimated annual operating cost of covered equipment during a 
representative average use cycle and that are not unduly burdensome to 
conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) Manufacturers of covered equipment must 
use the Federal test procedures as the basis for: (1) Certifying to DOE 
that their equipment complies with the applicable energy conservation 
standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6296), 
and (2) making representations about the efficiency of that equipment 
(42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). Similarly, DOE uses these test procedures to 
determine whether the equipment complies with the relevant energy 
conservation standards promulgated under EPCA. The DOE test procedures 
for VRF multi-split systems appear at 10 CFR part 431, subpart F.
    ASHRAE Standard 90.1 sets industry energy efficiency levels for 
small, large, and very large commercial package air-conditioning and 
heating equipment, packaged terminal air conditioners, packaged 
terminal heat pumps, warm air furnaces, packaged boilers, storage water 
heaters, instantaneous water heaters, and unfired hot water storage 
tanks (collectively referred to as ``ASHRAE equipment''). For each type 
of listed covered equipment, EPCA directs that if ASHRAE amends ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1 with respect to the standard levels or design 
requirements applicable under that standard, DOE must adopt amended 
standards at the new ASHRAE efficiency levels, unless DOE determines, 
supported by clear and convincing evidence, that adoption of a more-
stringent level would produce significant additional conservation of 
energy and would be technologically feasible and economically 
justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A))
    Although EPCA does not explicitly define the term ``amended'' in 
the context of what type of revision to ASHRAE Standard 90.1 would 
trigger DOE's obligation, DOE's longstanding interpretation has been 
that the statutory trigger is an amendment to the standard applicable 
to that equipment under ASHRAE Standard 90.1 that increases the energy 
efficiency level for that equipment. See 72 FR 10038, 10042 (March 7, 
2007). If the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1 leaves the energy efficiency 
level unchanged (or lowers the energy efficiency level), as compared to 
the energy efficiency level specified by the uniform national standard 
adopted pursuant to EPCA, regardless of the other amendments made to 
the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 requirement (e.g., the inclusion of an 
additional metric), DOE has stated that it does not have the authority 
to conduct

[[Page 11339]]

a rulemaking to consider a higher standard for that equipment pursuant 
to 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A). See 74 FR 36312, 36313 (July 22, 2009) and 
77 FR 28928, 28937 (May 16, 2012). If an amendment to ASHRAE Standard 
90.1 changes the metric for the standard on which the Federal 
requirement was based, DOE would perform a crosswalk analysis to 
determine whether the amended metric under ASHRAE Standard 90.1 
resulted in an energy efficiency level that was more stringent than the 
current DOE standard.
    Under EPCA, DOE must also review its energy conservation standards 
for VRF multi-split systems every six years and either: (1) Issue a 
notice of determination that the standards do not need to be amended, 
as adoption of a more-stringent level under the relevant statutory 
criteria is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; or (2) 
issue a notice of proposed rulemaking including new proposed standards 
based on certain criteria and procedures in subparagraph (B).\6\ (42 
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In relevant part, subparagraph (B) specifies that: (1) In 
making a determination of economic justification, DOE must consider, 
to the maximum extent practicable, the benefits and burdens of an 
amended standard based on the seven criteria described in EPCA; (2) 
DOE may not prescribe any standard that increases the energy use or 
decreases the energy efficiency of a covered equipment; and (3) DOE 
may not prescribe an amended standard that interested persons have 
established by a preponderance of evidence is likely to result in 
the unavailability in the United States of any product type (or 
class) of performance characteristics (including reliability, 
features, sizes, capacities, and volumes) that are substantially the 
same as those generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(B)(ii)-(iii))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In deciding whether a more-stringent standard is economically 
justified, under either the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) or 42 
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C), DOE must determine whether the benefits of the 
standard exceed its burdens. DOE must make this determination after 
receiving comments on the proposed standard, and by considering, to the 
maximum extent practicable, the following seven factors:

    (1) The economic impact of the standard on manufacturers and 
consumers of the products subject to the standard;
    (2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated 
average life of the covered products in the type (or class) compared 
to any increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance 
expenses for the covered products that are likely to result from the 
standard;
    (3) The total projected amount of energy savings likely to 
result directly from the standard;
    (4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the 
covered products likely to result from the standard;
    (5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in 
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the 
standard;
    (6) The need for national energy conservation; and
    (7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) considers 
relevant.

(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(i)(I)-(VII))
    EPCA also contains what is known as an ``anti-backsliding'' 
provision, which prevents the Secretary from prescribing any amended 
standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or 
decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of a covered product. 
(42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I))) Also, the Secretary may not 
prescribe an amended or new standard if interested persons have 
established by a preponderance of the evidence that the standard is 
likely to result in the unavailability in the United States in any 
covered product type (or class) of performance characteristics 
(including reliability), features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that 
are substantially the same as those generally available in the United 
States. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II)(aa))

B. Background

1. Current Standards
    EPCA defines ``commercial package air conditioning and heating 
equipment'' as air-cooled, water-cooled, evaporatively-cooled, or 
water-source (not including ground water source) electrically operated, 
unitary central air conditioners and central air conditioning heat 
pumps for commercial application. (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(A); 10 CFR 431.92) 
EPCA further classifies ``commercial package air conditioning and 
heating equipment'' into categories based on cooling capacity (i.e., 
small, large, and very large categories). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B)-(D); 10 
CFR 431.92) ``Small commercial package air conditioning and heating 
equipment'' means equipment rated below 135,000 Btu per hour (cooling 
capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(B); 10 CFR 431.92) ``Large commercial 
package air conditioning and heating equipment'' means equipment rated: 
(i) At or above 135,000 Btu per hour; and (ii) below 240,000 Btu per 
hour (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(C); 10 CFR 431.92) ``Very 
large commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment'' means 
equipment rated: (i) At or above 240,000 Btu per hour; and (ii) below 
760,000 Btu per hour (cooling capacity). (42 U.S.C. 6311(8)(D); 10 CFR 
431.92)
    Pursuant to its authority under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)) and 
in response to updates to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE has established the 
category of VRF multi-split systems, which meets the EPCA definition of 
``commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment,'' but 
which EPCA did not expressly identify. See 10 CFR 431.92 and 10 CFR 
431.97.
    DOE defines ``variable refrigerant flow air conditioner'' as a unit 
of commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment that is 
configured as a split system air conditioner incorporating a single 
refrigerant circuit, with one or more outdoor units, at least one 
variable-speed compressor or an alternate compressor combination for 
varying the capacity of the system by three or more steps, and multiple 
indoor fan coil units, each of which is individually metered and 
individually controlled by an integral control device and common 
communications network and which can operate independently in response 
to multiple indoor thermostats. Variable refrigerant flow implies three 
or more steps of capacity control on common, inter-connecting piping. 
10 CFR 431.92.
    DOE defines ``variable refrigerant flow multi-split heat pump'' as 
a unit of commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment 
that is configured as a split system heat pump that uses reverse cycle 
refrigeration as its primary heating source and which may include 
secondary supplemental heating by means of electrical resistance, 
steam, hot water, or gas. The equipment incorporates a single 
refrigerant circuit, with one or more outdoor units, at least one 
variable-speed compressor or an alternate compressor combination for 
varying the capacity of the system by three or more steps, and multiple 
indoor fan coil units, each of which is individually metered and 
individually controlled by a control device and common communications 
network and which can operate independently in response to multiple 
indoor thermostats. Variable refrigerant flow implies three or more 
steps of capacity control on common, inter-connecting piping. 10 CFR 
431.92.
    DOE adopted energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split 
systems in a final rule published on May 16, 2012 (May 2012 Final 
Rule). 77 FR 28928, 28995. DOE's initial standards for VRF multi-split 
systems were prompted by ASHRAE's decision to include minimum 
efficiency levels for VRF multi-split systems for the first time in the 
2010 edition of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010). For 
four of the VRF water-source heat pump classes (including VRF water-
source heat pumps with cooling capacity less than 17,000 Btu/h and VRF 
water-

[[Page 11340]]

source heat pumps with cooling capacity greater than or equal to 
135,000 Btu/h and less than 760,000 Btu/h), DOE adopted the standard 
levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010, having determined that the updates 
to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010 either raised the energy efficiency levels 
above the existing Federal energy conservation standards or set 
standards for equipment for which DOE did not previously have 
standards. 77 FR 28928, 28938 (May 16, 2012). For all other equipment 
classes of VRF multi-split systems, DOE maintained the standards from 
the equipment class under which the corresponding VRF multi-split 
system equipment class was previously regulated (i.e., air-cooled VRF 
multi-split systems had previously been covered as small, large, and 
very large air-cooled central air-conditioning heat pumps with electric 
resistance heating, while water-source VRF multi-split heat pumps had 
previously been covered as water-source heat pumps).
    For the equipment addressed in this NOPR, DOE's current equipment 
classes for VRF multi-split systems are differentiated by refrigeration 
cycle (air conditioners or heat pumps), condenser heat rejection medium 
(air-cooled or water-source), cooling capacity, and heating type (for 
air-cooled: ``No heating or electric resistance heating'' or ``all 
other types of heating''; for water-source: ``Without heat recovery,'' 
``with heat recovery,'' or ``all''). DOE's current standards for VRF 
multi-split systems are set forth at Table 13 to 10 CFR 431.97 and 
repeated in Table II-1 of this document.

                                              Table II-1--Current DOE Standards for VRF Multi-Split Systems
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                             Compliance date: Products
           Equipment type                 Cooling capacity         Heating type \1\              Efficiency level          manufactured on and after . .
                                                                                                                                         .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners      <65,000 Btu/h..........  All....................  13.0 SEER........................  June 16, 2008.
 (Air-Cooled).                        >=65,000 Btu/h and       No Heating or Electric   11.2 EER.........................  January 1, 2010.
                                       <135,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating.
                                                               All Other Types of       11.0 EER.........................  January 1, 2010.
                                                                Heating.
                                      >=135,000 Btu/h and      No Heating or Electric   11.0 EER.........................  January 1, 2010.
                                       <240,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating.
                                                               All Other Types of       10.8 EER.........................  January 1, 2010.
                                                                Heating.
                                      >=240,000 Btu/h and      No Heating or Electric   10.0 EER.........................  January 1, 2010.
                                       <760,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating.
                                                               All Other Types of       9.8 EER..........................  January 1, 2010.
                                                                Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-      <65,000 Btu/h..........  All....................  13.0 SEER, 7.7 HSPF..............  June 16, 2008.
 Cooled).
                                      >=65,000 Btu/h and       No Heating or Electric   11.0 EER, 3.3 COP................  January 1, 2010.
                                       <135,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating.
                                                               All Other Types of       10.8 EER, 3.3 COP................  January 1, 2010.
                                                                Heating.
                                      >=135,000 Btu/h and      No Heating or Electric   10.6 EER, 3.2 COP................  January 1, 2010.
                                       <240,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating.
                                                               All Other Types of       10.4 EER, 3.2 COP................  January 1, 2010.
                                                                Heating.
                                      >=240,000 Btu/h and      No Heating or Electric   9.5 EER, 3.2 COP.................  January 1, 2010.
                                       <760,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating.
                                                               All Other Types of       9.3 EER, 3.2 COP.................  January 1, 2010.
                                                                Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water-    <17,000 Btu/h..........  Without heat recovery..  12.0 EER 4.2 COP.................  October 29, 2012. October 29,
 Source).                                                                                                                   2003.
                                                               With heat recovery.....  11.8 EER 4.2 COP.................  October 29, 2012. October 29,
                                                                                                                            2003.
                                      >=17,000 Btu/h and       All....................  12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................  October 29, 2003.
                                       <65,000 Btu/h.
                                      >=65,000 Btu/h and       All....................  12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................  October 29, 2003.
                                       <135,000 Btu/h.
                                      >=135,000 Btu/h and      Without heat recovery..  10.0 EER, 3.9 COP................  October 29, 2013.
                                       <760,000 Btu/h.
                                                               With heat recovery.....  9.8 EER, 3.9 COP.................  October 29, 2013.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-Cooled) with heat recovery fall under the category of ``All Other Types of Heating'' unless they also have electric
  resistance heating, in which case it falls under the category for ``No Heating or Electric Resistance Heating.''

2. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016
    ASHRAE released the 2016 version of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016) on October 26, 2016, which increased the heating 
mode efficiency level (in terms of COP) for six of the current DOE VRF 
multi-split system equipment classes:
    (1) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source <17,000 Btu/h, Without 
Heat Recovery;
    (2) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source <17,000 Btu/h, With 
Heat Recovery;
    (3) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source >=17,000 Btu/h and 
<65,000 Btu/h;
    (4) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps. Water-source >=65,000 Btu/h and 
<135,000 Btu/h;
    (5) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source >=135,000 Btu/h and 
<760,000 Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery; and
    (6) VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps, Water-source >=135,000 Btu/h and 
<760,000 Btu/h, With Heat Recovery.
    ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 left unchanged the heating mode 
efficiency level for the remaining six DOE equipment classes of VRF 
multi-split heat pump systems with cooling capacity greater than or 
equal to 65,000 Btu/h and left unchanged the cooling mode efficiency 
levels in terms of EER for all DOE equipment classes.
    DOE published a notice of data availability and request for 
information (NODA/RFI) in response to the amendments to ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2016 in the Federal Register on July 8, 2019 (July 2019 NODA/RFI). 
84 FR 32328. In the July 2019 NODA/RFI, DOE compared the current 
Federal standards for VRF multi-split systems (in terms of EER and COP) 
to the levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 and requested comment on its 
preliminary findings. 84 FR 32328, 32333-32334 (July 8, 2019). In 
addition to evaluating amended energy conservation standards for the 
six equipment classes triggered by the updated levels in ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016, DOE also examined the other 14 equipment classes of 
VRF multi-split systems under its 6-year lookback authority (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(C)) and solicited data from stakeholders. 84 FR 32328, 32334 
(July 8, 2019). DOE received comments in response to the July 2019 
NODA/RFI

[[Page 11341]]

from the interested parties listed in Table II-2.

             Table II-2--July 2019 NODA/RFI Written Comments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Reference in this
          Commenter(s)                   NOPR           Commenter type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
California Investor-Owned         CA IOUs...........  Utilities.
 Utilities.
Air-Conditioning, Heating, &      AHRI..............  Trade Association.
 Refrigeration Institute.
Hydronic Industry Alliance--      HIA--C............  Trade Association.
 Commercial.
Institute for Policy Integrity    Policy Integrity..  Academic
 at NYU School of Law.                                 Institution.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE discusses comments received in response to the July 2019 NODA/
RFI in the following sections of this document. A parenthetical 
reference at the end of a comment quotation or paraphrase provides the 
location of the item in the public record.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for 
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop 
energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems. (Docket 
No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003, which is maintained at 
www.regulations.gov). The references are arranged as follows: 
(Commenter name, comment docket ID number, page of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 24, 2019, ASHRAE officially released for distribution 
and made public ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019 
maintained the equipment class structure for VRF multi-split systems 
from ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 and did not update efficiency levels for 
any VRF equipment classes.
3. ASRAC Negotiations
    On April 11, 2018, DOE published in the Federal Register a notice 
of its intent to establish a negotiated rulemaking working group 
(Working Group) under the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal 
Advisory Committee (ASRAC), in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act \8\ and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act,\9\ to negotiate an 
amended test procedure and amended energy conservation standards for 
VRF multi-split systems. 83 FR 15514. The purpose of the Working Group 
was to discuss and, if possible, reach consensus on a proposed rule 
regarding the test procedure and energy conservation standards for VRF 
multi-split systems, as authorized by EPCA. Id. The Working Group 
comprised 21 voting members including manufacturers, energy efficiency 
advocates, utilities, and trade organizations.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 5 U.S.C. App. 2, Public Law 92-463.
    \9\ 5 U.S.C. 561-570, Public Law 101-648.
    \10\ A complete list of the ASRAC VRF Working Group members is 
available by clicking on the ``Working Group'' tab at: 
www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/appliance-standards-and-rulemaking-federal-advisory-committee#Variable%20Refrigerant%20Flow%20Multi-Split%20Air%20Conditioners%20and%20Heat%20Pumps%20Working%20Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 1, 2019, the Working Group reached consensus on a test 
procedure term sheet (VRF TP Term Sheet; Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-
0003-0044) that includes several recommendations. The following list 
includes the most substantial recommendations:
    (1) VRF multi-split systems should be rated with the Integrated 
Energy Efficiency Ratio (IEER) metric to allow consumers to make 
consistent comparisons with other equipment using the IEER metric 
(e.g., rooftop air conditioner ratings).
    (2) Use of the amended test procedure should not be required until 
the compliance date of amended energy conservation standards.
    (3) The Federal test procedure for VRF multi-split systems should 
be consistent with the September 20, 2019 draft version of AHRI 1230, 
with additional recommended amendments to be implemented after the 
conclusion of ASRAC negotiations.
    Following completion of the VRF TP Term Sheet, the Working Group 
proceeded to negotiate recommended revised energy conservation 
standards for VRF multi-split systems that accounted for the 
translation from the EER metric to the IEER metric, as well as the 
changes between the Federal test procedure that references AHRI 1230-
2010 and the recommended 2019 draft test procedure AHRI 1230 (which was 
later published as AHRI 1230-2021). As described in greater detail in 
section III.A of this document, DOE conducted a crosswalk analysis to 
inform the development of standard levels for VRF multi-split systems 
in terms of the new test procedure and metric. DOE presented the 
results of its crosswalk analysis on November 5, 2019 (Docket No. EERE-
2018-BT-STD-0003-0061 at p. 45), and subsequently, the Working Group 
reached consensus on an energy conservation standards term sheet (VRF 
ECS Term Sheet; Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003-0055) recommending:
    (1) Amendments to the Federal minimum efficiency standards for VRF 
multi-split systems (as presented in Table II-3 of this NOPR) and per 
the test procedure recommended in the VRF TP Term Sheet.
    (2) The compliance date of the recommended energy conservation 
standards should be January 1, 2024 for all VRF multi-split system 
equipment classes included in this proposed rulemaking.

    Table II-3--Recommended Efficiency Levels From VRF ECS Term Sheet
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Energy efficiency levels
             Equipment class                      recommended \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-cooled,         15.5 IEER.
 >=65,000 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-cooled,         14.9 IEER.
 >=135,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h.
VRF Air Conditioners, Air-cooled,         13.9 IEER.
 >=240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=65,000 Btu/ 14.6 IEER, 3.3 COP.
 h and <135,000 Btu/h, No Heating or
 Electric Resistance Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=65,000 Btu/ 14.4 IEER, 3.3 COP.
 h and <135,000 Btu/h, All Other Types
 of Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=135,000     13.9 IEER, 3.2 COP.
 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, No Heating or
 Electric Resistance Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=135,000     13.7 IEER; 3.2 COP.
 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, All Other
 Types of Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=240,000     12.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, No Heating or
 Electric Resistance Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Air-cooled, >=240,000     12.5 IEER; 3.2 COP.
 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, All Other
 Types of Heating.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, <17,000     16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
 Btu/h, Without Heat Recovery.

[[Page 11342]]

 
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, <17,000     15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
 Btu/h, With Heat Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=17,000    16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h, Without Heat
 Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=17,000    15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
 Btu/h and <65,000 Btu/h, With Heat
 Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=65,000    16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, Without Heat
 Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=65,000    15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
 Btu/h and <135,000 Btu/h, With Heat
 Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=135,000   14.0 IEER, 4.0 COP.
 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, Without Heat
 Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=135,000   13.8 IEER, 4.0 COP.
 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h, With Heat
 Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=240,000   12.0 IEER, 3.9 COP.
 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, Without Heat
 Recovery.
VRF Heat Pumps, Water-source, >=240,000   11.8 IEER, 3.9 COP.
 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h, With Heat
 Recovery.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The VRF ECS Term Sheet includes the notation ``COPH'' which
  indicates coefficient of performance in heating mode at 47 [deg]F
  outdoor ambient temperature (for air-cooled VRF multi-split heat
  pumps) and at 68 [deg]F entering water temperature (for water-source
  VRF multi-split heat pumps).

    DOE notes that there are minor differences in equipment class 
structure (related to cooling capacity, supplementary heating type, and 
presence of heat recovery) between the VRF ECS Term Sheet, ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2019, and the current Federal energy conservation 
standards for VRF multi-split systems. This topic is discussed in 
greater detail in section III.B of this document.
    On May 18, 2021, AHRI published an updated industry test standard 
for VRF multi-split systems AHRI 1230-2021. Subsequently, on December 
10, 2021, DOE published in the Federal Register the VRF TP NOPR 
(December 2021 VRF TP NOPR), in which DOE proposed an amended test 
procedure for VRF multi-split systems that incorporates by reference 
AHRI 1230-2021 and proposed to adopt IEER as the test metric for VRF 
multi-split systems. 86 FR 70644, 70652. In the December 2021 VRF TP 
NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that the proposed amendments to the 
test procedure, if made final, would alter the measured efficiency of 
VRF multi-split systems, as compared to ratings using the current 
Federal regulated metric, EER (see 10 CFR 431.97). In that document, 
DOE stated that were the proposed test procedure to be made final 
(i.e., were DOE to adopt IEER as the metric for VRF multi-split 
systems), testing pursuant to the amended test procedure would not be 
required until such time as manufacturers were required to comply with 
amended energy conservation standards that are denominated in terms of 
IEER, should such standards be adopted. 86 FR 70644, 70652 (Dec. 10, 
2021).

