[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81396-81403]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25872]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Case Number 2023-004; EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0016]


Energy Conservation Program: Notification of Petition for Waiver 
of United CoolAir Corporation From the Department of Energy Commercial 
Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps Test Procedure and Notification of 
Denial of Interim Waiver

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

ACTION: Notification of petition for waiver and denial of application 
for interim waiver; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This notification announces receipt of and publishes a 
petition for waiver and interim waiver from United CoolAir Corporation 
(``UCA''), which seeks a waiver for specified basic models of double-
duct air conditioners and heat pumps from the U.S. Department of Energy 
(``DOE'') test procedure used for determining the efficiency of double-
duct air conditioners and heat pumps. This notification also announces 
that DOE is declining to grant the request for an interim waiver for 
the reasons described in this notification. DOE solicits comments, 
data, and information concerning UCA's petition and its suggested 
alternate test procedure so as to inform DOE's final decision on UCA's 
waiver request.

DATES: Written comments and information are requested and will be 
accepted on or before December 22, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov under docket 
number EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0016. Follow the instructions for submitting 
comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, 
identified by docket number EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0016, by any of the 
following methods:
    (1) Email: [email protected]. Include the 
case number [Case No. 2023-004] in the subject line of the message.
    (2) Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 
Petition for Waiver [Case No. 2023-004], 1000 Independence Avenue SW, 
Washington, DC 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all items on a 
compact disc (``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include 
printed copies.

[[Page 81397]]

    (3) Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards 
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 
L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case 
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
    No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted. For detailed 
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this 
process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal 
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, 
is available for review at 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/docket/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0016. The docket web page contains instructions on how 
to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See 
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for information on how to submit 
comments through www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Ms. Julia Hegarty, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop 
EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. 
Telephone: (240) 597-6737 Email: [email protected].
    Ms. Kathryn McIntosh, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-33, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence 
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0103. Telephone: (202) 586-2002. Email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE is publishing UCA's petition for waiver 
in its entirety, pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iv). DOE invites all 
interested parties to submit in writing by December 22, 2023, comments 
and information on all aspects of the petition, including the alternate 
test procedure. Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(d), any person submitting 
written comments to DOE must also send a copy of such comments to the 
petitioner. The contact information for the petitioner is: John Hodges, 
[email protected], Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP, 1919 M Street NW, 
Washington, DC 20036.
    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 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, hand delivery/courier, or postal 
mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/
courier, or postal mail 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 on a cover letter. 
Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and 
optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly 
viewable as long as it does not include any comments.
    Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, 
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via postal mail 
or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if 
feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies. 
Faxes will not be accepted.
    Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE 
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that 
are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses. 
Documents should not contain special characters or any form of 
encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature 
of the author.
    Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the 
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters 
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled 
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting 
time.
    Confidential Business Information. According 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. Submit these documents 
via email. 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).

[[Page 81398]]

