Notice2023-25872
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
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
November 22, 2023
Issuing agencies
Energy Department
Abstract
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.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81396-81403]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> 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: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#02576c6b766766416d6d6e436b7043414a5230323031554354323233344267672c666d672c656d74"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="386d56514c5d5c7b57575479514a797b70680a080a0b6f796e0808090e785d5d165c575d165f574e">[email protected]</span></a>. 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. All documents in the
docket are listed in the <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0016">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0016</a>. 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>.
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: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2c6d7f737b4d455a495e737e495d59495f586c494902484349024b435a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="db9a88848cbab2adbea98489beaaaebea8af9bbebef5bfb4bef5bcb4ad">[email protected]</span></a>.
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:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2863495c405a514606654b61465c475b40684059064c474d064f475e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3e755f4a564c475010735d77504a514d567e564f105a515b10595148">[email protected]</span></a>.
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,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c4aeacaba0a3a1b784acb3a3a8a5b3eaa7aba9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4e2426212a292b3d0e263929222f39602d2123">[email protected]</span></a>, Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis LLP, 1919 M Street NW,
Washington, DC 20036.
Submitting comments via <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. The
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>
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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. 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 (<ls-thn-eq>=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 H<INF>2</INF>O) 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:
<a href="http://webstore.ansi.org">webstore.ansi.org</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
<a href="http://webstore.ansi.org/">webstore.ansi.org/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
<a href="http://webstore.ansi.org">webstore.ansi.org</a>.
\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:
<a href="http://webstore.ansi.org">webstore.ansi.org</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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. H<INF>2</INF>O 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 <a href="http://regulations.gov/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0016">regulations.gov/EERE-2023-BT-WAV-0016</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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;
<a href="https://unitedcoolair.com">https://unitedcoolair.com</a> 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:
q<INF>fa</INF> 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
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on November 22, 2023.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.