III. General Discussion

A. Methodology for Efficiency Crosswalk Analysis

1. Crosswalk Background and Overview
    Consistent with the recommendation of the Working Group, DOE is 
proposing to amend the energy conservation standards for VRF multi-
split systems to rely on the IEER metric for cooling efficiency. DOE is 
not proposing to amend the metric for heating efficiency (i.e., COP). 
The Department has tentatively concluded that a change of metrics would 
be beneficial for a number of reasons. The current Federal metric for 
cooling efficiency, EER, captures the system performance at a single, 
full-load operating point (i.e., single outdoor air temperatures for 
air-cooled systems and single entering water temperatures for water-
source systems). EER does not provide a seasonal or load-weighted 
measure of energy efficiency. In contrast, the IEER metric factors in 
the efficiency of operating at full-load conditions as well as part-
load conditions of 75-percent, 50-percent, and 25-percent of full-load 
capacity. Under part-load conditions, air conditioning and heating 
equipment may cycle off/on or may modulate down the capacity in order 
to match the imposed load. DOE has tentatively determined that the IEER 
metric provides a more representative measure of field performance of 
VRF multi-split systems by weighting the full-load and part-load 
efficiencies by the average amount of time equipment spends operating 
at each load.
    As stated, EPCA prohibits DOE from prescribing any amended standard 
that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or decreases the 
minimum required energy efficiency of a covered product. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(I)); commonly referred to as EPCA's ``anti-
backsliding provision'') In consideration of the IEER metric and to 
ensure any potential amendment would not violate EPCA's ``anti-
backsliding'' provision, DOE conducted a crosswalk analysis to validate 
the translation of the EER levels currently required by the DOE 
standards to IEER, as well as the IEER efficiency levels as recommended 
by the Working Group. The crosswalk analysis translates the current 
Federal EER standards (measured per the current DOE test procedure) to 
IEER levels of equivalent stringency (measured per the updated AHRI 
Standard 1230). (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003-0056).
    The proposed energy conservation standards presented in this 
document were developed based on an update to the relevant industry 
test standard (i.e., the 2019 draft test procedure AHRI 1230 that was 
finalized as ASHRAE 1230-2021). Compared to the current Federal test 
procedure (which references ANSI/AHRI 1230-2010), AHRI 1230-2021 
included two substantive changes that impact the translation of 
standards in EER to standards using IEER. Specifically, DOE considered 
in its crosswalk analysis in addition to the metric change from EER to 
IEER:
    (1) Maximum sensible heat ratio (SHR) limits of 0.82 and 0.85 were 
added for full-load and 75-percent, part-load conditions, respectively. 
SHR represents the ratio of sensible cooling capacity (i.e., the 
ability to change the temperature of indoor air) to the total cooling 
capacity, which also includes latent cooling capacity (i.e., the 
ability to remove moisture from indoor air). For example, an SHR of 
0.80 indicates that 80 percent of the capacity of a system reduces the 
temperature of the air and the remaining 20 percent dehumidifies the 
air.
    (2) A controls verification procedure (CVP) was added that verifies 
that the values provided by manufacturers in the supplemental test 
instruction (STI) for setting critical parameters during steady-state 
testing are within the range of critical parameters that would be

[[Page 11343]]

used by the system's native controls at the same conditions.
    On November 5, 2019, DOE presented its crosswalk findings to the 
Working Group to inform the development of recommended standards levels 
for VRF multi-split systems in terms of the new test procedure and 
cooling metric. (Docket No. EERE-2018-BT-STD-0003-0056). To validate 
the relative equivalency of the IEER standard levels as recommended by 
the Working Group and the current Federal EER standards, DOE analyzed a 
minimally-compliant model from a high-sales-volume equipment class 
(with a current Federal standard of 10.6 EER) to ensure that 
translation of the current EER standards to the recommended IEER values 
would not decrease the minimum required energy efficiency of VRF multi-
split systems. As discussed, because of the change in metric and 
changes in the test procedure, DOE cannot translate the current EER to 
a single IEER value (further discussed in section III.A.3 of this 
NOPR). DOE identified the resulting crosswalked efficiency of the 
minimally-compliant model from the selected class ranged from 13 to 16 
IEER.
    DOE also presented to the Working Group anonymized and aggregated 
data provided by VRF multi-split system manufacturers. These data 
showed a preliminary translation of ratings to the IEER metric in terms 
of the updated test procedure for a collection of VRF multi-split 
systems spanning four equipment classes. The sample data were mostly 
composed of systems above the current Federal baseline efficiency 
levels in terms of EER and, thus, were not instructive as to a 
crosswalk of minimum energy efficiency levels. (Docket No. EERE-2018-
BT-STD-0003-0056). The IEER efficiency level specified in the VRF ECS 
Term Sheet for the selected class was 13.9 IEER, which was within the 
range of crosswalked results.
    Given that translating the current EER levels to IEER according to 
the updated test procedure does not provide for a single point answer 
(as would thereby allow for a direct comparison), DOE believes it is 
reasonable to ensure that the recommended value lies within the range 
resulting from DOE's evaluation as a proxy for understanding whether 
there is a potential for backsliding. Consequently, DOE has tentatively 
determined that the recommended IEER levels are at least equivalent in 
stringency to the current EER levels. Further, given that IEER is a 
more comprehensive metric (reflecting energy efficiency across a range 
of operating conditions, as opposed to the efficiency at a single 
condition), DOE has tentatively determined that the recommended IEER 
levels would not decrease the minimum required energy efficiency of a 
VRF multi-split system.
2. Crosswalk Details
    In its analysis to crosswalk the current DOE energy conservation 
standards for VRF cooling efficiency, DOE sought to account for the 
translation from EER to IEER, as well as changes in the updated 
industry test standard--namely the addition of SHR limits and the 
introduction of the CVP. Because these three factors have interacting 
effects on the measured cooling performance of VRF multi-split systems, 
DOE modeled their interaction holistically and did not examine 
incremental changes in performance due to any one factor.
    As discussed, DOE is not proposing to change the heating efficiency 
metric (i.e., COP), because both ASHRAE 90.1-2016 and the Working Group 
VRF ECS Term Sheet define heating mode efficiency in terms of COP. 
Additionally, the changes to the test procedure for VRF multi-split 
systems did not impact measured efficiency in heating mode. Therefore, 
DOE did not conduct a crosswalk analysis for VRF heating mode 
efficiency.
    The following paragraphs describe DOE's crosswalk methodology to 
translate the current cooling efficiency standards for VRF multi-split 
systems that rely on the EER metric to standards using IEER that are of 
equivalent efficiency. DOE also identifies the various factors that 
limit the ability to strictly translate standards that rely on EER to 
standards that standards that rely on IEER.
    In order to develop a crosswalk approach that is applicable to all 
equipment classes of VRF multi-split systems, DOE analyzed a basic 
model representative of equipment classes with high sales volume.\11\ 
Specifically, DOE selected an air-cooled VRF multi-split heat pump 
system in the cooling capacity range greater than 135,000 Btu/h and 
less than or equal to 240,000 Btu/h without heat recovery. The selected 
basic model had an EER rating within 0.2 points of the Federal standard 
for the applicable equipment class (i.e., a 10.8 rating vs 10.6 EER 
minimum required), and 0.4 points above the Federal standard for the 
corresponding equipment class equipped with heat recovery (i.e., a 10.8 
rating vs 10.4 EER minimum required).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ According to a report from Cadeo group, air-cooled VRF 
multi-split heat pump systems in the cooling capacity range greater 
than 135,000 Btu/h and less than or equal to 240,000 Btu/h without 
heat recovery account for 12.4 percent of the VRF multi-split system 
market. Air-cooled VRF multi-split systems in the same capacity 
range equipped with heat recovery account for an additional 32.6 
percent of the VRF multi-split system market. (EERE-2017-BT-TP-0018-
0002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of the Working Group DOE, along with several 
manufacturers, DOE conducted investigative testing on VRF multi-split 
systems operating under native controls. Included in this testing was 
the basic model selected to serve as the basis for the crosswalk 
analysis. DOE created a performance model using VapCyc and CoilDesigner 
software \12\ to evaluate capacity and efficiency of the selected 
system per the updated industry test standard. DOE first modeled the 
system's behavior at the full-load cooling condition by selecting 
compressor speed, outdoor fan speed, indoor airflow rate, and superheat 
condition to match information that was available in STI and provided 
confidentially by the manufacturer to DOE contractors under a 
nondisclosure agreement (NDA). DOE then calibrated the system as 
modeled in VapCyc and CoilDesigner so that the predicted capacity and 
EER matched the rated capacity and efficiency for the system (at full-
load conditions) as certified by the manufacturer. Specifically, in its 
investigative testing, DOE observed typical control strategies for 
unloading at part-load conditions, including turning individual indoor 
units off, modulating compressor and fan speeds, and increasing 
evaporating temperature. DOE also observed patterns in which compressor 
speed and outdoor fan speed tended to scale together at reduced load 
conditions. DOE used this information to adjust the model so as to 
project the performance of the selected VRF multi-split system at 
partial loads by decreasing the operating state of components according 
to load level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ VapCyc and CoilDesigner are HVAC energy modeling software 
programs. CoilDesigner is a detailed heat exchanger modeling 
program. VapCyc integrates CoilDesigner heat exchanger simulations 
with compressor and expansion models to complete a refrigeration 
cycle model to simulate performance of an air conditioning or heat 
pump system at specific operating conditions. Available at: 
www.optimizedthermalsystems.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed, the capacity and EER rating for the basic model used 
in DOE's analysis were measured according to the current DOE test 
procedure, but DOE is seeking to translate the current EER standards to 
equivalent IEER standards when tested according to the updated industry 
test standard. As such, DOE also considered in its crosswalk analysis 
the maximum SHR limits that were added in the industry test procedure 
AHRI 1230-2021. By establishing upper limits on SHR, DOE understands 
AHRI 1230-2021 to create test conditions that

[[Page 11344]]