Case Number 2023-004

Denial of Interim Waiver

I. Authority and Background

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA''),\1\ 
authorizes the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') to regulate the 
energy efficiency of several consumer products and certain industrial 
equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part C of EPCA \2\ 
established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial 
Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve 
energy efficiency for certain types of industrial equipment. This 
equipment includes double-duct air conditioners and heat pumps, which 
are a subset of air-cooled commercial package air conditioning and 
heating equipment, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(B)-
(D))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute 
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116-260 (Dec. 
27, 2020), which reflect the last statutory amendments that impact 
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part C was redesignated as Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of 
four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation 
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant 
provisions of EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), test 
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), 
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to 
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316).
    The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that 
manufacturers of covered equipment must use 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 
relevant standards promulgated under EPCA.
    Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures 
DOE is required to follow when prescribing or amending test procedures 
for covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures 
prescribed or amended under this section must be reasonably designed to 
produce test results which reflect the energy efficiency, energy use, 
or estimated annual operating cost of covered equipment (or class 
thereof) during a representative average use cycle and requires that 
test procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 
6314(a)(2)) The test procedure for air-cooled commercial package air 
conditioning and heating equipment, including double-duct air 
conditioners and heat pumps, is contained in the Code of Federal 
Regulations (``CFR'') at 10 CFR part 431, subpart F, appendix A, 
Uniform Test Method for the Measurement of Energy Consumption of Air-
Cooled Small (=65,000 Btu/h), Large, and Very Large 
Commercial Package Air Conditioning and Heating Equipment (``appendix 
A'').
    Under 10 CFR 431.401, any interested person may submit a petition 
for waiver from DOE's test procedure requirements. DOE will grant a 
waiver from the test procedure requirements if DOE determines either 
that the basic model(s) for which the waiver was requested contains a 
design characteristic that prevents testing of the basic model 
according to the prescribed test procedures, or that the prescribed 
test procedures evaluate the basic model in a manner so 
unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to 
provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2). A 
petitioner must include in its petition any alternate test procedures 
known to the petitioner to evaluate the performance of the equipment 
type in a manner representative of the energy consumption 
characteristics of the basic model. 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iii). DOE may 
grant the waiver subject to conditions, which may include adherence to 
alternate test procedures specified by DOE. 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2).
    As soon as practicable after the granting of any waiver, DOE will 
publish in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking to 
amend its regulations so as to eliminate any need for the continuation 
of such waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(l). As soon thereafter as practicable, 
DOE will publish in the Federal Register a final rule to that effect. 
Id.
    The waiver process also provides that DOE will grant an interim 
waiver from the test procedure requirements if it appears likely that 
the petition for waiver will be granted and/or if DOE determines that 
it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate 
relief pending a determination on the petition for waiver. 10 CFR 
431.401(e)(3). Within one year of issuance of an interim waiver, DOE 
will either: (i) publish in the Federal Register a determination on the 
petition for waiver; or (ii) publish in the Federal Register a new or 
amended test procedure that addresses the issues presented in the 
waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(h)(1).
    If the interim waiver test procedure methodology is different than 
the decision and order test procedure methodology, certification 
reports to DOE required under 10 CFR 429.12 and any representations 
must be based on either of the two methodologies until 180-360 days 
after the publication date of the decision and order, as specified by 
DOE in the decision and order. Thereafter, certification reports and 
any representations must be based on the decision and order test 
procedure methodology, unless otherwise specified by DOE. Once a 
manufacturer uses the decision and order test procedure methodology in 
a certification report or any representation, all subsequent 
certification reports and any representations must be made using the 
decision and order test procedure methodology while the waiver is 
valid. 10 CFR 431.401(i)(1). When DOE amends the test procedure to 
address the issues presented in a waiver, the waiver or interim waiver 
will automatically terminate on the date on which use of that test 
procedure is required to demonstrate compliance. 10 CFR 431.401(h)(3).

II. UCA's Petition for Waiver and Interim Waiver

    On November 19, 2018, DOE received from UCA a petition for waiver 
and interim waiver from the test procedure for commercial air 
conditioners and heat pumps set forth at 10 CFR part 431 subpart F.\3\ 
(UCA, No. 1 at pp. 1-9) \4\ The petition did not identify any of the

[[Page 81399]]

information contained therein as confidential business information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The specific models for which the petition applies include 
UCA C-Series commercial indoor horizontal double-duct air 
conditioner models C***T***, H***T***, E***T***, B***T***, and 
BC***T***, with nominally rated capacities of 72000, 96000, 120000, 
144000 and 180000 Btu/h; C13-Series commercial indoor horizontal 
double-duct air conditioner models C***H***, H***H***, E***H***, 
B***H***, and BC***H***, with nominally rated capacities of 72000, 
96000 and 120000 Btu/h; VertiCool Classic commercial indoor vertical 
double-duct air conditioner models VA***T***, VAR***T***, 
VARC***T***, BVA***T***, BCVA***T***, and EVA***T***, with nominally 
rated capacities of 72000, 96000, 120000, 144000, 180000, 240000 and 
300000 Btu/h; and VertiCool Aurora commercial indoor vertical 
double-duct air conditioner models VA***H***, VAR***H***, 
VARC***H***, BVA***H***, BCVA***H***, and EVA***H***, with nominally 
rated capacities of 72000, 96000, 120000, 144000, 180000, 240000 and 
300000 Btu/h. These models were provided by UCA in the Appendix 
included in its November 19, 2018 petition. The petition is included 
at the end of this notice.
    \4\ A notation in this form provides a reference for information 
that is in the docket for this test procedure waiver. This notation 
indicates that the statement preceding the reference is document 
number 1 in the docket and appears at page 2 of that document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its petition, UCA stated that the current DOE test procedure 
does not address the unique characteristics of UCA's double-duct 
technology. (UCA, No. 1 at p. 1) UCA noted that the basic models for 
which it is seeking a waiver use a double-duct configuration, which do 
not have an outdoor section and instead have ducting to an outside wall 
or window for the supply and discharge of outside air to and from the 
indoor condenser. (UCA, No. 1 at p. 3) UCA asserts in its waiver 
petition that the energy characteristics of these double-duct air 
conditioners \5\ are different from equipment with an outdoor section. 
(Id. at p. 3) UCA additionally states that the Federal test procedure 
does not account for this technology, and that the standard AHRI 340/
360-2007,\6\ incorporated by reference at the time of petition, was 
developed to test products with both outdoor and indoor sections (and 
UCA noted the references to ``indoor section'' and ``outdoor section'' 
throughout that standard). UCA asserted that because double-duct units 
do not have an outdoor section, they cannot be tested by the DOE test 
procedure and a waiver is necessary. (Id. at pp. 4-5) Further, UCA 
expressed that double-duct air conditioners have higher condenser fan 
motor horsepower to move condenser air against significant air pressure 
(0.5-1.5 in H2O) and smaller but deeper condenser coils, 
which creates a higher pressure drop than that of an outdoor condensing 
section, resulting in more energy consumption of the condenser fan 
motor, and claimed that both of these characteristics were not 
accounted for in the test procedure. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As referenced in footnote 4 of the petition, quoting 10 CFR 
431.92, double-duct air conditioner or heat pump means air-cooled 
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment that--(1) 
Is either a horizontal single package or split-system unit; or a 
vertical unit that consists of two components that may be shipped or 
installed either connected or split; (2) Is intended for indoor 
installation with ducting of outdoor air from the building exterior 
to and from the unit, as evidenced by the unit and/or all of its 
components being non-weatherized, including the absence of any 
marking (or listing) indicating compliance with UL 1995, ``Heating 
and Cooling Equipment,'' or any other equivalent requirements for 
outdoor use; (3) (i) If it is a horizontal unit, a complete unit has 
a maximum height of 35 inches; (ii) If it is a vertical unit, a 
complete unit has a maximum depth of 35 inches; and (4) Has a rated 
cooling capacity greater than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h and up to 
300,000 Btu/h.
    \6\ ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/360-2007, 2007 Standard for 
Performance Rating of Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-
Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment, approved by ANSI on October 
27, 2011, and updated by addendum 1 in December 2010 and addendum 2 
in June 2011 (``AHRI 340/360-2007''). Available online at: 
webstore.ansi.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    UCA also requested an interim waiver from the existing DOE test 
procedure, asserting that the petition for waiver is likely to be 
granted because the DOE test procedure does not address the unique 
characteristics of the requested basic models. (Id. at p. 7) UCA stated 
that without the granting of an interim waiver, UCA would suffer 
economic hardship and be at a competitive disadvantage if it must wait 
to rate these basic models pending a determination on petition for 
waiver. (Id.) UCA also claimed that the petition was supported by sound 
public policy because the products offered property owners and 
developers the ability to install new efficient central air 
conditioning in old buildings. (Id.)

III. Requested Alternate Test Procedure

    EPCA requires that manufacturers use DOE test procedures when 
making representations about the energy consumption and energy 
consumption costs of covered equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)) Consistency 
is important when making representations about the energy efficiency of 
covered equipment, including when demonstrating compliance with 
applicable DOE energy conservation standards. Pursuant to 10 CFR 
431.401, and after consideration of public comments on the petition, 
DOE may establish in a subsequent Decision and Order an alternate test 
procedure for the basic models addressed by the Interim Waiver Order.
    UCA seeks to use an alternate test procedure to test and rate 
specific double-duct commercial unitary air conditioners (``CUAC'') 
basic models. As an alternate test procedure, UCA proposed to test the 
specified basic models by ducting the condenser fan and imposing 
external static pressure (``ESP'') per the manufacturer's instructions. 
Then, UCA proposed to adjust the input power of the condenser fan motor 
by subtracting ``added'' condenser motor horsepower imposed by the 
additional ESP, as presented below:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22NO23.256

Where:

ffa is the fan power adjustment, in watts;
h is 0.3 x 10\3\ by convention;
 Dp is the measured ESP difference, in pascals; and
q is the nominal airflow rate, in litres per second.

(UCA, No. 1 at pp. 6-7)
    This formula is drawn from section 4.1.3.2 of ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE ISO 
Standard 13256-1:1998 \7\ and is used in that test standard to adjust 
for the motor horsepower expended in moving air through the indoor 
ducts. UCA proposed that this formula be used to adjust the condenser 
motor horsepower for double-duct units tested at non-zero condenser ESP 
to account only for the motor horsepower utilized in overcoming 
internal resistance of the unit. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ANSI/ARI/ISO Standard 13256-1:1998, Water-source heat 
pumps--Testing and rating for performance--Part 1: Water-to-air and 
brine-to-air heat pumps, ISO approved 1998. Available online at 
webstore.ansi.org/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the course of reviewing UCA's petition, DOE requested additional 
data from UCA to support their proposed alternate test procedure. UCA 
provided confidential data to DOE that included condenser fan power 
values at various ESPs and adjusted condenser fan power based on their 
suggested approach for several basic models offered.