are more representative of field applications for VRF multi-split 
systems, as compared to the current DOE test procedure. AHRI 1230-2021 
sets SHR limits of 0.82 and 0.85 at the full-load cooling condition and 
the 75-percent part-load cooling condition, respectively, but does not 
include SHR limits for the 50-percent or 25-percent part-load cooling 
conditions. AHRI 1230-2021 also establishes a calculation method for 
the efficiency rating reduction for systems that exceed the SHR limits 
at the full-load and/or 75-percent part-load cooling conditions in the 
IEER test.
    Because manufacturers do not currently certify or publicize any 
information about SHR at the full-load EER test condition, DOE was 
unable to precisely determine SHR values representative of a baseline 
EER VRF multi-split system. Also, because the current DOE test 
procedure does not include any part-load cooling test points, no 
information was available about SHR values that VRF multi-split systems 
would produce at the 75-percent part-load IEER test condition. Because 
SHR data was not publicly available, DOE instead examined data from its 
investigative testing to identify the typical range of SHR values for 
VRF multi-split systems when operating under native controls at the 
full-load and 75-percent part-load conditions. DOE observed several 
cases of basic models with native controls test data indicating SHR 
values above the AHRI 1230-2021 limits at the full-load and 75-percent 
part-load condition, and also observed some basic models testing below 
the SHR limits. The precision of the crosswalk from existing EER levels 
to IEER levels in terms of the updated industry test standard was 
limited by the lack of available data about representative SHR values 
at the full-load EER test condition and by the variation in SHR values 
observed in the native controls test data.
    To account for the effect of the SHR limits in the updated industry 
test standard in its crosswalk analysis, DOE relied on the native 
controls test data to establish a range of potential initial SHR values 
observed at the full-load and 75-percent part-load IEER test 
conditions. DOE then adapted the VapCyc and CoilDesigner performance 
model to examine the effect of changing indoor airflow and evaporating 
temperature on SHR and the associated impacts on energy efficiency. 
Reducing the evaporating temperature increased the rate of 
dehumidification (thus reducing SHR), but also required more power 
input from the compressor, which reduced the measured efficiency. DOE 
also observed that at reduced airflow rates, the dehumidification 
capacity was higher, but the overall system capacity and efficiency 
were lower.
    Ultimately, the crosswalked IEER values varied depending on 
modeling input assumptions, such as whether the initial SHR was below 
or above the new SHR limits (and by how much), as well as the different 
control strategies employed to reduce SHR. The crosswalked IEER values 
also depended on overlapping input assumptions related to the EER-to-
IEER translation, such as the number of thermally-active indoor units 
at part-load conditions. Reducing the number of indoor units at partial 
loads (while keeping all else constant) increased the amount of 
refrigerant flow to each remaining indoor fan coil, which provided 
better dehumidification performance and, thus, reduced SHR at the 75-
percent load condition.
    As discussed, the updates in AHRI 1230-2021 include a CVP for 
verifying that the certified operational settings for critical 
parameters are representative of values that would be observed with the 
VRF multi-split system operating under its own native controls. As 
described in AHRI 1230-2021, critical parameters include compressor 
speed(s), outdoor fan speed(s) and outdoor variable valve position(s). 
As proposed in the December 2021 VRF TP NOPR, manufacturers would 
specify operational settings for each of these components in their STI 
to implement during steady-state tests for IEER and COP. 86 FR 70644, 
70666 (Dec. 10, 2021). The CVP is not a part of rating tests for IEER, 
but rather, it serves as a validation method for cooling mode only.
    DOE's ability to fully account for the potential changes to the 
measured performance of VRF multi-split systems as a result of the CVP 
was limited by the lack of available information regarding the control 
strategies employed by VRF system manufacturers--particularly at part-
load conditions where manufacturers do not currently certify or make 
public any information about control settings. DOE was also limited by 
uncertainty about how these control strategies may change or how 
manufacturers may certify their critical parameter settings in response 
to the CVP.
    As discussed, the CVP is intended to validate that the certified 
operational settings (i.e., those used during IEER testing) for 
critical parameters are representative of controls behavior exhibited 
under the system's own controls at the same conditions. DOE used 
information about the ranges of operational settings observed during 
native controls testing to represent a future system that would pass 
the CVP (i.e., a system for which the certified critical parameter 
settings would be validated by a CVP conducted with the system 
operating under native controls). Specifically, DOE selected inputs 
used in its VapCyc and CoilDesigner performance model for simulating 
IEER that were consistent with native controls testing observations, 
including the number of thermally-active indoor units at part-load 
conditions, compressor and fan speeds, expansion valve control 
strategy, and other refrigeration cycle parameters. DOE tentatively 
concluded that modelling IEER results using control settings observed 
during native controls testing was the most accurate approach for 
estimating how manufacturers would certify critical parameter control 
settings as part of testing to IEER as measured by AHRI 1230-2021.
3. Crosswalk Results
    As discussed, DOE conducted its crosswalk analysis on a high-sales-
volume equipment class of VRF multi-split systems and selected a 
representative model with EER near the Federal baseline level (10.8 EER 
vs 10.6 EER baseline) in developing its VapCyc and CoilDesigner 
performance model. Based on the modeling conducted, the expected 
performance of the selected equipment class of VRF multi-split systems 
when tested according to AHRI 1230-2021 would be in the range of 13 to 
16 IEER. Because of the wider range of operation conditions captured in 
IEER as well as the various strategies that manufacturers may employ to 
respond to the test procedure changes, a single EER baseline value 
inherently translates to a range of IEER values.
    As discussed, the IEER metric captures performance at additional 
part-load operating conditions not considered by the EER metric; 
therefore, a single EER value translates to a range of potential IEER 
values.\13\ IEER captures the impacts of design features and control 
strategies that may not affect full-load operation but do affect part-
load operation. For example, VRF multi-split systems may use different 
strategies for reducing capacity at part loads like reducing the number 
of thermally active indoor units or slowing compressor speeds, which 
may result in differential impacts on measured IEER, but which would 
not have any impact

[[Page 11345]]

on the measured full-load performance EER. DOE also recognizes that 
there are a variety of paths that manufacturers may take to account for 
the new test procedure, and that the crosswalk analysis approximates 
how manufacturers in the aggregate may respond to test procedure 
changes. For example, some manufacturers may elect to meet the new SHR 
limitations by reducing evaporating temperatures, while other 
manufacturers may meet the new SHR limitations by reducing indoor 
airflow and decreasing the number of thermally-active indoor units. 
Each strategy may have different tradeoffs in terms of overall system 
performance and measured energy efficiency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ In a January 2016 energy conservation standards direct 
final rule for ACUACs, DOE discussed a metric translation from EER 
to IEER in which a single EER level corresponds to a range of IEERs. 
81 FR 2420, 2452 (Jan. 15, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As described in section II.B.3 of this document, the Working Group 
recommended efficiency levels for VRF multi-split systems that align 
with the efficiency levels specified in ASHRAE 90.1-2016 in terms of 
IEER and COP. While DOE's crosswalk analysis showed that a single EER 
baseline could result in a range of IEER values (as discussed, due to 
the wider range of operation conditions captured in IEER, as well as 
the various strategies that manufacturers may employ to respond to the 
test procedure changes), the IEER levels included in the VRF ECS Term 
Sheet (which the Working Group recommended as an appropriate crosswalk 
of current Federal EER standards) are within the range of DOE's 
crosswalked results. As explained previously, DOE has tentatively 
determined that the recommended IEER levels are at least equivalent in 
stringency to the current EER levels. Further, given that IEER is a 
more comprehensive metric (reflecting energy efficiency across a range 
of operating conditions, as opposed to the efficiency at a single 
condition), DOE has tentatively determined that the recommended IEER 
levels would not decrease the minimum required energy efficiency of a 
VRF multi-split system, thereby avoiding statutorily impermissible 
backsliding with respect to the current Federal standards in terms of 
EER. DOE has also tentatively determined that no changes to heating 
mode ratings in terms of COP are expected from the changes to the test 
procedure for VRF multi-split systems included in AHRI 1230-2021.
    Issue 1: DOE requests comment on its crosswalk analysis methodology 
and crosswalk results.

B. Equipment Class Structure for VRF

    In the July 2019 NODA/RFI, DOE discussed two areas where the 
equipment class structure for VRF multi-split systems differs between 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and the Federal standards. 84 FR 32328, 32334 
(July 8, 2019). First, DOE noted that in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 (as 
in previous versions of ASHRAE Standard 90.1), two water-source VRF 
multi-split heat pump equipment classes (greater than or equal to 
17,000 Btu/h and less than 65,000 Btu/h; and greater than or equal to 
65,000 Btu/h and less than 135,000 Btu/h) are disaggregated into 
equipment with heat recovery and equipment without heat recovery, with 
each ASHRAE equipment class having a separate minimum cooling 
efficiency. The current Federal standards do not disaggregate water-
source VRF multi-split heat pumps in these capacity ranges based on the 
presence of heat recovery. (See Table 13 to 10 CFR 431.97.) However, as 
DOE pointed out in the NODA/RFI, the cooling efficiency EER standard in 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for these units with heat recovery is below 
the current Federal standard. Consequently, under EPCA, the Secretary 
cannot prescribe those levels due to anti-backsliding concerns, so 
those classes were not subdivided further. Id.
    Second, DOE identified that ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 disaggregates 
and sets distinct standards for VRF water-source heat pumps by cooling 
capacity above and below 240,000 Btu/h (i.e., separate equipment 
classes with cooling capacities greater than or equal to 135,000 Btu/h 
and less than 240,000 Btu/h and greater than or equal to 240,000 Btu/h 
and less than 760,000 Btu/h). The DOE standards provide for VRF water-
source heat pumps with a cooling capacity of greater than or equal to 
135,000 Btu/h and less than 760,000 Btu/h. (See table 13 to 10 CFR 
431.97.) DOE sought feedback from stakeholders on whether to consider 
additional equipment classes for VRF water-source heat pumps between 
135,000 and 760,000 Btu/h, which would align with the ASHRAE 90.1-2016 
structure for those classes of equipment. Id.
    In response to the July 2019 NODA/RFI, AHRI and the CA IOUs both 
commented that DOE should align its equipment class structure for all 
classes of VRF multi-split systems with the equipment structure found 
in ASHRAE 90.1-2016 (i.e., not just for the specific equipment classes 
on which DOE requested comment). (AHRI, No. 42 at p. 3; CA IOUs, No. 41 
at p. 3) AHRI commented that aligning with ASHRAE 90.1 would reflect 
the structure of other VRF classes, such as air-cooled heat pumps and 
air conditioners. (AHRI, No. 42 at p. 3) The CA IOUs commented that 
aligning with the equipment structure in ASHRAE 90.1-2016 would provide 
additional clarity regarding which standards apply to heat pumps versus 
units with heat recovery. (CA IOUs, No. 41 at pp. 3-4) The CA IOUs 
further commented that for air-source VRF multi-split heat pumps, in 
order to be more easily understood by the market, DOE should align with 
the convention from ASHRAE Standard 90.1 by adding a new column titled 
``subcategory'' that specifies ``heat pump'' or ``heat pump with heat 
recovery'' and should remove its existing designation of ``no heating 
or electric resistance heating'' and ``all other types of heating,'' 
which is terminology more applicable to commercial unitary air 
conditioners than to VRF multi-split systems. (CA IOUs, No. 41 at p. 3) 
The CA IOUs also recommended that DOE should follow ASHRAE regarding 
breaking out the 135,000 Btu/h to 760,000 Btu/h categorization into two 
size categories, and that DOE should eliminate the 17,000 Btu/h cutoff 
for water-source equipment so as to align with ASHRAE. Id.
    As stated, EPCA generally directs DOE to establish amended uniform 
national standards for the VRF multi-split systems at the minimum 
levels specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)) Consistent with EPCA, and in consideration of the 
comments received, DOE proposes to adopt the ASHRAE 90.1-2016 equipment 
class structure for VRF multi-split systems in its regulations at 10 
CFR 431.97. By adopting the equipment class structure from ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016, DOE would fulfill requests by stakeholders, utilize 
terminology that is more representative of distinctive features in the 
VRF market, and would better align the cooling capacity break points 
with those for other equipment categories (e.g., the standards for 
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, which are 
subdivided by the same capacity boundaries. See Table 3 to 10 CFR 
431.97). As noted previously, DOE has identified two areas for which 
the equipment class structure differs between the existing DOE 
standards and ASHRAE Standard 90.1.

    (1) Capacity break points. For water-source VRF multi-split heat 
pumps, the current Federal standards include VRF multi-split systems 
with cooling capacity greater than or equal to 135,000 Btu/h and 
less than 760,000 Btu/h in a single category. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-
2016 splits this grouping at 240,000 Btu/h to create capacity 
categories of greater than or equal to 135,000 and less than 240,000 
btu/h and greater than or equal to 240,000 and less than 760,000 
Btu/h. Also for water-source VRF multi-split systems, the current 
Federal standards include separate classes for systems with cooling 
capacity less

[[Page 11346]]

than 17,000 Btu/h and for systems with cooling capacity between 
17,000 Btu/h and 65,000 Btu/h. ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 groups 
these classes together into a single equipment class with cooling 
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h.
    (2) Heating type. The current Federal standards are 
disaggregated for certain classes of VRF multi-split systems based 
on heating type. For all air-cooled VRF multi-split air conditioners 
and heat pumps with cooling capacity greater than or equal to 65,000 
Btu/h, the Federal cooling standards differ by 0.2 EER points 
depending on whether a system is equipped with ``no heating or 
electric resistance heating'' or ``all other types of heating.'' For 
water-source VRF multi-split heat pumps, some capacity classes 
disaggregate instead by systems with heat recovery versus without 
heat recovery (also with a 0.2 EER difference in the applicable 
standards classes). Other water-source VRF multi-split heat pump 
standards are not disaggregated beyond the specified capacity range. 
ASHRAE 90.1-2016 disaggregates standards for air-cooled and water-
source VRF multi-split heat pumps based on the presence of heat 
recovery, instead of ``heating type.'' Air-cooled VRF multi-split 
air conditioners do not have subdivided cooling efficiency levels 
based on heating type in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016.