IV. Denial of Interim Waiver

    DOE has reviewed UCA's application for an interim waiver, the 
alternate test procedure requested by UCA, publicly available 
specification sheets and installation manuals relevant to these basic 
models, and additional confidential data from UCA regarding its 
petition. In submitting a petition for waiver, a petitioner must 
demonstrate that the subject basic model contains one or more design 
characteristics that prevent testing of the basic model according to 
the prescribed test procedures or cause the prescribed test procedures 
to evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true 
energy and/or water consumption characteristics as to provide 
materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1); 10 CFR 
431.401(f)(2). In determining whether to grant a request for an interim 
waiver, DOE considers whether: (1) it appears likely that the petition 
for waiver will be granted; and/or (2) it would be desirable for public 
policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination on the 
petition for waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(=3).
    As described, UCA claims in its petition for a waiver that the 
subject basic models contain a design characteristic (i.e., no outdoor 
section) that prevents testing according to the DOE test procedure. In 
response to this claim, DOE notes that the current DOE test procedure 
for double-duct air conditioners and heat pumps is the same as that for 
single-duct commercial air conditioning and heating equipment at 
appendix A. In a direct final rule published on January 15, 2016 
(``January 2016 Direct Final Rule''), DOE clarified

[[Page 81400]]

that double-duct air conditioners are tested and rated under the same 
test conditions as single-duct air conditioners, without any ducting 
connected to, or an external static pressure applied on, the condenser 
side. 81 FR 2420, 2445.
    The DOE test procedure at appendix A references certain sections of 
both AHRI 340/360-2007 and ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009.\8\ As mentioned by UCA, 
Table 3 of AHRI 340/360-2007 uses the term ``outdoor section'' in a 
header for columns providing test conditions. This term refers to the 
section of an air conditioning or heat pump system that rejects or 
absorbs heat (during mechanical cooling or heating mode, respectively), 
and does not apply only to units installed outdoors. For an air-cooled 
air conditioner, the test conditions under the heading ``indoor 
section'' are used for indoor air (i.e., the evaporator airstream) and 
the test conditions under the heating ``outdoor section'' are used for 
outdoor air (i.e., the condenser airstream), regardless of whether the 
components are intended for indoor or outdoor installation. DOE notes 
that condenser temperature conditions for testing water-cooled 
commercial unitary air conditioners (``WCUACs'') are also specified 
under the ``outdoor section'' header, but similar to double-duct 
systems, both the indoor and outdoor sections of WCUACs are generally 
intended for indoor installation. Similarly, DOE notes that in rooftop 
air-cooled and evaporatively-cooled commercial unitary air 
conditioners, the ``indoor section'' (i.e., the section conditioning 
indoor air) is located outdoors. Further, DOE notes that both ANSI/
ASHRAE 37-2009 (which is referenced in the current DOE test procedure 
at appendix A) and ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2005 \9\ (which is referenced by AHRI 
340/360-2007) use the term ``outdoor side'' to refer to the condensing 
section of an air-conditioning system. Specifically, both versions of 
ASHRAE Standard 37 define ``outdoor side'' as ``that part of the system 
that rejects heat to or absorbs heat from a source external to the 
indoor airstream.'' This definition does not specify or require that 
the outdoor side is located outdoors. Therefore, DOE has tentatively 
determined that UCA has not demonstrated that the basic models subject 
to the petition contain a design characteristic that prevents testing 
of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures because 
the test procedure applies to double-duct systems regardless of 
intended installation location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2009, Methods of Testing for Rating 
Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment 
(``ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2009''). Available at online at: 
webstore.ansi.org.
    \9\ ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 37-2005, Methods of Testing for Rating 
Electrically Driven Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment 
(``ANSI/ASHRAE 37-2005''). Available at online at: 
webstore.ansi.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE also evaluated UCA's petition to determine whether the 
prescribed test procedures evaluate the subject basic models in a 
manner so unrepresentative of their true energy consumption 
characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 
Relevant to this evaluation, DOE notes that the current energy 
conservation standards for double-duct air conditioners are defined in 
terms of the energy efficiency ratio (``EER'') metric, which as defined 
by the test procedure at appendix A, represent the performance of an 
air conditioner when operating at zero condenser ESP. DOE further notes 
that the rating conditions associated with a metric are integral to the 
metric--performance measured at a different condenser ESP, for example, 
would not represent an EER value (as that metric is currently defined 
in appendix A) and would therefore not provide comparative data with 
which to compare to other equipment on the market subject to the same 
EER standard. As such, DOE evaluated UCA's suggested alternate test 
procedure to determine whether it would provide a more representative 
measure of EER (i.e., a more representative measure of performance at 
zero condenser ESP) compared to the current Federal test procedure.\10\ 
DOE reviewed UCA's proposed alternate test procedure, including the 
additional confidential data provided to DOE by UCA, within this 
framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ DOE notes that it recently published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (``NOPR'') regarding the test procedures for commercial 
unitary air conditioners and heat pumps, including double-duct air 
conditioners and heat pumps. 88 FR 56392 (August 17, 2023). This 
NOPR proposes a new test procedure that specifies the new metrics 
integrated ventilation, economizer, and cooling (``IVEC'') and 
integrated ventilation and heating efficiency (``IVHE''). These 
proposed new metrics would change the condenser ESP requirement from 
zero to 0.5 in. H2O for double-duct air conditioners and 
heat pumps. Were DOE to adopt the test procedures for IVEC and IVHE 
for double-duct systems as proposed, testing to those metrics would 
not be required until DOE adopts energy conservation standards for 
double-duct systems in terms of those metrics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    UCA's suggested alternate test procedure specifies testing at a 
manufacturer-specified non-zero condenser ESP and then adjusting the 
measured condenser fan power down to reflect operation at zero 
condenser ESP. This adjustment of the measured condenser fan power 
requires an assumption regarding the efficiency value of the condenser 
fan. In its petition, UCA requested to use an assumed fan efficiency 
value of 0.3. Based on its review, DOE has tentatively concluded that 
the fan efficiency value of 0.3 suggested by UCA is unrepresentatively 
low. In particular, confidential data provided by UCA suggests that for 
some of the models subject to UCA's petition for waiver, assuming a fan 
efficiency value of 0.3 would result in the fan power adjustment 
exceeding the actual fan power consumed at zero condenser ESP, thus 
resulting in negative condenser fan power being reflected in the 
metric.
    As a result, the test procedure suggested by UCA would under-
represent the condenser fan power that would be expected at zero 
condenser ESP because it subtracts an unrepresentatively high 
adjustment factor from the measured value of condenser fan power. This 
would result in EER ratings of performance at zero condenser ESP that 
are unrepresentatively high and therefore not comparable to EER ratings 
developed by other manufacturers of double-duct systems based on 
testing at zero condenser ESP (i.e., ratings developed without any 
adjustment to measured condenser fan power). Therefore, DOE has 
tentatively concluded that the alternate test procedure suggested in 
UCA's petition for waiver would not evaluate the performance of the 
subject models in a manner more representative of the energy 
consumption characteristics of each basic model, within the context of 
representing EER performance at zero condenser ESP.
    Additionally, DOE notes that multiple other manufacturers of 
double-duct systems list condenser fan motor performance at ESPs as low 
as zero in their product literature, demonstrating that there is 
nothing inherent to double-duct systems that prevents representing EER 
performance at zero condenser ESP in accordance with the current 
Federal test procedure.\11\ Therefore, DOE has tentatively concluded 
that UCA has not demonstrated that the basic models subject to the 
petition contain a design characteristic that prevents testing of those 
models according to the prescribed test procedure or that the 
prescribed test procedure evaluates the basic model in a manner so

[[Page 81401]]

unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to 
provide materially inaccurate comparative data with other double-duct 
systems. Absent such data, DOE is unable to conclude that UCA's 
petition for waiver will likely be granted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Condenser fan motor performance at condenser ESPs as low as 
zero is listed in the product datasheets for the Carrier Omnizone 
and Skypeak D-series double-duct model lines. These examples can be 
found on the docket at regulations.gov/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, DOE does not find that public policy reasons weigh in 
favor of granting immediate relief pending a determination on the 
petition for waiver. As previously indicated, multiple other 
manufacturers certify to DOE EER ratings for double-duct systems that 
are compliant with the currently applicable EER standards and are based 
on the current Federal test procedure, which reflects performance at 
zero condenser ESP. These models demonstrate that commercial consumers 
currently have multiple options for installing double-duct systems; 
therefore, DOE does not find granting immediate relief to UCA is 
necessary. For these reasons, DOE is denying UCA's petition for interim 
waiver and requesting comment.
    DOE makes decisions on waivers and interim waivers for only those 
basic models specifically set out in the petition, not future models 
that may be manufactured by the petitioner. UCA may submit a new or 
amended petition for waiver and request for grant of interim waiver, as 
appropriate, for additional basic models of double-duct air 
conditioners and heat pumps.
    While DOE declines to approve the use of UCA's suggested alternate 
test procedure in an interim waiver at this time, DOE may consider 
including an alternate procedure in a subsequent Decision and Order. 
DOE solicits comments from interested parties on all aspects of the 
petition, including any alternate test procedure.

V. Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on November 
17, 2023, by Jeffrey Marootian, 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 November 17, 2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.

Before the United States Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585

In the Matter of: Energy Efficiency Program: Test Procedure for 
Commercial Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps

Petition of United CoolAir Corporation for Waiver and Application for 
Interim Waiver of Test Procedure for Commercial Air Conditioners and 
Heat Pumps

    United CoolAir Corporation (UCA) respectfully submits this Petition 
for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver \12\ from DOE's test 
procedure for commercial air conditioners and heat pumps. UCA seeks a 
waiver because the current DOE test procedure \13\ does not address the 
unique characteristics of UCA's double-duct technology. Therefore, 
UCA's double-duct models cannot be tested under the DOE test procedure. 
UCA also requests expedited treatment of the Petition and Application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 10 CFR 431.401 (Petitions for waiver and interim 
waiver).
    \13\ Id. Sec.  431.96.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. UCA

    Since 1988, UCA has been a small, family-owned and operated 
American company. It is a specialty manufacturer of double-duct 
commercial air conditioners and other air conditioning products. It is 
located at 491 E Princess Street, York, PA 17403 (tel. 717-843-4311; 
https://unitedcoolair.com com). UCA's start came with the creation of air 
conditioning units built to meet extremely high standards for the U.S. 
Military. Since then, UCA has evolved into a full service provider of 
unique and often complex HVAC systems.

II. Double-Duct Commercial Air Conditioners

    UCA specializes in double-duct commercial air conditioners. They 
are used to provide efficient central air conditioning in older 
buildings that are being renovated or updated and where there is only 
limited space available. These systems fit entirely inside a building 
and thus are dramatically different from the bulky products that have 
outdoor as well as indoor components. Their modular sections can be 
taken through standard doors or smaller openings, around corners, down 
hallways, and placed into service elevators. Indoor installation (above 
the ceiling and crawl spaces) minimizes expensive handling, rigging, or 
permits, and avoids the need for building modifications. It also 
eliminates expensive repairs and replacements due to weather damage, 
theft, and vandalism. All of these products are built-to-order and 
adapted to the different requirements of unique buildings, while 
providing the latest in control and design technologies.

III. Basic Models for Which a Waiver Is Requested

    The basic models for which a waiver is requested are set forth in 
the Appendix. They are double-duct commercial air conditioners 
distributed in commerce under the UCA brand name. The models are within 
the following series: C-Series; C13-Series; VertiCool Classic; and 
VertiCool Aurora.\14\ The C-Series and C13-Series are indoor horizontal 
air conditioners. The VertiCool Classic and VertiCool Aurora series 
have vertical cabinets that fit neatly along walls, in closet spaces, 
or in mechanical rooms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ To the best of UCA's knowledge, AboveAir Technologies, 
Skymark, Task Applied Products, Skil-aire, and Compu-Aire are the 
only manufacturers of other commercial air conditioning basic models 
distributed in commerce in the United States to incorporate design 
characteristic(s) similar to those found in the models that are the 
subject of this petition. To the best of UCA's knowledge, AirPac, 
Carrier, and Addison used to produce similar products but no longer 
do.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Need for the Requested Waiver

    The UCA double-duct models are specialized, niche products intended 
for indoor installation--almost entirely in old buildings. They are 
ideal for replacement or renovation applications, where space 
constraints prohibit roof-top or other types of products. They do not 
have an outdoor section, and their energy characteristics are different 
from products that have one. They have ducting to an outside wall or 
window for the supply and discharge of outside air to and from the 
indoor condenser.\15\

[[Page 81402]]