    These differences are presented in Table III-1:

                                        Table III-1--Comparison of Current DOE Efficiency Levels With ASHRAE 90.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                               ASHRAE 90.1-2016/2019
           Equipment type                 Cooling capacity           Heating type              DOE efficiency level               efficiency level
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners      >=65,000 Btu/h and       No Heating or Electric   11.2 EER.........................  11.2 EER, 15.5 IEER.
 (Air-Cooled).                         <135,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating.
                                                               All Other Types of       11.0 EER.........................  No Standard.\3\
                                                                Heating.
                                      >=135,000 Btu/h and      No Heating or Electric   11.0 EER.........................  11.0 EER, 14.9 IEER.
                                       <240,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating.
                                                               All Other Types of       10.8 EER.........................  No Standard.\3\
                                                                Heating.
                                      >=240,000 Btu/h and      No Heating or Electric   10.0 EER.........................  10.0 EER, 13.9 IEER.
                                       <760,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating.
                                                               All Other Types of       9.8 EER..........................  No Standard.\3\
                                                                Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-      >=65,000 Btu/h and       No Heating or Electric   11.0 EER, 3.3 COP................  11.0 EER, 14.6 IEER, 3.3 COP.
 Cooled).                              <135,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating\1\.
                                                               All Other Types of       10.8 EER, 3.3 COP................  10.8 EER, 14.4 IEER, 3.3 COP.
                                                                Heating 1 2.
                                      >=135,000 Btu/h and      No Heating or Electric   10.6 EER, 3.2 COP................  10.6 EER, 13.9 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                       <240,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating \1\.
                                                               All Other Types of       10.4 EER, 3.2 COP................  10.4 EER, 13.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                                                Heating 1 2.
                                      >=240,000 Btu/h and      No Heating or Electric   9.5 EER, 3.2 COP.................  9.5 EER, 12.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                       <760,000 Btu/h.          Resistance Heating \1\.
                                                               All Other Types of       9.3 EER, 3.2 COP.................  9.3 EER, 12.5 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                                                Heating1 2.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water-    <17,000 Btu/h..........  Without heat recovery..  12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................  12.0 EER, 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
 Source).
                                                               With heat recovery.....  11.8 EER, 4.2 COP................  11.8 EER, 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                      >=17,000 Btu/h and       Without heat recovery..  12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................  12.0 EER, 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                       <65,000 Btu/h.
                                                               With heat recovery.....                                     11.8 EER, 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                      >=65,000 Btu/h and       Without heat recovery..  12.0 EER, 4.2 COP................  12.0 EER, 16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                       <135,000 Btu/h.
                                                               With heat recovery.....                                     11.8 EER, 15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                      >=135,000 Btu/h and      Without heat recovery..  10.0 EER, 3.9 COP................  10.0 EER, 14.0 IEER, 4.0 COP.
                                       <240,000 Btu/h.         With heat recovery.....  9.8 EER, 3.9 COP.................  9.8 EER, 13.8 IEER, 4.0 COP.
                                      >= 240,000 Btu/h and     Without heat recovery..  10.0 EER, 3.9 COP................  10.0 EER, 12.0 IEER, 3.9 COP.
                                       <760,000 Btu/h.
                                                               With heat recovery.....  9.8 EER, 3.9 COP.................  9.8 EER, 11.8 IEER, 3.9 COP.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In terms of current Federal standards, VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-Cooled) with heat recovery fall under the heating type ``All Other Types of
  Heating'' unless they also have electric resistance heating, in which case it falls under the category for ``No Heating or Electric Resistance
  Heating.''
\2\ In ASHRAE Standard 90.1, this equipment class is referred to as units with heat recovery rather than all other types of heating.
\3\ ASHRAE Standard 90.1 only includes standards for VRF air conditioners with ``electric resistance or none'' heating type. Because stakeholders have
  expressed that it is unlikely that VRF air conditioners would ever be paired with other forms of supplemental heating, DOE's proposed equipment
  classes for VRF air conditioners are condensed using ``all types of heating'' to ensure no change in coverage or backsliding.

    In this document, DOE proposes to amend 10 CFR 431.97 to adopt the 
equipment class structure found in ASHRAE 90.1-2016 for VRF multi-split 
systems (which is identical to the most current version, ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2019). This proposal would amend the existing DOE class 
structure by expanding the number of VRF water-source heat pump 
classes, reducing the number of air-cooled VRF air conditioner classes, 
and amending the convention for heating type for heat pump systems with 
and without heat recovery. Additionally, DOE is proposing a minor 
clarification in the language used to describe the heating type for VRF 
multi-split system heat pumps--ASHRAE 90.1-2016 currently includes 
separate classes for systems with and without heat recovery, designated 
as ``VRF multisplit systems'' or ``VRF multisplit system with heat 
recovery.'' However, DOE proposes a minor clarification to revise these 
descriptions to explicitly state either ``heat pump without heat 
recovery'' or ``heat pump with heat recovery.''
    For VRF multi-split system air conditioners, ASHRAE 90.1-2016 only 
includes classes with the heating type designation of ``Electric 
resistance (or none),'' thus excluding any VRF multi-split air 
conditioners with ``other'' kinds of heating. As previously described, 
DOE received comment from stakeholders requesting that DOE align its 
equipment class structure with the structure from ASHRAE 90.1-2016.

[[Page 11347]]

(AHRI, No. 42 at p. 3; CA IOUs, No. 41 at p. 3) However, because the 
current Federal standards include separate efficiency levels for VRF 
multi-split air conditioners having electric resistance (or no) heat 
vs. those having ``all other types of heating,'' DOE is proposing to 
label the condensed equipment classes for VRF multi-split air 
conditioners as having ``All'' types of heating, and to set IEER 
standards for the proposed condensed classes that are equivalent in 
stringency to the EER standards for the class with ``electric 
resistance or none'' heating type. DOE does not have any knowledge of 
VRF multi-split air conditioners on the market that have ``all other 
types of heating'' (e.g., a furnace), and, thus, has tentatively 
concluded that setting IEER standards to cover ``all'' kinds of heating 
would not constitute an increase of stringency for any models currently 
in existence.
    The ASRAC Working Group recommended IEER levels for VRF multi-split 
systems that utilized the equipment class structure of ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2016 (with limited exceptions as previously described). As 
discussed in section III.A of this document, DOE evaluated the IEER 
levels recommended by the ASRAC Working Group using a crosswalk 
analysis and determined that there is limited precision in translating 
the current EER levels to IEER according to the updated test procedure. 
In cases where DOE is proposing to subdivide or condense equipment 
classes relative to the existing DOE equipment class structure, the 
IEER levels recommended by the Working Group are within the limits of 
precision determined by DOE's crosswalk translation. For example, in 
cases where the current DOE equipment class only includes a single EER 
standard but ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 includes separate IEER standards 
for classes with and without heat recovery, both of the ASHRAE Standard 
90.1 IEER levels fall within the crosswalk range determined by DOE to 
represent equivalent stringency to existing EER standard. Therefore, 
DOE has tentatively concluded that adopting the proposed class 
structure and efficiency levels would not result in a change in 
stringency for any classes.
    Issue 2: DOE requests comment on its proposal to align equipment 
classes for VRF multi-split systems with the structure in ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016, with additional clarification of heating type.

IV. Estimates of Potential Energy Savings

    As required under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i), for VRF multi-split 
system equipment classes for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 set levels 
more stringent than the current Federal standards, DOE performed an 
assessment to determine the energy-savings potential of amending 
Federal standard levels to reflect the efficiency levels specified in 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. In the July 2019 NODA/RFI, DOE presented the 
findings of the energy savings potential for the six considered 
equipment classes for which the Department was triggered. 84 FR 32328, 
32335 (July 8, 2019). DOE tentatively determined, based on a report by 
Cadeo Group,\14\ that four of the six affected classes--those with 
cooling capacities that are less than 17,000 Btu/h or greater than or 
equal to 135,000 Btu/h (with or without heat recovery), do not have any 
market share and, thus, no energy savings potential from amended 
standards. The Cadeo report showed that the remaining two affected 
classes, with cooling capacities greater than 17,000 Btu/h and less 
than 135,000 Btu/h, represented under 3 percent of the VRF multi-split 
system market. DOE tentatively concluded that potential energy savings 
for these equipment classes were de minimis. Id. DOE notes that in 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016, the COP was raised by 0.1 on both of these 
equipment classes, and that most commercial buildings are cooling 
dominant. Given this information, and the small market share, in this 
NOPR DOE maintains its tentative conclusion that energy savings for 
these equipment classes are de minimis. Consideration of more-stringent 
efficiency levels than those specified in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 are 
discussed in section V.A of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Cadeo Report, Variable Refrigerant Flow: A Preliminary 
Market Assessment. See: www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0018-0002. The report presents market share by VRF multi-split 
system equipment class, based on confidential sales data given in 
interviews with several major manufacturers of VRF multi-split 
equipment and DOE's Compliance Certification Database.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusions

A. Consideration of More-Stringent Efficiency Levels

    When triggered by an update to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, EPCA requires 
DOE to establish an amended uniform national standard for equipment 
classes at the minimum level specified in the amended ASHRAE Standard 
90.1 unless DOE determines, by rule published in the Federal Register 
and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that adoption of a 
uniform national standard more stringent than the amended ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1 for the equipment class would result in significant 
additional conservation of energy and is technologically feasible and 
economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I)-(II)). In the 
July 2019 NODA/RFI, DOE requested feedback on its proposal to adopt the 
levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 as the Federal standards for the 
six VRF water-source classes for which DOE was triggered by ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016. 84 FR 32328, 32335 (July 8, 2019). DOE also 
requested data and information that could help it determine whether 
standards levels more stringent than the levels in ASHRAE Standard 
90.1-2016 for VRFs would result in significant additional energy 
savings for classes for the 14 classes where DOE was not triggered 
(i.e., classes reviewed under the six-year-lookback provision). Id. at 
84 FR 32335-32336.
    AHRI supported DOE's proposal to adopt the energy efficiency levels 
for the six equipment classes triggered by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. 
(AHRI, No. 42 at p. 3) AHRI added that the adoption of a more-stringent 
standard of the non-triggered classes is not economically justified at 
this time and that the stringency of any new standards need to account 
for all of the changes in the test procedure as a result of the Working 
Group negotiations (especially the CVP and SHR limits). (AHRI, No. 42 
at p. 4) AHRI also provided information regarding the building types 
that are common applications for VRF. (AHRI, No. 42 at p. 4)
    The CA IOUs recommended that the Working Group and DOE analyze a 
range of efficiency levels (including max-tech) for both water-source 
and air-source VRF systems. The CA IOUs also stressed that any changes 
to the energy conservation standards should account for the test 
procedure changes being discussed by the Working Group. The CA IOUs 
acknowledged that while DOE's data show limited sales on water-source 
VRF multi-split systems, they still believe that the Working Group 
should analyze trial standard levels for these classes. (CA IOUs, No. 
41 at p. 4) The CA IOUs provided a set of historical VRF incentive 
program data to assist in the energy use analysis and recommended that 
DOE use Energy Plus \15\ to analyze the energy use of VRF multi-split 
systems. (CA IOUs, No. 41 at pp. 6-12)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Energy Plus is a whole-building energy simulation program 
that engineers, architects, and researchers use to model both energy 
consumption for heating cooling, ventilation, lighting, plug and 
process loads, and water use in buildings. (Available at https://energyplus.net/)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HIA-C commented that DOE should first ensure that VRF multi-split 
systems

[[Page 11348]]

can actually meet the current ASHRAE Standard 90.1 efficiency levels 
before attempting to adopt new efficiency levels. (HIA-C, No. 40 at p. 
4)
    Policy Integrity commented on the emissions analysis, suggesting 
that DOE should monetize the full benefits of emissions reductions and 
use the global estimate of the social cost of greenhouse gases. (Policy 
Integrity, No. 39 at p. 2) In response, DOE considers the monetary 
benefits likely to result from the reduced emissions of greenhouse 
gases when analyzing efficiency levels more stringent than the ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1 levels. DOE uses the social cost of greenhouse gases from 
the most recent update of the Interagency Working Group on Social Cost 
of Greenhouse Gases, United States Government (IWG) working group, 
which are available in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of 
Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under Executive 
Order 13990.\16\ The IWG recommended global values be used for 
regulatory analysis. Because DOE is not conducting an economic analysis 
of levels more stringent than the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 levels in this 
notice, there is no corresponding consideration of emission reductions 
or the associated monetary benefits. As DOE is required by EPCA to 
adopt the levels set forth in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE did not conduct 
an economic analysis or corresponding emissions analysis for the levels 
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse 
Gasses, United States Government, Technical Support Document: Social 
Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under 
Executive Order 13990 (2021) (Available at: www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/TechnicalSupportDocument_SocialCostofCarbonMethaneNitrousOxide.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in section II.B.3 of this NOPR, following publication 
of the July 2019 NODA/RFI, the Working Group (which included AHRI and 
the CA IOUs) reached consensus on two term sheets containing 
recommendations regarding the test procedure and energy conservation 
standards for VRF multi-split systems. As discussed in section III.A of 
this document, the recommended standards are consistent with the 
crosswalk conducted by DOE to translate the existing Federal standards 
in terms of EER to equivalent levels in terms of IEER, measured per 
AHRI 1230-2021. These recommended efficiency levels also align with the 
IEER and COP levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. The Working Group did 
not consider more-stringent efficiency levels.
    DOE considered but did not estimate potential energy savings that 
would occur from more-stringent standards. To assess the magnitude of 
potential energy savings from amended standards and determine which 
level, if any, of more-stringent standards would be economically 
justified, DOE must be able to properly represent the no-new-standards 
case--the case without amended standards--and must be able to properly 
characterize the technology options and costs associated with specific 
levels of efficiency. With regards to VRF multi-split systems, this 
would require developing efficiency data for the entire market in terms 
of IEER measured per AHRI 1230-2021.
    DOE considered two approaches for developing market-wide 
performance data in terms of IEER measured per AHRI 1230-2021: (1) DOE 
examined whether any such data exist in publicly-available sources, and 
(2) DOE considered whether existing performance data (in terms of EER, 
measured per the current Federal test procedure) could be effectively 
translated to IEER, measured per AHRI 1230-2021.
    On the first approach, DOE found that public data in terms of IEER 
measured per AHRI 1230-2021 are not available, as the rating of VRF 
multi-split systems using the updated metric and test procedure is not 
currently required.\17\ While DOE acknowledges that IEER performance 
data are widely represented by VRF manufacturers, all such data are 
measured per an earlier version of the industry test standard (AHRI 
1230-2014) and, thus, not directly comparable. DOE also found that the 
AHRI Directory does not yet require IEER representations measured per 
AHRI 1230-2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The VRF TP Term Sheet recommended an effective date for the 
amended test procedure to coincide with the compliance date of 
amended standards in terms of IEER, if adopted by DOE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the second approach, DOE considered the results of its crosswalk 
analysis to determine whether a market-wide translation of existing EER 
data to IEER data (measured per AHRI 1230-2021) was possible. As 
discussed in section III.A of this document, the combined effect of 
translating the Federal cooling efficiency metric from EER to IEER and 
the effect of test procedure changes between the current DOE test 
procedure (which references AHRI 1230-2010) and the proposed DOE test 
procedure (which would reference AHRI 1230-2021) is likely to produce 
different impacts on measured efficiency across different manufacturers 
and different models. As DOE's crosswalk analysis has shown, a 
minimally-compliant VRF multi-split system with 10.8 EER can result in 
a range of crosswalked IEER levels from 13 to 16, depending on control 
inputs selected by the manufacturer. Additionally, an estimation of 
energy savings potentials of more-stringent energy efficiency levels 
would require developing efficiency data for the entire VRF multi-split 
system market, which would be a much broader analysis than that 
conducted for the crosswalk. The crosswalk analysis conducted to 
support the Working Group recommendations and presented in this NOPR 
only translated the baseline efficiency level between the metrics for a 
single class of VRF multi-split system, and did not translate all 
efficiency levels currently represented in the market. As noted, there 
are insufficient market data regarding the performance of VRF multi-
split systems measured in terms of IEER per AHRI 1230-2021. As such, 
DOE has preliminarily determined that it lacks clear and convincing 
evidence to adopt more-stringent standard levels.
    Regardless of whether DOE preliminarily determined that more-
stringent standards would be technologically feasible and economically 
justified, DOE would be unable to adopt such standards absent a 
determination, supported by clear and convincing evidence, that more-
stringent standards would result in significant additional energy 
savings. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II)) Therefore, having 
preliminarily determined that it lacks clear and convincing evidence as 
to the energy savings that would result from more-stringent standards, 
DOE has not conducted analysis as to the technological feasibility or 
economic justification of such standards for VRF multi-split systems.

B. Review Under the Six-Year Lookback Provision

    As discussed, DOE is required to conduct an evaluation of each 
class of covered equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1 every six years. (42 
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C)(i)) Accordingly, DOE is evaluating 12 of the 
Federal VRF equipment classes for which ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 did 
not increase the stringency of the standards. Energy conservation 
standards for the two remaining classes of VRF multi-split systems 
(i.e., three-phase, air-cooled VRF multi-split systems with cooling 
capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h) are not addressed in this NOPR and 
instead will be addressed in a separate energy conservation standards 
rulemaking. DOE may only adopt more-stringent

[[Page 11349]]

standards pursuant to the six-year look-back review if the Secretary 
determines, by rule published in the Federal Register and supported by 
clear and convincing evidence, that the adoption of more-stringent 
standards would result in significant additional conservation of energy 
and is technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(C)(i)(II); 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B); 42 U.S.C. 
6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II))
    For the reasons presented in the prior section, DOE has 
preliminarily determined that it lacks clear and convincing evidence 
that more-stringent standards for these 12 equipment classes would 
result in significant additional energy savings. Because DOE does not 
have sufficient data to meet the ``clear and convincing'' threshold for 
these 12 classes, DOE did not conduct an analysis of standard levels 
more stringent than the current Federal standard levels for VRF multi-
split systems that were not amended in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. See 
section V.A of this document for further discussion of the 
consideration of energy efficiency levels more stringent than the 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 levels.

C. Proposed Energy Conservation Standards

    Based on the foregoing, DOE proposes amended energy conservation 
standards for VRF multi-split systems in terms of IEER and COP 
equivalent to those specified for VRF multi-split systems in ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016, which align with the levels recommended in the VRF 
ECS Term Sheet. The proposed standards are presented in Table I-1. 
Compliance with the proposed standards, if adopted, would be required 
for VRF multi-split systems manufactured in, or imported into, the 
United States starting January 1, 2024. which aligns with the Working 
Group's recommendation in the VRF ECS Term Sheet.
    As discussed, ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 includes more-stringent COP 
standards for six water-source VRF multi-split heat pump classes. If 
DOE were to prescribe COP standards at the efficiency levels contained 
in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for these classes, EPCA provides that the 
compliance date shall be on or after a date that is two or three years 
(depending on the equipment type or size) after the effective date of 
the applicable minimum energy efficiency requirement in the amended 
ASHRAE standard. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(D)). The effective date for 
amended COP standards in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 was January 1, 2017. 
DOE acknowledges that the statute originally tied calculation of a 
compliance date to either two or three years after the effective date 
of amended ASHRAE Standard 90.1. However, because these dates have 
passed, DOE is proposing the date recommended in the VRF ECS Term Sheet 
(i.e., January 1, 2024) as a reasonable amount of lead time supported 
by a broad array of interested stakeholders. If DOE receives comments 
in response to this notice that recommend alternative compliance 
date(s) later than January 1, 2024, DOE will consider adopting 
alternative compliance date(s) in the final rule.

VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Section 1(b)(1) of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review,'' 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), requires each agency 
to identify the problem that it intends to address, including, where 
applicable, the failures of private markets or public institutions that 
warrant new agency action, as well as to assess the significance of 
that problem. The problems that the proposed standards for VRF multi-
split systems set forth in this NOPR are intended to address are as 
follows:
    (1) Insufficient information and the high costs of gathering and 
analyzing relevant information leads some consumers to miss 
opportunities to make cost-effective investments in energy efficiency.
    (2) In some cases, the benefits of more-efficient equipment are not 
realized due to misaligned incentives between purchasers and users. An 
example of such a case is when the equipment purchase decision is made 
by a building contractor or building owner who does not pay the energy 
costs.
    (3) There are external benefits resulting from improved energy 
efficiency of appliances and equipment that are not captured by the 
users of such products. These benefits include externalities related to 
public health, environmental protection, and national energy security 
that are not reflected in energy prices, such as reduced emissions of 
air pollutants and greenhouse gases that impact human health and global 
warming. DOE attempts to quantify some of the external benefits through 
use of social cost of carbon values.
    The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
determined that this regulatory action is not a significant regulatory 
action under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, DOE has not 
prepared a regulatory impact analysis for this rule, and OIRA in the 
OMB has not reviewed this proposed rule.
    DOE has also reviewed this regulation pursuant to E.O. 13563, 
issued on January 18, 2011. 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011). E.O. 13563 is 
supplemental to and explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, 
and definitions governing regulatory review established in E.O. 12866. 
To the extent permitted by law, agencies are required by E.O. 13563 to: 
(1) Propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination 
that its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and 
costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the 
least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory 
objectives, taking into account, among other things, and to the extent 
practicable, the costs of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in 
choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that 
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, 
public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; 
and equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify performance 
objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or manner of compliance 
that regulated entities must adopt; and (5) identify and assess 
available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing 
economic incentives to encourage the desired behavior, such as user 
fees or marketable permits, or providing information upon which choices 
can be made by the public.
    DOE emphasizes as well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to use the 
best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future 
benefits and costs as accurately as possible. In its guidance, OIRA has 
emphasized that such techniques may include identifying changing future 
compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or 
anticipated behavioral changes. For the reasons stated in the preamble, 
this NOPR is consistent with these principles, including the 
requirement that, to the extent permitted by law, benefits justify 
costs and that net benefits are maximized.