DOE's test procedure does not account for this technology and is 
therefore inapplicable for these products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Double-duct air conditioner or heat pump means air-cooled 
commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment that--
    (1) Is either a horizontal single package or split-system unit; 
or a vertical unit that consists of two components that may be 
shipped or installed either connected or split;
    (2) Is intended for indoor installation with ducting of outdoor 
air from the building exterior to and from the unit, as evidenced by 
the unit and/or all of its components being non-weatherized, 
including the absence of any marking (or listing) indicating 
compliance with UL 1995, ``Heating and Cooling Equipment,'' or any 
other equivalent requirements for outdoor use;
    (3)(i) If it is a horizontal unit, a complete unit has a maximum 
height of 35 inches; (ii) If it is a vertical unit, a complete unit 
has a maximum depth of 35 inches; and
    (4) Has a rated cooling capacity greater than or equal to 65,000 
Btu/h and up to 300,000 Btu/h.
    10 CFR 431.92.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE has recognized the useful, unique nature of double-duct 
products such as UCA's.
    DOE agrees that these [double-duct] units have features that 
justify establishing separate equipment classes for them. Double-duct 
units, as evidenced by several commenters, offer a unique utility that 
may otherwise become unavailable if these units were subjected to the 
more rigorous standards required by this direct final rule for other 
CUAC and CUHP equipment. DOE notes that double-duct units, which are 
installed within the building envelope and use ductwork to transfer 
outdoor air to and from the outdoor unit, would have added challenges 
in meeting more stringent energy conservation standards due to space 
constraints and added condenser fan power.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial 
Equipment: Energy Conservation Standards for Small, Large, and Very 
Large Air-Cooled Commercial Package Air Condition and Heating 
Equipment and Commercial Warm-Air Furnaces, 81 FR 2420, 2446 (Jan. 
15, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Even though DOE has agreed that double-duct products are unique and 
useful, its test procedure has not yet been amended to address and take 
into account their unique characteristics. Rather, the test procedure 
is silent on these products.
    Instead, DOE's test procedure \17\ incorporates AHRI Standard 340/
360-2007,\18\ which was developed to test units that have both outdoor 
and indoor sections. Specifically, AHRI 340/360- 2007 requires: 
``Standard Ratings shall be established at the Standard Rating 
Conditions specified in Table 3.'' \19\ Table 3, ``Conditions for 
Standard Rating and Operating Tests,'' mandates conditions for an 
``Indoor Section'' and ``Outdoor Section.'' \20\ ``Table 3 indicates 
the tests and test conditions which are required to determine values of 
standard capacity and ratings and values of energy efficiency.'' \21\ 
Therefore, double-duct units, which do not have an outdoor section, 
simply cannot be tested by the DOE test procedure. Moreover, even 
though DOE acknowledges ``added condenser fan power'' as a 
distinguishing characteristic of double-duct products,\22\ the DOE test 
procedure does not account for the higher condenser motor horsepower of 
these products. Nor does it account for the smaller but deeper coil 
required for the double-duct systems to move air through the duct and 
discharge it to the outside.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 10 CFR 431.96.
    \18\ ANSI/AHRI Standard 340/360-2007 (formerly ARI Standard 340/
360-2007), 2007 Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial and 
Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment.
    \19\ AHRI 340/360-2007 Sec.  6.1.
    \20\ Id. Sec.  6.1, Table 3.
    \21\ Id. Sec.  6.1.3.
    \22\ Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial 
Equipment: Energy Conservation Standards for Small, Large, and Very 
Large Air-Cooled Commercial Package Air Condition and Heating 
Equipment and Commercial Warm-Air Furnaces, 81 FR at 2446.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An outdoor condenser/condensing unit utilizes a propeller fan 
(light duty) to move large volumes of air against low air pressure (0'' 
External Static Pressure--ESP) and utilizes a relatively small motor. 
In addition, since space (footprint/volume/height) and air path 
(perimeter inlet and top discharge) through the outdoor coil of such 
models are not an issue, outdoor condensing sections typically utilize 
1 or 2 row deep `U/L' shaped condenser coils to maximize heat transfer 
and minimize air pressure drop.
    In contrast, a double-duct unit's condenser fan (heavy duty--
typically centrifugal and belt driven) has to be designed to move 
condenser air against significant air pressure (0.5-1.5'' ESP), and it 
utilizes a relatively larger motor. Double-duct models also have 
smaller and deeper condenser coils than models with outdoor condensing 
sections, since cabinet space is much smaller than an outdoor 
condensing section. An indoor condenser coil is typically 3-4 rows 
deep, with higher pressure drop than an outdoor condensing section. 
Such higher pressure drop consumes more energy than that associated 
with an outdoor condensing section.
    Since the DOE test procedure does not address and account for 
double-duct technology, a waiver is necessary. DOE's rules provide that 
DOE ``will grant a waiver from the test procedure requirements'' in 
such circumstances.\23\ Accordingly, UCA urges that a waiver be granted 
for the basic models in the Appendix that will allow use of the 
alternate test procedure discussed below. Unlike the current test 
procedure, the alternate test procedure is designed to properly take 
into account UCA double-duct technology. The waiver should continue 
until DOE adopts an applicable amended test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 10 CFR 431.401(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Proposed Alternate Test Procedure