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires 
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) for 
any rule that by law

[[Page 11350]]

must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that 
the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities. As required by E.O. 13272, 
``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 
53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on 
February 19, 2003, to ensure that the potential impacts of its rules on 
small entities are properly considered during the DOE rulemaking 
process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made its procedures and policies available 
on the Office of the General Counsel's website (https://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel).
    DOE reviewed this proposed rule to amend the Federal energy 
conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems under the provisions 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies 
published on February 19, 2003. DOE certifies that the proposed rule, 
if adopted, would not have significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. The factual basis of this certification is 
set forth in the following paragraphs.
    DOE is proposing to amend the existing Federal minimum energy 
conservation standards for VRF multi-split systems under EPCA's ASHRAE 
trigger requirement and the six-year lookback provision. Under the 
trigger, EPCA directs that if ASHRAE amends ASHRAE Standard 90.1, DOE 
must adopt uniform national amended standards at the new ASHRAE 
efficiency level, unless DOE determines, by rule published in the 
Federal Register and supported by clear and convincing evidence, that 
adoption of a more-stringent level would produce significant additional 
conservation of energy and would be technologically feasible and 
economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Under the six-
year-lookback, DOE must also review energy efficiency standards for VRF 
multi-split systems every six years and either: (1) Issue a notice of 
determination that the standards do not need to be amended based upon 
the criteria in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A) (i.e., that there is clear and 
convincing evidence to show that adoption of a more-stringent level 
would save significant additional energy and would be technologically 
feasible and economically justified); or (2) issue a notice of proposed 
rulemaking including new proposed standards based on certain criteria 
and procedures in 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(B). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C))
    In this NOPR, DOE proposes to update the standards for VRF multi-
split systems at 10 CFR 431.97 to align with the most recent version of 
ASHRAE Standard 90.1, including the updated COP levels for the six 
classes of VRF multi-split water-source heat pumps on which DOE was 
triggered. DOE is also proposing to express cooling efficiency 
standards in terms of the IEER metric, as measured according to the 
amended industry test procedure AHRI 1230-2021, and to remove standard 
levels in terms of the EER metric, as measured according to the current 
DOE test procedure. Finally, DOE is proposing to amend the equipment 
class structure for VRF multi-split systems to align with the equipment 
class structure present in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, with regards to 
capacity break points, supplementary heating type, and presence of heat 
recovery. The proposed standard levels, if adopted, would have a 
compliance date applying to all VRF multi-split systems manufactured on 
or after January 1, 2024. The proposed Table 14 to 10 CFR 431.97 
accounts for all changes between the previous Federal VRF multi-split 
system standards and those outlined in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 (as 
reaffirmed in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2019).
    DOE uses the Small Business Administration (SBA) small business 
size standards to determine whether manufacturers qualify as small 
businesses, which are listed by the North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS).\18\ The SBA considers a business entity 
to be a small business, if, together with its affiliates, it employs 
less than a threshold number of workers specified in 13 CFR part 121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The size standards are listed by NAICS code and industry 
description and are available at: www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards (Last accessed on July 16, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VRF multi-split system manufacturers are classified under NAICS 
code 333415, ``Air-Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and 
Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing.'' The 
SBA sets a threshold of 1,250 employees or fewer for an entity to be 
considered as a small business for this category. This employee 
threshold includes all employees in a business's parent company and any 
other subsidiaries.
    DOE has recently conducted a focused inquiry into small business 
manufacturers of the equipment covered by this rulemaking. DOE used 
available public information to identify potential small manufacturers 
that manufacture domestically. DOE identified manufacturers using DOE's 
Compliance Certification Database \19\ and the AHRI Directory 
database.\20\ DOE used this publicly-available information to identify 
ten distinct original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of the covered VRF 
multi-split system equipment. In reviewing the ten OEMs, DOE did not 
identify any companies that met the SBA criteria for a small entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ DOE's Compliance Certification Database is available at: 
www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms (Last accessed May 10, 2021).
    \20\ The AHRI Directory Database is available at: 
www.ahridirectory.org (Last accessed on May 10, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue 3: DOE requests comment on its tentative conclusions that no 
small business OEMs of VRF multi-split systems, that adoption of the 
prevailing industry standard levels would not result in any significant 
economic impact, and, accordingly, that the proposed rule would not 
have significant impacts on a substantial number of small 
manufacturers.
    Therefore, DOE tentatively concludes that this proposed rule, if 
finalized, would not have ``a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities'' and that preparation of an IRFA is not 
warranted. Additional information about this proposal is addressed 
elsewhere in this document. DOE will transmit this certification and 
supporting statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy 
of the Small Business Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Manufacturers of VRF multi-split systems must certify to DOE that 
their products comply with any applicable energy conservation 
standards. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their 
products according to the DOE test procedures for VRF multi-split 
systems, including any amendments adopted for those test procedures. 
DOE has established regulations for the certification and recordkeeping 
requirements for all covered consumer products and commercial 
equipment, including VRF multi-split systems. See generally 10 CFR part 
429. The collection-of-information requirement for the certification 
and recordkeeping is subject to review and approval by OMB under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been approved by 
OMB under OMB control number 1910-1400. Public reporting burden for the 
certification is estimated to average 35 hours per response, including 
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 
gathering and maintaining the

[[Page 11351]]

data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of 
information.
    This NOPR is not proposing changes to the certification and 
reporting requirements for VRF multi-split system manufacturers.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty 
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the 
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays 
a currently valid OMB Control Number.

D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

    DOE is analyzing this proposed regulation in accordance with the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and DOE's NEPA 
implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE's regulations include 
a categorical exclusion for rulemakings that establish energy 
conservation standards for consumer products or industrial equipment. 
10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, appendix B5.1. DOE anticipates that this 
rulemaking qualifies for categorical exclusion B5.1 because it is a 
rulemaking that establishes amended energy conservation standards for 
consumer products or industrial equipment, none of the exceptions 
identified in categorical exclusion B5.1(b) apply, no extraordinary 
circumstances exist that require further environmental analysis, and it 
otherwise meets the requirements for application of a categorical 
exclusion. See 10 CFR 1021.410. DOE will complete its NEPA review 
before issuing the final rule.

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132

    E.O. 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999), imposes 
certain requirements on Federal agencies formulating and implementing 
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism 
implications. The Executive order requires agencies to examine the 
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would 
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess 
the necessity for such actions. The Executive order also requires 
agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely 
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE 
published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental 
consultation process it will follow in the development of such 
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has 
tentatively determined that it would not have a substantial direct 
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. EPCA governs 
and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to energy 
conservation for the products that are the subject of this proposed 
rule. States can petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the 
extent, and based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) 
Therefore, no further action is required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988

    Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation 
of new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 12988, ``Civil Justice 
Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal agencies the 
general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) Eliminate 
drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to minimize 
litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct 
rather than a general standard, and (4) promote simplification and 
burden reduction. Regarding the review required by section 3(a), 
section 3(b) of E.O. 12988 specifically requires that Executive 
agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: 
(1) Clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly 
specifies any effect on existing Federal law or regulation; (3) 
provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct while promoting 
simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive 
effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms, and (6) addresses 
other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship 
under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. Section 3(c) of 
Executive Order 12988 requires executive agencies to review regulations 
in light of applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine 
whether they are met or it is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. 
DOE has completed the required review and determined that, to the 
extent permitted by law, this proposed rule meets the relevant 
standards of E.O. 12988.

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal 
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the 
private sector. Public Law 104-4, section 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 
1531). For a proposed regulatory action likely to result in a rule that 
may cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any 
one year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA 
requires a Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates 
the resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national 
economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal 
agency to develop an effective process to permit timely input by 
elected officers of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed 
``significant intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan 
for giving notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially 
affected small governments before establishing any requirements that 
might significantly or uniquely affect them. On March 18, 1997, DOE 
published a statement of policy on its process for intergovernmental 
consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820. DOE's policy statement is also 
available at https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/gcprod/documents/umra_97.pdf.
    DOE examined this proposed rule according to UMRA and its statement 
of policy and determined that this proposed rule contains neither a 
Federal intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate that may result in the 
expenditures of $100 million or more in any one year. As a result, the 
analytical requirements of UMRA do not apply.

H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
1999

    Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family 
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being. 
This proposed rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or 
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has 
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking 
Assessment.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

    Pursuant to E.O. 12630, ``Governmental Actions and Interference 
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights,'' 53 FR 8859 (March 
18, 1988), DOE has determined that this proposed rule would not result 
in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth 
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

[[Page 11352]]

J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
2001

    Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for Federal agencies to review 
most disseminations of information to the public under information 
quality guidelines established by each agency pursuant to general 
guidelines issued by OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 
(Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 
(Oct. 7, 2002). Pursuant to OMB Memorandum M-19-15, ``Improving 
Implementation of the Information Quality Act'' (April 24, 2019), DOE 
published updated guidelines which are available at: https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf. DOE has 
reviewed this NOPR under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has concluded 
that it is consistent with applicable policies in those guidelines.

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211

    E.O. 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly 
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 
2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OIRA at OMB, 
a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy 
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an 
agency that promulgates or is expected to lead to promulgation of a 
final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to 
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use 
of energy, or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a 
significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action, 
the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on 
energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented, 
and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected 
benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
    DOE has tentatively concluded that this regulatory action, which 
proposes amended energy conservation standards for VRF multi-split 
systems, is not a significant energy action because the proposed 
standards are not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the 
supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been designated as 
such by the Administrator at OIRA. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a 
Statement of Energy Effects on this proposed rule.

L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review

    On December 16, 2004, OMB, in consultation with the Office of 
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued its Final Information 
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (``the Bulletin''). 70 FR 2664 (Jan. 
14, 2005). The Bulletin establishes that certain scientific information 
shall be peer reviewed by qualified specialists before it is 
disseminated by the Federal Government, including influential 
scientific information related to agency regulatory actions. The 
purpose of the bulletin is to enhance the quality and credibility of 
the Government's scientific information. Under the Bulletin, the energy 
conservation standards rulemaking analyses are ``influential scientific 
information,'' which the Bulletin defines as ``scientific information 
the agency reasonably can determine will have, or does have, a clear 
and substantial impact on important public policies or private sector 
decisions.'' 70 FR 2664, 2667 (Jan. 14, 2005).
    In response to OMB's Bulletin, DOE conducted formal peer reviews of 
the energy conservation standards development process and the analyses 
that are typically used and has prepared a report describing that peer 
review.\21\ Generation of this report involved a rigorous, formal, and 
documented evaluation using objective criteria and qualified and 
independent reviewers to make a judgment as to the technical/
scientific/business merit, the actual or anticipated results, and the 
productivity and management effectiveness of programs and/or projects. 
DOE has determined that the peer-reviewed analytical process continues 
to reflect current practice, and the Department followed that process 
for developing energy conservation standards in the case of the present 
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ The 2007 ``Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking Peer 
Review Report'' is available at the following website: https://energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/energy-conservation-standards-rulemaking-peer-review-report-0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Public Participation

A. Participation at the Webinar

    The time and date of the webinar meeting are listed in the DATES 
section at the beginning of this document. Webinar registration 
information, participant instructions, and information about the 
capabilities available to webinar participants will be published on 
DOE's website: www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/public-meetings-and-comment-deadlines. Participants are responsible for ensuring their 
systems are compatible with the webinar software.

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution

    Any person who has an interest in the topics addressed in this 
proposed rule, or who is representative of a group or class of persons 
that has an interest in these issues, may request an opportunity to 
make an oral presentation at the public meeting webinar. Such persons 
may submit requests to speak via email to the Appliance and Equipment 
Standards Program at: [email protected]. Persons 
who wish to speak should include with their request a computer file in 
WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format that 
briefly describes the nature of their interest in this rulemaking and 
the topics they wish to discuss. Such persons should also provide a 
daytime telephone number where they can be reached.
    Persons requesting to speak should briefly describe the nature of 
their interest in this rulemaking and provide a telephone number for 
contact. DOE requests persons selected to make an oral presentation to 
submit an advance copy of their statements at least two weeks before 
the public meeting webinar. At its discretion, DOE may permit persons 
who cannot supply an advance copy of their statement to participate, if 
those persons have made advance alternative arrangements with the 
Building Technologies Office. As necessary, requests to give an oral 
presentation should ask for such alternative arrangements.

C. Conduct of the Public Meeting Webinar

    DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the webinar/public 
meeting and may also use a professional facilitator to aid discussion. 
The meeting will not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing, 
but DOE will conduct it in accordance with section 336 of EPCA (42 
U.S.C. 6306). A court reporter will be present to record the 
proceedings and prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the right to 
schedule the order of presentations and to establish the procedures 
governing the conduct of the webinar/public meeting. There shall not be 
discussion of proprietary information, costs or prices, market share, 
or other commercial matters regulated by U.S. anti-trust laws. After 
the webinar/public meeting and until the end of the comment period, 
interested parties may submit further comments on the

[[Page 11353]]

proceedings and any aspect of the proposed rulemaking.
    The public meeting webinar will be conducted in an informal, 
conference style. DOE will present a general overview of the topics 
addressed in this proposed rulemaking, allow time for prepared general 
statements by participants, and encourage all interested parties to 
share their views on issues affecting this proposed rulemaking. Each 
participant will be allowed to make a general statement (within time 
limits determined by DOE), before the discussion of specific topics. 
DOE will allow, as time permits, other participants to comment briefly 
on any general statements.
    At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit 
participants to clarify their statements briefly and comment on 
statements made by others. Participants should be prepared to answer 
questions by DOE and by other participants concerning these issues. DOE 
representatives may also ask questions of participants concerning other 
matters relevant to this rulemaking. The official conducting the public 
meeting webinar will accept additional comments or questions from those 
attending, as time permits. The presiding official will announce any 
further procedural rules or modification of the above procedures that 
may be needed for the proper conduct of the public meeting webinar.
    A transcript of the webinar/public meeting will be included in the 
docket, which can be viewed as described in the Docket section at the 
beginning of this NOPR. In addition, any person may buy a copy of the 
transcript from the transcribing reporter.

D. Submission of Comments

    DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
proposed rule before or after the public meeting webinar, but no later 
than the date provided in the DATES section at the beginning of this 
proposed rule. Interested parties may submit comments, data, and other 
information using any of the methods described in the ADDRESSES section 
at the beginning of this document.
    Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The 
www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and 
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE 
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be 
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization 
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your 
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, 
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
    However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you 
include it in the comment itself or in any documents attached to your 
comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable 
should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to 
your comment. If this instruction is followed, 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 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 
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 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 www.regulations.gov 
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
    Submitting comments via email. Comments and documents submitted via 
email also will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not want 
your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not 
include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, 
provide your contact information in a cover letter. Include your first 
and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing 
address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it 
does not include any comments.
    Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, 
documents, and other information to DOE. 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, that are written in English, and that are free of any 
defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or 
any form of encryption, 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 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. DOE will make 
its own determination about the confidential status of the information 
and treat it according to its determination.
    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).

E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment

    Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE 
is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of 
interested parties concerning the following issues:
    Issue 1: DOE requests comment on its crosswalk analysis methodology 
and crosswalk results.
    Issue 2: DOE requests comment on its proposal to align equipment 
classes for VRF multi-split systems with the structure in ASHRAE 
Standard 90.1-2016, with additional clarification for heating type.
    Issue 3: DOE requests comment on its tentative conclusions that 
there are no small businesses that are OEMs of VRF multi-split systems, 
that adoption of the prevailing industry standard levels would not 
result in any significant economic impact, and accordingly, that the 
proposed rule would not have significant impacts on a substantial 
number of small manufacturers.
    Additionally, DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant to the 
conduct of this rulemaking that may

[[Page 11354]]

not specifically be identified in this document.

VIII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of 
proposed rulemaking and request for comment.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on February 9, 
2022, by Kelly J. Speakes-Backman, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary 
for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 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 February 17, 2022.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DOE proposes to amend 
part 431 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth 
below:

PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND 
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT

0
1. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

0
2. Section 431.97 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (f) and Table 13; and
0
b. Adding Table 14.
    The revisions and addition read as follows:


Sec.  431.97  Energy efficiency standards and their compliance dates.

* * * * *
    (f)(1) Each variable refrigerant flow air conditioner or heat pump 
manufactured on or after the compliance date listed in Table 13 of this 
section and prior to January 1, 2024, must meet the applicable minimum 
energy efficiency standard level(s) set forth in Table 13 of this 
section.

    Table 13 to Paragraph (F)(1)--Minimum Efficiency Standards for Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-Split Air
                                           Conditioners and Heat Pumps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                             Compliance date:
        Equipment type           Cooling capacity   Heating type \1\   Efficiency level   Products manufactured
                                                                                            on and after . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air             <65,000 Btu/h....  All..............  13.0 SEER........  June 16, 2008.
 Conditioners (Air-Cooled).     >=65,000 Btu/h     No Heating or      11.2 EER.........  January 1, 2010.
                                 and <135,000 Btu/  Electric
                                 h.                 Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types    11.0 EER.........  January 1, 2010.
                                                    of Heating.
                                >=135,000 Btu/h    No Heating or      11.0 EER.........  January 1, 2010.
                                 and <240,000 Btu/  Electric
                                 h.                 Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types    10.8 EER.........  January 1, 2010.
                                                    of Heating.
                                >=240,000 Btu/h    No Heating or      10.0 EER.........  January 1, 2010.
                                 and <760,000 Btu/  Electric
                                 h.                 Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types    9.8 EER..........  January 1, 2010.
                                                    of Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps      <65,000 Btu/h....  All..............  13.0 SEER, 7.7     June 16, 2008.
 (Air-Cooled).                  >=65,000 Btu/h     No Heating or       HSPF.             January 1, 2010.
                                 and <135,000 Btu/  Electric          11.0 EER, 3.3 COP
                                 h.                 Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types    10.8 EER, 3.3 COP  January 1, 2010.
                                                    of Heating.
                                >=135,000 Btu/h    No Heating or      10.6 EER, 3.2 COP  January 1, 2010.
                                 and <240,000 Btu/  Electric
                                 h.                 Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types    10.4 EER, 3.2 COP  January 1, 2010.
                                                    of Heating.
                                >=240,000 Btu/h    No Heating or      9.5 EER, 3.2 COP.  January 1, 2010.
                                 and <760,000 Btu/  Electric
                                 h.                 Resistance
                                                    Heating.
                                                   All Other Types    9.3 EER, 3.2 COP.  January 1, 2010.
                                                    of Heating.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps      <17,000 Btu/h....  Without Heat       12.0 EER, 4.2 COP  October 29, 2012.
 (Water-Source).                                    Recovery.                             October 29, 2003.
                                                   With Heat          11.8 EER, 4.2 COP  October 29, 2012.
                                                    Recovery.                             October 29, 2003.
                                >=17,000 Btu/h     All..............  12.0 EER, 4.2 COP  October 29, 2003.
                                 and <65,000 Btu/
                                 h.
                                >=65,000 Btu/h     All..............  12.0 EER, 4.2 COP  October 29, 2003.
                                 and <135,000 Btu/
                                 h.
                                >=135,000 Btu/h    Without Heat       10.0 EER, 3.9 COP  October 29, 2013.
                                 and <760,000 Btu/  Recovery.
                                 h.
                                                   With Heat          9.8 EER, 3.9 COP.  October 29, 2013.
                                                    Recovery.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ VRF multi-split heat pumps (air-cooled) with heat recovery fall under the category of ``All Other Types of
  Heating'' unless they also have electric resistance heating, in which case it falls under the category for
  ``No Heating or Electric Resistance Heating.''

    (2) Each variable refrigerant flow air conditioner or heat pump 
(except air-cooled systems with cooling capacity less than 65,000 Btu/
h) manufactured on or after January 1, 2024, must meet the applicable 
minimum energy efficiency standard level(s) set forth in Table 14 of 
this section.

[[Page 11355]]



Table 14 to Paragraph (F)(2)--Updated Minimum Efficiency Standards for Variable Refrigerant Flow Multi-Split Air
                                           Conditioners and Heat Pumps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Equipment type                  Size category             Heating type          Minimum efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VRF Multi-Split Air Conditioners (Air- >=65,000 and <135,000    All....................  15.5 IEER.
 Cooled).                               Btu/h.                  All....................  14.9 IEER.
                                       >=135,000 and <240,000
                                        Btu/h.
                                       >=240,000 Btu/h and      All....................  13.9 IEER.
                                        <760,000 Btu/h.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Air-       >=65,000 and <135,000    Heat Pump without Heat   14.6 IEER, 3.3 COP.
 Cooled).                               Btu/h.                   Recovery.               14.4 IEER, 3.3 COP.
                                                                Heat Pump with Heat
                                                                 Recovery.
                                       >=135,000 and <240,000   Heat Pump without Heat   13.9 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                        Btu/h.                   Recovery.
                                                                Heat Pump with Heat      13.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                                                 Recovery.
                                       >=240,000 Btu/h and      Heat Pump without Heat   12.7 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                        <760,000 btu/h.          Recovery.
                                                                Heat Pump with Heat      12.5 IEER, 3.2 COP.
                                                                 Recovery.
VRF Multi-Split Heat Pumps (Water-     <65,000 Btu/h..........  Heat Pump without Heat   16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
 Source).                                                        Recovery.               15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                                                Heat Pump with Heat
                                                                 Recovery.
                                       >=65,000 and <135,000    Heat Pump without Heat   16.0 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                        Btu/h.                   Recovery.
                                                                Heat Pump with Heat      15.8 IEER, 4.3 COP.
                                                                 Recovery.
                                       >=135,000 and <240,000   Heat Pump without Heat   14.0 IEER, 4.0 COP.
                                        Btu/h.                   Recovery.
                                                                Heat Pump with Heat      13.8 IEER, 4.0 COP.
                                                                 Recovery.
                                       >=240,000 Btu/h and      Heat Pump without Heat   12.0 IEER, 3.9 COP.
                                        <760,000 Btu/h.          Recovery.
                                                                Heat Pump with Heat      11.8 IEER, 3.9 COP.
                                                                 Recovery.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[FR Doc. 2022-03836 Filed 2-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P