    UCA proposes the following alternate test procedure to evaluate the 
performance of the basic models listed in the Appendix. It is the same 
as the existing DOE test procedure for commercial air conditioners, 
except that it takes double-duct technology into account. It does so by 
utilizing a formula drawn from Section 4.1.3.2 of ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE ISO 
Standard 13256- 1:1998 \24\ to adjust for the motor horsepower expended 
in moving air through the indoor ducts. It bears noting that AHRI 340/
360-2007 provides that ISO 13256-1:1998 is among those publications 
``essential to the formation and implementation of the standard [340/
360]. All references in this appendix [to 340/360] are considered as 
part of the standard.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE ISO Standard 13256-1:1998.
    \25\ AHRI 340/360-2007, App. A Sec. Sec.  A1, A1.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The formula in Section 4.1.3.2 of ISO 13256-1 normalizes the 
double-duct condenser motor horsepower by adjusting the condenser motor 
horsepower to account only for the motor horsepower utilized in 
overcoming internal resistance of the unit.
    The waiver should provide that UCA shall be required to test the 
performance of the basic models listed in the Appendix hereto according 
to the test procedure for commercial air conditioners and heat pumps in 
10 CFR part 431, subpart F (including AHRI 340/360-2007), except as 
follows:
    1. Duct the condenser fan, and impose ESP, each as per 
manufacturer's instructions.
    2. Adjust kW input by subtracting ``added'' condenser motor 
horsepower utilizing the following formula. (No changes to unit cooling 
capacity or heating capacity is required.)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22NO23.257

Where:
qfa is the fan power adjustment, in watts;
h is 0.3 x 10\3\ by convention;
DP is the measured ESP difference, in pascals; and
q is the nominal airflow rate, in litres per second.

VI. Application for Interim Waiver

    UCA also hereby applies for an interim waiver of the applicable 
test procedure requirements for the UCA basic models set forth in the 
Appendix. UCA meets the criteria for an interim waiver. UCA's Petition 
for Waiver is likely to be granted, because the current DOE test 
procedure \26\ clearly does not address the unique characteristics of 
these UCA basic models. Without waiver relief, UCA would be subject to

[[Page 81403]]

requirements that are inappropriate for these products. Additionally, 
UCA will suffer economic hardship and be at a competitive disadvantage 
if it must wait to rate these basic models pending a determination on 
the petition for waiver. DOE approval of UCA's interim waiver 
application is also supported by sound public policy. As noted above, 
these products offer property owners and developers the ability to 
install new efficient central air conditioning in old buildings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ 10 CFR part 431, subpart F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Conclusion

    UCA respectfully requests that DOE grant its Petition for Waiver of 
the applicable test procedure for specified basic models, and also 
grant its Application for Interim Waiver. UCA also requests expedited 
treatment of the Petition and Application.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/

Scott Blake Harris John Hodges, Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP, 
1919 M Street NW Washington, DC 20036, (202) 730-1313

November 19, 2018

Appendix

    The waiver and interim waiver requested herein should apply to 
testing and rating of the following basic models that are 
manufactured by UCA:
    C-Series commercial indoor horizontal double-duct air 
conditioner models C...T..., H...T..., E...T..., B...T..., and 
BC...T..., with nominally rated capacities of 72000, 96000, 120000, 
144000 and 180000 Btu/h.
    C13-Series commercial indoor horizontal double-duct air 
conditioner models C...H..., H...H..., E...H..., B...H..., and 
BC...H..., with nominally rated capacities of 72000, 96000 and 
120000 Btu/h.
    VertiCool Classic commercial indoor vertical double-duct air 
conditioner models VA...T..., VAR...T..., VARC...T..., BVA...T..., 
BCVA...T..., and EVA...T..., with nominally rated capacities of 
72000, 96000, 120000, 144000, 180000, 240000 and 300000 Btu/h.
    VertiCool Aurora commercial indoor vertical double-duct air 
conditioner models VA...H..., VAR...H..., VARC...H..., BVA...H..., 
BCVA...H..., and EVA...H..., with nominally rated capacities of 
72000, 96000, 120000, 144000, 180000, 240000 and 300000 Btu/h.

[FR Doc. 2023-25872 Filed 11-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P